COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

SENATE

Official Hansard No. 12, 2002 WEDNESDAY, 23 OCTOBER 2002

FORTIETH PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—THIRD PERIOD

BY AUTHORITY OF THE SENATE INTERNET The Journals for the Senate are available at: http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/work/journals/index.htm Proof and Official Hansards for the House of Representatives, the Senate and committee hearings are available at: http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard

SITTING DAYS—2002 Month Date February 12, 13, 14 March 11, 12, 13, 14, 19, 20, 21 May 14, 15, 16 June 17, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, 26, 27 August 19, 20, 21, 22, 26, 27, 28, 29 September 16, 17, 18, 19, 23, 24, 25, 26 October 14, 15, 16, 17, 21, 22, 23, 24 November 11, 12, 13, 14, 18, 19, 20, 21 December 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12

RADIO BROADCASTS Broadcasts of proceedings of the Parliament can be heard on the following Parliamentary and News Network radio stations, in the areas identified.

CANBERRA 1440 AM SYDNEY 630 AM NEWCASTLE 1458 AM BRISBANE 936 AM MELBOURNE 1026 AM ADELAIDE 972 AM PERTH 585 AM HOBART 729 AM DARWIN 102.5 FM SENATE CONTENTS

WEDNESDAY, 23 OCTOBER Business— Rearrangement...... 5659 Consideration of Legislation ...... 5659 Notices— Postponement ...... 5667 Workplace Relations Amendment (Fair Dismissal) Bill 2002— First Reading ...... 5668 Second Reading...... 5668 Business— Consideration of Legislation ...... 5669 Crimes Amendment Bill 2002— First Reading ...... 5669 Second Reading...... 5670 Third Reading...... 5674 Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment Bill 2002— Second Reading...... 5674 In Committee...... 5680 Third Reading...... 5681 Family and Community Services Legislation Amendment (Australians Working Together and Other 2001 Budget Measures) Bill 2002— Second Reading...... 5682 Matters of Public Interest— Western Australia: Timber Industry ...... 5699 Western Australia: Electoral Distribution Repeal Bill...... 5699 Superannuation: Industry Funds...... 5702 Information Technology: Unsolicited Emails...... 5705 Never Pay Rent Again Home Loans...... 5707 Agriculture: Sugar Industry...... 5709 Veterans: Home Care...... 5711 Questions Without Notice— Indonesia: Terrorist Attacks...... 5714 Indonesia: Terrorist Attacks...... 5714 Health: Breast Prostheses ...... 5715 Insurance: Medical Indemnity...... 5716 Environment: Kyoto Protocol...... 5717 Finance: Housing...... 5718 Defence: Budget ...... 5719 Science: Human Cloning...... 5720 Centrelink: Breaching...... 5721 Drought...... 5721 Superannuation: Commercial Nominees of Australia Ltd...... 5722 Environment: Renewable Energy...... 5723 Business: Executive Remuneration ...... 5724 Information Technology: Research...... 5725 Questions Without Notice: Additional Answers— Agriculture: Agricultural Development Partnership Program...... 5726 Questions Without Notice: Take Note of Answers— Superannuation: Commercial Nominees of Australia Ltd...... 5727 Environment: Renewable Energy...... 5731 Petitions— Food: Irradiation...... 5732 SENATE CONTENTS—continued

Notices— Withdrawal ...... 5732 Committees— Selection of Bills Committee—Report...... 5732 Notices— Postponement ...... 5734 Withdrawal ...... 5734 Disability Discrimination Standards for Accessible Public Transport 2002...... 5734 Committees— Employment, Workplace Relations and Education References Committee— Extension of Time...... 5735 Employment, Workplace Relations and Education References Committee— Reference...... 5735 Electoral Matters Committee—Meeting...... 5735 Linow, Mrs Valerie ...... 5735 Indigenous Justice...... 5736 Korean Solidarity for Human Rights Group...... 5736 Monash University: Shooting ...... 5737 Business— Rearrangement...... 5737 Matters of Urgency— Insurance: Medical Indemnity...... 5738 Business— Rearrangement...... 5745 Committees— Publications Committee—Report...... 5745 Scrutiny of Bills Committee—Report ...... 5745 Corporations and Financial Services Committee—Report...... 5746 A Certain Maritime Incident Committee—Report ...... 5751 Documents— Auditor-General’s Reports—Report No. 13 of 2002-03 ...... 5773 Joint House Department ...... 5773 Committees— Membership...... 5773 Assent ...... 5773 Broadcasting Services Amendment (Media Ownership) Bill 2002— First Reading ...... 5773 Second Reading...... 5774 Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Amendment Regulations 2002 (No. 5)...... 5777 Egg Industry Service Provision Bill 2002 ...... 5782 Egg Industry Service Provision (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Bill 2002— Report of Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee ...... 5782 Business— Consideration of Legislation ...... 5782 Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorist Organisations) Bill 2002— First Reading ...... 5783 Second Reading...... 5783 Third Reading...... 5787 SENATE CONTENTS—continued

Committees— Membership...... 5787 Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Amendment Bill 2002— Second Reading...... 5787 Third Reading...... 5788 Documents— Parliament: Administration...... 5789 Business— Rearrangement...... 5789 Insurance and Aviation Liability Legislation Amendment Bill 2002— Second Reading...... 5789 Third Reading...... 5790 Family and Community Services Legislation Amendment (Budget Initiatives and Other Measures) Bill 2002— Second Reading...... 5790 Third Reading...... 5792 Family Law Legislation Amendment (Superannuation) (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2002— Second Reading...... 5793 In Committee...... 5795 Third Reading...... 5797 Adjournment— Victoria: Bracks Government ...... 5797 A Certain Maritime Incident Committee Report ...... 5799 Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee Report...... 5801 A Certain Maritime Incident Committee Report ...... 5803 Documents— Tabling...... 5804 Tabling...... 5806 Questions on Notice— Commonwealth Heritage Properties—(Question No. 408)...... 5807 Forestry: Regional Forest Agreements—(Question No. 500) ...... 5808 Defence: Fremantle Class Patrol Boat Fleet—(Question No. 563)...... 5809 Political Parties: Non-Electorate Staff—(Question No. 661)...... 5811 Defence: Naval Shipbuilding and Repair Sector Plan—(Question No. 662)...... 5812 Education: Cultural Heritage—(Question No. 703) ...... 5812

Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5659

Wednesday, 23 October 2002 Question, as amended, agreed to. ————— Consideration of Legislation The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western Paul Calvert) took the chair at 9.30 a.m., Australia—Manager of Government Busi- and read prayers. ness in the Senate) (9.32 a.m.)—I move: BUSINESS That the provisions of paragraphs (5) to (7) of Rearrangement standing order 111 not apply to the following bills, allowing them to be considered during this Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western period of sittings: Australia—Manager of Government Busi- Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) ness in the Senate) (9.31 a.m.)—I move: Amendment Bill 2002 That government business notice of motion Broadcasting Legislation Amendment Bill No. 1, standing in my name for today, relating to (No. 1) 2002 the days and hours of meeting and routine of business for the first sitting week in November, Egg Industry Service Provision Bill 2002 be postponed to a later hour of the day. Egg Industry Service Provision (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Bill 2002 Question agreed to. Excise Laws Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2002 Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western Australia—Manager of Government Busi- Excise Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2002 ness in the Senate) (9.31 a.m.)—as amended, Excise Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2002 by leave—I move: Customs Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 2) That— 2002 (1) On Wednesday, 23 October 2002: Family and Community Services Legislation Amendment (Budget Initiatives and Other (a) consideration of government Measures) Bill 2002 documents shall not be proceeded with; and Inspector-General of Taxation Bill 2002 (b) the routine of business from 6.50 p.m. Insurance and Aviation Liability Legislation to 7.20 p.m. shall be consideration of Amendment Bill 2002. the following bills: Senator LUDWIG (Queensland—Man- Insurance and Aviation Liability ager of Opposition Business in the Senate Legislation Amendment Bill 2002 (9.32 a.m.)—I ask that the question be di- Family and Community Services vided in relation to the Inspector-General of Legislation Amendment (Budget Taxation Bill 2002. If the question is divided, Initiatives and Other Measures) then the opposition will agree in relation to Bill 2002 the other matters. We wish to express a dif- Family Law Legislation Amend- ferent view in relation to the Inspector- ment (Superannuation) (Conse- General of Taxation Bill. quential Provisions) Bill 2002 Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (9.33 Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern a.m.)—This government motion is to exempt Territory) Amendment Bill 2002. about 10 bills from the requirement under (2) On Thursday, 24 October 2002: standing order 111 that the Senate give time (a) the hours of meeting shall be 9.30 am in any session for the proper evaluation of to adjournment; legislation coming from the House of Repre- (b) the routine of business shall be: sentatives or otherwise introduced here, so that we are able to go to our constituencies, (i) Prayers, get feedback on the legislation and properly (ii) Notices of motion; and handle it from that informed basis. We have (c) the Senate shall stand adjourned here a list of bills which in the main do not immediately after notices of motion fit the requirement of urgency, and they have to enable senators to attend a been put before us now to be dealt with as memorial service for the victims of bills that are exempt from the cut-off largely terrorist attacks in Bali. 5660 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 because the government has not done its High definition television is being intro- homework. duced at a great rate. We warned that new Let us look at the bills. The first one, sets would cost $8,000 to $10,000 and that which is the Aboriginal Land Rights (North- there would not be the rapid uptake that the ern Territory) Amendment Bill 2002, is to companies were talking about. Mr President, enable the people of Harry Creek East in the you will remember the display here in Par- Northern Territory to be relocated, with free- liament House when we were told that this hold title, onto traditional land of theirs that technology was here, it was now on the go— is located elsewhere, because the Alice ‘Let’s get it.’ It is not here, it is not now on Springs-Darwin railway construction is tak- the go and people are not getting it. This is a ing place in their current habitat. We are not delaying tactic to give the lucky licence going to oppose that bill being given rapid holders for that spectrum more time. There is passage through the parliament, because this no legitimate argument here. The govern- group of Indigenous people are being effec- ment have not presented any reason for that tively dispossessed of their houses by the other than to say that they are not ready. rapid progress of that railway line. Of course, Why aren’t they ready? They wanted the it is legitimate that they be given freehold legislation passed urgently last year. They title to their own lands at another site. said they had to get this through or we would be left behind. Without an explanation for When we look at the next piece of legisla- that, it is not legitimate that we now drop the tion, which is the Broadcasting Legislation provisions of proper Senate process which Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2002, we see that would allow us to better investigate this the government is introducing a piece of matter. We should have an informed debate legislation effectively to cover the failure on instead of a rushed one in the interests of the part of those who have gained from last people who have apparently defaulted on year’s broadcasting legislation to provide the their intention of providing those services to services that we were promised Australians the Australian public. were going to get under that legislation. I am sure, Mr President, you will remember that The next pieces of legislation are the Egg debate; it was a very heated one in the Sen- Industry Service Provision Bill 2002 and the ate. Big media organisations are being given Egg Industry Service Provision (Transitional a large part of the spectrum for a pittance in and Consequential Provisions) Bill 2002. order to bring in high definition television The reasons for urgency provided by the broadcasting and, effectively, at the same government to the Senate state that the Aus- time, new players are being excluded from tralian Egg Industry Association consulted acquiring that broadcast band. New players widely on this proposal between April and could give Australians expanded options in a September 2001 and that an industry vote whole range of information and broadcast revealed widespread support for a new com- services. pany and promotional levy—that is, to pro- mote the sale of eggs in the country. That is In the government brief it is proposed that fine; I will support that. But we are talking the commencement date of 1 January 2003 about a process whereby the industry for a 20-hour-a-week high definition televi- adopted this and said to the government, ‘Go sion quota obligation on those broadcasters ahead,’ more than 12 months ago. The prob- who got the spectrum be delayed by six lem is that the minister, Senator Ian Mac- months. The big media organisations are donald, has not done his job. He should be using this rushed legislation to cover their here now—he is not—to explain why this is own commercial interests. They have shut required. He has failed in his job. He has had out other players. The government supported more than 12 months to get that legislation that. It was supported by Labor. They have ready; indeed, it should have been introduced now got an obligation to provide the services at the end of last year. But we are getting it which they said were essential and for which 12 months later, and we are being told it has the legislation was needed. to be rushed through because it is urgent. Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5661

We are being told to drop provisions dated within 12 months of the date of tabling which allow the other parties in here to go which is 20 February 2003. out as independent arbiters and speak to peo- The question is: why wasn’t this legislation ple who are affected by this legislation in brought in earlier? What is the reason for order to make sure that it cannot be im- removing the indexation? Is it a gift to the oil proved or altered in the interests of the in- industry? If it is a gift to the oil industry and dustry and the buying public. It is not good it is going to reduce money going into the enough for ministers who do not do their job product stewardship oil levy—which, on behalf of the industries and the public amongst other things, I was told, during the whom they represent to come in here at this opportunity I had overnight to look at this stage of the political calendar and suddenly matter, involves helping the legitimate busi- say, ‘We want the proper processes’—which ness of recycling oil in the country—the the Senate has put into law and which give question is: why should we deal with this the Senate time to properly consult with the legislation without having more time to con- community—‘dropped because we were ei- sider it? As you know, Mr President, there ther too lazy or we have been ineffective or are people in Tasmania who have excellent dilatory in our job of making sure that legis- expertise in recycling oil. I do not know lation is brought in in a timely fashion so that whether their industry is depending on this the Senate can look at it with due diligence.’ levy, and I do not know whether indexation Then we have the Excise Laws Amend- is going to reduce the levy and therefore not ment Bill (No. 1) 2002 and the Excise Tariff fund their work as well as it could. I want the Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2002. The reason minister to be present to explain why we for urgency from the government is stated in need this now and why he did not introduce one sentence: this legislation earlier. He has obviously had The alcohol labelling and excise payment meas- plenty of warning. ure is retrospective to the time of the announce- Then we have the Family and Community ment, 14 May 2002, and it is desirable to provide Services Legislation Amendment (Budget certainty to affected taxpayers. Initiatives and Other Measures) Bill 2002. I May 2002 was five months ago. Suddenly, do not need to remind you, Mr President, we are getting this bill and we are effectively that the budget was brought down in May. asked that it be made an urgent bill—again, The Minister for Family and Community because the Treasurer, Mr Costello, has not Services, Senator Vanstone—who is also not ensured that the legislation was introduced here at the moment—said: here in time for a proper perusal by the Sen- The Bill will also amend the social security law to ate. It does have an impact on the industry, it streamline the process to allow more people car- is not proper process, and the government ing for certain terminally ill children to qualify have only themselves to blame. Effectively, for carer payment. what they are saying is, ‘We haven’t pre- The Greens do not want to delay the passage pared this on time; the Senate should make of this legislation but what we say is: why up for our default.’ wasn’t this legislation brought in earlier? This motion also includes the Excise Tar- This is a budget flow-on matter. The reason iff Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2002 and the for urgency given by Senator Vanstone was Customs Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 2) as follows: 2002. The reason for urgency this time was The Bill needs to be passed in the spring sittings reduced to two sentences. I quote from the to allow finalisation of supporting administration advice provided by Minister for Justice and ahead of the proposed July next year commence- Customs, Senator Ellison, who is not here to ment date for the nominees initiative. Early pas- put the case for urgency: sage of the bill would also enable more people caring for certain terminally ill children to qualify Enactment of the bills prior to 1 February 2003 is for carer payment. required to avoid further indexation taking effect on the Product Stewardship Oil Levy. Further, Please, where is the minister? She should Excise Tariff Proposal No.1 (2002) must be vali- explain why she did not get this legislation in 5662 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 earlier. Why was it not here five months ago? We are talking about the government’s emer- The payment is obviously going to be very gency provisions of September last year—13 important to some individuals out in the months ago. The question that Senator Mac- community, but the minister is treating it as donald should be answering for us is: why though it were not important—as though it didn’t he have that legislation in here last were just something that the Senate should year? I am not going to simply say, ‘Well, rubber-stamp. We have a function of review the Senate doesn’t count,’ like these govern- in this important house, and that involves our ment ministers make out. I am not simply being able to consult with people in the going to allow this process, which is getting community who are affected. We should not worse month by month and year by year, to simply take the minister’s word when she flout the Senate’s proper role as a house of says, ‘This is urgent; I haven’t been able to review. The problem is with the executive; it get to it for five months for reasons unspeci- is not with the Senate. The Senate has to take fied but I want you now to deal with it with- a stand on this. We concede that there is ur- out community consultation.’ gency in regard to some measures; we do not On the list is the Inspector-General of want to penalise people because of the min- Taxation Bill 2002. This time it is Senator isters’ lack of diligence, but in the other Coonan’s responsibility. She also is not here. matters we see absolutely no reason for sup- The reason for urgency given by Senator porting the government’s failure to get this Coonan states: legislation in here on time. In some cases it should have been in here 12 months ago. We The office of Inspector-General of Taxation is intended to be operational by the end of 2002 and want to support the Senate’s right to have funding was included in the 2002-03 Budget for adequate time to consult with the community the establishment of the office. on these matters. I move: There is a government commitment and commu- Omit: nity expectation that the office will be established Broadcasting Legislation Amendment Bill and operational by the end of 2002. (No. 1) 2002 Why didn’t Senator Coonan bring in that Egg Industry Service Provision Bill 2002 legislation months ago? She set the deadline. Egg Industry Service Provision (Transitional She should set in place the process that prop- and Consequential Provisions) Bill 2002 erly recognises the role that this house has in Excise Laws Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2002 debating an issue which has had quite a lot of media coverage, rather than just dump legis- Excise Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2002 lation in here and expect it to be rubber- Excise Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2002 stamped. Customs Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 2) We have another bill from Senator Ian 2002 Macdonald, who is not here, titled the Insur- Inspector-General of Taxation Bill 2002 ance and Aviation Liability Legislation Insurance and Aviation Liability Legislation Amendment Bill 2002. Amongst the reasons Amendment Bill 2002. for urgency, in writing, Senator Macdonald Senator BARTLETT (Queensland— tells the Senate: Leader of the Australian Democrats) (9.49 Since September 2001, the government has been a.m.)—I will try to be brief in relation to this providing indemnities to cover the difference question but, given the debate that has oc- between the amount of cover commercially avail- curred, it is important to put the Democrats’ able ... and that held by aviation enterprises be- views on the record and to explain perhaps a fore the terrorist attacks. little more clearly the purpose of standing He was referring to the attacks in New York. order 111(5) to (7). The motion, I believe, He went on to state: has its genesis in the activities of one of my Passage of the amending legislation is also likely Queensland Democrat predecessors, former to significantly reduce the number and size of Senator Michael Macklin. The reason behind indemnities provided by the Commonwealth. it was basically to prevent, at such a time during a parliamentary session, having leg- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5663 islation introduced and railroaded through tend committee hearings and to listen to the without proper scrutiny. We all know that the evidence to get our heads around the issues. risk of that happening increases as we get In the case of these bills, with the exception towards the end of the year. Nonetheless, that of the Inspector-General of Taxation Bill motivation, which is one that the Democrats 2002, that is the case. The Democrats are strongly stand by, needs to be balanced certainly across them all and we believe that against the responsibility of the Senate, there is no compelling case why they should which is the key chamber in terms of consid- not be allowed to proceed or at least given ering legislation, to make sure that there are the opportunity to proceed, if the government no unnecessary hold-ups. Broadly speaking, so wishes. the Senate has mostly not insisted on pre- There will, of course, no doubt be in- venting bills from being exempted from this creased arm wrestling between us about cut-off motion under standing order 111, as which bills get priority in the shrinking num- long as there was a case for their being put ber of weeks we have left this year. We have through in the specified time. The key aspect slightly less than four full sitting weeks to is that, as legislators, we ensure that we are go. That is a separate debate. Allowing them across the legislation before us. through at this stage is not the same as say- The bill that Senator Ludwig outlined, the ing that we support the bills or saying that Inspector-General of Taxation Bill 2002, they should have priority over other more which I think is going to be referred to a important legislation but it at least leaves committee, is one that the Democrats agree them in the mix for the Senate to determine needs further consideration. Therefore, it those that are non-controversial, beneficial or should not be subject to time pressures to try have time issues involved. to get it back to the Senate before the end of Senator Brown was a little bit harsh in his the year. The Egg Industry Service Provision view of some of these things. While I agree Bill 2002 has already been examined by a with some of his comments in relation to committee, and the report is expected to be legislation being delayed more than is neces- released today. I do not think that any of the sary, I know from experience that legislation bills on the list is likely to be debated today, like the family and community services leg- so we will have a full fortnight to consider islation takes a lot of time to get together. them. Agreeing to Senator Ian Campbell’s The Social Security Act is incredibly com- motion will not mean that the bills do not plex and the IT systems used to administer it receive adequate scrutiny. We obviously will are also complex, so there is a long lead time have the opportunity to debate them fully in to get legislation together and a long lead the chamber, to ask the sorts of questions time to implement it. In that context, the rea- that Senator Brown has raised and to move sons for it not appearing the night after or vote against amendments if necessary. budget night are fairly justifiable. The same Given that these bills will not be debated thing applies to a few of the other areas today and there is still a full two weeks which I will not go into. available, from the Democrats’ view of It is not quite as black and white as the things, we are aware of the details of the previous speaker suggested. We have to act legislation and what they are trying to do. responsibly where a credible case is made for We do not wish to hold up the bills unneces- urgency. The contrary also applies, of course, sarily where there is a case that it is benefi- particularly given the end of session logjam cial for them to have the opportunity of be- that often happens. Where there is no case ing passed this year, and that case can be for urgency, we should not allow bills in made and it is justified that there has been there, because they simply take up time adequate opportunity to examine them. The needed for other more important legislation. Senate needs to balance its responsibilities That is probably a relevant comment for the and it needs to utilise its powers responsibly next government notice of motion, which I and not hold things up unnecessarily. We will speak to when we get to it. also have a duty to follow legislation, to at- 5664 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

Senator LUDWIG (Queensland—Man- miss of us not to ensure that these bills, ex- ager of Opposition Business in the Senate cept for the Inspector-General of Taxation (9.55 a.m.)—In relation to the motion, the Bill 2002, are included in that mix for con- opposition take the government’s position at sideration. As Senator Brown knows, some face value unless something puts them on of those bills are non-controversial and can notice that that may not be the case. When be passed before the end of the year. Some of the government advises that these are urgent them will generate further debate, and I sus- bills which are required to be exempt from pect some will need further scrutiny, and that the cut-off, we examine the issues behind the can be done during the sitting period before exemptions from the cut-off, which, as I rec- the end of the year. There is sufficient time. ollect, the Democrats were behind in this We are going into a two-week break, which case. will allow the various people who have an Senator Brown interjecting— interest in those bills to consider them before we come back in a fortnight’s time. Senator LUDWIG—I am advised that it was the Greens. Perhaps I can take this opportunity to ex- plain why the Inspector-General of Taxation Senator Brown—It was Christabelle Bill 2002 should be taken off the list. The Chamarette. reason is more an argument over when that Senator LUDWIG—That is right; it was. exemption should be requested. I foreshadow I am sure the Democrats would have sup- that later this morning we will be amending a ported you at the time, Senator Brown; so we motion relating to the Selection of Bills can say this was collectively between Labor, Committee to send that bill to a committee. the Greens and the Democrats. We believe that it requires scrutiny. As I un- Nevertheless, the position Labor adopts in derstand it, it will then report back some time respect of this is that, the government having this year. At that point, it may be appropriate declared these bills as urgent, if there is to consider again whether it should be ex- something that puts us on notice that that empt from the cut-off, but that is a matter for may not be the case or there may be re- the government to determine in due course quirements to deal with the bills or undue and we will consider that issue, should it be pressure is put on the timetable, that will be put before us. However, at this point in time, an issue. We would then examine the bills it is our view that the Inspector-General of individually to see whether they have been Taxation Bill 2002 should not be provided dealt with by committees, and we have been with exemption from the cut-off. It is not an advised that some of them have been. We issue that is urgent for consideration during would look at the complexity and nature of the break. the bills to determine whether there is an Senator MURPHY (Tasmania) (9.59 issue that needs to be addressed before the a.m.)—With regard to the comments made end of the year and we would make a judg- by Senator Ludwig on the Inspector-General ment on those matters and reach a view of Taxation Bill 2002, I share his view. about whether they can be exempt from the Whilst I suspect this is a matter that would cut-off. That does not necessarily mean that have been and is still important to taxpayers, they will be dealt with by the end of the year; it should not have taken the government this it means that they are in the mix to be con- long to bring this bill forward. Indeed, my sidered. first reading of the bill would suggest to me As we move towards the end of the year, that this bill is a nothing, that the proposals the Senate knows that there will be time contained in the bill do not represent what pressures on what legislation can and will be the government promised the taxpayers; and dealt with. As we all know, we will look at I believe it ought to be referred to a commit- the priority legislation the government wants tee, because this is an important issue and it to move and we will examine it in due needs to be got right. So I would not agree to course. It is a little early to say what that pri- the Inspector-General of Taxation Bill 2002 ority list will be, but I think it would be re- being included in the list of bills. It should be Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5665 taken off it. It should be referred to a com- of things from standing orders for very good mittee. Despite the fact that the government reasons. It always occurs with a majority did promise that they would have this in decision of the Senate, and it seems that the place by the end of the year, that may not be vote on this bill will be passed with a signifi- the case as a result of a failure to bring in this cant majority, if the number-counting skills I bill in a much earlier time frame. But that is have learnt through my career are of any not the fault of the Senate: it is the responsi- benefit to me, of the order of 74 votes to two, bility of the government to bring in these with the exception of pairs. I have not fig- bills in a timely manner so that they can be ured out how Senator Kerry Nettle is going considered. to vote yet; she could have a split in the As I said, I have very serious concerns Greens on this one if she is sensible. about what is proposed in the bill as it cur- We need to understand the process here. rently stands. I went back and checked some In most cases the bills that we are exempting statements made by the Prime Minister on have been available for some extended pe- that particular proposal and I would suggest riod of time. Reflections were made on the to the government that what the Prime Min- diligence of my ministerial colleagues. Ref- ister proposed to the people of this country erences were made as to why they were not about an inspector-general for taxation is in the chamber to explain the urgency of certainly not represented in the form of this their bills. I explain the urgency of the bills bill. So I oppose the motion on the basis that on their behalf, as the Manager of Govern- it contains the Inspector-General of Taxation ment Business in the Senate. They distribute, Bill 2002. in most cases, detailed notes on the urgency Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western and on the consultations that have occurred Australia—Manager of Government Busi- in the process of bringing the bills here. On 8 ness in the Senate) (10.01 a.m.)—I thank all August this year, many months ago and some senators for their contribution to the de- weeks before we came together in the na- bate—although, on a day when the Senate tional capital for the spring sittings, I circu- will probably be dealing with more business lated a detailed list of all legislation that the than it has dealt with for many days, it is government wanted to consider in these sit- slightly frustrating to have to have the de- tings, which allowed all senators—including bate. It is still an important one, and I par- Senator Brown if he was diligent—to go ticularly welcome the contribution of Senator through that list diligently and find pieces of Andrew Bartlett, the new Democrats leader: legislation such as the egg bill, as I am be- it showed a sound understanding of the proc- ginning to call it—the Egg Industry Service ess, which we appreciate. I also appreciate Provision Bill 2002. If he had an interest in the support of the Manager of Opposition the egg bill, he could have picked it up from Business in the Senate, who shows a sound that list on 8 August—and, yes, it was on understanding of the competing stresses on that list. He could have come to me or to the the Senate’s time and the management of the minister or to Parliamentary Liaison Officer government’s business program in the Sen- Myra Croke and said, ‘I have an interest in ate, which is very rarely anything but diffi- this bill. Can I please get a briefing on the cult because of the modern complexities of bill? Can I get a copy of the bill as soon as managing what you could only describe as it’s available or even a draft copy before it is an important medium sized power in the introduced?’ But did Senator Brown do that world. There is a range of governance issues in relation to the egg bill? Of course not— and there are always changes occurring. and it was available. Can I say for the record, because I think it The customs bill he referred to was intro- is important that all Australians understand duced on 22 August, two months ago. If he this, that if you listen to Senator Brown’s was interested in the customs bill, he could comments you might think that there is some have come to us—come to the minister—and sort of railroading going on; however, the got a briefing from the Assistant Treasurer, Senate envisages the exemption of a number the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer 5666 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 or the Treasurer himself. But was he really tinue to do that and we will see it go to the diligent and was he interested? Of course Senate committee, which is the proper proc- not. Was he interested in the Broadcasting ess. We will cop legitimate criticism from Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2002, Senator Murphy and others who say we can which was introduced on 25 September, two improve it; we will listen to that. We have months ago? Did he ring up Senator Alston’s done our job within the Treasury, within the office and say, ‘I have an interest in this, government and within Senator Coonan’s Senator Alston. I want to be diligent. I want office to bring forward the best bill we can to ensure the Senate considers this bill prop- through a diligent process. I am sure Senator erly. I want to do my job as a senator for Murphy knows there is very broad consulta- Tasmania. I care about HDTV and digital TV tion on a new policy proposal. It is a new for Tasmanians’? Did he do that? No, he did concept. Are we going to get it right first not. What he does do is come in here and time? Let us see. pull another stunt—and that is what he is Senator Murphy interjecting— good at, not diligent consideration of legisla- tion. What did he do on every one of the 60- Senator IAN CAMPBELL—Senator odd days between now and 25 September? Murphy says no; I am sure Senator Coonan Did he diligently go and have a look at the would say she has got it absolutely right. But broadcasting amendment bill? Did he go and that is what the Senate can do. Of course, have consultations with people? Did he ring some of the bills for which we are seeking up Kerry Packer or Kerry Stokes or any of the exemption from the cut-off have in fact the TV people and say, ‘I want to have a yarn already been to two committees. For exam- to you about this’? No, he did not. He was ple, the customs bill, which Senator Brown not diligent: he did not look at the legisla- was saying was going to be railroaded tion; he has not asked for a copy of it. The through, has already been through a detailed family and community services legislation inquiry by the Senate Economics Legislation came into the parliament on 26 September. Committee. Regarding the egg industry bill, Has he asked for a briefing on that? No. He about which he says, ‘We need consultation; showed no interest in any of these bills. the Senate needs to consider the egg industry bill,’ do you know where that bill is? I will What we have seen today from Senator give you three guesses. It is actually before Brown is that he said we are trying to rail- the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and road these things. Of course we are not. We Transport Committee. introduced them diligently, we went through a diligent policy process, and the ministers Senator Brown would have listeners who worked extraordinary hours to bring these are driving around Australia listening to this proposals together. Senator Murphy made program on the Parliamentary News Net- some quite legitimate comments about the work believe that we are railroading the egg Inspector-General of Taxation Bill, which the bill through the Senate; it was referred to the government has been working hard on. You relevant committee. They have gone around could say that Senator Coonan should have and consulted, but where were you, Senator brought it here more quickly, but I think even Brown? Telling all my ministerial colleagues Senator Murphy would know that Senator they are not diligent for doing the bill prop- Coonan has been working particularly hard erly. Where were you on those areas? Did on a whole range of issues. She probably has you go to one hearing? Did you get yourself one of the busiest workloads in the govern- put on the committee? Do you care about the ment, and I think Senator Murphy would egg bill? Of course you do not. You care respect that. about coming in here and casting aspersions on hardworking senators on that committee, I am not making any excuses; I am just hardworking ministers who are doing their saying that even Senator Murphy would job for Australia—you come in here and pull know that the government have tried very a stunt. hard to live by our promise to get the bill passed by Christmas this year. We will con- I thank Senator Bartlett for his support and I thank Senator Ludwig for the opposi- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5667 tion’s support. We will not pull any stunts. (The Acting Deputy President—Senator We will work hard to make sure that Austra- S.C. Knowles) lia is well governed and we will not cop it Ayes………… 2 when this lazy senator wanders in here and pulls another stunt. This person is not dili- Noes………… 45 gent. How can he possibly stand up and cast Majority……… 43 aspersions on ministerial colleagues who AYES work hard for this country— Brown, B.J. * Nettle, K. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Knowles)—Order! Senator Ian NOES Campbell, I ask you to withdraw your termi- Allison, L.F. Barnett, G. nology in referring to Senator Brown. Bartlett, A.J.J. Boswell, R.L.D. Senator IAN CAMPBELL—I referred to Buckland, G. Campbell, G. Campbell, I.G. Carr, K.J. him as lazy and I should not have done so. It Colbeck, R. Cook, P.F.S. was inappropriate of me to do so. However, I Crossin, P.M. * Eggleston, A. am saying that he should not call other Ferguson, A.B. Ferris, J.M. senators— Forshaw, M.G. Greig, B. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- Heffernan, W. Hogg, J.J. DENT—Could you withdraw the comment? Johnston, D. Kemp, C.R. Senator IAN CAMPBELL—I have Kirk, L. Knowles, S.C. withdrawn it unconditionally. In fact, I am Lees, M.H. Lightfoot, P.R. chastising myself. I am in the process of Ludwig, J.W. Lundy, K.A. saying it is not fair for this bloke, this hon- Marshall, G. Mason, B.J. McLucas, J.E. Moore, C. ourable senator, to come in here and say that Murray, A.J.M. O’Brien, K.W.K. ministers and other senators are not diligent Patterson, K.C. Payne, M.A. when they have been working hard on the Ray, R.F. Reid, M.E. egg bill, which Senator Brown has not been Ridgeway, A.D. Scullion, N.G. doing. How dare he come in here and say to Tchen, T. Tierney, J.W. the Australian people that this egg bill has Troeth, J.M. Vanstone, A.E. been railroaded through, when it is being Watson, J.O.W. Webber, R. considered by a committee at the moment? I Wong, P. think the report is coming in today. Will he * denotes teller read the report? Of course he will not. The Question negatived. closest he comes to caring about an egg is when he hoes into one at breakfast time with The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT his knife and fork—that is about as close as (Senator Knowles)—The question is that he comes to caring about eggs in this place. the motion in respect of all bills except the Inspector-General of Taxation Bill 2002 be Madam Acting Deputy President, the Sen- agreed to. ate considers legislation in a most diligent fashion. The government brings forward Question agreed to. legislation in a most diligent fashion, and the The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- person who is least qualified to talk about the DENT—The question now is that the motion diligence of the process is the one who has in respect of the Inspector-General of Taxa- caused this debate. I commend my motion to tion Bill 2002 be agreed to. the Senate and I thank people for their sup- Question negatived. port. NOTICES Question put: Postponement That the amendment (Senator Brown’s) be Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western agreed to. Australia—Manager of Government Busi- The Senate divided. [10.16 a.m.] ness in the Senate) (10.20 a.m.)—I move: 5668 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

That government business notice of motion Members will be familiar with the content and No. 4 standing in the name of the Parliamentary intent of this bill. It is the same bill that was laid Secretary to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisher- aside on 28 June 2002 after Members of this ies and Forestry (Senator Troeth), relating to the House rejected Senate amendments that would consideration of legislation, be postponed till a have destroyed the employment creating potential later hour. of this bill. Question agreed to. The Government is reintroducing this bill to WORKPLACE RELATIONS honour a commitment it has made to the people of Australia to free up the large number of small AMENDMENT (FAIR DISMISSAL) business jobs that are being lost because of the BILL 2002 unfair dismissal laws. First Reading ABS labour force figures show that more than Bill received from the House of Repre- one million jobs have now been created since the sentatives. Government came to office in March 1996. The Government has produced an environment which Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western fosters sustained jobs growth through sound eco- Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the nomic policies, sound fiscal management, and Treasurer) (10.20 a.m.)—I move: workplace relations reforms to help small busi- That this bill may proceed without formalities ness. and be now read a first time. These businesses account for 96 per cent of all Question agreed to. businesses and our workplace relations system must be responsive to the needs of Australia’s Bill read a first time. hard working small business men and women. Second Reading The unfair dismissal laws currently place a Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western disproportionate burden on small businesses. At- Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the tending a Commission hearing alone can require a Treasurer) (10.21 a.m.)—I move: small business owner to close business for the day. The time and cost of defending a claim can That this bill be now read a second time. be substantial. I seek leave to have the second reading In giving evidence before the Senate Commit- speech incorporated in Hansard. tee inquiring into this bill, the restaurant and ca- Leave granted. tering industry indicated that, it costs, on average, $3600 and around 63 hours of management time The speech read as follows— to defend an unfair dismissal claim. This bill amends the Workplace Relations Act Many small business owners are not confident 1996 to prevent the unfair dismissal provisions that they know how to comply with the dismissal from applying to small businesses with fewer laws. A recent survey by CPA Australia, for ex- than 20 employees. ample, found that 27 per cent of small business If passed it will to improve the employment owners thought that they were unable to dismiss prospects of people, particularly unemployed an employee even if the employee was stealing people, seeking jobs in the small business sector. from them, and 30 per cent of small business It will protect small businesses from the costs and owners thought that employers always lost unfair administrative burden of unfair dismissal claims dismissal cases. These small business concerns in the federal system. will persist under the current laws. The bill will require the Australian Industrial Research has found that many small busi- Relations Commission to order that an unfair nesses are reacting to the complexity and cost of dismissal application is not valid if it involves a unfair dismissal laws by not taking on additional small business employer. This provision will only employees. The Senate Committee inquiring into apply to the new employees of a small business, this bill looked at the many surveys and projects not to existing ones. on the impact of the unfair dismissal laws and However, it will not exempt small businesses concluded that the arguments in favour of ex- from the unlawful termination provisions of the empting small business were compelling. Act, which, amongst other things, prohibit em- For almost a decade federal unfair dismissal ployees from being dismissed for discriminatory laws have created a serious obstacle to employ- reasons such as their age, gender or religion. ment growth in Australia. A report by the Centre for Independent Studies indicates that if only 5 Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5669 per cent of small businesses employed just one Territory provisions that restrict the ability of the extra person, 50,000 jobs would be created. The Commonwealth, States and Territories to ex- report concludes that ‘employment in small busi- change DNA information. This will ensure that ness would rise significantly in the absence of the DNA collected and analysed by the States and unfair dismissal laws’. Territories as a result of the Bali bombing, can be In reintroducing this bill, the Government is up-loaded and matched on the CrimTrac system continuing its commitment to address the needs and the results communicated to the relevant and circumstances of the small business sector authorities both in Australia and overseas. and to create jobs. This sector has tremendous The application of the legislation to future inci- growth potential and is vital to the Australian dents will require a determination of the Minister economy. which will be a disallowable instrument. This will I commend the bill. ensure that the existing regime remains the pri- mary source governing the exchange of DNA Ordered that further consideration of this information. bill be adjourned to the first day of the next The amendments will also clarify the category of period of sittings, in accordance with stand- people to whom information may be disclosed for ing order 111. non-law enforcement purposes and enable the BUSINESS matching of the unknown deceased persons index Consideration of Legislation with an unknown deceased person access. There is a need to have the legislation apply ret- Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western rospectively to ensure that the existing restrictions Australia—Manager of Government Busi- on the sharing of that information do not preclude ness in the Senate) (10.22 a.m.)—by leave— its transmission to the Commonwealth. I move: Reasons for Urgency That the provisions of standing order 111 not The amendments to the Crimes Act 1914 are ur- apply to the Crimes Amendment Bill 2002. gently required as some State and Territory police I table a statement of reasons justifying the services have commenced collecting samples need for this bill to be considered during from relatives of those who are missing. Until these sittings and I seek leave to have the legislation is enacted that modifies existing re- statement incorporated in Hansard. strictions on the sharing of information held on DNA databases, the process of investigating the Leave granted. Bali incident and the identification of deceased The statement read as follows— persons could be delayed. Purpose of the Bill (Circulated by authority of the Minister for Jus- The Crimes Amendment Bill 2002 will put in tice and Customs) place measures to enable the Commonwealth, Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (10.22 States and Territories to access and disclose in- a.m.)—The Crimes Amendment Bill 2002 is formation held on DNA databases for the pur- an extraordinarily important bill. As the gov- poses of: ernment has informed us by letter, it deals • identifying persons killed by the Bali bomb- with the tragic events in Bali and the need to ing incident; and assist in the rapid processing of the DNA • assisting with the investigation of the Bali samples that are required for identification bombing incident. purposes and so on. These circumstances As the CrimTrac DNA database was established mean that the Greens will indeed support the for criminal investigation and not for Disaster rapid passage of this piece of legislation. Victim Identification (DVI), it is now imperative Question agreed to. that legislation be passed so that the CrimTrac system can be used for DVI for the Bali incident. CRIMES AMENDMENT BILL 2002 The Australian community expects us to do eve- First Reading rything possible to re-unite relatives and friends Bill received from the House of Repre- with the victims of this attack as quickly as possi- sentatives. ble. Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western This legislation will amend the Crimes Act 1914 to modify the effect of Commonwealth, State and Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) (10.23 a.m.)—I move: 5670 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

That this bill may proceed without formalities The DNA profiles are stored on these separate and be now read a first time. indexes and they can be matched with profiles in Question agreed to. another index according to a set of tabulated matching rules. For example, it enables DNA Bill read a first time. profiles taken from unidentified deceased persons Second Reading to be compared with DNA profiles taken from property that belonged to persons who are miss- Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western ing or from a blood relative of such a person. Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) (10.23 a.m.)—I move: As the CrimTrac DNA database was established for criminal investigation and not for Disaster That this bill be now read a second time. Victim Identification, it is now imperative that I seek leave to have the second reading legislation be passed so that the CrimTrac system speech incorporated in Hansard. can be used for victim identification for the Bali incident. Leave granted. The Australian community expects us to do eve- The speech read as follows— rything possible to re-unite relatives and friends The tragic events in Bali on 12 October have with the victims of this attack as quickly as possi- brought home to all Australians the horrors that ble. human beings can inflict on others. It has shown It is essential that this national database can be that none of us are immune from the suffering accessed to enable the full, efficient and auto- that the evil of terrorism can bring. matic comparison of DNA profiles that is neces- This Government is committed to helping the sary to resolve the Bali tragedy. This bill will victims of that tragedy. ensure that this can occur immediately. The Australian Federal Police and the Indonesian Part 1D contains a number of safeguards in rela- National Police have established a Joint Austra- tion to access to and use of information held on lia-Indonesia Police Investigative Team to inves- the DNA database. There are also restrictions on tigate the Bali bombings and to bring the perpe- the disclosure of that information. These provi- trators of this atrocity to justice. sions are critical to maintaining the integrity of This Government has also made Australia’s new that DNA database and to ensure a balance be- national DNA matching systems at CrimTrac tween the needs of law enforcement with the pri- available to ensure that the process of Disaster vacy of those involved. Victim Identification is completed as quickly as Part 1D provides that the ability of the Common- possible. This process of victim identification has wealth, States and Territories to share information commenced, with State and Territory police held on the DNA database, is to be facilitated by services now collecting samples from the rela- arrangements in place between the jurisdictions. tives of those who are missing. The use of the While there has been progress in relation to the CrimTrac DNA matching systems will enable the settlement of those arrangements, they are not as deceased to be released to grieving relatives and yet in place. brought home to Australia as soon as possible. This bill represents the immediate solution that is This Government has also offered CrimTrac to necessary now, to address the extraordinary cir- facilitate Disaster Victim Identification for the cumstances posed by the Bali bombing. Indonesian Government and other nations who This bill will modify the existing laws so that lost people in the Bali attack. Commonwealth, State and Territory officials can This is a bill to ensure that CrimTrac and Austra- access the national DNA database for the purpose lian officials are able to fully utilise the forensic of identifying an unidentified person who died in procedures that are available to them for these or as a result of the bombings that occurred in purposes. Bali on 12 October 2002 or for the purpose of Part 1D of the Crimes Act 1914 establishes a conducting a criminal investigation in relation to national DNA database system, which is designed that incident. This bill will also enable the infor- to enable DNA profiles taken from forensic mate- mation held on a DNA data base to be disclosed rial to be compared with other DNA profiles. For to law enforcement agencies, foreign law en- instance, the database consists of a series of in- forcement agencies and Interpol for the purpose dexes. For example, there is a suspects index, a of identifying an unidentified person who died in serious offenders index, a crime scene index, a or as a result of the bombings that occurred in missing persons index and an unknown deceased Bali on 12 October 2002 or for the purpose of persons index. conducting a criminal investigation in relation to Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5671 that incident. There is a need to include foreign ensure that the bill currently before the Sen- law enforcement agencies to remove any doubt ate is expedited. about this being covered by the existing provi- sions. Australian officials are assisting with the identification of the victims of the bombing The provisions of this bill will operate to modify in Bali and with the investigation of the of- the existing restrictions in existing legislation. fences. This involves collecting and analys- The amendments to enable disclosure of informa- ing forensic material. That material in turn tion to foreign law enforcement agencies will provides DNA profiles that can be matched enable disclosure of the identity of persons who are residents or citizens of that country when they against other DNA profiles. We understand have been identified following DNA profile that the Australian Federal Police do not matchings undertaken by the Australian authori- have the capacity to do all the DNA sam- ties. pling, analysis and profiling of relatives, The bill also makes the important amendment to missing persons and deceased persons with- enable the identification of a victim to be pro- out assistance from the states and territories. vided to a relative, guardian, spouse, de facto To assist in this process, some state police partner or friend of that victim. forces have already started taking and ana- The situation in which we now find ourselves was lysing samples. However, under current leg- simply not envisaged when the DNA database islative arrangements, the samples cannot be provisions were added to the Crimes Act. Part 1D matched until enabling legislation has been does not, for example, enable the DNA profile passed. taken from the deceased unknown index to be Labor shares the government’s concern to compared with a DNA profile from the same in- dex. The extent of the devastation in Bali has remove any delays in the identification and necessitated that this comparison be available and release of remains to families, and that is this bill will ensure that this is the case. exactly what this bill aims to do. It is also This bill is an emergency measure. However, necessary to clarify the disclosure provisions none of us can predict what might lie ahead. For around the information that is gathered from this reason there is provision in the bill for these DNA samples collected in Bali. In essence, special provisions to be activated by way of a this bill is about removing some obstacles Ministerial determination should Australian citi- that currently prevent DNA information from zens or residents be killed in a similar incident being entered into a newly created disaster outside Australia and it is appropriate in the cir- victim database. That new database has been cumstances for these modifications to apply. This created alongside the national CrimTrac determination will be a disallowable instrument. DNA database, but it is an entirely separate The bill also includes a provision requiring an database. We have been given absolute as- independent review of the operation of the pro- surances by the government that the two will posed provisions. This is a safeguard ensuring be quarantined from each other and there that there is proper independent oversight of the will be no sharing of information between proposed regime. them. Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (10.23 a.m.)—In speaking on the Crimes Amend- The amendments in this bill are designed ment Bill 2002, we are now only too familiar to override state and territory legislation— with the terrible tragedy in Bali and its af- which requires ministerial arrangements to termath. Not only are the families and be in place—but they will only have imme- friends of the victims suffering the grief of diate operation in relation to the Bali bomb- loss but their loss is compounded by the pro- ings. The legislation applies only to terrorist cess of identifying the bodies. Labor is incidents overseas. It will act retrospectively committed to working with the government to the date of the Bali bombings. The gov- to find ways of speeding up that process. ernment has included in the proposed legis- That means allowing the families to bring lation some provisions that will allow it to home the bodies to bury their loved ones and use DNA from Bali in any criminal investi- to grieve. The opposition has worked in a gation aimed at finding the people responsi- spirit of cooperation with the government to ble for the bombings. In the event of a simi- lar incident overseas, it is proposed that the 5672 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 legislation may apply in future cases where our sincere condolences to those Australians the minister issues a determination. who lost loved ones in the recent attacks. I have noted that Labor supports any Our thoughts continue to be with those who moves to help families and friends come to are still awaiting news of missing loved terms with their loss and to bury their loved ones. I hope this bill will reduce the suffering ones. The DNA database will help in identi- of such people by ensuring that the process fying the bodies. But the whole issue of of identification occurs as efficiently as pos- DNA records and the storage of that infor- sible. mation is an important one for the commu- We Democrats support the intent of this nity. The Australian Law Reform Commis- bill and appreciate the urgency of its passage. sion and the Australian Health Ethics Com- Nevertheless, we do have some concerns mittee recently warned that we need a tighter with a few particular aspects of the bill, and I system to control the collection and use of think it is important to talk about those. Spe- DNA records. On 28 August, these organisa- cifically, our concerns relate to the disclosure tions put out a joint news release where they provisions. We note that disclosure of infor- warned: mation on Australian databases is permitted The revolution in genetic science means that to a wide range of agencies and organisa- Australia now requires a careful mix of strate- tions, including foreign agencies. Such dis- gies—stronger ethical oversight, stiffer regula- closure is permitted not only for the purpose tions, industry codes, education campaigns, an of identifying bodies but also for the purpose independent expert advisory body, revised pri- of investigating incidents such as the Bali vacy and discrimination laws, and perhaps even bombings. The government should exercise new criminal laws—to ensure human genetic considerable caution in providing the DNA information is well protected and intelligently profiles of Australian citizens to foreign used. agencies over whose activities the govern- It is in the context of these broader concerns ment has no control. Information contained about DNA testing and privacy, and the fact on DNA databases is highly sensitive. This is that we are still finding our way on this is- why there are currently strict requirements sue, that Labor suggested to the government governing the access, use and disclosure of on Monday night that the ability of the min- such information. We Democrats concede ister to use these powers in future should be that there are some persuasive reasons for a disallowable instrument. That is an effec- departing from such strict requirements in tive tool to allow parliament to make sure order to facilitate the investigation of inci- that these powers are used properly. Labor dents such as the Bali bombings. However, also suggested that these new laws be re- we also believe that any such departure viewed in 12 months. The government has should be limited to what is required for the agreed to both these requests and they are purposes of that investigation. incorporated into the legislation before us. I sincerely hope that this law will hasten the An additional concern of the Australian identification of bodies and allow those who Democrats relates to the inclusion of the have been left behind to grieve their terrible term ‘friend’ in the categories of persons to loss. I extend my sympathies to the families whom disclosure can be made of a match and friends of those who are still missing and between a missing person’s DNA profile and those who died in Bali. This legislation will the DNA profile of an unidentified body. We assist their grieving process. I commend the appreciate the strong desire of friends of de- bill to the Senate. ceased persons to be informed of such in- formation. However, we are concerned that Senator GREIG (Western Australia) there are no criteria for determining whether (10.28 a.m.)—The Democrats welcome the someone was in fact a friend of a deceased Crimes Amendment Bill 2002, a legislative person. We urge the government to exercise initiative from the government which we caution in disclosing information pursuant to hope will assist in the identification of bodies the proposed subsection 23YUI(2). We hope in the aftermath of the tragic Bali bombings. that the government will not simply disclose We Democrats have already placed on record Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5673 such sensitive information to any person As I outlined in my speech in the second claiming to be the friend of a deceased per- reading debate on that legislation, the Demo- son without at least attempting to corroborate crats would like to see the review specifi- such a claim. cally required to address disparities between I note that the Labor Party had the oppor- the various jurisdictions participating in that tunity to have a number of its concerns ad- national scheme. We also wanted to ensure dressed by amendments agreed with the gov- that the review was specifically required to ernment prior to the introduction of this bill. address privacy and civil liberty concerns We Democrats have had no such opportunity that may arise, with a view to focusing the to address our concerns. Given the urgency review and ensuring that it adequately ex- of this legislation and the fact that it is to be amined those measures. When it comes to the subject of an independent review in a the question of DNA databasing and da- year’s time, we are prepared to simply high- tabasing generally, my party has continuing light these concerns at this time whilst sup- and ongoing concerns about privacy. I hope porting the legislation. We hope that these that, with the passage of this legislation, issues will be specifically considered as part which we today support, the spirit of the of the independent review of the legislation original and enabling legislation—particu- and that appropriate recommendations be larly in terms of reviews and the scrutiny of made. We Democrats will reconsider these civil liberties and privacy—is retained. issues following the review and take any Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western action necessary to address our outstanding Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the concerns at that time. Treasurer) (10.34 a.m.)—in reply—I sin- Essentially, the bill will amend the Crimes cerely thank all honourable senators for their Act 1914 to ensure that DNA profiles are contributions to this incredibly important able to be provided by states and territories debate on the Crimes Amendment Bill 2002. to the Commonwealth for comparison on the I am representing my very good comrade, central DNA database; to ensure that DNA friend and ministerial colleague Senator Elli- profiles are able to be provided by the Com- son here this morning because he is involved monwealth to states and territories to ensure in a very high-level meeting in relation to that the results of the DNA matches can be Bali related security issues. I know he would disclosed to certain specifies persons, such as have very much liked to carry this bill in the family members; to enable the communica- Senate himself. tion of DNA matches to overseas agencies in The Minister for Justice and Customs has relation to the victims; and to enable the asked me to make the point that this bill is a matching of body parts with body parts. It is demonstration of how Australians can work also worth noting that, when enabling legis- very well together at very short notice in re- lation or originating legislation dealing with sponse to the Bali tragedy. It shows that in a the notion of CrimTrac and DNA databasing place like the Senate—where it is often the was introduced and discussed—essentially, fact that legislation gets held up and it takes that was done with the Crimes Amendment ages to get it through—we can pull together (Forensic Procedures) Bill 2001 some 18 when a national tragedy confronts this great months or so ago—at that time we Demo- nation and act expeditiously and steadfastly crats moved a variety of amendments, one of in response to this challenge to Australia’s which was successful. That amendment in- security. The other senators and the second cluded the notion that any issues relating to reading speech that I have already incorpo- privacy or civil liberties arising from foren- rated make clear the importance of the fact sic procedures be permitted by a part which that it will significantly improve the oppor- contained a reference to a review. The tunities to help in the painstaking and, I amendment related to the review processes know, painful job of identifying victims of existing under the legislation as it was pre- the tragedy of 12 October 2002. The sented at that time and would have been amendments will also enable the Australian amended by the government bill. officials to contribute to the very important 5674 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 task of seeking to identify those who were Bill read a third time. responsible for these crimes. I commend the EDUCATION SERVICES FOR bill to the Senate. OVERSEAS STUDENTS AMENDMENT The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT BILL 2002 (Senator Hutchins)—I remind honourable Second Reading senators that, under a sessional order agreed to on 20 June 2002, after the second reading Debate resumed from 15 October, on mo- I shall call the minister to move the third tion by Senator Abetz: reading, unless any minister requires that the That this bill be now read a second time. bill be considered in Committee of the Senator CARR (Victoria) (10.39 a.m.)— Whole. The Education Services for Overseas Stu- Question agreed to. dents Amendment Bill 2002 before us today is one that the opposition will be supporting. Bill read a second time. It makes a number of relatively minor Third Reading amendments to the education services for Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western overseas students regime, which forms the Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the basis of the regulation of Australia’s interna- Treasurer) (10.36 a.m.)—I move: tional education industry. However, in That this bill be now read a third time. speaking to this bill I would like to make a few points about the state of the international Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (10.37 education industry in this country. Given that a.m.)—I reiterate that the Greens support this the industry now contributes some $4 billion legislation. The need to give rapid identifi- to our export revenue, I think it is one that cation of loved ones to the people who have this parliament should consider from time to suffered so much as a result of the outrage in time. It is now one of the most significant Bali is paramount. This will obviously also, contributors to Australia’s export industries. coincidentally, help people who are suffering in Indonesia and in many other countries I am pleased to say that this is an area to around the world in their need to know what which the opposition has been able to devote has happened to their relatives and loved considerable time over recent years. In many ones who are missing at this awful time. We ways it highlights to the cynics in our midst recognise that the whole issue of DNA test- and at large that this is an example of where ing—how it should be used and how it parliament does matter. We are able to use should not be used—is a very contentious the forms of the parliament, through the Sen- one. I can see reasons for potentially ex- ate estimates committee and through this panding this legislation in the future—for chamber, to force change. We now have a example, to identify people who die as a re- situation in which the government has re- sult of aircraft accidents overseas. However, sponded to the concerns of the opposition that is not the case in point at the moment. and the industry. The industry, of course, has There may be ways in which this legislation been only too happy to talk to the opposition could be improved both to ensure that DNA about effecting change, and that has resulted testing does not go beyond the parameters in new legislation and, in fact, a whole new that we are talking about here this morning regulatory regime. To this extent, I think the and, in special cases, to ensure that it does. government has moved very much closer to The urgency of the legislation is so important the opposition’s views on this matter. In this that this is one of the rare cases when it over- way, we have the development of what rides the impulse we all have to look at it seems to be a much higher level of biparti- further and get more advice. That is why the sanship on this question than there was a few whole Senate is joining in seeing the rapid years ago. passage of this legislation. We are in full I think it has also been affected by the support of it. changes that have occurred within the de- Question agreed to. partment itself, with new personnel working in the department, and by the change in phi- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5675 losophy that has occurred in the department according to the Commonwealth guidelines, and the government. When these matters a student whose English language skills are were first pursued, I recall government insufficient to undertake a course success- senators, ministers and some in the sector fully should not have been enrolled. It would saying that the opposition was damaging the appear, on the material that has been made industry by drawing to public attention some available to us, that not only did Monash of the problems. That is not said so often University enrol a student whose English now. I think it is understood that to have a skills were not up to standard but the English strong international education industry this skills of the student had not improved in a country needs an extremely strong quality period of four years. assurance regime that is internationally rec- In fact, it would appear that the student ognised as rigorous and transparent. had been enrolled in an honours course but In making these points, I draw attention to could not meet the basic English language some of the issues that still concern me. I requirements. I think we are entitled to ask begin by drawing attention to the shocking what Monash University is doing allowing a tragedy that occurred at Monash University situation like this to develop. Is this the only two days ago. I am sure that all senators case where students who are enrolled in pro- would be in agreement in expressing their grams do not have the necessary English horror at this event and would wish to extend skills to complete them? How widespread is their deepest sympathies to the families of the problem of inadequate English language the dead students and to the students who skills within our international student pro- have been injured in this shocking attack. grams? Like many of us, I am amazed at the bravery I note that in the court in Melbourne yes- of the lecturer and the students who disarmed terday the magistrate had to have the charges the gunman and at the way in which the stu- read out by a Chinese interpreter. I also note dents have responded to this at Monash Uni- that the question of students with inadequate versity. In the context of this bill, I note that English language skills was the subject of an charges have now been laid for murder. As Auditor-General’s report in Melbourne in such, I do not want to comment on the mat- April this year, which indicated that a major- ters that are before the courts. ity of Victorian academics believe that the I would like to comment, though, on a foreign students they teach do not have suffi- newspaper report in the Melbourne Age yes- cient competency in English. A survey of terday concerning a fourth-year student in nearly 360 academics in Victoria’s three big- the honours degree program in economics at gest universities revealed that 66 per cent Monash University. It said that the student considered that English language entry re- was struggling with the English language; in quirements were set too low for international fact, the article suggested that this was a students. The Auditor-General pointed out contributing factor to the shootings that oc- that academics found it difficult to assess the curred. The student was due to give an oral written work of students with underdevel- presentation to the class on the day that these oped English skills and that they should be events occurred. It is argued that the student given greater guidance in such assessment. was suffering from extreme stress. I am not This is obviously a question that the Labor one who runs the argument that people are Party have been pursuing, and we have ex- misunderstood in these circumstances. As far pressed our concern about this over a consid- as I am concerned, these are matters for the erable period of time. I raised the matter court, and the full weight of the law should through the report Universities in crisis, and be brought against people in these things. I note that the government have yet to re- I want to make a couple of points. The spond to that—days and days after we were student concerned had been studying at told that they would be responding to it. We Monash University for four years. According are waiting for the government to address to the AVCC guidelines which exist now— that particular issue. We would like to know and they also existed four years ago—and what action the government has taken to en- 5676 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 sure that universities and other education eral rounds of Senate estimates before the providers do not accept for enrolment inter- department woke up to the problem. There national students who have had inadequate were extraordinary numbers of unscrupulous English language preparation. There is a operators in our major capital cities, particu- question here about the quality of programs larly on the eastern seaboard, who were us- being provided. If we have students who do ing so-called students to work illegally. They not speak English graduating from our do- were using falsified attendance records. Re- mestic campuses then it undermines all stu- cently in Sydney printers were charged be- dents who gain the same qualifications. cause they were printing up bodgie qualifi- I think we are entitled to ask that the gov- cations, academic transcripts of results and ernment ensures that education providers various other documents necessary to essen- meet their responsibilities to ensure that tially perpetuate a scam. Those persons have there is sufficient support with the English been charged under the Crimes Act and I language and that students who do not have understand they are being processed through the English language skills one would expect the courts. These are examples of what has are not awarded those qualifications. In the happened, and we have been raising such past the government has sought to deny its matters for some time. responsibilities with regard to international This government likes to talk tough about education. Senator Tierney has joined us border protection. It likes to talk about dras- now. He has often pointed out to me that I tic action being taken against asylum seekers was on fishing expeditions and that illegal but it does not do sufficient work, in my and dodgy behaviour by crooks was a matter opinion, to ensure that those people who ar- that we should not be concerned about. I rive here on aeroplanes with student visas have always said, and I will repeat, that the and who have gained those illegitimately and overwhelming number of people involved in improperly are dealt with. It has not done international education are of the highest sufficient work, in my judgment, to make quality and our education institutions are of sure that the bodgie providers—who are un- the highest quality. But the problem remains dermining the industry and who are not ap- that a few dishonest operators are using col- proaching this industry on the basis of a level leges for immigration rorts and visa scams playing field, because they are getting an and are bringing people here. It is a people- unfair advantage economically and in many smuggling exercise and it can undermine the other ways—are forced out. My concern is entire industry. By ripping off students in this that the government has not taken sufficient way these operators can undermine the quali- steps to force changes in that regard. fications of all students. We do acknowledge that changes have oc- There are a number of notorious examples curred and, as I say, the government has one could point to. I am sure that Senator moved forward by introducing the new re- Tierney would remember the case that I gime last year. We are looking forward to the raised of the G-Quest Institute of Advanced review in 2003 that the government has an- Learning. That was a case that was drawn to nounced and we are keen to know how the the attention of Commonwealth officers as a new legislative framework is standing up to result of a complaint received from an over- the pressure that invariably occurs. As I say, seas student, who said that she went down to this is a bit like tax avoidance. You need to have a look at the college and it physically be constantly vigilant. The same bodgie op- did not exist. It was a vacant block of land. erators seem to reappear in one guise or an- What did the department do about this? They other, involving new groups of people. They did not smell a rat, of course—nothing silly are taking in all sorts of gullible people, in- like that! They made sure a refund was or- cluding people now within the university ganised, which was very big of them! sector itself who have gone into partnerships The nature of that college and how it got with some of these bodgie operators in the registration was something I think we ought quest for additional student numbers without to be more rigorous about. There were sev- doing the proper checks and review of their Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5677 own operations. These are points that have We have had the example recently of the been raised in the Senate estimates hearings Australian College of Technology, which and demonstrated to be correct—despite the collapsed in August and owed $1 million to denials, I might add, of some of these com- students and creditors. The academic director panies who have written to me and no doubt of this college was a Michael Megas. This is to the Privileges Committee, and I am look- a man widely known in the international ing forward to yet another hearing on that. education industry. I understand he had been Despite the fact that ads are placed in convicted for embezzlement while working newspapers, some simple devices can be for other industries. He and the chief execu- used to establish that these events have oc- tive of the college, Mr Nabil Nasr, have been curred—that is, that a number of universities convicted for embezzlement of funds. Both have fallen for these bodgie operators. That the key players in the college had criminal is why we welcome the changes that have records involving dishonesty. Yet they man- occurred and the change in attitude. We will aged to get a licence and run an international remain vigilant and we will continue to place college, and only when it collapsed was any pressure on the government to ensure that attention paid to their past record. These there is a follow-through to look behind the were people who were able to operate under state accreditations. All too often the gov- the old rules because the ‘fit and proper per- ernment is still relying upon being told that son’ test was different under the old rules certain things are all right and is not follow- from what it is under the new rules. This is ing through to ensure that the decisions taken an area in which we need to move. We need at other levels of government are in fact fol- to find a mechanism to make sure that those lowed through. The capacity to enter col- crooks who are operating in the industry and leges to ascertain whether the ESOS Act is who are able slip under the regulatory regime being contravened; the seizure of documents, are encouraged to get out. computer records and other things; the de- We have had the example of the Sydney mand for information or records, and an im- International College. The proprietor of that provement in student record keeping are all college, Mr Phillip Lobo, claimed a doctor- things we support. However, they have to be ate in business administration which, as I enforced. That is why we are concerned understand it, he bought on the Internet from about recent events. In the time remaining to an institution known as Harrington Univer- me I will go to some of those issues. sity. Quite clearly, by purchasing his qualifi- We have had about 100 colleges close cations on the Internet—running an educa- down in the last year or so. Of the 30 or so tional institution and claiming that he has a colleges that I have named, my understand- doctorate—he was misleading potential stu- ing is that about 25 of them are now out of dents and their families. business. We have a reasonable strike rate Then there was a private school in Queen- record in naming people who have done the sland, the Kooralbyn International School, wrong thing, having them investigated and which collapsed. At that school there were having them forced out of the industry. But it 132 international students displaced. If my should not be up to senators and the re- memory serves me rightly, a number of those sources of a senator’s office to produce this. students could not be found. There was some I am concerned that further actions be taken $400,000 in paid-up fees. They had to be by the department to show that they too are bailed out by the state education department concerned. I understand there are some six in Queensland. Because the current act does colleges currently under investigation over not require institutions that are in receipt of compliance issues, and I would like to hear recurrent funds from the Commonwealth from the department about what progress is government to be part of the TAS, the Tui- being made on the six colleges that were tion Assurance Scheme, those students could named in the last round of Senate esti- not call upon the protection of this regulatory mates—because we have yet to see work in regime. That is another area that requires that regard. further attention. 5678 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

There are questions that require further this legislation has had an interesting history. action and, while this bill proposes relatively The first piece of legislation was brought in minor changes, the 2003 review provides the in 1991, under the Labor government and opportunity for more extensive changes to be Minister Dawkins, who had considerable entertained. They go to, for instance, the re- concerns about operations of some of the lationship between private colleges and the private colleges that were not delivering universities, the issue of institutions that re- quality or value. At that time, he gave rea- ceive recurrent funding but are currently ex- sons as to why this industry needed this sort empted from the ESOS provisions, and the of legislation. In the parliament in 1991, dis- question of the fit and proper persons test cussing the export of education services, he and the means by which we can ensure that said it was: persons who are not genuine educators and ... a major industry, one which is already making who are not genuinely running educational an enormous contribution to Australia and is al- businesses and who have serious criminal ready extending Australia’s influence as a pro- records can be excluded from the industry. vider of education and training services through- This bill is a development on the regime out the region that we have seen and has come about as a …… … result of parliamentary discussion. This is a We do not need to go back to the old rules, which point that can never be underestimated. It is prevented students coming here at all. We can an occasion where we can demonstrate that manage this program and deal with the problems the parliament does work. The bill is essen- as they arise ... tially technical and it does provide for addi- The legislative history of ESOS—the over- tional powers for the Commonwealth to act. seas student legislation—is one of managing These are measures we support. However, the problems as they arise. The original leg- we do think that further action needs to be islation was quite draconian and, as I men- taken. The bill also needs to be seen in the tioned, it was a $700 million industry which context of a staging post in that regard. We has now grown to a $4 billion industry. But it place the government on notice that our in- would have been cut off in its prime if the terest in international education is not de- original legislation, designed by the former clining. (Time expired) Labor government, had gone through at that Senator TIERNEY (New South Wales) time. (10.59 a.m.)—I rise to speak on the Educa- It was a very short bill, and it was the first tion Services for Overseas Students Amend- bill I ever had to deal with when I came into ment Bill 2002. This bill underpins one of this place. The education committee then the great export success stories of the Aus- was chaired by Terry Aulich with Karin tralian economy over the last 15 years. The Sowada, leading for the Democrats, and me whole education export industry is a sign that for the Liberals. We were all horrified by this a country as intellectually rich as ours—one piece of legislation. We conducted an inquiry in which there is a very high level of educa- into the eight-page bill and suggested 32 rec- tion and training—can, in the new informa- ommendations to change it. At the end of the tion age, develop past the primary and sec- day the minister accepted that, because he ondary stage into the tertiary stage of indus- realised that he had overreached the proper trial development and create industries that provisions that were needed for the control support jobs and growth in our economy. of this industry at that time and it would have Since I have been in this place there has been killed off the industry if those had gone remarkable growth in this industry. ahead. So a regulatory regime was brought in When I first came into the parliament in that was not quite as draconian. 1991, this was a $700 million industry and it As the industry very rapidly expanded, is now a $4 billion industry. It is very im- obviously, problems did emerge and, as portant that the parliament should get right Minister Dawkins originally said, ‘We will the legislative underpinning of such an im- manage the program and deal with the prob- portant export industry. The development of lems as they arise.’ There have been five Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5679 amendments to the bill over time. As this complex industry, which is privately pro- industry develops and evolves and problems vided, I suppose that you are never going to emerge, we have to manage them by adjust- solve all the problems. But, through the pro- ing the legislation and the provisions to try to cesses of the parliament, I think we are just get the balance between providing a system about at the point where we have finetuned of education for overseas students that, in the the legislation so that it complements and first instance, provides quality and, in the supports a great Australian export industry. It second instance, provides a driver for our is industries like this that are the hope of the economy. Those are the goals that we are future. I think this parliament has played a trying to achieve. major role in helping it flourish, thus not For the most recent changes that were only assisting in the education of students made a few years ago, I would like to pay that have come from overseas but also giving special tribute to Senator Kay Patterson, who great underpinning and support to an export at that time was the parliamentary secretary industry and, therefore, to the entire Austra- to the minister for immigration and multi- lian economy. cultural affairs. She did major work to get Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special the education bureaucrats and the migration Minister of State) (11.07 a.m.)—in reply—I bureaucrats to work together in a much more thank honourable senators for their contribu- harmonious and consistent way and actually tions to the second reading debate on the put in place changes that solved a number of Education Services for Overseas Students problems that were developing in the indus- Amendment Bill 2002. We have had two try as it evolved. contributions, one by Senator Carr and one I was on the migration committee in the by Senator Tierney. In relation to Senator mid-1990s in Cairns when we picked up the Carr’s contribution, I acknowledge some of fact that the two departments were not the concerns he expressed about certain working very well together. They were schools and colleges. All I can say to him, working in their own little silos and they and remind him of, is that these schools are really needed to work in a very cooperative in fact registered and licensed by the various way to make sure that the migration and the state Labor governments around this nation. education aspects of these problems were We as a federal government do not seek to being dealt with in a consistent way. Senator second-guess whether or not they are neces- Patterson did a marvellous job in bringing sarily appropriate institutions. that together and developing a regime which Senator Carr—You haven’t read the act, solved a lot of the difficulties that were aris- have you, to say something as silly as that! ing. Of course, we now have a new piece of Senator ABETZ—I have just checked legislation and we welcome the fact that the with the advisers, who confirmed exactly Labor Party is supporting that legislation. It what I have said, Senator Carr, so I think it is does strengthen the act further and, as Sena- quite obvious who has not read the act. Once tor Carr mentioned, there will be a review again Senator Carr has charged in with an later this year and further changes might be interjection, clothed with his usual igno- made then. rance, and has shown that he does not know In reference to the new changes, Dr Bren- what he is on about. I invite the honourable dan Nelson, the Minister for Education, Sci- senator to speak with his mates in the various ence and Training, has said: state Labor governments and see what can be Ambiguities will be removed and greater clarity done. If the matters that are raised are an provided with regard to certain sections relating issue—and I am sure they were raised genu- to Commonwealth powers and sanctions of the inely by Senator Carr—then clearly these ESOS Act. These measures all contribute to pro- matters do need to be addressed, and I sim- viding greater certainty for the Australian educa- ply seek to direct him to the appropriate area tion and training export industry. to have them addressed. We do have a much better regime: problems In relation to Senator Tierney’s contribu- have been raised and responded to. In such a tion, I acknowledge his longstanding interest 5680 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 in education and especially in overseas stu- Senator CARR (Victoria) (11.13 a.m.)— dents in this country. As Senator Tierney Given the minister’s comments in the second pointed out, when he first came into this reading debate about the issue of the states, I Senate in 1991, the value to Australia of have a question. I ask the minister: can he overseas students coming to this country was now confirm to the chamber whether this act $700 million. That figure is now $4 billion. overrides state legislation, in particular in As I understand it, in the academic year reference to the fit and proper persons test? 2000, there was a 16 per cent increase in the Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special number of overseas students. Most of them Minister of State) (11.13 a.m.)—I thank came from South-East Asia or were our Senator Carr for his question. I think I can Asian neighbours. So much for the nonsense now understand where his confusion has that we continually have fed to us by those arisen with regard to his earlier interjection. on the extreme left of politics in Australia Whilst the situation is that this act does have that somehow Australia’s reputation amongst that provision in it, the people who undertake our near neighbours is being damaged by the the test on behalf of the Commonwealth are Howard government! In fact, overseas stu- in fact the state education personnel on dents are coming here in droves, as wit- whom we rely. If they are not undertaking nessed by these figures, because they respect that properly, then once again we might have this nation and they respect the rigour of our a problem that we need to address and, education system. clearly, that is something we would need to I would not want anybody to think that we address with state departmental officials who are interested only in the dollars. Clearly, we undertake the test. are interested in the dollars; it is good for our Senator CARR (Victoria) (11.15 a.m.)—I economy and good for our educational in- am pleased that the minister acknowledges stitutions. But there is also a richness added the nature of the act, given the ignorance of to this nation by having these students come his previous comments. But I ask him this from overseas. They add to the richness and further question: is it not the case in the act diversity in the schools and in the communi- that the secretary has to be satisfied that the ties in which they live. After they have un- fit and proper person test is applied? And is dertaken their education, the vast majority of it not the fact that this secretary that I refer to them go back to their home countries having is the Commonwealth officer responsible and had a very positive experience of Australia that it is the Commonwealth’s responsibility and, as a result, spread the good news about to ensure this act is applied, not the states’ Australia to their fellow countrymen when responsibility? they go home. Senator Abetz—I refer the honourable The Education Services for Overseas Stu- senator to section 9(2)(ca) of the act, where dents Amendment Bill 2002 seeks to make he will find the answer. the regime that we have somewhat more ro- bust. I understand that a review of the com- Senator CARR—Minister, I am at a dis- plete act will commence by December 2003. advantage because I do not have that section I believe that this area of education is often in front of me, but I do have a fair knowl- overlooked and not given the regard that it edge of the act. I have asked you a direct deserves. I compliment Senator Carr and question, so can you confirm this: does the Senator Tierney on their interest in this bill act require that the secretary of the Com- and for the fact that they have been willing to monwealth department of education has to make a contribution to the debate. I com- be satisfied that the act is being enforced? It mend the bill to the Senate. is no good for you to come in here and claim that this is a state responsibility when this Question agreed to. legislation clearly specifies that it is the Bill read a second time. Commonwealth’s responsibility. In Committee Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special Bill—by leave—taken as a whole. Minister of State) (11.16 a.m.)—Mr Tempo- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5681 rary Chairman, I can see that Senator Carr nated authority and has some very real role has been caught out—he has been embar- to play. In relation to the investigations with rassed and he is now trying to whip up respect to the various colleges that he men- something around this assertion. Clearly, he tioned, I am prepared to take that on notice does not have the act in front of him, so and see what detail can be provided. The bill when I refer him to a particular section it will does not deal with what are ongoing investi- be of no assistance to him; I will have to gations, some of which are undoubtedly sen- waste the time of the committee by reading sitive. out a section of the act. I would have thought Senator CARR (Victoria) (11.20 a.m.)—I that if somebody wanted to come into this have a final question. Let us accept your ar- place to make a solid and sensible contribu- gument—which I do not—in terms of the tion they would have at least clothed them- current legal framework under the new act. selves with some knowledge of the act and Under the old act, that certainly was the have the act in front of them so that when we case—your departmental interpretation is engage in this committee debate they are correct. Of the 30 providers that I named as able to follow it. For Senator Carr’s benefit, operating improperly or illegally and causing section 9(2) refers to the secretary registering damage to the industry, how many were reg- the provider, but section 9(2)(ca) then states: istered by state Liberal governments? (ca) except in the case of a provider mentioned in Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special subsection (5)—the designated authority has told Minister of State) (11.20 a.m.)—I do not the Secretary in writing that the provider has sat- isfied the designated authority and that the pro- know the answer to that. Unfortunately, we vider is fit and proper to be registered ... have had a regime of various state Labor governments around this country that have As I understand it, the designated authority been in office for some substantial period of is—guess what, Senator Carr?—the state time and have not seen fit to deregister the government authority. 30 institutions that the honourable senator Senator CARR (Victoria) (11.18 a.m.)— has referred to. So don’t talk about who reg- But the act quite clearly states that it is the istered them once; let us ask why current secretary who has to register— state Labor governments have not seen fit to Senator Abetz—No, the word is ‘except’. deregister them. This is embarrassing. Senator CARR (Victoria) (11.21 a.m.)— Senator CARR—Given the minister’s This whole episode has arisen because of comments, I ask what progress has been your idiotic remarks during the second made on the investigations into the following reading debate. If you had not tried to be colleges: the Australian International College such a smart alec, you may well have found of Business—I will give you a code number this matter would have progressed much if you want to look it up—the Bridge Busi- more quickly. You would also have known ness College, Canterbury Business College, that, of the 30 colleges named, 25 or so are Marrickville Commercial College, Hurl- no longer in operation. So you are factually stone-Marrickville Business College, the incorrect on that point, but I will leave it New South Wales International College, the there. Educationists College of Business and Tech- Bill agreed to. nology and the Windsor Institute of Com- Bill reported without amendment; report merce. adopted. Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special Third Reading Minister of State) (11.19 a.m.)—I note how very quickly, once I interjected, yet again, Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special with the word ‘except’—the exception in the Minister of State) (11.22 a.m.)—I move: act—Senator Carr left the subject which we That this bill be now read a third time. were debating to move on to something else. Question agreed to. I welcome that and I accept that he now rec- Bill read a third time. ognises that the state authority is the desig- 5682 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

FAMILY AND COMMUNITY this bill are a marginal improvement, but we SERVICES LEGISLATION do have concerns. AMENDMENT (AUSTRALIANS Apart from the government’s slash-and- WORKING TOGETHER AND OTHER burn mentality when it comes to making the 2001 BUDGET MEASURES) BILL 2002 necessary investments to assist people to Second Reading move off benefits, over the past few years it Debate resumed from 19 June, on motion has demonstrated its cold-heartedness. It has by Senator Ian Campbell: presided over a ‘shoot first, ask questions later’ breaching policy that saw a trebling in That this bill be now read a second time. the number of people being breached—many Senator MARK BISHOP (Western Aus- unfairly. Labor has no objection to proper tralia) (11.23 a.m.)—I rise to speak on the compliance in the social security system— Family and Community Services Legislation indeed, it was Labor that introduced data Amendment (Australians Working Together matching and most of the other compliance and other 2001 Budget Measures) Bill 2002. tools that are in use today. This is essential to Finally we are now nearing the end of what ensure that the public has absolute confi- has been quite a drawn-out process on the dence in the operation of our social security government’s implementation of its Austra- safety net. lians Working Together proposals. The bill before us today originated in 1999, when the But this government went too far and pe- former Minister for Family and Community nalised people without sufficient justifica- Services, former Senator Newman, heralded tion. It has used a ramped-up breaching re- a ‘seminal’ address at the National Press gime as a crude tool to reduce benefit out- Club. According to media reports, the speech lays. It did this rather than make the proper and discussion paper were to announce a investments in people and decent financial major welfare shake-up, including cuts to incentives, coupled with a fair compliance payments for parents with children over 12, regime, to assist people to get off benefits cuts to disability pension recipients and more and back into work. And Labor was not mutual obligation. But the minister was alone in its criticism. Some of Australia’s forced to abandon the proposals after com- largest charities rang the alarm bell: St Vin- munity backlash and simply announced the cent de Paul, Uniting Care, and even those McClure committee process. The bill before who have had close dealings with the gov- us today forms the government’s response to ernment, such as the Salvation Army and the McClure welfare reform committee. Mission Australia. They had to help the flood of people who were left without an The measures included in the bill are in- income, many of whom had been breached cremental. After more than six years in gov- unfairly. ernment and three years specifically contem- plating welfare reforms, we have a set of How do we know that they had been proposals that take us back rather than ap- breached unfairly? We need look no further preciably forward. We have wasted six years than the stories of people being breached for of unemployed Australians’ lives; for six not turning up to appointments that they had years we have denied them opportunities to never received advice of or that clashed with assist them back into work. The central other compulsory activities. The Pearce re- spending measure—the work credit—is es- view and, more recently, the Ombudsman sentially the restoration of Labor’s earning exposed patently unfair breaching activity. credit scheme that was abolished by the coa- We also need look no further than the gov- lition in 1997. Other elements of the package ernment’s own statistics on appeal. Up to 50 essentially restore the tailored individual per cent of people who appeal their breach case management that was a feature of La- have it overturned. Belatedly the government bor’s Working Nation reforms, which were acknowledged that there were problems and dismantled by the coalition on coming to announced a range of administrative meas- office. Given the prospect of a continuation ures to improve the regime. In all honesty, of the status quo, the elements contained in though, it is not enough. The government is Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5683 going to have to accept that further changes Labor is broadly supportive of the gov- need to be made. And in the context of this ernment’s efforts through these measures to bill, we are going to insist that they are made provide a better transition for parents who if the government is to receive support for its are just two short years off being placed on a changes in relation to the parenting payment full activity-tested benefit like Newstart. and the mature age allowance. There is compelling evidence that more Before I discuss what Labor will propose needs to be done to assist parents to gradu- to restore the balance in relation to breach- ally return to the work force as their children ing, I intend to outline Labor’s position on become older. Bob Gregory’s research using the detail of the bill before us. Schedule 1 longitudinal data has reinforced this point. sets out proposed new arrangements for peo- Whilst Labor’s view is that these are not on- ple receiving parenting payment, PP. The erous requirements, we believe there needs measures apply to both parenting payment to be greater scope for exemptions and more partnered, PPP, and parenting payment sin- flexibility in the participation agreements. In gle, PPS, recipients. PP recipients with a the light of the government’s ‘shoot first, ask youngest child between the ages of 13 and questions later’ breaching regime, Labor is 15 may be required to participate in one or concerned to ensure that the application of more activities—such as Jobsearch, educa- financial sanctions to parents is an absolute tion, training or community work—of up to last resort. Accordingly, Labor will be mov- 150 hours duration over a six-month period; ing amendments in the committee stage to that is, up to six hours per week. A participa- broaden exemptions and improve the flexi- tion agreement will set out the activities that bility of the participation requirements, with the person agrees to undertake or participate particular attention paid to ensuring that the in during the life of the agreement. This re- terms of the participation agreements prop- quirement will not apply to a person with a erly take into account the circumstances of severely disabled child. The penalty regime parents and their children. proposed for PP recipients subject to the new Schedule 2 establishes a tax exempt lan- arrangements differs significantly from the guage, literacy and numeracy supplement of breaching regime for Newstart and youth $20.80 per fortnight to assist people who allowance recipients. The regime has more undertake approved language, literacy or checks and balances in place before a breach numeracy training and who receive one of is applied and also has the ability to reinstate the following payments: DSP, mature age and fully backdate payments on compliance. allowance, Newstart allowance, parenting Before a breach may be applied to a per- payment, partner allowance, widow allow- son, Centrelink must first examine whether ance or Youth Allowance. This is a positive the person had taken reasonable steps to measure and will assist with the costs of par- comply with the agreement, then examine ticipating in such training programs. It re- whether the terms of the agreement were ceives our full support, although we encour- appropriate, and then establish whether the age the government to examine other areas person does not have a reasonable excuse for of participation where a payment such as this the failure. If at this point it is decided that a could be paid to help offset costs. breach will be imposed, the person’s compli- Schedule 3 establishes the Personal Sup- ance will then be monitored at shorter inter- port Program, the PSP, which replaces the vals until the person starts to comply. Com- Community Support Program, the CSP. The pliance with the terms of an agreement will PSP is designed to assist people who have trigger waiver of a breach penalty. Their multiple non-vocational barriers, such as payments will be reinstated and, if compli- homelessness, drug and alcohol problems, ance occurs within 13 weeks, payments will mental illness or domestic violence. These also be fully backdated. There will be no people have been judged to be unable to par- administrative breach penalties applicable to ticipate in employment related activities or to parenting payment customers, as is the case benefit from employment assistance because now. of their barriers. The PSP is designed to en- 5684 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 courage social as well as economic partici- ance and breaching regime for other job pation by establishing outcomes that match seekers. participants’ individual abilities, capacities Schedule 5 seeks to establish new partici- and circumstances. The schedule proposes to pation requirements for those who formerly make PSP an activity available under the would have received mature age allowance activity test for Newstart allowance and and partner allowance. People who might Youth Allowance and an activity that can be otherwise have qualified for these payments included in a person’s activity agreement. It will be eligible for Newstart. These require- also proposes PSP as an activity that can be ments are intended to be more flexible than included in a person’s parenting payment those applicable to other Newstart clients participation agreement from 1 July 2003. and will be extended to Newstart recipients The schedule also contains breach penalty aged 50 and over. The terms of the activity waiver rules that will ensure that a breach agreements are made more flexible in line penalty does not apply while a person is par- with the changes made to parenting payment ticipating in a Personal Support Program. recipients. Significantly, a new modified This schedule is supported by the opposition. breaching regime will apply which allows Schedule 4 seeks to close entry to the full reinstatement of payments upon compli- mature age allowance and partner allowance ance. The government’s changes also incor- from 1 July 2003. Current recipients will be porate a more flexible reporting period of 12 saved. As a result, the respective populations weeks rather than fortnightly. of mature age allowance will be completely Labor are supportive of these changes but phased out by 2008, and of partner allow- we do have a number of concerns. Labor ance by 2020. Mature age allowance is cur- created the mature age allowance in recogni- rently paid to people who are unemployed tion of the fact that many of those who were and aged over 60 who have no recent work eligible faced little prospect that they would force experience and have been receiving work again. Mature age allowance removed income support payments for nine months. this group from the requirements that exist Partner allowance is currently paid to people under Newstart and, for many, the view that born before 1 July 1955 who have no recent they were part of the active labour market. work force experience and are not caring for While the changes bring this group back dependent children and who have partners within the Newstart population and will en- receiving an income support payment. sure that some are more engaged in retrain- The changes will involve no loss of bene- ing or skilling, for others it may impose par- fits or concessions. Newstart allowance re- ticipation requirements that may not be ap- cipients aged over 60 who have been in re- propriate to their circumstances. Accord- ceipt of benefits for nine months will still be ingly, Labor’s approach is to safeguard the eligible for the higher rate of allowance, population of 50-plus-year-olds from any pharmaceutical allowance and a pensioner unreasonable obligations. Labor will move concession card. Notwithstanding Labor’s amendments similar to those in relation to concerns about the next schedule and pro- schedule 1 to ensure that the participation posed amendments, this schedule will re- agreements properly take into account the ceive our support. circumstances of the mature age unem- Despite the government’s efforts, the ap- ployed. plication of new participation frameworks Labor are also concerned to ensure that for parenting payment and the mature age the mature age group are not forced to apply unemployed is far from perfect. Accordingly, for countless job vacancies where they have Labor will be moving amendments in rela- little or no prospect of success. Accordingly, tion to these measures. I intend to outline Labor will seek to introduce caps on the these amendments in some detail shortly. number of job vacancies that they will be Whilst not attempting to exceed the scope of asked to apply for. These caps will only ap- this bill, Labor will also be moving amend- ply in circumstances where job search is re- ments to improve the fairness of the compli- quired in the activity agreements; in many Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5685 instances, voluntary and paid work may oc- Newstart allowance and Youth Allowance. cur in lieu of job search. This needs to be done. Schedule 6 introduces the working credit Despite the government’s assurances that and a modified implementation date as an- its administrative changes have improved the nounced in the 2002-03 budget. The credit is safeguards that protect against unfair strikingly similar to Labor’s earning credit breaching, the truth is that the government scheme, which the government saw fit to can just as easily push the changes to one abolish in 1997, a short-sighted cut by any side and ramp up breaching again. The definition. The working credit will provide a Pearce report, the Commonwealth Ombuds- benefit of up to $1,000 per year for all work man and Australia’s most respected charities force age income support recipients. Labor have all concluded that there is a gross im- are disappointed that the government has had balance between the level of breaching ac- to delay this measure, which is desperately tivity and the incidence of wrongdoing on needed and which is the central spending the part of job seekers and other income sup- measure in this bill. It goes some way to im- port recipients. Labor are of the view that the proving incentives, but more does need to be government too quickly dismissed many of done. Those who have exhausted their credit the suggestions made by Professor Pearce in or who have sufficiently low levels of part- his independent report on breaching. The time earnings for the credit not to accumulate report is a balanced piece of work that, in will still face effective marginal tax rates, some cases, pushes tough but fair require- EMTRs, of 90 per cent or more. ments. Most importantly, the report focuses Schedule 7 contains an amendment that on ensuring compliance. The government enables Centrelink to trial new methods of has consistently claimed that its breaching flagging family homelessness. This measure policies are not about revenue raising. If this is the result of extensive research conducted is the case, it should embrace the logic of jointly with Hanover and other homelessness Professor Pearce, Julian Disney and their services. It is welcome and receives Labor’s own Heather Ridout and undertake further full support. reform of the system to ensure that it is com- pliance oriented. I want now to foreshadow other amend- ments. Labor are heartened by the more con- I reiterate that no side of politics should structive approach the government has taken tolerate welfare fraud. We did not in gov- in relation to the activity agreement and pen- ernment and in fact we established the data- alty regime for the parenting payment and matching programs that ensure compliance mature age allowance recipients. We have in and weed out the fraudsters. But we must this legislation a different approach to penal- respond when our systems are chewing up ties. There has been an attempt to address the Centrelink staff time and time in appeals and situation of parents and older unemployed are costing people on very low incomes who people, although we do not necessarily be- are trying to play by the rules their payments. lieve that the government has got it right yet. Accordingly, Labor will move a range of moderate amendments to give effect to a As I indicated at the commencement of number of recommendations of the Pearce my remarks, Labor will be making some report. Labor will move amendments to en- moderate amendments to ensure that the sure greater fairness and improved compli- proposed new framework for mature age and ance for Newstart and youth allowance re- for parents will work fairly. However, it is cipients. Labor will move amendments in our view that a fairer framework should also respect of the cooling-off period for partici- be implemented for other job seekers at the pation agreements. Recipients required to same time as we consider this bill. Some of enter into an activity agreement will be able the elements in the proposed regime for par- to change the terms of the agreement, with ents and for mature age should be incorpo- the approval of the secretary, within 14 days rated into the activity agreement and compli- of the agreement first being signed. The sec- ance regime for other job seekers, namely retary will be required to advise them of this 5686 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 right. As for appropriate agreement terms, namely, that benefit reductions should not formulation of the terms of participation exceed 25 per cent for the first or second agreements will need to more thoroughly breach, that breach reduction and non- take into account the circumstances of the payment periods should not exceed eight job seeker, including costs of compliance, weeks and that benefits should be reinstated travel, particular barriers to employment, on compliance. I now move the amendment medical conditions and any caring responsi- that has been circulated in my name: bilities. The agreement will also be required At the end of the motion, add: to include the assistance to be provided to “But the Senate condemns the Government’s the job seeker to comply with the agreement. unfair application of breach penalties on job In respect of new safeguards before breaches seekers and calls on it to amend the breach are imposed, before the application of a penalty regime in line with principles out- breach the secretary is to determine that the lined in the report of the Independent Review terms of the agreement are still reasonable. of Breaches and Penalties in the Social Secu- Before a breach is applied, the secretary will rity System (The Pearce review), including: be required to attempt to contact the job (a) a rate reduction for first or second seeker by a minimum of two different medi- breaches of no more than 25 per cent of ums. benefits; With regard to notice and application of (b) breach and non-payment periods of a breaches, a notice setting out the reasons for maximum of 8 weeks duration; and a breach must be sent at least 14 days before (c) reinstatement of benefits on compliance. the breach is to be applied. As for exemp- I seek advice from the chair, Madam Acting tions from agreements, we will broaden ex- Deputy President. Do I have to speak to that emptions to include job seekers utilising amendment now or can I address the SAAP funded crisis accommodation. As for amendment at a later stage of deliberations? measures to ensure that those in housing dif- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ficulty are not breached, sections of the act (Senator Knowles)—You speak to it now, dealing with movement to lower employ- Senator. ment areas will be amended to include a clause to protect people who have moved Senator MARK BISHOP—If I speak to due to housing affordability. In respect of the it now, can I return to it or will my time be penalty accumulation period, Labor will exhausted? move to reduce the accumulation period The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- from two years to 12 months. DENT—Your time will be exhausted in one These are reasonable amendments and minute and 42 seconds. many build into the broader compliance Senator MARK BISHOP—So, if I mechanism proposals that the government is choose not to speak to it now, can I speak to seeking to introduce for smaller groups— it in more detail later? parents and mature age people—through its The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- bill today. Labor are happy to talk to the DENT—No, it is a second reading amend- government about any technical issues re- ment, Senator, and you need to make your garding these amendments and are willing to contribution prior to the second reading. discuss options to make them workable if the Senator MARK BISHOP—Thank you government is concerned that they are likely for that guidance, Madam Acting Deputy to be difficult to implement. However, we President. In that case, in speaking very stand by our intentions: we can and must briefly to that amendment, it is instructive to improve the fairness of the system. In addi- look at the current breaches under the bill. tion to these measures, Labor will be moving They are significant breaches: $863 payable a second reading amendment urging the gov- over 26 weeks for a first breach, $1,144 pay- ernment to adopt a fairer and more effective able over 26 weeks for a second breach, and breach penalty regime broadly in line with even higher penalties for third and subse- the Pearce report recommendations— quent breaches. They are indeed significant Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5687 penalties to apply to those who are seeking cause of unavoidable life events that over- employment and whose breach may be of the took them. most minute or incidental nature. When one The government’s construction of mutual looks at the history of the current breaching obligation is that, if you are a sole parent, regime in recent years, one notes that in the you are undeserving not only of income sup- period from 1996-97 up until 1999-2000 the port but of the right to parent your own chil- average monthly number of breaches in- dren. If you are a partnered parent, this gov- creased from about 9,400 to 25,200. So there ernment’s policies encourage you to stay at has been almost a trebling in the number of home and care for your child. You can claim breaches since the government instituted the the baby bonus to stay at home for five years new regime in 1997. We believe that the following the birth of your child and you can government has stepped up breaching activ- claim family tax benefit B for your child’s ity as part of a concerted attempt to hassle entire growing period, with no regard to your people back into work. This activity reflects partner’s income. This way, even wealthy a view that the personal attributes of the un- families are therefore encouraged to have employed are— (Time expired) one parent stay at home and raise the chil- Senator CHERRY (Queensland) (11.43 dren. But, according to the public policies, if a.m.)—I rise to speak on the Family and you lose the support of that partner, you no Community Services Legislation Amend- longer deserve to be a parent. ment (Australians Working Together and This bill fails to acknowledge that re- other 2001 Budget Measures) Bill 2002. The search published in 2000 by Eardley and in bill before us is touted by the government as 2002 by Gray et al. reports that, of all in- a major step in welfare reform towards come support recipients, single parents are building a modern and responsive social already the most active in education, training support system for people of working age. and employment—even more than Newstart Reform of the Australian welfare system is allowance recipients. ABS data shows that overdue and indeed needs to be a continuous half of the population of single parents with process. The Australian Democrats have dependent children are already active in the long called for reform, but true welfare re- work force. Gray’s longitudinal data on ma- form is that which assists Australians to par- ternal employment in Australia shows that ticipate economically in community and so- both single- and couple-family mothers re- ciety while at the same time enabling them to turn to employment as their children get live in dignity and with sufficient means to older. Given that they already have the high- feed, clothe and house themselves and their est level of labour force participation and families. This bill does the opposite. It pro- given that the majority of sole parents spend vides the means to take away the means of only three years in receipt of parenting pay- support not only of unemployed Australians ments, the question must be asked: why is but now also of sole parents and their chil- compulsion necessary, particularly one with dren and older Australians. It was never the financial penalties attached? intention of the McClure report, out of which this bill has allegedly sprung, that people be The extension of compulsory activities to trapped by rules which do not help them get parents is a conceptually misguided initia- a job, which cut their benefits and which tive, drawn from inferences and imagined stigmatise and penalise them because they stereotypes about sole parents, without refer- have lost the support of a partner while rais- ence to the demographics or reality. Intro- ing children. Welfare reform means invest- ducing new compulsory activities devalues ment before savings can be achieved. This the significance of caring for children, even bill is simply about savings, with little in- though social indicators such as family vestment by government. In the name of homelessness, children in care and youth welfare reform, this government is reintro- suicide point to a need to increase support ducing the 19th century notion of the unde- for families’ care-giving activities. The ab- serving poor, those who in past centuries surdity of this bill is that it requires a par- would be condemned to the workhouse be- enting payment recipient with young chil- 5688 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 dren to take time away from work and study Forcing parents to agree to undertake an ac- to go and tell Centrelink that they are work- tivity which will have no effect on their ing or studying. Interviewing parents of chances of gaining employment, which has young children and financially depriving no regard for their personal circumstances them when they are unable to attend because and which threatens to take away the finan- of an unforeseen family crisis does not help cial support with which they house, feed and them get a job. Current family policy that educate their children is both regressive and rewards mothers in coupled families for dangerous. It provides no protection for chil- withdrawing from the work force but stig- dren who will be subjected to the outcomes matises them when relationships end is inco- of decisions imposed on their parents be- herent and inconsistent. cause of this bill. The best protection against unemployment The penalties on sole parents will be con- for single parents is to enable all parents, siderable. While the percentage reductions of whether coupled or single, to make struc- payments are the same as those currently tured transitions in and out of the work force, applying to Newstart recipients, the actual as their care-giving needs require, until the amount of penalty for single parents will be child reaches the age of 16. This needs con- greater. A first activity breach for a sole par- sideration of initiatives such as maternity ent will be $987. The Australian Democrats leave, affordable quality child-care services, asked Senator Vanstone earlier this week retraining packages and subsidy entitlements, whether she could give a guarantee that a and tax breaks for caregivers returning to person who fails to attend a Centrelink inter- work. Increasing the economic risks to par- view would only be subject to the adminis- ents through inventing new methods to re- trative test and not the activity test. The duce and remove their income—as this leg- minister could not give such a commitment, islation does—will directly impact on the despite touting the changes to administration welfare of their children. made by Centrelink since 1 July 2000. There is no cogent research evidence that Therefore, a single parent who is unable, compulsion is a better approach than assis- because of family or parenting requirements, tance, hence there is no strategy in this ele- to comply with a Centrelink direction to at- ment of the bill. It would have been a more tend just one interview could be fined $987. efficient use of public funds to increase re- That is just extraordinary. The sum of $987 sources to the JET program, the Jobs, Edu- is a lot of money in anyone’s terms, but it is cation and Training Program, which is so significantly more so when you are trying to successful but which has such enormously raise children alone on income support, long waiting lists. This program has a proven which is already well below the poverty line. track record of assisting sole parents back It may mean that you will not be able to pay into the work force, yet we do not see in this the rent for weeks and hence face being bill—a bill about participation in the work homeless. It may mean you cannot afford force—any extension of that particular school fees, excursion fees or shoes and scheme. clothes for your children. It may mean that Indeed, this government is determined to you will not be able to feed your family ade- plan for people who already have plans and quately for that week. All of this may happen to check on people who are already busy because you could not comply with a request trying to meet family and work commitments to attend a Centrelink interview, a request and who would have to satisfy a range of that has no regard for your circumstances in new paperwork and activities for the Centre- the first place. link office in order to avoid losing a subsis- Reports released this year by the Hanover tence income. In its changes to the sole par- Foundation, the Brotherhood of St Laurence ent pension and parenting payments, this bill and the Commonwealth Ombudsman all focuses almost exclusively on compelling concur that the current breaches and penal- parents to get into work, to the unfortunate ties system applying to Newstart allowance exclusion of their caring roles as parents. and Youth Allowance customers is harsh and Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5689 counterproductive and is sending people into The report of the Independent Review of homelessness and poverty. The extension of Breaches and Penalties in the Social Security this punishment framework of breaches and System—the Pearce report—made strong penalties to parents will impact most harshly recommendations to the government. It on parents who are least able to challenge found that, notwithstanding the existence of Centrelink’s decisions. A single parent who phrases such as ‘reasonable steps’, ‘reason- has just had $987 stripped from her pay- able excuse’, ‘without sufficient reason’ and ments and who cannot see her way straight ‘special circumstances’ in the relevant legis- to rent a house and feed the family over the lation, in practice insufficient investigation next few weeks will certainly not have the and consideration of reasons and surrounding wherewithal to navigate the complexities of circumstances have often prevented the authorised review and social security appeals achievement of this intention. mechanisms. I would draw the relevant provisions of Most sole parents live week to week with that report to the Labor Party’s attention if no reserves, and cutting payment on a day indeed they wish to go down the route of when rent and bills are due is devastating for adding more special circumstances and rea- them. Most likely, the disadvantages of illit- sonable steps as possible exemptions to eracy, limited education, transitory or uncer- breaching, because the evidence is that it tain accommodation or family trauma have does not work. The evidence is that it does led to the failure to comply in the first place. not reduce unfairness. The evidence is that Adding financial deprivation to the equation departmental officers are overstressed, have does nothing to assist that person to get a too many clients and simply do not have the job. The impact of such circumstances is not time, the effort or even the inclination to im- always easily understood by people who plement things effectively. For this reason have not experienced them personally, and the Australian Democrats are not satisfied sole parents will be faced with subjective that the presence of such exemptions or even judgments by Centrelink staff. Sole parents new exemptions will provide any guard are not immune from the severe and demor- against arbitrary or unfair impositions of alising pressures faced by long-term job penalties, despite the parliament’s clear in- seekers, particularly when very few jobs are tention. available which they can realistically hope to For many Newstart and Youth Allowance secure and when many of those jobs—even recipients, the breaching regime has been a if secured—will be part time and casual in sickening and frightening experience. Ex- nature. tending it to new groups, including single This is not mere surmising on our part. We parents, means more crisis and suffering for know that the punitive breaching regime has the most disadvantaged people in Australia. had a devastating impact on the most vulner- The extension of breaching to sole parents able Newstart and Youth Allowance claim- raises the prospect of an even worse impact ants. The system has operated to identify on children, since there is no other income those who are not coping, remove their in- source available to those parents or children. come, reduce their capacity to cope still fur- In a climate where welfare agencies are ther and then blame them for it. Hanover reeling from the impact of Newstart clients welfare services, which provides services to who encounter breaching and where they are people who find themselves homeless, found overloaded with requests for food and shel- that almost one-third of their clients have ter, and in the light of the independent review been breached in the last 12 months. The and the Ombudsman’s inquiry, it is simply Salvation Army found that around one- outrageous to contemplate extending this quarter of its emergency relief clients had regime to sole parents. been breached. Of even more concern is that Research in US welfare reform also pro- it found that 11 per cent of clients said they vides some unsettling findings relating to had to turn to crime to survive. children. A considerable body of that re- search suggests that forcing parents away 5690 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 from caring for their children may have det- Australians for every job vacancy already rimental effects on teenage children but little out there in the labour market. effect on rates of poverty. The Australian At the very least, we should take long- Democrats have always believed that parents term measurements of the impact of these are best placed to make decisions about the changes on Australian families, before im- relative importance of employment and par- plementation. We do not want to hold up the enting and to determine when their own par- implementation of the Working Credit enting responsibilities enable them to par- scheme, although we do wish that it were ticipate. more in keeping with current earnings pat- This bill provides for exemptions from terns. But it is an un-Australian thing to do to compulsory activities for children with pro- link it with legislation that vilifies and pe- found disabilities or recognised disabilities nalises people who have lost the support of a linked to the carer allowance. The term ‘pro- partner, as this government has done in the found disabilities’ is extremely misleading. bill before us. The Australian Democrats will Cystic fibrosis, which is a terminal condi- sit down with the government and nut out tion, is considered to be neither profound nor welfare reform but, where that reform re- a recognised disability, according to this flects a commitment by government to ad- legislation. The actions of this government in dress the real economic and social barriers to 1998 saw the parents of children with this participation, we will do what the govern- condition denied carer allowance. Juvenile ment has failed to do—that is, act on the rec- diabetes is not recognised as a profound dis- ommendations of the independent review by ability, despite being a potentially life- Pearce et al. and amend the breaching provi- threatening condition in children that re- sions of the social security legislation so that quires significant parental intervention to it reflects the original will of parliament. ensure a safe medication regime. The notion I should note in passing that the bill does of a single parent being compelled to leave a contain a number of other provisions, as in- child with a potentially fatal condition unsu- dicated earlier. The Working Credit scheme pervised in order to participate in training or will be supported by the Australian Demo- volunteer activities is contrary to the notion crats. We opposed the repeal of the former of parenting. working credit scheme in 1996, as it was a The Australian Democrats do not support measure that did in fact assist unemployed rorting of the welfare system, but sole par- people in accessing casual and part-time ents struggling to raise their children are not work. It is only a very small, token start and, rorters. They are vulnerable people who have as Senator Bishop pointed out, it certainly encountered difficult life circumstances and has been delayed as an obvious budget sav- who, as statistics report, will move into eco- ings measure this year. But it is a scheme nomic participation relatively quickly as that we support, and we would encourage the their circumstances permit. The Australian government to extend it to ensure that it ac- Democrats propose that sole parents should tually does provide much better encourage- be encouraged to participate and we particu- ment to unemployed people to pick up casual larly welcome the inclusion in this particular and part-time work. bill of participation payments, albeit at such The Personal Support Program included in a low level. But we want to do this in a con- this bill is also a measure that we will be structive way. We want to offer access to supporting, but, again, our concern is access affordable and accessible child-care support; to the number of places. The problem right access to out of school hours recreation pro- across the welfare reform system and in this grams for adolescent children; better access notion of mutual obligation is so often that to stable, low-cost public housing; accessible the government is not providing sufficient transport; and, importantly, access to job resources for its side of mutual obligation, creation schemes that will provide them with whether it be the JET program for sole par- employment instead of compelling them to ents, the PSP or the personal service advisers add to the ranks of the seven unemployed that are being put into Centrelink offices. Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5691

The resources are simply not there to ensure government that the breaching regime that is that people are given every encouragement in place is simply not satisfactory in terms of and every assistance to participate in the la- the unfairness that it is causing. I particularly bour market. welcome the second reading amendment The Democrats have deep concerns about moved by Senator Bishop, which draws at- the closing-off of the mature age and partner tention to the failings and unfairness of the allowances. This will impose JobSearch ac- government’s breaching regime and its fail- tivities on groups of Australians who, ure to ensure that the full recommendations frankly, really have the probably the lowest of the Pearce inquiry have been imple- chance of actually finding employment. So mented. I would encourage the Labor Party often, for those in mature age and partner to turn that second reading amendment into categories who have been out of the work formal amendments at the committee stage. force for a very long-time, if they want work Certainly, the Democrats would support they will look for work. There is plenty of amendments reflecting the Pearce inquiry evidence to show that people in those catego- being moved and becoming part of the act, ries want to work rather than not participate because we believe that that provides a better in the labour force. As the ABS showed in its basis on which the breaching regime can statistics on labour force participation earlier finally be reformed. this week, it is quite clear that so many peo- In conclusion, this bill contains some ple drop out of the work force because they things which are good and welcome and a lot have been told time and time again that they of things which simply are very harsh and are too old for the job. It has been quite unfair. It is picking the eyes out of McClure clearly shown through the Job Network and and leaving so much of what is important in the Productivity Commission that the gov- McClure and the regional welfare reform ernment is not providing sufficient assistance blueprint in the too-hard basket. Most of to the mature aged to get back into work. what McClure recommended in terms of the Whilst there have been some attempts to im- government’s side of mutual obligation has prove this in recent months, the situation for not been delivered. The programs and sup- mature age workers is simply not good port which are needed to ensure that people enough in terms of ensuring that there are can participate effectively in the work force jobs available for them. have not been delivered or have been deliv- I should note in passing that in Queen- ered only partially or ineffectively. These sland the Beattie government has initiated a things need to be reviewed by this govern- community jobs program directed at the ment if welfare reform is to proceed in a mature aged in particular. That scheme has a form that delivers social inclusion and better very high success rate of easing the mature economic opportunities. aged back into employment by at least giving Senator HARRIS (Queensland) (12.02 them a real job for a period of time. It works p.m.)—I rise to speak on the Family and far better than Work for the Dole, with a 90 Community Services Legislation Amend- per cent placement rate as opposed to about a ment (Australians Working Together and 35 per cent placement rate on Work for the other 2001 Budget Measures) Bill 2002. The Dole. It highlights that if you offer real work increasing pressure of globalism is leading to opportunities doing real community work a far greater role for economic rationalism in and real training opportunities then it will be welfare economics. As the negative impacts recognised by employers in a way that par- of globalisation spiral, the wage earners’ ticipation in Work for the Dole clearly is not welfare state is threatened. All aspects of the being recognised. welfare state, from financial assistance for The changes to the breaching regime in the unemployed and disabled to health care, this bill are obviously providing different are experiencing considerable cutbacks. The rules for parents and mature age workers. bill before us today, misleadingly titled The Democrats believe that this is the first ‘Australians Working Together’, reflects that acknowledgment that we have seen from the fact. 5692 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

We know that unemployment is rising and Meanwhile, the World Trade Organisation that the government’s figures in unemploy- has reaped a fateful harvest for our farmers. ment are rubbery. The department’s glossy, The seemingly deliberate and well- full covered PR pack—that is, the Austra- orchestrated drive to turn family farmers into lians Working Together initiative—acknowl- peasants on their own land has exacerbated edges that today more than one in five, or unemployment in rural and regional Austra- over 2½ million people, are receiving gov- lia, with many seeing no way out but to head ernment income support. Thirty years ago, for a life of unemployment in the cities. Ru- just one in 20 working age people were re- ral Australia is one of the major casualties of ceiving welfare. The government continues the global trap of free trade, yet it is inter- to perpetuate the myth of a low rate of un- esting to note that the government’s initiative employment of around 6.2 per cent, or a total Australians Working Together ignores the of 609,400 Australians unemployed. In a rural constituency. The government’s PR number of regional and rural areas, the offi- pack does not make one mention of people cial unemployment rate is much higher. I living in rural Australia, not one mention of will quote a few statistics from Queensland: the special and unique circumstances—that in Coolum, it is 17.8 per cent; in Maroochy- is, the tyranny of distance, the lack of educa- dore, it is 14.4 per cent; in Rockhampton, it tional services, the barriers to employment— is 9.4 per cent; in Mount Morgan, it is 27.8 that these people face. Where is the assis- per cent; in Gladstone it is 7.5 per cent; and tance for those rural people? in Gympie, it is 11.8 per cent. The bill should be more aptly titled the The Australian Bureau of Statistics define ‘Family and Community Services Legisla- an employed person as someone who is do- tion Amendment (IMF and the Government ing paid work for at least one hour a week. Working Together) Bill’. Most current eco- The real unemployment figures would be nomic reform programs here in Australia even higher—and our estimate would be in have a common origin: the International the millions—if the definition of employ- Monetary Fund. The IMF’s prescription in- ment was not so narrow. The Brotherhood of cluded privatisation, removal of health sub- St Laurence recently pointed out that the un- sidies and cutbacks to welfare budgets. In employment rate does not show that jobs are 1998, the International Monetary Fund made disappearing or being created, whether they a recommendation to the Liberal-National are part time or full time, permanent or cas- coalition government: ual. It also does not show whether people are ... to limit the duration of unemployment benefits working too many hours or not enough to encourage employment search, and to scale hours, or for how long they remain without back other social welfare benefits that discourage work. The stark reality is that there are sim- labor force participation. ply not enough jobs to go around. Again, in 2000, the IMF articles of agree- The Australian Bureau of Statistics data ment stated: indicates that, in February 2002, there were Directors welcomed the steps being taken to re- seven job seekers for every job that was duce disincentives to workforce participation and available. Trends towards privatisation and endorsed the view that the welfare system should outsourcing are forcing jobs offshore. Even provide greater incentives for people to move Minister Alexander Downer’s foreign affairs from welfare to work. department has encouraged Australian busi- This year the fund congratulated the gov- nesses to consider outsourcing their com- ernment on its Australians Working Together puter needs to low-wage developed nations initiative and urged further comprehensive such as India. The deliberate destruction of reform. Pushing people off welfare rolls and Australia’s manufacturing, clothing and tex- into low-paid jobs—which fits into the tile industries through the removal of tariffs IMF’s description for abolishing the award has seen the demise of thousands of jobs in system for setting minimum wages—is a small businesses. very narrow solution to the real problem of employment. So what is needed? What is Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5693 needed is legislation that addresses the deep US state of Connecticut which uses a per- structural crisis that Australia has been in son’s fingerprints to verify their identity or it and is currently experiencing. Indeed, we could be an extension of Centrelink’s speech have a pathetic bandaid, superficial approach recognition system, the multimillion dollar that focuses upon individual responsibilities system that will be used by customers re- or individual failings of welfare recipients porting for the government’s working credit themselves: legislation which implements a scheme, a key initiative of Australians kind of new paternalism and mutual obliga- Working Together. tion or voluntary compliance centring on ‘Personal support programs’, ‘community people’s choices, not on the fundamental work coordinators’, ‘personal advisers’, causes of unemployment; legislation which ‘participation plans’, ‘training accounts’, echoes the mantra that there is no society— ‘passports to employment’ and ‘mutual obli- there are only individuals and corporations; gation’ are phrases that our unemployed peo- legislation which positions Centrelink as a ple are increasingly more familiar with. For new interventionist bureaucracy replacing the government, it is a cosy middle ground some of the roles traditionally filled by the between the welfare state and the market church, the family unit and professional economy. It is cosy because governments counsellors. world wide are gradually extracting them- As a counter to welfare dependence, this selves from the provision of welfare and new paternalism advocates the controlling of other social services. Take the UK, for ex- patterns of behaviour. Rather than merely ample, where the leading Centre Left think helping those in need, new paternalists place tank, the IPPR, recently published its report great emphasis on program administration Building better partnerships. This report was and efficiency, privatisation and the en- seen as a key event in the move towards the forcement of social values. They are set out privatisation of essential public services in in two of the documents contained within the the UK. Australians Working Together package. One In the context of the General Agreement has a reference ‘Centrelink—with life on Trade in Services, GATS, it will be neces- events’. The customer chart in that shows a sary to eventually dismantle the public pro- program from birth to death. If we look at vision of health, education, welfare and other the second document, regarding life event social services, precisely because these frameworks for the new service delivery services represent the major area of expan- model, this is what Centrelink is setting out. sion for corporate profit. Corporations will The document is headed ‘How can Centre- transform welfare in rich countries so that link help you?’ It asks: ‘Are you responsible profits can be made from the delivery of tax for children, changing your marital or partner funded services. GATS means that these de- status, needing help after someone has died, velopments may well be forced on our citi- sick or disabled, caring for someone sick or zens. In Australia, the community welfare disabled, arriving to settle in Australia, coalition has already foreshadowed the looking for a job, responsible for a business outsourcing or privatisation of Centrelink or self-employed, in a crisis situation, seek- programs and services and has raised issues ing or changing education, planning your regarding a lack of staff resources and the retirement?’ We have Centrelink becoming enormous pressure to get clients in and out the overarching program through which this as quickly as possible. paternalism is going to be effected. The Howard government’s welfare re- The new paternalism amounts to the close forms are premised on the idea that unem- supervision of the poor. This supervision ployment has been caused or at least exacer- goes hand in glove with future scenarios bated by the welfare system. The govern- which would employ the use of biometrics in ment’s attitude towards unemployment is human service provision. I will raise that reflected in Minister Abbott’s statement that issue later in the debate on the bill. This welfare is ‘cruelty masquerading as compas- could be along the lines of the model in the sion’. Rather than addressing the causes of 5694 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 unemployment which I mentioned at the be- tion premiums on primary produce con- ginning of my speech—causes such as the sumed in Australia. One of the major prob- dramatic decline in our manufacturing in- lems that One Nation has with this legisla- dustries, the devastation of family farming, tion is that it does bring some benefits but it privatisation, outsourcing and corporate col- fails to address the real cause of the unem- lapses—the government’s programs repre- ployment that we see in Australia. sent and promote the belief that unemploy- As I mentioned earlier, there is Centre- ment is a problem because of the deficiencies link’s program for the implementation of of the individual, like being unmotivated or voice recognition in their services. The lacking a work ethic. The real problem is that speech recognition system would be used, there is insufficient demand or growth in the firstly, for customers reporting to the Com- economy to employ these people. monwealth government’s working credit The Australians Working Together initia- scheme, which will begin in April next year. tive creates a new stream of bureaucrats— People using the scheme will call the auto- that is, personal advisers—who will give matic speech recognition line, report how information about getting back to work and much money they have earned and thus, ac- about balancing work and family, and tips on cording to Centrelink, they will be able to how to look for work or take on study, keep more of their income support payment. training or volunteer work. This is a new sort People will call in every two weeks. What of intervention where Centrelink becomes a we actually have is a program whereby, in- coordinating service for people’s lives. It is a stead of the person going to Centrelink and form of paternalism—a life events approach having at least a one-on-one interview with a from birth to death. Almost everywhere, the person, they will pick up the phone—their welfare state is under siege and is being re- voices would eventually have been digitised cast in new directions. Unquestionably, wel- so that they would be recognised by that fare reform is needed. Equity and efficiency system—and they will then give their details demand suitable new welfare programs to a machine—that is, a computer—over the where existing programs can be reliably phone line. How impersonal! How will our shown to discourage the search for work and unemployed people have an incentive to use the acquisition of skills or to hinder growth a system such as that? I believe that is only and employment. There is even greater need, one of the uses to which biometrics is even- however, to reconsider the problems that tually going to be put. In conclusion, One globalisation brings: unemployment, the as- Nation sees enormous discrepancies in this cendancy of market immorality, the overrid- legislation. We see that there are areas that ing preoccupation with international compe- should have been addressed, including those tition, privatisation, and the codification of that I have raised my speech. I seek leave to social welfare as economic activities. table the two documents that I have circu- Many of the new social problems that old lated in the chamber. welfare state programs are failing to meet Leave granted. spring from the effect of economic policies Senator MOORE (Queensland) (12.20 being pushed on the world by radical liber- p.m.)—I rise to speak, in this debate on the alisation. Much of the welfare state crisis is Family and Community Services Legislation due to market failure and free market ideol- Amendment (Australians Working Together ogy. While there will always be support for and other 2001 Budget Measures) Bill 2002, government initiatives which generally assist about the current provisions on breaches and unemployed people, One Nation believes penalties under the social security system. that we need a far more vigorous and long- Recently, I was fortunate enough to be with term assessment to ensure the continuation you, Madam Acting Deputy President of the public welfare safety net. This will be Knowles, on a review that the Senate han- achieved by the government committing to a dled of the participation requirements and program of constructing public infrastructure penalties in the current social security sys- and the introduction of domestic consump- tem. This particular Senate inquiry was for- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5695 tunate enough to be briefed by a range of clusion, marginalisation and total loss from people—community groups, participants in the system. the system as it currently works and genu- There has not been a lack of reviews into inely interested people—about how the cur- the way breaches and penalties operate in our rent system works before any changes could system. As with all social security operations be made in future legislation. The key, com- of government departments, this has been mon concern of the people who appeared reviewed and reviewed. In terms of the sys- before the Senate committee was the harsh- tem of breaches and penalties, there have ness—perhaps the unfairness—and the fear been internal reviews, the Senate committee generated by the current system of breaches process, the much publicised Pearce inde- and penalties under the social security sys- pendent review and an Ombudsman’s report tem. This is a particularly important point as on the whole process. It is a good thing that we move towards discussion about extending people are reviewing the system. What we this same process. need to do is listen to what comes out of The original changes to the system came those reviews. under the process of Australians Working A common theme of the results of those Together. That is such a splendid title: Aus- reviews is that it must be done better. An- tralians Working Together. In fact, the whole other common theme is that there are genu- concept is that, if there is going to be genu- ine administrative and processing problems ine movement forward, Australians must be in the current system, which means that the working together under this system. One of system is not working effectively. I am not the key components of the changes to Aus- here to put blame on anyone for those fail- tralians Working Together—it is called AWT, ures but I am saying that those failures are and I do not like that very much—was the making the entire concept of mutual obliga- concept of increased mutual obligation. This tion and participation fall over, because peo- came out all the time during our Senate ple are being pushed away. Their distrust of committee process. What we heard from the the system is increasing, and therefore the people who were working in the system, efforts to involve and engage them are not from recipients of different payments in the being successful. system and from people who were helping make the system work as it is was that there The process that we have had, in terms of was some concern about the mutual nature of what has gone wrong with the system, seems the obligation. This is where I come to a to hinge on a couple of key themes. One point about how any focus of breaches and theme is the communication between the penalties would operate. Encouraging people people who need the system and the people to participate is the key concept of Austra- who work in the system. There seems to be lians Working Together. an ongoing need for improvement, and this is accepted by all the reviews, accepted by There is an acceptance that people must people in the various departments and ac- be engaged in the community and must be cepted by the ministry. The issue of getting engaged in participating in the work force people who want to be involved back into and in training. There is no question about work and participating as members of the that. It is the process by which people are Australian community is being damaged by engaged in participation that is being ques- the fear generated by the way that the tioned, as well as what happens to people breaching system is currently operating. who, for whatever reason, are not effectively engaged. I submit that the current process of We had a number of submissions from breaching and penalties does not encourage people that talked about receiving communi- participation. In fact, it pushes people away. cation from the department. The communi- It encourages fear and concern and it in- cation was intended to keep them involved creases the massive distrust of the system. with the department but it actually forced The end result of such a process is not in- them away. It forced them away for a num- creased participation; I fear it is actually ex- ber of reasons, ranging from their inability to understand the system and their inability to 5696 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 understand the communication through to a fair system is and I am aware that the sys- their genuine fear of the whole departmental tem that was in place in the early nineties process. The very efforts being made by the was, in some ways, more difficult than the department to engage with people actually one that is currently in place. But this is not ended up pushing them further away. the time to be talking about which system is In that way, the entire step 1, step 2, step 3 tougher than others. This is the time to talk breaching process, with its increasingly se- about the information that we have received vere penalties, just made people who were from people who know the system and par- already marginalised and feeling isolated ticipate in the system, and to work together more damaged and less capable of doing the to try and make the system better. very things which the legislation intends There is no particular value in saying that them to do: to engage with the department; one system is tougher or has more impact to engage with the community; and to seek than another. What we have is a body of evi- out effective methods of training, communi- dence, which we have all shared, from a cation and ways of developing so that they range of different reviews and which points can return to the work force in some way. out that the impact of the current system is If any of the legislation that has been onerous. The impact of the current regime of placed before both houses of parliament is penalties and breaches has the most mon- going to be successful, the key issue must be strous effect on people who, currently, are a rekindling of trust between those people mostly young unemployed. That is where the who are developing the legislation and those current range of breaching penalties is im- people who need it. The amendment before posed. the house, which talks about a change in the Their stories are now public. They are sto- current breaching provisions quite specifi- ries about what it means to have your money cally as part of an overall change to the gen- cut, sometimes without even realising why, eral legislation, takes on board three specific sometimes without receiving effective com- components of our concerns with the current munication from any level of government— breaching regime. to suddenly go to your bank account, on One aspect is just the sheer size of the which you are totally reliant, and find sig- breach. We heard various people before our nificant cuts in your fortnightly payment. committee talk about the immediate impact Under the current system the cuts can extend of the cut in payment. It was very difficult in over strike 1, strike 2 and strike 3 for in- many ways for those of us who were sitting creasing periods of time—up to half a year. on that committee to be confronted with The current statistics—and there are numer- submissions from people talking about what ous statistics, but I have to admit there are it was like to lose such a large and immediate very few I trust—indicate that there is a low aspect of your very livelihood. I am not percentage of single breaches. People who talking about people who are receiving sup- are into this cycle of breaching fall into con- plementary payments. I am not talking about secutive breaching. Once you have breached people who, in most cases, are receiving once, once you have fallen into the penalty money on top of some kind of supported process once, it is highly likely that you will wage or any wage that they are currently then fall into a second and a third process. able to receive. I am talking about people That means that you are not further involved who are totally reliant on fortnightly welfare in the community and that you are not more payments. likely to take up job opportunities or develop yourself as a trained, effective person in the That sense of total reliance is something community. What happens is that you lose that many of us cannot understand. I am money, you lose your accommodation and talking about people who are totally reliant you lose your ability to move around, be- on a fortnightly payment which is already cause you have no money to access trans- quite small, and about a breaching regime port. The very system which has been devel- which currently takes massive amounts of oped to encourage people to participate is, as money. There are various debates about what Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5697

I said, moving people further away, pushing ent a letter, they will get it automatically and them aside and reinforcing some feeling that then be automatically part of the process. they are not worthy, that somehow they are That has been proven to be just not true. You evil, that they have done wrong and that they cannot rely on written communication to must be punished. I question the ability of a engage people in the social welfare system. I system that uses that form of terminology— submit that you cannot rely on written com- the terms ‘breaching’ and ‘penalties’—to munication to get anyone engaged in any effectively engage and enforce participation. system and certainly not people who are reli- The second point is the quantum. Perhaps ant on the social welfare system, some of it would be useful for all of us on our current whom—our figures indicate many of wage—and this was something put to us by whom—are in situations of homelessness or, the Welfare Rights Centre of New South at best, are rapidly moving between different Wales during the committee hearings—to addresses. If our process continues to be reli- translate our current employment and wage ant on people receiving mail or having regu- rates to a breaching regime and see, using lar phone calls, it is guaranteed to fall over. our own money, what it would mean to cut it The first step towards receiving a penalty down by the current percentages and for the under the system is reliant on someone re- periods of time. It is a particularly confront- sponding to mail or responding to telephone ing system, and I encourage people to have a communications or, I am thrilled to say, re- look at their own processes and see how that sponding to an SMS! The department were would work. very excited about their ability to SMS peo- ple on mobile phones. That is a wonderful The evidence provided to us by people thing but I question just how many people who were directly involved in the Pearce who are totally reliant on the social welfare review indicated that they were not saying system will have the immediacy of the SMS that there should not be some form of pen- system for receiving their information from alty. They were not saying that there was a the department. philosophical opposition to any kind of proc- ess to encourage people to keep in contact. It was clear during the discussions that we They were questioning the size of the penalty had that some of the people who were most under the current regime and they were interested in developing and making the clearly questioning the process by which it system work better were the people in Cen- was administered. They could point to mas- trelink and the Department of Family and sive amounts of evidence which indicated Community Services who administer the that people were not trusting the way the system. Those people genuinely wanted to system was operating. There was consider- make the system work better as well. able evidence about the administrative proc- Throughout the Ombudsman’s report and esses within the department which indicated other documents that I have read it has been that it was not an easy thing to maintain noted that the departmental people are very communication between the people who are keen to look at ways to make the system working within the system at the depart- work better. That is a tremendous effort to mental level and the people who are totally contribute to the concept of Australians reliant on it. The people who are totally reli- Working Together, because we are never ant on it do not fit any particular model. going to develop an effective social welfare There are all kinds people who are reliant on system if it develops into some kind of con- the social welfare system, and not all of them test. I have mentioned this before in this can be clearly defined or labelled. A system place. There is no moral high ground. There that would work effectively for some client is no righteousness in this argument. The groups may not, and in fact I submit does only way we are going to be able to develop not, work for everyone. and, much more importantly, implement an effective social justice system—as opposed Our reliance on written communication is to a purely welfare system—is for everybody misplaced. We seem to think that, once you who has a stake in this to be actively in- put something in the mail and send a recipi- volved and be part of the solution. That in- 5698 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 volves some genuine communication be- If we use this process to continually pun- tween all the stakeholders. ish, to—in many more ways—label and We must ensure that, instead of the first marginalise, we will not have Australians reaction to people expressing criticism being working together. We will have more people outrage, the first reaction is to listen. We who are distrustful of our system and who must listen to the issues being raised by the are fearful of any engagement with govern- people who know the system. If people say ment agencies regardless of which ones they that they are having difficulty with the sys- are. One of the real issues is that people do tem, perhaps the first response should be to not know with whom they are speaking. listen and to say, ‘How do you think it could There is not a great deal of knowledge out work better?’ The committee made some there in the community about exactly which specific recommendations about how it could government department does what. In fact, if work better. In fact, the three points in this people actually get the courage to come into amendment are directly part of a response a government department, they just want all from the committee comprising people who their questions answered by whoever is be- want to make the system work better. There hind the desk at that time. If we are to break is no expectation that the system should be down that fear and engender trust and get destroyed; there is an expectation that the people into the system, surely we must re- system should be made to work better. One ward, encourage and nurture them so that the of my pet issues is with point (c) of this next steps of Australians Working Together amendment, which talks about the ‘rein- will be successful and they will be working statement of payments benefits’—I do not together. like the word ‘benefits’—‘on compliance’. Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) I began by saying that the concept of this (12.40 p.m.)—I rise to speak on the Family whole process is to have people participat- and Community Services Legislation ing. That is what we are trying to do. If the Amendment (Australians Working Together concept of the penalty is to ensure that peo- and other 2001 Budget Measures) Bill 2002. ple participate then surely once the person or This bill implements the first stage of the persons, if it is a group, do fulfil their re- government’s response to the McClure report quirements under the legislation and com- on Australia’s social welfare system. These municate, that must mean that their payment measures were announced in last year’s should be returned. This, in fact, was one of budget and have been examined by the Sen- the key issues that came out of our discus- ate Community Affairs References Commit- sion. We have this concept of ‘balance’—we tee, which last month tabled its report high- use the word a lot at the moment—between lighting the bill’s shortcomings. encouragement and the success of the sys- This bill increases the requirements im- tem, which is about getting people commu- posed on people in receipt of income support nicating and participating, and yet we have a under threat of having benefits suspended. penalty which says, ‘We have not heard from With the exception of a few worthwhile you; we do not know where you are; you measures—such as the introduction of a have not fulfilled your commitment to the working credit to assist people moving from system, so you have breached.’ The require- income support to paid work; minor financial ments of mutual obligation must be fully assistance for language, literacy and nu- understood by the person before they receive meracy training; and more help with child the payment. If, in fact, the intent of the pro- care—this bill continues the government’s cess is to get people training, engaging, misguided approach to addressing long-term communicating and moving towards work, reliance on income support, poverty traps then when they do communicate, get in and shortfall of available jobs at adequate touch, and fulfil their requirements surely rates of pay. The Australian Greens support that must mean that they have complied. measures to assist people to move into paid Surely then their payments and their status in work, including providing relevant training the system should be restored. and education, but we do not support coer- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5699 cion or penalties which cause substantial trenched from their job. These circumstances hardship to people already struggling to meet occur through no fault of the individual, and their material needs. income support is provided so that they have Like so much of this government’s focus, enough to eat and a place to live. It is the this bill is couched in terms of providing ‘in- minimum that a decent society should pro- centives for self-reliance’ which the govern- vide to those members whom our economic ment says are missing in the income support system has failed. system. The government tells us people Debate interrupted. should be ‘taking responsibility for their own MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST futures’. The language reveals the govern- ment’s misunderstanding of the circum- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT stances of Australians who find it difficult to (Senator Hutchins)—Order! It being 12.45 obtain a secure job at reasonable pay that p.m., I call on matters of public interest. also permits them to meet their responsibili- Western Australia: Timber Industry ties as carers and members of their commu- Western Australia: Electoral Distribution nity. It blames individuals for their circum- Repeal Bill stances instead of acknowledging structural Senator JOHNSTON (Western Austra- impediments to greater work force participa- lia) (12.45 p.m.)—I rise to discuss as a mat- tion. These include affordable child care, ter of public interest the situation in Western publicly funded education and training, de- Australia which arose recently following the cent wage rates, reasonable hours of work, demise of the timber industry in that state. paid parental leave and creating work in People living in rural and regional Western places where people live—not expecting Australia are currently enduring a sustained them to move, possibly with a family, to and vindictive attack, if I may say so, upon some other place. This language disguises their standard of living such as has not pre- the government’s real agenda, which is to viously been seen in my state. create an impression of activity amid a bur- den of paperwork and interviews. What is By way of example I point to the formerly required is a serious refocusing on our work- thriving communities of Manjimup and place environment, including the pursuit of Pemberton in the south-west of Western sustainable and socially useful work; the Australia. The Premier of my state, with one sharing of available paid work; and a signifi- stroke of the pen, has devastated Manjimup cant investment in training, education and and the lives of timber workers throughout child care. It underestimates the generosity the entire south-west of my state, but par- of spirit amongst many Australians who in ticularly in Manjimup, when he slashed tim- general, unlike this government, are not bent ber quotas in that region. Everyone, includ- on punishing disadvantaged members of our ing the timber working families of Manji- society. mup, realises that our old growth forests must be preserved for future generations. But This legislation is based on the policy of that preservation can be achieved through a mutual obligation, which under this govern- reasonable program to phase out the logging ment translates to onerous obligations on of such forests with a gradual and less trau- individuals and minimal obligations on the matic shift to value adding and plantation part of government. The government argues industries. that people receiving income support should give something back to society in return. But The reality is that my state Premier does this policy is founded on false premises. not care at all about WA’s rural and regional People rely on income support when their communities. I have been to Manjimup twice circumstances prevent them from earning since being elected to this place. The leader income. They may be mentally ill, physically of my state parliamentary party, Mr Colin disabled, suffering chronic ill health, caring Barnett MLA, has visited Manjimup five for young children alone, or caring for a sick times since the last state election. Mr Gallop partner or parent, or they may have been re- is yet to go there, notwithstanding his quite 5700 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 capricious actions regarding the livelihood of area. The changes were going to alter the the people living in these communities. balance between metropolitan and country I have observed first-hand, with the assis- seats from 34-23 to 41-15. tance of the Hon. Paul Omodei, the very It is no surprise that various people allied hard-working and popular member who rep- together to oppose the alteration to the state’s resents that local community, just how resil- electoral laws and expressed their determi- ient and committed the people of Manjimup nation to fight those changes. They formed and Pemberton are to their communities and the Country Alliance, which took the matter, to the region generally. In the face of the loss with the Clerk of the Legislative Council of of many millions of dollars in annual in- Western Australia, to the full court of the vestment and of hundreds of jobs through the Supreme Court. decimation of the timber industry, this com- The crucial legislation was the Electoral munity is bouncing back, I am pleased to Distribution Act, which was to be repealed to advise the Senate. There is renewed energy inaugurate these changes. There were two in the area of export horticulture. This region potential problems for the government. exports potatoes into South-East Asia and Firstly, section 13 of the act had entrench- cauliflowers into Singapore, Thailand and ment provisions. Section 13 stated: Malaysia. Avocados, wine, apples and other It shall not be lawful to present to the Governor horticultural products are all being exported for Her Majesty’s assent any Bill to amend this from this region. Traditional agriculture is Act, unless the second and third readings of such thriving, thanks to beef and sheep. Plantation Bill shall have been passed with the concurrence timber is coming along, and tourism is of an absolute majority of the whole number of slowly but surely developing, permitting a the members for the time being of the Legislative recovery from this government induced dis- Council and the Legislative Assembly respec- aster. tively. In these circumstances, I am drawn to ask The government had no difficulty in the just how many times the Premier of my state Legislative Assembly. However, it had a 16- has visited this community and shown con- 17 ratio in the upper house. The government cern for the livelihood of these people. The actually had 18 seats in the upper house. answer, of course, is: not once. However, However, one of those seats was occupied by since being elected, he has been to China, the President and, of course, under the Con- Dubai, the United Kingdom and other places stitution Act of 1899 the President of the with an international address. It seems that, Legislative Council of the Parliament of clearly, he has a great deal more concern for Western Australia does not have a delibera- people living over there than he does for tive vote, only a casting vote. The govern- those living in his own state. ment asserted that a vote of 17-16 was suffi- The contempt shown for the hard-working cient to meet the terms of the Electoral Dis- people of country Western Australia is all tribution Act, which sought simply to repeal played out against the backdrop of a further the previous entrenchment provisions. and more insidious assault upon rural and The other question which arose from sec- regional communities. That assault is in the tion 13 of the act was that the words seemed form of the repeal of the Electoral Distribu- to suggest that the law could be broken if the tion Act. Since the mid-1970s the Australian legislation, passed in this way, were to be Labor Party in Western Australia has used presented for royal assent. The interesting every possible occasion when it has been in legal aspect that flowed from this was the power to seek to introduce changes to the position in which that left the Clerk of the electoral arrangements of my state. It was Legislative Council, Mr Laurie Marquet, therefore no surprise when the current West- with respect to the passing of the law in these ern Australian state Labor government set circumstances. Marquet himself actually re- out to introduce one vote, one value altera- ferred the matter to the full court of the Su- tions by undertaking a movement of eight preme Court of Western Australia for deter- seats from the country to the metropolitan mination. Liberal parliamentary legal affairs Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5701 spokesperson and former Attorney-General text of such an intention. ‘Amend’, in our view, Peter Foss suggested that, at the very least, should be interpreted accordingly. the government had put Marquet in a diffi- That is to say, of course, that to simply drive cult and precarious position. He stated that if around the entrenchment provisions by the bill had received vice-regal approval, the amending the act was unconstitutional. It is, Clerk may have been, or could have been, therefore, with some great relief for regional facing criminal charges if the law were sub- Western Australians that the Supreme Court sequently struck down. This would have decision was handed down, as I say, last Fri- been on the grounds of it having been found day week. In its wisdom, the court found 4-1 not to have been properly passed. Mr Mar- that the democratic principles of the Legisla- quet’s referral sought a determination from tive Council were being abrogated by this the full court, as I said, as to the legitimate piece of legislation. passing of this repeal act. The Western Australian Attorney-General, In the unreported decision handed down who is vested with the onerous responsibility last Friday week—the case is Marquet Clerk of upholding the law and democratic princi- of the Parliaments of Western Australia v. ples in that state, was attacking the constitu- The Attorney-General of Western Australia tion he was bound by his office to defend. and Anor, 2002, WA Supreme Court, 277—a The Attorney-General’s actions were found 4-1 majority rejected the view that the simple to be unlawful. He, along with the Premier of majority of 17-16 met the provisions of sec- Western Australia, must bear the responsi- tion 13 of the Electoral Distribution Act. As bility for the undermining of the Western Mr Justice Steytler and Mr Justice Parker Australian constitution and its parliamentary stated: systems. The position of the Attorney- It is clear that the entrenchment provision in s.13 General is now plainly and obviously unten- was not enacted for its own sake. As indicated able, given the decision of the Supreme there was a purpose for its enactment and that Court. I pause to observe that this Attorney purpose, in our view, is material to understanding has a long and thankfully unsuccessful track the intended meaning of its terms. It is also rele- record with respect to the prosecution of this vant to the understanding of this purpose, and to issue. He has attacked with zeal the constitu- the interpretation of s.13 that, in the absence of a tional electoral framework of my state for the fundamental change to the manner of constituting the Houses of the Houses of Parliament, the 1947 past seven years. It has become the major Act could not be repealed, in the sense of finally focus of his political life. revoked or annulled, and not replaced. Four judges of the Supreme Court have The legislative purpose for the enactment of s.13 now confirmed that he was wrong to pursue is therefore to be perceived from the viewpoint legislative change through underhand and that it was intended to entrench the provisions of backdoor legislative strategies. He has al- an Act which dealt with an essential and politi- ready been warned by the highly regarded cally important aspect of the process by which the Clerk of the House, Mr Laurie Marquet, that Houses of Parliament are constituted, and was his parliamentary tactic of trying to circum- enacted in the expectation that there must always vent the legitimate legislative process was be legislation on that topic. flawed, but he ignored this warning and This discourages any narrow understanding of the pressed on. Further to this, there were nu- intention of Parliament when it used the word merous precedents that would have told him ‘amend’ in s.13. It is strongly indicative, that the purpose of s.13, which its language was intended that what he was proposing was wrong. The to achieve, was to protect or ‘entrench’ the provi- Supreme Court reminded him of these sions of the 1947 Act from change, except in cir- precedents when telling him that he was so cumstances where the requirements of s.13 were very wrong. It is of considerable concern to satisfied. Whether, as a matter of form, change realise that Western Australia has an Attor- was effected by some alteration of the existing ney-General prepared to ignore sound advice provisions, or by their complete repeal and re- and reasonable warnings in the pursuit of an enactment incorporating the desired change, ideological objective. I have no doubt that, would appear to be of no materiality in the con- given the level of obsession, further scarce 5702 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 resources will be committed to an appeal of whole island from any high point—have ab- this decision. solutely no concept of what it is like. The current system of how Western Aus- Senator Forshaw—What about New tralians are elected to the Legislative Council South Wales? Talk to Peter Black. has been put in place for very good reason. Senator JOHNSTON—For the benefit of Western Australia is a large and vast state the learned senator from New South Wales, I with, if not the biggest, one of the largest have just cited the fact that under this elec- electoral territories in the world. It is 3,000 toral system we would have had four country kilometres from the north of the state to its electorates each the same size as that one most southern point. From South Australia state. I am certain that some of the senators and the Northern Territory borders to the opposite have never even traversed the re- west coast it is close to 2,000 kilometres. gions of their own state to see how vast they Coupled with a large population mass that is are. centred on the capital city of Perth, it is in- conceivable that there should be an elector- The Western Australian Attorney-General ate system that would allow the people living has not accepted this humiliating defeat. in an area that represents less than one-tenth David has taken on Goliath and won. He of one per cent of the landmass of the state to plans now to present a further amendment have vastly disproportionate electorate repre- and a further law to the parliament—that is, sentation in the parliament of Western Aus- he wants to give the President of the Legis- tralia. lative Council a deliberative vote. This is in the face of a number of citations by his own If the Labor government in Western Aus- Premier who, when such a proposal was tralia had been successful with its chicanery, made in 1997, as reported in the West Aus- we would have one electorate that stretched tralian of 21 January 1997, declared that it 2,000 kilometres from Coral Bay on the west was ‘a cynical attempt to subvert the will of coast to the South Australian border on the WA voters’. It was not so cynical for them east side of my state. Four of the country now to purport to achieve exactly the same electorates would have been individually purpose. Let us look at what that really larger than the entire state of New South means. Harry Phillips, politics professor at Wales. This would be clearly unfair and Edith Cowan University, said: would have denied effective representation Changing the law to give the President a delib- to a significant number of Western Austra- erative vote was an unacceptable break with con- lians. What was suggested by this legislation vention. was that one member of parliament would be able to travel for a day and a half through his Further to that, David Black of Curtin Uni- electorate and still not reach the other side. versity said: Any change to the president’s voting rights would The Western Australian Labor govern- be subject to legal challenge and posed a political ment has reportedly wasted $3 million in danger to the Government. lawyers’ fees on this bid which, on any- body’s reading of the argument, was always That is not enough for this Attorney-General. going to fail. It would not be beyond the He wants to push on; he has no concept of realm of possibility that the all-up cost of the convention of this parliament and seeks this little foray into the electoral reform pro- to undermine it. He has previously lost 4-2 in cess is going to cost something like $9 mil- the High Court; he has now lost 4-1 in the lion—an abhorrent waste of taxpayers’ Supreme Court. It is clear that he is going to funds. Western Australians have rallied to press on with this foolhardy zealotry when, the cause to protect their rights and to protect of course, he should be saving the time and their right to representation—and decent rep- money of the taxpayers of Western Australia. resentation. Of course, senators who come Superannuation: Industry Funds from states such as Tasmania, where you can Senator SHERRY (Tasmania) (1.00 virtually look across to the other side of the p.m.)—The Liberal and National parties have a long history of making inaccurate and Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5703 misleading assertions about nonprofit super- the insertion of superannuation provisions in annuation funds, particularly multi-employer industrial awards. Superannuation was, he or so-called industry funds. Despite all the said: evidence to the contrary, they just cannot ... one of the most underrated threats to the future help themselves. Today I want to lay out the stability of Australia’s economy, and indeed to the accurate and true picture of superannuation capitalist system ... funds and give some examples of the blatant Apparently, superannuation—and most Aus- inaccuracies and claims that have been made tralian employees now have it—was going to by ministers in this government. No amount bring about the collapse of the Australian of evidence of the strong performance of economy and the capitalist system. Since corporate, industry and public sector super- then, superannuation coverage has increased annuation funds in terms of investment re- from around 40 per cent to well over 90 per turns, prudential soundness and value for cent of the Australian work force—thanks to money, particularly when it comes to fees the Labor Party—and superannuation assets and charges, can divert the Liberal-National stand at some $532 billion but, despite Mr Party government from their political attacks Downer’s dire warnings, capitalism is still on trustee funds. alive and well. The most common line used by almost Another example occurred in the 1998 everyone in the Liberal-National Party gov- election campaign. In the Bulletin magazine, ernment, from ministers who should know the former Liberal Party director, Mr Robb, better—I am sure they know better but they suggested that industry funds are a source of do not want to tell the accurate story—to donations to the Labor Party and that unions backbenchers, some of whom have little idea involved in industry funds derive profits about superannuation, is that industry super- from administration fees. He said: annuation funds are union funds. This is a The unions, which would stand to benefit from blatant lie. While there are many superannu- millions of dollars of management fees over the ation funds where some trustees are ap- years ahead, may have a great incentive to put pointed by trade unions, there are no union- their hands deep in their pockets to see Labor win only funds allowed in Australian law. The this election ... law, the Superannuation Industry (Supervi- I searched the list of publicly available do- sion) Act, requires that all nonprofit funds nations made to all political parties and I have equal employee and employer trustees. could not find one industry fund that has All decisions must be taken by a two-thirds ever made a donation to the Labor Party. Nor vote. It is simply impossible, even if they could I find from the evidence that I have wished to, for a trade union or a group of seen any trade unions that have received fi- trade unions or, for that matter, a group of nancial benefits through the payment of ad- employer trustees or their representatives, to ministration fees—presumably that would be control exclusively these funds, provided approved by the trustees, if it ever happened. that employee representatives are independ- In nonprofit trustee funds administration, all ent of employers. the fees are used to cover the expenses of the I will provide some more details on the operation of the fund and any surpluses are reality of nonprofit superannuation funds a paid to members of the fund via the return. little later, but first it is worth hearing some Corporate industry and public sector funds of the inaccurate and, at times, frankly, stu- do not pay a dividend to their shareholders. pid statements that have come from some They effectively pay any profits to the mem- members of the government on matters re- bers of the fund. So Mr Robb’s allegations lating to superannuation. In 1985, the Liberal were just totally false. As I said at the time, Party member for Mayo, now the Minister Mr Robb was either ill-informed, totally ig- for Foreign Affairs, Mr Alexander Downer, norant or deliberately misleading in his arti- came out with one of the greatest pearls of cle in the Bulletin. wisdom that we have seen in terms of an More recently, on 2 October last year, the economic prediction when he argued against then Minister for Financial Services and 5704 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

Regulation, Mr Hockey, made an extraordi- for the regulation of superannuation—the nary claim when he launched proposed new minister, Senator Coonan, has made changes to the regulation of super funds. He similarly inaccurate statements of her own. said: On 14 May, in response to a question from It is going to be tough. It is going to be hard par- my colleague Senator Buckland about this ticularly for the industry funds. It is going to government’s tardy response to the Commer- mean that the representatives of some of the cial Nominees debacle—a case of theft and workers on those industry funds, including union fraud in superannuation—Senator Coonan officials, are going to start to be held accountable made the following outlandish claim: for investment decisions. It is going to force those ... Labor’s union masters are responsible for $200 people to disclose and at times, seek approval, of billion in investment assets. This, of course, is a members if they are going to engage in related- wonderful fund for the union movement’s politi- party activities. So if they are giving work to cal wing here in the Senate. mates they are going to need to seek approval of members of the fund. The days of the cosy rela- It is worth reiterating that at no stage has an tionships in superannuation are now over. industry superannuation fund made dona- I found Mr Hockey’s claim of ‘cosy relation- tions to the Labor Party—or any other politi- ships’ particularly extraordinary, given that cal party for that matter. Again, it highlights the very next day Mr Hockey appointed Mr the remarkable degree of paranoia on the part Baume—former senator, former Consul of this government that Senator Coonan General in New York and confidante of the seems to believe that some of Australia’s Prime Minister—to the independent Super- most high-profile employer groups, such as annuation Complaints Tribunal. If that is not the Australian Industry Group, who are joint a cosy relationship, I do not know what is. trustees of many of these funds, would con- When I asked Senator Coonan, on notice, spire with unionists to divert superannuation what Mr Baume’s qualifications as a member moneys to her political opponents. Since of the tribunal were, she replied: then I think even Senator Coonan has tried to hide the stupidity of the remarks she made Mr Baume has had a long and distinguished ca- reer in parliament ... on those occasions. When challenged on this issue in question time on 22 August, Senator A quick search of the Hansard over this long Coonan had the President rule the question and distinguished career reveals that Mr out of order. Had she possessed a shred of Baume said next to nothing about superan- evidence to justify her wild and inaccurate nuation. Despite his appointment to this in- claims, she could have come into the cham- dependent tribunal, Mr Baume continues to ber and presented it to the Senate. Not to be act as a shamelessly partisan newspaper col- outdone by his more senior colleagues, umnist in defence of the worst policies of Senator Ferguson, during a debate in this this government. On 15 May this year, I chamber on 26 September—when dealing, asked Mr Hockey’s successor, Senator amongst other things, with this government’s Coonan, on notice, whether APRA, the pru- failure to provide for adequate superannua- dential regulator, had any evidence to sup- tion fee disclosure—posed this question: port Mr Hockey’s wild claims about industry funds and whether APRA had ever provided If you want transparency in superannuation and you want to talk about showing everybody the Mr Hockey with any such evidence. Senator exit fees and charges, why do you not tell us how Coonan’s answer was short and to the point: much Bernie Fraser is being paid to do his ads for ‘No. No to both these questions.’ In other Cbus? Where does that appear on the balance words, Mr Hockey’s comments had no basis sheet—or is he being very generous in his retire- in fact. They simply reflected the blind ment and saying, ‘I’m prepared to do all of these prejudice of the Liberal Party towards any ads for the industry fund for nothing.’ outcomes reached through cooperation be- Senator Ferguson did not need to ask the tween employers and trade unions. Despite Labor Party about Mr Fraser. He could, and disowning Mr Hockey’s comments—and, if he should, have asked Cbus before making the draft of the Superannuation Working those remarks—and in a highly accusatory Group is anything to go by, most of his ideas manner. On 2 October, Cbus wrote to Sena- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5705 tor Ferguson, informing him that Mr Bernie employers have established funds without Fraser does not receive payments from Cbus genuine employee representatives. In the or from industry funds for his involvement in draft report of the Superannuation Working these advertisements. It seems that Mr Fraser Group, the prudential regulator stated: really is prepared to do all of these ads for The equal representation rules for trustee boards nothing. This may come as a profound shock of standard employer-sponsored funds provide to Senator Ferguson and others in the Lib- balanced representation of employer and em- eral-National Party government, but most ployee interests. They are conducive to active trustees on superannuation funds are honor- member interest in the prudent management of ary. They receive nothing for the tireless, these funds. This benefit exceeds the cost of dedicated work that they do on behalf of su- finding and appointing members who are capable perannuation fund members. of undertaking trustee duties. This is the issue at the very core of the This is the exact opposite of the sort of Liberal government’s approach to superan- ideologically motivated misrepresentations nuation: they simply cannot believe that rep- coming out of this government. A report pre- resentative trustees would be motivated by pared for the Investment and Financial anything other than financial reward. Trus- Services Association by Phillip Fox actuaries tees appointed by employers, employer or- and consultants, which was presented on 9 ganisations and trade unions, or elected by April this year, showed that member costs as members, overwhelmingly are not paid. The a percentage of assets were 0.95 per cent for Liberal Party mindset requires the invention nonprofit corporate funds, 0.43 per cent for of secret ulterior motives such as the diver- public sector funds and 1.18 per cent for in- sion of funds to the Labor Party, even if such dustry funds—and these costs were coming accusations are untrue. The Liberal govern- down. This compares favourably with the ment simply cannot stomach a successful 2.34 per cent for-profit personal funds and stakeholder system of governance, particu- 2.5 per cent for so-called retirement savings larly when the governance of too many Aus- accounts offered by banks. The cost of these tralian corporations, most of whose directors products is rising. In other words, in the for- and executives are handsomely rewarded, profit sector the costs of fees and charges and has been shown to be wanting. The govern- particularly commissions are double those of ment would do much better to focus on en- the not-for-profit sector. An additional ex- suring that this country does not produce planation for the government’s attitude to another Rodney Adler or a Jodee Rich rather some superannuation funds is that they do than to focus on its delusional vendetta not really believe in, and never have believed against superannuation trustees. in, universal superannuation at all. It was the Liberal Party that opposed the Labor Party What is most galling for this government and then Treasurer Keating’s initiative for is that nonprofit superannuation funds with universal superannuation for all Australian representative trustees outperform the for- workers. They have continued their white- profit sector on every criterion, including anting, their incorrect claims and on many investment return, safety and fees and occasions their false claims against the suc- charges. For example, an independent re- cess of the Australian superannuation indus- search organisation, Rainmaker, which try. monitors fees and charges, reported that for 2001-02 retail superannuation products lost Information Technology: Unsolicited on average 4.7 per cent, while nonprofit su- Emails perannuation funds such as industry and cor- Senator GREIG (Western Australia) porate funds lost 2.3 per cent. The company (1.15 p.m.)—This afternoon I want to talk responsible for Australia’s worst case of su- about an issue which anyone who is a regular perannuation fraud, Commercial Nominees, user of the World Wide Web or just an email was a for-profit trustee company. Where user would have found is at best a source of fraud or mismanagement has occurred in uninvited advertising or at worst an unmiti- nonprofit superannuation funds, it is where gated nuisance, and that is the issue of spam. 5706 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

The definition of spam is unsolicited bulk highlights the need for laws to provide pro- email or junk email which is used to promote tection for everyday Internet users who a wide variety of products and services— should be able to choose whether or not they everything from Viagra to household goods are to be bombarded with unrequested and invitations to visit pornographic web emails. Similar jurisdictions around the sites. It is possible for spammers to send 10 world are already well on the road to enact- million or even 100 million spams per day ing laws against spamming, but Australia is without paying for them. What is more, it lagging well behind. Court proceedings like has been reported that this multimillion dol- those of Which Company v. McNicol will, I lar industry accounts for an estimated 20 per fear, become more and more prevalent. cent of all email traffic in Australia and this The government needs to follow the ex- figure is growing. ample of places such as the state of Wash- Earlier this year in my home state of ington in the United States, where it is an Western Australia a landmark case over offence to send junk email to an Internet user spamming between a WA marketing com- who has registered their email address on a pany and an individual Internet user raised government monitored web site banning some very interesting legal and ethical is- such email. In other parts of the world, the sues. It also highlighted the need for legisla- practice of bulk emailing is severely re- tion or other urgent action to address the stricted, to the point where commercial ever-increasing problem of junk email in emails can only be sent to an Internet user Australia. The court proceedings were un- where a pre-existing business relationship dertaken by the directors of a Perth IT mar- exists. An article in the Sunday Age on 8 keting company called the Which Company, September this year said that America’s Fed- trading as T3 Direct, which filed claims for eral Trade Commission had filed civil law- damages against an individual alleging his suits against six individuals who used a mas- action had harmed their business. sive spamming campaign to promote a It is often the case that originators of spam pyramid investment scheme but that, in gen- conceal their identities in such a way that the eral, governments have not done enough to receiver of the unsolicited email cannot re- tackle the problem. spond, nor request their details be removed In Europe, various countries are tightening from mailing lists. The individual concerned, laws regarding junk email even further to Mr Joseph McNicol, who in this case be- close loopholes in laws which were supposed came the defendant, has been described as a to be the answer but which in time have fearless spam fighter, and defended his case proven not to be. The only action this gov- through the District Court of Western Aus- ernment has taken regarding the Internet has tralia. The court heard that Mr McNicol had been the heavy-handed censorship laws of placed a message on an Internet discussion the Minister for Communications, Informa- group complaining about receiving spam tion Technology and the Arts, Richard Al- from T3 Direct. T3 Direct sued Mr McNicol ston, which simply resulted in stifling the for allegedly getting the company black- free flow of information via the Internet. De- listed on an antispam web site. In a prelimi- spite that law being two years in the making, nary hearing, the Which Company increased it took a mere 27 minutes for many users of its claim against Mr McNicol from the origi- the Internet to bypass it. nal amount of $45,000 to $250,000, the According to eMarketing, an online sur- amount the company claimed it had lost vey company, Australia, with a population of through Mr McNicol’s actions. over 19 million people, has approximately I am very pleased to say that Mr McNicol five million Internet users. This means that was ultimately successful in his defence. The Australia makes up just under one per cent of District Court of Western Australia dis- the number of people worldwide who are missed the law suit, describing it as ‘specu- currently considered Internet users and yet, lative’ and based on propositions the plaintiff incredibly, Australia also accounts for the ‘knew to be incorrect’. This legal action creation of about 16 per cent of junk email Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5707 worldwide. This means Australia is now parts but fails to recommend any sweeping producing 16 times more junk email than one changes to address the overall problem. would expect, given our relative Internet Internet users and organisations have been population. If Australian laws remain as lax calling for action from the government on as they are at present the percentage of spam this issue for many years but, understanda- emanating from within Australia to email bly, their patience is wearing thin. addresses right around the world is likely to The police, both state and federal, already skyrocket. Australian Internet users have have enough to deal with without also being been complaining long and loud about the responsible for tracking down spammers. A issue of junk email, but the government is far better solution is to have legislation failing to take proper action. Despite rhetoric which allows the receivers of such email to and even a survey or two, there has still been take their claims to small claims tribunals or no direct action. The only way to protect similar and seek minimal damages. This pro- Internet users is to take legislative action cess is currently being implemented in over- against unscrupulous Internet practices, in- seas jurisdictions. Internet service providers cluding spamming. should also be able to take action against Mark Reynolds, President of the Western spammers for damages based on the effort Australian Internet Association, says his as- required to clean up after a spam run. Until sociation includes as a part of its standards the government takes action, the issue of that Internet provider members will not par- junk email will only escalate further and ticipate in the practice of spamming. He says Australia will become the worldwide hub for the Internet provider members were the spamming. driving force behind the desire to have such Home Loans: Never Pay Rent Again a standard because they constantly have to deal with irate clients sick of receiving junk Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (1.24 email. Organisations such as the Coalition p.m.)—I rise to speak today about a com- Against Unsolicited Bulk Email, Australia, pany operating in my home state of Tasma- CAUBE.AU, have been calling on the gov- nia, Victoria and, I am advised, some other ernment to take some form of action for sev- states that is providing—and I use the term eral years. That organisation has made a advisedly—home loans on what is known as number of submissions to parliament on this an ‘instalment purchase contract’ to low- issue with its latest being submitted as re- income earners. This company is preying on cently as April this year. Troy Rollo, Chair of those who can least afford it by charging CAUBE.AU, is one of the litigants in a case outrageous and exorbitant costs for the against a junk emailing firm claiming dam- privilege of lending money to people who ages for ‘trespass to chattel’. According to are considered to be in a high-risk category Mr Rollo, his group took the step of civil due to the fact that they are unemployed or a legal action because there were no legislative sole parent. The company concerned be- laws in place and such action would be at nignly refers to these as being like a lay-by least some form of precedent. transaction, except you get to live in the premises while you pay it off. That is the In February, the Minister for Communica- way it is characterised. This particular com- tions, Information Technology and the Arts, pany, called Never Pay Rent Again, buys up Senator Alston, directed the National Office low-cost houses, doubles the price and then for the Information Economy, NOIE, to in- adds a premium of at least another $20,000 vestigate the issue of junk email. According onto that price simply because, the company to many in the Internet industry, it was defi- says, it takes all the risk by lending money to nitely a case of ‘better late than never’, and high-risk people. The interest rate charged to NOIE responded by commencing a survey customers is not disclosed in the contract and into how Internet users felt about various is set between two per cent and five per cent Internet issues, including spam. NOIE has above what financial institutions currently now completed its report on junk email as offer. An extra two per cent is charged to requested by Senator Alston. It is good in those who make regular payments and five 5708 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 per cent to those whom the company consid- these people up at the local community hall, ers are higher risk. where they are put under pressure to sign up The properties being sold by this company so the contracts can be collected. are on what are called vendor terms. This The target group of people for this un- means that the vendor dictates the terms of scrupulous company often have little educa- the contract of the sale of the property. The tion or they have literacy difficulties. They company retains the certificate of title in its are therefore reluctant or do not have the name until the final payment is made. The resources to approach lawyers or financial only form of protection that the purchaser advisers to obtain advice regarding the con- has is by their solicitor placing a caveat on tract for the sale of the property. This com- the premises to protect their equitable inter- pany is specifically targeting single mothers est in the property. For example, I have been aged in their early 20s and early 30s, as well told of a case where a woman wished to pur- as unemployed people and people who are chase the housing commission property for- bankrupt. I find it particularly reprehensible merly owned by her parents. The parents had that this company is blatantly targeting and sold the property to the company Never Pay then taking advantage of these people who Rent Again for $35,000. This company ne- can barely afford housing in the first place gotiated to sell the same property to the and who will end up paying many, many daughter for approximately $70,000. An- times more than the original purchase price. other $20,000 was added to this price for The risk that these people may lose every- what the company terms ‘company risk’, thing is extremely high as any breach of the making the final purchase price $90,000 on a contract, regardless of how minor it is, property originally sold for $35,000. De- will—according to the contract—give the pending on how much of a credit risk the company the right to rescind the contract and company assessed her as, she would have the purchaser will lose all moneys they have been up for an extra two per cent above the paid into it. If the property burns down, the current interest rate for repayments. Thank- insurance money goes to the company, which fully, in this case, after seeking legal advice then retains the discretion to give any of the this woman decided not to proceed with the money to the purchaser. purchase. However, many other people have The company are telling purchasers that, not been so prudent or able to get additional if the property is sold, they will keep the legal and financial advice. house—they will just be making repayments The unscrupulous directors of this com- to someone else who has purchased the com- pany are buying up low-cost, ex-housing pany’s interest in the property. If the pur- commission properties in Tasmania, then chaser wants to make any cosmetic changes adding a minimum of $20,000 onto the pur- to the premises, they have to have permis- chase price to cover their risk of lending sion from the company—even to paint the money to what they regard as a high-risk walls. If they do not obtain permission from group of people, not disclosing the true and the company, then as far as the company is full cost of the loan offered in the instalment concerned they have breached the contract contract, and not disclosing the interest rate and are liable to lose everything they have for the loan but saying that it ‘will be re- paid so far. In my opinion, this document viewed from time to time’—to quote directly reads more like a 25-year lease agreement from the contract—although no actual figure than a housing loan. This is despicable and is stated in the terms of the contract. They blatant preying on those who can least afford are targeting people who qualify for assis- it by this company called Never Pay Rent tance from the Streets Ahead program, which Again. I remind honourable senators that operates in Tasmania, but who are unaware they are not just operating in Tasmania. We of their eligibility for the program. I have know they are operating in Victoria and they been told that this company is sending out may well be operating in other states. the contracts for sale and then a week or so These are the unscrupulous dealings of later the company director flies in and signs two people in particular: George Mihos and Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5709

Mannix Rousseau, who are responsible for the Senate that this has been signed by the exploiting Tasmanian people who are unable same George Mihos. to get housing loans. Immediate measures Leave granted. should be implemented to stop the outra- geous exploitation of young mothers who are Senator MACKAY—I thank the Senate desperate to provide a home for their chil- for its leave. As I said, the Tasmanian state dren that is their own home. In my home government is acting on this matter. I urge state of Tasmania, the Attorney-General’s senators from other states to check whether office is currently investigating whether the this company is operating in their state as contract is in fact legal and binding. I exhort well. My information is that it certainly is in other senators to take this up with their state Victoria, and it may well be in other states. governments as well. This is an absolute disgrace. This brings eve- rybody who is operating in this sector of the I believe that this contract will be found to industry into disrepute. This is a disgrace. I be in breach of the Consumer Credit (Tas- cannot tell you how angry I am about it on mania) Act and therefore will be declared behalf of those people who have come for- illegal. That is my belief, and certainly my ward. This issue has had some coverage in aspiration and hope. The Tasmanian Depart- Tasmania. I am seeking the opportunity to- ment of Justice and Industrial Relations and day under privilege—I make no bones about the ACCC are also inquiring into the legali- that—to lay out the entire story for the peo- ties of this company, and I pay particular ple of Australia and for the people of Tasma- tribute to those two organisations for the nia. I thank the Senate for its attention. work that they are doing. I believe the Tas- manian Department of Health and Human Agriculture: Sugar Industry Services is now looking at reviewing their Senator HARRIS (Queensland) (1.34 criteria for sale of low-cost ex-housing p.m.)—I rise to speak about the crisis in the commission properties. My hope is that peo- Australian sugar industry. In starting my ple who have paid out money to this nefari- comments, I would like to acknowledge that ous company will not be left financially dis- they are directly from a Mrs Margaret Men- advantaged, with only debts as a result of zel, who has given her permission for this to their exploitation—and there is no other way be read into Hansard: to put it. ... we are being forced to sell our sugar for an I congratulate those Tasmanians who have artificially low price by a Qld Govt. Ministerial had the intestinal fortitude to come forward Directive! and make complaints about this company. I NO OTHER SUGAR PRODUCER IN THE congratulate them for doing that. On the WORLD IS FORCED TO DO THE SAME—We grounds of coercion and harassment, this is are asked to buy water from the same Gov. for $37.34/megalitre which is considerably more than what they are alleging. I know that for peo- the independent findings of the Marsden-Jacob ple unfamiliar with the legal and regulatory Report calculations of $25/megalitre as full cost system this can be a difficult thing to do. I recovery. WE’RE AWAITING A QCA understand that, and I think all senators un- DECISION WE TRUST WILL RECTIFY THIS derstand that. I bring this matter to the Sen- EQUITY! ate’s attention in order to—and I am not The Federal Government have pitted us against making any bones about it—expose the un- the Multinational Corporate giants and the other scrupulous dealings of this company called sugar producing countries of the world, all being Never Pay Rent Again and the actions of paid subsidies on their product. How then is George Mihos and Mannix Rousseau, who in this OUR FAULT if we are being forced to sell my view are exploiting vulnerable people in our product below the input costs of producing Tasmania. I seek leave to table a copy of the this product? Why is it the fertiliser/ contract from Never Pay Rent Again, with fuel/chemical/water/electricity/wages/machinery etc. costs we pay are not “WORLD PARITY” all the commercial details identifying any- COSTS also? body having been blacked out. I point out to …… … 5710 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

Here in Australia, we are paying 1st World costs duction system. The grain price is also af- and receiving LESS than 3rd World countries are fected by US farm subsidies. Direct em- paying their sugar producers—the reasons given ployment from the operation of the 60 mil- by the Federal Government include their wanting lion litre Dalby grain ethanol plant is 34 jobs. Australia to show the way for other countries in The Queensland ethanol 10 market would the Global Trade Market. How is it then that we are asked to bear the full brunt of trade reform; require approximately 320 million litres of yet wages, input costs, Retail prices, etc. all con- production for ULP and PULP. This equates tinue to rise while the world sugar price continues to the direct employment of around 180 full- to fall? If we are on a level playing field, how is it time employees. PwC estimates that the that NO-ONE ELSE in the world has shown up to Dalby grain ethanol plant will indirectly play? generate 185 jobs. Thus, indirect employ- …… … ment in the ethanol based industries—trans- A comment by Pascal Lamy is worthy of note port, distribution and growing opportuni- here—what a pity our politicians don’t appreciate ties—would be around 990 jobs. us the same way and in fact don’t seem to under- The sugar industry has initiated numerous stand that “EVEN FARMERS HAVE TO reforms and has undergone a number of in- COVER COSTS”. quiries, all ending at the farm gate. Any At a WTO conference in Seattle, Mark Vaile, schoolchild can work out the maths: if farm- Then CANEGROWERS chairman Harry Bo- ers are being paid on average approximately nanno and General Manager, Ian Ballantyne came $18 per tonne of cane, equivalent to $220 per up against Pascal Lamy, Trade Commissioner for tonne of sugar, and customers are paying the European Union who said, $1.38 per kilo for sugar, equivalent to $1,380 “In Europe, we have seven million farmers who per tonne of sugar, on the supermarket shelf, we believe have another function than just pro- consumers are being ripped off somewhere ducing food. These people are useful for our envi- in between. They are definitely not being ronment, they’re important for family structure, for our society, they’re important for our land- ripped off by the primary producer. scape. We have to pay for that. Our taxpayers No other country produces as sustainably agree to pay for these functions which our farms, or as effectively as Australian producers. for the number they have and the relatively small Brazil is woodchipping its forests at an size of their farms, do bring to our society. We enormous rate, to the detriment of our sugar want to keep these farms by keeping the sort of and now our cotton industries, yet our gov- protection through subsidies which we give to our ernment rewards its environmental vandal- farmers. If we apply the market rules, they will disappear and we will have problems, which in ism and inefficiency—in some cases they are our view, would be more costly to society.” still hand-cutting cane in parts of Brazil—by providing funds to the World Bank to prop I would like to justify a mandate for the up the Brazilian currency. It seems that the ethanol industry. Ethanol is a renewable en- ‘wealth for toil’ part of our national anthem ergy source which comes from cane, grain et will have to be rewritten, excluding rural cetera and which can effectively replace non- Australians who have been reduced to a state renewable energy sources without material of penury while bolstering the profits of cor- loss in energy efficiency. Ethanol is a non- porate Australia and the incomes of subsi- polluting oxygenate. As a clean-burn fuel, dised farmers in other countries. exhaust gases from ethanol blends contain lower particulate mass, posing a lower risk So what are the environmental benefits of of cancer-forming compounds. ethanol? For each 1,000 litres of ethanol, when mixed with petrol at a rate of 10 per Establishing a defined market for ethanol cent, we will reduce carbon dioxide emis- will create an onshore market for sugar and sions by 1.58 tonnes. Ethanol also stimulates grain, with great potential for fixing a floor more complete combustion, reducing the price for produce, based on the less volatile amount of carbon monoxide formed by 30 to transport fuel industry. At the moment, world 40 per cent. Another benefit of ethanol is that sugar prices are very low and are subject to ethanol-petroleum blends produce fewer market influences from the Third World pro- greenhouse gases than straight petroleum Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5711 equivalents; thus their use enhances man- growers. The growers have met continually agement of greenhouse gas emissions and in North Queensland to convey this message global warming. Ethanol can be produced to both the Commonwealth government and from organic waste streams such as molas- the state government. In concluding, I would ses, a waste product of sugar production, and like to cite a passage from Mrs Margaret the use of rain damaged grain and fruit crops, Menzel’s letter. She writes: or from other primary produce. Ethanol is a As supported by grassroots cane growers highly biodegradable fuel and there is some throughout Queensland and voted unanimously potential to make use of 100 per cent ethanol by the state canegrowers council at their June standing generators, as manufactured by board meeting—support in the form of a domestic Scania, to replace diesels. levy on sugar consumed in Australia could be collected in much the same way as the airline Taking an overall view of the sugar in- levy is now collected, Australia-wide and would dustry, the program initially put forward by a be distributed equitably across all sugar- group of sugarcane producers in North producing states to individual growers to enable Queensland was for a levy to be placed on them to cover their costs of production and re- the sale of sugar products within Australia main viable within the current corrupted world and for that money to go into a pool similar market. to that which operates in the dairy industry I seek leave to table the document entitled and, for the first year, for the money from Australian sugar industry: the crisis ... the that pool to be disbursed to the growers on realistic solutions as circulated to senators. the basis of their cane allocation. That is Leave granted. critically important because, if we look at the industry right across the board, we have large Veterans: Home Care private producers, we have some corporate Senator MARK BISHOP (Western Aus- producers and we have smaller, family pro- tralia) (1.47 p.m.)—I rise today in this debate ducers. Irrespective of whether producers are on matters of public interest to draw the Sen- corporate, large private entities or medium ate’s attention to a further erosion of services sized farms, they all have an exposure to to veterans and war widows which has been debt, an exposure to the costs of the market. caused by the Howard government’s dra- It is reputed that, in the North Queensland matic reduction of home care services under area, the cost of production of a tonne of the Veterans’ Home Care scheme. The Veter- standing cane, cut and ready to deliver, is in ans’ Home Care scheme was initiated by the the vicinity of $23 to $25. The Burdekin Howard government in the 2000-01 budget area, because of the additional cost of water, in the usual triumphant way, with fanfares has an additional $6 per tonne of cane fac- and press releases to the veteran community tored into the cost. extolling its generosity and expressing all the The proposal put forward by both the usual mock concern about the needs of vet- Commonwealth government and the Queen- erans and war widows in growing older—in sland state government has been resound- the same way it trumpets every indexation ingly rejected by the cane growers because increase to pensions, which are automatic, of its intention to distribute the money and every other dollar spent, as if good gov- through Centrelink. A situation is being pro- ernment were measured in monetary terms posed where farmers would have to go into alone. Centrelink and take in their tax returns and As the Senate knows, prior to this pro- all of their financial details, and only if their gram, veterans and war widows requiring fixed assets were under a certain level would assistance to stay in their homes, rather than they be able to access the benefit of the pro- enter residential care, in general availed posed scheme. The growers were asking for themselves of the Home and Community immediate help, right across the range of Care, HACC, program, which is jointly producers, and to achieve that by having the funded by the federal government and the levy put into a pool and then disbursed based states and administered on the Common- on the per hectare allocation for each of the wealth’s behalf by the Department of Health 5712 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 and Ageing. Additionally, veterans and wid- viders. Compared with HACC, it is a high- ows can receive personal care from commu- cost model. The annual budget is divided nity nurses contracted by the Department of among the regions, based on some demo- Vet er a ns’ Affairs and avail themselves of the graphic formula. By means of a sophisticated Home Maintenance Helpline, whereby for a system, all services are centrally recorded commercial fee veterans can get maintenance and accounted for. The agencies, it seems, tasks undertaken by accredited tradesmen. have the responsibility for managing all the As we know, the point of all these pro- services, including the apportionment of grams is that the longer ageing people can be services and the funding needed. Assess- kept in their own homes the longer they can ments of individual needs are conducted by avoid institutional care—which is so much telephone by these agencies according to a more expensive—and can retain the quality common standard, and reviews are supposed of life which comes from living in their own to be conducted regularly against the stan- surroundings. The home care program of- dard to ascertain continuing needs. fered no more to veterans except the con- That sounds like a fine model—in fact a venience of having these services all deliv- Rolls Royce by HACC standards—but the ered through one agency, namely the De- rub seems to be that, unlike any other veter- partment of Veterans’ Affairs. In brief, serv- ans’ program, the program has a fixed ices flowing from an assessment could in- budget. That means that, if more veterans clude domestic assistance, personal care, apply for the service and funds are fully house and garden maintenance and varying committed, the cake must be cut into smaller levels of respite care. For this, veterans pay a pieces; hence, we now have some dramatic $5 copayment and for personal care they pay reductions in services to veterans in many $10 per hour. areas of Australia. Without any advice to Given that the proposal offered continuity veterans, many agencies have had their of care under one agency, it was clearly sup- funding allocations dramatically reduced for portable, particularly as it proffered some this financial year, leaving the agencies to additional quality of life for veterans. It also pass on the news to veterans and widows offered to free up additional funds for that, despite their assessed needs for care in HACC, as 20,000 veterans would be trans- their own homes, their services are to be re- ferred out of HACC into home care. There duced. That is now leading to some very un- were some concerns, however, beginning satisfactory consequences in that veterans, with the supposition that, for a cost of $62 having been promised the world, are now in million per year, there would be $80 million some cases having the standard of their worth of savings based on the assumption of service reduced to a level where they would reduced health costs and reduced incidences have been better off under HACC. And, as I of institutional care. To give some assurance understand it, some are doing just that—go- that those savings were indeed genuine, an ing back to HACC. evaluation was committed to, eventually be- My colleague in the other place the mem- ing contracted to the University of New ber for Braddon in fact raised this issue in South Wales, on which I understand an in- the adjournment debate last Monday even- terim report has been provided but is being ing, citing the circumstances of an agency in kept very secret. North-West Tasmania. The budget for that This new program, while appearing to be particular regional contracted agency had like HACC, is administered by different been reduced from $311,000 to $228,000 this means. Rather than being delivered by the year—a cut of $83,000 for an increased list states, largely through voluntary, non- of veteran clients. There is therefore no government and community based organisa- choice for the agency—the 300 veterans on tions, home care is delivered by the Depart- its books must have their services slashed to ment of Veterans’ Affairs through contracted meet the budget cuts and no new clients can agencies on a regional basis, using profes- be taken in. So a waiting list has been drawn sional staff and subcontracted service pro- up, and those in need who cannot be satisfied Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5713 are referred back to HACC, which is strug- ing to realise the savings projected—namely, gling to meet the demand. The same tales are $80 million per year. But then this is not a also coming out of other states. new phenomenon, as it seems to me that very For the agencies, this of course is a real few departmental savings options are ever problem because they in turn have contracts realised, thus corrupting the whole budget with their subcontractors for agreed levels of process. service, all of which now need to be re- I regard this as a very serious matter and I viewed and written down. So administra- am amazed at this routine whereby agencies tively this program has become a nightmare. and their ministers can bid for what is called Imagine the concerns of veterans who are ‘new policy’ on the basis of offsetting sav- now told that what they were once assessed ings and then blithely forget the savings, take as needing is no longer available and, by the money and press on spending. In fact, inference, that their ability to remain in their this is one reason we see budget overspends, own homes is similarly reduced. This is in- and it is particularly the case with Veterans’ deed the situation in a number of cases that Affairs, where most of the budget is funded have been referred to me, including those of through standing appropriations—that is, TPI veterans who were interned by the Japa- open-ended funding, where what is de- nese on the Burma railway. One man has had manded is paid. This then also begs the his house and garden allowance totally re- question about the adequacy of estimating moved, and no substitute is available under processes; as we have seen in Senate esti- similar conditions. I am advised that this is a mates, adequate answers have not been relatively common story. A representation I forthcoming. received just yesterday from the North Coast The home care program is a case in point. of NSW states: First we are presented with what seems to be Veterans have had their hours reduced by half an eminently good idea, which we support— in most cases without notification from Veterans’ that is, that retaining veterans in their homes Affairs. is preferable and more cost effective than Care plans may have a three month life span institutional care. So far so good, but then we and when a new care plan is received a month look at the savings. True, there is some logic after the expiration of the initial plan the hours to the proposal and, yes, one would expect have been reduced by half. The impact of this savings in the health budget, but how much? is—service has been operating for a month with- Where was the $80 million promised in the out a care plan only to find that the next plan has reduced hours, however the organisation is out of measures estimated? More importantly, how pocket for staff hours in the interim. will it be measured in a budget in which there are few controls and so many vari- Information regarding changes should come to all organisations so that we are equipped to an- ables? swer queries from consumers. In this context I refer to answers I rou- HACC services have replaced veterans who tinely receive in the Senate estimates, in re- changed to Veteran Home Care and now do not sponse to my probing on the adequacy of have the capacity to service veterans with reduced estimates, that overspend on veterans health, hours who want to change back to HACC serv- despite falling numbers, is due to shifts to ices. higher cost services due to ageing and the This seems to encapsulate what is happening use of higher technology. Frankly, that is too more broadly—to the detriment of agencies easy and it should not be accepted without and their subcontractors but most of all to the hard evidence, simply because there are so detriment of veterans and widows who have many other factors, such as program design been misled by false promises and are now and policy, which are equally responsible. trapped. Moreover, this growing debacle also We in this parliament vote annually to ap- raises the question about the integrity of the propriate this money, yet at the same time we program’s aims, because clearly it is failing can have little confidence about the advice to deliver what was promised. If it is failing we are being given by the government as to to deliver what was promised, it is also fail- 5714 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 the accuracy of the estimates on which it is this intelligence was in fact obtained? Can based. the minister inform the Senate what action It seems to me that the much vaunted was taken by his department after receiving Charter of Budget Honesty is a fraud. I note this intelligence? Will the minister also indi- to the Senate that I currently have on the No- cate whether this intelligence was obtained tice Paper a number of questions trying to before the bombings in Bali on 12 October? get to the heart of this very issue because, as Senator HILL—I have now been advised sure as night follows day, the department that the relevant Australian agency and its will be back for additional estimates which, US counterpart searched their databases this as we know, can totally change budget fig- morning and have not found a report match- ures. The example of home care is therefore ing that mentioned in the media out of interesting in that, unlike most other veterans Washington. programs, it seems to be fixed. So if demand Senator MARSHALL—Mr President, I increases, some will miss out or others will ask a supplementary question. Will the min- be cut. In terms of budget certainty, this is ister request the Inspector-General of Intelli- probably a good thing but it does demand gence and Security, Mr Bill Blick, to exam- that program design should take that limita- ine this specific intelligence as part of his tion into account, and clearly it does not inquiry into what information was available here. So again, like the gold card, we have to the government before the terrible bomb- another magnificent promise in the process ing in Bali? of being diminished and broken. Senator HILL—As the Senate and all The 20,000 veterans estimated as transfer- Australians know, that is the task that has ring from HACC are probably ruing the day been put to the inspector-general: to search they transferred, and the agencies are proba- the records of the agencies, to reassess their bly regretting doing business with the De- assessments, to give confidence that there partment of Veterans’ Affairs. Contracting was not something that was missed and, be- agencies are very worried about their busi- yond that, to see if there is anything that can ness viability and of course are not happy be learnt from this experience. In addition to about their task on behalf of the govern- what I have just said to the Senate, the agen- ment—cutting back services to those they cies, in searching their records, have also have assessed as in need, in good faith, in identified no material that specifically line with government guidelines. Veterans warned of the Bali attack. affected have very good cause to be angry and disappointed. The gloss has gone already Indonesia: Terrorist Attacks and that is very sad because, with a bit more Senator EGGLESTON (2.02 p.m.)—I care, the same outcomes may have been have a question for the Minister for Health achievable. and Ageing. Will the minister update the Debate interrupted. Senate on her recent visit to many of the public hospitals around Australia which are QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE treating the victims of the terrorist attack in Indonesia: Terrorist Attacks Bali? Senator MARSHALL (2.00 p.m.)—My Senator PATTERSON—I thank Senator question is to Senator Hill, the Minister for Eggleston for his question. I also thank the Defence. I refer to the minister’s comment management and staff of the hospitals. To this morning on Radio National that he have a ministerial visit, especially when they ‘didn’t know’ whether the government re- are under stress, adds yet another pressure. I ceived intelligence from Australian intelli- appreciate the time and effort they took in gence agencies on conversations they are organising my visits. The purpose of my vis- reported to have intercepted between Jemaah its was not just to thank the hospital staff on Islamiah operatives, in which there was dis- behalf of the government; I took the liberty cussion of attacks on Australians. Has the of thanking them on behalf of all members of minister had a chance to confirm whether the federal parliament. The medical staff, the Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5715 management of the hospitals, ancillary staff did they know that they would have to put it such as the catering, security and cleaning into action so soon. There were spontaneous staff—all of them—pulled out all stops in the comments about that. As I have said, there hospitals that I visited. I want to express my were stories of doctors who came in off duty. gratitude to all of them, because without For example, in the Adelaide hospital they them all pulling together it would not have had a meeting on Sunday afternoon—doctors worked. came in from leave—and 15 doctors and On Friday I visited the Alfred hospital in nurses were in Darwin by Sunday night. That Melbourne. On Monday I visited Royal is extraordinary. They were able to get the Darwin, Royal Perth and Sir Charles Gaird- minister to enable them to assist in Darwin. I ner hospitals, and I met staff from Princess am sure that I will hear similar stories when I Margaret and Fremantle hospitals. Yesterday visit Concord. I visited the Royal Adelaide Hospital and I The courage of the victims and their am hoping to visit Concord hospital on gratitude and that of their relatives are a trib- Monday. At each hospital it was impossible ute to all hospitals and staff involved. Once not to experience the intense mixture of again I would like to put on the record the emotions that was etched on the faces of the parliament’s appreciation of all those in- medical staff and all the other staff: the joy volved in the care and treatment of the Bali of seeing some of their patients improving victims. and the grief and devastation, despite hercu- Health: Breast Prostheses lean attempts not only on the part of the staff but also on the part of the families and pa- Senator HUTCHINS (2.06 p.m.)—My tients, that some of them failed to survive. question is to Senator Patterson, the Minister for Health and Ageing. Is the minister aware At each hospital there are stories of in- of the inadequate arrangements, which differ credible charity. At one hospital, a cleaning in each state and territory, for the provision staff member found that an overseas visitor of breast prostheses to women? Will the had arrived without toiletries, so they took government support Labor’s proposal that money out of their own pocket to buy toilet- breast prostheses be provided free of charge ries for the relative. In other hospitals, staff in Australia’s public hospitals through the had come in from holidays. In Royal Perth, upcoming Australian health care agreements nurses who had left the hospital 10 years ago to women throughout Australia who have reappeared and joined the staff. There were had a mastectomy? just amazing stories. In the four minutes available, I do not have time to do justice to Senator PATTERSON—I thank Senator every story that I heard. In Darwin hospital Hutchins for his question and of course La- they told me that they had not treated as bor would no doubt pull a stunt like this many patients at one time since World War when we are all concerned about those II. Again, the memories of their experi- women who have been affected by breast ences—the staff were in the first line—were cancer and who have died from breast can- etched on their faces. cer. Some 12,500 every year are affected by, or die as a result of, breast cancer. I am On Friday at the Alfred the staff spoke in aware of the concerns of members. They glowing terms about the Australian defence have written to me about the provision of forces and the tremendous work that Darwin external breast prostheses for women who hospital had done under enormous pressure have undergone mastectomies. There are to triage patients. They had expected them to issues about Medicare benefits. The Medi- come into the hospitals in the south in much care benefits arrangements were designed to worse condition and they waxed lyrical provide assistance to people who incur about the incredible skills and the dedication medical expenses in respect of professional of the ADF personnel and Darwin hospital services rendered by a qualified medical staff. Great credit should go to the staff. practitioner. Medicare benefits are not pay- They had just finished emergency training able for aids and/or appliances including and finished the paperwork on Friday. Little breast prostheses. Funding for such prosthe- 5716 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 ses, irrespective of whether it is a breast vision of prostheses is the responsibility of prosthesis, an artificial limb or any other the states. The states had a 28 per cent in- prosthesis, for public patients in hospitals is crease in funding in the last round of agree- a matter for state and territory health depart- ments. They are responsible for prostheses ments. Some health insurers cover the cost of not only for people who have had breast can- prostheses as part of their ancillary cover. cer but also for other people who have lost The Commonwealth will be happy to dis- limbs and who require prostheses. I ask hon- cuss the funding of prostheses with the states ourable senators on the other side of the in the context of the Australian health care chamber to put pressure on their state Labor agreements, but I remind Senator Hutchins governments to deliver the benefits to their that the states had a $3 billion windfall in the constituents that they ought to deliver, given last health care agreement, when private the Commonwealth’s commitment to the hospital insurance membership went up and state health care agreements, and to encour- we did not claw back the money from the age the states to provide prostheses to states. With $3 billion they could very well women who have had a mastectomy. do something about breast prostheses, and I Insurance: Medical Indemnity would welcome federal Labor Party mem- Senator LIGHTFOOT (2.10 p.m.)—My bers putting pressure on their state col- question is directed to the Minister for Reve- leagues to address this issue. The states are nue and Assistant Treasurer, Senator funded to deal with these issues, whether Coonan. Will the minister update the Senate they be breast prostheses or any other sort of on what steps the government is taking to prosthetic, and they have had a $3 billion help ensure that medical practitioners have windfall to do so. The number of patients access to affordable and sustainable medical admitted to private hospitals has gone up and indemnity insurance? Could the minister the number admitted to public hospitals has elucidate any alternative policies? gone down. They have had a windfall and they should be able to address it. I encourage Senator COONAN—I thank Senator Senator Hutchins to go to the minister in Lightfoot for his question and I acknowledge New South Wales and encourage that person his longstanding interest in this issue. As to do this. senators on this side of the chamber would be well aware, Australia’s medical profes- The government have provided unprece- sions have been facing some very real and dented growth in funding for hospitals serious problems in terms of obtaining af- through the current agreements and, over the fordable and available medical indemnity five-year life of the agreements, which ends cover. I am pleased to be able to inform the next year, we have increased our support for Senate that this morning the Prime Minister public hospitals by around 28 per cent. With announced a package of measures to address this level of funding, I will expect the states rising medical indemnity insurance premi- to be able to afford prostheses for women ums, which includes long-term measures to who require them. ensure a viable and ongoing medical indem- Senator HUTCHINS—Mr President, I nity insurance market. ask a supplementary question. Is the minister The government’s package is designed to aware that some women who cannot afford address two fundamental problems in the the cost of a prosthesis have been required to provision of medical indemnity insurance resort to stopgap measures such as the recy- which are absolutely essential to ensure that cling of prostheses of women who have vital health services continue to be provided passed away? Will the government use the in this country. The package is designed to current negotiations over the Australia health address the financial viability of the provid- care agreements to ensure that women who ers of medical indemnity insurance and the need breast prostheses do not have to suffer affordability of cover for doctors. To address these same indignities? these two issues, the government has put Senator PATTERSON—I have just indi- together a six-pronged comprehensive pack- cated to the honourable senator that the pro- age. The first prong is financial viability. The Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5717 government has agreed to extend the guar- As to affordability, the government will be antee to the medical indemnity provider providing subsidies to three groups of doc- UMP-AMIL for a further 12 months. The tors facing the most serious premium af- extension of the guarantee will enable poli- fordability problems. The government will cies to be renewed and provide certainty to also be providing a large claims scheme— UMP members while the provisional liqui- reinsurance cover funding 50 per cent of dator continues to explore options for the claims in excess of $2 million. The measure restructuring of the business. The guarantee will directly reduce the costs for medical has not been called on to date to meet any of defence organisations in providing cover, UMP-AMIL’s claims. If it were ever called particularly to high-risk groups, and it will upon in the future, the cost of the extended reduce the costs of reinsurance and assist in guarantee would be funded by members stabilising the cost of premiums. These through a levy. measures are all designed to assist and to The government will be assuming the un- protect doctors and to once again restore the funded liabilities of medical defence organi- services that people need across Australia. sations and then later levying doctors to re- Environment: Kyoto Protocol cover the costs of this arrangement over Senator BOLKUS (2.15 p.m.)—My time. The arrangement is to ensure that question is to the Minister representing the medical defence organisations are put on a Minister for the Environment and Heritage, sound financial footing while still ensuring Senator Hill. Can he confirm that the Euro- premium affordability for doctors. The alter- pean parliament has passed legislation pre- native to this arrangement would be that venting EU members and companies from doctors would have to fund these liabilities trading in carbon credits with countries—like immediately. The levy arrangement enables Australia—that have not ratified the Kyoto these liabilities to be funded over at least five protocol? What has the government got to years to ensure that premiums for doctors are say to Australian business, which will now affordable. It is difficult at this time to say be cut out of what is expected to be a lucra- exactly what the levy will be for individual tive market in carbon credits because of this doctors. The liabilities that we are talking government’s refusal to ratify the Kyoto about here are highly uncertain. For exam- protocol? ple, the provisional liquidator has estimated UMP’s unfunded liabilities at between $360 Senator HILL—I understand that Senator million and $500 million. Bolkus is a little ahead of himself in that draft legislation to establish an EU carbon The levy will be based on a percentage of trading scheme was recently the subject of a premiums. The levy will never exceed the first reading in the European parliament. levy imposed in the first year. If it turns out Nevertheless, there are two issues involved that the unfunded liabilities are higher than here. The first is how Australia can contrib- expected, the term of the levy will be ex- ute to a better global greenhouse outcome tended. Certain members, for example retired and the second is whether the Kyoto protocol and student members, will not be required to is the best mechanism to achieve that goal. pay the levy. While the cost is not yet cer- Basically, Australia can contribute to a better tain, the types of estimates that we expect outcome through its domestic policies. This would work out the cost of the levy being government, as Senator Bolkus knows, has a less than 20c per consultation for a GP. The whole suite of domestic policies to achieve government will require medical defence the outcome of a better carbon profile in this organisations to be regulated by APRA and country. We have put a large sum of public to provide insurance contracts to their mem- money towards it and we have passed legis- bers. This will ensure that members of medi- lation in this place to encourage renewable cal defence organisations have greater secu- energy, with little help from those such as the rity and will be protected by both the con- Greens in this place. We have spent a lot of sumer and prudential laws that apply to in- money on solar power, on small hydro surance companies. schemes—and one can go on. That is con- 5718 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 tributing to a better outcome from Australia, Senator HILL—The government does and a better outcome from Australia in a support the goals of the Kyoto protocol and very minor way can contribute to a better that is why we signed the protocol. We are global outcome. I say ‘in a minor way’ be- committed to the target that Australia was cause we are such small contributors to the given in Kyoto, a difficult target but an global greenhouse picture—only about one achievable target, and we are making signifi- per cent. cant progress towards it. By doing that we The next question is: can the Kyoto proto- will be actually contributing to a better out- col in its current form help achieve that bet- come, rather than just playing the politics. So ter global outcome? Our argument, of course, if we can bring the United States back on is that it is not going to achieve that until the board and if we can resolve the issue of leak- United States is brought within the loop, be- age to developing countries, then I hope the cause the US is creating about 30 per cent of time will come when we are able to ratify the world’s carbon. Therefore you have a and we have a total global program in which choice: you either proceed with Kyoto with- each country shares an equal burden of the out the United States and lock the United cost and of the weight towards achieving the States out—and that will lead inevitably to outcome that we are all seeking. an unsatisfactory outcome in terms of global Finance: Housing carbon—or you seek to continue to encour- Senator BARTLETT (2.20 p.m.)—My age the United States to come on board to- question is to the Minister for Family and wards achieving a protocol that can actually Community Services, and it relates to this accomplish better real benefits. Friday’s meeting of state housing ministers. As for politics, yes, you can play the poli- Firstly, does the minister agree that one of tics on this issue if you like, but what the the primary purposes of the Commonwealth- government is more concerned about is actu- state housing agreements has been to deliver ally achieving a better greenhouse outcome, affordable housing outcomes to low-income and the government’s policies have been di- Australians? Does she agree that many state rected towards that better outcome and al- housing authorities are now no longer finan- ready they are showing some modest suc- cially sustainable or are in danger of be- cesses towards that goal. This government coming financially unsustainable? Is the will concentrate on reducing greenhouse minister aware that funding for public and gases per capita and per quantum of produc- community housing has declined signifi- tion in Australia and by doing so will be cantly, meaning less housing stock for low- making a very significant contribution in the income earners? Will the government com- right direction. mit to reversing this decline in housing stock Senator BOLKUS—Mr President, I ask a or will it wash its hands of the issue and say supplementary question. The minister had a that it is a problem for state governments? good time answering his own questions but Senator VANSTONE—I thank the sena- he refused to answer the question that I tor for his question, which follows from his asked him, which was: what message does question to me yesterday or the day before— the government have for businesses cut out I cannot remember which. I am pleased to of a lucrative market? Is the minister aware see he is not persisting with a view that Fri- that the Prime Minister said recently, ‘If we day’s meeting is to finalise; it is simply the become convinced in the months ahead that second meeting that the Commonwealth will it’s in Australia’s interests to sign the proto- have with the states to progress negotiations col, we’ll sign it’? Doesn’t the looming deci- on a new Commonwealth-state housing sion of the European parliament make it agreement. Yes, Commonwealth-state hous- crystal clear where Australia’s interests lie? ing agreements have had, as their main pur- Will the government now cut through the pose, the provision of housing to low-income gumf, reverse its position and ratify the Australians—a particular category of that. Kyoto protocol? We are now at the point where, as I under- stand it, some 90 per cent of recipients of Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5719 public housing are on income support and it The Commonwealth is, of course, com- would be about 87 per cent of those that are mitted to assisting low-income earners in on some form of income support, not family two ways, as I told you yesterday—partly by tax benefit. It is only about four per cent that contributions to the states to assist in the might be very low income earners—they are public housing stock and partly through rent actually earning, they have a job but they are assistance, which assists those other Austra- very low income earners—and the only gov- lians for whom public housing is not appro- ernment assistance they are getting is in fact priate or not available but who nonetheless the family tax benefit, the sort of payment need assistance and turn to the Common- back of tax that Senator Coonan was refer- wealth for it. ring to yesterday. There is a very small pro- Senator BARTLETT—Mr President, I portion of people like that. ask a supplementary question. Does the Senator Bartlett, as I indicated in my an- Minister for Family and Community Serv- swer to you yesterday, there are other groups ices agree with findings of the summit on of low-income Australians who need assis- affordable housing that was held in Canberra tance—those who are not on welfare who yesterday that among the measures that need might find it much harder to get into public to be explored is the measure of implement- housing and those for whom it may not be ing solutions to increase the amount of pri- appropriate to be in public housing because vate investment that is targeted at affordable of its placement at the moment in relation to housing for low-income earners? Will the where the jobs are, its placement at the mo- minister be putting forward measures at this ment in relation to transport and the limita- Friday’s meeting aimed at improving private tions that this puts on the flexibility of some- sector investment in housing for low-income one who is genuinely looking for work. earners? Secondly, you asked me about the finan- Senator VANSTONE—I have two re- cial viability of the state housing authorities. sponses to that question. I think it is a com- I do not think that is for me to comment on at mon view that we would like to see more this point. I would not welcome comment private sector involvement in low-income from the states on what they think about the housing. There is a range of difficulties asso- Commonwealth and its financial arrange- ciated with that, dealing with the sorts of ments. I would not agree with their compe- returns that can go back to the private sector. tence to comment and I do not expect them Some proposals that I have looked at are not to agree that we have the competence, or that realistic, considering the sort of purchasing it is our province, to be indicating whether power you would expect housing tenants to we think their state housing authorities are have at the expiration of a long period in viable. order to buy out that housing and considering You do invite me, however, to say that I that you have such dramatic rises in house think state and territory budgets are the least prices in certain inner-city areas. It is not transparent in the community services and realistic to go into some of those plans and health areas, and probably all other areas. expect that those people will genuinely be They are useful in terms of a bottom line, able to buy that house at the end of the time. but, as for being useful in terms of telling a It is a very difficult situation, but I think it is community sector group, any interested one where there is common agreement that journalist or an interested bystander where we should all be looking to see what we can the money is actually going, they are pretty do to increase private sector involvement in close to useless. Insufficient attention has low-income housing. been paid to the transparency that ought to Defence: Budget be in state budgets, which would then allow Senator CHRIS EVANS (2.26 p.m.)— us to see them and make a competent com- My question is addressed to Senator Hill, the ment as to the viability of state housing Minister for Defence. Does the minister sup- authorities. port the Prime Minister’s view that increased defence spending will be required in re- 5720 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 sponse to the Bali bombing? What sort of lia’s interests. In relation to how the money increase will be required and what will this will be raised for any additional cost in- increased expenditure be used on? volved in these measures, that will be deter- Senator HILL—If we look at the experi- mined by the government. ence of September 11, what did the govern- Science: Human Cloning ment do after that? It increased domestic Senator HARRADINE (2.29 p.m.)—My security in relation to key installations—that question is to the Leader of the Government cost more money. It increased security in in the Senate, Senator Hill. There is a pro- airports and on aircraft, and it significantly posed UN convention against human clon- increased intelligence, particularly within our ing. Given the Prime Minister’s public oppo- own region. It established a second counter- sition to the cloning of a human embryo for terrorism capability in the form of a second any reason, is the government using diplo- TAG on the east coast of Australia. It estab- matic efforts to support at least that conven- lished a permanent regiment to deal with tion as proposed by the United States and chemical, biological and radiological attacks. Spain? These are the sorts of responses that the gov- ernment took after the September 11 experi- Senator HILL—I am advised that there ence to better protect Australia and Austra- are two resolutions in the Sixth Committee lian interests from terrorists. of the United Nations General Assembly on the banning of human cloning: a Franco- Now, having experienced the horrible German proposal and a Spanish-USA- bombing in Bali, the government is obvi- Mexican proposal. The Franco-German pro- ously back at the table again, determining posal seeks an immediate ban on reproduc- whether further actions should be taken. Ob- tive cloning and a moratorium on other viously, any further actions in terms of pro- cloning pending further negotiations. The tection will cost more money. At this stage, Spanish-USA-Mexican proposal calls for an whilst the detail is being considered by the immediate ban on all cloning, both repro- government—and there is no secret about ductive and therapeutic. Australia is finalis- that, because the Prime Minister said pub- ing its position in relation to those particular licly that we were doing that—it would be resolutions. However, the government will inappropriate for me to speculate. But, best ensure that any resolutions and negotia- looking at our responses on the last occasion, tions for a UN convention on human cloning I think it gives some sort of indication of the are consistent with its own legislation. types of options that are open to the govern- ment. Senator HARRADINE—Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Is not the pro- Senator CHRIS EVANS—Mr President, posed legislation to ban the cloning of a hu- I ask a supplementary question. I thank the man embryo for any purpose? Is the minister minister for his answer. In terms of the fur- aware of the fact that the Australian Health ther actions that the minister says the gov- Ethics Committee condemned the use of the ernment is considering, are those largely in word ‘therapeutic’ as used by the minister, the defence portfolio or are they spread stating that it was a misleading term as it is across portfolios? In terms of funding any not very therapeutic for a human embryo to increased expenditure as a result of these be dissected of its stem cells? What is meant measures, is it anticipated that it would re- by the minister’s response to my question? quire a new defence tax, or would these costs Are the government leaving the door open be met by just increasing general taxation for human cloning for that purpose? revenue? Senator HILL—No, what I am saying is Senator HILL—The responses are, obvi- that the government will want to be consis- ously, across portfolios. In many ways, the tent. The government has put legislation on most effective response in this area is not a this matter to the parliament and, as Senator defence response. Defence has a contribution Harradine has said, it would ban human it must make, but it requires a range of other cloning. It would seem that these proposed skills and capabilities to best protect Austra- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5721 resolutions before the United Nations deal Senator VANSTONE—When I first took with what could be described as other asso- this job I indicated to this chamber that we ciated matters. All I said was that, in deter- would look very carefully at breaching—the mining a final position on those resolutions, last thing we wanted to do was unfairly we would want our position to be consistent breach people who had an intellectual dis- with the legislation that we are putting to the ability, an alcohol problem, a drug problem parliament and that we hope will be carried. or a range of other problems—but the people Centrelink: Breaching who did not show up for what they were meant to show up for and had no reasonable Senator FORSHAW (2.33 p.m.)—My excuse could expect to be dealt with firmly. question is directed to Senator Vanstone, the What you have seen since then, which you Minister for Family and Community Serv- may or may not care to acknowledge, is a ices. Can the minister confirm that the social decline in the breaching numbers, an in- security breaching activity that saw 269,000 crease in programs designed to assist people unemployed Australians lose some or all of in real need and a shift from the one, two, their income support payments in the last three breach—in one area, at least, signifi- financial year is factored into average in- cantly—to suspension with automatic rein- come support payment rates and benefit statement when someone provides a reason- outlays? Can the minister confirm that a able excuse. On the last survey that was done change in the rate or the duration of breach of 666 people, to whom this survey applied penalties to reduce the number of unem- since the new system started in July, I under- ployed people who are unfairly hurt by the stand that 25 per cent had their benefit ab- current system would affect benefit outlays solutely cancelled because they did not show and, as a result, the budget bottom line? up. That tells you something about how the Senator VANSTONE—I thank the sena- previous breaching system did not catch tor for the question, which relates to the cheats—it just penalised them. (Time ex- treatment of the consequences of increases or pired) decreases in breaching for the budget bottom Drought line. In a range of areas in the welfare sec- tor—and I believe this includes breaching, in Senator PAYNE (2.36 p.m.)—My ques- my portfolio at least, but I will go back and tion is to the Minister representing the Min- check that for you—it is largely done on ister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, broad movements, not on weekly or monthly Senator Ian Macdonald. Will the minister changes. But, since you have raised the issue outline to the Senate what actions the How- and I am interested in it myself, if you want ard government is taking to assist farmers an understanding from Finance and Treasury who are facing hardship in drought-stricken as to when the fortnightly and monthly fig- parts of Australia? ures match in with the overall annual esti- Senator IAN MACDONALD—I thank mates and changes, I will be happy to ask for Senator Payne for that question. I know that detail on that, look at it myself and share it members of her family are experiencing the with you. impacts of drought, as Senator Payne comes Senator FORSHAW—Mr President, I from a farming background. There are many ask a supplementary question. I thank the Australian families who are paying an enor- minister for the answer. I note that she has mous price, both emotionally and financially, not directly confirmed whether it does or it due to the drought. As we all know, drought does not. I note that she will pursue that fur- is an insidious, creeping, heartbreaking event ther. I then ask the minister: if it does not over which human beings have little control. have an impact on the budget bottom line, It is even a more bitter pill to swallow when will the government consider the merits of we know that last financial year was a record reforming the current rules to give effect to year for our agricultural produce. It was val- Professor Pearce’s inquiry’s suggestions ued at something like $38 billion last year. about reform of the rate of breaches and the Just as things were going so well in country duration for which people are breached? Australia, the drought comes along and 5722 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 wipes a massive $6 billion off farmers’ in- should have. For example, in New South comes in this financial year—that is half a Wales Labor made farmers wait for six per cent off the national GDP. One of the months after declaring the Rural Lands Pro- things that the government has been able to tection Board areas in drought before they do to mitigate the impacts of drought is to were able to access state help. We want to implement its Farm Management Deposit avoid that. We have changed the rules re- Scheme. That is a cash management tool that cently, and in Bourke and Brewarrina the complements on-farm risk management— first impacts of our new arrangements are strategies like developing fodder and water already having good results. (Time expired) reserves, financial planning and diversifying Superannuation: Commercial Nominees the production system. This Farm Manage- of Australia Ltd ment Deposit Scheme allows farmers to put money into farm deposits in good years and Senator SHERRY (2.41 p.m.)—My draw it out in bad years. As at 30 June this question is to Senator Coonan, the Assistant year, 43,400 farmers had invested over $2 Treasurer and Minister for Revenue. Can the billion in farm management deposits. The Assistant Treasurer confirm that on 8 May government will forgo income revenue to the this year she received an application for as- extent of about $510 million as a result of sistance on behalf of over 21,000 members that scheme. of the Australian Workforce Eligible Rollo- ver Fund who lost superannuation savings as On the ground relief from the drought is a result of alleged theft and/or fraud when principally a matter for the state govern- Commercial Nominees was trustee? Has the ments around our country. They should be Assistant Treasurer sought advice from the looking at things like transport subsidies and prudential regulator, APRA, on this matter? specific grants but, when the drought be- Has APRA provided this advice and, if so, comes so exceptional as to be beyond the what was it? capabilities of the state governments, the federal government comes in under its ex- Senator COONAN—I thank Senator ceptional circumstances drought arrange- Sherry for the question. The situation with ment. Federally, we have an income support respect to the recovery of funds arising out scheme through Centrelink, and Centrelink of the fraud of Commercial Nominees is on- do a marvellous job in administering that going. As I think I informed the Senate on an efficiently and well—as with everything earlier occasion, there have been some de- Centrelink do. We also have a business sup- terminations made by me and some money port scheme that provides interest rate subsi- has flowed to those funds that otherwise dies. We did want a more generous business were eligible for compensation under the support scheme. We wanted to be able to Commercial Nominees investigation. provide cash grants of $60,000 to farmers, With respect to the ongoing recovery, I but Mr Truss put that to the Labor states and, have decided to grant compensation to cer- regrettably, not one of the Labor states has tain small superannuation funds formerly been prepared to assist the federal govern- under the trusteeship of Commercial Nomi- ment in this additional business support for nees. There are 181 of those who have suf- those impacted upon by drought. fered eligible losses. With respect to out- Labor has fudged its responsibilities. We standing applications for financial assistance, have been trying to improve the EC scheme, as I have explained before in some detail, the and we have announced some additional en- trustee of a superannuation fund can apply hancements but, regrettably again, the Labor for financial assistance for a regulated fund Party governments throughout the states under part 23 of the Superannuation Industry have not been prepared to come on board (Supervision) Act when that fund has suf- with the Commonwealth. They refuse to fered an eligible loss. make more generous cash grants. Accord- My current information is that 466 appli- ingly, farmers are left without the support cations have been received for losses relating that the Commonwealth thinks that they to Commercial Nominees. These losses re- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5723 late to the ECMT, the Global bank account, matter. I have no control over external ac- the Enhanced Income Trust, the Enhanced countants providing advice to APRA. But, in Equity Fund and the Confidens Investment respect of the specific question about the Trust. The total estimated losses for these Australian Workforce Eligible Rollover funds are in the order of $30 million. ECMT Fund, I have said that KPMG’s advice did losses account for 199 applications, and not cover the point. APRA now has addi- those estimated losses are in the order of tional advice, and you, Senator Sherry, and $23.3 million. Determinations have been all those people affected who may be listen- made in respect of 196 of these applications, ing to this, can be assured that I will make and payment has been made to all 196 funds. the determinations the minute they hit my There are three remaining applications re- desk. lating to ECMT. Two relate to large public Environment: Renewable Energy offer funds. These are the Australian Workforce Eligible Rollover Fund and the Senator ALLISON (2.46 p.m.)—My Wealthy and Wise Master Plan. APRA has question is to the Minister representing the informed me that these funds are outside the Minister for the Environment and Heritage. scope of the KPMG report that I had re- Is the minister aware of the report prepared ceived. However, additional advice has been by Origin Energy which showed that the obtained by APRA on these applications and mandated renewable energy target legislation I expect to be in a position to make determi- will deliver a 0.9 per cent increase in renew- nations in respect of these applications able energy by 2010, which is less than half shortly. I can go on: GBA, EIT and EEF of the two per cent this government promised losses account for 179 applications, all of the Senate? Does the government intend to which are outstanding, with estimated losses fix this problem with the MRET? If not, why in the order of $4.9 million. CIT losses ac- not? count for 88 applications. These applications Senator HILL—I was asked a somewhat were, in fact, made on 30 July 2002. These similar question, perhaps from elsewhere in remain outstanding, and I am waiting on ad- the Democrat community, on the issue of vice in respect of those. failure to achieve the target. In that instance, Senator SHERRY—Mr President, I ask a it was being put to me that it was because of supplementary question. Minister, my ques- a baseline issue related to hydro. I think the tion went specifically to the rollover fund best I can say, without referring it back to Dr and their application, which you have ac- Kemp—which I will do for a detailed re- knowledged that you have received. Can you sponse—is that this was a significant contri- indicate to the Senate, particularly for the bution by this government to achieving a 21,000 members of the rollover fund, when better greenhouse gas outcome. In fact, the you anticipate being able to make a determi- form of legislation was unique in terms of nation to provide assistance in regard to the developed world. It was designed to pro- moneys lost and to fees in respect of com- vide an incentive for an additional take-up of pensation—particularly given that, in regard renewable energy. As far as I understand, it to the compensation determination which is succeeding, but there are issues as to you have made to date, which you have whether further changes need to be made in mentioned, it took just over a year for mon- order that it might be even more productive eys and compensation to be awarded. in the future. That potential was written into the legislation. A review is to be undertaken, Senator COONAN—I thank Senator which no doubt others in this place will have Sherry for his questions. I really do think that an opportunity to contribute to, but, from the they are reasonable questions. In respect of government’s perspective, we certainly want the matter taking a year, of course Senator the measures to work because we believe in Sherry would be well aware that, pretty well a better environmental outcome. That is why the minute I got the advice, I moved very we brought these initiatives to the parliament quickly. I do not think anyone is suggesting in the first instance. I will seek a detailed that I have sat on anything in relation to this response from Dr Kemp as to where we are 5724 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 in delivering the target that we indicated and, process of legislative reform for renewable if necessary, what further refinement needs energy and to ensure that we are in fact to be made to the scheme. maximising the potential that is out there. Senator ALLISON—Mr President, I ask That is my invitation to the Australian a supplementary question. I thank the minis- Democrats, and, if they respond positively, ter for his answer. I want to clarify that this is together we can achieve a better environ- nothing to do with the hydro baseline. In mental outcome. (Time expired) fact, the hydro baseline further reduces that Business: Executive Remuneration target of just 0.9 per cent. Australia will fall Senator CONROY (2.51 p.m.)—My short of its Kyoto target by around 14 million question is to Senator Coonan, the Minister tonnes of CO2 per year. The energy sector for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer. Is the says that increasing MRET to 10 per cent is minister aware of the call by the former CEO easily doable and will allow Australia to of BHP Billiton, Mr Paul Anderson, for a meet its target. Why does your government freeze on executive remuneration, following continue to resist this option? Isn’t it the case a period of obscene increases in executive that this study shows that Australia’s relative remuneration? Does the minister support Mr competitive position would not be damaged Anderson’s call for a freeze on executive at all by increasing renewable energy by 10 remuneration packages designed to ‘let the per cent? market settle down’? Senator Brown—Because the coal in- Senator COONAN—Thank you, Senator dustry is running the show! Conroy. You can always tell when the oppo- Senator HILL—I remember the battle it sition are starting to run out of questions: was to get any decent environmental reform they always come back to executive options. through this chamber. Why was it a battle? The situation with options and executive re- Firstly, it was because the Greens totally op- muneration is that it is a matter for the indi- posed it—extraordinary though that might vidual corporations and it is a commercial seem. But of course we know why they are matter as to what remuneration somebody opposed to it: because it is an initiative of the should receive. It is a very different matter if Howard government. Any step taken by the a company is insolvent. The government, as I Howard government towards a better envi- explained very carefully yesterday, has in- ronmental outcome has to be condemned on troduced an amendment to the Corporations principle. Law. In the circumstances where excessive Senator Allison—I rise on a point of or- remuneration has been paid to executives, or der. Mr President, I ask you to remind the indeed where any unreasonable bonuses have minister that the question that was put to him been paid to executives, and a company sub- was quite specific and to ask him not to de- sequently becomes insolvent, there will be an bate the matter of another party’s response to action available to the liquidator to recover environmental issues in this chamber. any unreasonable amount. That, of course, would be made available to the liquidator for The PRESIDENT—I hear your point of distribution to creditors and for other pur- order. Senator Hill, please return to the ques- poses. It is a matter for the shareholders as to tion. what is an adequate or inadequate amount to Senator HILL—I had said that the gov- be paid to their executives. Most executives ernment is committed to a better environ- are paid, as you would expect, on perform- mental outcome, particularly in relation to ance. It is entirely then a matter for share- renewable energy, and that we are prepared holders, if the company is not insolvent, as to to work with those who are prepared to work whether or not that is adequate. with us. So I extend the invitation to the new This is a very interesting matter. For 13 Australian Democrats—who are now want- years Labor appeared to sleep through this as ing to re-establish their place in the broader a problem. It is interesting that Mr David Australian political scene—to be coopera- Murray’s remuneration was set for the tive, to come with us, to work through this Commonwealth Bank about 10 years ago. In Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5725 the last few weeks he managed to make him- Information Technology: Research self available for about $7 million. For 13 Senator MASON (2.56 p.m.)—My ques- years the Labor Party did nothing about this; tion is to the Minister for Communications, they did nothing about employee entitle- Information Technology and the Arts, Sena- ments. It is an absolute disgrace. Now they tor Alston. Will the minister please outline to come into this chamber and, when they are the Senate the steps the government has running out of steam in question time, they taken to ensure that research and develop- bring up this old chestnut again. Even with ment in the information and communications the wreckage of economic disaster around technology sector continues to foster inno- them, the Labor Party did nothing for em- vation, accelerate the commercialisation of ployees and nothing in respect of executive new products and services and contribute to payment for 13 years. It has been left to this strong and sustainable economic growth? government to pick up the pieces of Labor’s mess, which is the usual style, and to bring in Senator ALSTON—I thank Senator Ma- not only a scheme for employees but also an son for a very important question from a amendment to the Corporations Law to make very innovative senator. The fact is that, for sure that anything that is unreasonably paid Australian ICT R&D, we have gone from to executives can be made subsequently something like $1.2 billion to $2 billion in available to a liquidator. the last five years, which is a very impressive performance. Just as we have already got Senator CONROY—Mr President, I ask runs on the board, I think we have made it a supplementary question. I refer to the min- fundamentally plain that we do not want to ister’s comment yesterday and again today go down the tired old track that seems to be that it was an absolute disgrace for the Labor an endless fascination for the Senator Lun- Party to even raise a question in relation to dys of this world: the idea of building fab executive remuneration. Is the minister plants and vertical silo operations. We are aware of a recent survey by Ernst and Young much more interested in the high value and Orient Capital that found only 29 per added end of the market, where the intellec- cent of companies’ managements thought it tual property resides, where the margins are was important to consult shareholders on high and where you have something that executive pay, while 81 per cent of share- sits— holders thought it was important? Isn’t it a disgrace that, while this government avoids Senator Conroy interjecting— any debate on the issue of executive remu- Senator ALSTON—I am not sure about neration, companies can ignore shareholders that. who want to be consulted on how much of The PRESIDENT—Order! I would like their money is being siphoned into the pock- to be able to listen to him, if you would keep ets of greedy executives? quiet, Senator Conroy. I think everybody else Senator COONAN—Thank you, Senator would too. Conroy, for the supplementary question. Un- Senator ALSTON—The fact is that in- fortunately it ignores the fact that sharehold- novation has always been very high on our ers have got every right at an annual general agenda. We think it is much more important meeting to raise the issue of executive remu- than noodles and spaghetti, and we demon- neration. Indeed, they have every right not strated that some 18 months ago with our only to raise it at annual general meetings Backing Australia’s Ability program. The but also to raise it independently with the high watermark of that— chairman and the board of any corporation. Senator Lundy—How high was it on To suggest that the issue is not adequately your agenda when it really mattered and you dealt with by a possible clawback if a com- could have given the industry a decent— pany becomes insolvent really just begs the question. Senator ALSTON—The trick is to stay ahead of the game, Senator Lundy. That is really what it is all about. If you think you can wait until a couple of months before an 5726 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 election and come out with a silly little car- you cannot quite get your head around. This toon like that and expect people to take you is the big chance to do it and I think you will seriously, you still have a long way to go. We find that if you visit the ATP there is a high were actually well ahead of the curve. Nearly level of excitement about the prospects of two years ago, we released Backing Austra- this centre. When you combine it with all the lia’s Ability—a $2.9 billion initiative— other initiatives that we have announced in Senator George Campbell—You sus- Backing Australia’s Ability—such as dou- pended most of it! bling the ARC funding over a period of five years, the 80 per cent increase in funding for Senator ALSTON—It has been so suc- the cooperative research centres and the cessful, Senator Campbell, as you well know, major national research facilities—these ini- that in some areas supply has not been able tiatives are the vital ingredients that were to keep up with demand. That is hardly a lacking for so long under Labor. (Time ex- sign of a failed policy. The high watermark, I pired) think, of the whole Backing Australia’s Ability program is the Centre of Excellence Senator Hill—Mr President, I ask that for ICT—$129.5 million. The contract for further questions be placed on the Notice that has recently been signed and the funding Paper. arrangements have been put in place. Now QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: that the NICTA consortium is up and run- ADDITIONAL ANSWERS ning, it is going to be a tremendous asset for Agriculture: Agricultural Development us because it will attract the best and bright- Partnership Program est. It will provide critical mass. There will be up to 300 researchers. Just so that you Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- understand that this is not passing unnoticed sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- overseas, I can tell you that we had the CEO tion) (3.03 p.m.)—Yesterday Senator Buck- of Microsoft here last week. His comment land asked me about the Agricultural Devel- was that this would constitute— opment Partnership Program. I can tell Senator Buckland that in the 2001-02 budget Senator George Campbell—Did we pay the Commonwealth announced the program, his fare? which is designed to provide assistance for Senator ALSTON—No, I do not think structural adjustment targeted to agricultural so. I think he arranged his own transport. industries and regions experiencing signifi- The PRESIDENT—Senator Alston, re- cant problems affecting farm profitability turn to the question and do not respond to and sustainability. A feature of the program interjections from Senator George Campbell. is that the state governments are expected to provide matching funding to facilitate a Senator ALSTON—What he said was genuine partnership approach. that the Australian government is working on exactly the right kinds of things to leave the The state governments’ responses have right kind of industry development ingredi- been, to put it politely, mixed. There have ents around. He went on to say that building been a number of issues and points of differ- a centre of excellence such as this would be ence, especially with regard to the shared of much greater importance than providing funding responsibilities. In 2001-02, as the higher R&D incentives for multinationals. states had not come on board, $2.5 million So he was not talking to his own brief. He was transferred from the program to fund was actually saying it is in the national inter- other regional and industry priorities within est to have world-class research facilities, the portfolio. A revised set of guidelines is and that is what we are doing. now being prepared, Senator Buckland, and is being considered by the Minister for Agri- I hope that you will acknowledge that, culture, Fisheries and Forestry prior to dis- Senator Lundy. Pay them a visit. They would patch to state ministers for their concurrence. be more than happy to take you on a familia- risation tour and explain all those important The Commonwealth is very eager for the concepts which sound exciting but which partnership program to become operational Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5727 but it will depend on the future support and Superannuation deserves special consid- cooperation of the states. A number of pre- eration with regard to the protection that it is liminary proposals that may fit within the afforded. We cannot have the situation in program either have been developed or are Australia that has occurred in some other being developed in some states. I urge countries, and the UK comes to mind. I draw Senator Buckland to use his influence with a distinction between theft and fraud in a the Labor states to get them to come on superannuation fund and low returns. At the board with this program so that the money present time, unfortunately, we are in a low- can start to flow. return and generally negative-return envi- QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: ronment with respect to superannuation. That TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS follows a significant number of years of positive and generally very favourable re- Superannuation: Commercial Nominees turns. We have to draw a distinction between of Australia Ltd what to do when theft and fraud occur— Senator SHERRY (Tasmania) (3.01 when the money is literally stolen from a p.m.)—I move: worker’s retirement fund—and the issue of That the Senate take note of the answer given lower returns. by the Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treas- The Labor Party argues that it is totally urer (Senator Coonan) to a question without no- unacceptable in a society such as ours that, tice asked by Senator Sherry today relating to superannuation and the Australian Workforce where a person’s retirement income is in part Eligible Rollover Fund. or whole stolen before the person reaches retirement, there should not be adequate The Workforce Eligible Rollover Fund was a compensation for the moneys that have been subcomponent of a superannuation trust removed from the fund illegally and also in known as Commercial Nominees. Unfortu- respect of the fees and charges that are part nately within the structure and the various and parcel of the administration of the fund substructures of Commercial Nominees a in those circumstances. It is totally untenable level of alleged theft and fraud has taken and totally wrong for Australians not to be place. My colleagues Senator Buckland and fully compensated in those circumstances. If Senator Wong will be commenting on some the theft or fraud occurs close to retirement it specific matters in relation to the issues of is obviously impossible for those people to Commercial Nominees and compensation in make up the losses that have occurred as a the event of moneys being lost as a result of result of that theft and fraud. theft and fraud. They will comment on the compensation payable in those circum- In a policy options paper I released ap- stances and also on compensation for fees proximately two months ago, I advocated and charges that apply in those circum- much tougher protections for Australians’ stances. superannuation in the event of theft or fraud taking place. Unfortunately, some in the me- Superannuation is very important to Aus- dia seem to be perpetuating a myth that the tralians. It is compulsory and it is set at a Labor Party has not put out any policy since level of a nine per cent contribution for all the last election. This is incorrect and I urge employees in this country. I think the last them to read my 60-page superannuation documentation I looked at showed that 8.8 policy options document. I think it is a very million Australians are in superannuation, comprehensive document, and this is one of with approximately $530 billion in assets. It the issues that we focus on. The Labor Party is compulsory and it is there to be preserved has put forward the fundamental principle for retirement. So superannuation has a very that where theft and fraud occurs in a super- special status in this country and plays a very annuation retirement fund—fortunately, it is important role in providing an additional very rare in this country—full compensation, retirement income over and above the rela- 100 per cent compensation, for both moneys tively modest pension that Australia has for lost and the costs of the fees and charges persons who have reached retirement age. should be provided to persons in those cir- 5728 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 cumstances because of the unique status of told that around 18 per cent, being $11,500, their savings as compulsory superannuation would be deducted as an exit fee. This was savings vested in the private sector. We have not explained to him when joining the fund. also outlined a range of very tough options Other examples are an exit fee of $4,000 for stronger protections on the fees and imposed on savings of $33,000, an exit pen- charges that apply to superannuation. (Time alty of $1,796 on an account of $2,635— expired) around 68 per cent of the total savings—and, Senator WONG (South Australia) (3.09 most disturbingly, a punitive fee of $3,324 p.m.)—It is interesting how much the gov- on savings of $3,300, which left the member ernment appears to want to debate the issue owing the provider some $24. of superannuation. I rise to support Senator Minister Coonan, consistent with her ap- Sherry’s motion to take note of the answer proach today, has previously argued that provided by Minister Coonan in relation to making the government rather than the mar- the Commercial Nominees case and the fail- ket responsible for setting or regulating fees ure by this government, as exemplified in her and charges is inappropriate. However, this answer, to provide adequate compensation to position of the government bears little logi- employees who have been victims of the cal analysis. It is saying that this should be theft or fraud of their hard won superannua- left to the free market when clearly the free tion savings which, as we all know, are sup- market in this situation is causing significant posed to be part of their retirement incomes. problems for consumers in this area—it is a It really is indicative of this government’s disincentive to fund choice. It is extraordi- failure to recognise problems in allowing the nary that the government is refusing to en- market to operate unfettered in the area of gage in any regulation where there is clearly superannuation, its failure to regulate prop- market failure in some instances on the issue erly and its failure to ensure that consumers, of exit fees. I do note that Minister Coonan ordinary Australians, have the opportunity to did concede at a press conference on 19 obtain compensation when their savings are September when she was discussing port- taken away through theft or fraud. ability that some funds might increase exit This concern that the government appears fees to stop people withdrawing their money to have with regulating the market is also under a choice regime and going to another shown when one looks at their position on fund. Despite this, we still see no action from fees and charges, in particular exit fees. We this government to regulate exit fees, just as know that massive exit fees already exist we see today in the answer given by Minister amongst retail superannuation funds. While Coonan no action on compensating ade- some of them are reasonable, in the unregu- quately Australians whose retirement savings lated sectors there are some extremely unrea- are lost through theft or fraud. sonable examples of exit fees. These operate The minister has stated that the govern- as a substantial disincentive to people who ment will reserve the right to regulate exit wish to leave funds. It is interesting that we fees but has so far failed to act, despite clear have a government that propounds the con- evidence that there is market failure in rela- cept of choice in superannuation but refuses tion to a number of funds and that this is a to deal with a policy factor—that is, the im- massive disincentive to choice of funds for position of unreasonable exit fees—that is many Australian consumers. It seems that the clearly limiting the choices available to government is more interested in a superan- Australian consumers. nuation sector which benefits the big end of We are aware of many cases of excessive town who want to get their snouts into the exit fees charged against superannuation superannuation trough rather than protecting savings, and I will advise the Senate of a Australian consumers. That failure of the number of these. We have one example government is exemplified, as I said, in rela- where, after 12 years, a fund member had tion not only to exit fees but also to the in- built up savings of $65,500. He attempted to adequate compensation of Australians who transfer his money to another fund and was Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5729 are victims of superannuation theft or fraud. three years and this will lower the maximum (Time expired) surcharge rate to 10.5 per cent by 2004-05. Senator COLBECK (Tasmania) (3.14 A co-contribution of up to $1,000 per an- p.m.)—I find it somewhat amusing that num will be introduced for personal super- Senator Sherry gets up to talk about policy annuation contributions made by low-income on superannuation given the record of the earners in place of the current $100 rebate. Labor Party over the last six years in this The limit on full deductibility of superannu- respect. In fact, looking at the Labor Party ation contributions by self-employed persons web site, I notice they mention policy dis- will increase from $3,000 to $5,000 while cussion papers but there is nothing on their retaining 75 per cent deductibility on any web site that relates to Labor Party policy. I amounts above this threshold, subject to the am happy to concede that the policy papers age based deductibility limits. Also the tax exist, but I find that it is a little bit difficult to on the excessive component of ETPs from believe the Labor Party’s claim that they superannuation funds will be reduced to have specific policy with respect to superan- lower the tax effective rate to no more than nuation when all the evidence suggests that 48.5 per cent. they do not. Other measures in the package will widen Senator Sherry—We set it up. the accessibility of superannuation by ex- Senator COLBECK—Oh, good on you. tending the circumstances in which contri- In fact, they have had no policy since 1996. butions to superannuation can be made. This They went to the 1998 election without any will be achieved by allowing working indi- policy and they went to the 2001 election viduals aged between 70 and 75 to make per- without any policy. Go to the web site and sonal contributions to superannuation. This have a look at that. It is amusing that, all of a follows on from the government’s earlier sudden, the Labor Party seem to have found increase from 65 to 70 years for voluntary superannuation as an issue and that they have contributions and to 70 years for employer extensive policy credentials with respect to contributions. Recipients of the baby bonus superannuation. They might have had some will be allowed to contribute it to superannu- policy in a previous government but in the ation and superannuation contributions up to last six years there has been no policy activ- $3,000 per child will be allowed over a ity whatsoever. three-year period. Other elements of the package announced will require all employ- Senator Sherry—I am happy to go again ers to make at least quarterly superannuation if you have run out of things to say. contributions on behalf of their employees Senator COLBECK—I am sure you from 1 July 2003 and reaffirm the govern- would be, Senator. The coalition has made ment’s commitment to its policy of choice superannuation a significant priority. Tax and portability of superannuation. This pol- concessions provided to superannuation icy will give workers the freedom to decide make it the single largest tax expenditure who manages superannuation and the right to item amounting to approximately $9.5 bil- move superannuation benefits from one fund lion in 2001-02. Measures contained in A to another. The measures will allow tempo- Better Superannuation System will increase rary residents the option of accessing their the attractiveness of superannuation by al- superannuation benefits after they have per- lowing couples to split their superannuation manently departed Australia, subject to tax contributions, ensuring that single income withholding arrangements, and commit the families will have better access to two ETP government to examining whether market tax-free thresholds and two reasonable bene- linked income streams also— (Time expired) fit limits in the same way as dual income Senator BUCKLAND (South Australia) families. The superannuation termination (3.19 p.m.)—I also rise to speak on the take payment surcharge rates will be reduced by a note motion moved by Senator Sherry. In the tenth of their current level in each of the next last 18 months in this chamber we have wit- nessed the fallout of the Commercial Nomi- 5730 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 nees debacle with all of its ongoing difficult Senator Coonan’s answer today shows issues. Senator Coonan, the Minister for that she has done nothing concrete to ensure Revenue and Assistant Treasurer, in her an- that the 21,000 members of Commercial swer today did not give us any assurance and Nominees’ AWERF—who have lost super- this issue remains a source of grave concern. annuation savings at the hands of what is We have been given no assurance that it is arguably the worst and most dishonest trus- going to get any better and we have grave tee in history—receive at least some of their concerns, as do many Australians, waiting losses back. The Australian Workforce Eligi- for the government to resolve the issue. ble Rollover Fund had around 40,000 mem- Commercial Nominees was a for-profit bers. The fund was divided into a number of corporate trust. It acted as a trustee for a pools, some of which were invested in number of public offer superannuation funds Commercial Nominees’ own unregulated and some 475 small funds. One of those trusts. This translates to some of the mem- public offer funds was the Australian bers not having suffered losses through Workforce Eligible Rollover Fund, AWERF. fraud, but around 21,000 of the members Commercial Nominees directed money from have. (Time expired) these funds into a number of unregulated Senator EGGLESTON (Western Aus- investment trusts, where it was also a trustee, tralia) (3.24 p.m.)—We are talking about moving money from one pocket to another. what happens to superannuation fund mem- Unbeknown to fund members, these trusts bers who have lost money as a result of invested in business related to Commercial mismanagement of the super funds by di- Nominees directors, including a mushroom rectors and so on. That is certainly an issue, farm. They moved money out of funds into and one case which specifically comes to their own pockets and into their own busi- mind concerns the activities of Commercial ness enterprises. The Minister for Revenue Nominees of Australia Ltd. In that case the and Assistant Treasurer has done nothing to people who belonged to the superannuation redress this situation. Through these suspi- fund were disadvantaged by the activities of cious investments, Commercial Nominees directors. On 14 June the Assistant Treasurer lost millions of dollars worth of members’ announced that it had been decided to grant retirement savings. These members are ordi- financial assistance to certain small superan- nary workers who have entrusted their nuation funds formerly under the trusteeship money to a company that was using it for its of Commercial Nominees of Australia Ltd. own gain and that fraudulently took their This assistance was to be granted under part money. 3 of the Superannuation Industry (Supervi- In December 2000 APRA replaced Com- sion) Act 1993 to some 181 small superan- mercial Nominees as a trustee of AWERF nuation funds that suffered loss in the En- and two other public offer funds. In February hanced Cash Management Trust, or ECMT. 2001 it replaced Commercial Nominees as In other words, these people were being trustee of the 475 small funds. On 14 June looked after by the Howard government to this year, after a delay of over 12 months and ensure that their losses were redeemed. not without significant pressure from Labor, Redemptions from the ECMT were frozen Senator Coonan agreed to provide assistance in November 2000 and applications for as- to some 181 of these small funds that had sistance for these funds were made by Oak suffered losses as a result of serious fraud by Breeze, the replacement trustee, on 7 Febru- Commercial Nominees. Labor had every ary 2002. The Assistant Treasurer was satis- right to be critical of Senator Coonan for fied that the 181 small funds suffered eligible providing less than full compensation as losses under the act; that is, that the losses permitted by the act. At least members of were the result of fraudulent conduct or, in these funds have received something, but the effect, theft, and the public interest required act provides for full compensation—far more that a grant of assistance was made, and it than what has been received by these funds. was done. In this situation the safety net which is in place acted to support the 181 Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5731 small funds which had suffered losses as a The matter related to whether we are getting result of the bad management of Commercial a two per cent increase in renewable energy Nominees of Australia Ltd. as part of this measure. The short answer to Finally, with regard to the outstanding ap- that is, ‘No, we are not.’ In fact, we are not plications for financial assistance, the trustee even getting half as much as two per cent. of a superannuation fund can apply for fi- Honourable senators who were here at the nancial assistance through a regulated fund time may recall that the two per cent was under part 23 of the Superannuation Industry converted into a figure for electricity of (Supervision) Act 1993 where that fund has 9,500 gigawatt hours. During the debate, suffered an eligible loss. As it happens, some several people in this place—myself in- 466 applications have been received for cluded—warned the minister that to do so losses under that category. Again, these was to ignore the likely increase in the con- losses have been redeemed under the system sumption of electricity over that period of which I have already referred to. The losses time and that, inevitably, 9,500 gigawatt which overall related to the ECMT—the hours would be reduced in percentage terms Global Bank Account, the Enhanced Income from two per cent to something much less. Trust, the Equity Enhanced Fund and the That has, indeed, happened. It is much worse Confidence Investment Trust—came to an than we anticipated at the time of that debate estimated total of some $30 million. The and for this reason it is my proposition that ECMT losses accounted for 199 applications the government ought to seriously reconsider with estimated losses in the order of $23.3 this question and not just increase renewable million. Determinations were made in rela- energy targets to the full two per cent but to tion to 196 of these applications and payment look seriously at increasing them now to 10 was made to all 196 funds. So the people per cent. who had been disadvantaged by the collapse A study, commissioned by Origin Energy, of these funds due to fraud and other kinds of has recently been done. It is available on a activities, which fell within the requirements web site. I will take the opportunity of men- for the assistance to be given, had their tioning it here so that people can look it up— losses redeemed. This shows that the safety www.originenergy.com.au. On that web site net which is in place has worked to support there is a report by McLennan Magasanik people in this kind of situation. Associates. The report looks at whether The federal government has supported the Australia would be disadvantaged economi- compulsory superannuation provisions which cally in terms of our industry by increasing have been in place for some time now and, our target from 0.9 per cent to a real 10 per certainly with the ageing of Australia, it is cent. For some time, the renewable energy necessary that we have an effective and industry has been saying that that is possible strong superannuation industry and that peo- and it is eminently doable and that Australia ple have the confidence to believe that their ought to do it. But now we have a report that funds are secure. If, due to fraud or criminal categorically shows how we can do this and mismanagement, the money is lost, then how it would have no effect whatever on our people in these superannuation funds need to competitive relationship with countries with know that their losses will be redeemed. whom we do business. (Time expired) I commend honourable senators’ attention Question agreed to. to this report because I think it is an impor- tant one. It does give rise to serious questions Environment: Renewable Energy about the government’s intention over Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (3.29 Kyoto. We are likely to overshoot our com- p.m.)—I move: mitment by some 14 million tonnes of CO2 a That the Senate take note of the answer given year; that is the gap between what we are by the Minister for Defence (Senator Hill) to a committed to achieve under Kyoto—eight question without notice asked by Senator Allison per cent of the 1990 levels by 2010. It over- today relating to renewable energy. shoots that by a long way and that gap could 5732 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 be filled if we in this country were to commit sland, as well as the Electron beam irradiation ourselves to more renewable energy. So it is facility proposed for North Queensland. my contention that the minister, in fact, knew Your petitioners request the Senate should that this was going to be a problem at the • Prohibit the establishment of a nuclear irra- time. He has not heeded warnings which diation facility or X-Ray or Electron beam ir- have been given to him both in this chamber radiation facility at any location in Australia. and subsequently. This report states categori- • Ban the import, export and sale of irradiated cally that it is possible for us to move to 10 food in Australia. per cent by 2010 and that it would fix our • Call on the Australia New Zealand Food problem. It would stop Australia being a pa- Standards Council (ANZFSC) and the Aus- riah to the rest of the world. It would stop us tralia New Zealand Food Authority having the highest per capita emissions level (ANZFA) to amend Standards A-17 and of greenhouse gases and save us the huge 1.5.3—Irradiation of Foods in the Food embarrassment on the world stage of being a Standards Code to ban food irradiation out- country which appears not to care about right in Australia and New Zealand. global warming. by Senator Brown (from 3,886 citizens). In the last couple of weeks, I spent some Petition received. time in the Pacific Islands, in Fiji, and talked NOTICES with parliamentarians there who come from small island states in our immediate region Withdrawal and they are deeply worried about climate Senator GREIG (Western Australia) change. They are very, very critical of Aus- (3.35 p.m.)—Pursuant to notice of intention tralia’s position because it appears that we do given on 22 October 2002, I withdraw busi- not care about their interests. It appears that ness of the Senate notice of motion No. 1 we are not prepared to take the steps which standing in my name for 24 October 2002, would put us on the right path to a properly relating to the disallowance of Therapeutic sustainable future in terms of our energy Goods (Charges) Amendment Regulations consumption and where we get energy from. 2002 (No. 1), as contained in Statutory Rules As we all know, Australia is well resourced 2002 No. 144 and made under the Therapeu- in wind and solar energy. There is no excuse tic Goods (Charges) Act 1989. for us to continue to not provide the incen- COMMITTEES tives and the initiatives that would allow that Selection of Bills Committee industry to blossom and to provide us with clean, green energy. Report I was disappointed by the minister’s an- Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (3.36 swer to my question. He was very well aware p.m.)—I present the 11th report of 2002 of of the problem that I alluded to. To say that the Selection of Bills Committee and move: this is something to do with hydro That the report be adopted. schemes—(Time expired) I seek leave to have the report incorporated Question agreed to. in Hansard. PETITIONS Leave granted. The Clerk—A petition has been lodged The report read as follows— for presentation as follows: SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE Food: Irradiation REPORT NO. 11 OF 2002 To the Honourable the President and members of 1. The committee met on Tuesday, 22 October the Senate assembled in Parliament: 2002. The petition of the undersigned shows: 2. The committee resolved to recommend— That— The residents of Australia are opposed to food irradiation and the building of the nuclear irradia- (a) the Trade Practices Amendment (Liabil- tion facility proposed for Narangba, in Queen- ity for Recreational Services) Bill 2002 be referred immediately to the Eco- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5733

nomics Legislation Committee for in- (Jeannie Ferris) quiry and report by 3 December 2002 Chair (see appendix 1 for statement of reasons for referral); 23 October 2002 (b) the order of the Senate of 15 May 2002 Appendix 1 adopting the Committee’s 3rd report of Proposal to refer a bill to a committee 2002 be varied to provide that the provi- Name of bill(s): sions of the Workplace Relations Trade Practices Amendment (Liability for Rec- Amendment (Improved Protection for reational Services) Bill 2002 Victorian Workers) Bill 2002 be re- ferred immediately to the Education, Reasons for referral/principal issues for con- Employment and Workplace Relations sideration Legislation Committee for inquiry and • the role of the Trade Practices Act in per- report by 12 November 2002 (see ap- sonal injury claims pendix 2 for statement of reasons for re- • the definition of recreational services ferral); • waiver of gross negligence (c) the following bills not be referred to committees: Possible submissions or evidence from: • Australian Broadcasting Corporation (Scru- ACCC, Treasury, Insurance Council, Australian tiny of Board Appointments) Amendment Consumer’s Association, Australian Plaintiff Bill 2002 Lawyer’s Association • Higher Education Legislation Amendment Committee to which bill is referred: Bill (No. 3) 2002 Economics Legislation Committee • Migration Legislation Amendment (Migra- Possible hearing date: Week commencing 25 tion Advice Industry) Bill 2002 November 2002 • Workplace Relations Legislation Amend- Possible reporting date(s): 3 December 2002 ment Bill 2002. (signed) The committee recommends accordingly. Senator Sue Mackay 3. The committee deferred consideration of the Whip/Selection of Bills Committee member following bills to the next meeting: ————— Bill deferred from meeting of 19 March 2002 Appendix 2 • Aviation Legislation Amendment Bill 2002 Proposal to refer a bill to a committee Bills deferred from meeting of 20 August 2002 Name of bill(s): • Financial Sector Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2002 Workplace Relations Amendment (Improved Protection for Victorian Workers) Bill 2002 • Occupational Health and Safety (Common- wealth Employment) Amendment (Em- Reasons for referral/principal issues for con- ployee Involvement and Compliance) Bill sideration 2002 • the adequacy of the employment protections Bills deferred from meeting of 24 September contained in the bill for schedule 2A workers 2002 and outworkers having regard to the protec- • tions enjoyed by other Victorian and Austra- Inspector-General of Taxation Bill 2002 lian workers and outworkers. • International Tax Agreements Amendment • The implications, including any constitu- Bill (No. 2) 2002 tional implications, of the bill for alternative • Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No. 6) legislative approaches at the state level, in- 2002 cluding the Outworkers (Improved Protec- Bill deferred from meeting of 15 October 2002 tion) Bill and the Federal Awards (Uniform System) Bill • Trade Practices Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2002 Possible submissions or evidence from: Bill deferred from meeting of 22 October 2002 Unions, employers, employees, outworkers, aca- demics, legal experts • Corporations Amendment (Repayment of Directors’ Bonuses) Bill 2002. 5734 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

Committee to which bill is referred: Legislation Committee had that reference so Education, Employment and Workplace Relations that it could inquire into that piece of legis- Legislation Committee lation. That is the reason that we now pro- Possible hearing date: One day hearing in Mel- pose to amend the report to allow the refer- bourne in the week 11-15 November 2002 ence to the Economics Legislation Commit- Possible reporting date(s): The week 2-6 De- tee. It can now undertake that inquiry, get the cember 2002 appropriate processes under way and ensure (signed) that the bill receives proper scrutiny by the committee. The Selection of Bills Committee Senator Sue Mackay will not meet again until the next sitting Whip/Selection of Bills Committee member week of the Senate—on the Tuesday at 4 Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (3.37 p.m. Referral will allow the process to get p.m.)—I move the following amendment to under way now and it will allow proper the motion that the Selection of Bills Com- scrutiny of the bill by the Senate committee mittee report be adopted: in the terms that I have proposed. At the end of the motion, add “and, in respect The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—The of the Inspector-General of Taxation Bill 2002, question is that the amendment moved by the bill be referred to the Economics Legislation Senator Ludwig be agreed to. Committee for inquiry and report by 3 December 2002”. Question agreed to. I do not wish to take up much time of the The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—The Senate—I know that we have a packed pro- question is that the amended motion be gram—but it is worth while stating the rea- agreed to. sons for referral. Earlier today we denied Question agreed to. leave for this legislation to be exempt from NOTICES the cut-off to allow this bill to go to the rele- vant committee for inquiry and report. The Postponement bill should not be passed in the Senate until Items of business were postponed as fol- such time as the committee has had the op- lows: portunity to consider the wider governance General business notice of motion no. 197 issues relating to the Australian Taxation standing in the name of Senator Allison for Office and tax policy involving the ATO, today, relating to a response by the Austra- Treasury, the Board of Taxation, the Tax lian Competition and Consumer Commission Ombudsman, the Auditor-General and the to an order of the Senate, postponed till 11 proposed Inspector-General of Taxation. La- November 2002. bor wishes to save taxpayers’ money and to General business notice of motion no. 222 ensure that the unnecessary duplication of standing in the name of Senator Allison for Commonwealth administration in this tax today, relating to the Gembrook Primary School, postponed till 11 November 2002. area is dealt with. Those are the reasons for the referral, which will allow the Senate Withdrawal Economics Legislation Committee to have Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (3.40 sufficient time to inquire into and report on p.m.)—I withdraw business of the Senate the bill. notice of motion No. 1 standing in my name It is also worth while adding that, proce- for today relating to a proposed amendment durally, the Selection of Bills Committee to the Disability Discrimination Standards sought to defer a recommendation that the for Accessible Public Transport 2002. matter go to the Economics Legislation DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION Committee. However, five minutes or so STANDARDS FOR ACCESSIBLE after the committee had concluded we re- PUBLIC TRANSPORT 2002 ceived a reference request. As we will not be Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western sitting again for another two weeks, it was Australia—Manager of Government Busi- worth while ensuring that the Economics ness in the Senate) (3.41 p.m.)—Mr Deputy Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5735

President, I seek leave to make a short state- References Committee for inquiry and report by ment about the next step that it is necessary the last sitting day in June 2003: for the Senate to take in relation to the Dis- (a) areas of skills shortage and labour ability Discrimination Standards. demand in different areas and locations, Leave granted. with particular emphasis on projecting future skills requirements; Senator IAN CAMPBELL—Although (b) the effectiveness of current Senator Allison has withdrawn the proposed Commonwealth, state and territory amendment, it is necessary for the Senate to education, training and employment approve the standard as tabled and to inform policies, and programs and mechanisms the House of Representatives so that the for meeting current and future skills House may also approve the standard in the needs, and any recommended same terms. Only then will the standard take improvements; effect. I therefore seek leave to move a mo- (c) the effectiveness of industry strategies to tion to approve the standard. meet current and emerging skill needs; Leave granted. (d) the performance and capacity of Job Network to match skills availability with Senator IAN CAMPBELL—I move: labour-market needs on a regional basis That: and the need for improvements; (1) In accordance with subsection 31(3) of the (e) strategies to anticipate the vocational Disability Discrimination Act 1992, the Sen- education and training needs flowing ate approves the Disability Discrimination from industry restructuring and Standards for Accessible Public Transport redundancies, and any recommended 2002, made under subsection 31(1) of the improvements; and Act and tabled on 20 August 2002. (f) consultation arrangements with industry, (2) A message be sent to the House of Repre- unions and the community on labour- sentatives acquainting the House of this market trends and skills demand in resolution. particular, and any recommended Question agreed to. appropriate changes. COMMITTEES Question agreed to. Employment, Workplace Relations and Electoral Matters Committee Education References Committee Meeting Extension of Time Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (3.43 Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL (New p.m.)—At the request of Senator Mason, I South Wales) (3.42 p.m.)—I move: move: That the time for the presentation of reports of That the Joint Standing Committee on Elec- the Employment, Workplace Relations and toral Matters be authorised to hold public meet- Education References Committee be extended as ings during the sittings of the Senate on Monday, follows: 11 November 2002, from 7.15 p.m., and on Mon- day, 2 December 2002, from 7.15 p.m., to take (a) education of students with disabilities— evidence for the committee’s inquiry into the to 5 December 2002; and conduct of the 2001 federal election. (b) small business employment—to 12 Question agreed to. December 2002. Question agreed to. LINOW, MRS VALERIE Employment, Workplace Relations and Senator RIDGEWAY (New South Education References Committee Wales) (3.44 p.m.)—as amended, by leave— I move the motion as amended: Reference That the Senate— Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL (New (a) notes that: South Wales) (3.43 p.m.)—I move: (i) Mrs Valerie Linow, an Aboriginal That the following matters be referred to the woman from New South Wales, was Employment, Workplace Relations and Education removed from her family at the age of 5736 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

2 years and placed in children’s Islander Commission, the Public homes in Bomaderry and then Interest Advocacy Centre and the Cootamundra, National Sorry Day Committee. (ii) at the age of 14, Mrs Linow was Question, as amended, be agreed to. placed on a rural property in New INDIGENOUS JUSTICE South Wales by the Aborigines Welfare Board and employed as a Senator CROSSIN (Northern Territory) domestic worker, (3.45 p.m.)—I move: (iii) Mrs Linow is the first member of the That the Senate— stolen generations to be awarded (a) notes the signing of the 1997 National monetary compensation for the Communiqué to progress Indigenous psychological trauma she suffered as Justice issues by the Northern Territory a result of sexual assaults that Government confirming its commitment occurred when she was employed as a to reducing the over-representation of domestic worker, and Indigenous people in all stages of the (iv) by awarding Mrs Linow compen- criminal justice system; sation of $35 000, the New South (b) recognises that the 1997 communiqué Wales Victims Compensation commits all signatories to addressing Tribunal is distinguished as the first customary law and its relationship with judicial body in Australia’s history to the criminal justice system; award compensation to a member of the stolen generations for harm that (c) notes that, in accordance with Australian occurred while in state care; and international law, Aboriginal customary law should be recognised (b) acknowledges that the success of Mrs consistently with universally-recognised Linow’s case may give hope to other human rights and fundamental freedoms; members of the stolen generations who and suffered a similar fate and validate their conviction that the harm done to them (d) acknowledges that the Northern Territory does warrant and deserve compensation; Government is working in partnership with Indigenous people in moving to (c) regrets that the Government has conduct an inquiry into Aboriginal provided members of the stolen customary law and its relationship with generations no alternative to the the criminal justice system. adversarial, costly and protracted court system for the resolution of their claims, Question agreed to. with the result that many claims will KOREAN SOLIDARITY FOR HUMAN continue to be defeated because of the RIGHTS GROUP applicants’ inability to produce the necessary documentation or the Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) witnesses to substantiate their claims; (3.45 p.m.)—I move: and That the Senate— (d) calls on the Government to: (a) notes the rally in Sydney on 22 October (i) reconsider its opposition to the 2002 of the Korean Solidarity for establishment of a more humane and Human Rights Group, which is compassionate response, particularly demanding an apology for the for those members of the stolen imprisonment in high security jails of generations who have suffered harm two Korean asylum seekers who were as a consequence of the act of neither convicted nor charged with any removal, and offence; (ii) establish a reparations tribunal for the (b) condemns the transfer of asylum seekers stolen generations, as recommended into the regular prison system as in the Legal and Constitutional contrary to the strong tradition in References Committee report on the Australia of, and legal commitment to, stolen generations, Healing: A Legacy civil and human rights that protect of Generations, the Human Rights individuals from imprisonment without and Equal Opportunity Commission, conviction or charge; and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5737

(c) calls on the Government to end this (b) the routine of business from 12.30 pm to 2 practice immediately, bringing Australia pm, and 7.30 pm to 11 pm shall be consid- back in line with commitments under the eration of the Research Involving Em- International Covenant on Civil and bryos Bill 2002 and the Prohibition of Political Rights. Human Cloning Bill 2002; and Question negatived. (c) the question for the adjournment of the Senator Brown—I ask that I be recorded Senate shall be proposed at 11 pm. as very definitely supporting that motion. (3) On Wednesday, 13 November 2002: Senator Nettle—I do the same. (a) the hours of meeting shall be 9.30 am to 6.30 pm and 7.30 pm to 11.40 pm; The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—That will (b) the routine of business from 9.30 am to be done, Senator Brown. The support of 12.45 pm, and 7.30 pm to 11 pm shall be Senator Brown and Senator Nettle will be consideration of the Research Involving recorded. Embryos Bill 2002 and the Prohibition of MONASH UNIVERSITY: SHOOTING Human Cloning Bill 2002; and Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (3.46 (c) the question for the adjournment of the p.m.)—by leave—At the request of Senator Senate shall be proposed at 11 pm. Bartlett, I move: (4) On Thursday, 14 November 2002: That the Senate— (a) the hours of meeting shall be 9.30 am to adjournment; (a) extends its condolences and sympathies to the families of the people who died, (b) the question for the adjournment of the and to those who were injured, in the Senate shall be proposed at 8 pm; and shooting at Monash University on (c) standing order 54(5) shall apply as if it Monday, 21 October 2002; and were Tuesday. (b) expresses its support to the staff and (5) The Senate shall sit on Friday, 15 November students affected by this tragic incident 2002 and that: and thanks those whose courage and (a) the hours of meeting shall be 9.30 am to effective intervention prevented more 4.25 pm; people from being harmed. (b) the routine of business shall be govern- Question agreed to. ment business only; BUSINESS (c) the sitting of the Senate shall be suspended Rearrangement for 45 minutes from approximately 12.30 pm; and Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western Australia—Manager of Government Busi- (d) the question for the adjournment of the ness in the Senate) (3.47 p.m.)—as amended, Senate shall be proposed at 3.45 pm. by leave—I move the motion as amended: I seek leave to make a short statement. That: Leave granted. (1) On Monday, 11 November 2002: Senator IAN CAMPBELL—The motion (a) the hours of meeting shall be 9.30 am to which we are seeking to amend has been the 6.30 pm, and 7.30 pm to 11.40 pm; subject of long consultation at meetings to- (b) the routine of business from 9.30 am to 2 day between leaders of parties, Independents pm and 7.30 pm to 11 pm shall be consid- and the whips and in discussions around the eration of the Research Involving Em- chamber. In effect, it seeks to facilitate a bryos Bill 2002 and the Prohibition of heavy legislative program. We effectively Human Cloning Bill 2002; and have three and a bit weeks left to complete (c) the question for the adjournment of the the legislative program and, of course, Senate shall be proposed at 11 pm. amongst the bills on the list are the Prohibi- (2) On Tuesday, 12 November 2002: tion of Human Cloning Bill 2002 and the (a) the hours of meeting shall be 12.30 pm to Research Involving Embryos Bill 2002. 6.30 pm, and 7.30 pm to 11.40 pm; These are obviously bills which are well known in the community and in the parlia- 5738 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 ment, in respect of which all senators will be The Senate will sit on the Friday to con- exercising a conscience vote, and we know, sider other government business, to make up through talking to whips and colleagues, that for time we would have otherwise lost. It most senators will be involved, so there will will sit from 9.30 a.m. to 3.45 p.m., which, be a long debate. The government is trying to as far as sitting on a Friday is normal, is a ensure, through consultation with all senators normal schedule for Friday. As for votes on and interested parties, that the debate enables any remaining stages, it may be possible that all senators to contribute in an adequate and the bills are finished by lunchtime on Thurs- thorough manner. day. I certainly hope they are but if they are The hours may be subject to alteration and not the votes will be held over to 2 Decem- I may have to get leave to do that later, as we ber. We have checked with the whips and we are waiting for one party to come back on a think there may only be one or two people small outstanding issue. However, the mo- from the entire Senate not here on that day, tion involves sitting at 9.30 on a Monday which is highly unusual. The government morning, which is unusual. That will allow hope that perhaps with a late sitting on the the commencement of a second reading de- Monday, if that legislation is still under con- bate on the Prohibition of Human Cloning sideration, we will be able to complete those Bill 2002 to commence on a Monday morn- bills on the Monday night. It may not be pos- ing. That will allow senators who come in on sible; it is very hard to tell at this stage. That Sunday night to commence the second read- lengthy explanation explains amended gov- ing debate. It certainly will not mean that ernment business motion No. 1 in relation to other senators need to get here on the Mon- those sitting hours. day morning. I will be seeking to ensure that, Question, as amended, agreed to. as far as possible, the second reading debates MATTERS OF URGENCY are done on a no divisions and no quorums basis. That will need a good amount of Insurance: Medical Indemnity goodwill, which I think has been evident The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I inform already in negotiations on how to handle the Senate that the President has received the these bills. The Senate will then sit until 11 following letter, dated 23 October, from p.m. on the Monday night. We will resume Senator Ridgeway: again at 12.30 on the Tuesday, which is an Dear Mr President, hour and a half earlier than normal, and Pursuant to standing order 75, I give notice that again sit late on Tuesday night until 11 today I proposed to move “That in the opinion of o’clock. the Senate the following is a matter of urgency: On Wednesday we will commence sitting The need for the Federal Government to act to at 9.30 and go, with normal breaks and so include midwives in the medical insurance rescue forth, until 11 o’clock at night. On the package, as by next week all agencies supplying Thursday we will sit at the normal time and contract and casual midwives—around one quar- the debate on those bills will stop at 12.45 ter of all working midwives—will be unable to obtain professional indemnity insurance cover p.m., which is the normal time for what is precipitating an immediate crisis in the safe known as non-controversial legislation. The birthing of babies in both public and private hos- bills I have referred to will not be considered pitals”. again that week. That, Mr Deputy President, Yours sincerely, as you know personally, is to ensure that the greatest number of senators possible will be Aden Ridgeway able to be here for votes on the committee Senator for NSW stage of the Research Involving Embryos Is the proposal supported? Bill. A number of senators are travelling on More than the number of senators re- overseas delegations and ministerial delega- quired by the standing orders having risen in tions at that time, and we obviously want to their places— facilitate as many people as possible. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I under- stand that informal arrangements have been Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5739 made to allocate specific times to each of the ing from the government. Midwives were speakers in today’s debate. With the concur- also not initially invited to participate in the rence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to Medical and Professional Indemnity Work- set the clock accordingly. ing Party that was established by the Com- Senator RIDGEWAY (New South monwealth government. That particular Wales) (3.55 p.m.)—I move: situation affected not only independent mid- wives but also around 500 future midwives That in the opinion of the Senate the following is a matter of urgency: who are and will be discouraged from enter- ing the field by being unable to undertake The need for the Federal Government to act to clinical placements as a part of their studies. include midwives in the medical insurance rescue package, as by next week all agencies supplying Today I come here with this urgency mo- contract and casual midwives—around one quar- tion as this situation has since escalated. By ter of all working midwives—will be unable to the end of tomorrow, one of the largest agen- obtain professional indemnity insurance cover cies providing contract and casual midwives precipitating an immediate crisis in the safe will have no professional indemnity cover. It birthing of babies in both public and private hos- will no longer be able to provide midwives pitals. to public and private hospitals. Other such I move this urgency motion because of a agencies have already closed the books on dramatic worsening in the professional in- midwives. By early next week, most agen- demnity insurance situation as it applies to cies providing any other contract and casual midwives. We are now approaching a near- midwives will have no professional indem- disaster situation in birthing and maternity nity cover. To put this into context, the crisis care within Australian hospitals and birth in professional indemnity insurance now centres. It is a developing disaster of which means that approximately 3,000 contract and the government has been well aware for casual midwives—that is, 25 per cent of all some time. It is also not the first time I have working midwives in Australia—will not be raised this matter in the chamber. I raised it able to work due to the lack of insurance as recently as yesterday—last evening in cover. These 3,000 contract and casual mid- relation to the Senate Economics References wives are an essential part of the operations Committee report that had been tabled—and of birthing in public and private hospitals, in the last fortnight’s sitting as well as on a covering daily roster shortages. number of other occasions. In Australia there are currently around When the recent insurance crisis hit, the 12,000 midwives, who attend 98 per cent of federal government was willing to assist the 250,000 births in Australian hospitals and doctors and specialists not only through the birth centres. They are the ones that provide financial assistance that has been afforded to the constant care and commitment to women failed insurer United Medical Protection but before, during and after childbirth while also as a result of the recommendations of doctors, obstetricians and others attend the the first report on the law of negligence—the birth only when it is necessary. Based on Ipp review. With UMP, the government has recent figures, this dramatic removal of offered millions of dollars in support of an 3,000 midwives from the health system in insurance company that operated with op- the work force globally is exacerbated by the portunistic business practices that essentially insurance crisis. I ask senators to contem- led to its inability to be ‘an ongoing con- plate the situation where you or your wife or cern’. Yet, in this particular case, the gov- your partner or daughter arrive at a hospital ernment rightly recognised that this was nec- or birthing centre next Monday in an ad- essary to ensure that doctors were able to vanced stage of labour, only to be told, continue to practise. At the same time, ‘Sorry, can you come back another day? We around 200 independent midwives who were have no midwives available.’ You do not unable to obtain professional indemnity in- need me to tell you that the birth of a baby is surance were seeking a relatively small not an elective surgery issue. When inde- amount of money, which was not forthcom- pendent midwives and midwifery students 5740 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 lost their insurance coverage, the govern- demnity insurance, full stop. This is not a ment ignored their plight. That affected 200 case of insurance premiums being too high; midwives and around 500 students enrolled this is about blanket unavailability—the in- in universities across the country. It appears surance is simply not available. One of the that in this situation the government is once agencies involved described to me how they again prepared to ignore midwives by not have ‘trawled the world’ looking for an un- responding to the plight of the 3,000 mid- derwriter but have been unable to find any- wives that are now subject to their own cri- one who will accept the risk. That agency’s sis. Yet had this week’s legislation program insurance cover expires tomorrow. continued as planned, as the government This morning, I heard the Prime Minister would have wanted, we would have been generously extending until the end of next voting on the government’s bill to prop up year the insurance guarantee for doctors, and UMP to the tune of around $500 million. during question time Senator Coonan made We have to ask the question: where is the her own announcement. This is a big deal, government when it comes to assisting mid- and we should provide certainty for doctors wives, those who are most responsible for and those in high-risk specialties such as the safe birthing of our babies and who sup- obstetrics. I want to commend the govern- port our women and our babies into the fu- ment for responding in the way that they ture? Having recently had a birth in my own have but, let us be quite clear, the Prime family, I know the value of midwives. We Minister’s rescue package is assistance for did not see much of our obstetrician, but we doctors facing unaffordable premiums. I re- certainly saw the bill when it arrived in the mind the government that the professional mail. In order to ensure that senators are indemnity crisis facing independent mid- aware of the contribution of midwives, some wives, contract and casual midwives and crucial information needs to be provided. students of midwifery is not one of soaring Firstly, the World Health Organisation says: or unaffordable premiums but one of getting Midwives are the most appropriate and cost- any cover, full stop. effective care provider for normal pregnancies It seems to me that the government was and normal birth, including risk assessment and quick to offer short-term insurance—and will the recognition of complications. continue to do so on a three-monthly basis— In addition, midwives provide continuous to the aviation industry while they were un- care to women from the early stages of preg- able to obtain war or terrorism insurance. If nancy until around four to six weeks after the the government can help there, then why birth of the child—the kind of care that is not can’t they help in the case of midwives? This readily available from any doctor or obstetri- is a crisis of unavailability of cover, this is a cian. Midwives also make good economic crisis which has been building since July last sense, cutting hospital and health care costs. year and this is a crisis of which this gov- The recently launched national maternity ernment has been too well aware. I now ask action plan stated: the government to take up the message in Normal birth is more likely to be achieved when a this urgency motion and put midwives in the woman has access to ‘continuity of carer’ or insurance picture by extending to the 3,000 ‘continuity of care’ from a midwife who is re- midwives who are likely to be out of work sponsible for her care throughout pregnancy, la- next week the rescue package announced by bour and birth, and the postnatal period ... The the PM this morning. I commend this motion ‘continuity of carer’ model of care has been to the Senate. proven to reduce the use of obstetric interventions in labour and birth, including the need for phar- Senator KNOWLES (Western Australia) macological pain relief, inductions, augmenta- (4.03 p.m.)—Today we are debating whether tions, instrumental deliveries, episiotomies and or not midwives should be included in medi- caesarean sections. cal indemnity. It is interesting, because But all of this sounds very hollow when the Senator Ridgeway has been offered, as re- agency representing these essential health cently as today, a full and comprehensive care workers cannot find professional in- response from Senators Patterson and Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5741

Coonan. He chose not to go down that path ered under the professional indemnity ar- but to move this urgency motion today. I rangements of their employers. really have to question the motive as to why I know that many good independent mid- one would move a motion of this kind if one wives are having difficulty obtaining profes- was seeking definite answers and definitive sional indemnity insurance. But we need to responses when that was offered but this understand that this is quite different from course of action was preferred. Its just begs the situation doctors face, since doctors are the question of whether or not we are want- able to obtain medical indemnity insurance ing an answer or whether or not we are just cover. What I am trying to say is that it is wanting to grandstand. I fear now, having because of the policies of the insurance com- listened to the debate and having heard what panies that midwives have not got that cover, has been said previously, that the grand- not because of some government policy that standing option is the course of action that is we are going to discriminate against all inde- now being taken. pendent midwives and are not going to allow We need to understand that midwives ac- them to have indemnity cover. It is quite a tually fall into three employment groups: different kettle of fish. The package an- midwives who are employed by hospitals, nounced today by the Prime Minister is de- agency midwives contracted to hospitals and signed, firstly, to address the financial vi- independent, self-employed midwives. I do ability of the providers of medical indemnity not think anybody would underestimate the insurance and, secondly, to ensure that insur- role of many of the midwives. But one of the ance cover for doctors remains affordable. things that I think Australia has to come to It is interesting that there is basically grips with is whether the government now nothing the Commonwealth can do to force has to step in for every group of people and an insurer to cover certain people; it is the provide cover, insurance and backup. I think decision of an insurance company whether or we are heading to a very dangerous course. I not to cover those people. Dare I say that we said to group of people who were in my of- have seen such decisions being taken by the fice a few days ago that it is starting to worry insurance companies only in the last week me, with all of this insurance and with peo- and a half in relation to the tragic events in ple now wanting government to take respon- Bali. It was the insurance companies that sibility for their own actions, that govern- made the decision to cover many of those ment—and, thereby, the taxpayer, remem- who had policies that specifically excluded bering that government does not have any acts of terrorism. The government did not money other than what the taxpayer gives say to the insurance companies, ‘You must it—is now becoming more of a hammock do X, Y and Z’; the decision was taken by than a safety net. That worries me. I think the the insurance companies. As I said, there is attitude of many people could certainly de- nothing the Commonwealth can do to force velop so that they could lie back and say: ‘It the insurance industry to provide insurance does not matter what happens; the taxpayer to this group of professionals, but it is inter- will pick up the tab. It doesn’t matter, I don’t esting to note that the governments of my have to cover myself; the taxpayer will pick state of Western Australia and of the Austra- up that tab as well.’ lian Capital Territory have extended insur- I think we should be looking at this under ance coverage to independent midwives by very different circumstances. Some of these effectively bringing them under the umbrella midwives have got no coverage not because of government employment. of any lack of government initiative but be- Senator McLucas—So governments can cause insurance companies believe many of do something. the midwives are a high risk. We also have to understand that the overwhelming majority Senator KNOWLES—The state and ter- of midwives are directly employed as em- ritory governments can. The point Senator ployees of hospitals and are therefore cov- McLucas has just raised by way of interjec- tion—that governments can do something— is a very good point because, based on what I 5742 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 was just saying, one could think that I meant the indemnity arrangements for midwives as all governments. What I am actually saying these are professional indemnity arrange- is that these people are working in the state ments not covered by medical defence or- and territory environment. They are working ganisations. MDOs are mutual societies of under state and territory auspices and they doctors and so are separate from general in- should be covered, if at all possible, under surers. I wish to make that point very clear. It the umbrella of government employment in is a very separate subject, and people who try the states and territories. If Western Australia to bring them under the same net are just and the Australian Capital Territory can do trying to complicate the issue in an emotive that, I do not see any reason why the other way. They are saying that the government states and the Northern Territory cannot do it has to pick this up, when it should in fact be as well. I encourage them to consider noting looking at the source of the problem and how that they are responsible for the registration it can be resolved instead of trying to bring of midwives and for issues relating to mid- the midwives into an area where responsibil- wives’ professional standards. Therein lies ity for them does not lie. There has been a the important distinction which Senator recently escalating media campaign by and McLucas quite rightly raised: it is the states on behalf of midwives in response to media that are responsible for licensing and regis- reporting on the expected medical indemnity tration of midwives and it is the states that package, and I think that this debate is now set their professional standards. part of that. If he had really wanted to try to The Commonwealth has an important role resolve this issue, it would have been much in encouraging our state and territory coun- more sensible of Senator Ridgeway to accept terparts to assist the midwifery work force in the offer of a full and comprehensive update this way. The comprehensive package of and briefing. measures announced today to address the Senator McLUCAS (Queensland) (4.13 financial viability of the providers of medical p.m.)—I also rise today to support the ur- indemnity insurance and to ensure that insur- gency motion moved by Senator Ridgeway. ance cover remains affordable for the doctors For the benefit of Hansard, I think it is im- is important. But I say to honourable sena- portant to read again the words of this mo- tors that we are heading down a dangerous tion. The matter of urgency is: path where everyone is wanting the taxpay- The need for the Federal Government to act to ers to pick up coverage as a matter of course include midwives in the medical insurance rescue instead of as a matter of last resort. There are package, as by next week all agencies supplying many ways out of this other than trying to contract and casual midwives—around one quar- bring this very important group of profes- ter of all working midwives—will be unable to sionals under the same umbrella as doctors obtain professional indemnity insurance cover when, in fact, the states and territories have precipitating an immediate crisis in the safe the responsibility for registration and profes- birthing of babies in both public and private hos- sional standards with regard to midwifery. I pitals. in no way wish to diminish the importance of The government must move to address the the role of midwives and I in no way wish to insurance crisis that midwives are facing diminish the importance of their indemnity. and, in doing so, gain an understanding of But I think it is important to understand that the potential impact that the lack of action the Australian Institute of Health and Wel- would have on women and families in this fare figures indicate that 1.6 per cent of the country. Having experienced childbirth my- midwifery work force is self-employed, self, I know of the support that midwives can while the claim by recruitment agencies to provide to a woman during that process. I represent 25 per cent of the midwifery work was fortunate to be supported by a midwife force may to all intents and purposes be an during my delivery and also in prenatal and overestimate. postnatal care. Midwives provide a service that obstetricians and gynaecologists just The package of measures announced by simply do not have the time to. They provide the Prime Minister today does not address an enormous amount of support; they have Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5743 the time. They are often women, although wives. That, of course, will increase pressure there are some men, and they have a greater on the obstetricians in the country. Senator empathy with an expectant mother. As an Knowles suggested that the federal govern- older potential parent—as I was before the ment had no role at all in supporting mid- birth of my child—with no family close to wives in their need to obtain professional me, the relationship between me and my indemnity insurance. She said that there was midwife was a very strong one. Especially as nothing that we could do, nothing that the a person coming from a regional area, I re- government could do. There was something lied on her very much for support. the government could do when we had the There is a real crisis facing our commu- crisis in the aviation industry late last year; nity when over 3,000 contract and casual there was something that we could do when midwives cannot get professional indemnity Ansett collapsed. I am afraid that the reality insurance—that is about one-quarter of all is that the government is simply sitting on its working midwives in Australia. Whether you hands. have your baby in a hospital or at home, a There has been significant discussion re- midwife assists in almost every birth that cently about declining fertility rates in Aus- occurs in this nation. Approximately 250,000 tralia and the need for government policy on births occur in Australia every year and the balancing work and family. We have heard a vast majority of those births take place in a lot from the Prime Minister about the need hospital assisted by a midwife. These con- for this to occur. We have heard a lot of tract and casual midwives are an important words but, unfortunately, we have seen very part of birthing in Australia, with midwives little policy. Providing quality services to assisting in rostering and daily shortages. mothers and their partners during and fol- The involvement of midwives in the birthing lowing the birth of their child is central to the process provides a positive health benefit for debate about declining fertility rates. As I our community that we cannot overlook. The have said, midwives play an essential role in benefits are of course to the mother and the ensuring mothers receive the appropriate child, as I have explained from my personal care and support that they need at that time. I experience. A good relationship between an suggest that women are more likely to want expectant mother and a midwife statistically to have more children if their first birthing leads to reduced intervention in the birthing experience, and their prenatal and postnatal process. It has also been shown that bonding care during that time, is reasonable. You are between the mother and the child is im- certainly not going to come back happily if proved if that process is a more comfortable you have had a fairly difficult birth; you one. would have to think twice. I suggest that the We all know how much strain the health crisis in midwifery could have an effect on system is under because of the government’s women making choices about whether or not attacks on public hospitals and the public to have a second or third child. The issue is health care system in general. The failure of also about choice. Women should have the the government to address the crisis facing option to choose whether to have their baby midwifery is just another symptom of gov- in a hospital or at home. Women are in- ernment mismanagement of health care in creasingly wanting to give birth in a place of this country. Expectant mothers and their their choice, and that is often their home. partners and families should not have to They find that option suitable to their needs. worry about whether or not our health care Unfortunately, if midwives are not going to system can meet their basic needs. With the be able to gain professional indemnity insur- Americanisation of health care in this coun- ance then that may not be able to occur. try, however, increasingly the quality of care The other concern that I have is for you receive is based more on the size of your women in rural and remote areas. In the Sen- wallet than the need that you have. Whilst ate Community Affairs References Commit- that is true, the actual reality that we are tee inquiry into nursing, we were given very facing is the absolute unavailability of mid- strong evidence about the lack of availability 5744 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 of midwives. In fact, we noted in our report, The medical indemnity insurance package an- The patient profession: time for action, that nounced today also fails to address the profes- there are shortages of registered midwives sional indemnity needs of health care profession- across every state in Australia. We all know als such as midwives who are also facing a crisis that this is exacerbated in regional and rural situation that may result in further withdrawal of areas, with impacts on the women who live services. in those areas. But the other area of my con- I commend the motion to the Senate. cern is the impact that it has on Indigenous Senator HARRADINE (Tasmania) (4.23 women who want to take the option not to p.m.)—Mr Acting Deputy President, I have travel. Many Indigenous women who live in learnt that there is some arrangement that remote areas do have to travel a long way there will only be three speakers to the ur- from their community in order to have their gency motion. I was not made aware of that baby. In North Queensland, women have to previously. With your consent and that of the leave their community six weeks before the chamber, I would like to make one comment. expected delivery date of their child and I would have liked to have said quite a deal travel in most cases to Cairns but often to about this question, as I believe it to be very Thursday Island or Mount Isa. Six weeks of important. separation from one’s family is difficult. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT There have been efforts by the state gov- (Senator Lightfoot)—You can speak to the ernment in Queensland to encourage women motion. who do not have a series of risks to deliver Senator HARRADINE—Thank you, Mr their children at home. This shortage of Acting Deputy President. I will respect the midwives will exacerbate that initiative arrangements that have been made to limit enormously. If midwives cannot practise in the debate. I will just state that I too believe rural and remote places, I would suggest that that it is very important to provide medical the opportunities for women to give birth in insurance for midwives. In the medical in- their communities will be almost zero. In- surance rescue package, I am sorry to see digenous women deserve choice; rural and that most midwives are not covered. As has regional women deserve choice. Women de- been stated by the mover of the motion and serve to be able to choose where to have the last speaker, it is very important that this their child, whether it is in a hospital or at be reviewed and that something be done to home. This crisis facing midwives will put ensure that those working midwives are enormous pressure on the ability of those protected. Unfortunately, as the motion says, women to actually make those choices. they will be unable to obtain professional The government has recognised today, in indemnity insurance and that will precipitate its statement about medical indemnity insur- an immediate crisis in the safe birthing of ance, the important work that doctors and babies in both public and private hospitals. I specialists, including obstetricians, do in suppose I should declare an interest. When I providing health services to the community. was born—out bush—there was a midwife It has extended its insurance protection to present. Obviously I am grateful—as my that sector. Unfortunately, the announcement mother and father and family were—for the today in no way goes to the issue of profes- help of that midwife. I congratulate Senator sional indemnity insurance for midwives. Aden Ridgeway for bringing this vital matter Maybe the Prime Minister just does not forward. At another stage I certainly will be know or understand the crisis that faces explaining to the Senate how I feel about this midwives and women in our community, but matter, including some of the old boy type he should have included them in his frame- networking that goes on, where some doctors work. Labor does recognise the crisis that look down on people such as midwives. To midwives face. The press statement today be fair, other doctors are very keen on seeing from Stephen Smith, our shadow minister for that midwives are covered. I support the mo- health and ageing, says: tion and I hope it is carried. Question agreed to. Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5745

BUSINESS At the briefing, the Executive Director and other Rearrangement officers of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau emphasised that the powers in question related to Senator KEMP (Victoria—Minister for “no blame” safety investigations which are not the Arts and Sport) (4.27 p.m.)—I seek leave designed for use in civil or criminal proceedings. to move a motion relating to speaking times The Executive Director suggested that, in weigh- for debate on the report of the Select Com- ing the object of the power against the degree of mittee on a Certain Maritime Incident. intrusion involved, the balance of proportionality was in favour of the proposed provisions. Leave granted. The Committee, however, did not accept this Senator KEMP—I move: proposition. It concluded that the provisions may That so much of standing order 62(4)(b) be breach personal rights even if their object is be- suspended as would prevent the debate on tabling nign. In this case the powers are no less intrusive and consideration of committee reports exceeding simply because they are intended ultimately to 60 minutes and each senator speaking for the time improve transport safety. specified in the list circulated in the chamber. The Committee in its report on this bill has re- Question agreed to. fined its concerns into three specific areas which are discussed below. COMMITTEES The first concern of the Committee was at the Publications Committee process of delegation. The bill provided for the Report delegation of power to enter to any person at all, Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (4.28 limited only by the subjective opinion of the Ex- p.m.)—On behalf of Senator Colbeck, I pre- ecutive Director that a person is suitable. There were no further criteria to define the power, in sent the fourth report of the Standing Com- contrast to other related provisions, which pro- mittee on Publications. vided such criteria either directly or by mandatory Ordered that the report be adopted. reference to the regulations. The Committee con- Scrutiny of Bills Committee siders that delegates who exercise such important powers should have appropriate skills and experi- Report ence expressed in objective terms. The primary Senator McLUCAS (Queensland) (4.29 legislation should either provide directly for this p.m.)—I present the 13th report of 2002 of or expressly require the regulations to do so. The the Senate Standing Committee for the Scru- Committee has accordingly written to the Minis- tiny of Bills. I also lay on the table Scrutiny ter along these lines. of Bills Alert Digest No. 12 of 2002, dated Another apparent difficulty with the bill was the 16 October 2002. defective nature of the provisions designed to inform members of the public of their rights. The Ordered that the report be printed. view of the Committee is that a bill should pro- Senator McLUCAS—I seek leave to in- vide not only adequate safeguards and protections corporate my tabling statement in Hansard. when public officials exercise powers, but also proper notification of those rights to those af- Leave granted. fected. In the case of the present bill, however, The statement read as follows— there are problems on both these grounds. The Committee’s Thirteenth Report of 2002 gives In relation to the notification of rights the bill details of its continuing scrutiny of two bills, both provides that a delegate exercising powers must of which illustrate significant aspects of its op- be provided with a photographic identity card in eration. the prescribed form, but does not require the The Committee has previously reported on the delegate to produce the card unless the occupier Transport Safety Investigation Bill 2002, when it of the premises about to be entered actually asks indicated that its concerns in relation to delega- for it. This is a clear case of putting the cart be- tion and entry and search provisions were such fore the horse. The problem is exacerbated by the that it would ask the minister to arrange a briefing power to use force to enter the affected premises. by departmental officers. The Minister has now In this case, premises includes any vehicle wher- done this and the Committee thanks him for this ever situated, as well as the site of an accident. prompt response. In addition, the bill does not provide for the proper notification of rights to the occupier. The 5746 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 bill, in fact, provides for some rights but there is Corporations and Financial Services no requirement for a comprehensive statement of Committee these to be provided to an occupier. Report The Committee was also concerned at the practi- calities of the operation of identity cards under Senator CHAPMAN (South Australia) the bill. The ATSB advised the Committee at its (4.29 p.m.)—I present the report of the Par- briefing that delegated powers of entry and search liamentary Joint Statutory Committee on without a warrant were necessary for immediate Corporations and Financial Services on the action in the case of the crash of a large aircraft in regulations and Australian Securities and remote northern Australia or a serious night acci- Investments Commission policy statements dent in a foreign ship in a remote area. The ATSB made under the Financial Services Reform told the Committee that such an aircraft crash Act 2001, together with the Hansard record would require substantial investigating assistance of proceedings and documents presented to from the ADF, the police, Qantas and others. It the committee. will apparently be possible to issue delegations and identity cards for all these people but not to Ordered that the report be printed. obtain a warrant from a magistrate. The Commit- Senator CHAPMAN—I move: tee has therefore written to the Minister about these aspects of the notification of rights. That the Senate take note of the report. The last major matter which concerned the Com- I note that there is another report to be tabled mittee was the arbitrary nature of the powers. The which, I understand, the Senate desires to principal power in question is provided by clause debate at length this afternoon. On that basis, 33, which is headed “Power to enter special I seek leave to have my remarks on the ta- premises without consent or warrant”. As men- bling of this document incorporated in Han- tioned earlier, special premises includes not only sard. an accident site, but also any vehicle at all located anywhere in Australia. The power to enter with- Leave granted. out consent or warrant is not limited by the usual The statement read as follows— reasonable grounds limitation to control and de- This report builds on the Committee’s findings in fine its operation. The only limitation on the two previous inquiries which were published in power is that, while delegates are expressly its Report on the Draft Financial Services Reform authorised to enter premises by force, such force Bill tabled in August 2000, and the Report on the must be reasonable. This is not much of a com- Financial Services Reform Bill 2001 tabled in fort. Other key concepts in the bill are defined August 2001. broadly. Both inquiries found a high level of support for The Committee has similarly written to the Min- the legislation. However, at the inquiry into the ister in relation to these matters, suggesting that Financial Services Reform Bill last year, reserva- entry and search powers not involving an accident tions were expressed about how the Bill would where loss of life has occurred, or which involve work in practice. The main concerns were that the a vehicle away from an accident site, should be mechanisms for the implementation of the new subject to a reasonable grounds requirement. legislation—the regulations and ASIC’s policy The other bill included in the report is the Trade statements—had not been finalised. Practices Amendment (Liability for Recreational A widespread concern at the time was that the Services) Bill 2002, which allows individuals to contemplated commencement date for the major waive their contractual rights to sue in relation to regulatory provisions, namely, 1 October 2001, injuries suffered when undertaking hazardous would not allow sufficient time for consultation in recreational activities. This clearly affects per- the drafting of the regulations. Although com- sonal rights in this controversial area, but the mencement was postponed until 11 March 2002, question is whether the provision unduly breaches this still imposed a relatively tight timetable for those rights. This bill is another case where the the finalisation of the regulations, particularly Committee has received a response from the given their fundamental role in the regulatory Minister but has decided that it needs further ad- framework. vice. The Committee will therefore write again to the Minister. The report sets out the reasons for Another concern was that the legislation would doing this and its areas of continuing concern. place too great a responsibility on ASIC to pro- vide the regulatory detail needed for implementa- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5747 tion. It was considered this would produce too The Committee received very disturbing evidence much uncertainty about the Act’s operation. from the Bendigo Bank Group, the Credit Union Against this background and, following the com- Services Corporation, the Australian Association mencement of the Act’s major regulatory provi- of Permanent Building Societies, the Australian sions on 11 March 2002, the Committee decided Finance Conference and the Australian Bankers’ to hold an inquiry to ascertain the extent to which Association all indicating that the inclusion of the regulations and ASIC’s policy statements these basic banking products in the legislation has made under the Financial Services Reform Act caused enormous disruption and cost to the in- 2001 were consistent with the stated objectives dustry just in terms of meeting the training re- and principles of that Act. quirements prescribed in ASIC’s policy statement 146. The inquiry was announced and submissions in- vited on 6 April this year. Altogether 40 submis- On the costs front, for example, the Bendigo sions and 7 supplementary submissions were re- Bank estimates it will spend close to $1 million ceived. The committee is grateful to those who on training in the first year and an additional invested the time and effort to make sometimes $630,000 in the following year. The Credit Union very detailed submissions. Services Corporation (Australia) Limited esti- mates its members will be paying between $440 The committee held four days of public hearings to $900 per employee for 6,000 employees. In in May, July and August. The committee thanks total, that works out to between $2.6 and $5.4 those who so generously made themselves avail- million. able at these hearings. These basic banking products are of low or no The main objects of the Act which I adverted to risk and are well understood by consumers. The earlier are stated in section 760A. These are to Committee is unable to identify how consumers promote: will benefit from the application of Policy State- • confident and informed decision making by ment 146 training requirements to staff advising consumers of financial products while fa- on basic deposit products. The Committee is also cilitating efficiency, flexibility and innova- unable to identify any justification for the signifi- tion in the provision of those products and cant initial and ongoing costs and disruption that services; training will impose on ADIs. • fairness, honestly and professionalism by One thing is certain. If basic deposit products those who provide financial services; continue to be regulated by the Corporations Act, • fair, orderly and transparent markets for fi- consumers will be the losers. Small branches and nancial products; and agencies—particularly in rural and regional ar- eas—will have to be closed. The costs of training • the reduction of systemic risk and the provi- staff to provide advice on these basic banking sion of fair and effective services by clearing products will render these smaller branches and and settlement facilities. agencies commercially unviable. Based on evidence received, the Committee was Furthermore, rural and regional areas are often able to conclude that, generally, the regulations serviced by agencies, for example, the local and ASIC policy statements operated in harmony pharmacist or newsagent. How many pharmacists with the Act’s objects. or newsagents will have the resources, time or However, the Committee identified several issues inclination to undertake the type of training to which demonstrated quite serious divergence provide a service in these very basic banking from the Act’s objectives, particularly those re- products? lating to the promotion of consumer protection and efficiency in the delivery of financial prod- Just providing very basic advice on these prod- ucts will involve logistical problems for small ucts and services. branches and agencies. What happens to the cus- I shall now turn to discuss these more compelling tomer if the only person trained to tell them about issues and the Committee’s recommendations in a basic deposit product is at lunch, sick or absent relation to these. for some other reason? What happens to a small Basic deposit products and non-cash payment branch or agency that loses a trained adviser and facilities cannot find a replacement? Where is the benefit The first relates to the regulation of basic deposit to consumers in this? products and non-cash payment facilities by the The Committee recommended in its two previous Corporations Act. reports on the FSR legislation that basic deposit products should not be regulated by the Corpora- 5748 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 tions Act. The Committee has not departed from The Committee has been told that these costs will this view and, for the third time, recommends that drive small suburban practices out of business. basic deposit products and related non-cash pay- Importantly, these smaller practices currently ment facilities not be regulated by the Act. deliver cost-effective services to the vast bulk of Should the Government inexplicably fail to do self-managed superannuation funds. Who will this, the Committee recommends that ASIC ur- take over when these small practices have closed gently review Policy Statement 146 to make the shop? Will costs increase as a result? training requirements more in keeping with the The Committee has been told that licensing costs type of financial product involved and to recog- will threaten the independence of accountants. nise the training challenges presented by rural and Accountants who cannot afford to be licensed, are regional areas. finding that authorised representative status may Licensing of accountants only be available if they agree to sell financial Accountants and licensing was another major products for commission. In other words, if the issue raised before the Committee. At present, accountant is prepared to flog certain financial there are two licensing exemptions regarding products for a licensee, the licensee will appoint accountants’ activities: the accountant as an authorised representative. 1. the exemption for accountants who are reg- Worldcom, Enron and HIH to name just a few, are istered tax agents regarding their tax agent’s glaring reminders of the crucial importance of work. This exemption has only a very limited auditor independence in financial market regula- coverage because tax advice often overlaps tion. It would be ironic indeed if a mandatory with other business advice. licensing requirement compromised the inde- pendence of accountants at a time when inde- 2. the purported exemption provided by regula- pendence has emerged as a significant corporate tion 7.1.29. This exemption simply does not governance issue. But this is what the FSR legis- work. lation is doing. It is compromising accountants’ Accountants will therefore have to be licensed to independence. carry out their professional activities even though The Committee believes that urgent amendment these might fall into what would be regarded as of the legislation is required to provide account- traditional accounting activities. Importantly, ants with a licensing exemption for their more these activities do not involve the marketing of traditional activities. In keeping with the recom- financial products for commission or similar mendations of the Wallis Report, these activities benefit. Furthermore, sufficient consumer safe- would not include investment advice for which guards are already there: commissions or other benefits by parties uncon- • accountants must carry PI insurance; nected to the client were payable. • they must belong to professional associations The ongoing management charge which oversee their activities; The specific disclosure requirements in the regu- • they must satisfy continuing professional lations regarding the ongoing management charge educational requirements; for superannuation funds attracted several sub- • they must observe codes of conduct; and missions. These regulations were disallowed on 16 September 2002 following a motion by Sena- • they must practise quality assurance. tor Conroy. The Committee heard from The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia, CPA Austra- The Committee notes that ASIC recently released a report, Disclosure of Fees and Charges in Man- lia, the Taxation Institute of Australia, the Na- aged Investments prepared by Professor Ian Ram- tional Institute of Accountants, the National Tax and Accountants’ Association, the Institute of say. ASIC has indicated that the report is to be the starting point for ASIC’s consultation with indus- Chartered Accountants of New Zealand and two try and consumer representatives regarding the practitioners that the licensing requirement will not improve efficiency but will add to costs which future directions for disclosure. will be passed onto consumers. The Committee has recommended that the De- partment of the Treasury and ASIC build on the Indeed, the costs involved in obtaining and momentum generated by Professor Ramsay’s maintaining a licence have been estimated by one report to produce guidelines for a leading-edge, of the industry groups as ranging from $12,000 to consumer-friendly model for disclosure of super- $15,000 on a cost recovery basis per accountant annuation fees and charges that will facilitate per year. comparability of funds. Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5749

Disclosure of unauthorised foreign insurers to activities otherwise subject to State or Territory wholesale clients legislation. Here, we could be talking about the The Committee has recommended that the disclo- activities of a trustee appointed by the Court to sure requirements applying for retail clients when act as the guardian or financial manager for a insurance is placed with unauthorised foreign minor or a person with a disability. insurers also apply for wholesale clients. This Another activity that could be caught is the hold- merely continues what were the disclosure re- ing of shares or options to subscribe for shares by quirements under the now repealed Insurance an employer as a trustee of an employee share (Agents and Brokers) Act 1984. The Committee scheme. is concerned that many small businesses—as The Committee believes that the definition cast wholesale clients—will be denied very pertinent its net too widely. We have recommended that information unless the same disclosure require- regulations be made to refine the scope of the ments apply to them as presently apply to retail definition. clients. Spread betting—licensing The Committee has also recommended that the reporting requirements under the Insurance During the inquiry, the Committee became aware (Agents and Brokers) Act 1984 about unauthor- that IG Index plc had obtained a licence to deal in ised foreign insurers be re-instated. We believe it and advise on a derivative. The derivative in- is important for the effective monitoring and volves spread betting on financial indices. regulation of the insurance industry that we have Spread betting is not your typical financial prod- this sort of information available. uct. It involves a form of high-risk gambling Offshore service providers—exemption from where losses can be open-ended. The Committee licensing does not believe that activities such as spread betting should be licensed under the Corporations The Committee heard from the International Act. The Act is supposed to be protecting con- Banks and Securities Association of Australia, sumers—certainly retail consumers. Instead, by Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley that regula- allowing spread betting to be licensed, it is send- tion 7.6.01(1)(n) is posing quite significant diffi- ing out the message that this high-risk gambling culties in application. activity has the imprimatur of the Government. This regulation aims to allow offshore service Furthermore, it appears that some State and Ter- providers to deal in financial products in the ritory gaming authorities do not want this activity Australian marketplace on condition that the conducted within their jurisdictions. Indeed, the services are arranged by a person holding the South Australian gaming authority recently re- requisite licence. It appears that there is overlap fused to licence a betting operation in relation to between ‘dealing’—which is allowed—and ‘mar- the 2002 Commonwealth Games. ket making’ and other activities which are not allowed. The Committee urges joint action at Common- wealth and State level to ban spread betting on We are concerned that problems with regulation financial markets. At Commonwealth level, this 7.6.01(1)(n) could result in the withdrawal of can be achieved through amendment of the Cor- offshore service providers from our domestic porations Act. At State level, governments would markets. The Committee has recommended there- have to ensure that their gaming and wagering fore that the practical problems with the regula- laws prohibited this type of gambling. tion be resolved urgently. The spread betting issue alerted the Committee to Licensing—the provision of custodial or de- a shortcoming in the Act’s licensing provision. It pository services appears that there is no mechanism whereby a The Committee received submissions about the discretion can be exercised regarding the granting definition of custodial or depository services. of a financial services licence. Currently, ASIC The submissions claimed that the definition was must grant a licence if the statutory criteria are so widely framed so that it caught a whole range satisfied, regardless of whether the financial ac- of trustee activities that should not be regulated tivity to be conducted will undermine the con- under the Corporations Act. Many instances were sumer-protection or other objectives of the Act. given of the inappropriate application of the defi- The Committee believes this shortcoming should nition. be remedied. The Committee has consequently For the sake of brevity, I’ll mention just a couple recommended that the Government set up an ap- of the types of activities that will be caught. There propriate mechanism whereby ASIC may refer are the traditional or personal trustee corporation these types of applications—that otherwise meet 5750 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 the statutory criteria—to an appropriate entity or • to provide for the development of a mecha- person for a decision. nism (for example, a trust fund) to protect Small business—insurance multi-agents payments owed to a multi-agent where the multi-agent’s principal becomes insolvent or At the two previous inquiries into the FSR legis- bankrupt or where such is threatened. Pro- lation and again at this year’s inquiry, the Com- tected payments would include those owed mittee heard from a number of insurance multi- directly to the multi-agent by the principal or agents about the adverse effects the FSR legisla- those payable to the principal by a product tion is having on their businesses. We heard that provider before they are drawn upon to pay licensees are using the FSR legislation as a pre- the multi-agent. text for terminating agents’ contracts. We heard that multi-agents’ bargaining power has been In addition to the above recommendations, the weakened. We have been told that multi-agents Committee would strongly encourage the De- are being forced to sign up as authorised repre- partment of the Treasury and ASIC to seek out sentatives generally on much less favourable non-legislative initiatives to redress the negatives terms than was previously the case. that the FSR legislation has imposed on insurance multi-agents. The Committee is aware that section 1436A of the Corporations Act was inserted specifically as a Fine-tuning the Act and regulations protective measure so that insurance agents could Quite a number of submissions to the inquiry continue to operate under the Insurance (Agents commented that the Act and regulations presented and Brokers) Act 1984 for the full two-year tran- some quite significant ‘navigational’ challenges. sitional period notwithstanding that their princi- Instances of inconsistencies and anomalies were pals might transition before then. We are also highlighted. One submission suggested that the aware that the legislation provides for complexities in the legislation would lead to in- cross-endorsements to allow multi-agents to op- creased operational and regulatory costs which erate as authorised representatives for more than ultimately would be passed onto consumers. one principal under the FSR regime. However, The Australian Stock Exchange Limited said that evidence received by the Committee suggests that the structure of the Act and regulations made ‘full licensees are reluctant to enter into comprehension of relevant concepts in the Act cross-endorsements because of liability issues. difficult’ and suggested that consideration could This has had serious consequences for be given to including notes to the regulations with multi-agents. cross-references. The Committee heard evidence that quite funda- The FSR Act and regulations are extensive and mental re-structuring is occurring in parts of the complex, and it is inevitable that there will be insurance industry largely as a result of the FSR teething problems. The Committee is satisfied legislation. We are concerned that the legislation that the Department of the Treasury is progres- may be placing a reputable industry sector at a sively attending to these. However, the Commit- significant disadvantage. The Committee would tee suggests that the Department of the Treasury like corrective action to be taken to ameliorate the consider ways in which the legislation might be difficulties caused by the legislation. The Com- made more ‘user-friendly’. mittee has recommended that legislative amend- ments be made: Final comment • to protect them from arbitrary termination of I have not covered all of the matters raised during their existing contracts and the rights that go the inquiry. You will find most of these in the with them; Committee’s report. On behalf of the Committee, I am pleased to say that, generally, the Commit- • to address the post-FSR trend away from tee’s findings are that the regulations and ASIC cross-endorsements; policy statements do meet the objectives of the • to require payment of monies (including FSR legislation which I spelt out earlier. commissions) owed to multi-agents within a Considering the volume and complexity of the reasonable period; regulations developed by the Department of the • to provide for ASIC’s exercise of its powers Treasury, and the range of policy statements is- under section 915H of the Corporations Act sued by ASIC, this is quite an achievement. to protect the position of insurance multi- I offer my personal thanks and, I am confident, agents should their licensee’s licence be sus- that of all of the Committee members to the staff pended or cancelled; of the Committee Secretariat. They have worked hard and long on the Inquiry, which has involved Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5751 quite complex issues. My thanks therefore go to This inquiry came into being by resolution Committee Secretary, Kathleen Dermody and of the Senate on 13 February this year. The especially Bronwyn Meredith for their efforts, as Senate expanded its reference on 13 March, well as to James Sampson from my own office. which led us to an examination of the Senator CHAPMAN—I seek leave to SIEVX tragedy. Our reporting date was ex- continue my remarks later. tended four times because of the complexity Leave granted; debate adjourned. we encountered and because of a desire to A Certain Maritime Incident Committee conscientiously discharge the responsibilities delegated to us by this chamber. In all, the Report committee sat on 15 days, often from early Senator COOK (Western Australia) (4.31 morning until late at night. It heard 60 wit- p.m.)—I present the report of the Select nesses—all in Canberra—and generated Committee on A Certain Maritime Incident, 2,181 pages of transcript. Now, eight months together with the Hansard record of pro- and 10 days later, we table our report. It ceedings, the report by S.J. Odgers SC—the contains 49 findings and 16 recommenda- independent assessor to the committee—and tions. documents presented to the committee. The report comes in four parts: first, the Ordered that the report be printed. main report endorsed by Senators Bartlett, Senator COOK—I move: Murphy, Faulkner, Collins and me—all the That the Senate take note of the report. non-government senators, who are united in our findings; second, additional comments Today as I present this report, Australia is by Senators Bartlett, Faulkner and Collins; grieving the senseless loss of life in Bali and third, a minority report from government bracing for the possibility that within weeks Senators Brandis, Ferguson and Mason; and, or months our troops may be at war in Iraq. fourth, the report from the assessor, Mr Ste- When Australia as a nation is challenged, our phen Odgers SC. values as a society are also challenged. When our military fights, they risk death and These are the basic facts of the inquiry, some make the ultimate sacrifice in the de- but the significance of the inquiry is, of fence of our values. We may debate the wis- course, in its subject. This was an inquiry dom of certain military conflicts, but we do into an act of public duplicity on the eve of a not need to debate what it is we stand for. By federal election. The Senate asked us to in- our history and our practice as a democracy, vestigate. We asked: what actually hap- a feature of our character as Australians is pened? Were children thrown into the sea? that we value honesty and truth. At election How was it that this story came to be com- time, while voters may be cynical about po- mented on by ministers and the Prime Min- litical promises, they expect to honestly ister and made front-page news throughout know the underlying facts. Mr Howard said Australia? Why was there a failure to correct this himself in 1995 on ABC radio: the record when the truth quickly became known? How were photographs of a coura- We want to assert the very simple principle that geous rescue by naval ratings falsely used to truth is absolute—truth is supreme, that truth is never disposable in political life. prove a lie? What were the facts behind the tragedy of the deaths at sea of 353 men, The values which we embrace as a nation women and children when SIEVX sank? and which define what it is to be Australian What were the policy underpinnings of the are not fulfilled by words. They are made Pacific solution, its background and circum- real by deeds. This report seeks to uphold stances? those values by telling the truth. That is what the Senate asked us to do and, within the But the significance of these events goes limitations imposed by the government, that to an even deeper issue, to the very heart of is what we have done. Significantly, every our democracy—the right of voters to know senator that sat on this inquiry, except those the truth before they vote. I believe the in- from the government, agree on these find- quiry has delivered on all of its obligations ings. but, regrettably, I cannot stand here today 5752 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 and say, ‘Mission accomplished.’ I cannot is for sure: this is not open, transparent gov- say that because, manifestly, our mission is ernment—the kind of government, it should incomplete. We have not been able to ac- be noted, that Mr Howard promised Austra- complish it because our path has been lia. Surely those arguments do not count blocked by the cabinet—that is, the execu- alongside the right of the public to know the tive wing of government has used its power truth, and the fact that Australia was lied to to prevent the parliamentary scrutiny of it- at election time when the nation was in self. caretaker mode. What do they have to hide? The pertinent The Senate Select Committee on A Cer- questions we want ministers, the Prime tain Maritime Incident quickly became Minister and their staff to answer are: what known, for commonsense reasons, as the did they know, when did they know it, and ‘children overboard’ inquiry. For the same what did they do about it? Today, we have ease of reference, the document I table today incomplete answers to these questions, but should be known as the ‘truth overboard’ not so incomplete however that there is not report, because that is what it finds happened enough evidence for us to find that the then to the truth. Our first finding is that no chil- defence minister, Peter Reith, deliberately dren were thrown overboard from SIEV4. deceived the nation and not so incomplete Other findings are that photographs released that there is not enough evidence to raise to the media on 10 October as evidence of serious questions about the Prime Minister’s children thrown overboard on 7 October probity. were actually pictures taken the following It was always the case that we could not day, 8 October, whilst SIEV4 was sinking. call serving members of the House of Repre- We find that by 11 October 2001 the naval sentatives. That meant we could not call the chain of command had concluded that no Prime Minister and Mr Ruddock. We accept children had been thrown overboard from that, but there is ample precedent for calling SIEV4. The Chief of Defence Force, Admi- their advisers and Mr Reith’s advisers, some ral Chris Barrie, was informed at the very of whom were at the time, and remain, pub- least that there were serious doubts attaching lic servants subject to estimates scrutiny. We to the report. would have liked to have had the sworn tes- We find that on 11 October 2001 Minister timony of Mr Miles Jordana, Mr Mike Reith and his staff were separately informed Scrafton, Mr Ross Hampton and Mr Peter that the photographs were not of the alleged Hendy. The public interest would have been children overboard events of 7 October; they served if we had had that evidence. We were were of the foundering of SIEV4 on 8 Octo- unable to call them because the Howard gov- ber. We find that, on or about 17 October ernment put them beyond our reach—delib- 2001, Admiral Barrie informed Minister erately. Reith that there were serious doubts about We also wanted to hear from Rear Admi- the veracity of the report that children had ral Gates and Ms Liesa Davies, but they were been thrown overboard from SIEV4. And we blocked from giving evidence by Minister find that, on 7 November 2001, the then Hill. It was not an iron curtain that fenced Acting Chief of Defence Force, Air Marshal these witnesses off; it was a curtain of ex- Angus Houston, informed Minister Reith ecutive privilege that descended to thwart that children had not been thrown overboard this Senate inquiry and deny the right of the from SIEV4. We find that on four other oc- parliament to thoroughly scrutinise the ac- casions the lack, or dubious nature, of evi- tions of the government at the time of a criti- dence for the ‘children overboard’ report was cal election, when border protection and drawn to the attention of the minister or his asylum seekers were lively issues. Some may staff by officers from Defence. We find that, say that blocking our inquiry was smart poli- on 7 November 2001, Minister Reith in- tics. Some may even contend that we have formed the Prime Minister that at least there no right to inquire into the actions of minis- were doubts about whether the photographs ters. Whatever arguments are put, one thing represented the alleged children overboard Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5753 incident or events connected with SIEV4’s remained strictly enforced, we may have sinking. never learnt the truth of this case. The findings go on to note that, despite all Senator Faulkner and Senator Collins will this advice, no correction or retraction was say a lot more about SIEVX, and I expect made by any member of the federal govern- that Senator Bartlett will also speak about the ment before the election on 10 November Pacific solution part of our reference. SIEVX 2001. The committee goes on to conclude was a genuine tragedy. Many of the issues this section of its findings by saying: we are concerned about have not been fully Minister Reith made a number of misleading resolved, but they need to be. We recom- statements implying published photographs and a mend that there be an independent inquiry video supported the original report that children into all the events surrounding SIEVX, in- had been thrown overboard well after he had re- cluding the extent of the so-called ‘disrup- ceived definitive advice to the contrary. tion activities’. Since our inquiry concluded, And: more information has come into the public The Committee finds that Mr Reith deceived the domain through media reports. Senator Australian people during the 2001 election cam- Faulkner has spoken about this in the Senate. paign concerning the state of the evidence for the To do the job properly a full judicial inquiry claim that children had been thrown overboard is necessary. from SIEV 4. I reject the findings of the minority report. Perhaps the most insidious issue that the in- It is long on name-calling and political rheto- quiry highlights is that in August last year, ric. It is wafer-thin on facts or analysis. Un- when the government was gearing up to play fortunately, it seems to take its theme from the border protection card, Minister Reith efforts by the government to discredit the quietly ordered that all important ADF press inquiry. Ironically, the greatest compliment communications be centralised and coordi- the inquiry has received is from the govern- nated through his office. This broke a cen- ment. Yesterday, Senator Hill released a tury of tradition. It trespassed on the auton- statement announcing steps the government omy of the Australian military, an autonomy was taking to make sure the children over- that has been exercised even in wartime. It board affair could not be repeated. He has meant that defence force issues could be ma- not gone far enough, but that is not the point nipulated for political purposes. This was a I make. He did not choose to make these breathtaking intrusion into the independence changes earlier when the government’s in- of the military, and marked a new nadir in house reports came down. He did it yester- the politicisation of the Public Service. day, maybe in an effort to pre-empt our re- Countries that do this sort of thing typically port, certainly to provide a fig leaf to cover are not democracies. I note Senator Hill has the government’s embarrassment and, obvi- changed this instruction, but that is not ously, because it was necessary. If there had enough. If only one reform flows from this been no inquiry it is very likely no changes report then it should be that set out in rec- would have been made. ommendation 9. If that recommendation is As a nation, we are keen to distinguish adopted it will go some way to preventing ourselves from those types of countries that the manipulation of the armed forces of this are not democratic. They do not have our country from ever occurring again. good human rights records, our free media or It is salutary to remember that the truth in our non-partisan defence forces. They have this case may never have surfaced if Com- government owned media with totalitarian mander Banks had not inadvertently spoken control of public information, and the mili- to a Channel 10 research assistant, and the tary is used as a political arm of the state. Australian had not reported leaks from dis- What distinguishes us is that we like to be- gruntled Adelaide crew members on Christ- lieve that this could not happen here. The mas Island. These were accidents in breach only thing we need to do to for it to happen of the Reith media mandate. If the order had here by stealth is to pretend that somehow the truth of what happened in the children 5754 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 overboard affair is not really important. After of order first it may be irrelevant for you to all, they were only asylum seekers and, any- speak to the point of order. way, the government members say it is sour Senator Kemp—I thought you might like grapes by us. to hear two sides before you rule. But the truth matters—of course it mat- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- ters. We all know it matters. This report says DENT—I am happy to acquiesce to that. I it matters. And if we pretend it does not will hear your response to the point of order, matter or that the children overboard lies Senator Kemp. were just some smart political game, we do that at our own peril and the peril of our de- Senator Kemp—Mr Acting Deputy mocracy, our political processes, and good President, I point out to you that Senator government, whichever party is in power. I Cook has used very extreme and strong lan- thank the secretariat for the work that they guage in relation to his descriptions during have done in supporting us in this inquiry. his speech on Mr Peter Reith, a former dis- Their efficiency helped us considerably. tinguished minister. It is excessively precious They operated at a high level of competence for Senator Cook, who has spent 10 minutes and I thank them. defaming and vilifying a former distin- guished minister of the Howard government, The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT to worry about the comments that have been (Senator Lightfoot)—Order! The honour- made by my colleagues about him. able senator’s time has expired. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- Senator Cook—Mr Acting Deputy Presi- DENT—I will refer the complaint in Senator dent, now that I have made my speech I rise Cook’s point of order to the President. In the on a point of order and seek your ruling on it. interim I will follow assiduously those con- The minority report of the government tributions that will no doubt be made during senators on the committee refers to other my time in the chair. I will ensure, as near as members of the committee in terms which I practicable, that there are no breaches of believe are contrary to standing order 193. standing orders. The terms to which I particularly refer are ‘hypocrisy’, ‘insidious intellectual dishon- Senator BRANDIS (Queensland) (4.49 esty’ and ‘selective and misleading reference p.m.)—Before I address the issues which to the evidence’ used with application to the Senator Cook has addressed concerning the majority senators. Past rulings have indicated SIEV4 episode, it is very important that that it is not in order for senators to breach those who hear the broadcast today realise standing order 193 by quoting documents that in relation to SIEVX, which Senator containing language contrary to the standing Cook touched on at the end of his speech, order. I ask that you rule that it is also not in there is no significant difference between order to use such language in a committee government and opposition senators—I can- report or to repeat such language in a debate. not speak for Senator Bartlett. Those who Because the report has now been tabled it is heard Senator Cook’s remarks a few mo- automatically ordered to be published with ments ago may have thought that the gov- parliamentary privilege. There is, therefore, ernment and the opposition were of a differ- no effective remedy to the initial breach of ent view on SIEVX. That is not so. SIEVX is standing orders by the minority report. How- dealt with in chapters 8 and 9 of the report. ever, your ruling on the subject would pro- The government senators address it in para- vide guidance on this question for future ref- graph 13 of the first chapter of our report. erence and would also prevent the debate on We say: the report from degenerating. In regard to SIEVX, Government Senators sup- port the general conclusions and findings in Senator Kemp—Mr Acting Deputy Chapters 8 and 9. In particular we agree with the President, on the point of order— finding in paragraph 9.142, which states “On the The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- basis of the above, the Committee cannot find DENT—Senator Kemp, if I rule on the point grounds for believing that negligence or derelic- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5755 tion of duty was committed in relation to SIEV The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- X.” DENT—Senator Brandis, resume your seat That is all I propose to say about that. The again. government senators’ report appears between Senator Cook—Mr Acting Deputy Presi- page 477 and the conclusion of the volume. dent, on a point of order: the report that When I speak of ‘the report’ I speak of the Senator Brandis refers to is a report signed majority report. The government senators’ by me and several other senators in this report critiques the majority report. Para- place. We are the authors of that report, and graph 4 of the first chapter of the govern- if there is an allegation of the character that ment senators’ report says that the majority the senator opposite knows is unfair and un- report is a document which is corrupted by true—but it is also against standing orders— intellectual dishonesty— it is an allegation against us and he should be Senator Cook—Mr Acting Deputy Presi- asked to withdraw it. dent, I rise on a point of order. The point of The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- order goes to the one I raised earlier. These DENT—There is no point of order because are exactly the terms I rejected. We never Senator Brandis, in my view, is not referring saw this report before it was tabled, as to individual senators. However, Senator promised. This is unparliamentary language Brandis, I ask you to continue but to desist and you should rule it out of order. It is a from the ambiguity that is in this chamber liberty. this afternoon when you use such language Senator Ferguson—You did. Yours like that. wasn’t finished when it was adopted. Your Senator BRANDIS—I will be unambi- report wasn’t even finished. guous, Mr Acting Deputy President. The Senator Cook—That’s a lie and you’re a majority of the report is based on findings, or liar! what it is pleased to describe as findings, The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT which are unsupported by evidence and, in (Senator Lightfoot)—Senator Cook, that is particular, it makes loose and unsupported unparliamentary. You will withdraw those allegations of dishonesty against an individ- remarks. ual, Mr Reith. It ignores vital evidence which explains the sequence in which events took Senator Cook—I withdraw my remarks. place and then casts doubts on the motives of Senator Kemp interjecting— those involved which could not be cast if the Senator Cook interjecting— evidence had not been ignored. It indulges in The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- innuendo and allows doubts to linger in the DENT—Order! I would like some quiet, air when none exist. It engages in conspiracy please, Senator Cook and Senator Kemp. theories of the most Kafkaesque hue. It re- Senator Brandis, you know as well as anyone flects upon the reputations of distinguished in this chamber that you cannot use that sort Australians, in particular the former Chief of of language if it is directed towards any of the Defence Force, Admiral Chris Barrie, the honourable senators here. Insofar as it who at the time these events took place had may not be, then I ask you to proceed. one thing and only one thing on his mind and that was concern to protect the Australian Senator BRANDIS—Mr Acting Deputy people during the war against terror. Why? President, I abide by your ruling, of course. I Because the entire ‘children overboard’ in- do not speak of any individual senators and I quiry was nothing more and nothing less do not speak of senators corporately. I speak than an orgy of self-pity and misplaced out- of a document—that is, a report. The report rage engaged in by the Australian Labor is a document corrupted by intellectual dis- Party because they lost the federal election. honesty. It is based on findings, or what are For 15 hearing days, through 56 witnesses, described as findings, which are unsupported for 138 hours, the Australian Labor Party by the evidence. engaged in an orgy of self-justification. And to what end? To no end, because the evi- 5756 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 dence, unfortunately from the point of view dence as to what was said during that tele- of the Australian Labor Party, did not pro- phone conversation. The innuendo left lin- duce the conclusions that they were seeking. gering in the air against the Prime Minister is I said at the start that the report was cor- utterly dishonest. There is not a scintilla of rupted by intellectual dishonesty. There are evidence, whether direct, hearsay, circum- two particular techniques that are used in the stantial or otherwise, which could support report about which I make that charge. The the proposition that there was any question at first of them is the use of open findings— all involving the Prime Minister. That is an language to the effect ‘the committee is un- example of the dishonesty in which the ma- able to determine such and such a proposi- jority report has so freely engaged. tion’—where there is no evidence whatso- Senator Mason interjecting— ever to suggest that there is even a question, Senator BRANDIS—It is Orwellian, thus leaving doubt lingering in the air. The Senator Mason; you are quite right. Let me innuendo to be found in open findings leav- turn to the outrageous treatment of Mr Reith ing doubt lingering in the air is dishonest and in this report. In what the majority pleases to disgraceful. The second technique in which call ‘findings’ at page xxiv of the report, this the majority report indulges is to arrive at is what is said: what it is pleased to call ‘findings’ of fact The Committee finds that Mr Reith deceived the which are not findings at all—at least not Australian people during the 2001 Federal Elec- findings having any bearing on the evidence; tion campaign concerning the state of the evi- they are findings based on conjecture and dence for the claim that children had been thrown surmise. overboard from SIEV 4. There are many people who are attacked The majority also purports to find: in the majority report, but there are three in Mr Reith engaged in the deliberate misleading of particular about whom I wish to speak. The the Australian public concerning a matter of in- first is the Prime Minister. The majority re- tense political interest during an election period. port alleges at paragraph 6.97: Mr Reith failed to provide timely and accurate The Committee is unable to conclude with any advice to the Prime Minister concerning the mat- certainty whether the advice given to Minister ters associated with the ‘children overboard’ con- Reith, which overturned the report of the incident troversy. itself— Then it goes on to find: and I interpolate that that itself is a mis- Mr Reith failed to cooperate with the Senate Se- statement; that is not what the evidence lect Committee established to inquire into the showed— ‘children overboard’ controversy, thereby under- mining the accountability of the executive to the and the photographs as evidence of it, was com- parliament. municated fully to the Prime Minister ... At paragraph 6.101, it goes on to say: Those are the findings. The first point to be made about those findings is that they are The Committee is unable to determine whether on entirely unsupported by the evidence. There 7 November Mr Reith, in telephone conversations are more than 2,000 pages of Hansard tran- with him, informed the Prime Minister that there was no other evidence supporting the claim, and script of this inquiry, and one will not find that he had been informed by the Acting CDF that anything in them to support the finding of the incident did not take place. deliberate dishonesty by Mr Reith. I will turn That is an example of that dishonest tech- in a moment to what the evidence does show. nique of open findings, thus leaving a ques- But it is a bit rich, it must be said, for the tion lingering in the air. But the fact is that Australian Labor Party to attack Mr Reith for there was no question in the first place. failing to cooperate with the Senate inquiry, There was a telephone conversation on 7 because for months on end Senator Faulkner, November between Mr Howard and Mr Senator Cook and other Labor Party politi- Reith. Both of them are on the public record cians demanded that Mr Reith appear. There as to what was said during that telephone was no reason why the Senate’s subpoena conversation and both offer the same evi- powers could not have been used against Mr Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5757

Reith. If they had wanted to put him on the Senator Faulkner. It is not unparliamentary spot, they could have done so, they could for someone in this chamber to speak of a have subpoenaed him, but for week after person outside this chamber in those terms. It week and month after month the Labor Party is, however, unseemly and it brings no credit senators delayed. to this chamber. Eventually, on 22 May—I have the min- Senator BRANDIS—The gravamen of utes with me—not the Labor Party but the charge against Mr Reith is that he was in Senator Andrew Bartlett from the Democrats possession of information which falsified a moved that Mr Reith be subpoenaed and, public report that asylum seekers on the ves- when Senator Bartlett moved that motion, sel SIEV4 had behaved badly. The gravamen Senator Ferguson, Senator Mason and I told of the charge is that he concealed that infor- the Labor senators that we would not stand mation to attempt to gain a political advan- in their way. Mr Reith was their witness and tage for the government. What the majority they wanted to put him on the spot, so we report does not mention—there is not so told them we would not stand in their way much as a reference to it in 550-odd pages— and we would abstain from voting on Sena- is the fact that the committee heard a range tor Bartlett’s motion. of evidence from several witnesses that Mr Mr Acting Deputy President, do you know Reith was in possession of knowledge of what happened? I will tell you what hap- much more severe and significant and dis- pened. The Labor senators voted not to sub- graceful behaviour by asylum seekers which poena Mr Reith. They voted against the mo- never reached the public arena. If that was tion that they had, in the public arena, de- Mr Reith’s motive, why was that information manded. On the airwaves, on the TV chan- not made a matter of public record? nels and in this chamber they demanded that In an article in the Sydney Morning Her- Mr Reith appear. When Senator Bartlett ald on 31 March 2002, the journalist Alan moved a motion on 22 May that he be called, Ramsay wrote: Senator Faulkner, Senator Collins, Senator Like much of the media coverage, they were little Cook and Senator Murphy raised their hands interested in anything other than the one “certain to defeat the motion. The minutes show: maritime incident” on October 7. Yet imagine those in favour, 1; those against, 4; and ab- what Howard could have made of them during the stentions, 3. election campaign had he known the detail of those six other boardings? The navy never told Senator Mackay interjecting— the Government. The October 7 disclosure was a Senator Jacinta Collins interjecting— communications cock-up. Just like [almost] eve- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- rything else about this futile political pursuit. DENT—Order! Senator Mackay, you will Mr Acting Deputy President, that is what a come to order! Senator Collins, you will journalist observed after two days of hear- come to order! ings. But do you know what? He was wrong, Senator BRANDIS—Mr Reith’s credi- because the government did know. The gov- bility has been attacked savagely in this re- ernment did know about the behaviour of port. asylum seekers on all of the other nine SIEV boats that were intercepted before the 10 Senator Faulkner—He’s a liar! November election—SIEV1 through to The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- SIEV10. Admiral Barrie told Senator Mason DENT—Order! Senator Faulkner, you will in his evidence when this proposition was come to order! put to him—and this evidence is quoted in Senator Ferguson—That’s unparliamen- the minority report: tary! I think the minister was in possession of the Senator Faulkner—It is not unparlia- knowledge. Certainly on a few occasions I can mentary. He is not a member of parliament. attest to that personally. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- Ms Halton, the Deputy Secretary of the De- DENT—Order! You will come to order, partment of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, 5758 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 gave evidence to the same effect; so did Rear about the evidence and you will not hear Admiral Ritchie, so did Brigadier Silver- Senator Faulkner do so either, and Senator stone, so did Rear Admiral Smith, so did the Collins would not be able to understand it if Chief of Navy, Vice Admiral Shackleton, and she tried. The evidence shows in the first so did Air Vice Marshal Titheridge. place that there was a report to the joint task So if that is the Labor Party case against force commander from the bridge of the Mr Reith, that he forbore from interfering to Adelaide that a child or children were thrown correct to the public record in order to overboard. The evidence shows that three maintain a political advantage for the gov- days later, on 10 October, the Commander, ernment, the case falls at the first hurdle. He Australian Theatre, Rear Admiral Ritchie, was in possession, he had been told by his who in the command structure was the offi- military officers, of other information of a cer immediately below the Chief of the De- much more prejudicial character and not a fence Force, told Mr Scrafton from Mr word of it came into the public arena. Reith’s office at 12.42 that he still believed the accuracy of that report. He still believed The third piece of evidence in relation to it to be true; that is the evidence. Mr Reith’s conduct is the question of what has been called ‘the video’, a video taken The evidence is that doubts were growing from the bridge of the Adelaide that showed in the mind of Admiral Ritchie and others asylum seekers on the bridge of SIEV4 but and that at 10 o’clock on the morning of 11 did not show any children being thrown October Admiral Ritchie had a conversation overboard. That video evidence is both spa- with the Chief of the Defence Force, Admi- tially and temporally limited. It is limited to ral Barrie. He told him that there were doubts a part of the incident and it is limited to one about the accuracy of the report. Admiral side of the ship. But, nevertheless, as far as it Barrie said to Admiral Ritchie, and I will goes, that video did not support the view that paraphrase his words, ‘I am not sufficiently the government had expressed publicly. Mr persuaded by what you have told me to Reith was told of that on 7 November by Air change my initial reliance on the report of Marshal Houston. Mr Reith rang the Prime the commanding officer.’ All of this evidence Minister and mentioned the video to him. is set out chapter and verse in the govern- What was the reaction of Mr Reith when he ment senators’ report. Admiral Barrie went was told there was a piece of evidence that away from that conversation, as he put it, did not assist the government’s case? If Mr ‘inviting Admiral Ritchie to fight a re- Reith were motivated by the malign conduct pechage’. He said to him, ‘If you have any alleged against him by Labor senators, he further evidence to put before me, you would have suppressed it—of course he should come to me and give it to me, but would have. What did he do about this piece until you do I am not sufficiently persuaded of unhelpful evidence that told against his to abandon the view of Commander Banks, own case? He ordered that it be released the commanding officer.’ immediately. Air Marshal Houston’s evi- That was at 10 a.m. on 11 October. Three- dence was that, when he told Mr Reith about and-a-quarter hours later a signal came in, the video, Mr Reith said, ‘Well, we’d better received by Admiral Ritchie, which was the release it then.’ It did not help the govern- evidence that Admiral Barrie had asked for. ment’s position, yet the immediate reaction That was never brought to Admiral Barrie’s was to put it out there into the public arena. attention. Admiral Barrie briefed Mr Reith This has been an argument, essentially, on 17 October and he told him two things: about a sequence of events. It has been poli- ‘Minister, there are doubts among the chain ticised by the Labor Party and all sorts of of command about the accuracy of this re- extravagant innuendoes have been made, but port; however, my advice to you as your it has been an argument about a sequence of chief defence adviser is that there is not suf- events. Let me quickly summarise them, be- ficient evidence available to persuade me cause this is what the evidence in truth that the original report was wrong and I ad- shows. You did not hear Senator Cook talk here to it.’ It is as simple as that. That was Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5759 the advice to Minister Reith from the Chief ... as far as I’m concerned I have nothing to fear of the Defence Force, Admiral Barrie: that in relation to the truth on this matter. I don’t have although doubts had been expressed along anything to hide. the chain of command he, Admiral Barrie, That is what Mr Howard said. But of course was not persuaded that the first report was he did have something to hide. If he did not, wrong and his professional advice to his he would not have banned the key witnesses minister was that the report should be sup- Hampton, Hendy, Scrafton and Jordana from ported. When you get into the evidence it coming to the committee and giving evi- tells a different story from the rhetoric we dence. have heard from the Australian Labor Party. Let me outline for the Senate what was The case is closed. uncovered at the CMI committee. From 7 Senator FAULKNER (New South October 2001, the Prime Minister, his office Wales—Leader of the Opposition in the Sen- and senior members of PM&C received on at ate) (5.12 p.m.)—We are debating today the least 13 occasions written or oral reports that report of the Senate Select Committee on a there were serious doubts that children had Certain Maritime Incident, better known now ever been thrown overboard. From 7 Octo- as the CMI or ‘children overboard’ select ber, Mr Reith, the then Minister for Defence, committee, and the opposition welcomes the and his office received on at least 14 occa- report. We would like to recognise the efforts sions written or oral reports that either indi- of the committee secretariat for their hard cated serious doubts that children were work and diligence on this difficult and thrown overboard or contained categorical complex reference. I want to begin my con- advice that no children had been thrown tribution by being generous. I would like to overboard. thank Senators Mason and Brandis for their From 7 October, Mr Ruddock’s depart- helpful suggestion to extend the terms of ment never received any advice from de- reference of the committee—one of the fence indicating that children were thrown greatest own goals in Australian politics. overboard. Furthermore, Mr Ruddock’s of- Without this extension we could not have fice received at least two reports based on explored the knowledge that Australian defence advice that did not mention that authorities had about the vessel SIEVX and children were thrown overboard from we could not have explored the govern- SIEV4. We now know that not only did this ment’s people-smuggling disruption pro- event never occur but the original informa- gram. tion was based on fifth-hand verbal advice— Through many hundreds of hours of it is a sort of Chinese whisper. Commander hearings and hundreds of pages of docu- Banks from the HMAS Adelaide told the ments that were brought before the commit- CMI committee that he believed he never tee, we now have a greater understanding of said a child was thrown overboard. If the the lies and the misinformation that the Prime Minister had simply picked up the Howard government dished out to the Aus- phone and spoken to Commander Banks, of tralian people during the 2001 federal elec- course he would have learned the truth very tion campaign. Despite the ban on ministerial quickly—but it did not suit the election cam- staffers attending committee hearings, de- paign. spite the cabinet ban on submissions from The allegation that asylum seekers threw departments and agencies, the committee has children overboard suited Mr Howard’s divi- still managed to find mountains of material sive approach in his election campaign tac- indicating that the government either lied or tics at the time. It was not an allegation that deliberately ignored and covered up the truth the government would have wanted to cor- that children were never thrown overboard rect in a hurry in the campaign; it suited the on 7 October 2001. Earlier this year, the political purposes of Mr Howard and the Prime Minister, Mr Howard, told Neil government. They shamefully used and Mitchell on 3AW: abused the defence forces, and they abused and used the asylum seekers, to progress 5760 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 their campaign strategy. You just have to tional adviser, Miles Jordana, received on 7 listen to what Mr Howard and Mr Ruddock October two reports—DFAT sit rep 59 and said about the asylum seekers on SIEV4, Defence Headquarters Operation Gaber- once they had made the allegation that chil- dine/Op Relex 8 October—which did not dren were thrown overboard. They could not mention children being thrown overboard. get in quick in enough. Mr Ruddock said: The other crucial piece of evidence found I regard these as some of the most disturbing at the Senate estimates committee was that practices I’ve come across in the time that I have Miles Jordana rang Mr Jones from ONA, been involved in public life. asking if there were any reports indicating And Mr Howard said: that children had been thrown overboard on Quite frankly, Alan, I don’t want in this country 7 October. Mr Jones sent Jordana ONA re- people who are prepared ... to throw their own port 226-2001 dated 9 October but warned children overboard. the Prime Minister it should not be used as They could not get in there quickly enough definitive advice, given that it had been to condemn them. Commander Banks told based on ministerial statements. The ONA the CMI committee of his frustration during report had been based on press reports. But the election campaign. He said: did it stop Prime Minister Howard? Of course not. He went straight in to the Na- I then felt, in the ensuing period, that the issue of children being thrown overboard was now a me- tional Press Club, using this highly classified dia and political stunt and that if anybody wanted ONA report based on media reports as justi- to verify the veracity of the information perhaps I fication and false proof that children had should have been questioned ... been thrown overboard. That is what the Precisely. Commander Banks described Prime Minister of Australia is like. HMAS Adelaide’s efforts during the rescue I will now tell the Senate of some of the of people on SIEV4 when their boat began to key pieces of information that this very ef- sink as ‘superb’. The justifiable pride that fective select committee found out. We know Commander Banks felt for his crew mem- that on 7 October defence told Peter Reith’s bers was evident in the many photos he sent media adviser, Ross Hampton, that there was back to the Department of Defence. To their no information of children being thrown great shame, the government chose to use overboard. He was also sent a fax summary two of those photos for political gain, to mis- with no mention of children. On 7 October, represent the facts and to cover up again. The the evening of the People Smuggling Task political cover-up continued until the first Force meeting, Group Captain Walker told parliamentary sitting day this year, when the the meeting that he could find no documen- Prime Minister tabled the PM&C report into tary evidence to prove children were thrown the ‘children overboard’ matter. It was clear overboard, and that was verified by the task from the PM&C and defence reports that not force note-taker, Katrina Edwards. only were the claims wrong but the behav- On 8 October, two written reports that did iour of certain ministerial advisers and min- not mention that children had been thrown isters in covering up the claims was outra- overboard on SIEV4 were sent to ministers geous. and senior officials. One of those reports, But the opposition said that there was DFAT’s sit rep 59, was sent to the Prime more to the story, there was a web of deceit, Minister, the Minister for Immigration and it was time to unravel the truth. In the week Multicultural Affairs, the Minister for For- of the estimates committees of the Senate in eign Affairs and to the office of the Minister February, with no assistance from the gov- for Defence. DFAT sit rep 59 concerned Ka- ernment at all, we began to get to the truth of trina Edwards from PM&C so much that it this matter. Very important questions were triggered her to make ‘vigorous inquiries’ asked of Air Marshal Angus Houston about with defence. Over the next few days, as categorical advice to Reith on the fact that Katrina Edwards told the CMI committee: children were not thrown overboard. We also Strategic Command had been telling us a very learned that the Prime Minister’s interna- similar message for the previous couple of days, Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5761 which was that they had no evidence within their the briefing material the Prime Minister and holdings ... his office received indicated very serious By 10 October, defence sent a chronology to doubts about the original claims. We know PM&C and Reith’s office based on HMAS that Peter Reith told the Prime Minister on 7 Adelaide’s signals; it did not mention kids November that the photographs were proba- being thrown overboard. Katrina Edwards bly not taken on 7 October but when the boat confirmed she showed the chronology to sank on 8 October. The Prime Minister has Jane Halton, the head of the task force. also suggested in his own interview with the PM&C drafted talking points based on the Four Corners program that one of Reith’s chronology. Halton requested they be staffers told him about these doubts regard- emailed to Minister Ruddock, Minister Reith ing the photographs. Despite this, the Prime and Minister Downer. Katrina Edwards says Minister deliberately avoided answering the that Miles Jordana also received a copy— question—avoided and evaded the truth— once again, no mention of children being when asked the next day at the National thrown overboard. Press Club by 7.30 Report journalist Fran But the evidence does not stop there: from Kelly: 10 October, Peter Reith and his office mis- Defence sources are saying today that the photos used photographs to reinforce the original released by the Defence Minister’s office some great lie. We now know as a result of the weeks ago of the people in the water from that CMI committee that Peter Reith and his staff sinking boat were captioned when they were handed to the Government and that those captions were told on at least three occasions that the clearly showed that the people were in the water photographs were not taken on 7 October. because the boat was sinking, not because ... chil- Peter Reith continued to propagate this dren had been thrown overboard. Will you now downright lie, despite the testy conversation ask the Minister of Defence to release those pho- he had with the then CDF, Admiral Barrie, tos with captions as originally provided by the on 11 October, when Reith was told by Ad- Navy? miral Barrie that the photographs proved But that is how he operates. In February this nothing. Peter Reith also told the media that year Mr Howard told the Insiders program: there was a video that could prove the claim What I’m saying is that if I had done something made by the government. We know now that deliberately misleading I would owe people an Reith’s office knew that that video was in- apology, I haven’t. conclusive and, according to one defence Isn’t the failure of the Prime Minister to tell official, Reith’s response to this was, ‘Well, the National Press Club, in the last major we had better not see the video, then.’ That is event of an election campaign, that the pho- what he said. What a disgrace. tographs were wrong downright misleading What has now come to light is the so- and, I would say, downright dishonest? What called tearoom gossip—another thing not else? What about— mentioned by the Liberals—that the photos Senator Brandis—I raise a point of order, were not of the incident that they purported Madam Acting Deputy President. I direct to be. That was original advice from the your attention to standing order 193(3). DLO in PM&C, Commander King. He passed that advice on to the PM&C senior The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT officer Harinder Sidhu and then to the branch (Senator McLucas)—Senator Faulkner, I head, Brendon Hammer, on 11 October. Dr request you to withdraw those words. Hammer says he told no-one else, but in Senator FAULKNER—I will withdraw early November when Harinder Sidhu passed them. But what else? What about Scrafton on the same advice about the photos, the ad- and the Prime Minister? The Prime Minister vice was seen as so significant it was relayed admitted in a press conference that Mike to Miles Jordana in the Prime Minister’s of- Scrafton might have a different recollection fice. of their conversation on 7 November but, as Finally, you have got to ask yourself: what a result of the gag on ministerial staffers, we did the Prime Minister know? We know that could never get to the bottom of that. 5762 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

It is hard to believe that no-one in the tralian authorities knew about its departure government is willing to stand up and be and its condition. accountable for the lies and the misinforma- But there are broader concerns that go be- tion that were perpetrated during the election yond just those issues, go to the whole heart campaign. Australians were grossly deceived of the people-smuggling disruption program by this government. No-one has been shown in Indonesia. Who exactly was involved? the door for the breach of trust in the election What accountability was there? Who funded campaign—no politicians, no political this? How much was provided? Who was staffers, no public servants. It appears, of responsible for ensuring that this program course, that ministerial advisers have gone was operated within reasonable constraints? beyond their traditional role; they have exer- What sorts of activities were involved in cised executive authority for which they are stopping those particular vessels from de- accountable to no-one. We believe that ab- parting? I am pleased that the CMI commit- sence of accountability is unacceptable and tee recommends that a full and independent needs to change. inquiry be held into those matters. We have heard astonishing evidence right I hope the government does that; I hope through this, from the then Chief of the De- the government takes up that recommenda- fence Force, Admiral Barrie, and the then tion and acts upon it. But if they do not, I can Secretary of the Department of Defence, Dr promise senators and the Senate that the La- Hawke, offering resignations. We heard bor Party senators, at those forums available about the comfortable conversations held at to us, will progress those issues. We will ask the Hotel Kurrajong between certain wit- the questions. We will attempt to get to the nesses. We heard the Prime Minister’s office truth of those particular matters and also find instructing defence that no humanising im- out why the MOU between the AFP and the ages should be shown of asylum seekers, the Indonesian police collapsed. I have still been defence instructions requiring that all de- unable to establish that, but I will work on it; fence information go through defence min- we will keep going. ister Reith’s office, enabling him to control all the information that the media received In relation to the other terms of reference on this. about the Pacific solution, we examined that issue. What is clear about the Pacific solu- The committee also spent a considerable tion now, as a result of the efforts of this amount of time on the issue of the vessel committee, is that half an hour before the now know as SIEVX. During the election caretaker conventions were in place, on 8 campaign, the Prime Minister told the Aus- October, a $54 million deal was struck be- tralian people that nothing could have been tween the Australian government and the done by Australia to save the people who former PNG government over the Manus drowned when that vessel sank, because it detention centre arrangement. That is not sank in Indonesian waters. We now know good enough, and that is another area where that the advice the government received did more transparency is required. not support that claim. The People Smug- gling Task Force notes on 23 October state I believe that the CMI committee is a very that the vessel was likely to have been in good example of the Senate committee sys- international waters south of Java. The tem working at its best—getting to the facts, DIMA intelligence notes on 23 October exposing the lies and deceit of the Howard noted that SIEVX sank in international wa- government, maintaining the spotlight on the ters and well within Australia’s air surveil- accountability of government, demanding lance zone, at approximately 60 nautical higher standards from the Howard govern- miles south of the Sunda Strait. Have we ment and from future governments. This af- ever had a correction or an apology from the fair has served to highlight the political Prime Minister on that matter? Of course we lengths that the Liberal Party and Mr How- have not. We have looked into the intelli- ard and his team of ministers will go to in gence side of SIEVX and at how much Aus- order to spread disinformation at the most sensitive time of the electoral cycle—during Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5763 an election campaign. It is crystal clear that intelligence resources and the human impact, Mr Howard and his ministers and his gov- the human reality of how that works. ernment were prepared to lie and deceive and With the SIEV4—that is, the ‘children cover up to save their political hides. This is overboard’ boat—incident, what I found a most contemptible action from a con- most valuable was the information that came temptible government. to light about what happened there, what the Senator BARTLETT (Queensland— reality was, what it actually means and what Leader of the Australian Democrats) (5.32 the boat people are going through. The most p.m.)—The report of the Senate Select absolutely scandalous thing about that inci- Committee on a Certain Maritime Incident is dent, in my view, was not about the confu- important, despite a lot of the political heat sion and then the misleading about whether a and bunfights surrounding it which have led child was thrown overboard but that the some to dismiss it as just political. There is a Australian Navy personnel were forced to lot of important information contained in the intercept a boat and then leave it out there in report. Even more important information the middle of the ocean despite their com- came through the hearings and the evidence mander’s own assessment—and this was tabled in this inquiry which would never oth- from the valuable documents that the com- erwise have become public. That is why I mittee got—that the boat was marginally believe this to be an important inquiry which seaworthy and significantly overcrowded. provides a valuable resource for people that That would never have happened in the past, are interested in this policy area. before the government changed its policy in The report basically has three key compo- relation to the arrival of asylum seekers by nents. There is the ‘children overboard’ inci- boat. That scandal, which was repeated time dent which initiated it and is a source of a lot and time again with all the boats that were of the political heat. My view and the Demo- intercepted, is what I find most disgraceful crats’ view in relation to that is that, clearly, about that incident. former Minister Reith knew the reports were This comes into stark relief when you false, knew the photographs did not depict look at the SIEVX incident, where 353 peo- what he said they did, and chose not to cor- ple tragically drowned just over a year ago. rect the record. It is not the first time that a The Navy were not able to find that boat; minister has chosen to not correct the record they were not able to intercept it. I accept or to allow a mistaken picture to go out to that they were not aware that it was where it the Australian community, and unfortunately was. But the key thing is that undoubtedly, it will not be the last; it should be con- on the evidence that was provided of every- demned nonetheless. But the much bigger thing that had been done in the past, if the issues for the Democrats are the broader in- Navy had found that boat before it sank and formation about the operation of the Pacific intercepted it, they would not have taken off solution and also the inquiry into the sinking the women and children and tried to look of the SIEVX. after their safety; they would have tried to I was instrumental in ensuring, when this turn it around and make it sail back to Indo- proposal was first put forward, that the in- nesia. quiry would expand its focus beyond just the Safety of life at sea obligations only kick ‘children overboard’ incident. Whilst that is in—and we had evidence confirming this— important, the Democrats believe it pales once a boat is sinking. Until then, the para- into insignificance beside the policy ramifi- mount priority that our Navy are forced to cations and the human ramifications of the operate under, under direction from the gov- broader Pacific solution. In that area I think ernment’s policy, is to deter and deny entry the inquiry has been most valuable. It got and to try and turn the vessel around. We did more information out about the amount of have vessels that were intercepted, turned money that is spent on that solution, more around and sailed back to Indonesia, includ- information out about the extent of military ing one that was so overcrowded that, for resources that are devoted to it and about defence personnel to get on the boat to take 5764 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 control of it and turn it around, they actually diverted towards detecting terrorists and as- had to take people off so the defence person- sessing terrorist threats—which, tragically, nel could fit on. That is a disgrace, and our we now know are a very real threat to the defence personnel should not be put in that security of Australians. The Treasurer talked situation. today about possibly needing to increase de- I support the recommendations and gen- fence spending and even increase the tax eral findings of the committee. I have made burden on Australians as a consequence, yet some additional comments. the government is continually willing to throw away hundreds of millions of dollars Senator Ferguson—Have you read it all? on something with no security implications Senator BARTLETT—I have read it. It whatsoever, purely because it is electorally took a long time. I have not read your stuff beneficial. That is a disgrace. yet—I cannot wait for that. It is clear that In our comments in this report the Demo- Defence should not be held to blame. It is crats call for the immediate abolition of the government policy and the actions in de- Pacific solution. The reason why so many ceiving the Australian public were govern- women and children were on that SIEVX ment actions. The defence personnel were boat—hundreds of women and children who very cooperative with the inquiry and should drowned—is that the temporary protection not be held to blame. The Democrats agree visa, which is a significant component of the with the concerns expressed by Senator government’s Pacific solution policy, denies Cook about the many unanswered questions family reunion. The only way now for surrounding the SIEVX. Some of those women and children to reunite with hus- questions could not be answered because of bands and fathers who are already in Austra- deliberate decisions by Minister Hill to pre- lia is to take that option of the boat. That is vent the committee from having access to why so many of them lost their lives. The key witnesses. There needs to be a further policy should be scrapped straightaway, and independent inquiry into some of those there needs to be an immediate independent questions, and they are particularly crucial. investigation into the ongoing questions sur- This report is not only important but also rounding our intelligence operations in Indo- timely because, as I detail in my own com- nesia and leading up to the SIEVX sinking. ments on page 448, some of the key things about SEIVX go to failings in our intelli- I would like to pay tribute to Mr Tony gence system and mirror concerns that are Kevin, who has come in for a fair bit of being expressed now about what may or may flak—including in this chamber—for his not have gone wrong in intelligence opera- persistence in bringing these concerns to the tions leading up to the tragic bombings in committee inquiry. I do not agree with some Bali—another tragedy in which hundreds of of the allegations he made. I do not believe lives were lost. The Australian National there is any substance to the suggestion that Audit Office detailed manifold significant Australian authorities knew precisely where problems in the management framework for the boat was but decided to let it sink to the inter-agency intelligence systems that are make an example; I think that is clearly in place. wrong and that Defence should not be hit with such an allegation. But many issues In the Democrats’ view, the extra absurd- were raised that clearly would not have been ity and outrage is that the whole Pacific so- examined—and this issue would not have lution policy has meant that all of those in- been examined—without Mr Kevin. There is telligence resources and military resources no doubt about that. I have to say with regard supposedly provided in the context of secu- to the government’s response that each time rity for Australians have been diverted to- we got a little bit further they had to correct wards detecting refugees. All of those hun- their evidence from before. I would have dreds of millions of dollars and all of those thought that it was in the government’s inter- defence personnel are being used to detect est to clear up the questions about this, yet refugees who are no threat to the security of the committee had to drag it out piece by the Australian public when they could be Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5765 piece, correction by correction, and we still the Senate. This is a majority report and he had huge numbers of pages provided to us knows it, despite having tried to organise with acres of black lines through them. So I otherwise. think Mr Kevin’s actions need to be ac- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT knowledged. (Senator McLucas)—There is no point of Whilst I am acknowledging people, an- order, Senator Collins. I request you to with- other group that really needs acknowledg- draw that comment. ment and thanks is the committee secretariat, Senator Jacinta Collins—Withdraw because this was a fairly heated inquiry and a what? lot of demands were placed on them. As we can all see, this is a very large report that The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- they had to put together under very tight time DENT—Saying that Senator Ferguson was frames. All of them—Brenton Holmes, Al- deliberately misleading. istair Sands, Sarah Bachelard, Judith Wuest Senator Jacinta Collins—Madam Acting and Kerry Olsson—need to be thanked for Deputy President, if you are suggesting that I their efforts. As I say, it is a valuable report called Senator Ferguson a liar, I withdraw. and their efforts have contributed to this use- Senator FERGUSON—This is a Labor ful document that will, I think, be significant senators’ report, because there was no con- in assisting further policy development. The tribution from anybody other than Labor Democrats believe that we are clearly senators, except in the smallest way. It is one breaching our human rights obligations. This of the worst abuses of the Senate processes inquiry has demonstrated beyond doubt that for adopting committee reports that I have the government’s policy means that people seen in my 10 years in the Senate. It took 2½ cannot access their fundamental legal rights. months for the chairman to present a draft Its downgrading of the basic values of hu- and it was presented incomplete—there were man life and human rights clearly demon- still changes to be made—at approximately strates why we need a change in policy. I 11.30 last Monday morning for formal adop- should quickly note that there was a submis- tion some three-quarters of an hour later. sion from the press gallery calling on gov- That is not too bad. I suppose we should be ernments to correct their mistakes. I agree expected to peruse 380-odd pages and con- with that, and I have noted in my additional sider the changes that were made, some of report that it would be handy if the media which we were unaware of at the time be- corrected their mistakes when they make cause they had been slipped in during the last them as well. (Time expired) week. So 2½ months of preparation passed, Senator FERGUSON (South Australia) with no discussion whatsoever, before the (5.42 p.m.)—I would like to say at the outset report was complete and the chairman was that I am pleased for Senator Cook in at least asking for an adoption. Senator Cook says one regard tonight: at least he did not suffer that all the other senators agreed. Maybe the humiliation of not being able to table his Senator Murphy agrees—I do not know—but own report as chairman. When I saw the first he scarcely attended one meeting of the speakers list it had Senator Faulkner, 20 committee. I would be surprised if he has minutes; Senator Brandis, 20 minutes; and read the whole 383 pages; he may have. But Senator Cook coming on at some later stage. the only evidence he could base his support So, Senator Cook, I am very pleased for you for this report on was the evidence that was that you were able to table your own report. supplied in this report by Senator Cook and Because, in fact, it is your report. It is your the Labor Party. The sins of omission in the report and yours alone, because this is not a Labor Party report are certainly more than committee report; it is a Labor senators’ re- those things which were included from evi- port. dence. Senator Jacinta Collins—On a point of So we have 2½ months of preparation of order, Madam Acting Deputy President: the chairman’s draft. Some three months ago, Senator Ferguson is deliberately misleading this committee was asked to spend $38,500 5766 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 to get expert opinion because the Labor Party distinguished military career; I do not know. members were not capable of dissecting the It was so long ago, nobody would remem- information themselves, or so they thought. ber—because Sir Richard Peek began his But then, of course, the Odgers report came career in the Royal Australian Navy in 1928 much later. They did not wait for that and during the prime ministership of Stanley they went ahead and wrote a report anyway. Melbourne Bruce. It was just a few years Why on earth that money was ever spent in after the sinking of the Titanic. He retired getting a report from somebody outside of some 30 years ago and he could hardly be the committee I will never know. I opposed it regarded as an authoritative commentator on at the time. I think it was an abuse of the contemporary military decisions or systems. committee process and it should never have This is the only person from the military—an been done in the first place. Then we have armchair academic—that the Labor Party the matter of additional comments by Sena- could wheel out to give evidence before this tor Faulkner and Senator Collins. It must be inquiry. Senator Cook’s report because, they being Senator Cook—Madam Acting Deputy Labor senators, Senator Cook obviously did President, I rise on a point of order. I think not want their comments included in the that is a reflection on a distinguished Austra- main body of the report. For some reason or lian. I invite the senator to go outside and say other, he did not want Senator Faulkner’s or it. Go outside and say that about Sir Richard Senator Collins’s additional comments in- Peek. cluded. I can only assume that it was Senator Cook who did not want those included. Oth- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- erwise, why wouldn’t the Labor Party sena- DENT—Senator Cook, there is no point of tors’ comments be included in the main body order. of the report? That I cannot understand. Senator Brandis—You were happy to No doubt, the senators opposite are well cast reflections on a distinguished Austra- acquainted with the show trials of Stalinist lian: Admiral Barrie. Russia. They seem to be because in all of Senator Cook interjecting— those show trials you firstly determine the Senator FERGUSON—You cast your re- verdict that is required and you then set up a flections on Admiral Barrie, who is a con- trial using as many witnesses as necessary to temporary military officer. Comrades, you obtain tenuous evidence which is subse- learnt well in your Stalinist show trial. quently used to ratify the predetermined ver- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- dict. Senator Cook, you have done it to per- DENT—Senator Ferguson, I request you to fection—this is a Stalinist show trial if ever I direct your remarks through the chair. have seen one. Comrades, you have learnt very well. In the course of the whole event, Senator FERGUSON—Madam Acting never at any time did we object to any of the Deputy President, the comrades over on the witnesses you called. We said you could call opposite side learnt their talents well in Sta- anybody you liked—and so you did. And linist show trials, because if you know what you wheeled in some rippers. I remember verdict you require and then get the evidence you had academics and armchair analysts afterwards, that is what it is: a Stalinist show operating with the benefit of hindsight and trial. On 14 February, six weeks before we free of the pressures of decision making in a took one item of evidence, Mr Crean, your highly mobile environment. They are the leader, said: sorts of people that you brought in, and I Yours is a government that has lied to the Austra- think their judgments need to be questioned. lian people ... It rushed out within four hours to make the allegation, to tell the lie ... Indeed, as it says in our report, the only person with senior military experience that Senator Forshaw—Madam Acting Dep- the Labor Party could wheel out to criticise uty President, I rise on a point of order. We the handling of the issue was Sir Richard can take the usual abuse from Senator Peek—a gentleman who may have had a Ferguson but is it in order to describe a Sen- ate committee as being a Stalinist show trial? Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5767

I would say that is a breach of the standing being made in this country. You try to look orders because it is a reflection upon a com- backwards; you never look forwards. Even mittee of this parliament. after two days of hearings, respected jour- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- nalists were starting to realise that this was DENT—Thank you, Senator Forshaw. I blowing up in the Labor Party’s face. I quote suggest that Senator Ferguson selects his from an article that appeared on Monday, 1 words wisely. April in the Australian— Senator FERGUSON—I will select them Senator Forshaw—Who is it by? as wisely as I can, Madam Acting Deputy Senator FERGUSON—It is by Glenn President. On 14 February, Mr Crean made Milne, chief political correspondent for the that statement. On 13 February, as Hansard Seven network—a great journalist. The arti- records, Senator Faulkner said: cle says: There is no doubt that the Howard government Unless federal Labor can come up with the deceived the Australian people on this issue ... smoking gun that directly implicates John How- That was on 13 February, more than six ard in deliberate deception over the children- weeks before we had taken a single word of overboard affair, the Senate inquiry into the mat- ter is halfway to blowing up in the Opposition’s evidence. If there was no doubt, why the face. need for this political farce and political witch-hunt? The verdict was predetermined This was after two days. It is a lot more than by the Labor Party and they decided that halfway now. After four days, it had totally they would have to have some sort of inquiry blown up. The article goes on: in order to gather some evidence so that they With two days of hearings already complete in the could justify their predetermined verdict. I so-called Senate Inquiry Into a Certain Maritime can understand what a state the ALP must Incident, it’s Labor that’s taking political water, have been in when they set up this inquiry. In not the Government. 1996 they were slaughtered at the election. That is a fair assessment of exactly what In 1998, with no forward vision—and they happened to you throughout the whole 15 have shown no forward vision since 1996, days of hearings. You continued to get wit- because they have scarcely had a policy; they nesses to come along and not one of them do nothing but look backwards—they were supported what you said, because in fact you defeated in spite of their negative, fraudulent could never— campaign against the GST. Senator Cook interjecting— Senator Crossin—We got the majority of Senator FERGUSON—You said in your the vote in 1998. initial remarks that truth is absolute. Why Senator FERGUSON—You lost again in doesn’t your report tell the truth? Why 1998. In the year 2001, what did we have? doesn’t the Labor Party’s report tell the More negativity. Roll back the GST—that is truth? the negative side. Those senators opposite Senator Cook—I rise on a point of order, know that they were deserted by the Austra- Madam Acting Deputy President. I am not lian people, who after 5½ years knew and going to have someone say in this place that trusted Prime Minister John Howard. They we do not tell the truth, because we do. That cannot stand it that, after 5½ years, their remark should be withdrawn. You know negativity, their backward looking, would get better. them nowhere. Senator FERGUSON—The report does It has now got even worse. Last Saturday not tell the truth. the Australian voters deserted you in Cun- Senator Cook—It is my report— ningham. Even your own supporters are now deserting you. You find yourself in a situa- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- tion where you simply have to use red her- DENT—There is no point of order. rings to try and somehow divert attention away from the wonderful progress that is 5768 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

Senator FERGUSON—It is your report. Senator Cook—There is no hard evi- I am glad you said so, Senator Cook. I am dence. pleased you said it is your report. Senator FERGUSON—There is hard Senator Cook interjecting— evidence, because a child was dropped over- Senator FERGUSON—You said it was board on SIEV7 and Senator Cook knows it. your report. Senator Cook—There is no proof. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- Senator FERGUSON—It is in the evi- DENT—Order! dence. Senator FERGUSON—You are intel- Senator Cook interjecting— lectually dishonest. Senator FERGUSON—It is in the evi- Senator Cook—I rise on a point of order, dence and the report simply does not tell the Madam Acting Deputy President. I was just whole truth. It is Senator Cook’s report, as he accused in an unparliamentary way. That said. Senator Cook said, ‘It is my report,’ and should be withdrawn. it is your report, Senator Cook, because no- Senator FERGUSON—I withdraw it. body else had the opportunity to put anything into it, because you did not finalise it in time Senator Cook—The earlier remark that for the rest of the committee to consider it in this report does not tell the truth should be ways that reports are always considered withdrawn. It is my report and the report— whenever they are brought to this committee. Senator FERGUSON—It is his report! (Time expired) Senator Cook—of the other senators in Senator JACINTA COLLINS (Victoria) this chamber, and that is a reflection on me (5.57 p.m.)—I will not grace the contribution and all of them about honesty. That remark made by Senator Ferguson just now in rela- should be withdrawn. tion to the process of this inquiry with fur- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- ther comments in the small amount of time DENT—Senator Ferguson, I understand you that I have. Anyone who has followed this have withdrawn those unparliamentary inquiry is able to see the manner in which it comments. was conducted quite fairly and openly by the Senator FERGUSON—If your report chair, Senator Cook. But let me go to the one contains so much truth, why is there no reference from the media that Senator mention in your report of the pattern of con- Ferguson referred to, because it is my op- duct that took place over the whole of the portunity to correct for the record the inaccu- period of the election campaign? racy of the garbage that this government has been feeding the media. In that same article, The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- Glenn Milne accused me of vainly seeking to DENT—Senator Ferguson, I request again do something that simply was not the case. that you address your remarks through the There is no substance for his claim. There is chair. nothing on the record that can sustain it and Senator FERGUSON—I apologise. Why he must have been misled by government is it not included in the report simply be- senators feeding him tripe. Let me go further, cause it does not suit your purposes? If the though, to the issue of the pattern of behav- Australian government wanted to use the iour, because it will be relevant—if I get the treatment of asylum seekers in order to win time—to a theme that I have explored in my an election, it would have put out to the pub- additional comments. lic the treatment of people on SIEV5, SIEV6, The pattern of behaviour record that this SIEV7, SIEV8, SIEV9, SIEV10, SIEV11 government refers to was provided to the and SIEV12. That is what would have hap- government on request by the government in pened. It would have put all of those things a fashion designed by the government to suit into the public arena. But Mr Reith chose not the government. When in our hearings we to. were able to prove that one of the percep- tions reported in that report had not in fact Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5769 occurred, the poor hapless defence officer has been—as he has gloated in the media— involved could not even see the distinction defence counsel to Howard and Reith. He between perception and fact. He basically cannot pretend to be both defence counsel indicated that what he had put to this com- and judge at the same time, and he knows mittee was a table of perceptions. Senator that well. Rather than a forensic and bal- Brandis knows, on the evidence, that the anced position, he has presented a selective purported strangulation incident that he trot- representation of the evidence aimed at a ted out to the Australian to demonise asylum target. This target I am referring to now is seekers—and that was front page news—did the one I find most offensive. For him to not occur. have targeted Commander Banks in his se- Senator Brandis—I rise on a point of or- lective representation of the evidence is out- der, Madam Acting Deputy President. That is rageous. For him to then be here claiming unparliamentary. I have been accused of at- this tactic about open findings is absolutely tempting to demonise asylum seekers. I have outrageous. There is no other conclusion in attempted to do no such thing. I have simply, relation to Commander Banks and Brigadier in a clinical way, called attention to the facts. Silverstone— I ask you to insist that it be withdrawn. Senator Brandis—Mr Acting Deputy Senator Cook—Madam Acting Deputy President, I rise on a point of order. I have President, I rise on the point of order. The been accused of something which is false. I remark made is not unparliamentary. Senator have been accused of targeting Commander Brandis knows full well that it is not unpar- Banks. I have not done so. liamentary. The point of his point of order The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT was to interrupt Senator Collins. (Senator Lightfoot)—What is your point of Senator Ferguson—Hang on: how many order, Senator Brandis? times did you interrupt us with points of or- Senator Brandis—My point of order is der? that the allegation is false. I believe Com- Senator Cook—But I was justified; mander Banks told the truth to the committee you’re not! I have made my point of order. at all times, and there is nothing in the mi- nority report that suggests to the contrary. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator McLucas)—There is no point of The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- order. DENT—There is no point of order. Senator JACINTA COLLINS—In rela- Senator JACINTA COLLINS—I have tion to Senator Brandis’s claim, his report— not suggested that Senator Brandis has sug- and he is joined by the other government gested that Commander Banks lied. We all senators—purports to represent the facts. Let know that he did not. We all know that both us just take pause for the moment and see Commander Banks and Brigadier Silverstone precisely what it does. Senator Ferguson has demonstrated the finest of our Defence Force already said that he did not look at the Odg- integrity, as did many others. However, ers report. The Odgers report, which I did Commander Banks has been set up by the refer to in my report, is quite clear on the government as the target for blame. He has matter. On page 39, it says: been scapegoated in this report, but any rea- sonable person who looks at the evidence In my opinion, it was misleading of Mr Reith not to refer in the interview on 14 October to the fully—and I stress fully—set out in the ma- doubt he knew existed in relation to the attribu- jority report would conclude that there is no tion of the photographs. way we can ever conclude what occurred, I am not surprised that this component and unless, as the witnesses said, the incident had other references in the Odgers report do not been taped, and it had not. We found that appear in the report of the government sena- both officers have the highest of integrity tors because, as Senator Brandis has already but, again, as they said to us, that is not the gloated, rather than providing a forensic and point. The point is that, when that misunder- balanced approach to the evidence, he really standing occurred, what happened? It is that 5770 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 that the government is culpable for. Let me The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- go to that particular point: why did John DENT—Senator Ferguson, I feel obliged to Howard on 18 February on the John Faine hear Senator Collins. program say: Senator JACINTA COLLINS—Some ... I never received any written contradiction of senior defence officers privately raised con- that, nor did I receive any verbal contradiction of cerns with the culture and agenda which was that. developing in PM&C. I will comment on this When asked in his office, the answer was no. later tonight in relation to the conduct of the The facts are that on 13 occasions it did oc- Prime Minister’s task force and Jane Halton, cur. I am not bothering to go to the detail of but the blame in this very circumstantial case the 14 occasions when it did with respect to goes directly back to John Howard. Peter Reith and his office; I think you are The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- just in absolute denial there. DENT—The Prime Minister or Mr Howard. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- Senator JACINTA COLLINS—The DENT—Senator Collins, are you saying that Prime Minister. Some excerpts from the I am in denial? ship’s logs had not been made fully public, Senator JACINTA COLLINS—No, I but there are some excerpts of those logs in am sorry. my comments. Who, for instance, was in- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- truding between a request from the boarding DENT—I would appreciate it if you would party at 0751 zulu that women and children address your remarks through the chair. be moved off the SIEV, a request, at 1009 zulu, that people be put in the water on the Senator JACINTA COLLINS—I will double and then, at 1036 zulu, the comment refer my remarks through the chair. How- ‘contacting parliament on the crisis’? Why ever, Mr Acting Deputy President, you may on earth would you be contacting parliament be, in part, if you accept the government between people being put in the water and senators’ response on this issue. being put somewhere safely? The time gap Senator Ferguson—Mr Acting Deputy between those poor people being put in the President, I rise on a point of order. That is a water at 1009 and the final instruction that reflection on the chair and I ask that it be they could go onto the Adelaide was at 1100 withdrawn. zulu. Why did it take 51 minutes for the The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- Prime Minister’s office to intrude in this DENT—There is no point of order. situation rather than just let the Navy get on Senator JACINTA COLLINS—I have with their job and the principal imperative not bothered going to the detail of the case relating to safety of life at sea? against Peter Reith because our independent I encourage people to look at these logs assessor has done that quite well. It is just with this in mind, because there are countless interesting that the government did not refer incidents where the Prime Minister’s office to that. In my remarks, I have looked at the needed to be consulted, or the Prime Minis- detail of what John Howard, his office and ter responded, when the principal objec- the Department of the Prime Minister and tive—on which the Navy should have been Cabinet did do. That is where the principal allowed to do their job—was to treat these concern is. As I reflected in my comments, a people with dignity and safety. But this did couple of months before the election— not occur, because of the much broader Senator Ferguson—Why didn’t you put agenda of the Howard government and its them in the main report? border protection plan—one that it did not consult the public on and that it implemented Senator JACINTA COLLINS—Because during an election period. During a caretaker they are my personal reflection of some is- period, it made a fundamental change in sues. policy. (Time expired) Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5771

Senator MASON (Queensland) (6.09 vendetta of the highest order, a payback, in- p.m.)—On behalf of the government senators deed, a witch-hunt or a show trial. The truth I would like to thank the secretariat for all is—this is the hardest thing for the hardheads their work on the preparation of the report, in of the Labor Party, and this is what they do particular over the last couple days where not like—that Labor misjudged it. They they went above and beyond the call of duty. misjudged public sentiment before the elec- I agree with what Senator Cook and Senator tion. They did not realise that the Australian Bartlett said: this report will stand the test of public would back the Howard government’s time. But not for the reasons they gave. This strong border protection policy. After the report is perhaps the longest—and certainly Labor Party were so crushingly defeated, the the weightiest—testament to sour grapes in bourgeois left that run the Labor Party these Australian political history. This committee days thought, ‘We will run the issue again.’ inquiry was supposed to be the vehicle for Really clever! The bourgeois left said, ‘We revenge for the Labor Party’s crushing defeat will run the issue again in the inquiry, but in November 2001. This was the vehicle for this time we will win.’ What has happened their vendetta. If you want to know about six months later? An ignominious and abso- Labor Party motivation for this report, Mr lutely pathetic backdown and defeat. They Acting Deputy President, the motivation can set up this inquiry to embarrass the govern- quickly be calculated from having a look at ment, and in the end they embarrassed them- what Senator Faulkner said to Admiral selves. Barrie. This was Senator Faulkner in inti- The inquiry has totally backfired on the mate mode, sounding positively Labor Party for two reasons. Firstly, as Clintonesque. He said to Admiral Barrie: Senator Brandis said, Labor were not able to ... I know what you feel ... But I hope you under- find evidence to smear the government, pub- stand the way that some of us on our side of the lic servants, the military or senior ministers. parliament feel when we see some of our col- They tried hard. They tried hard but they leagues who are not returned in a federal election. failed. Secondly, instead the inquiry un- The motivation, as I say, was defeat at the earthed more and more evidence about the general election. There was no search for behaviour of illegal boat people and the peo- truth. This was simply a vehicle for a ven- ple smugglers. This stream of information, detta. Ms Macklin, now Deputy Leader of which was adduced by Senator Brandis, in the Opposition, said to Young Labor in fact convinced the people of Australia that Queensland on 24 February: the Howard government had the right poli- In Parliament over the past two weeks, day after cies. And every time a new bit of informa- day we have seen further damning evidence that tion came out, the Labor Party just hated it. this Government will sacrifice all pretence of The pattern of conduct that was exposed truth and honesty to achieve its political ends. during the inquiry makes for startling read- The children overboard affair has revealed the ing. Most of the dozen interceptions by the magnitude of their deceit. Royal Australian Navy involved behaviour And so it went on. Make no mistake: when on the part of boat people and people smug- this inquiry was called together and the Sen- glers that most Australians found really dis- ate commenced its inquiry, the Labor Party turbing and also quite appalling. It included, thought they were on a winner. They thought amongst many other things, the destruction they would gain some political mileage out of navigational equipment and threats of of this. But, oh dear, in the end this inquiry violence against Navy personnel and other was not about children going overboard; it illegal immigrants, particularly women and was about Labor going over the top. It was children. The pattern of conduct also in- not about lost accountability; it was about a cluded threats of suicide or self-harm, hunger lost election. It was never about finding the strikes, the lighting of fires, sabotaging the truth; it was simply about finding a hammer vessels and, finally, scuttling the boats so or a vehicle to belt the government. That is that the Royal Australian Navy would have what this inquiry was about. It was a political to succumb to moral blackmail, pick up the 5772 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 refugees and take them back for onshore Reith did not use the information he knew processing here in Australia. That was the about. That, more than anything, explodes aim of that pattern of conduct. the Labor Party case. He did not need to We put the facts out to the Australian peo- make anything up because he knew of far ple, and more heartily than ever they en- more significant and far, far more serious dorsed government policy. And didn’t the events. Labor Party hate that! Establishing the pat- In the end, Senator Brandis is right. This tern of conduct did three things. First, it vin- was a waste of taxpayers’ money—thousands dicated Australia’s tougher border protection of pages, hundreds of hours of testimony, policy, including the Pacific solution. Scut- thousands of taxpayers’ dollars spent on this tling your boat in Australian territorial wa- inquiry. After weeks of hearing scores of ters no longer pays dividends and no longer witnesses there is still no smoking gun de- means you will be taken to Australia. The spite the very, very best efforts of the Labor first thing the pattern of conduct did was Party to find one. I found it quite interesting justify that policy. Second, it established the that the Labor Party started off going after context in which this entire event occurred. the Prime Minister to skewer his credibility. When the call came from Commander Banks Before long, they moved off the Prime Min- through to Brigadier Silverstone and right up ister. They thought, ‘No—a bit hard. We’ll through military high command to public go after Mr Reith.’ servants and senior ministers people were Senator Brandis—No evidence there ei- concerned about the report that a child had ther. been thrown overboard. They were con- cerned, but no-one was particularly sur- Senator MASON—There was no evi- prised. That is the point. The atmosphere at dence there either. ‘We’ll go after Admiral the time lent itself to the distinct possibility Barrie instead,’ they said. And then of course that a child may have been thrown over- Air Vice Marshall Titheridge, Rear Admiral board. That is why government senators Smith and Rear Admiral Ritchie—no evi- went to so much trouble to adduce all this dence against them. What did the Labor evidence before the inquiry. It established the Party do then? They lowered their sights atmosphere and the context in which the again and went after public servants like Ms military was operating at that time. Third, Halton—no evidence against her either. And and more importantly, it explodes the entire in the end the best shot they had was in this Labor case that the children overboard affair context quite a junior public servant. Poor was motivated by the government’s determi- old Dr Hammer allegedly inappropriately nation to use the affair for sordid political interfered with a witness over a cup of coffee purposes. at the Kurrajong Hotel. Of course that is the site of the death of the Labor Party’s dreams Mr Reith knew about the other illegal en- in contexts other than just this one. try vessels. He knew about SIEV1 right through to SIEV12. He knew all about the The Labor Party had their sights set on the pattern of conduct—the sabotaging of the Prime Minister at first but in the end the guns navigation equipment, the lighting of the were sighted on Dr Hammer. Dr Hammer fires, the pouring of petrol on the vessels, the was examined up hill and down dale for threats of violence against Royal Australian hours about his conduct, how he had inap- Navy staff and so forth. He knew about that. propriately dealt with Commander King and He knew that a child had been dropped over- tried to influence him. So what happened? board from SIEV7—he knew that as well. He went to the Senate Privileges Committee. But did he use any of that information for And what did the Senate Privileges Com- political purposes in the lead-up to the elec- mittee find? What it found was that there tion? Did he? No, he did not. And that ex- was no evidence to support any allegation plodes the entire Labor Party case. They say against Dr Hammer. That was the Labor this entire matter was manicured for political Party’s big hit. They couldn’t get the PM, purposes. In fact, what happened was that Mr they couldn’t get Minister Reith, they couldn’t get the military, they couldn’t get Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5773 the senior public servants so they thought, 1997, I present the following report of the ‘We’ll go after a middle-level public ser- Auditor-General: Report No. 13 of 2002- vant.’ They couldn’t even get him! There 03—Information Support Services—Bench- simply was not the evidence they thought marking the Internal Audit Function: Fol- there was. low-on report: Benchmarking Study. This example is far from exceptional. The Joint House Department whole inquiry is littered with similar failed The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT attempts to implicate the government, the (Senator Lightfoot)—I present the annual Public Service and the military in this pa- report of the Joint House Department for thetically imagined grand conspiracy. Sena- 2001-02. tor Ferguson and Senator Brandis are right that they had conclusions they wanted to COMMITTEES reach and they did everything they could to Membership contort and distort the evidence to reach The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT those conclusions. Guesswork, speculation, (Senator Lightfoot)—The President has misinterpretation—in fact, a grand theory received letters from party leaders seeking to that would have made Oliver Stone very vary the membership of various committees. proud. Admiral Barrie, Ms Halton, Dr Ham- Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- mer and the Prime Minister all came under sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- the gun in a really pathetic attempt to dis- tion) (6.23 p.m.)—by leave—I move: credit the government. It is no wonder that in the end this inquiry embarrassed the Labor That senators be discharged from and ap- pointed to committees as follows: Party. The only smoking gun in this case was the one they held to their own heads. Economics Legislation and References Committee. As I mentioned before, not only did the Appointed—Participating member: inquiry not embarrass the government but Senator Buckland quite the opposite. It uncovered a pattern of conduct on the part of the illegal boat people Environment, Communications, Infor- mation Technology and the Arts Legisla- and the people-smugglers, a pattern of con- tion Committee duct that until recently was unknown to the public. Mr Reith and the government never Appointed—Substitute member: Sena- tor Barnett to replace Senator Tierney used the information they had available to for the committee’s inquiry into the them for political purposes. Labor said they provisions of the Renewable Energy wanted to find the truth. They have claimed (Electricity) Amendment Bill 2002. that from the word go. In the famous words Question agreed to. of Jack Nicholson in the film A Few Good Men, ‘You want the truth? You can’t handle ASSENT the truth.’ The truth is—sadly for the Labor A message from His Excellency the Ad- Party—that people in all the circumstances ministrator of the Commonwealth of Austra- acted reasonably and conscientiously. There lia was reported informing the Senate that he was a failure to correct information in the had assented to the following law: military chain of command, but there was no Higher Education Funding Amendment Act grand conspiracy—no material for Oliver 2002 (Act No. 87, 2002). Stone at all. Case closed. BROADCASTING SERVICES Question agreed to. AMENDMENT (MEDIA OWNERSHIP) DOCUMENTS BILL 2002 Auditor-General’s Reports First Reading Report No. 13 of 2002-03 Bill received from the House of Repre- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT sentatives. (Senator Lightfoot)—In accordance with the provisions of the Auditor-General’s Act 5774 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- dations concerning the introduction of an obliga- sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- tion to disclose cross-media relationships, and tion) (6.24 p.m.)—I move: restricting regional cross-media mergers to two of the three types of media covered by the cross- That this bill may proceed without formalities media rules. The remaining recommendations are and be now read a first time. also under consideration. Question agreed to. I turn now to the specific measures contained in Bill read a first time. the bill. Second Reading Like other sectors of the economy, Australia’s media industries are under pressure to become Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- more global in their technology and equity links. sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- These business strategies are necessary because tion) (6.25 p.m.)—I table a revised explana- technological convergence in the communications tory memorandum relating to the bill and I sectors has placed pressure on media operators to move: invest in digital technologies. Digitisation of pro- That this bill be now read a second time. duction and transmission could enable new types of interactive services to be offered and reduce I seek leave to have the second reading the cost of producing content. However, invest- speech incorporated in Hansard. ment in digital technologies requires large capital Leave granted. outlays. The speech read as follows— The current foreign ownership and control re- strictions in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 The communications environment is experiencing (the BSA), which apply to free-to-air and sub- a period of rapid change. Existing and potential scription television services, serve as a major media operators are forging innovative commer- deterrent to investment in Australian media or- cial strategies to secure their position in the new ganisations. market place. Consolidation and diversification have created substantial global communications The bill therefore repeals the media-specific for- groups. Consumers are no longer confined to the eign ownership and control restrictions contained traditional media of radio, free-to-air television in the BSA. Foreign ownership of Australian me- and newspapers available in their local area. dia assets will continue to be regulated by the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 and The regulatory framework in relation to the own- Australia’s general foreign investment policy. ership and control of Australian media assets is These provisions have the ability to address na- anachronistic in such a dynamic environment. tional interest concerns that might arise in relation The current restrictions impede commercial flexi- to a particular investment. bility and access to capital for infrastructure and content investment. They hinder the ability of Repealing these restrictions will improve access Australian media organisations to succeed in the to capital, increase the pool of potential media new market environment. owners and act as a safeguard on media concen- tration. The Government is committed to reforming the regulatory framework governing foreign and I turn now to measures to reform the cross-media cross-media ownership of media assets. This bill rules. seeks to give effect to this commitment and al- Technological progress and globalisation are lows Australian media organisations to take changing the structure of the Australian media greater advantage of the rapidly evolving com- market, and patterns of media consumption. In- munications environment. creasingly, Australian media organisations are When the Government introduced this legislation, responding to these changes by investing in new it invited sensible debate on these important me- technology, developing new business models and dia ownership issues. The bill was immediately forming broader strategic partnerships. Despite sent to the Senate Environment, Communications, this, the regulation of ownership and control of Information Technology and the Arts Legislation Australian media has remained largely static. Committee for consideration and to enable public Reform of the cross-media rules will clear the input into the proposed changes prior to debate in way for renewed market interest in Australian either House of Parliament. media assets and will allow media companies to The Government welcomed the Committee’s take greater advantage of investment opportuni- inquiry and report, and adopted their recommen- ties as they arise. Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5775

The Government is committed to ensuring ongo- The certificate must be issued if the ABA is satis- ing diversity of opinion and information in the fied that the conditions included in the application Australian media. It does not believe that diver- will meet the objective of editorial separation for sity of ownership is necessary to achieve this. the set of media operations concerned. This ob- Nevertheless, the Government recognises the jective is that separate editorial decision-making need to ensure that media owners do not exploit responsibilities must be maintained in relation to their co-ownership of media organisations in a each of the media operations. way which prevents those organisations from Three mandatory tests are prescribed for the ob- exercising separate editorial judgements. jective of editorial separation to be met. They are To this end, the bill provides for a transparent and the existence of: effective public-interest test in relation to main- (a) separate editorial policies; taining separate editorial decision-making respon- sibilities in cross-controlled media organisations. (b) appropriate organisational charts; and Diversity of opinion is further protected by ex- (c) separate editorial news management, news isting provisions in the BSA relating to limita- compilation processes and news gathering tions on the number of licences able to controlled and interpretation capabilities. by an individual organisation, and on the percent- These requirements will not preclude the sharing age of audience share able to be controlled by a of resources or other forms of co-operation in person or organisation. These provisions will be newsgathering between organisations that could preserved. assist owners seeking to realise efficiencies from The Trade Practices Act 1974 will continue to jointly owned organisations. apply to proposed media mergers and acquisi- The conditions for exemption included in the bill tions. Any such proposals will be subject to a test are straightforward, reasonable and transparent. for the effect on competition, which is adminis- They provide certainty for industry by clearly tered by the Australian Competition and Con- setting out expectations for editorial separation. sumer Commission (ACCC). It is important that there be adequate monitoring The bill provides for a process whereby exemp- and compliance measures to ensure public confi- tion certificates are issued to applicants who dence in the new provisions. would otherwise be in breach of the cross-media The bill provides that once an exemption certifi- provisions. Holders of exemption certificates will cate is active in relation to a set of media opera- not be in breach of the cross-media rules in rela- tions, those media operations must meet the ob- tion to media entities which they control, pro- jective of editorial separation as a condition of vided the conditions of the certificate are satis- their licence. fied. Certificates become active upon a person The BSA gives the ABA the ability to investigate assuming control of two or more media entities in bona fide complaints of failures to adhere to li- a way which would otherwise breach the cross- cence conditions, and to publish the outcome. If media rules. the ABA determines that a licensee has failed to Consistent with a recommendation of the Major- comply with the editorial separation condition, it ity Report of the Senate Environment, Communi- may issue a notice requiring the licensee to ad- cations, Information Technology and the Arts dress the contravention within a specified time- Legislation Committee, the bill provides that a frame. Failure to comply with the ABA notice is a cross-media exemption in regional areas could criminal offence, which can result in a large fine only authorise cross-ownership of two of the being imposed. The ABA is also able to suspend three types of media (television, radio and news- or cancel a licence if a licence condition is papers) covered by the cross-media rules. This breached. Such action may be appropriate in the acknowledges that regional areas frequently have case of repeated or severe breaches of the edito- comparatively fewer choices of media outlets rial separation condition. than in metropolitan Australia. This provision is Enforcement options are also available against an appropriate means of addressing the differ- controlling parties. When an undertaking is not ences that exist in the metropolitan and regional adhered to, the exemption certificate will cease to media environments, and the different economic apply and the controlling party will therefore be circumstances experienced by regional media. in breach of the cross-media provisions. In these The Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA) circumstances the BSA allows the ABA to require must maintain a Register of active cross-media the controlling party to divest. exemption certificates which is to be available on In line with another recommendation of Majority the Internet. Report of the Senate Committee, the bill imposes 5776 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 a general obligation to disclose a cross-media The Government recognises public concern about relationship on media outlets subject to the same declining levels of local and regional news and exemption certificate. information programs on both TV and radio. Lo- The bill details two means of disclosure: cal services are important for developing commu- • nity identity, and ensuring that important infor- the ‘business affairs’ model, which will apply mation is relayed in a timely fashion. The Gov- to commercial television broadcasters and ernment’s election commitments stated that or- newspapers, and which will be the default ganisations seeking exemptions from the cross- disclosure model for commercial radio media rules would be required to give undertak- broadcasters; and ings in relation to minimum levels of local TV • an alternative ‘regular disclosure’ model and radio news and current affairs. This bill which will only be available to commercial strengthens the nature of that commitment to en- radio broadcasters. sure that substantial measures are taken to ensure The business affairs model requires that media the continuation of local news services. outlets disclose a cross-media relationship at the The bill amends the BSA to impose a condition time that they broadcast or publish matter that on broadcasting licences in relation to which concerns the business affairs of a cross-controlled cross-media exemptions have been granted that media organisation, including cross-promotional requires broadcasters to comply with prescribed material (other than clearly identifiable advertis- minimum levels of local news and information ing material). services, or to retain existing levels of local news Exemptions are also provided for TV/radio pro- and information where these are higher than the gram guides, journalistic acknowledgment of prescribed minimum. sources, and unanticipated comments in live The prescribed minimum levels include at least broadcasts. Further material may be exempted five news bulletins per week containing matters from the business affairs disclosure requirement of local significance, broadcast of local commu- by Ministerial determination. nity service announcements and the ability to Alternatively, commercial radio broadcasters may broadcast emergency warnings if and when re- adopt the regular disclosure method by written quired. notification to the ABA. The regular disclosure Whilst the Government is predisposed to imple- method requires a radio broadcaster covered by a menting a broader local news requirement, further certificate to regularly disclose the cross-media consideration of the Senate Committee’s recom- relationship in such a way and with such fre- mendations on local news will occur once the quency that the prime-time audience of the ABA has made its final determination in relation broadcaster would be reasonably likely to be to its recent investigation into the adequacy of aware of the cross-media relationship. local news and information services on commer- It will be sufficient for the regular disclosure cial television. method if a statement that there is a cross-media The Government is concerned to maintain a di- relationship is broadcast by the radio broadcaster verse range of commercial radio services of broad once a day during prime-time. general appeal, especially in regional areas. The intention of the regular disclosure model is to Therefore, the bill prohibits contracts and ar- establish a general level of audience awareness rangements that attempt to restrict the program about the cross-media relationship. This is a vi- format of commercial radio broadcasting services. able alternative to the business affairs model for These provisions address a situation where con- radio broadcasters, given the largely unscripted tractual or other arrangements limit the program nature of radio and the variation in size and re- format of a commercial radio service, reducing sources of radio entities. the diversity of radio services and competition for For both models (business affairs and regular audience and advertisers, particularly for the disclosure), alternative means which satisfy the benefit of an incumbent commercial radio broad- disclosure requirement may be specified by caster. regulations. The bill prohibits contracts and arrangements for The requirement for disclosure of cross-media the transfer of control of a commercial radio holdings protects the public interest by ensuring broadcasting licence, where the contract or ar- that audiences and readers are made aware of the rangement restricts the program format of the ownership structures of the media outlets from service provided under that licence. which they access information. The bill also prohibits other contracts or arrange- ments that restrict the program format of a com- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5777 mercial broadcasting radio service, where the Authority recently completed their rezoning purpose or effect, or likely effect, of the contract of the far north section of the marine park, or arrangement is to confer a commercial advan- the most northerly of four zones. It has been tage on another commercial radio broadcasting a lengthy process, extending back to the mid- licensee in the same licence area. 1990s, which has resulted in some relatively Civil penalties, including fines of up to $275 000 small changes in the zoning plan. for a body corporate, will apply for entering into such contracts or arrangements. Furthermore, the Despite some early optimism, the far bill renders the contract or arrangement void. northern section zoning plan was unfortu- As well as written contracts, the prohibition will nately not used as an opportunity to ensure also apply to agreements or understandings that that protection and conservation were im- do not constitute legally binding contracts. An plemented as primary objectives of the Great arrangement of this sort could be formal or in- Barrier Reef Marine Park Act. In early dis- formal, written or unwritten. cussions for that zoning plan, the Great Bar- The prohibition will not apply to contracts or rier Reef Marine Park Authority recom- arrangements exempted by regulation. The ABA mended that Princess Charlotte Bay—a ma- will also have the power to exempt particular jor dugong habitat, which is what this regu- contracts or arrangements. This is intended to lation applies to—be designated as a green or allow some flexibility once the provisions com- a no-take zone. As a result of pressure from mence, where there are legitimate types of trans- the commercial fishing industry, the subse- actions that should not be prevented. quent draft and the final draft recommended The proposed changes will not affect the ability a lesser designation of a conservation park of the ACCC to scrutinise both existing and fu- zone equivalent to a yellow or marine park A ture arrangements that might have the effect of zone under the zoning plans in other regions limiting competition. However, the Trade Prac- of the marine park. This permits line fishing tices Act generally only addresses competition issues, rather than effects on diversity, which are and collecting. It does not permit trawling the primary concern of these provisions. and netting and is intended to provide for conservation of the bay in perpetuity. It is not This bill provides for the timely reform of the regulatory framework governing the ownership an ideal solution in the Democrats’ view, and and control of Australian media organisations, many felt that the conservation values of ensuring that Australian media organisations, as Princess Charlotte Bay justified, and still well as the Australian public, are positioned at the justify, stronger protection. Nonetheless, that forefront of an exciting new communications era. is the level of protection provided to it. A Debate (on motion by Senator Mackay) number of activities are permitted in the con- adjourned. servation zone only with a permit. Commer- cial netting and trawling activities are not GREAT BARRIER REEF MARINE included as activities that could be permitted. PARK AMENDMENT REGULATIONS However, the federal government added a 2002 (No. 5) new clause to the zoning plan that provides Senator BARTLETT (Queensland— that a person may also use or enter the Prin- Leader of the Australian Democrats) (6.25 cess Charlotte Bay area of the conservation p.m.)—I move: park zone for commercial netting or crabbing That the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park if the person has the permission of the Amendment Regulations 2002 (No. 5), as con- authority to use or enter the area for that pur- tained in Statutory Rules 2002 No. 209 and made pose. under the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975, be disallowed. There is a requirement that certain condi- tions are met before such a permit is granted. This is an important issue that needs exten- These non-conforming uses are permitted as sive examination and explanation, and be- a result of legislation created through the cause of the time and a desire to have a deci- Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Amendment sion on this before 6.50 p.m. I will truncate Bill 2001, which was intended to strengthen my remarks rather severely, which is unfor- the capacity of the marine park authority to tunate, but I will put some things on the rec- make changes to fishing practices in a timely ord. The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park 5778 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 fashion. Prior to that amendment, the is not expressly prohibited in the zoning authority, for instance, could not remove le- plan. Passing a regulation that allows rapid gal commercial fishing from a high conser- response for the purposes of conservation is vation area except by amending the zoning an entirely legitimate exception to this broad plan, a process that can take several years. zoning and regulatory structure. Tabling a The amendment that went through last year regulation such as this, which is intended to allowed the making of regulations so that the circumvent the zoning plan and circumvent authority can require a permit for commer- the entire rezoning process, is simply not cial fishing in certain zones that were previ- acceptable and the Democrats do not support ously open to commercial fishing without such efforts. There is no excuse for such a regulation. In other words, it allowed a regulation, especially considering the con- speedier management decision for conserva- servation values of Princess Charlotte Bay tion purposes to be made. and the minimal number of highly protected As a result of continuing pressure from areas in the marine park—fewer than five per the fishing industry, there was consideration cent. given to a phasing out of fishing activities in Damage can be caused by fishing, and the Princess Charlotte Bay rather than an imme- need to ensure that the representative areas diate prohibition. That would have permitted process is capable of succeeding without all existing commercial fishing in the bay to interference at every step of the way is cru- continue until the licence holders died, which cial. This may be the most dangerous conse- is a very long phase-out indeed. That was quence of these regulations. If zones that never implemented. Instead, after the most ostensibly exclude commercial fishing can recent federal election and renewed industry now allow commercial fishing by regulatory pressure, these regulations were devised. stealth, then the entire purpose of the zoning These regulations, which the Democrats and plans and the representative areas process is Labor are aiming to disallow today, effec- called into question. It is a threshold issue. tively reinstitute commercial fishing in Prin- The representative areas process, which the cess Charlotte Bay, in what is supposed to be Democrats have repeatedly supported, is the a conservation zone. The claim in the ex- largest and most important initiative under- planatory memorandum that this is a capping taken by the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park effort in the bay is simply nonsense. The Authority since the marine park was declared claim that permits are conditional is also a over 25 years ago. It is an attempt to rezone nonsense, as the only condition precedent to the entire marine park, and one of its objec- acquiring a permit for commercial fishing is tives is to significantly increase the number that the applicant be a commercial fisher and size of highly protected areas. who has previously fished in the bay. In That increased protection is critical if we other words, all the commercial fishers who are going to ensure the long-term survival of currently fish, and in the past have regularly the marine park—and that is for the benefit commercially fished, in Princess Charlotte of commercial fishers, recreational fishers, Bay will be allowed to continue to do so de- the tourist industry and others as well as the spite the zoning of the bay. That regulation general public. The representative areas pro- makes a mockery of the entire zoning struc- cess has been in preparation for a number of ture. years now. In the last two to three years it The zones are intended to set out the types has started to take shape and the entire ma- of uses that can occur in each of the six rine park has been mapped according to bio- zones regularly used in the Great Barrier regions. There is no doubt in the scientific Reef Marine Park. The regulations are not community that a significant increase in the designed to circumvent the restrictions con- number and size of green zones is necessary. tained in the zoning plan; they are intended These will not protect the park from all to elaborate on the requirements associated threats of course, but it will be a significant with permitted uses in each zone or to out- advance. The representative areas process line the criteria for permitting an activity that must succeed, as the current prognosis for Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5779 the marine park is not good. This regulation gested that the bay be declared an interim must not succeed, in the Democrats’ view. To dugong protection area. In 1997 a decision allow this precedent to be set would create a was made to address measures for dugong dangerous future prospect for similar moves protection through a review of the zoning by governments down the track that would plan. undermine months and years of work by the GBRMPA undertook a review of the plan entire community and the marine park in the mid to late 1990s, and the far northern authority in ensuring adequate protection of section zoning plan came into effect in April the environmental values of the marine park. this year. Zoning areas of the Great Barrier I urge all senators to support this disal- Reef is the management tool used by the lowance motion. It is a crucial one for pro- authority to protect and preserve the reef. tecting the conservation values of Princess Zoning separates activities that may be in Charlotte Bay—conservation values and conflict with each other. It also allows areas protection that were put in place after a long that need a higher level of protection to have process of evaluation and consultation. That different levels of activity permitted. There protection should not be reversed overnight are 14 types of zones used by the authority to by regulation that would effectively allow manage the region. The consultation process the reintroduction of trawling and commer- on the revision of the plan started in Novem- cial fishing in that marine park. I commend ber 1994, the second consultation draft was the disallowance motion to the Senate. I out in 1997 and the plan was tabled, as I thank Senator McLucas, in particular, for her said, on 6 March 2000. support and her commitment to the protec- When the draft zoning plan was released tion of the ecological values of the marine during that consultation process, Princess park. Charlotte Bay was zoned as a habitat protec- Senator McLUCAS (Queensland) (6.34 tion zone, marked dark blue on maps. A p.m.)—The history of the zoning in the Great habitat protection zone has objectives that Barrier Reef Marine Park far northern sec- provide for the protection of the area, but tion zone is a long and complex one. It is a they do allow certain fishing activities to story that unfortunately is littered with epi- occur. In the case of Princess Charlotte Bay, sodes of political intervention in what should commercial netting was a permittable activ- be, but has not been, a process driven by a ity. However, around 1999 the then Minister goal of protecting and presenting the values for the Environment and Heritage, Senator of the marine park. Management of the ma- Robert Hill, intervened in that process and rine park should be delivered through a rig- declared that Princess Charlotte Bay would orous evaluation of the science and analysis be zoned as a conservation park. A conser- of the environmental, social and economic vation park zone, or yellow zone as it is values attached to the area. known by North Queenslanders, does not In the development of these regulations, allow commercial netting. One can ask: this fundamental principle has not been ad- where was the science that Senator Hill used hered to. In fact, the reality is quite the re- to inform his decision on this unilateral verse. The development of this set of regula- measure? The answer is that there was none. tions has been a long and complex process. I In 2001, the election year—an important want to take the opportunity to ensure that fact to note—Senator Hill once again inter- the record is clear about what has happened vened and, without consultation with all in- to bring us to this point. The far northern terested parties, offered a compromise that section was incorporated into the marine essentially grandfathered or phased out the park in late 1983, and its first zoning plan permits for commercial netting in Princess came into force in 1986. In 1996, in recogni- Charlotte Bay. This was to be delivered tion of the fact that Princess Charlotte Bay, through a set of regulations. Again, where on the east coast of Cape York Peninsula, is was the science to inform that decision? The well known as a dugong habitat area, the reality is that there was no science; there was Great Barrier Reef Ministerial Council sug- only politics. The other reality is that the 5780 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 member for Leichhardt, Mr Warren Entsch, advise its ministers when they are acting out- agreed to that compromise. That fact needs side accepted natural resource management to be understood, even though he is trying to principles. rewrite the history books as we speak. The The regulations also have implications for Queensland Seafood Industry Association the community’s acceptance, or lack of ac- advise me that they did not agree with the ceptance, of the current development of the compromise at that time and continued to representative areas program. GBRMPA has lobby for change. The environment sector consistently said that RAP is an open and was not consulted, nor were the recreational accountable process. The community is fishing groups or tourism industry. Once sceptical at this point in time and the intro- again, a unilateral decision was made that duction of this regulation without consulta- was not backed up by science or consulta- tion will call into question any trust at all that tion. the community has in GBRMPA being able The promised regulations, though, did not to deliver an open and accountable process. eventuate. They were obviously not priori- The introduction of the regulations while this tised by Senator Hill and the promise was process is under way is inappropriate. Over not actioned by GBRMPA. Following the 10,000 submissions have been received election, and the appointment of Dr Kemp to through the representative area program pro- the environment portfolio, another interven- cess, and these people will be sceptical of the tion occurred. Dr Kemp, again without the commitment of GBRMPA to that process if support of any consultation or any scientific they think that all they have to do is start advice, once again changed the policy on banging on their politician’s door to get a Princess Charlotte Bay. This time it was to different outcome. permit commercial netters with history in the The impact on the fishers who operate in area to apply for a permit to continue to op- Princess Charlotte Bay is real, and they are erate in the bay. This regulation, the one that angry. But their anger needs to be directed at Dr Kemp promoted earlier this year, amends Mr Entsch, Senator Hill and Dr Kemp for the a conservation park zone to allow a specifi- contemptuous way they have treated them. cally prohibited activity in that same zone. The Queensland Seafood Industry Associa- The regulation-making power, which was tion says there is no evidence that the reten- ostensibly to increase protection for the tion of a net fishing industry in the area will Great Barrier Reef, has effectively become a have any impact on environmental values. power to achieve the opposite. It is a breach Other stakeholders, notably the environment of process and it was undertaken without sector, have a different view. That of course consultation with the broader community. is predictable. But the reality is that the peo- It is a process which has been tainted by ple who should be making the decision are political intervention that has left 16 fishing not the politicians who sit in this place and in families in limbo, without direction, for over the other place but the natural resource man- two years. This decision has not been made agers who have the skills and experience to properly, and I am concerned that there could make decisions based on sound science and have been the potential for an individual or a on social, economic and environmental val- group to take legal action questioning the ues. validity of the decision. It is a decision that We should be looking for a scientifically has politicians’ fingerprints all over it. This is based decision-making process that relies on not the way to manage the world’s most sig- science, not politics, to make appropriate nificant coral reef system; in fact, it is not decisions about the management of the reef even the way to manage a fishery. GBRMPA and the management of fishers. I say to the has consistently argued that it is a manager government that it is time they went back to of a marine park, not a fisheries manager, the drawing board to truly look at Princess and I must say that the way in which this Charlotte Bay: look at the environmental regulation has come to this place certainly values, look at the need for dugong protec- suggests that it does not have the ability to tion, recognise that there are 16 fishing Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5781 families that have history in the area, and do bills that the government want to go through. the work properly. Do not bring in a yellow I would caution the minister—I understand zone and then amend it to allow an activity his frustration—to please be a bit more judi- that is specifically excluded in the descrip- cious in his use of language. tion of that conservation park zone. The ball The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- is now back in the government’s court. If DENT—That is not a point of order. they want to do this process properly, they should consult with the community, consult Senator IAN MACDONALD—Mr Act- with the fishers, consult with the environ- ing Deputy President, I now have 120 sec- ment sector and treat the people in North onds to deal with this very important issue. Queensland properly. This is all about not having the full story told. Senator McLucas is having all sorts of Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- problems up her way. We have consulted sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- with everybody: we have consulted with the tion) (6.44 p.m.)—I move: fishermen, we have consulted with EcoFish, That the debate be adjourned. we have consulted with the Cape York Ma- Question negatived. rine Advisory Group, we have consulted Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- with Indigenous people—all of these people sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- have been consulted. tion) (6.44 p.m.)—In spite of Senator McLu- Senator McLucas—Mr Acting Deputy cas’s fine words, the Labor Party and the President, I rise on a point of order that goes Democrats have just prevented the govern- to relevance. I suggest that the minister is ment from having any response to this most misleading the Senate. ridiculous and unfortunate motion to disal- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- low Great Barrier Reef Marine Park regula- DENT—That is not a point of order. tions. Effectively, the Democrats and the Senator IAN MACDONALD—The con- Labor Party have had their say. The govern- sultation has been wide. The arguments ment are going to be denied that opportunity, against this motion are so telling that it is a because a number of very important pieces disappointment to me that the Senate will not of legislation have to be dealt with tonight. I be able to hear the arguments against it and am constrained by an agreement to finish this make a decision based upon those argu- debate prior to 10 to seven. That is what the ments. We have done everything that needs government have agreed to and that is what to be done. It is a great conservation out- we will do: we will stop before 10 to seven. come, and it is an outcome that looks after But it means that I now have three minutes to the livelihoods of some of Senator McLu- answer Senator McLucas’s 10-minute speech cas’s constituents. I am absolutely amazed and Senator Bartlett’s 15-minute speech on that Senator McLucas would be supporting this very important issue. I can well under- this motion which is an attack on the work- stand why Senator McLucas and the Labor ing people of Cape York. I would love to Party do not want us to deal with this. develop that argument. I would love to be Senator Mackay—Mr Acting Deputy able to point out to Senator McLucas’s con- President, I rise on a point of order: I under- stituents just how much she has acted in their stand the frustration of Senator Ian Mac- worst interests by, first of all, ensuring that donald; however, I would like to make this there is no debate. point— Senator Mackay—Mr Acting Deputy The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT President, I rise on a point of order: that is a (Senator Lightfoot)—No, it is a point of reflection on Senator McLucas; I ask that it order that you should make, Senator Mackay. be withdrawn. Senator Mackay—My point of order The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- goes to relevance. The opposition have given DENT—I do not think that is right. There is up the time that we normally use to debate no reflection on Senator McLucas. documents in order to progress a number of 5782 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

Senator IAN MACDONALD—The La- these sittings. I seek leave to have the state- bor Party will take every single opportunity ment incorporated in Hansard. to make sure that the truth about this disal- Leave granted. lowance motion is not heard. The motion is ill-conceived. It is not appropriate— The statement read as follows— CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT Senator Mackay—Do you want another (TERRORIST ORGANISATIONS) BILL 2002 point of order? Purpose of the Bill Senator IAN MACDONALD—I will not The Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorist Or- buckle under your threats, Senator Mackay. ganisations) Bill 2002 will amend the Criminal Senator Mackay—We are trying to get Code so that regulations made from the com- your bills through! mencement of this Act specifying organisations Senator IAN MACDONALD—Would for the purpose of the definition of terrorist or- ganisation in Division 102 take effect in accor- you keep quiet and let me have my two min- dance with section 48 of the Acts Interpretation utes without interruption. Your speaker has Act 1901. had 10 minutes and Senator Bartlett has had The bill will also ensure that the existing regula- 15 minutes. The motion is ill-conceived, it is tion specifying Al Qa’ida/Islamic Army as a ter- against conservation outcomes, it is against rorist organisation takes effect on 21 October the local people, it is against working people, 2002, the date the regulation was notified in the it is against the Indigenous people of this Gazette. country. Unfortunately, I can say no more. The Criminal Code currently provides that regu- Question agreed to. lations specifying organisations as terrorist or- EGG INDUSTRY SERVICE PROVISION ganisations do not come into effect until after the end of the Parliamentary disallowance period. BILL 2002 Division 102 of the Criminal Code contains a EGG INDUSTRY SERVICE PROVISION number of offences relating to terrorist organisa- (TRANSITIONAL AND tions. These offences include directing activities CONSEQUENTIAL PROVISIONS) BILL of a terrorist organisation, membership of a ter- 2002 rorist organisation, recruiting for a terrorist or- Report of Rural and Regional Affairs and ganisation and providing training to, or receiving Transport Legislation Committee training from, a terrorist organisation. Terrorist organisations for the purposes of Divi- Senator EGGLESTON (Western Aus- sion 102 are organisations that are engaged in, tralia) (6.49 p.m.)—On behalf of the Chair of preparing, planning, assisting in or fostering the the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport doing of a terrorist act or organisations specified Legislation Committee, Senator Heffernan, I in regulations. Organisations may be specified in present the report of the committee on the regulations if the Minister is satisfied on reason- provisions of the Egg Industry Service Pro- able grounds that the organisation is identified in vision Bill 2002 and a related bill, together a United Nations Security Council decision re- with the Hansard record proceedings and lating to terrorism and that the organisation is documents presented to the committee. engaged in, preparing, planning, assisting in or fostering the doing of a terrorist act. Ordered that the report be printed. Reasons for urgency BUSINESS Urgent amendments to the Criminal Code are Consideration of Legislation required to ensure that regulations specifying Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- terrorist organisations take effect immediately on sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- notification in the Gazette in accordance with section 48 of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901. tion) (6.50 p.m.)—I move: This will enable immediate action to be taken by That the provisions of standing order 111 not law enforcement authorities against specified apply to the Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorist terrorist organisations, including any terrorist Organisations) Bill 2002. organisation believed to be responsible for the I table a statement of reasons justifying the Bali bombings on 12 October 2002. need for this bill to be considered during (Circulated by authority of the Attorney-General) Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5783

Question agreed to. Listing of organisations sends a clear and une- CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT quivocal message to those who might involve themselves with those organisations that if they (TERRORIST ORGANISATIONS) BILL do so they will face the full weight of the law. 2002 Listing also facilitates the investigation and First Reading prosecution of those engaged in supporting or Bill received from the House of Repre- carrying out the activities of terrorist organisa- sentatives. tions. Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- Given the delay and uncertainty that could be sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- involved in waiting to prove an organisation’s engagement in a terrorist act in court, listing or- tion) (6.50 p.m.)—I move: ganisations by regulation is a more effective That this bill may proceed without formalities method of specifying terrorist organisations in and be now read a first time. most cases. Question agreed to. Listing of organisations serves a number of pur- Bill read a first time. poses. Second Reading It puts people on notice not to deal with the listed organisation. Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- And it provides certainty to law enforcement sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- agencies that they can act against the organisation tion) (6.51 p.m.)—I move: immediately, without the significant delay that is That this bill be now read a second time. likely in completing a criminal prosecution. I seek leave to have the second reading The procedure for making regulations is set out in speech incorporated in Hansard. the Act. Leave granted. In broad terms, before regulations can be made, the Attorney-General must be satisfied that: The speech read as follows— • the Security Council of the United Nations The Howard Government is committed to the war has made a decision about terrorism that against terrorism and to ensuring that our law identifies the organisation; and enforcement and intelligence agencies have the • the organisation is directly or indirectly en- best possible tools to fight that war. gaged in terrorism. In June 2002 we passed a package of counter- Under the Act in its present form regulations terrorism legislation designed to bolster our ar- made now that list an organisation as a terrorist moury in the war against terrorism and deliver on organisation will not come into operation until our commitment to enhance our ability to meet after the Parliamentary disallowance period has the challenges of the new terrorist environment. ended, in 2003. The Security Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) This is because there are insufficient sitting days Act was an important element of that package. in the remainder of the sitting schedule to satisfy That Act introduced a number of criminal of- the required waiting period. fences relating to terrorist organisations. This means that the Government cannot, under Those offences include an offence of intentionally the existing law, complete the listing of a terrorist being a member of a terrorist organisation; di- organisation—such as a terrorist organisation recting the activities of a terrorist organisation; believed to be involved in the Bali bombing— and providing training to or receiving training until next year. from a terrorist organisation, among others. As a result, even though there may be known An essential element of each of those offences is members of a terrorist organisation here in Aus- that they relate to or involve a “terrorist organisa- tralia, this will limit the ability of authorities to tion”. investigate them and, if there is enough evidence, The Act defines a terrorist organisation as: to prosecute them, until well into 2003. • an organisation directly or indirectly engaged This is totally unacceptable. in, preparing, planning etc a terrorist act; or We need to be able to act swiftly against the per- • an organisation specified in regulations made petrators of terrorist acts. under the Act. 5784 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

Currently the Act provides that regulations cannot tigations and enable no stone to be left unturned come into force until the end of the 15 parlia- in bringing them to justice. mentary sitting day disallowance period in both Senator FAULKNER (New South Houses of Parliament. Wales—Leader of the Opposition in the Sen- This is an unusual provision, and one that does ate) (6.51 p.m.)—Notwithstanding the very not apply to regulations made in the ordinary short notice we have been given of the manner. Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorist Or- Normally, regulations come into effect immedi- ganisations) Bill 2002, the opposition have ately they are signed and gazetted but they can be carefully considered the bill, and we will disallowed by Parliament if a notice of motion of support the bill. We are of the view that the disallowance is given in either House of Parlia- ment within those 15 days. Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorist Or- ganisations) Bill 2002 is uncontroversial and This bill removes the provision that prevents ter- will improve the operation of Australia’s rorist organisation regulations coming into opera- tion straight away. antiterrorist laws. As the Senate knows, fol- lowing the commencement of the Security It does not remove the preconditions to making Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act the regulations in the first place. 2002 on 6 July 2002, terrorist organisations The Attorney-General still needs to be satisfied of can now be proscribed under Australian law the matters set out in the Act before he can make by way of regulation. a regulation, and that decision is still subject to parliamentary scrutiny and judicial review. Before the Governor-General can make a This bill merely changes the day on which such regulation specifying a terrorist organisation, regulations come into effect. the minister must be satisfied that the organi- The bill amends the Act to provide that regula- sation is identified in a UN Security Council tions made under the Act will come into operation decision relating wholly or partly to terror- immediately in the usual way, but they will also ism and that the organisation is directly or be subject to disallowance by Parliament in the indirectly engaged in preparing, planning, usual way. assisting in or fostering the doing of a ter- When the bill is enacted, our intelligence and law rorist act. The act stipulates that these regu- enforcement agencies will then be able to take lations take effect after the last day on which immediate action now against specified terrorist they can be disallowed—that is, 15 sitting organisations and their members for their criminal days after tabling. conduct. The consequences of being proscribed as a The events in the United States on 11 September terrorist organisation in Australia are severe. 2001 demonstrated the enormous loss of life and If someone directs the activities of, is a devastation to communities that terrorist acts can member of, recruits for, provides training to cause and highlighted the need for measures to be taken to prevent future attacks. or receives training from, receives funds from or gives funds to, or provides support The events in Bali on 12 October 2002 brought or resources to a listed terrorist organisation, that reality tragically close to home. they commit very serious criminal offences, Australia cannot afford to be complacent about with penalties ranging from 25 to 50 years in the threat that terrorism poses to our community. prison. The offence occurs whether or not the The Government has a clear responsibility to conduct, or result of the conduct, occurs in cooperate with global counter-terrorism measures Australia. If an organisation is listed, it is and to provide our security and law enforcement deemed to be a terrorist organisation and agencies with the tools they need to combat ter- rorism. prosecuting the relating offences is easier. Without a listing, all of the terrorist organi- The Howard Government is committed to the war sation offences are still in play; however, the against terrorism and ensuring we have the best possible tools to fight that war. prosecutor would have to prove that the or- ganisation was a terrorist organisation rather This bill will allow our security and law enforce- than rely upon the listing. ment agencies to act swiftly against perpetrators of terrorist acts uncovered in the course of inves- The first regulation made under this leg- islation was made on Monday, 21 October Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5785 this year—that is, the sitting day after the the Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorist Attorney-General was asked a question in Organisations) Bill 2002 refers was one the House of Representatives about listing which we ultimately did not support. We al-Qaeda. The 21 October 2002 regulation argued at the time, amongst other things, that listed al-Qaeda and seven related terrorist fundamentally and philosophically we had organisations that had been listed by the Se- grave concerns about the notion of proscrip- curity Council. Under the legislation as it tion itself and the way in which the bill pro- currently stands, the regulation to ban al- posed to do that. Philosophically we believe Qaeda would not take effect until the end of that proscription must essentially be based the disallowance period. This means al- around the notion or the identity of behav- Qaeda would not become a listed terrorist iour rather than belief—a concern that we organisation in Australia until 13 December maintain. 2002—that is, 15 sitting days after tabling. Having said that, we acknowledged at the The Australian government has asked the time and I acknowledge again that, having Security Council to as a matter of urgency been through the comprehensive committee list Jemaah Islamiah as a terrorist organisa- process, through the Senate Legal and Con- tion. As everyone would know, this is the stitutional References Committee, the pro- organisation suspected of being responsible posed ways in which proscription was for the Bali bombings and other terrorist deemed were significantly watered down and violence in South-East Asia. Under the leg- there were greater and stronger safeguards islation as it currently stands, even if the Se- ultimately constructed within the bill—most curity Council listed Jemaah Islamiah today particularly in ensuring that the Security and the consequential regulations were made Council of the United Nations was involved immediately, the organisation could not be in the decision-making process about pro- proscribed in Australia until the end of the scription and not, as the bill as it was then second sitting day in 2003. was designed to do, leaving that power in the The Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorist autonomous hands of the Attorney or his or Organisations) Bill 2002 will rectify this her nominee. situation and ensure that regulations relating We acknowledge, however, that the legis- to the listing of terrorist organisations come lation, although we opposed it at the time, is into effect in the normal way, namely upon now law and we acknowledge also that it tabling. Specifically, this bill will remove the should therefore be given reasonable oppor- provisions of the current act preventing ter- tunity to work properly and effectively. It is rorist organisation regulations coming into very important to spell out exactly what the operation straightaway and ensure that the bill means. Senator Faulkner has done that regulations made on 21 October 2002 pro- for the most part, and others will too, I guess. scribing al-Qaeda and related organisations There are many people in the community come into effect on that date—in other who would be very anxious—and I have words, do not have to wait until the end of taken some phone calls and emails already the disallowance period. on this—to receive or to hear the perception The opposition consider that this bill is that at the last minute, on a last day of sit- consistent with the clear and balanced prin- ting, late in the day, another antiterrorism bill ciples insisted upon when the package of is being pushed through. That is the percep- security legislation was debated and consid- tion, and it is very important that we take ered at some length in this chamber earlier time to explain to those people that that is this year. We believe that the bill before the not exactly what is happening here and that Senate is sensible and an improvement and, the amendment bill before us is reasonable accordingly, the opposition support it. and does not fundamentally change the ex- isting antiterrorism laws but for what might Senator GREIG (Western Australia) be described as a loophole in the timing of its (6.58 p.m.)—When the Democrats first ap- operation. proached what was the suite of antiterrorism bills, some five or six bills, the bill to which 5786 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

Let us be clear, then, that the legislation do that if we see this regulation being we have before us provides for regulations abused. which cannot come into force until the end The government is clearly indicating here of the 15 parliamentary sitting days that a that it will not be moving, under the provi- disallowance period in both houses of par- sions of the legislation, to proscribe organi- liament provides for. Let us also be clear that sations as terrorist organisation unless the normally regulations would come into effect United Nations has listed such organisations immediately they are signed and gazetted but and proclaimed that they are terrorist organi- that they can be disallowed by parliament if sations. That is effectively what the govern- a notice of motion of disallowance is given ment is saying here. We believe that a watch in either house of parliament within these 15 needs to be kept on that United Nations pro- days. The Attorney’s office advises that, un- cess, because it does mean that organisations der the act in its present form, the regulations can be proscribed by a member nation of the made now that list an organisation as a ter- United Nations—be it Iraq, China or North rorist organisation will not come into opera- Korea, for that matter. Without a trial or tion, as Senator Faulkner has said, until without evidence coming from the organisa- 2003—that is, next year. That would mean— tion, the United Nations can then decide that again referring to the Attorney’s advice— the organisation should be proscribed. that the government could not complete the listing of a terrorist organisation, such as one We have got checks and balances much perhaps involved in the Bali bombings, until better than that in this parliament, and we next year. As a result, even though there may believe that this legislation should be sup- be known members of the terrorist organisa- ported. It will move rapidly to effectively tion here in Australia, that would limit the proscribe the al-Qaeda organisation as a ter- availability of authorities to investigate and rorist organisation in this country, as has prosecute them, if there were enough evi- happened in many other places around the dence, until well into 2003. world, rather than the situation under exist- ing legislation, where that could not happen So in the spirit of goodwill and in coop- until some time early next year. We support eration, given recent events, we Democrats it. are happy to support this amending legisla- tion, notwithstanding our original opposition Senator HARRADINE (Tasmania) (7.05 to the initiating bill. We understand the need p.m.)—I want to indicate that I, too, support and urgency for this. There is no reason why the Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorist members of the community ought to be par- Organisations) Bill and am appreciative of ticularly concerned about this. As I say, it the briefings the Minister for Justice and does not fundamentally change the existing Customs has given us. As you know, Mr legislation; it merely facilitates it more ap- Acting Deputy President, I have always propriately, and so we are happy to lend our maintained that responses to terrorist attacks support to it. and terrorist organisations should not be- smirch the individual rights of innocent citi- Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (7.03 zens, albeit that those rights have been be- p.m.)—The Greens also support the Criminal smirched, taken away and drastically cur- Code Amendment (Terrorist Organisations) tailed by the actions of the terrorists. But Bill 2002, which reverses the imposition of here we have, I believe, a piece of legislation the effective regulations in this matter to the that enables regulations to name terrorist day on which they are tabled rather than at organisations on the basis that the Attorney- the end of the 15 days of the parliamentary General is satisfied that the Security Council wait. That brings them into line with the of the United Nations has made a decision usual way in which regulations work. It also about terrorism that identifies the organisa- allows that we retain the right to be able to tion and that the organisation is directly or disallow regulations as soon as they hit the indirectly engaged in terrorism. table. The Senate majority has the ability to I think we must bear that in mind, together with ensuring that the parliament has the Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5787 power to disallow the instrument within 15 Economics Legislation and References sitting days but that it comes into operation Committees immediately. I feel that this legislation is Appointed:—Participating member: consistent with the rights of citizens and is in Senator Ludwig no way besmirching the principles of human Employment, Workplace Relations and rights, and therefore I support it—as also in Education Legislation Committee the war against terrorism. Appointed—Participating member: Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— Senator Marshall. Minister for Justice and Customs) (7.08 Question agreed to. p.m.)—I thank the opposition for its coop- ABORIGINAL LAND RIGHTS eration in relation to the Criminal Code (NORTHERN TERRITORY) Amendment (Terrorist Organisations) Bill AMENDMENT BILL 2002 2002, which is an extremely important bill for the security of Australia. I also thank the Second Reading Greens, the Democrats and Senator Har- Debate resumed from 17 October, on mo- radine for their contributions to the speedy tion by Senator Ian Campbell: passage of this bill. Senator Faulkner out- That this bill be now read a second time. lined the rationale for the bill and the way it Senator CROSSIN (Northern Territory) operates quite clearly. If the United Nations (7.11 p.m.)—I realise that time is short this sees fit to list an organisation as a terrorist evening, so I may have to leave for an ad- organisation, Australia needs to be able to act journment debate in the weeks before quickly and to put into place regulations Christmas a number of comments that I which empower us to act in Australia’s best would like to make about recent statements interests. This is precisely what the bill does in regard to the Aboriginal Land Rights and why it is being treated as urgent—be- (Northern Territory) Amendment Bill 2002, cause of the emerging threats to Australia. but let me provide the Senate with some of The fact that this bill is in the national inter- the background to this bill. The bill will add est has been touched on by other senators five new parcels of land to part 4 of schedule who have spoken on it tonight. I thank them 1 of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern again for their cooperation. I commend to the Territory) Act. These additions are the result Senate this very important and urgent bill of two separate agreements that have been which is in the interests of this country. reached between the Northern Territory gov- Question agreed to. ernment and the relevant traditional owners Bill read a second time. and land councils. Third Reading The effect of the scheduling will firstly be Bill passed through its remaining stages to enable the grant of four parcels of land in without amendment or debate. the Northern Territory that were the subject of the Upper Daly repeat land claim. This COMMITTEES land will be given to an Aboriginal trust es- Membership tablished under the land rights act for the The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT purpose of being able to manage the land. (Senator Bolkus)—The President has re- This land will be granted to the land trust to ceived letters from a party leader seeking to hold on behalf of the Aboriginal traditional vary the membership of various committees. owners. The land we are talking about is situated some 250 kilometres south-west of Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— Darwin. Minister for Justice and Customs) (7.10 p.m.)—by leave—I move: The scheduling will also enable the grant of a smaller portion of land, about 450 hec- That senators be discharged from and ap- pointed to committees as follows: tares in size, located some 40 kilometres north of Alice Springs. This will be for the benefit of the members of the Harry Creek East community. This scheduling has come 5788 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 about through the need to relocate land pre- up and sitting on exploration licensing applica- viously owned by the community—a reloca- tions that have been the problems. tion to which the community has agreed. It is actually the inaction of a previous con- This transfer of land is to accommodate the servative government that has created the Darwin to Alice Springs railway corridor. problem—the perception that the act is not The existing land has been rendered unfit for working—rather than the act itself. human occupation because it will be too As I said, there is a need for this act to be close to that railway corridor. The new parcel reformed but with two things in mind. We of land is situated only a few kilometres will always point to the recommendations in south-east of the community’s previous lo- the House of Representatives report that said, cation. firstly, that no changes to this act should oc- The passage of this bill and the scheduling cur unless there is the consent of the tradi- of these new parcels of land will bring to 69 tional owners and, secondly, that no changes the number of parcels of land scheduled un- to this act should occur that would be to the der the land rights act since 1977. I want to detriment of Aboriginal people and tradi- quickly make a number of comments about tional owners in the Northern Territory. I the land rights act. There have been many realise time is short and I will conclude my comments in recent weeks, if not months, comments there, perhaps taking up at some about the need for this act to be reformed. It other time a speech that dispels the myth that was started many years back by the Northern certainly this current federal government Territory CLP government when John would want to promulgate about the land Reeves was commissioned to do a review of rights act. the act. Since then there has been a response This bill is another example of where this to that by the House of Representatives land rights legislation is working. It is an- Standing Committee on Aboriginal and Tor- other example of where Aboriginal people in res Strait Islander Affairs. the Northern Territory get the title to their Following on from that, we saw an op- land and get to reclaim the land, to their tions paper produced by Minister Ruddock benefit, in the legal way in which we per- earlier this year. However, in his speech in ceive land ought to be held. relation to this bill, Minister Ruddock said Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- that the land rights act is in need of urgent sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- reform. He is probably right about that— tion) (7.16 p.m.)—The Aboriginal Land there are recognised areas of that act that Rights (Northern Territory) Amendment Bill need to be improved. But he went on to say 2002 reflects the continuing commitment of that only one new mine had been created on the Howard government to securing legiti- Aboriginal land in 25 years. It was a claim mate title to traditional lands on behalf of the that he also made in an article in the Sunday Aboriginal people of the Northern Territory. Territorian on 8 September. Those claims are While supporting the return of traditional wrong, as are the claims by Mr David Toll- lands to Aboriginal owners, the government ner, the member for Solomon, that the cur- considers that the land rights act is in urgent rent Chief Minister has refused to take con- need of repair because it has not assisted as it trol of 55 per cent of the land—not that it is should have in improving the social and eco- land for her to take control of. So what we nomic position of Aboriginal landowners. see is a government that on one hand wants There is much more I wanted to say but time to reform the land rights act but on the other has beaten us. I thank senators for their sup- hand is starting to promulgate untruths and port for this bill and urge its adoption. misconceptions about the way in which this act operates. In fact, as my colleague in the Question agreed to. House of Representatives said in his contri- Bill read a second time. bution to this bill: Third Reading It is not in fact the act that is at fault. It is the ac- Bill passed through its remaining stages tions of the previous CLP government in holding without amendment or debate. Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5789

DOCUMENTS motion for the adjournment is moved by a minis- Parliament: Administration ter. The PRESIDENT (7.18 p.m.)—Earlier Question agreed to. this year the Speaker and the then President INSURANCE AND AVIATION of the Senate commissioned the Parliamen- LIABILITY LEGISLATION tary Service Commissioner, Mr Andrew AMENDMENT BILL 2002 Podger, to inquire into certain aspects of the Second Reading administration of the parliament. On 30 Debate resumed from 21 October, on mo- September 2002, the commissioner provided tion by Senator Ellison: his report to me and the Speaker. Before the Speaker and I make decisions in relation to That this bill be now read a second time. the recommendations made in the report, we Senator O’BRIEN (Tasmania) (7.20 felt it important to provide it to all senators p.m.)—Having consulted with the govern- and members for their consideration. Ac- ment in relation to this matter, I propose to cordingly, I will table the report, together incorporate the opposition’s contribution to with a copy of the commissioner’s covering this debate on the Insurance and Aviation letter and a draft research paper prepared at Liability Legislation Amendment Bill 2002 the commissioner’s request tracing the his- in the form of a document which does, I tory of previous attempts to make structural must admit to Senator Ian Macdonald, criti- changes within the parliamentary admini- cise the minister from the previous parlia- stration. ment. The Speaker and I intend to consider the Leave granted. matter further at the end of November, and I The document read as follows— would welcome any written comments from The Opposition supports of the Insurance and senators by 22 November 2002. The Speaker Aviation Liability Legislation Amendment Bill and I have also written to the heads of the 2002 parliamentary departments asking them to The bill proposes minor amendments to three circulate the report to all their staff. We pieces of legislation. Two of the amendments would welcome written comments on the arise from the events that shook the world on report’s recommendations from those who September 11 last year. serve the parliament as well as from any There are a number of key parts of this bill. other interested parties by the same date, 22 The first part is the amendment to the Civil Avia- November. Electronic copies of the docu- tion (Carriers’ Liability) Act 1959. ments I have just tabled will be made avail- This bill amends the act to correct an error that able shortly on the parliament’s Internet site imposes a liability on foreign charter operations and can be found by going to the publica- that is inconsistent with Australia’s international tions link on the parliament home page. My obligations. predecessor and I have kept the Senate The amendment has been mooted for some time. Standing Committee on Appropriations and It actually formed part of the lapsed Aviation Staffing informed of progress with this re- Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2001. view and I will send a copy of this report to This was a bill that lapsed mainly as a result of the committee for its information. I table the the incompetence of the Minister when the par- report and other documents. liament was prorogued. BUSINESS The bill proposes changes to two other pieces of Rearrangement legislation. As I said the changes arise from the events of September 11. Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- The first is an amendment to the Damage by Air- craft Act 1999. tion) (7.20 p.m.)—by leave—I move: The act is amended to exclude passive owners, That the question for the adjournment of the such as lessors, from absolute liability for damage Senate today not be proposed today till after a on the ground. 5790 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

The events of September 11 last year threw the This bill is a timely response to events beyond aviation and airport insurance industries into our control and beyond the control of the indus- chaos. try. Initially it was thought that Australia’s fairly Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- unique protection for industry against insurance sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- companies withdrawing cover was a major bene- tion) (7.21 p.m.)—In the same spirit, I will fit to the aviation industry; however, it soon be- not relate the quite voluminous speech I had came clear that the unique provisions hampered for this debate on the Insurance and Aviation reinsurance processes. Liability Legislation Amendment Bill 2002, This in turn impacted on the leasing and financing except to say that I am sure the criticism that arrangements negotiated for aircraft operators in Senator O’Brien has spoken of is completely Australia. unwarranted and unjustified. I do thank Following September 11, the insurance and fi- senators for their cooperation in dealing with nance industries raised concerns about the liabil- this bill. ity of passive owners for damage on the ground, noting that the Australian practice of having own- Question agreed to. ers and operators jointly and severally liable was Bill read a second time. not common international practice. Third Reading The amendment removes the liability of passive owners who do not have an active role in the op- Bill passed through its remaining stages eration of the aircraft immediately before the im- without amendment or debate. pact occurred and where another person or or- FAMILY AND COMMUNITY ganisation has the exclusive right to use the air- SERVICES LEGISLATION craft, and finance or other arrangements are in AMENDMENT (BUDGET INITIATIVES place. AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2002 The amendment does not affect the strict and unlimited liability of aircraft operators. Second Reading The amendment to the Insurance Contracts Act Debate resumed from 21 October, on mo- 1984 allows for the exemption by regulation of tion by Senator Ellison: war and terrorism risk insurance from the can- That this bill be now read a second time. cellation and variation provisions of the act. Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (7.22 The protection offered by the current act against p.m.)—On behalf of Senator Bishop, I seek cancellation simply meant that the bulk of Aus- leave to incorporate his speech on the second tralia’s aviation industry was not able to obtain cover once the existing contracts came up for reading. renewal. Leave granted. This industry relies on the global insurance mar- The speech read as follows— ket for cover. We are happy to support the two separate meas- Exempting war and terrorism cover from the can- ures contained in today’s bill. cellation and variation provisions of the act will The measure to codify arrangements relating to place this class of insurance in the same position nominees in the social security system is, on the as the rest of the international aviation world. whole a welcome one. It will thereby enable Australian operators to have So too is the measure that assists children with access to global markets for insurance. disabilities with terminal conditions and their Australia is now part of a global alliance of families. countries pursuing a global, coordinated solution However, our support on this occasion should not to terrorism insurance for airlines, airports and be taken as ringing endorsement of the nominee associated organisations and operations. arrangements in the social security system. In the meantime, the government is correctly of- Nominees fering war risk indemnities to those aviation in- dustry participants who have not been able to The legislative formalisation of nominees of obtain sufficient war risk cover. Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 of the bill are primar- ily administrative initiatives that provide specific guidelines for the role and obligations of nomi- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5791 nees under the social security and family assis- that arise out of the non-compliance of a princi- tance laws. pal. The amendments grant the Secretary the authority The Government has also assured that compre- to appoint a nominee to be responsible for corre- hensive information material will be made avail- spondence and the necessary action and, partici- able to existing and potential nominees. pation of a social security payment recipient As it is envisaged that with an ageing population (principal). the use of nominees will increase, there also Under these amendments, the role of the nominee needs to be the assumption that many nominees will vary from bearing the responsibility of re- may be new to the social security system. ceiving principal correspondence to receiving a A person who is naive to agencies such as Cen- social security benefit and other payments on a trelink, will no doubt find the internal hostility, principal’s behalf. lack of genuine support and understanding within A correspondence nominee has a fairly straight- such agencies, can make a simple exercise quite forward role of being responsible for ensuring daunting. that the principal will receive any notifications, While there is no obligation from the Government requests and information from relevant govern- to implement designated case workers for new ment agencies. The amendments are clear on this. nominees, it is recommended that individuals be The amendments however, do not provide clear encouraged to quickly establish a sound working protection for a nominee in relation to their obli- relationship with an individual staff member gation in ensuring a principal’s compliance with (perhaps a Social Worker), who can at least pro- requests for government required information and vide continued guidance for the Centrelink nov- appointments. ice. Proposed section 123J outlines the responsibili- Under these amendments, nominees can also re- ties of correspondence nominees in advising prin- ceive a Principal’s social security benefit directly cipals of social security requests for information into a designated bank account, with the under- and appointments. standing that any financial obligation a principal The amendments strongly outline a correspon- may have, such as rent, bills and daily living dence nominee’s duty to notify principals of such would be undertaken by the nominee. Existing social security requests. There is a concern how- nominees have this current ability. ever that based on available information, it is There is a concern however, that a principal may difficult to ascertain the ramifications of a nomi- be vulnerable to exploitation from a nominee who nee’s continued suitability should the principal does not have the principle’s interest at heart. not comply with a request. Proposed section 123E of the amendments grant On the surface the amendments imply that a the Secretary the ability to review and revoke a nominee can be considered fully responsible for a nominee’s status when it is found that the nomi- principal’s non-compliance to social security re- nee is unable to fulfil their obligation. quests. However, the amendments appear inflexi- Current information does not however, provide ble in accounting for a principal’s capacity to sufficient guidance on what circumstances can comply with requests and a nominee’s ability to trigger a review and what matters are taken into ensure compliance. account. There is an assumption that current re- Based on the amendments being considered, the view processes, such as investigation based on onus for failing to comply with social security information from another interested party, would requirements are primarily the responsibilities of comply with the ongoing suitability of a nominee. the nominee. This assumption however, is not clearly indicated The nominee may therefore have to rely heavily in the amendments. on a good working knowledge of the social secu- The Government has advised that a significant rity system and an awareness of the flexibility amount of anomalies with nominee payment ar- that can sometimes be accommodated for special rangements are usually found through adminis- individual cases. trative processes; such as returned mail or failure The Government has advised that each appointed to comply with Centrelink request. nominee under these amendments will be as- There is also an arrangement that Centrelink will sessed by a social worker and advised of their investigate an allegation of nominee misuse from rights and obligations. They will also be given the an interested party. opportunity to discuss and negotiate any problems 5792 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

Although, the interested party is usually another Families caring for children with chronic illnesses family member and are often considered hostile such as cystic fibrosis, diabetes, epilepsy and to the nominee. phenylketonuria continue to miss out on the pay- The government has assured us that the current ment. process to investigate the suitability of a nominee Assessment for the Carers Payment should take is sufficient to sustain the new formal nominee into account the financial, social and emotional arrangements. cost borne by families caring for children with We are going to revisit this issue over the next severe disabilities. twelve months. As I said at the outset we do have The problem is that the Child Disability Assess- some niggling concerns about the new arrange- ment Tool which is used to determine the func- ments. tional ability of the child does not measure the However, we accept that this legislation repre- care and attention demanded of the carer. sents a genuine attempt to codify the current ad- As a result, many more families are failing to ministrative arrangements. qualify for financial support. Children with disabilities who have terminal Since the new assessment tool was introduced in conditions July 1998 the Labor Party has received a constant In December 1999 the Department of Family and stream of letters and phone calls from concerned Community Services completed a review of and distressed parents struggling to care for chil- measure relating to carer payment in respect of dren with severe disabilities. parents of children with profound disabilities. These parents caring for children with disabilities That review made a number of recommendations such as cystic fibrosis are struggling to keep their to address inadequacies in the original legislation. heads above water. Amongst those was the one before the Parliament Without the Carers Payment they are forced to today. I commend the government for bringing it meet the costs of pumps, masks, sterilising forward. equipment, special diets, exercise programs and equipment out of their own pockets. The proposed amendment maintains Carer’s Al- lowance for parents who maintain active treat- These are substantial costs. ment for a profoundly disabled child, even if the It is often the case that the extraordinary efforts child is medically considered to have a terminal and care provided by parents is the very reason condition. that children are able to function day-to-day even The addition of new subsection 197(2) also al- when their life-span is limited. lows a less intrusive diagnostic and restrictive Ironically, these efforts may also disqualify them criteria process for a medical practitioner to ad- from receiving financial support. vise of a change in the status of a profoundly dis- These families want an assessment tool that rec- abled child. ognises the cost and time involved in providing Put simply this means that a person caring for a care for their children. terminally ill child with a profound disability will I urge the Government to expand on what it is not have their payment jeopardised. doing for terminally ill children today. I just want to record my disappointment that this Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- amendment was not accompanied by a further sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- one to address the situation of children with dis- abilities who have high support needs, who do not tion) (7.22 p.m.)—Again I thank the Senate meet the qualifications to enable their parents to for its cooperation in dealing with this bill, receive carer payment. and I urge support for it. There are a group of children identified in the Question agreed to. 1999 review in this category. Bill read a second time. While the objective of the payment is to recognise Third Reading the needs of those parents whose caring responsi- bilities to a disabled child prevent them from Bill passed through its remaining stages working, it is so narrowly drafted, the parents of without amendment or debate. many children whose disabilities are not as se- vere, but whose support needs are very high, miss out. Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5793

FAMILY LAW LEGISLATION In general, women have less superannuation than AMENDMENT (SUPERANNUATION) men, and those who do have superannuation have (CONSEQUENTIAL PROVISIONS) significantly smaller amounts than their male BILL 2002 counterparts. These differences are evident in the statistics for retired Australians under 70 years of Second Reading age who receive income from superannuation, Debate resumed from 25 September, on with the relevant figure for men being 55% while motion by Senator Patterson: the correlating percentage for women is only 28%. That this bill be now read a second time. Thus, the significance of the Family Law Legis- Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (7.23 lation Amendment (Super) (consequential provi- p.m.)—On behalf of Senate Kirk, I seek sions) Act 2001 was to ensure that superannua- leave to incorporate her speech on the second tion, as a substantial part of Australians’ wealth, reading. could be divided as part of a property settlement Leave granted. in the event of divorce. This was a step toward enabling more equitable and just settlements at The speech read as follows— the end of a marriage. The statistics I have given Family Law Legislation Amendment (Superannu- you above paint a picture of the superannuation ation) (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2002 situation for many Australians, and why it is so makes amendments to the Family Law Act 1975, crucial that these benefits can be divided. The the Judges’ Pensions Act 1968, the Social Secu- Labor party also supports the Family Law Legis- rity Act 1991 and the Veterans’ Entitlements Act lation Amendment (Superannuation) (Conse- 1986. The Bill’s amendments are essentially a quential Provisions) Bill 2002. clarification of the 2001 Act. Labor supported the It is important that we have legislation in place 2001 Act and will also support this Bill. that ensures that disadvantage does not become The Family Law Legislation Amendment (Super- entrenched. Taking into account the vulnerable annuation) (Consequential Provisions) Act 2001 position of women from low asset marriages and recognised the importance of superannuation allowing for superannuation payments to be di- funds as a source of family wealth in Australia. vided is one way that we can do this. Compulsory membership of superannuation funds However, it is also important that our legislation has meant that superannuation represents an in- keeps pace with a rapidly changing Australian creasingly significant proportion of the personal society. The Act does recognise the growing im- wealth of all Australians, and is now second in portance of superannuation as a family asset. It value only to the family home. does not, however, recognise the need to rectify The Australian Bureau of Statistics released its the current lack of legal provisions for same sex report “Superannuation: Coverage and Financial couples, who face the same difficulties, and Characteristics” last year, in which it identified should be afforded to same rights as, heterosexual that three quarters of the pre-retired population couples. aged 15 to 69 years had some superannuation. Approximately 78% of males in this group had The Senate Select Committee on Superannuation and Financial Services recommended that the some superannuation, and 71% of females. Of Commonwealth discuss with the States how to these, however, the median total amount was $13,400 for men, more than double that of the achieve similar superannuation provisions for same sex couples that separate. The Government median $6,400 for women. has refused to accept the States’ referral of powers These disparities reflect the substantially different in this area. employment experiences that face men and The Opposition believes that the Government women. Men in work are far more likely to hold must act in this area. The law should not dis- full-time positions, while almost half of all female criminate on the basis of gender, ethnicity or sex- jobholders are part-time workers. ual preference. The Government’s inaction on the Women are also much more likely to punctuate issue of ensuring consistent superannuation and their working life with periods out of the family law legislation for both heterosexual and workforce to care for children, the elderly and homosexual Australians shows it to be unrespon- disabled. This not only tends to slow their career sive and unreasonable. path, and progress toward better wages, it also means that little or no superannuation contribu- We should do all that we can to ensure that the Law itself does not discriminate. The Govern- tions are made during these periods. 5794 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 ment, despite having been given the opportunity, Assistant Shadow Treasurer, the Hon. David Cox has done nothing. MP, has outlined some technical concerns relating This Bill basically makes three minor amend- to the implementation of this Bill, which I will ments to the Family Law Act to clarify aspects of briefly relate to you. the 2001 Act. In general, the Government has handled the im- Firstly, under the 2001 Act, a splittable superan- plementation of this Bill very poorly. The com- nuation interest included a payment to a rever- plexities of family law and superannuation mean sionary beneficiary, but this term was not defined. that together this new legislation is very compli- This Bill defines a “reversionary beneficiary” as cated. Government bungling has made this even any person who becomes entitled to a benefit in more difficult for those who must operate under respect of a superannuation interest of a spouse, the altered legislation. after the death of that spouse. This is a broader A particular issue is the commencement provision definition than the one used in the superannuation in the original Bill allowed for an earlier com- industry but it reflects the intention of the original mencement date by proclamation. It now seems bill that most death benefits constitute splittable certain that no such proclamation will be made payments. and the legislation will commence the full 18 Secondly, this Bill rectifies an inconsistency that months after receiving royal assent. If this was arose from the 2001 Act, in that successive splits always the government’s intention, they should could be made if a person divorces more than have made this clear from the beginning. once, but this principle did not apply where the The inadequacies of the initial legislation have same couple divorces, remarries and divorces made the implementation of the Act particularly again. difficult for the superannuation industry, who had Thirdly, under the 2001 Act, the entitlement of a initially been promised a transition period of at spouse under a split was subject to preservation least twelve months from the tabling of the new requirements if it was paid to a regulated super- regulations. However, the government made an annuation fund of Retirement Savings Account. additional 102 pages of regulations on 25 July This Bill clarifies that the preservation require- this year, largely to make up for drafting deficien- ments also apply to interests paid to an approved cies in the Act. This is in addition to the amend- deposit fund or an exempt public sector superan- ments made by this bill. Most of the announced nuation scheme. amendments to the regulations, made on 25 July, were of a minor and technical nature. However, This Bill also make one amendment to the the treatment of allocated pensions for the pur- Judges’ Pensions Act to authorise the making of poses of payment splits was substantially revised. regulations to set out factors for use in calculating Altering rules applying to an entire class of su- the proportion of a judge’s pension had “accrued” perannuation benefits so tardily points to a gov- at the time of a judge’s marriage breakdown. This ernment that is inefficient, and out of touch with amount can then be used to determine superannu- the real work that needs to be done in implemen- ation interest under the Family Law Act. tation. This Bill makes amendments to the Social Secu- It is crucial that both industry and the general rity Act and the Veterans’ Entitlement Act, essen- public are informed of these changes, so that ad- tially to ensure that payments from a family law visers and super funds are able to best inform superannuation interest split can be consistently their clients. It is also crucial that the public are assessed with other income and assets under the aware of these changes and their intricacies so social security and veterans’ entitlement means they are able to make informed and wise deci- tests. The bill authorises the Secretary of the De- sions. partment of Family and Community Services, in the case of the Social Security Act, and the Repa- Despite the importance of clarity in fostering an triation Commission, in the case of the Veterans’ understanding of legislation, confusion reigns in Entitlements Act, to make guidelines for income the interpretation of some areas of this Act. One testing of different kinds of income streams under is the extent to which superannuation benefits the superannuation splitting regime. This is im- transferred from one partner to another are sub- portant as it provides consistency between the ject to preservation. Apparently, it is the govern- guidelines produced by the Department of Family ment’s intention that preserved and non-preserved and Community Services and those produced by components of an interest be transferred on a pro the Repatriation Commission. rata basis. Despite the fact that Peter Costello has prematurely foreshadowed plans to increase the My South Australian colleague in the House of preservation age the Government needs to act Representatives, the Member for Kingston and now to clarify this aspect of the new law. Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5795

Another area of uncertainty is what is commonly Senator Coonan should commit to providing more called the ‘clean break’ principle. This refers to resources to the tribunal and begin to take ap- whether members of defined benefit schemes will pointments more seriously than her predecessor be able to transfer a proportion of their benefit, as Mr Hockey, former Minister for Financial Serv- required by a court order or financial agreement, ices and Regulation, did when he appointed for- to their former partner straightaway or whether mer Liberal Senator Michael Baume to this sup- they will need to wait until their benefits become posedly independent tribunal. payable. Amendments to the Superannuation In- Labor supports this bill as part of the necessary dustry Supervision Regulations provide for the reforms to superannuation and family law. The immediate transfer of accumulation interests to number of outstanding issues that remain unad- another account in the same fund or a different dressed by the government is testament to their fund, depending on the rules of the fund or the lack of regard for all Australians who must con- receiving partner’s preference. tend with this new legislative regime. The gov- The Attorney-General’s Department has indicated ernment has an obligation to clarify the remaining that there are constitutional difficulties in apply- ambiguities and attend to the task of creating con- ing this ‘clean break’ principle to certain funds, sistent superannuation legislation that does not and in particular, state public sector funds. This discriminate. I commend this Bill to you as a needs clarification. I believe the government must small step in this direction. ensure that we have a national approach to super- Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- annuation regulation, and they should act expedi- sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- ently in this area for consistency and conformity. tion) (7.23 p.m.)—Again I thank the Senate The continuing uncertainty surrounding these for their cooperation in dealing expeditiously regulations has only contributed to the low levels with this important bill. of awareness in the community and, indeed, the superannuation industry and family law practitio- Question agreed to. ners. Bill read a second time. The government’s lack of attention to detail in In Committee ensuring that the general public is able to under- stand and operate within the new legislation Bill—by leave—taken as a whole. shows a government out of touch with the people. Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- Everyday Australians should be uppermost in the sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- mind of the government when drafting and im- tion) (7.25 p.m.)—I table a supplementary plementing any new legislation regime. Unfortu- explanatory memorandum relating to the nately, this government seems to have forgotten the very people who elected them. government amendments to be moved to this bill. The memorandum was circulated in the An area of ongoing concern to the Opposition is chamber on 22 October. I also seek leave to the resources provided to the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal. The original bill conferred move government amendments (1) to (4) new powers on the tribunal to deal with com- together. plaints against superannuation providers from Leave granted. prospective members of superannuation funds- Senator IAN MACDONALD—I move: that is, spouses or former spouses who are party to, engaged in or considering a property settle- (1) Schedule 1, page 3 (after line 4), before ment involving superannuation. It seems likely item 1, insert: that a number of disputes will arise in relation to 1AAA Section 90MD (at the end of the splitting of superannuation interests and pay- paragraph (b) of the definition of ments and the Superannuation Complaints Tribu- operative time) nal will need more funding to cope with these. Add “or paragraph 90MLA(2)(c) as The exceptionally complex provisions and the appropriate”. government’s lack of action to clarify them means (2) Schedule 1, page 3 (after line 9), after that the number of disputes is also likely to be item 1, insert: higher than expected. The tribunal’s workload will most certainly increase after December 28th. 1AA After subsection 90ML(4) Labor’s concerns have been noted by the Senate Insert: inquiry, but as yet we have seen no indication (4A) Subsection (4) does not apply if the from the government that it intends to act on this splittable payment is made in circum- matter. 5796 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

stances in which section 90MLA ap- (3) Schedule 1, page 3 (after line 22), after plies. item 1B, insert: Note: A defendant bears an evidential 1C At the end of Division 3 of burden in relation to the matter Part VIIIB in subsection (4A) (see subsec- Add: tion 13.3(3) of the Criminal Code). 90MUA Some splittable payments may be made without leave of court 1AB After section 90ML (1) A flagging order made under subsec- Insert: tion 90MU(1) in relation to a superan- 90MLA Some splittable payments nuation interest (original interest) a payable if payment flag operating person has in an eligible superannua- (1) This section applies if: tion plan (old ESP) does not apply to a splittable payment if the splittable (a) a superannuation interest (original payment is made by the trustee of the interest) a person has in an eligible old ESP to the trustee of another eligi- superannuation plan (old ESP) is ble superannuation plan (new ESP) in identified in a superannuation respect of the original interest as part of agreement; and a successor fund transfer. (b) a payment flag under section 90ML (2) If the splittable payment is made, then is operating on the original interest; the flagging order is taken to be made and in relation to the new interest from the (c) a splittable payment is made by the time that the payment to the trustee of trustee of the old ESP to the trustee the new ESP is made. of another eligible superannuation (3) In this section: plan (new ESP) in respect of the original interest as part of a succes- successor fund transfer means the sor fund transfer. transfer of a person’s superannuation interest in the old ESP in circumstances (2) If this section applies, then: where: (a) the new interest in the new ESP is (a) the new ESP confers on the person, taken to be the original interest in relation to the new interest, identified in the superannuation equivalent rights to the rights the agreement; and person had in relation to the original (b) the payment flag operates on the interest; and new interest; and (b) before the transfer, the trustee of the (c) despite section 90MK, the operative new ESP had agreed with the trustee time for the payment flag in respect of the old ESP to the conferral of of the new interest is the time that such rights. the payment to the trustee of the (4) Schedule 1, page 3 (after line 31), at the end new ESP is made. of the Schedule, add: (3) In this section: 5 Subsection 90MZD(2) successor fund transfer means the Omit “on any person who subsequently transfer of a person’s superannuation becomes the trustee of that eligible su- interest in the old ESP in circumstances perannuation plan.”, substitute: where: on: (a) the new ESP confers on the person, in relation to the new interest, (a) any person who subsequently be- equivalent rights to the rights the comes the trustee of that eligible su- person had in relation to the original perannuation plan; or interest; and (b) in a case where section 90MUA (b) before the transfer, the trustee of the applies—a person who is the trustee, new ESP had agreed with the trustee or any person who subsequently be- of the old ESP to the conferral of comes the trustee, of the new ESP. such rights. I am sure every honourable senator knows well the reason for these amendments. I un- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5797 derstand that neither the bill nor our amend- show that all the major projects undertaken ments to the bill are contentious. I think they by the Kennett government were in the met- are very sensible. I think all parties have in- ropolitan area and that the majority of dicated that they support both the bill and the building investment in 1998 was in metro- government amendments to the bill. politan Melbourne as well, thus demonstrat- Question agreed to. ing a neglect of regional Victoria. Bill, as amended, agreed to. The simple fact that seems to have es- caped Senator Marshall’s notice is that the Bill reported with amendments; report Bracks government has initiated no major adopted. project at all. If Senator Marshall cares to Third Reading check Victorian building statistics for, say, Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- 2001, he will find the pattern of building sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- investment has not changed since 1998. So tion) (7.27 p.m.)—I move: his statistics are meaningless. Kenneth Da- That this bill be now read a third time. vidson—no friend of Kennett or the Liberal Party—writing recently in the Age about the Question agreed to. difference between Jeff Kennett and Steve Bill read a third time. Bracks, said: ADJOURNMENT What’s different is style. Jeff Kennett was in your Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- face ... Steve Bracks tries to sugar-coat the same sland—Minister for Forestry and Conserva- pill with phoney consultative processes and tion) (7.28 p.m.)—I move: documents in warm, earthy colours ... with lots of pictures of happy people enjoying cafe latte soci- That the Senate do now adjourn. ety ... Victoria: Bracks Government Let us have a look at some of the specifics. I Senator TCHEN (Victoria) (7.28 p.m.)— will start with gaming. Ewin Hannan, writing A few weeks ago I spoke in the Senate about also in the Age, on 28 September 2002 said: the mismanagement of Victoria by the After relentlessly attacking Jeff Kennett for Bracks Labor government. A few days later, promoting a casino culture, Labor came to office I was very pleased to hear that Senator Mar- promising to reduce the state’s reliance on gam- shall responded to my comments. I am par- ing revenue ... In fact, they— ticularly pleased to see Senator Marshall that is, the pokie losses— here today. I welcome Senator Marshall’s ballooned by $460 million over two years. contribution, especially because it came with some very impressively crafted statistics. But Jeff Kennett had to rely on gaming revenue I was rather bewildered when I realised that because he had no choice. After 10 years of Senator Marshall’s theme was an attack on Labor mismanagement, Victoria was broke the Kennett government, since the Kennett in 1992—flat broke. In 1992, the Kirner government is clearly a matter of history and government was borrowing money on the its achievements a matter of record. Surely short-term market to pay public servants. In Senator Marshall, as a Victorian senator, 1992, Jeff Kennett was given the task of res- should be more interested in the current per- cuing Victoria from financial ruin, and he ilous situation of his home state. succeeded. Let me quote this assessment of his performance by Dr David Hayward, the Let me quickly deal with Senator Mar- executive director of the Institute for Social shall’s criticisms of the record of the Kennett Research at the Swinburne University of government. It is a very curious collection of Technology—another certified ‘non-friend’ choices, since in each category that Senator of Jeff Kennett. In an unashamed apologia Marshall has chosen the Bracks govern- for the Bracks government in the Age on 26 ment’s record has been far worse. Senator September 2002, Dr Hayward said that Ken- Marshall started with major projects and nett did so well that: drew the interesting conclusion that the Ken- The budget turned from deep red to thick black nett government had failed because statistics 10 years ahead of schedule. 5798 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

Not so the Bracks government. Not only did Girls College to attend the opening of the it inherit a full treasury, it inherited a $3.3 million stage 3 of the school’s capital blooming economy so well set up that even works project, to which the school commu- the kind of incompetence exemplified by the nity contributed close to $1 million. The saga of the Federation Square—the uniquely Melbourne Girls College has an enrolment of post-Federation Square—cannot stop it from approximately 1,180 students, and it prides performing well. itself as a model girls school for the 21st Senators may be interested to note that the century, aiming for exemplary standards of Victorian state budget brought down in May achievement and conduct. The curriculum 2002 estimated a surplus of some $765 mil- places a special emphasis on science and lion, which has since been reduced to $250 technology and aims to be the leading edge million after losses incurred in currency of technological innovation in teaching and trading by the Victorian government. The learning, providing innovative and chal- same budget revealed revenue from stamp lenging learning experiences. It stands as an duties to be almost 50 per cent higher than illuminating example of the education vision forecast, providing a $773 million windfall. of the Kennett government. Senator Marshall It also showed that land tax revenue would should visit it to experience it himself before be $611 million, up 66 per cent since 1999, he again criticises the Kennett achievement and that police fines would be a staggering in education. $337 million, up from $99 million in 1999. In the time left to me, let me quickly touch So there is no reason for the Bracks govern- on two other areas of government services ment to rely on gaming revenue. Surely there that Senator Marshall has nominated as Ken- is no reason why the Bracks government nett failures and, by implication, Bracks suc- could not keep its promise to reduce the cesses: public hospitals and WorkCover. state’s gambling culture. Yet there has been Since Senator Marshall shows such a prefer- no action—none. ence for statistics, let me provide him with Senator Marshall then picked education as some more. According to the Victorian hos- an area of Kennett failure because 350 pital services report for the June 2002 quar- schools were closed and teachers were ‘re- ter, in the 15 major Victorian hospitals the moved from schools’. These were Senator’s number of people waiting on trolleys for Marshall’s words; I am sure that is because more than 12 hours in emergency depart- the number who actually left the education ments has gone from 2,245 in 1999 to 6,887 sector was far less impressive. But what in 2002—that is a 207 per cent increase. The about the quality of education that Victorian number of people on waiting lists for elective children receive? Surely the quality of edu- surgery has increased by 4,425 people in cation provided by the schools and the teach- three years. The number of people on wait- ers is far more important than the quantity of ing lists for ‘longer than ideal’—I do not schools and the number of teachers who turn know what that means exactly; I have quoted up for work between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.? that from the report—has increased from 3,623 to 6,252. That is an increase of 73 per Let me cite an example. Once upon a cent in three years. The number of ambu- time, there was a school in Melbourne called lance bypasses has gone from 130 in 1999 to the Richmond Secondary College. It had no 416 in 2002. These statistics speak for them- building more recent than 1950, it had no selves. Senator Marshall should study them facilities more modern than the 1980s and, carefully before he sings the Bracks govern- on a good day, it had about 100 students at- ment’s praises again. tending. It was one of the schools that was closed, and its closure provoked considerable On WorkCover, in 1992, Victoria had un- public protest and disorder, lockout and ar- funded liabilities amounting to $2.1 billion. rests. On this site, the Kennett government By 1999, this had been reduced to $295.6 established a new school in 1994—the Mel- million, representing a deficit of just 6.8 per bourne Girls College. Recently, I had the cent, and the premiums were 1.9 per cent of great privilege of visiting the Melbourne wages. At the end of 2001, the unfunded li- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5799 abilities had again blown out to $533 million be broadcast, because it reflects unfairly and or a deficit of 10 per cent, notwithstanding improperly on senators under the standing an increase in the rate of the premium to 2.22 orders. But I do not wish to labour that point; per cent. In 1998-99 there were 31,242 re- that is not the main one. ported claims and in 2000-01 there were The main argument that the government 32,539 reported claims—a small increase. senators made is, in my view—and I ex- The number of staff increased from 709 to pressed this forthrightly in my remarks ear- 828 during this period. But, Senator Mar- lier—long on the criticism or abuse of sena- shall, the return to work rate has decreased tors and long on political rhetoric. One by eight per cent. would even say it is windy. But it is very Let me conclude by once again quoting thin, in fact wafer thin, on the evidence. The Kenneth Davidson’s comment on the Bracks evidence purported to be adduced by gov- government: ernment senators is best exemplified by the ... what we have got is pre-election spiel that at- attachment to their report of documents that tempts to hide three wasted years of government were put before the committee as exhibits. with more spin. They purported to show what happened in all A Certain Maritime Incident Committee of the other SIEVs and purported to make Report the case that there was somehow a pattern of behaviour. In other words, the defence being Senator COOK (Western Australia) (7.38 promoted here was: ‘Okay, you did not get p.m.)—Earlier today the report of the Senate us on SIEV4; you did not catch us that chil- Select Committee on a Certain Maritime In- dren were thrown overboard there; the evi- cident was tabled. That inquiry, of course, is dence is conclusive that they weren’t. But colloquially known as the ‘children over- look at all of these other events where equal board’ inquiry. I had the opportunity to make or worse things’—they allege—‘did occur. some remarks then about the report of the Isn’t that justification for the misleading and committee that I had the pleasure of chairing, outright lying by Minister Reith that went on and I now want to add to some of those re- within the election context?’ marks because I have had the benefit of the debate contributions by other committee Of course, it is a classical fallacy to argue members. Their contributions open up the in that way, and I am sure someone with a need to ensure that the record is kept straight classical education, such as Senator Brandis, on this inquiry. would be fully aware of the fallacy of that argument. The truth is, too, that the docu- The government members on the inquiry ment they have relied on is not evidence. I told the rest of us that we would see their said that by way of interjection, and Senator minority report in time for us to digest it, so Collins referred in her remarks to this docu- that all of us would come into this chamber ment at some length as well, but it does to without any unfair surprise and be able to reiterate some of these points. The document debate the issues based on a full knowledge they have published in the report as part of of each other’s case. Unfortunately, the rest the evidentiary foundation upon which they of the committee did not see the government rely is a document that was obtained at the members’ report until after the report was request of the government through Admiral printed. You may recall, Mr President, that I Smith. He had made a broad request to all raised a point of order about some unparlia- naval officers on all naval vessels that had mentary language in the report that, if it were intercepted SIEVs at the relevant time to ruled unparliamentary, would have been report anything in a series of categories he given parliamentary privilege—and I still had set, which was designed at the request of think that is a matter for the Senate. If lan- the government to try and establish whether guage is included in a report that other any ‘improper behaviour’ had occurred at all. senators have not seen but which is objec- tionable in parliamentary terms, there ought That document came forward. It was to be a device to prevent that language from never fully tested in the inquiry, and I am being given privilege and thus being able to sure the government senators will admit that 5800 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 fact. But, to the extent that it was, there was clusion. We do not set out to argue against a reference in it that a suspected asylum the facts on the basis—self-admitted in this seeker was seen on the deck of a vessel at- case by Senator Brandis—that they are de- tempting to strangle a child. That question fence counsel. He was not, and he should not was tested and, when it was put under scru- have conducted himself in such a manner. tiny in the committee, it was admitted that The other point I want to make is about that may not at all have been true, and that the forgotten people in this whole affair, the the more likely explanation was that a parent asylum seekers themselves. I always think it was trying to pacify a child by shaking them is odd that in Australia when we talk about or by rubbing their shoulders, and containing asylum seekers we are talking about people a child who, in the face of a catastrophe at fleeing persecution in Afghanistan, in Iraq, sea, was frightened of the imminent possi- in Iran and in some cases in parts of Pakistan bility of being in the water and at risk of and that somehow we regard those people as their life. Any parent in a similar circum- questionable individuals because they seek stance would have taken parental responsi- safe haven in a stable democracy like Aus- bility and would have done just what that tralia. I do not know of too many Australians parent did. For that now to be adduced as who, if they lived under the dictates of the some sort of proof of a ‘pattern of misbe- reprehensible regimes in those countries, haviour’ is quite scandalous, and shows the would want to remain in those countries and depths to which the argument has sunk in not leave. I certainly admit there is a big trying to defend this whole imbroglio con- question about how you gain access to Aus- cerning asylum seekers in Australia. tralia, but the motives of trying to escape The other point I want to make, which is persecution and tyranny are motives that all quite extraordinary in my experience— Australians can identify with and empathise which regrettably next March will be 20 with. It is partly the reason why we are now years in this place—is that, for the first talking about military action in that part of time— the world and why Australian military per- Senator McGauran—Why regret it? sonnel have already conducted military ac- tion in Afghanistan. These were the people Senator COOK—Because it is a hell of a trying to make it across the Timor Sea in long time, Senator, and it just seems like boats. Whatever view you take, you have to yesterday that I arrived. say that what they were escaping from was Senator Boswell—You and I came in to- reprehensible and deserving of our greatest gether. condemnation. Even if you do not approve of Senator COOK—We did indeed, Senator. them, at least their motives are understand- In all of that 20 years I have sat on many able. Senate committees and I have never sat on a They are innocent of the charge that was committee on which a senator has said, for made. People will remember that the Prime example, as Senator Brandis did to the Can- Minister in the election campaign said words berra Times just recently, that he interpreted to this effect: no Australian would like peo- his task on that committee to be defence ple that do these things coming to Australia. counsel for the government—he prided him- The truth is that they did not—they never did self in it. I would have thought that from those things—and there is no evidence any- time to time senators do take on the roles of where in this inquiry to suggest that they advocates for their party and that that is un- were other than caring and responsible par- exceptional, but I do not think any senator ents. Somebody has got to say that these regards it as their sole role. In this place people have been defamed or misrepresented there is, if you like, a tradition that ought to or subject to an electoral scam for political be preserved that when we are on commit- purposes in which their reputation is in tat- tees we try and do the work of the commit- ters. They have not had an opportunity—be- tees and conduct inquiries as senators deal- cause they are out of our jurisdiction and we ing with the facts to try and arrive at a con- cannot afford them protection—to speak for Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5801 themselves in this inquiry. I think it is a fundamental to that process, most particu- shame that that is not on the record, because larly to demonstrate the parliament’s biparti- they were there too and they were witnesses san support for the Australian defence forces to these events. I conclude on the point that currently deployed in the area. 14 different sources of information went to It is particularly important to acknowledge Minister Reith and 13 to Prime Minister the extraordinary work of the Army, Navy Howard about this event that indicated that and Air Force personnel deployed in the re- the—(Time expired) gion. They work under very onerous physical Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade and climatic conditions, never more so than Committee Report at the height of summer when this visit took Senator PAYNE (New South Wales) place. Australians, as we all know, are nor- (7.48 p.m.)—I rise this evening to make mally used to extremes of temperature, but some reference to a report—another report— temperatures in excess of 50 degrees Celsius which was also tabled this week, on this oc- in Kuwait and in the Gulf test even the har- casion by the Joint Standing Committee on diest soul. Our soldiers and sailors in those Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade on the two instances carry out their roles without visit to Australian forces deployed to the complaint, notwithstanding those conditions. International Coalition Against Terrorism in This particular delegation gave senators July and August of this year. That visit in- and members a chance to see our troops on cluded Kuwait, the Gulf, Kyrgyzstan, Af- active deployment. It is an opportunity that is ghanistan and Dubai. The report was tabled not often available to members and senators in the Senate by the chair of the joint com- of this place, so I regard it as both an honour mittee and in fact the leader of the delega- and a privilege to have participated. It is par- tion, my colleague Senator Alan Ferguson. I ticularly not easily available in a key region want to thank Senator Ferguson particularly such as this, such an enormous distance from for noting at the time of the tabling that I was our own nation, and particularly not at a time absent from the chamber because I was of such heated debate on Australia’s role in chairing a session of the Women and Polic- any future involvement in the area. On a per- ing Globally 2002 conference, that session sonal basis, I really feel that this is an op- being on peacekeeping, the timeliness of portunity that enabled me to see with much which in many ways was interesting. greater clarity the aspects of this debate. I Other speakers both in this chamber and have used this experience in discussions with in the other place have indicated that this the many experts, academics and defence visit was extraordinarily valuable to all personnel that one talks to on these issues. members of the delegation to enable us to As the report notes, and as I am sure my appreciate—and in some cases that appre- colleagues did not miss the opportunity to ciation was felt quite acutely—the extreme also note, the delegation travelled as our conditions in which our defence personnel forces do: from Perth to Kuwait in an Ilyu- are serving in the region. The committee is shin 76 Defence resupply aircraft, between undertaking a range of activities as part of Kuwait and Kyrgyzstan, Kyrgyzstan and our watching brief, as it is described, on the Afghanistan and Afghanistan and Dubai on a war on terrorism. This visit was particularly Hercules C130 and on Seahawk helicopters. important to that in terms of monitoring, We also had the occasional very real-life ex- considering and reporting on Australia’s on- perience of climbing ladders up and down going commitment to this effort. Its particu- the sides of the USS Hopper and the Austra- lar purposes were to give the committee a lian frigates the Melbourne and the Arunta. comprehensive understanding of the nature The delegation made the effort to travel as and effectiveness of our commitment, an our troops do, rather than choosing the alter- understanding that then enables us to report native of first-class commercial flights— that to the Australian community. This re- something for which parliamentarians are port, its tabling and members’ responses to it often derided—and I think those decisions in this place and in the other place are very were well received by the troops that we vis- 5802 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002 ited. In fact, I venture to say that in some much to thank them for. The report notes the cases they just stood there in horror and dis- very clear sense of purpose and strong com- belief saying, ‘You can’t be serious; you mitment to duties of these troops and, most came here on an Ilyushin 76!’ But we did importantly, their high morale, which was indeed and we all survived the journey. evidenced in every activity we enjoyed. I want to comment briefly on some of the In relation to the Gulf, the Maritime Inter- key aspects of the delegation’s visit, starting ception Force has been in operation since with our time in Kuwait. The delegation August 1990. Australia has been involved made official calls on both the Speaker and since its inception. These are the patrol and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, and they are boarding operations in the central and north- well recorded in the report. But most par- ern Persian Gulf and in the Gulf of Oman. ticularly in relation to our troops we visited We began with a visit to the USS Hopper, a Camp Doha in Kuwait City, where the pres- US Navy guided missile destroyer. It is nota- ence of an Army logistics support element ble for one particularly interesting reason, I and the Australian national command head- thought. It is not just an extraordinary ship; quarters enabled us to make some very valu- the USS Hopper carries the largest percent- able inspections. Initial briefings provided to age of female naval crew in the United States us by Brigadier Garry Bornholt and his team Navy. It was in fact named after Admiral noted, amongst other things, the very good Gladys Hopper, who was the first female impression that Australian personnel have admiral in the US Navy. Her formidable vis- made, and the report notes particularly their age surveys the wardroom, and I feel that all reliability and their competence. They were those who are viewed by Admiral Hopper comments that were echoed throughout the would be reasonably intimidated. We re- delegation’s entire visit, not just by the Aus- ceived very high level and, in some cases, tralian national command representatives but classified briefings on the Hopper, and an most particularly by representatives of the Australian crew is embarked there. It was United States and other forces present in the quite clear to us that the Australian crew and international coalition. the crew of the American guided missile de- We had initial discussions in Camp Doha stroyer are working together very well. on command and control elements, which are We observed a particularly interesting referred to more broadly in the report itself. I boarding at the time, and I commented to the want to record my appreciation of the assis- intelligence officer of the Hopper that tech- tance of the United States in the visit to and nology has made amazing advances for inspection of the US helicopter flight line, troops deployed in such instances. For ex- the AH64 Apache attack helicopter and the ample, to see a naval crew board a suspect terrain flight that they provided to members illegal ship, a dhow, and bring back to the of the delegation on US Army Black Hawks. Hopper by an inflatable boat the documents It was an absolutely unforgettable experi- from the suspect dhow, have those scanned ence—indescribable in the extremes of heat and registered on the Hopper and return the and those climatic difficulties that I referred original documents to the suspect boat in a to earlier. matter of minutes is quite an extraordinary I want to thank the Australians at Camp performance in that environment, and I was Doha who looked after us so well on this very impressed by that. initial meeting. I can only imagine how diffi- We transferred in two groups to the Mel- cult it is to sustain, entertain and brief nine bourne and the Arunta Australian frigates parliamentarians who drop into, if you like, a deployed in the Gulf as part of the Maritime high level of operational activity and seek Interception Force. I was in the small group briefings and information. It cannot be easy that overnighted on the Melbourne. We took to interrupt very important daily activities, the opportunity to do a full tour of the ship but in every single instance, in every single and to talk to the crew and observe their high aspect of our visit, that was done by Austra- morale and the very positive experience they lian troops deployed in this area. We have were able to relate to us. Our 3 a.m. transfers Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5803 from the Melbourne to the Arunta by RHIB levels of risk in the management of information. gave us another equally valuable experience The Taskforce failed to establish at the outset a on the Arunta, and I want to thank the cap- control structure appropriate to the nature of the tains on both of those ships. activities upon which it was embarked. Overall, it lacked a clear governance framework defining In Kyrgyzstan we met relatively briefly accountability and reporting arrangements and the with the RAAF 84 Wing Detachment—in roles and responsibilities of the various partici- fact, from Richmond RAAF Base in my own pants. In particular: constituency—at Manus International Air- Copies of advices to the government prepared by port near Bishkek in Kyrgyzstan. Those the Taskforce and other outcomes of Taskforce valuable briefings that we had there on air deliberations, were not distributed to the partici- operations were ones which I will certainly pating agencies that contributed to those delib- never forget. The support of the air opera- erations, thereby denying agencies the opportu- tions from the RAAF 707s were absolutely nity to correct errors or to clarify misleading in- extraordinary. I will not have time to finish formation. my remarks this evening, so I will continue The Taskforce’s proceedings and decisions were them on another occasion. not sufficiently well minuted, thereby preventing a reasonable record of the Taskforce’s activities A Certain Maritime Incident Committee from being available to its many participants, and Report rendering the activities of the Taskforce largely Senator JACINTA COLLINS (Victoria) inaccessible to subsequent scrutiny. (7.58 p.m.)—It is a pleasure, in returning to There was considerable variation in the manner of the report of the Senate Select Committee on ‘reporting back’ by participants to their home A Certain Maritime Incident, which was ta- agencies. In many instances it was insufficient to bled earlier today, to follow Senator Payne ensure a coherent engagement of the agencies with her references to the admirable behav- with the Taskforce and inhibited the adequate iour of our Defence Force personnel. She has ‘hand over’ of advice between the various repre- sentatives from the same agency who attended relayed her experience akin to the experience Taskforce meetings on different occasions. that I had in the previous year of our new parliamentary program on the HMAS Ade- Within the Taskforce and between the Taskforce and agencies and/or ministers, information flows laide. were often poorly managed with inadequate at- I want to return briefly to the additional tention being paid to risk mitigation and the de- comments that I added to our report, where I tection and correction of errors in information. highlighted that one of the very clear find- The Committee is not questioning the integrity of ings of this report, one of the very clear the individual participants on the Taskforce, but things proven in this report, is the absolute finds substantial weaknesses in its basic adminis- integrity of our Defence Force personnel. trative operations, including record keeping, risk The many sad reflections that have been management and reporting back. made in a number of other areas can be dealt Beyond that statement, tonight I would like with another time. However, I want to extend to reflect on the management of the People the comments that I made on the culture that Smuggling Task Force and of course its had been reported to me from some defence manager, Ms Jane Halton. Ms Halton was personnel which had been developed in the involved in a policy that was playing chicken Department of the Prime Minister and Cabi- with people’s lives. One might question the net and focus tonight on just one small ele- full role of her behaviour in this, but it is ment of how that culture developed. Looking clear from examples such as the one I high- at the government’s People Smuggling Task light when I show excerpts from the log of Force, which was headed by Ms Jane Halton, the HMAS Adelaide that this is what in fact I would like to go to the findings that the transpired. committee made in relation to that task force. I take the Senate again to the log refer- We found: ences that are part of the additional com- The Taskforce failed to observe certain key prin- ments that I made to the report. In respect of ciples of best practice in the conduct of its opera- SIEV4, at 7.51 zulu time the boarding party tions, thereby exposing itself to inappropriate 5804 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

‘request to move children and women off’. you observe memory loss, lack of recall, But at 10.09 zulu they are still on the ship, fidgetiness and like behaviour. and we have the recommendation to ‘put If we look today at what the reward has people in the water’ on the double. At 10.36, been for what I would describe as a very the ship is ‘contacting parliament on the cri- convenient memory, Ms Halton has been sis’. We have people in the water and we are well rewarded. She is now the secretary of contacting parliament on the crisis, accord- one of the biggest Commonwealth depart- ing to this log. Finally, at 11.00 zulu—which ments. But what I think is worse, and what I is 51 minutes after these people were put in think has been a slap in the face for these the water—HMAS Adelaide’s RHIBs were asylum seekers whom she played chicken instructed to bring children on board the with to some degree, is that she received the Adelaide. Public Service medal for policy reform on How can it be that the discussions that illegal immigration. I say tonight that she were going through the task force and should hand that medal back! What this through PM&C in relation to how to manage committee report states about the behaviour these asylum seekers allowed people to be of the task force and the culture in PM&C put in the water for 50 minutes? Compare indicates quite clearly that she has no right to that with Ms Halton’s statements that she claim that medal. She has been involved in was concerned about women and the garb some degree in playing chicken with peo- that they were wearing—I think she referred ple’s lives and she should return that medal to it as the Hajib, although it is probably to the Australian public. better described as the Burqua—and how Senate adjourned at 8.07 p.m. they might survive in the water in such garb. People were in the water for 51 minutes. DOCUMENTS If we go to SIEV10, we know two women Tabling died. We still do not know the full details The following government documents about how or why they died, but we know were tabled: that they died and they were in the water. Aboriginal Hostels Limited—Report for Yet, if you look at this log reference from the the period 24 June 2001 to 23 June 2002. HMAS Adelaide, you can see that the serv- Administrative Appeals Tribunal—Report icemen involved—the people who were in for 2001-02. the boarding party—were saying at 7.51, Aged Care Standards and Accreditation almost three hours earlier, ‘Take these Agency Limited—Report for 2001-02. women and children off.’ And we need to Albury-Wodonga Development Corpora- know who stopped them. Who was playing tion—Report for 2001-02. chicken with these people’s lives? A concern Australian Broadcasting Authority—Re- expressed by Ms Halton that she was con- port for 2001-02. cerned about women in this sort of garb be- Australian Broadcasting Corporation ing in the water beggars belief when you (ABC)—Report for 2001-02. read things such as these logs and see what happened to people. Australian Communications Authority— Report for 2001-02. But that is not the only problem with Ms Australian Competition and Consumer Halton’s evidence. If you look at her evi- Commission—Report for 2001-02. dence, you will see 53 occasions when she Australian Hearing Service (Australian just cannot recall. There are another 10 occa- Hearing)—Report for 2001-02. sions when she cannot remember. There is a strange element to her evidence. When she is Australian Institute of Criminology and Criminology Research Council—Reports explaining something that works in the fa- for 2001-02. vour of the position that she is trying to maintain for the government, her memory is Australian Institute of Family Studies— crystal clear, but when she is being ques- Report for 2001-02. tioned on conflicting or damaging evidence Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5805

Australian Institute of Health and Wel- Forest and Wood Products Research and fare—Report for 2001-02. Development Corporation and Forest and Australian Institute of Marine Science— Wood Products Research and Development Report for 2001-02. Corporation Selection Committee—Re- ports for 2001-02. Australian Law Reform Commission—Re- port—No. 94—Report for 2001-02. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Author- ity—Report for 2001-02. Australian Maritime Safety Authority— Report for 2001-02. Health Insurance Commission—Equity and diversity program—Report for 2001- Australian National Maritime Museum— 02. Report for 2001-02. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Australian National Training Authority— Commission—Report for 2001-02. Australian vocational education and Maritime Industry Finance Company Lim- training system—Report for 2001— ited—Report for 2001-02. Volumes 1, 2 and 3. Migration Review Tribunal—Report for Report for 2001-02. 2001-02. Australian Nuclear Science and Technol- National Competition Council—Report for ogy Organisation (ANSTO)—Report for 2001-02. 2001-02. National Industrial Chemicals Notification Australian Postal Corporation (Australia and Assessment Scheme—Report for Post)—Report for 2001-02. 2001-02 on the operation of the Industrial Australian Prudential Regulation Author- Chemicals (Notification and Assessment) ity—Report for 2001-02. Act 1989. Australian Research Council—Report for National Museum of Australia—Report for 2001-02. 2001-02. Australian War Memorial—Report for National Occupational Health and Safety 2001-02. Commission—Report for 2001-02. ComLand Limited—Report for 2001-02. National Office for the Information Econ- Commissioner for Complaints [Aged omy—Report for 2001-02. care]—Report for 2001-02. National Road Transport Commission— Cotton Research and Development Corpo- Report for 2001-02. ration and Cotton Research and Develop- NetAlert Limited—Report for 2001-02. ment Corporation Selection Committee— Office of Parliamentary Counsel—Report Reports for 2001-02. for 2001-02. Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Public Service Commissioner—Report for Forestry—Report for 2001-02. 2001-02, incorporating the report of the Department of Family and Community Merit Protection Commissioner. Services—Report for 2001-02—Volumes 1 Repatriation Commission, Department of and 2. Veterans’ Affairs and the National Treat- Department of Foreign Affairs and ment Monitoring Committee—Reports for Trade—Reports for 2001-02— 2001-02, including reports pursuant to the Volume 1—Department of Foreign Af- Defence Service Homes Act 1918 and the fairs and Trade. War Graves Act 1980. Volume 2—Australian Agency for In- Seafarers Safety, Rehabilitation and Com- ternational Development (AusAID). pensation Authority—Report for 2001-02. Department of Veterans’ Affairs—Data- Social Security Appeals Tribunal—Report matching program—Report for 2001-02. for 2001-02. Director of Public Prosecutions—Report Special Broadcasting Service Corporation for 2001-02. (SBS)—Report for 2001-02. Family Court of Australia—Report for Stevedoring Industry Finance Commit- 2001-02. tee—Report for 2001-02. 5806 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

Telstra Corporation Limited—Equal em- Australian Meat and Live-stock Indus- ployment opportunity program—Report try (High Quality Beef Export to the for 2001-02. European Union) Amendment Order Tobacco Research and Development Cor- 2002 (No. 1). poration—Report for 2001-02. Class Ruling CR 2001/1 (Addendum). Tabling Defence Act—Determination under section The following documents were tabled by 58H—Defence Force Remuneration Tribu- nal—Determination No. 18 of 2002. the Clerk: Goods and Services Tax Ruling GSTR Australian Bureau of Statistics Act—Pro- 2002/5. posal No. 15 of 2002. Health Insurance Act— Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Act— Health Insurance (Amendment) Deter- mination HS/08/2002. Australian Meat and Live-stock Indus- try (Beef Export to the United States of Health Insurance (Transurethral Needle America—Quota Year 2003) Order Ablation) Determination HS/07/2002. 2002. Taxation Determination TD 2002/24. Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5807

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE The following answers to questions were circulated: Commonwealth Heritage Properties (Question No. 408) Senator Crossin asked the Minister for Finance and Administration, upon notice, on 27 June 2002: (1) What is the amount of revenue generated from the sale of Commonwealth heritage properties over the past 3 years. (2) What is the Government’s current position with respect to the disposal of heritage property. (3) Is it a fact that decisions about the disposal of heritage properties are made on an agency by agency basis; if so, how does the Government ensure that heritage values are not compromised under these arrangements. (4) Does the Government have any plans to establish a whole of government policy which balances considerations of financial return to the Government with environmental or heritage values to the community. (5) Does the department have any system for identifying heritage-listed properties when it is planning to dispose of property. (6) Did the department notify the Australian Heritage Commission (AHC) in relation to the proposed sale of two properties listed on the Register of the National Estate at Myilly Point in Darwin; if so, on what date did this notification occur. (7) Did the department seek advice about the proposed sale; if so, what advice was given. (8) In the case of a tendering or expression of interest process, does the department involve the AHC in selecting the successful bid when disposing of a property listed on the Register of the National Estate; if not: (a) how does the department use the advice of the AHC in relation to disposal of these properties; and (b) is there any system for weighing heritage considerations against the fi- nancial gain to be made. (9) Why is the disposal of the Myilly Point properties being done by an ‘expressions of interest’ proc- ess while the heritage-listed property in Hartley Street Alice Springs was granted in freehold title to the National Trust in 1998. Senator Abetz—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) Over the past three years (1999/2000 to 2001/02) the Department of Finance and Administration has sold properties with heritage values recognised by listing in a heritage Register by either the Australian Heritage Commission (AHC) or a State/Territory heritage authority, for sale revenue totalling some $37 million ($30 million of this total was from the sale of one property - the Cam- eron Offices at Belconnen ACT). (2) The Government’s position is that the Commonwealth should own property only where there is an efficient economic reason for doing so, or where it is otherwise in the public interest. This reflects the Government’s view that the Commonwealth should not be a property investor, and should fo- cus its scarce resources on core functions. At the same time, the Government acknowledges the importance of heritage issues generally, and is particularly sensitive to the heritage values inherent in some of its own Commonwealth properties. The ongoing protection of heritage values is an im- portant public interest consideration in divestment decisions. (3) There are several portfolios of Commonwealth owned properties managed by different agencies, including the Departments of Defence, Foreign Affairs and Trade, and Finance and Administra- tion, as well as individual buildings, such as the National Library and Gallery, which are con- trolled by the user agency. Divestment decisions are made by the agency responsible for the prop- erty portfolio, its Minister and/or the Government depending on the significance of the divest- ment. The environmental and heritage values of Commonwealth properties are protected by the Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975 and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Con- servation Act 1999 which bind Commonwealth agencies and Ministers in their decision making. (4) The current legislative framework will be further enhanced by the environment and heritage leg- islation amendment bills currently in passage through the Parliament. The primary responsibility 5808 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

for this legislation rests with my colleague the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, the Hon Dr David Kemp MP. (5) Yes. (6) Yes. The formal notification occurred on 6 December 1999. (7) On 30 December 1999 the AHC wrote to the Department of Finance and Administration indicat- ing that it appreciated the Department’s commitment to the heritage values of the Myilly Point houses, ensuring their long term protection through preparation of a conservation management plan, investigating appropriate contractual mechanisms and consultation with the Northern Terri- tory Government to ensure its commitment to the protection of the properties. (8) No. (a) AHC advice is obtained, accepted and implemented to ensure the ongoing protection of heritage values via mechanisms that include conditions of sale, conservation management plans, restrictive covenants and State and Territory heritage legislation. (b) Yes. (9) Transfer of the heritage house at 86 Hartley Street, Alice Springs to the National Trust was negoti- ated in 1997. Since that time, the Government has implemented major reforms to the ownership and management of Commonwealth property because it is committed to strong financial manage- ment, full accountability and value for money for the Australian taxpayer. The Government is also committed to ensuring the preservation of the Myilly Point heritage houses, and the ‘expressions of interest’ process will assist development of a strategy for their long-term ownership and man- agement. Forestry: Regional Forest Agreements (Question No. 500) Senator Brown asked the Minister for Forestry and Conservation, upon notice, on 30 July 2002: (1) Is the Minister aware that, according to the latest Tasmanian Forest Practices Board report, 11.8 per cent (9,040 hectares) of the Regional Forests Agreement area’s Eucalyptus regnans remaining in 1996 was logged by 2001. (2) Does the Minister recognise that, at this logging rate, 100 per cent will be lost by 2044 and that logging is not sustainable. (3) Will the Government move immediately to reduce this rate to a sustainable level. (4) What, in the Minister’s estimate, is the sustainable rate of Eucalyptus regnans logging in Tasmania for: (a) sawmills; (b) veneer; and (c) woodchip purposes. Senator Ian Macdonald—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) I am advised by the Honourable Paul Lennon, Deputy Premier and Minister for Economic Devel- opment, Energy and Resources, that the Tasmanian Forest Practices Board Annual Report for 2000-01 does not provide data on how much Eucalyptus regnans has been logged since 1996. (2) Given that the Tasmanian Forest Practices Board Annual Report for 2000-01 does not provide data on how much Eucalyptus regnans has been logged since 1996, as stated in the preceding an- swer, the proposition behind this question is incorrect. Nevertheless, I would add that the Tasmanian Regional Forest Agreement (RFA) provides the ba- sis for sustainable management of Tasmania’s forests, including a comprehensive, adequate and representative (CAR) reserve system that protects 40 per cent of Tasmania’s forests, including 16,330 hectares of Eucalyptus regnans forests. Most native forests are regenerated to the same forest community after logging, ensuring their sustainability. (3) In light of the answers provided previously, I cannot see how you can maintain that the level of Eucalyptus regnans harvest is unsustainable. Therefore, I will not be seeking for Tasmania to change how it manages this forest type. (4) The Commonwealth does not have the responsibility for calculating sustainable yield from Tas- mania’s forests. The Commonwealth has accredited the methods used by the Tasmanian Govern- ment for calculating sustainable yields of wood products. Tasmania publishes five yearly reviews of the wood resource in public and private forests and plans the harvest of its public forests on a sustainable basis. Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5809

Defence: Fremantle Class Patrol Boat Fleet (Question No. 563) Senator Chris Evans asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 19 August 2002: (1) Can a summary of the activities undertaken by the Fremantle Class Patrol Boat (FCPB) fleet be provided for each of the 2000-01 and 2001-02 financial years, including the following informa- tion: (a) how many days each of the FCPBs and/or the fleet as a whole spent on seagoing days; (b) of those seagoing days, how many days were spent on activities tasked by Coastwatch; (c) with reference to seagoing days of the FCPBs not spent on civil surveillance patrols, specify (as a pro- portion of the fleet) what activities they were engaged in and for how many days (eg. in the 2001- 02 financial year, 20 per cent of the seagoing days of the total fleet, not including days tasked by Coastwatch, might have been spent doing military training exercises); (d) of the days any or all of the FCPBs were not at sea, what use was made of them (eg. work-up or evaluation periods, port visits, maintenance and leave periods, etc); and (e) with reference to their use on non-seagoing days, can a breakdown be provided of how many days the FCPBs (or a proportion of the fleet) spent in each different use. (2) (a) In what Australian Defence Force exercises did the FCPBs participate in each of the 2000-01 and 2001-02 financial years; and (b) can the following information be provided: (i) how many boats, or what proportion of the fleet, participated in these exercises, (ii) the number of days they did so, and (iii) which of these days were international, joint or single service exercises. (Note: The question does not seek information that would prejudice operational security, ie. in- formation regarding where particular FCPBs have been used or when, but on use patterns of the fleet. The tender documents for the replacement patrol boats included a summary of the activities of three individual FCPBs over a year.) (3) What are the costs associated with the following aspects of the FCPBs: (a) initial value (ie. pur- chase price paid for each FCPB); (b) average annual maintenance casts for each boat in each of the 2000-01 and 2001-02 financial years (include any automatic payments made to contractor for ongoing maintenance, as well as additional costs for any irregular or extra repairs that have been needed); (c) average daily running costs (on a seagoing day); and (d) average daily crew costs (ie. a breakdown of salary, on-costs, training etc.) (4) What is the patrol range of an FCPB. (5) Please describe what sea state the FCPB fleet: (a) usually operates in; and (b) is capable of oper- ating in, and what this means in laymans terms. (6) Can the Minister confirm that the FCPBs are not capable of operating in all parts of the Australian Exclusive Economic Zone (FEZ). (7) Please describe in general terms where the parts referred to in (5) are (eg. Torres Strait, Heard and Macdonald Islands, the Australian Antarctic Territory etc). (8) When were the last three occasions (or the month) in which any of the FCPBs conducted civil surveillance patrol south of Geraldton. (9) Has Defence reached any agreement with Coastwatch on P3-C Orion use that includes docu- mented criteria for their use. (10) How many flying hours were provided to Coastwatch by Royal Australian Air Force in each of the 2000-0l and 2001-02 financial years. (11) Were all of these hours provided by Orions; if not, please specify what other aircraft have contrib- uted. (12) How many hours does an average civil surveillance patrol by an Orion take. (13) What is the total full cost per hour of using an Orion for civil surveillance. (14) What is the southern-most point the Orions operate to in civil surveillance patrols. (ie. the most southern latitude that they fly to.) (15) Has Defence given any consideration to entering into formal arrangements with Coastwatch on training, certification or exchange of staff involved in air activities; if not, why not; if so: (a) have any arrangements been agreed to in principle, or made; and (b) can details be provided of the pro- gress made to this point. 5810 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

(16) For how many hours in total did the Orion fleet collectively fly in the 2000-01 and 2001-02 Fi- nancial years. Senator Hill—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) (a) FY 2000-01 - 2690 sea going days programmed. FY 2001-02 - 2632 sea going days programmed. (b) FY 2000-01 - 1688 patrol days. FY 2001-02 - 2103 patrol days. (c) FY 2000-01 - 27% of sea going days were used to support workups, military exercises and deployments. FY 2001-02 - 21% of sea going days were used to support workups military exercise and deployments. (d) When not at sea FCPB’s conducted assisted maintenance periods (AMP), leave, maintenance and training (LMT). (e) FY 2000-01 and 2001-02 non sea going days breakdown: (i) AMP 49%. (ii) LMT 51%. (2) (a) FY 2000-01 - Penguin, Lumbas and Minor War Vessels Concentration Period. FY2001-02 - Minor War Vessel Concentration Period. (b) (i) FY 2000-01 - Penguin (2 FCPBs), Lumbas (2 FCPBs) Singaroo (2 FCPBs) and Minor War Vessels Concentration Period (9 FCPBs). FY 2001-02 - (8 FCPBs). (ii) FY 2000-01 - Exercise Penguin 20 Days. Exercise Lumbas 22 Days. Exercise Singaroo 4 Days. Minor War Vessel Concentration Period 108 Days. FY 2001-02 - 82 Days. (iii) International Exercises conducted were: Penguin, Lumbas and Singaroo. Single Service Exercise conducted was the Minor War Vessel Concentration Period. (3) (a) $28.3 million. (b) FY 2000-01 - $26.606 million for FCPB maintenance, divided by 15 boats equals $1.773 per boat average annual maintenance cost. FY 2001-02 - $26.793 million divided by 15 boats equals $1.789 million per boat average maintenance cost. No personnel costs or fleet intermediate maintenance cost savings are included in the above figures. All contractor costs are included, as are consumables, but these consumables are in direct support of maintenance. (c) and (d) As provided in the response to Senate Question on Notice No 343 (Senate Hansard Monday 19 August 2002), advice was given that the past practice in answering questions of this nature has been for Defence to provide daily, hourly, full-cost recovery rate for ADF as- sets. The full-cost recovery rate methodology is used to calculate the recovery or waiver costs of using a particular asset when Defence is asked to perform a non-Defence activity. The rate includes all the embedded costs that Defence would be paying whether or not the assets had been deployed. The underlying assumptions in recent questions and debate, that the full cost recovery rate can be extrapolated to estimate the cost of operations is, quite simply, misleading. The true cost to the taxpayer is the net additional cost. The net additional cost of a particular asset in an operation, in terms of extra fuel, rations and allowances would depend on the particular operation. It would also take account of the offsets within the overall budget De- Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5811

fence would make in absorbing some of that cost; for example, cancelling or postponing ex- ercises or seeking additional efficiencies to help offset the additional costs. The net additional cost is consistent with the approach taken by successive Governments in providing supplementation to the Defence budget for operations. It is this method the Gov- ernment intends to use for its own costings and to employ when answering questions about the costs of operations. (4) 2,360 Nautical miles. (5) (a) Varies up to sea state 5. (b) Up to sea state 5. In layman’s terms, seas generated from a fresh breeze 17-21 knots of wind with probable wave height of 2.0 metres and with a maximum probable wave height of 2.5 metres. Note: FCPB capability is greatly reduced above sea state 3. (6) Yes. (7) The FCPB’s do not operate at Heard, McDonald or Macquarie Islands, the Australian Antarctic Territory, Cocos and Christmas Islands, due to sea state limitations and the extreme range from mainland Australia. (8) During the months of June, August and September 2001. (9) There is no formal agreement between Defence and Coastwatch that documents criteria for their use. However, the Government has directed 250 Orion flying hours be made available in support of the civil surveillance program. Coastwatch may request Orion tasking for any civil surveillance related purpose they desire, within the capabilities and limitations of the aircraft. A process has been arranged whereby Coastwatch tasking requests are reviewed and prioritised with other op- erational and non operational tasking by Defence, who in turn inform Coastwatch which tasks can be undertaken. (10) Defence provided 256.0 hours in 2000-01 and 100.3 hours in 2001-02. (11) Yes. (12) Eight to ten hours. (13) The full-cost recovery rate methodology is used to calculate the recovery or waiver costs of using a particular asset, usually when Defence is asked to perform a non-Defence activity. A compre- hensive set of cost factors, including management overheads, capital costs and depreciation, sala- ries and accrued superannuation, is used to calculate the recovery rate. In the case of support to Coastwatch, the associated costs have been absorbed within the Defence Budget. (14) Orions on normal civil surveillance patrols will fly to 46S; the fisheries zone south of Tasmania. Orions have operated to approximately 57S, Macquarie Island EEZ. (15) There is no extant formal arrangement with Coastwatch on the training of staff involved in air activities. Coastwatch aircraft perform a narrow spectrum of roles performed by Orion aircraft and little benefit would be gained by cross-training Defence personnel in Coastwatch duties. In addition, security issues preclude the cross-training of Coastwatch observers for Orion duties. In regard to the exchange of personnel, the Coastwatch Director General, Chief Of Staff and Op- erations Officer are military personnel and a Coastwatch Officer serves in Northern Command (NORCOM). In addition, Customs Officers have free access to NORCOM. (16) The P-3C Orion flew 8,216 hours in 2000-01 and 9,624 hours in 2001-02. Political Parties: Non-Electorate Staff (Question No. 661) Senator Murray asked the Special Minister of State, upon notice, on 19 September 2002: Can the following details be provided for each parliamentary political party for each of the following financial years: (a) 1998-99; (b) 1999-2000; and (c) 2000-01: (1) The total number of non-electorate staff provided by the Commonwealth to parliamentary repre- sentatives of the party. (2) The aggregate amount spent on airfares and travel allowance by the Commonwealth on the non- electorate staff of the party. 5812 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

Senator Abetz—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) (a) 1998-99 Government: 339 Australian Labor Party: 71 Australian Democrats: 12 (b) 1999-00 Government: 346.9 Australian Labor Party: 73 Australian Democrats: 15 (c) 2000-01 Government: 358.5 Australian Labor Party: 75 Australian Democrats: 15

(2) (a) 1998-99 Government: $6,019,183.95 Australian Labor Party: $1,371,264.28 Australian Democrats: $390,065.35 (b) 1999-00 Government: $5,182,910.60 Australian Labor Party: $1,371,709.10 Australian Democrats: $388,397.19 (c) 2000-01 Government: $5,838,350.25 Australian Labor Party: $1,531,102.08 Australian Democrats: $401,121.17 Note: The airfare and travel allowance amounts included in (2) parts (a) and (b) contain archived data that has been derived from the entitlement management system that was in place within the Department until September 1999. Due to the nature of the archiving process and its technical limitations, the De- partment is unable to guarantee the exactness of this information. Defence: Naval Shipbuilding and Repair Sector Plan (Question No. 662) Senator Chris Evans asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 23 September 2002: Can a copy of the presentation given at the Defence Industry Conference in Canberra on 26 June 2002, concerning the Naval Shipbuilding and Repair Sector Plan, be provided. Senator Hill—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) Yes. A copy has been forwarded separately to your office. Education: Cultural Heritage (Question No. 703) Senator Greig asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, Science and Training, upon notice, on 26 September 2002: (1) Have enrolments into the Conservation of Cultural Materials and Cultural Heritage Management programs, offered at the University of Canberra, been cancelled for 2003. (2) What is the reason for ceasing enrolments into these courses. (3) Is it true that this program of study is unique in Australia. (4) What other programs exist in south-east Asia and the Pacific that could train conservators in our cultural heritage. (5) Is lack of government funding the reason these courses are being threatened. (6) Does the Government believe that a scientifically-trained profession is important in the preserva- tion of Australia’s cultural heritage; if so, where will such professionals now be trained. (7) How many countries have had students trained at this University of Canberra course. (8) (a) Which government initiated the funding for this course; (b) in what year was it initiated; and (c) was it a result of the Pigott Report. (9) How many students have graduated from these programs since its inception. (10) If universities are to be encouraged to diversify and not replicate programs (as discussed in the Crossroads issues paper by the Minister for Education, Science and Training), why is the Univer- sity of Canberra suspending a unique program. Wednesday, 23 October 2002 SENATE 5813

Senator Alston—The Minister for Education, Science and Training has provided the fol- lowing answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) The University of Canberra (UC) has advised that the following courses will not be open for new admissions in 2003: 365AK BAppSc Cultural Heritage Studies 624AA BAppSc/BComm CHS/Information 151AL GradDipAppSc Conservation of Cultural Materials 305AD MAppSc Cultural Conservation Studies 305AE MAppSc Conservation of Cultural Materials. Cultural Heritage Management will be available as a major to new entrants within the Resource and Environmental degree. Further to this, the following courses will remain open for admission and enrolment: 589AD GradCertAppSc Cultural Heritage Studies 151AB GradDipAppSc Cultural Heritage Management 305AA MAppSc Cultural Heritage Management (the Masters consists of the GradDip plus 24cp thesis - ie no additional subjects). The University indicates that all current commitments to students in the relevant awards will be honoured. (2) The University indicates that it has been cross subsidising these courses for many years and that it cannot continue to do so. The University is seeking further external support to allow these pro- grammes to continue in subsequent years. (3) The University of Canberra has advised that while its conservation course has unique features, related courses are taught at Curtin University of Technology, Deakin University, James Cook University, Melbourne University and the University of Western Sydney. (4) The University advised that it is not aware of many similar programs in south-east Asia and the Pacific, but stated that there are many similar programs in Europe, for example, in Florence, Rome, Vienna and Northumbria. (5) The Commonwealth does not fund universities for particular courses but provides block grant funding to universities for a specified number of student places consistent with each institution’s teaching and research activities. As universities are autonomous institutions, generally established under State legislation, the allocation of funding to support various programs of study is an inter- nal matter for the university to determine on the basis of its own assessment of needs and priori- ties. The University advises that these courses cost many times more than the average course to run. An additional problem is the low take up rate, and a lack of precise information as to professional demand and its future. (6) The Government has demonstrated the value it places on the preservation of Australia’s cultural heritage by working cooperatively with State Cultural Ministers at the Cultural Ministers Council. The Council established a National Collections Advisory Forum to provide strategic advice on the future directions, needs and priorities of the heritage collections sector and to identify priorities for government in addressing these issues. Related courses are currently taught at Curtin University of Technology, Deakin University, James Cook University, Melbourne University and the University of Western Sydney. If there is suffi- cient demand from students, employers and the profession, education institutions will respond by offering appropriate training and education. (7) The University advises that students from at least 10 countries have undertaken its programmes. (8) (a) The Federal Government provided funding for the Canberra College of Advanced Education (became the University of Canberra in 1990). (b) The University advises that the course was established at the then Canberra College of Ad- vanced Education in 1978 and that (c) the course was established as a result of the Pigott Report. 5814 SENATE Wednesday, 23 October 2002

(9) The University advises that around 340 students have graduated from the programmes. (10) The Government encourages universities to diversify their offerings to provide wider student choice and to meet the changing demands of industry and the professions, however the current funding arrangements have encouraged duplication across some university activities. The Higher Education Review Issues Paper, Varieties of Excellence: Diversity, Specialisation and Regional Engagement included a range of issues for debate, including possible options to facilitate further diversity and specialisation in higher education. However, as discussed under answer (5) above, decisions relating to specific course offerings are matters for universities to decide. The Govern- ment does not dictate to universities what decisions they should be taking in relation to course of- ferings.