PROOF ISSN 1322-0330

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Hansard Home Page: http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/work-of-assembly/hansard E-mail: [email protected] Phone: (07) 3406 7314 Fax: (07) 3210 0182

Subject FIRST SESSION OF THE FIFTY-FOURTH PARLIAMENT Page Thursday, 23 August 2012

REPORTS ...... 1669 Office of the Speaker ...... 1669 Tabled paper: Statement for Public Disclosure: Expenditure of the Office of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly for the period 1 July 2011 to 14 May 2012...... 1669 Tabled paper: Statement for Public Disclosure: Expenditure of the Office of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly for the period 15 May 2012 to 30 June 2012...... 1669 Register of Members’ Interests ...... 1669 Tabled paper: Twenty-Fifth Report on the Register of Members’ Interests...... 1669 PRIVILEGE ...... 1669 Speaker’s Ruling, Alleged Reflections on the Speaker by a Minister ...... 1669 Tabled paper: Letter to the Speaker, dated 30 May 2012, from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Mr Tim Mulherin MP, regarding allegations that the Deputy Premier, Hon. Jeff Seeney, deliberately mislead the House and reflected upon the chair...... 1669 PETITIONS ...... 1669 TABLED PAPERS ...... 1670 MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS ...... 1670 Campbell, Mr C ...... 1670 Forced Adoptions ...... 1670 Olympic Games, Queensland Athletes ...... 1671 National Others Week ...... 1671 State Planning Policies ...... 1671 Tabled paper: Queensland Government, Draft Temporary State Planning Policy, Planning for Prosperity, August 2012...... 1672 Government Air Services ...... 1672 Rural and Regional Hospitals, Infrastructure ...... 1673 Tabled paper: Queensland Health Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, Preliminary Evaluation, April 2011 Version 2.1...... 1673 Tabled paper: IPPEC, Statewide Implications for Rural Service Provision Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Atherton and Mareeba Hospitals Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010...... 1673

FS SIMPSON N J LAURIE L J OSMOND SPEAKER CLERK OF THE PARLIAMENT CHIEF HANSARD REPORTER Table of Contents — Thursday, 23 August 2012

Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Biloela Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Charleville Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Emerald Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Roma Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Ayr Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Charters Towers Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Kingaroy Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Longreach Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Sarina Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Thursday Island Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: IPPEC, Attachments to Service Profiles, Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Atherton Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, June 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Ayr Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, June 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Beaudesert, Volume 1 and 2, August 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Biloela Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, July 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Caboolture Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, August 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Charleville Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, July 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Thursday Island Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, June 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Sarina Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, August 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Roma Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, July 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Maryborough Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, August 2010...... 1673 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Mareeba Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, July 2010...... 1674 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Longreach Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, July 2010...... 1674 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Logan Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, August 2010...... 1674 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Kingaroy Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, July 2010...... 1674 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Ipswich Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, August 2010...... 1674 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Hervey Bay Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, June 2010...... 1674 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Emerald Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, July 2010...... 1674 Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Charters Towers Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, June 2010...... 1674 Bullying ...... 1674 Aviation Tourism ...... 1674 Water Infrastructure ...... 1675 STATE DEVELOPMENT, INFRASTRUCTURE AND INDUSTRY COMMITTEE ...... 1675 Report ...... 1675 Tabled paper: State Development, Infrastructure and Industry Committee: Report No. 6—Subordinate legislation tabled on 19 June 2012...... 1675 FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE ...... 1675 Reports ...... 1675 Tabled paper: Finance and Administration Committee: Report No. 19—Portfolio subordinate legislation tabled between 17 May 2012 and 31 July 2012...... 1675 Tabled paper: Finance and Administration Committee: Report No. 20—Annual Report 2011-12...... 1675 Table of Contents — Thursday, 23 August 2012

EDUCATION AND INNOVATION COMMITTEE ...... 1675 Reports ...... 1675 Tabled paper: Education and Innovation Committee: Report No. 7—Review of Auditor-General’s Report 1: 2012: Improving student attendance...... 1676 Tabled paper: Education and Innovation Committee: Report No. 8—Subordinate legislation tabled between 19 June 2012 and 27 July 2012...... 1676 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ...... 1676 Public Service, Jobs ...... 1676 Palmer, Mr C ...... 1677 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS ...... 1677 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ...... 1678 Agriculture Industry ...... 1678 Schools, Funding ...... 1678 Planning ...... 1679 Cairns, CBD Upgrade ...... 1680 Tabled paper: Article in the Cairns Post, dated 21 August 2012, titled ‘Let’s get cracking on CBD upgrade’...... 1680 QR National ...... 1681 Mental Health Services ...... 1681 Recycling ...... 1682 Citytrain ...... 1682 Northern Pipeline Interconnector ...... 1683 Accommodation Support and Respite Services ...... 1684 Torres Strait, Water ...... 1684 Public Service, Jobs ...... 1685 Seniors ...... 1686 Agricultural Colleges ...... 1686 SPEAKER’S STATEMENT ...... 1687 School Group Tours ...... 1687 LEGAL AFFAIRS AND COMMUNITY SAFETY COMMITTEE ...... 1687 Report No. 6, Motion to Take Note ...... 1687 Report No. 7, Motion to Take Note ...... 1687 HEAVY VEHICLE NATIONAL LAW BILL ...... 1687 Second Reading ...... 1687 Consideration in Detail ...... 1704 Clauses 1 to 680, as read, agreed to...... 1704 Schedules 1 to 3, as read, agreed to...... 1704 Third Reading ...... 1704 Long Title ...... 1704 PRIVATE MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS ...... 1705 Neighbourhood Watch ...... 1705 Townsville, National Weather Map ...... 1705 MULTICULTURAL RECOGNITION BILL ...... 1706 Introduction ...... 1706 Tabled paper: Multicultural Recognition Bill 2012...... 1706 Tabled paper: Multicultural Recognition Bill 2012, explanatory notes...... 1706 First Reading ...... 1707 Referral to the Health and Community Services Committee ...... 1707 PRIVATE MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS ...... 1707 Surf Life Saving Queensland, Point Danger Branch ...... 1707 The Tertiary PLACE ...... 1708 Flexible Support Services ...... 1708 North Stradbroke Island, Law and Order ...... 1709 Central Queensland University, Allied Health Clinic ...... 1709 Campbell, Mr C; International Year of the Cooperatives ...... 1710 Seniors Week ...... 1710 Seniors Week ...... 1711 Queensland Tuberculosis Control Centre ...... 1711 Returned Service Men and Women ...... 1712 Youngcare; Caspari, Ms S ...... 1713 The Lakes College Fun Run and Fair; Public Transport; Battle of Long Tan, Commemoration ...... 1713 Logan Electorate, Public Transport ...... 1714 Australian Agricultural College Corporation ...... 1714 Assisi Catholic College ...... 1715 Opti-MINDS Creative Sustainability Challenge ...... 1715 Gold Coast, Cruise Ship Terminal ...... 1716 Tabled paper: Publication, dated March 1998, by Gold Coast Harbours Authority, titled ‘Meeting Dredging Needs in Gold Coast Waterways’...... 1716 Whitsunday Electorate, Bruce Highway ...... 1716 Queensland Health, IBM Contract ...... 1717 Table of Contents — Thursday, 23 August 2012

Tabled paper: Information briefing from Chamber and Procedural Services regarding orders for production of documents...... 1717 Tabled paper: Letter, dated 9 August 2012, from the Premier, Hon. Campbell Newman, to Mr Peter Wellington MP regarding orders for production of documents...... 1717 Public Housing ...... 1718 Politics and the Media ...... 1718 Mount Isa, Preventative Health Unit ...... 1719 Police Service, Recruits ...... 1719 Bassingthwaighte, Mr E; Mini Ekka ...... 1720 Seniors Week ...... 1720 Agricultural Colleges ...... 1721 Collins Family ...... 1721 PUBLIC SERVICE AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL ...... 1722 Second Reading ...... 1722 Tabled paper: Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012, erratum to explanatory notes...... 1722 Tabled paper: ReachTEL poll, conducted on 22 August 2012, titled ‘Newman support update: Sandgate, Townsville and Brisbane Central’...... 1739 Tabled paper: Queensland State Political Pendulum—2012 State Election, updated on 27 May 2012, prepared by Jake Smith...... 1740 Division: Question put—That the bill be now read a second time...... 1747 Resolved in the affirmative...... 1747 Consideration in Detail ...... 1747 Clauses 1 to 3, as read, agreed to...... 1747 Insertion of new clauses—...... 1747 Tabled paper: Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012, explanatory notes to Hon. Jarrod Bleijie’s amendments...... 1748 Division: Question put—That the amendment be agreed to...... 1749 Resolved in the affirmative...... 1749 Amendment agreed to...... 1749 Clauses 4 to 22, as read, agreed to...... 1749 Insertion of new clause—...... 1749 Division: Question put—That the amendment be agreed to...... 1751 Resolved in the affirmative...... 1751 Amendment agreed to...... 1751 Clause 23, as read, agreed to...... 1751 Insertion of new clauses—...... 1751 Division: Question put—That the amendment be agreed to...... 1756 Resolved in the affirmative...... 1756 Amendment agreed to...... 1756 Clauses 24 and 25, as read, agreed to...... 1756 Insertion of new clauses—...... 1756 Amendment agreed to...... 1756 Schedule—...... 1756 Amendments agreed to...... 1759 Schedule, as amended, agreed to...... 1759 Third Reading ...... 1759 Division: Question put—That the bill, as amended, be now read a third time...... 1759 Resolved in the affirmative...... 1759 Long Title ...... 1760 Division: Question put—That the amendment be agreed to...... 1760 Resolved in the affirmative...... 1760 Division: Question put—That the long title, as amended, be agreed to...... 1760 Resolved in the affirmative...... 1760 SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT ...... 1760 ADJOURNMENT ...... 1760 Newman Government ...... 1760 North Keppel Island Environmental Centre ...... 1761 Seniors Concert ...... 1761 Labour Day ...... 1762 Mount Gravatt Show ...... 1762 Vietnam Veterans Day ...... 1763 Rugby League Championships; Mackay Historical Society ...... 1763 Myuma-Dugalunji Program ...... 1764 Speed Careering; Men’s Services; Nerang State Primary School; Seniors Week ...... 1764 Fraser Coast, Festivals; Lazy Acres Caravan Park ...... 1765 ATTENDANCE ...... 1765 23 Aug 2012 Legislative Assembly 1669 THURSDAY, 23 AUGUST 2012

Legislative Assembly The Legislative Assembly met at 9.30 am. Madam Speaker (Hon. Fiona Simpson, Maroochydore) read prayers and took the chair.

REPORTS Office of the Speaker Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I lay upon the table of the House Statement for public disclosure: expenditure of the Office of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly for the period 1 July 2011 to 14 May 2012. Tabled paper: Statement for Public Disclosure: Expenditure of the Office of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly for the period 1 July 2011 to 14 May 2012 [795]. I also lay upon the table of the House Statement for public disclosure: expenditure of the Office of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly for the period 15 May 2012 to 30 June 2012. Tabled paper: Statement for Public Disclosure: Expenditure of the Office of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly for the period 15 May 2012 to 30 June 2012 [796]. Register of Members’ Interests Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table the 25th report on the Register of Members’ Interests. Tabled paper: Twenty-Fifth Report on the Register of Members’ Interests [797].

PRIVILEGE Speaker’s Ruling, Alleged Reflections on the Speaker by a Minister Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I wish to draw to your attention that I have received a complaint from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition under standing order 269. It relates to statements that the Deputy Premier and I made in the media in late May 2012 in relation to the issue of the allocation of the Bernays Room. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition alleges that a breach of the privileges of the House might have occurred if the Deputy Premier was reflecting on the chair in the media. In the interests of transparency, I table correspondence regarding this matter of privilege. Tabled paper: Letter to the Speaker, dated 30 May 2012, from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Mr Tim Mulherin MP, regarding allegations that the Deputy Premier, Hon. Jeff Seeney, deliberately mislead the House and reflected upon the chair [798]. I have taken significant time with this matter as it has exposed some complexities with regard to occasional structural role conflicts created by changes made to the Parliamentary Service Act last year. It has been a common practice of Speakers to seek the advice of the Clerk prior to determining matters of privilege. However, the letter from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition queried the allocation of rooms, and this was a matter in which the Clerk had some involvement. Therefore, it was inappropriate for me to place him in a position where providing advice could be construed as a conflict of roles. I strongly emphasise that I am not suggesting that anyone has acted improperly, merely that these role conflicts may now exist from time to time. Members would also be aware that the Speaker is not involved in the allocation of rooms. In my role as guardian of the rights, powers and immunities of the parliament, it is important that I also protect the role of Clerk as an independent and trusted adviser to both government and non- government members. As I considered this matter, seeking to progress it prudently and judiciously, I determined that I would have to seek external legal advice as to the most appropriate course of action. Having now received this advice and after deliberations, I do not consider that the comments made by the Deputy Premier were a reflection on the decisions or the actions of the chair. As I am not persuaded that a matter of contempt has arisen from the Deputy Premier’s statements in the media, I will not be referring this to the Ethics Committee.

PETITIONS The Clerk presented the following paper petition, lodged by the honourable member indicated—

Chermside, Go Card Top-up Outlet Mr Woodforth, from 584 petitioners, requesting the House to work with TransLink to ensure the installation of a GoCard machine at Nextra Express newsagency at Chermside [799]. 1670 Ministerial Statements 23 Aug 2012

The Clerk presented the following e-petitions, sponsored by the honourable members indicated—

Atherton Tablelands Council, Deamalgamation Mr Kempton, from 149 petitioners, requesting the House to conduct a referendum on the deamalgamation of the former Mareeba Shire from the current amalgamated Atherton Tablelands Council [800].

Moreton Bay Regional Council, Deamalgamation Mr Driscoll, from 191 petitioners, requesting the House to conduct a referendum on the proposal to deamalgamate the former Redcliffe City Council from the current amalgamated local government area known as Moreton Bay Regional Council [801].

Western Downs Regional Council, Deamalgamation Mr Hopper, from 36 petitioners, requesting the House to deamalgamate from Western Downs Regional Council by the creation of two distinct areas based on the townships of Dalby and Chinchilla [802]. Petitions received.

TABLED PAPERS

MINISTERIAL PAPERS TABLED BY THE CLERK The following ministerial papers were tabled by the Clerk— Minister for Education, Training and Employment (Mr Langbroek)— 803 Public Report of Opposition Office Expenses, for the period 1 July 2011 to 23 March 2012 Attorney-General and Minister for Justice (Mr Bleijie)— 804 Queensland Workplace Rights Ombudsman—Annual Report 2011-12

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Campbell, Mr C Hon. CKT NEWMAN (Ashgrove—LNP) (Premier) (9.35 am): It is sad for me to report that a short time ago I heard that renowned and respected garden guru Col Campbell, OAM, passed away last night on the Sunshine Coast after a short battle with cancer. Col was somewhat of an institution—and that is an understatement—with not only his much loved 4BC listeners and Gardening Australia viewers but also with gardeners Australia-wide. He was one of the most knowledgeable and respected people in his field. His influence in the horticultural industry spread over some five decades. Col received many accolades and awards for his contribution to the industry that he dearly loved. Col’s gardening show on 4BC consistently rated highly and he was a great advocate of gardeners’ rights, especially during the water shortage problems earlier in the decade. As Lord Mayor of Brisbane, I worked with him as did my team. I believe he was inspirational in the way he encouraged people to deal with the drought and still enjoy their gardens. He strongly advocated the health benefits that gardening has to offer people of all ages, especially the elderly, and that there are ‘water wise’ ways to garden. Colin in particular took it upon himself to stand up for gardeners. Col Campbell will be sadly missed. I am truly shocked and greatly saddened to have heard this news this morning. On behalf of the Parliament of Queensland, I express my deepest sympathy to Col’s wife, Bev, and their family. I acknowledge his contribution to the Queensland and, indeed, Australian community. Forced Adoptions Hon. CKT NEWMAN (Ashgrove—LNP) (Premier) (9.37 am): I rise also today to announce that during an upcoming sitting the Queensland government will make a statement of apology in parliament to the many people affected by past forced adoption practices. In February this year a Commonwealth Senate committee inquiry found that forced adoptions were widespread in Australia during the 1950s through to the 1970s and that the emotional damage caused to all those affected remains prevalent to this day. Between 1951 and 1975 an estimated 140,000 to 150,000 adoptions took place in Australia, but it is unknown how many of these were forced. During its deliberations, the Commonwealth Senate committee held a public hearing in Brisbane in April 2011 and heard evidence from individuals and stakeholder groups about the impacts of the practices and policies of the past on Queenslanders. Across the nation the inquiry heard stories which highlighted women’s experiences of being physically shackled to beds and social workers failing to advise mothers of government payments that may have been available to support them in keeping their child. Indeed, only a week ago in my electorate office one of my constituents, who was born in 1967, poured out her heart-rending tale of what happened to her mother at her birth here in Brisbane. 23 Aug 2012 Ministerial Statements 1671

This is a devastating experience for many and it is a very sad time indeed in the state’s history. These forced-adoption practices have had long-term impacts for the many mothers, children, fathers and extended families that were affected, many of whom continue to be haunted each and every day of their lives by what happened to them. Again I refer to my constituent’s story. She has been searching for her identity for over 25 years. Thankfully, these practices no longer continue. To those who have been affected we say: whilst we cannot change what happened in the past, we hope that an apology will acknowledge the role of past Queensland governments in practices that are now recognised, and rightly so, as wrong. We hope that an official apology will help ease the pain felt by those people who have been so deeply affected and will assist them in their healing process. I invite people affected by forced adoption to attend the apology in this House. We will ensure that information is made publicly available in the lead-up to this significant event. I feel honoured to lead a government that is prepared to do the right thing in acknowledging a practice of the past that should never have occurred. Olympic Games, Queensland Athletes Hon. CKT NEWMAN (Ashgrove—LNP) (Premier) (9.40 am): Tomorrow, Friday, 24 August, Queenslanders will welcome home the Australian Olympic team. The Queensland government, along with the Brisbane City Council, will host a tickertape parade through the Queen Street Mall. Queenslanders are encouraged to come and support their sporting heroes as they walk along the parade route from 12 noon. Seventy-seven athletes and six team officials will participate in the parade. If it is anything like parades of the past, it will be something for them and certainly us to remember. It will finish with a public presentation of the athletes on stage at Reddacliff Place. This will then be followed by an official reception for the team at Parliament House. There will be some great opportunities for Queenslanders to come out and celebrate the team’s efforts at the London Olympics, and we have good reason to celebrate. Queensland had the highest representation of any state in Australia’s Olympic team. There were 90 athletes from our state competing at the games. Queensland has always been a great sporting state, and this was highlighted by the success of our state’s medallists. Australia’s first gold medal of the games went to the women’s swimming 4x100-metre relay, an all-Queensland team. Another Queenslander, Anna Meares, did us proud when she won gold in the women’s track cycling sprint. And who could forget Sally Pearson’s gold in the women’s 100-metre hurdles? I sat there with tears in my eyes watching that one. Our Queensland athletes also went on to win a raft of silver and bronze medals throughout the games—an amazing success. I particularly look forward to welcoming home our Queensland athletes and celebrating the achievements of this great team as a whole. I want to give a special shout-out this morning to the three bronze-medal-winning medallists from the women’s water polo team who live in my electorate of Ashgrove: Bronwen Knox, Sophie Smith and Jane Moran. It was a privilege to personally wish them well before they went to London, and it is now very exciting to welcome them home as Olympic medallists. Athletes put in long hours and make personal sacrifices to represent our country at the Olympic Games. The parade will also say thanks to the countless volunteers and support staff who have helped the team throughout the games and also acknowledge the role of families and friends. I would like to thank the Australian Olympic Committee and Fitness First, as the official presenting partner, for bringing the team to Brisbane. It will be a great celebration, and I encourage all Queenslanders to come out in their green and gold to pay tribute to our athletes. National Others Week Hon. CKT NEWMAN (Ashgrove—LNP) (Premier) (9.42 am): In a world of constant change, it is reassuring to know that faith communities, like the Christian Outreach Centre Australia, are growing stronger. The COC is behind National Others Week, which will be launched in Brisbane tomorrow, Friday, 24 August. National Others Week encourages all of us to think about others and to reach out and do something nice for someone else. Albert Einstein said— Only a life lived for others is a life worthwhile. I congratulate the Christian Outreach Centre for helping to raise awareness of how we can all play a part in making life better for others through National Others Week. I also commend the Christian Outreach Centre’s efforts in building up the spiritual and emotional health of our communities which is, after all, where true prosperity lies. State Planning Policies Hon. JW SEENEY (Callide—LNP) (Deputy Premier and Minister for State Development, Infrastructure and Planning) (9.43 am): Over the past three months I have spoken a number of times in this House about the urgent need for a complete revamp of Queensland’s planning policies. Planning 1672 Ministerial Statements 23 Aug 2012 policies and regulation are key determinants of future growth, future development and future economic prosperity. As I have said a number of times, fixing the planning system will be one of this government’s critical actions in getting the state back on track. This week we will gazette a temporary state planning policy which will ensure our four-pillar economic policy is included in all planning decisions taken in Queensland. I table a draft copy of that temporary state planning policy. Tabled paper: Queensland Government, Draft Temporary State Planning Policy, Planning for Prosperity, August 2012 [805]. Planning for prosperity provides a clear statement of the position of this government on the importance of agriculture, construction, mining and tourism to our great state and how those four pillars must be considered in all planning processes in Queensland. This policy will promote agriculture by preserving good-quality agricultural land for its income- earning potential and as a natural resource and by supporting agriculture as the predominant land use in rural zoned areas. It will also promote agriculture by not supporting land uses that have the potential for conflict with agriculture in those rural zoned areas. The policy will promote tourism by protecting Queensland’s tourism attractions and significant natural assets for the benefit and sustainability of the tourism industry by facilitating tourism projects that complement local conditions and by removing hurdles and locational limitations for appropriate tourism development. The policy will promote the state’s mining and extractive resource industries by preserving mineral and extractive resource industries, by resolving at a regional and local level potential land-use conflicts and by supporting our mining communities with housing and community facilities. The policy will promote construction activities by facilitating residential, commercial and industrial development in appropriately zoned areas, by identifying infrastructure required to support new development and by removing impediments to a steady supply of land in suitable locations. This is the first positive, enabling planning policy that Queensland has had in over a decade—one whose purpose is to ensure that economic growth is facilitated and not adversely affected by a planning process that was designed to stop everything. In essence, this policy will ensure that state agencies and councils must ensure that economic development considerations are a fundamental planning consideration in this state. This is common sense. It is a simple and straightforward policy, not weighed down by processes or prescriptive requirements. The temporary state planning policy will be in effect for a maximum of 12 months or until it is incorporated into a single planning policy for Queensland. I intend to release that policy for public comment by October and have set a target of March next year to have it adopted. It will replace the current batch of policies, some 14—a mishmash of policy documents that have been developed in an ad hoc manner over the past 20 years. This is a key step in this government’s determination to get Queensland back on track.

Government Air Services Hon. TJ NICHOLLS (Clayfield—LNP) (Treasurer and Minister for Trade) (9.47 am): On 24 March Queenslanders voted for change. They voted to put an end to Labor’s waste and inefficiency. The savings we are making across government are necessary for fiscal repair. Queensland taxpayers can be assured that under a Newman government they will get value for money. We will deliver services as effectively and as efficiently as possible. That is why we are reviewing the way in which government delivers several of its air services, including the Government Air Wing, the Police Air Wing and the Emergency Management Queensland Helicopter Rescue service. These services provide vital assistance to the Queensland community and facilitate government business across this vast state. Queensland’s emergency pilots were a godsend during the summer of natural disasters. Every day they transport sick patients from the regions for treatment and deliver organs for transplant. I wish to make it absolutely clear that no services will be affected by this review. There will be no reduction in the number of flying hours; in fact, we are seeking an increase. Patients will still be carried, as they are now. Organ transplants will continue unchanged. The capacity to respond to natural disasters is unchanged. Private companies will be asked to register their interest in delivering the fixed-wing and rotary- wing aircraft services. If there is sufficient interest, the government will consider commencing a more detailed expression-of-interest process. The Gold Coast police helicopter is a prime example of how public-private partnerships can be highly beneficial and deliver services—services that Labor failed to deliver. Private investment is just one option being considered by the review. The government will consider outsourcing all or part of its air service operations and infrastructure to a commercial third party or may decide to operate its fleet from a single integrated Air Wing. The review may find current operational arrangements are ideal and recommend no change. But we owe it to the people of Queensland to examine these services closely to ensure that we are getting the best bang for the taxpayer dollar. I want to reiterate that the government is undertaking an examination of these options and no decision has yet been made. 23 Aug 2012 Ministerial Statements 1673

Rural and Regional Hospitals, Infrastructure Hon. LJ SPRINGBORG (Southern Downs—LNP) (Minister for Health) (9.48 am): Today I present a damning report which was shunned by the former Labor government for two years and left to rot. In 2010 this report was received by Minister Lucas. In thousands of pages it warns of a serious state of disrepair at 12 rural and regional hospitals. The Atherton, Ayr, Biloela, Charleville, Charters Towers, Emerald, Kingaroy, Longreach, Mareeba, Sarina, Roma and Thursday Island hospitals were in a shocking condition then and sadly, because of Labor inaction, they remain in a shocking condition now. These are the realities caused by a Labor backlog of $300 million in basic maintenance. The report talks of hospital foundations rotted halfway through by concrete cancer. There are hospitals without fire detection equipment and with loose wires and faulty wiring. There are rusted roofs, dangerous disability ramps and other critical maintenance issues ignored now for two years or more. Told of these public facilities and the fact that they were a danger to workers and patients, what did the Labor Party do—the so-called champions of the workers? Absolutely nothing! And this was so soon after the scandal over nursing accommodation in the Torres Strait and the rape of a nurse on Mabuiag Island. Time and again, Labor shirked its responsibility. Today I will place the report on the web and urge members to view the documents themselves. There they will read of three options proposed at the time, including a $670 million scheme to bulldoze many of these facilities and completely rebuild them. Members might reflect on the fact that when this report was presented the Labor government was about to spend $680 million on a new Queensland Children’s Hospital. That controversial facility, which was built in part to replace a brand-new hospital already operating on a site next door, has since blown out in price by another $800 million. And so every day more examples of gross Labor mismanagement come to light in Queensland Health. Each of Labor’s half-baked schemes add a cost to the current budget and impact on front-line health services, jobs and our future investment in health. Meanwhile, once again I turn to the task of cleaning up after years of Labor government neglect. Unlike my predecessors, I have taken this report head-on. By redistributing priorities, Queensland Health will find $51.58 million to provide these bare-bones repairs to meet basic requirements. It will be necessary to adjust our plans for future work. Because of Labor neglect, these urgent repairs simply must be facilitated. Today the 12 communities mentioned in this report will receive details of the restorative program that is proposed. Plans to provide medium- to long-term strategies for these facilities will then be developed in partnership with local hospital and health boards. Tabled paper: Queensland Health Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, Preliminary Evaluation, April 2011 Version 2.1 [806]. Tabled paper: IPPEC, Statewide Implications for Rural Service Provision Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010 [807]. Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Atherton and Mareeba Hospitals Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010 [808]. Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Biloela Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010 [809]. Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Charleville Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010 [810]. Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Emerald Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010 [811]. Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Roma Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010 [812]. Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Ayr Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010 [813]. Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Charters Towers Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010 [814]. Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Kingaroy Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010 [815]. Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Longreach Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010 [816]. Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Sarina Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010 [817]. Tabled paper: IPPEC, Service Profile for Thursday Island Hospital Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010 [818]. Tabled paper: IPPEC, Attachments to Service Profiles, Infrastructure Renewal Planning Project for Rural and Remote Areas, July 2010 [819]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Atherton Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, June 2010 [820]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Ayr Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, June 2010 [821]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Beaudesert, Volume 1 and 2, August 2010 [822]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Biloela Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, July 2010 [823]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Caboolture Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, August 2010 [824]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Charleville Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, July 2010 [825]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Thursday Island Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, June 2010 [826]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Sarina Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, August 2010 [827]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Roma Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, July 2010 [828]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Maryborough Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, August 2010 [829]. 1674 Ministerial Statements 23 Aug 2012

Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Mareeba Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, July 2010 [830]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Longreach Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, July 2010 [831]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Logan Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, August 2010 [832]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Kingaroy Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, July 2010 [833]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Ipswich Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, August 2010 [834]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Hervey Bay Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, June 2010 [835]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Emerald Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, July 2010 [836]. Tabled paper: HIPEC Preliminary Infrastructure Planning Study for Charters Towers Hospital, Volume 1 and 2, June 2010 [837]. Bullying Hon. JH LANGBROEK (Surfers Paradise—LNP) (Minister for Education, Training and Employment) (9.52 am): Last night on Seven News we saw the tragic story of 14-year-old Brianna, who took her own life as a result of sustained and vicious cyberbullying. Her family had moved from Coffs Harbour to Queensland to escape the torment and give her a better life, but through social media the campaign continued with tragic consequences. The story is an indelible reminder of the prevalence and impact of bullying. Many of us as parents in this place have seen the impact of adolescent interactions at senior, primary and secondary level. When you see your child physically and emotionally change, it can take some time to realise that this is just not kids being kids. The frightening speed with which bullying escalates to a dangerous level is confronting and is something about which I as a policymaker am committed to doing something. The public conversation about school bullying is about to take centre stage with today’s release of the American movie Bully. Having seen the previews and read the reviews, it appears to present a powerful insight into the problem. The Australian review stated that the reaction had been overwhelmingly positive from school communities. I will certainly take the time with my family to watch the movie and I endorse federal minister Peter Garrett’s comments that all families and educators should make the time to watch it and gain a better understanding of this important issue. Queensland is the leading jurisdiction in the Federation in tackling bullying. The 2010 Working Together report and the 2011 Keeping Queensland Schools Safe report produced a total of 19 recommendations to respond to bullying and school violence. All of the recommendations that fall within my portfolio are being acted on and I have written to other relevant ministers to help address the issue. I also encourage all members of the House to promote two useful tools to help deal with bullying in schools. The Bullying. No Way! website provides a range of tools and resources to assist parents and teachers identify and address bullying. The other is the smart phone app Take a Stand Together. I have it and it gives students useful techniques to deal with bullying at schools so that we can work towards crushing this very real problem.

Aviation Tourism Hon. JA STUCKEY (Currumbin—LNP) (Minister for Tourism, Major Events, Small Business and the Commonwealth Games) (9.54 am): Once again I rise to report good news for Queensland on the aviation front. Just two days ago the Premier informed the House of the abundance of new flights coming into our state, both international and domestic. I am now able to inform the House that, in the month of July, there were almost three million passenger movements across our domestic and international airports. This is an increase of more than five per cent on the same time last year. This is more evidence that Queensland is most definitely open for business. As I said on Tuesday in this chamber, from Coolangatta to Cairns the skies are buzzing. Gold Coast Airport in my electorate of Currumbin showed the largest increase, with a jump of more than 10 per cent across both domestic and international terminals—and this is before Qantas begins its direct flights from Sydney! Brisbane Airport saw almost two million movements in July, an increase of almost two per cent, and this can only grow given our recent announcement of increased flights by both China Southern and Etihad. Likewise, both Cairns and Mackay have seen a spike, both recording an increase of more than five per cent. Cairns domestic terminal saw almost 350,000 passenger movements, making July 2012 the busiest month ever recorded at the airport. The sky will literally be the limit once China Eastern and then China Southern flights begin later this year. Boosting access to our major tourism centres is vital to reaching the government’s goal of doubling overnight visitor expenditure by 2020, and this is why we established the Attracting Aviation Investment Fund to encourage new routes and expand current ones and bring more tourists into our great state. The Newman government is determined to return Queensland to its rightful place as Australia’s No. 1 tourist destination. We recognise tourism as one of the four pillars of our economy—as opposed very much to those opposite, who all but ignored this vital industry. They did not even have a department for tourism! We now do and these figures are further proof of the Premier’s and this government’s foresight. These figures are a clear sign that the LNP government is getting on with the job and that, yes, we are definitely open for business. 23 Aug 2012 Education and Innovation Committee 1675

Water Infrastructure Hon. MF McARDLE (Caloundra—LNP) (Minister for Energy and Water Supply) (9.57 am): Today I am pleased to announce that a 30-year vision for an affordable, secure, sustainable and high-quality water and sewerage service is being developed for the whole of Queensland as part of the Newman government’s six-month action plan. The best way to show how important a 30-year plan is is to look at what happened without it. Labor’s failure to plan resulted in the South-East Queensland water supply crisis followed by a massive $7 billion panic-hurried investment in redundant water assets and then massive price hikes for SEQ householders. The legacy of the Beattie Labor government water policy— a policy limited to praying for rain until it was too late—was that our state’s most populated south-east earned the distinction of becoming a major metropolitan region in the world to come close to running out of water. Most people will recall that the water supply crisis ended with heavy rainfall. We cannot afford to make the same mistakes Labor governments have made. Labor’s legacy in the water supply sector will cost Queenslanders every day for many generations to come. Planning for Queensland’s future water sector is an important first step in delivering a reliable and affordable water and sewerage supply system, which is critical to maintaining business growth and lifestyle choices.

STATE DEVELOPMENT, INFRASTRUCTURE AND INDUSTRY COMMITTEE

Report Mr MALONE (Mirani—LNP) (9.59 am): I lay upon the table of the House report No. 6 of the State Development, Infrastructure and Industry Committee. This report examines subordinate legislation tabled on 19 June 2012 which was considered by the committee. This report examines subordinate legislation 73, Water Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2012. The subordinate legislation has a disallowance date of 13 September 2012. The committee did not identify any significant policy issues or technical concerns regarding consistency with fundamental legislative principles. The committee therefore concludes that the subordinate legislation examined is lawful. I commend the report to the House. Tabled paper: State Development, Infrastructure and Industry Committee: Report No. 6—Subordinate legislation tabled on 19 June 2012 [838].

FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE

Reports Mr CRANDON (Coomera—LNP) (10.00 am): I lay upon the table of the House report No. 19 of the Finance and Administration Committee. This report covers the portfolio subordinate legislation tabled between 17 May 2012 and 31 July 2012 considered by the committee. The subordinate legislation has disallowance dates between 13 September 2012 and 14 November 2012. The committee did not identify any significant issues regarding consistency with fundamental legislative principles or the lawfulness of the subordinate legislation. Tabled paper: Finance and Administration Committee: Report No. 19—Portfolio subordinate legislation tabled between 17 May 2012 and 31 July 2012 [840]. I also lay upon the table of the House report No. 20. This annual report covers the 2011-12 financial year for the Finance and Administration Committee of both the 53rd Parliament and the 54th Parliament. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all those who contributed to the work of the committee over the year. I commend the reports to the House. Tabled paper: Finance and Administration Committee: Report No. 20—Annual Report 2011-12 [841].

EDUCATION AND INNOVATION COMMITTEE

Reports Mrs MENKENS (Burdekin—LNP) (10.01 am): I lay upon the table of the House the Education and Innovation Committee’s report No. 7, titled Review of Auditor-General’s report 1:2012: improving student attendance. This report details the committee’s consideration of a report tabled by the Auditor- General in May this year on the important issue of school attendance rates for state school students in Queensland. The Auditor-General’s finding was that state-wide attendance rates have not improved since the Every Day Counts initiative was implemented by the former department of education and training in 2008. The report asks the House to note that the Education and Innovation Committee intends to review state school attendance rates in 2014. 1676 Questions Without Notice 23 Aug 2012

In the meantime, the report details the committee’s recommendation that the Minister for Education, Training and Employment advise this House on the acceptance or otherwise of the recommendations made by the Auditor-General as well as on whether there will be any changes to evaluation and reporting in respect of the Closing the Gap strategy. We also ask that consideration be given by the Department of Education, Training and Employment to undertaking and publishing a comprehensive evaluation of the many initiatives and strategies underway to improve student attendance rates in Queensland. I commend the report to the House. Tabled paper: Education and Innovation Committee: Report No. 7—Review of Auditor-General’s Report 1: 2012: Improving student attendance [842]. I also lay upon the table of the House the Education and Innovation Committee’s report No. 8, subordinate legislation tabled between 19 June 2012 and 27 July 2012. This report covers two pieces of subordinate legislation tabled on 19 June 2012. Both work to postpone provisions of the Education and Training Legislation Amendment Act 2011 and associated regulations that relate to expanded mandatory reporting requirements until legislation is amended to ensure that teachers who fail to report likely future sexual abuse of a student will not be subject to criminal sanctions. The subordinate legislation has a disallowance date of 13 September 2012. The committee did not identify any significant issues regarding consistency with fundamental legislative principles or the lawfulness of the subordinate legislation. I commend the report to the House. Tabled paper: Education and Innovation Committee: Report No. 8—Subordinate legislation tabled between 19 June 2012 and 27 July 2012 [843].

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Madam SPEAKER: Question time will finish at 11.03 am. Public Service, Jobs Ms PALASZCZUK (10.03 am): My question is to the Premier. Is the Premier aware that hundreds of government workers are suffering anxiety, depression and other illnesses as they wait for his jobs axe to strike? The Premier is literally making Queensland sick. Madam SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition did put a question in the first part. I call the Premier. Mr NEWMAN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I am only too happy to answer the Leader of the Opposition’s question. Yes, I am sure there is a lot of anxiety in the Queensland Public Service and I apologise again, as I have in the past, for that situation. My ministers and I are working hard to resolve the financial problems that we have been given by those opposite and the former Premier Anna Bligh and the former failed Treasurer, Andrew Fraser. We do not like doing this at all. We are not doing this for fun. It is Anna Bligh and Andrew Fraser’s legacy that we are cleaning up. I noticed with some interest yesterday the questions from the Labor Party members. I was wondering for a while where we were going with their questioning on borrowing. I now know—I am very confident—that they are playing one of their usual little games. The members of the Labor Party have this incredible capacity for reinventing history. It is Orwellian, it is a breathtaking sort of attempt—‘We have never been at war with Eurasia, we have always been at war with East Asia.’ This is where these people are going. Believe it or not, in about two years time they are going to say that the LNP government said it was going to deal with debt, it was going to balance budgets, and then they are going to say, ‘Look, when we left the debt was $62 billion and now it is $85 billion.’ I draw their attention to their own midyear fiscal economic review that Andrew Fraser handed down a few weeks ago. Here it is on page 2 in the fiscal overview, by 2014-15— Opposition members interjected. Madam SPEAKER: I warn members on my left. The Premier has answered the question and is entitled to continue to answer the question, but the interjections on my left are out of order. Mr NEWMAN: I note that page 2 of their own midyear fiscal and economic review says this— By 2014-15, gross borrowings are expected to reach $85.378 billion. Ms Palaszczuk: Yes, we know that. Mr NEWMAN: The questioning yesterday would indicate that they did not get it. We heard the member for Mulgrave and the shadow Treasurer saying and interjecting the other day that there was no problem with the finances. But we know the third potential leader, the former member for Greenslopes— old Cameron Dick, brother of my favourite sparring partner at the Brisbane City Council, Milton Dick—is making a comeback. We now have three leaders. We have the supposed leader, Annastacia Palaszczuk, we have the one who sits behind with the big carving knife and we have the other bloke who actually is not a debt and deficit denier, who knows that the only way back for the Labor Party is redemption. It is the confession of sins. It is acknowledging the past mistakes, the misleading of the people of Queensland. That is the only way back for the Labor Party. I am backing Cameron Dick at the moment. I think he has more credibility than the rest of them. 23 Aug 2012 Distinguished Visitors 1677

As to anxiety, before I close, I note some comments today about counselling services being provided by Mr Palmer and China First. I only say that I know one thing that will create even more anxiety for those opposite, and particularly the member for South Brisbane. Mr Palmer’s other plan is for a statue of Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen in South Brisbane, prominent in local parkland. That is another proposal that Mr Palmer is working on at the moment. I look forward with great interest to hearing the member for South Brisbane’s views.

Palmer, Mr C Ms PALASZCZUK: My question is to the Premier. He likes talking about Clive Palmer and now he has an opportunity to keep talking about him. Is the Premier aware that Clive Palmer, a life member of his own party, is so concerned about the Premier’s job-slashing program that he is considering providing funding for counselling services for those 20,000 public sector workers facing the sack? Mr NEWMAN: They are showing so much flexibility, are they not? It is like they sit there in their little den and come up with questions. They have shown week after week that they will continue to drive the caboose over the cliff, even though I have already dealt with it. Mr Palmer and China First have lots of plans. They have a plan for a mine in the Galilee Basin, they have a plan for a resort on the Sunshine Coast, they have a plan for Titanic II. And, no, I am not taking tickets because I saw what happened to the first one. A government member: Labor should go on it! Mr NEWMAN: I do not know if those opposite have bought tickets. Again I reiterate, in terms of this anxiety, very seriously for a moment, that we understand— Ms Palaszczuk interjected. Mr NEWMAN: Madam Speaker, they asked the question. The people who are the victims at the moment are public servants who have been employed by the people opposite when there was not money to pay their salaries. Unfortunately we are the ones who are cleaning up Anna Bligh’s mess. It is Anna Bligh’s legacy. We get the pooper scooper out every day of the week. We have to make these tough decisions. We know there is fear and anxiety and we are sorry about that. It will end as soon as possible. In relation to Mr Palmer—and those opposite need to hear this—if he is indeed the Labor Party’s newest best friend, if that is the case— Ms Palaszczuk: No, I am not saying that at all. Mr NEWMAN: The Leader of the Opposition is saying now she is not supporting Mr Palmer. Ms Palaszczuk: No. Mr NEWMAN: You are supporting Mr Palmer? Yes or no? Is Mr Palmer the Labor Party’s new best friend? Is Mr Palmer going to be providing electoral funding contributions to the Labor Party? Is he going to be providing money to the Katter’s Australian Party? Is he going to be building a statue of Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen in South Brisbane? And will those opposite support it? Because, fair dinkum, Mr Palmer wants to build a statue to the former Premier in South Brisbane. Will they support that proposal or will that cause great anxiety for the member for South Brisbane? They support counselling services, but will they support the statue? That is what I want to know. We have no problem with statues to former Premiers—perhaps not Anna Bligh at the moment. A lot of members here might not agree, but I am prepared to think about a statue of Peter Beattie. He was on a traffic signal box while I was the Lord Mayor of Brisbane. I am not overly combative about these things. The rhetorical question that I have for those opposite is: will they have any sort of anxiety about the statue in South Brisbane? Interruption.

DISTINGUISHED VISITORS

Madam SPEAKER: Order! Before I call the next member I would like to recognise a visiting United Kingdom delegation in the Speaker’s Gallery. We have Lord Bruce Grocott, Ms Diana Johnson MP and Mr Craig Whittaker MP. Also attending are Mr Alex Pinfield, First Secretary, Foreign and Security Policy, British High Commission, and Ms Morna Richards, delegation secretary. Honourable members: Hear, hear! 1678 Questions Without Notice 23 Aug 2012

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Resumed. Agriculture Industry Mr CHOAT: My question without notice is to the Premier. Could the Premier please outline to the House how the Queensland government is supporting skills and training in agriculture, one of the four pillars of our great Queensland economy? Mr NEWMAN: I thank the member for a question that is relevant and most appropriate in terms of what really needs to be dealt with in Queensland today rather than the nonsense of the opposition. My government has begun the herculean task of transforming Queensland back into the engine room of Australia’s economy. Mrs Miller interjected. Madam SPEAKER: I now warn the member for Bundamba under standing order 253A. Mr NEWMAN: Madam Speaker, thank you for your protection. To underpin the transformation of Queensland, we are reforming and revamping the state’s vocational education and training system so we can have job skilled, job ready employees. Unlike the previous Labor government, those economic vandals opposite me, we know that industry, not government, creates jobs. Employers and governments should work in partnership to actually grow the economy. That is what we are doing. We have established a Queensland Skills and Training Task Force to assist in this important task. The task force members represent industry, employers and, yes, unions—we are not ideologically opposed to unions over here—and the vocational education training sector. We encourage all Queenslanders to provide their views to the task force. Submissions close on 7 September. It is not just about TAFE. It aligns with our commitment to reform and revamp skills and training across-the-board. The final report from this task force will help this government improve Queensland’s vocational education and training system to provide the skilled employees who will drive future productivity and profitability. Sadly, due to Labor’s woeful economic management, our agricultural colleges have gone to rack and ruin. They have been so badly neglected they are now in need of a major review. I thank the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, the member for Toowoomba South, for his straight up and down statement yesterday. What I have to ask today is what did the former minister for DPI know? What information did he bring to cabinet? What briefings occurred? This disaster in agricultural skills training did not happen in the last five months, did it, honourable members? It did not! I call on the Leader of the Opposition, in the spirit of openness and transparency—we did not see much of that from them, but we live in hope—to release all cabinet or CBRC briefing documents on the state of the agricultural colleges. I look forward to the minister writing to the Leader of the Opposition— Opposition members interjected. Mr NEWMAN: Those opposite will heckle away, but again this did not happen overnight. This disaster in agricultural skills training did not just happen in the last five months, it happened on their watch, and the people who sit opposite are the guilty ones. Schools, Funding Mr MULHERIN: My question is to the Premier. I note that last night the government gave an assurance to independent schools that their funding will not be cut in next month’s budget. I understand a similar assurance will be made to the Catholic schools. Will the Premier now make the same commitment to the parents of state school students or will the state system bear the brunt of cuts in next month’s budget? Mr NEWMAN: I thank the honourable member for his question and the opportunity again to espouse on the way that we are going to approach these things. Yes, there was that gathering of independent schools last night. It must have been hard for them to mix and mingle with members of the Australian Labor Party who are philosophically opposed to independent and Catholic schools. Those opposite have the gall to turn up and have a little drinkies. Mr MULHERIN: I rise to a point of order. I find the remarks of the Premier offensive. My children go to Catholic schools. I support independent schools and state schools. Madam SPEAKER: Are you seeking that those comments be withdrawn? Mr MULHERIN: Yes. Mr STEVENS: Can I make a point of order on the point of order? It was not a personal reflection on the member. It was a generalisation for all the members. 23 Aug 2012 Questions Without Notice 1679

Madam SPEAKER: The member has risen under standing orders and taken offence and I ask the Premier to withdraw. Mr LANGBROEK: Point of order, Madam Speaker. Can I draw your attention to the actual wording of standing order 234, which clearly refers to personal reflections. Madam SPEAKER: I have taken advice. I thought that the matter in question was personally reflective, but I understand from the advice I have received that the member was not referred to personally and on that basis I rule there is no point of order. I call the Premier. Government members interjected. Madam SPEAKER: We will hear the Premier without your additions to the Premier’s answer. I call the Premier. Mr NEWMAN: I heard the glass jaws, all seven of them, shattering just then. In the Australian Labor Party they can dish it out, but they cannot take it. I know a lot about the personal vilification, the tactics, the smears and innuendo used by those opposite. They can dish it out, but they cannot take it. They have never been able to take it; they can’t hack it. A government member: The truth hurts. Mr NEWMAN: The truth does hurt. Let us talk about the Labor Party turning up to little functions with independent and Catholic schools. They stand around having drinks and rubbing shoulders with principals and administrators in the independent and Catholic school sector. If people from outside only knew what is the agenda of those opposite. They hate independent and Catholic schools. Opposition members interjected. Mr NEWMAN: Here we go. Opposition members interjected. Madam SPEAKER: Order! I ask that the Premier please withdraw that as his comments were unparliamentary. Mr NEWMAN: I withdraw. I can tell the House how much the Labor Party dislikes independent and Catholic schools. I refer the House to the table published on the weekend, thankfully, by the Sunday Mail, and I applaud its efforts. There are 19 schools in my electorate. I went through the table very quickly and I saw 14 schools that, under a federal Labor government, lose money. The interesting thing is that six of the 14 are state schools. Not only are they against choice for parents, not only is the ALP against independent and Catholic schools, but they are also proposing peddling a Gonski review that hurts state schools in my electorate because they are ‘wealthy’ state schools in a ‘well-to-do’ community. This side of the chamber will go out across Queensland and tell everybody in this state about the Labor Party’s approach to education. Do they back Gonski or not? You bet your socks that this mob backs Gonski! They always fail to stand up for Queensland. They back the carbon tax. They back the mining tax. They back the way that the NDIS has been rolled out in a totally political way. They will do everything to back their mates in Canberra and they never stand up for Queensland. They should not come in here and ask us about education funding. Planning Mr MANDER: My question without notice is to the Deputy Premier. Can the Deputy Premier please inform the House of progress in the government’s planning reform agenda? Mr SEENEY: I thank the member for Everton for the question. I really appreciate being asked a question in this House, because I never seem to get asked a question by the opposition. It is fairly normal for the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to ask the Deputy Premier a question, but I have noticed a distinct reluctance on the part of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to ask a question, especially today. Opposition members interjected. Madam SPEAKER: There are too many interjections from my left, but I also ask that the Deputy Premier refrains from casting aspersions on the members on my left. Mr SEENEY: Especially today I think the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is most reluctant to ask a question about agricultural colleges, for example, given the revelations from the minister yesterday. This government has had a very clear agenda about planning reform. From well before the election, we talked about the need to reform Queensland’s planning schemes. We talked about the mess that planning had become. We have embarked on that planning reform since being elected. One would expect that the opposition would ask a question or two about it, but of course they have not. Therefore, I do appreciate the question from the member for Everton. I acknowledge the efforts of the member for Mansfield, the Assistant Minister for Planning Reform. Since we have come to power he has driven the government’s agenda. He has driven an agenda of planning reform that is long-overdue in Queensland. Under the former Labor government, 1680 Questions Without Notice 23 Aug 2012 planning was an issue for everyone in Queensland. Everybody from the biggest mining company to the smallest property owner who wanted to do something had a planning story and had difficulties with the planning system. We have moved very quickly to implement the reform that we promised to the people of Queensland. The member for Mansfield has consulted widely. He has spent the last three months consulting with all stakeholders in the industry. Now we are starting to see some of the reforms rolled out. This morning I tabled the temporary state planning policy that will include our four-pillar economic development policy in the planning process in Queensland. We have spoken about the statutory regional planning process, which is well under way. There is plenty more to come. In the last half of this year and early next year, we will have rolled out in this House a planning reform agenda that will change planning in Queensland in a way that has not been seen for a long time. It will ensure that people can invest in Queensland and that they can invest knowing that there is an approvals process and a planning process that allows for economic growth and protects the environment in which we live.

Cairns, CBD Upgrade Mr PITT: My question without notice is to the Premier. I refer to a report in the Cairns Post this week that the government is considering funding for an upgrade of the Cairns CBD. I table that article. Tabled paper: Article in the Cairns Post, dated 21 August 2012, titled ‘Let’s get cracking on CBD upgrade’ [844]. Will the Premier acknowledge that this is because the LNP’s plan is to replace Labor’s $38 million funding commitment for an upgrade with a tokenistic $3 million project? Mr NEWMAN: I have not seen the article, so I really cannot comment on it. Ms Palaszczuk: There it is. Mr NEWMAN: I will have a look at it and a think about it. I will say that this is our commitment to Cairns to get the tourism industry going. What did the member for Mulgrave do? He is situated just south of Cairns. What did he do while he was a minister in the cabinet? What did he do when unemployment in Cairns went to 13 per cent? He might have forgotten, he might be trying to forget, but I remember that at the start of 2011—I am pretty sure that that is when it was, or maybe it was late 2010—unemployment in Cairns hit 13 per cent and at that time the member for Mulgrave was a member of the cabinet. What did he do for Cairns then? Nothing at all! I will try another one— Mr Pitt interjected. Madam SPEAKER: Order! I ask the member on my left to cease interjecting. I understand that the Premier is referring to him in his answer, but I do not want members shouting across the chamber. They have appropriate mechanisms under standing orders. I call the Premier. Mr NEWMAN: I thought he wanted to know what this government was doing for Cairns and I am telling him. What did the member for Mulgrave and, indeed, fellow Labor members do when crime got out of control in Cairns, when young women were being assaulted, when people were being robbed and when cars were being stolen? What did they do? Did they put in more police up there? No, they did not! This government has acted. That is what the honourable minister— Mr Pitt interjected. Madam SPEAKER: Order! I now warn the Manager of Opposition Business under standing order 253A. Mr NEWMAN: The glass jaw is out in force today. They asked the question, ‘What is the government doing for Cairns?’ and I am trying to tell them. We are dealing with the law and order issue. The Minister for Police and the commissioner have acted. We are dealing with that crime issue. All the feedback from Cairns right now is that the place is much safer than it was 12 months ago under the people over there who are soft on crime. By the way, the other night they voted against laws that would increase the penalties for those who assault our hardworking police. They voted against increased penalties for people who evade police. I move on. What else are we doing for Cairns? We have China Eastern and China Southern airlines. We are working to get extra flights and we have delivered already. We are working hard on a most important project, the dredging of Trinity Inlet. What did the Labor Party do during the election campaign? It said, ‘The LNP say they are going to dredge the inlet. Let’s put some money in for a study.’ Meanwhile, when we made our definitive announcement, they said, ‘You can’t do it. That would be environmentally unsound.’ Typical Labor! You are all the same, you are always the same, you’ve got the same stripes. When in doubt they announce a study, an inquiry or a fact-finding mission, but never ever have any intent to deliver. We are delivering for Cairns. Cairns is a safer place now, there are more tourists coming now and we are investing in the infrastructure of the city. 23 Aug 2012 Questions Without Notice 1681

QR National Mrs SMITH: My question without notice is to the Treasurer. Can the Treasurer clarify whether the member for Mulgrave is correct in his assertion that the state receives sufficient dividends from QR National to cover the cost of loans against the shares instituted by the former Labor government? Mr NICHOLLS: I thank the honourable member for her question. She is obviously concerned to know a little bit more about the detail of the finances of the state of Queensland and to understand just why it is that the shadow Treasurer, the member for Mulgrave, makes the claim that the dividends from the shareholding of QR National, which Labor privatised, will cover the cost of the debt. It is of course interesting to know that, after selling the state’s share in QR National, the Labor Party immediately hocked the shares that they still retained and borrowed $2.2 billion against the shares. Having sold the asset in an effort to pay down debt, Labor—in a way that only Labor could do— borrowed more money on the shares after they had sold the asset. When it comes to voodoo economics, when it comes to ‘Labornomics’, there is none better in the fine art of duping the people of Queensland, of racking up debt and deficit than the Labor Party. We saw again earlier this week the shadow Treasurer stand up and say, ‘There is no problem. We have sold the asset. We have hocked the shares, but there is enough coming in because of the dividends to pay the interest bill on the borrowings.’ So the $2.2 billion that the Labor Party borrowed against is being paid off. There was one item where the shadow Treasurer was correct on Tuesday evening when he made that claim, and that is that the state of Queensland has indeed earned something in the order of $61 million in dividends from the shares of QR National. That is a good outcome, one would think, $61 million. The only problem— and the member for Mulgrave did not let people know this—is that the interest on the debt is $180 million. More Labor economics! Is it any wonder that we have a $64 billion debt when we have geniuses on the other side who think it is a good idea to not only sell an asset but also hock the shares to earn $60 million and incur a $180 million interest bill. It is exactly that policy that sees Queensland, without a change of government, without a change in policy, heading towards $100 billion worth of debt. That is exactly the policy that the former government would have continued with if it had stayed in office. We would have seen $100 billion worth of debt on top of the health minister’s $1.2 billion to fix up the Health payroll system, on top of the unfunded maintenance system in the education portfolio of $300 million— (Time expired)

Mental Health Services Mrs MILLER: My question is to the Premier. Is he taking any notice? Mr NEWMAN: I can do both. Mrs MILLER: He is very rude. Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Bundamba, please take your seat. Member for Bundamba, ask your question without a preamble or imputations on the person that you are referring your question to. Mrs MILLER: My question is to the Premier. How much does the Queensland government currently spend on mental health? Will the Premier confirm that the plan to relocate the Barrett Centre Adolescent School at The Park Centre at Wacol to new facilities at Redland Bay is being axed as part of the government’s cuts to front-line services? Mr NEWMAN: I do not have that figure, of course, and I ask the member to put it to me in a question on notice. I also note that there is a review into these matters, and the Mental Health Commission is looking at this. That is why the whole matter has been put on hold in terms of the move. But, again, we need to reflect on the practices and policies of the former Labor government and the way that it wasted money. Would we have more money for health or mental health in Queensland if the previous government had not wasted $1.2 billion on a failed Health payroll system? Yes, we would. We would have a lot more money to treat sick people. Would we have more money if it had been more sensible in the procurement of goods and services for our hospital system? Yes. If there had been better financial controls and there was not an alleged fake Tahitian prince stealing all the money—it is alleged—would we have more money to treat sick people? Yes, we would. Do I need to keep going, honourable members? Do these economic dunderheads need more of a lesson? If they had not borrowed $62 billion by the time they were kicked from office, would we have a lower interest bill? Yes. What would we do with that interest? What is the interest at the moment, Treasurer? Mr Nicholls: $3.2 billion. Mr NEWMAN: It is $3.2 billion a year in interest. How much is it per hour? Mr Nicholls: $180,000. 1682 Questions Without Notice 23 Aug 2012

Mr NEWMAN: $180,000 an hour in interest. What could we do with $3.2 billion this year in terms of treating those who are sick? A very big, brand-new hospital will cost about $1.2 to $1.5 billion if you do it right. So there are two big tertiary hospitals that you could build every single year if you did not have woeful, poor and reckless financial management. Opposition members interjected. Mr NEWMAN: I hear the hecklers and interjectors on the other side. Three of them were in cabinet. Three of the economic dunderheads were there when the decisions were made when the money was wasted, when the frauds occurred. Come on, bowl up some more, you mob. Bowl up some more. Madam SPEAKER: Order! Premier, I ask that you direct your comments through the chair. In regard to your answer to the question, we will have interjections across the chamber if the minister casts aspersions on members. That will provoke a response, so I ask the Premier to answer the question. Mr NEWMAN: Madam Speaker, I thank you for correcting my remarks and I will follow the appropriate protocols. There is the debt burden—the gold medal-winning performance of the Australian Labor Party administration. Opposition members interjected. Mr NEWMAN: I welcome their interjections because when they are interjecting they are not listening. When they are not listening they are not learning. And when they are not learning they will continue to sit over there, and for that I am truly grateful. Recycling Mr DILLAWAY: My question without notice is to the Minister for Environment and Heritage Protection. Could the Minister for Environment and Heritage Protection advise the House whether this government will support the COAG option of a container deposit tax, or are there better solutions available? Mr POWELL: I thank the member for Bulimba for his question. The short answer is, yes, I can. The member for Bulimba and other members in this House realise that Queensland is definitely the most beautiful state in the nation. Government members interjected. Mr POWELL: Thank you, I take those interjections. Unfortunately, as the national litter index indicated again this week, we are also the most littered state in the nation. The previous government’s solution was to throw another tax on it—tax, tax and tax. As many in the media reported last night, there are two outcomes from that. One, it drives up the cost of living for each and every Queenslander and, two, it will drive up illegal dumping not only in Brisbane but throughout South-East Queensland and throughout Queensland. Similarly, one of the solutions still being looked at nationally after four or five years of procrastination—and I am off to COAG tomorrow—is a container deposit scheme. In theory, it sounds wonderful but in practice such schemes are not. The consumer ends up paying the price. Every time a Queenslander goes out to buy their milk, their soft drinks or their beer, they would be paying more. It has the detrimental outcome of undoing the fantastic work each and every householder is already doing in recycling their products on the kerbside. There is another way, and I am pleased today to announce that the procrastination is over as far as Queensland is concerned. There will be no more talkfests; we want to get on with delivering. Today we have announced a new partnership between the Newman government, Keep Australia Beautiful Queensland and the Australian Packaging Covenant. I have also announced two new initiatives. The first is a three-year, $550,000 partnership between Keep Australia Beautiful Queensland and the Australian Packaging Covenant—at no cost to the Queensland taxpayer. Keep Australia Beautiful Queensland will be using the money to improve their Tidy Towns and Clean Beaches strategies, as well as starting to invest in educative services to teach a new generation to ‘do the right thing’. The second is that today we are rolling out the Queensland Bin Network in south-east and regional Queensland. We will be targeting entertainment centres, major shopping venues and sporting clubs and stadiums in Toowoomba, on the Sunshine Coast and in Cairns as part of rolling out this initiative over the next couple of years. This shows that you can deliver real environmental outcomes for Queensland and this nation without imposing another tax and another cost- of-living increase on Queenslanders. This will produce excellent recycling outcomes for the Queensland environment. Citytrain Ms TRAD: My question without notice is to the Premier. I refer to the report commissioned by the— Government members interjected. 23 Aug 2012 Questions Without Notice 1683

Madam SPEAKER: Order! Members on my right, I ask you to cease interjecting when we have a member on their feet asking a question. I call the member for South Brisbane to start again. Ms TRAD: I will start again. My question without notice is to the grinning Premier. I refer— Madam SPEAKER: Order! I ask the member to withdraw that. Ms TRAD: I withdraw the comment that the member was grinning. Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member, I will warn you again under standing orders. Please pay respect to the chair and ask your question properly. I ask you to withdraw. Ms TRAD: I withdraw unqualified. My question without notice is to the Premier. I refer to the report commissioned by the transport minister outlining measures to increase capacity on the Citytrain network, including the removal of train seats. Given the minister’s refusal to provide further details, will the Premier outline how many seats need to be removed from QR passenger trains to achieve the government’s five per cent capacity increase? Mr NEWMAN: I am a little disappointed because I thought the question was going to be about the statue in South Brisbane, and that is why I was smiling. The member for South Brisbane was smiling so I thought it was going to be a humorous question. The statue is true, by the way; I am not making it up. I know honourable members think I am making it up about the statue, but it is true. I turn to trains. Who ordered trains that had air-conditioning units on top that meant the trains could not go through the tunnels? The Labor Party, that is right. Who ordered trains that actually did not have seats? The Labor Party. The seats were optional extras. When was the last time we had high levels of trains running on time and graffiti-free rail corridors? That is right, a long time ago. I am not going to mislead the House because I do not have the exact figure but it was a long time ago. In fact, I do remember in the 1990s that there was a bit of a purge. Oh, that is right, it was the Borbidge government that was serious about on-time running and had a huge push to deal with maintenance and safety issues on the rail network. Then Paul Lucas took over. It pains me because I am very friendly with Paul, as many members know, but it went down hill because he took his eye off the ball. So what are we doing? We are going to fix it, we are fixing it and we have a plan to fix it. We have a plan to buy trains with seats, which is more than the other side did. The minister has already undertaken a review of the maintenance issues, and we are getting right into sorting out things that have caused stoppages in the systems. These basic preventative maintenance mechanisms that they neglected have been dealt with. There is also this paper that the minister is going to release which shows all the things we are going to do to claw— Opposition members interjected. Mr NEWMAN: They have asked the question, Madam Speaker. If they keep interjecting on this one, I will sit down if they do not want the answer. I say to them, through you, Madam Speaker, that they should listen quietly and then they will hear the answer. The minister will be releasing the little report that he has. It is a nice, short, brief report but it covers really meaty things that will be done to get the extra capacity to get those trains across the river. It will be about $200 million to $300 million, and we have asked Minister Albanese to give us a hand at stage 1 of the inner city rail capacity enhancement project and then we will roll on and build the major project. But it will not be a grandiose thing like those opposite were doing. It will be scaled and fit for purpose and it will achieve the outcome; it will not be a gold plated, over-the-top, non-feasible project. Northern Pipeline Interconnector Mr WELLINGTON: My question is to the Attorney-General. Minister, numerous property owners on the Sunshine Coast, including Mr Yarrow at Kallangur, cannot resolve their claims for loss and damage caused by the Northern Pipeline Interconnector through mediation and need to proceed to a Land Court hearing. What can the minister do so that these disputes can be heard in the Land Court before the end of the year? Mr BLEIJIE: I thank the member for Nicklin for the question. My advice is that this matter is currently before the Land Court, so as first officer it would be completely inappropriate for me to discuss the matter in parliament today. Suffice to say that if you look at the issues that were created in terms of those resumptions of the land and so forth—and I know that the Sunshine Coast community was hit hard by that—who was it again who did all of that? The Labor Party. I am advised by the Deputy Premier that he is working hard to ensure that the best is made out of these communities. I can say to the member that I am happy to have an offline conversation out of the House about it, but I am advised that it is a matter before the Land Court so it would be inappropriate to talk about it here. I will take the second element of the question in terms of courts in general and what we are doing. We are doing a lot about it. We are doing a lot about court reduction times in Queensland. Last week we appointed a new magistrate in Queensland who will act as a central coroner in the area of Mackay. They will deal with all the central coronial matters and therefore relieve magistrates from doing that coronial 1684 Questions Without Notice 23 Aug 2012 work. We are also about to appoint an additional Supreme Court judge—thank you, Treasurer—to ensure that matters before the Supreme Court are dealt with in a timely fashion. We are also restructuring the acting magistrates arrangement which will allow me to appoint three permanent magistrates rather than having acting magistrates working at 40 or 50 per cent capacity. I was surprised when I opened the paper this morning and saw Cameron Dick protesting out the front of a courthouse yesterday talking about closing the courthouse. I have already ruled out closing the courthouses, but I did— Mr Newman interjected. Mr BLEIJIE: Thank you, Premier, but I have a bigger photo than that. Yesterday, the former member for Greenslopes and the former Attorney-General was protesting out the front of the Holland Park courthouse, and this photo resembles a statue—a leadership statue here. It is not of a former Premier, but I suspect he wants to be a future Premier. I have accused the member for South Brisbane of wanting to be leader, but the rumour on the town is that ‘Statue Dick’ here—the biggest ‘Statue Dick’ I have ever seen—wants to take the leadership from the outside. That is what the Labor Party is doing. We showed how successful it was by having a good leader from outside, and that is what the rumour on the town is—that the Labor Party wants to instill ‘Statue Dick’, who was here out the front of the courthouse. The rumblings around the legal circle are that he is about to make a move on the opposition leader. Does he have the support of the member for South Brisbane? Will she support ‘Statue Dick’ in Holland Park? I suspect not. Accommodation Support and Respite Services Ms MILLARD: My question without notice is to the Minister for Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services. Will the minister please inform the House of the cost of Accommodation Support and Respite Services and how many people these services support? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches? Ms DAVIS: I thank the honourable member for her question. I know how very passionate she is about people with a disability in her electorate and the very great advocacy work that she does on their behalf. The Queensland government is committed to improving the lives of people with a disability, their family members and their carers. We do this in a number of ways, including the provision of accommodation, support and respite services, which is also known as ASRS. This service— Mr Newman interjected. Ms DAVIS: I say to the Premier: wait and you will hear. This service is a support to adults with a disability living in supported accommodation outside of their family home but in a community setting. Currently, the provision of these services is delivered in two ways. Firstly, there are government run ASRS services staffed by Disability Services staff and, secondly, we fund around 370 non-government organisations to deliver the same sort of thing on behalf of government. In the year 2010-11 the overall budget for accommodation support was around $490 million. With respect to the specifics of the member’s question, whilst the government spend on ASRS has significantly increased over the last six years to around $145 million, there has not been any significant increase in the number of people who have been provided accommodation. Through this service we support around 545 clients. By contrast, the non-government sector receives $372 million and was able to support more than 6,325 people with a disability through accommodation support alone. The NGO group currently supports 91 per cent of our client group. In simple terms, government run services account for 24 per cent of the spend of the budget and deliver 8.6 per cent of the services. In answer to the Premier’s question, I think it is pretty clear that the government run services are not competitive in the market given what NGOs can deliver for the same amount of money. We are very interested in supporting people with a disability. In a tight fiscal environment it is incumbent on us to be looking to deliver as many services as we can. I am sure members have met people looking for supported accommodation in their own electorate. I will be looking at ways that we can deliver these services to the most people. Torres Strait, Water Mr BYRNE: My question is to the Premier. Given that the Premier has been reported as saying that the supply of safe drinking water in the Torres Strait is ‘not an identified need’, I ask: will the Premier explain why he has ordered that work stop immediately on an important housing project that was underway to construct residences for some of our most vulnerable Queenslanders in Cape York, the Torres Strait, Palm Island, Woorabinda and Yarrabah? Mr NEWMAN: I would be really interested to know where this quote that I do not think safe drinking water is a vital need—or whatever the words were—came from. That is absolutely outrageous. Of course, it is untrue. It is outrageous. I cannot believe anybody would come in here and make such an outrageous assertion. 23 Aug 2012 Questions Without Notice 1685

Ms Palaszczuk: Like you don’t support independent schools or Catholics. Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, you will cease your interjections. I call the Premier. Mr NEWMAN: I will take the interjection. The interjection relates to what I was saying earlier about Catholic and independent schools. We know very clearly from what we have heard from Canberra sources that the Labor Party has reached out its hand to Mr Gonski and given him some very clear guidance, which is that only 30 per cent of the money goes to independent and Catholic schools. Mr PITT: I rise to a point of order. The question is directly related to infrastructure in Indigenous communities. It has nothing to do with the Gonski report. I ask you to rule on relevance. Madam SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition, your leader, put forward an interjection which the Premier took. Please take your seat; it is not a point of order, but I do ask the Premier to come back to the question. Mr NEWMAN: Not only do they interject, but they do not listen to each other or the interjections. Obviously there is a leadership issue across the chamber. I will deal with this quickly. The point I am trying to make regarding the interjection is that the actions of federal Labor show a clear agenda that is against independent and Catholic schools. It is as clear as day. Those opposite need to stand up—perhaps today or another day—and say whether or not they will support Gonski taking away money from independent and Catholic schools. We will not support that. Will they? I come back to the question. In relation to housing, I can say that Dr Flegg is again dealing with Anna Bligh’s and Andrew Fraser’s mess. We intend to provide affordable housing and social housing for people across Queensland. Regardless of their location and regardless of their ethnicity, we will be going out and building houses like those opposite never did. How many public houses did they build in the last full year? I think it was fewer than 100. It was 92 or 97—something like that. Ms Trad: It was 20,000 across Australia. Mr NEWMAN: Across Australia? Honourable members interjected. Madam SPEAKER: Order, members! I call the Premier. Mr NEWMAN: They sold them off. They built fewer than 100 in Queensland during the last financial year—that is what they did—and there are 30,000 families on the list. How can members opposite come in here and even ask such questions when they have just left office and left a smoking disaster area? Thanks to them it is as though an earthquake has hit public housing in Queensland. Dr Flegg is sorting out the mess. Dr Flegg cares about these people. More importantly, Dr Flegg has the financial acumen and the commercial skills, and he is delivering solutions. Only yesterday I met with Professor John McAuliffe, who chairs the Brisbane Housing Company. He and I are very excited about the things that Dr Flegg and his department are now working on in terms of affordable housing and public housing in Queensland. Public Service, Jobs Mr STEWART: My question without notice is to the Minister for Education, Training and Employment. Can the minister update the House on the Newman government’s commitment to school cleaners and teacher aides? Can he also inform the House whether he has encountered any difficulties in dealing with the unions that represent them? Mr LANGBROEK: Madam Speaker, as I know you have already done, may I welcome our delegation from Westminster. I remember a delegation some years ago saying at a lunch in the dining room with the former Speaker, ‘Oh I say, I was very interested to see your question time and your dorothy dixers. It is a slightly different Westminster to what we have.’ I remember saying, ‘I suppose the further you go from Westminster, you do find variations,’ but it is our Westminster and we are proud of it. We did borrow it, but we have made some variations that are probably slightly unusual. I thank the honourable member for the question. I have encountered some difficulties with the unions that represent the school cleaners and teacher aides. United Voice is the union that represents them. It has been very disappointing considering that they have had reassurances from me on 29 May when I met with representatives of United Voice in my office. At that time I told them that we would be fulfilling our side of the enterprise bargain that is due to expire in 2015. Following subsequent Public Service Commission directives, the Premier and I reiterated these commitments. But, unfortunately, United Voice has gone out and created a ‘straw man’ argument. A ‘straw man’ argument is one that suggests something completely different to what is actually happening and then, when the government has to fight that argument, somehow the union claims a victory. It is completely unfair to the very people whom they claim to represent, the school cleaners and teacher aides. Because there are other unions trying to get column entries in the Courier-Mail, United Voice has gone out trying to obtain column entries as well. I say to United Voice that is not how we work. 1686 Questions Without Notice 23 Aug 2012

I spoke at the QTU—the Queensland Teachers Union—state council on 21 July and I discussed the constructive relationship that unions and governments should have, that is, that sometimes, despite competing interests, a strong working relationship leads to the best outcomes for Queenslanders. So I was disappointed yesterday to see the Queensland Teachers Union issue a news flash about which many members would have been made aware stating their intention to launch industrial action. It is disappointing but it is par for the course for the QTU to disrupt the lives of Queensland parents and students during EB negotiations. Despite previously accepting that independent public schools are a good thing, the union is now seeking to drag independent public schools into the debate on the EB. They are recommending that their members do not nominate for IPS and are threatening a directive if the EB is not resolved. United Voice and the QTU are cut from the same cloth. They need to stop misleading their members, stop suffocating debate with scaremongering and stop their obsession with column entries in the Courier-Mail. Seniors Mrs SCOTT: My question without notice is to the Premier. Will the Premier explain to the House whether the government is planning any funding cuts for programs, such as Sixty and Better or the Older People’s Action Program, when Seniors Week is being celebrated this week? Mr NEWMAN: I thank the honourable member for the question, but she will have to wait. I know that it is hard. I know that honourable members opposite are excited by the budget. Their keen anticipation is palpable, but they will have to wait until the budget is brought down. What I will say in terms of the budget is that we need to deal with this bleak picture. Whose bleak picture is it? It is Andrew Fraser’s bleak picture. It is not our document; it is Andrew Fraser’s document, handed down before we came into office. Page 2 of this document states— Non-financial Public Sector borrowings of $62.352 billion are projected at 30 June 2012 ... Actually, it was higher than that. It goes on— By 2014-15, gross borrowings are expected to reach $85.378 billion. For the benefit of honourable members, this is what we inherited. It is what the Labor Party said would happen. What are we trying to achieve in the budget? We are trying to pull out of this financial power-dive. Yesterday I explained to members that we are at the controls of the aircraft, we are zooming into the financial abyss and we are pulling back hard to level out with a balanced budget in 2014-15 and debt of around $85 billion. If we do not, we know—this is the bit that those opposite cannot stomach, cannot handle and will not accept—that the debt will go to $100 billion. Highly qualified people have told us that through the Commission of Audit: $100 billion debt is what we will end up with if we do not act. That is what I reflect on when I am asked questions about the budget. That is what the Treasurer is working hard to avoid. Today we have heard questions on other issues, some of which I have been able to deal with along the way. I stress: we are not doing this because it is fun. It is not fun. It is not fun for the people who are losing their jobs. It is not fun for the ministers or for me; it is very hard. I have to say: these have been the hardest couple of months of my working life, knowing that we have been losing people. One of my ministers spoke about the sad scenes of people packing up their gear and leaving the building. That minister was quite choked up about it. Opposition members interjected. Mr NEWMAN: Three of those opposite—some of them are interjecting right now—were members of the cabinet that created this situation. They have done this to Queensland’s government. They have done it to these hardworking Public Service employees. We are sorry about it, but we will fix the mess. Agricultural Colleges Mr HOPPER: My question is to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Can the minister advise the House of the steps he is taking to redress the management disaster in our agricultural colleges? Madam SPEAKER: Minister, you have one minute to answer. Mr McVEIGH: I thank the member for his question. I know that it is something he is tremendously concerned about. From the outset I wish to put on the record the absolute dismay industry stakeholders have expressed to me in the last 24 hours about the situation Mr Mulherin and his Labor government have left us in, with the AACC running into the red to the tune of some $7 million this year. I call on Mr Mulherin to release any and all cabinet documents relating to the financial position of the AACC over the seven long years he was in charge. I will be working closely with the Minister for Education to get agricultural education in this state back on track. Any staff, students and local communities looking to blame someone for the mess that our agricultural colleges are in need look no further than Mr Mulherin and those opposite. Madam SPEAKER: The time for questions has expired. 23 Aug 2012 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 1687

SPEAKER’S STATEMENT

School Group Tours Madam SPEAKER: I acknowledge the school groups visiting today: Kedron State High School in the electorate of Stafford; Ocean Shores Public School from New South Wales; Bethany Lutheran Primary School, Raceview, in the electorate of Ipswich West; Elanora State School in the electorate of Currumbin; and the leadership group of Burleigh Heads State School in the electorate of Burleigh.

LEGAL AFFAIRS AND COMMUNITY SAFETY COMMITTEE

Report No. 6, Motion to Take Note Madam SPEAKER: There being no mover, in accordance with standing order 71 the notice of motion has lapsed. Report No. 7, Motion to Take Note Madam SPEAKER: There being no mover, in accordance with standing order 71 the notice of motion has lapsed.

HEAVY VEHICLE NATIONAL LAW BILL

Second Reading Resumed from 22 August (see p. 1661), on motion of Mr Emerson— That the bill be now read a second time. Mrs FRANCE (Pumicestone—LNP) (11.06 am): I rise in support of the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012. I am pleased to offer my support to yet another bill proving the Newman government’s commitment to reducing red tape and growing a four-pillar economy. The Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill amends 12 previous model laws across Australia and introduces a single national law reducing regulation and red tape. Queensland has the responsibility of being the first jurisdiction in Australia to introduce the new law. In its submission to the Transport, Housing and Local Government Committee the Australian Livestock and Rural Transporters Association commended the decision to name Queensland as host jurisdiction. The submission noted— The regional diversity of Queensland, which is well reflected in the State Parliament, means that Queensland always takes a balanced and responsible view of the transport industry and is well suited to being the host of the National Law. One of the significant benefits to the heavy vehicle industry as a result of the introduction of a national law is the provision of timely advice surrounding access to the road network. The permit application process will be coordinated nationally by the regulator, and one access permit will cover each applicable jurisdiction. The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator project office highlighted a key benefit of the new system in the committee’s report: those with local knowledge still get to make the decisions about what vehicles travel on what part of the road network, while still maintaining a high level of consistency nationally. A single permit will be issued with a straightforward set of operating conditions and the process will be streamlined, with regulators dealing with cross-border asset owners and local governments on behalf of operators. This drastically reduces the red tape currently surrounding the permit application process and has been welcomed by Queensland’s freight industry. The regulator will administer a national access management system which will provide for access permit applications to be simultaneously sent to decision makers in council and state road authorities. This will help facilitate a simplified approach to access decisions and allow road managers to undertake their assessment tasks at the same time. Access applications will be coordinated by regulator case managers. The creation of ministerial guidelines will ensure a high level of consistency, resulting in the effective operation of the new national system. Ministerial guidelines will provide a set of principles to be developed in conjunction with the regulator, road managers, local councils and state road agencies to assist the decision-making process. This will help the regulator improve the consistency of decisions made across all jurisdictions. It is important to note that current Queensland access arrangements will remain. This includes livestock loading, the grain Harvest Management Scheme and existing higher mass limits. The bill allows for the potential to extend such routes in the future, one of the key promises in the LNP’s six-month plan. Any extensions of such routes would be undertaken in consultation with asset owners. The regulator will work closely with industry to support their common goal of increased productivity across the entire road network. 1688 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 23 Aug 2012

The benefits to owners and operators from having consistent and informed decision making is clear. The impact of regulated access applications on industry will be significant. The Queensland Trucking Association in its submission to the committee summarised the importance of this legislation to Queensland, saying— ... the legislation is consistent with the LNP Government’s ‘Four Pillar approach’ to the exercise of policy and Legislative priority. In particular, it continued that the legislation will lower the cost of operating a road transport business and reduce red tape for an industry which is critically important to and services construction, agriculture, tourism and resources. This legislation will help Queensland and the rest of Australia to ‘keep on truckin’. I commend the bill to the House. Mrs FRECKLINGTON (Nanango—LNP) (11.10 am): I rise to support the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012. As Assistant Minister for Regulatory Reform, it is pleasing to discuss a bill which aims to actively reduce red tape and regulation. In fact, the development of this single, consolidated body of heavy vehicle national law will significantly reduce the regulatory burden on the freight industry, not just in Queensland but nationally. Queensland should be justifiably proud of its role in the creation of this bill. In February 2010 Queensland was chosen as the host jurisdiction to lead the national implementation of the national law and the establishment of the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator. We were given this role in recognition of our state’s positive working relationship with the transport industry and our strong support for an adoption of previous national heavy vehicle legislation. With the passing of this bill we will see the establishment of the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator here in Queensland, which is an excellent outcome. From my own perspective and that of the constituents of the Nanango electorate, this bill will help local transport businesses carry out their daily work with less stress, less regulatory burden and less hassle from agencies. It will mean that a transport company can contact one central agency—the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator—for registration renewals, logbook queries, access permits and escort requirements for wide loads. The intention of this bill if drivers are crossing the border to travel interstate means that they will no longer need to comply with each jurisdiction they enter to receive multiple approvals and access permits. This single regulator will ensure that the current level of regulatory inconsistency, costs and red tape will be drastically reduced. I want to provide the House with some examples. Seiler’s Transport, based in Kingaroy and one of our wonderful local businesses which employs many people, delivers pigs to New South Wales at least three times a week. Queensland has volume loading, which means that Seiler’s trucks can weigh 50 tonnes. This means that it can keep the cost of freight for livestock to a lower amount for our farmers. However, once the trucks cross into New South Wales they can only carry 42.5 tonnes, as New South Wales does not have volume loading. In real terms, this is 60 fewer pigs each trip to New South Wales and potentially an extra load, costing the farmer some $3,000 to get the remaining pigs to market. Just three weeks ago a Seiler’s truck was booked in New South Wales for being overloaded. Now that they cannot weigh the pigs on their farm or at a depot, as both Seiler’s and the farmer cannot afford the set of scales at $130,000 and the closest scales are several hundred kilometres away, is this local transport agency supposed to travel out of its way to weigh its truck, and then what does it do with the extra pigs when it gets across the border if it is overloaded? Is it to leave them on the side of the road? It is these types of inconsistencies between states that hinder and annoy our transport companies. Family owned companies like Seiler’s, which employs many people, keep our agricultural industry alive. It also relays the experience of purchasing custom trailers. Seiler’s must purchase its pig crates from Wagga Wagga, as this is where custom pig crates are made. It means though that it must receive a permit from the New South Wales transport department to drive the trailer unregistered back to Queensland, where it will remain off-road until it can be assessed and registered in Queensland. If there were standard rules across the states, this process would be sped up and the trailer would be on the road much sooner, creating more employment. Kingaroy Freight Express, while it does not travel interstate, says that the laws and central regulator can only help its business. For that business it will mean it is easier to establish the current correct regulations and its drivers can be confident when they are out on the road that they will comply with current regulations. The new heavy vehicle law will replace eight sets of laws that operate across Australia. Obviously, this can only help the owners and operators of transport companies which, on a daily basis, work their way through a maze of red tape and heavy regulatory burden. The new law will promote productivity in the sector and rather than staff spending hours on the phone to various government bodies and agencies they will be able to make one call to solve their problem. I look forward to the positive outcomes that this bill will create and the commencement of the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator by 1 January 2013. I congratulate the Minister for Transport and Main Roads for his work in introducing this bill, and I commend the bill to the House. Mr JOHNSON (Gregory—LNP) (11.15 am): In rising to make a short contribution to the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012, first and foremost this legislation shows that Queensland is leading the nation in heavy vehicle reform. The National Transport Commission is an integral and important body in road transport laws in this country. The minister as a member of SCOTI would understand fully the 23 Aug 2012 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 1689 responsibilities that lie with the NTC and the other state jurisdictions in making uniform laws that will create an environment that will make national heavy vehicle laws easier to manage and cut red tape, something that the Newman LNP government is endeavouring to do. Heavy vehicle transport in this state has been strangled and set back years because of poor management strategies by governments that have had no comprehension or understanding of the logistics of transport. I say to the minister, our government and members of the transport industry in this state: we have a unique situation in this state in that we have a transport industry that is much needed, probably more so than any other state except Western Australia, in order to carry the goods and services that the people of this state need and desire on a daily basis. Because we have a decaying and crumbling rail system created by the former Labor government, we now need to ensure that private enterprise in transportation in this state creates the leadership in order to make our national heavy vehicle operators the best in the country, if not the world. The member for Nanango mentioned a couple of transport companies in her electorate. Those companies are in every electorate right across this great state. When we look at what has happened in the past with operations like the Livestock Transporters Association, the now State President of the LNP, Mr Bruce McIver, was an integral player in that process. He was just one of the players at the time along with the late Russell Hinze, the then minister for main roads, when we created that great asset to the road transportation of cattle in this state—that is, volumetric loading. What a great advantage that has been to the people of this state in the transportation of their cattle to the marketplace or to processing plants. At the same time, this legislation, which introduces a national regulator, is going to cut away a lot of that red tape. One thing we have to remember is that this legislation is not about dangerous goods, or heavy driver licensing, or the industry accreditation; they are covered by separate legislation. The one thing we have to remember is that we in this state of Queensland are showing the way in Australia in terms of the needs and requirements of heavy vehicle operations. The minister who now sits in the chair as the Minister for Transport and Main Roads will go to COAG and other meetings, as I did when I was the minister, and hear other jurisdictions say what their needs and requirements are. But I have to say here today that, when it comes to heavy transport needs, there is no parallel to Queensland. This state relies on heavy transport. When we realise that two-thirds of Queensland’s cattle transcends on the south-east corner for processing or marketing, we see why it is so vitally important that we retain our volumetric loading. Last week, I led a deputation and spoke to the minister and the director-general about the possibility of the implementation of C-trains in this state. Mitchell’s transport in Western Australia has C- trains in operation in that jurisdiction. As Main Roads engineers said to me and the director-general said to me in a meeting last week, the one thing that we have troubling us in this state is the inferior bridge structures that are not allowing that type of configuration to be used. In the case of companies in my electorate, the Emerald Carrying Co. carries probably the greater majority of diesel fuel for the mines in Central Queensland—in the whole of Queensland, for that matter, for the mining industry. They are trying to implement those C-train operations but, because of the triple dollies, they are not going to be allowed on our bridge structures because of the inferior quality of those structures in question. C-trains are an innovative idea from John Mitchell of Mitchell’s transport in Western Australia and I believe we will see them introduced into this state when this LNP Newman government gets those bridges upgraded and gets the road infrastructure upgraded so that we can be the model heavy transport state in Australia. What Emerald Carrying Company is looking at with those C-trains—and I believe this will flow on to other transport operations—is that, instead of 68,500 litres of diesel being carried in one configuration, that will go to 85,000, but at the same time it is going to be a safer operation. That will take 25 per cent of those fuel-carrying configurations off the road. So that creates a safer environment straightaway. But it comes back to one thing and that is dollars. I believe that this legislation puts Queensland at the forefront. Queensland has always led the way in relation to heavy vehicle operations, whether it is through the livestock transport industry, the land transport freighters association, the RTA, or whoever it may be. We have always been in the lead and it is important that we stay in the lead and stay focused. I congratulate the minister and the Department of Transport and Main Roads for bringing this legislation before the House today. I will tell members why. It puts the rest of Australia on notice that Queensland is still leading in this field of transport. We saw it fall by the wayside under the former Labor governments in this state but we are now seeing the revitalisation and regeneration of growth and productivity in this state. How are we going to do it? We are going to do it with a very successful, very fruitful and very well-run road transport operation industry. The road transport industry carries this state and carries this nation. The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator will administer a national body of laws to govern the regulation of all heavy vehicles and will be vital to the progression and needs of the heavy road transport industry in this state. I talked about the C-train configurations. We also have the BAB quads, the B-doubles and the AB- triples running between here and Darwin now on a daily basis—and other places right throughout Australia, for that matter, where those configurations can be used—and the type 2 and type 1 road 1690 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 23 Aug 2012 trains in the far west. These modern transport operations are integral to the ongoing viability of not only the road transport industry but also the productivity of Queensland. I hope that through future legislation introduced into this House by this minister and by this government we will have in place in Queensland better standards and better requirements for the drivers of these configurations. They are regarded as experts in their field, which they are. These people are true professionals in the operation of road transport. They should be accorded the accolades they deserve for their professionalism—no different from the professionalism displayed by a neurosurgeon or a heart surgeon. The men and women who drive these configurations are at the forefront of delivering a safe road transport industry in Queensland and a safe road transport industry across Australia. I heard some transport companies mentioned here today. I know many of them myself personally. They have spent countless millions of dollars on road transport in this state over a long period. A lot of people think you can put a type 2 road train or a cattle-carrying configuration on the road for $200,000 or $300,000. But it could cost these companies a million dollars and, for those C-train configurations that I was talking about for the transportation of fuel, they cost another million dollars. For those types of operations, you cannot just pick anybody off the street corner to drive them. That is why it is so very important that this Newman LNP government continues to lead the nation—not only the state—in road transport reform. We can only do that when we get the federal government in Canberra to make certain that the dollars are forthcoming for the upgrading of road infrastructure that has crumbled under its stewardship over the past number of years. I congratulate the Queensland government for the introduction of this legislation. Mr GRANT (Springwood—LNP) (11.26 am): I rise to speak in support of the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012. As a member of the Transport, Housing and Local Government Committee, it has become clear to me that the nation cannot afford to continue with all the different conflicting state government legislation and regulations that are currently in force in the road transport sector across our nation. I would like to acknowledge that much of what I have to say today has been drawn from the explanatory notes to this bill. Those explanatory notes run to nearly 250 pages. There have been moves by all state and territory governments to increase the harmonisation of laws regulating heavy vehicles. In recent years, a number of model laws were developed by the National Transport Commission. For example, national model heavy vehicle driver fatigue laws commenced in New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and South Australia in September 2008. However, a number of variations in the laws remained. Consequently, in July 2009 a Council of Australian Governments—COAG—agreement was reached to develop and implement national laws for vehicles over 4.5 tonnes that would simplify compliance issues across the states and reduce duplication and inconsistencies in the heavy vehicle transport sector. COAG decided that, rather than start from scratch in developing a heavy vehicle law, it should be based on those existing model laws developed by the National Transport Commission and the states and the territories. It was further agreed that Queensland would be the host state to introduce the first state legislation. The agreement states— The Parties agreed on 25 February 2010 that national legislation regulating all vehicles over 4.5 tonnes, and establishing a National Heavy Vehicle Regulator ... will be established under legislation of the Queensland Parliament, with each state and territory passing enabling legislation to give effect to the legislation as passed in the Queensland parliament. In August 2011, the states and the territories officially signed off on the Intergovernmental Agreement on Heavy Vehicle Regulatory Reform, recognising that all states and territories have a mutual interest in improving outcomes in heavy vehicle regulation. The process has two initial components to implement: firstly, to establish common heavy vehicle laws across all Australian states under the heavy vehicle national law and, secondly, to establish a National Heavy Vehicle Regulator as an independent body responsible for administering the heavy vehicle national law. I want to add here that it is important that we avoid two layers of regulation by ensuring the dismantling of the old layer once the new one is in place, otherwise the savings will not be realised to the fullest extent. As agreed in the IGA, a single set of laws need to be passed in the host jurisdiction, Queensland. Each of the other jurisdictions will then pass an enabling act which applies to the Queensland law locally. Consequently, the first Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill was introduced to the Queensland parliament in November 2011 but later lapsed following the dissolution of parliament and the calling of the Queensland state election on 24 March 2012. The bill was reintroduced into the Queensland parliament on 31 July by our government and referred to the Transport, Housing and Local Government Committee. When the legislation is passed in Queensland, other states and territories can proceed with passing their own enabling legislation. The initial time frame anticipated that the NTC was to have the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator established and operating by the start of 2013 with full implementation of the new laws by mid-2013. The principal objectives of the bill are firstly to reconcile variations in state heavy vehicle laws to a single unified practice applicable across all states and territories and, secondly, to establish the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator responsible for the administration of those laws. 23 Aug 2012 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 1691

The bill marks the culmination of the heavy vehicle reform program which formally began in March 2008 when the Council of Australian Governments committed to a micro-economic reform agenda throughout Australia. The Australian Transport Council proposed a single regulator to administer a body of national heavy vehicle laws. The proposed framework was the subject of a regulatory impact statement developed by the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government in 2009. The current annual cost of compliance has been estimated by NatRoads at $17.78 million because the lack of a single administering body currently leaves operators to navigate a maze of government bodies for important decisions around registration, accreditation, vehicle conditions and access. There is no single repository of expertise for the industry to refer to. Hence, operators seeking road access often face ambiguity when identifying appropriate decision makers and where to lodge their various applications. The divergent roles of transport agencies and the road manager may be unclear and operators may face long delays in determinations. Rights of review have been enshrined in law and administrative mechanisms are inconsistent. Consequently, letters of complaint are often addressed to ministers, chief executives and other officials thought to be relevant in the hope of a favourable response. Some operators may shop around within and between departments in search of advice and information that best suits them. An operator wishing to cross a border into Western Australia may be a member of up to three accreditation schemes all with entry fees and entry requirements, although efforts have been made to streamline the associated auditing and compliance regimes. An independent cost-benefit analysis was commissioned to ascertain the net benefits possible through adoption of the proposed national heavy vehicle law. Two separate methodologies were used. The first, based on previous regulatory impact statements and the work of the Productivity Commission, estimated total net present value gains of around $12 billion over 20 years. The second methodology, based on new research and direct consultation, conservatively estimated gains in the order of $9 billion in net present value over 20 years. These benefits will be predominantly derived through red tape reduction and reduced regulatory burden to industry through the consistent and coordinated administration of a single nationally applied heavy vehicle law. As provided for in the COAG Intergovernmental Agreement on Heavy Vehicle Regulatory Reform 2011, the costs of establishing the Heavy Vehicle Regulator will be funded by the Commonwealth government. The national law will cover such particulars as vehicle registration, mass and loading, fatigue management, as well as compliance and enforcement. Heavy vehicle licensing laws will not form part of the proposed NHVR laws at present. Licensing laws will remain under the administration of various jurisdictions. Around 368 variations in current state laws were initially identified by the National Transport Commission. Many of these are caused by factors such as differences in legal and law enforcement systems and drafting practices. Although technically different, they result in similar outcomes. Many of these issues have been resolved by jurisdictions agreeing to use a single drafting approach to be proposed in the NHVR laws. Research for the planning of this reform began in 2008 and has included a vast amount of work across multiple jurisdictions throughout Australia. We must proceed with this legislation. I look forward to the many benefits that it will bring when other jurisdictions repeal their current legislation and regulations to make way for the new system across the nation. I commend the bill to the House. Mr BYRNE (Rockhampton—ALP) (11.35 am): I would like to voice my support for the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012 currently under consideration. The following matters, among others, are incorporated into the heavy vehicle national law: heavy vehicle registration, heavy vehicle registration regulations, Australian Vehicle Standards Rules regulations, heavy vehicle registration charges, mass and loading regulations, oversize and overmass vehicles regulations, restricted access vehicles regulations, higher mass limits regulations, heavy vehicle driver fatigue and heavy vehicle speeding compliance acts. I understand a separate body of work is being undertaken on the potential for incorporating heavy vehicle licensing at a later stage. As members would be aware, this bill arises from the Council of Australian Government decision in 2009 to move to a nationally consistent regulatory environment. The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator is one component of a broader suite of transport regulatory changes, including a national rail safety regulator and consistent maritime safety laws. Over a number of years, as more and more companies have expanded operations nationwide, it has become increasingly clear that separate state based regulatory frameworks were imposing unnecessary costs on businesses. It is understandably difficult to keep track of the various regulatory requirements of different jurisdictions. It is clearly preferable that a single unified body regulate the trucking industry. I am glad that all Australian jurisdictions have been able to cooperate through the COAG process to deliver this micro-economic reform. Elections have come and gone over a period since the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator was first proposed in 2009 and government has changed hands in New South Wales, Victoria and, of course, here in Queensland. That this reform has continued over successive governments is a testament to its clear and undeniable benefits. As we have already heard, the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator is estimated to save the national economy some $12 billion over the next 20 years. 1692 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 23 Aug 2012

COAG has received some negative press of late, amidst concerns that it is becoming fractured, disjointed and incapable of progressing reforms. The Premier has done much to foster this perception with his combative approach to recent COAG meetings. The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator proves that COAG is still an important driver of micro-economic reform if jurisdictions are able to put aside politics and act in the national interest. Queensland will host the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator and therefore is the first to consider the national model law. Our state was chosen to host the regulator for a number of reasons, but one overriding factor must be Queensland’s sterling record for heavy vehicle regulation. We have been at the forefront of modernising regulations in the trucking industry and have improved the safety framework. As such, this bill only makes relatively minor changes to existing Queensland regulatory requirements. I recognise the previous Labor government for securing the right to host a regulator. I would particularly like to thank successive transport ministers, Rachel Nolan and Annastacia Palaszczuk, for their work on this reform and I would also like to thank the current minister, Scott Emerson, for finishing this work after legislation lapsed when the parliament was prorogued earlier this year. I also acknowledge the federal transport minister, Anthony Albanese, for his role in stewarding this reform over the past three years. Finally, I thank the staff of the Department of Transport and Main Roads, the National Road Transport Commission and the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator project office for their work on this reform. This has been a detailed reform process and it has been made possible only by the hard work of Queensland public servants. In particular, I acknowledge the detailed consultation that has been conducted as part of the reform. The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator has the support of both industry groups and unions. This is due in no small part to the exhaustive consultation process. This bill is proof positive that diligent consultation can foster consensus for important reforms. I commend the bill to the House. Mr KNUTH (Dalrymple—KAP) (11.40 am): The Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012 seeks to reconcile variations between the states with regard to heavy vehicle laws so that transport operators, companies and drivers do not have to deal with a raft of different regulations when conducting transport operations. A national framework makes sense and it makes it easier for regulators in the different jurisdictions. The unified approach also enables industry to improve efficiency and reduces the administration burdens, particularly on small transport companies and owner/operators. Industry and regulators alike have welcomed the implementation of the unified approach and the establishment of the single regulatory body. However, there have been disagreements with regard to what this should be like, and I would like to touch on two issues raised in the submissions. The first is the assurance by the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator project office of the retention of local productivity arrangements that will be of benefit to the primary producers and, particularly, the cattle industry. Local productivity initiatives are essential to primary industry operations, particularly seasonal industries, and I hope these continue to be retained in the future. The second issue is the recommendation by the National Road Freighters Association that the Western Australian model of fatigue management be adopted, particularly the code of practice for fatigue management for commercial vehicle drivers, which is contained in the National Road Freighters Association submission to the committee. Fatigue management systems have proven to be one of the most difficult things to get right but can mean the difference between the survival and extinction of small transport companies that are competing against large multinationals with whole fleets of drivers and vehicles. It is vitally important that any fatigue management system accommodates the unique difficulties faced by small companies so that the logistical disadvantages experienced by those small operators do not translate into economic loss in regional communities such as the Tablelands, where owner/operator transport companies contribute significantly to the local economy. I commend the bill to the House. Mr GRIMWADE (Morayfield—LNP) (11.41 am): I rise to contribute to the debate on the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012. I thank my colleagues in the Transport, Housing and Local Government Committee and our chairperson, Mr Howard Hobbs, the member for Warrego, for their contributions to the committee reviewing the legislation. I also thank the research directors and secretariat who assisted us, as well as all the stakeholders who provided valuable submissions on this bill. This is the first bill that has been referred to our committee for examination and I must say it is probably the largest that the House has seen since the LNP was elected. The bill introduces a national scheme legislation for which our great state is the lead jurisdiction. The key policy objective of this legislation is to reconcile variations in state heavy vehicle laws to a single unified approach applicable across all states and territories to establish a National Heavy Vehicle Regulator responsible for the administration of those laws. The Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012 will replace 12 previous model laws that operate all across Australia. The unification of national heavy vehicle laws is necessary to address a longstanding problem of contradictory and inconsistent state laws that stifle productivity and hamper the promotion of safety. 23 Aug 2012 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 1693

The creation of this bill goes right back to 2009 when COAG agreed to establish a National Heavy Vehicle Regulator to administer a national body of law to govern the regulation of heavy vehicles. This bill was first introduced to the parliament on 15 November 2011 by the previous Labor government in the 53rd Parliament and it was referred to the then Transport and Local Government Committee. The Transport and Local Government Committee had not completed its report at the time of the dissolution of parliament on 19 February 2012, at which time that bill lapsed. As a committee, our job was nonetheless made a little easier as we had a history of submissions from stakeholders to review. All previous submitters were written to and asked to update, amend or withdraw their previous submissions where necessary. In total, the committee received 17 submissions, although one of those was later withdrawn, leaving us with 16 submissions to take into account. The committee was cognisant of the multi-stage approach being taken to the legislative reform process. Transport and Main Roads advised the committee that there were over 1,000 technical and policy issues raised during the consultation process on the bill. While some of those have been addressed in the bill, some will need to be addressed and incorporated in the amendment bill as the current time frame did not allow for them to be incorporated in this bill. It is important to note that the Heavy Vehicle National Law Amendment Bill is currently being finalised and should address a large number of those outstanding technical and policy issues. It is very important though, due to the time frames of implementing this national reform and Queensland being the lead jurisdiction, that we pass this legislation and use the amendment bill to correct any technical changes that are needed. It is for this reason that our committee recommended that this bill be passed. It is also noted that a large number of the submitters recommended that the legislation be passed. In their submissions to the committee, the National Farmers Federation and AgForce raised issues of funding for the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator. I took a keen interest in this area of the bill. The committee came to the strong view that funding for road maintenance and upgrades in Queensland should not be reduced as a result of the cost of establishing and maintaining the office of the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator. Specific details in relation to funding was asked of the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator project office in a public briefing on 3 August 2012. The response indicated they were endeavouring to create the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator within the pool of funding that is currently in existence. The office also indicated that savings through having one national body rather than doing things eight times individually will enable the regulator to make savings. Concerns were raised in relation to pilot and escort arrangements. I understand that the member for Kallangur undertook a large amount of investigation and has a keen interest in this part of the bill. I will not add further to the debate on that as I know that he will talk about those issues. Ultimately, however, it is a big issue with regard to the large amount of pilots that are needed as the Queensland economy expands over the next decade and the mining industry demands more pilots to transport large heavy vehicles. Driver fatigue was another issue that was raised and the National Road Freighters Association also made a submission on the subject. The issue centred around flexibility with regard to the current requirements to stop for a 24-hour break period, even if the driver is within close proximity of home or a town with a rest facility. Under the current legislation, if a driver is within a few kilometres of home or a town with a rest facility, legally they would not be able to finish their journey in that safe place. They would be forced to pull over on the side of the road and endure their rest period. At times this can be in an unsafe location. Ultimately, the committee was satisfied that the intention of the regulator is to resolve operational issues relating to the driver fatigue situation. In a further submission, the Suncorp Group raised concerns in relation to CTP insurance. It had concerns that registrations will shift to the state with the lowest CTP premiums, leading to market volatility and threatening the ongoing viability of CTP schemes nationally. The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator project office provided information that led the committee to believe that any concerns raised here will be addressed in the amendment bill. It is the intention that CTP will be charged at the garage address of that vehicle. It is important to note that industry is fully supportive of the national law, as the benefits gained will flow on to itself and, of course, on to consumers. In a nutshell, this reform will allow Queensland operators to contact one central regulatory agency, a one-stop shop if you like, for things like registration renewals, logbook queries, access permits, escort requirements for wide loads and lots of other services. It is for those reasons and after addressing concerns raised by stakeholders that I will be supporting the bill in this House today. I look forward to reviewing the amendment bill when it becomes available and further addressing some of the minor technicalities to ensure this national reform is up and running by 1 January 2013. I commend the bill to the House. Mr RUTHENBERG (Kallangur—LNP) (11.49 am): I rise to support the Heavy Vehicle National Bill 2012, but I note that there is an amendment being prepared to the bill that will be introduced in the not- too-distant future that will address some of the issues identified during the wide consultation that has been conducted across Australia and with many different stakeholders. 1694 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 23 Aug 2012

Firstly, I want to recognise the staff who serve our committee. They work very hard and they work long hours. To Ms Kate McGuckin and her staff, I say that we truly appreciate the work you have put in. I want to thank our chair, the member for Warrego, Mr Howard Hobbs. I appreciate the chairman’s patience and guidance as we first-termers learn our roles and responsibilities in committee. I also want to thank the stakeholders who took the time to either speak to us or clarify their positions in written submissions, especially the representatives of the department and the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator project office. I echo and wish to quote the comments of the committee chair— I would like to thank the Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) and the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR) Project Office for the assistance it has given the committee, and in particular for the briefing it provided. This greatly assisted the committee to understand the purpose of the bill and to gain knowledge of the harmonisation process that is currently being undertaken by the federal, state and territory governments in consultation with industry. The development of a single, consolidated body of heavy vehicle national law aims to significantly reduce regulatory burden for the freight industry. As some speakers have already mentioned, there is some history to this bill. Even though it was an unbelievably thick document, significant work was undertaken prior to our committee receiving the bill. A previous version of the bill, the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2011, was introduced into the 53rd Parliament and referred to the then committee. The then committee had not completed its report when the parliament was dissolved. The bill that came before our committee is essentially the same bill as the one considered by the former committee. We commenced our investigation into the bill and invited new submissions by 7 August. I want to speak to the principal objectives of the bill. One of the principal objectives of the bill is to reconcile variations in state heavy vehicle laws to a single, unified approach applicable across all states and territories. The second objective is to establish a National Heavy Vehicle Regulator responsible for the administration of those laws. The new national heavy vehicle legislation will replace eight sets of laws, as has already been mentioned. As the Hon. Scott Emerson, the Minister for Transport and Main Roads, when introducing the bill to the Assembly stated— ... Queensland businesses will soon benefit from improved productivity and the ability to operate across state borders without the unnecessary burden of dealing with a range of regulators and regulatory interpretations across jurisdictions. We all know that the Council of Australian Governments, or COAG, has been driving a reform agenda for some years now. Again, I quote from the report— The COAG reforms aim to improve productivity and international competitiveness and reduce compliance burdens for business, making it easier for businesses and workers to operate across state borders. In my previous job I was executive officer for a very large and diverse organisation focused on the social fabric of our society. We were engaged in aged care, education, social justice and community- building enterprise. Our organisation had reached into many, many parts of Australia’s community. Prior to that, I lived in the US and my job extended all over the world. In my experience, it is harder to do business across Australia due to the very complex legislative and regulatory landscape than in most other parts of the world due to this very complex maze of laws and regulations across neighbouring precincts. As executive officer of a national organisation, I spent an awful lot of effort, resources and time addressing the many different laws and regulations in the various precincts of Australia covering similar issues. There is a very real cost to organisations that operate across precincts with different rules, and it is a real disincentive to companies thinking about expanding their operations. These costs drive up overheads and contribute to our companies’ lack of competitiveness. Issues business face in this landscape include funding, productivity, training, audit and assurance work, compliance, human resource and recruitment. I quote from the committee’s report— The lack of a single administering body leaves operators to navigate a maze of government bodies for important decisions around registration, accreditation, vehicle conditions and access. There is no single repository of expertise for industry to refer to. Hence, operators seeking road access often face ambiguity when identifying appropriate decision makers and where to lodge an application. The divergent roles of transport agencies and the road manager may be unclear, and operators may face long delays in determinations. Rights of review have not been enshrined in law, and administrative mechanisms are inconsistent. Variations in law create particular problems for interstate operators. Even relatively small distinctions in regulation have compliance and enforcement consequences for cross-border operators. The more diversions within law, the more resources interstate operators must expend on understanding and maintaining compliance. This was my experience and it was not just with heavy vehicles; it was with all those other industries that I previously identified. As an example of how this bill will help significantly reduce the uncompetitive nature of what eight different sets of laws create, there are approximately 44,000 interstate drivers. Annual training costs the industry approximately $17.7 million due to the training required for the various precincts. By reducing that need and introducing a single law, the annual training need will be substantially reduced. This is just one simple example of the types of savings and efficiencies that will be gained with the introduction of this law, assuming the promised amendments receive the same attention and scrutiny the bill has received. 23 Aug 2012 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 1695

This bill serves to ensure that in the area of vehicles over 4½ tonnes a common and standard set of laws and regulations will operate across Australia. The pure economic benefit from this initiative will be very real and long lasting. It is exactly this type of initiative that we as an Australian community must consider more broadly, and I encourage the Premier and cabinet to consider these types of initiatives. I want to turn the attention of the House to a few specific issues identified within the report. The new regulator must, in the interests of Queensland, ensure that implementation by cross-fertilisation of best practice is accomplished. This is, by the way, another positive outcome of this bill. In setting up a single national regulator, based here in Brisbane, examples of best practice or innovation can be identified and implemented across Australia, thereby benefiting all Australians. I turn my attention to chapter 4—vehicle operation, mass dimension and loading. I turn my attention specifically to the issue of gaining permits for wide and heavy loads. Under the former government, as we have seen in many departments, there was a distinct lack of forward planning. Queensland is open for business, and this government is making sure of that. Our ministers are in the process of ensuring that fundamental policy, process and procedure are in place to reduce red tape and bottlenecks that get in the way of progress and allowing businesses to get on with employing Queenslanders. I bring an issue to the attention of members which has developed under the watch of the former government and which has been left to this government to look for solutions to. Thankfully, this bill will bring focus to the issue and I strongly urge the national regulator, once established by the passage of this bill, to expand resources on this issue urgently. I have done some research and have found that there is a very real threat that the development pipeline for agriculture, tourism, mining and construction will be seriously impacted if this issue is not addressed. Over the next five to 10 years, the number of normal semitrailer trips per day is expected to increase about 50 per cent. Loads of construction modules are expected to increase across the state over the next two years by 150,000 as we build new infrastructure to cope with expanded demand. Gas resource infrastructure is expected to cause an increase—for example, drilling rig movements for the next five years will be approximately 44,000; pipe haulage for one of the LNG proponents is now forecast at 36,000; and train haulage for one of the proponents will generate, over two years, 6,300 truck trips requiring police escorts and 11,600 truck trips requiring pilot escorts. Beef production plans to the year 2020 are expected to generate an additional road transport task of 4.5 million head. Existing truck trips for this year’s cotton crops from the Balonne shire were 35,000 and these are expected to increase by the year 2020. Rail line construction and water pipeline construction are expected to generate additional heavy vehicle activity. General mining will see freight volumes increase by 3½ million tonnes. Significant increases in diesel cartage to keep up with the mining activity will also be experienced. On top of this we have an ageing population, and the grey nomads will be out in force with their caravans. They are expected to significantly increase as our tourism grows. All this points to our roads and highways seeing significant increases in use by regular semitrailers and heavy and wide load trucks. Without an efficient mechanism to manage both the movements of the heavy vehicles and the roads and bridges, we will cause unacceptable delays for development and industry. I ask the national regulator, once they are established, to ensure as a matter of priority that permits from local, state and federal asset owners requested from road pilots and companies for heavy and wide loads are delivered in a timely and expeditious manner. I also ask that the information needed by road pilots and heavy and wide load movers with regard to road and asset condition, and guidelines they use to plan and manage their trips, are also made available in a timely and expeditious manner. Again, the current situation is the making of incredibly poor foresight and planning by the former government. For the good of Queensland, I urge the national regulator, once established, to address this situation with urgency. I also want to draw attention to another specific issue—that is, logbooks. I appreciate the need to move to a single system. I acknowledge that during their presentation the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator project office assured us that this issue is on their forward work plan. Many of today’s new trucks collect data that would significantly allow a logbook to be electronically maintained. I think if we are looking at efficiencies, effectiveness and economic benefit, this would be a great way to use reliable proven data because it would not only help ensure that this information is collected accurately and without delay but also help law enforcement in its task. Again I urge the national regulator, when established, to consider this issue with some urgency. While the committee’s interaction with the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator project office was brief, I have read much from their office and I must say that it appears to me that this office has conducted wide consultation and has captured well the majority of the policy issues that the ministers from the various precincts will have to consider in coming months as they consider the forthcoming amendment bill. From what I have experienced and observed, I think the people of Australia and Queensland can have some confidence in this body at this time. I urge them to continue to focus on seeking stakeholder feedback. I have some confidence that over the years this body of legislation will 1696 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 23 Aug 2012 serve as a model for future national focused legislation. I again thank the secretariat for their effort and attention to their task and the chairman for his leadership and guidance. I am happy to speak in support of this bill. Dr DOUGLAS (Gaven—LNP) (12.03 pm): Road transport for shifting freight in Queensland is arguably the most critical industry in our state. I say so because, in a ‘just in time’ modern world, as soon as those trucks stop moving the nation stops. It would have a massive concertina effect—not just ripples, but massive swirls of catastrophe—if for some reason those enormous diesel behemoths stopped moving. The name W Edwards Deming should never be forgotten. He grandfathered this new, modern world order; he actually started this in Japan. Volumetric loading is a Queensland principle. It has not gained acceptance nation-wide; this is regrettable. This is in spite of agreed state views that it is in everyone’s interest that we seek uniform heavy vehicle legislation. It has been noted by all speakers that Queensland was the first of the states to push through forward enabling legislation, with an end date of all for 2013. It goes without saying that, in the absence of an upper house, Queensland is more than likely to be able to get faster uniform agreement than other bicameral parliaments throughout Australia. Inherently, this is both a bonus and sadly it seems a handicap. I will not list all the changes. I am delighted to see that the Labor Party is supporting the legislation. This bipartisan approach is to be congratulated. In view of all the preliminary work by the previous Labor administration, including the now opposition leader, it is very reassuring to see this process completed by the incoming transport minister, the member for Indooroopilly. This legislation gives certainty to the industry and its participants. This is commendable as so much money is effectively committed when the average cost of vehicle truck fleets in Australia is taken into account. Economies collapse when incorrect decisions are made; in contrast, they surge with every new development. We had the introduction of million mile trucks, B-doubles and then B-triples and B- quads. We are due to see B-triples on the M1 very soon. It is very disappointing to see the position of the Western Australian government. Their decision to retain what is their decisive flexibility is the very reason we got into the situation where we needed a National Heavy Vehicle Regulator. Whilst Western Australia is making very reassuring noises, it seems that we will have to wait and see. They are not only out of step; they are playing a waiting game to see if they can gain a national advantage in their favour. This is inequitable and irrational. I note the discussions and statements of the committee chair, the member for Warrego. He is to be congratulated. I thank all of his committee members for their superlative efforts and their commitment to generating positive changes for the bill, and the minister has taken them on board. By and large, the stakeholders have been listened to. Honourable members, the M1 bisects my electorate of Gaven between Nerang-Worongary and Helensvale. Every night thousands of B-doubles traverse these points, passing the same point every 20 seconds. Their average truck weights are controlled but are limited by regulation. Their margins are slim and the GFC has only made things tougher for them. That road is shared by tourists, commuters, domestic traffic and many, many others. We need this new regulation not only to ensure our own local economic survival but also to ensure the safety of those who share the M1. Incidentally, the M1 was built by the former coalition government under the ministry of the member for Gregory, who spoke so eloquently on this bill. Sometimes simple legislation has a serendipitous knock-on effect in all sorts of areas we may never imagine. This bill might just have saved the lives of many younger Australians, fathers driving to work on night shifts or mothers ferrying children to work very early in the morning on what is a major but also a local road which is being traversed by trucks feeding and freighting to the nation. We should never underestimate what good can come from common-sense legislation, which this is. Mrs SMITH (Mount Ommaney—LNP) (12.07 pm): I rise today in support of the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012. The Newman government has always been committed to reducing red tape for businesses. The Newman government knows business. We understand that we need to grow business, and part of assisting businesses is identifying where we as a government can reduce the burden for businesses by way of cutting red-tape regulation and duplication. I believe the introduction of this bill goes to the very core of doing just that. I will give a brief background on the bill. The Council of Australian Governments, COAG, agreed in July 2009 that it was necessary to establish a single National Heavy Vehicle Regulator and a national body of law. This decision occurred as a result of the regulator impact statement process which was completed in May 2009. The Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill was initially introduced in the Queensland parliament in November 2011. However, it lapsed in February of this year when parliament dissolved. The Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill was then reintroduced in July 2012 by the Minister for Transport and Main Roads, the Hon. Scott Emerson MP. The bill was then referred to the Transport, Housing and Local Government Committee, of which I am a member, for our detailed consideration. In February 2010 23 Aug 2012 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 1697

Queensland was chosen to be the host jurisdiction for the national heavy vehicle reform. As the host jurisdiction, Queensland has the responsibility of being the first state to introduce the new national law. Following Queensland’s lead, remaining jurisdictions will pass legislation relevant to ensuring the establishment of the national law in their jurisdiction. The new national law replaces 12 previous model laws which operate across Australia. That is 12 pieces of legislation. I say what champions the owners of transport companies are to have had to deal with this. Due to the large task of reducing the 12 pieces of legislation, the national law will be split into two bills. The first bill establishes the regulator and the legislation that it will administer. The second bill to be introduced later in the year, as my colleagues have spoken about, will encompass a number of policy refinements, technical requirements and operational issues. The consolidation of these 12 pieces of legislation was necessary in order to increase productivity and safety within the industry. Prior to this bill, there was no single repository of information for operators within the industry to refer to. As a consequence, operators were left to navigate the necessary governmental bodies for decisions regarding registration, accreditation, vehicle conditions and access. The current inconsistencies between the states and the territories result in operators spending both more time and money ensuring compliance. I can tell honourable members that that is not good for business. I will give an example. If a cattle buyer from New South Wales comes to Queensland to buy our prime beef that is the best in the world, organising the trucking of the livestock back to New South Wales becomes a logistical nightmare. This is because Queensland has a volume load whilst New South Wales operates on a weight limit. Trucks need to transfer their loads to smaller trucks once they get to the Queensland- New South Wales border. The current system is cumbersome, confusing and bureaucratic. Again, small and large trucking companies find this costly and time consuming which, at the end of the day, affects the bottom line. The primary objectives of this Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill are to reconcile variations in state heavy vehicle laws to a single unified approach applicable across all states and territories and to establish a National Heavy Vehicle Regulator responsible for the administration of those laws. The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator and the national law will be responsible for regulating heavy vehicles over 4.5 gross tonnes. The NHVR will be established as an independent statutory body in Queensland and will be responsible for the administration of the national law. This will include the administration of registration, mass and loading, fatigue management, vehicle standards, compliance and also enforcement. The NHVR will have a governing board and will also employ the staff that will be necessary to implement both its core and administrative functions. For the provision of that on-the-ground service, the NHVR will enter into necessary agreements with states and territories and these service agreements will be entered into in areas which include that compliance factor. The NHVR will, however, not cover the transportation of dangerous goods, heavy vehicle driver licensing and bus industry accreditation. These will be covered by separate legislation. The cost is also a worry and was considered. However, the cost of establishing the NHVR will be funded by the Commonwealth government as stated in the COAG Intergovernmental Agreement on Heavy Vehicle Regulatory Reform in August 2011. The benefits of a national law including the substantial reduction in costs, red tape and also time spent dealing with all of these agencies in itself is music to the ears of the business community. The operators will be able to contact one agency for their needs instead of each jurisdiction that they enter, which may impose many different requirements. It will become easier for operators to conduct their business across states and territories. An operator will now only need to obtain a single permit to move between several jurisdictions, and this is all that businesses wish to see, not just the trucking industry— reduction of red tape that strangles and stifles businesses. There is a benefit not only to operators but also to Queensland itself, and this benefit is estimated to be in the region of approximately $1.47 billion in present terms over a period of 20-odd years. That is $1.47 billion for Queensland. Industry has also indicated that they support the introduction of this law because of the ease with which they could obtain the information, permits et cetera. That is definitely needed. Industry groups such as the Australian Logistics Council, Australian Heavy Vehicle Repairers Association, National Farmers Federation and Australian Trucking Association—just to name a few— are all in support of the establishment of a single national system of laws for heavy vehicles. Ideally, at the end of the day it will improve efficiencies and reduce the impact of administrative and regulatory burdens. The key words here are improving efficiencies and reducing red tape. Both the community and industry can enjoy numerous benefits from the implementation of the NHVR. This regulator implements regulation, and the noncompliance with any regulation will incur either punishment or penalty. As I have said, the implementation of this Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill will bring immense benefits to the state of Queensland, the community and also the industry. I would like to thank all who participated in the examination of this bill. A special thanks goes to the committee supporting team, led by Kate McGuckin, who work so diligently, and to the chairman, Howard Hobbs, member for Warrego, who guided the process with such expertise. 1698 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 23 Aug 2012

In summary, this bill should be passed because it reduces the duplication and red tape in the industry, thereby streamlining administrative and regulation processes; it increases productivity; it increases safety; it streamlines border-to-border access; and it revitalises Queensland’s transport industry. That has to be good for industry, good for the community and good for Queensland—and that is a good thing. I congratulate the minister on his commitment, forward thinking and proactive approach. I commend the bill to the House. Mrs MENKENS (Burdekin—LNP) (12.17 pm): I am very happy to support this Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012. Coming from a regional area and a regional electorate, I can really recognise the importance of the implementation of this legislation. My area of Bowen is the food bowl of Australia, particularly during the winter months. That produce travels interstate. It goes right down the coast to all of those different markets. I know that one of their biggest hurdles is transportation and red tape in the form of legislation and regulations surrounding that transport system. I commend the minister for following through on this pre-election commitment to bring this bill to the House. As has been mentioned previously, this bill was first introduced under the last government. However, thank goodness we are finally debating it today. The wheels of the economy of Queensland rely heavily on transportation and it is important that our state is not seen to be lagging behind national regulations. To see that we are leading the charge on these national regulations is tremendous. With this government’s focus on growing a four-pillar economy through the focus on tourism, agriculture, resources and construction, it is also this government’s aim to reduce red tape and regulation because they strangled business under Labor in Queensland for far too long. The introduction of the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012 will mean that one single national law will regulate Queensland, replacing 12 previous model laws that operated across Australia. Those in the transportation industry I have spoken to have welcomed the introduction of this bill. The industry has supported this bill all along, and many believe that the LNP is listening to industry members at the grassroots level. The government is listening to the input from truck drivers and operators who support the introduction of just one national law. If there is a body of people I truly salute, it is our truck drivers— our truckies who are out there on the roads 24 hours a day. Mr Rickuss: Their logbooks only allow them 14 hours on the road. Mrs MENKENS: I thank the member for Lockyer. Yes, they do allow only 14 hours but it depends exactly what part of the day or night they actually use those 14 hours. That is for sure. I can assure you that the whole of Australia depends on freight transportation and the trucking industry. I salute the truckies. There is a belief that the introduction of the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012 will have positive flow-on effects to Queensland businesses as they will be able to transport goods across state borders without dealing with a range of regulators and regulatory interpretations across various state jurisdictions. This bill is all about consistency, which is needed across our national road network. The national law includes provisions to create a single national regulator and will apply to heavy vehicles over 4.5 tonnes. It will not cover the transportation of dangerous goods, heavy vehicle driver licensing or bus industry accreditation, which are covered under separate legislation. Having a National Heavy Vehicle Regulator to administer a national body of law to govern the regulation of all heavy vehicles recognises the importance of national consistency in heavy vehicle law and regulations and the huge contribution made by the transport industry to the national economy. Indeed, here in Queensland the transport industry also keeps our economy moving, with a strong reliance on truck drivers to transport all of our wonderful fresh produce. Mr Rickuss: We are so decentralised, aren’t we? Mrs MENKENS: I take that interjection from the member for Lockyer. We are decentralised and it makes it extremely difficult. Fresh fruit and vegetables are an enormous part of the Burdekin electorate. Of course, there are a lot of other agricultural regions throughout the state; I just happen to be a little bit close to the Burdekin electorate. But all of this produce has to go to southern markets. Farmers’ lifeblood is interstate and beyond. Loads have to be hauled over our National Highway in Queensland— the Bruce Highway, which, as we know, requires a great deal of work. Thank goodness the LNP government is committed to that. These truckies have had to face a barrage of varying laws when crossing into other states. Commencing on 1 January 2013, the regulator will be responsible for administering the new laws for heavy vehicles. This will include matters such as registration, mass and loading, fatigue management, vehicle standards, and compliance and enforcement. The one single uniform heavy vehicle national law, which the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012 will provide, will create the same outcome in same circumstances, regardless of jurisdiction. This in turn will reduce regulatory and operational costs of compliance. For the past two decades the heavy vehicle industry was governed by a dozen nationally approved model laws that lacked coherence across jurisdictions. States and territories adapted the model laws based on their own individual needs and circumstances, and this in itself has become really 23 Aug 2012 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 1699 clumsy. In the case of Queensland, we only varied from the model laws to cater for the unique nature of freight operations within Queensland or Criminal Code requirements. As a result, the national law before the House contains those policy changes that are required to align Queensland with the national legislation. The only significant new provisions in the bill before the House are those provisions to create the regulator as a separate corporate entity. These provisions provide for human resourcing, financial controls and governance structures. The implementation of this bill will allow Queensland operators to contact the one central regulatory agency. This one central regulatory agency will be the port of call, so to speak, for registration renewals, logbook queries, access permits, escort requirements for wide loads and a variety of other services. This LNP government is about reducing the red tape that was turning businesses away from operating in Queensland under the previous Labor government. The Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012 will dramatically reduce operator costs and the time spent dealing with regulatory agencies. This bill will simply make it easier for transport operators and drivers as they will no longer have to comply with the multitude of red-tape roadblocks as they drive through various jurisdictions. Under current legislation, an operator transporting agricultural produce—our wonderful tomatoes, mangoes and capsicums, for example—from the Burdekin electorate to southern states is required to contact and receive access approvals from quite a number of state regulatory authorities. To make matters even worse, each of those jurisdictions then applies their own specific access requirements. Under this legislation, having the one single regulator, which this Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill allows, will ensure the current level of regulatory inconsistency, costs and red tape are dramatically reduced. The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator will act as the central link between state road authorities and local governments to ensure that a single permit, with a simplified set of operating conditions for all participating jurisdictions, is issued. For heavy, wide vehicles crossing the Burdekin River Bridge—it requires northbound or southbound traffic to be halted—having to contact just one authority should facilitate an easier passage. This LNP government is working hard for all Queenslanders. This LNP government is making it easier for industry and business in Queensland with a reduction in regulations and red tape. This bill is backing up and supporting the hard work which is being done by members of the heavy vehicle freight industry, which is keeping our state and our economy going. I commend this bill to the House. Ms PALASZCZUK (Inala—ALP) (Leader of the Opposition) (12.26 pm): I am very pleased to rise to speak in support of the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012. It is very pleasing to see that the transport minister has reintroduced the bill with only some very minor technical changes but there has not been any substantial change to the legislation that I introduced into this House when I was the transport minister. This is a very significant piece of microeconomic reform. When I was transport minister, all jurisdictions came together at the ministerial council meeting and were very supportive of the implementation of this heavy vehicle national law. We will be supporting this legislation as it represents an important part of the COAG reform agenda. It will have great benefits for Queensland and the nation as a whole. As I said when I introduced the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2011, in the past the heavy vehicle industry was governed and regulated by a dozen national laws that had been nationally approved over the past two decades. Despite being introduced with the best of intentions, these model laws often lacked conformity as jurisdictions would often adopt the model laws to suit their own individual needs and concerns. With this bill we now have one single national law to be adopted in a consistent manner in every jurisdiction as template law—with the exception of Western Australia, which is planning to mirror the legislation at some time in the future. All jurisdictions will pass legislation to ensure the national law as enacted by Queensland is effectively applied as law in their own jurisdiction. Queensland has a very strong record when it comes to heavy vehicle regulation. We are head and shoulders above other jurisdictions when it comes to the modernisation of laws in this area. Queensland was the stand-out state when it came time to consider where the new National Heavy Vehicle Regulator was to be based. We have an excellent relationship with the heavy vehicle industry and had been at the forefront of modernising our regulations in this area and implementing model law. That is why Queensland was chosen as the host jurisdiction for the new national regulator. I am pleased to say that it was the Labor government, through hard work in this area over many years, that made Queensland’s claim to be the host jurisdiction undeniable. As I mentioned, we have been an enthusiastic early adopter of model laws in this area. Consequently, there are very few substantive changes to this bill that will impact heavy vehicle operators in Queensland. In relation to Queensland being the host regulator, I want to raise something that I was considering when I was minister that the current minister may want to give some consideration to as well. I refer to whether or not the regulator would be based in Brisbane or whether some consideration could be given to basing it in, say, perhaps Toowoomba. Toowoomba is an area that 1700 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 23 Aug 2012 has a lot of transportation. Many of the vehicles come down the range to the port. It would send a very good signal to a regional community that the host regulator was being based not in the Brisbane CBD but actually in a regional area. I ask the minister to perhaps explore that issue further. There may be some reasons why that cannot be done, but that does give the opportunity for Rockhampton or Toowoomba or a regional centre to be the base for the regulator. That would be a very good symbol for the industry as well. There are going to be many arguments for and against, but I ask the minister if he would not mind taking that matter into consideration. It would send a strong message to some of our regional towns that we are serious about growing the industry and growing jobs. As I said in my speech in 2011, Queensland has a long history of working with industry to find practical solutions to operational realities. This has resulted in the implementation of a number of local productivity initiatives to suit Queensland conditions which vary from productivity initiatives implemented in other jurisdictions. A good example of this is the Grain Harvest Management Scheme. This scheme recognises the inherent difficulties of transporting a bulk commodity where varying moisture contents and densities can prevent an accurate load calculation. The Grain Harvest Management Scheme relieves this element of uncertainty by providing scheme participants with a certain amount of flexibility above normal mass limits. This is something that the industry raised with me time and time again—that is, there needs to be flexibility in terms of mass limits. Through the use of agreed administrative processes and compliance activities, industry and the Department of Transport and Main Roads can ensure the conduct of an efficient grain harvest and protection of road infrastructure. Queensland can be rightly proud of the role we have played in developing heavy vehicle regulation over the past few decades. That commitment to ease the burden on industry and improve safety continues with the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator reform. The benefits that this reform will bring are considerable and demonstrate how important the heavy vehicle industry is not only to Queensland but also to the rest of Australia. It has been estimated that the savings to industry from the establishment of a single national regulator will be approximately $1.47 billion over 22 years for Queensland alone and as high as $12 billion over the same period Australia-wide. From now on trucking companies will have a one-stop shop—the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator—to organise their permits, register their vehicles and comply with fatigue management regulations. No longer will these businesses have to liaise with different officers in different jurisdictions just to complete a journey that crosses state borders. The time and money saved to those businesses can be passed on to their customers through lower rates. Ultimately, consumers should benefit from cheaper goods. In conclusion I want to place on the record my thanks for all of the staff whom I used to work with at the Department of Transport and Main Roads. This legislation did not just come about overnight. If one looks at the volume of the legislation and its detail, this has been in the making for a number of years and there have been some very dedicated officers who have been focusing on this. It is a huge credit to them for the work that they have done, not just in Queensland but the work they have done in dealing with their state counterparts and dealing with the Commonwealth government. They now have the pleasure to see the final product of their years of investment become a reality. I also want to express my thanks to the industry. The industry participated in a lot of consultations in relation to this bill. It played a very important role. I thank it for raising issues with me in my time as transport minister—very complex issues. It put a challenge to me early on when I was transport minister in that it wanted me to go for a ride in a B-double from Toowoomba down the range out to the port— which I did. I hope the minister also takes that up, because it is not until you are sitting there next to the driver that you actually understand the complex issues that drivers face on the road. They drive for long periods of time. I was only in the truck for a couple of hours. However, they drive long distances. Queensland is a huge state. There are many issues in relation to fatigue and the quality of the roads. So I really want to place on record my thanks to the industry for raising these issues with me. I also want to place on record my thanks to the Transport Workers Union. It was also involved in discussions about the national laws, and it contributed at a national level as well. It was great to see not just the public servants, not just the ministers but the industry and the unions all coming together. This is the final product of their work. Everybody has a right to feel very proud that this legislation will pass through this House today. I also want to thank the new minister for not changing the bill. Essentially, it is the same bill that I had introduced. That is a sign that the government is recognising the work of the former government in a bipartisan way, shall I say—a very rare occurrence in this House—in that we know the significance of this legislation. It is going to benefit industry, it is going to benefit the workers and it is something that every member of this House can be rightfully proud of today. In conclusion, as Queensland is the host jurisdiction, I again ask the minister to please give some consideration to basing the headquarters in a rural location. That would send a very strong message and he would have my support on that. Mr HATHAWAY (Townsville—LNP) (12.35 pm): I rise in the House to speak in support of the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012. There are a number of reasons for rising today to speak to this bill. First of all, as a transport and logistics officer in the Australian Army of some 30 years experience, I recall many years ago the difficulty I had when, as a young lieutenant posted as troop commander in 23 Aug 2012 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 1701

Puckapunyal with Dad, Dave and Denny, moving heavy vehicle loads or wide and over-dimensional loads such as Leopard tanks and engineer plant and equipment. It was extremely difficult for us to organise to bring them to exercises up here—in fact, often up to my now home town of Townsville’s High Range. We had to go through no less than three state jurisdictions. Albeit that we had coverage under the Defence Act, we still always tried to comply with state regulations. I can tell members that it was an administrative and costly nightmare. The other reason I rise in support of this bill is largely because as the member for Townsville I understand that we are geographically dislocated from much of the country. Therefore we rely heavily on road transport, and cost of compliance and regulation impact on us dearly. They impact on either us getting our products to market and for the other products that come from further afield the cost of transportation being applied to the cost of the product. That is why I rise to speak about this bill today. I note also that the previous version of this bill was introduced in the last parliament in November and referred to the then Transport and Local Government Committee. Additionally I note, as has been made abundantly clear by the Minister for Transport and Main Roads and indeed many of the members who have spoken to the bill in this debate, this bill is essentially the same as the one that was considered by the committee from the 53rd Parliament. Noting that committee’s previous wide and public consultation of the earlier bill, the current committee, the Transport, Housing and Local Government Committee, considered wisely that it would accept many of the previous submissions and also offered those submitters an opportunity to refresh their submissions. With new submissions, a total of 14 submissions were considered by that committee. I also note—I listened to at least the Friday, 2 August public hearing—the briefings given by TMR and the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator project office as they briefed the committee on the bill. The actual process of national reform with respect to this legislation has been broad, consultative and in depth, the background of which has been more than adequately covered in the committee’s report and by previous speakers during this debate. I also note, perhaps surprisingly, that the legislation, both within the committee and during this debate, has enjoyed support right across the House. That support has been unqualified, and understandably so, because the intent of this legislation is twofold. It is to reconcile variations of state heavy vehicle laws that have been around for years and which have been a bugbear to business into a single unified approach applicable across all the states and territories and to establish the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator to be responsible for the administration of those laws. The national heavy vehicle law will replace no fewer than eight sets of laws that currently operate across the country. Our honourable minister, Scott Emerson, the Minister for Transport and Main Roads, when he introduced the bill to the Assembly stated— Queensland businesses will soon benefit from improved productivity and the ability to operate across state borders without the unnecessary burden of dealing with a range of regulators and regulatory interpretations across jurisdictions. That speaks to our government’s aim to reduce the burden on business brought on by red tape and regulation. That burden has hamstrung Queensland businesses for so long, adding a costly impost without any value. I also note the role that Queensland has played as the lead state in the formulation of this regulatory reform. Queensland was the host jurisdiction to lead the implementation of the national law and the NHVR. I note that the NHVR is being established in Queensland as the independent statutory body responsible for administering the national law and that the project office has been established in Brisbane. The previous lack of a single administering body has left many Queensland interstate truckers with the complex task of navigating a plethora of government agencies to seek simple answers, or advice, or decisions on registration, accreditation, vehicle conditions and access. As a heavy combination qualified operator, I can assure the members of this House that it is hard enough to manoeuvre a heavily loaded rig safely without the added burden of the anxiety of doing something wrong and getting pulled over by the scalies and having the confusion of multiple logbooks or multiple permits bouncing around in your cabin. This is particularly important— Mr Rickuss: Did you use more than one logbook? Mr HATHAWAY: We had a Defence logbook. This is particularly important for small operators and single-vehicle operators who, with extremely small margins on their businesses and also a high uncertainty of their return or their next outlay, simply do not have the staff to keep pace with the current mix of legislation. The committee was made abundantly clear through submissions that any variations in legislation provides problems for interstate operators. No matter how small those distinctions in the regulations, they have compliance and enforcement consequences that can be catastrophic for a business with cross-border operations. To keep abreast of this compliance issue, we heard from NatRoad that the estimate of compliance is costing this country about 132,000 days of training or approximately $17.8 million. Conversely, I note that the estimates of the benefit of this legislation across our country after full implementation are in the order of $9 billion to $12 billion across 20 years. So simply from a 1702 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 23 Aug 2012 business benefit perspective and also from a red-tape regulation reduction perspective, this legislation simply makes good sense. On that note, it gives me great pleasure to support the legislation and recommend its favourable consideration by the House. Mr KATTER (Mount Isa—KAP) (12.43 pm): I rise in this House to speak to the National Heavy Vehicle Bill. Firstly, let me state my intention to be supportive of this bill. I am supportive of anything that increases the development of the industry in our great state. The transport industry is very relevant to the people of my electorate, who face the tyranny of distance. The cost and burden of regulations can impact so much on the industry in my electorate. I have spoken to many stakeholders about this bill—many industry groups, the Transport Workers Union and many individual operators in my electorate—and I believe that I am cognisant of many of the issues that affect them and this industry and what impact this bill will have on them. The transport industry is very diverse, with individual drivers and operators having different requirements. Transport operators out west often face issues that are very different from those faced by transport operators in the south-east corner or other areas. Those issues mean so much to their operating costs and in the past they have impacted on them. So I ask that any amendments to this legislation that arise out of negotiations take into account issues that are relevant to transport operators in western areas, which have been spoken about today. I refer to logbooks and the chain of responsibility of the drivers and the owners. I have spoken extensively with the Road Transport Association, which is the peak body that represents haulage employers in this state. I have discussed many topics with that association, including how a mutual partnership between the government and employers in the form regulation can best help develop and diversify this industry that will only gain in credence as a vitally important industry, particularly for the mining and agricultural industries in the north-west of the state. I am also highly cognisant of the lack of development in the rail lines in my area. The movement away from rail activity has placed a lot more pressure on our roads and has increased demand on our freight industry. That has challenges for governments. I am also cognisant of issues raised in the submissions. One was the assurance by the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator project office of the retention of local productivity arrangements that will be to the benefit of primary producers, particularly the cattle industry. I think that is a relevant issue. The second issue that I thought was relevant was the recommendation by the National Road Freighters Association that the Western Australia model for fatigue management be adopted. I believe those issues warrant consideration. I have spoken countless times to many drivers in my area about the Flinders Highway and about how we, as parliamentarians, can have an impact on their industry. It always comes down to regulation. I accept the need for regulation in some areas and already I have spoken about the extra traffic we have on our roads. But we have to acknowledge that everything comes at a cost. The regulations that we keep imposing have a trickle-down effect and quite often the cattle producers in my area carry the burden— Mr Rickuss: This is actually better than before. Mr KATTER: I take that interjection. I agree with that. That is why I am supportive of the bill. I believe it is time that we see national reform of this matter so that all the states are on an equal playing field. National regulation will be successful in striking a balance between fair employers making demands on their employees and an employee driver understanding their entitlements and rights under the new federal legislation. I commend the bill to the House. I thank all the ministers—state and federal—for bringing the haulage industry up to date. This bill sets the precedent that Queensland is open for business and is a world leader in encouraging a prodevelopment ethos. Furthermore, I encourage all ministers at both state and federal level to ensure that reform keeps in mind those operators who are located west of the great divide and the issues that they face, particularly in terms of logbooks and the chain of command of responsibility. I commend the bill to the House. Mr MINNIKIN (Chatsworth—LNP) (12.48 pm): I rise to speak in support of the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012. The introduction of the uniform national heavy vehicle law and the subsequent establishment of the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator aligns with the promise that the LNP made to the people of Queensland when entrusted with the state’s governance, and that is a commitment to cutting waste, slashing red tape and revitalising industry. Given that the Gateway Arterial Motorway weaves its way through the heart of my electorate of Chatsworth, carrying numerous heavy vehicles per day, this legislation is of interest to me and the residents of my community, of whom I am proud to represent. The importance of the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012 is significant. The bill marks the culmination of the heavy vehicle reform program, which formally began in March 2008 when the Council of Australian Governments—COAG—committed to a microeconomic reform agenda for Australia, with a particular focus on regulatory reform and the broader productivity agenda. The COAG agreement committed to deliver more consistent regulation across jurisdictions and to address unnecessary or poorly designed regulation to reduce excessive compliance costs on business, restrictions on competition and distortions in the allocation of resources in the economy. 23 Aug 2012 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 1703

Taking a national approach to regulatory activities for heavy vehicles will eliminate the unnecessary duplication of regulations for companies undertaking interstate trade and commerce. I note that the national law includes provisions to create a single national regulator and will apply to heavy vehicles over 4.5 tonnes. It will not, however, cover the transportation of dangerous goods, heavy vehicle driver licensing and bus industry accreditation which are covered under separate legislation. From an economic perspective though, it will drive efficiencies for small to medium businesses, in addition to large industry around our nation. The ultimate beneficiaries will be those whom we in this House are here to serve: Queenslanders. The fundamental objective driving the introduction of national uniform heavy vehicle laws and regulations is to achieve the same outcome in the same circumstances across all jurisdictions, thus reducing the legal and administrative costs of compliance for industry. This fits directly within the spirit of the LNP government’s pledge to revitalise industry and foster the economic prosperity of Queensland. Given our parlous economic position as a result of the gross economic ineptitude of the previous ALP government, legislation which streamlines processes and regulation is most welcome indeed. Despite comprising of more than 600 pages, the legislation introduced to this House will replace thousands of pages of burdensome and conflicting legislation weighing business down across the nation. This single consolidated body of law, and the establishment of the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator projected to come into effect on 1 January 2013, will provide a stable platform for long-term improvements in heavy vehicle regulation and safety. This is significant and long-overdue legislation. The regulator will provide owners and operators a single point of contact, acting as, we would say, a one-stop shop for the processing of accreditation applications and the issuing of access permits. When this law is applied nationally, business will see the removal of regulatory inconsistencies that currently plague operators adding to the cost of compliance and, of course, the cost of doing business in the transport industry. It will mean that business will no longer have to bear the burden of burgeoning compliance costs. These, in turn, will no longer need to be passed on to the consumer, allowing for greater competition and, subsequently, savings to Queenslanders. In the lead-up to the election in March, throughout my electorate of Chatsworth I continued to hear about the blow-out in costs of living, including food and homewares amongst others. By streamlining business processes and encouraging efficiencies, this bill will play its part in reducing business input costs which should have a flow-on effect to the consumer. It is not just business and consumers who will benefit. The often less thought of group of people who will benefit from improving regulatory efficiency will be the actual drivers. Anything that we can do as legislators to relieve the red tape and cumbersome paperwork for this state’s fantastic heavy vehicle drivers is well worth it. I do not pretend to know how stressful it must be to work as a heavy vehicle driver, but common-sense indicates that anything that we legislate to lessen the burden on these vital men and women will add to their overall physical and mental wellbeing. As the Minister for Transport and Main Roads stated in this House last month, the passage of the Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 2012 will enable Queensland operators to contact one central regulatory agency for registration renewals, logbook queries, access permits, escort requirements for wide loads and a host of other services. In other words, operators will be able to deal with a customer focused one-stop shop. It goes without saying that this will reduce operator costs and the time spent dealing with the red tape of regulatory agencies. Currently heavy vehicle operators and drivers must comply with multiple regulations in each jurisdiction they enter. An interstate operator taking freight from the north of our great state to the southern states is currently compelled to contact and receive access approvals from a number of state regulatory authorities. Supply chain processes are slowed down, adding to time and cost pressures on heavy freight operators. In turn, each of those jurisdictions may apply their own specific access requirements. It goes without saying that a single regulator will ensure that the current level of regulatory inconsistency, costs and red tape is dramatically reduced. I am pleased to support this bill because it is an important practical step towards improving industry confidence in the economy and boosting conditions necessary for developing the economic strengths of Queensland. Given our current debt level of around $65 billion, any legislation that streamlines business processes and actually helps our vital heavy vehicle transportation system is to be commended. I recall many hours of business travel on the road and recall the famous trucking mantras, including the well-known ‘You are passing another Fox’ and ‘Without trucks Australia comes to a stop’. I thoroughly commend this important bill to the House, as the introduction of the uniform national heavy vehicle law and subsequent establishment of the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator is a drive towards cutting waste, assisting supply chain management, slashing red tape and, most importantly, revitalising this important industry to the Queensland economy. I congratulate the minister for introducing this bill and commend it to the House. Hon. SA EMERSON (Indooroopilly—LNP) (Minister for Transport and Main Roads) (12.55 pm), in reply: This bill clearly demonstrates the Newman government’s commitment to supporting business and reducing red tape by streamlining transport legislation for heavy vehicles. This bill will ease the regulatory burden on the road freight industry and allow for improvements in productivity and it is 1704 Heavy Vehicle National Law Bill 23 Aug 2012 eagerly awaited by industry. It will also allow operators to move between jurisdictions without unnecessary, time-consuming and confusing variations of the heavy vehicle law. I thank all honourable members for their participation in today’s debate and their support for this bill. I would like to reflect on the objectives of this bill in summary. This legislation will streamline variations in state heavy vehicle laws to a single unified approach that will apply across all states and territories and establish a National Heavy Vehicle Regulator responsible for the administration of those laws. This is a vital point. The regulator will administer the national heavy vehicle law covering day-to- day matters such as registering trucks and providing permits for trucks to access the road network and setting the standards for compliance and enforcement activities. The regulator will guide consistency across jurisdictions to give consistency to industry and act as a one-stop shop for heavy vehicle operators on a range of matters, such as access permit approvals, mass and loading and fatigue management. As the member for Warrego noted, it is the intention of the regulator to provide strength and consistency for operators without eroding existing local productivity initiatives such as volumetric loading and the grain harvest management schemes and exemptions. I would like to respond to several points raised in debate. The member for Warrego also spoke about the significant gains to industry, such as the reduced regulatory burden and less red tape. I want to reinforce this. This legislation will deliver real savings for industry. The member for Algester spoke about the history of this legislation and importantly noted the expected net benefit of $1.47 billion to be realised in Queensland over a 22-year period. The member for Gregory, with his past experience in this role and in his electorate, is well placed to speak so strongly about the improvements the heavy vehicle industry will realise from this legislation. The member for Dalrymple raised two issues. With regard to retention of local productivity initiatives, I advise the House that all local productivity initiatives in place at the creation of the regulator will be preserved. With regard to the Western Australian approach to fatigue management, I can say that in WA fatigue management standards are exclusively established under the occupational health and safety laws. Queensland’s approach to fatigue laws was to adopt the NTC model laws which are administered under transport laws. The member for Morayfield noted the accreditation for pilots and escorts. Under this legislation the regulator project office is developing a set of ministerial guidelines that road managers must consider when making decisions. The member for Kallangur raised the issue of electronic logbooks. I can advise the House that Queensland is participating in an electronic work diary pilot being undertaken by New South Wales. I also acknowledge the contribution from the member for Inala and will certainly consider her suggestions. I am also pleased to see that the opposition has continued its support for this bill. As so many members have noted, the industry is keen to see this legislation in place and I thank the industry for its involvement and contribution to the development of this legislation. I would also again acknowledge the work of the committee in reviewing this bill and its considered response. I would also like to thank my ministerial staff and departmental staff for their dedication in preparing this legislation. I know it has been an interesting journey. I commend the bill to the House. Question put—That the bill be now read a second time. Motion agreed to. Bill read a second time. Consideration in Detail Clauses 1 to 680, as read, agreed to. Schedules 1 to 3, as read, agreed to. Third Reading Hon. SA EMERSON (Indooroopilly—LNP) (Minister for Transport and Main Roads) (12.59 pm): I move— That the bill be now read a third time. Question put—That the bill be now read a third time. Motion agreed to. Bill read a third time. Long Title Hon. SA EMERSON (Indooroopilly—LNP) (Minister for Transport and Main Roads) (1.00 pm): I move— That the long title of the bill be agreed to. Question put—That the long title of the bill be agreed to. Motion agreed to. Sitting suspended from 1.00 pm to 2.30 pm. 23 Aug 2012 Private Members’ Statements 1705

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

Neighbourhood Watch Mrs MADDERN (Maryborough—LNP) (2.30 pm): In 1973 a program entitled Home Alert was started in Oakland in the USA. Participants attended regular meetings, displayed window stickers, marked property and acted as the eyes and ears of the police. It was the forerunner of Neighbourhood Watch in Australia. In Australia the first Neighbourhood Watch group started in Victoria in 1983. In Queensland the first Neighbourhood Watch group was formed on the Gold Coast in 1988. It was established there as a result of rising crime rates and from all the reports in the media, sadly, there is still an issue with crime on the Gold Coast. On 4 August this year, the north coast regional Neighbourhood Watch conference was held in Maryborough. At the conference, reports were given by representatives for Neighbourhood Watch groups in the Maryborough, Gympie, Sunshine Coast and Caboolture districts. The conference also acted as a training session for presentations on safety and security systems and closed-circuit television surveillance, marshall arts, disaster management and a safer living program. I was very privileged to be asked to open the conference and it was very satisfying to see the level of support in the community. In collaboration with my colleague Mr Ted Sorensen, the member for Hervey Bay, and with support from other parliamentary colleagues, the police and the Fraser Coast Regional Council, a crime management plan has been developed for the Fraser Coast region covering Maryborough, Hervey Bay and surrounds. While the contribution to crime prevention and management played by the police can never be underestimated, the contribution by community members as the eyes and ears of the police plays a major role in keeping our communities safe. The 24-hour-a-day, seven-day-a-week capacity to provide the police with information, which on its own may be insignificant but which builds a case for the resolving of crime as well as crime prevention, is one of the best readily available tools to keep our communities safe. The very valuable work played by Neighbourhood Watch groups forms a significant part of the crime action plan that has been developed for the Fraser Coast. Another valuable tool that forms part of the crime action plan is the myPolice Maryborough blog site that was recently launched by the police minister, Jack Dempsey. Probably the most exciting event at the Neighbourhood Watch conference was the announcement of a new Neighbourhood Watch at Henderson Park, a newer suburb of Maryborough. It was my privilege to be at the launch of this new group and I commend the work of Senior Constable Melanie Ryan in supporting and encouraging Neighbourhood Watch groups and in organising the Neighbourhood Watch regional conference. Over recent years the Maryborough area has been a relatively safe community, but it has not always been that way. It is the responsibility of all of us to be vigilant to ensure that our community remains a safe and enjoyable place.

Townsville, National Weather Map Hon. DF CRISAFULLI (Mundingburra—LNP) (Minister for Local Government) (2.33 pm): I rise to speak about an issue that has troubled the people of Mundingburra and, indeed, the entire City of Townsville for many years. Despite being the nation’s largest northern city, despite being the second capital of our state and despite having regional Australia’s most diverse and robust economy, we do not command a position on the national weather map. This is a disgrace and must be fixed. Mr Crandon: It is outrageous. Mr CRISAFULLI: It is. If we are to grow a four-pillar economy, we need to take every opportunity to promote our state’s largest northern centre to show we are open for business. This is not a Townsville versus Cairns battle. Our cities have moved on from that nonsense. Despite being smaller than Townsville, Cairns rightly deserves its place on the national weather map because of its vital role in Australia’s tourism industry, but so too does Townsville. We have earned that right. We have transformed a once dry and dusty frontier town, known as ‘Brownsville’, into a thriving commercial centre. Almost 200,000 people now call Townsville home, while many of the towns from the Cape to Rockhampton and out to the Isa do business in our town every day. We have a waterfront that is the envy of many larger Australian cities, and with community facilities like Riverway, a new look city heart and the myriad public parks we are now a desirable place to live. As the proud home to three successful national sporting teams, passionate host of a round of the V8 Supercars and birthplace of the highly regarded Australian Festival of Chamber Music, we are a city commanding interest from television viewers across the country and, indeed, the world. It is great to have in the chamber my good friend the member for Townsville; it is not so great to have my good friend the member for Coomera here beside me. We wear our relationship with the Australian Defence Force as a badge of honour and are now the posting of choice for Defence families, while our educational institutions are led by the revered James Cook University. 1706 Multicultural Recognition Bill 23 Aug 2012

This has been a battle I have fought for many years. I have written letters to TV executives, I have lobbied federal and state politicians, I have even run lengthy radio campaigns with my good mates CK and Blake from Mix 106. OMG! Won’t someone please take notice of Townsville? In the past I have been told by TV executives, ‘It is unfortunate to view a city’s strength as linked to its position on a weather map.’ That is not unfortunate; it is reality. The argument that the map will become cluttered is a nonsense. There are around 350 kilometres between Townsville and Cairns. They have no dramas fitting in Canberra and Sydney, which is over 50 kilometres closer. Like Sydney and Canberra, Townsville and Cairns are vastly different cities with vastly different weather patterns. There is room for us both. Townsville is a city that has worked hard to put itself on the nation’s economic map. It is time we took our place on the nation’s weather map as well. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mrs Cunningham): Order! Before calling the Leader of the Opposition, I recognise in the public gallery Mr Bill Newton, the previous member for Glass House and Caboolture.

MULTICULTURAL RECOGNITION BILL

Introduction Ms PALASZCZUK (Inala—ALP) (Leader of the Opposition) (2.35 pm): I present a bill for an act to provide for a Multicultural Queensland Charter, a Multicultural Queensland Advisory Council and a multicultural action plan and for related purposes. I table the bill and the explanatory notes. I nominate the Health and Community Services Committee to consider the bill. Tabled paper: Multicultural Recognition Bill 2012 [845]. Tabled paper: Multicultural Recognition Bill 2012, explanatory notes [846]. As the former minister for transport and multicultural affairs, I was appalled to learn from the assistant minister and member for Brisbane Central, Mr Robert Cavallucci, that the LNP government has not taken up the cause of Queensland’s multicultural community by re-introducing this important piece of legislation, which lapsed at the end of the last parliamentary term. The philosophy behind this bill is fundamental: Queensland’s multicultural community is vibrant and important and valuable. It is a community that deserves the recognition of us all. The Labor Party reflects that and recognises it with the reintroduction of this bill. This bill builds on our strong multicultural policy of ‘a multicultural future for all of us’. The policy was formulated after extensive consultations with more than 1,300 participants from Cairns to the Gold Coast, from Mount Isa to Gladstone, who attended 31 community forums held right across the state. By refusing to take up the cause, this LNP government has in turn refused to recognise our multicultural community. That is not only disturbing; it is discourteous and offensive. We already know that the LNP does not care about Queensland’s multicultural community with the recent service cuts experienced by organisations such as the Multicultural Community Centre Ltd, Access Community Services, the Multicultural Development Association, the Migrant Centre Organisation and others. Those organisations provide critical services to refugees and newly arrived migrants to help them with improved language and employment skills. The cold-hearted members opposite choose to repay those services by slashing them. These cuts, along with the contempt with which the LNP has approached the implementation of Queensland’s multicultural policy, is a worrying step backwards for this great state and the diverse communities that make up our society. Labor will always stand up for equality, Labor will always stand up for opportunity and Labor will always stand up for fairness, including supporting our multicultural communities. Government members interjected. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mrs Cunningham): Order! Ms PALASZCZUK: One of my proudest moments in the House was when I introduced the Multicultural Recognition Bill. Why did we do it? Because people have come from all parts of the world and have contributed to building our great state of Queensland. They have contributed from all different walks of life. There was extensive consultation on the bill. The ability to consult with people is something that this government fundamentally lacks. We have seen that with the job slashing that is happening under this government. The Multicultural Recognition Bill act was consulted on at length. Community consultations were held right across the state which I attended. It was one of the proudest moments of my life when I stood in this chamber and I stood up for multiculturalism. What have we heard from those opposite? At the India Day Fair held recently recognising Indian independence I heard the assistant minister very clearly say that this government had absolutely no intention of reintroducing this bill. That is what he told me; that the LNP government had washed its hands when it came to recognising multiculturalism in this great state. 23 Aug 2012 Private Members’ Statements 1707

Labor will stand up for multiculturalism. My grandparents came to this country from war-torn Germany as Polish migrants with absolutely nothing and they built a life here. I am proud of the sacrifices they have made because I would not be standing in this House without the sacrifices that they and many thousands of other migrants have made. This is a chance for all members of the House to stand up for multiculturalism; to stand up for what they believe in. This will be a fundamental test for this LNP government. Does it support multiculturalism or is it washing its hands of it? The minister is here in the chamber this afternoon. I challenge the minister: will he support this piece of legislation or not? I am not going to rush this piece of legislation through. I am going to ask the committee for at least two months consultation. Do honourable members hear that? Not a week, not four days, not seven days, not 10 days—I am going to ask the committee to consider this over a two-month period. That is going to be a final decision for the Committee of the Legislative Assembly, but this is an important piece of work. I am going to stand up for it. The Labor Party is going to stand up for it. We will wait and see what the LNP has to say about it. First Reading Ms PALASZCZUK (Inala—ALP) (Leader of the Opposition) (2.42 pm): I move— That the bill be now read a first time. Question put—That the bill be now read a first time. Motion agreed to. Bill read a first time. Referral to the Health and Community Services Committee Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mrs Cunningham): Order! In accordance with standing order 131, the bill is now referred to the Health and Community Services Committee.

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

Surf Life Saving Queensland, Point Danger Branch Hon. JA STUCKEY (Currumbin—LNP) (Minister for Tourism, Major Events, Small Business and the Commonwealth Games) (2.42 pm): I welcome to the gallery the Elanora State School grade 7 group. The 2011-12 period was the 88th season of volunteer lifesaving patrols for the Surf Life Saving Queensland’s Point Danger Branch. There are 11 affiliated clubs in the branch, and I am proud to say that the Currumbin electorate is home to eight of these great clubs. The mission of the Point Danger Branch is to deliver high-quality, innovative, progressive and responsive lifesaving services. For decades they have delivered this and more for residents and visitors to the southern Gold Coast. Reading the 2011-12 annual report revealed some truly commendable results. I wish to congratulate everyone involved in the branch for their selfless and dedicated efforts. In particular, I acknowledge branch president Mal Barnes and branch manager Kerrie Barnes for their longstanding and unwavering commitment to surf-lifesaving. We are deeply indebted to patrol club members, who in the past season alone were responsible for saving 240 lives by performing extraordinary rescues and resuscitations. This indicates the branch’s overall commitment to ensuring that members are proficient in the latest techniques in lifesaving. In what is yet another outstanding result for such a large branch with many popular locations, not one life was lost between the flags this past season. Point Danger Branch saw 604,000 visitors—up 75,000 on last season. All of our volunteers should be applauded for their stellar efforts in dealing with this high volume of people, performing 7,114 preventive actions and 10,764 warnings. These are not just numbers; these are figures that represent real people and reflect the boundless energy and dedication of these members in protecting both locals and tourists from the unforgiving conditions that are often present on our beautiful beaches. Surf-lifesaving clubs play such an important part in our community, and through their nipper programs provide a chance for children to participate in a positive environment. In some more great figures for the branch, it reports that nipper membership has increased from 2,044 to 2,227. I congratulate the Tweed Heads and Coolangatta Surf Life Saving Club for winning the patrol club of the year. For the eighth year running I have donated a rescue board to the winning club. This award is indicative of the overall strength of the club, both on the beach and in the administration of their patrols. On behalf of Currumbin, I sincerely wish to thank all men and women, boys and girls, young and old associated with the Point Danger Branch for their selfless, invaluable contribution to their community. I am very proud of all of them and feel very privileged to represent them in an area that they protect so well. 1708 Private Members’ Statements 23 Aug 2012

The Tertiary PLACE Mr MINNIKIN (Chatsworth—LNP) (2.45 pm): It is with great pleasure I rise to support a wonderful Queensland organisation—The Tertiary PLACE based in Murarrie in Brisbane’s east. The Tertiary PLACE provides creative and educational day programs for adults with disabilities by way of the continuance of postschool education. The organisation was founded by Nona Westenrieder and Angela Leneham—sisters who had a dream of providing lifelong opportunities for adults with disabilities following the acknowledgment of a lack of similar opportunities that are available to their non-disabled peers. Nona and Angela strived to provide a place where people with disabilities could access a tertiary education and continue formal learning. Thankfully for our South-East Queensland region, Nona and Angela achieved their dream and are able to create ‘authentic opportunities for people who have never been stars to take centre stage’. Recently, I had the privilege of being invited by my colleague the member for Bulimba to participate in SportSTAR, an initiative of The Tertiary PLACE, that enables people with disabilities over the age of 16 to participate in a weekly sporting program. SportSTAR encourages participants to learn a new sport, better their skills at the sports they love, and improve their health and wellbeing—all the while doing so in a supportive and safe environment. SportSTAR is particularly crucial in facilitating a weekly social experience for participants. It also fosters strong connections in our community between individuals and our sporting and recreational clubs. I was especially pleased to learn that SportSTAR is run from a fantastic Brisbane sports hub in my electorate of Chatsworth—the Clem Jones Centre at Carina. The key focus of SportSTAR is the breaking down of barriers for people with disabilities and empowering participants to realise their potential. A disability is not prohibitive to engaging in physical and social activities. In the last few weeks I have had the privilege of meeting with several families from my electorate, all of whom are supporting children or adults with disabilities. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge them and to thank them. As a member of the Newman government, I will work hard to ensure that the waste and debt we have inherited from the irresponsible former Labor government is reduced so that in the near future we may fund further disability services for our communities. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the member for Bulimba for inviting me to participate in SportSTAR and introducing me to the work of The Tertiary PLACE. I would like to acknowledge other colleagues of mine who attended on that day—the members for Greenslopes, Capalaba and Mansfield and the Assistant Minister for Sport, who all participated in a meet and greet. The basketball game was enjoyable, but we were no match for the guys from SportSTAR. I am extremely proud to stand in this House today and support The Tertiary PLACE and the fantastic opportunities it provides for people to take centre stage and realise their dreams.

Flexible Support Services Mr SHORTEN (Algester—LNP) (2.48 pm): I rise today to pay tribute to a wonderful organisation in the Algester electorate—Flexible Support Services. Earlier this week I had the extreme honour of being invited to open their Seniors Week roadshow. The roadshow is a celebration of Seniors Week but it also brings together a number of community organisations in the one place where seniors can collect information and find out what services are available to them. It was a wonderful Tuesday morning. There were about 70 people there and 50 of them would have been seniors from the electorate. We had a wonderful cup of tea and a piece of cake. I will take this opportunity to let MPs know about Seniors Week this year. Members probably already know that the theme for Seniors Week this year is Living and Loving Life, and I think that is what our seniors do. It is a great opportunity for them to get out and experience a number of day trips that Flexible Support Services put on for them—visiting Government House, visiting the Cultural Centre and even coming here to parliament to see how their state is run. I put on record my thanks to Tania Brown, the service manager of Flexible Support Services, who extended the invitation to me. She does a wonderful job, as do all of the volunteers at the organisation who look after not just the elderly in our community but also those who have a disability, both physical and mental. My community would be very worse off if they were not in it. The groups who were represented that day were Volunteering Queensland, the Elder Abuse Prevention Unit, Ability Care, Nutrition Australia and Australian Hearing. There was a van there with information on Commonwealth carers respite, and there was also a gardening workshop. Through sponsorship from the Algester electorate office, they were able to put on a bit of entertainment through a musician and a belly dancer. Mr Dillaway interjected. Mr SHORTEN: A belly dancer, yes. It was a great morning. After talking to the residents, I learnt that the service touches about 1,000 individual lives in my electorate. It is a wonderful service and I commend them for their advocacy to me and I wish them well. 23 Aug 2012 Private Members’ Statements 1709

North Stradbroke Island, Law and Order Dr ROBINSON (Cleveland—LNP) (2.51 pm): Last sitting week I spoke about the bright future of North Stradbroke Island now that the former government has been removed and we can get Straddie back on track. One of the unfortunate legacies of the former government has been a less than acceptable situation with respect to law and order. The former government failed to adequately deal with the community concerns and fears about violent crime and drugs. In spite of the hard work of the Queensland Police Service and the island’s police officers, serious issues were not sufficiently addressed by the former government. An escalation of crimes in 2012 culminated recently with the burning down of the Dunwich post office and assault of the postmaster’s wife, Hetty Conlon. I want to again pay tribute to Brian and Hetty Conlon and the community for the amazing response of warmth and practical care shown towards them. A recent community event on 11 August attracted many hundreds of people, mainly island residents, to the sharks football club, where over $30,000 was raised to support the Conlons. Recently, community leaders called a meeting of the community and invited the island’s elders, government members, government departmental representatives, the mayor and others to discuss the issues and to look for answers together. I want to acknowledge local residents Bill Giles, Robyn Mortimer and others for their invitation and good work in facilitating the meeting that several hundred people attended. After opening comments by a panel, residents asked questions and received informed answers. I took detailed notes of the questions and comments and committed to the room to take up the issues with the Premier and the relevant ministers. I met with the Premier, the relevant ministers and other departmental representatives this week to discuss the community’s concerns. I want to particularly thank the Premier, the Treasurer, the police minister and the minister for Indigenous affairs for their immediate response and for taking action. I also thank the mayor of Redland City Council, Karen Williams, for her keen involvement. We all recognise that this is a safe and peaceful place and it must not be allowed to deteriorate. Action needs to be taken now. In response to the community concerns, we planned the following action: first, to work with the mayor of Redland City Council and the Queensland Police Service to establish a community safety group to provide better cooperation between the community and the government to prevent and deal with crime; second, to assist the QPS with whatever resources they feel are needed to address the issues and make the community safer, including consideration of additional resources; and, third, to review current youth programs for their effectiveness and see what can be done in that regard. The residents of North Stradbroke Island gave the Newman government a very large mandate to change directions on Straddie, and we intend to fulfil our commitments. Central Queensland University, Allied Health Clinic Mr BYRNE (Rockhampton—ALP) (2.54 pm): I rise to welcome the opening of the Central Queensland University public allied health clinic located at the university’s growing campus in Rockhampton. On Monday, 13 August, at 8.30 am, the doors to this sprawling $12 million facility were opened to the public for the first time. Its very first client, local woman Anne Guthrie, arrived bright and early for her occupational therapy appointment and was welcomed as the first of many generations of Central Queenslanders who will receive first-rate care and treatment at this world-class facility. I was delighted to have been given a private tour of this impressive clinic by the vice-chancellor in the week before it opened, and I was bowled over by what the university has achieved for its community. Around 160 clients a day will have access to critical-need services like occupational therapy, physiotherapy, podiatry, nutrition, oral health and speech pathology. The clinical consultation rooms, procedures rooms, physical rehabilitation facilities, assessment rooms, laboratories and teaching spaces—along with all the technical equipment and technologies—are simply first-class industry standard. Not only are the facilities and fit-out impressive, but architecturally this clinic is a standout from anything I have seen before. It is truly a modern facility of which the Rockhampton community can be extremely proud. Certainly patients will not feel like they are in a traditional, sterile, bleak clinical environment. The critical-need health services that the clinic delivers did not arrive at this facility by accident. They are all health disciplines that the Central Queensland University has introduced via new degrees this year at considerable cost. The students studying these new health degrees now have a working clinic in which to refine their skills via clinical placements. Over 200 allied health students each year will benefit from six-week clinical placements, fully supervised by health professionals in a real-life working clinic. I know there are members in this chamber who realise how difficult it is for a university to come by 200 clinical placements, and I congratulate the university for this remarkable achievement. Not only has Central Queensland University built a world-class clinic that delivers critical allied health services in areas of chronic shortage, but it will also train future generations of health professionals who will be more inclined to remain in regional Queensland upon graduation. I congratulate the university, the Commonwealth government and Queensland Health for working together to see this clinic open for business last week. 1710 Private Members’ Statements 23 Aug 2012

I know that the member for Keppel has already had a look at the clinic while it was under construction, and he would agree with me that we are proud regional representatives and proud of the Central Queensland University. One outstanding aspect is the stage 2 development of that clinic, reliant on $16 million of Commonwealth funding that is associated with the amalgamation of the university and the TAFE which I hope will proceed as planned. Campbell, Mr C; International Year of the Cooperatives Hon. AC POWELL (Glass House—LNP) (Minister for Environment and Heritage Protection) (2.57 pm): I commence this afternoon by acknowledging the passing of Colin Campbell, OAM, on the Sunshine Coast last night. He was well respected, as everyone has said—particularly the Premier this morning—by the gardening community and the horticultural industry around the state. I know that gardening clubs in my electorate of Glass House, such as the Maleny Garden Club, will particularly be feeling the loss of Col. My heart goes out to his family and to those communities who will be feeling that at the moment. While talking about Maleny, it is worth while noting that 2012 is the International Year of the Cooperatives. I am not sure if the good Madam Deputy Speaker Cunningham is aware of that, but it has been designated as the International Year of the Cooperatives. Mr Crisafulli: Wow. Mr POWELL: The Minister for Local Government is certainly impressed. It is acknowledged by the international community that cooperatives drive the economy, respond to social change, are resilient to the global economic crisis and are successful businesses creating jobs in all sectors. I am particularly proud that in the electorate of Glass House we have a very strong reputation of cooperatives. It started way back in 1903 with the establishment of the Maleny Cooperative Dairy Association and it has come through into our modern time with the establishment of things like the Maple Street Co-op and the Maleny Credit Union. As someone who banks with the Maleny Credit Union, I am very proud to say that their fine heritage in terms of cooperative work on the Sunshine Coast is revered not only on the coast but across Australia and internationally. Some of the key drivers, including Jill Jordan, a former resident of Maleny, were instrumental in the establishment of many of those cooperatives and, as a result, spent a lot of time travelling around the world sharing their experience of setting up cooperatives. I acknowledge all the members of the electorate of Glass House who are involved in cooperatives and who are excited about the work they are doing this year to recognise this special year. In the time remaining I want to refute some of the claims made by the member for Nicklin regarding the Woombye Gardens Caravan Park. I particularly want to refute the fear that the member has generated within the community in that caravan park. After the visit of the member for Nicklin I received a phone call from a resident, Mr Bill Blades, who wanted reassurance on some of the things that he was told. In that call he acknowledged that the residents cannot decide who the owner is. However, he was reassured that we are maintaining the residency—whoever purchases the property must guarantee residency for a period of at least 18 months—and that the park is outside the urban footprint; it cannot be developed. Anyone who is spreading fear or rumour-mongering in that community is misleading those people and creating a fearful environment in which to live. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mrs Cunningham): Order! Before calling the member for Thuringowa, I encourage members to reduce the level of conversation. Seniors Week Mr COX (Thuringowa—LNP) (3.00 pm): I would like to take this opportunity to highlight Seniors Week, which runs from 18 to 26 August. The annual Seniors Week provides a range of activities and events right across the state. This is also an opportunity for people to get on board and celebrate the important role that seniors play in our communities. It is understood that the concept of Seniors Week started in my town of Townsville more than 37 years ago. Townsville community members realised there was a need for more focus on providing support and services for seniors. In 1975, the Townsville Region Committee on the Ageing Incorporated was formed. The organisation was put together by a group of doctors, directors of nursing homes, community-minded citizens, other health and service providers, the Townsville Senior Citizens Welfare Association and the Townsville City Council. The people involved over the past 37 years have helped to protect and promote the interests and wellbeing of seniors in the Townsville region. They have also played a role in the establishment of a range of initiatives, including the Seniors Legal and Support Service, which deals with elder abuse and is now a state organisation, the Grandparents Support Council, Townsville City Council seniors safety committee and Townsville Senior Legal Service reference group. The old records of the Townsville Region Committee on the Ageing suggest that the Seniors Week activities were discussed in 1975. By then the Townsville Senior Welfare Council was called Senior Citizen’s Week. The committee made a decision to hold a Senior Citizens festival on 27 23 Aug 2012 Private Members’ Statements 1711 and 28 May 1978 in Queens Park, and a Senior Citizens lifestyle expo was also held. I have also been told that some lobbying of local state politicians and the state government was conducted to declare Senior Citizens Week every year. Seniors Week is now celebrated annually, recognising the valuable contributions of seniors. The theme of Seniors Week this year is ‘Living and loving life’, which highlights the vibrant and active role seniors play in our community. This week there has been a range of events and activities across Queensland such as art exhibitions, computer workshops, exercise and cooking classes, and even a Seniors Mini Olympics. The Newman government has provided $125,000 in funding to community organisations to hold more than 40 Seniors Week events across this state. Last weekend I was fortunate to attend the Seniors Week launch in Townsville at the Townsville City Council. One of the highlights of Seniors Week in Townsville is always the Seniors picnic in the park. Yesterday more than 2,000 people attended the event. The event also gives an opportunity to reward two very special people who have shown dedication and hard work in the community with the title of Seniors of the Year. I can proudly say that one of the recipients of this year’s award went to a resident in my electorate of Thuringowa, theatre chorister Muriel Jones, from Condon. Mrs Jones has been involved in Townsville’s theatre and music scene since arriving in Townsville as a migrant in the 1950s. She joined the Theatrical Society and even performed at the Stage Door Theatre Restaurant with her late husband, Charlie. Mrs Jones also joined the Townsville Choral Society and a seniors group, Dawn’s Sunshine Singers. The other Townsville Senior of the Year was Bernie Smith, who was awarded for his years of dedication to the volunteer firefighters and the SES. Mr Smith has been a member of the SES for more than 20 years, a member of the Rural Fire Brigade at the Northern Beaches for 20 years, and a first officer and fire warden for 16 years. I would like to congratulate Muriel Jones and Bernie Smith for being this year’s Seniors of the Year. Seniors Week Miss BARTON (Broadwater—LNP) (3.03 pm): Like the member for Thuringowa, I am also planning on having a bit of a chat about Seniors Week. Of course, I am sure that Seniors Week on the Gold Coast is much better than Seniors Week in Townsville. Earlier in the year I had the great pleasure of being invited to join the board of the Labrador Memorial Senior Citizens Association. It was an honour and an invitation that I was very pleased to accept. Last week the Labrador Memorial Senior Citizens Association had their board meeting and AGM. It was great to see the camaraderie amongst members. The Labrador Memorial Senior Citizens Association is a central tenet of the Labrador community and the work that they do to ensure that members of the senior citizens community at the northern end of the Gold Coast is fantastic. The local seniors citizens association puts on some fantastic events. They ensure there are bus trips for locals. They also ensure there is indoor bowls, something that I have personally found very difficult. Apparently older mats are a lot faster than the new mats. I am ensuring that I practise getting my eye in. There is regular arts and crafts held as well as table tennis. They organise concerts, lots of card games and much more. Mr Crandon interjected. Miss BARTON: Unfortunately, I have not gone on any of the bus trips yet. The Labrador Memorial Senior Citizens Association does some fantastic things for members of my community. I would like to commend them on the work that they do not only for members of the seniors community in my electorate but also for members of the community at large, providing somewhere for people to come together and enjoy some strong fellowship. I would like to commend the chairman of the board, Mr Gary Doornbos, and the other members for their hard work and, of course, Councillor Margaret Grummitt, who is the local councillor. She does some fantastic work with the senior citizens association. As I said, the Labrador Memorial Senior Citizens Association is really the core tenet of my electorate and the core tenet of the Labrador community. I commend them for the very hard work that they do. I look forward to working with them for many years to come. I also look forward to becoming an active member of their board. Queensland Tuberculosis Control Centre Ms TRAD (South Brisbane—ALP) (3.06 pm): I rise to make a contribution to an important public health issue. In doing so I want to reflect on the Newman government’s unthinking decision to close the Queensland Tuberculosis Control Centre located at the PA Hospital in my electorate of South Brisbane. The decision to close the TB centre is an international disgrace. It is a retrograde step that will harm the health of people right across the state. This decision is the most dangerous example of those opposite seeking to take Queensland backwards. According to the Queensland Health website— 1712 Private Members’ Statements 23 Aug 2012

Queensland Tuberculosis Control Centre ... is a centre of excellence for research and treatment for tuberculosis in Queensland. The vision of the Queensland Tuberculosis Control Centre is to work towards the eradication of tuberculosis by ensuring all cases in Queensland are diagnosed and treated quickly and effectively However, the Queensland Health site now comes with a warning— ... this unit ... has been informed that consultation has now commenced to relocate all clinical and public health functions of this unit for TB control to the 17 Health and Hospital Services. We cannot, therefore, guarantee that we can honour any commitments made beyond the 30-09-2012 ... This is not a decentralisation strategy; this is a deprioritisation strategy from the man who gave us the term ‘de-necessary’. This announcement is a direct attack on Queensland’s public health system and on patients around Queensland. The TB centre— Mr Stevens: It was such a success! Ms TRAD: It was such a success. I do take that interjection from the Manager of Government Business. Queensland will no longer have a state-wide targeted and consistent response to the spread of tuberculosis, which will no doubt lead to an increase in TB cases. Those opposite do not have to take my word on this issue. This is not some crazy, hypothetical situation. Internationally, we have seen that when governments no longer invest in public health prevention there is a spread of diseases, particularly in the case of TB. In 1975 the New York city cut funding to its TB control program and, as a direct result, it was reported that over 89 per cent of patients discharged from some hospitals were lost in the follow-up and did not complete their treatment. Consequently, New York experienced a TB epidemic with TB rates rising every year between 1978 and 1992. It is estimated that cuts to funding resulted in an additional 52,000 cases of TB than would have been the case had funding continued to exist. While the Newman government’s refusal to invest in prevention and research may save money in this year’s budget, there is no doubt that it will result in a much larger cost down the road, although that is what this government does best: short-sighted, misguided and unthinking decisions. Returned Service Men and Women Mr RUTHENBERG (Kallangur—LNP) (3.09 pm): Last Thursday, 16 August, I represented the Premier at a lunch hosted by the Vietnam Veterans Association commemorating the 50th anniversary of Australia’s involvement in Vietnam and the 46th anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan that took place on 18 August 1966. As a person who proudly served in the Australian Defence Force, it was a great privilege for me to be at that lunch and a great privilege to be among those men and women who served our country overseas in a conflict that caused great division in Australia. While I support people’s right to express their thoughts in a peaceful manner, as it should be in a vibrant democracy, I am saddened that on their return to their homeland our Vietnam veterans were not treated in a manner they deserved, and on the 50th anniversary of our country’s involvement in Vietnam I want to add my heartfelt thanks to those who served in Vietnam. I also want to extend that to our newest veterans: thank you for your service. I point out that the lapel pin I am wearing at the moment commemorating the 50th anniversary is a copy of the Long Tan Cross. Last Saturday I attended several services in my electorate to commemorate this event. The first was with the Queensland chapter of the Patriots in the morning. I have had a close association with this club and with the Pine Rivers chapter, also in my electorate. I appreciate the friendships I have developed with the members. It was my great honour to wear a vest that the Pine Rivers chapter had given me as a supporter of the Patriots at the commemorative service of the Queensland chapter at their clubhouse, and I look forward to spending time with these fine veterans and ex-service personnel. In the afternoon I attended another service commemorating the 50th anniversary of Australia’s involvement in Vietnam at the memorial on Anzac Avenue where it was rededicated. Again as an ex- serviceman I was honoured to be at that event with so many Vietnam veterans. In my electorate there are several organisations that are made up of current and former service men and women. I would like to mention these here in an effort to encourage those in my community who have recently returned from a period of service or who are ex-service men and women but are not involved in any of these clubs. In my own experience, it took some time before I got involved with ex- services clubs. I wish I had done it sooner as I can get support from and give support to people who have a similar experience to me. The RSL in Kallangur was formed in 1946. It has approximately 386 members and meets on most Thursday mornings. The RAAF Association, which meets on the third Monday of every month, was formed in 1997 and has approximately 80 members. The Naval Association promotes mateship, community spirit, Australia and the Royal Australian Navy. They meet every Friday between 5.30 pm and 7 pm. I will be joining them this Friday for a meal. I have mentioned the Patriots association, of which there are two branches. They meet at The Church on Boundary Road and also at the Pine Rivers branch. I encourage all ex-servicemen and veterans, young and old, who live in my electorate to come and get involved. I thank those men and women in this House who served. 23 Aug 2012 Private Members’ Statements 1713

Youngcare; Caspari, Ms S Mr CAVALLUCCI (Brisbane Central—LNP) (3.12 pm): I rise to speak about Youngcare Australia, a brilliant organisation whose headquarters is based in my electorate. Importantly, I rise to speak about an inspirational individual who was the heart and soul of this organisation, Shevaune Caspari, who tragically passed away last week at the mere age of 40. Youngcare, established in 2005, was inspired by Shevaune and her husband, David Conry, in their search for a relevant and dignified care facility for young people with high needs. The fact was that they could not find one. Shevaune was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis at just 26 years of age, and in 2005, despite the best efforts, her care needs reached a point where it was not possible for her to remain at home. Shevaune and her loved ones discovered that her only option was to live in aged care. It was devastating news for Shevaune, who, although she could make jokes about the circumstances, knew that she had discovered a great modern social flaw—that there was a desperate lack of full-time care and housing options for young people across the nation. But she and her loved ones did not give in. David, along with Matt Lawson, Simon Lockyer and Nick Bonifant, co-founded Youngcare and vowed to change the way young people are cared for. Firstly they used their networks of friends and supporters, and after some hard work thousands began seeking information. Businesses, government and the wider community began contributing, and the first-ever Youngcare apartments were constructed and opened in 2007. Shevaune moved into her very own Youngcare apartment, along with 15 others. Her new home provided all the care and support required for her young life to be lived in a dignified and more appropriate manner. It was the beginning of a movement to provide such support Australia-wide. There are currently over 7,000 young Australians with high care needs living in aged care because there are few alternatives. A further 700,000 young people are currently cared for at home by family or friends. All young people deserve to live young lives. Youngcare is committed to raising awareness of the issue across the nation so that it can drive change and create real choices for young Australians with high care needs and their families. Addressing these issues head-on is a task that Youngcare and their dedicated staff work at every day. Their work includes raising awareness and securing funding support; facilitating the Youngcare Connect support hotline; lobbying government to drive policy change; providing at-home-care grants so that young people can be cared for at home; undertaking research; and, most importantly, continuing to build more Youngcare housing. These are big tasks, and Youngcare needs our ongoing support. For Youngcare, Shevaune will continue to inspire the work. For many Queenslanders, she will now be remembered as a leader in innovative thought and motivation for young people with high care needs. Shevaune, David and Youngcare have shown us the way. They have provided the spark of hope and the practical hard work needed to forge a new path for dealing with those in need. I commend their efforts and I beseech from all members ongoing support for Youngcare Australia. Finally, I offer my sincere condolences to Shevaune’s family. The Lakes College Fun Run and Fair; Public Transport; Battle of Long Tan, Commemoration Mr GULLEY (Murrumba—LNP) (3.15 pm): Have you ever wondered who runs fun runs? There are those of us who run in fun runs, but who are the good people who run the fun runs? I can give you a clue: they are fun guys. Being from Murrumba, which, as this House knows, is Aboriginal for ‘a good place’, I can also confirm that they are good guys, or, should I say, fun guys from a good place—fun, good guys. The Lakes College held their annual fun run and fair on Sunday, and I had fun running in their fun run but use the word ‘fun’ with tongue in cheek as I am not the runner that I used to be and confess that my 12-year-old daughter, Cassia, beat me by three minutes! So who are the fun run and fair runners? I would like to congratulate Graham Quick and Scott Johnston on a great fun run day. I also had fun listening to the school bands, conducted by Scott’s wife, Wendy Johnston, and thought her students were having fun. Reg has been on the buses in the last couple weeks—Reg Gulley, that is. A government member: Not Reg Varney? Mr GULLEY: I take that interjection—Reg Varney, On the Buses. I caught a bus on every route in my electorate and would like to say thanks to the passengers who shared with me their thoughts on what was important about their local bus service—bus run. I would like congratulate Elly Squire on a successful rock-and-roll fundraising dinner held at the Kallangur Leagues Club on 11 August. Mr Crandon: A ‘funraiser’, not a fundraiser! 1714 Private Members’ Statements 23 Aug 2012

Mr GULLEY: It was a ‘funraiser’, correct. I know that the Make-A-Wish Foundation is grateful for her support. On an important and sombre note, last Saturday was Long Tan Day. The RSL Deception Bay sub- branch conducts an annual service on the anniversary of that battle of 18 August 1966. I attended that service as the representative of Murrumba. I would like to note the respect shown by Peter Jones, secretary/treasurer, whilst conducting that service and for his message that reminds us that 2012 marks the 50th anniversary of Australia’s involvement in that war. Lest we forget. Logan Electorate, Public Transport Mr PUCCI (Logan—LNP) (3.18 pm): I rise to speak on the community needs assessment that was conducting by Planning and Community Engagement Pty Ltd for areas within my electorate of Logan. The assessment focused on several key elements of community development, from local business to schooling to community programs and infrastructure—all areas that have been neglected for many years in Logan. This assessment highlighted areas that are essential for the growth and viability of any emerging community. Today I speak specifically about the need for a strong and practical public transportation network. Public transport is vital—almost a lifeblood, if you will—for any community. My electorate of Logan sits on the semirural outskirts of greater Brisbane. It is in close proximity to Brisbane. Many of my constituents commute and are reliant on public transport. Sadly, due to the lack of support from the former government, the public transport network in my electorate of Logan is by no means sufficient to support the ever-expanding community basin. Areas within my electorate such as Flagstone and Logan Village, which have a population in excess of 4,000 residents, are not serviced by any form of TransLink public transport. This shows the poor planning and government practices implemented during the 20 years of a Labor government. The former Premier, like the one before her, landed this state under a mountain of debt. And what do we have to show for it? Nothing! The people of my electorate have nothing to show from years of inept Labor management. When the growth of a state, of a community or of an industry is in the best interests of all Queenslanders, we must support that growth. In my opinion, public transport is a key element to that very growth. Logan has only one mass transport hub located at the very tip of my electorate in Browns Plains. Residents from all over my electorate converge on this single point every day to go to work. Last week I met with commuters on their way to and from work during peak hour. I rode the network and saw firsthand what needs to be done. Their frustration over the fact that they have for so long gone without any form of satellite transportation networks in a community that in the coming years is projected to expand and play a significant role in the growth of greater Brisbane is a voice that cannot be ignored. High-density urban areas like Flagstone, Logan Village, Munruben, Park Ridge and Greenbank need a viable public transport network that links in with the mainstream network operating to and from the Brisbane CBD. Logan is an electorate with so many possibilities that lay before it. To reach those possibilities, we need the means and the ways to grow and provide a sustainable link to the workforce throughout South-East Queensland. Without a thorough assessment of the public transport needs within the Logan area, communities like Flagstone, Munruben, Park Ridge and Greenbank will continue to be disadvantaged—like they have been for so long. It is time that the developing regions of my electorate link in with greater Brisbane and keep pace with our ever robust and expanding state. Australian Agricultural College Corporation Mr MULHERIN (Mackay—ALP) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (3.20 pm): The flagged closure yesterday of Australian Agricultural College Corporation campuses by the Minister for Agriculture, John McVeigh, is another kick in the guts by the Newman government for rural Queensland. I never thought I would see the day when the National Party would be closing our state agricultural colleges. People in the bush must be outraged by the LNP ripping the heart out of the bush. I wonder what the member for Gregory’s view on this move is? There was no hint of this plan before the election and it shows how hollow the LNP’s promise is to grow the agricultural sector and create careers in primary industries. We have already seen Minister McVeigh say that he is going to axe hundreds of his own staff within the agriculture department, and now he plans on closing the agricultural colleges and sacking their staff. I know peak bodies including AgForce and the Queensland Farmers Federation would be very concerned about Mr McVeigh’s plans. When I was minister I undertook a comprehensive reform process of the state’s agricultural colleges, consulting widely with rural communities, industry and educational institutions. The new model modernised the agricultural college system to deliver relevant agricultural training for today’s youth, something that industry was asking for. By expanding the delivery sites of AACC from five to 14, we responded to industry and training needs in rural Queensland to be able to provide the skills and education needed for future growth in primary industries in Queensland. The new model was progressing with the delivery of new sites at Cunnamulla, Bundaberg and Mackay. The Ernst & Young report acknowledges that the implementation of this new model with increased delivery sites was operating well. 23 Aug 2012 Private Members’ Statements 1715

The reform process I implemented was also resulting in increased training hours being delivered to students, which essentially is the purpose of an educational institution. Instead of letting the reform process continue to deliver improved results for students at AACC, the LNP’s solution is—surprise, surprise—to slash and burn. The LNP wants everything to be profitable. However, the school system does not make money; it is an investment in the future, just like an investment in the agricultural colleges is an investment in the future of the agriculture sector—one of the LNP’s four pillars of the economy that it so frequently espouses. The next thing we will see is the Newman government closing schools in the bush because they are not making money. I think it will be a very sad day for the future of agriculture in Queensland when we see the closure of agricultural colleges.

Assisi Catholic College

Mr BOOTHMAN (Albert—LNP) (3.23 pm): It is very pleasing for me to be able to talk today on positive news surrounding Assisi Catholic College, a college in the electorate of Albert that has just completed the stage 5 development of the school’s master plan, delivering contemporary educational facilities, including a trade training centre, to complement a well-resourced, innovative curriculum. Assisi is located in Upper Coomera, a fast-growing community at the northern end of the Gold Coast, and has grown from 150 students to 1,300 students in just seven years. It is the first master planned prep to year 12 Catholic co-educational college on the Gold Coast. Brisbane Catholic Education is to be congratulated for creating such a pleasant and positive learning environment for students and teachers. Assisi Catholic College is a fantastic example of students, staff, parents and the wider community working together to meet students’ educational needs and work goals. Furthermore, I want to make special mention of foundation principal, Mrs Dora Luxton. The success of a new school relies heavily upon the ability of the principal to organise, prepare and communicate effectively with teachers, parents, students, government agencies and the wider community. Congratulations, Mrs Luxton. You should be very proud of the hard work and effort that you and your team have put in over the last seven years. Assisi not only provides an excellent educational environment for students but also provides choice in education. The state government is committed to ensuring that parents not only in Upper Coomera but right across Queensland are provided with schooling options by working together in partnership with independent and Catholic schools. It was a true honour to represent the minister on the day. The children were extremely well behaved. I can tell members that Mrs Dora Luxton should be very proud of what she has achieved. I thank her dearly for her efforts.

Opti-MINDS Creative Sustainability Challenge

Mr SHUTTLEWORTH (Ferny Grove—LNP) (3.26 pm): This afternoon I rise to talk about the Opti- MINDS Creative Sustainability Challenge, an inclusive team challenge which empowers participants to think, create and communicate. Mr Crandon: Is it going to be fun? Mr SHUTTLEWORTH: It should be fun. I was thinking of inviting seven additional people to come along. They might learn something. Opti-MINDS is a creative problem-solving event for teams of participants from preschool to adult within four divisions. It is run by Opti-MINDS Inc. on a not-for-profit basis and has operated for over 20 years. It operates within 14 regions of Queensland from Torres Strait through to Mount Isa and Charleville and most coastal regional cities, with 12 of these regions holding their finals this weekend. The state final will be between 12 and 14 October. The Metro North final will be held at Ferny Grove State High School on Sunday when 32 schools from the region will be participating across three challenges and four age divisions. I want to thank Michelle Snell, who is the regional director for Opti-MINDS; Mark Breckenridge, who is the Ferny Grove State High School principal; and acting deputy principal Jane Vanelli for their efforts in organising this event for the weekend, and several hundred locals and visitors are expected to attend the finals. Teams are required to solve demanding, open-ended challenges from one of the following categories—language literature, science engineering and social sciences. Teams are required to work together on a long-term challenge for up to six weeks without assistance from anyone outside the team. Students present the product of their ideas—their challenge solution—to a panel of judges and an audience on challenge day. They have 10 minutes in which to present and must do so within a three-by-three-metre performance area. The teams must also participate in an unseen spontaneous challenge on Opti-MINDS Day. This challenge requires a rapid interchange of ideas and the ability to think effectively and creatively and to have well-developed group cooperation skills. The objectives from the Opti-MINDS website—some of which I find very interesting, especially the first one—are to foster creative responsiveness in a can-do culture. I think we would align fairly well to many of its principles. Other objectives are that it fosters flexibility, innovative thinking and functioning and promotes complex thinking and creative problem solving. 1716 Private Members’ Statements 23 Aug 2012

Opti-MINDS looks beyond conventional achievement and understands that the pursuit of excellence knows no boundaries. I look forward to meeting and presenting the awards on Sunday afternoon to the award winners at 4 pm and I would encourage anyone to come along.

Gold Coast, Cruise Ship Terminal Dr DOUGLAS (Gaven—LNP) (3.29 pm): Our new Gold Coast Mayor, Tom Tate, is making reckless decisions that put the homes of some of the Gaven and Gold Coast residents of my electorate at very great risk. Mayor Tom Tate has stated that he supports a terminal for 300-metre plus ships on the land adjoining the Broadwater on the north-western section of the Spit. This decision will require massive dredging and blasting of seabed coffee rock of the existing five-metre narrow eastern Broadwater channel south of the Gold Coast seaway to accommodate independently powered ships requiring 12-metres plus draft. Mayor Tate appears to have no understanding of the unpredictability of moving such a large amount of sand from the estuary of two rivers in the immediate area—the Broadwater and upstream in the Nerang and Coomera rivers. Sand will always move under the influence of tide, wind and natural currents. There appears to be no understanding by Mayor Tate of the force of the ocean through what is now a stabilised Southport bar by virtue of a seaway established over 30 years ago. The equilibrium has been established over that time and, very importantly, what was done at that time was to stabilise the existing sand bar formation. Wavebreak Island had its eastern edges revetment wall created on a large and rising sandbank directly opposite the Grand Hotel at Labrador. This effectively controlled possible one-off tidal surges. Today, I table the original report prepared by the harbours authority for the Gold Coast titled Meeting dredging needs in Gold Coast waterways, dated March 1998. It is a very comprehensive document. Tabled paper: Publication, dated March 1998, by Gold Coast Harbours Authority, titled ‘Meeting Dredging Needs in Gold Coast Waterways’ [847]. It shows what is possible, what is impossible and what makes good sense. I highlight page 3 of the foreword, which states— General target channel depths of 2.5 metres below lowest astronomical tide are proposed for the main and secondary channels. However, deeper channels are recommended for high use areas serving commercial facilities such as the South Channel from the Gold Coast Seaway to the Gold Coast bridge (4.5 Metres), the North Channel from the Seaway to the Coomera River (3.5 Metres). The seaway walls at Southport were not designed or built for cruise ships to enter the Broadwater. This was decided by the original waterways authority. The north wall is 350-metres long and the south wall is 600-metres long and they are made with compacted clay core with a rock exterior. The seaway is 320-metres wide. Cruise ships are subject to high wind loadings. Cruise ships entering would have to use thrusters, which causes scarping along the wall and a slumping of the sand. Thrusters are up to 1,000 horsepower now and above. Only ships with thrusters could enter the seaway without tug assistance. The thrusters would demolish the existing walls in no time. It is arguable that they would destroy any other wall. The GHD report of 2005-06 stated that, to allow cruise ships through the seaway, we would have to move the walls. At that time it was estimated that the dredging cost alone was $8 million. This is an impossible decision irrespective of what retirees would want, with people living on the Broadwater with massive ships adjoining them. This is not the place to put a cruise ship terminal in the Broadwater.

Whitsunday Electorate, Bruce Highway Mr COSTIGAN (Whitsunday—LNP) (3.32 pm): I rise in this House to speak about the urgent need to upgrade the Bruce Highway in the Mackay-Whitsunday region. This is not just a call for cash, which has dried up thanks to the reckless spending of the previous Labor government, but a call for help on the back of some very tragic events that have occurred within my electorate over the past couple of weeks. On 10 August 2012, a whole family was all but wiped out in a shocking accident on the Bruce Highway at Cathu, north of Calen. That accident claimed the lives of four people: Leanne Summers, aged 39; Shane Summers, aged 41; Brendan Summers, aged 17; and Mia Summers, aged four. Matthew Summers, aged 18, lost his mum, his dad, his brother and a little sister. We especially pray for him and his little baby brother, Damian, who was the sole survivor from the family vehicle after it collided with a truck. Since then, on 16 August 2012 at Pindi Pindi, barely five minutes south of Cathu, again this notorious and dangerous section of the Bruce Highway road claimed another life—that of a truck driver who was also tragically taken after a head-on smash with another truck, the wreckage visible as I headed to my electorate office the following morning. It is a sad story as you travel up and down the highway. I remind members that, as you head north, there is not a single northbound overtaking lane for 250 kilometres—from Mount Ossa until you cross the Silver Link, which, for those members who are not aware, is the Burdekin Bridge, just south of Ayr. It is a disgrace. 23 Aug 2012 Private Members’ Statements 1717

I am proud to say that I campaigned long and hard on the Bruce Highway during my 57-week campaign for the seat of Whitsunday, because I was fed up—and I am fed up—with the neglect of the Bruce Highway in my wonderful part of North Queensland. My federal colleagues Warren Truss, Darren Chester and Ken O’Dowd saw this neglect for themselves when they joined me and the federal MP for Dawson, George Christensen, on the highway some weeks ago. I am pleased to say that a number of overtaking lanes are now being constructed on the highway, but I think the only reason that is happening is the hurry-up we gave my predecessor, who sat on her hands for 11 years and produced bugger-all in highway improvements in her electorate. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mrs Cunningham): Order! Member for Whitsunday, that is unparliamentary. I would ask you to withdraw, please. Mr COSTIGAN: I withdraw. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Good try, though. Mr COSTIGAN: For the record, produced stuff-all— Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Whitsunday, would you rephrase that, please. Mr COSTIGAN: Madam Deputy Speaker, I withdraw again, and thank you for your guidance— produced very little to say the least in highway improvements. We need more overtaking lanes and a better crossing of the flood plain at Goorganga Plains. Even line marking would help. The time for talk is over. The time for action is now.

Queensland Health, IBM Contract Mr WELLINGTON (Nicklin—Ind) (3.35 pm): I have sat here listening to the government claim time after time how it wants to access all the IBM Health contract documents and related material provided to the last government over the $1.2 billion failed Health payroll computer system. What the Premier has not told the parliament is that his government is not really fair dinkum about accessing these documents; he just wants to put on a show for the media. The Premier knows that the Parliament of Queensland Act gives our parliament special statutory power that many other parliaments in Australia do not have. The Parliament of Queensland Act gives us the power to order a person to attend and produce documents to parliament. I refer members to section 25(1), which states— The Assembly may order a person to attend before the Assembly or an authorised committee and also to produce ... any document or other thing in the person’s possession. The Parliament of Queensland Act overrides the common law, it overrides our sessional and standing orders and it overrides the claim that cabinet confidentiality is a justifiable ground to refuse to produce documents. That is a fact. If our parliament moved an order for the production of documents pursuant to section 25 of the Parliament of Queensland Act, those documents would be produced. That is a fact. I table the advice that I have received from the research unit of the Clerk’s office of our parliament for the benefit of all members. Tabled paper: Information briefing from Chamber and Procedural Services regarding orders for production of documents [848]. I understand this Health payroll contract debacle is set to cost Queensland an estimated $1.2 billion to fix by 2017. I believe that this is a justifiable ground upon which to use these special powers that many other parliaments do not have. This government needs to have all the information that is available so that it can make an informed decision on what legal action is possible against either the computer provider or whomever. Our own health minister is on the record saying that, if the state is to have any prospects of success with legal action, it needs all the advice provided to the former government. Some members may think that the parliament already has an order to access these important documents, but members need to be aware of the limitations of the motion that we moved last month. The motion only calls on the Leader of the Opposition to produce certain documents to the health minister. The motion is not an order for the production of documents to parliament. The Leader of the Opposition has stated in this parliament that she has done all she can to comply with the motion that this parliament moved as she no longer has possession and does not have possession of the documents. They are with the cabinet secretary. To reinforce my claim that the Premier is not fair dinkum in doing everything that he can and that he just wants to put on a show to the media, I now table a letter from the Premier dated 9 August 2012. In part, guess what it states— I am ... aware of the precedence that use of such power would create, particularly when seeking to breach cabinet convention to obtain cabinet or cabinet related documents. Tabled paper: Letter, dated 9 August 2012, from the Premier, Hon. Campbell Newman, to Mr Peter Wellington MP regarding orders for production of documents [849]. (Time expired) 1718 Private Members’ Statements 23 Aug 2012

Public Housing Mr GRIMWADE (Morayfield—LNP) (3.38 pm): I rise to talk about public housing and homelessness in my region. As we know the previous Labor government left public housing in this state in a shambles, with 30,000 people on waiting lists requiring housing. Since being elected, the Newman government is doing what it can immediately to fix this problem and it is going to get as many roofs over the heads of people as it can. In fact, as of 31 July 2012 in my electorate, a total of 729 applications have been registered for social housing. These applications include 249 applications where the person indicated on their application that they were homeless. We also have identified, through the minister’s recent survey, that we have 658 dwellings in the Caboolture Housing Service Centre area that are underoccupied by two or more rooms. I make no apologies for ensuring that families and kids in our region have a roof over their head rather than being forced to sleep in the back seat of their cars while perfectly good bedrooms are unattended night after night. My office has recently been contacted with many positive stories in relation to recent changes in public housing and I wish to read one today that was published in my local paper. The resident said— We have just been moved by the Queensland Department of Housing from a four-bedroom home which we lived in for 20 years. Housing could not have been more helpful. They paid all costs involved, kept us in the same area as our family all live here too. We totally understood as there are so many others waiting for homes. It is not as bad as it’s being made out. We have a little dog so they made sure we have a small yard. It is with this in mind that I am doing what I can locally to ensure the homelessness situation is addressed. In fact, on Saturday, 15 September I will be taking part in the 2012 Martin’s Haven sleepout. This community fundraising event is being held to raise awareness of the issues of local homelessness and raise funds to support services such as Martin’s Haven, which has been providing families who are homeless or at risk of homelessness with assistance and support to transition into housing. The format of the 2012 Martin’s Haven sleepout, at which I will be joined by the member for Pumicestone, has been elevated to include a new level of community participation. They are bringing the Bathurst 12-hour straight to Caboolture! Martin’s Haven 12-hour challenge will be a fun event which will involve local identities, media, businesses, mums and dads and, of course, us pollies, jumping on a scooter and navigating around a complex obstacle course in the fastest time possible. Money will be raised through sponsorship on a per lap basis. The more laps of the obstacle course we do on the scooter the more funds we raise. The winning team of this inaugural Martin’s Haven 12-hour challenge will receive a shield that I will be proudly supplying to them to present on the day. This is a great opportunity for our local community to come together in a fun way to raise awareness of homelessness in our region and make a contribution to local housing issues. I am looking forward to this event and my continued support to provide adequate housing needs for all those in our community. Politics and the Media Mr JUDGE (Yeerongpilly—LNP) (3.41 pm): On 19 April 2011 Ben Packham from the Australian interviewed the former federal Labor finance minister, Lindsay Tanner, as the author of the book on the corrosive impact of media on politics. As a 17-year political veteran, perhaps conveniently to some extent, he formed the view that neither the media nor politicians were to blame for the sorry state of their respective professions. To an extent I respectfully disagree with him. He said there were two trades being trashed here, that of being a politician and that of being a serious journalist. We all have a choice of how we choose to conduct ourselves. Mr Tanner claimed that there are no conspiracies and there are no bad guys. Some may dispute this point. He simply claimed that everybody is caught in a situation where they—politicians and journalists—are acting quite reasonably under the pressures that they are under. In his book, Sideshow: dumbing down democracy, he examined the danger that modern media and poll driven politics possesses for good public policy—that is, legislation, policies, programs and services—ultimately intended to address the important, if not critical, issues in society. In essence, he argued that there were two key rules now governing the practice of politics: firstly, look like you are doing something; and, secondly, do not offend anyone who matters. Without doubt, this should be considered as a sad indictment on the profession of politics. It is the mandated responsibility of modern government to undertake and arrive at informed decisions to make real differences in our society—in people’s lives—for businesses, families and communities alike. Make no mistake, it is research and evidence that ultimately enables politicians to make well-informed decisions about legislation, policies, programs and services that underpin our society. Provided such initiatives are based on solid research—that is, fact—it makes it difficult, if not impossible, for the media to criticise politicians. Tanner also reflected that in a world where across the political spectrum everybody was engaged in fights about big issues, questions of appearance, presentation and polling were always there but they were secondary to the big fights. In my humble opinion, this is something that has been eroded over 23 Aug 2012 Private Members’ Statements 1719 time and we need to respect this approach again and put an end to the game playing that all too often occurs in parliaments across Australia. There is no doubt in my mind that it is time for politicians to become less concerned with media advisers and more concerned with the opinions of the good people in their electorates. I want to make it very clear that this is exactly what I am here to do in this parliament. (Time expired) Mount Isa, Preventative Health Unit Mr KATTER (Mount Isa—KAP) (3.44 pm): I rise today to address the House regarding the preventative health unit and its subsidiaries in Mount Isa. I have recently met with workers from this service and from extensive discussion I wish to address the chamber regarding our mutual concerns. Mount isa has a considerably high rate of mortality from complications arising from conditions such as diabetes, heart disease, suicide and injury that are directly treatable by preventative health. These are all issues that are taken up by this preventative health unit. One recent initiative of this unit was the Tharrapatha Way walking trail, which is a low-budget walking trail that has seen a lot more people in Mount Isa walking along the Leichhardt River. It is just one way that we are encouraging healthy habits in Mount Isa. That is what this is all about. It has had a very positive impact on the community. Nor would I like to see this service go from Cairns. Having it locally based ensures proper local engagement with target groups who, if not treated properly, can go on to create some very large cost burdens on the community further down the track. The government needs to be acutely aware of how much harder this could make it on residents in north-west Queensland. Figures of 11 to 1 in a cost- benefit analysis have been produced from public health campaigns aimed at reducing heart disease in Australia. This is consistent with the old adage that a stitch in time saves nine. Mount Isa and its surrounding communities are hotspots for issues such as heart disease and diabetes. It is also worth noting that research from the Heart Foundation Queensland Policy Proposals 2012-15 identifies that Queensland deaths from heart disease are 11 per cent higher than the Australian average. Mount Isa and surrounding communities are, again, hotspots for this disease. The preventative health unit in Mount Isa goes a long way to preventing these incidents. Any fall in support of these services in Mount Isa is likely to have a very serious long-term effect on our community and consequently may have large impacts on the budget in years to come. I believe that the services provided by the preventative health unit in Mount Isa will have a strong impact and save the government substantial costs in the future. I therefore strongly urge the government to give consideration to any changes and do this on a long-term basis being mindful of the critical impact it could have on the community and their costs in the future. Police Service, Recruits Mr HATHAWAY (Townsville—LNP) (3.47 pm). I was honoured to represent our police minister and to attend with my other colleagues from Burdekin and Thuringowa the induction of the latest 40 police recruits into the Queensland Police Service. I also note for the record that it was Commissioner Bob Atkinson’s last time as the reviewing officer. He was always a strong advocate for the Queensland Police Service Academy, North Queensland Campus. I note it was his last review after 12 years at the helm. These newest inductees have completed a selection process that is replete with character checks, interviews, intensive assessment, as well as having to meet strict physical requirements and psychological testing. These most recent of constables also then completed 25 weeks of study and intensive training in firearms, driving, operational skills and tactics, physical education, computers, police policies, procedures and, of course, legislation. Amongst these 40 new officers were 26 males and 14 females ranging in ages from 20 to 40, with an average age of 29. There were also two graduates of the Queensland Police Services Justice Entry Program of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander descent. I note also for the House that these newest officers bring with them a variety of educational, tertiary and career experiences and, of course, a breadth of life experience. This can only provide to our Police Service a fresh outlook, angle and enthusiasm for a career in community safety, response and crime prevention. Amongst their number we had a certificate IV in justice administration, a Bachelor of Applied Science—medical, a Bachelor of Engineering, a lifeguard, a childcare worker, a chef, tradies and, of course, coming from a garrison city like Townsville, some six or seven soldiers. For the benefit of our northern and central region members, I note those newest officers will be welcomed to the following regions: 13 will go to the Cairns district, which should help with the Cairns Crime Action Plan; five will go to Mount Isa, despite the fact that the ALP north-west branch member did not vote for the bill; 10 officers will go to my own City of Townsville; one will go to your City of Gladstone, Madam Deputy Speaker; and, despite the fact that the ALP voted against the Criminal Law Amendment 1720 Private Members’ Statements 23 Aug 2012

Bill, six officers will go to Mackay and five will go to Rockhampton. I note that the member for Rockhampton is the shadow police minister, so, although he did not support the Police Service, those officers will support him and his city. Despite the lack of support that those new coppers and their senior mates will get from the ALP, they will continue to make family and personal sacrifices. As we know, regrettably they will go out to serve each day despite the threat to their own life and limb. I was able to remind the officers of their duties, their impeccable integrity, the need to have the highest standards of professionalism and transparency in their accountability and the fact that their duty does not stop at the station but goes 24/ 7. Bassingthwaighte, Mr E; Mini Ekka Mr STEWART (Sunnybank—LNP) (3.50 pm): Today I rise to draw further attention to a legend of Sunnybank and a legend of Queensland who has dedicated more than 40 years of service to the Ekka. The RNA has named Eric Bassingthwaighte of Sunnybank this year’s Show Legend. The Show Legend is a celebrated award presented each year and recognises the dedication and efforts made by an individual to both the RNA and the Ekka. Working as an honorary council steward in the Prime Beef Competition since the 1960s, Mr Bassingthwaighte has been responsible for the processing, showing, auctioning and delivery of cattle at the Ekka. RNA councillor and chairman of the Beef Cattle Committee, Philip Harpham, said Mr Bassingthwaighte has handled this high pressure job incredibly well. He said— Eric has organised the prime cattle section, both for showing and for sale, in a very efficient manner over the years. From my discussions with others at the RNA, I know Eric is highly respected by all of his colleagues, including fellow and past members of the Beef Cattle Committee, Ekka staff, livestock agents, cattle buyers and especially by all exhibitors. It is great to have people like Eric helping tirelessly every year with the RNA. Today I say to all the staff at the Ekka and the RNA, congratulations on a great job in 2012. I would also like to inform the House of another event that happens around this time of year and one that benefits children with special needs. It is the Mini Ekka. On Wednesday, 22 August, the Showman’s Guild held a free Mini Ekka for children with special needs. Those children rarely have the opportunity to experience the delights of the Ekka as we know it. The Showman’s Guild has been holding the Mini Ekka at the Yatala showgrounds for the past seven years. Not only does the guild host the event, but also it helps to organise for Townsend School Bus Service, which is based at Morayfield, to collect the children from school in minibuses and deliver them to the showgrounds at Yatala. The bus drivers give of their time freely to provide this service, with six bus loads of children from Sunnybank State Special School alone. Forty children from Sunnybank State Special School attended, four of whom were in wheelchairs and one in a stroller. The children enjoyed all the delights of Sideshow Alley, including a great assortment of rides and games, fairy floss, hot dogs and doughnuts. They all had a truly enjoyable day, leaving school at 9.30 and arriving back, very tired, at 2.30. I thank the Showman’s Guild and Townsend School Bus Service for providing a great community service and dedicating their time to bring smiles to the faces of many children. Seniors Week Hon. TE DAVIS (Aspley—LNP) (Minister for Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services) (3.53 pm): This week Queensland is celebrating Seniors Week 2012. The over 60s—our parents, grandparents, friends and mentors—make up a large and growing percentage of our community. It is important that we acknowledge those who have given so much over so many years and continue to give. Seniors Week is a fantastic opportunity for Queenslanders of all ages to recognise and celebrate the vibrant and active role seniors play in all aspects of our communities. The huge contribution seniors make through social and voluntary activities cannot be underestimated or undervalued. In fact, it is fair to say that older Queenslanders are the drivers of our volunteer sector. People say they are only as old as they feel, which is such a great attitude to have and one that fits perfectly with Seniors Week 2012. This week the theme for Seniors Week is ‘Living and Loving Life’ and we have a smorgasbord of activities and events on offer right across the state; everything from Zumba classes to computer workshops, art exhibitions and even a mini seniors Olympics. My department has provided funding of $125,000 to community organisations to hold more than 40 Seniors Week events across the state and there are many more events taking place across Queensland through councils and other organisations. I have enjoyed the opportunity to personally get involved in some of the activities and celebrations. On Monday night I attended the LGBT Seniors Expo and Forum and it was wonderful to have a chat with some of the attendees and experience firsthand the diversity that exists among seniors 23 Aug 2012 Private Members’ Statements 1721 in the community. Yesterday I attended the Active Living Seniors Expo and worked my way around many stalls, enjoyed discussions with seniors and organisations, and was taken on a tour through a fantastic mock home display that demonstrated assistive technologies for people with a disability. Earlier today I had the pleasure of addressing the Council of the Ageing Social Inclusion Forum. I walked into a room full of 50 people buzzing with activity and lively conversation. Those seniors were clearly passionate about the issues that mattered to them and their enthusiasm was infectious. I encourage every Queenslander, not just our seniors, to get involved in this Seniors Week. Seniors Week is a very important week and there is much to get involved in. On this side of the House, we appreciate the chance to celebrate the contribution of our over 60s and we appreciate them for everything they continue to contribute to this wonderful state of ours.

Agricultural Colleges Mr HOPPER (Condamine—LNP) (3.55 pm): In a short contribution I must redress what former minister Mulherin just stated in this House. I was a shadow minister to former minister Barton when he first started to wreck the ag colleges in this state. He said that we were educating New South Wales and Victorian students. Another minister, Matt Foley, stated that it was the last of the Bjelke-Petersen realm. Former minister Mulherin went to Dalby and talked about deinvest to reinvest. They purposely ran the ag colleges down to the state that they are in today. They used depreciation to make out they were losing money when the colleges could have come in at a profit. They talked the colleges down so that no students would enter them for rural training. They used to offer a Diploma in Agriculture, certificate II, III and IV, but they have been destroyed. Emerald is falling down. This is Labor’s mess that we are dealing with right now. At lunch time I met with the Premier and we are going to do our very best to salvage what we have, so that we can rebuild the ag colleges. Minister McVeigh has a heck of a job on his hands to rebuild the mess that Mulherin left.

Collins Family Mr TROUT (Barron River—LNP) (3.57 pm): On 12 and 13 August, three generations of the pioneering Collins family gathered at Spring Creek to celebrate 150 years of settlement. I felt extremely privileged to not only join this remarkable family in their celebration but also unveil a monument and speak to those present of the incredible Collins family’s history in Australia, which spans six generations in total. Historically, since 1862 the Collins family has battled the hardships of this remote station, enduring the ravages of droughts and resulting stock losses, brumby infestations, stock diseases, the challenges of travel and communication, times of financial crisis as in the 1890s, wars and cyclones and all manner of challenging weather. They carved a home in the wilderness through sheer courage and indomitable endurance, raised families and cattle, and have stuck there through thick and thin. Not only did the Collins family pioneer the pastoral industry in North Queensland, but they also pioneered tourism in the northern savannah region of Queensland. Undara epitomises the enduring Collins’ ability to venture beyond the horizon. Since the early cattle days, Spring Creek and Rosetta Plains have seen many changes, from horses and bullock teams to tractors and bikes, vehicles and aircraft; from Aboriginal stockmen to Chinese home staff; from home schooling to boarding schools. Today the Thomas Collins Memorial Prize at Blackheath and Thornburgh College is awarded every year to the senior girl who ‘excels in leadership, loyalty and courage’—a fitting recognition of the amazing contribution of the women of the family who helped pioneer this harsh land. The pioneer’s life in the early days of North Queensland settlement, from want of ready communication with seaports and the lack of means of obtaining supplies, was one that called on all the energy, resources and bushmanship of those who had taken this life on in an attempt to make a living for themselves. Their history began in Australia on 11 December 1838 when William Collins of Kent in the United Kingdom and his wife, Elizabeth, and their seven children arrived in Sydney after a 3½-month journey. In 1861 two of their sons—Thomas and Charles Collins—set off with two bullock drays from Deepwater in New South Wales heading north to Greenvale and the Leichhardt track. One night there was a lot of water about and their lead bullock strayed off. Fittingly, that bullock was found at Spring Creek, on the head of the big spring there. Gerry Collins, a fourth-generation member of this pioneering family, applied to develop a tourist facility to showcase the lava tubes located on his family holding, Rosella Plains Station, in 1987. Gerry believed the best way to protect these dramatic, ancient formations for future generations lay in developing a sustainable visitor experience. Gerry’s massive contribution to public life has been recognised in recent years by him being awarded an AM, a Member of the Order of Australia. I commend this amazing family for its fortitude, initiative and resilience in both the pastoral and tourism industries. 1722 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012

PUBLIC SERVICE AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL Resumed from 31 July (see p. 1292).

Second Reading Hon. JP BLEIJIE (Kawana—LNP) (Attorney-General and Minister for Justice) (4.00 pm): I move— That the bill be now read a second time. On behalf of the Premier, I thank the Finance and Administration Committee for its prompt consideration of the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012. The committee noted the reasons for the bill and the four pieces of legislation the bill amends. I also note that the opposition has attached a dissenting report to the committee report. However, it has not indicated its reasons for dissent. I look forward to hearing its contributions during the debate. The committee’s only recommendation was that the bill be passed, and the government is happy with that recommendation. I also table an erratum to the explanatory notes that clarifies that legal representation is available in proceedings before the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission under section 284 of the Industrial Relations Act 1999. Tabled paper: Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012, erratum to explanatory notes [850]. The purpose of the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill is to improve the operation of existing Public Service legislation through improved alignment and efficiencies in discharging its public sector integrity functions. In relation to the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission, the bill will facilitate the orderly and expeditious exercise of its jurisdiction and powers, and will also expand parties’ rights to have legal representation in matters that appear before it. The bill’s objectives will be achieved through amendments to the Public Service Act 2008, the Public Sector Ethics Act 1994, the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2010 and the Industrial Relations Act 1999. I will also be moving further amendments to the bill relating to the Industrial Relations Act 1999 and the Public Service Act 2008. We know from the bill that the particular provisions in relation to the legislation deal with public sector accountability, as explained in the introductory speech by the honourable the Premier, while at the same time streamline processes to ensure that acts are administered as efficiently and effectively as possible. It completes the final stage of the transition for the Public Service appeals function from the commission to the QIRC. It also deals with the government’s intention and direction that the Public Service Commission drive our public sector efficiency agenda. The bill completes the process by transferring the administrative functions of those appeals, as I have indicated. It also replaces and deals with issues of ethics in the Public Service and the training requirements. The oversight agency for public interest disclosures will now be the Queensland Ombudsman. The amendments with respect to the Industrial Relations Act deal with streamlining the administrative function of the QIRC by allocating responsibility for the administration of the commission from the president to the vice president including the allocation of the commission’s business. Finally, it allows a discretion to allow legal representation where the commission is satisfied it is appropriate for a party to be represented by a lawyer. As I have indicated, I will be moving some amendments in relation to the Industrial Relations Act and the Public Service Act. Since the introduction of the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill, it has become apparent that further amendments are required for the efficient transfer of the administration functions for the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission president to the vice president. These changes are technical in nature. Additional amendments will also be moved to legislate the government’s election commitment to have a Public Service that our state can afford and that delivers for Queenslanders. These amendment will also provide additional protection of public servants’ personal information. I commend the bill to the House. Mr PITT (Mulgrave—ALP) (4.05 pm): I rise to contribute to the debate on the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012. This legislation and its management through the committee process has been nothing short of farcical. The opposition will be opposing this legislation. In the public briefing by departmental officials, the government asked the department on two occasions why there had not been consultation on this legislation. On each occasion the department answered that this was because it was not government policy to consult. I will say that again: because it was not government policy to consult. It appears that this government is so bad at consultation that it has failed to even consult with its own committee members about the fact that the government’s policy is not to consult. This is a farce and something one would expect to see on an episode of Yes, Minister. The committee report at page 4 states— ... realistic consultation times should be adhered to particularly when legislation affects numerous stakeholders. 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1723

It is a pity that this is not government policy. That committee view says more about the willingness of LNP backbenchers to stand up to the so-called leadership team of this government and tell it how it is, and I commend them for that. Queenslanders should be concerned that after four months of LNP government with a large parliamentary majority a policy has already been developed to not consult with the public. Under the definition of ‘consultation’, it generally occurs before a decision is made. This process has been faux consultation explained away by so-called urgency. The government claims that this legislation is urgent because there is a need to provide legislative effect to the transfer of the Public Service appeals registry function to the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission. The appeals function has been operating from the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission since 1 July following the Industrial Relations (Fair Work Act Harmonisation) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012. If the government had consulted and managed this legislation properly, it would have no reason to claim urgency for this legislation. This is just another example of rushed legislation with a policy of limited—or now no— consultation leading to mistakes. The Labor Party does not agree with this approach, nor do we agree with this legislation. This legislation transfers Public Service appeals to the Industrial Relations Commission for the purposes, according to the explanatory notes, of allowing the Public Service Commission to have a public sector efficiency agenda. Representatives from the Public Service Commission advised the committee in the hearing that they had completed an audit of all government departments looking at the non-frontline, particularly at levels of corporate services and policy and program staff. Of course we have not seen this document made available to the public—just as this government continues its cruel holding pattern for government workers over their future. The Public Service Commission will also have public interest disclosure oversight transferred to the Queensland Ombudsman under this legislation. The reasons cited for this move are to increase efficiency, although no detail or substance has been provided to substantiate this. This legislation also removes requirements for annual ethics training for government workers. We are not surprised by this move and it will not help the government in its so-called ‘restore accountability in government’ agenda. There has been absolutely no justification provided by the government for the transfer of administrative functions from the president to the vice resident of the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission. The only justification is that the department went through legislation and looked at various provisions and this seemed to work better. We are none the wiser about what any of these provisions are or what justifies these ‘procedural’ amendments. Most concerning of all are the amendments in this legislation to broaden the scope for legal representation in the Industrial Relations Commission. The strength of the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission is that it is a layperson’s court. In fact, in describing the transfer of administrative arrangements, the committee report at page 11 describes the commission as a ‘lay tribunal’. It is a forum where workers and union advocates can operate on a level playing field with employers. The justification provided for these changes—that industrial relations matters are now more complex—is about as bad as no justification at all. Introducing legal representation will only make these matters more complex. It allows parties to slow decision making by bogging it down in legal technicality. Further, it risks removing the level playing field of the commission and providing an advantage to employers over employees. As the Queensland Council of Unions pointed out in their submission— ... employers have access to financial resources which place them in the position where they are able to engage legal representatives on all occasions. It is disappointing that this legislation will undermine the ability of lay advocates in the commission to achieve the best negotiated outcomes, rather than legalistic adversarial decisions. This government claims to stand for efficiency and reducing costs, but all that allowing broader legal representation will do is balance negotiations in the government’s favour. It will allow the government to stall negotiated outcomes and increase costs for all parties concerned. As the United Firefighters Union outlined in their submission, some of these increased costs will have to be met by the government. The Queensland Teachers Union outlined in their submission that the cost for a QC or SC is in the range of $1,000 per hour, for a senior barrister $600 per hour and for a junior barrister $400 per hour. These are costs ordinary Queensland workers cannot afford. It seems that, for this government, it is okay to find money for your election promises by sacking government workers and it is also okay to amend legislation to open up the ability to spend more money undermining workers’ rights. This is significant legislation in terms of what it does to workers’ rights in this state, and this government did not even consider it worthy of public consultation. It is symptomatic of this government’s approach to workers—of leaving them in the lurch on whether they have a job until the budget, of stripping away their enterprise bargaining agreements with the stroke of the pen, and at every turn treating hardworking Queenslanders with a complete lack of respect, almost as if they are not real people. Well, they are real people and, as the august Westpac-Melbourne Institute Survey of Consumer Sentiment has found, real people are suffering from this government’s reckless decision making. 1724 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012

The Treasurer and this government cannot deny that Queensland has experienced the sharpest fall in sentiment of all states within its first four months. The Queensland Industrial Relations Commission’s role is set out in the Industrial Relations Act 1999. The objectives of this legislation are to ‘support economic prosperity and social justice’ by ‘promoting participation in industrial relations by employees and employers’ and by ‘encouraging responsible representation of employees and employers by democratically run organisations and associations’. It seems that with this legislation the government has forgotten the principal objectives of the Industrial Relations Act—just as this government has forgotten about the requirements in the Industrial Relations Act to consult with employee organisations about dismissals, and just as this government has forgotten about treating government workers with dignity and respect. The opposition will be opposing this legislation because it is simply ill-considered. It is legislation aimed at changing the focus of the Public Service Commission away from the efficient delivery of services to Queenslanders to an ideological focus of attacking government workers. It is legislation that will result in increased costs for employers and employees through making the layperson’s tribunal of the Queensland Industrial Relations more legalistic. This LNP government is not interested in a level playing field between employers and employees, nor is it interested in consulting with the community. The LNP would rather strip away employee entitlements with a stroke of a pen, as it has done with Public Service directive 8/12 that now allows this government to contract out most of the Public Service. This was done—just like this legislation—with no proper consultative process. We will not stand for this in the Labor Party and most Queenslanders will not, either. Mr CRANDON (Coomera—LNP) (4.12 pm): I rise to make a contribution to the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill. The Finance and Administration Committee, of which I am the chair, took responsibility for this bill, and I thank all of those on the committee for their efforts. The staff— Deborah Jeffrey, Maggie Lilith, Marilyn Freeman and Lyn Whelan—were also involved in pulling this report together. On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank those who took the time to provide submissions and those who met with the committee and provided additional information during the inquiry, as well as the departmental officers for their cooperation in providing information to the committee on a timely basis. The committee recommends—and I note that the Attorney-General pointed this out—by a majority that the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 be passed. The Premier introduced the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 to the Legislative Assembly on 31 July 2012, and the bill was referred to the committee. The Legislative Assembly agreed to a motion requiring the committee to report back to the Legislative Assembly by 13 August 2012, which gave us about two weeks in total. The committee had limited time to consider the bill due to its urgent nature. The committee’s consideration of the bill included calling for public submissions and a public department briefing. We also considered expert advice on the bill’s conformance with fundamental legislative principles. The committee advertised the inquiry and the request for stakeholders to provide written submissions on 1 August. We also wrote to many stakeholder groups inviting them to give written submissions. The closing date for submissions was Monday, 6 August. We received five submissions— from the Queensland Law Society, the Queensland Council of Unions, the Queensland Teachers Union, the Queensland branch of the United Firefighters Union of Australia and the Electrical Trades Union. In other words, although we heard in the House today some complaints about the short time frame and what have you, we did manage to receive five quite specific and in-depth submissions to the committee. The detailed submissions are available on the parliament’s website. We held a public briefing on the bill with officers from the Department of Justice and Attorney-General and the Public Service Commission on Wednesday, 8 August 2012. As has been noted by the Attorney-General, the objectives of the bill are: to transfer the administrative arrangements for Public Service appeals under the Public Service Act 2008 to the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission; to amend the Public Sector Ethics Act 1994 to replace annual ethics training with an emphasis on employees having education and training in ethical standards at induction and regularly throughout their employment; to transfer the public interest disclosure oversight agency function from the PSC to the Queensland Ombudsman; and to transfer the administrative functions from the president to the vice-president of the QIRC and expand the ability for parties to access legal representation in matters before the QIRC. The committee recommended that the bill be passed, as was noted a short while ago. I want to talk about the matter of the urgency, and this needs to be understood by all. The committee report states— The PSC advised that the urgency in relation to the Bill is due to the transfer of the Public Service appeals registry functions. They advised that recent legislative changes transitioning the hearing and deciding of appeals to the QIRC became operative from 1 July 2012. The administrative functions that supported the hearing and deciding of appeals, the registry function, currently remain with the PSC. So the urgency is to ensure that the transition to the QIRC is finalised. The explanatory notes state that there has been no community consultation on the bill. Many of the submissions were critical of the lack of community consultation. However, it is important to note that the department advised that, in relation to the IR Act amendments, this was a matter of government 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1725 policy. In regard to the amendments to the other acts, the PSC advised that there was no community consultation as a matter of government policy. Importantly, they did consult internally and considered that the proposed amendments—and this is the bit that was left out by the member for Mulgrave—were not matters that would have a high level of interest to the community. It is all very well for the member for Mulgrave to say that the community was not consulted, but the reality is that this is all about the Public Service and that members of the community really were not all that interested, so the member for Mulgrave has taken things out of context. It is apparent from comments made in submissions and the subsequent departmental response that there is misunderstanding by stakeholders about the intent of some aspects of the proposed amendments. I make the point that in the future we do need to strive for more realistic consultation times, particularly when legislation affects numerous stakeholders. I want to make the point that we are not all that overjoyed with the short time frames. However, there is urgency built into this particular bill, as I outlined a short while ago. Let us face it, in the 53rd Parliament we saw many bills come through this place that were regarded as urgent bills. In fact, I seem to recall a couple of bills that were so urgent that we changed the rules of the House to ensure they were tabled in time so that the then Treasurer could stand up and start debating them. To say that consultation time frames have been shortened dramatically and beyond anything that has happened in the past when the government has determined there is an urgency in relation to the bill is not realistic. An overview of the concerns raised by various organisations that made submissions can be found in the committee’s report. As mentioned earlier, all submissions are on the parliament’s website. The report itself also outlines responses from departmental officers regarding concerns raised. I note that there are amendments to be moved during consideration in detail that have not been considered in this report. Once again, I thank all participants in this important legislative process for their input on this particular bill. I commend the bill to the House. Hon. GW ELMES (Noosa—LNP) (Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and Multicultural Affairs and Minister Assisting the Premier) (4.21 pm): I rise this afternoon to speak in support of the bill. The Newman government’s vision is for a renewed, refocused and more efficient Public Service—focused on the core and essential services that the people of Queensland need and deserve. Unfortunately, there are some tough decisions that a government has to make to achieve this and to restore the state’s finances to a sustainable level. None of these decisions is being taken lightly. We wish that there was an easier path to take, but there simply is not. Much has been said in recent weeks about the government’s plan to deliver a more efficient and effective Public Service. Unfortunately, not all of what has been said has been with the aim of furthering the debate. Unions and the opposition have intentionally tried to confuse the public about two separate processes currently underway across the Queensland Public Service. The government has been as upfront as possible about the restructure of the Public Service, which is necessary because of the neglect of the previous government over two decades. The Commission of Audit interim report showed that Queensland had more public servants than the state’s population can justify. We are not reshaping the Public Service because we want to; we are doing it because we have to. We are trying to redress years of neglect and unrestrained bureaucratic growth. That should not be confused with the second process, which is a three-yearly round of enterprise bargaining processes which are currently underway with various public sector unions, and I will come back to that a bit later. Unfortunately, some vested interests have chosen to intentionally confuse the two. The result of this misinformation has been unnecessary concern and confusion among the public about exactly what the government is doing. The worst of it is that people are being told by union leaders and opposition members that front-line services like teachers, police, fire and ambulance officers are to going to be cut. Ms Palaszczuk: You changed the definition. You just changed the definition. When did you change the directive? When did you change it? You changed it. Mr ELMES: The government has repeatedly stated its commitment to maintaining front-line services and that any staff reductions would be at back-of-house, administrative and corporate support functions. In relation to those comments made by the Leader of the Opposition, between June 2000 and June 2011, 60,480 additional public servants were put on in this state. Many of them are police, ambos, firies, teachers and so forth but many, many more have been put on and they have filled up high-rise buildings around Brisbane that this state cannot afford. Members opposite put them there. This state cannot afford them. We are now placed in a position where we have no alternative other than to fix the mess that the old Labor Party left well and truly behind. This bill is necessary to provide certainty for the government’s reinvigoration of the Public Service. The Public Service Commission chief executive issued a directive effective from 31 July 2012 which states that employment security and contracting-out clauses in industrial instruments no longer apply. The employment security and contracting-out clauses in many industrial instruments are overly restrictive and make reform of the Public Service difficult and cumbersome. This directive is necessary to allow for the efficient restructure of agencies. The government is confident that the Public Service 1726 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012

Commission chief executive acted within his delegated authority in approving the directive. Some unions have appealed the decision. This bill will provide the certainty needed for the public sector renewal process to continue and to be completed with the least delay. We have heard repeatedly in the last few weeks from public servants and their unions that they want an end to the uncertainty, and so do we. The restructure of agencies like the Department of Transport and Main Roads will result in savings which will assist the government in bringing the state’s budget back under control. Anyone in this place knows that we have to do that, and it is because of the legacy of debt left by the Bligh government that preceded us. We would rather not have to be restructuring the Public Service and finding savings, but it is something we have to do because it has been forced upon us by the incompetence of the previous government. Every minister and director-general feels for the staff in their departments who are affected by the decisions we have to make. But there is a much bigger consideration which cannot be ignored, and that is the future prosperity of the state and more than four million residents who each day contribute to making it a better place. We have a responsibility to act in the best interests of the state as a whole, not to protect Public Service jobs that the rest of the community pays for through more taxes, more charges and more levies. By taking action now which causes some pain, we are preventing the much greater pain which could have resulted in the future if we did nothing to correct Labor’s financial mismanagement. The Public Service restructure is being undertaken in an ordered way and this employment security directive is part of the process to achieve a more efficient and responsive Public Service. The existence of the directive does not mandate immediate change in any particular government department, nor does its existence mean that it has to be used. The directive provides the mechanism should any agency decide that better value for taxpayers’ money could be achieved by outsourcing some service or services. Our focus is on delivering quality services at the best possible price so that we can recover as soon as possible from the financial mess left behind by the former government. For the past few years the Bligh government could not even afford to pay public servants from consolidated revenue. They had to borrow just to pay the fortnightly wages bill. The result is that we are now faced with having to reshape the Public Service to bring it into line with the funds that we have to pay. It is basic economics: if you spend more than you have, then you incur an extra expense, which is an interest on borrowings. If you let borrowings get out of hand, then interest payments can become one of your biggest expenses, as it is in Queensland. Every dollar spent on interest payments is one less dollar available to be spent on staff and services. Let me return now to the enterprise bargaining process. Discussions are currently underway between the Public Service Commission and unions on various enterprise bargaining agreements which are due for renewal. We have made fair offers in the current circumstances in which inflation across Queensland is 1.2 per cent. In Brisbane I believe it is 0.9 per cent of one per cent. We inherited from the previous government a state debt which at the moment is $65 billion and is heading towards $85 billion if we can stabilise it at that point. There are times when restraint is needed from all parties so that we can retain as many Public Service jobs as possible. The focus of this government as far as the Public Service is concerned is to rein in the massive debt and thereby protect as many Public Service jobs as possible. However, we cannot do it alone. We need recognition from the public sector unions that wage increases exist within a broader environment. Enterprise bargaining is just that: bargaining. It is not just about what unions want; it is also about what the employer can afford to pay. I note that the Together union secretary last week said that his members would be prepared to consider a wage freeze if it meant Public Service jobs could be saved as a trade-off. It is a pity the union did not display this bargaining spirit a little earlier, rather than just opposing, point-blank, everything the government has put on the table. In keeping with his previous form, Mr Scott made his offer through the media rather than put it on the table as part of negotiations. That highlights the difference between the two sides of the current enterprise bargaining process: the government is prepared to bargain while the unions are only interested in confrontation. If the various unions are serious about representing their members, the best thing they can do is work with us to find savings, flexibilities and efficiencies in the Public Service so that we can retain as many jobs as possible. The alternative, if the unions have their way, is paying more money to fewer people. Mrs CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (4.30 pm): I rise to speak to the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill. On the face of it, it appears that these proposed changes to the Public Service Act follow on from the changes that were made in June. It may be quite logical that some of these changes occur. I think what is important to put on the record is that these changes are being made in an environment of incredible uncertainty. Public servants do not really know what changes to their employment are going to occur. We have had numbers of job losses mentioned in this place on repeated occasions, but there are no names attached to those job losses. Government members say that job losses will not affect front-line staff, but I have not heard a definitive definition of ‘front-line’ other than at one stage I heard that someone in a front-line position had 75 per cent public contact. In some departments, certain staff may be critical to the operation of their 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1727 area of employment but may not have as much contact with the community. I am keen to listen to further contributions from members of the opposition. I think any disquiet in the Public Service, other than on the part of those who are committed to the union’s program, will be from people who are incredibly uncertain in terms of their job security and who wonder whether these changes will put further pressure on them and their job certainty. Moving public interest disclosure issues to the Ombudsman, as was argued in the Premier’s explanatory speech, makes eminent sense. The Ombudsman already has the opportunity and the responsibility to deal with disclosures in relation to maladministration in departments and certainly has that experience. What will have to be looked at is ensuring there is appropriate resourcing for it to properly accept those additional responsibilities. In this debate I am certainly interested in hearing not only government members’ contributions—that is important—but also opposition members’ contributions. As a result of the passage of this bill, responsibility in relation to Public Service appeals will be moved to the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission. I personally believe that, provided the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission is independent and able to properly exercise impartiality, those appeals will be well heard and well arbitrated—provided, again, it has appropriate resources. I look forward to this debate and to hearing the various concerns from the opposition, but also from the government, in relation to assurances that government members are going to give to public servants and their families because, as I said, this bill is being debated in an environment of great employment uncertainty. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Miss Barton): I call the member for Logan. Mr PUCCI (Logan—LNP) (4.34 pm): Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. May I say, this is the first time I have had the opportunity to speak while you have been sitting in the chair. I just want to say congratulations and it is an honour to be here. I rise to speak in support of the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012. This bill will improve the operation of existing key Public Service legislation and facilitate the government’s reform agenda through greater alignment and efficiencies in discharging its public sector integrity functions; make proactive changes to the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission to support the orderly and expeditious exercise of its jurisdiction and powers; and, finally, expand parties’ rights to access legal representation in matters heard in the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission. This amendment bill, which is in keeping with our government’s campaign promises to reduce red tape and generate smaller government, will in turn produce a more accountable public sector. Streamlining operational functions and containing the escalating cost associated with the operations of a public office will reduce the tedious burden imposed on managers in the public sector. This amendment bill is in response to a series of issues that, until now, limited the operational effectiveness of the public sector. It will refocus the public sector, which currently operates on a regulatory function, and guide it towards a more efficiency based agenda. This realignment, from the existing oversight agency to the Queensland Ombudsman, will see a reduction in the oversight duplication that currently exists, thereby reducing waste and saving taxpayers’ money. Having two agencies whose purpose serves the same outcome defies the logic of a productive and efficient government. The Queensland Ombudsman is the key and effective force in dealing with the maladministration of departments and its current charter ensures that comprehensive oversight is provided for Queenslanders. This shift in focus, from the current public interest disclosure agencies towards the Ombudsman, will see an improved and more effective oversight capability in our state. This amendment bill also makes changes to the Industrial Relations Act 1999, with specific reference to the jurisdiction and powers of the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission. These changes will assist both the commission and those being heard before it in an expeditious and orderly process. Changes to the act will also see greater access to legal representation, which in turn will assist government in managing negotiations that would otherwise require arbitration by the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission. With the perilous state that our budget and Public Service were left in, courtesy of the frivolous and often negligent managerial operational practices employed by the former Labor government, the need to establish a clear, proactive and systematic Public Service is a must. The bureaucratic entanglement that is present in the oversight of workplace dispute resolutions hampers and at times even impedes the public sector from getting the very clarity it sorely deserves. This chaotic environment is detrimental to the public sector and ultimately decreases operational effectiveness. By eliminating duplicate organisations and streamlining the administrative process, we will again cut costs, clear red tape and see real results for Queenslanders who have cases before an oversight committee. This amendment brings about minor changes to the Industrial Relations Act 1999. The small yet significant change will push decision making in the administration of the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission down from the president to vice-president. This change, though appearing minor on the surface, will increase the capabilities and powers of the QIRC by boosting its capability to appropriately 1728 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012 delegate the necessary authority to execute its mandate. This refocus will also see the transitional changes to the Public Service Act 2008 completed and the transfer of the Public Service Commission chief executive’s appeal function to the QIRC. This move will give the QIRC the ability to administer more effectively the aspects attached to its members when carrying out the Public Service appeals functions. In almost every case of arbitration, both parties have the intention to reach an amicable solution and return their focus to getting on with the job. This amendment allows for a smooth and effective administrative process to achieve just that. Once again, this bill will bring about a reduction in red tape and create a smaller and more efficient government entity. This amendment bill supports the need to change the culture towards continuous training within the office environment. Whilst on active duty in the Marine Corps, a practice we employed on a regular basis—at a minimum, once per year—was that our unit would undertake induction programs that reinforced OH&S practices, ethics, equity and diversity and appropriate workplace behaviour. In my 20 years of military service and as a certified trainer and assessor, as well as a workplace health and safety officer, I not only was the recipient of this type of training but also conducted much of it. These programs are constructive tools that can be implemented in the workplace that, as mentioned, reinforce those key yet often forgotten strategies in ensuring a harmonious and productive work environment. This legislative amendment is a cost-effective, pragmatic and appropriate measure to reducing red tape and is in line with the five-point action plan we took to the election whilst at the same time protecting services within the government sector. When as a government we are taking the steps to fix the appalling condition our state was left in by those members of the Labor Party to my far right, legislation like this will play a key role in getting our state back on track, restoring accountability in government. If we are intending on providing an operationally sound government—one that will achieve results, one that will not jeopardise the economic stability of the state but, on the contrary, drive it—we need legislation like the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 to achieve that important mission. I am proud to commend this bill to the House and be part of a government that is making the right decisions to support the industrial changes within the public sector. Ms PALASZCZUK (Inala—ALP) (Leader of the Opposition) (4.39 pm): I rise to contribute to the debate on the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill. As the Manager of Opposition Business has already indicated, the opposition will be opposing this bill. The bill is ill conceived, rushed and has not had sufficient consultation to ensure it will work appropriately. We cannot in all conscience support a bill that has not been adequately scrutinised by the committee system and had the required input from stakeholders who will be affected by these changes. And what do we see this afternoon? This afternoon we see the Attorney-General come into this chamber and produce a series of amendments— four to five pages of amendments—with no consultation. They were not raised at the committee. You did not discuss this at the committee. You have come in here and what you have done is absolutely and utterly disgraceful. I cannot understand it. You have had little consultation in relation to this bill, and then you come in here with five pages of amendments at the last moment. We want to question the Attorney- General more as to what is the purpose of these amendments. Are these amendments because there is current legal action afoot in the Supreme Court by the unions? Is this why you have come in? Yes? You are sitting there smirking, so I will take that smirking as acceptance. I will take it as acceptance. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Miss Barton): Order! The opposition leader will direct her comments through the chair and will refrain from using the word ‘you’. Ms PALASZCZUK: Of course, Madam Deputy Speaker. What we have seen once again by this government—and I raised it in this House earlier this afternoon—is no decent consultation. The committee system was set up as a bipartisan initiative in that issues would go to a committee for a certain period of time. Mr Stevens: You were a part of the CLA that agreed to it. You agreed to it! Ms PALASZCZUK: You want to talk about the CLA, Manager of Government Business. It is dominated by the LNP where we very rarely get a say. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I have asked the opposition leader to stop referring to members as ‘you’. Ms PALASZCZUK: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. When this bill went to the committee for discussion, the Queensland Council of Unions lodged an objection to the short time frames for consultation on this bill. This was particularly exacerbated by the fact that a similar short time frame had been allowed on the amendments brought in earlier this year. The Queensland Law Society, which has been particularly diligent in providing written submission after written submission after written submission on much of the legislation so far referred to committees, has again noted the society’s concern over these ‘exceptionally short reporting time frames’. It felt that, given the severely truncated opportunity for review of the amending legislation, an in-depth analysis has not been possible. It is possible that there are issues relating to fundamental legislative principles or unintended drafting consequences which we have not identified. It is a shame that we undertook a massive review and restructure of the committee system of this parliament such a short time ago and so far in this parliament 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1729 we have seen very little opportunity for optimal use of the committee to scrutinise the legislation. This afternoon more amendments have come in here, once again not being able to be scrutinised by the process—the process that has been set up. When we are talking about the Public Service, I am more than happy to talk about the job cuts that this government is making. There is only one thing government workers need to remember, and these are the words. These are the words that government workers need to remember: ‘Public servants have nothing to fear from me.’ Who said that? Who said those words to the Brisbane Times on 4 April 2011? Or these words: ‘But the Public Service will grow,’ said at an LNP news conference on 20 February 2012? Those were the words the Premier and his Treasurer were using before they won office. But after their election victory, what did they say? The Premier said there are 20,000 more public servants than Queensland can afford. The Treasurer said— We on this side know that a real job is in the private sector. That is what the Treasurer said. That is how much the Treasurer of this state thinks of government workers. That is how much the Treasurer and the government of this state value government workers. I want to tell the House that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of government workers out there who are feeling anxiety, who are feeling stress, who are feeling periods of depression because they have no certainty. And who has created this uncertainty? A government member: Labor! Ms PALASZCZUK: No, it is not Labor. Government members interjected. Ms PALASZCZUK: No, it is not Labor. Government members interjected. Ms PALASZCZUK: No, it is not Labor. No, it is not the media. The people who are responsible for creating this fear and uncertainty are the members sitting on the government benches. That is who is responsible for creating this fear and this uncertainty. Why would any government worker want to trust this LNP ever again? In fact, why would anyone trust it to keep its word on anything? As I said earlier this week, only the member for Gregory has stood up for his constituents on job cuts, fighting for jobs in Emerald at the Transport and Main Roads office. The member for Gregory said, ‘Jobs will go over my dead body.’ He said that it was the job of MPs to stand up for local jobs, adding, ‘That’s what I’m elected to do.’ That is what every member of this chamber should be doing. Every member in this House should be standing up for job growth and the delivery of services in their electorates. A ReachTEL poll was released this afternoon, and I would urge members to have a look at that poll very closely. Mr STEVENS: I rise to a point of order. I fail to see in any way the relevance of a ReachTEL poll on the bill that is being discussed at this present time. It does not have any relevance to the bill. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition will remain relevant to the bill. Ms PALASZCZUK: I am speaking about the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill. Question 6 of the ReachTEL poll asked, ‘Which of the following do you think should be the primary focus of your local member?’ Some 79 per cent of respondents in Sandgate said supporting local jobs and services. Here is the member for Sandgate. Is the member for Sandgate standing up for local jobs and services? No! In Townsville 77.8 per cent of respondents said that they should be standing up for supporting local jobs and services. Is the member for Townsville standing up for local jobs and services? No! In Brisbane Central—and it is a pity the member for Brisbane Central is not here—once again over 70 per cent of people who responded said that they should be standing up for supporting local jobs and services. When you are elected as a member of parliament to this House you are elected to stand up for your constituents. You are elected to stand in this place and to stand up for the jobs that are in your local communities and to stand up for services. And what have we seen from this government? What have we seen in the last five months? Disappointment, job cuts, cuts to services. That is what we have seen. That is what we have seen and that is what we are going to continue to see under this government. We all know what it means: Queenslanders losing their jobs, people suffering anxiety as they wait to hear their fate, people crying at work as they wait to hear whether they will be able to pay the mortgage next week, ordinary Queensland workers who do not know whether they are front line or not because the goalposts keep moving. Local communities do not know whether their courthouse doors will remain open. Court transcription services are being threatened with being sent offshore. School cleaners and groundspeople are unsure whether they will be able to continue looking after our schools. Who did we see protesting here this week? Who did we see at the doors of the Parliament House? We saw the ambulance officers and we saw the firefighters. Why were they here? Because there is no certainty about their jobs. Who else did we see? Honourable members interjected. 1730 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012

Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Miss Barton): Order! There is too much noise across the chamber and I cannot hear the Leader of the Opposition. Ms PALASZCZUK: Who else did we see here this week? The teachers. Mr Bleijie: The Socialist Alliance. Ms PALASZCZUK: No, we saw the teachers here. They are uncertain about their jobs, uncertain about the future. Honourable members interjected. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! There are too many interjections across the chamber and I cannot hear the Leader of the Opposition. Ms Trad: And those people as well. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: I did not name any particular member. All members were loud. The directive was at all members. Ms PALASZCZUK: This government has the opportunity to end the fear and uncertainty. They have the opportunity— Mr Bleijie: Respect the chair. Ms PALASZCZUK: These are the words from Pinocchio over here. Mr Bleijie interjected. Ms PALASZCZUK: That is what the Courier-Mail said about you. The Courier-Mail said that you were Pinocchio, not telling the truth. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I have asked the opposition leader to stop calling members ‘you’ and stop referring to members as ‘you’. Please direct your comments through the chair and call members by their proper title. Ms PALASZCZUK: The government has the opportunity to end the fear and to end the uncertainty. By coming in here and continuing to change the goalposts, by continuing to make changes to legislation without consultation, by coming in here and moving amendments en masse that no-one has even had the chance to look at, goes against everything that the Labor Party and we here on this side believe in. The time to end this uncertainty is now and the LNP has the opportunity to do this once and for all. (Time expired) Mr GULLEY (Murrumba—LNP) (4.52 pm): I rise to speak in favour of the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 and note that I have a hard act to follow after that speech. I would like the House to note that I am a member of the Finance and Administration Committee, which has considered this bill in detail. I made five pledges to Murrumba during the campaign, including cutting waste, revitalising front- line services and restoring accountability to government. I believe that this bill allows the new government to fulfil those pledges. I support the urgency of the bill to enact the changes to be made by this bill to be effective in time and I also note the amendments to the bill. This bill before the House amends three acts: the Public Service Act 2008, the Public Sector Ethics Act 1994 and the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2010. I will explore the administrative changes to the Public Sector Ethics Act 1994. Under previous legislation, ethics training was required to be undertaken on an annual basis. These proposed changes will allow department heads flexibility in the timing and delivery of this training rather than slavish adherence to rules that may or may not be relevant. I wonder what the alleged fake Tahitian prince was thinking each year when he underwent that training and what, if any, effect the annual training had on that gentleman. On my review of the bill, I support the intent of these changes. I believe that the changes to the Public Service Act 2008 are largely administrative. They transfer the functions of hearing and deciding Public Service appeals to the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission. On my review of the bill, I support the intent of those changes. The amendments to the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2010 will transfer the public interest disclosure oversight to the Queensland Ombudsman from 1 January 2013. The protection of whistleblowers is a core tenet of a good society and a government. Sadly, the previous government did not respect whistleblowers. We only have to look at what happened in Bundaberg to realise that the last government was more interested in itself rather than good government and protecting good people. I believe there are real synergies in transferring the management of public interest disclosure in relation to maladministration. 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1731

I am proud to be a member of a government that seeks to serve society in an efficient and accountable manner. The previous government was neither efficient nor accountable. I commend the bill to the House. Mr MULHERIN (Mackay—ALP) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (4.55 pm): I rise to oppose the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012. These amendments are the second stage of changes to the administration of Public Service appeals. The first stage of the changes were introduced as part of the Industrial Relations (Fair Work Act Harmonisation) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012, which was passed on 6 June 2012. Those changes were wrong then and they are wrong now. The initial changes included instructions that the supposedly independent Queensland Industrial Relations Commission would have to take direction from the government about the economic situation when determining wage decisions. The initial changes also allowed for ministerial intervention in industrial disputes. This bill, which is a continuation of the initial changes, is essentially about streamlining the LNP process of sacking government workers. The explanatory notes of the bill state. ... the Government is refocusing the Public Service Commission away from a regulatory function towards a public sector efficiency agenda. In other words, this bill is making it easy for the LNP government to line up government workers, count them and then fire them. The changes in this bill are not surprising, as we know how ruthless this LNP government has been when dealing with its own employees. We heard the Premier and his government flip-flop about the number of government workers they are sacking—it was going to be 20,000 and now they are not so sure. What they fail to realise is that every one of these jobs is not a statistic, but a person’s life. The lack of dignity, humility and grace with which this government treats its own workers is astounding. The LNP government does not have the grace to let thousands of public servants, who are in a holding pattern, know about the future of their jobs. We hear today that this government is making its own workers sick with stress because of the treatment they are receiving from the LNP. It is long past the time that the LNP started to give answers about the job cuts that the Premier arrogantly refuses to provide. Any number of job losses in regional communities has widespread ramifications across the area, but uncertainty about job losses makes it even worse. We know jobs are going in QBuild, Main Roads, Transport, Primary Industries, Health and Education, but the Newman government will not be upfront with the people of Queensland and tell them how many jobs will go and what areas will be affected. The Newman government needs to acknowledge how local job cuts will affect regional communities. Job losses in regional communities have huge impacts on regional service delivery and local communities. Every job cut means one fewer pay packet being spent at local shops and on local services. Job losses also mean that families will have to move away from regional towns, taking their children away from local schools, which, in turn, could lose teachers as the population shrinks. According to research conducted by the Queensland Council of Unions, working off ABS figures on statistical regional populations, regional areas may lose millions of dollars annually if 20,000 public sector jobs are cut. The estimations are that in Wide Bay-Burnett, that would be $97 million a year out of the local economy; on the Gold Coast, $170 million a year out of the local economy; on the Darling Downs, $78 million a year out of the local economy; on the Sunshine Coast, $108 million a year out of the local economy; and in Far North Queensland, $90 million a year out of the local economy. The Newman government needs to end this waiting game and be honest with the people of regional Queensland about the many jobs he is axing. My other concern with this bill is that the LNP government has again allowed very little time for public scrutiny of the legislation. This is a reoccurring pattern with this secretive LNP government with a number of pieces of legislation suffering from the same lack of consultation. The lack of consultation on the bill has resulted in misunderstanding by stakeholders of the intention of some aspects of the proposed amendments. Again today we witness this secretive approach to legislation. The Attorney-General is introducing amendments to the bill which will enshrine in legislation the removal of employment security and outsourcing arrangement provisions in the enterprise agreements. This approach is about circumventing the legal challenge in the Supreme Court against the Public Service Commissioner’s directive of 31 July which strikes out the employment security and outsourcing provisions in enterprise agreements. What we have seen here is a government that is arrogant, that is drunk with its power and is just rolling over everyone. This is impacting on their standings in the poll. If one looks at the ReachTEL poll today one can see that the people in those electorates are very disappointed with this government which has been in power for a very short time. Mr BYRNE (Rockhampton—ALP) (5.00 pm): This bill is another step in this government’s ideological and retrograde agenda to remove the rights of working Queenslanders, the dedicated men and women of the Public Service. It is an attack on workers’ rights which deserves to be treated with righteous indignation and outright scorn. First of all I want to focus on the amendments that the Attorney-General has confirmed will be added to this bill. With these disgraceful amendments the 1732 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012 government will take away job security provisions for Queensland public servants. It is outrageous and unforgivable to add these amendments at this last minute and not allow time for proper consideration or consultation. What these changes do is allow the government to outsource key government services on a whim. It strips away working conditions negotiated through the Industrial Relations Commission. These amendments will allow the government to sack child safety workers, Legal Aid employees, emergency management and emergency service workers. It even allows for the government to outsource the work of the Electoral Commission. By any measure these are disgraceful changes and if the government cared about Queenslanders—cared about its employees—it would never have been considered. It is all too clear that the government does not care about Queenslanders. Not only is the government making these changes, it is doing it as sneakily as possible. On a Thursday afternoon it is using back door methods to introduce amendments to a bill that is already before this parliament. This is disgusting, a complete insult to Queenslanders and an abuse of this process. I now turn to the changes to the Industrial Relations Commission concerning legal representation. The Queensland Industrial Relations Commission was designed as a layperson’s tribunal and currently many matters are heard without legal representation. This ensures hearings are less combative, less adversarial and less prone to be bogged down by the unnecessary minutiae of legal argument. While legal representation is currently allowed in limited circumstances, this bill significantly expands the scope of when legal representation will be allowed in the commission. These changes mean businesses and the government, with their greater financial means, can hire fancy big-town lawyers to ride roughshod over employees. The truth of the matter is that many employees will be unable to afford legal representation while their employers get the best lawyers money can buy. The Queensland Industrial Relations Commission will be more focused on legal loopholes rather than emphasising fairness and natural justice. In short, this bill threatens to turn the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission into nothing more than a banquet for fancy big-city lawyers. Of course, this bill is just one more step in the LNP’s attack on the Queensland’s Public Service, a group of people it continues to deride and insult while conducting mass firings. The government’s programs threaten approximately a thousand jobs in my region of Fitzroy based on an analysis of the Queensland Council of Unions. The member for Gregory knows well the potential impact of these job losses and how they can affect our regions. He knows the potential for sackings within the Department of Transport and Main Roads out at Emerald and how sorely they will be felt. Unfortunately, the Premier and his ministers do not seem to understand. Lastly, I want to return to a familiar refrain: the consultation period on this bill was too short, was needlessly haphazard and, frankly, an insult to public servants. The Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 was introduced into this House and referred to the Finance and Administration Committee on 31 July. The call for submissions went out one day later on 1 August. The submissions were due just five days later on 6 August. Let us have a look at that for a minute. The call for submissions went out on a Thursday and the submissions were due on the Monday evening. That left stakeholders with Thursday, Friday and most of Monday to examine the legislation and prepare detailed submissions. I am sure many of the stakeholders worked over the weekend taking time away from their families just to try to provide reasonable and detailed submissions. Less than four working days were allowed for submissions. This is, frankly, a slap in the face to interested public servants and their union representatives. I want to thank the stakeholder groups who provided submissions to this bill in such a truncated and unacceptable time frame. I appreciate the work of the Queensland Council of Unions, the Queensland Teachers Union, the United Firefighters Union, the Electrical Trades Union and the Queensland Law Society in meeting the government’s disturbingly short consultation period. A public hearing was held on 8 August and the report was tabled just five days later on 13 August. I would also like to thank the committee’s secretariat for their hard work in meeting this unrealistic and inappropriate time frame foisted on them by the government. This bill is an assault on workers’ rights designed to make it easier for this government to fire public servants. It was designed to help out their lawyer mates at the big end of town. It is unacceptable and I will be opposing it. Mr KAYE (Greenslopes—LNP) (5.06 pm): I rise in this place today to speak on the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012. As a member of the committee I would first like to thank the other members of the committee, those who participated in the public hearings and also the secretariat for their outstanding work. This bill is part of the Newman government’s reform agenda and, as previous speakers have mentioned, is designed to restore public sector accountability and efficiency of service. I have also spoken previously in relation to the first stage of this process, the Industrial Relations (Fair Work Act Harmonisation) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012. The Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 will refocus the Public Service Commission away from a regulatory function towards a public sector efficiency agenda. I realise that the idea of efficiency may be a foreign concept to those on the opposition benches. I plan to focus on the efficiency components in our reform agenda. One of the fundamental principles of being an elected 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1733 representative is that you are a caretaker. You have to make sure that the taxpayers of this state are achieving the best possible outcome for the money they pay. Taxpayers have the right to demand an efficient use of their money. Maybe we should all be cognisant of that as all of us here are taxpayers as well. This extends to the services that the people of Queensland utilise. It is about efficiency, accountability and making sure what money is available is used to its best advantage. It is not about giving public servants a hard time or denigrating the jobs that they do. I refer back to explanatory notes for this bill and the section entitled ‘Estimated cost for government implementation’ and I quote— There are no direct financial considerations aside from indirect benefits of a more efficient alignment and better streamlining of the Government’s public sector integrity functions. No cost, more efficiency. I would say that that is a win for the people of this state. The Newman government has refocused the Public Service Commission away from hearing appeals and transferred that function to the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission. When I spoke on the first part of this process in June of this year, the Industrial Relations (Fair Work Harmonisation) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012, I noted the need for efficiency. This is the final stage of that process and will transfer the administrative functions from the Public Service Commission so it can focus on the government’s efficiency agenda and the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission can focus on public sector appeals and employment issues. Another aspect of this bill that helps achieve efficiency for Queensland taxpayers is the removal for the need for annual ethics training. Public Service employees will be given this training during their induction programs and at regular intervals after that. While, for the most part I am sure, honourable members would agree on the need for ethics, do public sector employees need reminding every twelve months what is ethical and what is not? As the Premier noted in his first reading speech and I reiterate— We are absolutely committed to ensuring that departmental chief executives are given maximum flexibility to provide ethical training at the point of induction and at regular intervals as needed, rather than simply requiring blind compliance with a requirement for annual training. In other words, we are allowing departmental chiefs to determine whether an employee requires a refresher on ethics. I have absolutely no doubt that the vast majority of public sector employees are ethical people and understand the importance of the jobs they perform. This will enable public sector workers to get on with their jobs and ensure that departmental heads are not slaves to training compliance issues. The Newman government was elected to stop the waste and get this state back on track. This government is implementing a reform agenda to enable people to get on with doing just that by revitalising our front-line services, getting public servants back into front-line service delivery, as opposed to spin-doctoring and burdening people with enormous amounts of duplication and paperwork. Ensuring efficient workplace practices for our departments and for the Queensland taxpayer is pivotal. I am aware the people in my electorate of Greenslopes face cost-of-living issues. Over the last three years, prior to March this year, they were constantly hit with increases in things such as motor vehicle registration, exorbitant public transport fares, electricity prices and the requisite rises associated with that. They have had to make adjustments to meet those extra burdens as the former Labor government spent like there was no tomorrow. The Newman government is working hard to improve efficiency in our public sector. The taxpayers and residents of this wonderful state deserve that. An efficient and accountable Public Service utilising all available resources to their best advantage are part of that platform. The Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 is the final process and I urge all honourable members to support it. I commend the bill to the House. Ms TRAD (South Brisbane—ALP) (5.11 pm): I rise to make a contribution to the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012. As my colleagues have already indicated, the opposition will not be supporting this piece of legislation because it represents another disgraceful and ideological attack on public servants, the people who serve and administer our state well. What has just happened? What little bomb did the Attorney-General set off at the beginning of this debate? We see it on the electronic media. We see that this government has come into the House, without consulting one person, to take away the permanency provisions in the Public Service Act, in enterprise bargaining. That is such an outrageous move by an outrageous government that is completely drunk on its massive majority. What a surprise that the Kmart Attorney-General, rather than take his chances in the courts of this state, brings amendments into this House without consultation to make it clear that the law will fall on his side. That is an outrageous move. This 19-page bill contains a variety of changes, most of them without valid justification. We heard the member for Noosa refer to the public sector renewal program, as did many who are sitting on the government benches. Let us be clear: there is nothing in this program that is about renewal; it is all about ruination. It is about ruining the public sector and Public Service provisions in this state. Fundamentally, these changes are based on the flawed ideology of those opposite and not on sound public policy. 1734 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012

Firstly, the legislation provides for the transfer of public service appeals to the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission. It is well known that the LNP government is refocusing the Public Service Commission away from its traditional and important regulatory function towards a public sector efficiency agenda. That is code for job cuts, sackings and purges of the Queensland Public Service. At this rate, the Public Service Commission will have to be renamed the ‘public sector hatchet commission’. This bill also provides for the transfer of public interest disclosures from the Public Service Commission to the Queensland Ombudsman. Much like many of the good programs and services that are being axed or deprioritised by this government, this is an example of a good system being changed for no apparent reason. This is a register of all public interest disclosures for all Queensland government agencies, as well as local government bodies. In a public briefing, Ms Sonia Cooper, the Acting Senior Executive for Workplace Strategy and Performance, indicated that the public interest disclosure database was being managed effectively and efficiently within its current operations. Given this information, why is the government determined to pursue these changes? The reality is that there has been no strong rationale outlined by the government, either during the public hearing or in the Premier’s introductory speech, that warrants the transfer of this function that is already running efficiently and successfully. The points I have just raised could be said to be mere administrative changes, but they are ones that are being undertaken without any clear rationale from the government. In relation to the changes to the provision to allow for widening of the scope for possible reasons for lawyers to appear in the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission, this is about muscling up and using the full force of government to come down on workers. Currently, the QIRC is similar to some areas of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal in that lawyers are not allowed to appear to provide a less adversarial environment and a level playing field for all who appear before it. However, we see this LNP government continuing its attack on government workers in this state, that is, the people who make our state tick and run. By allowing greater possibilities for legal representation to appear in the QIRC, we will see a power imbalance between the employer and the Queensland government, and employees. This government is sacking Public Service workers, taking away the permanency provisions and continuing to cause fear and anxiety amongst public servants in the lead-up to the budget by making it clear that thousands and thousands more are yet to be sacked. One of the most offensive things about this bill is the issue of consultation, which has been a particular focus of parliament this week. The Oxford Dictionary describes ‘consultation’ as— the act of discussing something with somebody or with a group of people before making a decision about it. To be fair, the LNP government did allow some time for consultation. It allowed a whole three working days. Does that sound familiar? I think it does. Let us couple the word ‘consultation’ with the word ‘proper’. The Oxford Dictionary describes ‘proper’ as— the required or correct type of form; suitable or appropriate. I ask the question: has there been proper, meaning suitable or appropriate, consultation, meaning the act of discussing something with somebody or with a group of people, before making a decision about it? Has there been proper consultation on this? Just like with many bills that have gone before the House, the answer is no! The Premier introduced the bill to the House on Tuesday, 31 July with an email calling for public submissions being transmitted on Wednesday, 1 August, indicating a closing date of Monday, 6 August. That provided a whole three business days for the citizens of Queensland to become aware of the legislation before the House, formulate their views and thoughts on the legislation and communicate those thoughts to the committee. Well, what a joke! I indicated that this is not the only bill on which poor and shabby consultation has been undertaken by this LNP government. I will list a few of the bills that committees have provided scathing remarks upon about the lack of due process and consultation: the Industrial Relations (Fair Work Harmonisation) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill, the Penalties and Sentences and Other Legislation Amendment Bill, the Electricity (Early Termination) Amendment Bill and the Animal Care and Protection and Other Legislation Amendment Bill. I would also mention, just because it is timely, the Mines Legislation (Streamlining) Amendment Bill 2012, when there was also a full three working days in which communities in Queensland could become aware of it, consult on it and come back to the parliament on it. Apparently that bill was not urgent, as other bills were debated and passed before it had chartered its course through this place. As previous speakers have outlined, on numerous occasions in the public briefing on this bill the question was asked, ‘Why wasn’t further consultation undertaken?’ and the answer from the department was, ‘It was not government policy to consult.’ They are unfortunately correct. When it comes to changing the laws of this state, the LNP government does not want to hear from the people of Queensland, the people who have put it there and have placed an enormous amount of trust in it, and understands this. It is blatantly clear that this LNP government, led by the cruel, cold and callous Premier Newman, does not care about the hardworking 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1735 men and women of the Public Service. Those opposite ideologically do not believe in the Public Service. Since they took office in late March this year, they have actively gone out of their way to cut and purge the Public Service and public services in this state. Those opposite said that these cuts would not affect front-line services, but they are wrong. On Tuesday I was proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with my fellow ALP parliamentary colleagues with the hardworking men and women of the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service and the Queensland Ambulance Service. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the members of Katter’s Australian Party and the member for Nicklin for coming down and showing their support. They are true members who stand up for their community and the members of the Public Service in this state and do not just follow the party line, like the spineless members opposite. The men and women of the Fire and Rescue Service and the Ambulance Service marched on this place to speak to their government about their pay and conditions. These people are front-line workers. They are the ones who go out on our streets day after day protecting us and looking after us when we are sick or in a car crash. They do this day in, day out. Our men and women of the Public Service are some of the finest, if not the finest, in the country. Whilst Brisbane and parts of regional Queensland were faced with the greatest— Government members interjected. Ms TRAD: Madam Deputy Speaker, are you going to call order? Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Miss Barton): Member for South Brisbane, I can hear what you are saying and I do not see the need to call order when I am able to hear the contribution that you are making. I would thank you not to make suggestions to the chair as to how they may wish or may not wish to call order. Ms TRAD: While Queensland faced the worst natural disasters in recorded history, these are the people who got up and helped recover and rebuild Queensland, and they are being paid back by this government by being sacked. The member for Gregory should hold his head down and should not look me in the eye because he knows, as I know, that these are the fine people who helped rebuild our state, and this government is sacking them in return for the good work they have done. You are shameful. You are all absolutely shameful. Mrs OSTAPOVITCH (Stretton—LNP) (5.21 pm): I rise to support the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012. To begin with, may I give my appreciation to the Finance and Administration Committee and our hardworking support staff, who do an amazing job. The objectives of the bill are: to improve the operation of existing key Public Service legislation and facilitate the government’s reform agenda through greater alignment and efficiencies in discharging its public sector integrity functions; to make changes to the administration of the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission, the QIRC, to support the orderly and expeditious exercise of the QIRC’s jurisdiction and powers; and to expand parties’ rights to access legal representation in matters heard in the QIRC. As for the reasons for the bill, with regard to the Public Service aspects of the bill, the government is refocusing the Public Service Commission away from a regulatory function towards a public sector efficiency agenda. The bill amends the Public Sector Ethics Act 1994 to require Public Service employees to receive ethics training as part of induction programs and at regular intervals. In addition to being a key part of the government’s public sector reform agenda, the bill builds upon the statutory objectives contained in the Public Service Act 2008, the Public Sector Ethics Act 1994 and the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2012. There are no direct financial considerations, aside from the indirect benefits of a more efficient alignment and better streamlining of the government’s public sector integrity functions. There are two amendments I would like to comment on. The first is the amendment of section 12K, education and training. Clause 21 replaces section 12K with a new section 12K. The new section 12K removes the requirement for annual ethics education training and replaces this with a requirement for Public Service agency chief executives to ensure their employees are given access to appropriate education and training as part of an induction program and at regular intervals. In order to provide clarity to chief executives of Public Service agencies about the ethics education and training to be provided, clause 22 inserts into section 12K(2) a paragraph that sets out the requirements of this education and training. This paragraph is similar to that contained in section 21(2). Section 21(2) applies to the broader public sector but does not capture Public Service agencies—‘Public Service’ agencies being only a subset of ‘public sector’ agencies. Lastly, I will comment on the amendment of section 319. Clause 23 amends section 319 of the Industrial Relations Act 1999 to remove subsection 319(2)(b), which provides for legal representation in matters before the commission. The new arrangements essentially create three instances where legal representation will be allowed in the commission. Firstly, any party has the right to choose to be represented by a lawyer in proceedings before the commission brought under chapter 4—other than section 110—section 149, section 230, section 274A and section 277. Secondly, for proceedings other than those listed above, a party may be represented by a lawyer if all other parties consent. Finally, 1736 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012 where consent is not given, a party may apply to the commission to be represented by a lawyer and the commission may allow legal representation if the commission is satisfied the relevant grounds have been met. I commend the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 to the House. Mrs SCOTT (Woodridge—ALP) (5.26 pm): I rise to contribute to the debate on the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012. Just as we saw with the mines legislation last night, it is clear that this government does not value consultation. Government members think their parliamentary majority means they do not need to pay any attention to the genuine concerns of Queenslanders. Not only is this approach arrogant but it also leads to mistakes and mismanagement. The opposition opposed this legislation. There was no prior consultation with stakeholders, particularly unions— Mr Hopper interjected. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Miss Barton): Order! If the member for Condamine wishes to interject, he shall do so from his seat. The member for Woodridge has the call. Mrs SCOTT: There was no prior consultation with stakeholders, particularly unions, whose role it is to advocate on behalf of workers. As the Queensland Council of Unions set out in its submission to the committee— We also register our concern that there was no consultation with employees or employee organisations prior to the Bill being placed before Parliament for consideration. This is another broken election promise from this LNP government. We all know that the Premier provided unions across Queensland with an undertaking in writing that the government would consult and work with unions—just like the Premier promised that government worker jobs were safe, and it is not as if this is a one-off based on the so-called urgency of this legislation. The government also failed to adequately consult on the previous Industrial Relations (Fair Work Act Harmonisation) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012. Every day this government brings yet another act of dastardliness in, such that I am fearful of no longer being shocked by what it does. Today’s amendment takes the cake. This is a knockout blow for Queensland public sector workers. I could not believe it when the directive was issued that purported to take away the rights of workers negotiated through the enterprise bargaining agreement process in relation to their job security. Rightly, the unions were exercising their rights in relation to that directive and just last week challenged the directive in the Supreme Court. That action was highly likely to be successful—so successful in fact that we have seen decisive action on the part of the Attorney-General by bringing his five pages of amendments into the House this afternoon. The gall of the government in legislating to take away workers’ rights is beyond the pale. This is the sort of callous, hard-hearted action that we are being less and less shocked by when it is wheeled out by the government. Sneaky does not even begin to describe the way this government has acted; mean and tricky was just the tip of the iceberg. We will see a public sector rally outside this chamber this afternoon, and I challenge any member of the government to go out in the Speakers Corner and face the crowd. The growing anger felt by public sector workers will grow from the dull roar that we have been experiencing to an overwhelming crescendo. The consultation on this bill was an outrage—and that was before the amendments have been introduced, which were not even a part of the consultation process. The member for Murrumba could not have been more right when he said that he had a hard act to follow in speaking after the Leader of the Opposition in this debate. If today’s ReachTEL poll is any indication—and that was taken before these amendments were announced—we will be in the fortunate position after the next election of having an easy act to follow when we again win government. This is a government which is unprecedented in its willingness to burn political capital for such obviously partisan political reasons. These amendments are ideologically driven, as were the industrial relations amendments that we debated early in the term of government. I have no doubt that we will be seeing many more pieces of ideological legislation being forced into this House without any warning or any consultation with stakeholders. I recall one of the first speeches made by the Attorney-General when he was newly elected to this House in which he made his views about unions very clear. On 21 May 2009 during debate on the Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009 the Attorney-General made this statement— ... but I call on the government to conduct an urgent safety audit of all state controlled bridges. In fact, in probably the first time in my life and possibly the last I will ever agree with a union, I note that the TWU called on the government to conduct this audit late last year to no avail. I find it an absolute disgrace that the minister responsible for industrial relations in this state has expressed such antiunion sentiments so publicly. As is clear from today’s amendments, he obviously approaches all of his dealings with unions and workers on this basis—that he will disagree with them just because he does not want to agree with them. This will not result in a particularly harmonious industrial situation in Queensland and it must make public sector workers quake in their boots. Just like the voices of the teachers, the firefighters and the ambulance officers we have heard outside the gates of the parliament this week, these are real people with real jobs who deserve to be listened to and 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1737 treated with respect. I know that the LNP government is divided on the issue of consulting with unions. It is a great pity that this Premier and Treasurer cannot even listen to their own colleagues, let alone Queenslanders. Instead, the LNP continues on a vindictive tirade against hardworking Queenslanders, a campaign of reckless cuts and stripping of workers’ rights that is having a real impact on so many lives. The Premier promised that he would govern with humility, but we see no such humility with the passage of this legislation. This government needs to stop treating the committee system as a rubber stamp. The opposition does not support this legislation as it is rushed and ideological. Mr KNUTH (Dalrymple—KAP) (5.33 pm): I rise to speak to the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012. Among other things, it seeks to further reduce the credibility of the parliament, the parliamentary process and the committee system. The other day I attended the rally with the ambos and the firies. I could understand why they were angry and why they were protesting. I point out that the ambos and firies are in the top 10 of the most trusted professions. Politicians are around No. 75. The reason for that is exactly what happened throughout this election campaign: the LNP promised, ‘Stick with us and we will never get hungry again.’ They promised accountability and efficiency. They also promised that they will be public servant friendly. The Premier came to Charters Towers and attacked me because I said that the LNP will sell the remainder of Queensland Rail. He attacked me and called me a liar for doing so. And what happened? The other night they voted for the sale of Queensland Rail. Now we are seeing that 2,500 Queensland Rail workers will be laid off and railway tracks are being closed down because of lack of maintenance. The LNP pounded the streets of the Atherton Tablelands and Charters Towers saying, ‘We care. Trust us. You can count on us.’ Two shadow ministers walked into the neighbourhood centre and had their pictures taken, which were published in the paper. They said, ‘We will look after you. We care about you. We assure you that this service will keep going.’ What happened? On 30 June they received a letter saying that the service had been cut and their jobs were gone the next day. I will read a list of some of the programs that are being cut in my electorate alone: the farm financial assistance office in the Tablelands, which provided a front-line service assisting farmers with the financial requirements of running small businesses; the closure of the Department of Transport office in Moranbah; the scaling back of industry workshops in Lotus Glen correctional facility, including the metal fabrication and tailoring; the closure of the Mareeba small mines office; the loss of lawn-mowing services provided by the Home Assist Secure, which will hit private enterprise that depends on those contracts; the loss of the Healthy Lifestyle Program at the Charters Towers Neighbourhood Centre—and that is where the two shadow ministers had their pictures taken which appeared in the paper before the election. They were saying, ‘We will look after you.’ My point is that these were sheer, blatant lies told to the people of Queensland setting the perception that they were going to be different. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Ruthenberg): Order! Take your seat. The language you are using— ‘liar’—is very unparliamentary. I would ask that when you resume please apologise for that and then you can continue. Mr KNUTH: What annoyed me is that as far as the eye could— Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I have asked you to withdraw the word ‘liar’ and not use it. Mr KNUTH: Sorry, I withdraw the word ‘liar’. As far as the eye could see, LNP members of parliament could be seen storming our streets. We saw billboards and continual mail-outs, day in and day out. I do not know where they got all the money for them from. They were saying, ‘We will look after you. We will care. Trust us. We are going to be different.’ Mr Johnson: Shane, it was a different story when you were with us. Don’t you forget it. Don’t forget it. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Mr KNUTH: Different, yes. You stand up for the railway employees, Vaughan. You stand up. Mr Johnson: I know exactly what you said. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Mr KNUTH: You stand up for the railway employees. Mr Johnson: I will stand up all right! Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Mr KNUTH: Well, start doing it. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I remind the member to address his comments through to chair. Mr KNUTH: I apologise. The Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 seeks, among other things, to further reduce the credibility of the parliament, the parliamentary process and the committee system. I would like to read from some of the submissions, and I note that these comments 1738 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012 could apply to any one of the 22 pieces of legislation introduced by this government. The Queensland Law Society stated that only three business days were provided for public submissions. The Queensland Council of Unions stated— ... stakeholders have been provided with less than one week to consider the amendments and prepare submissions ... The United Firefighters Union of Australia stated— We note that the Government stated no intentions to introduce any changes to the industrial laws as part of any pre-election platform. We express disappointment about having just a matter of days to consider and make submissions about a surprise Bill. In relation to the bill that we debated last night—600 pages of legislation—the government allowed four days for all of Queensland to make submissions. It had the audacity to tell us to leave our electorates to come down to Brisbane to have a public hearing when people did not even know it was being held. That is a waste of taxpayers’ money. That is lack of accountability. We need accountability in this government. If those opposite want us to fly down here to attend a public hearing, we want to make sure that the people affected are going to be here at that public hearing. If they are not, it is a waste of taxpayers’ money. The list goes on, but I could be reading from the submissions by AgForce or the National Farmers Federation to legislation passed this week. Across-the-board, organisations and individuals, industries and communities, watch in shock and disbelief as this government storms through the parliamentary process and makes a mockery of the committee system and the democratic process of government. I have not pushed for this before but, having seen what has happened recently, I believe that we need an upper house in this state. I oppose this bill. Mr SORENSEN (Hervey Bay—LNP) (5.40 pm): At the outset, I pay tribute to the committee’s research director, Deb Jeffrey, for the hard work she has done over recent weeks in relation to this bill. I would also like to commend my committee colleagues for all the work they have done. Prior to the election the LNP made a commitment to the people of Queensland to restore public sector accountability. It is a commitment the Premier is passionate about. The word ‘accountability’ may be new or not understood by those opposite me in this House. They should have learned at the last election what it is all about. We can talk about accountability in this place, but let us look at what happened in the past. We can talk about the Health payroll debacle—and it is still going on. Those opposite still do not want to come clean about it. Where is their accountability? There is no accountability in the Labor Party. The Traveston Dam is another example. Half a billion dollars went down the drain—wasted. Mr Costigan: Flushed it. Mr SORENSEN: Flushed it down the river. What about the redundancies before the election? Nobody wants to talk about those, do they? How many redundancies were there? The LNP made a commitment to restore accountability in government. The policy said that Queenslanders deserve a transparent, accountable government that will take responsibility and work to build a better future for all Queenslanders. This bill improves the operation of existing legislation for the Public Service. The Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill includes the streamlining of functions. The bill includes amendments to contain the escalating costs associated with public sector administration. The bill includes provisions reducing the public sector’s management overburden. The bill amends provisions of the Public Service Act by transferring the requirements for Public Service Commission staff to assist appeals officers to staff of the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission. This bill amends the Public Interest Disclosure Act by transferring the oversight agency function under the existing act to the Queensland Ombudsman. The government is refocusing the Public Service Commission away from a regulatory function and towards a public sector efficiency agenda. This aligns the Queensland Ombudsman with its existing charter to take complaints about decisions of Queensland government agencies. The bill amends the Public Sector Ethics Act, replacing the requirement for annual ethics training. Ethics training will be included as part of the induction programs and at regular intervals. The bill also amends the Industrial Relations Act. It will provide the right for parties attending proceedings to be represented by a lawyer in the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission. It will also provide that the vice-president of the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission is to be responsible for its administration and the administration of the registry. According to the CCIQ, Queensland now has an estimated 90,000 pages of regulation, the most of any Australian state or territory. This red tape has killed small businesses. It has killed job opportunities in the private sector for so long. Red tape has been wrapped around businesses. Recently I watched a program about Greece. It showed how a hairdresser was just drowning in red tape and could not continue in business. That is what was going to happen in Queensland under Labor—just more and more red tape. Small businesses were being strangled. 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1739

Mr Byrne: Ha, ha! Mr SORENSEN: You can laugh at it. Mr Byrne: What does it have to do with this bill? Mr SORENSEN: It has a lot to do with it. The LNP made a commitment to cut red tape and regulation by 20 per cent. This government will change the culture of the previous government, which promoted red tape, to a culture that actively reduces red tape. This bill is consistent with that. Mrs MILLER (Bundamba—ALP) (5.45 pm): I wish to raise in this House the ideological hatred of those opposite for the workers of Queensland. The tories opposite hate workers. While they hate them, I want to point out that they are public servants, not public serfs. That is what you lot over there think of them. You think they are serfs. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Ruthenberg): Order! I ask the member to address her comments through the chair and refrain from using the word ‘you’. Mrs MILLER: The Newman LNP government wants to drag Queensland back into the dark ages, back to the days when they were well-to-do and they had serfs and treated them like slaves. While they reposition the goalposts on what front-line services are, while they slash and burn the jobs of hardworking Queenslanders, while they strip away the conditions of workers like ambos and firies, while they attempt to remove the right to strike, while they abolish services aimed at helping hardworking Queenslanders, they again show that they are driven by ideology—an ideology that punishes the workers of Queensland at the behest of the big end of town, an ideology which puts the budget line ahead of front-line services for Queenslanders, an ideology that punishes hardworking Queenslanders, an ideology that is driving Queenslanders to stress, desperation and depression, an ideology that is forcing people to take their kids out of Catholic and independent schools, an ideology that is now forcing people to sell their homes, an ideology that sends workers and their families to doctors to get treatment for anxiety and depression and an ideology that takes away the dignity of working public servants in this state. This is a government that lets its ideology rule over good management, and it treats public servants—teachers, school cleaners, paramedics, firefighters and social workers—like serfs. It gives them no say and undertakes no consultation. But they have a voice and they have a say, and next election they will have a vote as well. While Campbell Newman— Government members interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! There is way too much interjection going on. I ask the members in the House to please calm it down and listen to the speaker. I call the member for Bundamba. Mrs MILLER: Thank you for your protection, Mr Deputy Speaker. While Campbell Newman clearly is not listening, people are certainly listening to him. The more they hear, the more they fear. He told public servants that they had nothing to fear. He told them that there would be more, not fewer, public servants. He told them to trust him, hand on heart. This is why they are so angry. This is why the Public Service is so upset and so disgusted with this LNP government. It feels like it has been taken for a ride—and, let me tell you, it has. This government clearly does not understand the anxiety and stress that its ideological ambush of Public Service careers has caused. If it really listened to Queenslanders it would be sharing the tears, as I have done—and as I have known, when I was sacked by you lot in 1996, when you were in government—with the workers who have given years of dedicated service to the public of Queensland as the LNP rips the guts out of them as public servants in Queensland. The ideological purge of the Public Service undertaken by Newman and the henchmen has caused workers to lose their dignity—the dignity of a job, the dignity to help support their families, pay a mortgage, pay the rent, pay off their car, take the kids to the beach, take their partner to the movies, send their kids to school, pay for the kids’ footy fees and dancing lessons, enjoy a beer with their mates, get their hair done, pay the vet bills, shop with the girls or grab a bunch of flowers for their wife on their way home from work. Instead, we have public servants in fear and anxiety going to their GPs. I have heard about public servants vomiting at work, bursting into tears as their co-workers leave and feeling guilty as they go and their work environments being so depressing that they are like a morgue, and this is a workplace that they used to love as they served the people of Queensland. This appalling treatment has got the people listening, got them listening to the LNP because they certainly know what they will be doing next time. They are listening when they are told in this House that their voices are not worthy when they express their democratic right outside this House. I table for this House 78 copies of the ReachTEL poll—one for each and every one of you, because I tell you what: you will not be getting it from your party. Tabled paper: ReachTEL poll, conducted on 22 August 2012, titled ‘Newman support update: Sandgate, Townsville and Brisbane Central’ [851]. 1740 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Ruthenberg): Order! I have asked the member before to address her comments through the chair. I am going to ask you again to direct your comments through the chair and not use the word ‘you’. Mrs MILLER: Thank you very much. It clearly shows what the people of Queensland think of this LNP government and its ideological purge of public servants and the front-line services that they deliver. Let us just have a look at what they think of legislation like this. Some 79.1 per cent of respondents in Sandgate said that they support local Public Service jobs and that these services should be the primary focus. In Townsville—where the LNP made front-line staff at Townsville Hospital take leave—the figure was 77.8 per cent. In Brisbane Central—where hospital staff were forced to bring in their own tea bags, for heaven’s sake—it was 70 per cent. When they hear another example of this ideological purge of the public sector today, they understand—the public servants and the people of Queensland understand— that it is all smoke and mirrors and political spin. When Queenslanders were asked if the Newman LNP government’s ideological purge had gone too far, they again showed that they listen when this government does not listen to them. In fact, in Sandgate 66.6 per cent of the people say that the purge has gone too far. I table the electoral pendulum for the benefit of all of the backbenchers here. In fact, most of you will not be here next time, so enjoy your time. Tabled paper: Queensland State Political Pendulum—2012 State Election, updated on 27 May 2012, prepared by Jake Smith [852]. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Mrs MILLER: Sorry, Mr Deputy Speaker. I apologise. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. Mrs MILLER: So 53 per cent of people in Sandgate have listened to the mean and tricky LNP government and decided that Campbell Newman has not kept his election policies. Some 60 per cent of respondents listened to the government when the government stopped listening to them and have said that they are less likely to vote for it because of the performance of Campbell Newman. This is an attack on Public Service workers. These are the people who stop your house from burning down, who look after your kids when they are at risk, who give CPR to grandma when she is crook, who flew helicopters to save Grantham residents when it was flooded, who teach kids how to write, who arrest bank robbers, who hold the hands of people when the doctor sees what is wrong with them in the emergency departments. That is who this government is attacking—hardworking, dedicated people who do the things that keep Queenslanders going. It is attacking the respect and dignity of a steady job that public servants have had for generations, because the Public Service has been a career—one that pays the bills and puts the food on the table. In fact, the LNP government changes the goalposts so much that its incompetence shows through so many times that there are more holes in a footy field now than there are on a golf course. It is still trying to take the dignity and respect that job security provides public servants. That is what happens. The Labor Party believes in the rights of workers. We believe in your rights at work. This is in fact Campbell Newman’s Work Choices for Queensland. That is what it is. This government cannot even consult with itself, because the backbench did not even know this was being brought on! These changes will allow, at the stroke of a pen, the contracting out of community services, of Community Safety staff, of school cleaners, of police support staff, of the Workplace Rights Office, of the Residential Tenancies Employing Office, of the staff of the Department of Transport and Main Roads, of emergency management helicopters. This is ill conceived, ideological and outrageous. This is Newman’s Work Choices, and never forget it! (Time expired) Mr STEWART (Sunnybank—LNP) (5.55 pm): Today I rise to contribute to debate on the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012. As a member of the Finance and Administration Committee, we were in the position of reviewing the bill to ensure that fundamental legislative principles were not compromised and to consider the policy outcomes. At this stage I want to thank the member for Coomera for his leadership and assistance in guiding us through the process to ensure the committee process remains an important part of the legislative process. I also want to thank Deb Jeffrey and her team for the fantastic support that they provided. This bill amends the Public Service Act 2008, the Public Sector Ethics Act 1994, the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2010 and the Industrial Relations Act 1999. This bill is needed to help the government achieve efficiency. This is what the people of Sunnybank want and this is what the people of Queensland want. Over the past 12 months, and particularly recently, residents of Acacia Ridge to Runcorn and afar have told me that they want an efficient government. They want to be able to know that the people’s money will give them the best bang for their buck. They want value from their government, and this bill will help achieve this objective. This bill is needed to refocus the Public Service Commission away from its previous regulatory model towards an efficiency model. It helps complete the transition of the Public Service Commission chief executive’s Public Service appeals function to the 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1741

Queensland Industrial Relations Commission and it provides for members of the QIRC to be appointed as appeals officers for the purpose of hearings and deciding appeals against certain decisions that affect Public Service employees. The bill will also make some minor administrative changes by transferring the responsibilities for the administration of the QIRC from the president to the vice-president. It will also allow all parties greater access to legal representation in proceedings with the QIRC. It will transfer the oversight of public interest disclosure for the Public Service Commission to the Queensland Ombudsman, an existing oversight body for the public sector. This is efficiency at its best and begs the question as to why it was not changed earlier. Not only does the bill scream with efficiency; it also provides better value to Queensland by amending the Public Sector Ethics Act 1994 to require Public Service employees to receive ethics training as part of their induction program and at regular intervals throughout their employment. This will help save funding by combining training and make ethics training more accessible, and hopefully this will help not only deter the undesirable to look for employment in the government but also deter through better education alleged fake Tahitian princes helping themselves to the people’s money, especially when Queensland is in the financial position that it finds itself in after many years of Labor mismanagement. One of the best parts of the bill is the cost. Traditionally when we look at creating efficiencies, there is often an initial cost involved. However, with the efficiencies gained by streamlining the affected bills, there is no cost. In fact, the bill will save money and help pay back the debt left by Labor. This bill is part of the government’s public sector reforms and there is an urgent need for it to continue the work of the previous legislation to streamline the government to ensure that the departments work in a clear and focused direction and that powers and responsibilities are well defined. The explanatory notes state— At this stage the Office of Queensland Parliamentary Counsel has not advised the Bill is inconsistent with any Fundamental Legislative Principles. The Finance and Administration Committee found this statement to be somewhat unclear and requested further information. We were happy to receive further information that the OQPC was consulted and that it was not aware of any breaches of fundamental legislative principles. At this time, I would like to thank the Queensland Law Society, the Queensland Council of Unions, the Queensland Teachers Union, the United Firefighters Union of Australia and the Electrical Trades Union for the time spent on preparing their submissions that helped inform the FAC. I am particularly encouraged by amended subsection 319(2)(b), which will retain the right of a particular party or person to be represented by a lawyer in proceedings brought before the commission under chapter 4. That means that the people of Queensland will now have access to legal representation when the proceedings are generally more complex and legalistic in nature. That is when they should have the right to choose to be represented by a lawyer. This amendment will help protect the vulnerable from at times complex negotiations. The submissions generally noted concern over the lack of time and the lack of community consultation on the bill. This issue was discussed with the government departments and, although the feedback was useful, I also note the importance of the bill, with the change required to achieve our efficiency agenda and to get Queensland back on track. I congratulate the Premier and the Attorney- General on a great bill. It will encourage greater alignments and efficiencies in the Public Service. It is clear that the Premier and the Attorney-General and cabinet have listened to the people of Queensland. I know that efficiencies in all areas of government is what the people of Sunnybank want. Any improvement to the integrity of government will also be welcomed with open arms by all Queenslanders. I commend the bill to the House. Mr KATTER (Mount Isa—KAP) (6.01 pm): The Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill raises some issues that should come under the scrutiny of this House. I believe those issues deserved to receive more scrutiny during the consultation phase. Without arguing the merits or the necessity of making significant cutbacks in the Public Service, the way in which these cutbacks are being made should be discussed. When considering these cutbacks in the Public Service, the primary focus should be on productivity. If it is found that changes are required, then a reduction in the number of public servants should be achieved through the process of natural attrition, with a particular focus on the top end of the Public Service. It is my contention that the ability to facilitate faster culling in the Public Service is not wanted by the general public and will not eventually lead to the desired outcome. I believe that the way out of the economic situation in which we have found ourselves may be in part by cutting the costs of the government but not at the expense of productivity in the Public Service. This bill can only accelerate our way down this path of economic turmoil. I see the imperative of the government right now to be facilitating future growth in the economy. We have enormous opportunities in Queensland, with the mandating of ethanol in petrol, building the transmission line to the north-west minerals province, allowing large scale irrigation development at the midwest plains and allowing a uranium mining industry. These are things that will dig our state out of a financial hole over the long term among some short-term pain. 1742 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012

I strongly believe that the pathway towards prosperity is by investing in wealth-generating activities in Queensland that will deliver returns in economic growth well outside this term of government. Therefore, selfless decision making is required by the government. The focus on cutting expenses through the Public Service at the level that it is being done is not the way to go. The economy is fickle and, apart from the mining industry at the moment, I think everyone in this House will agree that things are very tough. Despite the existing debt, large-scale cutbacks with a sledgehammer approach is too much of a burden for the economy to bear. Like everyone here, I have compassion for these workers and appreciate the government’s intent to outlay its economic plans as fast as possible. However, I do not agree with the government’s approach to solving the situation of our economy. Therefore, I cannot condone the intent of this legislation. Furthermore, the consultation period appears to be dramatically short. That does not reflect well on this parliament. I will not be supporting this bill. Hon. JP BLEIJIE (Kawana—LNP) (Attorney-General and Minister for Justice) (6.04 pm), in reply: At the outset I thank all honourable members for their contributions to the debate on the Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill and the foreshadowed amendments. I particularly thank the members on the government side of the House for offering support and offering a level of intelligence in this debate that the members of the Labor Party will never understand. I will start by referring to a couple of issues raised by the members opposite. The member for Mulgrave led the charge for the opposition in terms of being the first speaker to this bill from the opposition. He talked about public servants. There was a theme in the debate from the contribution of the opposition members in terms of an attack on public servants. The attack on public servants has been happening over the past 20 years by the Labor Party. We announced that we would not be renewing temporary contracts. We did not put those people on temporary contracts. The members opposite cannot come into this place and raise these issues about temporary contracts, when temporary is temporary. If you are employed on a temporary contract, you are employed to do a job for a certain period. The shadow Treasurer, who led the debate on this bill from the opposition, denies we are in a financial crisis in Queensland. He is denying there is a problem in Queensland with the finances. Mr Pitt interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Dr Robinson): Order! I remind the Manager of Opposition Business that he is already on a warning. I ask you to keep your interjections at an audible level, not at a very loud level. Mr BLEIJIE: It is amazing looking across and seeing the member for Mulgrave, who aspires to be the Treasurer of Queensland, and who this week during a debate in parliament said that what we are saying about Queensland’s finances is rubbish. He thinks there is no problem with the finances. If there was no problem with the finances, why did the Labor Party start the voluntary redundancy program for the Queensland Public Service? Because someone in the Labor Party, or in the department, started to think, ‘We have a problem in Queensland.’ The problem in Queensland is that we did not have enough money to pay the number of public servants that we had. I think it is a poor reflection on the entire opposition when the shadow Treasurer, the man who aspires to be the Treasurer of Queensland, says that Queensland does not have a financial problem—‘Budget problem? What budget problem? No problem at all.’ In fact, when we came to government the same Treasury officials said that the current fiscal outlook and the budgetary outlook was unsustainable. Ms Trad: Table the documents. Mr Bleijie: The member for South Brisbane should not give me a speech about tabling documents, because over the past few days we have seen the Labor Party not want to help us recover money in terms of the Health payroll bungle. You can go on about tabling, but until such time— Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Mr BLEIJIE: Mr Deputy Speaker, my apologies, I will address my comments through the chair. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. Mr BLEIJIE: The member for South Brisbane can go on all she wants about tabling documents. I thank the member for Coomera for his contribution to the debate tonight and for chairing the committee that looked at this legislation. I thank Minister Elmes for his contribution tonight and for highlighting the fact that the government has a situation that was created by Anna Bligh and Andrew Fraser and that we have to make the tough decisions. As the Premier said, we do not like making these decisions. It is hard on us seeing people walk out of our buildings, and the State Law Building particularly. We know that if we do not sort the finances out there will be a heck of a lot more public servants going than what is perceived at the moment. If we do not get the finances under control the state will have more problems and we will see more public servants go. That is why the Liberal National government has to make these decisions now. We are doing it now because if we do not sort these issues out Queensland and its public servants will be in a lot more trouble in the future. 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1743

Opposition members interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Those on my left will cease interjecting. Mr BLEIJIE: Just on cue, the member for South Brisbane’s socialist alliance out the front start their chanting. Ms Trad: Are you saying their concerns are illegitimate? Mr BLEIJIE: I am saying that they are the socialist alliance. You are making all sorts of assumptions, which is not surprising for the Labor Party. It is not surprising that you of all people would verbal people. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: The minister will address his comments through the chair. Mr BLEIJIE: Thank you for the reminder. The member for Gladstone raised the issue of the Ombudsman. I am pleased to say that I will be watching closely the Ombudsman’s new role to ensure that we have sufficient resources for the Ombudsman who has the carriage of those processes. We will ensure that there are sufficient resources. I believe at present there are sufficient resources, but we will make sure that happens. The Leader of the Opposition again spoke about consultation. Ms Trad: Three days! Mr BLEIJIE: You are pointing with three fingers and you are standing up. Do you want to sit next to me and interject? For goodness sake! The Leader of the Opposition raised the issue of consultation. Where was the Leader of the Opposition, who was then in cabinet, when the former Treasurer came into this place and the civil partnerships debate took place? Standing orders were amended, voted on by the Leader of the Opposition, to suspend the standing orders so that the motion could be moved to debate it early. We are not guillotining this debate. This went to a committee. We have not moved a motion to guillotine, but keep carrying on like you are and we may just get there. Opposition members interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Those on my left will cease interjecting. Mr BLEIJIE: We have an opposition leader who keeps coming in here saying ‘consultation, consultation’. I need not remind members that in 2009 the first legislation we debated under the Labor Party regime was the Vegetation Management Act. It was pushed through and I think it was guillotined. I am not going to cop criticism from the Labor Party about consultation when this went through a committee and there were five sufficient submissions that were put through the committee process. The Leader of the Opposition talks about job growth. If we do not do what we are doing and make these tough decisions now, we will not have job growth in Queensland’s future. We are doing it for job growth. Ms Palaszczuk: Why didn’t you explain it? Mr BLEIJIE: I will explain it to the Leader of the Opposition so she can get it through her head. This is why we are doing what we are doing. We immediately, within 100 days, lifted the payroll threshold so 5,000 small businesses in Queensland pay less government tax. We are going to increase it in another five years so that another 15,000 small businesses pay less payroll tax. Those opposite do not understand why we do this. Opposition members interjected. Mr BLEIJIE: They do not understand that if a small business pays less tax they will employ more people. Those opposite do not get it. If you encourage and invest in the private sector, they employ more people. If you tax them to death, they sack people. We want to create opportunities in Queensland for the private sector to encourage and employ more Queenslanders. We are well on track to do that. We have frozen registration costs for family vehicles for three years. We got rid of those silly sustainability declarations resulting in red-tape reduction. The Leader of the Opposition asked what have we seen in the last five months. I will tell her what we have seen in the last five months. We have seen red-tape reduction. We have seen business confidence grow. We have seen jets flying into Queensland that never would have considered coming to Queensland under the Australian Labor Party. We are providing an opportunity for business to grow in Queensland. We are providing an opportunity for business to invest and come to Queensland. I will tell the Leader of the Opposition what else has happened in the last five months: TattsBet has moved to Queensland providing another 1,000 jobs in Queensland. We are getting people to move to Queensland. Ms Palaszczuk interjected. Mr BLEIJIE: Their head office was not in Queensland. Opposition members interjected. 1744 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012

Mr BLEIJIE: The Leader of the Opposition says, ‘We were talking to them.’ Well, they were talking to a lot of people, but who signed the deal? I signed the deal to exempt them and give their licence another 30 years. Then the Premier made the announcement with TattsBet. Opposition members interjected. Ms Palaszczuk interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Those on my left. The minister has the call. Mr BLEIJIE: I take the interjection from the Leader of the Opposition talking about our great new Supreme and District Court, the Queen Elizabeth II Courts of Law. I will take every opportunity I can to talk about the Queen Elizabeth II Courts of Law. What an impressive building. The judges are just loving it. Opposition members interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Minister, resume your seat. I can barely hear the minister speak with the level of interjection. Ms Trad interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I now warn the member for South Brisbane under standing order 253A for imputations to the chair. I call the minister. Mr BLEIJIE: I think the Manager of Government Business may wish to go out and get me a Throatie because with the level of interjections I can hardly hear myself through this debate, but long let the interjections and debate continue from the Leader of the Opposition. The Labor Party do not get finances. They do not understand fiscal accountability and responsibility. They think we are doing all this for the fun of it. We are not. The Premier has made that indication. We saw the Leader of the Opposition come in here before and call me names like Pinocchio. Ms PALASZCZUK: I rise to a point of order. I did not call him that name. I said the Courier-Mail had referred to him as Pinocchio. Mr BLEIJIE: The Leader of the Opposition comes in here and espouses her fountain of wisdom from the Courier-Mail. The four people sitting in the corner—the highly paid, overresourced opposition— cannot help themselves. They have to rely on their tactics and calling people names. Does it not remind colleagues of what happened in the election campaign, the type of dirty personal attacks from the Labor Party? Opposition members interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Those on my left will cease interjecting. I cannot hear the minister. Mr BLEIJIE: As I was saying, the Labor Party only know one thing in Queensland. They wreck our budgets and then they personally insult people. That is their only tactic: to go to the gutter of politics. We see it time and time again. One would think that the Labor Party would have learnt a lesson from the election but it has not. Mr Stevens interjected. Mr BLEIJIE: As the Manager of Government Business says, the stench from the gutter of Peel Street is coming through the sewer grates. I can see it over there. Like the old teenage mutant ninja turtles, the green toxic waste is rising from under their seats. They engage in dirty politics and insulting people in this place because they have nothing left to offer the people of Queensland. Mr STEVENS: Labor mutant turtles. Mr BLEIJIE: I take the interjection from the honourable Leader of Government Business. The member for Rockhampton raised the issue that we should not have lawyers participating in the QIRC. Newsflash for the honourable member for Rockhampton: lawyers are engaged already in the QIRC. In fact, when the QPS took the state to the QIRC last year the Queensland Police Union had a couple of barristers and the Queensland Police Commissioned Officers Union of Employees also had a couple of barristers. I think one was an SC. Believe it or not, the state of Queensland, led by the Labor Party, had barristers act for it in the QIRC. Members opposite cannot come in here, pretend that this is something new and say, ‘Oh my gosh, the world is going to fall because we are putting lawyers into the QIRC’. At the moment, lawyers can be involved in the QIRC. We are enabling a better process by which parties can agree. If the other party does not agree in particular circumstances, they still have to seek the leave and approval of the QIRC. It is not a done deal, guaranteed, but lawyers are engaged. Sticking up for the time honoured profession of lawyers, I think it is quite appropriate and that more lawyers is good in all things. I have had that conversation with the Deputy Premier and I know he agrees with me. Lawyers get in there and we get things done. I thank the Deputy Premier for his support of the profession of the legal fraternity. 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1745

The member for South Brisbane, who nearly ate her microphone, talked about consultation. I have dealt with that. What I think is fascinating— Ms Trad: No, you haven’t. Mr BLEIJIE: I did deal with consultation. If the Leader of the Opposition wants me to get a list of legislation from when she was in cabinet— Opposition members interjected. Mr BLEIJIE: Members opposite cannot say ‘no’ now. I am taking the interjection. If the Leader of the Opposition wants me to get a list for her and table seven copies of all the legislation that the Labor Party ran through in the last three years, six years, nine years, 12 years and 14 years, I will do it. The Leader of the Opposition will not want me to do that because she knows what will be contained therein. The Leader of the Opposition is waving around amendments. I can remember when this place was led by the Labor Party and I think it was the honourable Attorney-General of the time who introduced 53 amendments to one piece of legislation. I was shadow Attorney at the time and I received them just before the debate. They cannot come in here and say, ‘I’ve been in this parliament for so many years and this is the first time I have seen any of this’. What an absolute joke! What I think is particularly interesting about the contribution of the Leader of the Opposition is that when she was on her feet the member for South Brisbane was screeching behind her, showing the utmost contempt for her own leader. As we heard in this morning’s question time, and I look forward to the day, I think the honourable member for South Brisbane wants to unveil the statue of Sir Joh. I know she is a fan of Sir Joh. I suspect— Ms TRAD: I rise to a point of order. I ask you to rule on relevance. What can the statue of Sir Joh possibly have to do with the Public Service Amendment Bill? Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Dr Robinson): Order! There is no point of order. The minister has the call. However, I do encourage the minister to be as focused as possible on the bill. Mr BLEIJIE: I make the point that, in the Leader of the Opposition’s contribution to the debate, the member for South Brisbane was screeching behind her leader and I had a visual of the statue of Sir Joh in the electorate of South Brisbane. I guess in that respect there is some slight connection to the legislation that we are debating. I look forward to the day when the member for South Brisbane unveils that statue. I will deal with the contributions of the member for Woodridge and the member for Bundamba at the same time. Mr Stevens interjected. Mr BLEIJIE: We hear that Cameron Dick will either run for Woodridge or he will be the leader from outside. We do know one thing: in a very short period the member for Inala will not be the leader of the Labor Party and it is likely that the member for Woodridge will not be the member for Woodridge. I will deal with the member for Woodridge and the member for Bundamba together. The member for Bundamba talked about the Queensland government selling out Queensland public servants. There is only one party in Queensland that sold out the workers of Queensland and that is the Labor Party. I know that the member for Bundamba has found her voice in this parliament. Some of us wish she had not found it, but she has found it. Mrs MILLER: I rise to a point of order. The minister has found his dancing shoes. If you want to look it up on YouTube, type in ‘Elvis and Jarrod Bleijie’. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Dr Robinson): Order! There is no point of order. The member will resume her seat. I remind the member about frivolous points of order. I also remind the member that she has been warned under standing order 253A and no such further outbursts will be tolerated. Mr BLEIJIE: She is just jealous that I used to be a Queensland DanceSport champion in rock’n’roll. There is no need to tell members more; they can view my shows on youtube.com. Getting back to the bill, the member for Bundamba talked about selling out workers in Queensland. As I said, the member for Bundamba has found her voice in this parliament. She had a very quiet voice when the Labor Party sold Queensland assets. Where was the member for Bundamba when the assets were sold? I can tell the House where the member for Bundamba was. She was sitting down there, crouched down. When the vote was on, she hid in the corner so that the unions could not see her. Let the record show that the member for Bundamba sold out unions in Queensland by voting for asset sales. That is why when Queenslanders watch this debate they do not believe it, because they do not believe the member for Bundamba and the convictions that she has so recently found. Where was the member for Bundamba, where was the member for Woodridge, where was the member for Mackay, where was the member for Inala and where was the member for Mulgrave when they sold assets in Queensland? Half of them were sitting around the cabinet table when that decision was made. They cannot talk about selling out Queensland workers, because the Labor Party did that a long time ago. I do not think the unions and the workers will ever forgive the Labor Party for what it did in terms of the asset sales. The opposition leader talks about consultation. Let us talk about consultation 1746 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012 on the asset sales. What consultation was there on the asset sales? I was in this place when Rachel Nolan was sitting where Minister Davis sits. Now a much better minister is sitting in the chair behind me than when Rachel Nolan sat there. Then minister Nolan was asked the question and she said, ‘Queensland Rail is not for sale’. Within hours, then Treasurer Andrew Fraser said, ‘Queensland Rail: sold!’ It went like that. Then I think they promoted the former minister, Rachel Nolan, to the position of finance minister. This Labor Party is surrounded by hypocrisy. I ask the Leader of the House, how do you sell ‘hypocrisy’? Mr Stevens: ALP. Mr BLEIJIE: I ask my honourable colleagues on this side of the House, how do you spell ‘hypocrisy’? Government members: ALP. Mr BLEIJIE: I ask again, how do you spell ‘hypocrisy’? Government members: ALP. Mr BLEIJIE: That is how you spell ‘hypocrisy’ in Queensland. Mr Deputy Speaker, that was the last time I will ask. I thank the honourable members on our side of the chamber for their very worthwhile contributions to the debate. This morning the honourable Premier summed it up when he said that we do not like what we are having to do, but we are having to do it for particular reasons. Those reasons are well known to people in Queensland and they are well known to the business community in Queensland. We know that, if we do not get Queensland’s finances under control, we will not have a Public Service to worry about. We will not be able to afford any public service and that is why we are doing this. That is why we are having to make the decisions to cut things across Queensland. The honourable Leader of the Opposition talked about cutting courthouses again. I have ruled that out 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 times. It is on the cabinet website. As I said this morning, what interests me, though, is that it was not the Leader of the Opposition, who members may not know is the shadow Attorney-General, down at the Holland Park courthouse yesterday protesting against any closure. Mr Watts: Who was it? Mr BLEIJIE: It was Cameron Dick, the former Attorney-General. What is the Labor Party doing? Is it sending out Cameron Dick to do its protests? Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The House will now break for dinner and resume at 7.30. Sitting suspended from 6.29 pm to 7.30 pm. Mr BLEIJIE: It was only an hour ago that I was stopped by the bell while I was in full flight. I am trying to recall where I was at. Mr Mander: I think you were going really well. Mr BLEIJIE: Thanks, mate. Mr Hopper: Start again. Mr BLEIJIE: Start again! I take that interjection. I think I took an interjection from the member for Toowoomba North in relation to the courts, and I was about to talk about courthouses in Queensland. I was talking about the opposition leader, who was saying that the courthouses were being shut, and that Cameron Dick was out the front of the Holland Park courthouse yesterday. I was reminded by that interjection from the honourable member that we saw the Labor Party in the early nineties in fact cut courthouses and justice services centres by 79, and I corrected the record on that during the week. I suspect that when the then government looked at these issues back then they appreciated that they had to pay down debt and get the state back on track. I think the Labor Party of those days would be quite ashamed at the Labor Party of the modern day. Mr Pitt: Oh, really. Mr BLEIJIE: I take the interjection from the Manager of Opposition Business that the old Labor guard would be proud of what they have done in modern Labor. We know there are lots of Labor lawyers in the legal profession and lots of old guard Labor lawyers in the profession. Mr Ruthenberg interjected. Mr BLEIJIE: There is, but a lot of the Labor lawyers who are the old guard Labor tell me that they left the Labor Party in the last few years, particularly after Beattie left and Bligh and Fraser took over. Ms Palaszczuk: No-one in the Labor Party would talk to you. Mr BLEIJIE: I take the interjection. I talk to plenty of lawyers who used to be in the old guard Labor who might not necessarily like our new tough on law and order policies in terms of their legal careers, but they certainly do not like the modern Labor Party. They do not like what the Labor Party has become. Testament to that is the fact that there are seven sitting opposite. I think the old guard Labor’s view is more widely accepted across Queensland. 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1747

We have heard Labor members tonight quoting the ReachTEL poll that was out today. I can remember the Labor Party used to say, ‘We don’t comment on polls,’ but now in opposition they live by the polls. I took the opportunity to have a look at this poll. It is a ReachTEL poll, but guess who the ReachTEL poll was commissioned by? The ReachTEL poll was commissioned by Together Queensland. They come in here— Ms Palaszczuk interjected. Mr BLEIJIE: No, I do not really like commenting on polls; I just want to mention the fact that you mentioned the ReachTEL poll. I want to set the record straight though; it was commissioned by Together Queensland. Ms Palaszczuk: Have you read it? Mr BLEIJIE: I have read it and I have got it in front of me. I am reading it here, and question 6 asked respondents what they believed should be the primary focus of their local members, and it talks about fixing the state’s finances and supporting local jobs. That was 400 people. The fact is if we do not fix the economy and we do not get the basis of the economy right then everything else will come crashing down around it and a lot more people will be unemployed in Queensland than there are now. There will be a lot more unemployment in Queensland and there will not be business investment in Queensland so businesses will not employ people. We want to create an opportunity in Queensland. We know if we make the tough decisions now in this budget then we will be providing an opportunity and we will be creating an environment in the future where businesses will want to come and invest in Queensland. But the Labor Party does not get it. If you get the businesses coming and investing in Queensland, they will create jobs and they will employ our mums and dads, our grandmothers, our friends and our family members and then those people will pay taxes and that keeps the economy moving. But the Labor Party philosophy is, ‘We’ve got to grow the Public Service by an exponential amount.’ We have had 60,000 extra public servants in X amount of years. Labor believes we just keep borrowing. It never stops. One of the ministers raised an issue yesterday—and I do not recall it exactly but I will put it in these terms—of this great big rainbow, and that the Labor Party sees this rainbow and thinks there is a little leprechaun sitting at the bottom of the rainbow with a pot of gold. But we know that if you move towards the rainbow and try to catch the rainbow you never quite get there. That is what the Labor Party actually believed. I have just been reminded of an article in today’s Courier-Mail about Labor stalwart Theo Castro, who passed away recently. The article said— Another disappointment was the changing face of those who stood for office for the ALP, once largely the preserve of workers who had to fight to educate and better themselves. “It’s getting so that they practically have to be solicitors to be MPs and it’s getting to look that they don’t care much for workers,” he lamented in an interview in his ALP branch newsletter. That is the type of old guard Labor Party that I was talking about—the Labor old guard who thinks that the new Labor guard over there is a disgrace and that the modern Labor is not what the old Labor guard represented. They want a change and they voted for a change. We are getting the finances back on track in Queensland. Division: Question put—That the bill be now read a second time. AYES, 60—Barton, Bennett, Berry, Bleijie, Boothman, Cavallucci, Choat, Costigan, Cox, Crandon, Cripps, Davies, T Davis, Dickson, Dillaway, Douglas, Dowling, Elmes, Emerson, Flegg, France, Frecklington, Grant, Grimwade, Gulley, Hathaway, Hopper, Johnson, Judge, Kaye, King, Krause, Latter, Maddern, Malone, Mander, McArdle, McVeigh, Millard, Minnikin, Molhoek, Newman, Ostapovitch, Pucci, Rickuss, Ruthenberg, Seeney, Shorten, Sorensen, Springborg, Stevens, Stewart, Stuckey, Symes, Walker, Watts, Woodforth, Young. Tellers: Menkens, Smith NOES, 11—Byrne, Cunningham, Katter, Knuth, Mulherin, Palaszczuk, Pitt, Trad, Wellington. Tellers: Miller, Scott Resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. Consideration in Detail Clauses 1 to 3, as read, agreed to. Insertion of new clauses— Mr BLEIJIE (7.49 pm): I move the following amendment— 1 After clause 3 Page 4, after line 11— insert— ‘3A Amendment of s 23 (Application of Act to public service offices declared under a regulation) Section 23(3)— omit. 1748 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012

‘3B Amendment of s 53 (Rulings by commission chief executive) Section 53, after paragraph (b)— insert— ‘(baa) the remuneration and conditions of employment of public service employees other than persons mentioned in paragraph (b)(i) or (ii); or’.’. I table the explanatory notes to my amendments. Tabled paper: Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012, explanatory notes to Hon. Jarrod Bleijie’s amendments [839]. Amendment No. 1 that I have circulated amends section 23 of the Public Service Act 2008 to omit subsection 23(3). This removal of the subsection allows for the parts of the act including rulings to be applied to Public Service officers declared under the regulation without limitation, specifically when a part of the act including rulings is applied under new section 23. There is no requirement to consider whether there is a reduction in the employee’s overall employment conditions. The amendment also amends section 53 of the Public Service Act to insert a new subsection (baa). The new subsection gives the commission’s chief executive the ability to make a ruling about the remuneration and conditions of employment of Public Service employees. This is consistent with the power that the minister has to make a ruling at section 54(1)(a). Mr PITT: I rise to speak on this first amendment moved by the Attorney-General. This clause makes changes to omit section 23(3) of the act. This means the amendments will apply to Public Service officers declared under regulation without limitation. This clause is designed to facilitate the removal of workers’ rights by the stroke of a pen. Let us think about that for a moment—removing workers’ rights by the stroke of a pen. This is not what Queenslanders voted for on 24 March. These are the sorts of things that this government should have told us before they went to the election. There are so many things that this government has been deceitful about, and all of these changes to workers’ rights are included in that. In effect, this means that when this part of the act applies, it will not be necessary for the chief executive to consider whether there is a reduction in the employee’s overall conditions. Essentially, once they had to take into consideration how this would impact upon them. That is no longer in there. This amendment allows an employer to run roughshod over their employees. It is interesting that this government is making these sorts of changes. They are not only the government; they are also the employer. Public sector employees can have their working conditions altered to their detriment because the government says so. Again, this is not something that people voted for. The government needs to look at how the job cuts are affecting people. Let us talk about the ReachTEL poll and let us talk about the fact— Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Dr Robinson): Order! There is too much audible conversation in the chamber. If members could keep their voices down that would be much appreciated. Mr PITT: As I said, public sector employees can have their conditions altered to their detriment just because the employer says so. This means that the government can cut employees’ wages and conditions without legislation. It means that outside of this chamber this can be done by regulation; it can be done through Governor in Council, and that is very, very concerning. We have to look at what we have here with this particular Attorney-General. I am trying to figure out where we have seen him before. Now I know. He is one of the Von Trapp children. He is the all-singing, all-dancing Kmart lawyer who has come in here to sink the boot into workers. People are not going to stand for this. He can sit there smiling about this all through the debate, but these amendments are going to have massive ramifications on people’s lives. The Premier said that he had a lot of fun in the first 100 days, but no-one else is having fun. We have to look at the impacts of these changes right across our state. Mr BLEIJIE: Is it any wonder they have only seven members left in this chamber? The government is acting in the interests of Queensland so that we have a prosperous economy and a prosperous future for the people of Queensland. That is why we are making these decisions and moving these amendments tonight. Ms PALASZCZUK: Once again we are seeing that this government is removing workers’ rights. There has been absolutely no consultation in relation to these amendments that have been put forward at the last hour by the Attorney-General. I would like to ask the Attorney-General who he consulted in relation to these amendments. Was it just his department? Was it just the Crown Solicitor? We know that this section is the sleeper. Essentially, it means that government regulates rather than through a directive. It means that the government is taking away the power so that everything is done through regulation and it will not have to come back through this House. We know what you are trying to do here. We can see right through it. Over the course of the dinner break we did our own consultation. Who did we consult? We consulted the QCU, the Together union and the AWU. Do you know what? There had been no consultation by this Attorney-General, by this Premier and by members who sit opposite. I ask the Attorney-General now to detail who he consulted with in relation to this specific provision and the amendment he has moved. 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1749

Mr BLEIJIE: I note that the opposition leader says that she went and consulted unions over the dinner break. I know that the member for South Brisbane certainly consulted with the Socialist Alliance because I heard her on the microphone out the front. The Leader of the Opposition talks about the Together union. Did she talk to them about the ReachTEL poll that the Together union commissioned? I suspect not. These are important amendments. We are getting Queensland back on track. We have to make tough decisions. Queenslanders elected the LNP government because they trusted us to make these tough decisions so that they have a prosperous economy and a prosperous future. Division: Question put—That the amendment be agreed to. AYES, 62—Barton, Bennett, Berry, Bleijie, Boothman, Cavallucci, Choat, Costigan, Cox, Crandon, Cripps, Davies, T Davis, Dickson, Dillaway, Douglas, Dowling, Elmes, Emerson, Flegg, France, Frecklington, Grant, Grimwade, Gulley, Hathaway, Hopper, Johnson, Judge, Kaye, King, Krause, Latter, Maddern, Malone, Mander, McArdle, McVeigh, Millard, Minnikin, Molhoek, Newman, Nicholls, Ostapovitch, Pucci, Rickuss, Ruthenberg, Seeney, Shorten, Sorensen, Springborg, Stevens, Stewart, Stuckey, Symes, Trout, Walker, Watts, Woodforth, Young. Tellers: Menkens, Smith NOES, 11—Byrne, Cunningham, Katter, Knuth, Mulherin, Palaszczuk, Pitt, Trad, Wellington. Tellers: Miller, Scott Resolved in the affirmative. Amendment agreed to. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Dr Robinson): Order! With the leave of the House, I propose to order that all future division bells in consideration in detail on this bill be of one minute’s duration. Leave granted. Clauses 4 to 22, as read, agreed to. Insertion of new clause— Mr BLEIJIE (8.05 pm): I move the following amendment— 2 After clause 22 Page 10, after line 18— insert— ‘22A Amendment of s 89 (When this division applies) ‘Section 89— insert— ‘(2) However, this division does not apply in relation to an employee to whom a relevant industrial instrument under chapter 15, part 2 applies.’.’. Amendment No. 2 amends section 89 of the Industrial Relations Act 1999 to insert new subsection (2) in section 89. The amendment ensures that the division in chapter 3, part 4, division 2 under subsections 89 to 90(b) does not apply in relation to an employee of a government entity to whom a relevant industrial instrument under chapter 15, part 2 particular provisions of an industrial instrument applies. Mr PITT: This amendment, as we have heard, inserts a new subsection into section 89 to ensure that this section does not apply to employees of a government entity. This division will no longer apply to employees of government entities requiring an employer to give notice of proposed dismissals. The act states— The notice must state— (a) the number and categories of employees being dismissed; and (b) the reasons for the dismissals; and (c) the time when, or the period over which, the employer intends to carry out the dismissals. Under that act, if an employer does not give the requisite notice, the QIRC could impose fines and penalties on an employer and also declare the dismissal ineffective until they have complied. This goes out the window for employees of government entities if this is passed. Those protections—the sorts of protections one would expect for employees—will not apply to public sector workers. One only has to look at the previous amendment that was passed, and we have all figured it out. We know that when it comes down to the legal advice that has obviously been received this is all about making sure that, essentially, this government does not have to go through that scrutiny. It does not need to be under any scrutiny through that court process. That is why this is being brought into legislation. All of these things should be a very frightening thing for people right across Queensland. What we know is that people are getting a taste. They are getting the movie trailer. They are getting a preview here and they are getting a taste of what they would get if they had an Abbott government. This is the Newman preview. This is Newman Work Choices. Actually, it is not Work Choices; it is actually no choices. This is all about no choices. It is Work Choices on steroids. Mr Newman: Get a real job! 1750 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012

Mr PITT: This is something that those opposite have decided to sneak in—the typical way for this government, consulting with nobody, coming in here at the eleventh hour and just throwing this on the table without even caring what those ramifications are going to be for Queenslanders. The Attorney- General has a lot— Mr Newman: Speak up and get a real job! Mr PITT: The Premier might wish to go to his seat. A government member: He’s never had a real job! Mr Newman: Speak up and get a real job! Mr PITT: The Premier might wish to go to his seat. Honourable members interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I just remind members that if you need to interject please do so from your own seat. Mr Newman: The Premier can interject from any cabinet seat. That’s the ruling of the Clerk. Mr PITT: The Premier keeps harping on, and that is fine. If the Premier wishes to keep going, the Premier can keep going. He might be the Premier of this state, but he is no statesman. Honourable members interjected. Mr Newman: Good one! Good one, you thug! Honourable members interjected. Mrs CUNNINGHAM: Mr Deputy Speaker— Mr Newman: Good one, you thug! Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I call the member for Gladstone. Mr Newman: Did you support the campaign? Yeah, good on you, grub! Mrs CUNNINGHAM: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I just seek a clarification from the Attorney- General. Mr PITT: I rise to a point of order. I find the words the Premier has just said offensive and I ask that they be withdrawn. Mr Newman: You weren’t speaking. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Premier has been asked to withdraw. Mr Newman: He wasn’t speaking. Mr Stevens: He was interjecting. Mr PITT: He called me a ‘grub’. Mr Newman interjected. Mr Stevens: You weren’t speaking. Mr Newman: You weren’t speaking. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: The term I heard was ‘grub’ as an interjection. Mr PITT: From the Premier. Ms Palaszczuk: Ask him to withdraw it. It’s unparliamentary. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: It probably would help the House if the Premier— Mr Newman: No. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:—would— Mr Newman: No. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:—withdraw. Mr Newman: No. Mr PITT: That is a reflection on the chair, Mr Deputy Speaker. Ms Palaszczuk: You have to withdraw. Mr STEVENS: I rise to a point of order. There was no direction at all. Ms Trad: No, there was. Mr Pitt: He said no. Mr Mulherin: The chair asked and he said no. 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1751

Honourable members interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The term could be considered as potentially unparliamentary language and I just wonder whether the Premier might withdraw that. Mr NEWMAN: Mr Deputy Speaker, then I will withdraw. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, Premier. Mrs CUNNINGHAM: I would seek a clarification from the minister of new section 691D, titled ‘Termination, change and redundancy provisions’. I have interpreted this new section to mean that the employer—and that would be the state—is not required to notify the entity of the decision until the time the employer considers it appropriate. The employer is not required to consult with the entity about the decision until the employer notifies the entity of the decision and the employer is not required to consult with the entity about the decision other than in relation to implementation of the decision. Can the minister clarify who the entity is? I should know, but industrial relations is not my strong point. I am assuming that this new section is about termination, change and redundancy provisions. Mr BLEIJIE: I think the member for Gladstone is actually referring to the next amendment that I am going to move, which includes a new section 691D, in terms of consultation. While I am on my feet, can I say for the benefit of the member for Gladstone that what generally happens currently is that when the employer decides to make an announcement of a change of policy direction, upon making the decision, then they are required to consult. The entities generally are the unions involved in the negotiations. This next amendment simply states that the employer has a choice as to when to start the consultation. So the decision can be made, but when it is notified to the entity, that is, when the government chooses or the employer chooses to notify, then the consultation starts. Division: Question put—That the amendment be agreed to. AYES, 62—Barton, Bennett, Berry, Bleijie, Boothman, Cavallucci, Choat, Costigan, Cox, Crandon, Cripps, Davies, T Davis, Dickson, Dillaway, Douglas, Dowling, Elmes, Emerson, Flegg, France, Frecklington, Grant, Grimwade, Gulley, Hathaway, Hopper, Johnson, Judge, Kaye, King, Krause, Latter, Maddern, Malone, Mander, McArdle, McVeigh, Millard, Minnikin, Molhoek, Newman, Nicholls, Ostapovitch, Pucci, Rickuss, Ruthenberg, Seeney, Shorten, Sorensen, Springborg, Stevens, Stewart, Stuckey, Symes, Trout, Walker, Watts, Woodforth, Young. Tellers: Menkens, Smith NOES, 11—Byrne, Cunningham, Katter, Knuth, Mulherin, Palaszczuk, Pitt, Trad, Wellington. Tellers: Miller, Scott Resolved in the affirmative. Amendment agreed to. Clause 23, as read, agreed to. Insertion of new clauses— Mr BLEIJIE (8.19 pm): I move the following amendment— 3 After clause 23 Page 11, after line 19— insert— ‘23A Insertion of new ch 15, pt 1, hdg Chapter 15, before section 686— insert— Part 1 General’.’. ’23B Insertion of new ch 15, pt 2 Chapter 15— insert— Part 2 Particular provisions of industrial instruments ‘691A Definitions for pt 2 ‘In this part— industrial instrument see the Public Service Act 2008, schedule 4. relevant industrial instrument means an industrial instrument to which this part applies under section 691B. TCR provision see section 691D(4). ‘691B Industrial instruments to which this part applies ‘(1) This part applies to an industrial instrument (whether made or certified before or after the commencement of this part) to the extent the instrument applies to the employment of persons in a government entity. ‘(2) In this section— government entity— (a) has the meaning given by the Public Service Act 2008, section 24; and (b) despite the Public Service Act 2008, section 23(4), includes a public service office for which an application provision has been made under that section. 1752 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012

‘691C Particular provisions are of no effect ‘(1) The following provisions of a relevant industrial instrument are of no effect— (a) a contracting provision; (b) an employment security provision; (c) an organisational change provision. ‘(2) In this section— contracting provision— (a) means a provision about the contracting out, or in, of services; but (b) does not include a TCR provision. Examples— The following provisions, as in force on 30 July 2012, are examples of contracting provisions— • clause 7.3 of the State Government Departments Certified Agreement 2009 • appendix 22: Queensland Government Policy on the Contracting-out of Services, of the State Government Departments Certified Agreement 2009 • clauses 4.2 and 4.3 of the Transport and Main Roads Operational Employees’ Certified Agreement 2011 • clauses 2.3(1) and 2.3.2 of the QBuild Field Staff Certified Agreement 8 (2011) • clauses 6.2 and 6.3 of the Queensland Public Health Sector Certified Agreement (No.8) 2011 (EB8) • clause 3.1(b) of the Queensland Ambulance Service—Determination 2010. employment security provision— (a) means a provision about job security or maximising permanent employment, including a provision that applies all or part of a government policy about employment security; but (b) does not include a TCR provision. Examples— The following provisions, as in force on 30 July 2012, are examples of employment security provisions— • clauses 7.1 and 7.2 of the State Government Departments Certified Agreement 2009 • appendix 21 of the State Government Departments Certified Agreement 2009 • clause 2 contained in Appendix 5 of the State Government Departments Certified Agreement 2009: New Provisions Applicable to Employees Engaged in Operations in Youth Detention Centres • clause 4.1.1 of Part 4 of the Transport and Main Roads Operational Employees’ Certified Agreement 2011 • clause 2.3 of the QBuild Field Staff Certified Agreement 8 (2011) • clauses 6.1, 6.6 and 6.7 of the Queensland Public Health Sector Certified Agreement (No.8) 2011 (EB8). organisational change provision does not include a TCR provision. Examples— The following provisions, as in force on 30 July 2012, are examples of organisational change provisions— • clause 7.3 of the State Government Departments Certified Agreement 2009 • clauses 4.1 and 4.2 of the Queensland Public Health Sector Certified Agreement (No.8) 2011 (EB8). ‘691D Termination, change and redundancy provisions ‘(1) This section applies if a relevant industrial instrument includes a TCR provision about notifying an entity of a decision or consulting with an entity about a decision. ‘(2) The following principles apply— (a) the employer is not required to notify the entity of the decision until the time the employer considers appropriate; (b) the employer is not required to consult with the entity about the decision until the employer notifies the entity of the decision; (c) the employer is not required to consult with the entity about the decision other than in relation to implementation of the decision. ‘(3) The TCR provision is of no effect to the extent it is inconsistent with any of the principles mentioned in subsection (2). ‘(4) In this section— TCR provision means a termination, change and redundancy provision of a relevant industrial instrument that is an award. Examples— The following provisions, as in force on 30 July 2012, are examples of termination, change and redundancy provisions— • clauses 4.1, 4.7 and 4.8 of the Queensland Public Service Award—State 2012 • clauses 4.5, 4.6 and 4.7 of the District Health Services Employees’ Award—State 2012 • clauses 4.11, 4.12 and 4.13 of the Ambulance Service Employees’ Award—State 2012. ‘691E Restriction on giving personal employee information ‘(1) This section applies if a relevant industrial instrument includes provision for giving personal information about an employee to an entity other than the employee or a government entity. ‘(2) Despite the provision of the industrial instrument, an employer may give the information to the entity only with the express written consent of the employee. ‘(3) In this section— giving information to an entity includes— (a) releasing information to the entity; and (b) providing the entity with access to the information. personal information means information about an individual whose identity is apparent, or can reasonably be ascertained, from the information.’.’. 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1753

This amendment deals with a few things. It inserts a new section 691A, which provides definitions. Specifically, the industrial instrument has the same meaning as the Public Service Act 2008 in schedule 4. New section 691B deals with the application of part 2. Part 2 applies to government entities. A ‘government entity’ has the same meaning as given by the Public Service Act 2008, section 24. A new government entity includes departments, a Public Service office, for example, the Queensland Ambulance Service, the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service and the Queensland hospital and health services in the department of health. It does not include local government, sworn officers of the Queensland Police Service and government owned corporations. New section 691C provides that particular provisions of industrial instruments are of no effect. These provisions of industrial instruments are (a), a contracting provision; (b), an employment security provision; and, (c), an organisational change provision. These provisions are defined in the examples given. New section 691C(2) also clarifies that contracting, employment security and organisational change provisions do not include a termination, change or a redundancy provision contained in an award. New section 691D clarifies notification that consultation will occur under the TCR. New section 691D(2) sets out three principles. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Dr Robinson): Order! There is too much audible conversation in the chamber. The Attorney-General and Minister for Justice has the call. Mr BLEIJIE: The new section 691D clarifies that notification and consultation will occur under a TCR. Subsection 2 sets out three principles that will guide that. Principle one states that the employer is not required to notify employees and, where relevant, a union of a decision until the time the employer considers appropriate. Principle two states that the employer is not required to consult about the decision until after the employer has notified the employees and, where relevant, a union. This does not mean that an employer does not have to consult about changes, the employer must consult—I repeat, they must consult—with employees and, where relevant, a union after notification of the commencement of the implementation. Principle three states that consultation is required in relation to the implementation of the decision but not in relation to the making of the decision. New section 691E protects an employee’s personal information from being released. An employee must first give express written consent to the employer before their personal information will be released. Just to summarise, if I can, 691A, 691B and 691C confirm the provisions of the Public Service directive recently issued by the Public Service Commission. They also address the issue of organisational change. The change provides certainty. They will be part of an act of parliament. Directives are issued by the Public Service Commission and this enshrines it into legislation and gives it certainty in terms of the government’s commitment to make sure that we have a Public Service that is efficient and affordable as well. I talked about the three principles outlined in the new section 691D. They clarify the existing consultation provisions. The three principles, as I outlined, sit alongside the TCR provisions. The government will still consult with public sector workers and their unions about changes. These provisions provide certainty for all the parties. The new section 691E relates to protection of personal information. These changes are about protecting the individual. Public sector employees must first give their consent before their personal information will be released. These are fair changes and should be welcomed by all. At the moment if there is an issue before the QIRC a union can apply for information in relation to workers. Whether they are a member of a union or not, we believe that the employee should have the right to decide if their information is given to a particular union. It should be welcomed by all because we are giving the individual the responsibility to accept that. Opposition members interjected. Mr BLEIJIE: What is wrong with the employee giving written consent to have their details available? If an employee does not wish their details to be available what would be wrong with that? If an employee does not want a union to have their details then they should not have their details. This provision gives power to the employee to determine if a union should have their personal details or not. Mr PITT: Clause 691A defines a number of terms that are used in the bill. ‘Industrial instrument’ has the same meaning that it has in the Public Service Act 2008. ‘Relevant industrial instrument’ means an industrial instrument referred to in these amendments and ‘TCR provision’ means a termination, change and redundancy provision in an instrument referred to in these amendments. The new section 691B is where it gets interesting. This applies to all workers employed in a government entity. This is about all public sector workers being in the firing line. I was going to ask the Attorney-General which workers are going to be affected by this, but the easier question to ask is which ones are not going to be affected. The answer is pretty much everyone who is in a government entity. That changes things dramatically. We thought the directive was going a long way; the directive was nothing compared to what these amendments are putting forward this evening. That is why we were so determined to ask 1754 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012 earlier—and we have had no response—who was consulted on these amendments. These have come in at the eleventh hour. They are not amendments that are being run by anybody. I guess this is more of the know-it-all government that we have come to see here in Queensland since 24 March. All of our child safety workers, teachers, ambos, firies and hospital workers are at risk of having their working conditions that they have negotiated through enterprise bargaining processes overturned by the strike of a pen by this deceitful government. This is exactly the sort of thing that this government is trying to push as part of its ideological agenda. It is not what people voted for in Queensland. We thought Work Choices was bad. We saw what happened federally when the conservative government put forward Work Choices. This is Work Choices plus. Everything that is in these amendments is rotting away workers’ rights. That is without getting to the point of talking about 691C. This is really a great one. This includes contracting provisions, employment security provisions and organisational change provisions. This is about contracting out. It means no Queensland public sector employee will have job security. Mr Seeney: How many contractors did you have? Mr PITT: I take the interjection from the Deputy Premier. Government members talk about temporary employees and that if you do not renew a contract then it is okay, it is not sacking somebody. Guess what? The outcome is exactly the same—someone is without a job. There are plenty of reasons why someone could be on a temporary contract. This is not what this is about. This is about ideology. This is about the LNP not telling the people what they were going to do before the election. They saw what the midyear review said. They did not tell anyone about their $4 billion worth of election commitments. They did not tell people they would be sacking everybody. This is a disgrace. This is why people are losing faith in this government very early on. Five months has gone by and no-one trusts this government. Mr BLEIJIE: I will tell the member who trusts this government: the people who put 78 members in this parliament and left you with seven. Opposition members interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Dr Robinson): Order! Those on my left will cease interjecting. A number of those on my left are already on 253 warnings. Mr BLEIJIE: They trust this government to have the financial competence to get Queensland back on track. They trust this government to reduce their cost-of-living pressures. They trust this government to at some point in the future, when we have the economy back on track, reduce their taxes and increase their wages to make sure they are making a living so that they can feed their families. It would never have happened under the Labor Party. We saw the Moody’s report and the Commission of Audit. Their own Treasury officials were saying where we were heading was unsustainable—it was projected to $100 billion. Mr Mulherin interjected. Mr BLEIJIE: I take the interjection from the member for Mackay. Do not lecture me on election commitments in terms of what we did or not did say at the election. I need not remind you about asset sales. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Attorney-General will speak through the chair. Mr BLEIJIE: I need not remind the honourable Deputy Leader of the Opposition about fuel subsidies, I need not remind the honourable Deputy Leader of the Opposition in relation to all these commitments in 2009 that they did not tell the people of Queensland about. I need not remind the seven opposite that two months after the 2009 election they delayed the Sunshine Coast University Hospital and told no-one before the election. They cannot lecture us about what we did and did not say at the election. We told Queenslanders that we were going to get back on track and sort out the finances so that people could make a decent living and reduce their costs of living. We are unapologetic about getting the financial basics right. Ms PALASZCZUK: Just so all members are very clear about what they are voting on here tonight, it is very clear— Government members interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Members on my right will cease interjecting. I want to hear the Leader of the Opposition. Ms PALASZCZUK: Fundamentally, this is about cutting jobs in the Public Service. Where do I get that from? It is from the explanatory notes to the amendments moved the Attorney-General, which state— The amendments are designed to provide the Government with appropriate flexibility to effectively manage employment arrangements and the right-sizing of the Public Service. 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1755

Members should make no mistake about this. This is the last sitting day before the budget sittings. What do we know? We know that potentially 20,000 jobs are on the chopping block. Up to 20,000 jobs are going to go. How is the government going to get to 20,000 jobs? It is all here in black and white, in the amendments, how the government will get to 20,000 jobs. What is being moved in this amendment is very clear. New section 691C refers to ‘an organisational change provision’. I ask the Attorney-General: does this provision apply to the nurses’ agreement that was recently signed by this government? The Attorney-General needs to answer that question very clearly tonight, so all the nurses throughout Queensland know exactly what he is doing. If we look further, what else can we contract out now? The Ambulance Service. Shame on you! Who are we talking about with the Queensland public health services? So that all members are very clear, I outline that we are talking about the cleaners, we are talking about the wardies, we are talking about admin positions, we are talking about pathology, we are talking about pharmacy, we are talking about clinical workers. Does every member here support the workers who work in our health system or don’t they? This is what is going to happen: for every member sitting on the government side, there will be a community campaign the likes of which this state has not seen before. That community campaign will be run in each and every electorate. It will be run in the electorate of the member for Ipswich, in the electorate of the member for Brisbane Central, in the electorate of the member for Gregory. It is going to happen in every single electorate. Who will mount that community campaign? It will be the Labor movement. What is happening in this place tonight is absolutely unbelievable. Was the backbench consulted in relation to these amendments? This is how the government is going to get to 20,000 jobs. I urge every single government worker in this state to contact their member tomorrow, make an appointment and say, ‘We’re not happy’. Mr BLEIJIE: This is a fear campaign being run by the seven opposite, in line with the unions. They are trying to revive their relationship, because the unions did not like them in 2009 following the asset sales. Certainly they went off the member for Bundamba, because she lost her voice for the past three years. They are running a fear campaign. They say, ‘We’re going to get people out the front of parliament to protest’, but this evening they managed to get only a couple of hundred from the Socialist Alliance. They have been running a fear campaign. They have been thinking that there will be hundreds of thousands of people protesting in the street out the front of parliament, but each time all they have managed to get is a few hundred people, because the employees, the Public Service and the Queensland community know better. They can see through the fear, the untruths and the mistruths that the unions in Queensland are peddling, in conjunction with the Australian Labor Party. Mr MULHERIN: Tonight really reveals the true colours of the LNP government. It is a government that is driven by ideology. This government will have a huge impact on regional and rural Queensland. At least the member for Gregory had the guts to stand up last week and express his concerns about the people who will lose their jobs in rural and regional areas. New section 691C shows what this government is about, which is contracting out. Recently, the government said it would look at providing services to the people of Queensland based on a cost-benefit analysis, that is, whether it was cheaper to do it in the public sector or the private sector. If it goes out to the private sector, it will be about contracting and it will be about the further casualisation of the workforce. Forty per cent of the Australian workforce is casualised now. Those people will be unable to get loans for homes. The government talks about the four pillars of the economy and restoring and rebuilding the construction industry, but because of permanency in employment people will not be in a position to borrow to drive the economy forward. What will we see in Main Roads? They will dud the member for Gregory. They will dud him like they are dudding the rest of Queensland. We have seen the government’s true colours. It is like a wolf in sheep’s clothing. They went to the election and said, ‘Don’t worry about us. Your jobs will be safe.’ However, since they have come in here all they have done is cut, cut, cut. Up to 20,000 jobs will go. Once they settle the quantum around jobs, they will start contracting out even further and we will see more reductions from the Public Service in the coming years. We will see the impacts that that will have on rural and regional Queensland. Tonight the government’s ideology has been exposed. It did not have the guts to put these amendments into the original bill, because it would have been exposed a lot earlier. Mr BLEIJIE: If there is one thing that I fear more than sharks, it is the Deputy Leader of the Opposition talking about a cost-benefit analysis. Across Queensland the agriculture colleges are in a huge financial abyss. Government members interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Dr Robinson): Order! Those on my left! Mr BLEIJIE: Nothing scares me more than sharks and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition talking about— 1756 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Attorney-General, take your seat. Those on my left will cease interjecting. Those on my right, I want to hear the Attorney-General. Mr BLEIJIE: As I said, nothing scares me more than sharks— Mr Mulherin interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for Mackay will cease interjecting. Mr BLEIJIE:—and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition talking about finances and financial competence. We have seen the honourable agriculture minister table a document from the report into the agriculture colleges. Mr Mulherin interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Attorney-General, please take your seat. I now warn the Deputy Leader of the Opposition under standing order 253A. The question is that the Attorney-General’s amendment be agreed to. Those of that opinion say ‘aye’— Mrs MILLER: Mr Deputy Speaker, I am on my feet. Government members: You were not. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for Bundamba, I did not see or hear you. I did not hear you take the call. I am going to continue on. Next time, make your call loud and clear. Division: Question put—That the amendment be agreed to. AYES, 62—Barton, Bennett, Berry, Bleijie, Boothman, Cavallucci, Choat, Costigan, Cox, Crandon, Cripps, Davies, T Davis, Dickson, Dillaway, Douglas, Dowling, Elmes, Emerson, Flegg, France, Frecklington, Grant, Grimwade, Gulley, Hathaway, Hopper, Johnson, Judge, Kaye, King, Krause, Latter, Maddern, Malone, Mander, McArdle, McVeigh, Millard, Minnikin, Molhoek, Newman, Nicholls, Ostapovitch, Pucci, Rickuss, Ruthenberg, Seeney, Shorten, Sorensen, Springborg, Stevens, Stewart, Stuckey, Symes, Trout, Walker, Watts, Woodforth, Young. Tellers: Menkens, Smith NOES, 11—Byrne, Cunningham, Katter, Knuth, Mulherin, Palaszczuk, Pitt, Trad, Wellington. Tellers: Miller, Scott Resolved in the affirmative. Amendment agreed to. Clauses 24 and 25, as read, agreed to. Insertion of new clauses— Mr BLEIJIE (8.42 pm): I seek leave to move an amendment outside the long title of the bill. Leave granted. Mr BLEIJIE: I move the following amendment— 4 After clause 25 Page 12, after line 12— insert— ‘Part 6 Amendment of Industrial Relations (Tribunals) Rules 2011 ‘26 Rules amended This part amends the Industrial Relations (Tribunals) Rules 2011. ‘27 Amendment of rule 79 (Application to refer matter to full bench) Section 79, ‘president’— omit, insert— ‘vice president’.’. Amendment No. 4 inserts after clause 25 of the PSOLA Bill a new clause 26 and clause 27 to amend the Industrial Relations (Tribunals) Rules 2011 by deleting at section 79, ‘application to refer matter to full bench,’ the reference to president and replacing it with vice-president. This is consistent with the amendment to section 279 in the Industrial Relations Act 1999. Amendment agreed to. Schedule— Mr BLEIJIE (8.44 pm): I move the following amendments— 5 Schedule (Minor amendments of Industrial Relations Act 1999) Page 13, after line 9— insert— ‘2A Section 246A— omit. ‘2B Section 252— insert— ‘(1B) The vice president must prepare, and give to the president, a report for the year on the working of the commission for inclusion in the president’s report under subsection (1).’.’. 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1757

6 Schedule (Minor amendments of Industrial Relations Act 1999) Page 15, lines 2 to 4— omit, insert— ‘15 Section 299(3)— omit, insert— ‘(3) In performing a function or exercising a power, the registrar must comply with a direction given by— (a) the president in relation to the court; and (b) the vice president in relation to the commission.’.’. 7 Schedule (Minor amendments of Industrial Relations Act 1999) Page 16, lines 10 to 12— omit. 8 Schedule (Minor amendments of Industrial Relations Act 1999) Page 16, lines 16 to 18— omit, insert— ‘27 Section 708— insert— ‘(1A) When acting under subsection (1), in relation to forms for use by or in the commission or registry, the president must consult with the vice president.’.’. 9 Schedule (Minor amendments of Industrial Relations Act 1999) Page 16, after line 22— insert— ‘30 Schedule 2, section 4A(1), after ‘president’— insert— ‘, the vice president’. ‘31 Schedule 2, section 4A(2), ‘president’— omit, insert— ‘vice president’.’. There are a few amendments contained in here. Amendment No. 5 amends clause 25 of the PSOLA Bill to insert a part 2A and part 2B into the schedule of minor amendments. Part 2A deletes section 246A of the Industrial Relations Act 1999. The removal of this section is consistent with the transfer of the administrative functions of the QIRC from the president to the vice-president. Part 2B of the schedule of the minor amendments creates a subsection (1B) at section 252 of the Industrial Relations Act 1999. Having regard to the administrative responsibilities of the position, section 252(1B) will require the vice-president to provide to the president of the QIRC a report for inclusion in the annual report of the Industrial Court of Queensland, the QIRC and the Queensland Industrial Registry. Amendment 6 amends clause 25 of the PSOLA Bill at part 15 of the Industrial Relations Act to omit the amendment to section 299(3) of the IR Act 1999 proposed in the schedule of minor amendments and replaces it with a differently worded amendment. The amendment makes it clear that the registrar must comply with the direction given by the president as it relates to the court and the vice- president as it relates to the QIRC. Amendment 7 of the bill omits the proposed amendment to section 318(1)(a) and (2) as this erroneously deletes the reference to president and replaces it with vice- president. It is technical in nature. Amendment 8 amends clause 27 to omit the proposed amendment to section 708(1) as this erroneously deletes the reference to president and replaces it with vice-president. It is again technical. Amendment 9 inserts a further amendment to the schedule of minor amendments to insert the vice- president and omit the president and replace it with the vice-president at section 4A(1) and 4A(2) of the Industrial Relations Act 1999 respectively. Mrs MILLER: This government is treating public servants like they are public serpents. That is what you are doing. That is what this government is doing, and shame on every single LNP MP in this House. The most important thing to understand about the Queensland Public Service is that it was, until this day, a career Public Service, and you have wrecked this today. You have wrecked the careers of many people in the Public Service. I can tell the House that as a young student I studied a four-year degree next door at QUT and I graduated with a Bachelor of Business (Public Administration). Why? So I could work and serve the public. That is why, and many of my friends in the Queensland Public Service did the same. It is not just a job. People in the Public Service are there because they work for the people of Queensland. A lot of them start off as AO2s or AO3s and some are in the scientific level or the professional level, and over a period of time they build their careers and they are public servants for life. We have in fact had generations of public servants who have built their careers right down the road there on George Street, Mary Street and Adelaide Street, and you are going to wreck their careers tonight—just like the LNP 1758 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2012 government wrecked my career in 1996. This is something that I know about. I just want to say to the LNP members on the other side that there will be plenty of public servants joining the Labor Party. You upset me so much back then and that is why I am in this House today—because you ruined my career. The other thing I want to say to my Public Service friends and colleagues down the road in George Street is that they should flex off tomorrow and go and visit every single MP’s office. If members thought the Your Rights At Work campaign was a bobby-dazzler, I have got news for you. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member will speak through the chair. Mrs MILLER: Right up until the next election, we are going to make sure that you are out of here—every single one of you. That is what we are going to do. Mrs CUNNINGHAM: I know there are a number of amendments put together here, and I appreciate the minister’s latitude last time when I picked the wrong amendment to ask a question on. I do have concerns about this bill and about the changes in consultation and the periods when consultation is required, but I had to get up in this part and say that there is no way the LNP is starting the politicisation of the Public Service—that started under Goss. Ms TRAD: What we have here fundamentally is a privatisation of the Public Service. Fundamentally, what you will do tonight is privatise— Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member will speak through the chair. Ms TRAD: Mr Chairman, what the government proposes to do tonight is privatise the Queensland Public Service, privatise front-line jobs, and they sit there grinning and smiling about it. It was a pledge by this government that they would not privatise without the consent of the people, without taking it to the people. What happened? We have seen privatisation of the Public Service by stealth. Government members interjected. Ms TRAD: They can groan and they can moan but they did not tell the ambulance workers, they did not tell the firefighters— Mr Choat interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for Ipswich West will cease interjecting. Ms TRAD: They did not tell these public sector workers that they would wake up on 24 August and they would have their jobs privatised by this government that promised the people of Queensland that they would not privatise without taking it to the people. This is the biggest con of all. This is not a can-do government; this is a ‘can-con’ government. Quite frankly, the biggest con is on the backbench. The biggest con is on all of them. The member for Brisbane Central is sitting there smirking. How many public servants are there in Brisbane Central? How many public servants are there in Ashgrove? Mr Minnikin interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Dr Robinson): Order! The member for Chatsworth will cease interjecting. Ms TRAD: I ask the member for Lytton: how many public servants are there in your electorate? Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member will speak through the chair. Ms TRAD: In Sandgate there are many public servants and many firefighters whom I know. Many of them were out there on Tuesday protesting against the windback in entitlements—their entitlements. After working tirelessly through the worst national disasters in Queensland’s history, their payback from this government—this can-con government—was to privatise their jobs, outsource their jobs. Queensland workers will not forget this. A government member interjected. Ms TRAD: I will take that interjection from whichever faceless backbencher it was because we will struggle, we will campaign and we will fight up until the next election and we will beat you. Mr BLEIJIE: Call the doctors for the member for Bundamba and the member for South Brisbane. Get the closest doctor in town for the member for South Brisbane and the member for Bundamba. If I have seen a circus in my life, if I have seen anything—the member for South Brisbane had the gall to come in here just now and talk about ‘the faceless men of the backbench’. Talk about the faceless men and women of a political party! Ms TRAD: I rise to a point of order. I did not say ‘faceless men’, I said ‘faceless MP’. It was gender non-specific. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The Attorney-General has the call. Mr BLEIJIE: The member for South Brisbane may say ‘faceless MP’ but I said ‘faceless men and women of the Australian Labor Party’ which you are all too experienced in. We remember when the Labor Party went and privatised all the assets in 2009 and did not tell anyone—did not tell the unions. Rachel Nolan sat over here in cabinet— 23 Aug 2012 Public Service and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1759

Opposition members interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Mr BLEIJIE: A cabinet minister, Rachel Nolan, stood here—in fact, as the Minister for Transport—and said, ‘Queensland Rail is not for sale.’ Then, of course, the then Treasurer, Andrew Fraser, went on to say, ‘Queensland Rail is for sale.’ So they cannot come in here and lecture people about what is not on the agenda and what has not been told because they had the gall to do that when in government. The member for South Brisbane has the hide to come in here and talk about faceless people because you have been a faceless person of the Australian Labor Party. You have been sitting down in Peel Street— Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Through the chair, Attorney, please. Mr BLEIJIE: The member for South Brisbane sat down in Peel Street during the state election campaign—and the things that came from Peel Street, the things we saw on TV against the honourable Premier, his wife and family. She might stick up for public servants but she was not sticking up for the individual rights of the honourable Premier and his wife at the time. No, she was there drawing the spider web, paying the money, and that is shameful. So she should not come in here and talk about faceless people. The member for Bundamba talks about the Public Service. Who cut the Public Service by 5,000 jobs? The Labor Party! Five thousand jobs were cut by the Labor Party. Under the Australian Labor Party government in Queensland, 5,000 people left the Public Service because someone in government had started to work out that they could not afford to do what they were doing any longer. I would hazard a guess that if the Labor Party won the last state election they would be going down the same route— although they were financial illiterates so I doubt that, and that has been the problem. So members opposite should not talk about Public Service jobs because more public servant jobs were lost under the Labor Party than during this LNP government’s time. Mrs SCOTT: On this side we value jobs and the final insult— Government members interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Those on my right, I want to hear the member for Woodridge. Mrs SCOTT: I will add the final insult from the MP for Ipswich, who was just overheard saying, ‘This is spoiling my dessert.’ What an absolute insult to what is happening in this House tonight. Mr BERRY: I rise to a point of order. I have no idea what she is talking about. Those words were not said by me or anybody in close proximity to me and I ask for them to be withdrawn by the member for Woodridge. I do find it offensive. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Woodridge, you have been asked to withdraw. It would help the House if you would withdraw. Mrs SCOTT: Do they want an explanation of— Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! It is an unconditional withdrawal. Mrs SCOTT: I withdraw. Mr BLEIJIE: We have just seen again a little more verballing. That is what the Labor Party does: verbal. Oh, they point to their staff to the side—the overresourced opposition. Did they hear it? We have seen it again: verballing from the Australian Labor Party and wasting the parliament’s time talking about an interjection such as that. This is all verballing, something the Labor Party is very well used to. Opposition members interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Those on my left will cease interjecting. Amendments agreed to. Schedule, as amended, agreed to. Third Reading Hon. JP BLEIJIE (Kawana—LNP) (Attorney-General and Minister for Justice) (8.59 pm): I move— That the bill, as amended, be now read a third time. Division: Question put—That the bill, as amended, be now read a third time. AYES, 57—Barton, Bennett, Berry, Bleijie, Cavallucci, Choat, Costigan, Cox, Crandon, Cripps, Davies, T Davis, Dickson, Dillaway, Dowling, Elmes, Emerson, Flegg, France, Frecklington, Grant, Grimwade, Gulley, Hathaway, Hopper, Johnson, Judge, Krause, Latter, Maddern, Malone, Mander, McArdle, McVeigh, Millard, Minnikin, Molhoek, Newman, Ostapovitch, Pucci, Rickuss, Ruthenberg, Seeney, Shorten, Shuttleworth, Sorensen, Springborg, Stevens, Stewart, Stuckey, Symes, Walker, Watts, Woodforth, Young. Tellers: Menkens, Smith NOES, 11—Byrne, Cunningham, Katter, Knuth, Mulherin, Palaszczuk, Pitt, Trad, Wellington. Tellers: Miller, Scott Resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a third time. 1760 Adjournment 23 Aug 2012

Long Title Hon. JP BLEIJIE (Kawana—LNP) (Attorney-General and Minister for Justice) (9.07 pm): I move the following amendment— That the long title of the bill be amended so that the title reads ‘a bill for an act to amend the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2010, the Public Sector Ethics Act 1994, the Public Service Act 2008, the Industrial Relations Act 1999 and the Industrial Relations Tribunals Rules 2011 for particular purposes’. Division: Question put—That the amendment be agreed to. AYES, 59—Barton, Bennett, Berry, Bleijie, Boothman, Cavallucci, Choat, Costigan, Cox, Crandon, Cripps, Davies, T Davis, Dickson, Dillaway, Dowling, Elmes, Emerson, Flegg, France, Frecklington, Grant, Grimwade, Gulley, Hathaway, Hopper, Johnson, Judge, Krause, Latter, Maddern, Malone, Mander, McArdle, McVeigh, Millard, Minnikin, Molhoek, Newman, Ostapovitch, Pucci, Rickuss, Ruthenberg, Seeney, Shorten, Shuttleworth, Sorensen, Springborg, Stevens, Stewart, Stuckey, Symes, Trout, Walker, Watts, Woodforth, Young. Tellers: Menkens, Smith NOES, 11—Byrne, Cunningham, Katter, Knuth, Mulherin, Palaszczuk, Pitt, Trad, Wellington. Tellers: Miller, Scott Resolved in the affirmative. Division: Question put—That the long title, as amended, be agreed to. AYES, 60—Barton, Bennett, Berry, Bleijie, Boothman, Cavallucci, Choat, Costigan, Cox, Crandon, Cripps, Davies, T Davis, Dickson, Dillaway, Dowling, Elmes, Emerson, Flegg, France, Frecklington, Grant, Grimwade, Gulley, Hathaway, Hopper, Johnson, Judge, Krause, Latter, Maddern, Malone, Mander, McArdle, McVeigh, Millard, Minnikin, Molhoek, Newman, Nicholls, Ostapovitch, Pucci, Rickuss, Ruthenberg, Seeney, Shorten, Shuttleworth, Sorensen, Springborg, Stevens, Stewart, Stuckey, Symes, Trout, Walker, Watts, Woodforth, Young. Tellers: Menkens, Smith NOES, 11—Byrne, Cunningham, Katter, Knuth, Mulherin, Palaszczuk, Pitt, Trad, Wellington. Tellers: Miller, Scott Resolved in the affirmative.

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT Mr STEVENS (Mermaid Beach—LNP) (Manager of Government Business) (9.17 pm): I move— That the House, at its rising, do adjourn until 9.30 am on Tuesday, 11 September 2012. Question put—That the motion be agreed to. Motion agreed to.

ADJOURNMENT Mr STEVENS (Mermaid Beach—LNP) (Manager of Government Business) (9.17 pm): I move— That the House do now adjourn. Newman Government Ms PALASZCZUK (Inala—ALP) (Leader of the Opposition) (9.17 pm): Another week, another glimpse into the heartless abyss that is the LNP government. Another round of nonanswers. Another atrocious display by a Premier who promised to behave with dignity and with grace and with humility but now behaves in a manner which is simply the polar opposite. Another week in which thousands who are on the chopping block, whose livelihoods are at stake, are asked yet again to participate in a cruel game of ‘wait and see’ before they are dumped on the unemployment queue. Another week of broken promises. Another week of slash and burn. Another week of this government letting down the Queenslanders it was elected to represent and protect. What we have seen this week once and for all is the black heart of the LNP—the disturbing, gruesome core of a government which in four short months has betrayed Queenslanders, has taken the trust placed in it and thrown that trust to the wind. But not only has it abused this trust; today we received a true insight into this Premier when he took things a step further and rubbed their noses in it. This morning in this place the Premier used an analogy when he described his full-scale slash and burn policy against the public sector, and it was amongst the most offensive things I have ever heard. I am not going to repeat the words he used, but frankly I had difficulty believing these words were coming from the mouth of our own state Premier. His analogy equated public sector workers with waste that needs to be swept away, and that places this Premier firmly at a new level—in the gutter. It was astonishing in its heartlessness but typical of what we have come to expect from this government. This is a government and a Premier that continue to delude themselves that they are doing the right thing, that they are living up to expectations and continuing to get a pat on the back from the same public they are absolutely now deceiving. But no matter how many times the Premier tells himself and tells us that Queenslanders continue to congratulate him, the cold, hard truth lies in what the public actually now thinks of him. Just this morning the results of a new poll tell that story. The poll by ReachTEL focuses on the key electorates of Sandgate, Townsville and Brisbane Central, and it does not make pretty reading for the Premier and his LNP members. It shows that his members are not listening 23 Aug 2012 Adjournment 1761 and they are refusing to listen. It shows that their constituents are dissatisfied, angry and extremely disappointed by this government. This government needs to do better. It must do better, and we know that the budget is going to bring heartbreak and heartache to many. (Time expired)

North Keppel Island Environmental Centre

Mr YOUNG (Keppel—LNP) (9.21 pm): Two weeks ago I had the pleasure to officially launch the new hot-water solar panels on the North Keppel Island Environmental Centre. The panels were bought from three different manufactures, in six different configurations and in a range of materials. As well as providing hot water for six of the cabins, these solar panels will also be part of a research project to determine which were most effective and resistant to the salty environment. The North Keppel Island Environment Centre has been operating for 17 years and is the only environmental education centre on an island located within a national park in Queensland. This high- demand centre is always fully booked out, with a long waiting list. During 2011, the centre hosted 40 international students and had 4,218 student visits and 800 adult visits from a range of community groups. In 2010-11 the average student group size grew from 22 to 32. Of those students, 50 per cent were from local schools, 30 per cent from Western Queensland and the remaining 20 per cent were from other parts of Queensland. The North Keppel Island Environment Centre offers a range of activities covering marine ecology, terrestrial plants, alternative energy, water management, ecosystems, local Indigenous history and environmental appreciation. The centre has many unique qualities and, being on an island, is totally self-sufficient, with water, energy and sewage management systems. All water is harvested from the roof area, monitored carefully and tested regularly to confirm that it is clean and hygienic. All energy is produced on site from solar panels, a wind generator and a gas fired generator. Toilets are waterless composting models, which also help dispose of kitchen waste. Whilst I was there, the students who were at that facility were from Monto State School and Barcaldine State School, and I questioned them whether they knew their local MPs.

Seniors Concert

Mr MANDER (Everton—LNP) (9.24 pm): I rise to advise the House of the inaugural Seniors Concert, which was held in the Speakers’ Hall on Monday morning. And what a great morning it was. Let me explain to members what this morning was all about. An instrumental music teacher from my electorate—from Albany Creek State High School—is a man named Tim Le Fever who has a great passion for music and, obviously, instructing students in music. He came to my office looking for opportunities for students to perform in places such as Parliament House. So we put our heads together and we realised that Seniors Week was coming up, so we thought, ‘Let’s invite school students to Parliament House to entertain seniors.’ I am delighted to say that we had over 200 seniors who came from as far away as the Sunshine Coast and the Gold Coast to enjoy an absolutely delightful morning of music. I want to thank Madam Speaker who allowed this concert to take place. As all members know, Madam Speaker is a fine appreciator of the arts and music. So Madam Speaker opened the morning and we were delighted to have students from four schools attend. We had the Brisbane State High School string orchestra, the Benowa State School choir, the Mansfield State High School orchestra and, would members believe, we also had a speaking choir from Banksia Beach State School at Bribie Island. It was a wonderful morning. The seniors who came along all talked about how much they enjoyed it. I want to thank the six or seven MPs who were there and who mingled with constituents from their electorates. They all were just so impressed by the talent in our state schools. I want to thank Mr Tim Le Fever. It was his vision that made this concert come about. I want to thank the schools and the teachers and the conductors from those schools who were involved. I want to thank Madam Speaker and her staff for enabling this concert to happen. I want to thank the electoral staff who were involved in organising this concert as well, particularly the electorate staff from my office of Everton. Sandy, Maddie and April did a fantastic job in bringing this together. It was amazing to see how much the seniors enjoyed the concert. They were really impressed with the catering staff and the scones that were served. One would think that if anybody knew their scones it would be seniors and they were very impressed by the morning. I also want to mention that the member for Thuringowa heard about this concert. Many people may think that his interests are limited to football, but he is a great lover of the arts and he was sorry he missed it. 1762 Adjournment 23 Aug 2012

Labour Day Ms TRAD (South Brisbane—ALP) (9.27 pm): Without the labour movement, Queenslanders— indeed Australians—would not enjoy the lifestyle that we all value. For years, unions have fought for and won rights for working Queenslanders—rights that many of us now take for granted. These rights include a minimum wage, workplace health and safety protection, the eight-hour working day, compensation for injured workers, superannuation, weekends, four weeks paid annual leave, paid maternity leave, bereavement leave and a whole range of other rights and entitlements, including employment security in the Public Service, which we have seen trashed here tonight without any consultation with the people of Queensland. Labour Day has significant historical importance for this state. The first Labour Day took place in Brisbane on 16 March 1861. The celebrations were limited to building workers who had already secured an eight-hour workday, with the majority of workers excluded from the celebrations. However, the example set by Brisbane workers sparked similar international actions, with workers in the United States declaring 1 May to be the day of universal work stoppage. Historically, Labour Day and May Day in Queensland have gone hand in hand, recognising the international and local significance of the day and celebrating in solidarity with workers around the world. The Newman government’s recent decision to move Labour Day— Madam SPEAKER: Member for South Brisbane, this is a bill before the House and, therefore, you are in anticipation of a bill before the House, which is against standing orders. I would ask you not to refer to a bill before the House. Ms TRAD: Labour Day is an important day for working Queenslanders in this state. It is important for a whole range of reasons. Indeed, it has been described to me as a day that is union Christmas. They call it ‘labour Christmas’. They call it that for a reason. It has significance; it has meaning; it is emblematic of their faith. People are talking now about the next Labour Day in Queensland and what will happen to it. What we have seen here tonight has been unprecedented in the history of this state, I would suggest. Organised labour in Queensland has been at the forefront of securing rights for Queenslanders, in particular, as I said earlier, workplace security and work entitlements for public sector workers. What we have seen here tonight is a complete trashing of these achievements, a complete trashing of this commitment to workplace security and permanency within the Public Service which the people of Queensland will know about through the Labor Party and the labour movement if not through their government of the day. Mount Gravatt Show Mr WALKER (Mansfield—LNP) (9.29 pm): The weekend of 28 and 29 July dawned with beautiful weather and saw the 97th Mount Gravatt Show occur in the electorate of Mansfield. It is a great tradition for our local community. This year approximately 8,000 people came to enjoy the delights of the show. That is a record this year on top of a record last year both in attendances and in relation to the exhibitor entries in the show. Far from being an event which is having its last gasp, it is an event very much alive, well and growing within the Mansfield and Mount Gravatt communities. A major attraction is the $2 rides which is great for families within our area. They can come to the Mount Gravatt Show and their children can have rides for $2. For families who are struggling to go to the RNA show it is a great opportunity for them, just a couple of weeks before the RNA, to take their children in a less expensive atmosphere to enjoy most of the delights of the fair and have a great time. As can be seen from the attendance, many people did just that. There were some old favourites there: the baby show, photography, school displays, equestrian events, cattle, sheep and goats and donkey judging— and all of this within 10 kilometres of the Brisbane GPO. I think it is a tremendous achievement for a suburb like ours to be able to maintain what is effectively a rural show in a city atmosphere. A government member: Just like a real country show. Mr WALKER: It is a real country show; it has the real country feeling. If you came along you would feel very much at home there. There is also great cooking, fine arts, quilting and even the odd budgerigar was on display. There is a tremendous array of things for locals to look at. This year the show society added some new and very popular attractions. We had a truck show, stunt bikes, a ute show, a lifestyle exhibition and even sheep dog demonstrations. It was just like the Ekka. The show is a magnet for our other community groups. We saw our Men’s Shed, the Girl Guides, the SES, the Scouts and the Lions Club manage the parking. Everybody gets involved. Our show society deserves great thanks. It was the first show since the death of president Kim Goss’ dad, Bob, a legend and a former show society president. The show was a wonderful tribute to Bob. Thanks to vice president Guy McEntyre, treasurer Margaret McEntyre and all the committee, but in particular Len Crook, the long-time secretary of the show. Len had not been well and was just about to retire due to ill health. It was a great tribute to him to see a successful show. We all look forward to the shows to come and, in particular, the 100th show in 2015. 23 Aug 2012 Adjournment 1763

Vietnam Veterans Day Mr SYMES (Lytton—LNP) (9.32 pm): I would like to advise the house of an important day in our nation’s history that took place on Saturday which was Vietnam Veterans Day. As the local member for Lytton I had the pleasure of attending two services from one end of the electorate to the other but both just as significant. At 6.15 am I was out with members of the Bayside National Servicemen’s Association and local residents from Manly at the memorial of Vietnam veterans which is positioned on the northern tip of Darling Point in Manly Harbour. The weather was brilliant and the glow of the sun rising over the calm waves in Moreton Bay was a simply magical backdrop for a fitting service. Special thanks must go to the entire Bayside Sea Scouts and their families for putting on a free breakfast for the crowd in the clubhouse adjacent to Darling Point. I know from talking to the national servicemen around the kitchen table that it was very warming that the young scouts got up early to put on a great spread. The second service was held at 3.15 pm at the Hemmant Cemetery with the Brisbane East National Servicemen. I would like to put on the record my pleasure and honour not only to be invited to attend—by Mr Ken Edwards, President of the Brisbane East Branch of the National Servicemen’s Association; Mr Peter Kinsella, President of the Manly-Lota RSL Sub-Branch and Mr Allen Callaghan, National Media Officer of the NSAA—but also to be the guest speaker at the service. The venue was very symbolic as it was changed so we could mark our respects at the resting place of three local Vietnam veterans, including Private Raymond Kermode, Private Joseph Ramsey and Private Ian Kingston. The fourth Bayside national serviceman, Private Kenneth Gant, is buried at Mount Gravatt Cemetery. It was and still is sobering to recall that they were young men the same age as myself who one week were walking the peaceful streets of our suburbs and very soon after were involved in events at the battle of Long Tan and other Vietnam fronts. It is long overdue that the battle of Long Tan is regarded as a pivotal battle in our military history. Against overwhelming odds our diggers went to Long Tan with a job to do and, as the Governor-General said at the dedication of national servicemen at the Australian War Memorial, they did their job honourably and well. Once again I would like to thank the association for having me there as their guest speaker. The people of Lytton, and no doubt the people of Queensland, are grateful for the national servicemen’s role in Vietnam and all other battles in history. Lest we forget. Rugby League Championships; Mackay Historical Society Mr MULHERIN (Mackay—ALP) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (9.35 pm): My electorate of Mackay recently hosted the best under 12-rugby league players in the country. Virgin Australia Stadium held the School Sport Australia 12 Years and Under Rugby League Championships between 4 and 11 August. Teams from across Australia flocked to Mackay for a long, hard week of football. The courage, strength and dignity the children showed, representing not only their families, but their schools and, most significantly, their state, was faultless. I was lucky enough to attend both the opening and closing ceremonies and enjoy the tremendous talent, sportsmanship and mateship on display. There was little doubt of Queensland losing the crown as national champions in the grand final and, as predicted, Queensland won a close battle with the Queensland Invitational. Many thanks must go to Laurie Shepherd and his organising committee for showcasing the beautiful city of Mackay. I would also like to thank Frank Leonard and the dedicated group of referees he supported throughout the week. Carnivals of such calibre do not go ahead without generous financial contributions from business in the local community and I would like to thank the major sponsors of the carnival, Souths Leagues Club, Central Queensland University, Beltec Services, Mastermyne, ARL Development and Virgin Australia Stadium. On 4 August the South Mackay Sports and Entertainment Precinct was at capacity to mark the 40th Anniversary of the foundation of the Mackay Historical Society. The historical society is a small but dedicated team whose members put on a grand event to celebrate the occasion. The formation of the Mackay Historical Society came from the foresight of Mr John Renton of Walkerston, who decided to convene a meeting of interested people with a view to creating a historical society to preserve and promote the wealth of history in the Mackay district. In 1974 the society, led by Mrs Bernice Wright, was instrumental in helping to save the old Mackay town hall from destruction and to be kept for the community. In 1981 the society’s patron, Mr Thomas Cook, passed away. Following his death his widow, Dorothy Cook, arranged to bequeath Greenmount Homestead to the community of Mackay as a homestead museum. Since the society moved from Greenmount Homestead in 2001, the society’s archives and collections have been stored at a new site in Casey Avenue in South Mackay. The old single men’s quarters originally from Marian Mill was moved from the grounds of Greenmount Homestead to the present address in Casey Avenue for the society to use as a museum. The museum is packed to the rafters with local history. I thank Glen Hall, who is the research officer at the society. I also thank Phil and Helen Martin for their many years of service to the society and the dedication they have shown to such 1764 Adjournment 23 Aug 2012 an important community organisation. Special recognition must be made of Mrs Bernice Wright for her continual service to the society over the past 40 years. Bernice is a well-known local historian and no- one in Mackay is game to engage in a historical debate with her, myself included. Anyone visiting Mackay should take the time to visit the museum. Myuma-Dugalunji Program Mr KATTER (Mount Isa—KAP) (9.38 pm): I rise to advise the chamber of the great work the Myuma-Dugalunji Program does at Camooweal under the leadership of Colin Saltmere. The program runs across all of rural Queensland and especially within my constituency of Mount Isa, and involves many first Australians from remote Gulf and Cape communities and regional townships. The Myuma- Dugalunji Program is a 13-week residential program based just outside of Camooweal. Usually, it takes 30 young people three times a year. The young people who attend the camp receive pre-employment training, life skills training and experience operating and maintaining heavy equipment in preparation for work. Upon completion of the program, for graduates there are a range of experiences and employment opportunities on offer with local mining and construction companies. Close to 100 per cent of young people graduate from the program. To ensure employment opportunities, Myuma has many developmental links with local mining companies in my patch of the world, extending throughout all of Queensland. Further to this, Myuma participates as a civil contractor in the region and throughout Queensland. It is mostly involved in road construction work in the local area. Much of that is undertaken by former graduates of the program. It is a real working commercial enterprise that is tied in closely with the training operations that serve as a strong complementary activity. Those operations have been identified and commended in the Infrastructure Australia report, which serves as a strong endorsement of this training solution for young Indigenous Australians. This is a highly credible endorsement that should be acknowledged by the government. The young people come from diverse regions such as Aurukun, Mount Isa, Dajarra, Cairns, Mount Garnet, Ravenshoe, Townsville, Ingham, Yarraba, Charters Towers and Palm Island. It is vital that first Australians in more remote areas, such as the Cape and the Gulf, have the opportunity to access training and employment opportunities. The mining and construction industries are constantly looking for skilled workers and this program is very successfully equipping those people with the confidence, skills and knowledge essential to be a part of those growing fields. Opening doors to long-lasting careers is a fundamental part of closing the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people. There are two very major issues facing us in Queensland. The first is the lack of skilled employment for the mining industry, to the point where it is now being suggested that a fly-in fly-out workforce be sourced from overseas. The second issue is that of unemployment in our Indigenous communities. That is something that lies on the consciousness of any compassionate Queenslander. We all want underprivileged people to pull themselves out of what seem to be helpless situations and into a working environment. I understand that this is a large undertaking, but guess what? Here we have a fine working example of a real solution. One only has to take a tour of the camp to see how well the operation is run. Once again I thank the former government for its support and the current government for its continued support of the program. I welcome Minister Elmes’s commitment to visiting Camooweal in the near future, to see the program at work. (Time expired) Speed Careering; Men’s Services; Nerang State Primary School; Seniors Week Dr DOUGLAS (Gaven—LNP) (9.41 pm): I am sure all members have heard about speed dating, but how many members know what speed careering is? Recently I took part in a speed careering session, which is set up along the same lines as speed dating, although with a different outcome, of course. I was one of 19 professional people from the Nerang area who represented real estate agents, motor dealers, bankers, medical people including me, veterinary surgeons and fitness professionals who spoke for four minutes with each of 20 groups of year 10 students at Nerang State High School. It was part of the Beacon program that was started at the school to better equip, motivate and inspire students to either stay at school or choose a positive pathway for the successful transition to employment, further education or training. It is a great program that I recommend to all members. Mrs Scott: It is a great program. Dr DOUGLAS: It is a great program and I think it should be spread right throughout the state. A gap in services for men in our community will be discussed tonight at a public meeting to form a Nerang Men’s Shed. The community development officer in Nerang, Vicky Va’a, says there are few services for men who have been sexually abused or raped by partners, who are victims of domestic violence, who need emergency accommodation or who are suffering from family separation, amongst other things. 23 Aug 2012 Attendance 1765

With Father’s Day coming up soon, I am told that the Nerang Neighbourhood Centre’s male counsellor is preparing for the busiest time of the year. That is a sad thing. He sees fathers who are banned from seeing their children, involved in custody disputes and going through nasty separations and they find Father’s Day the most difficult time to cope with those issues. Traditionally it is Christmas Day, but Father’s Day is another day where much sadness is being experienced by people. It would be nice to see a change there. The Nerang State Primary School’s Stephanie Alexander Garden has provided the produce for the school’s winning Queensland entry in a healthy sandwich competition for schools. This shows what a great asset the garden has been to the school, teaching students how to grow, harvest and prepare fresh produce for their daily diets. Not only did the students pick fresh produce; they also made bread from scratch for their highly nutritious winning entry, which had no artificial colours, flavours or additives. Next month the school will compete in the national final in Sydney. I have eaten their food and been to their sessions. It is a tremendous program. If any member has the opportunity, I encourage them to support it and do whatever they can to help. Two hardworking community workers, Kay Stevenson of Pacific Pines and Anne Panitz of Nerang, who have been great volunteers all their lives, have jointly won my award for the most community-minded senior citizens in the electorate. I run an annual competition whereby I ask people to nominate who they believe is the most hardworking volunteer who has not been recognised. This year we had joint winners, both of whom are 40-year veterans. The awards feed into the event that was run this week by Tim Mander. These are great events for seniors and I endorse them for the future. Fraser Coast, Festivals; Lazy Acres Caravan Park Mr SORENSEN (Hervey Bay—LNP) (9.44 pm): August is a very busy month in Hervey Bay and it is always positive. We have the Blessing of the Fleet, the Seafood Festival and the Whale Festival. I thank the minister, John McVeigh, for coming to Hervey Bay and meeting with the commercial fishermen. He had the pleasure of opening the Fraser Lions Seafood Festival. I hope John and the rest of the crew—Steve, Anne and Senator Boswell—enjoyed themselves. It was a great day. At the Taste of the Bay events, there was a wonderful array of local seafood that was available to all those who attended. I wish to thank Elaine Lewthwaite, Michelle Foz and Susan Harris for their continuing efforts to making this a bigger and brighter event on the Fraser Coast calendar each year. I turn to the Whale Festival. I thank the minister, Andrew Powell, for meeting with the constituents, attending the Whale Festival illumination parade and enjoying the festival. He also had an enjoyable morning on the pristine waters of Hervey Bay watching the whales, which his portfolio covers. The only negative distraction we have had in this wonderful month of August was a visit from the Leader of the Opposition with the support of her mouthpiece, the Labor editor of the Fraser Coast Chronicle. I would like to let the Leader of the Opposition know this: you can take it to me as much as you like, you can call me names, you can sit down with me and talk about the mess that you have left this state in. But what I want to know is how she and her Labor editor can sleep at night when using innocent people for their warped political agenda of self-promotion. There has been nearly a month’s worth of deceit and fear mongering with threats that the people of the Lazy Acres Caravan Park are going to be kicked onto the streets. That is absolute rubbish. This has come to the attention of a small community group, the Manufactured Home Owners Association. Yesterday the executive of the MHOA expressed their concerns that the reporting might unfortunately lead a lot of people to think that the people in caravan parks do not have any rights. I believe that they even wrote to the Leader of the Opposition about this matter, yet this week in parliament she carried on in an absolutely disgraceful manner. I believe this is absolutely disgraceful scaremongering directed at old people. What happened was an absolute disgrace. Question put—That the motion be agreed to. Motion agreed to. House adjourned at 9.47 pm.

ATTENDANCE Barton, Bates, Bennett, Berry, Bleijie, Boothman, Byrne, Cavallucci, Choat, Costigan, Cox, Crandon, Cripps, Crisafulli, Cunningham, Davies, C. Davis, T. Davis, Dempsey, Dickson, Dillaway, Douglas, Dowling, Elmes, Emerson, Flegg, France, Frecklington, Gibson, Grant, Grimwade, Gulley, Hart, Hathaway, Hobbs, Hopper, Johnson, Judge, Katter, Kaye, Kempton, King, Knuth, Krause, Langbroek, Latter, Maddern, Malone, Mander, McArdle, McVeigh, Menkens, Millard, Miller, Minnikin, Molhoek, Mulherin, Newman, Nicholls, Ostapovitch, Palaszczuk, Pitt, Powell, Pucci, Rice, Rickuss, Robinson, Ruthenberg, Scott, Seeney, Shorten, Shuttleworth, Simpson, Smith, Sorensen, Springborg, Stevens, Stewart, Stuckey, Symes, Trad, Trout, Walker, Watts, Wellington, Woodforth, Young