26 Nov 2002 Legislative Assembly 4693

TUESDAY, 26 NOVEMBER 2002

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

ASSENT TO BILLS Government House Queensland 14 November 2002 The Honourable R. K. Hollis, MP Speaker of the Legislative Assembly Parliament House George Street BRISBANE QLD 4000 Dear Mr Speaker I hereby acquaint the Legislative Assembly that the following Bills, having been passed by the Legislative Assembly and having been presented for the Royal Assent, were assented to in the name of Her Majesty The Queen on 14 November 2002: "A Bill for an Act to amend the Juvenile Justice Act 1992 and the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 to facilitate the provision of drug assessment and education sessions to particular offenders appearing before drug diversion courts" "A Bill for an Act to amend the Ambulance Service Act 1991, Fire and Rescue Service Act 1990 and State Counter- Disaster Organisation Act 1975" "A Bill for an Act to amend the Business Names Act 1962 and Fair Trading Act 1989" "A Bill for an Act to amend the Integrated Resort Development Act 1987" "A Bill for an Act to amend the Mineral Resources Act 1989" "A Bill for an Act to amend the Mineral Resources Act 1989, and for other purposes" "A Bill for an Act to provide for the racing industry in Queensland, including betting on races and sporting contingencies, and for other purposes". The Bills are hereby transmitted to the Legislative Assembly, to be numbered and forwarded to the proper Officer for enrolment, in the manner required by law. Yours sincerely (sgd) Peter Arnison Governor

PETITION Gold Coast Harbour Vision 2020 Project Mr Lawlor from 102 petitioners requesting the House to advise the Gold Coast Council that the House will not agree to the recommendations contained in the ‘Gold Coast Harbour Vision 2020 Project—Report No. 1’ and is against any commercial development of the Broadwater (including Wavebreak Is) and the western foreshore and any further reclamation.

PAPERS PAPERS TABLED DURING THE RECESS The Acting Clerk informed the House that the following papers, received during the recess, were tabled on the dates indicated— 11 November 2002— Brisbane Market Corporation—Annual Report 2001-02 Brisbane Market Corporation—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 CS Energy—Annual Report 2001-02 CS Energy—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 Energex—Annual Report 2001-02 Energex Retail—Annual Report 2001-02 Energex—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 Enertrade—Annual Report 2001-02 Enertrade—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 Ergon Energy—Annual Report 2001-02 and Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 4694 Legislative Assembly 26 Nov 2002

Golden Casket Lottery Corporation Limited—Annual Report 2001-02 Golden Casket Lottery Corporation Limited—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 Motor Accident Insurance Commission—Annual Report 2001-02 Powerlink Queensland—Annual Report 2001-02 Powerlink Queensland—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 QSuper Board of Trustees and the Government Superannuation Office—Annual Report 2001-02 Queensland Treasury Department—Annual Report and Financial Statements 2001-02 Stanwell Corporation Limited—Annual Report 2001-02 Stanwell Corporation Limited—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 SunWater—Annual Report 2001-02 SunWater—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 Tarong Energy—Annual Report 2001-02 Tarong Energy—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 Department of Natural Resources and Mines—Annual Report 2001-02 Department of Housing—Annual Report 2001-02 Building Services Authority—Annual Report 2001-02 Residential Tenancies Authority—Annual Report 2001-02 Tourism Queensland—Annual Report 2001-02 12 November 2002— Response from the Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Sport (Mr Mackenroth) to an E-petition presented by Mr Copeland from 126 petitioners, regarding Powerlink Queensland's high voltage powerline proposal from Millmerran to Middle Ridge— Our Reference: E0200806 11 November 2002 Mr N Laurie The Clerk of the Parliament (Acting) Parliament House [email protected] Dear Mr Laurie Thank you for your letter of 25 October 2002 forwarding a copy of the e-petition lodged in the Queensland Legislative Assembly, objecting to Powerlink Queensland's (Powerlink) high voltage powerline proposal from Millmerran to Middle Ridge. The issues contained in the e-petition have been considered and the following response is provided. The planning needs of Queensland's transmission network are developed by Powerlink on an integrated basis for the south east Queensland region over the next 15 years. The first priority is to augment supply to the Middle Ridge substation, which is the bulk electricity supply point for the entire Darling Downs region before the summer of 2004-05. The second stage, based on medium load growth forecast, is to augment supply to the rapidly growing Logan/Brisbane south/Gold Coast region by 2009. Powerlink has considered alternative routes to augment power supply to the Darling Downs and Logan/Brisbane south/Gold Coast regions. The two practical solutions considered by Powerlink are: ¥ Solution A—A new line from Millmerran to Middle Ridge in 2004, followed by a new line from Middle Ridge to Logan by 2009 at an estimated capital cost of $138 million; and ¥ Solution B—A new line from Tarong to Murphy's Creek in 2004, followed by a new line from Millmerran to Logan by 2009 at an estimated capital cost of $165 million. Powerlink has identified Solution A, which includes the proposed Millmerran to Middle Ridge transmission line, as its preferred solution, as it: ¥ delivers the lowest cost to electricity consumers—criterion required by the National Electricity Market (NEM); ¥ delivers the highest net market benefit to participants in the NEM—criterion required by the NEM; ¥ results in fewer kilometres of new transmission lines in south east Queensland, and thus lower overall community impact; and ¥ provides a higher level of security and reliability of supply to the Darling Downs by virtue of having two different geographical supply routes into Middle Ridge. Information has been provided to me and to representatives from the Darling Downs community regarding the above alternatives and costing. Powerlink also informed me and the community representatives of the cost of constructing an underground transmission line using high voltage direct current light technology available from a Swedish company. The cost to underground a transmission line using this technology is four to five times more than an overhead transmission line. A significant contributor to the capital cost of an underground direct current powerline, is the construction of converter stations at each end of the line to convert the current to direct current for the powerline and to alternating current for the high voltage grid. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) is the national regulator for regulated transmission entities and is responsible for setting the regulatory test for new transmission developments. The fundamental principle applied by the ACCC in regard to regulated transmission lines, 26 Nov 2002 Legislative Assembly 4695

is Powerlink must minimise costs while meeting the technical standards set out in the National Electricity Code. In addition to satisfying the ACCC regulatory test, Powerlink is also committed to conducting an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The EIA will assess the impact a transmission line may have on environmental, community, cultural and socioeconomic factors. The preparation of the EIA report will involve public consultation with government agencies and non-government bodies. Any comments on the draft documents are considered and included in the final EIA. The final report provides detailed information and recommendations on a preferred transmission line route within the study corridor. The EIA process also investigates how any potential negative impacts can be avoided or minimised. The final EIA report will also contain an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) which outlines ways to minimise any potential environmental impacts. The EMP will document detailed work plans to be implemented during construction of the proposed transmission line. Several concerns held by residents affected by the powerline project were listed in the Queensland Parliament e-petition. They include: a) Previous powerline proposal Several years ago, the private developers of the Millmerran power station initiated a proposal to acquire a transmission line route between Millmerran and Middle Ridge. The purpose of the proposal was to connect the Millmerran power station to the national electricity grid. The proposal to build the powerline from Millmerran to Middle Ridge did not proceed. Instead, a powerline was constructed to run west from the power station to the Queensland / New South Wales interconnector. Powerlink was not associated with the proposal. The primary purpose of Powerlink's project is to augment supply to the Middle Ridge substation to meet the energy demands of the Darling Downs region. Without reinforcement, the existing transmission network may not be able to provide a secure and reliable electricity supply to the region from the summer of 2004-05. b) Affected residents The 90km study corridor for the proposed powerline directly affects 105 property owners. Although the study corridor is nominally 1km wide, the required easement width will be 60m wide. The 1km wide study corridor allows for flexibility in identifying the best 60m alignment for the easement. Powerlink will consult with affected property owners and communities and complete an EIA before making a final decision about the easement alignment. Property owners have been given the opportunity to comment at each stage of the EIA process. In 1983, Powerlink acquired a 7km easement running south from the Middle Ridge substation. Part of the proposed transmission line will be constructed on the existing easement. c) Farm management practices The majority of farming practices, including most irrigation methods and aerial spraying of crops, can continue on a transmission line easement. The erection of tower structures on properties may have an impact on some farming practices. Powerlink will consult with property owners during all stages of the project to try and achieve minimal impact to farming practices. Where farming practices need to be changed, and that change makes the farming less efficient, a compensation payment will be negotiated between Powerlink and the property owner. d) Property values Powerlink acknowledges construction of new transmission lines can impact on property values. To offset this loss in value, Powerlink provides compensation to directly affected property owners at the time of easement acquisition. Powerlink assesses compensation in a consistent and equitable manner. A number of factors are considered in assessing fair compensation, which include, but are not limited to: ¥ the market value of the land over which the easement is taken; ¥ the reduced property value due to restricted use of the land within the easement and possible visual impact on the residential component of the property; ¥ the number of transmission line structures which could be located on the easement; ¥ the effect the line may have on farm management practices; and ¥ any loss of commercial or potentially commercial timber. e) Health factors The Queensland Government and Powerlink are aware of concerns within the community regarding the possibility of adverse health effects from exposure to Electromagnetic Fields (EMF). The current body of scientific studies into this issue has produced divergent conclusions. Given these contrasting views, the Government relies on the opinion of expert medical review panels, rather than individual researchers, for its advice on health matters. The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia has published Interim guidelines on the limits of exposure to 50/60Hz electric and magnetic fields. These interim guidelines are based on recommendations of the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection. Powerlink operates all its facilities within the interim guidelines adopted by the NHMRC. The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) is a Federal Government agency charged with the responsibility for protecting the health and safety of people, and the environment, from the harmful effects of radiation. In its April 2002 Information sheet, The Controversy over Electromagnetic Fields and Possible Adverse Health Effects, ARPANSA concludes: "On balance, the scientific evidence does not indicate that exposure to 50Hz EMFs found around the home, the office or near power lines is a hazard to human health." 4696 Legislative Assembly 26 Nov 2002

Powerlink is a member of the National Electromagnetic Fields Advisory Committee (NEFAC) of the Electricity Supply Association of Australia (ESAA). As a member of NEFAC, Powerlink has access to the latest information published by scientific review panels. Members of the ESAA practice a policy of "prudent avoidance" when designing new transmission and distribution facilities. All transmission and distribution lines in Australia are designed to produce ground level EMFs lower than the levels recommended in the guidelines. Clearly, the Queensland Government takes any suggestion of a health risk seriously and will continue to monitor developments in the field of EMF research. f) Notice to residents and affected property owners Residents were informed in a letter of 21 August 2002 of Powerlink's proposal to construct a transmission line between Millmerran and Middle Ridge. The Mayors and Chief Executive Officers of local Councils and local Members of Parliament were also informed of the project in August 2002. In the week commencing 26 August 2002, Powerlink began personally contacting property owners directly affected by the study corridor. A series of newsletters, public displays, community meetings and media releases have been undertaken by Powerlink since August 2002 to keep all community members informed about the project. At the request of community members, the date for comment on the draft terms of reference for the EIA was extended by Powerlink. A draft EIA will be issued for comment in March 2003. Completion of the EIA, which is proposed for May 2003, will allow easement acquisition and line construction during October 2003. Powerlink will continue to work with affected property owners and the Darling Downs community to reach an outcome that will meet the electricity needs of the area and minimise any impact the proposed infrastructure may have on the community. Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention and I trust this information is of assistance. Yours sincerely (signed) TERRY MACKENROTH Non-State Schools Accreditation Board—Annual Report 2001-02 Queensland Board of Senior Secondary School Studies—Annual Report 2001-02 Queensland School Curriculum Council—Annual Report 2001-02 Queensland Tertiary Education Foundation—Annual Report 2001-02 University of Queensland Statute No. 7 (Admission and Enrolments) 2002 Department of Justice and Attorney-General—Annual Report 2001-02 Public Trustee of Queensland—Annual Report 2001-02 Department of Primary Industries—Annual Report 2001-02 Queensland Sugar Corporation—Annual Report 1 July 2001 to 31 October 2002 13 November 2002— Government response from the Minister for Transport and Minister for Main Roads (Mr Bredhauer) to Select Committee on Travelsafe Report No. 36 entitled Rural Road Safety in Queensland Response from the Minister for Environment (Mr Wells) to a petition presented by Mrs E Cunningham from 5875 petitioners, regarding the hours of operation by Caltex at the Benaraby Service Station— 12 November 2002 Mr R Doyle The Clerk of the Parliament Legislative Assembly of Queensland Parliament House Alice and George Streets BRISBANE QLD 4000 Dear Mr Doyle I refer to your letter of 12 September 2002 forwarding a copy of a petition tabled in the Parliament on 3 September 2002 regarding the hours of operation by Caltex at the Benaraby Service Station. The Environmental Protection Agency undertook monitoring on site following noise complaints. The results of the monitoring were presented to Caltex, who as a result submitted a voluntary Environmental Management Program (EMP) outlining how they could abate the noise nuisance generated at the service station / truck stop. Caltex employed a noise consultant, who following a period of monitoring, also found that there was significant noise nuisance from this site. The consultant advised the company that compliance with noise nuisance laws could not be guaranteed even given the measures proposed in the EMP. Caltex have at no time disputed the veracity of the noise nuisance from this site, and consequently made the decision that given the noise sources involved the way to rectify the matter was to limit the hours of operation at the Benaraby site. I trust this information is of assistance. Yours sincerely DEAN WELLS Minister for Environment 26 Nov 2002 Legislative Assembly 4697

Department of Emergency Services—Annual Report 2001-02 Arts Queensland—Annual Report 2001-02 Queensland Local Government Grants Commission—Twenty-sixth Report 2002 Land and Resources Tribunal—Annual Report 2001-02 Department of Families—Annual Report 2001-02 Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy—Annual Report 2001-02 Disability Services Queensland—Annual Report 2001-02 Island Coordinating Council—Annual Report 2001-02 Office of the Public Advocate—Annual Report 2001-02 14 November 2002— Department of Main Roads—Annual Report 2001-02 Queensland Motorways Limited—Annual Report 2001-02 The Gateway Bridge Company Limited—Annual Report 2001-02 Logan Motorway Company Limited—Annual Report 2001-02 Port Motorway Limited—Annual Report 2001-02 National Road Transport Commission—Annual Report 2001-02 Correspondence between the Minister for Transport and Minister for Main Roads (Mr Bredhauer) and The Clerk of the Parliament and the Chairman of the National Road Transport Commission and the Minister for Transport and Minister for Main Roads (Mr Bredhauer) regarding certain information contained in the National Road Transport Commission Annual Report 2001-02 Queensland Transport Department—Annual Report 2001-02 Queensland Rail—Annual Report 2001-02 Queensland Rail—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 Bundaberg Port Authority—Annual Report 2001-02 Bundaberg Port Authority—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 Cairns Port Authority—Annual Report 2001-02 Cairns Port Authority—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 Gladstone Port Authority—Annual Report 2001-02 Gladstone Port Authority—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 Mackay Port Authority—Annual Report 2001-02 Mackay Port Authority—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 Port of Brisbane Corporation—Annual Report 2001-02 Port of Brisbane Corporation—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 Ports Corporation of Queensland—Annual Report 2001-02 Ports Corporation of Queensland—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 Rockhampton Port Authority—Annual Report 2001-02 Rockhampton Port Authority—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 Townsville Port Authority—Annual Report 2001-02 Townsville Port Authority—Statement of Corporate Intent 2001-02 Department of Tourism, Racing and Fair Trading—Annual Report 2001-02 Greyhound Racing Authority—Annual Report 2001-02 Trustees of the Albion Park Paceway—Annual Report 2001-02 Department of Innovation and Information Economy, Sport and Recreation Queensland—Annual Report 2001- 02 Major Sports Facilities Authority—Annual Report 2001-02 Stadium Redevelopment Authority—Annual Report 2001-02 Australian College of Tropical Agriculture—Annual Report 2001-02 Emerald Agricultural College—Annual Report 2001-02 Longreach Pastoral College Board—Annual Report 2001-02 Library Board of Queensland—Annual Report 2001-02 Queensland Art Gallery—Annual Report 2001-02 Queensland Museum—Annual Report 2001-02 Queensland Performing Arts Trust—Annual Report 2001-02; Erratum to the Queensland Local Government Grants Commission Twenty-sixth Report 2002 Environmental Protection Authority—Annual Report 2001-02 Wet Tropics Management Authority—Annual Report 2001-02 4698 Legislative Assembly 26 Nov 2002

Far North Queensland Hospital Foundation—Annual Report 2001-02 Royal Brisbane Hospital Research Foundation—Annual Report 2001-02 Royal Women's Hospital Research and Development Foundation—Annual Report 2001-02 The Council of the Queensland Institute of Medical Research and Queensland Institute of Medical Research Trust—Combined Annual and Financial Reports 2001-02 19 November 2002— Legal Aid Queensland—Annual Report 2001-02 Legal Ombudsman—Annual Report 2001-02 20 November 2002— Addendum to Environmental Protection Authority Annual Report 2001-02 21 November 2002— Queensland Gaming Commission—Annual Report 2001-02 25 November 2002— Controlled Operations Committee pursuant to the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act—Annual Report 2001-02 Gladstone Area Water Board—Annual Report 2001-02 Mount Isa Water Board—Annual Report 2001-02 Late tabling statement by the Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines (Mr Robertson) regarding the Gladstone Area Water Board Annual Report 2001-02 and the Mount Isa Water Board Annual Report 2001- 02 STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS The following statutory instruments were tabled by the Acting Clerk— Public Trustee Act 1978— Public Trustee (Fees and Charges Notice) (No. 2) 2002 Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995— Traffic Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2002, No. 293 Marine Parks Act 1982— Marine Parks Zoning Plans Amendment Zoning Plan (No. 1) 2002, No. 294 Environmental Protection Act 1994— Environmental Protection (Waste Management) Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2002, No. 295 Tourism, Racing and Fair Trading (National Competition Policy) Amendment Act 2002— Proclamation commencing remaining provisions, No. 296 Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000— Property Agents and Motor Dealers Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2002, No. 297 Mineral Resources Act 1989— Mineral Resources Amendment Regulation (No. 2) 2002, No. 298 Valuation of Land Act 1944— Valuation of Land Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2002, No. 299 Electrical Safety Act 2002— Electrical Safety Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2002, No. 300 Gaming Machine Act 1991— Gaming Machine Regulation 2002, No. 301 Government Owned Corporations Act 1993— Government Owned Corporations (Queensland Investment Corporation) Amendment Regulation (No. 2) 2002, No. 302 Nature Conservation Act 1992— Nature Conservation (Macropod Harvest Period) Notice 2002, No. 303 Duties Act 2001, Electricity Act 1994, Land Tax Act 1915, Land Title Act 1994, Offshore Banking Units and Regional Headquarters Act 1993, Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000, Taxation Administration Act 2001, WorkCover Queensland Act 1996— Revenue and Other Legislation Amendment Regulation (No. 2) 2002, No. 304 Corrective Services Act 2000— Corrective Services Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2002, No. 305 Transport Legislation Amendment Act 2001— Proclamation commencing remaining provisions, No. 306 Transport Legislation Amendment Act 2002— Proclamation commencing certain provision, No. 307 26 Nov 2002 Ministerial Statement 4699

Statutory Instruments Act 1992, Transport Infrastructure Act 1994— Transport Infrastructure (Dangerous Goods by Rail) Regulation 2002, No. 308 Transport Infrastructure Act 1994— Transport Infrastructure (Ports) Amendment Regulation (No. 2) 2002, No. 309 Chicken Meat Industry Committee Act 1976— Chicken Meat Industry Committee Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2002, No. 310 Motor Vehicles Securities Act 1986, Pawnbrokers Act 1984, Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000, Second- hand Dealers and Collectors Act 1984, Security Providers Act 1993, Travel Agents Act 1988— Fair Trading (Fees) Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2002, No. 311 and Explanatory Notes and Regulatory Impact Statement for No. 311 Local Government Act 1993— Local Government (Limited Reviewable Local Government Matters) Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2002, No. 312 Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995— Workplace Health and Safety Amendment Regulation (No. 8) 2002, No. 313 Electrical Safety Act 2002— Electrical Safety (Codes of Practice) Amendment Notice (No. 1) 2002, No. 314

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Education and Training Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.31 a.m.): My Government is passionate about Queensland becoming the Smart State of Australia. We have a vision of a Queensland where innovation flourishes and opportunities beckon our young people and where innovation is respected. To achieve this, we must also be passionate about education and training. If we expect our people to be innovative and bold in their approach to the creative new industries of the 21st century, and to get the jobs that go with them, then we must be innovative and bold in the way we prepare them to live and work at the dawn of this new age. Education and training lie at the very heart of our Smart State vision. Today I inform the House of a white paper that sets out the policy directions we have set to provide the best possible learning opportunities for every young Queenslander. The white paper follows the release in March this year of Queensland the Smart State—Education and Training Reforms for the Future, a landmark package of proposed education and training reforms. I table for the information of the House a copy of the white paper and, in addition, an accompanying document called Big Changes for Education and Training. I have arranged for every member of the House to receive a copy of it. The package included a major long-term investment in information and communication technologies for State schools, a trial of a full-time preparatory year prior to year 1, and a green paper on secondary schooling and increased education, training and employment opportunities for young Queenslanders. The green paper proposed that all young people should be 'learning or earning' and we sought the views of Queenslanders about this and a range of other proposed reforms. The white paper is the result of a comprehensive process of consultation involving parents, young people, employers, schools, TAFE and community leaders. A total of 58,000 green papers were distributed and 8,000 people attended community forums. I want to thank the Education Minister, Anna Bligh, and the Minister for Employment and Training, Matt Foley, for their commitment to this consultation process and advise the House that they will continue this consultation process with the white paper and the associated document with the rest of the community. My government is determined to create one of the most flexible education and training systems in Australia to help young Queenslanders achieve high-level qualifications and to continue learning throughout their lives. To achieve this we will change the compulsory school leaving requirements, and we will change the law to require young people to participate in education and training after year 10. We will give young people greater flexibility to achieve qualifications beyond year 10. We will introduce new laws that make it compulsory for young people to stay at school until they finish year 10 or have turned 16, whichever comes first; laws that require young people to then participate in education and training for a further two years, or until they have gained a Senior Certificate, or until they have gained a Certificate III vocational qualification, or until they 4700 Ministerial Statement 26 Nov 2002 have turned 17; and laws that provide exemptions for young people who enter full-time work after they have either completed year 10 or turned 16. This is the principle of earning or learning. These changes will take effect for students who enter year 10 in 2006. The penalties for breaking the law will remain the same as they are now. The package of reforms outlined in the white paper covers all stages of education from preschool to middle and senior schooling, as well as vocational education and training, and employment. It includes 19 specific actions that will be implemented through partnerships between schools, TAFE, universities, young people, parents, employers and local communities. It is an innovative and exciting package of reforms that will help prepare young Queenslanders for the innovative and exciting opportunities that await them. These reforms are perhaps the most significant ever undertaken in the Queensland education and training system. They pave the way for the future. Yes, they are visionary, but they are about giving young Queenslanders the opportunities that otherwise they will not get. No-one should be under any illusions: if we do not go down this road of the Smart State we will not, in future generations, enjoy the sorts of quality of life that we do now. I am personally passionately committed to these reforms, as is my cabinet, as is my caucus, as is my government. This is the future for Queensland.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Warner Roadshow Studios Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.36 a.m.): Queensland's film and television industry is going from strength to strength. Last week it was my pleasure to officially open Warner Roadshow's two new sound stages at Oxenford on the Gold Coast with the Minister for the Arts, Matt Foley. The extension to Warner Roadshow's facilities confirms Queensland's position as a prime location for film and television production. It has helped Warner Brothers expand operations by 50 per cent, making the studios one of the largest production facilities in the Southern Hemisphere. When we announced that we were going to loan Warner Roadshow $8 million for this facility my government copped a lot of flak—at least some. I make no apologies for this because in return for that $8 million loan Warner Roadshow Studios will increase film production in Queensland. That will deliver a $640 million return to Queensland's economy and the equivalent of 2,500 full-time jobs over three years. That is not a bad return for a good loan. That is a smart investment for the Smart State. Our film industry has reached the stage where the facilities of the Gold Coast needed to be expanded in order for Queensland's film industry to grow. As a government, we have a responsibility to ensure that this industry, which has such huge potential, thrives, and we are doing exactly that. Last financial year, the Queensland government's Pacific Film and Television Commission helped facilitate more than $130 million in film production expenditure in Queensland. That excludes television commercials and video production. This translates into nearly $400 million in economic impact and has created the equivalent of 4,800 jobs. Since 1991, the partnership between Warner Roadshow and the Queensland government—through the Pacific Film and Television Commission—has injected $615 million into Queensland's economy. That not only demonstrates Warner Roadshow's commitment to Queensland but also indicates a partnership worth continuing and fostering. Already, Queensland is becoming increasingly accustomed to hosting large overseas productions. The high-profile US feature Peter Pan is in production at the Oxenford studios. It is one of the biggest movies ever to come to Queensland and, indeed, to Australia, and is an enormous boost for the Queensland film industry. Mr Schwarten interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Absolutely. I take that interjection. They are everywhere, those Rockhampton boys. Scooby Doo was another feature film that was shot entirely in Queensland. Ghost Ship was another major Queensland production and has been well received by US audiences. These films will help spread the word that Queensland is a great location for film and television production. We have world-class facilities, a skilled work force and a range of stunning locations—all the elements the industry needs. The new Warner Roadshow facilities will undoubtedly help promote our local industry and attract more film production to this Smart State. 26 Nov 2002 Ministerial Statement 4701

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Smart State Initiatives Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.41 a.m.): Today I want to make a ministerial statement about Smart State initiatives, because Smart State is about thinking smart. It is about thinking for the future, and that is what we are doing. Good policy making depends on sound research and innovative thinking. My government wants to formulate policies which will benefit all Queenslanders and improve our already high standard of living. With this in mind, last week I launched an initiative which will strengthen our policy-making process and sets a standard for other governments to follow. Growing the Smart State is all about fostering innovation and thinking smarter about policy development and is my government's first funding program for PhD research. Under this scheme, selected PhD students will receive a government grant towards the cost of their research. Under this scheme, selected PhD students will be able to pursue their visionary research. In return, we will have access to that research and its findings and will use the information to formulate policies which will benefit all Queenslanders. This program allows us to build a direct bridge between the cutting-edge research being undertaken by our best and brightest PhD students and government policy making. The partnerships between PhD students and the government will help us achieve our key priorities in the Smart State, and they are more jobs for Queensland, safer and more supportive communities, better quality of life, valuing the environment and building Queensland's regions. To help achieve these Smart State goals, my government will provide funding totalling $100,000 over three years to Queensland PhD students who are undertaking research on topics relevant to these priorities. Growing the Smart State has the potential to create a significant pool of cost- effective research. It will also help establish relationships for future collaborations between the talent in our universities and the government. The first round of grants attracted 129 applications from six Queensland universities. Funding will go to 14 PhD students from three universities—Central Queensland, Griffith and the University of Queensland. The students will work with 11 government departments and agencies on a range of social, economic and environmental topics. I had the opportunity to present the certificates to the recipients last week. While talking about Smart State strategies, I want to highlight to the parliament that the government wants people from all walks of life to inspire other Queenslanders to be part of the Smart State. We are inviting people to share their stories of innovation as part of the Smart State: Smart Stories project. One could say that we are collecting examples of 'ordinary' Queenslanders doing extraordinary things, but frankly I am yet to meet an 'ordinary' Queenslander. They all seem pretty special to me! Modern Queenslanders are building on a proud tradition of innovation and ingenuity. Australia's first shipment of frozen meat left our state bound for Britain in 1880. The flying doctor took off from Queensland soil in the 1920s and Cloncurry spawned the first pedal radio base station. In the 21st century we are blessed with people like Gavin Scurr and his team at Pinata Marketing. They have improved pineapple quality and expanded the pineapple industry from its traditional Sunshine Coast base to new horizons in far-north Queensland. We have people like Frank Carter from Innisfail who helped develop a rescue craft to accommodate people in wheelchairs—an ideal invention for his cyclone-prone region. The closing date for stories and thoughts on the Smart State will be 28 February 2003. A selection of the stories will be published in a book. We need to use this to educate people and encourage other Smart State opportunities. As I say, the Smart State is a democratic creature. It is nourished by its people. The more people who participate the stronger it grows, and I for one am looking forward to reading it. Because of time, I seek leave to incorporate the rest of my ministerial statement plus incorporate the names of those PhD recipients who have received awards under the program I announced earlier. Leave granted. These stories and others are told on a website, www.smartstate.qld.gov.au, and also in a new Smart Stories project brochure. The brochure—which has been distributed throughout the State to Members' offices, schools, libraries, Government offices, local councils and community organisations—can also be obtained by calling 1800 803 788, or 3227 7111 for Brisbane callers. We want to publish more stories like Gavin Scurr's and Frank Carter's, which is why I am urging people to log on to the website or pick up a brochure. All over the State, we have people who think smart, think strong, think the future. 4702 Ministerial Statement 26 Nov 2002

They may be passing on skills and knowledge, creating jobs, promoting a more diverse and creative culture, or protecting the environment. There are no limits to the ways Queenslanders can make our state an even greater place to live. We also want Queenslanders to tell us what Smart State means to them. On 18 November, Smart State Forums in eight locations gave the Government a chance to find out more about smart local ideas, and for forum members to air their views about the meaning of Smart State for their regions. There was strong public attendance, and this was enhanced by the presence of young people—with schools, colleges and universities very were well-represented.

List of PHD recipients 1 Waheed Haider, Central Queensland University, for research into design rules to enable masonry walls to resist natural disasters such as cyclones 2 Tania Fuessel, Griffith University, for research into the effect on soils of chemicals used to eradicate fire ants in Brisbane 3 James Furse, Griffith University, to quantify the effect of the Lamington Spiny Blue Crayfish on the catchments of the Gold Coast's water supply 4 Veronica O'Neill, Griffith University, for research into occupational stress in the Queensland Public Service 5 Rosie Teague, Griffith University, for an evaluation of a social skills program for preschool children in a disadvantaged area 6 Angela Wardell-Johnson, Griffith University, for research into natural resource management 7 Tansy Boggon, University of Queensland, for research into the impact of humans on mangroves 8 Melanie Cox, University of Queensland, for research into the impact of estuarine water quality on humans 9 Lisa Kennedy, University of Queensland, for research into crime prevention methods 10 Samantha Miller, University of Queensland, for research into estuarine dredging 11 Nicola Milsom, University of Queensland, for a study into the commercialisation of university research 12 Mark Moran, University of Queensland, for research into indigenous settlements and planning 13 Suzanne Pillans, University of Queensland, for research into marine reserves 14 David Temple-Smith, University of Queensland, for research into native vegetation management

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Suncorp Metway Stadium Hon. T. M. MACKENROTH (Chatsworth—ALP) (Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Sport) (9.44 a.m.): In response to representations from the chairman of the City West Task Force, I have agreed to defer construction of the proposed pedestrian infrastructure east of Petrie Terrace that is associated with the Suncorp Stadium redevelopment. This decision was taken to ensure the infrastructure, when it is constructed, is consistent with the master plan being developed for the area by the City West Task Force. It is important to note, however, that whilst this part of the project has been deferred all other infrastructure works are progressing as scheduled and will be completed in time for the opening of the stadium. These include the northern plaza; the southern plaza; the bus station, which will be under the southern plaza; the Milton station upgrade, which is for enhanced pedestrian and disabled access; the Milton roadworks of a pedestrian walkway west to Milton station; the bridge from the southern plaza across Milton Road to connect to the western walkway; the Milton roadworks of a pedestrian walkway east to Petrie Terrace; the widening of Milton Road east of Castlemaine Street to accommodate a dedicated bus lane; the Caxton Street bridge extension to accommodate the walkway; and the Hale Street plaza. The City West master planning process, which is a joint initiative of the state government and the Brisbane City Council, is aiming to improve connectivity and enhance the public domain in the precinct west of the CBD and provide a stimulus for its economic revitalisation. The City West Task Force is in the process of preparing a master plan for the Upper Roma Street-Milton Road locality. Amongst other things, this master plan will address issues such as connectivity in and through the precinct. I have been requested by the Chairman of the City West Task Force, Mr Chris Buckley, to defer construction of any significant infrastructure until this plan is complete so that what is ultimately built will contribute to the planning and urban design objectives for this area. The Brisbane City Council acknowledges that better outcomes are likely to be achieved from involving the task force. 26 Nov 2002 Ministerial Statement 4703

The pedestrian infrastructure proposed to be constructed east of Petrie Terrace was conceptualised primarily to serve the needs of the stadium's patrons. If it is integrated into the City West master planning process, it is likely the infrastructure could serve not just the needs of the stadium's patrons but also residents in the surrounding suburbs and the community generally—in other words, providing the public with a safe, convenient and efficient pedestrian linkage between Milton and the CBD 365 days a year. This decision has the potential to provide pedestrian enhancements that will improve the general public's amenity whilst also supporting and complementing existing and future developments in the inner-west corridor. As a consequence of this decision, the $12 million budget allocated for the works will be quarantined and made available to assist with funding such pedestrian infrastructure as approved by both state and civic cabinets following consideration of the City West Task Force plan for this precinct. In preparing its plan, the City West Task Force will engage with business in the area and the surrounding community. In the meantime, the statutory designations for the pedestrian infrastructure will be retained in a modified form as an indication of the government's commitment to the future provision of enhanced infrastructure. Pending construction of the new infrastructure, interim arrangements will be implemented with the Queensland Police Service, the Brisbane City Council and Queensland Transport and Queensland Rail to ensure the stadium's patrons have good access to and from the CBD in a safe and convenient manner.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Education and Training Hon. A. M. BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Minister for Education) (9.48 a.m.): The Beattie government's reforms of our state's education and training system are historic. They are an Australian first which will put Queensland where a Smart State should be, and that is leading the nation in education policy and thinking. The 19 actions in the reform package explain how we intend to deliver those opportunities by creating a system that builds the mind and character of every Queensland child. To underpin and support the legislative changes outlined by the Premier, we are also improving the early and middle phases of schooling, building year 10 as a transition to the senior phase of learning, and reshaping senior and providing a range of new and flexible options. To help young people achieve the new requirements, we are introducing a range of measures to give them more support, more options and more flexibility so they are better equipped for further education and the world of work. This includes employing 100 new youth support workers and establishing a grants program to trial initiatives that improve participation, retention and attainment of 15- to 17-year-olds in learning. The changes in year 10 will involve schools in the development and agreement of individual student plans for the senior phase of learning and senior education and training plans with young people and their parents or guardians. Schools will also be required to register young people with the Queensland Studies Authority during year 10 so their progress can be monitored and achievements recorded in the senior phase of learning. This is about making sure that young people do not fall through the cracks of the increasingly complex web of pathways and options. The government also wants young people to have exciting and relevant opportunities in the senior phase of learning so that they go into the world with knowledge, skills and confidence. While the pathway through schooling will continue to be the main track to university or further study for most students, we want to ensure that the 27 per cent of young people who currently do not finish year 12 have the best possible chances to succeed. The Senior Certificate will change so that it becomes an even more valuable document for young people and employers. That means young people will have to achieve an agreed amount of learning, including literacy and numeracy, to receive a Senior Certificate. To achieve this we will establish the quantity and quality of learning that students must achieve to receive a Senior Certificate, and this will take effect from 2006. We will record a broader range of learning, including learning in both school and vocational education and training, that will count towards a Senior Certificate from 2001. We will design a system so that students' achievements can be 'banked' with the Queensland Studies Authority and provide students and their parents or guardians with easy access to information about their achievements and progress towards a Senior Certificate. 4704 Ministerial Statement 26 Nov 2002

Making these reforms a reality involves building partnerships. Along with the Premier and my colleague the Minister for Employment, Training and Youth, I look forward to working with parents, teachers, training providers, employers and the community to achieve these goals and to help all young Queenslanders reach their full potential.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Education and Training Hon. M. J. FOLEY (Yeerongpilly—ALP) (Minister for Employment, Training and Youth and Minister for the Arts) (9.51 a.m.): Today 10,000 young Queenslanders aged 15 to 17 years are out of school, out of work and out of training. This is simply not good enough and we have to do better. The Education and Training Reforms for the Future provide an historic opportunity for the government and the entire community to take up that challenge head on and to promote social justice. This is about reshaping forever the way young Queenslanders move through school and training to work. The government will foster a community commitment to young people which will involve improved planning and coordination amongst schools, employers, vocational education and training providers and community agencies to improve services. We will work with local employers and authorities to generate new solutions, including more work placement opportunities, providing career advice and building local commitment to young people. To achieve this goal we will offer more options and greater flexibility for young people. Already some 14,000 15- to 17-year-olds study at TAFE, where they benefit from TAFE's job focused courses. To complement existing courses and provide for more young people in TAFE institutes, we will review the range of courses to make sure that they best meet the learning needs of young people. These reforms will also provide more school based apprenticeships and traineeships, which have already been a highly valued learning pathway for more than 13,000 Queensland school students. Under the reforms we will set targets for the employment of school based apprentices and trainees and we will also top up the Commonwealth government's incentives by offering incentives to employers to take on up to 1,750 extra school based apprentices or trainees. We will offer new incentives of up to $4,000 to not-for-profit community organisations for each school based placement that provides at least 96 days work in two years and up to $2,000 for private employers who provide a school based apprenticeship or traineeship for the required period for young people living in rural and regional communities. The world of work is undergoing radical change. Education and training cannot remain static. As the poet W.B. Yeats observed, education is not the filling of a pail but the lighting of a fire. The state Labor government is strongly committed to giving young people the education and training they need to cope with the rapidly changing workplace of the 21st century.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Cervical Cancer Vaccine Hon. W. M. EDMOND (Mount Coot-tha—ALP) (Minister for Health and Minister Assisting the Premier on Women's Policy) (9.53 a.m.): Queensland truly is the Smart State. Members may ask why I say that. I say that because the prestigious international medical journal, the New England Journal of Medicine, has just published the results of an early trial of a cervical cancer vaccine, and this vaccine was developed right here in Queensland. The vaccine was 99.7 per cent effective in producing immunity to the human papilloma virus, which causes most cases of cervical cancer. These results have huge implications for cancer prevention. This vaccine was developed at the Princess Alexandra Hospital by Professor Ian Frazer and his group at the Centre for Immunology and Cancer Research in a joint venture with the University of Queensland and CSL Ltd, the Australian vaccine company. Cervical cancer kills about 250,000 women worldwide every year, including more than 300 Australians. So I congratulate Professor Frazer and his team on this outstanding work, which has the potential to benefit women around the world. The vaccine has been licensed to the large multinational pharmaceutical Merck. While it will take up to three years to bring it to the international market, the benefits to Queensland and Australia are already evident. After the announcement, shares in CSL Ltd jumped 17 per cent overnight. Commercially, this is one of the most significant developments ever to come out of 26 Nov 2002 Ministerial Statement 4705

Australian medical research, and it has come from a Queensland teaching hospital, where Professor Frazer has a joint appointment with funding by Queensland Health. Our hospitals are concerned primarily, of course, with excellence in patient care, but we also recognise the benefits of strong hospital based research programs as exemplified by this discovery. Last year Queensland Health had its inaugural health research meeting showcasing the wide range of research undertaken by Queensland Health staff. I look forward to hearing about more of our outstanding Smart State health research at Queensland Health's second annual medical and scientific meeting next week.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Sugar Industry Hon. T. A. BARTON (Waterford—ALP) (Minister for State Development) (9.55 a.m.): The Queensland and Commonwealth governments are progressing with the implementation of our joint package for the sugar industry. We have advertised for membership to the regional guidance groups, which will be the key focus of government consultation and our major source of advice on service delivery. Membership of these bodies will reflect the industry and also the broader community. Minister Truss and I will make the ultimate decisions on who sits on these bodies. We are interviewing applicants for the six regional state sugar resource officers and we hope to have those officers on the ground in early January. Their job will be to ensure effective government service delivery and to coordinate change management in the region. Our Sugar Industry Innovation Fund is now operating. In fact, just last week I had a very constructive meeting with the board of the Canegrowers organisation. We discussed the issue of industry regulation. The Queensland government has commissioned a study from the Centre for International Economics. CIE will report on whether or not the Sugar Industry Act impedes efficiency and innovation in the industry and what would be the regional implications of any change. This study will assist informed debate. When the CIE study is received it will be released to the industry and the community for comment. A summary of the study will be sent to growers, millers and local authorities, and a full copy will be available on my department's web site so that anyone will be able to access it. We will ask for submissions on the study and the issues it raises from stakeholders in the industry and the wider community. We will consider these submissions and, together with the federal government, make a decision on what changes are needed. This is not about change for change's sake or ideology. We will not make changes unless they are for the benefit of the industry and the communities that depend on it. We only want to see the practical benefits of change. But I need to emphasise that no one organisation, company or individual has a right of veto on change. Both governments will work with growers, millers, harvesters and the wider community to prepare them for change through a comprehensive change management program. I was encouraged by commitments from the Canegrowers organisation to engage constructively with government on this and other issues. We want to work with the industry and the community to build a better future for sugar.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Roads Implementation Program Hon. S. D. BREDHAUER (Cook—ALP) (Minister for Transport and Minister for Main Roads) (9.58 a.m.): The Queensland Transport portfolio is integral to delivering on the Beattie government's five key priorities, meaning we are committed to delivering jobs, looking after regional Queensland, improving work force skills, helping the state's communities to work, providing a better quality of life, taking care of the environment and leading by example. I am therefore pleased to table the 2002-03 to 2006-07 Roads Implementation Program, which I launched on 12 November in Tugun. The program was launched in conjunction with the announcement of this government's decision to start work on stage 1 of the Tugun bypass project in 2003. Despite a $57 million federal government funding reduction in the 2002-03 federal budget, this year's five-year Roads Implementation Program provides for $5.6 billion in roads spending, including a $37 million or six per cent increase in state funded regional roads programs in 2002- 03, employment for 17,000 people in roads and supporting industries, delivery of state 4706 Ministerial Statement 26 Nov 2002 government election commitments, a continuing commitment by the Beattie government to regional development through spending 57 per cent of the regional roads budget outside the south-east of the state and a higher proportion of state roads funds to go towards maintaining Queensland's $26 billion road network. In 2002-03, $928 million will be spent on roadworks, including $242 million for federally funded National Highways, roads of national importance and black spots. State funding of $47 million also has been provided in financial assistance to local governments under the Transport Infrastructure Development Scheme generally on a 50-50 basis for local road upgrades. This includes an extra $2 million in each of the next two years. This $5.6 billion, five-year Roads Implementation Program provides a strong foundation for future economic growth throughout Queensland. It reflects a continuing commitment by this government to meet the demands of a growing population and industry expansion. It also recognises that better roads contribute to improving the quality of life for all Queenslanders by providing access to basic services and bringing communities together. Key highlights of this RIP include— completion of the port of Brisbane motorway before Christmas, ahead of schedule and under budget, providing an important access to the port; a 2003 construction start on stage 1 of the nationally significant Tugun bypass, with $120 million provided by the State government over two years, together with a continuing commitment to work with New South Wales and the Commonwealth to secure planning and environmental approvals to allow stage 2 to go ahead; and the construction of a new high-level bridge over the South Johnstone River, near Innisfail, in 2003-04. In the year ahead, the state government will strive to maintain existing local government employment levels, despite the federal government's funding cuts. But the state government is not—and will not—be held responsible for federal budget cuts. The federal government's AusLink proposal is a plan to back away from a decades-long commitment to 100 per cent funding of the National Highway. The Queensland government will continue to make the case for an increase in Queensland's share of road funding. As with previous years, this year's Roads Implementation Program has been developed following extensive consultation to help us ensure safer roads, more jobs in regional Queensland and a better quality of life for Queenslanders.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Queensland Sustainable Energy Innovation Fund Hon. D. M. WELLS (Murrumba—ALP) (Minister for Environment) (10.02 a.m.): The Queensland Sustainable Energy Innovation Fund fosters innovation in the field of renewable energy and energy efficient technologies. How we meet our energy needs has direct impacts on climate change from greenhouse gas emissions. It affects air quality in our cities and towns, our dependence on overseas sources of transport fuels, and employment opportunities in providing energy services for regional areas. We need innovative ideas that can be implemented cost effectively to drive our transition to a sustainable energy future. Most of our energy is still supplied from non-renewable fossil fuels, but in this century our energy sources will have to become more diverse. As part of our Smart State agenda, this government actively supports research, development and product innovation in Queensland. To date, more than $2.1 million has been committed to research, development and product innovation projects under the Queensland Sustainable Energy Innovation Fund. This year, 15 applications were received and these were subjected to intensive technical evaluation by specialists from around Australia. Today, I announce funding from the Queensland Sustainable Energy Fund for five new projects with a total government funding contribution of $619,000. Two projects, one based in Mackay and another at Indooroopilly, aim to increase power generated by sugar mills. Another aims to develop high-efficiency replacement for halogen lamps in a Cleveland based firm. Mr Briskey: Lumascape Lighting—an outstanding innovative company. Mr WELLS: I thank the honourable member for Cleveland and I thank him for his advocacy for sustainable energy. 26 Nov 2002 Ministerial Statement 4707

Another based at Ipswich West is to develop new sewage treatment technology, which produces all of its energy requirements. The final project aims to reduce energy use by industrial food dryers at Malanda. Projects such as these will help establish sustainable industries and a sustainable future for Queensland.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Capital Works Projects Hon. R. E. SCHWARTEN (Rockhampton—ALP) (Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing) (10.04 a.m.): I am pleased to report that the state government has continued to deliver major capital works projects across Queensland this year. By investing in major construction projects, the state government has significantly boosted employment growth and local business opportunities in communities throughout the state. As you know, Mr Speaker, it is the Year of the Outback and we have delivered several projects this year in regional Queensland. In July this year, the new government office building in Cairns was completed. The total project cost was $17.6 million and generated approximately 240 jobs. Ms Boyle: It's a magnificent building, Minister. Mr SCHWARTEN: I take that interjection. I thank the honourable member for her input along the way. She was very committed to that project and she should be justly proud of it. In September, the Maryborough Correctional Centre was completed. This project cost more than $94.5 million and delivered significant spin-off benefits for the local community. I notice a photograph of the honourable minister at the Jailhouse Roc along with mummy the other night. I might say that he was looking very smart. Approximately 1,340 jobs were generated during construction, of which 65 per cent of direct employment was undertaken by local residents. I think that is a pretty good result. All up, 99.6 per cent of the trade value of the project was sourced in Australia with 92.8 percent of that from Queensland. That is a good result for the state and the nation. The strong local involvement earned the project statewide recognition, winning the Local Content Award 2002. I would also like to report that the $9 million Toowoomba Police Station is almost finished. No doubt the local member, Kerry Shine, who has been pushing for this for some time, will be happily awaiting the opening date. This project is estimated to generate approximately 145 jobs and is expected to be completed by the end of the year. Just because it is approaching the end of the parliamentary year, we should not think for a second that we will be resting. In December, construction is expected to commence on the $7.2 million Mundingburra Police Station, which I know the local member has been heavily involved in. This project is estimated to generate approximately 95 jobs during construction. Work continues on the $26 million Rockhampton Hospital project, which includes the new clinical services building. This project is being constructed and is estimated to generate approximately 240 jobs. The local member certainly welcomes it. In Brisbane, work is continuing on several major projects. The $280 million redevelopment of Suncorp Stadium—the progress of which the Treasurer advised the House this morning—is now well on track to be completed for the State of Origin and the World Cup Rugby fixtures next year. I know that the Leader of the Opposition will not be going to those because he has knocked the project so many times. This project will generate more than 3,400 jobs. Work is also under way on the $135 million Magistrates Court complex in George Street, which commenced in late September. The 14-storey complex is due for completion in late 2003 and will incorporate approximately $1.7 million worth of public art works—the largest public art contribution for any state government project to date. More than 1,300 jobs will be generated during construction. Construction work has also commenced on the new government office building in Charlotte Street, which is due for completion late next year. The $68 million project will generate approximately 900 jobs and will deliver approximately 15,000 square metres of net letting area. Through the Department of Public Works, the state government is investing in significant construction project right across the state, providing better facilities and services for all Queenslanders. 4708 Ministerial Statement 26 Nov 2002

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Reparation Offer to Indigenous Workers Hon. J. C. SPENCE (Mount Gravatt—ALP) (Minister for Families and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy and Minister for Disability Services and Minister for Seniors) (10.10 a.m.): Last Wednesday this government confirmed its offer of reparations to indigenous Queenslanders who suffered the control of their wages and savings by successive Queensland governments from the 1890s until 1972. This offer has followed extensive consultation with indigenous Queenslanders by this government since we came to office, and I am proud to be part of a government that is prepared to finally provide some resolution to indigenous Queenslanders on this long outstanding matter. No amount of money will ever compensate for the gross injustices that have been perpetrated in the past against the traditional owners of this land. We know that but we also know that indigenous Queenslanders want this matter settled so that we can all move on. They also know that this is the only government that has been prepared to make a genuine offer to reconcile over this issue. So, in the spirit of reconciliation, we are offering: financial reparations of $55.4 million; a written apology from the government to all living persons who had their wages and savings controlled and who are eligible to make a claim for compensation; parliamentary acknowledgment that will publicly recognise the past injustices on the basis of race; and government protocols for the acknowledgment of traditional owners. The distribution of the welfare fund, which is currently $8.6 million, will be progressed next year, but that money will not be used for individual reparation payments. Consultations with indigenous Queenslanders have already produced some valuable suggestions about what to do with the money, including an educational scholarship program; history kits for schools; an oral histories collection; monuments; and other projects that will acknowledge the contributions of indigenous workers to the development of this state. It is important that we educate current and future generations about the facts of the past and the injustices that have helped create a legacy of disadvantage for indigenous people in Queensland. Under the reparations offer, indigenous Queenslanders whose lives were controlled under the earlier acts of 1897 and 1939 will be offered $4,000 payments. Indigenous Queenslanders who were subject to the 1965 act will be offered a $2,000 payment, and that is because the later act was less controlling and did not include compulsory contributions to the welfare fund. The government wants to make these payments as quickly as possible and the Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy will make sure this happens. We expect the payments process to take three years, and elderly and seriously ill people will be paid first. Official claim forms will be available from Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy offices from 1 February next year. To make a claim, people must fill out the form. We expect payments to commence in March. This is an historic offer and it will provide some long overdue justice to indigenous Queenslanders. I ask all members of parliament to encourage people in their communities to pursue a claim. People will be offered independent legal advice before they apply for the payment and they will not be forced to apply, but we want to get this money out to those people who deserve it. The Beattie government has much to be proud of. We offered a sincere and genuine apology to the stolen generation. We have moved forward in resolving native title issues. We have compensated indigenous people who were underpaid on the basis of race between the years 1975 and 1986. I believe that this reparations offer for the control of wages and savings and final resolution of the welfare fund next year will help us all move forward in the true spirit of reconciliation.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT SunWater Hon. S. ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines) (10.13 a.m.): Last week SunWater's 2001-02 annual report was tabled. It is important that I place on the record what the state government is doing with the $550,000 dividend it is due from SunWater's 2001-02 performance. Contrary to ill-informed claims by a handful of land-holders, SunWater and the government are not making massive profits at their expense, nor are we profiting from the drought. In fact, the Treasurer and I have given assurances that every single cent of the government's $550,000 dividend is being reinvested back through SunWater into projects to improve the efficiency of water delivery to irrigators and to reduce water losses through evaporation. In particular, SunWater is progressing plans to invest the government dividend in a total channel control trial which will be of enormous benefit to Queensland's irrigators. 26 Nov 2002 Overseas Visit 4709

SunWater owns some 1,000 kilometres of open channels, distributing water mainly for irrigation purposes. The control systems on these channels vary from manual to automatic, and are either float actuated or electronically controlled. The end result of these historical arrangements are variable levels of service to customers, including fluctuation in offtake rates, metering inaccuracy and an inevitable proportion of overflows and loss by evaporation. As a result, the water distribution efficiency last year was 74 per cent overall. The government believes that we can do things smarter. We believe that we can substantially improve upon the 74 per cent distribution efficiency rate by using the right technology and management arrangements. That is why the Deputy Premier and myself as shareholding ministers instructed SunWater to reinvest the government's dividend back into appropriate initiatives to improve service delivery to customers. The project trial being planned by SunWater would see channel controls and farm offtakes replaced by electronically operated gates managed by Smart State technology software. If successful, this trial could lead to substantial efficiency and service improvements in water management, both in our channels and on our farms. It will also improve on-farm efficiency as irrigators would have more accurate and constant farm inflows and access to water use data on a daily basis. The government should be commended, not attacked, for reinvesting its SunWater dividend into projects that will benefit irrigators by improving the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of water delivery systems. It is the responsible thing to do. It is the smart thing to do.

APPROPRIATION BILL (No. 2) APPROPRIATION (PARLIAMENT) BILL (No. 2) Remaining Stages; Cognate Debate Hon A. M. BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Leader of the House) (10.15 a.m.): I move— That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended to enable the Appropriation Bill (No. 2) and the Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) to be treated as cognate bills for their remaining stages— (a) one question being put in regard to the second readings; (b) the consideration of the bills together in committee of the whole House; (c) one question being put for the committee's report stage; and (d) one question being put for the third readings and titles. Motion agreed to.

SITTING DAYS AND HOURS; ORDER OF BUSINESS Sessional Order Hon. A. M. BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Leader of the House) (10.16 a.m.): I wish to advise members that the House will sit this Friday, 29 November, and not Friday, 6 December 2002, as previously advised. I advise members that the House will continue to meet past 7.30 p.m. this day. The House can break for dinner at 7 p.m. and resume its sitting at 8.30 p.m. The order of business shall then be government business followed by a 30-minute adjournment debate.

SCRUTINY OF LEGISLATION COMMITTEE Report Mr PITT (Mulgrave—ALP) (10.16 a.m.): I lay upon the table of the House the Scrutiny of Legislation Committee's Alert Digest No. 11 of 2002.

OVERSEAS VISIT Report Mrs REILLY (Mudgeeraba—ALP) (10.16 a.m.): I lay upon the table a report on overseas travel to Spain and France in October.

OVERSEAS VISIT Report Ms JARRATT (Whitsunday—ALP) (10.16 a.m.): I lay upon the table my report of travel to Spain and France in October. 4710 Occupants (Home Invasion) Protection Bill 26 Nov 2002

OCCUPANTS (HOME INVASION) PROTECTION BILL Mrs PRATT (Nanango—Ind) (10.17 a.m.), by leave: I move— That leave be granted to bring in a bill for an act to authorise occupants of dwelling houses to defend themselves and their property against intruders, and for other purposes. Motion agreed to.

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

Second Reading Mrs PRATT (Nanango—Ind) (10.17 a.m.): I move— That the bill be now read a second time. The purpose of this bill is to recognise in legislation that people do have the right to defend themselves, their family and their property without fear of prosecution and civil liability; that it is necessary that people who do break and enters realise that they forfeit their right to sue the occupant because they have engaged in a dangerous illegal activity; and that parity/disparity must be recognised as occurring in any break and enter or home invasion and given due consideration. The bill allows the occupant the right to use any force necessary to prevent an intruder breaking or entering, or to eject someone who refuses to leave once asked to do so. It also states that there is a time limit for prosecution of the occupant and that, in the event of prosecution, the prosecutor must prove beyond doubt that the occupant did not believe they needed to use the force they did. The bill also prevents the criminal and his/her associated family or other possible litigants from suing for any personal injury or trauma associated with the perpetration of the illegal act. Recently in Sydney, the person committing the criminal act of breaking and entering successfully sued and received compensation of $49,049, as did the mother of the young offender who successfully sued and who was awarded $18,578 for nervous shock after seeing her son's injuries. Any parent who sees the injuries their child receives from falling off a fence, a swing, out of a tree or sees the injuries from any number of activities/experiences, including a schoolyard fight, feels these same feelings. Who will these parents now be able to sue? It is only natural to feel such things, but it does not negate the child's own contributory factor to the result of those actions. I have felt the same 'sweating, insomnia, episodes of crying and nightmares' after my children have been in accidents and the thought of the worst possibility that could have occurred can be frightening. Usually these injuries are a result of their own actions and lack of judgment, but children can be forgiven for bad judgment. In the case of the Joshua Fox, he knew and was old enough to weigh the risks. Again, we see all manner of responsibility and logic thrown away and negated by the court. It is now necessary to convey to the criminal that it is not okay to break and enter a private dwelling or anywhere else considered as a person's home. Criminals must be made aware that there are consequences to their actions and, as was often stated by our parents, 'If you play with fire you're going to get burnt.’ This may sound harsh to some, but an option has been considered that outlines that a person engaging in a possibly dangerous activity like abseiling, horse riding or many other forms of leisure activity considered as dangerous should have the right to sign a waiver that they would not sue the organising body of the event in the case of injury. This is being considered because of the current insurance debacle which has threatened almost every aspect of our lives. If a person engaging in a lawful activity is permitted to waive their right to sue except under proven negligence by the operators, it is only fair that someone who engages in a criminal act which by its very nature is extremely dangerous should automatically be seen as waiving their right to sue the innocent occupant of a dwelling. Many people forget that the person has committed an illegal act by simply entering the house uninvited even if they are apprehended before they commit the second crime of theft, assault, abduction or murder, to name but a few. In many instances, the occupant of a dwelling is confronted by a person intent on a criminal act in the dark, they are confused, groggy from being awoken, and the first reaction is often based on 26 Nov 2002 Private Members' Statements 4711 the fight, flight or freeze instinct. If the occupants are already awake and confronted, the instinct is again to fight, flight or freeze. Would anyone in this chamber know instinctively what they would do if they were confronted? Would they know if the criminal in their house, if cornered, had the worst possible intention? Would we know whether they were drunk or high on drugs? Statistics report that Queensland has the highest number of hallucinogenic drug users. How would we know in the dark if that criminal person's instincts were heightened beyond any reason through drug abuse? We cannot. Research has shown that any person confronted will be subject to stresses on performance, which precludes the legalistic term 'reasonable force'. An article states— The effects of sudden stress on physiology and psychology is not generally known. The factors of parity/disparity, shown in research, generally indicate that the invaded person will be at a physical and psychological disadvantage and to establish parity may need a weapon of defence This article goes on to state— In order to truly understand the effects of stress on performance it is important to have an understanding of survival stress. It can be defined as: ¥ A condition that may occur when a person is startled by an imminent threat of personal injury ¥ A condition that may exist when a person's time to respond to a threat is minimal ¥ A condition when a person may not have confidence in their level of ability to control a threat Survival stress can activate the body's sympathetic nervous system and create a condition commonly known as 'Fight, Flight or Freeze' response. The activation of this sympathetic nervous system is a powerful survival mechanism shared by all mammals enabling them to completely focus all of the body's resources on either charging toward or running away from their opponent. The process is automatic, virtually uncontrollable and it dominates all voluntary and involuntary systems until the threat has been eliminated or avoided. It is therefore unreasonable for any court to say the occupant used too much force when they believed they were in fear for their own life or those of family members. No-one can put themselves into another's state of mind under these circumstances. Young Josua Fox was drunken, underage, uninvited, unrepentant, irresponsible, inconsiderate, selfish, and disrespectful of others rights and property. This reprobate has made a small fortune from his illegal activities. The law courts and the judgments they hand down continue to disillusion the general public. The constant undermining of people's rights through the handing down of inappropriate sentences by the justice system only continues to further entrench people's belief that 'the law is an ass'. Such judgments as the one in Sydney send the wrong message to the public. The law must now stand behind the occupant of a dwelling, not behind the person breaking and entering, the home invader or the person of criminal intent. Debate, on motion of Mr Welford, adjourned.

PRIVATE MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Government Advertising Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (10.24 a.m.): This government knows no limits when it comes to wasting tens of thousands of dollars of public money on its obscene propaganda. When it was in trouble over Cubbie Station, we saw full-page ads and four-page newspaper inserts. We saw this with respect to the Goodwill Games and CHOGM and now we see it on the discrimination bill— Mr SPEAKER: Order! Mr HORAN: I am talking about advertising. Tens of thousands of dollars is being wasted on advertising when in this state we have drought, hospitals with ballooning waiting lists, schools without airconditioning, and police in need of resources. We have need after need, yet we see all of this money being spent on propaganda. The height of arrogance of this big ad in the paper were the words 'ongoing consultation'. It never started. Talk about ongoing consultation! It never even started. The caucus was not even consulted. All of the caucus cowards sat back and let it go through without any consultation. This is a disgrace. Government in this state is being run by propaganda. There are 180 people in the Community Engagement Division and not one of those people engaged anyone involved in this legislation, be it archbishops, church leaders or anybody else. It is an absolute disgrace. The government is spending tens of thousands of dollars—public money—on full-page ads just to cover up its mistakes, incompetence and the lack of consultation. I wonder how the people in drought-stricken Queensland feel when they see these ads. I wonder how the people in the sugar industry feel and also the parents of the kids at schools without airconditioning. What about the people whose homes are broken into and who know that 4712 Private Members' Statements 26 Nov 2002 there is only a 13 per cent clear-up rate because of the shortage of police and equipment? That is what is happening in this state. We have plenty of money for advertising—$70 million or more a year—but nothing for the things that matter. Time expired.

Community Consultation, Toowoomba Electorate Mr SHINE (Toowoomba North—ALP) (10.26 a.m.): As a member for a regional area, may I say how proud I am to be part of a government to the people in regional Queensland. Toowoomba and Darling Downs residents have reaped rewards through this process. In June 2001, the Highfields community cabinet provided the first opportunity in my term for Downs residents to meet ministers and the Premier. Many locals took advantage of this. The cabinet also brought significant benefits to Toowoomba. In particular, the Premier announced the building of the Suncorp Metway call centre, which will create 300 jobs, and Police Minister Tony McGrady promised the construction of a new Toowoomba Police Station. This community cabinet was followed by one in our next-door region—the Granite Belt—in February this year. There Toowoomba received one of the most significant grants yet from the Beattie government—the key to launching an exciting new industry that will significantly boost Toowoomba's economy and employment rate, a $10 million grant for a Fibre Composites Centre of Excellence. These community cabinets have been followed up recently with two significant government visits to Toowoomba. On 18 November, one of the ministerial regional community forums was held in Toowoomba. This was a great occasion for the people of Toowoomba to play a greater role in government policy development and decision making. The government's most recent visit to Toowoomba was for the annual caucus retreat last week. This was the first time the entire caucus had visited Toowoomba and, from all reports, our city was the perfect host for the two-day event. In particular, I know the caucus's visit to the Empire Theatre highlighted the potential the facility has to host a regional parliament sitting in years to come. I share the support the Beattie government has for visiting regional towns. It is no good sitting in an office in Brisbane and making significant decisions for regions if we have never been there. The caucus visit to Toowoomba and the Downs highlighted the needs and the strengths of our region and what an exciting place it will be in years to come thanks to the investment and support the government is giving. In particular, fibre composites, the Charlton Wellcamp Industrial Estate, the second range crossing and, in the longer term, the interest being shown in the waste water pipeline, the Gowrie to Grandchester rail link, the quarry gardens project and so on. In the past, Toowoomba has at times struggled to get suitable support from both sides of politics, but the Premier has been to our city more times than any other Premier in history. Time expired.

Dog Impoundment Mrs PRATT (Nanango—Ind) (10.29 a.m.): It is bad that we judge a dog on its appearance alone, as the law now stands: if it looks like a dangerous breed, it must be. The recently high media profile of a court case about a dog called Joh in Kingaroy emphasises the point I am trying to make. Debate over the future of Joh raged in the region for several months, and the local paper carried dozens of letters from the community over several weeks by people who in the majority supported the stance of Joh's owner that the dog was being destroyed on unreasonable grounds. I am the first to admit that several breeds of dogs do look vicious and make most people wary about approaching them. I now table a non-conforming petition. Joh was impounded for several months. The petition specifically states that in cases like this where extended time of impoundment is necessary due to legal proceedings an animal should be housed in more humane conditions, such as the RSPCA shelter rather than a pound. The petition has a good point in that there is virtually no contact with humans in council pounds as compared with RSPCA facilities. The main point of the petition, however, is that a dog not be deemed dangerous— Time expired. Mr SPEAKER: The time for private members' statements has expired. 26 Nov 2002 Questions Without Notice 4713

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Antidiscrimination Legislation Mr HORAN (10.30 a.m.): In directing a question to the Honourable the Premier, I refer to the widespread community concern and significant dissent within his own Labor Party caucus over his government's arrogant neglect to consult them on social reforms. I also refer him to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which Australia is a signatory, and specifically to article 18, which states— Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance. I now ask: does his government subscribe to this basic right? If so, what action will he take to enshrine it for the benefit of all Queenslanders? Mr SPEAKER: Before calling the Premier, I want to refer honourable members to the rule of anticipation and question time. Generally, I give wide latitude to questions and do not wish to be overly restrictive on the right of members to ask questions. But questions should not be used to anticipate debate on an order of the day. That is, a question cannot invite anticipation of the second reading debate of a bill or the arguments and principles upon which the legislation is based. I would ask members asking questions and ministers answering questions to avoid reference to the detail of any bill. Mr BEATTIE: Mr Speaker, I thank you for your advice. I am always happy to answer any question. I appreciate the importance of the standing orders. My difficulty here, of course, is that the Leader of the Opposition, in his two-minute speech, has made reference to advertising and, in essence, to some of the strategies the government is taking to consult with the community. It is obviously very difficult for me not to respond to some extent to what the Opposition Leader has done because he has nibbled at the pieces and it means that I have to respond to the whole. Let me say this: my government believes in fairness, it believes in equity and it believes in a fair go for all Australians. Mr Johnson interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Mr Speaker, I simply ask for the courtesy to be able to answer the question. I am happy to answer any question asked in this House. I want to make it clear that one of the things that makes Australia great is our commitment to the fair go. That is our commitment: to ensure that people are judged by what is in their hearts and who they are, without prejudice. It is about ensuring that people are not victimised. It is about ensuring that, if people are victimised, there is legislation that protects them. I have taken a great deal of time, as have the Attorney-General and other ministers, including the Minister for Education, to talk to people about the issues to which the Leader of the Opposition referred. In fact, last night 209 people spent over three hours— Mr Johnson interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Mr Speaker, could I ask for some courtesy? Does the honourable member want to turn this into a circus or does he want an answer? Time expired.

Nurses, VERs Mr HORAN: I refer the Minister for Health to the fact that when the government announced 2,000 voluntary early retirement packages, the Premier said it would have no impact on 'Queensland Health clinical staff, our doctors and nurses'. Yet it has been revealed to the opposition that eight maternity nurses at Royal Brisbane and Royal Women's hospitals received offers of VERs. Is this another example of a deceptive government trying to cull the work force by stealth, or yet another Beattie government backflip? Mrs EDMOND: The message went out through Queensland Health that VERs as part of the renewal process of the Public Service were not for clinical staff. I am unaware that VERs have been negotiated, if any have been, because I know that the Leader of the Opposition's information is often incorrect. I have not been made aware of any VERs being offered to maternity staff. Mr Horan: Eight. 4714 Questions Without Notice 26 Nov 2002

Mrs EDMOND: That is the honourable member's allegation. The message that went out to Queensland Health staff was that there were not to be VERs made available to clinical staff, full stop.

Year of the Outback Awards Mr PEARCE: My question is directed to the Premier. The Year of the Outback has been an outstanding success. Celebrations have focused on the spirit of those who battled the bush and who have made this state a great state. Could the Premier please tell the House how this government has played a role in recognising and celebrating this magnificent spirit? Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for Fitzroy for his question because I know he has taken a keen interest, as have all members on the government side, in the Year of the Outback. An opposition member interjected. Mr BEATTIE: And other members; I take that interjection. The Year of the Outback has brought communities across Queensland together. Last week, some of the people who have helped to make the event such a success were here at Parliament House for the Premier's Year of the Outback awards which Henry Palaszczuk and I presented. These awards honour the individuals and community groups who make a positive contribution and commitment to our outback communities. It was apparent from reading about the backgrounds of the nominees that they have one thing in common, and that is a love of where they live. In true outback spirit, they are all willing to go the extra mile to make their communities better for others. It is the sort of spirit which has seen communities survive and prosper in an often very harsh environment, such as the drought we are experiencing at the moment. Awards were presented to three regional winners and the overall state winner. I can tell you, Mr Speaker, that the judges had a tough time choosing the award recipients. The winner for the central west region was VISE—Volunteers for Isolated Students' Education. VISE recruits retired teachers who are willing to spend up to six weeks with an outback family giving face-to-face tuition to students enrolled with the schools of distance education. The program helps outback kids compete with school students who take face-to-face teaching for granted. It ensures that outback kids get a fair go and, as honourable members know, my government is committed to ensuring that all Queenslanders receive a good education regardless of where they live. VISE also recruits volunteers who are willing to help out with domestic chores, allowing parents to spend time supervising their children's studies. The north west regional winners were Hughenden artists Terry Lindsay and Sam Brown. Terry and Sam run family cattle properties near Hughenden and in their spare time they have created some outstanding art works which are becoming an attraction in their own right. These include an impressionist's sculpture of a Muttaburrasauras and a windmill rotunda at Hughenden's dinosaur display centre. Terry describes herself as the ideas person and Sam is the one who uses metal and recycled materials to turn the concepts into works of art. The winner of the south east regional category and the overall state winner was Windorah nursing director, Anne Kidd. Anne has been in Windorah since 1963. Mr Johnson: Yes. Mr BEATTIE: The honourable member for Gregory knows her well. She arrived there to take up a private nursing position and met and married Sandy, raising five children. At the time the only medical facility in Windorah was a Royal Flying Doctor Service clinic and the nearest hospital was 230 kilometres away in Quilpie. When word got out about Anne's medical training she soon found herself on call for the community 24 hours a day. Anne Kidd could well be dubbed the Florence Nightingale of the south west; she has delivered babies, attended numerous accidents and literally saved lives. She reckons she has probably put stitches in every resident of the district over the years. In 1992, after years of tireless volunteer work, Anne was offered 20 hours paid employment a week in the clinic, and in July this year she was appointed full-time director of nursing. I want to congratulate all the winners. I know the member for Gregory would do the same. Mr SPEAKER: Before calling the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, could I welcome to the public gallery students and teachers from Bargara State School in the electorate of Burnett. 26 Nov 2002 Questions Without Notice 4715

Suncorp Metway Stadium Mr JOHNSON: In directing a question to the Treasurer and Minister for Sport, I refer to his attempt at damage control in his ministerial statement this morning and his apparent agreement to defer construction of the proposed pedestrian infrastructure for Lang Park. Treasurer, notwithstanding the Minister for Housing's attempt today to claim that the price tag is still $280 million, please detail the budgetary impacts this deferral will have on the total cost of the Lang Park redevelopment, or will he engage in more creative accounting and job split this component of the project and call it something else? I ask the Treasurer to tell the House how he is able to claim that the Brisbane City Council acknowledges better outcomes are likely to be achieved from involving the council through the City West Task Force when he recently issued instructions to reschedule community liaison group meetings to Tuesday afternoons to clash with Brisbane City Council meeting times and banned his Labor comrade Councillor David Hinchliffe from attending these meetings? Mr MACKENROTH: Firstly, in relation to the budget and what impact it is going to have, the budget is $280 million. What I said this morning was that— Mr Horan: What about the $12 million extra? Mr MACKENROTH: If the member had listened this morning and if he listens he will understand. The budget is $280 million. We are isolating $12 million of that $280 million to do this work. In other words, we will spend $268 million and we will have $12 million set aside. When we spend that, that will then make $280 million—that is, $268 million plus $12 million is $280 million. Mr Johnson interjected. Mr MACKENROTH: I think the member does. It is as simple as that. In relation to the meeting that has been called for today, I wrote to the council about six weeks ago inviting it to nominate a person to be on this committee and informed it that the meeting would be held today—that is, this Tuesday. The council nominated David Hinchliffe; it is its right to nominate whomever it wishes. I thought it would nominate a council official, but it chose to nominate a councillor, and that is its prerogative. It did not raise with me the fact that the meeting would clash with the council meeting; it actually raised that with the Courier-Mail. I saw David Hinchliffe last night at the sports awards and conveyed to him my desire that if he wants to communicate with me in the future he should pick up the telephone, not do it through the Courier-Mail.

Queensland Events Regional Development Program Mr SHINE: I refer the Premier to the fact that the government's Regional Events Program is proving to be an outstanding success. This year Toowoomba's Gospel Music Festival recorded an attendance lift of 20 per cent to 30,000 for its Easter annual event and I feel this was largely as a result of the government's support for such a quality event. I ask: is there any more good news for such quality events right across regional Queensland? Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for Toowoomba North for his question. The answer is, yes, there certainly is. On Friday in Toowoomba I had the pleasure, along with Don Pinel of Telstra Countrywide, to launch round three of the Queensland Events Regional Development Program with the member for Toowoomba North. As all members would know, the caucus retreat was held in Toowoomba. Mr Johnson interjected. Mr BEATTIE: He has more chance of being a minister than you ever have again. On Friday we added another 20 events from across regional Queensland to form Australia's most successful events development program. A total of $376,990 has been awarded to 20 events in this round. This has been bolstered by a $100,000 commitment from Telstra Countrywide over the next two months. In a globally controversial year it is clear that event retention is critical to sustaining tourism, and it is events, special interest and niche travel that will now assume even greater importance. That is being smart in a strategic sense. As we see many rural and regional centres turning to tourism, special events provide one of the most unique and fastest growing forms of tourist attraction. They offer an opportunity to exploit our state's diversity as well as provide a region's ongoing economic development. The 20 events announced on Friday at Toowoomba's magnificent Picnic Point mean that a total of 58 regional events will benefit from over $1 million in state government funding to support this focus. Events like Toowoomba's Gospel Music Festival, the inaugural World Polocrosse Championships in Warwick, the Australian-Italian Festival in Ingham, the Australian Chamber 4716 Questions Without Notice 26 Nov 2002

Music Festival, the Gladstone Harbour Festival and the Square Dancing Championships on the Sunshine Coast are all winners. This program is gaining the critical mass. It is proving the smart way to profile successful regional events so that the respective communities benefit socially, culturally and economically, and that is what we are about. Promoting our individual towns and regions has already produced significant lifts in economic activity, but two of the most underrated benefits to emerge are the social gain—the marked increase in civic pride and community self- esteem—as well as the gains cascading from the profiling now being generated from Queensland Events' innovative program. I remind members that a three-stage selection process is used to identify the most outstanding applications in a very strong field from across the state, and I urge all members to get involved in the next round. The Queensland Events Regional Development Program is designed to assist regional Queensland in taking creative and unique events to their full potential. I seek leave to incorporate the names of those successful applicants as well as the rest of my statement so that everyone knows who won. Leave granted. 2003 EVENT TOWN/CITY RTO REGION Australian Cotton Week (7-16 March) Dalby Toowoomba Australian Gospel Music Festival (18-20 April)** Toowoomba Toowoomba Easter in the Country (16-21 April) Roma Toowoomba Inaugural Polocrosse World Cup (24 April—4 May) Warwick Southern Downs Hippomanic Picnic (The Australian leg of the 2003 Evening) World Cup (26-27 Jul 2003) Warwick Southern Downs Sprint Around the Houses (17-18 August 2003) Leyburn Southern Downs 2003 Brisbane Valley Multicultural Festival (25-26 July) Esk Brisbane Castro Winternationals 2003 (6-8 July) Ipswich Brisbane 44th Australian National Square Dancing Convention (5-9 June) Caloundra Sunshine Coast Australian Festival of Chamber Music (2-13 July)** Townsville Townsville Australian Italian Festival (9-11 May)** Ingham Townsville Townsville Running Festival (3 August) Townsville Townsville South West Outback Qld Masters Games (25 Apr-3 May) Cunnamulla Outback Redford Muster (16-18 May) Aramac Outback International Mining Challenge (29 Apr-1 May)** Mt Isa Outback Opera in the Outback (3-5 October) Savannah Way Tropical Nth QId Port Douglas Carnivale (19-25 May) Port Douglas Tropical Nth Qld Gladstone Harbour Festival (14-21 April) Gladstone, Boyne/ Tannum, Calliope Gladstone Bowen Fishing Classic (22-23 September) Bowen Mackay 21st Noosa Triathlon (26 Oct-2 Nov 2002) Noosa Noosa SLSQ North Australian Championships (6-8 December) Mackay Mackay ** Events also previously funded in rounds one or two

For more information on the Queensland Events Regional Development Program phone: (07) 4799 7301 or visit www.qldevents.com.au/regionaldevelopmentprogram. Just remember—regional communities are no longer quarantined from the economic benefits that flow from events simply because of their remoteness—in fact remoteness is now a positive. I table the third round winners and wish every one of them good fortune for their event. Mr BEATTIE: There is one final thing I want to mention. While in Toowoomba we had the benefit of being hosted by Mayor Di Thorley at a reception attended by the Leader of the Opposition and Mr Copeland. The mayor left us in no doubt where she stood on things. I thank her for her hospitality, her directness and her warmth. It was a great experience to be with her.

Vegetation Clearing, Weribone Station Mr WELLINGTON: I refer the Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines to the fact that the Wilderness Society understands that in about August last year he authorised the clearing of approximately 1,173 hectares of remnant native vegetation including 486 hectares of endangered vegetation as identified under the Vegetation Management Act on Weribone Station near Surat in south-west Queensland, and I ask: what was the minister's involvement in the granting of this permit to clear and why was the permit issued? Mr ROBERTSON: I thank the honourable member for the question. The answer to the first question he asked is: none. I do not involve myself in the granting or rejecting of permits. In 26 Nov 2002 Questions Without Notice 4717 relation to the second matter—without having the details before me, I imagine that the granting of the permit was based on the provisions contained in the Vegetation Management Act where certain performance codes have to be abided by. Mr SPEAKER: Before calling the member for Burleigh, I ask honourable members to acknowledge the presence in the gallery of members of the parliaments of Fiji, New Caledonia, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, the Solomon Islands and Vanuatu who are participating in the 2002 Pacific Parliamentary Retreat. Honourable members: Hear, hear!

Tugun Bypass Mrs SMITH: I refer the Minister for Transport and Minister for Main Roads to the recent announcement that the state government will commence construction on stage 1 of the Tugun bypass, and I ask: can the minister please advise the House whether the Howard coalition government has yet provided any funding for the bypass's construction? Mr BREDHAUER: I thank the honourable member for the question and I thank all Gold Coast members for their support in our initiatives to try to get this project up and running, none more so than the Minister for Tourism and Racing and Minister for Fair Trading, Merri Rose, who has worked very hard with me to address the concerns of her constituents about this project. I announced that we were going to undertake the Tugun bypass in two stages, and I understand the concerns of the community in relation to the decision to do that. I also understand the concerns of the Boyd Street residents relating to how increased traffic will impact on them. We will seek to work through those issues in conjunction and in consultation with them, but I am very conscious of the levels of frustration that are felt by people in the southern Gold Coast about the fact that this project has not started. That is why I have made a very strong determination that we will commence construction using the $120 million that has been allocated by the state government for stage 1 of the project. I have to say that I am a little surprised—or maybe I should not be surprised—by the attitude of a couple of other local politicians. First and foremost, Sue Robbins, one of the local councillors, has sought to make political mileage out of our decision to go down Boyd Street. As a councillor who is on the Southern Gold Coast Planning Group, she knows that for many years the Gold Coast City Council has had a plan to upgrade Boyd Street to four lanes. In fact, it was a condition of the Cobaki Lakes development that that upgrading would occur to accommodate additional traffic flows. She has also been a person who has badgered me incessantly about getting the project up and running. So when I go there and announce that we are going to do both—that is, upgrade Boyd Street to four lanes and get the project up and running—what does she do? She takes the opportunity for cheap political point scoring in the media at my expense and at the expense of the local member. As a member of the National Party and former National Party candidate for the seat of Currumbin, she would be better served taking her concerns to the National Party Minister for Transport in Canberra and getting some money out of him. It gets worse. The member for Moncrieff, Steve Ciobo, put out a press release last week to say that the Commonwealth has committed $35 million to the project. That is a lie. The member for Moncrieff has lied to the people of the southern Gold Coast. The Commonwealth has contributed not one cent to this project. We have put in $120 million and we are about to start the construction. The Commonwealth government has spent nothing. John Anderson has said that he is not even prepared to talk to me about funding until 2006. Mr Ciobo says that we do not have a route selected. We do. It is the route alignment C4, which has been known by everybody down there for nearly two years. The reason we have had to split it into two is that we are still working with the New South Wales and Commonwealth governments on their development approval processes. They should stop telling lies to the people of the southern Gold Coast.

Drug Offences Mr SEENEY: My question is directed to the Minister for Police and Corrective Services. I refer to the annual statistical review for the Queensland Police Service and specifically to the statistics for drug offences investigated by Queensland police in the last year. Just so there can be no argument about the statistics, I table the well-marked copies of the relevant pages from this year's annual report and last year's annual report. Those statistics show that the number of drug offences investigated by Queensland police has declined significantly across all categories when compared with last year. Queensland police this year investigated 55 per cent fewer drug 4718 Questions Without Notice 26 Nov 2002 trafficking offences and 20 per cent fewer offences for supplying dangerous drugs. Can the minister tell the parliament whether this significant decline in drug related offences means that there is less of a drug problem in Queensland than last year? Or has this government given a low priority to prosecuting drug related offences as part of its social engineering agenda? Mr McGRADY: I thank the member for the question. If members of this place cast their minds back they will realise that I have spoken many times about the dangers of drugs in society. Members would recall that recently I visited some of the cities of Asia, where I had high-level discussions with police ministers and police commissioners about the problems associated with drugs. I have reported back, both in written form and via a number of statements. As recently as last week, members of my parliamentary committee had a briefing by senior members of the Queensland Police Service about the problems of drugs. I repeat what I have said many times: drugs are the greatest menace facing society today. If people think it is bad in Australia, they ain't seen nothing yet. The Queensland police have an active policy. They have numbers of people in the service whose job it is to work on drug offences and catch those merchants of death. They are well aware of the problems out there in society. They are doing what they can, whether it be with sniffer dogs or any other weapons at their disposal, to try to hunt out these people who are selling drugs particularly to our young people. As the Minister for Police I have a personal campaign to try to apprehend those people who are selling these drugs to our people. I will leave no stone unturned until we succeed in this task. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Before calling the member for Charters Towers, I welcome to the public gallery students and teachers from Ipswich West State School in the electorate of Ipswich.

Sale of Telstra Mrs CHRISTINE SCOTT: My question is directed to the Minister for Innovation and Information Economy. I understand the federal government's inquiry into regional telecommunications has handed down its report to Senator Alston. How much did the federal government get from the sale of the first half of Telstra and how have Queenslanders in the bush fared as a result? Mr LUCAS: I am delighted to answer the honourable member's question. She is someone who takes a real interest in the welfare of people in her electorate and their need for adequate telecommunications in the bush. The Estens inquiry report was handed down on 8 November. That inquiry was set up for one reason and one reason only: as a whitewash to sell off the other $30 billion worth of Telstra. The federal government received $30 billion from the sale of the first half of Telstra. Queensland has received $200 million in infrastructure expenditure. That means that 0.006 per cent of the money that belongs to Queensland taxpayers has been spent on infrastructure in Queensland. The Queensland government made a very strong submission to the Estens inquiry and said, 'Before you give any consideration to the future of Telstra, fix the job properly in Queensland.' When we look at mobile telephone coverage in Queensland we see what the federal government thinks of Queensland and what it thinks of other states. When people travel from Mount Isa to Townsville, 49 per cent of the time they do not get telephone coverage. We asked for continuous CDMA coverage on our western networks. We said that people in Queensland have every right to expect that. In Victoria there is 96 per cent coverage on highways. There is 82 per cent coverage on highways in New South Wales. But in Australia's most decentralised state— Mr Horan interjected. Mr LUCAS: The Leader of the Opposition might want to know that 8,500 kilometres of highways in Queensland have been covered while 6,800 kilometres of highways in Victoria have been covered. In other words, we are eight times as big but we have only 1,700 kilometres more coverage. That is the sort of deal we get from Telstra. That is the sort of deal we get from the federal government when it comes to the money it received. I note that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said on ABC Longreach Radio that the report was a sham. I commend the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for agreeing with the government. But what is he saying to his federal colleagues about their endorsements? What is he saying to them about them getting up and defending people in the bush? 26 Nov 2002 Questions Without Notice 4719

Next month I will be going on a listening tour of the bush. I will be talking to people there about what sort of deal they have got. I will be telling them that the federal government got $30 billion from the sale of Telstra, yet it has spent a paltry amount in Queensland. We are still waiting for it. There are two federal National Party MPs from Victoria and that state gets 96 per cent coverage. There are four from Queensland, yet we are getting dudded. It is about time people in this House stood up for people in rural and regional Queensland. We will if those opposite will not.

Government Advertising Mr QUINN: My question is directed to the Premier. The Premier would recall that during the AFL finals in Victoria his government took out a full-page advertisement in the Age in an attempt to secure business and investment. This advertisement contained a special Smart State phone line for people to contact the State Development Department to pursue business opportunities and it contained a special web site address at which potential investors could contact the department for more information. Given that in the seven days after the advertisements appeared not one phone call was made from Victoria to the Smart State line, and given that the number of people entering the web site to contact the department had increased by just four on the previous week, I ask: after this woeful response, will the government now instigate an immediate review of all government advertising to ensure taxpayers are getting full value for money? Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for his question. The member for Moggill asked a question on notice very similar to this. Tom Barton has given a detailed response. Dr Watson interjected. Mr BEATTIE: That is all right. It is the same question. It is the same point to Tom Barton. The important thing that needs to be pointed out is that Queensland does incredibly well out of the tourism market from Victoria. It is in many senses our biggest tourism market. People from Victoria go to Noosa and places such as that. Many people could be forgiven for thinking from time to time that Noosa is little Melbourne, and I have made that point. That advertisement was designed to continue our corporate image—a good, positive image of Queensland in Victoria. Mr Lucas: The Victorian Liberal Party says we are in front. Mr BEATTIE: The Victorian Liberal Party says a lot of very positive things about us. Perhaps the Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of the Liberal Party can pick up on that. Let me answer the question specifically. This is about continuing the very positive corporate image for Queensland in Victoria. That is what the ad was all about. Inevitably, we do not always get immediate responses from these things. They happen over a period of time. Some we do, some we do not. We are interested in long-term strategies for Queensland, not just 10-minute quick flicks. Mr Seeney: A bit like unemployment. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Callide! Mr BEATTIE: They are rude. Mr Seeney: Five per cent is long term. Mr BEATTIE: I will take that interjection. We have the lowest level of unemployment in Queensland since March 1990—seven per cent. When the Leader of the Opposition was a minister, the unemployment rate was 9.5 per cent. What was the National-Liberal Party legacy: 9.5 per cent. What is the Labor Party position: seven per cent. That says it all. The member should go back into his box. I would not get too excited. The reality is that we have delivered. I am glad the member raised this. Economic growth is expected to be four and a quarter per cent this financial year. Last month, trend unemployment was seven per cent. The unemployment rate is the lowest since March 1990. Queensland created 53,700 jobs in the 12 months to October—almost 30 per cent of the total jobs generated nationally. More than half of those Queensland jobs were full time. Are we delivering? You bet we are! Let me move on to what the Liberals are saying interstate. In relation to investment, an article titled 'Liberals eye bulk broadband savings' states— You compare the performance of (Premier Peter) Beattie in Queensland with (Victorian Premier Steve) Bracks here, and it is clear that IT companies much prefer Beattie. 4720 Questions Without Notice 26 Nov 2002

That is the benefit of having long-term strategic positioning in Victoria. There is the result. IT companies are coming to Queensland. What was the source for that article? The Victorian Liberal Party! I have to say that the Queensland Liberal Party may not like our ads, but the Victorian Liberal Party certainly does. If I had to choose between the Victorian Leader of the Liberal Party and the Queensland leader, I have to say on this occasion that I go for the Victorian leader.

Marine Stingers Ms JARRATT: I direct a question to the Minister for Tourism and Racing and Minister for Fair Trading. The annual marine stinger season is now upon us. I ask: can the minister advise the House what anti-stinger measures are being taken to educate residents, visitors, first-aid providers and the community about the dangers of marine stingers and the treatment of jellyfish stings? Ms ROSE: I thank the honourable member for the question. She has shown a great interest in tourism related matters, especially those that affect residents in and visitors to tropical Queensland. One of the key prevention and response outcomes of the multi-agency irukandji working group was an agreed set of first-aid guidelines to treat irukandji syndrome and a comprehensive community education program. Coordinated by Surf Life Saving Queensland, an awareness campaign is currently under way. Together with Tourism Queensland and regional tourist operators, we will distribute vital up-to-date information. This information is presented in a non-threatening manner to encourage visitors, tour operators and the community to adopt simple risk management measures to enjoy swimming in tropical Queensland waters. The material includes multilingual brochures, fact sheets and posters to ensure that the key safety measures are distributed as widely as possible. We have had 10,000 of these posters printed and they will be distributed to operators in north Queensland and to other key agencies. We also have a web site, www.marinestinger.com, which has been established with materials available in a format that can be downloaded so that anybody who wishes to use the information contained in the published materials can do so. This will be particularly useful for local government authorities should they wish to reproduce the information for distribution to their local communities. The materials detail basic scientific information on marine stingers—particularly the irukandji and box jellyfish—symptoms and signs of a sting, and basic first-aid guidelines. The visitor information materials contain tips on swimming in tropical waters and information on the location of stinger-resistant enclosures. Most importantly, the educational materials ensure that local communities, visitors and tourism operators are provided with the most accurate, timely and consistent information on marine stingers, particularly those that cause irukandji syndrome. The fact sheet and brochure will be distributed by Tropical Tourism North Queensland, Townsville Enterprise, the Mackay Tourism and Development Bureau and Tourism Whitsundays through visitor information centres, tourism operators, accommodation providers, retailers and dive and reef operators. The second irukandji working group, coordinated by CRC Reef, is focusing on research into irukandji syndrome. This group has called for proposals for irukandji research to be conducted within their $250,000 funding. The proposals are currently being considered by an advisory committee on which Tourism Queensland is represented. The need for additional research funding requirements will be based on the extent to which the currently available funds achieve the research priorities.

Royal Brisbane Hospital Miss SIMPSON: My question is to the Minister for Health. The Royal Brisbane Hospital had a budget deficit of $5.5 million at the end of the 2001-02 financial year. The opposition understands that that figure has at least doubled. I ask the minister: can she tell the parliament what exactly the budget blow-out is at the Royal Brisbane Hospital and what it is expected to be at the end of the 2002-03 financial year? Will there be bed closures to try to reduce the budget deficit? Mrs EDMOND: I thank the honourable member for the question, because it gives me an opportunity to correct a statement made previously by the Leader of the Opposition. Contrary to the allegations made by the Leader of the Opposition, no nursing staff—no qualified nurses—at the Royal Womens Hospital have been offered VERs. I am advised that some staff have requested VERs, but they are not qualified nurses. They have no formal training or knowledge. 26 Nov 2002 Questions Without Notice 4721

The work that they have been doing should be done by qualified nurses and will be done by qualified nurses. I reiterate that it is not part of the Public Service work force renewal process, but that does not mean that there will never be changes to staffing made at hospitals around Queensland due to changing demographics, changes arising out of the merging of hospitals and changes in the presentation of patients. But in this case, once again, the Opposition Leader is wrong. In terms of the budget of the Royal Brisbane Hospital, again it has a record budget. It has had a record budget each and every year that I have been the Health Minister. That hospital is providing an extra range of services. When I go and see the wonderful work that is being done at the Royal Brisbane Hospital—the magnificent new buildings—it is disappointing that all the opposition can do is wander around the state spreading misinformation and bagging the staff. Whether it is the administrative staff or the clinical staff, the opposition goes around the state bagging the Queensland Health staff. The staff do a fine job. We deliver health services in this state at a better rate than anywhere else in Australia. I think that South Australia may now be on a par with us, but we deliver a wider range of services at a better rate. I think that Queenslanders get a bit sick and tired of this constant whingeing from the opposition. They want to see the services being provided, they want us to take into our care people from other countries, such as from Bali, when they need it without asking, 'What is the cost going to be?' Miss SIMPSON: I rise to a point of order. Under standing order 69, will the minister answer the question? What was the budget blow-out at the Royal Brisbane Hospital? Mr SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Mrs EDMOND: The people of Queensland want to hear about the great services that we are providing and our new achievements. They are interested in hearing that. We were proud to accept people from Bali and proud of the work that was involved. We did not look at how much it was going to cost us or whether it was going to affect the budget. Obviously, the member opposite just wants to go around bagging the Queensland Health service and bagging the wonderful staff within it.

Western Outreach Camp Program Mr McNAMARA: Will the Minister for Police and Corrective Services inform the parliament about any new measures which have been put in place to enhance the Western Outreach Camp Program? Mr McGRADY: During August, the parliament approved changes to allow more low security prisoners to be put to work in outback communities as part of the successful WORC program to which the member referred. I am pleased to report to the House that I recently approved further changes to rostering and staffing which will provide for a 25 per cent increase in the number of days prisoners in these camps perform community service each year. The changes were made in consultation with representatives of the Queensland Public Sector Union. I have to say that I was most impressed with the way in which they assisted us. Under the changes, three local field officers in western Queensland were upgraded to the rank of field supervisors, which has resulted in six camps—Julia Creek, Winton, Clermont, Springsure, Charleville and Mitchell—being able to operate a 21-day month cycle, rather than 12 or 16 days as was previously the case. This began on 20 November. In consultation with the union we have also made changes to rostering of south-eastern staff involved in the WORC program, meaning that they will now be on site at the western camps for longer periods each cycle. In total, the two changes will mean prisoners work an extra 466 operational days each year, assisting rural communities through the western camps, which equates to a 25 per cent increase. This will be of great assistance to remote western communities, as I am sure all members will agree. In August, I also instructed the department to ensure that suitable prisoners from the three northern prisons—namely, Townsville, Lotus Glen and Capricornia—be placed on the program. I am pleased to inform the House that six prisoners from the northern prisons are now on the WORC program and that another 12 are being assessed. I am also pleased to advise the House that, since the highly publicised changes to the leave of absence procedures associated with the WORC program, there has been no decrease in the number of prisoners participating in the program. This runs contrary to the suggestions of the Leader of the National Party and the prisoners, who were the only people in favour of us not tightening up leave procedures. The 4722 Questions Without Notice 26 Nov 2002 number of prisoners on the WORC program was 90 in September, 146 as at October, and 148 on 20 November. So we now have more prisoners working on the program for longer hours. Through the program, they get back to the community. I urge members opposite to stop trying to undermine this program, because the government and I believe it is an excellent program bringing great benefits to the people of the western shires.

Sexual Offence Statistics Mr FLYNN: My question is directed to the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice. I asked a question on notice of the Minister for Police and Corrective Services on 13 July regarding investigations into child abuse. It was a multifaceted question, one element of which asked: how many complaints in the last 12 months have led to prosecution? The minister replied that the service's crime reporting system did not capture the number of prosecutions, and he referred me to the Attorney's office. I asked the Attorney the same question on notice on 23 October but was referred to the QPS because the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions was unable to provide the answer. Is this a political game of pass the parcel? Is the bureaucracy misleading the minister's office, or does the data collection system need upgrading, because both ministries referred me on a further seven points to each other? Mr WELFORD: There is no attempt or intention whatsoever to deny the member access to information that is available or indeed to mislead the member in relation to what information is available. The question the member asked of me was a question which was referred both to the DPP and to the QPS. I was unaware that the member had asked the same question of the Minister for Police, but whether he had or not was entirely an entitlement for him. The question went to a number of issues relating to false or unsubstantiated allegations. The system of collection of data in relation to criminal charges and offences does not seek to determine whether the allegations— Mr FLYNN: I rise to a point of order. My question to the Minister for Police did not refer to false allegations. I seek leave to table a question on notice where I asked: how many of the 6,017 complaints have led to prosecution? There was nothing in relation to false complaints. Mr SPEAKER: That is not a point of order. Mr WELFORD: I stand corrected in relation to the question the member asked of the Minister for Police. I know that the question the member asked of me did go to those issues. All I can say to the member is that the Queensland Police Service, the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Department of Justice can only provide him—and I can only provide him—with information which actually exists. The information of the nature that he specifically sought does not exist. In either case, neither of us is passing the buck. If it existed, we would give it. If it does not exist, we cannot give it.

Water Entitlements Mr RODGERS: I refer the Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines to reports of some people deliberately exceeding their water entitlements or illegally taking water from Queensland rivers without permits. What is the government doing to stop this practice which many Queenslanders battling drought and dwindling water supplies would view as stealing water? Mr ROBERTSON: I thank the member for his question and for his ongoing interest in natural resource issues throughout Queensland. In the current climate of drought and dwindling water supplies it is essential that all Queenslanders have fair and equitable access to water. Many Queenslanders are doing it tough, but the overwhelming majority of water users are also doing the right thing and just taking their fair share. However, I am very concerned about reports that some land-holders are deliberately taking more than their water licences allow and that others are reportedly stealing tanker loads of water from rivers and then selling that water for profit to drought affected properties. My department is currently investigating 146 complaints alleging unlawful taking of water or the development of projects designed to facilitate the taking of water without proper authorisation. The breakdown data for those figures is that in the south east region there are 37 cases under investigation; north region, 65; central west, 27; and south west region, 17. There is no excuse for this behaviour. It is low; it is despicable; and it amounts to stealing water from one's neighbours during a drought. It will not be tolerated. I have instructed my department to enforce the law and prosecute anyone found engaging in these illegal activities. It is timely to remind all Queenslanders that the maximum fine under the Water Act is $124,000. 26 Nov 2002 Questions Without Notice 4723

I strongly remind all land-holders that in the current drought conditions a person taking water without proper authority is reducing the capacity of some waterways to cope with amounts drawn by legitimate licence holders. It also means that some water users miss out on receiving their full water allocations. Licences and permits for the taking of water are issued by the department on the basis of an area's capacity to provide the water and also according to criteria designed to facilitate the sustainable, ongoing use and allocation of the limited water available. It is all the more important in these current tough times that all water users abide by the law. Authorised officers of my department are investigating all complaints and will carry out inspections to assess operations and identify instances of non-compliance. I can assure the House that all offences reported and those detected by departmental staff will be considered for prosecution.

Flying Foxes Mr ROWELL: My question is directed to the Minister for Environment. There is substantial opinion and evidence presently which suggests that flying foxes on freehold land are the property and responsibility of the land-holder. Can the minister confirm who owns the flying foxes on freehold land? Mr WELLS: I am not aware of the substantial opinion or evidence that the flying foxes belong to the particular land-holders. A number of them are protected species. Some of them are protected under the environmental protection legislation. The ones that are on national parks— Mr Rowell: No, on freehold property, not national parks. Mr WELLS: One thing that the honourable member said was true, that is, there is substantial opinion. It is very clear that there are a substantial number of opinions about this and that people are keen to express them. But the truth of the matter is—and this will please the honourable member—that those in national parks are owned by the honourable member and every other citizen of this state. Mr Schwarten: Doesn't God really own them? Mr WELLS: I try to keep theology and politics apart. The fact is that with respect to protected species the question does not arise. A protected species, particularly one protected under the Nature Conservation Act or under the Commonwealth's Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, is one to which the concept of ownership is not applicable. Consequently, it would be interesting to hear and examine more of the opinions that the honourable member has, but the legal situation is, firstly, if the species is protected the question of ownership is inapplicable and, secondly, species in national parks are the property of everybody in the community. I think this would be an opportune time to make the point that we should be proud of our national parks and proud of the fact that our heritage, perhaps to a great extent— Mr ROWELL: I rise to a point of order. I asked about freehold property. I was not referring to national parks. Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Mr ROWELL: I would be pleased if the minister would respond to the question I asked about freehold property. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Hinchinbrook will resume his seat. Mr WELLS: The member can be proud of his freehold property and the rest of Queensland will be proud of our national parks.

Drought Mr STRONG: I refer the Minister for Primary Industries and Rural Communities to a meeting that he held yesterday with bank and industry representatives to discuss the ongoing drought, and I ask: can he advise the House of the outcomes of that meeting? Mr PALASZCZUK: I thank the honourable member for his question and also acknowledge his great contribution to the Rural Queensland Council when we discussed the issue of drought and ways of addressing some of the serious problems facing our primary producers today. The pressure on primary producers comes in many forms, but an obvious one is servicing debts while continuing to meet day-to-day expenses. It is true that I convened a meeting of industry and representatives from the Commonwealth Bank, Westpac, National Australia Bank, ANZ and Suncorp Metway in Brisbane yesterday. The meeting was constructive and there is a 4724 Questions Without Notice 26 Nov 2002 willingness from all of the banks represented to work with their farm borrowers during this difficult period. One important area where support is increasingly sought is loan restructuring. Queensland's farming sector currently has loans totalling around $6.5 billion. The government, through its Queensland Rural Adjustment Authority, also lends to our primary producers. Last month I announced that QRAA was able to offer its drought affected farm borrowers an interest-only repayment. In terms of finance to assist producers when normal seasons return, QRAA offers concessional loans of up to $40,000 for cropping and up to $200,000 for restocking. QRAA is now in a position to take applications for these loans and make approvals, with the funds to be held until the seasons improve. It is this sort of action that will ensure that a recovery is hastened. Also following yesterday's meeting, I am pleased to say that the banks are also preparing to offer loan restructuring options and carry-on finance. I urge all drought affected primary producers who are having difficulty to contact their lender and I also encourage them to contact a DPI or community farm financial counsellor to assist them in any dealings with their banks. DPI farm financial counsellors assisted more than 1,500 Queensland primary producers last financial year. Queensland primary producers have done a lot of work to prepare for this drought. For instance, 8,000 Queensland farmers have invested more than $430 million in farm management deposits. Unfortunately, this scheme has been placed under a cloud in recent days after it was revealed that there were potential taxation implications for some of the FMD products offered by certain institutions. I appeal to the federal government to ensure that this situation is rectified. I would also like to acknowledge the work that our Federal Agriculture Minister, Warren Truss, is doing to assist in that area. However, I must say that this is a real worry for our farmers. There are 43,000 of them, with more than $2 billion invested, and they need that assistance.

Schoolies Festival Mr BELL: I refer the Premier to his reported comments regarding illegal actions by older persons during the present schoolies festival on the Gold Coast, and I ask— A government member: It wasn't you, Lex? Mr BELL: I was out there. I ask: will the Premier now support the initiative of the Surfers Paradise Community Association to convene a workshop next month at Griffith University's Gold Coast Campus to discuss the curbing of hooliganism and similar problems in Surfers Paradise and will he send a government representative to that workshop? Mr BEATTIE: I understand that a number of departments, including Families and Police, are already involved in this process. I make the point to the member—because this issue has been raised with me by a number of government members on the coast and I am delighted that he has raised it also—that we are keen to work through the issues with schoolies to make certain that we make it even better next year. Last week, when Matt Foley and I were opening the extension to Movie World, Gary Baildon indicated a very keen willingness to work with us to ensure that we improve schoolies week. The member identified the problem we have with schoolies and it has also been identified publicly. Most schoolies have a wonderful time and, yes, they get a bit boisterous on occasions, but they are young 17- and 18-year-olds making their transition from school to adulthood. They have a lot of fun. The problem is that there are some parasites—older people—who try to prey on and take advantage of them. On the Channel 10 news one night I saw someone being arrested for an offence. He had tattoos and looked older than I am. That gives members an idea of how old he was. He was a very old man indeed! He had ugly tattoos that I would never have. He was hardly a schoolie. If he was in school, we would have a real problem. Ms Bligh: Everyone gets a second chance in the system. Mr BEATTIE: Yes, everyone gets a second chance, and I want to make it clear that I support adult education. But this person was obviously inebriated and taking advantage. Mr Schwarten interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Yes, he was making a pest of himself. We need to be calm and pull back. As members know, my daughter went to schoolies on the Gold Coast. She had a good time. She was with responsible friends. They behaved appropriately and they had a wonderful time. She came back a little tired but, I think, benefited from the experience. 26 Nov 2002 Matters of Public Interest 4725

A number of government departments, probably five or six, are involved, namely, Police, Families, Transport, Liquor Licensing—a string of them. They are going to prepare a report that I will take to cabinet. We will hear what the Gold Coast City Council has to say and include that in our deliberations. We gave it $27,500 to support schoolies. We will look at schoolies next year to ensure that, if we can improve it, we will improve it. I believe we can. But let us not lose sight of the fact that there were extra police and extra arrests. That came about because there was a bit of a crackdown on these pests or parasites trying to take advantage of schoolies. This is an important tourism event and social occasion, and we need to ensure that our young people are protected. I thank all of the volunteers who worked very hard to support schoolies on the Gold Coast. They did a magnificent job and I thank them very much. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The time for questions has expired.

MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST Counter-Terrorism Measures Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (11.30 a.m.): Today I want to speak about the Beattie government's response to the terrorist threat and the terrorism alert. The world changed on 11 September 2001, and it changed again on 12 October 2002 when Australian lives were targeted by the despicable actions of the terrorist movement. Every Australian government, including the Beattie Labor government, now has a heavy responsibility to renew and improve all of our security arrangements. Governments around the country are taking extraordinary measures to protect their citizens but, foolishly, that is not the case here in Queensland. While other states are well advanced in their preparations to counter terrorist attacks, the Premier is sitting on his hands and saying that any response to the terror threat is a federal responsibility. How often do we see this Premier passing off anything that is difficult to the federal government. His Police Minister says that until the Police Commissioner says otherwise there will be no change to existing powers. That position would have some credibility except that we have heard it all before and we have seen how the Police Minister is just as susceptible to political backflips as is the Premier. We saw his hypocrisy as recently as yesterday when, after 12 months of defending the use of highly trained and experienced police officers in speed camera vans, apparently on the advice of the commissioner the minister now agrees with the opposition that they should instead be used more effectively in performing other policing and crime fighting duties. He now agrees with us that it is far better for police to be out investigating crime, preventing crime and taking part in mobile patrols than sitting for hours at a time in a white van behind a bush on the side of the road. It is hard not to come to the conclusion that the Police Commissioner's excuse is just that—an excuse to buy time to avoid making a hard decision or just to allow the minister and his government to do absolutely nothing. There is no doubt that countering the threat of terrorism is a hard issue. It is a hard issue that requires some hard decisions. There is no time for indecision but, to date, the Premier has been racked by indecision on what is perhaps the most important issue facing the state and the nation. The sad reality is that we cannot afford to be complacent about public safety here in Queensland. There are security and policing issues which must be addressed as a matter of urgency. The Queensland Police Service is this state's front line defence against crime and terrorism and those evil people who perpetrate these attacks against our society. In most communities around the state there is a police presence. Obviously, there is not an equivalent federal police presence in many parts of the state. If there is any illegal activity going on, or any threat of such activity, the Queensland police are usually the first to know. That is why the Queensland police, like their colleagues in other states, need all the tools to do the job. That is why the security threat is not just an issue for the federal government, as the Premier has claimed. That is why it is an issue for the Queensland government as well. But while the Premier is fiddling at the fringes, every other state is acting decisively. New South Wales is pushing ahead with new response capabilities and police powers and its new 70-strong Police Counter-Terrorism Coordination Command that will provide a central state coordination point on terrorist activity. We have no such body in Queensland. Where New South Wales has introduced new laws giving police the power to search suspicious people, property and vehicles without a warrant in the event of a terrorist attack or threat of attack—the same sort of powers that the Queensland police are now seeking through their union—the Beattie government has refused to act. 4726 Matters of Public Interest 26 Nov 2002

The Police Minister has claimed that police have not asked for these powers, but the head of the Police Union, Gary Wilkinson, told a very different story on ABC Radio yesterday. He reported—and it is no secret—that the police relationship with the minister leaves a lot to be desired, and it has been that way for 18 months. The worry is that it makes it difficult to be absolutely prepared for any threat when the minister does not even have a close and professional working relationship with the police under his charge, let alone enjoy their confidence and their trust. The rumour mill is speculating that the current minister may not last much longer in his portfolio. Hopefully, he might join a few other incompetent ministers who will be shifted. Quite aside from all his other failings that have been exposed by the opposition and others during his tenure, the fact that the minister still cannot work with the police in his employ in such a period of heightened security risk is reason alone for him to be replaced. Victoria is well advanced with its disaster response plans and is making sure that all sections of the community are informed of procedures in the event of an emergency. Queensland is dragging its heels on a coordinated response because the Premier is still not taking the threat seriously. In fact, there has been an alarming reduction in disaster management training for Queensland Emergency Services staff. The department's latest annual report revealed that only 1,828 of the more than 8,000 staff were trained in disaster management and mitigation this year, down from 2,101 last year. When the Beattie government should be ramping up the disaster program, it appears to be cutting it back to save a few lousy dollars because, as we all know, this government is broke after two successive budget deficits of $856 million and $894 million. Queensland Emergency Services workers need to be fully equipped to respond to any emergency or any threat of an emergency and we need a coordinated statewide plan. Western Australia has already indicated that it will urgently grant the federal government a counter terrorism reference of power which will ensure that terrorists can be charged as terrorists and not dealt with like other domestic criminals under inferior state laws. Here in Queensland the Beattie government has yet to act. While other states have long provided their police forces with telephone and data transfer interception powers, Queensland police still have to go cap in hand to the Commonwealth to apply for them. Organised crime and terrorism are inextricably linked and the Beattie government should review all options to stamp out any opportunity for either to flourish. The absence of state phone tapping powers is a weak link in the state's security arrangements and impedes the Police Service's ability to target organised crime. The current system, where Queensland police have only a limited capacity to apply to the federal police to use these powers, is clumsy at best and ineffective at worst. While the Beattie government panders to a minority group of civil rights activists, organised crime and other illegal acts are going undetected. The fact is that in the absence of these phone tapping powers the safest place for a crime lord or a terrorist to ply their evil trade is north of the Tweed River. The powers would obviously have to be closely regulated to ensure that they are used only to target those perpetrators who seek to harm our community and to ensure that the privacy of ordinary Queenslanders is respected absolutely. They are necessary because, without our own phone tapping powers, Queenslanders are a more vulnerable target for organised crime and other threats to our security. There are other concerns. Despite the excellent efforts of Australian hospitals and emergency departments throughout the time of the crisis in dealing with people who were repatriated to Australia, Professor Danny Cass, trauma committee vice-chairman with the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, has warned that about one-third of trauma patients with the potential to survive in the event of such an attack could die unless existing systems are upgraded. His warning was echoed by the college's chairman, Peter Danne, who said— If a catastrophe like the Bali bombing happened in Australia it would severely test our medical systems as we do not have the appropriate levels of trauma care in place to respond effectively. Former intelligence analyst and now of the Australian National University, Dr Ross Babbage, warned that health authorities have not yet grasped the potential for the new terror to produce thousands of casualties. Queensland's public hospital system, under the administration of the incumbent failed minister, has deteriorated to the dark days of the Goss government's administration, with budget blow-outs, closed wards and staff being put off. The only thing that the Beattie government has done to increase security at this parliament is to station an extra police officer or two at Parliament House, but no one—especially the opposition—has been told why these extra officers have been placed in this facility. I doubt if other staff members in the building have been told about this, either. It is a welcome backflip to 26 Nov 2002 Matters of Public Interest 4727 have these officers present after an incident a couple of months ago when an intruder was able to scale a fence and gatecrash a media conference. However, this is nowhere near an adequate statewide response. While other state governments are taking responsible and precautionary actions to counter the terrorist threat, it is clear that the Premier and his government are dangerously complacent about the terrorist alert. Now is not the time for any more excuses. It is not the time for inaction. It is not the time for the Premier to just shrug his shoulders and say, 'She'll be right, mate.' Why not do what some of the states in the United States are doing and tell people what they should be looking for and the sorts of things they should report to Crimestoppers? Now is the time for the Premier, his Police Minister and his government to take the terrorist warning seriously and act to protect Queenslanders, just as New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia have done. This government is more obsessed with its own propaganda than adequately looking after the safety and security of the people of Queensland.

Bulk-Billing, Cairns Ms BOYLE (Cairns—ALP) (11.39 a.m.): The people of Cairns cannot find GPs who bulk-bill. The reason they cannot find GPs who bulk-bill is that the numbers who do are getting fewer by the month. A constituent of mine, Mrs Fay Earl, raised this issue with me. Fay is now a pensioner and getting to an age where the body does not work as well as it used to. Unfortunately, she needs to see a GP from time to time and to undergo treatment. She is a lady who has more than done her time for Cairns and made a contribution to the community over many years. But she is a lady who is on a pension and finds great difficulty in having cash in advance to pay for GP services. And why should she? The Medicare system was designed so that she should be able to attend her GP and to have that consultation bulk-billed. Following her questions to me, I decided to investigate the situation to find the choice of GPs in Cairns who bulk-bill, and that is when I discovered how severe the problem is. In chatting to GPs in Cairns, I discovered that this is not a Cairns problem; it is a problem right across the state of Queensland. For over five years GPs have been pursuing the federal government in an effort to prove with statistics and figures the need for an increase in bulk-billing arrangements in the Medicare rebate for GPs, but this has fallen on deaf ears. This has a serious impact on GPs themselves and is a significant reason why general practice in medicine, an important service to the community, is less and less attractive as a career. GPs tell me that at the present level of Medicare rebate, in order to meet basic overheads—not fancy premises in a major inner-city building but ordinary premises in a suburb in Cairns—they would need to see a new patient once every six minutes for eight hours a day, five days a week in order to make a living. I ask members to think about that. When a person gets sick and finally makes an appointment to see their GP, do members think that that person's cancer can be diagnosed in six minutes? Do members think that a doctor can discover whether it is diabetes and inform the patient in six minutes of the appropriate tests as well as a regimen the person should follow? Whatever the health problem, particularly if investigation for a more serious problem is necessary, six minutes is not enough—nowhere near enough. The limited Medicare rebate is a dreadful impost on GPs and their accessibility to Queenslanders, but the worst of the impost is on the poor, the sick and the needy. The federal Health Minister, Kay Patterson, has been asked about this issue so many times and she comes out with figures that suggest that somewhere between 70 per cent and 75 per cent of GPs do bulk-bill. I suspect that that question is asked in a very particular fashion and that statistics are being played with—that is, that the question asked of GPs is if they ever bulk-bill and, as a result, that is where those figures of 70 per cent to 75 per cent come from. If GPs in Cairns and elsewhere in Queensland were asked if they regularly bulk-bill, the number would be very much less. In the last two years the state's public hospitals have seen an increase of about 10 per cent in their emergency waiting rooms. Most of these are category 4 and category 5 consultations that should be handled by a GP. What does it all mean? I have no doubt what it means. This is deliberate on the part of the federal government. This is, in fact, Prime Minister Howard deliberately eroding Medicare. He knows, as does his Health Minister, that this is an impost on the poor, the sick and the needy. He knows that there is a massive gap between the costs for a GP of running a surgery and the time that he needs to provide in order to diagnose and treat a patient effectively. He knows that throws more patients into the public hospital system and he cares not at all. I call on all members of this 4728 Matters of Public Interest 26 Nov 2002

House, especially those from the Liberal and National Parties, to put these questions to the Prime Minister loudly and to act for their constituents so that the Medicare rebate is lifted to a reasonable level not only to ensure the continuing number of GPs needed to service the people of Queensland but also to provide the access to health care that all Queenslanders and all Australians are entitled to.

Community Cabinet, Ipswich; Atkinsons Dam Mr LIVINGSTONE (Ipswich West—ALP) (11.44 a.m.): I draw to the attention of the House the very successful regional forum and cabinet meeting held in Ipswich over the weekend. This is the third time cabinet has come to my area but the first since my return to the parliament. I was able to be there with my colleagues and it was certainly a great experience. Mr Lucas interjected. Mr LIVINGSTONE: It was a great train ride. Thanks to this government, the $20-odd million rail museum is a great success. Mr Johnson interjected. Mr LIVINGSTONE: I will give those opposite credit. They supported it, but unfortunately they did not put any money in. It was all right to support it; we needed the cash. This government put up the cash. One of the most important things to come out of the regional forum on the weekend was the need to increase the size of the inlet into Atkinsons Dam. This has been a major problem for irrigators in the area for many years. Mr Johnson interjected. Mr LIVINGSTONE: I missed some of the member's interjection, but I will tell him about Atkinsons Dam because he might not know much about it even though it has been in National Party country for years. Having said that, the lack of water in Atkinsons Dam has been an absolute nightmare for the local irrigators. The problem is that the inlet running from the dam to Buaraba Creek have not been working successfully, and I acknowledge the work of Stephen Robertson, the current minister, and Henry Palaszczuk. When I first started talking to these ministers about these problems, both of them were only too happy to throw in a few dollars to make this possible. I certainly congratulate them for their support. However, the problem has been in Buaraba Creek for a long time. Because of the removal of sand and gravel and the construction of a few subdivisions in the area, the same volume of water that used to take five to six weeks now gets down the creek in about five days. Atkinsons Dam is filled by a man-made canal running under the road. When the creek is in flood, the man-made canal would fill up and the water would run through the pipes and fill Atkinsons Dam. Unfortunately, because the water gets away so quickly these days it has been mathematically impossible to fill the dam. In this case we are doing away with the pipes and putting in culverts to widen the intake so that when it does rain eventually these will be of great use to the local people. This issue affects not only the local irrigators but also a couple of very small caravan parks. One lady at the forum yesterday has a caravan park and a kiosk next to the dam. Because there has been no water in the dam for a long time, they have been doing it pretty enough. Tourists recently phoned her to book accommodation so they could do some waterskiing. However, she informed them that they needed grass skis because there was not a drop of water in the dam. This will certainly be good for those local businesses, because when tourists come to either fish or boat it helps many local businesses. There has also been great support from the local council of Esk. I mention Jean Bray who has been very supportive of this whole proposal. Selwyn Sippel, the chairman of the Lower Lockyer irrigators, came to me before the last election and asked me for support in relation to getting this problem resolved. I gave him an undertaking right there and then that I would go in to bat for him and expressed my desire for him to give me the best possible information so I could put up his arguments. He certainly did that and I very much appreciate his honesty all the way through. It is hoped that work will start on this some time in late January or early February, weather permitting. I hope these culverts are put in before rain, even though we would love it to start raining today. I missed the member for Gregory's interjection earlier; perhaps he was just speaking across the chamber. Until fairly recently, Atkinsons Dam has been in National Party heartland. This problem has existed for years and nobody has ever done anything about it. As a result of the redistribution at the last election, Atkinsons Dam is now in my electorate and we are delivering. 26 Nov 2002 Matters of Public Interest 4729

Drought Mr JOHNSON (Gregory—NPA) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (11.49 a.m.): I rise to speak about the current drought that is crippling not only western Queensland but also the majority of Queensland. Not too much of Queensland is not affected. Not too much of Australia is not affected. 2002 is the Year of the Outback. We who live in the outback will never forget the Year of the Outback because we have been affected by probably one of the worst droughts in 100 years. At the same time, rural producers are not able to make a contribution to the economy of this state, let alone their own economies, because they are trying to survive. They are trying to maintain their own livelihoods, sustain their families and educate their children away at boarding schools. They worry about how they will pay the school fees and they worry about how they will get the next dollar just to pay the tucker bill. That is how critical the situation is in western and rural Queensland at this very moment. Many producers in the south-west—around Charleville, Cunnamulla, Thargomindah and Quilpie and in the Barcoo, Diamantina, Winton and Boulia shires—are totally destocked. Many certainly do not have any breeding stock. Wool prices are not too bad at the moment, but nobody has any stock in order to take advantage of them. Graziers are fighting to keep alive what breeding stock they do have and they are wondering how they will keep them alive in the future. Graziers who are not on mulga properties have to buy feed or produce from somewhere else. That alone is an exorbitant cost. One of the great industries in western Queensland at the moment is the kangaroo industry. It is one industry that has been able to sustain many people who work and live in those western towns over a lot of years. These people work in the roo processing plants after the roos are brought in by the harvesters. We now have a problem in that people on the international stage are trying to shut down the industry because they believe we will shoot the roos out. Queensland currently has a population of something like 38 million kangaroos. We also have about a third of that number in sheep. We hear about government grants to big business all the time. When will this government give grants to some of these rural producers to pay the fuel bill, the tucker bill and the education bill? That would help them to take their minds off suicide or other negative ideas because they have been driven to the edge by people who do not want to understand. There is one guidance officer in Charleville and one in Longreach. The one in Longreach is just about to transfer to the coast. We should have at least four or five guidance officers in each of those places. There should be guidance officers in places such as Cunnamulla in the electorate of Warrego, which is in the grips of one of the worst droughts in living memory. Guidance officers should be available to talk to the local people and help them through the troubled times they are experiencing. We are approaching the festive season. What sort of festive season will these people have? We see every day the propaganda of this government. It is spending thousands of dollars on advertising. There is a private dentist in Charleville who wants to practise his business in places such as Tambo, Augathella, Blackall and Quilpie. Because he was under a bond with the state Health Department he has been told he has to pay back that money. He does not have that money. He wants to provide professional services to the people of the west—he is a very good dentist—but what does this government want to do? It wants to hunt him out. It will hunt him out over my dead body because he is a damn good dentist. At the end of the day, there is a vacancy for a dentist in Charleville but the government does not see fit to fill the position. Why? Because it cannot find one. There is a dentist there now who wants to practise privately and also fill the void for the public sector, but this government wants to play funny buggers with a man of very high professional capacity. It is not good enough. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Liddy Clark): I ask the member for Gregory to be careful with the language he uses. Mr JOHNSON: There is nothing wrong with what I am saying here, Madam Deputy Speaker. If you do not like it, I think you had better go and talk to some of those people out there. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: I ask the member for Gregory to use parliamentary language. Mr JOHNSON: They will tell you the facts, Madam Deputy Speaker. I appeal to the Minister for Police and Corrective Services to put in place extra WORC camps in those regions in order to 4730 Matters of Public Interest 26 Nov 2002 help some of these graziers with their programs to undertake maintenance work on their properties and assist in some of the areas of need— Time expired.

Education and Training Mrs MILLER (Bundamba—ALP) (11.54 a.m.): Yesterday I was proud to be an old girl of my high school, Bremer State High School. This was the school at which the launch of the white paper took place—a school with a proud commitment to education, to its school community and to the city of Ipswich. When I graduated from year 12 in 1975 I could not have dreamed that in 2002 I would be back at Bremer with the Premier, the Hon. Peter Beattie, the Minister for Education, the Hon. Anna Bligh, and the Minister for Employment, Training and Youth, the Hon. Matt Foley, for the historic announcement of the white paper on education and training reforms for the future. The white paper results from months of extensive consultation with the community, following on from the release of the green paper earlier this year. The government has been across the length and breadth of Queensland, including Ipswich, talking to people from all walks of life about the proposals. The white paper is a document that every parent in Queensland should read and understand. It is a document that, indeed, grandparents should also be familiar with, as these days many grandparents are also significant care givers to their grandchildren. Students should also read the document that has been especially printed for them. It is called Big changes for education and training. Essentially, the government is changing the compulsory school leaving age requirements and introducing new laws to require young people to participate in education and training after year 10. The new laws will make it compulsory for young people to stay at school until they have finished year 10 or have turned 16, whichever comes first. We will also reshape the education and training system to give all young people a better chance to succeed both at school or TAFE and in their future working lives. We will also give 15-, 16- and 17-year-olds more flexibility and greater choices to achieve a Senior Certificate or vocational educational qualifications. We will also provide greater opportunities for the 27 per cent of young people who currently do not finish year 12 to gain the skills and qualifications that they need to compete in the work force and to compete for entry to further study. We will also be creating a flexible education system in Queensland, a system that will prepare young people for a work force that requires multiskilling, flexibility and adaptability. The new laws will require young people to participate in education and training for a further two years following year 10, or until they have gained a Senior Certificate, or until they have gained a certificate III vocational education qualification, or until they have turned 17. The new laws will, however, provide exemptions for young people who have entered full-time work after they have completed year 10 or turned 16. In my own electorate, the Bremer Institute of TAFE and local high schools were so supportive of the proposals in the green paper that they did not wait for the release of the white paper to start their planning for the future. The Bremer Institute of TAFE, with the support of the director, Mike Guy, has already organised two workshops. The first workshop, held in May, was entitled 'Education and training reforms for the future—developing and piloting collaborative strategies'. It was attended by 60 participants from the Department of Employment and Training, executive directors of Education Queensland, representatives of the University of Queensland, local employers, including AMH and Bendigo Bank, community organisations, representatives of Ipswich City Council, principals of private and state secondary schools, institute directors of TAFE Queensland, staff of the Bremer Institute of TAFE and local members of parliament, including myself. A follow-up workshop was entitled 'Ideas to action'. It was held on 16 July this year. Other relevant stakeholders were brought into the process and models to enhance education pathways were discussed. If possible, a third workshop will be held later this year or in the early part of 2003 to further the work already done and to put together documentation in order that the Ipswich area be considered for one of the six trials. As members can see, in my area we do not rest on our laurels. When we see good policy and good programs we run with them. I know that the high schools in the electorate of Bundamba support the government's proposals. Having spoken with Ian Ferguson, principal of Redbank Plains State High, Barry Hopf, 26 Nov 2002 Matters of Public Interest 4731 principal of Bundamba Secondary College, and others, I know that there is support for the proposals and indeed a great eagerness to get on with the job. My area is very keen to hold a trial from semester 2 of 2003, and I will be putting the Ipswich case to be selected as a trial area very strongly to both the Minister for Education, Anna Bligh, and the Minister for Employment, Training and Youth, Matt Foley. There will be six trial areas from semester 2 of 2003. The trials will involve students who are in year 10 in 2003. They will include local initiatives to improve participation, retention and attainment of students in the senior phase of learning, including new or enhanced alternative programs. District youth achievement plans will also be implemented. A key component will also be the building of year 10 as a transition to the senior phase of learning, including the development of senior education and training plans and registering students with the Queensland Studies Authority. Like many other members of this House, I know how difficult it can be to go to year 12. My daughter Stephanie finished year 12 a couple of weeks ago. We know that it is a very stressful time. However, there will be more support given to young people under the new initiatives. One hundred youth support workers will be employed. A grants program will be established to improve participation, retention and attainment of 15- to 17-year-olds in learning. The use of mentors may also be part of this program. All of these initiatives are welcome in my electorate. Mr Ian Ferguson, who is also the president of the Queensland Secondary Principals Association, said yesterday— The Youth Support Workers should be of real benefit to schools and TAFEs wanting to retain students. We thank him for his wonderful comments. Time expired.

Ms P. Brown and Ms G. Ahrens; Gladstone Hospital Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (11.59 a.m.): I rise to commend two very wonderful people in my electorate and, in doing so, raise what has become a contradictory issue. Pam Brown has worked at the Gladstone Hospital since 1970. Gay Ahrens has worked there since 1975. I understand Pam is qualified in general nursing, midwifery and child health, while Gay is qualified as a general nurse and as a midwife. Both of these ladies, who admitted that they had been considering retirement, were recently offered voluntary early retirement and accepted those redundancies. Pam and Gay have contributed to nursing at the Gladstone Hospital and provided service to the community in a wonderful way over those many years. They have seen many changes in the hospital system. They have had highlights in their own experiences. Ms Ahrens said that she started the first chemotherapy clinic. I know that, whilst there have been some problems recently with oncology doctors at the hospital, many, many patients have appreciated having chemotherapy available at the local hospital. Pam Brown really enjoyed working in the community health sector of the hospital. As I said, both of them have contributed to a wonderful atmosphere at the hospital up until the past few years. I wish both ladies a happy time. They are both going to be travelling. Gay is going to travel around Australia with her husband, and Pam is coming down to see her children who live here. However, the irony of their VERs is that recently the children's ward was closed. The official line was that it was closed due to a lack of staff. The children's ward has been amalgamated with the maternity ward. That raises a question in the community's mind about appropriateness. Young children, when they are sick, can be quite grizzly; when they are recuperating, they want to make a noise and get around and do things. There is no play area for them in the midwifery area. There are concerns about cross-contamination and infection control. While the staff at the hospital do a wonderful job—and I have to commend them for that—they are being asked to do more with fewer staff and in more difficult circumstances every day. As I said, the official line was that the children's ward was closed due to a lack of staff. Whilst I commend Pam and Gay for the contribution that they have made to health services in Gladstone, the closure of the ward begs the question as to why VERs are being offered when services are deteriorating and wards are being closed due to the unavailability of suitably qualified staff. 4732 Matters of Public Interest 26 Nov 2002

The other issue that I want to raise in relation to the hospital is again a contradiction. We have a very good community in the Gladstone electorate, as I believe exists in all of our electorates across Queensland. Woolworths has been fundraising for the Royal Children's Foundation throughout Queensland year after year. In my electorate, the stores made significant contributions to the grand total. The Kin Kora store raised $14,768, the Boyne Island store collected $7,992, and the Gladstone Valley store contributed $9,060 to this fund. An article in the local paper highlighted the fundraising by Woolworths. I congratulate all of the staff of the stores in my electorate on their work. They offer fundraising items on the counter that people can buy. They are very quick to engage customers to think about purchasing those items and supporting this very worthy cause. As a result of that fundraising, Gladstone Hospital will receive funding to contribute towards printed fireproof privacy screens for the paediatric ward. That must be the new paediatric ward, because the old paediatric ward—the proper one, the one that is designed for young children with a play area and all of those attributes that are necessary for a speedy and sound recuperation of young people—has been closed and it is now incorporated in the maternity ward. I assume that the privacy screens are for that new area. The hospital has also accepted from McDonald's a big screen TV—again for the paediatric ward. As I said, that ward has been closed. I call on the Minister for Health to reopen the paediatric ward. It is equipped to provide not only good clinical work but also psychological and emotional support for the young children who have to be hospitalised. Also, that ward provides rooming-in areas for the parents, which are not available in the maternity ward where the children have been placed. There are facilities in the paediatric ward where children can play appropriately. They are not available in the maternity ward. I call on the Health Minister to reopen that ward and to not dispense with good, qualified staff but to enhance our health services in Gladstone. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr McNamara): Order! Before calling the honourable member for Nudgee, I wish to take a moment to recognise the presence in the gallery of parents, students and teachers from Southern Cross College in the electorate of the Speaker, Redcliffe.

Education and Training Mr NEIL ROBERTS (Nudgee—ALP) (12.05 p.m.): I feel very fortunate to have played a part in the education and training reforms process by attending a number of green paper consultation forums on behalf of the government. There were 39 forums held across the state with more than 8,000 people attending, including school and TAFE students, young people not in learning or work, teachers from schools—both state and non-state—TAFE teachers, parents and interested members of the community. The extensive consultation also included ministerial regional forums and the distribution of the green paper for comment. As I travelled throughout the state, I was amazed at the number of people participating in the forums and the thoughtful responses and fresh ideas that they contributed. The collective contribution throughout the consultation process was invaluable. The majority of students who attended the forums were keen to continue with their senior education but acknowledged that they all knew a number of young people who had either dropped out of school or were in danger of doing so. The forum sessions with the young people who were not in learning or work were particularly enlightening, if not a little confronting at times. These young people said consistently that they felt as though they did not belong at school, that they were not good at academic subjects and that it was best to get out of the system as soon as they possibly could. What stands out most in my mind from those forums is the young people's call for increased flexibility in their education. The message was consistent: we are not all the same, give us the options to learn in an environment we feel comfortable in, and let us learn what is relevant to us. When asked what would have made them stay at school, most of them said that a range of more flexible learning options and more vocational subjects would have made all the difference. These young people need to be engaged. They want to learn. They need to see some benefit to learning and they need to feel supported in that process. The government has listened to those young people and through the education and training reforms for the future white paper, we are taking steps to make sure that we can keep young people engaged and give them the support that they need to keep learning and to be well trained as they make plans to enter the work force. To keep young people engaged, we need to provide greater flexibility to meet their needs. Many schools already provide a range of flexible 26 Nov 2002 Matters of Public Interest 4733 options such as flexible timetables to allow students to undertake vocational programs or work. TAFE provides senior schooling for young people in an adult environment. But there is much more that we can do. To complement existing courses and to provide for more young people in TAFE, we will review the range of vocational and prevocational courses to make sure that they cater for the needs of 15- to 17-year-olds. We will also provide more flexible options by continuing our support for the five alternative trial sites within state schools and supporting schools that offer educational programs that will re- engage young people who are at risk of disengaging from the learning process. We will also continue the Youth Access Program, trial a new range of TAFE courses and continue to address completion rates in TAFE and other vocational education and training. To make sure that young people who study vocational education in schools leave with qualifications that are highly regarded by industry, we will make sure that courses have a strong component of workplace experience and ensure that schools deliver quality vocational education and training that satisfies the requirements of industry. These reforms to Queensland's education and training system will provide industry with better skilled workers. Today's students cannot learn just for the sake of learning; it is vital that learning prepares them for the world of work, particularly for those who will not be going on to further education. Young people need to have developed the skills that industry requires. Under the reforms, all young people beyond year 10 or once they have turned 16 will be engaged in education and training in a range of settings for two years, or until they achieve a Senior Certificate or Certificate III vocational qualification, or until they turn 17. There will be exemptions for young people who enter into full-time work after they have completed year 10 or turned 16. As the minister outlined, school based apprenticeships and traineeships will be expanded. Commonwealth incentives for private employers in rural, remote and indigenous communities who take on school based apprentices and trainees will be topped up. Young people need to obtain year 12 or some kind of substantial vocational or university qualification to get a good job and earn a decent income. The work force has changed from a jobs for life situation—and they are certainly hard to come by these days. I congratulate the Premier and ministers Bligh and Foley on their foresight in putting forward the education and training reforms for the future.

Emergency Services Mr FLYNN (Lockyer—ONP) (12.10 p.m.): We witnessed significant damage and loss of property during the recent bushfires in the Lockyer Valley and Toowoomba areas. Throughout this time we have witnessed great professionalism, ability and courage by emergency services personnel and local residents. There is no doubt that all personnel involved did all they could—and more—with what they had. However, what became abundantly clear during the danger period and what was also highlighted in the debriefing is that communications are a problem. Having been an emergency services worker, I understand the operational confusion that can exist in the heat of the moment—and I mean no pun—but two days later it appeared that the command post was never at any time aware of what troops there were, where they were and what they were doing. This is unacceptable. With modern technology communicating with outer space, I find it totally incomprehensible that within 100 kilometres of Brisbane we have problems with radio communications and the recording of information. I have consulted with all emergency departments involved, including the police disaster coordinator, and the message I have received from all, especially residents involved, is that communications must be improved. I believe that all parties involved sincerely believe that what they did was best, but no-one could possibly believe that the authorities would not do what is best for Australians. Warm and fuzzy statements about the workers involved are fine and well deserved, but please do not ignore information resulting from such debriefings simply because they may highlight deficiencies in the system. I have been involved in residents' meetings in areas affected by the fires. Whilst in general they appreciate the incredible work of our emergency workers, they all criticise communications and the lack of dialogue with locals. It is clear that locals must be involved in preplanning of counter-disaster issues and also in debriefings. To this extent, I will be approaching the Minister for Emergency Services to engage in a constructive meeting with about 100 residents directly affected by fire. This is not a criticism of the government. It is not a criticism of the emergency services involved. It is a criticism of the system which appears to miss the point that if we are directing an emergency operation we must have sufficient and adequate communications. Directly as a result of the debriefing it was admitted that communications were an issue—a problem. We are talking about a location within approximately 4734 Matters of Public Interest 26 Nov 2002

100 kilometres of the CBD. We are talking about the sale of Telstra. Let us hope to God that we do not sell Telstra, because it does not have it right—let alone radio communications for emergency services within Queensland and within 100 kilometres of the CBD. Please, let us get it right. We know the government wants to get it right. We know that the emergency services did everything they could under the circumstances, but they cannot talk to each other, deliver information or allow the command control posts to know where they are and what they are doing without proper radio communications. This has been an issue for years in all the emergency services, including the police. Can we please do something to get it right within such a small distance of the capital of this state?

Racing Industry Mr LAWLOR (Southport—ALP) (12.15 p.m.): On 6 November the member for Mansfield and I made statements deploring the failure of the coalition government to give the Queensland racing industry access to gaming machine revenue. Dr Watson said that those statements were either deliberately disingenuous or made from ignorance. He said— They in fact blindly repeated bleatings from sections of the racing industry to cover up the failure of the industry at the time to make submissions or representations to the review of Queensland gaming machine regulatory arrangements, the 1996 white paper which I authored. One of his points was— ... at no time after the public release of the white paper and the considerable public debate on its contents did the racing industry or any part of it make representations to me regarding access to gaming machine revenue. Let me put a few facts on the table. I will quote from correspondence, the first being a letter from the then chairman of the TAB, the late Bob Templeton, to Dr Watson dated 30 September 1996. The letter states— The Queensland Commission of Audit recently identified the TAB and the Office of Gaming Regulation's gaming machine leasing business as being at the top of a list of early candidates for privatisation. We expect that one of the key concerns for the government in the process of privatising these assets is to ensure that it maximises the sale price. The following paper advances a series of views on the potential to add value to the TAB and the government's gaming machines assets by integrating both businesses. The letter concluded— We hope that the paper provides a framework for you to promote the issues involved and for us to compile a business case which could form the basis for transferring the statewide gaming machine network to the TAB. The next letter was to Russell Cooper, the then Minister for Racing, on 21 February 1997. The letter stated— The recent agreement between hotels, licensed clubs and the government on the future of gaming machines presents the TAB with a number of opportunities. These opportunities do not stand alone. They also expose us to a number of threats, and the government to the prospect of missing the chance to capitalise the value of its gaming machine licences. The letter went on to set out those threats and also commented on the TAB's asset value, as follows— The TAB has an opportunity to benefit from both Keno and gaming machine restructuring. We will be a bit player in the Keno market which will be controlled by Jupiters. Our potential to exploit this market will be limited severely by Jupiters. Meanwhile, gaming machines will provide opportunities which would be far greater if we could take tax advantages from depreciation or if we controlled the total market. A decision by the government to spread the gaming machine operating licences over a number of operators (TAB, Golden Casket, Jupiters and others) raises some interesting questions about delivering public assets to private entities without extracting full value. Of course, we know that that happened. Another letter dated 24 February 1997 is a handwritten letter—and I will table these letters—from Russell Cooper to Joan Sheldon, the Deputy Premier at the time, saying— Please excuse the informality but I am writing this on a plane from Tokyo to Hokkaido. As you will be aware, the TAB is considering the issue of privatisation and as such commissioned a feasibility study by the Macquarie Bank. This bank made a presentation to the board last Wednesday. As a result, the board has written to me. Their letter is attached. Their letter to me raises considerable concerns, as you will see, and the issue of gaming looms large. If we are to remain competitive as a racing industry and if the TAB is to remain viable then the whole gaming/racing issue has to be considered together and in the best interests of Queensland as I know you will appreciate. To this end I believe it is imperative that TAB chairman Bob Templeton and the CEO Dick McIlwain meet with the Under Treasurer Doug McTaggart and appropriate Treasury officials to discuss the issue as a matter of urgency this week, if at all possible. I will contact you on my return. The final letter, again, is from the chairman of the TAB to Mr Cooper on 2 May 1997. Among other things it states— We are extremely concerned that Treasury, and the QOGR in particular, will move quickly to licence multiple gaming machine operators under the new bill. Any attempt to licence multiple operators will pre-empt the findings of 26 Nov 2002 Matters of Public Interest 4735 the current investigation into the future of the TAB, and deliver a significant blow to the government's interests in realising some value from these licences by incorporating them in the possible sale of the TAB. The damage that will be caused by any attempt to pre-empt the decision on the sale of the TAB is even more obvious since the announcement by the Carr government of the sale of the New South Wales TAB. The New South Wales government is to include all of the state's gaming machine monitoring and associated linked services in the New South Wales TAB privatisation. This situation must apply in Queensland ... We strongly urge you to intervene in any attempt by Treasury and the QOGR to pre-empt the current review of alternative ownership options for the TAB ... I table those letters. This correspondence exposes the incompetence, hypocrisy and duplicity of the coalition in relation to the racing industry. They had the opportunity to incorporate the gaming machine revenue and they gave it away.

Land Clearing Mr HOBBS (Warrego—NPA) (12.19 p.m.): I wish to inform Queenslanders of the underhanded and sneaky way this Labor government is using the court system to harass land- holders and rural workers. I am pleased that the Minister for Natural Resources is in the chamber. I hope he sees this as a genuine effort by me to explain some of these issues. Department of Natural Resources enforcement officers are using every trick in the book to secure convictions for breaches of the Vegetation Management Act and are taking advantage of the good nature and hospitality of country people. No-one would support the irresponsible management of our land. Land-holders go through a careful and responsible process to obtain a vegetation management permit. I refer to one example where the land-holder did everything he could to comply with the process. He states— During July August and early September 2000, there was a lot of media and press releases from the Government with regard to implementing tree clearing guidelines, and that a permit would be required to clear native vegetation on all land including freehold land. We were intending to pull some virgin timber around this time and had asked a neighbour to work with us where we had our own dozer and they provided the other to pull about 1,000 acres. I was concerned about the media releasing details of what was to come, being the Proclamation of the Vegetation Management Act of Parliament. Prior to this date I was liaising with senior officers of the Department of Natural Resources and Mines (D.N.R.) in Roma, Dalby, and Warwick, with regard to what to do if the legislation was introduced whilst we were pulling. We wanted to pull approximately 1,000 acres and had the opportunity to do this; as a neighbour was travelling home through our property with their dozers and we could hire one of theirs to pull with our own machine. We had these senior officers visit our property at an earlier date, when they actually drew up a tree-clearing plan for the whole of our property with our assistance, long before it was a requirement from D.N.R. They all indicated to me in their own words to keep pulling as we had a plan and that we were pulling within their guidelines and that there was no timber species that was endangered and that a permit would be approved anyway. These D.N.R personnel had not been briefed on what procedures were required, being what forms would need to be supplied or any details whatsoever with regard to making an application to clear. In other words there was total confusion in D.N.R. for a month as to what was required. A permit would be approved if and when it was required to clear according to our Tree Clearing Plan. They did suggest that if we had a break down or got wet weather to hold off and apply for a permit. I made notes in my Diary of these phone calls. We started pulling on 15 September and later we found out on the news that the Vegetation Management Act was proclaimed in parliament and that there were restrictions on tree clearing in Queensland. In February 2002 I had a phone call from D.N.R requesting a meeting with me at our property to discuss anomalies with the tree clearing maps. I agreed to meet with them on the next day to what I thought was to correct some anomalies with their maps. I felt that they needed my help as I have lived here all of my life, and I was made to think that they needed my assistance, knowing my local knowledge of the district. How wrong was I. Two of them came out and I invited them in to our home and made them a cup of tea and they produced maps and started questioning me and it was after about two hours that I realised things were not right when I was asked for my drivers licence to identify myself. I then realised that he was talking into a tape recorder and that I had told him things that did not relate to the original investigation. I was not made aware that our conversation was being recorded. This has led to me being charged for Tree Clearing without a Permit for clearing 49.7 H.A. of the 1,000 acres. Technically, we were clearing without a permit for the few days to complete the 1,000 acres, because of their inefficiencies of not being able to issue a permit. I was in fact consulting with them to prevent exactly what has happened. This is all happening at a time when we are under a lot of stress with the drought and the extra work and worry to keep our cattle alive and maintaining the viability of the property. We have had a lot of extra expenditure because we have had to lay about 14 km of poly pipe to provide water for our cattle. We have never been in water trouble before in all of the big droughts in the past, and now we have twelve out of sixteen dams dry, some of which have never looked like going dry in the past. In a drought like this we are so busy just ensuring our cattle survive without the stress and expenditure a court case can bring with it ... they have not provided us with the evidence they are bringing against me, which by law they are required to do. It is all delaying tactics to cost more and bully small people like me to plead guilty, pay the fine and become an environmental vandal that the Government can use in their Statistics. 4736 Matters of Public Interest 26 Nov 2002

The issue here is that the land-holder could be facing court costs in excess of $100,000 without the case going to an appeal. If it does, those costs could double. Not one endangered tree was destroyed and he had an appropriate plan at the time.

Queensland Health Ms NELSON-CARR (Mundingburra—ALP) (12.24 p.m.): I am forever amazed at the opposition's negative focus on Queensland Health. Its persistence in painting a bleak picture of a service that is probably one of the best in the world is not only outrageous and ill-informed but it actually frightens the general community and future clients of our health service. They seize on one issue, blow it out of all proportion, sensationalise it and then sound alarm bells ringing in the hearts and minds of the public. The opposition pursues this one issue day after day, illustrating its propensity for fantasy and sensationalism and it is generally at the expense of the person central to the allegation, because it cannot find a real flaw in a public health system that is the envy of the rest of Australia. Mrs Carryn Sullivan: It's a common trend. Ms NELSON-CARR: I thank the member. Whatever happened to positive comment, optimism and truth? Mr Speaker, let me tell you the truth. Picture this: while one story might make a front-page sensation, every day in Queensland Health $11.39 million is spent on public health services and $1 million is spent on rebuilding and maintaining health facilities. Every day in Queensland 479 women are screened for breast cancer, 3,180 vaccines are distributed, 92 babies are born, 2,035 people are treated in accident and emergency, 6,927 patients are cared for in public hospitals, 24,217 outpatients receive services, 904 people receive day-only procedures in a hospital, 1,090 adults receive free dental treatment every day, 904 school-age children complete dental treatment, 7,120 meals are delivered to people at home, and every day 10,375 hours of respite care are provided through respite centres or in people's homes. This is truly amazing. What about the good news the Minister for Health announced today? In Queensland the cervical cancer vaccine was developed. The vaccine was 99.7 per cent effective in producing immunity to the human papilloma virus which causes most cases of cervical cancer. These results have huge implications for cancer prevention. It was developed at the Princess Alexandra Hospital by Professor Ian Frazer and his group at the Centre for Immunology and Cancer Research, and it was a joint venture with the University of Queensland and CSL Limited, the Australian vaccine company. Did members know that cervical cancer kills about 250,000 women worldwide every year, and that includes more than 300 Australians? Surely this warrants front- page sensation? What about our mental health resources? Queensland Health's $100 million Capital Works Program has provided extra mental health beds in new facilities across the state. This is a record. Importantly, more services are being provided in hospitals and communities close to where patients come from. An investment of $11.4 million has meant that there are new community care units at Windsor, Mountain Creek, Pine Rivers, Redcliffe and Charters Towers. This enables patients to stay in touch with families, friends, carers and community support. This is a record. There have been major mental health capital investments in Townsville, Wolston Park and Baillie Henderson. The Beattie government has created more than 350 new mental health worker jobs. In this year's budget, we have continued our commitment with an allocation of an additional $10.6 million for 55 community based staff and an extra 16 forensic positions. The 10 Year Mental Health Strategy for Queensland 1996 has recommended a total of 4,436 positions, which includes clinical and administrative provisions, for mental health services by the year 2006. Queensland began the National Mental Health Strategy with the lowest per capita spending on mental health services of all jurisdictions. With one in five Australians expected to experience a mental health illness at some stage during their life, surely this is good news. Surely this is what Queenslanders want to hear. Queenslanders want to have faith in their public health system. I call on the opposition to stick to the facts, stick to the truth and stop frightening the public with sensationalist rubbish and instead support a system that does a power of good for all Queenslanders. There is more. In addition, Queensland's per capita expenditure on community based services has increased 222 per cent since 1992-93. Queensland Health has also allocated $6,057 million to organisations across the state for mental health services and for programs. I ask them to support Queensland Health and to stop rubbishing it. 26 Nov 2002 Property Agents and Motor Dealers Amendment Bill 4737

PROPERTY AGENTS AND MOTOR DEALERS AMENDMENT BILL Hon. M. ROSE (Currumbin—ALP) (Minister for Tourism and Racing and Minister for Fair Trading) (12.30 p.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— That leave be granted to bring in a bill for an act to amend the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000. Motion agreed to.

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

Second Reading Hon. M. ROSE (Currumbin—ALP) (Minister for Tourism and Racing and Minister for Fair Trading) (12.31 p.m.): The objective of this bill is to amend the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 to address ongoing viability of the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Claim Fund. The claim fund was established under the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 to compensate consumers who have suffered loss as a result of contraventions of that act. In relation to purchases of residential property, such contraventions have traditionally been committed by licensed real estate agents or by people pretending to be licensed real estate agents. The claim fund has been available to compensate consumers for these losses. Such contraventions include trust account fraud and purchase of a listed property by or on behalf of agents themselves or their associates. Before I introduced amendments to the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act in September 2001, marketeering was widespread. This practice exposed many consumers to potential loss because of the inherent deception of marketeering. Over recent months, the claims on the claim fund arising from losses attributed to marketeering have increased significantly. As at 1 November 2002, 540 such claims have been lodged with the Office of Fair Trading. Based on those claims received and for which the loss allegedly involved has been quantified, the potential financial liability of the fund presently stands at around $36.8 million. It is important to note, however, that only one of these 540 claims relates to alleged contraventions under the new Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000. That claim relates to a transaction which resulted in consumer detriment of just over $500. Effectively then, all of the claims relate to pre-July 2001 transactions, under the old Auctioneers and Agents Act 1971. The PAMD Act provides that people may be eligible to make a claim on the claim fund arising from the activities of a person 'acting as' a real estate agent. This is designed to protect people who are ripped off by someone pretending to be, or passing themselves off as, a licensee, or perhaps by a licensee whose renewal was sent in late and so was not licensed at the time the transaction occurred. In recent decisions, the courts have interpreted this provision in a way that could not have been anticipated—or was intended—at the time the legislation was drafted. They have allowed claims arising from the activities of the Dudley Quinlivans of this world because they deemed they were effectively performing the duties of real estate agents, even though they never presented themselves as licensed real estate agents. The claim fund was never intended to insure consumers against losses from failed investments or schemes of deception like marketeering. Given that the court's interpretations do not accord with the intent of the act, it is up to parliament to correct them. That is what this bill does. In so doing, it protects the Queensland taxpayer from claims potentially in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Taxpayers have a right to expect that their taxes will go to pay for hospitals, schools and police, not to compensate mainly interstate investors for paper losses that have not been realised and for which they are receiving a taxation benefit. Queensland taxpayers should not be expected to compensate consumers for losses they have incurred from investment decisions. In drafting this legislation, the government has been as fair as possible. Those claims already determined by the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Tribunal are being paid in full. The vast majority of remaining existing claims relate to properties purchased as investments. Investors who fail to carry out due diligence cannot expect that poor investment decisions will be underwritten by the taxpayer. Even where investment advice is provided by licensed advisers, as in the financial 4738 Property Agents and Motor Dealers Amendment Bill 26 Nov 2002 sector where investment advisers are licensed by the Commonwealth, the investor wears the risk associated with bad advice. Indeed, even where the advice has been provided by the Commonwealth government itself, as with the sale of Telstra 2 shares, investors have no claim against the taxpayer for their losses. Accordingly, no marketeering claims relating to investment property will be entertained. This applies to existing as well as future claims. The government will still protect consumers purchasing their family home. Where the marketeering claim relates to the purchase of an owner-occupied dwelling, it can still proceed, but with some provisos. First, the claim will only be paid on realised loss, that is, where the property has been sold. Claimants will have six years from date of purchase to realise their loss. This reflects the reality that the property market fluctuates, and even marketeered properties may well end up being worth more than what was paid for them. Second, the amount of claim payable will be capped at $35,000. The cap will discourage a rash of fire sales by owner- occupiers keen to access the claim fund. It will also be an incentive to help keep legal costs down and prevent taxpayers' funds being funnelled into the pockets of lawyers. Investors expect to collect on capital gains and take advantage of the taxation benefits from negatively gearing their losses. Surely then they must not expect to double dip by having these losses compensated by Queensland taxpayers. Those who fell victim to marketeers can still access the courts to sue marketeers and anyone else in the marketeering chain responsible for deception leading to losses: lawyers, valuers and banks. Many cases have already been lodged with the courts and this bill will not affect them. Another very important part of this bill is those amendments which make it clear that where a claim is paid in relation to a contravention committed by a corporation, the executive officers of that corporation will be personally liable to reimburse the claim fund. This clarification will also have retrospective effect and will apply to all relevant claims that have been made, or could have been made, prior to 25 November 2002. This applies despite any court or tribunal decision or determination made or to be made in relation to any claim or potential claim and reflects the original intention of the PAMD Act. In closing, I remind the House that this government has taken the fight right up to the property marketeers. No other jurisdiction in Australia has comparable legislation, incorporating substantial powers, heavy penalties, and consumer rights to get information and to withdraw from contracts. The success of the new legislation is reflected in the fact that only one of the 540 marketeering claims received to date relates to activity since commencement of the anti- marketeering provisions of the new Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000. But there comes a time when consumers have to take responsibility themselves. If consumers choose to ignore blunt government warnings—in big bold capital letters—contained in a statement attached to every property contract, if they choose to let their cooling-off rights slip by and to make big investments with little research, then they cannot expect government to pick up the tab and pay compensation. There are plenty of great investments to be made in the Queensland property market. I am sure most members of this House have a substantial part of their life's savings committed to residential property in this state. As with any investment, the advice is to do some basic market research before parting with hard-earned money. Just ten minutes checking out the property classifieds in the local newspaper or ringing around real estate agents can save thousands of dollars. Warning statements attached to every contract cannot be clearer: they tell people not to sign the contract without reading and understanding the warning. They are told not to sign if they feel pressured to do so. The statements go even further. They advise people to— ¥ obtain independent legal advice and an independent valuation of the property, and provide contact points ¥ exercise extreme caution in accepting the legal advice of anyone referred to them by the seller or agent ¥ ensure the purchase price is fair ¥ arrange for a search for the property's sales history from the Department of Natural Resources. People have to take responsibility for their own actions. This government has provided consumers with the best level of protection in Australia and will continue to crack down on fraudsters. However, we will not impose additional costs or burdens 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4739 on Queensland mums and dads to provide compensation for failed investment decisions. Nor will we be regulating residential property prices, or legislating to force people to buy legal services and line lawyers' pockets. I commend the bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Horan, adjourned.

APPROPRIATION BILL (No. 2) APPROPRIATION (PARLIAMENT) BILL (No. 2) Second Reading (Cognate Debate) Resumed from 22 October (see p. 3853). Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (12.42 p.m.): The cognate debate on the Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2002 and the Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 2002 provides a timely opportunity to draw attention to the fact that Labor's fiscal management over the past two years has been appalling. This debate will also enable the House to examine this Labor government's lack of economic vision due to its lack of vision and its incompetence when it comes to managing the budget for this state. Examining these two bills enables this parliament to consider once again how the government has managed—or rather mismanaged—its budget. Firstly, let honourable members look at what has been presented with these unforeseen expenditure statements. This all follows on from recent news that the Queensland budget deficit has blown out to nearly $900 million. In fact, it is $896 million—almost double what was forecast by the Treasurer only five months ago. Labor's inability to be a sound fiscal manager creates in itself economic difficulties. Queenslanders are witnessing looming difficulties. As evidence of this there are the poor investment returns and the forecasting by the Treasurer on investment returns—that is, for the past two financial years we have seen forecasts of 7.8 per cent plus and 7.5 per cent plus. It is the forecasting and the way that the budget is predicted and managed that we criticise, because it is just sheer folly to be forecasting 7.8 per cent and 7.5 per cent returns when all the indicators are that that long-term trend is not likely to be achieved in the current investment climate. The burgeoning enterprise bargain payments have created another problem for the government. It could have avoided it if it had not been involved in the sheer bullyboy tactics and confrontations with the unions, not turning up to meetings and all the other publicity stunts it went on with. At the same time we have the long-lasting drought, which is having a great effect on Australia and Queensland. The government's ability to encourage business has been tested. In fact, it does not seem to be able to encourage any businesses to Queensland unless it shells out some $64 million of free grants. It does not seem to have any economic plan or any targeted regional plan to attract businesses to Queensland without having to buy jobs and buy businesses. The bills under debate today provide supplementary appropriations for unforeseen expenditure in two amounts. In the Appropriation Bill the Treasurer is looking to extract an amount of $371,786,000 from the consolidated fund for various departments as outlined in the associated schedule. With regard to the Appropriation (Parliament) Bill, the Treasurer is seeking approval to extract an amount of $4,121,000 from the consolidated fund for the Legislative Assembly and Parliamentary Service for the financial year commencing 1 July 2001. The amounts sought for unforeseen expenditure include the Office of the Governor, $44,000; the Office of the Ombudsman and the Office of Information Commissioner, $60,000; the Department of the Premier and Cabinet, $291,000; the Treasury Department, $272.089 million; the Department of Education, $32.444 million, Arts Queensland, $12.149 million; the Department of Health, $23.572 million; the Department of Police, $13.149 million; the Environmental Protection Agency, $1.9 million; the Department of Families, $864,000; Disability Services Queensland, $1.9 million; the Department of Tourism, Racing and Fair Trading, $1.231 million; the Department of Natural Resources and Mines, $5.52 million; the Department of Local Government and Planning, $14,000; and finally the Department of Emergency Services, $6.53 million. I have already mentioned the total amounts of these unforeseen expenditures. These appropriations apply to departmental outputs, equity adjustments and administered items of the various departments and to the Legislative Assembly and Parliamentary Service respectively. These supplementary payments, whilst required by departments and the Legislative Assembly and Parliamentary Service to operate and function, are outside the estimates committee process and thereby diminish the parliament's ability to closely scrutinise the appropriation and ascertain whether taxpayers are obtaining value for money. Similarly, the accompanying schedule does not identify policy areas or program areas requiring supplementary 4740 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 funding. No detail was provided by the government, and the Treasurer was remiss in not outlining how the money was spent or outlining why government departments and the Legislative Assembly required this supplementary funding. However, the Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) is consistent with the convention which ensures that appropriation for the Legislative Assembly and the Parliamentary Service is separate from the supplementary appropriation bill for government departments. The north Queensland parliamentary sittings saw an unhealthy smudging of the roles of the executive government and the Speaker when the Premier sought operational and budgetary control over the north Queensland parliamentary sitting. That is something that we have mentioned before. We do not believe that is healthy for the way in which this parliament operates. In future we believe that the operation of any parliament outside of this particular precinct or campus should continue to be totally and fully under the control of the Speaker. In discussing these cognate bills, it is important to go back to the state budget which was delivered only five months ago. In delivering my budget reply speech I advised the parliament that the Treasurer had underestimated state debt by more than $400 million by conveniently forgetting to mention the massive losses of government owned corporations. On that day I put the Treasurer on notice: I advised that I would ensure that the Beattie government did not forget its gross underestimation of its true budgetary position. Queensland deserves better government and it is my duty as the Opposition Leader to ensure that Queenslanders know that their state government is letting them down badly when it comes to financial management. Using the whole-of-government figures, Queensland's true financial position was an $883 million operating deficit and a $200 million cash deficit. To reiterate, in June this year the Treasurer delivered to Queensland exploding debt, massive infrastructure spending cuts, nil returns on the superannuation savings of hundreds of thousands of workers—and we found out that that nil return was actually minus five per cent—a total killing off of the five per cent unemployment commitment, blatant untruths about meeting the Forde inquiry's recommended funding levels, a Police Service aimed more at booking motorists than catching criminals, a health system on the verge of collapse, the heart and soul ripped out of primary industries and whole-of- government depletion of government services across the state. We are now seeing continuing problems with drought, the problems with the sugar industry and the ongoing problem of another 2,000 VERs plus, which will no doubt see job losses in the railways and the Main Roads Department as well. The debt position and the cutbacks to capital works coupled with poor unemployment forecasts and the lack of vision for business in the past two budgets shows why Queensland cannot trust Labor to manage the economy and to effectively manage money. Everywhere we are hearing the same story: they are broke. This government, and the Premier in particular, is obsessed with public relations, media events, social functions and openings. The government is obsessed with building up the Community Engagement Division as a propaganda division within the Premier's Department to produce volumes of colourful and expensive brochures and booklets which only create illusions. Alas, they are only delusions of grandeur on the part of the government and its band of incompetent ministers. However, the delusions will only last for a limited period of time, and the tricks perpetrated on the sad and sorry taxpayer will be seen for what they are—tricks and ruses—for Queenslanders have grown up knowing that good government delivers positive results and a well-managed budget. I will ensure that all taxpayers know that this Treasurer has attempted to fool them and has attempted to lure each and every business proprietor or entrepreneur into a false sense of security. When it comes to the real issues of creating real wealth through the development of industry or of creating jobs through the development of business and industry, the Beattie Labor government completely fails. As a proud Queenslander and a strong advocate for Queensland's many natural resources and its many industries, be it agriculture, mining, construction, tourism, technology and the potential growth of Queensland's creative industries, it is disturbing to me personally that this government is letting down the state and therefore letting down the people. Let us look at the unemployment situation. Even though the Beattie Labor government chanted mercilessly about jobs, jobs, jobs, the percentage of unemployed in this state is greater than that of any other mainland state of Australia. That relative position has been the case for 24 months or more. So month after month Queensland simply comes last. Relative to the other states we have the worst unemployment on the mainland. We cannot get ahead of South 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4741

Australia. We cannot get ahead of Western Australia. We cannot get ahead of the other mainland states. It is a tragic situation for our state. The former economic basket cases of Victoria and Western Australia, functioning, I might add, in similar economic circumstances to Queensland, are performing far better than Queensland in the employment stakes as well as in the economic viability stakes. So how do our economic competitors perform that much better? First let us examine the state's Capital Works Program. The real story is quite frightening. In the past three years the Labor government has slashed approximately $600 million from the Capital Works Program. In 2000-01 the government budgeted to spend $5.285 billion on capital works. In that financial year the government underspent by $278 million. That is a 5.3 per cent underspend. Further, in 2001-02 the government budgeted to spend $5.1 billion on capital works throughout the state, but we learnt that the government had another underspend of $346 million, or this time 6.8 per cent. In this financial year the government has allocated $4.7 billion towards capital works in Queensland. It is acknowledged that the government downsized the program when it could not meet its previous years' obligations, but how can anyone believe that the program will be fulfilled this year, even in its downsized state? The capital works underspend this year is anyone's guess, but on past performances it will probably be around five per cent to seven per cent. All honourable members need to be reminded that this is the first time in 16 years that any government has cut its capital works budget for two years running. In the mid eighties the capital works budget represented around 42 per cent of the total state budget. In 2001-02 the capital works budget of the Labor government represented only approximately 26 per cent of the total state budget. In 2002-03, the Beattie government's capital works budget was approximately 24 per cent of the total state budget, the lowest proportion in 19 years. The government says that there will be 43,000 additional jobs created, but how can anyone trust it? When we consider that we have the worst unemployment rate in mainland Australia, then obviously relative to the other states we do not perform as well when it comes to employment. Queenslanders cannot rely on the Beattie Labor government to properly manage the budget and properly and effectively manage the Capital Works Program which has, if managed correctly, the potential to create jobs throughout the region and to provide for enduring work and enduring business growth. Along with all taxpayers, Queensland's regions will be the big losers in the capital works stakes. This year's budget recorded a massive decrease in capital works funding in our regions. For example, Wide Bay suffered a cut of 30.2 per cent. The south-west suffered a cut of 37.8 per cent. The central west was down 36.4 per cent. The far north and northern regions received cuts of 11.7 per cent and 21.1 per cent respectively. These cuts represent around $400 million of capital works taken out of those regions. That is a huge drain on the regions. More importantly, it is a huge slap in the face of Queenslanders who miss out on the job creating opportunities. On top of the almost $600 million of capital works ripped from the state budget in the last two years, these regional cutbacks signal a severe loss of jobs for Queensland. What is immensely disappointing is that the Beattie Labor government does not recognise its role in the provision of vital infrastructure which is needed to encourage or fuel private investment in our state economy. Unfortunately, Labor governments do not understand that fiscal responsibility and the implementation of a sound Capital Works Program are the real generators of growth in this state. On the subject of jobs, it is timely to again remind all honourable members of the Beattie government's secret plan to shed thousands of Public Service jobs—the 2,000 jobs that have been going under the current VER program. Day by day we are hearing stories of lack of service, growing queues or people simply not being able to get service as a result of the cutting of these 2,000 jobs. If we multiply the number of positions by an average of 35 hours a week, we see that there is 70,000 hours of work that is not done in Queensland by public servants as a result of these jobs being cut. That is 70,000 hours of work that was done in providing service over the counter, service in answering queries and providing correspondence, actual service in dealing with people and providing the necessary advice and information that people need or actually doing things like work in hospitals, work in schools or work on the roads and elsewhere. We see now that the railways will probably be forced to shed some 650 jobs. We saw that the road building gang of some 200 was to be cut. We have seen the 200 VERs to be provided to teachers—experienced, senior teachers—in some instances irreplaceable, all being pushed out to save money because the government simply does not have the money to pay the wages. It 4742 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 cannot fill the pay packets every second Friday afternoon. It is broke. It is losing money. It does not have the cash to pay these workers and it is pushing them out. In this year's estimates public hearings I exposed a leaked document which shows plans drawn up by PricewaterhouseCoopers Consulting for the government to rationalise corporate service provision within the Public Service. The report showed how the top echelons or strategic elements of the Public Service were going to grow while the numbers of workers or operational elements would be slashed—in other words, many more chiefs and fewer Indians. This line of action is being undertaken by a Labor government. How can we trust it? PricewaterhouseCoopers identified more than 15,800 public servants doing corporate services work. The PWC report also identified that the proposed changes would aim to achieve 20 per cent to 40 per cent savings. Once again, how could we trust this government? The Premier is kidding himself if he thinks he can get 20 per cent to 40 per cent savings without staff losses. Has he asked any of his Labor colleagues if they are prepared to allow the shedding of public sector jobs within their respective electorates? Obviously this meek and mild backbench would just agree with anything that he put forward. If so, perhaps all of those members who think it is a fine plan can identify which electorates will sustain job losses. It is time to come clean with these secret plans. Not satisfied with a Public Service purge, the proposal comes on top of plans to cut 1,000 from the Public Service on terms similar to those offered to get rid of the 200 teachers. These drastic job shedding measures are a clear indication that the government's budget is in trouble. The government has no money to negotiate settlement for those enterprise bargaining agreements due now or coming up in the future. The government has to make serious savings quickly and engage in substantial supplementary funding because, in typical Labor style, the government cannot manage the money, nor can it manage the budget. In relation to the budget balancing exercises, I draw members' attention to the disgraceful increases in many taxes and charges which were outside the budget process altogether. Instead of raising taxes, the government should learn to manage its budget. For decades Queensland governments have been able to work within a low-tax environment and still keep the state out of debt, but this Premier and his government have been incapable of saying no to any pressure group that mounts a campaign against it until now, when it is too late because the budget is so far in deficit. How is it that previous governments have been able to provide new services, such as extra police and additional hospital services, and grant all the necessary wage and salary increases, but this Beattie Labor government is not able to manage it? New costs and wage increases are not new. All governments have to address those difficulties, as this parliament is expected to do today with this debate on supplementary appropriations. Sitting suspended from 12.59 p.m. to 2.30 p.m. Mr HORAN: Just before lunch I was talking about how previous governments were able to provide new services, such as extra police and additional hospital services, and grant the necessary wage and salary increases but that the Beattie Labor government has been unable to manage this. New costs and wage increases are not new. All governments have had to address those difficulties, as this parliament is expected to do today with this debate on the supplementary appropriations. The difference between this government and former governments is this government's failure to budget for unforeseen expenditure, such as wage increases, even though its union mates had signalled back in December last year that significant wage increases were expected by the workers. As I mentioned previously, the government is focused more on propaganda and pet projects, such as pedestrian bridges, parklands and football stadiums, than providing good government and sound fiscal management. I refer to some of the recent windfalls for this government. It received some $400 million in increased stamp duty during the last financial year and an increase in payroll tax receipts in the order of $75 million. This government also expects some $48 million in land tax this financial year, $10 million this financial year in transport licence fees—which were introduced into this parliament without any notice whatsoever in the budget process immediately preceding their introduction—and a saving of around $100 million by shedding 2,000 Public Service jobs at least. All of that comes on the back of GST income receipts, which are flowing into the government's coffers. But will we still see a budget blow-out in the next financial year? On the basis of how the government has operated over the past 12 months, we certainly will. 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4743

The question has to be asked: what has the government done with all the money? All members of this parliament should be in no doubt that this Labor government is behind the increased taxes debate. The Premier is on record back in 1993 as supporting a broadened tax base that included a petrol tax. The 'more taxes' debate is about getting more spending money, but not money to be allocated to infrastructure and job creation, just to the Labor Party propaganda machine. Why is this money grab on? The Beattie Labor government has been forced to consider new and higher taxes because of its failure to properly manage our economy. Earlier this year, Queenslanders learned that the government had in its possession a Queensland Treasury report that outlined a plan to reintroduce death duties as well as introducing a raft of new taxes that were designed to make up for future shortfalls in revenue. In 1977, the Bjelke-Petersen government led Australia in abolishing succession and gift duties, which is commonly known as death duties. All members of this parliament would recall the iniquitous death duties, how unpopular it was and how it often caused genuine hardship for inheritors, particularly for those on the land. As a result of Queensland abolishing death duties, all other states progressively followed the lead. As a consequence of that Bjelke-Petersen foresight, Australia now has the unique distinction of being one of the few countries in the world where death duties do not apply. Earlier this year, the Left Wing Australian Manufacturing Workers Union embraced Paul Keating's call for the reintroduction of wealth taxes and death duties. At the same time it was revealed that Queensland Treasury developed a report titled Directions for State Taxation Policy: a Strategic Analysis that examined Queensland's taxation collection and expenditure. The report touched on 'grey' taxation and floated the reintroduction of death duties. The Premier has ruled it out, but how can we trust his government to not introduce death duties? This was the Premier who said that he would not increase taxes or introduce new taxes. However, if the Premier and the Treasurer are rolled again by Treasury officials, let everyone be warned that the Queensland Nationals will strenuously oppose any attempt to reintroduce death duties into Queensland and will travel the length and breadth of the state decrying the wickedness of those duties and the government that tried to introduce them. As this government follows the well-worn path to economic ruin that has been followed so steadfastly by many other Labor governments, a number of promises have been broken time after time. To date, Queensland businesses and Queenslanders have had to shell out for a new pub tax on poker machines; a widened payroll tax base to trap more businesses in the payroll tax net; the scrapping of the land tax rebate for companies, trustees and absentees; new transport licence fees and charges; 100 per cent and more increases in DPI tick clearance and plant inspection fees; new charges for freedom of information applications; a jump in Supreme Court fees from $156 and $420 and up to $820 for companies; changes in the mining royalties regime from the price received at the mine gate to the gross realised value aboard ships, which effectively means that the royalty will be charged on an amount that included rail and freight costs; and stamp duty on insurance premiums, which gains the government an extra $10 million a year. Although not-for-profit organisations have been relieved, business is still being slugged. So much for the charter of social and fiscal responsibility! This government stands for more taxes and fewer services, even though the GST funding from the federal government is flowing. A revenue analysis of GST distributions for Queensland, which are outlined in the state budget papers, reveals that in the 2002-03 financial year the Beattie Labor government will receive $5.643 billion in GST revenue grants, $67.5 million in budget balancing assistance, and $139.6 million in national competition payments. That brings a total of $5.85 billion in general purpose payments from the federal government. In the last financial year, the government realised estimated actual general purpose payments of $5.703 billion. Again, I have to ask: what has the government done with all the money? It is time that this government stopped playing smoke and mirror games with the state's budget, particularly now that the state is almost $900 million in the red from the last financial year. Associate Professor Tony Makin from the School of Economics at the University of Queensland has warned that the larger than expected deficit reflected poor forecasting by the government. He warned that it could hurt the state's credit rating. That warning is most alarming, as any downgrading in Queensland's credit rating would force the government to pay even more for its borrowings. Associate Professor Makin also stated in the Courier-Mail on 1 November that the state budget accounts were very opaque and was critical of the lack of detail in the budget papers. 4744 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002

As the budget papers contain minimal detail and the estimates committee process is a farce, the government owes Queenslanders a detailed taxation plan that outlines clearly how it intends to fund the extreme budget shortfall. But the plan needs to be genuine and one that is not designed to mislead the public. Any matters relating to increases in fees and charges or taxes that the government intends to introduce should be outlined in the budget process so that there can be some real budget honesty in this state. As well, the government owes Queensland a detailed investment plan that outlines clearly how it intends to fund the infrastructure that is required to generate economic activity and industrial growth, such as the much-needed major dam projects around the state like the Paradise and Nathan dams and the recycled water project for the Lockyer and Darling Downs areas, about which I have been so strongly advocating for a number of years. Queensland's economy has suffered some effects from the downturn in world markets and tourism. It is estimated that the worsening drought could wipe out $1 billion from the state's economy over the next financial year. A possible downturn in housing and the unpredictable nature of tourism are still looming. Any of those factors would have a negative impact on the state's economy and budget bottom line thereby jeopardising our Standard and Poor's AAA credit rating. The supplementary appropriations, which are outlined in these two bills, may well be going to projects that are setting in train genuine plans by the government. But how would we know? We are not given any particular detail in the appropriation bill. The supplementary appropriation for the Legislative Assembly and Parliamentary Service is established at $4.124 million. But again, the parliament was not given the courtesy of any explanation as to what this money is for. Although I have no difficulty in seeing the parliamentary staff, particularly the library, research, security and catering areas fully resourced, I am concerned that the Legislative Assembly and Parliamentary Service had unforeseen expenditure of over $4 million. In previous years, supplementary funding has been in the vicinity of a quarter of a million dollars. Hopefully, in his reply the Treasurer will outline in some detail the reasons for this. In the meantime, the final message that I want to send about these appropriations and the last budget—similar to the budget before—is that this parliament is still looking at a budget that lacks vision and has no real economic plan for this state. It is no wonder that we had reductions in capital works and it is no wonder that we had the worse unemployment figures in mainland Australia. It is such a shame that a state such as Queensland has for two consecutive years massive budget deficits of $856 million and $894 million. It is an indictment on this government's management of the economy. Hon. J. FOURAS (Ashgrove—ALP) (2.40 p.m.): I am pleased to take part in this debate. This is legislation we debate at this time every year. It is fascinating, though, to listen to the Leader of the Opposition. It reminds me of another episode of Blue Hills where we hear exactly the same speech time after time. The leader talked about incompetence and mismanagement of the budget and about exploding debt. However, the Leader of the Opposition was also very critical of the cuts of about $600 million over the last two years to the capital works budget. At the same time, the leader was very critical of the inadequate funding for implementing the recommendations of the Forde inquiry and of the cut to the number of public servants. The Leader of the Opposition talked about bad fiscal management and the fact that the Treasurer did not foresee the fiscal returns. Who could foresee what the American capitalists would do, because as CEOs all they did was manage companies? What happened with Enron? What happened with the outsourcing of its core business? After they stopped buying back their own shares, giving options to people and diluting the value of the shares, they started lying. After it was found that they were lying, all confidence left the market. They doctored the books. These people are the economic managers of the world. Members opposite will tell us that they are the people to follow. Nobody could foresee what would happen to the share market. Even if one could foresee that, what would be the difference to the budget deficit? It would not be any different. We make an estimate and that is it. In the end, the returns are what we get. A crystal ball would not make any difference, unless we could foresee that there would be a shortfall of $400 million. If that were the case, what would we do? Cut capital works! Do we cut back on services to the public? What are the options in this wonderful world of funny money that the leader talks about? The Leader of the Opposition accused the government of being party to burgeoning enterprise bargaining settlements but still is critical of significant pay increases to public servants. What would the leader have paid them—two per cent? The leader was critical of the fact that nurses and public servants were out on the street. I was on the executive of a union before I 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4745 entered this parliament. In those days, Joh Bjelke-Petersen always looked after public servants by giving them a salary increase just before an election. Our government was very responsible in that whole process. We held the line very well, but the leader is still very critical of that. It is just like a broken record. It is so tedious and repetitious that it does not require a response, but I am giving one because it is time to do so. The leader is critical of the concept of 'buying' jobs. But 30 per cent or in excess of 53,000 jobs were created as a result of the Queensland economy, more than 50 per cent of which were full-time jobs. Somehow or other, the Leader of the Opposition is critical of this unforeseen expenditure. It is not really unforeseen. We know there will be enterprise bargaining and salary increases. This is not unaccounted for by Treasury. Treasury has a reasonable idea of what it will cost. But because it does not know exactly how much money will be needed, it cannot appropriate for it. We cannot appropriate the money by putting it in a bucket and saying that this is what it will cost. We need to appropriate money for a particular purpose. That is exactly what the Magna Carta was about in 1215. One of the functions of any parliament is to ensure that we authorise the expenditure of monies. The leader is saying that there was $371.8 million of unforeseen expenditure and that the Treasurer is incompetent and cannot manage his budget. What arrant nonsense. I notice that the Leader of the Opposition criticised the north Queensland sitting in terms of what it cost and said that the Speaker was responsible for this. That is also nonsense. I am aware that the budget for north Queensland was less than what was estimated. The north Queensland parliament was under the control of the Speaker, not the Premier. With regard to the appropriations for Parliament, the leader seems to think it all right that there are unforeseen expenditures. I presume this is because the leader believes that it is okay to adjust members' salaries by the CPI every year. In fact, this amount was less than what the public servants received. I presume that Mr Horan would not want to accept those increases. Perhaps that sort of petty politics will be played in here. Again, public servants working in parliament must be given their increases via the enterprise bargaining process. It is very important that members undertake trade delegations and are part of a wider economy. That is the bottom line. I refer to the budget review committee and to the electorate officers because they do such a great job. Mr Mackenroth: Do you realise that none of their members want to speak? No-one on the opposition benches is prepared to speak at this stage. Mr FOURAS: If I sat down very quickly you could close the debate, but the Treasurer is too much of a gentleman to do that. Mr Mackenroth: I have done that before. Mr FOURAS: I am saying that the Treasurer would not do it. I will continue talking until the next government member is ready. The bottom line is that, as I was saying— Mr Mackenroth: What we need is a Whip. Mr FOURAS: Yes. The parliamentary budget needs to provide for training for electorate officers. I know that part of this increase in unforeseen expenditure relates to further support for the assistant electorate officer initiative. I suggest that, when the budget review committee looks at the parliament's budget next time, it tries to find some money for training. I am great believer in training. There is a great deal of new equipment and technology in our offices and there are great efficiencies to be gained by training our electorate officers. My electorate officer gained enormous benefits through training at the parliament. I will conclude as I started. I have heard the economic nonsense from the Leader of the Opposition. On the one hand, he complains about a budget deficit. On the other hand, he complains about not having $600 million more for capital works, cuts in Public Service numbers, inadequate service provision and the enterprise bargaining process. Does he think he could wave a magic wand and get the public servants back to work for less than a 3.5 per cent increase? Mr Reynolds: He probably wants to hike the taxes up. Mr FOURAS: He also indicated in his speech that we are looking for tax hikes. Does he have a magic pudding? It is time we had a realistic economic assessment from the shadow Treasurer and heard about realistic targets—the art of the possible. That is what politics is. Politics is about how one creates an economic cake and slices it. We ought to be hearing a bit more than simply naive criticism from the opposition. I commend the Treasurer for the way he has been handling his portfolio. I have every confidence that the Queensland economy is in the very best of hands, which has been highlighted by all sorts of indicators; for example, IT, employment and our capacity to attract big players, boost our economy and diversify it. This enables us to move further 4746 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 away from our reliance on primary produce, which at the moment is doing nothing to help our economic coffers; in fact, it is costing us dearly. It is about time the Leader of the Opposition stood up in this chamber and said something meaningful instead of trying to be all things for all people. Sir Thomas Moore was said to be the man for all seasons at the time of Henry VIII. The Leader of the Opposition is the man for all arguments. He is trying to have five bob each way and I do not think that washes well at all. Dr WATSON (Moggill—Lib) (2.52 p.m.): Today it gives me pleasure to rise in the debate on the appropriation bills. Last Monday week, 18 November, I attended a meeting organised by a Neighbourhood Watch group to which Main Roads officers, including Don Steele, the manager of the Brisbane area, were invited. The Main Roads officers handled the meeting well. A number of community members raised a number of difficult issues during that evening meeting. I thought the officers gave a pretty good account of where they were and what was going on. The community was particularly upset by continual delays in some work being done on Moggill Road, one of the main roads through the electorate, particularly around the Kenmore area. It was concerned also about the delays with the Kenmore bypass. Unfortunately, from the Roads Implementation Program tabled today by the Minister for Transport I note that there will be no joy in the future in terms of getting any money to address a very serious traffic bottleneck which is a problem not only for my constituents and businesses in the Kenmore area; that is, more traffic is using Mount Crosby Road, Moggill Road and other parts of the electorate through the Kenmore area. The reason they are upset and the reason the Main Roads officers could not do anything about it is simply that there is no money available. There is not sufficient money in capital works in this state, nor in the Main Roads area, to come close to fulfilling not only the responsibilities of Main Roads but also the commitments made in earlier versions of the Roads Implementation Program. The reason for that is quite simple: insufficient money is being allocated in the budget process and insufficient money is available. That reflects poorly upon the budget management of this government. According to the Queensland Economic Update, which is produced by Queensland Treasury, for the quarter ended June 2002 public investment in this state fell by 3.7 per cent. Public investment, investment made by the government, fell by 3.7 per cent. At the same time, had we looked at any population figures, we would have noted substantial increases in the population of this state. The fact of the matter is that capital works in this state—public investment in this state—has been falling for a number of years. One has only to look at the state budget, in particular the budget statement concerning gross fixed capital formation, to get an understanding of precisely what has happened in this state over the past few years. In 1999-2000 the actual investment in gross fixed capital formation was $4.257 billion. In the budget 2000-01 this was budgeted to fall to $3,805 million, or $3.805 billion. In the budget 2001- 02 it was at $4,077 million. In the last budget it was in at $3,543 million, or $3.543 billion. That is a fall from the actual in 1999-2000 to the budget this year of $714 million. If we look further, in the general government sector we see that the actual in 1999-2000 was $2,647 million, and this year it is budgeted to be $1,712 million. In other words, the area of the budget looking at the amount of money that goes into developing the public capital of this state—and Main Roads is part of it—has fallen, from an actual position in 1999-2000 to a current budget position, by $935 million. The budget of this state is being organised in such a way as to put less money into capital works—less money into gross fixed capital formation—to the tune of some $1 billion a year compared to what it was three years ago. That is the reason we have a problem in terms of fulfilling the capital works programs in this state. That is the reason that my constituents, along with constituents elsewhere in the state, are seeing bottlenecks at Kenmore and main roads that need upgrading not only in Moggill but also elsewhere not being attended to. It is partly offset by the fact that the government is extracting more gross fixed capital formation from public trading enterprises, but that has gone up by only a couple of hundred million dollars, whereas in the public sector it has fallen by close to $1 billion. The problem is that the fall in capital expenditure in this state has an impact in the short term with projects being delayed. In the long term, of course, without the appropriate public capital formation we will not encourage private investment into the state and, as a result, we will not see increasing living standards for Queenslanders. Gross fixed capital formation is falling in this state by $700 million to $1 billion compared with what it was three years ago. When this is taken with the fact that we have a rising population, it means that the capital formation per head of population has fallen dramatically. That will inevitably lead to lower living standards for the taxpayers of this state. 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4747

The same type of issue is having an effect on other economic variables in this state. I refer to the latest economic update of October 2002, which talks about the components of economic growth in the June quarter of 2002. These are Treasury figures, not mine. One of the things that struck me in that particular update was that Queensland was behind the rest of Australia in all the significant investment areas. In the area of private investment, Queensland was growing at 2.1 per cent and the rest of Australia was growing at 3.8 per cent. In dwellings, Queensland was growing at 0.9 per cent and the rest of Australia was growing at 4.7 per cent. In business investment, Queensland was growing at 2.5 per cent and in the rest of Australia it was 4.6 per cent. In buildings and machinery and other structures, Queensland was growing at 5.2 per cent and in the rest of the country it was 9.4 per cent. In machinery and equipment, Queensland was growing at 1.2 per cent and the rest of the country was growing at 2.3 per cent. I think it is budget paper No. 2 where all these things are set out. Those are the figures on which one has to judge the state and its economic performance. The latest economic information we have is that, compared with the rest of Australia at the end of the June quarter, Queensland was doing poorly. That is a reflection on the economic management of the state. More importantly, as I said previously, it is a reflection on what will happen to the standards of living of Queenslanders in the future if that kind of thing continues. Unfortunately, when we look at some external evaluators—particularly Econtech—we can see that Queensland has remained behind the majority of Australian states right throughout this year. For example, when one looks at gross state product per capita, which is the measure of the wealth we produce per capita in this state, in January 2002 Econtech ranked Queensland fifth of all the states. We have gross state product per capita of 1.8 per cent. The highest was Western Australia at 3 per cent, followed by the Northern Territory at 2.9 per cent, New South Wales at 2.2 per cent, Victoria at 2 per cent and Queensland at 1.8 per cent. We were ahead of South Australia at 1.4 per cent, Tasmania at 0.8 per cent and the ACT at 1.1 per cent. The Australian average was 2 per cent. That was at the beginning of this year. The latest figures I have are for July this year. From those figures we can see that the position has hardly changed except that we are no longer fifth, but fourth. We are still behind Western Australia, Victoria and New South Wales. We are looking at this government's economic management and therefore we have to compare how this government is doing in relation to other Australian governments. The latest Queensland Treasury documentation tells us that we are performing worse than the rest of Australia. Econtech, an outside economic commentator, is run by Chris Murphy, a man who is regarded as one of the best, if not the best, economic modellers in the country. He is responsible for developing the models used at the federal Treasury and at Access Economics. Chris Murphy's work has shown consistently right throughout this year that Queensland has fallen to the middle of the pack, or even worse, when compared with the other Australian states. The evidence is there and cannot be seriously questioned given that it comes from reputable economic forecasters and from Queensland Treasury. We hear about people complaining about money not going to areas which they think is essential, such as main roads, schools and police stations. The issue of main roads affects a broad range of people in this state and people are complaining about delays in terms of capital works being undertaken. They are complaining about projects which they thought were going to be delivered being put off to three, four or five years down the track. It is that experience which is reflected so clearly in the economic statistics that are available. I do not think there is any doubt that this government has a budgetary crisis. The problem is that the government is not spending sufficient in terms of capital works to fulfil its duties in the state. It is not spending sufficient in capital works to maintain the infrastructure that we already have, let alone develop it. The government is not ensuring that we have sufficient public investment in the state. This attitude will discourage private investment. This will lead to a lower standard of living and higher jobless rates in the future. This government has a lot of work to do to turn the situation around and make sure that there is sufficient capital investment at the public level to encourage private investment, to encourage job creation and to ensure higher living standards for all Queenslanders. Mr PURCELL (Bulimba—ALP) (3.08 p.m.): It gives me pleasure to rise today and speak to the Appropriation (Parliament) Bill. I will also address the Appropriation Bill for all the government departments. I will also make some comments on what the honourable member for Moggill has said, but I will leave that until the end. If the honourable member wants to hang around I might say something that will interest him. 4748 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002

This bill is being introduced as a supplementary appropriation bill for the Legislative Assembly and the Parliamentary Service for the financial year commencing 1 July 2001. This bill ensures that it is consistent with recent convention. It also ensures that the Legislative Assembly and the Parliamentary Services appropriation is separate from the supplementary appropriation bill for the other activities of government. It is a distinction that needs to be made, and it has been made quite clear by this bill so that parliamentary expenditure will not be confused or lumped together with all the other expenditures. This will allow the parliament to be independent and distinct from the appropriations for government departments. The Appropriation Bill (No. 2) provides supplementary appropriation for unforeseen expenditure incurred by the departments for 2001-02 and the amounts listed for each department are contained in the schedule. The bill authorises the Treasurer to pay $371,786,000 from consolidated revenue to cover the departments as listed. This budget is the biggest budget Queensland has ever had. In terms of some of the issues the member for Moggill raised, he mainly spoke about roads and the funding shortfall. Obviously he referred to his electorate, and I do not blame him for that. That is fine; he is the local member and he is entitled to speak about such issues. However, he should tell the whole story. The whole story is that the amount of funding we get to spend on roads is governed by the federal government. As he knows, the Liberals have more parliamentarians in the federal parliament than ever before, yet we are getting less and less funding for roads and state government infrastructure than ever before. He ought to stand up to some of his colleagues in Canberra and let them know how they are selling Queensland down the drain. The member for Moggill ought to talk to his colleagues about the Tugun bypass and what that is costing Queensland taxpayers when the federal government has a responsibility to fund it but has walked away from the project. He ought to talk to them about the port road. During my time in this parliament—that is, over 10 years—the federal government would not commit funds to that project until the Queensland government put the funding up and shamed it into coming to the party with funds for the port road. We took funding from the port authorities and so forth to ensure that that went ahead. It is a very commercially sound road which was needed for the progress of this state. Most of the trucks that use that road come from Sydney and Melbourne to go to our ports. Funding of that road was a federal responsibility yet the federal government walked away from it. I could go on and on with regard to the issue of funding. I have been involved with the parliamentary Public Works Committee and have seen cases where the federal government would set a scheme up in New South Wales and Victoria to designate certain roads as federal roads and those states would therefore get federal grants for those roads. However, when it came time for Queensland to get its fair share of those grants, the scheme would finish and it would think up some other rort to do Queensland out of its rightful funding for roads. The fact that funding for Queensland roads is being ignored by the Liberals is a national disgrace. The Queensland government is spending more money on health than has ever been spent before in the history of Queensland. We are treating more people than we have ever treated before and are therefore making people's lives better and saving more lives than we have ever done before. In terms of education, this week the white paper for education was announced by cabinet. We are spending more money than has ever been spent before in education. There will be more dollars to take care of non-academic students at the end of their high school life to ensure that their career, which is not necessarily an academic career, is taken care of. I am sure there will be funds in the coming budget to ensure that year 11 and 12 students who do not want to go on to an academic career can be trained so they are job ready to ensure that they get a job. We need to cooperate with employers to ensure that this happens and that those kids get a chance like we did when we left school. There were jobs waiting for us. If a kid is job ready, all the better. We have also spent more money than ever on law and order. As the minister said earlier today in question time, there is a large drug problem not only in this country but also overseas. I cannot see that diminishing. It is a large problem that we need to continue to work at. The simple reality is that funds are needed to do that, and that is why the Police budget is growing and will continue to grow. With those few words, I support the bills. Mr ROWELL (Hinchinbrook—NPA) (3.15 p.m.): Reviewing the Beattie government's commitment to our primary industries through the first five months of this year's budget is crucial given the horrendous drought that is directly affecting 52 Queensland shires, two part shires and at least another 450 individual droughted properties across the state. This is a very difficult time 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4749 for many families in a lot of our electorates and we certainly hope that much-needed rain is just around the corner. Government cannot influence or change our unpredictable weather patterns; however, one definite duty of government is to deliver a budget that guarantees a commitment to jobs, services and support to industry. With an actual operating deficit of $894 million, it comes as no surprise that this government has yet again failed to deliver what is required for Queensland's primary industries. Instead of financing our important agricultural sector, which will continue to grow, this government—using its Labor Party ideology of picking winners and punishing opponents—throws money at $30 million bridges, provides $64 million in grants that are not accountable to taxpayers and spends millions of dollars on its own publicity. We have so often heard the minister acknowledge the contribution that the primary industries sector makes to the state, which was projected to increase to almost $8 billion this last financial year. But of course it may very well be a different story for this financial year. The Beattie government has always been quick to claim the credit for any increase in the value of the industry despite the fact that, in real terms, since coming to government it has reduced the state's funding commitment to the DPI. One of the major areas where this is most evident—and will always be remembered as the legacy of the Beattie government—is its staffing cuts to that department. We can all recall the Premier's promise to deliver a five per cent unemployment rate in Queensland. We now hear repeatedly why he has not been able to achieve that target. Over the last three financial years the total job losses so far under the Beattie government are 534. This is from a government that has on numerous occasions purported to be a government for all Queenslanders! It is disgraceful. This is from a minister who promised when in opposition that there would be no job losses in DPI under a Labor government. According to the budget papers for DPI, the staffing level has increased by some 138 persons, which is up from the previous year. It is worth noting that the majority of these gains in staffing were in the rural community and development output and due to the red imported fire ant eradication program, not in the productive side of primary industries. I support the need for government to have the resources—including staff and funding—to appropriately deal with and, hopefully, eradicate the fire ant. However, the truth is that most of these jobs are not full-time equivalents, to use the appropriate term, but short-term positions for the duration of this project. This is not what I refer to as increasing the base level of staff within the department that is so readily needed to service the grassroots primary producers in rural and regional areas of Queensland. Importantly, when staff numbers are progressively cut back over a period of time, whether it be through sacking, redundancies or staff leaving of their own accord due to the frustration over the Beattie government's arrangements for this portfolio, the department and the people of Queensland lose knowledge, corporate expertise and on-the-ground experience that can never be replaced. This is an extremely important issue because much of this expertise is gained over a period of time. Morale is also at a low ebb in the department as there are diminishing prospects in terms of some career opportunities. To add to this, the government's VER program, which is being used as a method to wind in a bit of cash to fill the budget hole, has already claimed four officers from DPI, according to the minister's annual report, and these numbers are expected to increase by the end of the financial year. These job losses do not simply come out of central Brisbane offices but also out of the regions in which the services DPI provides are crucial. Stripping them away leaves many people without a local office to approach for assistance or advice. The Treasurer has championed a real capital increase in expenditure on primary industries and rural communities of 14.1 per cent, but the primary producers' pockets will be plundered to help pay for the $39 million biosecurity plan that the Beattie government has failed to fully fund in this year's state budget. As a result, the government will scrap Queensland's free cattle tick clearance service and increase plant inspection fees by more than 100 per cent. For cattle producers this will mean having to pay the full cost of the tick clearance service by 1 July 2004, with a 30 per cent increase in fees from 1 July this year. Plant inspection charges for fruit and vegetable, nursery and garden producers will be increased from $39 to $84 per hour, and there will be an additional $100 annual accreditation charge for interstate trading that will increase to $200 by 2004. These budget nasties come at a time when cattle prices have plummeted and drought conditions are worsening across much of Queensland. We are seeing a lot of industries—the horticultural industry, the beef cattle industry and other primary industries—not being able to afford this increase in charges. A new tax on cattle being transported across the tick line is the very last thing producers need to deal with. It is also important to note that the fruit and vegetable 4750 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 growers have been placed in the same position, suffering from poor prices, pests, weeds and drought. These new inspection and accreditation fees are yet another slug on already slim returns. Instead of supporting the development of Queensland's primary industries, this government is callously increasing taxes and charges on producers and slashing services that can be provided by the Department of Primary Industries. Agforce has described the decision on tick inspection fees as going against the personal guarantee to the cattle industry 18 months ago and one that will place our markets in jeopardy and potentially cause production losses for tick-free producers. Agforce goes even further to say that it was amazing that the various industries were not consulted in any way, shape or form about these new fees prior to the state budget launch. It is amazing that such a tax could be introduced and used as a trade-off for the government's biosecurity commitment without one of the peak industry bodies even being aware of it, let alone receiving any initial consultation. Given the hardship already being experienced by farmers, cutting these new charges during the current drought would lessen the burden on them. It is always possible for governments to introduce that kind of initiative to reduce costs, but the minister has refused to consider this very reasonable concession during the extreme drought conditions being experienced around the state. There is also a need to re-establish the Drought and Rural Development Unit that was set up within DPI by the Queensland Nationals-led state government to coordinate the state's response effort. This unit had the responsibility for compiling applications for exceptional circumstances assistance covering the cost of that process and sourcing the collection of all of the technical information needed to lodge a claim. However, the incoming Beattie government made a very short-sighted decision to scrap it, and much of the expertise that had been built up was lost from the department or redirected to other areas. That is a great shame, because very often the expertise involved in disseminating information is so crucial to future direction when looking at the claims of people who are in dire straits and need some assistance. When that level of expertise is not there, very often there is a sidetracking of claims and certainly they do not receive the attention warranted. Because of the absence of a specialist drought unit and the lack of both leadership and urgency, farm groups have had to take on the huge job of compiling the EC application for the Peak Downs district themselves. That is not normally the case. Normally we would expect government to assist in this area, but that is not what happened in relation to Peak Downs. There is also a reluctance by this government to increase its contribution to upgrade exceptional circumstances assistance. The federal government has made a request for the state government to increase its contribution to improve the scheme for funding producers who are experiencing severe drought. I believe that should be recognised by the government. There have been a number of attempts by the federal government to do just that. Unfortunately, there has been a degree of reluctance on the part of the state. All we hear from the minister and the government is excuses. There is a failure to genuinely assist Queensland's producers when they need it most. There is an urgent need for the minister and his government to listen to the mounting calls from rural industries and small business to overhaul the state's Drought Relief Assistance Scheme to provide better targeted assistance to all sectors. The scheme is based largely on providing freight subsidies for livestock producers which are not available for intensive livestock producers; that is, the likes of the pig and the chicken industries, which are facing very high prices for grain and its transportation to their establishments. They are trying hard to make ends meet. Fruit and vegetable producers and small business are suffering similar financial hardship because of the drought. It is time that the Minister for Primary Industries accepted that the state scheme is failing to assist all primary producers, including horticulture, sugar and grain, and small business in drought declared areas. The signs are not good for improvement in the drought situation. The department put up $20 million to provide low interest loans to canegrowers to assist in covering the cost of planting and fertilising their 2003 crop. It is confirmed that the only four loans taken up at this stage value $102,822. The crisis in the sugar industry is extremely serious and growers can no longer afford to borrow more money. In fact, most growers are at the point where loans are not an option. They are in a position where they have no capacity to borrow more money. Even if Queensland's 6,500 growers could access all of the $20 million promised by the government, they would still be out of pocket by $80 million to plant next year alone. 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4751

There is approximately 100,000 hectares of land to be planted next year at an average cost of $1,000 per hectare and a total cost of $100 million. This government has offered just $20 million in loans, or $3,076 each for Queensland's 6,500 growers. According to this figure, growers will be able to plant and fertilise only three hectares of cane. All that this loan scheme represents is another unhelpful proposal for the sugar industry—just like the failed $10 million loan scheme that was launched in 2000. That scheme was totally insincere and inadequate. The loan for replanting lent only something like $60,308 for planting cane over a two-year period. The federal government's scheme provided $60 million in interest subsidies. That was particularly worth while, because it meant that there was a substantial subsidy on the money that was borrowed and not just a low interest rate on the money that was borrowed from the state scheme. Rural communities up and down Queensland's coast depend on the sugar industry and they require genuine support from this government, not another bogus loan scheme. The decision by the government to vote against the opposition's primary industries bill to mandate and introduce a minimum 10 per cent fuel ethanol blend, even though the government knows the enormous opportunities that ethanol represents, is just another example of this government's refusal to support primary industries. The exemptions would have allowed the industry to build up an ethanol industry over a period in the event that the 10 per cent was not available from producers. Ethanol could have been bought from other states—a fact missed by the government when it used section 92 as an excuse for not supporting the bill. The Premier's political bloody-mindedness and lack of vision on ethanol has cost Queensland this great opportunity for now. I would like to mention the sale of the Brisbane Markets. The $74 million proceeds from the sale of the markets to a private consortium led by Landacq Pty Ltd should be reinvested in the horticultural industry to create more jobs and export earning opportunities. The sale of the markets illustrates how insincere the Labor government is in claiming that it opposes any privatisation. The process that it employed in selling the markets showed a lack of commitment for the future of a great industry. None of the funding that was attributed to the sale of the markets has gone to the horticultural industry. I believe that is a great loss. That funding could have provided expertise and assistance during this dry period in Queensland. I concluded on that point when I made my speech to the budget when it was delivered in June. Over the past five months nothing has changed from this government, except that we now have an even larger budget black hole. The 2002-03 budget, brought down by the Treasurer, failed to assist Queensland's primary industries and rural communities to meet both the short and long-term funding and resources that it needs to continue to sustain primary producers in what we can describe as a difficult time for many. In fact, almost half of the state's shires are affected by drought. As we see time and time again, this is a government that is high on rhetoric but low on real funding for outcomes in the industry. I would like to move to a few issues that are important to the Ingham district. I am pleased to see the Minister for Health in the chamber, because a replacement is badly needed for the old Ingham Hospital. Mrs Edmond: And it didn't make the priority list when you were in government? It is not needed? Mr ROWELL: It is probably the last of the older hospitals located within that northern region. If the minister is talking about priority lists that we set when we were in government, we have to go back five years. We have now reached the point where we need to do some planning for a new hospital. It will effectively take two to three years to get the hospital on the list, to do the planning and then implement the building program. I believe that it is essential. Mrs Edmond: Don't you worry, Marc. We'll look after you. Mr ROWELL: I am pleased to hear those words, because they are music to my ears. I am pleased that the minister is going to look after the Ingham district. Mrs Edmond: I am looking after your constituency. Mr ROWELL: I am saying the Ingham district, which is a part of the constituency of the Hinchinbrook electorate. It is also important that we acknowledge that the staffing requirements are inadequate. Time expired. Ms BOYLE (Cairns—ALP) (3.35 p.m.): I rise to support the appropriation bills before the House. They give recognition to relatively minor adjustments that need to be made to departmental outputs, equity adjustments and administered items. I must say that I noted in the 4752 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 schedule that details the amounts per department that no adjustments are required by the Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing for either Public Works or Housing. In terms of the Department of Housing, I think that that reflects well on the minister and his staff, given the pressure that public housing is under these days. Of course, much of that pressure is associated with the mean-spirited, private sector focus of the Howard government towards public housing and its ongoing reductions in funds to state governments for public housing. I would like to draw to the attention of both the Treasurer and the Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing a program of great importance that comes within the jurisdiction of the Housing portfolio under the dual headings of urban and community renewal. Throughout the state, former large public housing estates that, unfortunately, have experienced a plethora of social problems have been assisted by the urban and community renewal programs. Over the years of the Beattie government, those programs have been rolled out progressively. I can attest to the fact that the program has been particularly successful in the Manoora area of Cairns. The Manoora Urban and Community Renewal Project is well known across Cairns. Unfortunately, prior to the institution of this program by the Department of Housing there were almost weekly reports of trouble associated with people who lived in Manoora—whether this was trouble in terms of street violence, vandalism or youth crime, or trouble in terms of social dislocation, joblessness, lack of school attendance, or various kinds of community problems. There seemed no cure. Under the community and urban renewal program, Manoora is now a suburb pretty much like any other suburb in Cairns or in any other city. Those social parameters of disturbance, of poor community and of ill health in the community are no longer, thanks to very considerable funds expended primarily through the Department of Housing. Unfortunately, there is another community similar to that of Manoora, which is located in the western area of Cairns. The community of Mooroobool is also based around a large public housing estate. The residents of Mooroobool looked on with some envy at the urban and community renewal program that was rolled out in Manoora. That is understandable. I am sorry to report to members of the House that the signs of ill health in the community of Mooroobool are still apparent. They are reported on weekly. For example, only weeks ago a couple of freshly renovated houses in the Mooroobool area that were made ready for new tenants to move in were vandalised completely to the tune of many thousands of dollars. Unfortunately, it was discovered that the vandalism was carried out by children aged between five and 13. From time to time we hear reports of children behaving badly on the way home from school and causing harm to property. We hear about misbehaviour around the creeks and the dark areas of the community. Due to the design of the Mooroobool public housing estate, it is difficult for police and emergency services to get to people quickly. There are many dark laneways which vehicles cannot access and which provide a kind of haven for those hell-bent on creating trouble in the community. This certainly is a design problem that goes back many years, but it is one that would be addressed under an urban and community renewal program. There are many good people in the community who are working hard to address the problems without government money and without formal programs. I recognise people like Lisa Scott, the community safety officer; Antonio Pinto, who works for the community; Sergeant Caroline Barker, from the Queensland Police Service who works with the community; and the lady who runs the home support service, Ms Mary Wapau. All of them and others, too, are doing their best for the people of the Mooroobool community, but the hard fact is that the community cannot really be turned around without major urban renewal programs, without redesign of the public area, and without the kinds of additional programs that have been rolled out in the Manoora community renewal area and others around the state. I use this time today to bring to the attention of the Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing and the Treasurer the importance and the opportunity that can occur with urban and community renewal, to put in a plea for there to be continuing funding in the next term of government, presuming for a moment that the Beattie Labor team is returned, and to call, too, for Mooroobool to be on the top of the list of priorities. I also recognise that a relatively small amount of supplementary appropriation of $1.86 million is required for the Department of Health. This reminds me of the sheer size of the Health budget and of the extent to which the Beattie government over the years since we came in in 1998 has increased the Health budget. The budget has, since the 1998-99 budget through to this 2002-03 budget, increased by some 25 per cent, that is, from $3.387 billion to $4.25 billion, an increase of some $863 million. This is a very substantial increase and one that I think is not well recognised by people across Queensland. It is understandable that every Queenslander in no matter which region or remote community wants the absolutely latest and 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4753 best health services available on their doorstep for the people that they love. I understand that and wish it could be so. At the same time, I understand why people who are on waiting lists, even if the matter is not urgent but is nonetheless one which causes them some discomfort—some day-to-day worry—want that date brought forward. It is important that we as a government stand proudly over the substantial increases that we have made to the Health budget. Of course, part of our difficulties lies at the feet of the federal government and of Prime Minister Howard and his deliberate cost shifting priorities in health—the $2.3 billion that he allocated to the private health funds that could instead have been allocated for direct health services and his refusal to face the problem with the Medicare benefit for GPs with regard to the gap that there is between the price for which they can afford to provide their services and the Medicare rebate. These are ways in which he has successfully shifted the pressure to the public sector, resulting across the state in a 10 per cent increase in activity in emergency service departments at public hospitals and in longer waiting lists in categories 4 and 5 for people who should properly see a GP for their services, resulting in even more pressure on the public health dollar. I recognise the Minister for Health and the Treasurer for their continual boosts to the state Health budget. I am sure that in the years to come there will be more boosts should we remain in government. Nonetheless, it places pressure on us to keep rolling out the health services to meet the wishes of the people of Queensland. I support the other adjustments and allocations in these appropriation bills. I am pleased indeed to support them. Hon. K. R. LINGARD (Beaudesert—NPA) (3.44 p.m.): I want to make a plea to the Queensland government to continue to fund a very important program in the Beaudesert area. Beaudesert and Boonah are in an area that was really hit by the dairy regulation, yet I was very proud to see what happened with Beaudesert Rail, which commenced as a program to replace the problems in the Beaudesert-Boonah area because of the deregulation of the dairy industry. The dairy industry is certainly feeling the effects not only of the deregulation but also of the drought. Many people who probably did not need a cash flow previously have had to borrow to purchase water and grain. Unfortunately, with the drought continuing as it has these people now are faced with a cash flow problem. Beaudesert and Boonah need something different as far as infrastructure is concerned. The Commonwealth government has provided massive funds for the new Beaudesert Rail. The state government has made significant funding in the CJP program, but compared to the $5 million of the federal government the state government has contributed only about $150,000. This will be a massive project, a magnificent project, of which the whole state will be very proud. We have seen the success of the historical service at Gympie. Beaudesert Rail, which opens on 7 December this year, will be very similar. It will be a part of the history which will come alive in the electorate. At one time, the old Beaudesert rail line was going to be pulled up. It was used by the AMH. When AMH fell apart, a significant group of people decided they would set up a Beaudesert rail line as a historical rail, a community rail and a railway which would run just at weekends. But I think it will become part of Beaudesert's history and become a commuter service. Ms Keech: It will attract a lot of tourists, too. Mr LINGARD: Yes, it will. Since the railway will traverse Bethania and Logan Village, it will force businesses in those areas to provide a service to the many visitors to the rail service. People will board this first historic trip on 7 December this year at Logan Village and enjoy a ride to Beaudesert. Ms Keech: Will you be there? Mr LINGARD: At Beaudesert? I am always there. I hope the member is there as well. A formal public function, along with lunch and entertainment, will be held before the train returns to Logan Village. The train will be hauled by Beaudesert Rail's rebuilt C17 class steam locomotive and its support non-steam locomotive. Some of these carriages have been brought from as far away as Tasmania. That particular locomotive has been brought from Tasmania. People would be amazed to see the infrastructure, the massive sheds and the massive platforms that have already been built at Beaudesert and are being built at Logan Village and Jimboomba. I certainly look forward to riding on this historic trip. I commend the members of Beaudesert Rail who have worked extremely hard to bring this dream to reality. It will be an excellent asset to the shire. It will bring many tourists to the area and it is a great way for them to enjoy the beautiful surroundings that Beaudesert shire and, as the member for Albert interjects, Bethania and Logan Village in her electorate offer. A magnificent 4754 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 new platform was recently opened in Beaudesert. It was built by participants of the CJP. They have certainly done a wonderful job. Beaudesert Rail has supplied employment opportunities to 54 long-term unemployed through the CJP programs. Mr Reeves interjected. Mr LINGARD: Look, the member has had enough speeches in this House without my answering his interjections and adding another number to the number of speeches he makes in the House. Of the 30 people in the completed programs, 28 have gone on to achieve full-time employment. Certainly, there are still two CJP programs running which have provided employment for a further 24 long-term unemployed persons. That is the section on which I congratulate the state government. I cannot speak highly enough of the workmanship of these people. Recently, Beaudesert Rail was given a high recommendation in the Senate for its success rate in getting people back into jobs. It is great to see how proud they are of all their work, which has been completed ahead of schedule. Talks amongst the business community are now focusing on what could be provided by way of entertainment for these visitors. For example, at areas such as Jimboomba and Logan Village, where there is no great amount of infrastructure, the tourists will need facilities for boarding and alighting from the train, stalls and so on. It will be an important issue as visitor numbers increase. I am very proud of the way everything has come together over the past 12 months. In December 2001 Queensland Transport presented Beaudesert Rail with a certificate of accreditation for railway manager and railway operator. There has been a signing of contracts between Beaudesert Rail and Queensland Rail for this infrastructure. Another special occasion was the official opening of the Beaudesert Rail administration centre in February. Not only has the rail line, the platform and a massive shed been built; the old railway station house, other infrastructure, and the railway station have been upgraded. People are amazed at the brand-new 92-metre platform at Beaudesert, which will be able to take one locomotive and five carriages. It is magnificent. The buildings are of great benefit, because these are the centre where the key day-to-day running of the Beaudesert Rail will take place and also where management meetings and courses will be held. During May of this year a staff amenity facility was opened. This cottage was in poor condition. It was raised and set back from the road frontage. I again congratulate the CJP and in particular Les Bartle, who looked after these workers and transformed these buildings into something of which Beaudesert Rail can be justifiably proud; they are a great asset. The restored facility was opened on 1 September, with several hundred people in attendance. It is an impressive building with three sets of railway tracks concreted into the slab. Inside this massive building there is a pit for carrying out work under the carriages or locomotives as part of the facility. It is a great step forward and work can be performed undercover, which is a most important part of operating a railway. The new wooden platform has been constructed adjacent to the landscaped area. This was built by Les Bartle and the CJP and was opened by them during October. Special thanks go to Bill Kingston and the Queensland government for looking after this program. I congratulate the Beaudesert Rotary Group, which has given $5,000 towards the restoration of the Beaudesert station building. Queensland Rail has replaced many thousands of sleepers, put down ballast and upgraded the line to a standard that will give the green light for traffic to commence. Seeing these machines working between Logan Village and Jimboomba has given the public a lot of confidence. There has been apprehension about whether this extra project would get off the ground and be completed. Seeing the massive number of sleepers and massive amount of work going on on Beaudesert Rail has made everyone start to realise that they have to start to support the project, and I am sure this will happen as we come to 7 December. During the year more carriages were purchased. Some were not in the best condition. But amazingly, these carriages are being brought back into magnificent condition. I remember a long time ago travelling on the top carriages in Queensland. They are magnificent to ride in. A day is probably a long enough time to experience the carriages. They have been magnificently restored. On the electrical scene, we are very grateful for the expertise of people such as Steve Austin for the advice, design and wiring of the carriages with 240 volt power. This will enable the first fleet to have a good lighting system. The group was fortunate in obtaining a grant from the Gaming Machine Community Benefit Fund. This enabled the purchase of tractors, buckets, units, chainsaws and brush-cutters to control the vegetation. I congratulate Jim Daynes from Logan 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4755

Village News and Views, who through his tenacity has pushed to get this project completed against what I believe were great odds. Certainly, many people did not believe that the rail between Bethania and Beaudesert would be viable. I would have thought that originally the plans would have been to bring electric trains from Gailes, through Greenbank to Beaudesert and to the infrastructure at Flagstone. I have had a long fight over whether the high school should be built at Flagstone or Jimboomba. However, the government decided to build a new high school at Flagstone. Personally, I think the government is still in trouble over that high school, because the corridor between Gailes, Greenbank and Beaudesert has not been set aside. So we have a massive, brand new high school sitting in an area with little infrastructure around it. As I have mentioned in the parliament before, there is not even a shop or any other social infrastructure around this magnificent high school. I would hope that in the future the area will expand, but at this stage I still believe that the wrong decision has been made. I congratulate Alan Robert and Joy and Doug Drescher, who have really put their hearts into this project. I congratulate also Robert Cawley. Another area where I believe some mistakes have been made is with respect to the Wolffdene dam. I was involved in the whole problem of the Wolffdene dam in the 1990s, when Wayne Goss and the Liberals said that they would not build a Wolffdene dam. There was a problem with the social infrastructure in the Albert River area. There is no doubt that many people would have been affected. However, all of those people, back in the 1960s and 1970s, understood that a Wolffdene dam would be built. Because of politics, the Wolffdene dam was cancelled. It is only now, in our present situation, that we realise the benefits that a Wolffdene dam would have brought. It was close to the urban population and the back of Beenleigh. There were streams that could have carried the water from Wolffdene down through Beenleigh and Logan City. I believe that would have relieved some of the pressure on the Hinze Dam. Mr Speaker, as you know, that has created problems for the Gold Coast. Had the Wolffdene dam been constructed, I believe it would have relieved a lot of that pressure. There is no doubt, given the social infrastructure now at Wolffdene, that there is no chance of building a dam unless a massive cost is incurred in the future. Certainly, I am not saying that the Wolffdene dam should be resurrected. It is gone. It is finished. However, this government said that it would build a Glendower dam, which is closer, towards Beaudesert, and will be needed for the urban development between Beenleigh and the Gold Coast. I have asked the minister when the Glendower dam will be built. I cannot get an answer about when the Glendower dam will be built. This government has been responsible for cancelling the Wolffdene dam concept, saying that it would build a Glendower dam, and yet no Glendower dam has been built. It is only now, given our present situation, that we see the lack of water in this area and the massive population development and demographic growth occurring between Brisbane and the Gold Coast and the consequent need for water. Already Beaudesert, Jimboomba and Logan find themselves in trouble. Water which is now being released from the Maroon Dam cannot even get to Jimboomba before it is used by people and farmers. There is a need for infrastructure to be built along the Albert or Logan Rivers to assist the urban people in these areas. More importantly, there is a need for assistance with the Moogerah Dam, which is well below one per cent. The Moogerah Dam provides water for Boonah and used to provide water for Ipswich. It provides water for Swanbank as well. There is no doubt that, if the government wanted to, it could switch Swanbank over to the Wivenhoe, switch Ipswich completely over to the Wivenhoe and leave the people of the Warrill and Boonah areas only to take water from Moogerah. But Moogerah is not the answer; it has a very poor catchment area. Unless another dam is built on the Teviot or water is brought from the Maroon over the hill to feed the Moogerah Dam, we will always be in trouble. Unfortunately, this government has no definite plans regarding water infrastructure and the construction of dams in the Boonah area. Similarly, in the Beaudesert area we have massive demographic growth such as that occurring in the Jimboomba area. This is really going to be a massive problem. I ask the government to really look at what is happening there and to understand what is happening there. I always believed that both the Moogerah Dam and the Maroon Dam were built for agricultural viability. They were built to maintain the agriculture of the area and those small crops in the area, especially around Boonah. Now they can hardly provide the urban water that is necessary. I believe this government is backing itself into a situation where, in the future, no dams will be built for agricultural use. The only way they can afford the infrastructure in building a dam is through urban use and the rates 4756 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 that people will pay for the water because certainly agriculture cannot pay for the water. We see this now in the Beaudesert area and the Boonah area. I thank the government for its contribution to Beaudesert Rail. That contribution is very small compared with the contribution by the Commonwealth government for the Beaudesert rail infrastructure. The project has been successful. I would ask the Treasurer to ensure that this sort of funding is provided because I think this government is going to be very proud of what will happen with Beaudesert Rail. Mr MICKEL (Logan—ALP) (4.00 p.m.): This is an important debate because it again highlights the difference between the two sides of politics. That is why these debates are important at this time of the year. What we have heard from the alternative Premier and the alternative government is a mish-mash—nothing consistent. On the one hand, they talk about how evil it is to spend more money but, on the other hand, they talk about the wish to spend more money. We just heard the member for Beaudesert speaking about a project under the Community Jobs Plan and I was pleased to hear of the job placement out of that program. The Community Jobs Plan is a good scheme. It helps northern Beaudesert shire magnificently. But it was not so long ago that the Leader of the Opposition was criticising these plans because they are nothing more, I think he said at the time, than painting rocks. So we cannot even get agreement within the opposition on a scheme as fundamental to the long-term unemployed as the Community Jobs Plan. A previous speaker criticised the grants the government has given to encourage industry, whilst at the same time bemoaning the fact that we had not given more government money to other industries. What sort of grants were given? Well, happily they were grants that have benefited my electorate. The Qantas Snap Fresh which has been established in the Logan City suburb of Crestmead will now supply meals to Qantas and British Airways and a number of mining operations throughout Queensland. It is a very significant employer in Logan City, employing people from my electorate, and it happened because this government was prepared to get in there and back it and encourage it. We have also heard criticism over the months from the opposition spokesmen about the creation of jobs through National Foods in my electorate. National Foods is another great national company. One of the opposition spokesmen had the temerity—the absurdity—to suggest that a national company set up there simply to improve my electoral prospects. That is the absurdity of the opposition at the moment under the leadership of the honourable member for Toowoomba South. What of the Berri fruit juice company which moved up from down south to create jobs here in Queensland. The general manager of that company in Australia allegedly threatened the Opposition Leader with defamation for the comments he was making about the grants allocated to that company. We have also heard from the honourable gentleman today about what he called a deficit. He was bemoaning that deficit. Yes, it is an operating deficit, but it is solely related to the share market. Allow me to quote from this. The September quarter was one of the worst in decades. The Australian share market delivered a negative 7.5 per cent return. That was one of the world's best performances. The Leader of the Opposition somehow thinks that he can outperform the world's markets when demonstrably he cannot even outperform this government. He cannot even convince his own side, as I have proved, so how is he going to convince the share market. The reality is that the international share market has been spooked by accounting scandals, rumours of war and US economic uncertainty, which has helped keep a lid on the share market recovery. Those are not my words; they actually come from the executive vice president of BT Australia. The other point made by the Leader of the Opposition is that somehow the economy in Queensland is in such utter chaos that it is not worth investing in it. That is not the opinion of Moody's who have given us an AAA credit rating, and that credit rating stays where it is today. The honourable gentleman is famous for his rhetorical blasts. I remember when he was in opposition in the early 1990s and he used to say, 'Where has all the money gone?' He has reeled out the same old speech today and said, 'Where has all the money gone?' The money has gone in this budget on 307 extra police, including a new police beat in my suburb of Crestmead. The police beat is actually in the electorate of Woodridge. Another one has been opened at Loganlea. There is another police station opening at Loganholme. So we are seeing it in Logan City. We have 307 extra police throughout the state. A government member interjected. 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4757

Mr MICKEL: At Fraser Island; I take the interjection. In health, we are seeing extra funding in the face of what is a significant cost transfer from the federal government. I have just been given a piece of information which I hope members will all keep confidential until tomorrow. The Logan Hospital today is going to receive five experienced doctors. What for? For the extra emergency work that is carried out at that hospital! As a former Minister for Health, the member for Toowoomba South should realise how important that is to a growth area like Logan City. Where has the money gone? It has gone to the emergency services in places like Logan City. What about the 382 new teachers? I am happy to say that in the recent allocation every school in my electorate received an extra teacher to help with literacy and numeracy programs or school behaviour management. That is where the money has gone. It has gone to places like Regents Park State School which was deprived of a sporting oval and now has an extra one. It is going to go into the new TAFE training facility that is going to be built in this financial year in Browns Plains. That is where the money is going to. $50 million this year will go to the Mount Lindesay Highway. When the honourable member says, 'Where is the money going?' it is going on important projects like that. It is going to go to the Tugun bypass because, as I understand it, we are still waiting for the federal government to come up with any sort of money at all for that project. So in the absence of any national leadership it is up to the state Labor government to show that leadership and to provide that much needed infrastructure for tourism and for residents of the Gold Coast. That is where the money is going to. I heard the honourable shadow minister talk about fire ants. My electorate has a significant issue at the moment with fire ants and we are working very hard to eradicate that problem. Extra money is being poured in there to make sure that problem does not get out of hand. That is also happening in the neighbouring electorate of Stretton and the neighbouring electorate of Algester. Where has the money gone? It has gone to fighting a great issue—a tremendously important issue like fire ants because we are the world's leaders when it comes to taking on that issue. I want to take on another issue with the honourable the Leader of the Opposition where he referred to the GST and the money coming to Queensland as a result of the GST. The reality of life for state governments—and the opposition has not got its head around this yet—is that there has been a shrinking of the tax base as a direct result of the GST. The state taxation base has shrunk. Just under 50 per cent of the money going to Queensland budgets these days is completely dependent upon the federal government. For the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, I point out that no state will gain any benefit from GST revenue in 2002-2003. As a result of this, the Treasurer advises that the federal government is providing top-up grants to all states to ensure that the states are no worse off than they were before the GST was implemented. These arrangements have seen federal government payments to Queensland drop below our per capita share. Other states are compensated for the abolition of taxes that Queensland never imposed in the first place. In fact, the federal government's basis for distributing these top- up grants disadvantages Queensland by more than $250 million. So if those opposite are serious about extra money for such programs, they should get on to the federal government—their coalition government in Canberra—and help us fight for Queensland, for the extra money that should be given to Queensland, and we could do a whole lot more in terms of delivery of services. In the face of this, what are we seeing? Are we seeing extra help from the federal government? In fact, no. Every time there is a bit of trouble we see an extra tax imposed by the federal government such as a tourism tax— Ms Keech: They call them levies. Mr MICKEL: It calls them levies. Levies are taxes from the federal government, and there is not one word from the opposition about what is the highest taxing federal government in the history of Australia. What is happening to Queensland services? What we are seeing is the greatest cost shift that has ever happened in federal-state relations. Take Logan City in my electorate as an example. What we are seeing is the opting out of doctors in the bulk-billing program where bulk-billing is all but ceasing to exist because of the federal government's health policies. That means that more and more working families are having to present to the emergency department at the Logan Hospital and that is causing a strain on health services. The Minister for Health came out with a program that I think deserves full support, and I wish the federal government would wake up to itself and get behind it—that is, the idea of placing a GP at the services to ensure that we can get a bulk-billed service at either the private hospital in 4758 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002

Logan or at least in some of the outpatient services in Logan. That would be a way that working families who have sick kids at any time of the day or night could retain the benefits of bulk-billing. I would like that scheme examined. Members of the Logan South branch of the Labor Party have asked me to bring this matter to the attention of the Queensland parliament. I hope that the Queensland Health Minister can look at this issue and take it up with the federal government. The other great cost shift we are seeing is the cost shift in regard to disability services—in other words, services for people who are not able to express concerns themselves and who often times do not have the means to be able to get out and protest. What we are seeing is that disability programs are being shifted from the federal government straight on to the states. The states are having to pay for those programs out of a diminished tax take. When the member for Toowoomba South was the Health Minister we saw another cost shift when it came to dental services. Costello said, 'There is no such thing as dental waiting lists and we don't have to fund it anymore.' One only has to ask around the place to find out how long the dental waiting lists are as a direct result of that cost shift from the federal government. I believe that the federal Treasurer deliberately misled the parliament on that issue. If one looks at the dental waiting lists in Queensland one finds that they are significant, and they are significant because of the cost shift and the fact that Queensland taxpayers are having to pick up that entire federal program. I have mentioned in this House before about how the high schools in my electorate and throughout Logan City had to pick up a program where the federal government said it would provide $20,000 a year instead of the youth allowance. And what happened? The schools worked assiduously for 12 months to get the program started before any money came through and when the money came through the federal government pulled the rug from under the program. How disconcerting it was for those young people to have that opportunity smashed away from them by an uncaring federal government simply because they live in a federal Labor electorate. Do not tell me that this federal government is on about fairness; it is on about unfairness, and it is unfairness to working families. The federal government is also on about another great cost shift, and the Minister for Main Roads is on it—that is, the latest scheme to transfer costs to the states for main roads. What I fear is that this will put the Mount Lindesay Highway project, which is much needed in the Logan City and north Beaudesert areas, further under pressure as the state government has to find money for the National Highway system or worse—that is, having to impose more toll roads. I have said in this House before that when the previous government abolished the tolls on the Sunshine Coast it was my electorate which carried the can for that. We have still got the toll roads. We are the ones whose road program suffered as a direct result of that $400 million loss of revenue to pay for that decision. It is our roads and our traffic jams every day that are paying for that decision and the decision by the Borbidge government to spend the proceeds of Suncorp Metway on one road—namely, the road to the Gold Coast. It is my electorate that is carrying the can for that. It is my electorate that pleads every day for the extra funding. We are getting $50 million, but how much of an effort it would have been if the federal government had recognised its responsibility for a road system that links up with northern New South Wales. The Leader of the Opposition was also critical about the appropriation for parliament, particularly when it came to the sittings of parliament in Townsville. I know he has had more positions on this than a drunken sailor trying to work his way through the Kama Sutra, but the fact of the matter is this: the other night in Toowoomba when the acid was put on him and he was asked, 'Would you like the parliament to sit up here?', there was the Opposition Leader saying, 'Yes, we'll have it up here in Toowoomba.' What happens is that he does not want it in Townsville when he is in Brisbane; he wants it in Townsville when he is in Townsville; but when he is back in Brisbane he did not want it up in Townsville either. It is the same thing: when you stand for nothing you will fall for anything. That is what is happening with the opposition: it is falling for the lot. It has no consistent policies and no coherent strategy. There is one thing we need a strategy on, and that is corporate law. I believe that in this day and age when we see corporate executives walking away from companies that they have sent down the chute with multimillion-dollar payouts it is time that there were corporate law reforms in this country. What we need to do is increase the transparency and accountability in payments to directors and executives, especially bonus share issues, directors' fees and severance payments. We also need to provide for the recovery of severance payments, bonuses and other extraordinary payments to the directors and executives of companies which go broke and cause losses to shareholders, creditors and employees. I fail to see why directors who have sent their companies' share price down should still get a company bonus for that effort. It is time also that 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4759 the corporate law was changed to rein in extravagant benefits enjoyed by some company directors and executives such as unlimited expenses, the charging to business of the cost of upgrading their private homes, and enabling private secretaries to live almost permanently in first- class hotels. These are basic requirements if public and investor confidence in corporate Australia is to be restored. The worst recent examples of corporate fraud and excess and greed relate to HIH, One.Tel and even Ansett. The obscene payments made to the executives and directors of these companies must be recovered to the greatest possible extent and future payments to directors and executives of companies which go broke must be able to be automatically recovered. It is especially obscene that the disgraced directors of HIH are holding up payments by the liquidator to staff, the work force, working families and creditors because they are demanding a greater share, having already taken an obscene share. The multimillion-dollar severance payment to the former CEO of Suncorp, even though the company is profitable, demands serious explanation, and the same applies to the former head of the AMP company. But the real villains are the executives and directors of companies which go broke while the directors retain their extravagant benefits. It is time the federal government acted to restore confidence in the private sector and in the share market, and the way it can do that is to amend the corporate laws to address these issues without delay. Mr HOBBS (Warrego—NPA) (4.19 p.m.): I am pleased to rise to speak to the appropriation debate today. A lot has been said in relation to government debt, particularly by the Opposition Leader. I do not want to go over it all again, but the point is that there are some great concerns out there in relation to where the budget is going. That concern is not coming just from our side of politics; it is across the board. There are serious concerns in relation to whether the funds of this state are being managed well. In light of how many deficits we have had—there are more to come—it is quite a scary situation. That is particularly the case with the capital works budget being cut. I understand that when there are some troubles with finances capital works have to be cut back. So we understand why it has happened, but funding really is a matter of priorities. An issue that is very important particularly out in my region is exceptional circumstances funding. Insufficient funding has been provided to the Department of Primary Industries to effect reforms to the exceptional circumstances arrangements agreed to by the Commonwealth and state ministers. As members would be aware, the ministers have met and have thrashed out a much better system for approving drought exceptional circumstances assistance. That has taken quite a long time to achieve. The only hold-up in relation to these reforms now is funding from the state. The process has been streamlined with quicker applications and the ability to expand those regions when necessary, rather than having to go back through the whole bureaucratic process of making a second application for the same region plus a bit more. The delay boils down to the state not providing the funding. The Commonwealth government presently supplies 100 per cent of welfare support, but business support is provided on the basis of 10 per cent from the state and 90 per cent from the Commonwealth. It is proposed to change that ratio to fifty-fifty. Therefore, the state will be an equal player in this particular game. And from what we could see it has basically been a game for the Minister for Primary Industries. It seems that even though the Minister for Primary Industries is on the group that set the guidelines, he is quite happy to play politics and blame the federal government when an application for exceptional circumstances assistance is being held up. Under these reforms, at least everybody is brought together to make a collective decision. If they are paying equal amounts, then they also share equally the praise or the blame when the time comes. I think this a very serious situation. It is a stalemate, but a resolution needs to be found fairly quickly. Another important issue is the airconditioning of schools. This is particularly important in many areas of the state. A lot of schools in my area do not have airconditioning. Even though we are in the same zone for which airconditioning is available on a four to one funding basis, I believe that schools in my area are being discriminated against. An example of this is St George Primary School. For a long time it has been raising money to aircondition the school. There is an e-petition online at present. Airconditioning the school will cost about $300,000. Normally under the government scheme if the school raises $75,000, under a four to one arrangement it can get airconditioning. The school has already raised $130,000. It will keep $30,000 up its sleeve for the next round, but of the $100,000 it will spend it will be able to aircondition only one-third of the school. So the school has to go out and raise not only the $75,000 that the schools in the north raise; it has to raise close to another $100,000 to even meet the criteria. That school is really 4760 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 copping it in the neck. I do not think it is fair and the parents out there do not think it is fair. I do not see why we cannot have a better system for the airconditioning of those schools. I am disappointed that the Treasurer is not present in the chamber to hear me quote his comments. I did not trawl for this; it happened to fall on my desk. It is a speech in the Address in Reply debate from 20 April 1978. Mr Mackenroth said— This is the first opportunity I have had to put forward some of my views on how I feel a Government can help the community in which we live. One important way a Government could help our community would be by proper protection of school p. and c. organisations. At the present time schools are forced to raise money for many necessary items of education such as special textbooks, television sets, musical equipment and playground equipment. The list is endless. He is dead right. The list is endless. When some schools have to raise twice or three times as much as schools in the north to get the same sort of equality in education, I think there is something wrong with the system. The other issue I raise is the general underfunding of many of the departments, particularly in relation to staffing. Today we had a bit of a discussion about planning. That brought home to me just how underfunded that area is. One of the most important strategic planning issues faced in the whole of south-east Queensland relates to traffic flows, integrated transport and South East Queensland 2020. Unless we can plan ahead to make sure the roads are in the right places, the railways are in the right places, the population is in the right places and so on, there will be serious livability problems in years to come. There is a most important planning arrangement in place, but there are no staff left to run it. For one of the most important facets of our whole life there are about 10 people in the Department of Local Government who are trying their best to pull it together, and they just cannot do it. We really need to plan ahead to ensure that Queensland continues to be a great place to live. One only has to drive along the highways to see the traffic jams that are happening again. This mirrors experiences overseas. Some cities decide not to build more highways because as soon as they build them they are filled up within two, three or four years. They are trying to find alternatives. We have the opportunity now, while we are still developing, to put planning regimes in place. It certainly will not happen unless we are able to sufficiently fund planning. Somebody said to me today that it is a bit like trying to take off in a Hercules plane with a tiger moth motor. It just will not fly. I say to the Treasurer: it is important in the next budget that the government recognises, particularly in the planning field—it is one the minister would be very well aware of from his time overseeing local government—that we need to provide sufficient funding. I am sure there are many other departments that want more funding. We see time and time again that government services just are not being delivered. We are seeing cutbacks particularly in a lot of the rural service areas, for example DPI and DNR. People cannot get applications through. Nothing is happening. Everything is bogged down. I do not doubt that every department is experiencing similar problems, but I think the issue in relation to planning in south-east Queensland is important. I request that the Treasurer look very carefully at funding that properly in the future. Mr NEIL ROBERTS (Nudgee—ALP) (4.29 p.m.): This bill allocates additional funds for expenditure by departments in the 2001-02 financial year, but I want to take this opportunity to talk about some of the expenditure that has been approved this financial year in my electorate, particularly from the Department of Education. I was very pleased to see that yesterday the Minister for Employment and Training and the Minister for Education announced the education and training reforms for the future. These are indeed a major investment by the state government in our young people. In fact, in my view they are the most exciting reforms to our education and training system in a generation. In general, the reforms will provide an increased range of choices for 15-, 16- and 17-year-olds to achieve a senior certificate or vocational educational qualification. There are also a range of other measures to improve the opportunity and support for young people as they make those sometimes difficult transitions from school to further training or further education or work. Some of the expenditure that has been approved for my electorate is quite exciting and links directly to these education and training reforms. This year's budget provided an allocation of $2.3 million out of a total of $8.8 million that will be provided by the state Labor government for the construction of a new preschool to year 12 college on the grounds of Banyo High School. The new school is going to be known as Earnshaw State College and will officially commence its 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4761 operations at the start of the 2003 school year. This development has been a very exciting phase of development for the Banyo-Nudgee community. There was extensive consultation over a long period, which eventually resulted in community support to amalgamate the existing Nudgee Primary School and Banyo High School to form a new integrated P-12 school on the grounds of Banyo High School. As I have indicated, it will formally be known as Earnshaw State College. Significantly, this decision, which was supported by the community, included an acknowledgment that Nudgee Primary School would be sold to provide part of the funding for the new school. I am pleased that stage 1 of Earnshaw State College is currently under way. In the last budget, $2.3 million was allocated to establish the middle school component of the project. This middle school will cater for students in years 5 to 9. Work to be undertaken in this stage includes a major gutting and refurbishment of G block, which will form the basis of the middle school; a new business and computing education centre; a new preschool to year 5 library; upgrades to the years 6 to 12 library; canteen expansions; information technology network upgrades; telephone network upgrades; and new roadworks and parking facilities. Completion of the P-12 at Earnshaw State College will put this school at the forefront of the education and training reforms that were announced yesterday by the Minister for Education and Minister for Employment and Training. I am also pleased that another investment in my electorate links directly to these reforms, and that is that the Geebung State School will be one of the first 39 schools that will be running a trial of a full-time preparatory year of education from next year, 2003. The current Geebung Preschool teacher, Julie Slingsby, is tremendously excited about being involved in the trial and she is highly regarded in this field. Parents at the school have also shown tremendous support for their involvement in this trial. I am pleased to congratulate Geebung State School on being selected for this historic trial. In many ways, it is a vote of confidence in the school's ability to deliver quality educational outcomes for its students. Another investment in education is that, for the first time, St Kevin's Catholic School at Geebung will offer preschool education in 2003. The state Labor government has contributed $160,000 towards the provision of a purpose-built preschool building, which is currently under construction and is expected to be completed by January next year. There has been a very strong response from the local community for places in 2003. Children at this preschool will attend on a five-day fortnight basis and will be catered for in a child-orientated play based environment. Mrs Sharon Wharton, the teacher appointed to the preschool, and Mrs Robyn McDonald, the preschool teacher aide, are very much looking forward to their involvement with the establishment of the preschool program at St Kevin's. A further investment in education in my electorate came in the last budget with the allocation of $350,000 to build new classroom facilities at Geebung Special School, which is a very worthy recipient of that investment. The school, its staff and parent body provide a wonderfully supportive environment for the students. The staff and the dedicated parents and volunteers who help spend a lot of time and effort in providing additional support services for those children. These new facilities will go a long way towards improving the opportunities for those needy students at that school. As well, I will give a snapshot of some recent state government expenditure in Geebung. For Geebung State School, $29,000 was recently approved for the upgrade of the activities hall. That came out of the Gambling Community Benefit Fund. There was an additional $20,000 to upgrade before and after school care facilities; $130,000 under the Triple R program for repainting and reroofing; and over $20,000 has been provided to upgrade facilities for the prep year trial, which includes not only upgrades and refurbishment of a classroom for the prep year but also playground equipment. St Kevin's Catholic School has also recently received $231,000 for new classrooms that will be built at the school. John Wesley Gardens has also benefited from the Gambling Community Benefit Fund by receiving $30,000 to develop a wheelchair accessible garden. Aspley Little Athletics, which is located in Bowden Park, Geebung, received $18,200 from the fund to purchase a tractor and some new mats. Another significant investment in the Geebung area occurred over the past few years with major upgrades to the Sunshine Railway Station and the Geebung Railway Station. Geebung in my electorate has certainly benefited greatly from investment by this state government. I commend the bill to the House. Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (4.36 p.m.): I rise to speak to the appropriation bills before the parliament. I know that the responsibilities of the government are significant. There is never going to be a time when the need for expenditure is able to be answered in any one budget. Everybody understands that. But there are a number of issues that I wish to bring to the attention of the parliament in relation to the portfolios addressed in the bill. 4762 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002

The Department of Education and the Minister for Education, in tandem with the Premier and the Minister for Training, have announced the new educational reforms. The main feedback that I have received, particularly in relation to the extension of schooling to include early childhood, is in relation to the apparent lack of staffing, that is, 15 hours of teacher aide time that is going to be allocated to the trial. Given that significant additional numbers of children are going to require assistance and supervision, I pass on to the minister the concern that has been outlined to me in relation to that extension of schooling to include the prep year. I want to commend the Minister for Education for the hall at the Tannum Sands State High School. Although it is not complete, it is heading that way for the beginning of the next school year. It is very much overdue. As the structure is developing, it looks like it will be a magnificent building and one that the school community will be able to use very positively in the years to come. Only last week, the school held its final year 12 assembly. The procedure that the school has to go through to prepare the area and to create a reasonable amount of shade for the full school community entails quite a lot of extra work for the staff. I know that they are looking forward to having the hall available. So I want to pass on the appreciation of the school community for that facility. During the week I spoke with the minister's office about a very special young man in my electorate called Cameron Brown. Cameron is 13 and is starting high school next year. He spent his first seven years at Clinton Primary School. Cameron has a chronic heart condition and his mobility is severely reduced. He has been given from the Variety Club of Queensland a three- wheeled scooter. On Tuesday, for the first time in his entire life, Cameron was physically present on the sports field—not being particularly active but he was among his peers with his scooter. However, there are problems getting the scooter to the high school. He falls between the cracks in terms of eligibility for school transport, even under the state government's 50 per cent taxi subsidy through the Department of Transport. The cost to the family is too high. It is about $50 a week. That is not a criticism of the minister's department. It is just that the half cost to the family is too high. The federal government will not provide any support. We have pursued that line to see if it will provide any sort of assistance. I commend the Minister for Education's office because I know that it is reviewing Cameron's situation. It is a very genuine situation. He has a quite chronic heart condition. His parents have supported him through years 1 to 7, although he has missed a lot of school. They are looking for some assistance to get the scooter to and from school each day so that he can enjoy this enhanced quality of life for the short time he has with them. His parents are well aware that they will not have Cameron for a long time, but they want to make that time they have together as good as possible. I raised one of the concerns about health services in my electorate this morning. In spite of the Minister for Health responding to a number of letters I have written, people in my community still see and experience a reduction in the available health facilities. I know that one member referred to bulk-billing and the Medicare scheme. We do not have any doctors in Gladstone who bulk-bill. There are a few who may have private arrangements with pensioners or long-term patients, but for the majority of people who see a private doctor there are no bulk-billing facilities. A family with one or two children, particularly in the winter when the children are sick, needs at least $100 in their pocket to see the doctor and get the scripts filled. Many families do not have that disposable income. So they go to the hospital and wait six or seven hours—if they are seen at all. I am not criticising the staff at the hospital. They are required to work under the regime imposed on them. I know that the majority of the community who access the Gladstone Hospital see it as offering a deteriorating service. Our oncology section has suffered because the specialist has stopped attending. A huge cost to the department involves flying cancer patients, often with carers, to Brisbane to see an oncologist. The question often put to me is: why does the department not arrange to fly an oncologist up here who everyone can meet and see on a given day? It is a question I cannot answer, because the practicalities are that it would have to be cheaper for the department to do it that way. We have a number of needs regarding specialities at the hospital, not the least of which are renal services. Our people have to travel to Rockhampton on at least a three-hour round trip and stay on the dialysis machine from three to five hours. We want a stand-alone dialysis unit in Gladstone to allow at least those who can self-attach to do their dialysis without enduring that huge trip. I look forward to the minister's support for that. There are places in public areas, 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4763 shopping centres et cetera, where a community renal unit could be located. For many in our community, that would be a huge step forward. The Minister for Police has issued press releases which state that the crime statistics in Queensland have improved. I am sure that is dealing with averages. However, in Gladstone assaults have increased. In the Gladstone district the number of assaults rose by two per cent. Gladstone and Biloela are black spots for assaults. In the next 12 months police are looking to target that area. The police know what are the pertinent days for these assaults—Fridays and Saturdays. The crime tends to occur at night and in the early hours of the morning when young people in particular are leaving the clubs along the waterfront. I again ask the Minister for Police to increase the staffing levels in Gladstone. Our community is growing exponentially. We are looking at quite significant increases in our population, particularly during the construction phase of industry. Police cannot respond in hindsight to crisis situations. They need the personnel to turn out to incidents before they occur or at the time that the incidents occur. The police must be on hand. The projections of population indicate that there will be a further 5,000 or 6,000 people before 2004-05. Some of them are construction workers, some of whom will not have a connection to the city but who will want recreation and entertainment in the city. Things like our emergency services, police and health services will have to be upgraded and numbers increased to accommodate those increases in the population. Recently there was a rally of Families Department staff outside my office— A government member interjected. Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM: They came out with their balloons to protest the stretching of their resources and their increasing workload. All power to them. It was an orderly rally. As I say, they had balloons, and they had some very interesting signs with innovative wording that I will not repeat in the House because some of it was very imaginative. The union organised the demonstration. But the point they were trying to make is that as a department they are under stress. They have to prioritise the cases that are lodged with them. No-one said this to me in as many words, but as individuals they are frustrated that they cannot fulfil their duties to the extent that they would like to. Some families contact my office and those matters are passed on to the Department of Families. The minister's officers and her office have always been good in terms of responding to my inquiries in a timely manner. However, in the long term and in terms of the reality of day-to-day operation, the staff at Family Services are really under pressure. They have a lot of complaints, for want of a better word, from the hinterland of Gladstone and they need the staff to appropriately cope with that demand. Anglicare, which looks after the foster carers, also has a workload beyond its capacity to cope. Anglicare in Gladstone is linked with Anglicare in Rockhampton and is seen as one service and funded as such. However, the caseload of the two offices, Rockhampton and Gladstone, is equal to two separate services. They desperately need additional funding for an additional person in Gladstone to cover Gladstone, Calliope, Rockhampton, Biloela and Miriam Vale. It is a significant area. They are looking all the time for foster carers. They need the time and the ability to train those foster carers and to do some early intervention and prevention work. They are looking for additional funding to increase to two full-time people the staff in the Gladstone office. The notifications from the area around Biloela make up 30 per cent of all notifications to the office at Gladstone. It is a significant demand. It is an hour or so from town. Because there is only one point something staff at Gladstone it means that somebody must be away from the region on the coast to respond to the demand at Biloela. Another person is certainly needed. I commend Mandy Jones, who heads the Gladstone office. She is a wonderful person who has a tremendous way with people. She is a great communicator who does a brilliant job under very trying circumstances. I have already talked about emergency services issues with regard to the additional staffing in my electorate. All of us who have any component of bushland in our electorates—and that would be the majority of 'other than the centre of Brisbane' people—know that this forthcoming summer without rain will be very trying, for want of a better way of putting it. The body of fuel available for fires is there and is tinder dry. All of our emergency services, particularly the firefighting volunteers and full-timers, expect the worst. Emotionally they will need to be prepared to respond. But their area of responsibility is significant. I recommend that additional staff be provided. The only other matter that I wanted to raise is one that I have raised with the Minister for Housing previously so he will not be surprised, and that is the need for a men's shelter in my electorate. We have a wonderful women's shelter for women who have suffered domestic 4764 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 violence in particular. We have a youth shelter at Rosebery House. However, there is a significant number of older men who have not been married, whose marriages have broken up or who have lost their spouses and who find themselves displaced. Many of them lived in a set of flats called Palm Court. That has been sold for redevelopment and many of them will not have anywhere to go once that sale goes through. I have spoken to the minister. He is not opposed to the notion of a men's shelter. It has become critical for a shelter to be established, one where meals are provided. Although this is a sexist comment, a lot of these fellows grew up in a generation where they did not cook their meals—their wives did—and they are not able to do the cleaning, washing and cooking. This is the work that their partners did all their lives, but now that they have lost their partners they are displaced. They are certainly not old enough for Meals on Wheels. They need some support to ensure that they have somewhere to go. My region is in chronic need of a boarding house or a men's shelter. A number of us are working on a number of options. We thought we found one recently when one of the motels was put up for sale. We got very excited about that. The ad was in the newspaper on a Tuesday morning. We rang up on Tuesday at about 11 o'clock only to find that it had been sold. That option did not pan out. It is a matter of priorities. These are men who have contributed to the economic viability of the area, whether through a job or in other ways. They are at a loss at the moment as to where they will go. We are at a loss as to where they will go. They deserve some consideration. I have no doubt that there are many areas of need in all of our electorates. I place these matters before the various ministers for consideration, because the people I represent, similar to the constituents of other honourable members, are hardworking people with great hearts who give great support to the state. They want some consideration. Mr COPELAND (Cunningham—NPA) (4.51 p.m.): I rise to speak to Appropriation Bill (No. 2). As the previous speaker, the member for Gladstone, said, there are a lot of issues in all of our electorates that need attention. Today I wish to touch on one area, that of education. There are many rural and regional state schools in my electorate, as there are in many other electorates, that have enthusiastic and competent staff, strong parents and citizens associations and very generous wider community support. These enduring features have always stood those schools very well and ensured that students always received education of the highest quality. However, with the current level of government funding and the very tight economic conditions in our rural and regional communities with the ongoing drought, many are simply not able to attain the level of capital needed to provide some basic facilities and resources. My electorate, for example, has very large schools and small schools. The smallest school in my electorate has only six pupils. It is a very good school and the children of some very good friends of mine attend it. Regardless of the size of the schools, all are faced with the same problem of raising money to provide what many would consider to be basic resources and facilities. It is very difficult to explain the immense effect that the crippling drought is having on rural and regional communities and just how significantly it affects those local schools. Community funding is vital for local state schools. However, this money can go only so far and cannot cover the costs of major improvements such as capital works, staff and extensive resource renewals. I have spoken previously in the House about a number of programs at some of the schools. Today I wish to mention a couple more. The Leyburn State School, which is in an area experiencing severe climatic conditions, has a number of issues that require attention. Airconditioning in classrooms is a very big issue, especially in the school's demountable. The region that I represent is not in the Cooler Schools zone yet still experiences very high temperatures on school days in the middle of summer. That was especially noticeable in the summer of this year. Any member who has visited their schools and especially the demountables, which are being used so extensively now to house classrooms, libraries or resource centres, in the middle of summer would realise just how hot those demountables get. The demountables need to be looked at as a separate issue rather than just looking at the wider Cooler Schools program. They are not specifically designed for hot climatic conditions. They can get incredibly hot—much hotter than the highset classrooms that have verandas and better design features than what is essentially just a movable box, which is what these buildings are. They are very welcome in terms of the extra space and resources they provide, but there are some issues that need to be taken into account. I think that is probably a statewide concern. These days they are widely used so that if a school changes in size they can be moved quite easily and relatively inexpensively to make sure that the facilities are provided in the schools where they are needed. Mr Shine: What about winter in Leyburn? 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4765

Mr COPELAND: Winter in Leyburn is incredibly cold, as the member for Toowoomba South would know. Similarly, that also presents some issues. I visited the Leyburn State School in the middle of winter. It was a cold winter this year. They have a couple of little bar heaters. The kids were running around in bare feet. They had cold hands and were holding them up to the bar heaters to try to warm up. Winter is also a problem. It is probably a pertinent question to raise that, yes, the heat is a problem for the learning environment but the cold is also, and that probably needs to be examined as we continue to upgrade our school facilities. Funding is also required to undertake general upgrades to the current facilities, such as repaving around the school's swimming pool for the benefit of students' safety. It is the only swimming pool in Leyburn. Leyburn is only a very small community. The swimming pool is used by the whole community. It is a valuable resource for the town. Upgrades to that pool are needed. The Nobby State School is another school in my electorate that has a swimming pool. It is, again, the only pool in that town. I believe it is the oldest school pool in the state. I do not know whether that is correct. They are very good assets for those schools and communities to have, but they can be expensive to maintain. For the school community or the school itself to try to raise the funds to look after those pools can be a very big ask. But they are such a valuable resource that we must make sure that funds are available to them to continue to use those pools. These are simple upgrades that have no room in the very tight school budgets, but they are very important for the Leyburn State School community. The Karara State School, a little further south than Leyburn, also has a couple of problems. The Karara State School community has been hit especially hard, for example, by the public liability crisis. The Karara Carnival, a major fundraising event held for many years by the very small community of Karara—anyone who has driven through Karara would realise that it is not a very big township; there are a few homes, a small store, a pub, a school and not much else—had to be cancelled because they were simply unable to find public liability insurance. That was a direct result of the horse sport activities. Anyone who has had anything to do with public liability knows that if a horse is involved it is virtually impossible to get cover. That has meant that the funds that would have been raised by that event which for many years has directly benefited the school community simply are not being raised this year. They will have some very real problems in trying to raise money to continue to deliver the sort of education that they want to. Problems have been highlighted with respect to rural schools accessing specialist teachers, especially LOTE teachers. There are LOTE teachers who are shared amongst the schools and who do a day or half a day in each. But there needs to be more funding to entice those specialist teachers—LOTE is just one example—to work in rural areas. Physical education and other specialist teachers, such as music teachers, are also in the same category. Significant problems still exist in relation to providing sufficient teacher resources and time to cater for high-needs children. This by no means is only a Karara problem. There are many other schools in my electorate that have this problem. Certainly, it is one that has been raised with me by Karara. This is a very important funding issue. Schools such as Karara have increased difficulty catering for the extra demands that high-needs children put on the school. Children with particularly challenging needs can place a very big demand on schoolteachers, teacher aides and the specialist teachers who are required. It is vital that sufficient funding is provided so that the needs of these children are met without being detrimental to the other children in the class at that school. The final school that I would like to mention is the Pittsworth State School, which is one of the larger primary schools in the electorate. It has a very good musical program. The school has won many awards over the years. There is very good cooperation between the Pittsworth State School and the Pittsworth State High School. This cooperation ensures that the musical program is followed through from primary school to secondary school. It has achieved fantastic results. I think it is a very commendable program. They are facing a bit of a problem in replacing the musical instruments. The instruments are over 20 years old and are starting to fall into a state of disrepair. As I said, the primary school has won many awards, including being a finalist in the local education showcase awards. It has won awards in eisteddfods and in concert band competitions. The program is exceptional. As honourable members know, schools that are providing well-rounded education for their students in academic, sporting and cultural pursuits are the ones that are turning out really terrific students. Pittsworth State School is certainly one of those. It has had a real focus on the cultural, academic and sporting areas. The school is establishing more current and comprehensive library resources for the students. The current resources are starting to get out of date. Some of them 4766 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 are 20 years old and are significantly out of date and need attention. Library resourcing is an issue generally. Another area to be looked into is the recabling of the old school buildings in order to facilitate important new technologies. That is an issue with a lot of the older buildings. Some schools have been able to cable quite easily. In some of the smaller schools where the distances are not so great or they may be only a one classroom school it has been an easier thing to do. Raising the funds has not been easy but it has been physically easier to do. I have previously referred to the Darling Heights State School, the Clifton State High School and others—and the Pittsworth State School is in the same situation—which are in desperate need of a multipurpose facility so that they can undertake a wide range of activities, be it the school assembly, performances or sporting activities. It is important that the school should be able to host these activities at all times of the year no matter what the weather conditions may be. Most of those schools have no undercover general assembly area which can be used for those sorts of activities. They also need extra teacher aide time to ensure that students do not fall between the gaps because of the large student/teacher ratio that they have. Those are just three of the schools in my electorate that have specific issues. As I said, I have mentioned a number of other schools in previous debates in the parliament in the 18 months I have been here. One issue I have referred to before and which I think is still worth considering and touching on today is the issue of chaplaincy or youth counselling services in schools. Currently, chaplaincy is not funded by the Department of Education or by the state government. I have seen chaplains working in schools and they are making a very valuable contribution to the school. Where schools have been able to raise the money to employ a chaplain they have found that the chaplain is a non-threatening person who a student can speak to. With a lot of the challenges that students face, chaplains or other youth counsellors can play a very important role. I am glad to see that the government is going to employ 100 extra youth workers. I hope the schools are given some flexibility in this matter so that they can provide the sort of services that are specifically required for their school because there are different issues that face different schools. Hopefully the schools will be able to choose, to some extent, just what sort of circumstances they can provide. As I said, the P&C organisations at all the schools I deal with work very hard at raising funds. There is a lot of work that needs to be done on these schools, be it maintenance or upgrading, or even putting in classroom dividers which, when they are being retrofitted, are not provided by the department. The P&C has to raise the money to do it. The ongoing maintenance of older schools is an area that needs particular attention. Obviously, capital funding for new schools is welcome but there is also the capital upgrade component that is required to meet the ongoing needs of the older schools to ensure that the environment they are providing continues to be adequate to ensure that the students receive the best possible education. I bring these issues to the attention of the Treasurer. As the member for Gladstone said, there are many issues in many electorates. These are just a couple of issues in my electorate. Mr MALONE (Mirani—NPA) (5.05 p.m.): I rise to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 2) and Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) in the cognate debate this afternoon. The true champions of our state are the emergency service workers in our community. They put their lives at risk and on the line on a daily basis to help others. I think that can be clearly understood by the enduring and gruelling circumstances in which they put their lives at risk for the benefit of others. I guess the culmination of that was the fires that occurred west of Brisbane a couple of weeks ago. I refer to Toowoomba and the Granite Belt. Unfortunately, that is probably just the start of it. With the drought situation and the continuation of the El Nino factor it is likely that we will have above average temperatures this summer, and with that comes the high risk of fire. We are seeing that occurring in New South Wales at the present time. I know that the budgets for emergency services are at record levels, but unfortunately we are seeing a heightened and extended need for emergency services to be doing what they can. It has been admitted that the requirements for emergency services—particularly QAS and QFRA—are increasing at a rate of about 6 per cent a year and it is very difficult for resourcing to keep track with that sort of level. One only has to talk to some of the operational staff around the state to understand the circumstances under which they are currently working. I think all members of this House have an understanding of the circumstances in which these people operate. In the more heavily populated 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4767 regions the ambulance service is being impacted quite severely and they are finding it very difficult to maintain their shifts and the service they would like to offer. It came to my notice, I guess, on the Gold Coast where there was almost a strike. The Ambulance Service was looking for 50 extra paramedics to make the operations successful. The government advised that it would supply 10, of whom eight have already been provided and two students are yet to take up duty. The other issue is the QFRA. In an endeavour to cover the costs of the QFRA the government, in its wisdom, has seen fit to extend response times out to 14 minutes. Anybody within that 14-minute response time is now paying a substantial fire levy. That is fine, but what has happened in some of our more urban areas is that the 14-minute response time has overlapped another station and in a couple of cases those stations have been closed down. If one has a three-bedroom wooden house within the 14-minute period response time, one would find that one would be left with ashes in 14 minutes. We would have to fear for people who might be trapped in those buildings or who had been hurt or incapacitated in some way. It puts a heightened strain and effort on to the fire service personnel where they are tackling a fire that is substantially bigger and substantially hotter. They have to enter those buildings under far different circumstances than if they were at the fire within a five or six minute period. Many people in our community are forking out a fairly substantial fire levy through their rates believing that they are in a safety zone and, quite frankly, they may not be in that situation at all. In my own electorate at Walkerston the rate notices went out recently and a substantially increased number of people had to pay a fire levy on their rates without any notification at all. On further investigation, we found that the QFRS at Kedron in Brisbane had failed to send out notification that the fire levy had been extended. As I said, a considerable number of people west of Mackay suddenly found that they had to pay an urban fire levy while living in a rural environment—that is, there was the expectation that they would have to pay a substantial fire levy and be covered by an auxiliary fire station at Walkerston. That situation is creating intense difficulty, and I assume that that is happening around the state. In actual fact, the figures show that this year the fire levy increased by $7.2 million and the total amount collected in fire levies throughout Queensland last financial year was $190 million. I understand that a fire service has to pay for itself, but unfortunately the mums and dads in our communities are the ones who are paying for it. In some circumstances I think they are being hoodwinked by a 14-minute response time. As I pointed out, they could be in some difficulty if that were the case. I turn now to the QAS. I take on board the fact that the minister indicated that the budget has increased, and the latest annual report shows that 90 per cent of code 1 cases are being attended to within 17 minutes. Code 1 cases are life threatening—that is, strokes, heart attacks or substantial trauma. However, the fact is that within five minutes of a stroke there is not a lot that the paramedics can do anyway. As I said, the current situation is that in 90 per cent of cases the response time is 17 minutes; the other 10 per cent of those cases could be even longer than that. Those figures are not good and we should not accept those sorts of figures. There needs to be something done to pull that back. I have talked in the House on a number of occasions along these lines. I do not think that any of us, the minister included, would be happy waiting 20 minutes for an ambulance to attend in a life-threatening situation. The minister has blamed the response times on an increase in the number of cases, and undoubtedly that has a lot to do with it. However, I contend that it is the government's role to meet an increased number of cases with an increased budget allowance in order to cover those situations where the response times have to be reduced. It is possible that they are mainly in urban areas, which would seem to me to be fixable, and the government should be looking more closely at this. I understand that the minister has tried to address the problem and has written to the director-general requesting a review. That is very interesting. I just hope that that review highlights to the minister some of the issues and we look forward to some action in that regard. The situation with the subscription scheme within the QAS is another issue that is of great concern to all of us. As members would be aware, an election promise of the Beattie government in 1998 was free ambulance subscription to pensioners and seniors. Unfortunately, the allocation of funding to cover that promise was not sufficient, as we have seen in recent times, to make that program work and the budget has been bungled in true Labor style. Indeed, it appears that the government has decided to shift the responsibility for the subscription scheme to the federal government under the 30 per cent federal government rebate. While the government hunts around for an option as to where it can off-load its responsibility to the citizens of Queensland, the public is left in the dark. The outcome of the tender process that the subscription scheme is 4768 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 currently going through appears to be lost in the dark, too. We understood that that review and that tender process would be available for publication in early November. It is now almost the end of November and we have heard nothing more about it. We wait with bated breath to see what the government's position is on the subscription scheme for the QAS. I want to raise a couple of issues relating to my own electorate while I have the chance. In the eight years that I have been in parliament I have raised on numerous occasions the state of the police station at Sarina. Sarina is a pivotal station for police in that it covers a large section of highway, particularly to the south of Sarina, and is the backup station for Carmila and St Lawrence. Most members of the parliament would be well aware that the area between Marlborough and Sarina is one of the most accident-prone stretches of highway in Queensland—maybe even Australia, for that matter. The police are operating out of a station in Sarina which, even on the most generous assessment, would have to be described as disgraceful. It is a rabbit-warren. It is unbelievable that the officers who operate that station can work within its confines. It is not only old; it is also not configured to enable police officers to operate in any appropriate manner within the building. As I said, over a long period I have rallied to try to have that fixed but, unfortunately, it does not even appear to be on the horizon. I think it is way past time that we looked very carefully at that issue. In recent weeks there was a situation in Mackay where one of the three bridges across the Pioneer River was closed for some work—that is, Hospital Bridge. For those who do not know, there are three bridges crossing the Pioneer River. There is the very old, low-level Hospital Bridge; the Ron Camm Bridge, which is a high-level, four-lane bridge that is part of the Bruce Highway network funded by the federal government; and an older, reasonably high-level bridge called the Forgan Smith Bridge that was almost washed away in the 1958 floods. The state infrastructure is the old, low-level Hospital Bridge and the extremely old but reasonably high-level Forgan Smith Bridge. Both of those are basically at the end of their life cycle and there is a real need to replace them. As I said, when Hospital Bridge was closed the other day there was absolute chaos. It was rectified by some changes to the sequence of lights, but it highlighted the fact that if there were a major flood in Mackay there is the possibility of both Hospital Bridge and Forgan Smith Bridge either being damaged or washed away and that would create chaos in the Mackay district. It is about time that we looked at state infrastructure and considered building another bridge or replacing one of the current bridges. Another situation we have in Mackay relates to the Bucasia-Eimeo Road. Quite a large community is being established in Bucasia. Residents' main access to Mackay is a two-lane road which is really becoming a logjam, particularly at peak hour. If there is an accident, that northern beaches area of Mackay can easily be cut off. There is a need to upgrade that infrastructure. Some work is being done on roundabouts, but the reality is that the main section of the road is a logjam. There is a real need to bring forward extra funding to put a four-lane road right through to Bucasia as quickly as possible. Health is of concern in the Mackay district. There is a lack of specialists. The patient transfer system is under a lot of strain with people trying to get to specialists in Rockhampton, Townsville or Brisbane. I get numerous calls to my office from people trying to access the patient transfer scheme. As other members have mentioned, there are no bulkbilling facilities in Mackay, except for a couple that have started only recently. That causes quite a considerable problem for low- income earners, as the member for Gladstone mentioned earlier. There are 34 schools in my electorate. Some of them are quite large, a lot of them are reasonably small and a couple are very small. I also have three high schools. I congratulate all of the staff for the great work they are doing with the children in my communities. They do an excellent job. In a lot of cases they go beyond what their roles require. The P&Cs in all of those school communities work hard to provide extra facilities for the children. It seems that more and more things are necessary in schools these days to make them efficient teaching environments for our children. We are looking at some issues at some of the smaller, remote schools in terms of water supply. About three months ago the school at Milman, which is only about 10 kilometres north of Rockhampton, ran out of water. Since then the school has been able to access water and has put down a bore. Water has to be carted in to the school at Eungella. As most members would know, my electorate covers areas from Rockhampton through to Mackay and out to Moranbah, so quite a lot of dry country falls within my electorate. A number of properties have had to destock. A lot of other properties are actually hauling water in B-double transports and pumping it into dams to water their cattle. I am not sure how long they can 26 Nov 2002 Appropriation Bill (No. 2); Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) 4769 continue to do that. All properties that I know of are supplementary feeding their cattle. The issue in the cattle industry is extreme. As members would realise, prices for starving stock are not that great, and a lot of people are being forced to market cattle simply because they are running out of feed. The areas close to where I live, at Carmila, and along the stretch of road to the south of Sarina have been affected very badly by drought this year, as is the case with the top end of your electorate, Madam Deputy Speaker. The areas on the extremities of the sugar industry areas seem to have copped the worst. Farmers there were cutting cane down to 15 tonnes to the hectare. Normally it would have been in the vicinity of 80 tonnes to 100 tonnes to the hectare. On top of that, they also faced low sugar content. We have to take our hats off to some of the farmers who had the guts and determination to go back and replant. They did that into very dry soil and in most cases it seems to have paid off. The plant cane is coming up. They need rain desperately now. Let us hope that happens in the near future for all of our sakes. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN (Stafford—ALP) (5.24 p.m.): In rising to support the bills before the House, I congratulate the Treasurer on being assiduous in raising revenue and careful in spending the state's resources. The Beattie Labor government is doing its part to manage the finances of this state well and to deliver services to all Queenslanders. One of the key sources of revenue is the federal-state agreements we participate in in a number of areas. This is where the federal government is failing the people of Queensland. An example is in the disability services area, where the federal government simply stopped funding to a particular program and left $17 million for the state to pick up without any change to the agreement. It did not care about the families or the individuals who were being cared for and catered for by those services. It has left the state to pick up the tab totally by itself. The Minister for Housing has highlighted to this House on many occasions the shortfall of approximately $90 million in the last triennial federal-state housing agreement and the shortfall expected of slightly more than $90 million in the coming three years. This is having a significant effect in everyone's electorate. We are seeing waiting times for public housing having to be extended. We are seeing a slower rate of new growth in terms of construction. This can be directly attributed to the cut in funds the federal government has imposed. What it is doing is hurting those who are the most vulnerable—those who are the least resourced in our community. The Minister for Main Roads this morning made reference to the federal government again not putting in its fair share of funding for the Tugun bypass, a significant piece of road infrastructure to which it should be contributing greatly, and it is not. In the medical area there are three or four examples that show clearly why the federal coalition is failing the people of Queensland. The loss of bulkbilling services is hurting people all across Queensland, particularly those on lower incomes. As well, its absolutely atrocious handling of the GP provider numbers is making services in outlying urban areas very difficult to access. That anyone in the Howard ministry can claim that places such as Lawnton, Kallangur and Deception Bay are classified as inner metropolitan when assessing the provision of GP provider numbers is absolutely unbelievable. Because of what the federal government is doing, it is not allowing people in those areas to access basic medical services. Others who have spoken before me have pointed out how it is affecting pensioners in terms of financial cost, but there is also a medical and social cost if families cannot get their children to a GP in time. We are all aware—in my family we are acutely aware, with three of my children at uni; another one will be attending next year—of what has happened with cutbacks in federal education funding. The Howard government should be ashamed of itself. It is failing our youth. It is failing our pensioners. It is failing the most disadvantaged people in Queensland. The Howard lie is that the state is getting every cent of the GST. That lie is evident. It is not returning to us our due rate of funding and the people of Queensland are suffering. I congratulate the Treasurer on the work he is doing and encourage him to continue to fight for our fair share of federal revenue. Hon. T. M. MACKENROTH (Chatsworth—ALP) (Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Sport) (5.28 p.m.), in reply: I thank all members for their contribution to the debate. The Appropriation Bill (No. 2) and the Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) are simply two bills to provide for extra appropriation for the last financial year. These types of bills are passed every year. They give members an opportunity to talk about issues relating to their electorates. I thank members for their contributions to the debate. Motion agreed to. 4770 Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill 26 Nov 2002

Committee Appropriation Bill (No. 2) Clauses 1 and 2 and schedule, as read, agreed to.

Appropriation (Parliament) Bill (No. 2) Clauses 1 and 2 and schedule, as read, agreed to. Bills reported, without amendment.

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

REVENUE LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL Second Reading Resumed from 22 October (see p. 3856). Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (5.32 p.m.): In rising to speak to the Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill 2002, I want to point out that the major purpose of this legislation is to amend the Duties Act 2001, which commenced in March this year, and which replaced the old Stamp Duties Act 1894. Since the introduction of the Duties Act, we have seen a number of these types of bills undertaking finetuning to assist in the changeover to the Duties Act from the Stamp Duties Act. As the Duties Act provides for the collection of state government revenue in a multitude of transactions, it is obviously in the best interests of Treasury that it continually finetune and update its ability to collect revenue that is necessary, as part of the taxation system of this state, to ensure that the way in which this tax is collected is fair, accurate and in accordance with the ethics of the bill itself. As is usually the case with these types of bills, the changes are technical in nature. I will just provide a brief explanation of each of these changes, because basically it is a technical bill. As I said, this bill addresses mainly technical matters—reducing opportunities for duty avoidance, clarifying the operation of the Duties Act, extending concessions or ensuring that the act operates properly or aligns with arrangements that applied previously under the Stamp Duty Act. Also, the bill amends the Fuel Subsidy Act 1997 to ensure that the commissioner can obtain information and documents to impose notification requirements for bulk end users. I refer firstly to the technical amendments to the Duties Act. First of all, there is the statutory vesting of dutiable property. These amendments clarify the operation of the Duties Act in regard to the vesting of properties between two entities and, in particular, who in law the transfer has been actually effected to. There is a section on property contributed on the formation of a partnership. The changes ensure that an incoming partner is not taxed on the original property that they bring to the partnership. I believe that this is a sensible amendment that ensures that partnerships will not be hampered or overly taxed when they are undergoing changes. The tracing of interest in wholesale unit trusts is a minor change that reflects arrangements that formerly existed under the Stamp Act. In terms of the transfer of fund property involving custodians of public superannuation entities, the Duties Act will be amended to provide exemptions for transactions involving the transfer of fund property from a trustee of a public superannuation entity to a custodian, and vice versa. Transfers to custodians are usually not for commercial purposes and are for the benefit of fund members. In light of this, it is the opinion of Treasury that the transfers should not be treated as commercial transactions and, therefore, should not be taxed. In terms of the transfer duty exemption for redemptions of mortgage backed securities, the Duties Act provides only an exemption for the acquisition of a mortgage backed security by a trust, not redemption. These changes will be positive for the debt markets. In terms of concessions for the securitisation of financial assets receivables, this section of the bill extends securitisation stamp concessions for financial receivables. Again, we regard this as a positive for financial markets and issuers of debt. The securitisation of mortgage backed securities is an extremely popular instrument in the market. Extending the concession to financial asset receivables will ensure a greater number of debt instruments in the market and also foster greater competition in the market for loanable funds, which will mean savings for customers. 26 Nov 2002 Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill 4771

In terms of the nominal transfer duty on transfers of mortgages of land in securitisation transactions, the change is necessary to provide consistency in relation to the amendment that I just spoke about. Also, changes to leases and deeds of grant under the Land Act 1962 and the Land Act 1994 will increase the scope of leases to which a duty exemption will apply. In terms of the exemptions for grants of leases of land, these changes will prevent the ability to sidestep duty on grants of leases of land. Treasury has recognised the ability of leaseholders to avoid duty on these transactions. Therefore, the changes seek to tidy up the provision and prevent avoidance. In terms of duty that is payable on the exercise of an option, the changes provide a credit for duty payable on the exercise of an option for the purchase of dutiable property. The idea behind these changes is that the purchaser of the option is liable to duty on the purchase of the option and also the exercise of the option. In effect, they are being taxed twice for the same option. The changes will prevent this from happening by providing a credit when the option is exercised. In terms of preventing a loss of concession duty for homes where the acquirer gifts an interest to a spouse, the change will amend the Duties Act so that a concession rate of duty is not lost upon the transfer of an interest in a house when it is transferred to a spouse. The changes to home concessions in the case of multiple residences reflect the operation of the Stamp Act and impose an additional condition on the exercise of the commissioner's discretion. The changes are designed so that each person can be tested for the amount of their interest when multiple residences are acquired. In terms of the tracing of interest in wholesale unit trusts, these changes address investments in public unit trusts. Where a majority interest has been acquired in a trust that consists mainly of property, it is necessary to trace the total interest held by the person and also related persons to determine whether the majority interest has been acquired. This is a very important area. If a majority interest is acquired in a land rich trust, then the acquisition is really not about making an investment; it is about acquiring control of the property in the trust. Therefore, conveyancing duty should be payable. The changes already existed under the Stamp Act and will be reflected in the Duties Act. In terms of the duty free threshold of $10,000 for lease duty on occupancy rights and an anti-avoidance provision relating to the term of occupancy rights, these changes are made to include additional conditions that existed in the Stamp Act but were not originally included in the Duties Act due to a drafting mistake. There are further transitional provisions regarding the payment of lease duty and provision of credits where potential liability for double duty arises. These reflect the operation of the Stamp Act. Subsequent leases will provide a credit for the holding-over period while a new lease is being negotiated. This is a sensible change as a person should not be taxed twice for the holding-over period and then again for the execution of the new lease. The exercise of option and subsequent lease will provide a credit for stamp duty if the option is exercised. This is similar to the previous change mentioned regarding the exercise of the option on the purchase of dutiable property and is a fair and equitable change. There is an inclusion of a nexus for mortgages of premium funding arrangements. These arrangements are where an insurer will lend on the amount of the premium. The changes will specify that duty is only applicable on an insurance policy for the place of residence. There is endorsement of instruments by mortgagees registered as self-assessors prior to the lodgment of the mortgagee's return with the commissioner. Many self-assessors are financial institutions. To enable settlements of conveyances and mortgages, these institutions sometimes need to endorse instruments and assess the amount of duty payable by their customer before lodgment of the return. The changes will be amended to enable a self-assessor which is a financial institution to endorse a mortgage under which the financial institution is the mortgagee following receipt of the duty and any assessed interest and penalty tax but before paying these amounts to the commissioner. The changes will ensure that financial institutions must pay the duty, assessed interest and penalty tax when lodging the return. The legislation will delay the requirement for self- assessors to endorse mortgage documents upon a further advance. These changes give legislative effect to a common, current practice by self-assessors of endorsing mortgage documents. These changes will provide a greater deal of efficiency for financial institutions. The problem arose when mortgage documents were held interstate and financial institutions needed to wait until these documents were transferred to their Queensland offices before they were able to endorse the documents. 4772 Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill 26 Nov 2002

An important part of this bill is excluding interest payments from exempt payments in relation to hire purchase agreements. The practical effect of these provisions is that hire duty assessed by hirers will now be assessed on an interest inclusive amount. This will mean an increase in the duty liability on businesses for duty to the state government on hire purchase agreements. While these changes are beneficial for hirers as it will improve the efficiency of the calculations of duty, it seems that the changes will impose a greater impost on businesses which have hire purchase agreements. I will certainly ask the Treasurer to clarify this either in his reply or when we get to the clauses. There is a clarification of a condition for duty exemption for corporate reconstructions. I want to speak about this part in particular. These changes deal with exemptions when corporate reconstructions occur. The changes are claimed to be necessary to tidy up the original drafting of the section again. I want to speak in particular about the corporate demerger process that has developed as a result of the federal government passing legislation, unopposed, on 21 October. This legislation was unopposed after a Senate economics committee gave the green light to this proposal and to the legislation. The legislation provides for significant taxation relief for companies which undergo corporate demergers. On 22 October the Queensland Treasurer introduced the Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill 2002. There are a number of major companies which operate in Queensland and provide a lot of employment that have been eagerly awaiting the federal changes before undergoing corporate demergers. Some of these companies are Western Mining Corporation, CSR and the Mayne Group. In anticipation of the federal legislation, one company, WMC, sought a ruling from the Queensland Commissioner of Revenue regarding its eligibility for exemption from the stamp duty for its corporate reconstruction which would be necessary in order to undergo the eventual corporate demerger, its final goal. On 8 November 2002 the commissioner ruled that Western Mining Corporation would be exempt from state government stamp duty in the proposed corporate reconstruction. The benefit for WMC under that ruling by the commissioner is estimated to be about $10 million. Section 411(3)(b) of the Duties Act provides that when the actual application for a corporate reconstruction is made the commissioner must make an assessment of nil duty if he or she has already done so in a prior ruling. In section 412(4)(b) this rule does not apply if the circumstances relating to the transaction are materially different from those when the ruling took place. In this case, the commissioner is saying now that he does not have to stand by his ruling because of the proposed changes before the House. Basically, Western Mining Corporation will lose the concession because under the amendments the Office of State Revenue will make a reassessment of WMC and will be able to take account of dutiable property that is held indirectly by WMC. In the past, the commissioner was able only to take account of direct interests. This has the potential to significantly increase the government's revenue take on corporate reconstructions. WMC plan on carrying out its corporate reconstruction on 11 December this year. This means that if the legislation were not passed in this sitting, WMC would not be liable for the $10 million in stamp duty. This is because of the date of its application for corporate reconstruction. The old regime would still be in effect. WMC has been in contact with the Office of State Revenue throughout the whole process. It has proposed and suggested there be an amendment to the revenue bill which would basically acknowledge that, in the light of the government changing the rules with regard to the exemption, those rulings that have been given by the commissioner prior to the legislative changes should not be affected. For companies like WMC, the thrust of its argument is based on commercial certainty. The effect of the changes will mean that the commissioner will have to make retrospective rulings. It is important in this case to look at the time in which the company's original decision was made by the commissioner. A very big issue in this is: what is an indirect interest? Does this mean that Treasury is able to drill down deep into company's assets looking and searching for indirect interests? It raises a very big issue about what exactly is meant by indirect interests. This matter is of some substance to the state and to WMC, because we are talking about a substantial amount of money. We are dealing with a company that is one of Australia's largest mining and metals corporations. The Premier recently launched the construction of WMC Fertiliser Ltd's $700 million Queensland fertiliser project at Phosphate Hill. It is obviously a huge and very important project for Queensland. About 1,800 direct jobs will be created during construction of this project at Phosphate Hill. It will create enormous and significant opportunities particularly for the north-west mineral province of Queensland. The operation is expected to add $400 million a year to the Queensland and Australian economy through import replacement. According to the 26 Nov 2002 Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill 4773 managing director, Mr Morgan, the operation will inject income to the Queensland government of $60 million a year through royalties, taxes and other payments over the next 20 years. So a very significant contribution is being made by this company to the coffers of the state. This particular matter is important to clarify, particularly because of the timing issues that have been involved and because of the contribution that the company is about to make through this new project on a year-by-year basis to the Queensland Treasury. The bill also refers to property held by a company leaving the corporate group within three years. These changes are designed to increase the ability of the Office of State Revenue to determine the amount of Queensland property held by a company when leaving a corporate group. This will be achieved by widening the definition of property to be assessed upon leaving a corporate group. Originally the office looked only at assessing if the company held greater than five per cent of its assets as dutiable property. The changes will now allow the Office of State Revenue also to assess indirect property interests. This is intended to prevent property leakage from Queensland's taxable property base. There is also clarification that reference to a salary package includes an employment package. This change will ensure that where property is included as part of a salary package it will not be exempt from duty. The intention of the change is to ensure for definitional purposes that salary packages are treated the same as employment packages. The definition of a de facto relationship instrument clarifies that a duty concession will apply to de facto relationship property transfers. In terms of the duty amendments flowing from the Commonwealth Financial Services Reform Act 2001, amendments will reflect the change in federal legislation dealing with interests in registered managed investment schemes and for mortgage duty over marketable securities. Finally, there is the prevention of windfall gains for stamp duty. Where a refund of stamp duty is made by the state, the person receiving the refund must reimburse any person from whom an amount was received for stamp duty. There are also some minor and technical amendments to the Fuel Subsidy Act. Basically, they will expand the instances in which the commissioner can appoint a person to require information for the purposes of investigation and also extend the notification requirement of a bulk end user in respect of the commencement of a storage facility. In respect of the fuel subsidy scheme, as most honourable members know, prior to 1997 Australian states and territories raised revenue through the imposition of business franchise fees on alcohol, fuel and tobacco. This was an important source of revenue for the states and territories. However, a High Court decision on 5 August 1997 found that the states did not have the constitutional right to charge this fee. In order for the states and territories not to lose this significant revenue, a scheme was established whereby the Commonwealth government collected these fees and remitted the full amount collected back to the states and territories. However, a uniform amount was to be collected from each litre of petrol as the Commonwealth could not constitutionally levy different amounts in different jurisdictions. Prior to the High Court case, fuel taxes were not levied in Queensland. In order for fuel prices to remain the same in Queensland, the Queensland government came to an agreement with retailers, licensed bulk end users and licensed off-road diesel users to buy fuel at a subsidised price. The Queensland fuel subsidy scheme became operational on 1 November 1997. Basically, the scheme is aimed at returning the levied fee to consumers so that fuel sold in Queensland remains free from this form of taxation. In 2000 the legislation changed the scheme to ensure that only those fuel consumers who are entitled to the subsidy receive it. The legislation was aimed at curtailing the resale of Queensland subsidised fuel in other states for profit. Under the amended scheme, the subsidy is paid directly to fuel retailers and bulk end users. These arrangements came into effect for bulk end users from 1 October 2000 and for retailers from December 2000. The fuel subsidy scheme allows Queenslanders who use diesel for off-road purposes in Queensland, other than in diesel engine road vehicles on a public road, to obtain fuel at a subsidised price. This includes diesel fuel for farm machinery and fishing vehicles. I think we all know there are a number of problems with this scheme, particularly for those people who are operating earthmoving equipment, who are not able to obtain fuel at the subsidised price. Those people generally operating scrapers, backhoes, dozers and so forth involved in off-road activities but not being farm machinery or fishing vehicles have a serious problem in that they are not able to obtain this particular benefit. 4774 Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill 26 Nov 2002

To receive the fuel subsidy a person has to show once to a fuel seller their off-road diesel fuel licence, which is issued by the Office of State Revenue, and any subsequent purchase will be automatically at the subsidised price unless the licence cannot be produced on request or the seller is told that the purchase is not under licence. In short, the Queensland fuel subsidy scheme is designed to ensure that Queenslanders can enjoy the benefit of the 8.354 cents per litre subsidy for eligible fuel purchases. The subsidy is paid directly to fuel retailers, who pass it on to motorists by reducing the price of fuel by the amount of the fuel subsidy. But there is that ongoing and continual problem with earthmoving operators. I would appreciate it if the minister could address in his summary what, if anything, can be done. Many of us have had deputations from people involved in the earthmoving business. It continues to be a serious problem for them. As this bill is dealing mainly with technical matters to do with the Duties Act and some tidying up to do with the fuel subsidy scheme, we will be supporting it. Mr PURCELL (Bulimba—ALP) (5.55 p.m.): I rise to speak to the Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill 2002. This bill is introduced primarily to amend the Duties Act 2001. This act commenced on 1 March 2002. This bill, while not large, covers a lot of territory. The Duties Act 2002 will be amended to prevent loss of home duties concession where there is a later exempt gift of an interest in a home to a spouse. That means a spouse does not have to pay duty when it is transferred to them. That is very practical. The amendments will restore the Stamp Duty Act 1894 thresholds for lease duty on occupancy rights; provide clear nexus rules for premium funding arrangements; improve arrangements for self-assessors; and—this is one that we do not find too often—remove the exemption for interest payments under hire purchase agreements as requested by industry. At industry's request to simplify compliance, the bill will remove the exclusion of interest from the calculation for hire duty on hire purchases, resulting in approximately an additional $900,000 duty per annum. However, with other hire duty changes in the Duties Act, no additional revenue will be raised. The bill extends concessions for other matters and transfers and, therefore, will be revenue neutral. Those were the major changes. The bill will also remove nominal duty for transfer of mortgages for security purposes and refine the 'related person' test used for majority trust acquisition and land rich duty purposes. It is also necessary to amend the Fuel Subsidy Act 1997 to ensure that the commissioner can obtain information and documentation to impose notification requirements on bulk end users. I think that is fairly self-explanatory. Were that not done, it could result in a loss of revenue for the state. I commend the Treasurer for the package of amendments he has brought forward and commend the bill to the House. Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (5.59 p.m.): In rising to speak to the Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill I wanted to pick up on something that the Leader of the National Party raised in relation to the lack of access to the diesel rebate for off-road earthmoving equipment. I had quite a lot to do with the Treasury Department when the notification was released a year or so ago. That placed those in the earthmoving industry across Queensland in absolute turmoil. They were required to repay retrospectively a significant amount of money because they had not been included in a direct communication loop and were not informed of their ineligibility to access the diesel rebate for fuel that they used on their off-road equipment. A number of people in my electorate who run earthmoving businesses were significantly impacted upon, and I know that representatives of the Treasury Department came and met with us on a number of occasions and answered correspondence in relation to it. I seek clarification from the minister on the basis that my electorate was not alone in suffering those impacts and there was, I believe, an oversight on the part of government in directly communicating with these business owners. Mind you, the department contacted them directly when the government identified a potential loss of income. Each of the businesses was written to and told that they were perhaps in breach of this legislation and that they needed to calculate what revenue they may owe the state relating to the off-road diesel rebate. I wondered whether there had been any consideration given in the interim to having an across-the-board access to the diesel rebate—not necessarily because that is what the federal government was going to support because I know the federal government took the diesel rebate under its control, but more for simplicity and ease of operation for small businesses, which are significantly impacted upon by the need to keep the paperwork involved in tracking the diesel that they use in on-road vehicles. Some of their machinery, such as backhoes, are used off-road and on-road and it is quite a laborious job to have to keep track of what kilometres are used on-road 26 Nov 2002 Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill 4775 and what kilometres are used off-road and what hours are used off-road to ensure that the appropriate debts are paid to state revenue. I wonder whether any consideration was given to giving these small businesses some relief. The main issue that I wanted to raise with the minister is something about which I have written to his office and received a reply. It has been the same reply to each constituent about whom I have written. I wanted to put it on the public record because the grievance on the part of these constituents continues. They have been given no answer that they believe is fair and equitable, and I have to concur with their position. Linda Kelly Eldridge e-mailed me in regard to her general household insurance, and I would like to quote from her e-mail— I recently received my renewal notice for general household insurance and was shocked to find that 18.5% of my bill was made up of taxes—8.5% stamp duty, 10% GST. I have also recently received a letter from the Prime Minister, in this letter contained a booklet about tax reform. Upon reading this booklet I found that every second page contained the following information "Every cent of the GST goes to States and Territories—Every cent of the revenue raised from GST will be given to the States and Territories to fund things like social and community services, like hospitals, schools, roads and emergency services." Why is it then that we still have to pay stamp duty on our general household insurance when the State Government is receiving GST of 10% on this bill. I feel the State Government is double dipping as far as taxes are concerned. There are only three States that pay this stamp duty—WA, Tasmania, and Queenslanders. I feel that the stamp duty should either be abolished or reduced dramatically and I'm sure a lot of other Queenslanders feel the same as I do. It's getting that way where insuring your home is going to be a luxury a lot of people will not be able to afford. Part of her letter outlined a situation that was not true. All the information I have regarding the GST keeps reinforcing that all of the revenue goes to the states and territories. However, the stamp duty that applies to insurance policies was not one that was earmarked for abolition. I sent another constituent's concerns to our federal member, Paul Neville, and he wrote back and said that under the agreement there were a number of state taxes that it had been agreed would be repealed. Some of these were: bed taxes from 1 July 2000, financial institutions duty from 1 July 2001, stamp duty on quoted marketable securities from 1 July 2001 and debits tax by 1 July 2005, subject to review by a ministerial council comprising Commonwealth, state and territory Treasurers. In his letter he said— The States and Territories have responsibility for stamp duty on insurance. Stamp duty on insurance was not slated for abolition in a New Tax System and the removal of this tax was not proposed by Heads of Government as part of the reforms to Commonwealth-State financial relations. It goes on to say— You will be pleased to know that, consistent with what the Government has always intended to do, an amendment to the insurance provisions of A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 has recently been passed that removes the value of stamp duty from the insurance premium that will be subject to GST. That is a very important element. Another resident, a Mr Tighe, came into the office and he was quite irate. His home insurance policy had a premium of $513 for option A, GST of $51.30 and stamp duty of $47.96. In his response the Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Sport outlined the Commonwealth Government's tax reform package and said— It is now well known that, following the Federal election, the Commonwealth Government modified its package by excluding food from the GST in order to win the support of the Australian Democrat senators for the package. Removing food from the GST base significantly reduced the revenues available to the States and Territories under the GST. Therefore the Commonwealth decided that the stamp duties and other taxes originally proposed for abolition would need to be retained for some time to make up for the loss of GST revenue on food. Queensland stamp duty on insurance policies was never proposed to be abolished under the Commonwealth proposals. This duty applies to a number of types of insurance policy and is usually calculated on the premium. Therefore, increases in the premium have stamp duty consequences. He goes on to address the issue of the GST and justify why the state government places its stamp duty charges on the total premium. Where my constituents are, I believe, justifiably angry is the fact that stamp duty is charged on the premium as well as the GST component, so it is a tax on a tax. In his reply, the Treasurer has given an explanation for that but it is not an explanation that the constituents find acceptable. The GST component from the Federal side of things is charged on the premium only, not the premium plus Queensland stamp duty. At least an outcome that this government could give to the community of Queensland would be to charge stamp duty only on the premium component and not on the premium plus GST component. 4776 Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill 26 Nov 2002

The residents of Queensland are right to say that they are being taxed on a tax. I would ask the Treasurer to again review that situation. It is unpalatable for people to have to pay the double tax on the premium, but it is more unpalatable that the government is seen to be double-dipping in that it charges stamp duty on the GST component as well. I have received that complaint from quite a number of people in my community. I will give them a copy of the Treasurer's response as well as a copy of Paul Neville's response. I have not seen any of them happy yet. I bring that matter to the Treasurer's attention for his review. Ms STRUTHERS (Algester—ALP) (6.09 p.m.): This bill and others before the House today demonstrate that the Treasurer is continually monitoring the effectiveness and impact of taxation and revenue options in Queensland. The Treasurer does have his eye on the ball and I commend him and support his efforts through this bill to amend a number of areas of the Duties Act and the Fuel Subsidy Act 1997. The amendments to the Duties Act are primarily technical in nature and I do not intend to go through them in detail. I simply want to say that there is widespread public support for taxation measures that are adequate and fair—adequate in that the overall revenue pool can meet the infrastructure and service needs of the state, and fair in that the measures ensure that those who have the greatest capacity to pay tax actually pay their fair share and those on low and fixed incomes do not carry an unfair burden. As the Duties Act 2001 applies in the main to acquisitions and transfer of property, it does appear to operate as a fair and progressive form of state taxation. Importantly, these amendments in the bill limit opportunities for tax avoidance. I regularly hear in my own local area of people who are sick and tired of seeing media reports of people from the top end of town—the corporate executives and others—who are finding very creative ways of avoiding tax while many people in my local area, particularly around Acacia Ridge and other suburbs, are what we would probably consider to be the working poor. They are people who are doing it pretty tough and who are working hard. A lot of them are doing shift work. They have two family members out to work trying to keep their heads above water. These are the people who are wanting some tax relief. It is also important to acknowledge that with the introduction of the GST Queensland has foregone significant state based revenue options and the federal government now has in its hands the biggest tax grab ever. The federal income tax take has risen from $82.4 billion, which is 16.4 per cent of GDP, to about $127 billion this year, which is more than 17 per cent of GDP. Despite this federal government windfall, the federal government has been buck-passing more and more. During debate on the previous cognate bills many members cited examples in their own electorates. The same is happening in my own electorate and statewide. We are seeing it in road funding, public housing, dental care, disability services and many more key areas of service and infrastructure. The waiting list at the QEII Hospital for public dental care in my local area rose sharply when the federal government ripped out the federal dental assistance program. As I have said on many occasions in this House, my electorate is one of the transport hubs of south-east Queensland and the local road and rail links are very important, yet the federal government is pulling out of a lot of its road responsibilities and putting more and more pressure on the states. Infrastructure such as the Ipswich Motorway, which is a very important transport link through my electorate, is suffering from that buck-passing. As the member for Bulimba said during the previous debate today, there are plenty of federal Liberal members in the south-east corner—in fact, far too many federal Liberal members in the south-east corner—but we do not hear them speaking up and lobbying their federal colleagues with regard to these issues. We do not see them lobbying hard for more road funding and the Commonwealth government paying its fair share. In fact, it is putting more and more responsibility back on to the states. Local members like Gary Hardgrave, the member for Moreton, keep bleating about the need to take tolls off the Logan Motorway. As other members in the House have said today, it was the state Liberal members who were instrumental in removing the toll on the Sunshine Motorway but it is the people in the Brisbane southern suburbs, as the member for Logan, John Mickel, spoke so passionately about today, who suffer. It is them who pay. Residents in my electorate are suffering as a result of that decision, yet the federal Liberal members bleat about our responsibilities as a state government. We had scope to use that money in more creative ways—that is, to gather revenue on a road instead of having to fork out money continually to cover that debt. Those opposite need to continue to lobby their federal members, but sadly they are very silent on this issue and we need to see more action from them. 26 Nov 2002 Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill 4777

We certainly cannot rely on the federal government to hand out a fair share of its massive GST take to Queensland. We certainly cannot rely on it to provide the sort of road and rail infrastructure and other services that we need. We must continue to get our fair share. We must also ensure that, at the state level, with the limited options available to us, we continue to maintain a reasonable, adequate and fair tax base. The public of Queensland have also been very vocal supporters of the government continuing to pay a fuel subsidy to make petrol cheaper and more affordable in Queensland relative to other states. However, it is not cheap to maintain this commitment and, in addition, the subsidy is open to exploitation by licensed bulk end users and major fuel companies. It has been an important initiative and one that we must keep our eye on. If it is not achieving the goals it ought to achieve, we certainly need to be changing course in relation to that sort of subsidy to ensure that the rorters do not get the opportunity to rort. It was estimated that the illegal cross- border fuel trade cost Queensland $200 million in the three years before the subsidy scheme was introduced. That is simply not on. The scheme has been substantially overhauled, but there is certainly no guarantee that all traders are playing by the rules. Rorting is likely to be happening under our noses. I commend the efforts of the Treasurer in this bill to enable the Commissioner of State Revenue to obtain documentation from fuel traders and distributors to substantiate whether the subsidies have been fully paid. Many people feel ripped off by fuel companies. They cannot understand how fuel prices fluctuate daily. I am certainly perplexed about this issue at times, too. I noticed when in Toowoomba last week for the caucus retreat that petrol prices averaged around 72c or 74.9c per litre when in Brisbane on the same day the average seemed to be around 82.9c per litre. Like other members of the public, I cannot understand what is going on with fuel prices. It is important that we keep a watchful eye on what is happening and keep a watchful eye to prevent further rorting. The fuel pricing system is a complex one and I am sure it is very difficult to know exactly what is happening under our noses, but we must remain vigilant. I commend the Treasurer's efforts in keeping Queensland on a very solid financial footing and I commend the bill to the House. Hon. T. M. MACKENROTH (Chatsworth—ALP) (Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Sport) (6.15 p.m.), in reply: I thank honourable members for their contributions to the debate. The Leader of the Opposition raised the issue of demergers and I have some notes that I will make him aware of in relation to that. I will not speak about a particular case but about the issue. Commonwealth demerger legislation is a deferral of capital gains tax liability when companies restructure. Any exemption for stamp duty relief is where the corporate reconstruction exemption applies. The Office of State Revenue can provide a ruling in advance of a corporate reconstruction as to whether duty will or will not be payable. The ruling must be based on the law applying at the date the ruling is made, but the Duties Act makes it clear that the actual exemption must be decided on the law applying at the time of the actual transaction. The corporate reconstruction concession is intended to assist asset transfers within groups and not to provide duty exemption where the effect of the transaction is to move assets outside the group. Where duty relief is provided and one of the companies involved leaves the group or moves the assets outside the group, the duty will be required to be repaid. There are limited exceptions to this duty clawback, and one of these is where there is minimal dutiable property held by the company leaving the group. The Duties Act currently provides that there will be no clawback if the company holds less than five per cent dutiable property. The five per cent dutiable property test is based on direct holdings only, but some recent transactions have highlighted that a company with shares in a land-rich company can leave the group and satisfy the five per cent direct property holding test—that is, there is no requirement to repay the duty even though they have control over significant Queensland land. The bill therefore amends the five per cent test to require a testing of direct and indirect property holdings. The five per cent dutiable property holding can only be tested at the time that the company leaves the group and not when the advanced ruling is provided. This has been made clear to companies who have been given rulings where the five per cent property holdings may become relevant in the future. In his contribution to the second reading debate, the Leader of the Opposition raised the issue of a company that wants to restructure and that we are going to in some way bring down a different ruling on them. The issue he asserted that we need to look at here is whether it is fair on Queensland taxpayers to be subsidising a company in the way that he would suggest, and that is this: in relation to a dealing, if a company restructures and holds a considerable amount of 4778 Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill 26 Nov 2002

Queensland land and wishes to sell that land out of the restructure, they today would be required to pay the stamp duty. The way that companies can perhaps get around that is if that same block of land is held within another company which is owned 100 per cent by the major company and they sell the shares and with those shares the actual land-holding goes with it. In that case, it is possible that stamp duty would then not be payable. I do not think that is fair on the Queensland taxpayers. The member mentioned a sum of $10 million. I think of the debates we have heard in this parliament over recent times. In an earlier speech today the member actually raised the issue of the government giving concessions to companies to establish in Queensland to create jobs. He levelled criticism in his earlier speech in relation to giving concessions to companies, but his criticism here is that this company has to pay $10 million when it is going to create jobs. His very argument is that we should be gifting this company $10 million because it is creating jobs. If I was to be here today amending the stamp and duties acts to allow for that sort of a concession and I was to have used the argument that we are doing this because this company is creating jobs, the member would probably be sending me to the CMC, as he has done on many other occasions in relation to things that have been done in terms of concessions. I think it is wrong of the member to argue that. We need to ensure that when stamp duty is assessed it is being assessed across the board in a uniform way. We need to ensure that people are not able to use a vehicle to get out of paying their stamp duty. The only reason these sorts of restructures are being made is to benefit the corporate structure of that company and probably to make more profit. We should not be giving up our stamp duty to allow those things to happen in that way. The member may not be happy with that, but I believe that answers the issue he raised. I have not had the opportunity to look at a proposed amendment, but it would not be possible to accept that because his amendment would be saying that, if the Office of State Revenue was to give a ruling and then the act could be changed twice after that ruling had been given, he would then expect that we would apply the rule in relation to when the ruling was given and not in fact with the act in force at that particular time. The first tax that I paid was 3s. I would like to still be paying that. Mr Shine: What were you earning, though? Mr MACKENROTH: I earned five pound 10. I earned $11 and I paid 30c tax. That is a great rate, is it not? Mr Shine: Those were the days. Mr MACKENROTH: It is a long time ago, though. Under the new rules I would not be able to leave school at the age I did. I would have had to stay for a lot longer. We need to ensure the law applies at the time the transaction is done. We cannot have somebody who goes in and gets a ruling and then in the future goes ahead with the transaction if the law has been changed. This would not apply to just this one transaction; it could apply to many different things. We just could not do that. The member for Gladstone raised the issue of tax. There is no simple answer to that. The reality is that I have not met anyone yet who likes to pay tax. People always have a reason they should not be paying as much. The member has my letter. She should just keep showing it to people. I can assure her that they will never agree with it. I thank all honourable members for their contributions to the debate. Motion agreed to.

Committee Hon. T. M. MACKENROTH (Chatsworth—ALP) (Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Sport) in charge of the bill. Clauses 1 to 28, as read, agreed to. Clause 29— Mr HORAN (6.25 p.m.): Clause 29 amends section 333. It is designed to ensure that interest payments are not exempt payments for hire purchase agreements. The issue is that with the change to the Duties Act from the Stamp Act the basis on which duty was calculated has changed from the base amount of the hire purchase agreement to a periodic basis. This change brought Queensland's duties legislation into line with the rest of the country. 26 Nov 2002 Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill 4779

The only problem was that under the Stamp Act Queensland had an exemption from duty assessed on an interest inclusive amount. On the periodic basis, it is administratively very difficult for hirers to determine the stamp duty payable on each individual periodic payment when they have to exclude an interest amount which reduces with each payment. This is an understandable problem that would impose significant administrative cost on hirers. However, just because something is administratively difficult does not necessarily mean that the consumer of hire purchase agreements needs to pay the price. While the change could gain more revenue for the government, it will be over a longer period of time. The average length of hire purchase agreement is around four years. The state government will now receive duty from these transactions on a monthly basis as opposed to one amount paid at the beginning of the transaction. The representative group for hirers is the Australian Finance Conference. It believes that the changes may be revenue neutral for the government as some hire purchase agreements may be paid out early. Therefore, the government will not receive the monthly amount as duty is not payable on the final amount. The only reason is that often with hire purchase agreements there is a balloon payment at the end of the contract. This basically means that the final payment made under the agreement is significantly more than the periodic payment that had previously been paid. Because these balloon payments are not dutiable in these cases, the government will miss out on some duty. Can the Treasurer confirm that these changes are revenue neutral? If they are not, how much revenue does he expect to gain or lose? If the changes are revenue positive, does the minister consider there are ways to bring about the changes without creating a greater impost on business? Mr MACKENROTH: The situation in relation to the stamp duty payable needs to be looked at in two parts. One is the fact that stamp duty will be paid on the interest and the other is the fact that stamp duty will not be paid on the balloon payments. In relation to the stamp duty payable on the interest, it is expected to bring in revenue of about $900,000 a year. In relation to the balloon payments it is expected to be over $1 million a year. The question is: is this revenue neutral? The answer is no, it is not. In fact we will be losing slightly. Clause 29, as read, agreed to. Clause 30, as read, agreed to. Clause 31— Mr HORAN (6.30 p.m.): I move amendment No. 1— 1. Clause 31 At page 23, after line 18— insert— '(2A) Section 412(4)— insert— '(d) if the commissioner has, before the commencement of this paragraph, made a ruling under section 410 exempting the dutiable transaction or relevant acquisition from duty under this part.'.'. During my speech I described the situation relating to this amendment in some detail. The Deputy Premier and Treasurer basically provided his side of the argument in his reply. The Deputy Premier got it wrong when he said that I was proposing that he give some sort of gift to this company that acts as an incentive for jobs. I pointed out the jobs and the size of the project because I realise that we are talking about an amount of money as a consequence of something. Is it right or is it wrong to make a decision when there has been a ruling given by the commissioner which, under the previous legislation, applied? My point in talking about Phosphate Hill and the jobs was to point out that the minister, in his terms, is not gifting $10 million; I am looking at how we do this correctly. That project is going to deliver an estimated $60 million a year to the state. That is really a side issue to making sure that this decision on stamp duty payable is correct. I pointed that out. I can understand that $10 million is valuable to the state—for all the things that the Treasurer needs it for and for all the things that I say the Treasurer needs it for. I do not think that it is necessary for me to go over this because I gave all the details of the argument and they are in Hansard. The key point is that section 411(3)(b) of the Duties Act states that when an application for corporate reconstruction is made, the commissioner must make an assessment of nil duty if he or she has already done so in a prior ruling. Section 412(4)(b) states 4780 Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill 26 Nov 2002 that this rule does not apply if the circumstances relating to the transaction are materially different from those when the ruling took place. I think that pretty well summarises it. Section 411(3)(b) of the act says that when the actual application for a corporate reconstruction is made the commissioner must make an assessment of nil duty if he or she has already done so in a prior ruling. That is what this amendment is based upon. Mr MACKENROTH: We oppose the amendment. The issue that is very clear is that if the amendment is passed and comes into law the company's reconstruction has not yet happened. With the member moving the amendment for the company, it is obviously aware that it is before parliament tonight. So the company would certainly know what the law is at the time. Obviously, it would know the effect of it. Therefore, the company's decision as to whether to go ahead with the restructure will be made clearly with the knowledge that if it does that, it will be liable to pay stamp duty if, after doing the restructure, it then transfers land assets in the way in which we believe—and the member believes—it is going to do. So we oppose the amendment. I think that really it is just a gift. We do not support it. Amendment negatived. Clause 31, as read, agreed to. Clauses 32 to 42, as read, agreed to. Clause 43— Mr HORAN (6.35 p.m.): This clause states just that it amends the Fuel Subsidy Act. There are ongoing concerns by those people who are operating earthmoving equipment and who are not able to access the subsidy arrangement that others, such as people who operate farm machinery and fishing vessels, are able to access. In speaking to this clause I really wanted to know if there is any possibility or any opportunity to be able to provide a fairer treatment of these people who are the one group who did not get access to the subsidy arrangements. Mr MACKENROTH: The simple answer to this is that the Commonwealth government took on the responsibility for off-road diesel when the GST came in. We cannot now start to pay a subsidy for which we are getting no recompense at all. If any operators have a concern in relation to the price that they are paying for diesel, they really should be talking to the federal government. Clause 43, as read, agreed to. Clauses 44 and 45, as read, agreed to. Clause 46— Mr HORAN (6.37 p.m.): The Scrutiny of Legislation Committee has some concerns about the issue of protection against self-incrimination. In the Alert Digest the committee states that the clause empowers the commissioner, by written notice, to require information or documentation from a person that is under their control. The provision denies the person the legislative principle of self-incrimination. The principle normally dictates that the person may be excused from complying with the legislation on the basis that they may incriminate themselves, but this excuse has been terminated. The Alert Digest states that— ... the committee normally considers such provisions are only... justifiable if: The matters concerned are matters peculiarly within the knowledge of the persons denied the benefit of the self-incrimination rule, and which it would be difficult or impossible to establish via any alternative evidentiary means; The bill prohibits the use of information obtained in prosecutions against the person; In order to secure this restriction of the use of the information obtained, the person should not be required to fulfil any conditions such as formally claiming the right. Can the minister provide the details regarding these concerns of the Scrutiny of Legislation Committee as to why the denial of the self-incrimination benefit was justifiable in these circumstances? Mr MACKENROTH: I have not as yet answered the Scrutiny of Legislation Committee, and I apologise for that. I like to send them a letter about their concerns before the debate takes place in the parliament. So I will make sure that they get a fairly quick answer to this matter. The new provisions, like the existing provisions relating to authorised persons, state that a person may not fail to comply with information or lodge the requirement on the basis that complying may incriminate the person. This approach recognises that licensees often uniquely possess the information necessary to enable the commissioner to determine whether or not they have 26 Nov 2002 Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4781 properly satisfied their obligations so that any refusal to provide that information would preclude the accurate determination of the licensee's fuel subsidy entitlement. However, as the principle in abrogating the self-incrimination privilege is to ensure that the commissioner can access all relevant information to properly determine a licensee's fuel subsidy entitlement, the provisions state that any information so obtained cannot be used in civil or criminal proceedings except where the falsity or misleading nature of the information is relevant. The provisions therefore strike an appropriate balance between revenue protection for the state and the licensee's rights. Clause 46, as read, agreed to. Schedule, as read, agreed to. Bill reported, without amendment.

Third Reading Bill, on motion of Mr Mackenroth, by leave, read a third time.

TREASURY LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL (No. 2) Second Reading Resumed from 7 November (see p. 4528). Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (6.42 p.m.): The stated objective of the Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) is to make changes to a number of acts administered by the Treasury Department. The acts to be amended are the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994, the Superannuation (State Public Sector) Act 1990 (QSuper Act), Public Officers Superannuation Benefits Recovery Act 1998, the Gaming Machine Act 1992, the Charitable and Non-Profit Gaming Act 1999 and the Keno Act 1996. I shall highlight some of these proposed changes, particularly those to the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994. The amendments are in four main areas. The first objective is to operate with the government's recent Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002. The second objective is to allow for the different GST treatment of compulsory third party insurance for registered tax entities, that is, businesses that have to provide a BAS. The changes endeavour to introduce thresholds on gratuitous care for compulsory third party claims and require cost statements to clearly differentiate between legal fees and disbursements. This will ensure that the right proportions are there for legal fees and disbursements because that personal injuries legislation set particular levels on certain claims. In certain cases the legislation provided that there would be no legal fees, a set amount of legal fees or a maximum amount of legal fees on particular claims that were paid out. The bill is also designed to encourage cooperation at an early stage between the parties by facilitating expressions of regret by defendants. As I understand it, those expressions of regret do not then carry weight in any future proceeding. For example, if there is a car accident and someone gets out of their car to say sorry for what they have done, that is not used as evidence against them as the matter proceeds. The third objective is to provide a legislative basis in relation to the variations in filing and setting premiums as a result of the expiry of the GST transitional provisions as they apply to CTP insurance. The fourth objective is to redefine the premium to be used in determining scheme affordability. These changes to the MAIA are intended to help facilitate the introduction of a dual premium model. The other major drivers behind the changes are to align the operation of the compulsory third party scheme with the operation of the GST. The GST was introduced on 1 July 2000 and transitional provisions were put in place for three years for GST and compulsory third party. It prevented businesses from claiming an input tax credit on GST. Now they will be able to claim GST as an input tax credit. For private cars there is no change. For those people who pay a premium on private cars and are not in a position to claim GST, CTP insurers under the transitional arrangements were able to claim a 1/11th deduction on their claims, but insurers will no longer be able to claim on business policy claims. Such policies represent about 20 per cent of insurance policies. Therefore, insurers cannot claim the 1/11th on these. Hence, compulsory third party for business entities will rise in the order of about eight per cent. On balance, businesses will be able to claim the 10 per cent deduction. In summary, the state government will increase the CTP by eight per cent on business policies and businesses will claim 10 per cent. Basically, for registered GST business entities, no-one will be paying more provided they are claiming through 4782 Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 their BAS. Arrangements will be put in place for a relative or pro rata calculation depending on the date that falls due during this introductory phase. The other issue is that now some six companies are involved in the provision of compulsory third party insurance—Suncorp, Alliance, RACQ, QBE, AAMI and NRMA. Every quarter, the MAIC provides actuarial advice giving a floor and a ceiling for the premiums that these companies are able to charge so that there is a measure of competition between these insurers. The actuary's report goes to the insurers, to the Queensland Law Society and Australian plaintiff lawyers. Of course, customers have the opportunity to get a quote from these different companies. The amount of competition is probably limited by the floor and ceiling provided by the actuarial advice. Under these arrangements, there will be a pro rata application for those people who use their vehicles partly for business and partly privately. As I said, these changes have been aligned with the PIP Act. Where there is structured settlements for claimants under this act, it introduces these arrangements for the threshold on gratuitous care on CTP claims and requires cost statements that clearly differentiate between the legal fees and the disbursement. So, it will be in accordance with the PIP Act. Recently, the Commissioner of the Motor Accident Insurance Commission, Lesley Anderson, expressed some concerns regarding the viability of the state compulsory third party insurance scheme. I would like to hear from the Treasurer his response to those concerns expressed by the commissioner. The other changes in this legislation refer to the Superannuation (State Public Sector) Act. Recent Commonwealth changes to the Family Law Act enable a superannuation benefit to be split following the separation of a married couple. The QSuper Act needs to be amended to facilitate this change. The bill will also remove references to the Financial Administration and Audit Act in the QSuper Act, as the Queensland Audit Office has confirmed that the QSuper fund is outside the scope of whole-of-government reporting. Commonwealth reporting requirements will still be applicable. Under the Public Officers Superannuation Benefits Recovery Act the government may recover from persons who have committed certain offences a portion of their superannuation benefits. In the past, out-of-court settlements have been negotiated between the Treasurer and that person. However, legal advice obtained by the government has indicated that these out-of- court settlements are unable to be enforced. The changes are designed to legitimise these out- of-court settlements, and the offences all relate to instances of official misconduct. Another act amended is the Gaming Machine Act 1991. The amendments provide for a minimum number of five and a maximum number of seven commissioners who may be appointed to the Queensland Gaming Commission. They are designed to allow flexibility for the commission depending upon its workload. The role of the commissioners mostly concerns the granting of gaming machine licences for clubs and hotels; in the case of hotels, the transfer of licences, because there is a cap on hotels as to the number of machines that can be in place. They are also involved with new licences as they apply particularly to clubs. Their other role is with respect to employee licences. A further role concerns licensed operators, who are those persons who act in a monitoring capacity, that is, licensed monitoring operators who look at the data on the taxation, sale, disposal of machines and so forth and also licence major dealers. In respect of the Charitable and Non-Profit Gaming Act, the changes reflect modern standards of legislative drafting and provide for a prescribed fee instead of relying on the general regulation-making power in the act. Fees will be prescribed for filing a notice of appeal with the registrar of the commission and making an application for approval of the chief executive to change the percentage return to players of gaming machines under the Gaming Machine Act. The final act amended is the Keno Act. There are some changes under the Keno Act as to the method by which the fee is paid. This is fairly important, because this fee is the contribution that is made to the Community Investment Fund, which is important in providing opportunities to various community organisations through the community benefit fund. In summary, in the past the fee was based on 8.5 per cent of total fees. It will now be 8.5 per cent of 26.25 per cent of the gross income. So 8.5 per cent was paid by Jupiters as calculated on an amount of 50 per cent of the gross profit and the fee was paid twice yearly. The licence fee paid by Jupiters will now be paid quarterly and will be at a set amount of 8.5 per cent of 26.25 per cent of the Keno tax levied on the turnover. I will be seeking assurances from the Treasurer that the proposed changes will not diminish in any way the amount of the proceeds flowing to the Community Investment Fund, because it is a very important fund. There would not be one of us who do not have constituents applying for it. 26 Nov 2002 Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4783

It has been of enormous benefit. I could not speak highly enough of it. In terms of this change in the way in which the fees are determined, I seek an assurance that it will not make any difference to the total amount going into the Community Investment Fund. Ms STRUTHERS (Algester—ALP) (6.55 p.m.): There are two key actions within this bill that I wish to comment on briefly in supporting the bill; that is, the amendment to the Keno Act 1996 to ensure that the 8.5 per cent levy to the Community Investment Fund is applied only to the keno tax and not the licence fees, and the second action is the amendments to the Motor Insurance Act 1994. In respect of the keno tax, it is important to say up front that, whilst there are many people—and to some extent myself included—who have concerns about the increase in gaming activity in a whole range of areas across the state over the past decade, we have one of the strongest, most responsible gaming regimes of any jurisdiction. There are high levels of probity and integrity and many clubs, hotels and other venues around the state are implementing very responsible gaming measures. One of the benefits is that we have the Community Investment Fund and money flowing to the Gambling Community Benefit Fund. In my area we have had airconditioning in the Acacia Ridge YMCA Preschool, a couple of schools have picked up shade cover and cricket practice nets at the Grand Avenue State School, where we will see some budding new Waugh brothers, out at Forest Lake. It certainly has been a great fund and I share the sentiments expressed earlier by the Leader of the Opposition that it is important that these funds flow through to the Gambling Community Benefit Fund. Last year the fund provided over $34 million to some 2,843 community groups. In relation to the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994, the amendment in this bill brings the legislation into line with the new Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 that the Attorney-General introduced a few months ago. A very important aspect of this act is the capacity to have precourt processes in place to try to limit the extent to which people will take legal action. In particular, I wish to comment on the expressions of regret provisions that this amendment will incorporate into the Motor Accident Insurance Act to bring it into line with the Personal Injuries Proceedings Act. It is important that people have fair and effective options for out-of-court settlement. Expressions of regret certainly help this process. There is lots of evidence to show that if aggrieved people receive an apology, even without liability being admitted, matters can be more easily resolved. For instance, a study by Vincent, Young and Phillips in 1994 asked the question of a number of participants, 'Once the original incident had occurred could anything have been done which would have meant you did not feel the need to take legal action?' The overwhelming majority of participants in that study indicated that an explanation or apology would have prevented their taking legal action. Lastly, I turn to the Law Council of Australia submission in September of last year to the Negligence Review Panel. It stated that there is often a concern that an apology will be construed as an admission of liability. The law in the United States does distinguish between apologies and admissions of liability. Thankfully, in the very positive actions taken recently by the Attorney we now see similar legislation in Queensland that provides that an expression of regret is not admissible in a court proceeding. These are very positive changes. I am very pleased to see that this amendment bill brings these provisions into line with the Personal Injuries Proceedings Bill. I am very happy to support the legislation before the House tonight. Sitting suspended from 7.00 p.m. to 8.30 p.m. Mr PURCELL (Bulimba—ALP) (8.30 p.m.): I rise to speak on the Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2002. The objective of the bill is to make a number of technical changes to acts administered by the Treasury Department. Apart from the amendment to the Pay-Roll Tax Act 1971, these amendments do not involve any significant policy changes. The amendment to the Taxation Administration Act will remove the commissioner's obligation, when remitting assessed interest by way of an assessment, to issue a notice to the taxpayer where, after any remission and application of payments received, there is no unpaid amount for an instrument or transaction. This will improve administrative efficiency without adversely impacting on the taxpayer. Sections 24(4) and 24(6) of the Queensland Treasury Corporation Act 1998 require amendment to clarify that the relevant arrangements to which the sections apply are not necessarily only those to which the Queensland Treasury Corporation or an affiliate is a party. This bill will also amend the Gas Act 1965. This has two purposes. The first is to allow a regulation to be made which will contain the timetable for introducing gas retail contestability, and the second is to provide a mechanism enabling gas retail consumers to be certified as contestable. 4784 Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002

The Duties Act 2001 will also be amended. As I said earlier, the Pay-Roll Tax Act 1971 will also be affected by this bill. The Queensland Competition Authority Act 1997 will also be affected. There are provisions to allow for the formation of a panel of associate members, thereby improving the authority's ability to conduct investigations, mediations and arbitrations in a timely manner and to clarify the definition of 'water supply' to ensure that only private sector water suppliers are considered under part 5A of the act. During drafting of the amendments to the legislation some unanticipated policy issues have been encountered relating to water supply activities which are only part owned by government agencies. It is intended to consider and consult on these issues. Those are the only amendments. With those few words, I support the bill. Mrs ATTWOOD (Mount Ommaney—ALP) (8.33 p.m.): I rise in support of the Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2002. Amendments in parts 2 and 3 of the bill, in lieu of depending on the general regulation making power of the act, will provide for a prescribed fee to file a notice of appeal with the registrar of the commission under the Charitable and Non-Profit Gaming Act 1999 and the Gaming Machine Act 1991 and to make an application for approval of the chief executive to change the percentage return to players of gaming machines under the Gaming Machine Act 1991. I will take this opportunity to thank the Treasurer for the enormous benefits provided to the community as a result of the Gambling Community Benefit Fund and the Jupiters Casino Benefit Fund. Recently I held a forum for community groups in the electorate of Mount Ommaney to inform these groups about applying for funds from the Gambling Community Benefit Fund, the projects which may attract eligibility and why projects are selected to receive funds. Thanks go to the officers from the Office of Gaming for assisting me to bring this forum to fruition. The electorate of Mount Ommaney has a large number of community groups working as non-profit organisations in the areas of sport and recreation, services for seniors, Rotary, Lions and Apex clubs, Neighbourhood Watch groups, child care organisations, respite care, Meals on Wheels, parents and citizens associations, Girl Guides and Scout groups and many more. All of these groups benefit individuals in the community enormously by providing facilities and activities for their development and recreation. The funds available from the state government are put to good use by these groups to enhance the services they provide. From shade areas to anti-graffiti equipment, the uses are far-reaching. On the other side of the coin, the Sherwood RSL in my area is able to provide a great community facility and a venue for locals, aided by gaming machine profits. The club is becoming increasingly popular and provides meals, activities and entertainment for people in the local area. The club has a strong community conscience and organises fundraising activities for local charities. Last night, Peter Patterson, RSL president, and Peter Ward, club manager, announced an ongoing bursary to 218 Squadron Air Cadets to assist the young men and women in the cadets gain practical leadership and other skills. The club also tries to ensure that users of the gaming machines stay within their budgets and are able to manage their expenditure appropriately. The RSL will be pleased to note that the amendments to the act will not result in a change to the existing appeal or approval fees. Part 3 of the bill will provide for a minimum number of five and a maximum number of seven commissioners that may be appointed to the Queensland Gaming Commission. This allows for flexibility in the number of commissioners who may need to be appointed in accordance with the workload and modifies the quorum requirements for commission meetings according to the number of appointments at that point in time. I commend the bill to the House. Mr SHINE (Toowoomba North—ALP) (8.36 p.m.): I would like to make some comments with respect to that aspect of the bill which relates to the amendments to the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994. It covers basically two respects: one being the expression of regret provisions and the other the gratuitous service provisions. By and large, the proposed amendments will create conformity with the provisions of the Personal Injuries Proceedings Bill 2002 which was passed in this place a few months ago. The explanatory notes to that legislation stated that the bill will reduce the cost of legal proceedings by introducing a process with which claimants are required to comply before legal proceedings can be commenced in a court. The bill is based on the pre-court processes in the Motor Insurance Act 1994 which has been successful in reducing claims costs and legal costs associated with personal injuries arising out of motor vehicle accidents. In other words, the bill before the House is one that espouses the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 as the major innovator for the reduction of legal costs. 26 Nov 2002 Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4785

The first subject matter that I wanted to talk about was the expression of regret provisions contained in proposed new section 44B. The purpose of that is to allow an individual to express regret about a motor vehicle accident without being concerned that the expression of regret may be construed or used as an admission of liability on a claim, or in a proceeding based on a claim arising out of the accident—that is the reason for the provision going in—provided, however, that the expression of regret does not contain an admission of liability. I think people in practical terms will have to be careful how they express that regret. As a consequence of a motor vehicle accident some people are overcome with remorse and say all sorts of things which, a day or two later, having thought about it and having obtained some advice, they might regret having said. What we are trying to do is get over that circumstance. More importantly, I think we are trying to get over the circumstance where people are more inclined not to bring legal action if an appropriate apology is given. From personal experience, I know in other areas of law—in slip and fall and public liability areas—people have come to me to seek legal redress, and the only reason they have come to me is because the person or entity responsible for the injury did not make an apology—did not say 'I am sorry'—and that is all they ever wanted. The insertion of that clause in this legislation and the previous legislation, the Personal Injuries Proceedings Bill, can, if it works properly—and time will tell whether it does—lead to a lessening of the number of claims which otherwise would have been brought. It is a great innovation and perhaps should have been thought of and introduced years ago. Another point associated with that is that there is a slight difference in the language used in this bill as opposed to the Personal Injuries Proceedings Bill. In this bill the expression is 'does not contain an admission of liability' whereas in the personal injuries legislation the expression was 'an acknowledgment of fault'. I would doubt whether there have been any judicial decisions arising since the passage of the first bill, but when he sums up the debate the Treasurer might be able to throw some light on why different language is used. The second aspect I want to refer to relates to the restriction on gratuitous services. I think the meaning of it is that, where the services are less than six hours a week and they do not last for more than six months, no claim can be brought for that rather than an instance where it can be shown that the services amounted to less than six hours a week and we were not concerned about what time limit or how many weeks or months. The purpose of this legislation is to simply cut down the extent of damages that will be awarded. The reason for that being introduced in the Personal Injuries Proceedings Bill was of course to save the day so far as premiums were concerned having regard to the comments made about skyrocketing premiums and the cause of that being, it was alleged, people bringing claims. However, in relation to the motor vehicle insurance area, there has been no suggestion to my knowledge that the fund is at any risk. I just wonder why we need to follow suit in this area, other than for the purposes of consistency with the other area, if in fact there are no financial reasons behind that. I also note that there is a further requirement that cost be distinguished between legal professional costs on the one hand and legal disbursements on the other. I think that is just a matter of leading to clarity and, again, consistency with the other legislation. I commend the bill to the House and praise the consistency of the legislation with other similar legislation dealing with personal injuries. Hon. T. M. MACKENROTH (Chatsworth—ALP) (Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Sport) (8.43 p.m.), in reply: I thank all members for their contributions to the debate tonight. The Leader of the Opposition raised a couple of points to which he would like a response. Firstly in relation to the Insurance Commissioner's view of the CTP scheme in relation to affordability, whilst there has been widespread community concern regarding the costs and availability of public liability insurance cover, the Insurance Commissioner advises that there is some evidence that pressure is also building on CTP premiums. Although there has been a steady rise in CTP premiums, there has not been a breach of the affordability index to warrant immediate changes to the CTP scheme. The affordability index, is breached when the highest class 1 premium filed by an insurer exceeds the index which is based on 45 per cent of average weekly earnings. Currently, the index figure is $357 and the premium remains under the index trigger. I think that answers that question. In relation to keno, the Leader of the Opposition asked if there would be any change to the revenue taken into the community scheme. The answer to that is no. The changes will be revenue neutral, so there will not be any cutback in the funds that actually go in there. I thank members for their contributions. Motion agreed to. 4786 Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002

Committee Hon. T. M. MACKENROTH (Chatsworth—ALP) (Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Sport) in charge of the bill. Clauses 1 to 10, as read, agreed to. Clause 11— Mr HORAN (8.45 p.m.): Clause 11 relates to amendment to the Keno Act. When summing up the debate the minister talked about the changes to the Keno Act and said that it would be revenue neutral. What modelling has been undertaken by the Treasury Department? Are there any figures that the Treasurer can make available which show that the contribution will not actually be reduced through the new formula that is to apply? A number of speakers tonight have spoken about the importance of the Gambling Community Benefit Fund and the Community Investment Fund. I think it is important that we feel absolutely sure that there has been some modelling done and that figures have been worked out by Treasury that give an indication of what the return would be for a full financial year compared to what the return would have been for a previous financial year. Mr MACKENROTH: The modelling has been done and what it would tell the member is this: under the present system, the tax is estimated for this financial year to be $6.72 million and the licence fee is estimated to be $4.5 million, which gives a total amount of $11.22 million. The changes for this year would in effect have meant—and if it had been for a full year—that the tax pool would have been $6.72 million plus $4.5 million, which equals $11.22 million. So the actual estimates are the same either way. Clause 11, as read, agreed to. Clause 12— Mr HORAN (8.48 p.m.): The amendments to the Motor Accident Insurance Act under clause 12 affect the way that the affordability index will be calculated. We have some concern that the index may be artificially calculated, meaning that in the original legislation if the affordability index was breached a review of the legislation would be triggered. Can the minister tell us the way in which the affordability index is being changed and how it will be calculated. Mr MACKENROTH: I am informed that the changes are being made because of the way that the GST impacts on this in that business vehicles can claim back the GST. It makes a difference in terms of the way that that is assessed, so the affordability index is being changed to take account of that. It is really not affecting the way the system worked before at all. Mr HORAN: The Treasurer made some comment regarding the commissioner's concerns about the compulsory third party car insurance scheme. On ABC's 612 Brisbane radio news on 12 November Commissioner Lesley Anderson reported that Queensland's compulsory third party car insurance scheme is losing its viability. If she said that it is losing its viability, what did she actually mean? Is it in danger of losing its viability? Does the Treasurer have any figures to show that? Mr MACKENROTH: I would have to plead guilty to not knowing what someone said on the afternoon of 12 November. That was my 25th anniversary and I was actually celebrating. I am unaware of the comments made by Lesley Anderson in relation to that. The officials I have here from the Motor Accident Insurance Commission also are unaware of those comments. The information I provided in my reply to the second reading debate set out what the affordability index is, where we are at and the fact that we are underneath that. I am unaware of the comments. I would need to know what was said and in what context it was said. I really do not know. Mr HORAN: I am really only going by the summary of what was said. Mr Mackenroth: I actually start from the principle of never believing anything I read in the newspaper or hear on the radio. Mr HORAN: But this is what the commissioner said. The affordability index relates to the premiums and whether they are in an affordable range for people to be able to pay. It has nothing to do with the viability of the scheme. I think it is a little concerning if she is saying that the scheme is losing its viability. Is there any concern within the department that the viability is being affected by the reserves that are being held, the amount of premiums being paid in, or the payouts that are occurring? If it was losing its viability it would only be on the basis that there was more going out than was coming in and the reserves were being drained. Is there any evidence of that? 26 Nov 2002 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4787

Mr MACKENROTH: No. There are no concerns about the viability of the scheme. We made amendments to the act in 2000 to actually ensure that premiums were contained, and they are working. There are no concerns with the viability. I do not know the context of what the member is quoting from, but perhaps—it is only perhaps—the context in which Lesley Anderson has been reported was HIH and FAI and the viability in terms of some comments that she may have made to the royal commission. I do not know whether that is the case, but perhaps it is. The member would be aware that we have put in place mechanisms through a $5 levy to pick up the FAI claims. We have also transferred money—we debated it in the parliament—to assist in meeting those claims. So perhaps in the context of that there may have been some talk about viability, but there is no concern about the viability of the scheme as it is operating today and will continue to operate in the future. There has been no concern at all expressed to me by the Motor Accident Insurance Commission about the viability of the scheme. I know that if Lesley Anderson had those concerns about the scheme as it operates today she would certainly have made me aware of them, and she has not. So there are no concerns in that regard. I just need to know the context of that radio interview. I think what can be said here tonight is that there is no concern within government about the viability of the scheme. I have officers here from the Motor Accident Insurance Commission who tell me that within the Motor Accident Insurance Commission there are no concerns about the viability of the scheme. What we can say is that there are no concerns at all. Clause 12, as read, agreed to. Clauses 13 to 25, as read, agreed to. Clause 26— Mr HORAN (8.55 p.m.): Clause 26 has regard to the amendments to the Superannuation (State Public Sector) Act 1990. The changes will take the QSuper fund outside the scope of the state Auditor-General under the Financial Administration and Audit Act. The Scrutiny of Legislation Committee has referred to the parliament the question of what effect this will have upon the auditing and reporting requirements of the FAA Act. How will the scrutiny of the QSuper fund now be conducted at the state level? Mr MACKENROTH: The effect of this amendment does not take state Public Service superannuation out of being audited by the Auditor-General. It takes out a redundant provision. The information I have is that it still will be under the Financial Administration and Audit Act. It still has to comply with that and it still will be audited by the Auditor-General. Mr HORAN: Is the minister saying that it is still under the FAA Act? So the auditing of the QSuper fund will continue to be undertaken by the Auditor-General? Mr MACKENROTH: That is what I said. Clause 26, as read, agreed to. Clauses 27 to 29, as read, agreed to. Bill reported, without amendment.

Third Reading Bill, on motion of Mr Mackenroth, by leave, read a third time.

TRANSPORT LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL (No. 2) Second Reading Resumed from 6 November (see p. 4481). Mr JOHNSON (Gregory—NPA) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (8.58 p.m.): I rise to speak to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2). This is the second omnibus bill introduced by the minister to amend a number of acts administered by Queensland Transport and the Department of Main Roads. This bill contains quite a number of machinery amendments but also contains a number of significant amendments to which I shall refer in some detail and to which I will be seeking a specific response from the minister. This bill also amends the Century Zinc Project Act 1997. It details the property descriptions that relate to the mine project, including the port facility and the associated transport infrastructure corridor. It also deletes the previous regulation making power that was in the initial bill for the purpose which has now expired. I welcome the resolution of the recent sit-in that occurred at the 4788 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002

Century Zinc mine as a result of the concerns with the review of the current agreement. I also congratulate the Minister for State Development, the Hon. Tom Barton, on the part that he played in resolving the dispute by visiting the mine after the Leader of the Opposition called for a senior minister to get up there and resolve the issue. I believe that Mr Barton going there was certainly a productive move. I applaud the minister for that. Part 3 of this bill amends the Tow Truck Act 1973. This act is to be amended by omitting the outdated reference to the Transport Infrastructure (Roads) Act 1991 and inserting a reference to the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995. Part 4 seeks to amend the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994. One of the most important provisions that is proposed is that the Director-General of Queensland Transport is to be taken as the owner of rail corridor and non-rail corridor land where an owner's consent is required under the Integrated Planning Act 1977. Section 161 of the act, which concerns the functions of the port authorities, is to be amended to permit the Cairns Port Authority to develop residential and tourist accommodation on the city port site. The proposal is that when these projects are developed, freehold title will pass from the port authority to the developer of the project. Although the opposition supports this proposal, which is specific to the Cairns Port Authority, I believe that I should flag a concern that the development of strategic port land for profit by real estate speculation is not an appropriate activity for port authorities. It is also proposed that a new section will specify port limits by restricting them to marine operational areas. I understand that these amendments will ensure that port authorities retain planning power over these strategic port assets. That means by default that port authorities will be losing planning control over those assets that they currently control. The assets that appear to have disappeared from the control of the port are the actual terminals associated with wharf infrastructure. I ask the minister to clarify this point in his reply: will terminal infrastructure outside the 100-metre limit be included specifically as port infrastructure or not? Part 5 of this bill contains the major amendments that this legislation proposes. The first amendment to the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 inserts a new authority to amend, suspend or cancel an authority or permit that has been previously issued. On the surface, this is a reasonable provision that would permit conditions to a permit to be changed when circumstances have changed, for example, when on-road conditions might mean that a route specified on a permit might need to be altered. I am concerned that many businesses depend upon a period permit to conduct their businesses. Many people use excess dimensional vehicles, such as vehicles that are specially constructed, like cranes or floats for moving houses. The community, including this government—and for that matter the minister's own department—rely upon these vehicles to deliver and place bridge pylons. I am concerned that this provision does not require any substantive reason as to why a permit is suspended or cancelled. Is it something that the director-general can do on a whim? I note that the explanatory notes indicate that there is recourse to an appeal if a permit holder is adversely impacted upon by a decision of the director-general, including an appeal to a Magistrates Court. I ask the minister to respond specifically to my concerns in this respect and give an assurance that this provision will not be used in an ad hoc way that will impact upon the investment of people who have an expectation that they will be able to continue to use their vehicles for which permits have been issued as a matter of course. This bill also contains amendments that provide for the extension of the definition of obstruction of enforcement officers to be extended to include abuse and insults. I support the protection of people going about their lawful business, particularly the difficult business of enforcing our laws. I note that there is a requirement that an officer must first issue a warning and that a breach report, which will be independently adjudicated, is required rather than proceeding by way of infringement notice. The chain of responsibility provisions have also been amended by this legislation. The most significant of these proposals is a provision for an enforcement officer to compel a person to provide information, including documents, and a requirement to attend an interview to provide such information. My primary concern is that these provisions remove a person's common law right to remain silent. There is an obvious protection in relation to self-incrimination as any information obtained by these provisions cannot be used against them unless the information is false or misleading. There is also an amendment that relates to an extended liability provision. In effect, this amendment means that the current requirement for a driver to have been convicted of an offence before a chain of responsibility offence can be sustained against an employer no longer applies. 26 Nov 2002 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4789

I acknowledge that there is a serious problem in relation to matters such as fatigue and mass offences. However, I have reservations that the balance may well be swinging too far in the direction of the driver. As I read the proposed legislation, it seems that a driver may be able to escape prosecution if he is able to provide incriminating information against the employer or somebody else in the chain of responsibility. This is a major concern. Although the explanatory notes refer in particular to the use of documentation to substantiate an offence against a person who may have influenced a person to commit an offence, the matter of verbal evidence is not adequately addressed. The road transport industry is not unknown for vitriolic industrial action. I am concerned that drivers could be encouraged by these provisions to conspire to avoid prosecution by implicating an employer. I can see that the other consequence of this legislation is that there will be less and less documentation available in relation to loads. I suspect that more information will be transmitted electronically between the consignor and the consignee. Section 61 is to be amended to abolish reference to an approved form where there is no such form. All that will be required is a written notice. Section 78 is to be significantly amended by this legislation. This amendment just about abolishes the draconian and unjust provisions that the minister introduced last year for unlicensed driving. Of course, this is the second go that the minister has had in correcting an intolerable situation that he created with the six months disqualification for persons who had failed to renew their licence, often because of a failure of Queensland Transport systems in the first place. The minister could have had the good grace in his second reading speech to acknowledge that the problems that he is now acting to correct are those that I and other members of the opposition raised when the first Transport Legislation Amendment Bill was debated back in March. In fact, many of the adverse consequences that the minister referred to were the ones that I warned about when these amendments were introduced last year. I find it somewhat surprising now to find that, in the explanatory notes that are provided for this legislation, for a whole range of offences that were covered by the 2001 amendments and were ignored in the first Transport Legislation Amendment Bill that was introduced this year, the six month penalty is now considered unnecessarily severe. It was only on 8 May this year that the following members spoke in support of the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill—all the usual suspects—the members for Mansfield, Burnett, Springwood, Toowoomba North, Albert, Clayfield, Bulimba, Kawana, Glass House, Broadwater, Barron River, Cairns, Ferny Grove, Nudgee, Redlands, Indooroopilly and Stafford. I ask these members: why were these penalties okay in May but are not acceptable in November? I remind those members and others that many people have suffered and are suffering because those members are out of touch with reality. I also remind the minister that the amendments in the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill were retrospective so that these penalties would not apply. The opposition now asks: why are these amendments not also retrospective for those people whom the government now acknowledges with this legislation are suffering unnecessarily severe penalties? There are probably drivers who have appeared before a Magistrates Court this morning and who have been handed a six-month disqualification even after the minister introduced this legislation some weeks ago, admitting that the penalties for a range of offences were inappropriate. Unless the minister is able to indicate that he is prepared to make these reduced penalties retrospective, the opposition will have no recourse but to oppose that clause. This bill also amends a number of provisions in relation to camera detected offences. The first significant amendment provides a defence against a camera detected offence if an owner is unable to determine with due diligence who the driver of a vehicle was at the material time. I must say that I find it somewhat intriguing that, in the same bill, the minister is making amendments to the chain of responsibility provisions and is accepting that the owner of a vehicle can be in a position where they do not even know who is driving the vehicle. I feel that this amendment is opening Pandora's box and that in the new year we all will be sitting here amending section 114 again because no-one will bother keeping a record of who was driving what vehicle because of this provision. There is a commonsense amendment that permits a statutory declaration to be accepted to nominate a responsible driver. Similarly, there is a provision that will allow a person who was driving a vehicle at the time of an offence to self-nominate themselves as the responsible driver. Most importantly, section 120 of the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 deals with the offences which can be prosecuted by way of camera detected offences. Put simply, this bill provides that cameras can now be used to detect an offence involving a motor vehicle under this or another act. I am advised that the intention of this amendment is to permit photographic evidence obtained by a speed camera to be used, for example, in supporting an offence under the hooning provisions or a dangerous driving charge. This intention is supported 4790 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 by the opposition, and its introduction is not before time. However, I believe that this amendment means that section 120 can now be used for an offence involving the use of a motor vehicle. There is no reason now why a camera could not be used for enforcing issues like following too close, using an unregistered vehicle and even log book offences. I ask the minister— Mr Bredhauer: They can be used now for unregistered vehicles. Under present legislation they can be used for unregistered vehicles and also for uninsured vehicles. Mr JOHNSON: I thank the minister. I also ask the minister to point out any legal bar to cameras being used for a whole range of offences presently not covered. I cannot let the opportunity go without commenting on recent issues in relation to the use of speed cameras. As is often pointed out in this House, I introduced the legislation for speed cameras, with the full support of the Labor Party in opposition at the time and every other member of the House. I believe that they have saved many lives. I know that the minister agrees with that. I wanted the revenue from these cameras to be quarantined so that it would be spent on initiatives to bring about even more life saving activities such as road improvements, educational campaigns and more enforcement. It is very disappointing to learn that much of this revenue now goes to recurrent expenditure. Recently there were admissions that the funding has been spent on police overtime to operate the cameras. In fact, there was a statement in the media the other day by the Police Union that the only time speed cameras are operated is on overtime paid for out of the revenue collected. I remind the minister about the existing section 117, which relates to the use of penalties for camera detected offences. This section provides that all money collected for penalties imposed for camera detected offences in excess of the administrative cost must be used for the following purposes—road safety education and awareness programs, road accident injury and rehabilitation programs, and road funding to improve the safety of the sections of the state controlled road where accidents most frequently happen. I suppose we could call it a black spot area. I believe that the funding both of police overtime and the blood bank are examples of how the current legislation has been abused. It is these sorts of claims that give rise to the community concern about the philosophy that covers the use of this equipment. The other issue is appropriate site selection and appropriate operating procedures. We have recently seen examples of where speed cameras are being operated outside the guidelines. It is critical for the continued success of speed camera programs that public confidence is maintained. It is for these reasons that the opposition has been critical of some elements of this operation. Obviously, if the government is now going to open up the legislation for the enforcement of other offences, this parliament needs to be satisfied of the policies and controls to apply. I also signal that, if the effect of this legislation is that there is no legal barrier for section 120 to be used for these offences, we would be intent on establishing clear guidelines on how any revenue raised is accounted for. I also would like to see a special fund established and administered by the Travelsafe Committee with a requirement that the revenue be spent on additional road safety activities and not be squandered by a cynical cost shifting exercise which replaces recurrent expenditure. Finally, there are a number of other machinery amendments which the opposition supports. Once again, I thank the minister for the courtesy he provided to the opposition via his departmental officers and members of his personal staff giving me and the opposition a briefing on this legislation. I thank those members of the government, the members of the minister's staff and the members of the Department of Transport. I look forward to the minister's response to the issues I have raised this evening. Mrs ATTWOOD (Mount Ommaney—ALP) (9.15 p.m.): I rise to support the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill. I would like to speak to the aspects of the bill relating to camera detected enforcement. There are two changes incorporated in this bill that impact on the current approach to offences detected by camera detection devices. The first deals with improving processes by which the driver is nominated, and the second ensures that information collected by these cameras can be used to provide evidence in other, often more serious, offences like dangerous driving under the Criminal Code. Speed and red light cameras are one of the tools used by Queensland Transport to improve road safety. Along with on-road enforcement by police and extensive public education and advertising campaigns, speed and red light enforcement cameras have contributed to helping Queensland maintain one of the lowest road fatality rates in Australia. The existing legislation aims to outline a process so that these cameras can be used to identify inappropriate driving behaviour. Ultimately, this results in offending drivers being sanctioned through fines and demerit 26 Nov 2002 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4791 points. The threat of these sanctions is designed to discourage unsafe driving practices. Also, the allocation of demerit points allows Queensland Transport to monitor the driver's overall conduct. If sufficient demerit points are accumulated, the licence may be suspended or cancelled. This again works toward improving road safety. The camera detected offence system works on the basis that when a vehicle is detected in excess of the speed limit or contravening a red right, the registered operator of the vehicle is forwarded an infringement notice. The existing legislation also allows a registered operator who was not the driver at the time of the offence to nominate the person who actually drove the vehicle. This process has been very effective as frequently the registered operator of the vehicle was the driver or was aware of who was the driver at the time the offence was committed. Importantly, this process acknowledges that it is the behaviour of the driver, not the vehicle owner, that must be addressed to improve road safety. However, there have been occasions when the registered operator is not able to nominate the driver but the driver of the vehicle wishes to nominate themselves. This may occur when the registered operator is overseas and is not able to be contacted but has left the vehicle in the care of the driver. In these circumstances it would be difficult for the registered operator to provide notification of who the driver was, but the driver may be willing and able to nominate themselves. Clearly, this bill is taking a pragmatic approach to this issue. It works to ensure that the actual driver of the vehicle is able to take responsibility for their actions without being hindered unnecessarily. But the bill goes even further in improving the administrative processes applying to camera detected offences. A further improvement involves the use of statutory declarations when nominating the driver. Previously, notification of the actual driver of the vehicle involved using an approved form. This would be particularly difficult for a person to comply with if they wished to nominate themselves and the approved form had been sent to the registered operator. By allowing statutory declarations to be used by persons wishing to nominate themselves or others as drivers, this bill removes a further administrative hurdle to ensure that the camera detected offence process is as flexible and efficient as possible. Finally, this bill recognises that the information obtained by cameras to detect offences may be useful in prosecuting other offences involving vehicles, such as dangerous driving, under the Criminal Code or even where the vehicle is being unlawfully used or has been stolen. This may even extend to where a vehicle involved in a robbery as a getaway car is later detected by a speed or red light camera. Perhaps the application of this provision to dangerous driving is the clearest example of how this change can benefit the community and assist in improving road safety. While any speeding at any level above the approved speed limit carries risk, clearly the risk to the driver and other road users increases the higher the speed. For example, a vehicle travelling at 200 kilometres per hour or more on a public road where the speed limit is normally 100 kilometres an hour is more than just speeding. The driver is showing flagrant disregard for the safety of other road users to the extent that it could be considered to be driving dangerously within the terms of the Criminal Code. Unfortunately, this type of conduct has been detected on our roads. Importantly, unlike speeding or red light offences, dangerous driving carries a possible penalty of imprisonment. This bill ensures that where these excessive speeds or other dangerous behaviour are detected by camera detection equipment the image is admissible during court proceedings. This will ensure a more efficient court process but will not detract from an alleged offender's ability to dispute the information in the same way they can dispute the information for a speeding or a red light prosecution. This bill takes a sensible approach to camera detection as a useful tool in detecting irresponsible driving behaviour and promoting an efficient enforcement process. I commend the bill to the House. Mr SHINE (Toowoomba North—ALP) (9.21 p.m.): I rise to speak on the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2002, which amends a number of acts administered under the minister's portfolio, including the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994, the Century Zinc Project Act 1997, the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995, the Tow Truck Act 1973 and the Hay Point (Ratification of Agreements) Act 1987. Tonight I wish to speak briefly to one act that is being amended, namely, the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995, as I have had my interest wakened in a sense by the comments of the Scrutiny of Legislation Committee, which has referred to some aspects of it, namely, new section 50AA proposed under this bill and which has been referred to by the honourable member for Gregory also. 4792 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002

The committee pointed out in its Alert Digest that this proposed section expands the existing powers conferred by section 50 of the act under which an authorised officer may require information to be supplied in relation to an information offence involving a heavy vehicle. The proposed section 50AA enables the chief executive or commissioner, if he or she has information leading to a reasonable suspicion that such an offence has been committed, to require a person to give information about the offence at the stated time and place. The point is that the person cannot refuse to give that information on the grounds that answering the question or supplying the information might tend to incriminate the person with respect to a criminal offence. The committee draws that situation to the attention of the House, because the committee generally opposes the removal of the benefit of the self-incrimination rule and usually only considers it potentially justifiable if certain conditions are satisfied. It is for the parliament to determine whether those conditions have been satisfied. The purpose is to expand the extended liability provisions for heavy vehicle offences in respect of the requirement to produce information. Chain of responsibility is strongly supported by drivers and the industry as a key initiative targeting those who put the lives of drivers and others at risk and gain an unfair competitive advantage by breaking the law. At present, extended liability provisions can be activated only if the driver has committed an offence. This generally means the driver must be convicted of an offence before others in the chain can be charged with extended liability offences. This can result in delays in prosecuting others in the chain. This amendment extends existing provisions to enable action against employers without first having a conviction recorded against a driver. In my view, the conditions that the committee imposes normally would be met having regard to the purpose of the legislation. I commend the bill to the House. Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (9.25 p.m.): I rise to speak to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) to raise a couple of issues of concern that perhaps the minister will be able to clarify. The intention of the bill is to give Queensland Transport inspectors, as departmental representatives, the opportunity to commence proceedings in respect of certain types of behaviour that have not been covered by the act in the past. My understanding is that inspectors, as they pull up vehicles for inspection, are often subjected to—and I have no doubt that this occurs—some abuse and insults. A lot of drivers are affronted at being pulled up, particularly if they have been, as happens in some instances, pulled up on a number of occasions over a short period. They find it offensive, in their minds, anyway, as drivers to be pulled over. I can understand that because of the type of work they do inspectors could be subject to some difficult situations. However, I wanted to clarify with the minister that the process will be that the departmental representative will be required to warn the offender—the driver of the vehicle assumedly—and if the offending behaviour continues, rather than issue an infringement notice, will issue a breach report and then another officer of Queensland Transport will adjudicate on that report. Will the person who has had the breach report made against them be able to respond to that report? What opportunity will they have to represent their point of view as far as the appropriateness or fairness of the breach report in the first instance? Queensland Transport inspectors—I am not accusing any individual in any way—get to see some of the same drivers on a repeat basis and it would be easy in that type of job to perhaps have difficulty with certain individuals. I am seeking clarification about the transparency and fairness of the process and the opportunity for the driver who has been breached to be able to respond to the breach report. I commend the minister. I listened to the comments of the member for Gregory regarding his concerns about giving greater immunity to those heavy vehicle drivers who may alert the authorities to the fact that they have been asked to perform duties that could be seen as unsafe or illegal. I understand the member for Gregory has raised the issue of how far the pendulum swings one way or the other as to the ability of drivers to report bosses who may be stepping outside of safety or legal considerations. But his caution was that that not go too far. I know there have been a number of inquiries and one major inquiry into heavy transport safety. A number of drivers, particularly on an anonymous basis so as to avoid repercussions to their jobs, have said that they have been asked to drive extensive hours without appropriate rest breaks, and to put inaccurate time entries into their logs. I believe from talking to truckies that it does happen. There is a huge economic pressure on trucking companies to deliver product. They are in competition with rail and a number of other delivery methods. The only way to get their trucks there quicker is to ask their drivers to drive longer hours. Historically, the stories of drivers who are popping pills to stay awake longer and the risks that these drivers take as far as fatigue is 26 Nov 2002 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4793 concerned—the risk not only to their own lives and rigs but also to other drivers and highway users—are well documented. I welcome the enhanced protection that this bill will give to drivers to report actions that they may be asked to perform or directions that they may be given that will be contrary to safety and good driving principles. There is a point where the balance has to be established and maintained. However, until drivers can feel that they have some freedom in refusing to accept a direction from a boss, that balance will not be achieved. They need a measure of protection for themselves and for their continuity of work. They need to be able to say no in the event of an unsafe direction being given to them. There are another couple of matters that I want to raise. The first matter was raised by another member, and that concerns the issue of retrospectivity with regard to changes in government policy and legislation in relation to recently expired licences. It is easy for people to inadvertently allow their licences to expire. I know of one person in my electorate who was greatly assisted by the legislation when it was brought in. I question whether there is retrospectivity attached to these changes. I cannot see any evidence of that in the bill or in the notes. The last issue that I wish to raise concerns speed cameras. I notice that the legislation intends to allow information captured on camera to be used to support a much broader range of offences both under this act and under the Transport Operation (Road Use Management) Act and possibly under the Criminal Code. Documentary evidence such as film is difficult to dispute provided it is clear and easily establishable. However, I just want to put on record that I have had quite a number of people come to see me in my office or who have called me on the telephone who have complained about the use of speed cameras in a couple of specific areas. One issue concerns the placement of speed cameras, namely at the bottom of grades where a person naturally may increase or pick up speed. There is no danger in the area. It is certainly not a black spot area. A government member interjected. Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM: I agree that they are still speeding; I am not arguing against that. When the speed camera legislation was introduced, speed cameras were going to be placed in areas where there is a high level of accident risk or accident history. These areas were going to be targeted. The revenue gained from the cameras was to go back into driver education and black spot type funding. When one area of road has a high accident history and another area of road is relatively safe but has high revenue generation and the community sees that the cameras are always in the revenue generation area and not in the high risk area it supports their complaint. I raise that issue here. I do not believe I would be the only person who has raised it with the minister. I do not dispute that speeding is speeding. However, the criteria for the use of speed cameras was quite heavily debated because there was some community reaction to that. These were the guidelines that were given. The other complaint I have received is that over a relatively short period of time the requirements for the placement of signage and the visibility of the vehicles have changed. The initial requirements were quite clearly set out and discussed. The signage is now usually a metre, if that, from the vehicle. It is often put back in the undergrowth, or the brush, so that it is almost impossible to see. Again, before somebody interjects on me, a traffic offence is a traffic offence, but certain guidelines were put in place to, I guess, appease the community when speed cameras were introduced. It seems that over time those guidelines have been diluted, if not done away with altogether. It is a cause for complaint for people in the community—not because they are not law-abiding citizens but because they are frustrated and angry by their perspective that the speed cameras are used for income generation and not for safety. A government member interjected. Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM: I have already answered that. They have acknowledged that. Certain things were said when speed cameras were introduced in a previous term of government. Those guidelines have not been followed. It was done as a panacea then and the community is frustrated. It is not always the people who are caught who complain. On many occasions the people who complain are law-abiding citizens. I put that issue in front of the minister. Mr Bredhauer: The sign was not to be used to tell motorists that a speed camera was coming up. The sign was always intended to advise motorists that they had just been past an operating speed camera. People now think that the sign should be before the speed camera so that they can slow down. 4794 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002

Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM: The signage is not even far enough away from the vehicle to tell a motorist that he has been snapped. It is about this far from the car. A driver is already past both of them. A government member interjected. Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM: It is my responsibility to raise the concerns of people in my electorate. I have done that. I believe that many of the issues and concerns they have raised are bona fide and justifiable. I bring them to the minister for his consideration. Mr WILSON (Ferny Grove—ALP) (9.37 p.m.): It is my great pleasure to speak tonight in support of the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2). I just note that legislation in this form over recent years has occurred from time to time and has become a convenient and appropriate vehicle for addressing the updates that need to take place in this legislative area, which is quite complex. One can see from this bill that there are five pieces of legislation for which amendments are introduced. Two key areas of legislation involved are the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994 and the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995. There are also three others. This area of legislation unavoidably requires amendment from time to time and this form of legislation, as I say, is a convenient vehicle for introducing these types of amendments. Of principal concern to me are issues concerning transport infrastructure. This is very important in the Ferny Grove electorate, as it is no doubt in other parts of the state. Before I address a couple of local areas of concern and interest, I want to commend the minister and his departmental staff for the work they have done in preparation of this omnibus piece of legislation. It is better appreciated, I might say, because of my involvement in the minister's ministerial legislation committee. I want to broadly adopt the minister's explanation for a number of these changes as set out in his second reading speech and also the observations by the member for the Toowoomba North earlier this evening. As I foreshadowed, I want to address a couple of local infrastructure issues. Firstly, I want to bring the House, and the minister in particular, up to date with the Samford Road upgrade, which is an issue that I have spoken about in the House on quite a number of occasions. It is a significant $12 million project that is shortly to commence in the Ferny Grove electorate. It is the key item referred to in the Roads Implementation Program that was announced and tabled in the parliament today. I commend the minister and the Department of Transport and the Department of Main Roads for the development and continuing refinement of the RIP. It is an excellent document which seeks to properly inform all Queenslanders of forthcoming infrastructure requirements and their priority subject to availability of funding. One sticking point that has arisen and which I have addressed directly with the Department of Main Roads is a problem with Telstra and the construction of the Samford Road upgrade. A number of services on the edge of Samford Road have to be relocated to enable the upgrade to take place. Originally, the advice from Telstra was that there would be no need to physically relocate the Telstra services but rather an access pit could be installed from a different part of the road so that the pavement of the road could go over the top of what is presently the manhole that gives access to those facilities. More recently, Telstra has changed its tune and advised that it will not allow DMR to undertake the work as originally proposed and on which basis the costings were done for the upgrade. It requires a different approach to be taken which it estimates will cost an additional $1.5 million. If members think that that is an extraordinary estimate of the cost of relocating a services pit for Telstra, then they are not alone, because everyone in my community thinks it is outrageous as well. I am advised by DMR officials that they have had some positive discussions with Telstra and in fact there might be a way around this problem that produces minimal extra cost to the project and, most importantly, minimum delay to the commencement date of this project. The second item of great importance in my electorate that is also mentioned in the Roads Implementation Program is the Samford Road passing lane, which I have spoken about previously in the House. It is good to see that that is on track. Another major issue of continuing concern to my constituents is the need to expand the capacity of the car park at the railway station at Ferny Grove. Many constituents have raised this issue with me over recent years and Queensland Rail in conjunction with the Department of Transport and DMR have been working on a proposal to significantly improve and increase the capacity of the car park at the railway station, and work is continuing on that. I draw this matter particularly to the attention of the House and the minister to ensure that everyone is well aware of the pressing need that is growing for this facility to be developed. It will make a significant contribution to the increasing use of public transport in my area, namely the 26 Nov 2002 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4795 use of the Ferny Grove railway line into the city. The more people we can get on to public transport the better both for the environment and for long-term redirection of public expenditure away from the enormous costs involved in providing ever-increasing road networks for private vehicles. I express my appreciation to the minister for his ready reception of my representations to him and to the department about the need to press ahead with the car park upgrade. I look forward to continuing those representations with some productive outcomes from the work of QR along with DMR. I want to briefly mention that the Mitchelton State High School community as well as the community generally which uses Samford Road, which passes Mitchelton State High School, express their considerable appreciation to the state government and also to the Brisbane City Council for the construction of a $200,000 bus bay. I point out to the member for Mansfield that we do not have a busway in my area, but we certainly do have a bus bay now for two buses to be able to pull off Samford Road to pick up and drop off school students at Mitchelton State High School, increasing enormously the safety of their movement and the movement of traffic along Samford Road. In closing, I also mention to the House and to the minister that in another area, the hills district of my electorate, there is growing interest and support for extension of the bus service that is provided by Brisbane Transport on behalf of the state government for that area, particularly for night and weekend travel, public holiday travel and especially for elderly people who have no other means of transport on those occasions. There is a widespread view emerging that the state government would make a considerable contribution to public transport infrastructure in my area with the extension of the bus system in the hills district. I look forward to continuing my representations to the department about that matter. On that note, I commend the bill to the House. Mr STRONG (Burnett—ALP) (9.46 p.m.): I rise in support of the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2002. This bill promotes a practical solution to the question of appropriate penalties for persons found driving unlicensed for the first time or for disqualified driving offences. It is of course important for all drivers to ensure that they have a current driving licence before they drive a motor vehicle. A current drivers licence ensures that the driver has passed their test to drive the category of vehicle for which they are licensed and the information connected with the licence such as photographic ID and addresses is up to date. If a driver is involved in a traffic accident, the information contained on the licence helps police conduct their investigations as efficiently as possible. Clearly, this benefits the whole community. It is appreciated that unlicensed drivers who find themselves unlicensed for a number of reasons should not be treated in the same way as drivers who have been disqualified from driving for road safety related offences. One of the achievements of this bill is that it paves the way for additional infringement notices to be issued in circumstances where a person is found to be driving while unlicensed. In March 2002 the government introduced an infringement notice scheme for expired licence holders. We have now extended this provision to all first time unlicensed driving offenders. For example, a licence expired for under 12 months will attract a penalty of $115, while a licence that has been expired for more than 12 months will attract a fine of $150. Where a person from another state or country has not obtained a Queensland licence in the statutory three-month period or where they have completed the period of disqualification and have not obtained a new licence the penalty will be $150. Where a person may not be licensed for the class of vehicle they are driving—for example, they hold a car licence but are found to be riding a motorcycle—the penalty will be $250. The fine will also apply to a person who is found driving after they have voluntarily surrendered their licence. If a person is found driving after they have had their licence cancelled because they were medically unfit, then the penalty will be $300. Lastly, the person who has never held a licence will attract a penalty of $335. The penalty levels have been graduated in accordance with the escalating seriousness of each offence. Importantly, the infringement notice option will only be available to first-time offenders and will be exercised at the discretion of the intercepting police officer. There are many benefits in the use of the infringement notice process for these offences. As the infringement notice is often issued at the time the driver is intercepted, this serves as an instant reminder to the driver that they need to attend to their licensing responsibilities. It is also a deterrent from driving again before they have done something to remedy the situation. The issue of an infringement notice does not remove the opportunity for a driver to elect to undergo the court process if they believe they are not guilty or have extenuating circumstances that may mitigate the penalty. An infringement notice will reduce the cost to the driver by not having to 4796 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 attend court unless they wish to challenge the infringement notice. This has the added benefit of freeing up the court so court resources can be dedicated to more serious matters. This bill reinforces the established view that unlicensed driving, whether through intention or through oversight, should result in a penalty. While it is often a difficult process to gauge the appropriate penalty for an offence, I believe that this bill succeeds in achieving that delicate balance, particularly for those drivers whose circumstances I have highlighted. I commend the bill to the House. Ms STONE (Springwood—ALP) (9.50 p.m.): I rise to speak in support of the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2). This bill amends the Century Zinc Project Act 1997, the Tow Truck Act 1973, the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994 and the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995. The Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 provides a legislative framework for the management of road based transport in Queensland. It is extremely important that as a government we promote road safety. We need to ensure that we take into consideration road design and environmental impacts in our road safety campaign. I am pleased to inform the House that this is happening in my electorate of Springwood. I have just been informed by the department that a contract has been awarded to Allen's Asphalt for the widening of shoulders and asphalt overlay for Beenleigh-Redland Bay Road from Atlantic Drive to Osborne Court, Loganholme. I know how much the residents down there have been asking me for this. I appreciate that this is being done. Beenleigh-Redland Bay Road is a busy road that links parts of Logan and Redlands to the M1. While I appreciate this maintenance being carried out on this road, I would also like to remind the minister of the increasing use of this road and I would ask that the widening of this road, especially the stretch between Bryants Road and the M1, be investigated. I am pleased that this bill will expand the definition of 'obstruct' to include abuse and insults to Queensland Transport inspectors. I am sure that the inspectors’ job can sometimes be very difficult. Any worker who is performing a legitimate duty of their job should not have to endure abuse and insults from members of the public. Some jobs seem to attract their share of this behaviour more than others. It is good to see that Queensland Transport inspectors will be given further protection when carrying out their duties. Another part of this bill focuses on the heavy vehicle industry. The amendments will enable Queensland Transport officers to obtain information from drivers about possible breaches of legislation while at the same time protecting them from self-incrimination. This information is important if we want to get rid of those in the heavy vehicle industry who continually breach legislation that is there to ensure the safety of the heavy vehicle driver and other road users. It is important to recognise that it is not only the driver that has a role to play in ensuring legislation is not breached. Other persons involved in the company also have a part to play in ensuring the legislation is not breached and that road safety for their drivers is at the forefront of their business. If road safety is at the forefront of the companies in the heavy vehicle industry, that will flow on to ensuring road safety for all road users. I have had quite a few heavy vehicles in my area lately with the building of the Springwood bus station and new off-ramp in Springwood. The project is steamrolling ahead. I must thank Thiess and the department for all the communication to the residents regarding the roadwork activities, but the biggest thanks must go to the people of Logan, especially the residents of Springwood, for the patience and care they have taken around the roadworks sites. This was certainly evident last Sunday at the launch of the new look Centro shopping centre at Springwood. I must congratulate the centre. It looks fabulous. From speaking to the many shoppers who came along to the opening celebrations I know they were very impressed. The Springwood bus station is an exciting project that the people of the Springwood electorate and Clarks Logan City Bus Service are looking forward to using. Updates on the progress of the bus station are on display on the front door of my office and can be viewed at any time. I look forward to keeping the electorate informed on this project. I thank the minister for recognising the transport needs of the Springwood area. I commend the bill to the House. Mr REEVES (Mansfield—ALP) (9.54 p.m.): I rise to support the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2). I will speak particularly about powers of authorised officers and the extended liability provisions of the bill. Clearly the minister has overseen significant application of chain of responsibility enforcement since the first enactment of chain of responsibility or extended liability legislation in 1997. Queensland leads Australia in sheeting home responsibility to 26 Nov 2002 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4797 employers, consignors and consignees who place a driver under pressure to drive a heavy vehicle without regard to the safety of the driver or other road users. Whilst the number of road accidents involving heavy vehicles has remained relatively stable during the last 10 years to 2001, fatalities have been significantly reduced from 85 in 1992 to 50 in 2001. Heavy vehicles are extensively used in my electorate, particularly on Mount Gravatt- Capalaba Road, through the Brisbane urban corridor, about which I will speak later. It is very important that ways of ensuring safety in these vehicles and for drivers are found. Injury accidents have not shown the same level of reduction as fatalities. These statistics support the need to examine other education and enforcement interventions with a view to reducing the incidence and severity of accidents involving trucks, semi-trailers, road trains and B- doubles and triples. When I was at Longreach last year on my honeymoon I saw the huge road trains and triples. They are enormous, as the member for Gregory would attest. Mrs Reilly: Everything is big out there, isn't it? Mr REEVES: I will not talk about the emus! Queensland Transport has taken the lead in forming a chain of responsibility overview group in collaboration with the Queensland Police Service, Main Roads and the departments of Employment, Training and Industrial Relations. The group has the very commendable mission of providing leadership and strategic direction to better manage behaviour and accountability of each link within the transport chain. The bill will enable authorised officers to exercise significant new powers to be able to require a person who the officer reasonably believes can assist in the investigation of an offence to give information including documents about the offence to the officer at a stated reasonable time and place. In the first instance in section 50 of the act, a person required to provide information must do so unless the person has a reasonable excuse. A reasonable excuse includes the failure of a person to give information if the giving of information would tend to incriminate the person. Similar provisions exist in the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act 1994, the Fair Trading Act 1989 and the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995. The bill inserts a new section that empowers the chief executive or commissioner to require persons to give information to the chief executive or commissioner where the person may be offered immunity from self-incrimination. I note that the chief executive or the commissioner will be able to delegate these powers to suitably trained senior QT investigators and commissioned police officers rather than them being available to all QT inspectors and police officers. Persons giving information are to have protection against self-incrimination so that the information cannot be used against them in proceedings, unless the information supplied is false or misleading. The amendment will also provide Queensland Transport officers with the power to issue a notice to attend an interview with an authorised officer at a reasonable time and place in order to furnish information. The information or evidence obtained could then be used to activate the extended liability provisions or to enforce other offences such as the specified obligations of employers, consignors or loaders who have influenced on-road behaviour. It is believed that these amendments are justified because they recognise the role that persons other than a driver may play in the way that heavy vehicles are used on the road. For example, one employer may influence the behaviour of several drivers. Clearly, being able to identify and address the persons adversely influencing drivers will lead to safer heavy vehicle driving practices. This in turn will mean a safer road environment for all road users. In a social context, the heavy vehicle industry is becoming increasingly aware of the chain of responsibility or link between consignors, loaders, packers and employers and driving behaviour. Information bulletins issued by the National Road Transport Commission and articles in industry journals acknowledge the need to make each party responsible for their conduct. The proposed amendments are a natural progression from the existing legislation to meet community and industry expectations. I note that the amendment includes protection for employees who give information. The dismissal of an employee because the employee gave information under this section would be a harsh, unjust or unreasonable dismissal under the Industrial Relations Act. This will relieve those employees required to give information from the threat of dismissal for giving the required information. I commend the minister for his foresight. In the heavy vehicle industry drivers may be requested, instructed or directed to perform their duties in ways that would lead them to commit fatigue and/or mass and/or loading offences which result in unsafe driving practices. Traditionally, only the actions of the driver have attracted 4798 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 enforcement measures. Queensland Transport aims to expand existing provisions to enable direct enforcement against parties other than the driver who contribute to heavy vehicle offences. The extended liability provisions in the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995, section 57B, are designed to help QT identify the causes of offending behaviour, such as inappropriate work practices or instructions, and to address those causes. Where a driver has committed an offence, section 57B allows prosecution action to also be commenced against persons who have influenced the driver's behaviour or the operation of the vehicle. Influencing persons may include employers, consignors or loaders of vehicles. At present, section 57B(2) indicates that extended liability provisions can be activated only if the driver has committed an offence. This effectively requires a court conviction. The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that authorised officers are able to take direct action against employers and other influencing persons without first having a conviction recorded against the driver. The authorised officer must be able to prove that the driver or other person committed the offence. An example of when this would be beneficial is where a heavy vehicle driver dies as a result of an accident and the rosters, manifests, consignment documents or loading records show conduct by an employer, loader or another person that may have contributed to the accident. Further examples include where a QT investigation reveals a pattern of inappropriate conduct through an audit of a transport company or where infringement notices are continually issued to a particular company's drivers. In these circumstances the ability to directly pursue an influencing person would more effectively and efficiently address the root cause of the offending behaviour and improve road safety for all road users. These additional powers will enhance the options available for enforcement from pure interception of offenders during on-road surveillance to intervention with the behaviour of those persons who influence the behaviour of drivers. These measures, supported by education of the transport industry, will bring about significant changes, reduce the number of accidents and improve community safety. As I said earlier, I wanted to mention the Brisbane urban corridor. As members would realise, the Brisbane urban corridor study is coming to its final draft stage. Hopefully, the draft report will be released early in the new year. In all of my public comments, I have encouraged the residents in the community to have their say. While this process of community consultation was under way, I did not make any public comment, except for my involvement in the study workshops, both as the state member for the area and a long-time resident of the area. However, I am concerned about the recent comments that were made by the federal member for Moreton, Mr Hardgrave. Rather than going into the comments that he made, I simply say that I believe that he is trying to white-ant the whole process. I think that it is time that the politics were taken out of this debate. Mount Gravatt-Capalaba Road, Kessels Road and Rowena Road are a very important issue. It is very important that the community has its say and that the process is not hijacked by politicians or people with political agendas, including me or anybody else. I think that Mr Hardgrave's recent comments in newsletters that he has distributed do not do anything for the community consultation process. I am hoping for some great outcomes. The contribution made by the local residents involved in the community consultation was excellent. The consultants who have been involved, Jan Taylor and Associates, have done a fantastic job. I am looking forward to seeing the draft report, which will be released early in the new year. However, I do not think that it is beneficial for the community or the whole process of the Brisbane urban corridor study for politicians—in this case Mr Hardgrave—to try to white-ant and to determine the outcome before the community's say is finalised. Mr Bredhauer: It is time to keep the politicians and the politics out of it and let the community have its say. Mr REEVES: That is exactly right. Unfortunately, Mr Hardgrave has continued with his political agenda. I say to Mr Hardgrave that I hope that he is going to be able to back up his agenda with commitments from the federal government. This road is a federal road, a federal responsibility. Main Roads maintains the road on behalf of the federal government. If changes, infrastructure or whatever are recommended as part of this study, I hope that Mr Hardgrave will get his government to put its money where his mouth is. I know that whatever the draft report says, I will be knocking on the door of the minister, as he knows that I will be, to try to get the commitments for the local area. Mr Bredhauer: As you have done many times before. 26 Nov 2002 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4799

Mr REEVES: As I have done many times before. Finally, I want to mention one issue about the busway. Being the busway's No. 1 ticket holder, I can say that there is a major concern for local residents who use the Garden City shopping centre car park as a park and ride for the Garden City interchange. Unfortunately, expansions of Garden City in early January will result in that car park being lost, which will create major problems. I have been talking to people within the minister's office, the busway operations and Brisbane Transport. We are looking at innovative ways of alleviating this problem. I am confident that, by working together, we will be able to find ways so that people will not have to get in their cars and drive to the bus station; they could actually get on a bus, or maybe catch two buses. But that will be a lot quicker and cheaper than getting off the bus and, obviously, much better for the environment. I caught the bus this morning. It took me only 12 minutes to travel to the city from Garden City. I encourage everybody to catch the bus. I commend the bill to the House. Mrs LAVARCH (Kurwongbah—ALP) (10.05 p.m.): The Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) amends a number of pieces of legislation under the portfolio responsibility of the Minister for Transport and the Minister for Main Roads. Tonight I want to confine my remarks to the amendments to the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 and in particular the amendments that deal with the penalties for unlicensed driving. The proposed amendments to section 78 of the act further refine the range of penalties that a court can impose for unlicensed driving offences. Section 78 provides that driving a motor vehicle without a drivers licence is prohibited. Over time, the provisions of this section have been subjected to a number of amendments. Each time, these amendments have sought to strike a balance between meeting the policy objective that all Queensland drivers commit to road safety and the fair treatment of individuals. We not only expect but also require that all those who drive on our roads uphold the highest safety standards, which have as their starting point the prerequisite licence for the vehicle being driven. In circumstances where a person has already been before the courts and had their licence removed or disqualified and again commits an offence of driving without a licence, the community has an expectation that they will be dealt with sternly by the courts and by the law. Repeat offenders who thumb their noses at our law do not garner much, if any, sympathy in the general community. However, there are many who sit between the law-abiding citizens who are committed to our road rules and road safety and who are properly licensed and repeat offenders. It is these people who have been the hardest hit by the changes that we made to section 78 this time last year. As a result of the 2001 amendments to section 78, the court's discretion to mete out an appropriate disqualification period for unlicensed driving or, for that matter, any disqualification period at all, was taken away. At present there is an automatic six months licence disqualification period except in circumstances where a person has failed to renew their licence up to 12 months after it has expired. These are now dealt with by the infringement notice method. This infringement notice method was introduced in February of this year as the 2001 amendments had the unintended consequence of severely punishing those who had simply failed to renew their licence. Over the past year, first-time offenders who may never have held a licence for the vehicle that they are intercepted driving—or riding for that matter—also felt that the imposition of an automatic six-month licence disqualification period was unnecessarily harsh and resulted in unfairness, especially if we compared this penalty to the drink-driving penalties. It was quite often commented that, with our drink-driving provisions and the penalties under the act dealing with drink-driving, there was an opportunity to apply for a work licence. In this case, with unlicensed driving, there is no opportunity to apply for a work licence. A very good example came before me—and I have made representations to the minister—where a person who was a professional man, who had held his open car licence for 25, 30 years, without ever having a traffic fine or any other driving penalty has, as a hobby, undertaken off-road trail bike riding. On a particular occasion, in circumstances unforeseen to him at the time he was off-road on his trail bike, he was required to go on to the road. As fate would have it, the police were on the road at the time and he then was charged with unlicensed driving because he did not have a licence for his trail bike. When he appeared before the courts, the courts sympathised with the circumstances; however, there was no provision under section 78 which allowed the court to take into consideration his special circumstances. His individual circumstances could not be considered by the court and the court was required under the provisions of section 78 to impose an automatic six-month penalty. Given that he required his car for work, this would have caused great hardship to his family and also was what he considered to 4800 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 be an injustice in the circumstances. That is why I am pleased that these representations have resulted in a positive response through the amendments to section 78 that we are debating tonight. I am sure that this was one of many cases that may have been brought before the minister. Under these amendments, the infringement notice method with no disqualification will also apply and extend to circumstances where the person has never held a drivers licence authorising the person to drive the vehicle. It will extend to circumstances where the person holds a drivers licence but is not authorised to drive that particular class of vehicle—that is the example I just used—or where a person's drivers licence had expired for any length of time or been surrendered. It also extends to the circumstances where the person's drivers licence has been cancelled because of the person's medical unfitness to drive safely. The proposed amendments also reinstate the court's discretion in applying disqualification periods where the disqualification is not as a result of the court imposed disqualification. I commend the minister for listening to the community and for introducing a graduated penalty system. These provisions will now truly strike the balance between community expectations and individual circumstances where unlicensed driving is concerned. If the minister would allow me, I will be so bold as to say that perhaps this has been an all too valuable lesson to us in what happens when we take away the court's discretion and introduce mandatory penalties. Mr LEE (Indooroopilly—ALP) (10.12 p.m.): I am delighted to rise in support of the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2002. This bill regulates a range of statutes administered by the Department of Transport and the Department of Main Roads. For instance, the Tow Truck Act of 1973 is amended to omit references to the expired Transport Infrastructure (Roads) Act 1991. The changes will have no impact on tow truck operators and this represents only an updating of the Tow Truck Act. Another positive part of this bill will enhance the chain of responsibility provisions applying to those offences which involve the heavy vehicle industry. I am delighted to see this. I also take this opportunity to make a couple of comments about some issues related to railway stations and railways within my electorate of Indooroopilly. The first relates to some land at the Sherwood Railway Station. It is the piece of land that adjoins the station and is located between the railway line and local residents. For many years there has been a fence on the property line here and it has had bushes and various other foliage growing on it. I understand that it has obstructed the view from the road to the railway station and that the police believed this would be detrimental to their attempts to police the station at night. The local residents who live right next to it have had a very good relationship with Queensland Rail over a lengthy period of time. They live in high-set houses that look out on the railway line. They have a clear view of what is happening on the platform. They are frequently home at night and have often been the people to immediately call the police when something is happening at the railway station. My worry is that in cutting down this foliage to appease the police we have managed to get local residents offside. They do not particularly want to look at railway tracks, although they do not mind looking at a railway office building which looks a little like a house. I suggest that in the future we look at developing some protocols where we can liaise better with the railways, the police—who I guess have some quite strong views on these things—and local residents. Another issue I would like to place on record involves parking difficulties at Taringa Railway Station. This is a problem that I think is unique to stations like Taringa that happen to be a particular distance away from the centre of Brisbane. Taringa station has parking available at it. It is very close to Moggill Road. People have been getting in their cars, driving from places as far afield as Ipswich and beyond to Taringa, using the free parking at the railway station to park their cars and paying a relatively small amount of train fare to go to the city. Effectively, they have been getting near-city parking for a fraction of the cost. This has caused all sorts of problems in the car park at the railway station where there has not been enough room, I guess, for bona fide passengers. There have also been issues of commuters parking on surrounding streets. This is an old part of Brisbane. The streets are not very wide. We have issues where people park on both sides of the street and this does not allow for vehicles to pass through. I suggest that we should look at developing some sort of a system where, first, maybe we install something like a web cam in Queensland Rail car parks so that before people leave their homes they could log on to the web and see how many parking spaces are left. Perhaps we could also do some sort of an assessment of parking spots at city train stations. For instance, one would be able to have a rough guide as to how likely one would be to get a car park at, say, 7 a.m., 8 a.m. or 9 a.m. at any given station. With these few words, I commend this bill to the House. 26 Nov 2002 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4801

Ms BOYLE (Cairns—ALP) (10.17 p.m.): I am pleased to join other members in supporting this bill. There are some elements of the bill that have particular relevance to Cairns and it is these that I would like to address, particularly in relation to the powers that will be clarified in relation to the Cairns Port Authority under the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994. These changes will clarify the delivery of all aspects of the Cairns city port development presently being undertaken by the Cairns Port Authority. I draw members' attention to clause 12 in the explanatory notes which says that clause 12 amends section 161 relating to the functions of port authorities by inserting a new paragraph that will allow the Cairns Port Authority to develop residential and tourist accommodation on its strategic port land. Some strategic port land in Cairns is adjacent to the main city centre. These relatively dry words do not really address the tremendous excitement and importance of the Cairns city port project. I have been involved with this project from its inception, and its history bears mention tonight. In the late eighties in Cairns development was proceeding, some of us would say, too fast. There was widespread concern that the authorities at the time, the then Cairns Port Authority as well as the Cairns City Council, were embracing any development application. There were widespread fears that Cairns would end up a pale imitation of the Gold Coast—something Cairns is not and should not be. It was feared that the precious environment, the essential element of Cairns, might be lost or damaged, that is, the Great Barrier Reef and the world famous Wet Tropics rainforests surrounding Cairns. The locals became so concerned about the decisions being made by those authorities that there was widespread public revolt. It was in those circumstances that I, along with Keith Goodwin, who later became mayor of the city, stood for election to the Cairns City Council and was successful. At that time the people of the city were most concerned about the decisions being made by the Cairns Port Authority to resume land without consultation with the people of Cairns. At the time, environmental impacts were not so stringently monitored and there were several developments that those of us with a long history in Cairns remember were decisions made by a small group without consideration of these other important factors. Mr Bredhauer: I remember the day we had 8,000 people on the esplanade in Cairns. Ms BOYLE: The minister is correct; there were 8,000 people on the esplanade. The minister and I were there and I dare say that was part of why the National Party was never going to be in government as far as the people of Cairns were concerned. Some 8,000 people protested against potential high-rise development on reclaimed land in front of the Cairns Esplanade in what is an area now declared, thanks to the Goss government and also the Beattie government, a marine park. It was in that context that with the new membership of the board of the Cairns Port Authority recognition was at last given to the port lands and the city lands and the need for careful planning. I am proud to say that I was a member of the board of the Cairns Port Authority in the early nineties when the city port project was conceived. This project recognises that the port of Cairns is an essential element in the economic life of the city and of the region and that, while it needs to be carefully monitored, at the same time the port's interface with the city involves a lot of land area that must also be taken account of in city planning. The city port project is one that I have embraced from those early days and which is now under way. In its first stage, the spending by the Cairns Port Authority, which is a state government owned corporation, is some $35 million. The facilities being provided at this first stage are port infrastructure particularly related to the vessels touring daily to the Great Barrier Reef, to the dive boats and to other tourist related activities on the waterfront. Also included in this first stage are major public works that will interface with the Cairns Esplanade project, commonly referred to as the Cairns City Council's project but one to which I am pleased to say we have contributed a very significant amount of money, that is, $11.5 million. These works will enhance the seafront of Cairns. We hope the esplanade will have some of the life and glamour associated with The Strand in Townsville. This will extend through to the city port area, where there will be all sorts of tourist related activities but also land preserved on the waterfront for promenades, restaurants and public areas for the people who live in Cairns to enjoy as much as those who visit the city. However, in order to finance the city port development for the long term it is necessary to look at the other strategic lands set back from the waterfront and which provide some development sites. The indication is that these sites—some six sites—will be most suited to accommodation, whether tourist accommodation or residential areas. What has been found through the Port Authority's proper studies and consideration is that a leasing arrangement will 4802 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 not suffice; that for these sites to be well developed there will have to be considerable capital investment and that it is appropriate, therefore, and having regard, of course, to the provisions of strata titling, that once those sites have been properly developed to the standard set within the city port plan these sites should be freeholded. Tonight the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill sets in place the processes that will allow the freeholding of only these six particular sites and only so long as the developments accord with the city port regulations and standards. After these developments have been built, completed satisfactorily and freeholded, the control will then be passed under the Integrated Planning Act to the Cairns plan. I am satisfied, therefore, that I can reassure all of those people in Cairns who are concerned about the freeholding of these sites that it is appropriate action, that it is action limited to the specific sites and that it is, as it were, in association with very many beneficial and important facilities for the locals of Cairns as well as for the tourists who will visit our fair city in the years to come. There is a second part of this bill that also relates very much to Cairns and that is mentioned as clause 13 in the explanatory notes. The amendments to the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994 will insert a new section dealing with port marine operational areas. Port marine operational areas will include shipping channels, swing basins, berthing pockets and dredge spoil grounds. The amendments will ensure that port authorities retain planning powers over these strategic port assets. I am sure it will come as no surprise to those members who know Cairns that this, too, is a matter of some concern to the people of Cairns. There are many people who, quite rightly, want to guard that precious environment. They are people who support the declaration of the fish habitat areas of the marine park that is now Trinity Inlet. At the same time, however, we need our port to operate and to operate well. In particular, the channel is narrow and difficult and there is a constant siltation process. It is, therefore, on balance just as important that the Port Authority maintain control of these essential areas and be mindful of environmental impacts and, in a proper and public way, to still administer correctly and take action as needed to maintain that shipping channel and ensure that port movements are efficient and effective. The port of Cairns is a small and difficult port to manage. It had been regarded in the past by those in the port business as a difficult port. Instead, these days, I am pleased to inform honourable members, we are recognising that while it is small, while it has limitations because of the environmental features of the port, it is also a dynamic port with a tremendous mix of activities that is unusual in such a small area. We have the tremendous reef fleet—all of those boats associated with diving, trips to the reef and trips to the outer islands. We have a large cruise shipping industry—the second largest in Australia. We are the second busiest port, only beaten by the number of cruise shipping movements in Sydney. We want this growth in cruise shipping to continue. It is not widely known but it is true that the Cairns port is home to the largest fishing fleet in Australia. We expect that that will remain so. We are a naval port. We also have a burgeoning hydrographics industry and our shipbuilding industry is alive and well, particularly in terms of small shipbuilding targeting the hospitality and adventure tourism industry. I stand by the need of the Cairns Port Authority to have these clear controls over the wharves, swing basins and channel to ensure that the port infrastructure is able to operate. Therefore, I strongly support the amendments in this bill. Ms MOLLOY (Noosa—ALP) (10.28 p.m.): I rise in the House this evening in support of this bill. As has been indicated by the diligent and energetic members who have spoken before me on this bill, it amends legislation administered by the Departments of Transport and Main Roads, those acts being the Century Zinc Project Act 1997, the Tow Truck Act 1973, the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994, and the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995. This is the second Transport Legislation Amendment Bill in 2002, the first being in May. The Century Zinc Project Act 1997 is amended by leaving out an expired regulation power. Also, the property descriptions in the act have been reviewed, a more detailed surveyed work having now been completed. The Tow Truck Act 1973 currently provides that a tow truck driver cannot operate a tow truck unless the driver holds a current licence certificate of inspection. Now, for some of us this may seem quite basic, and for those operators today this is adhered to. However, we need to be vigilant about some of those operators—the very few who in the past have given this industry a questionable reputation. It simply requires those operators to be accountable. 26 Nov 2002 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4803

In our area we have several tow truck operators who work the north shore down to Caloundra. Their integrity and honesty is well known on the Sunshine Coast. The heavy vehicle industry is of interest to me and many of my constituents. I also believe it is of interest to most driving holiday tourists. This area of tourism is a key tourism driver on the Sunshine Coast and in the Noosa electorate especially. We market Noosa as a high quality tourist destination offering fine beaches, friendly locals and great places to eat such as the Coolum, Peregian and Sunshine Beach bowls and surf clubs. We market our area as a desirable, safe place to get to and to stay in. Therefore, the heavy vehicle industry has to take the responsibility to ensure the safety of not only their own drivers but also other drivers, locals and tourists alike, in our area. We welcome this piece of legislation because it puts industry on notice to take greater care of the lives of our communities—of our kids, our visitors and other drivers. The legislation targets those who put drivers’ lives and others at risk just to gain an unfair competitive advantage by breaking the law. Many of us who are out on the road regularly welcome the good behaviour of most of our heavy vehicle drivers, but we all know only too well the pressure some drivers are placed under to shave off half an hour here and two hours there so that the profit margin is notched up and up. Well, those industry representatives are now on notice because the amendments allow for a chain of responsibility. The driver is ultimately responsible for his or her own actions but the employer is now open to scrutiny, making way for extended liability which could well negate the drive to put other people's lives at risk. We live in a glorious part of the world and understand the desire of heavy vehicles to veer off the Sunshine Coast Motorway and come on to the beautiful David Low Way, which impacts on the small villages of Coolum and Peregian especially. We really would prefer not to see or hear these heavy vehicles on the David Low Way as they negatively impact on the holiday-makers and those locals who have made serious lifestyle choices to live in those areas. We welcome these initiatives and live in the hope that these amendments will positively contribute to saving lives in the first instance and enhance our lifestyle and help restore commonsense to our roads. We cannot all have a Eumundi bypass in our backyard but I would just like to comment that I did open the Eumundi bypass for the Minister for Main Roads, Mr Bredhauer, last week. It is a magnificent double bypass that takes the heavy vehicles away from the beautiful village of Eumundi. It allows for greater safety for our local community, including our schoolchildren at the Eumundi primary school. I think there must have been about 120 kids who turned up with their headmaster and their P&C to celebrate and help me cut the ribbon. It was truly exciting. They gave me a 'One, two, three, let's cut the ribbon.' They all clapped and cheered. They were part of making history. I thank the minister for that magnificent addition to safety standards for our drivers and our local community. I also compliment the minister on bringing in this legislation. I also compliment his hardworking staff who are all sitting there in the background. I know they have been slaving away. I commend the bill to the House. Mrs CROFT (Broadwater—ALP) (10.34 p.m.): It is my pleasure to rise to speak in support of the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2002. This bill amends legislation administered by the Departments of Transport and Main Roads. The acts amended by the bill are the Century Zinc Project Act 1997, the Tow Truck Act 1973, the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994 and the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995. While I acknowledge that the amendments proposed for all of these acts are important in ensuring the operations of the departments are carried out effectively and efficiently, it is the amendments to the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act on which I wish to focus my contribution to this debate. One of the most significant amendments within this bill that I am particularly pleased to see being brought before the House by this Labor government is the chain of responsibility provisions applying to offences involving the heavy vehicle industry. Too often do we hear stories of how the extreme pressures, expectations and demands placed upon truck drivers have led to accidents on our roads. For far too long hardworking truckies have had to put up with being instructed to perform their duties illegally—to meet unreasonable deadlines by speeding or by committing mass offences in vehicles. The reality of this industry has always been that those drivers who object to unreasonable demands risk being fired or given no work. Truck drivers, many of whom are family men and women, enjoy their jobs. They enjoy driving their heavy vehicles, meeting the people they encounter on the road and travelling to the cities they go to, but they want to do so safely, without breaking the law and with the support of the companies they work for and distribute to. 4804 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002

The proposed extended liability amendments to the Transport Operations (Road Use management) Act 1995 will enable Queensland Transport officers to obtain information from drivers about possible breaches of legislation, while at the same time protect them from self- incrimination. The chain of responsibility is an important aspect when discussing the trucking industry as it may not be at the trucking company level where the pressure and unreasonable demands start. It may be the consignors and/or loaders that have influenced the breaches of fatigue management or dangerous goods legislation. Under these amendments the information passed on to Queensland Transport inspectors could be used to activate extended liability provisions or enforce other offences on the other players in the chain of responsibility. The amendments also provide for the protection of employees who provide information on illegal activities. I am pleased to know that the recognition of the chain of responsibility is supported by drivers and the industry. It is imperative that all stakeholders see the benefits of such legislation. These amendments will go a long way towards improving the integrity of the industry and providing a fair playing field for all, targeting those who put drivers' lives and other lives at risk and gain an unfair competitive advantage by breaking the law. Hopefully this legislation will provide some comfort for the families of truckies around Queensland. Over the past year there has been a focus on such issues as hooning. In my electorate I have noticed a lot of speeding complaints. I have noticed an increasing intolerance towards speeding and dangerous driving. I support my electorate's concerns. It is important that each and every person remembers that having a drivers licence and driving a vehicle is a privilege and that when driving we have an obligation to drive safely and responsibly. But it is also the driver's responsibility to treat that drivers licence as being as important as other household affairs. I support the introduction of a graduated penalty scheme for first-time offenders found driving unlicensed as it will not only reduce the number of court hearings but the infringement notice will hit the hip pocket and serve as a timely reminder to drivers that driving while unlicensed is a significant offence. There will be a fine of $115 for driving on an expired licence of less than 12 months and a $335 for someone who has never held a licence and is thus driving unlicensed. I am also pleased to see that within the bill there are amendments to the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 to enable information obtained by cameras used for camera detected offences to be used in prosecuting other offences involving vehicles—for example, dangerous driving under the Criminal Code. Before closing, I thank the minister for listening to my representations regarding Frank Street in the electorate of Broadwater. I thank him for the $810,000 which was recently announced in the RIP. I am glad to hear that the project will not actually go ahead until the community consultation is complete. Community consultation has been an important part of this project. Community consultation will contribute to the design that will be established for the lighting system. I believe that this will significantly improve the congestion and the safety issues that have been raised within my electorate of Broadwater, in particular for those residents in the Labrador area. I thank the minister for listening to my representations and those of the electorate. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the Main Roads Department for the efforts it has put in to assist me in coming to this outcome of $810,000 for the lights. I look forward to this project beginning as soon as possible. I commend the bill to the House. Mr MICKEL (Logan—ALP) (10.39 p.m.): The Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2002 again gives me a chance to both praise the minister and voice an urgent plea on behalf of my constituency in regard to the Mount Lindesay Highway. I praise him because we finally got the money for the Granger Road-Stoney Camp intersection. That has been a bad intersection for fatalities. The minister came down and gave an assurance and now at last work will start on that project—a very important project for people in the north Beaudesert shire. I also need to impress upon the department on behalf of the constituency and the residents of the Regents Park- Boronia Heights area the need to ensure that next year the contract for the Mount Lindesay Highway—I noticed in the paper last week that the money was there for it—is called for at the earliest possible opportunity and let at the earliest possible opportunity because people are frustrated with the traffic delays. As I said earlier this afternoon, I feel that my electorate carried the can for the fact that the Sunshine Coast tollway was done away with. Some $400 million was taken out of the road funding effort and it was the Mount Lindesay Highway in my electorate that suffered as a result of that decision. I am also fearful that with the wind back in federal funding for the road effort projects like the Mount Lindesay Highway—and it needs further money in the years down the track—will suffer as a direct result of that federal program. I am actually terrified that what Wilson 26 Nov 2002 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4805

Tuckey will force upon this government is that we will have a toll road to finish the Mount Lindesay Highway. Let me tell you: I will fight that every inch of the way. There is no way in the world I will allow the federal government to impose a toll road to complete the works that should be done by the state government. I also want to make an appeal on behalf of the people who live in Regents Park, and it is this: it is high time local government woke up to the fact that every time they approve a housing estate people in those houses are going to want to drive and ultimately will end up on the main road system. What is happening on the Mount Lindesay Highway is that the Logan City Council has approved new housing estates. On one level that is good, but it has not allowed for a road infrastructure that empties safely onto the highway. What people are now suffering on Emerald Drive and Green Road is increased traffic flows at a time when our major highway system is already under threat. I would like to see some more cooperation between the local authority and Main Roads about future developments so that we do not have these frustrating, unnecessary delays. This bill is about speed cameras and their operation. What is happening on the arterial roads run by the Logan City Council is that, through frustration with the highway system and frustration with the fact that there are too many vehicles, people are speeding or hooning along those roads. I cannot for the life of me understand the point of view put today which said, 'You shouldn't have speed cameras down the bottom of the hill.' Let me tell members: if you live on Emerald Drive and somebody was speeding along Emerald Drive, which undulates, it is no compensation at all for those people if somebody is doing 80—I think the police told me that somebody was caught on the radar at something like 120 going down that hill—and you are trying to get out of your premises. They want people to do the speed limit. Therefore, I approve and support any measure that will get these people to slow down. If speed cameras are part of that process, I welcome it. The other thing that this bill does is widen the sorts of things that speed cameras can be used for. They will now be admissible in courts, and I think that is a darn good thing. When the police pull drivers over that is one aspect of road safety. The police in my area report that when they pull a person over it can oftentimes lead to the detection of other criminal activity. Therefore, I support the use of this sort of material being used and made available and subject to the sanctions of the courts. I want to say this about road safety and commend the measures that have now been in place for over 30 years: what has happened as a result of each incremental measure is that the road toll in Queensland has come down. It has come down from 30 fatalities per 100,000 in the mid-1970s to fewer than nine per 100,000 from 1998 to 2002. I know that that is poor comfort to the people involved in those fatalities and their relatives, because one is too many, but as a result of the road safety measures that have been put in place by this minister and others and by improved road safety designs road fatalities are coming down. If one looks at the chart when each of the measures was introduced—measures such as reducing blood alcohol content from .08 to .05, RBT, the Queensland Road Safety Strategy and action plans including Random Road Watch, increased RBT and the Speed Management Strategy—one finds that the road toll has had a commensurate fall after the introduction of those measures and in subsequent years. That has been going on now for 30 years. Speed cameras are an important road safety tool and deliver significant road safety benefits due to their general deterrent effect and the high visibility of speed camera operations. Speed cameras together with other important road enforcement activities such as RBT, hand-held speed enforcement, Random Road Watch and general traffic enforcement provide a powerful road safety program which, supported by the public, delivers Queensland's low road toll. I have said it before in this House and I will say it again tonight: why in heaven's name do we take away from individual responsibility by saying, 'Oh, well, the cameras are hidden or they shouldn't be in such and such a place,' or 'I was only five kilometres over the limit.' We do not do that with shoplifting. We do not say, 'Well, you've only stolen a bit. It doesn't matter,' yet for some reason we do that with speeding. Both are unlawful activities. Until we as a parliament accept that and face up to that, then we allow people to shirk that responsibility. This legislation should again be a timely reminder that it is up to you the speed limit you drive at. If it says 40 it means 40, because that is what the experts have determined. As I have said, independent studies have shown the effectiveness of speed cameras—that is, a study done by Monash University. The results to date have shown that in 2000, the last full calendar year, the program saved the lives of over 120 Queenslanders and prevented serious injury to over 1,000. This equates to over $800 million in social costs saved at an operating cost of around $11 million a year. Those are spectacular results by any measure. 4806 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002

In the last few minutes available to me tonight I also want to commend the minister on what has been an ongoing commitment by this minister to improve transport in Logan City. It was not so long ago that we were urging upon this government—and the government listened—an east- west connector throughout Logan City to address what had been a social problem and a transport problem in the suburb of Crestmead in Logan City. What has happened now as a direct result of the representations made by the member for Woodridge and myself is that the minister has listened and acted upon a Sunday service for that east-west connector for bus routes 7 and 12. What that means for people living in Crestmead is that they will now be able to access other services and get to other places, and that is so very important for the people who live in those areas. I commend the minister for listening to those pleas on behalf of those residents. We look forward of course, as we always do, to the improved transport opportunities in Logan City. I can only say this: that West Logan City also benefited from the busway initiative. The bus operating in Grand Plaza is able to get people along that busway into the central city in times that are just not achievable in a motor car at peak hours. For all those measures, I commend the government. It should stick with this road safety initiative. It should not allow itself to be sidetracked, because it is saving lives and it is protecting the community. Ms PHILLIPS (Thuringowa—ALP) (10.49 p.m.): I rise to support the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2). The bill offers an opportunity for some of those people who have been convicted of unlicensed driving or disqualified driving to be given a penalty by a court where some discretion can be exercised in considering all of the merits of the circumstances. In March 2002 the minister introduced some reduced penalties for those who had inadvertently let their licence expire. I see that the amendments in this bill are a further enhancement to the penalty regime that recognises the road safety impacts of various categories of unlicensed and disqualified driving offences. I remind honourable members opposite that these amendments are improvements to the existing legislation. Retrospectivity is therefore not relevant. The existing act embodied the legislation as it was. The bill will amend the act and therefore change the law from the date of enactment. In essence, the bill reduces the burden on the courts in not having to hear first offences, gives unlicensed drivers the opportunity to get a licence after a first offence and is consistent with the recommendations on unlicensed and unregistered drivers in report No. 27 of the Travelsafe Committee. Specifically, the bill refines the range of penalties applying to unlicensed driving offences. Currently, a person charged with unlicensed driving is dealt with by a court and faces disqualification from driving unless they have held a valid licence which had expired by less than one year. In that case an infringement notice is issued with no disqualification period. The infringement notice method is to be extended to include where the person has never held a licence authorising the person to drive that vehicle, the person holds a licence but is not authorised to drive that class of vehicle, the person's driver licence had expired for any length of time or was surrendered, or the person's licence had been cancelled because of the person's medical unfitness to drive safely. The penalty infringement notice scheme for all first time unlicensed driving offences will give those persons an opportunity to apply for a licence. I expect that it will prompt them to obtain a licence and to prove that they meet the road safety knowledge and practical driving skills required by our society. However, in my view the more important reform addressed by this legislation is an ability for the court to use some discretion in applying disqualification periods for those offenders who have been convicted of unlicensed driving for a second or subsequent time. The one to six months disqualification period reduces the previous six months automatic penalty. It provides the court with discretion to deal with offenders on a case-by-case basis. Those who wilfully drive while they are disqualified are blatantly thwarting the law. However, there are circumstances where a person may be disqualified from driving but not necessarily because of any road safety issues. The case of a person having their licence suspended because they have not paid their fines is quite a different situation from having demerit point offences or having previously been disqualified from driving by a court. I note that the legislation now gives the court a discretion to apply a disqualification period of between one and six months for a person who is disqualified through the state penalties enforcement provisions for unpaid fines. A magistrate will be able to determine the relationship of the non-payment of fines to road safety issues and apply an appropriate penalty. 26 Nov 2002 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4807

I am pleased to see that the six months disqualification will still apply to those people who have been disqualified for demerit point offences. People who are disqualified due to accumulation of demerit points have committed safety related offences, such as speeding or disobeying traffic signs. These people are already suspended from driving under the regulations and therefore a six-month disqualification for driving while disqualified is most appropriate. They have already been given the opportunity to reform their driving behaviour and have obviously chosen to disobey the law. The reform to the legislation in March 2002 gave the court discretion to apply disqualification periods for those who were already disqualified by a court. I am pleased to see that this provision has remained. I recognise that unlicensed driving is a serious offence that can have huge social and economic impacts on society. If a person is unlicensed, there is no guarantee that they have the necessary driving skills, the medical fitness or the knowledge of the road rules to ensure the safety of other road users. If they are disqualified from driving, they have usually committed offences which impact on road safety, and this is a concern to us all. When we are dealing with unlicensed and disqualified drivers we must be mindful of the road safety consequences for all road users. As I mentioned earlier, the parliamentary Travelsafe Committee dealt with the issue of unlicensed drivers in its report No. 27, issued in July 1999. I am pleased to see that the infringement notice scheme and disqualification periods have been addressed and provide a more equitable approach to unlicensed and disqualified driving offences. There should be appropriate penalties for unlicensed and disqualified drivers and road safety should be our primary concern. I commend the bill to the House. Ms KEECH (Albert—ALP) (10.56 p.m.): I am happy to support the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2). The bill amends four acts; namely, the Century Zinc Project Act 1997, the Tow Truck Act 1973, the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994 and the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995. This evening I will particularly address my comments to the latter act. I note that the provisions of the bill allow images from speed cameras to be admissible as evidence of a wider range of offences. This amendment will allow certified images from photographic detection devices to be generally admissible as evidence in prosecutions. For example, an image could be used in a prosecution for dangerous driving under the Criminal Code. The electorate of Albert has the fastest growing suburbs in the Gold Coast, in the fastest growing city in Queensland, in the fastest growing state in Australia— Mrs Carryn Sullivan: The best local member. Ms KEECH: That is very kind. Honourable members would not be surprised that road use and management are very important to my constituents. The people of the northern Gold Coast are fortunate that the state government main roads are under the expert management of the minister, the Hon. Steve Bredhauer, and the Department of Main Roads district director, Mr Eddie Peters. Whether it be keeping me informed of the four-lane upgrade to the Beenleigh-Waterford Road or having discussions about future upgrades to the Stapylton-Jacobs Well Road or myriad other important road issues, Mr Peters is always happy to make himself available to listen and act on the important issues I present to him on behalf of my constituents. The current Roads Implementation Program states that one of the major challenges that the south-east Queensland district faces is managing the impacts of heavily trafficked roads on the environment and the amenity of adjacent land uses. This is a particular challenge for some residents in the electorate of Albert who live adjacent to the $1 billion Pacific Motorway. There is no doubt that the M1 has brought significant benefits to the Gold Coast region, including attracting additional tourists, encouraging commuting between Brisbane and the Gold Coast and ensuring safe and efficient travel conditions for road users. However, with these advantages gained by the M1—a National and Liberal coalition decision—has come some challenges. As I informed honourable members in this House during my first speech in April 2001, the eight-lane M1 has brought noise problems to some families who live alongside it. Recently, Mr Tony Brabazon met me at my electorate office to describe first-hand the impact that living with the noise has had on his family. He is very keen to get noise attenuation as soon as possible. Although sound barriers would be effective for his home, he expressed concern that they would not be effective for others who live more than 300 metres from the motorway. Therefore, I am appreciative of the efforts of the minister in working to address the ongoing concerns of residents. In fact, the minister has met with residents and has also visited the home of a resident at Ormeau to experience first-hand the noise that she was experiencing from the motorway. 4808 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002

I thank the minister for his actions. He initiated a report by Professor Brown and Dr Samuels to investigate possible opportunities for noise reduction. The results of the report are that the comprehensive noise measurement and modelling recommended by Professor Brown and Dr Samuels will be carried out by two independent consultants. Dr Samuels will continue to advise Main Roads to ensure the integrity of the program. This measurement and modelling has begun and will take about nine months to complete. The consultants will investigate the highest-priority areas first. These are in the Helensvale and Oxenford areas. I am happy to say that the Ormeau- Pimpama area has also been designated a priority area. Some early results are expected to be available by the end of 2002. The comprehensive measurement and modelling, along with continuing investigations into remedial options, will enable Main Roads to determine an appropriate response to any issues identified. As I promised in my first speech, I will continue to work with the minister, his department and the residents to gain relief from the noise that continues to affect their quality of life. I share with the residents their frustration in wishing to get a quick resolution to this problem. However, it is important that any solution is a sustainable and long-term one rather than a technique that may be very expensive but prove difficult and unsafe to maintain in the long term. I thank the minister for his personal and ongoing attention to this issue, Mr Eddie Peters, the residents and also my colleague the member for Gaven, Robert Poole, for working together to find a solution to this frustrating problem. While I am talking about roads, I would like to make an additional comment about the provisions that refine the range of penalties applying to unlicensed driving offences. Currently, a person charged with unlicensed driving is dealt with by a court and faces disqualification from driving unless they have held a valid licence that has expired by less than one year. In that case, an infringement notice is issued with no disqualification period. The infringement notice method is to be extended to include where a person has never held a licence authorising the person to drive that vehicle, where the person holds a licence but is not authorised to drive that class of vehicle, where the person's drivers licence had expired for any length of time or was surrendered, or where the person's licence has been cancelled because the person is medically unfit to drive safely. I commend the bill to the House. Mr WELLINGTON (Nicklin—Ind) (11.03 p.m.): I rise to participate in the debate on the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2002. I do not intend to repeat the contributions that have been made already to this debate by members who have already spoken. Suffice it to say I would like to inform the minister of the great work that the workers are undertaking on the Sunshine Coast highway upgrade near Eumundi. Recently, I attended the Sunshine Coast Environment Council Awards night. It was great to see that the workers on this Main Roads upgrade project were recognised by the Sunshine Coast Environmental Council for the environmentally friendly way in which they have been undertaking these major roadworks. By way of example, I note that there was specific acknowledgment of the way in which the contractors and the department used the chipping of timber on the road to retain it for future road use when the project was completed. The bark and the wood products were used for landscaping on the edges of the roadworks. We still see significant stockpiles of this resource and material. It was great to see that it was not simply burnt and destroyed. Also, there was the stockpiling of significant road base material on the site. Again, this material was stockpiled and reused to fill many of the significant depressions in the location instead of transporting a lot of road base material from quarries in the vicinity. I understand that this stockpiling and reuse of the material made significant reductions in possible future truck movements. It certainly took a lot of pressure off this significant roadwork project. Also, at the Environmental Council Awards night there was recognition of the use of barriers around all the earthworks that were undertaken on the site for the purpose of preventing run-off and silt from the stockpiled materials into gullies and adjoining streams. Although work on the road has been undertaken throughout the day, I note that significant roadworks have been undertaken at night to minimise the impact on traffic movements. We certainly regularly see the signalmen and women out there working day and night to try to ensure that there is minimal interference with the flow of traffic. Can I say that I certainly am very pleased to be able to stand tonight and inform the minister that his staff on this project and the contractors have been recognised by the Sunshine Coast Environmental Council for doing a great job. So often we hear criticism of the way in which our department staff and contractors do the work, but I think that we need to put on the public record when our government agencies do a good job. 26 Nov 2002 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4809

I also note that there have been significant noise barriers erected in the North Arm area, hopefully to minimise the impact of the increased traffic noise on residents in that location. Can I simply again thank the minister. I believe that his workers and the contractors are doing an excellent job. I believe that there is minimum impact on the road users. I think it is time that we remind all Queenslanders of the great work that the minister's department is doing. I say: congratulations; job well done. Mr PURCELL (Bulimba—ALP) (11.06 p.m.): I rise to speak to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2002. Like the previous speaker, I will not go over a lot of what has been said. However, I would like to talk about a couple of things. In a moment, I will refer to the amendments in the bill that relate to the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995. But like the previous speaker, I would like to talk about a road that is being built in my area—the port road from the South East Freeway down to the port of Brisbane. This road has been a long time coming. I have been involved with the road for probably 10 years—in talks with the people at Hemmant to let them know about what is happening with businesses at Hemmant, with businesses in and around Murarrie and where the road has disrupted local businesses while it was being built. One thing I want to say is that the contractors that are building the road, Leightons, are doing a marvellous job. I have been down to the road to make regular inspections with and without them. I live not very far away from the road, so from time to time I take a drive and have a bit of a stickybeak. One thing I must say is that I knew a lot of the workers on the site. I also knew all the crane companies, the steel fixing companies, the concrete companies and the scaffolding companies that were working on that job. I spoke to the workers. I can say that they are very happy with the way the job was run. It was run safely, the workers were paid, the contractors were paid and paid on time, the job ran on time—in fact, before time—and good savings were made on that job because of the efforts of all the people who worked on that road to work together and ensure that the project was a success. It has been such a success that, from the savings made on the project, additional work has been done. Intersections were going to meet at ground level. Now they are going under and over. If vehicles stay on the port road between the South East Freeway and the port of Brisbane, they will not have to go through an intersection. Once motorists get on the Ipswich freeway, they can come down onto the Logan Motorway, down onto the South East Freeway and down to the port and not hit a set of lights and probably not drive under 80 kilometres per hour all the way. So that trip is going to be a vast improvement on what it was previously. I congratulate everybody who has been involved in that project. I thank them for their diligent work and the way in which they got the job done. I must comment on the nearly $800,00 that Main Roads, the port of Brisbane, Energex and another authority have contributed to the Bulimba Oxbow. There was such a serious environmental problem that the Oxbow was dead. It ceased to be a working part of the environment. With the money that has been spent, it will now become a habitat for bird life. It will bring the Oxbow back to life. The tide will come back in. It will be a breeding ground for fish and birds and will really be a pleasant area again. That is a great outcome. This bill enhances the powers of transport inspectors. They do a very difficult job. They are often subjected to abuse and threats in some cases when they pull up truck drivers for overloading. I know a little about this as I used to drive trucks for a living. I do not think that drivers overload their trucks intentionally, because they know how a truck handles when it is overloaded. I know that in a lot of cases companies regularly overload their trucks and that the driver wears the fines and the responsibility for driving an overloaded truck. I am not talking about, say, a bulk wheat truck. Sometimes it is difficult when carting grain from three or four different properties to know what the grain weighs. I am not talking about half a dozen bags but about two or three tonnes of weight. This is hearsay evidence. I hope that the minister will take some note of my hearsay evidence in that it does not take long for the truck drivers—and the member for Gregory might comment on this off the record later—to know where the inspectors will be. That is wrong. People should not take backhanders to give out information about when a blitz will occur. If there were half an inch of rain on some of those roads that overloaded trucks use, they would be chopped to pieces. That costs the community a fortune. It is dangerous for inexperienced drivers to use those roads when overloaded trucks have ruined them. We know that trucks are driven when overloaded. That is why the department conducts inspections and blitzes on certain roads. With scales being built into culverts, we can determine by how much trucks are overloaded. A number of these trucks are 100 per cent overloaded. That means that they might be licensed to carry 22 4810 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 tonnes but can carry anything up to 44 or 45 tonnes. That is unsafe and it is just chopping the roads to pieces. Mr Bredhauer: We had one bloke stop to pay the toll on the Gateway Bridge and then couldn't get up the hill! Mr PURCELL: His truck might have been underpowered. His power pack might not have been quite up to scratch. Mr Johnson interjected. Mr PURCELL: Yes, bad fuel. I congratulate the minister and his department on further enhancing the chain of responsibility provision applying to the offences involving heavy vehicles in the industry. The chain of responsibility is strongly supported by drivers in the industry as a key initiative that targets those who put drivers' lives and others at risk and gain an unfair competitive advantage by breaking the law. We know that responsible companies do not do this. Trucks may be overloaded inadvertently or by an inexperienced person, but in a lot of cases companies overload trucks day in and day out, week in and week out and get drivers to drive for unreasonable hours. It is more than their job is worth. We can say that the drivers should not do it. If a driver has a mortgage, children and a job and if he knows that he will be blackballed by a company for not doing what is asked of him, the driver tends to do what is requested. Drivers may be requested or instructed to perform their duties illegally, for example, by speeding or overloading their truck. The proposed extended liability amendments to the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 will enable Queensland Transport officers to obtain information from drivers about possible breaches of the legislation while at the same time protecting them from self-incrimination in appropriate circumstances, for instance, where the information provided was not false or misleading. I hope that the penalties will be stiff and broad enough so that companies which continue to breach the law in regard to those penalties will feel the full weight of the minister's department and will cease such behaviour. I know that drivers and companies who do drive per the correct tonnage rate from A to B and pay their drivers appropriately find it difficult to survive in a cutthroat industry. What about the people who break the law by overloading trucks and who get more hours out of drivers for less wages to get a job? The incentive is for those people to get the job and to continue to break the law. I would like to see those people dealt with and to see the drivers protected. Even those drivers who own their rigs are told for what they will cart their freight from A to B. The competition is so stiff that, if they blow a tyre or a couple of tyres between here and Sydney and Melbourne, that is their profit down the drain. They dare not say they will not do the driving because they will not get the job. Their rigs are in hock. They are on the never-never. They do not own them and they never will at the prices for which they are driving. They are driving themselves into the ground. There was a young bloke who lived across the road from me. He and his missus had three children. He was driving from Brisbane to Darwin. He used to see his missus very infrequently; every time he saw her I think they had another kid, but that is beside the point. That bloke killed himself trying to pay off a rig he would never own by driving for impossible rates from Brisbane to Darwin. That is a life destroyed. That family was pulled apart. That is the sort of stuff that is happening. The minister knows of the number of prangs on the road involving other vehicles like buses, cars et cetera and of the number of people killed. I commend the bill to the House. Hon. S. D. BREDHAUER (Cook—ALP) (Minister for Transport and Minister for Main Roads) (11.19 p.m.), in reply: I know the hour is getting late, but if I take a couple of minutes to respond to some points, especially those raised by the member for Gregory, we might be able to save a bit of time during the committee stage. I will go into a couple of those issues in a bit of detail. Firstly, I thank all members for their contribution. I mean that genuinely. I especially thank those members who have put on record tonight their appreciation of the efforts of my Departments of Transport and Main Roads in respect of various issues in their electorates or other dealings they have had with them. They cop brickbats a lot and it is nice to get bouquets occasionally. I appreciate the comments that have been made. The member for Gregory raised the issue of permits and period permits. While the government recognises the need for businesses to be able to rely on a period permit to undertake their business operations, from time to time reasonable issues may arise, such as major changes to road conditions or roadworks—primarily issues like flooding, which occurs regularly in my electorate and would occur from time to time in the member's electorate—where it 26 Nov 2002 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 4811 is warranted to amend or revoke the permit. In any case, natural justice applies, as the appeal arrangements within the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act apply and can be utilised to have the merits of the permit holder's circumstances reviewed. The review would only take place under exceptional circumstances, such as changes to road conditions, and there is a mechanism under the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act for an appeal to review the decision to change the conditions of the permit. The member for Gregory talked about the possibility that drivers might collude or, I think he suggested, almost verbal their employer, the truck owner or the operating company in order to get themselves off the hook and put the blame somewhere else. That is not the intention of the amendments that we have carried. What these amendments enable us to do is in certain circumstances grant an indemnity to a driver who can provide evidence that might lead to a prosecution. The Crown still has to meet the burden of proof. A driver saying, 'My boss made me do this,' will not necessarily stand up in a court of law. But there are circumstances that need to be catered for, and they would only be exceptional circumstances. The way the amendment is drafted is that it is only the Commissioner of Police or the Director-General of Queensland Transport who can grant those indemnities. A driver does not elect to indemnify himself from prosecution by squealing on the boss; he has to come to us and convince us that he has evidence of malpractice that is leading to breaches of the law, and in certain circumstances we can indemnify. We may still, if we believe that he has been guilty of a serious offence himself in driving the truck at an excessive speed, in excess of his areas, mass limits, dimensions or anything like that, choose to prosecute that person, although the information provided cannot be self-incriminating. What we are trying to do is make sure that it is not just the driver who shoulders that responsibility. Chain of responsibility is about that. One thing that this amendment allows us to do, for example, is even if the truck driver dies as a result of the accident and we can still prove negligence on behalf of the operator or the owner of the vehicle, we can still prosecute them. That is an opportunity that is opened up to us by this amendment. In relation to the issue of retrospectivity, I do not want to go into the history of the amendments that came into effect in December last year except to say that when those amendments were introduced the intention was to reduce the absolute disqualification period which people experienced. If a person was found to be driving whilst disqualified from holding a licence, whether the disqualification was for administrative reason or by decision of the court, the person was automatically absolutely disqualified. There was an attempt made, in consultation with a range of people, including the magistracy, to try to remedy that situation. Inadvertently, though, what we did was introduce mandatory six-month disqualifications. In March this year we indicated that for those people who had forgotten to renew their licences, which was the area that most people were concerned about, we would make the change so that the automatic six-month disqualification no longer applied. We indicated at that time that we would see how that situation operated and make sure it was okay. Members should bear in mind that we consulted on the first amendments late last year and they came into effect in December. They had an unintended consequence. We had complaints from the magistracy, the RACQ, the opposition got on the bandwagon and members on this side wrote to me. We admitted that there was a problem with that legislation. We came back here as quickly as we could with amending legislation and we indicated that we would then come back in this Transport Legislation Amendment Bill with further amending legislation once we had had more opportunity for consultation to make sure that we got it absolutely right, and that is what we are doing here today. We are actually providing a benefit to certain classes of unlicensed drivers as a result of this amendment, and that is why we do not believe it is appropriate that retrospectivity apply in this circumstance. I appreciate the issue that the honourable member raises. I understand the circumstances. The benefits that accrue include reducing the burden on the courts and giving unlicensed drivers the opportunity to get a licence after a first offence. It is also consistent with the recommendations of the unlicensed, unregistered drivers report, report No. 27, of the parliamentary Travelsafe Committee. Those are the reasons we believe these amendments are appropriate but that retrospectivity is not necessary. In terms of self-nomination, I got a bit confused about what the member for Gregory was driving at there, except to say that this is about allowing the driver of the vehicle to nominate themselves as the person who was driving the vehicle at the time the offence occurred. At the moment, the legislation is drafted so that the owner of the vehicle has to nominate who was driving the vehicle at the time. What we are trying to say is that the owner of the vehicle might be out of the country and so the person who was driving the vehicle can say, 'I'll stick my hand up.' We do not need the statutory declaration from the owner of the vehicle to say, 'My next-door 4812 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 26 Nov 2002 neighbour was driving.' We will accept the next-door neighbour's word that they were the person who was driving the vehicle. They can self-nominate themselves for the offence. But if it is not clear who the offending driver was, the offence still accrues to the registered owner of the vehicle. They cannot get out of it just by saying, 'It wasn't me.' In relation to speed camera and red light camera offences—another issue the honourable member raised—currently the offences that can be picked up through camera detection are red light offences, speeding offences, unregistered vehicle offences and uninsured vehicle offences. They are the four offences that we are currently able to prosecute by way of photo detection. What this amendment allows us to do is use that photographic evidence for the purposes of other offences. If, for example, a person is doing 140 kilometres an hour and exceeding the speed limit by 50 or 60 kilometres an hour and we have evidence of that, at the moment we can use that only for the speeding offence. This amendment will allow the police to charge that person, say, with dangerous driving because of how much they are breaking the speed limit by. The intention of this legislation is to enable the police to do that. I wish to comment on the speech by the member for Logan briefly. The fact is that if we are speeding we are breaking the law. If we get caught speeding we have to expect to pay the fine. I know there has been a bit of a debate about this, but if we are one kilometre an hour over the limit we are speeding. If the speed limit is 60 kilometres an hour, it is 60 kilometres an hour. It is not 61 kilometres an hour; it is not 65 kilometres an hour; it is 60 kilometres an hour. Mr Purcell: Tell them the story. Mr BREDHAUER: The other day a bloke in Ipswich went for doing about 137 kilometres an hour in a 60 kilometre zone. When the magistrate said, 'What's your excuse for speeding?', he said, 'I thought it was an 80 kilometre an hour zone.' People who recklessly put other people's lives at risk do not deserve our sympathy. But I put it to members that anybody who is exceeding the speed limit is potentially recklessly putting other people's lives at risk. If honourable members look at our suburban streets, they will find that kids get killed crossing the street. They are bowled over by cars that are doing 60 kilometres per hour. The reality is that it happens. If we can moderate people's speed we have a better chance of either avoiding an accident or minimising the injury that might be caused as a result of an accident. We can have this debate, we can have the politics about revenue raising and we can complain about people hiding the speed cameras and all that sort of stuff, but the bottom line is that if you do not speed, you do not get caught and you do not have to pay the fine. No doubt we will have more discussions about this over time and I will be asked questions in question time, but I am very strongly of that view. I supported the member for Gregory when he introduced speed cameras. The member for Logan pointed out some of those critical road safety initiatives and the impact they have had on our road toll. We need to continue to be vigilant. We have had some shocking weekends and other periods on our roads this year. Notwithstanding that, right now we are just a little ahead of where we were this time last year. It does not give me a lot of joy to say that because, as members have said, one life lost on our roads is one life too many. Every life we can save on our roads is one life worth saving. I really think that we need to look at speed cameras and other parts of our speed management program, but not in a political context. I give credit to the member for Gregory; he has never looked at road safety issues in a political sense. They have always been the subject of bipartisan support in this House. I think we might have the foot on the slippery slide at the moment in some of our discussions about speed cameras, but I ask members to think seriously about this. We set the cameras up in accordance with the provisions that were put in place at the time. We spend the revenue in accordance with the provisions that were put in place at the time. We can demonstrate by our research that we are saving up to 100 lives a year through the deployment of speed cameras. That is 100 mums and dads and brothers and sisters who are going home to their families every year who might not be going home if we did not have speed cameras. I will also touch briefly on the port planning controls. It has been asked whether the creation of a port marine operational area in the Transport Infrastructure Act will lessen the control of the port authorities over planning. In fact, port authorities currently have little formal control over planning. The creation of port marine operational areas will facilitate a planning role for port authorities in a proposed scheme under the Coastal Protection Act and the Integrated Planning Act. In the proposed scheme, port authorities will share planning authority with local government and the Environmental Protection Agency. Port authorities will have concurrent status in the 26 Nov 2002 Adjournment 4813 strategically vital port marine operational areas, meaning that the ports' concerns must be addressed. Port authorities will have advice only status in the wider area of the port limits, meaning that the views of the port authority must be considered. The new scheme will give a greater level of influence in planning to port authorities than currently exists. In relation to the member for Gregory's concerns that we are going to have real estate agents taking an interest in strategic port land, the amendments that we introduced today are specific to the Cairns Port Authority and the city port development. There is no danger of them being extrapolated out. Just briefly, the member for Gladstone talked about the issue of transport inspectors and truckies, and transport inspectors not being abused. Transport inspectors work with the heavy vehicle industry. They are pretty down to earth people. They are not shrinking violets. Everybody is entitled to reasonable working conditions; it does not matter what kind of industry one works in. Everyone is entitled to be treated with respect. I do not think we are likely to see vexatious claims of abusive or insulting language coming from our transport inspectors against truck drivers. I think, as the member for Gregory acknowledged, that the transport inspectors are doing a job that is a pretty thankless task sometimes. It is a task that we as a government ask and expect them to do. I think they do a fantastic job. That is not to say that we do not have problems and issues from time to time. By and large, I think they do a great job and they are entitled to be treated with respect. We all know what happens if a policeman pulls us over and we start swearing at him and abusing him. I do not see any reason why transport inspectors should be treated any differently. With those few comments, I would like to thank all members who contributed to the debate. I would like to thank all those people in my departments and my ministerial office who have been involved in helping to draft this legislation and steer its passage through the parliament. I commend the bill to the House. Motion agreed to.

Committee Clauses 1 to 28, as read, agreed to. Bill reported, without amendment.

Third Reading Bill, on motion of Mr Bredhauer, by leave, read a third time.

ADJOURNMENT Hon. S. D. BREDHAUER (Cook—ALP) (Minister for Transport and Minister for Main Roads) (11.37 p.m.): I move— That the House do now adjourn

Native Timber Forests Mrs PRATT (Nanango—Ind) (11.37 p.m.): I rise to speak about a letter that I received from a constituent congratulating Department of Primary Industries staff on workshops on how to sustainably manage and harvest native timber forests. The constituent, whose family has been milling timber in the South Burnett for the past 80-odd years, said— I have found these field days absolutely wonderful. I think that the transfer of this information from these experts to the land holder is essential to ensure that we can sustainably manage these reserves and ensure the viability of the timber industry in our region. My constituent referred in particular to DPI officer Sean Ryan and his team but queried whether further funding had been put aside for Mr Ryan and his team to continue their workshops. In light of the comments made, I urge the minister to look more closely at the issue as the implementation of the RFA has caused considerable concern for landowners. If the DPI can promote the advantages of managing timber reserves in a way that reaches the very people who rely on timber harvesting, I can only acknowledge the efforts of the minister and the DPI staff. 4814 Adjournment 26 Nov 2002

Although the RFA process effectively halved the state forest production area in south-east Queensland with a guarantee of access to an annual harvest until 2024, the information on developing hardwood plantations as a substitute after that time is essential. A lot of farmers are unsure of the advantages of establishing hardwood timber plantations, especially plantation development of non-domesticated species, which is considered to be a high-risk venture. The current knowledge of the likely wood quality or quantity produced in the nominated 25-year rotation length is scarce enough according to industry sources. My main concern, and the reason why I ask the minister to ensure ongoing education, is that industry figures show that there is a trend indicating a reduced volume available from private resources. I am quoting from the joint paper put out by staff from the Queensland Forestry Research Institute, Gympie, and the Mary Valley Sunshine Coast Farm Forestry Association. Industry sources claim that one reason for the decline is the lack of good silviculture management that is evident in many private forests. It states that high percentages of the standing timber are either suppressed or damaged from past logging operations, causing a progressive decline in the productivity and value of the resource. The paper calls for discussion on the history of private native forest management, the current condition of these forests, and the processes—both physical management and those involving information exchange—needed to bring them back into productivity. The paper also calls it naive to believe the notion of replacing private native forest timber production solely with plantation grown hardwoods. The paper discusses at length the problems mentioned above and it appears that DPI Forestry has at least addressed the growing importance to land-holders of the future of private forests and their property management. I call on the minister to ensure that education funding to ensure the sustainability of this resource and income for private landowners is continued. I would be happy to supply the minister with the paper in full. I hope that he continues to support his staff in addressing an issue that has been a very important issue for land-holders, especially in the south-east Queensland region.

BP Awards Ceremony, Girl Guides Mrs SMITH (Burleigh—ALP) (11.39 p.m.): Recently I attended a BP awards ceremony for Girl Guides on the Gold Coast. An invitation to speak at the ceremony sent me scurrying for my box. I think everyone has one storing a collection of memorabilia, letters, cards and trinkets collected over the years and too sentimentally valuable to be thrown away—no matter how many times one moves house. The box is a wonderful way to reminisce and recall long forgotten good times and experiences. In this box I knew I had badges and other odds and ends from my days as a Girl Guide more than 40 years ago. A special find was my colour patch which I had to embroider before I could be sworn in as a Girl Guide. Not being the best embroiderer, it took three attempts before the guide leader would pass it as acceptable and allow me to be enrolled. At the awards ceremony I was able to relate some of my experiences and show off my colour patch to a new breed of Girl Guides. These days hand embroidered colour patches are a thing of the past and it created some interest, especially among the retired Girl Guides. These retired Girl Guides introduced me to the Trefoil Guild—the adult section of the Girl Guide movement. At the awards function they were in charge of the catering, but their objectives also include fellowship and community work as far as their other commitments will allow. I was introduced to Rita, a member of the Burleigh Heads guild, who encouraged me to come to one of their meetings. To cut a long story short, I am now a fully-fledged member of the group. I thank Rita, Hazel, Robyn, Erin, Merle and Jean for making me so welcome and reintroducing me to the wonderful world of guiding. But Girl Guides are not the only ones with a base in Burleigh. The Burleigh Heads Scouts, which includes girls and boys from six to 18 years of age, is also very active. It has a wonderful facility in a scout hall on a huge block of land in Burleigh Heads which was donated to it many years ago. Upkeep on this property, however, is a continuing problem. Brian Barry from the North Burleigh Surf Club alerted me to the financial problems of this scout troop. The local government rates on the property had become more than it could afford and the future was looking bleak. Because scouts only raise money during Scout Job Week, their income is very limited. As scouts are always the first to get involved in community events and fundraising, it was time to give them a helping hand in the form of a couple of donations. The scout leader, Tracey Dickson, organised a gathering of scouts on a non-meeting night so Barry and I could hand over our cheques. 26 Nov 2002 Adjournment 4815

Hopefully this money will ease the immediate financial crisis. While scouting and guiding have a long history after being started by Lord Baden Powell in 1908, they are still relevant in today's world. I congratulate those leaders who give of their time to work with young people and provide experiences and training that will last a lifetime.

Re-volt 2002 Mr COPELAND (Cunningham—NPA) (11.42 p.m.): On Saturday I had the great pleasure of opening the Re-volt 2002 exhibition at the Toowoomba Regional Art Gallery. Re-volt is an energetic exhibition of works of art by graduating students from the University of Southern Queensland Visual Arts Department. Aptly named to represent the energy and excitement of the students as they complete three hard years of study, Re-volt comprises the best art works from their final semester of study. The students were given no boundaries or restrictions in approaching their final semester of work, the results of which have led to an amazing diversity of mediums and techniques used to a very impressive standard of excellence. The works clearly represent the artists as no longer just university students but now expressing themselves as fully-fledged professional artists in their own right. The Toowoomba Regional Art Gallery is a wonderful venue for these works and is very supportive in promoting up and coming artists from USQ. It is a part of a burgeoning cultural precinct in Toowoomba—a precinct that is witnessing Toowoomba forge a reputation as a regional leader in showcasing fresh and dynamic exhibitions of culture and art across the disciplines of theatre, music and visual arts in facilities like the magnificent Empire Theatre and the Cobb and Co. Museum. One of the main driving forces behind developing and growing this great depth of creative and cultural talent in Toowoomba is of course the University of Southern Queensland. USQ is a leader of regional universities in Australia and embodies the unique qualities that make these universities such fresh and forward-thinking education providers. Arts in regional universities across the disciplines of theatre, music and visual arts provide unique and highly developed courses. These achieve wonderful success in developing talent to a level that can easily rival and, for that matter, even exceed the standards in metropolitan universities. The Bachelor of Visual Arts at the University of Southern Queensland is widely renowned as providing the highest focus on developing the practical skills of students. However, by no means does this extra focus on skills come at the expense of important theoretical aspects of a student's artistic studies. USQ recognises the importance of theoretical aspects of art but simply goes the extra step in providing a high component on developing the practical skills of students. This high skill base captures the interests of students and, going on the art works displayed at Re-volt, this focus certainly turns out students that have an exemplary standard of skill. Consequently, we must ensure that our regional universities are given the focus and support that they deserve. This focus must also extend to the great work being achieved across the arts disciplines. It is imperative that both state and federal governments work to strengthen support and recognition of arts programs in regional areas. I commend the Re-volt exhibition to members of the House and encourage anyone fortunate enough to be visiting the Garden City to drop in to the Toowoomba Regional Art Gallery and take in the freedom and flair of our future artists. I congratulate the students on completing three very successful years of hard work in the Bachelor of Visual Arts. They have done themselves and the staff at USQ very proud with this exhibition.

Schoolies Week, Airlie Beach Ms JARRATT (Whitsunday—ALP) (11.45 p.m.): We have all heard a great deal about schoolies week on the Gold Coast, but tonight I want to tell the House about one of the state's best kept secrets—schoolies week in the Whitsundays. This year the Whitsundays was the destination of choice for over 2,000 year 12 school leavers from places afar afield as Atherton and Cairns to Rockhampton, Yeppoon and Gladstone. This is the fourth year of official schoolies week activities at Airlie Beach and it has truly become a week to celebrate. The fundamental reason for the success of the program is undoubtedly the high level of planning and organisation that occurs in the weeks and months leading up to the event, and for this much credit must go to schoolies week Whitsunday coordinator, Bruce Green, who doubles as the youth development officer with the Whitsunday Shire Council. He and his very able committee ensured that the program was enticing and exciting while having built-in safeguards to maximise the personal safety of the young participants. 4816 Adjournment 26 Nov 2002

I am very proud of the Whitsunday community, which not only welcomed the school leavers into their midst but in many cases played an active role in supporting them. Many local businesspeople went out of their way to contribute by either donating services or providing them at reduced cost for registered schoolies. Special mention must also go to the many wonderful workers from the youth sector who came from far and near in order to provide a free chaplaincy service for the young people during schoolies week. These dedicated volunteers made sure that they were available at crucial places during activities in the street and around accommodation units so that they could lend assistance where needed and provide a rescue service for anyone who felt unwell or unsafe. They were also on hand to cook breakfast for some groups in their accommodation units, which I am sure provided welcome relief from instant noodles and take- aways. I also want to pay tribute to the local police, health workers, the sexual assault service staff and the Whitsunday Shire Council who worked so hard to ensure that the schoolies were kept safe and had a week to remember, not one to forget. Evidence of the success of the strategies put in place by the organising committee is reflected in the headline in the local paper which declared 'Schoolies get top marks for behaviour'. It is also evident in the fact that police reported an incident-free week. I think it is important that credit also be given to the young people themselves who, though sometimes noisy and overly energetic, proved themselves to be fabulous ambassadors for youth. I was amazed and delighted at the high level of awareness in relation to issues such as drink spiking and the benefit of sticking with a buddy through thick and thin. Not only did the schoolies bring a heady dose of youth culture to the Whitsundays, they also injected over $1 million into the local economy. Schoolies week was a win-win situation in the Whitsundays. In the time left to me, I want to explain why it is that I wish I was 17 again if only for schoolies week. Had I been able to register as a school leaver last week, I could have chosen to indulge in movies on the beach, pyjama parties, foam parties, island cruises, snorkelling trips, jelly wrestling, quad bike riding adventures, Skirmish and pool parties to name just a few activities. All this leads me to ask if we should consider having a pollies week at Airlie Beach, but then again I doubt we would have the stamina!

Kenilworth Rural Fire Brigade Mr WELLINGTON (Nicklin—Ind) (11.48 p.m.): I rise tonight not to criticise the government but to say thank you—yes, thank you—to the Hon. Mike Reynolds, the Minister for Emergency Services, for listening to the concerns I raised with him recently in relation to the Queensland Rural Fire Service bureaucrats' proposal to remove one of the vehicles attached to the Kenilworth Rural Fire Brigade and allocate this vehicle to another community. Kenilworth is a small country town in the Mary Valley, approximately two hours drive north of Brisbane. The Kenilworth community has faced a number of real challenges over recent years. The deregulation of the dairy industry has had a significant impact on the region with the loss of many real jobs, and now the area is experiencing the effects of unseasonably dry conditions. The proposal of the Queensland Rural Fire Service to take one of the Kenilworth Rural Fire Brigade vehicles and give it to another community certainly brought the Kenilworth community's fighting spirit to the surface. I am very pleased that the recent meeting with the minister gave me an opportunity to present a different perspective from that put by the Queensland Rural Fire Service bureaucrats in relation to the proposed vehicle. I accordingly thank the minister for his willingness to listen to my concerns in relation to the bureaucrats' proposal and for intervening on our behalf. I know that many residents of the Kenilworth community will sleep soundly tonight knowing that if a bushfire should break out in the region Kenilworth will have suitable vehicles to fight the fire, irrespective of whether the fire is in the mountains or on the flood plains. I thank the minister for his support. I also take this opportunity to inform members that last week I attended the Kenilworth Village Units Association's annual general meeting. At that meeting there was a report about the progress of the expansion of the Kenilworth Village Units. I hope to take the Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing on a tour of the new units in the new year when he visits the Sunshine Coast again. I thank the Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing for his support for the Kenilworth community and for enabling the expansion of the Kenilworth Village Units to occur. 26 Nov 2002 Adjournment 4817

I also indicate that I recently attended the Kenilworth State Community College presentation night, which took place in the community hall. During the evening we saw many students from Kenilworth receiving public recognition for their great work. Congratulations, Kenilworth State Community College: well done!

Mr R. Marx; Mr L. Towsk Ms MOLLOY (Noosa—ALP) (11.51 p.m.): Earlier this year I had the honour of opening an art exhibition of the work of Ray Marx at Cafe Paradiso in Noosa Junction. Ray and Robyn Marx are both hardworking, active community members on the Sunshine Coast. Ray's art is simply beautiful. Its colour, shape and sheer sensitivity are a credit to Ray's ability to communicate what words cannot express. The venue, Cafe Paradiso, is one of our area's much-loved icons, providing quality service, heaps of community support and a great place to go. At the art exhibition I was invited to visit at Leon Towsk's 100th birthday by his daughter and son-in-law. The invitation arrived and I was delighted to accept. Leon Towsk is one of my constituents who now lives at Laguna Retirement Village in Noosaville. Leon's life story symbolises the sacrifices and achievements of many Australians of his generation who chose to make Australia their home. Leon was born in Prague on 22 August 1902. Two years later the family moved to Vienna, where he lived until 1938. He graduated in electrical and mechanical engineering from Vienna's technical university. On graduating in 1925 Leon was employed with a company that was supporting the Austrian railways and he was involved in the design of innovative machinery. Leon travelled all over Europe with his work. In 1938, shortly after the Nazi Anschluss, with the help of an Austrian friend in Melbourne he and his wife were able to immigrate to Australia. He worked solely on creating and patenting knitting machines that were a great success. Myer stores were among his customers. During World War II Leon designed instruments for the RAAF, machine tools for the Army and precision instruments for the RAN. He received recognition from the commander of the RAN for his part in the development of a supersensitive device that picked up signals from the cables laid across Sydney Harbour. This work helped to detect the midget submarine attack of 31 May 1941. After the war Leon had a number of jobs, and in 1952 he joined the government aircraft factory in Port Melbourne and was involved in ground-breaking work in his field. When he retired in 1963 he was senior engineer in charge of research and development. After retirement he returned to work as a consultant with Victorian Gas and Fuel Corp. There he was associated with the creation and operation of a testing facility to ensure the safety of appliances using natural gas. During my conversation with Leon I found that he had been a neighbour of mine in the Melbourne suburb of Balwyn. Leon actually knew my cousins—Sandra, Gerard and Helenmary Gilhooly—and my uncle and aunty, Vera and Dick Gilhooly. It was a pleasure to spend some time reminiscing about the beautiful old times of Balwyn, to share a bit of his past and to know that people such as Leon have been able to immigrate to Australia and help build this nation into what it is today—a beautiful and safe place for all of us. I salute Leon Towsk.

Vegetation Management Act Mr HOBBS (Warrego—NPA) (11.54 p.m.): This morning in the debate on matters of public interest I spoke about the sneaky and underhanded way in which the Department of Natural Resources and the EPA were going about investigating Vegetation Management Act breaches. I read from a letter which described how someone had been tape recorded without their knowledge. Since then I have spoken with the minister. I think it is appropriate that I make members aware of a few more issues. I am aware of numerous other cases in which the courts have been used in an attempt to bludgeon land-holders into submission and the appeal system has been used in the hope that land-holders will eventually run out of money. This process can result in costs in excess of $250,000 for a land-holder—and double that for the taxpayers as the government desperately tries to obtain a conviction. 4818 Adjournment 26 Nov 2002

Because land-holders have been tricked into conversations tape recorded without consent, I believe it is necessary to inform people of what their actions should be. I understand that there are a further 250 breaches under the Vegetation Management Act which will be investigated in the near future. I am very concerned that these mean and tricky practices will continue to be used. Land-holders need to be cooperative with enforcement officers because of the way the courts view those who do not cooperate. However, land-holders also need to be aware of the correct procedure in these matters. If a land-holder is approached, telephoned or questioned about an alleged VMA breach, they should insist that all information is conveyed to them in writing at the earliest possible opportunity, and they should immediately seek legal advice. There are strict procedures under the Vegetation Management Act in relation to enforcement officers identifying themselves, their powers of entry and the procedures of entry. There are procedures for seeking land-holders' consent and for when land-holders do not consent to the purpose of entry. Unfortunately, it would appear that in some of the cases I am aware of the enforcement officers tend to use their own interpretation of the powers and procedures under the Vegetation Management Act. The problem with the conduct of and tape recording by some enforcement officers is that unsuspecting land-holders try to cooperate and yet find themselves unwittingly pleading guilty to charges they may not necessarily have committed because they cannot afford to defend themselves in court. In some cases the department has had insufficient evidence that a breach of the Vegetation Management Act has in fact occurred. This manipulation of land-holders creates a conviction record which is then taken into consideration when they apply for the next vegetation management plan. I urge all land-holders to be wary, careful and cooperative with the VMA enforcement officers. I cannot stress enough that land-holders should request all queries from enforcement officers to be in writing. It is disappointing that this government has allowed its bureaucrats to behave in this manner and manipulate land-holders into court in such an underhanded manner. Time expired.

Key-Employment Mrs DESLEY SCOTT (Woodridge—ALP) (11.58 p.m.): In our communities there are some organisations which are quietly engaged in activities which deserve our highest accolades, such is Key-Employment right in the heart of my Woodridge electorate. Key-Employment is a support organisation for people who may have varying degrees of physical or mental disabilities or acquired brain injuries. They concentrate on their clients' abilities and talents rather than their disabilities, groom them for employment in a selected area of the work force, seek an employer and then provide ongoing appropriate support and training as required. This organisation is having fantastic results. It was recently my privilege to attend the opening of its new office, which gave me an opportunity to meet staff and clients and to hear some of the truly wonderful personal stories of what their clients are doing. Employers should note that these people are loyal, efficient, committed and long-term workers. They love to go to work and appreciate the opportunity to make a contribution to our work force and to know in return that they are valued for who they are and for their efforts. Key-Employment was born out of Keystone, which was founded by Father Doug Kohn, when we called such places sheltered workshops. Keystone, as opposed to Key-Employment, is now a business service area where tasks such as the refurbishment of headsets for Ansett were carried out. This centre gives an opportunity for people with disabilities who may not be able to work in the open employment sector to make friends, develop a work ethic, socialise and offer respite. Margaret Harvey has been with the service for eight years and is training and development officer as well as taking care of marketing. She was previously a manager at Endeavour and prior to that she worked here at Parliament House in our hospitality section. Margaret's inspiration is her son, Brian, who following an accident as a young police officer lay in a coma for six months. He is now one of our fine, highly decorated elite paralympians, gaining Australia's first gold medal at the Atlantic Paralympics in 1996 and a world record in Prague. He is the only paralympian to hold three world records simultaneously in javelin, shot-put and discus. He won a bronze medal in Sydney and was then inducted into the Sporting Hall of Fame. We salute Brian. 26 Nov 2002 Adjournment 4819

The workers at Key-Employment are dedicated and committed to doing all that they can to assist their clients. Workers such as Tim Kohn, Workplace Health and Safety Officer and Training Placement; John Davies, Entry Office; Peter Schilling, coordinator; and Robyn Burgess, who ensures a well-run office. Leanne Andrews, the new general manager and her management team of volunteers oversee the operations. Members will find clients of Key-Employment in many varied fields—from collecting supermarket trolleys to factory workers, crane drivers or storemen. I commend the employers who are willing to give these workers a chance and those who work so passionately for this great organisation.

Dairy Industry, Tablelands Ms LEE LONG (Tablelands—ONP) (12.01 a.m.): By now we are all familiar with the images of the drought ravaging inland and southern areas of Queensland. It is a truly pitiful thing to see the relentless destruction of family farms and businesses caused by this harsh set of environmental circumstances. But I have risen tonight to remind members that it is not only these areas that are suffering. In my electorate, this drought is also tearing through the dairying areas in particular. As the member for Brisbane Central may recall from his youth, the tablelands is generally an area of lush greenery—be it in the cane fields, paddocks of maize or potatoes or, in the case of dairying, fields of pasture for the dairy herds. It is not so long since the Premier was on the tablelands to open some Queensland Heritage Trails Network projects. There was still greenery then, but in the short time since there have been severe changes. Many of those who rely on irrigated pastures to feed their herds have had enormously restrictive controls put on the amount of water they can use to the extent that their supplementary rye grass has died off prematurely and many now have nothing for their herds to eat, since there has been a severe lack of rain this year and a run of early frosts in winter saw their grass burn off months earlier their usual. Purchasing fodder is one potential answer, but for dairy herds especially it is quite problematic. Apart from the obvious issue of high cost, there are also the pressing issues of quality and availability. While farmers can keep their animals alive on average feed, for a dairy beast to produce it needs a very high quality of nutrition. However, good-class feed is rapidly running out and many dairy farmers are now facing the situation of deciding whether to keep their animals or sell them off to the meatworks. The dairy industry on the tablelands is a mature and resilient industry. It managed to survive deregulation, although at great cost. It has generally adapted every practical method of managing this drought. In many cases, herds have already been reduced and I am told that in the past few weeks nine farmers have withdrawn from supplying any milk at all to the Malanda factory. I am also told of examples where up to 30 cattle from a single herd have died from the impact of the drought. It is a vicious cycle. At times like this, a strong financial position is a great help in coping with the drought, but at the same time the impact of the drought is stripping away what is left of farmers' resources, cutting their production and so their income. All this is occurring at a time when many dairy farms are carrying heavy financial burdens due to the impact of national competition policy and deregulation. I acknowledge that there is state assistance for those properties that are drought declared, but it amounts to only a portion of the freight on just some of the feed. The needs of the green areas are as pressing as those of the inland—perhaps in some ways more so, as drought is a far less regular part of their environment. In the case of dairy herds, the cattle themselves are far more vulnerable to harsh conditions. It is a very telling argument for a far more vigorous policy of water storage and conservation than this government has so far followed.

Nerang Chamber of Commerce Mr POOLE (Gaven—ALP) (12.04 a.m.): I wish to take this opportunity and rise to speak about a community in my electorate of Gaven. I have spoken before about Nerang and its people but, truly, the community feeling among some of the locals makes me feel good about representing them at this level. Those people are not waiting for opportunities to come their way; they are out there trying to make a difference to the township of Nerang. I talk about the Nerang Chamber of Commerce, which is led from the front by a get-up-and- go type of president in Bob Janssen, who has in turn encouraged business leaders to join him in 4820 Adjournment 26 Nov 2002 making that difference. Recently, we had an event known as the Nerangfest, which was put together under unusual hardship and circumstances due to the public liability circus and other factors. A substantial amount of money was raised and distributed to three different worthy recipients in Nerang. Tonight, I would like to tell the House about what Bob Janssen and his chamber did last weekend. Nerang is no different from most other places in that it experiences constant vandalism in the form of graffiti that tarnishes the township. The chamber members, along with lan McLean, an executive with Nifsan, and other businessmen decided that enough was enough, donned the appropriate attire and got stuck into removing every visible sign of the blight on the township. At long last, Nerang was graffiti free. Nifsan is a leading Gold Coast developer on the Gold Coast. It found no problem in supplying the detergents and stripping agents to do the job. The same company has also installed cameras in a couple of strategic places in the town with the consent of the Gold Coast City Council. It already has reaped rewards as a couple of morons have been fingered trying out their so-called art on buildings. In working together with the local police, council and me in seeking realistic solutions to the problems of graffiti, the Nerang Chamber of Commerce presents us with the opportunity to observe this and develop future ways to combat the effects of this costly and destructive antisocial behaviour. I would also like to give a special mention to local solicitor Paul Doumaney, who proved to be as adept with a scrubbing brush as he is with a legal brief and another local known to our group as Barbara, who gave up her time from 6 a.m. until she started her real job at 9 a.m. and came back again after finishing her shift. With $3 million dollars being spent on streetscaping and alterations to the CBD, made available by the Beattie Labor government and the Gold Coast City Council, and traders returning to the township to set up business, I can see Nerang reaching its potential as the hub of the Gold Coast and gateway to the hinterland sooner rather than later. If members think that I sound a bit parochial about my electorate, I mean to be. The previous member talked the place down and the crime rate up. I intend to heal that wound and assure everyone that nothing could be further from the truth. Crime is way down and potential is sky high. Motion agreed to. The House adjourned at 12.07 a.m. (Wednesday).