Legislative Council

Tuesday, 5 September 2000

THE PRESIDENT (Hon George Cash) took the Chair at 3.30 pm, and read prayers.

WILLESEE, HON WILLIAM FRANCIS Condolence Motion HON N.F. MOORE (Mining and Pastoral - Leader of the House) [3.32 pm]: I move - That this House expresses its deep regret at the death of Hon W.F. (Bill) Willesee, a former member of the Legislative Council for the North Province and the North-East Metropolitan Province, Minister for Community Welfare and Leader of the Government and Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Council; and places on record its appreciation for his long public service, and tenders its profound sympathy to his wife and members of his family on their bereavement. Hon Bill Willesee had a distinguished career as a member of the Legislative Council for 20 years representing the North Province and the North-East Metropolitan Province. He was the Minister for Community Welfare from 1971 to 1973 and Leader of the Opposition and of the Government for seven years from 1966. At the same time he is remembered as a fair-minded, decent and unassuming man and a loyal member of the Australian Labor Party, well respected by his political opponents. Bill Willesee was born in Adelaide in December 1911, but grew up in Wyndham and at Carnarvon where he attended primary school. During this time his father unsuccessfully contested the districts of Kimberley and Gascoyne for the Australian Labor Party on three occasions, establishing a family tradition of political involvement. Bill Willesee left school at the age of 13 and began working for the Goldsborough Mort pastoral company while qualifying as an accountant after studying by correspondence. During his working career, Bill Willesee was employed in both the private and public sectors and most notably was Town Clerk of Carnarvon from 1936 to 1942 - when he enlisted in the Volunteer Defence Corps - and again from 1951 to 1954. It was a considerable achievement to be appointed a town clerk at the age of 24 and he proved a most popular incumbent. His younger brother Don Willesee was elected as a Western Australian senator at the 1949 election. At the biennial election for the Legislative Council in May 1954, Bill Willesee contested the North Province for the Australian Labor Party. It was then a three-member province consisting of the districts of Kimberley, Pilbara and Gascoyne with a total of 1 500 electors. The restricted franchise of those days disadvantaged the ALP in North Province and only since 1950 have Labor candidates been successful. At the previous biennial election in 1952 the ALP candidate won by five votes. With the retirement of the sitting Liberal MLC, Bill Willesee polled 619 votes to gain an absolute majority of 35 over his two coalition opponents. The turnout of voters was an impressive 82 per cent, given that voluntary voting applied to Legislative Council elections prior to 1965. Bill Willesee was a popular representative of the remote communities of North Province. At the 1960 election he received 65 per cent of the 1 500 votes cast. With the changes to the Legislative Council after 1963, each province had two MLCs in place of three, and North Province lost the Gascoyne district. In the transition arrangements, Bill Willesee’s term was extended until 1968 and in 1965 he transferred to the new North-East Metropolitan Province comprising the districts of Maylands, Mirrabooka, Ascot, Swan and Belmont. He was returned unopposed at the 1968 election. His contribution to Parliament is reflected in his appointment as ALP Whip in the Legislative Council in 1959, becoming Deputy Leader of the Opposition in this House in 1962. In 1966 he succeeded Hon Frank Wise as Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Council. It is notable that all three MLCs from the old North Province - Harry Strickland, Frank Wise and Bill Willesee - successfully led the ALP in this Chamber between 1958 and 1973. After the 1971 election, Bill Willesee was Leader of the Government and Minister for Community Welfare. Leading a government team outnumbered by the Opposition is not an easy task but he had the great respect of coalition members. He would even offer to move opposition amendments himself. He was regarded as a competent and conscientious minister, conscientious to the extent that his health became affected. In early 1973 he stood down from Cabinet and did not recontest the 1974 election. According to biographical notes, after leaving Parliament, Bill Willesee worked as an accountant for a curtain company, and then as a crosswalk attendant for seven years from 1978. This is the measure of a man anxious to serve the community in small things as well as in high office.

558 [COUNCIL]

It is clear that Bill Willesee was a man of humility and dedication. He served both as the representative of a huge, sparsely-populated province and of a numerically large compact urban province. He was a respected leader of his party. Such people enrich this Parliament and set a fine example. Our sympathies are with his wife and family in their loss. HON TOM STEPHENS (Mining and Pastoral - Leader of the Opposition) [3.37 pm]: On behalf of the Opposition, I speak in support of the motion moved by the Leader of the House in expressing the sympathy of this Chamber to the family of Hon W.F. (Bill) Willesee, a former leader of the Australian Labor Party in this place. In so doing, I take the opportunity of expressing the appreciation of the Australian Labor Party for the dedicated life and service of this former member. Bill Willesee was born in Adelaide on 26 December 1911. Bill was the elder brother by three years of former Senator Don Willesee who was a Labor senator from 1950 to 1975 and who survived Bill and still lives in the northern suburbs of Perth. Bill and Don were the sons of William Robert Willesee. Bill Willesee senior was well known in the north as a drover, cattle buyer and stock inspector in Wyndham. He married Ethel May Flinders who had gone to Wyndham as the paid companion to my wife’s grandmother, Mary Durack, back in the early part of this century when she married James Ebeneezer Davidson. The links between Adelaide and those Wyndham families were manifold through the Davidson-Durack, Durack-Johnstone and Willesee-Flinders connections. It was Ethel May who in many ways was the extraordinary strength in that family. She later went on to become the proprietor of a lodging house, and she helped support her young family later in Carnarvon working as a dressmaker. It was Bill Willesee senior who, among many things he did in the township of Wyndham, took on the role of pioneering the cattle trade with the Philippines. That was a fledgling trade that M.P. Durack was trying to secure in the face of the difficulties that the station people had in getting their cattle from the east Kimberley to the Western Australian market. I find it fascinating to read in the records about the work done by Bill Willesee senior as he tried, in collaboration with M.P. Durack, to open up that trade. In recent months I have been involved in some diplomatic efforts of my own in re-establishing the cattle trade with the Philippines that was for a while under threat because of a variety of issues about which people will know. I have had some success in ensuring that the cattle trade is once again available to those northern stations. Anyone involved in that will look with amazement at the work of someone like Bill Willesee senior, as well as M.P. Durack, in the early part of the century. All of that was an extremely formative experience for a young man who subsequently went on in this place to take up the challenges of championing the cause of the northern residents of this State. From Wyndham the family moved to Carnarvon, but not before Bill Willesee senior decided to run against his former business partner, who was then the sitting member for Kimberley. M.P. Durack was elected as a member of the Nationalist Party, and recontested as a Country Party member. However, at the election in 1921, Bill Willesee stood formally as an Independent, but clearly an Independent Labor person, against M.P. Durack, but was unsuccessful. At Carnarvon, Bill continued his studies with distinction. He had studied previously at the primary school in Wyndham. He then studied at the local primary school in Carnarvon. He left there at the age of 13 years but was later to complete his high school education, effectively part time, at the local Carnarvon convent. He went on to study accountancy by correspondence at the Perth Technical College, picked up his Diploma of Accountancy and was an Associate Member of the Australian Society of Accountants and an Associate of the Chartered Institute of Secretaries. From 1925 to 1932 he was employed by Goldsborough Mort, and during the depression years of the 1930s, having lost his work opportunities with Goldsborough Mort, he took casual work that included periods as a wool lumper, as a jetty and road worker, and as a worker with the local trucking companies in Carnarvon which carted the fuel and other supplies from Carnarvon to the station communities of the Gascoyne region. It was through this work that he secured many relationships throughout the Gascoyne region that would subsequently stand him in good stead in his political career. In 1936 he became town clerk in Carnarvon, a position that he held until 1942, when he went on to serve in the Volunteer Defence Corps, taking the rank of sergeant in that year. After the war, he worked with the Harbour and Lights Department, and then from 1948 to 1951 was the manager of Thornett and Davis, the transport company and plantation owner - again resuming that connection with the station communities and the growers of Carnarvon. He returned to work as town clerk in Carnarvon from September 1951 until his election to this place in 1954. Although Bill formally joined the Labor Party in 1943, he had been intimately involved in the Labor movement and campaigns in the north of this State from when he was a very young boy. Not only did his father run his first campaign from Wyndham but also he subsequently ran unsuccessfully for the seat of Gascoyne in 1924 and 1927. Bill Willesee records in his oral history, which is found in the library in a record taken in 1986, the great sense of disappointment that his family experienced as a result of the losses his father suffered at those three elections, especially the last, into which so much of the family fortune, time and effort had been sunk and which I am led to believe was in part the reason that his wife was faced with the task of taking on the responsibility of running lodging houses, sewing and dressmaking to look after the young family members who were still wanting to take up an education. In those times, running for Parliament in those areas required an enormous amount of arduous work in a vast, sparsely populated region, with miles of road travel to seek out those pockets of voters who might lend their support and be persuaded to vote for a particular

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 559 candidate in a contest that the Leader of the House has described as one that was inevitably close by virtue of the nature of politics in that part of the world. Despite the early experiences and heartaches of politics, Bill Willesee stayed intimately involved in politics in that area. Subsequent to his father’s lack of success, he was involved in the campaigns of Frank Wise. The first was the unsuccessful campaign that Frank ran in 1930, then the campaign when Frank successfully ran for Gascoyne in 1933, and subsequently he was involved in Harry Strickland’s successful campaigns. He was involved again when Frank Wise resumed his period of parliamentary representation for North Province from the 1950s. It was Bill’s loyal support of the Labor Party and local Labor members of Parliament, his popularity locally, his work in support of the ordinary working men and women of the north west and his talent and success in local government that ensured his preselection when he ran successfully for North Province in 1954. His recall in the memoirs of which I have spoken of that successful campaign and subsequent efforts to serve the people of that vast, remote region illustrates the character and the life and times of our former colleague and my party’s former leader in this place. The work was arduous, the travel was exhausting and the challenges and tasks were difficult. Bill travelled extensively by car, boat and increasingly by aeroplane, particularly to those northern centres of the then North Province, which stretched from Wyndham, through the Pilbara down into the Gascoyne. It was in that role as a local member of Parliament for the people of the north west that Bill served with particular distinction. Interestingly, he is still remembered in a number of ways in the towns of the north. His family name graces an attractive street off the main street of Carnarvon, in which is located the family home of our former Labor colleague for that area, Kevin Leahy. Bill also lives on in the history books and stories of the north, one of which I came across when I was in Shark Bay-Denham last week. There, a lifelong resident and current local shire councillor, Dennis Hoult, described to me being given a lift from his home town of Denham when, as a youngster, he was being returned to his school in Geraldton by his family. He had been entrusted to the care of the local member of Parliament for the car trip south. He was in the member’s car as it took off from Denham to take Bill back to Perth and to take Dennis to Geraldton via the route chosen by the local member of Parliament. Dennis described the trip that was taken by Bill at the time as incredibly educative. Bill's trek took much longer than the normal anticipated time for such a trip, because on the back seat of the vehicle was an ice chest containing the produce of the north - the mangoes and bananas of Carnarvon - as well as a catch of pink snapper from the Shark Bay-Denham area. Hon Kim Chance: When they still had them. Hon TOM STEPHENS: Yes, when they still had them in bigger numbers. Bill called in at each and every station homestead to drop off a fish and some mangoes and bananas. Such was the nature of the electorate and the narrow margins upon which the local member was operating that he greeted the station people with an attentive, cheerful hello in an effort to stay in contact and intimately interested in their lives and welfare as he weaved his way south. It was a memorable trip for Councillor Dennis Hoult, who, as a young boy, was returning to Geraldton for schooling. Bill served in this House in the incredibly difficult years for Labor between 1956 and 1958, especially when item after item of the Government's legislative agenda was being given a rough trot. In fact, a substantial amount of the legislative program bit the dust because of the vigorous, robust approach that was adopted by the conservative majority at that time. The changes in the mid 1960s, about which the Leader of the House spoke, left two seats in the north for Frank Wise and Harry Strickland. Bill, their junior and in awe of his seniors whom he held in the highest regard, immediately indicated that he had no intention of contesting their preselections. He was quickly the beneficiary of a call from Joe Chamberlain at the party office who said, "Put your name in for North East Metropolitan." He secured preselection and successfully returned to this House as a metropolitan member of Parliament, uncontested at the 1965 by-election following the reconstitution of this House. Bill served his party, this Parliament and the people of this State in various significant roles. He was Opposition Whip from 1959 to 1962. He was Deputy Leader of the Opposition from 1962 to 1966. He was the Leader of the Opposition from 1966 to March 1971, when he became the Leader of the Government in this place for the Tonkin Labor Administration. He was given the onerous responsibility of Minister for Community Welfare at a time of enormous social change in this State. It was close on the heels of the 1967 referendum and the changing nature of the Aboriginal population's position within our society. Bill was left with the responsibility of welding together a department that accepted the responsibility for the old native welfare office and also the statutory obligations that came with looking after the interests of children in particular. The Department of Community Welfare was established, as was the Aboriginal Affairs Planning Authority. Bill basically charted the course for recognising that the interests and the responsibility of the Federal Government in this area had been awoken by the referendum. There were fresh opportunities for injecting into the community of Western Australia additional financial help that had already been available in the Northern Territory but which had not been significantly available in this State. He skilfully combined the role of a state commissioner for Aboriginal affairs with the dual role of being both a state and a commonwealth official. With the support of the Federal Government, he appointed Frank Gare in that unusual dual role, trying to do the best that could be done to harness and husband the resources that were needed for the Aboriginal community of this State. He was capably and ably assisted in that role by Frank Gare, who went on to serve the State with distinction for most of that decade.

560 [COUNCIL]

In the community welfare portfolio Bill was capably assisted by his head of department, Keith Maine, whom I was pleased to see at the funeral of Bill Willesee, which I attended on behalf of the Australian Labor Party. Keith Maine went on to champion for his minister the responsibilities which flowed to the department during the Tonkin years. Bill took over the portfolio at a time when people were coming into the towns from the stations and facing enormous change and social dislocation, as new fringe dwellers were being effectively created as a consequence of the changed social policies and legislative responsibilities of their employers.

Bill, as minister, saw award wages arrive for the Aboriginal stockmen, and as a consequence large populations sprang up on the edge of towns like Wyndham, Halls Creek, Fitzroy Crossing, Port Hedland, Roebourne, Carnarvon and many others. The Government of the day faced a huge task in finding ways to respond to the needs of that section of the Western Australian community. At the same time, the Labor Party was left with the responsibility of responding to the changed statutory position of Aboriginal people and transferring, among other things, drinking rights to Aboriginal people These rights had already started to move into some sections of the State as into the rest of regional Western Australia. The minister had to preside over the inevitable, but also difficult, social transition that occurred at that time. It was enormously painful for anyone with a sense of compassion and an interest in the welfare of that section of the population to see, inevitably, Bill struggle with those realities as a minister.

I have heard a story that Bill, as a minister, had to watch the arrival of Aboriginal activists in what would have been the first demonstration on the steps of Parliament House. In the cold winter months of the Tonkin Government, the Aboriginal people effectively became occupants of the steps as they maintained a long vigil to protest the need for the accelerated transition to them of their rights, entitlements and opportunities that would come from the interests of Federal and State Governments. Bill Willesee, having responsibility for community and native welfare, quickly organised for those people to be issued with blankets to keep them warm as they huddled in the cold on the front steps of Parliament House, much to the chagrin of the Premier of the day, who summoned Bill and expressed his annoyance. He was hoping that they would move on quickly rather than cause the Government any further embarrassment. However, Bill wanted to see the Aboriginal people at least comfortable as they protested about his Government. Such was the character of this man.

Bill was also faced with getting extra resources for government to respond to the housing and welfare needs and the homemaker programs. Much of the housing was constructed on the best available advice at the time. Some of it was done well and some of it was disastrous, but all of it was done with the passionate commitment to doing the right thing and to looking after the needs of that section of the population.

Bill made it quite clear in his memoirs what happened to him. In those two short years as a minister, he found that the portfolio wore him down enormously. His health started to fail. He worried about his inability to deliver all that was required to respond to the needs of that section of the population. As his health failed, and under pressure from his family in the light of that reality, he stood down from the ministry and as government leader. He was succeeded in this place by his friend and close colleague, Jerry Dolan, who became Leader of the Labor Government in this House.

Much can be learnt from the character and the parliamentary life of Bill Willesee. He retired from this House on 21 May 1974, having served in this Parliament during the terms of Presidents Loton, Latham and Diver. In his record, Bill described that period in this place as a difficult time. He also spoke of how the presiding officers of the time championed the rights of the House and of individual members. His recorded history refers to the great lengths to which each of those presiding officers went to adopt political impartiality and to embody that impartiality in the way they operated in the Chair. There is much to learn from the life and times of the likes of Hon Bill Willesee. He was the embodiment of the fine characteristics of loyalty and dedication to his constituents as their MLC, to his State as a minister, and to his party as a lifelong member. Bill knew what was required of a Labor Party member elected to this place and he accepted that role and those obligations right through to the end of his career. Bill’s electors and electorates, this State of Western Australia and the Australian Labor Party are richer for having had Hon W.F. Willesee, MLC at their service.

Bill returned to family life with his health soon restored. He took up an active working life as an accountant for a Perth business and then later, as the years crept up on him, accepted the role of a school crosswalk attendant in his suburban neighbourhood, from which neighbourhood the stories still emerge of this charming and generous man and his close friendships and relationships with the youngsters of that suburb as they were carefully guarded to school across the dangerous crossings. He took particular interest in the multicultural community that was emerging at those crosswalks and pleasure in the role that this section of the community was playing in the life of his suburb. He kept up an active role in various organisations, including the Italian Club and the Epilepsy Association Inc. (WA). He was the honorary auditor for the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association’s Western Australian branch and also the honorary auditor for the State Parliamentary Labor Party until the late 1980s, and it was in both those roles that I knew him best. Bill died on 18 August this year at the age of 88. He leaves behind his wife Sadie, their children Kathleen, Shirley, William and Ian, and their grandchildren, and his brother Don. On behalf of the State Parliamentary Labor Party I

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 561 accepted the honour and responsibility of representing the Australian Labor Party and joining with a number of Bill’s former Labor colleagues who attended his funeral service where we joined with his family in saluting him and celebrating his life and times. On behalf of all those constituent elements of his life that made up his professional career - as town clerk of the Shire of Carnarvon, representative of the north, as Leader of the Government and the Opposition in this place and as minister - one is left with the task of saying “thank you” to a family that was deprived of this particularly loving man for an extended period of his life - some 20 years in political life and a large number of years before in local government. His final speech to this House included these words - Therefore, I believe the Government should finish its term before a full-scale election. One can imagine the controversies at the time. I hope that this Bill will be passed . . . I do not have the name of the Bill; I did not think it was germane to this condolence motion. . . . but I cannot let these serious imputations about our coloured people go without comment. His final words were - We have to squarely face up to what we did when, in the grandeur of 1967, we said we would give Aborigines equality. Mr President, Hon Bill Willesee may now rest in peace but I am sure the ideals for which he stood live on in the legacy that he has left this State, this Parliament and our party. THE PRESIDENT (Hon George Cash): Before I put the question, I join with the Leader of the House as the mover of this motion and the Leader of the Opposition as the seconder in this expression of profound sympathy to Mrs Sadie Willesee and the Willesee family on the sad occasion of the death of our esteemed former colleague, Hon Bill Willesee. As is the practice of the House, I will ensure that a copy of this condolence motion is forwarded to Mrs Willesee and the Willesee family. I now invite members to rise and stand in their places for one minute to indicate their support for this motion. Question passed, members standing.

PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS, EROSION Petition Hon Simon O'Brien presented a petition, by delivery to the Clerk, from one person praying that the Legislative Council give consideration to protecting property rights. [See paper No 173.]

POULTRY INDUSTRY, SERPENTINE-JARRAHDALE SHIRE Petition Hon Derrick Tomlinson presented a petition, by delivery to the Clerk, from one person praying that the Government urgently examine the poultry industry. [See paper No 174.]

STANDING COMMITTEE ON ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 2000 National Conference of Parliamentary Public Works and Environment Committees - Eighth Report Hon Christine Sharp presented the eighth report of the Standing Committee on Ecologically Sustainable Development in relation to the 2000 National Conference of Parliamentary Public Works and Environment Committees, and on her motion it was resolved - That the report do lie upon the Table and be printed. [See paper No 175.]

OLD-GROWTH TUART FOREST - SHEARWATER, BUNBURY Urgency Motion THE PRESIDENT (Hon George Cash): This morning I received the following letter -

562 [COUNCIL]

Dear Mr President At today’s sitting it is my intention to move under SO 72 that the House at its rising adjourn until 9am on 25 December for the purpose of discussing the urgent need to protect all the old-growth Tuart forest at Shearwater, Bunbury and to incorporate the whole stand as a reserve under the draft Greater Bunbury Region Scheme which is to be released shortly. Yours sincerely, Hon Dr Christine Sharp Member Legislative Council South West Region. The member will require the support of four members in order to move the motion. [At least four members rose in their places.] HON CHRISTINE SHARP (South West) [4.12 pm]: I move - That the House at its rising adjourn until 9.00 am on 25 December. It must be a rare event that between the lodging of an urgency motion in the morning and the opening of the afternoon sitting and the debate on that motion that a ministerial announcement is made that delivers the requirement of the urgency motion. We are witnesses to such a rare and exceptional circumstance. It is a positive beginning to the sitting week that we are able to do this after the sadness of the condolence motion. I note the ministerial statement that was made in the Legislative Assembly earlier today, the copy of which I have is labelled a draft. I assume that because it has been made in the Assembly that it is a firm indication of the Government's commitment. The statement begins - The State Government has agreed that the whole of the Shearwater tuart forest in the City of Bunbury should be conserved. This is extremely good news for the conservation of the tuart forest and for the City of Bunbury. I will continue to talk on this matter despite the minister's statement because it is worthy of the attention of the House. The conservation status of the tuarts is in a parlous state. I asked a question in this place in December 1998 about the conservation status of the tuart forest and was told in response to question on notice 722 that some 23 500 hectares of tuart forest remain. I believe that includes much of the land between Bunbury and Mandurah, which is parkland cleared agricultural land; therefore, not all of that land is intact forest. According to the minister's answer, of that 23 500 hectares, only 9 300 hectares are in current or proposed conservation reserves - that is, until this announcement. I also asked the minister at that time if he knew what the extent of the tuart forest was originally when white settlement began in this State. The minister replied that there was no reliable estimate of the pre-1750 area of tuart forest. However, that well-known expert on the State’s native trees, Irene Cunningham, estimated that the original extent of the Eucalyptus gomphocephala was 130 000 hectares. We know that the tuart forest stretched along a strip about five or seven kilometres wide along the coast from the Sabina River north of Busselton through to the Moore River. If we accept that estimate of about 130 000 hectares, when one takes away the wetland vegetation that would replace it in those damper sites and compares it with the 9 300 hectares that are proposed to be included in reserves, that leaves the conservation status of the tuart at roughly 7 per cent of its original distribution. Seven per cent is a low figure for recognised conservation standards. If one simply uses the standards of the Regional Forest Agreement, for example, which followed national standards for conservation objectives for all major vegetation types, the conservation objective as a minimum is 10 per cent of the distribution as at 1750. At less than 7 per cent, we cannot afford to lose any tuart forest. This section of tuart forest to the south of the City of Bunbury offers an exciting possibility for the City of Bunbury to develop a remarkable public open space and regional reserve. It is probably offering the City of Bunbury the opportunity, through the Preston River to ocean reserve, to conserve the most intact vegetation transection across the Swan coastal plain which remains and which still has available the opportunity for reservation. We have a unique opportunity here at the south of the city to create a conservation reserve which is of great conservation significance but which also will be an amazing recreational resource for the City of Bunbury. That reserve can go from the Indian Ocean up the extremely steep dunes which occur to the south of the beach reserve and which are known as the Maidens. I am told that that is due to the perfect conical shape of the two major sand dune forms which are seen from the ocean and which resemble a part of a maiden's anatomy. They offer a spectacular, panoramic view of the entire City of Bunbury, the Indian Ocean and the dunes right across the plain to the Preston River. It is a spectacular location. The area includes the tuart forest that has been the subject of much controversy in the City of Bunbury over recent months. The forest contains healthy old-growth tuart, and that is an important point to remember. Members who use the Old Coast Road will know that a lot of the tuart between Mandurah and Bunbury is in poor health and there is great concern about the deaths of the tuarts in the Lake Clifton region. The reason for the decline and death of the trees is not known. I understand from answers to other questions that I have asked in this place

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 563 that the Department of Conservation and Land Management is undertaking considerable research to try to determine the reasons for the decline of the tuarts north of the City of Bunbury. Despite some weed infestation in the understorey, the tuarts south of the City of Bunbury are extremely healthy, as is the Western Australian peppermint that grows with the tuarts. It is a beautiful part of the forest. The area of land containing the tuarts can now extend to the flood plain and the Preston River and provide a corridor of natural vegetation that is intact. Those involved in the south west environment centre and others in the City of Bunbury who have been pressing for the preservation of this area under the greater Bunbury region scheme and who had been told for several years by the minister that the proposal would be dealt with under the region scheme process were alarmed to learn that the Minister for Planning had written to the City of Bunbury directing it to develop 21 hectares of the tuart forest in the region, thus pre-empting the greater Bunbury region scheme process. My motion states that the documentation of the draft greater Bunbury region scheme is due for release in a few days. I believe that the launch of the scheme is scheduled for this Friday. It was alarming to learn in July that the minister had said there was no point in waiting for the scheme, that the land was important for Homeswest’s development plans and that, as a consequence, the tuarts would be removed.

Under that ministerial statement, 20 hectares were to be preserved, but 21 hectares were to be removed so that low-cost housing could be built. The proposal would have a serious, long-term effect on the sustainability of the reserve, as it would take the width at the narrowest point of the reserve - where the tuarts are - to a mere 130 metres. That is so narrow that it is difficult to imagine that the trees could remain intact over generations, as we hoped they would.

It was an amazing and marvellous surprise to learn, as I planned to speak on this motion this afternoon, that the minister in the other place representing Homeswest had made an announcement that the 21 hectares will not now be removed. Now only one last link needs to be put in place, in addition to the Maidens Reserve, the land at Dalyellup and the Shearwater land, and that is the 10 hectares at Usher, which is owned by the City of Bunbury. The entire reserve proposal will then be secured and the Preston to ocean reserve can be established. I take this opportunity to congratulate those involved with the south west environment centre on their hard work and dedication in bringing this matter to the attention of the community of Bunbury, their elected representatives in Parliament, the Ministers for Planning and Water Resources and the candidates who seek to represent Bunbury after the forthcoming election. The people at the south west environment centre have done an amazing job. In particular, Dr Bernard Bischoff, a well-known biologist from Bunbury, has for many years dedicated himself to capturing the collective imagination of the community of Bunbury about the potential of the reserve. Dr Bischoff had the foresight to realise that Bunbury had an opportunity similar to the opportunity that existed in Perth in 1872 when Kings Park was dedicated. At that time the dedication of Kings Park was considered to be excessive and unnecessary. Generations later, we recognise the foresight and wisdom of that decision. I am sure that, many years hence, the people of Bunbury and those who visit it will recognise the wisdom of this decision.

HON M.J. CRIDDLE (Agricultural - Minister for Transport) [4.26 pm]: For several years negotiations on the tuart forest have taken place. The remaining 21 hectares was the main issue. The Government agreed that all the Shearwater tuart forest in the City of Bunbury should be preserved. The Government has listened to the views of the public and the local member, Ian Osborne, who has strongly put the case for preservation. The Ministry of Housing will endeavour to purchase alternative land and will develop the old Bunbury hospital site. It will also make spot purchases to cater for those waiting for public housing. The City of Bunbury has indicated that it will work closely with the Ministry of Housing to find alternative options to develop public housing in the area. The Government’s decision means that the remaining 21 hectares of tuart forest will be added to the 20 hectares at Shearwater, the 100 hectares at Dalyellup and the 40 hectares at the Maidens Reserve, which have already been identified for regional open space. That 181 hectares, in addition to the land on the coast already set aside by the City of Bunbury, will give the region an area larger than Kings Park which will be made up of significant tuart forest. For generations to come that asset will be enjoyed by all who visit the picturesque south west region of the State. The management committee, chaired by Bill Scott, has been appointed by the Minister for Housing and will continue to prepare a management plan for the forest that will now include the extra 21 hectares. This has been possible through the hard work of the local member, Ian Osborne, who has worked tirelessly to find a balance between the needs of conservation and the need for affordable housing in the fast-growing Bunbury region. The Dalyellup beach estate, a Ministry of Housing joint venture to the south of Shearwater, is ahead of schedule. The blocks are selling well and this has provided extra funding to allow the Ministry of Housing to pursue other options. Development can now proceed with the remaining cleared area of Shearwater, which I understand is currently a farming area. It must be realised that, by forgoing this land, the Government cannot forgo its commitment to provide a variety of affordable and quality public housing across the State. I think it is a good outcome for the community. The Minister for Planning will not finalise the local government town planning scheme amendment that was to be put in place. The draft region scheme will be issued this Friday and the issues raised here will emerge during the comment period for the scheme proposal. This has been a good outcome for the people of Bunbury. Motion lapsed, pursuant to standing orders.

564 [COUNCIL]

STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Remedies Available to Recipients of Contracted-out Government Services - Sixteenth Report Hon Kim Chance presented the sixteenth report of the Standing Committee on Public Administration, a discussion paper in relation to the remedies available to recipients of contracted-out government services, and on his motion it was resolved - That the report do lie upon the Table and be printed. [See paper No 176.] TOWN OF VINCENT LOCAL LAW RELATING TO PARKING FACILITIES - DISALLOWANCE Order Discharged HON TOM HELM (Mining and Pastoral) [4.30 pm]: I move without notice - That the order of the day be discharged from the Notice Paper. The local government authority has satisfied the Joint Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation’s concerns regarding these local laws. Question put and passed. TOWN OF VINCENT LOCAL LAW RELATING TO DOGS - DISALLOWANCE Order Discharged HON TOM HELM (Mining and Pastoral) [4.31 pm]: I move without notice - That the order of the day be discharged from the Notice Paper. The local government authority has satisfied the Joint Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation’s concerns regarding these local laws. Question put and passed. FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION AND AUDIT AMENDMENT BILL 1999 Referral to Standing Committee on Estimates and Financial Operations On motion without notice by Hon N.F. Moore (Leader of the House), resolved - That Order of the Day No 19 be discharged from the Notice Paper and referred to the Standing Committee on Estimates and Financial Operations. CHILD WELFARE AMENDMENT BILL 1998 Referral to Standing Committee on Legislation On motion by Hon N.F. Moore (Leader of the House), resolved - That Order of the Day No 20 be discharged from the Notice Paper and referred to the Standing Committee on Legislation. HON N.F. MOORE - PERSONAL EXPLANATION Big Bell Mine Fatality HON N.F. MOORE (Mining and Pastoral - Minister for Mines) [4.33 pm] - by leave: I wish to make a personal explanation about an article published in The West Australian about the mine fatality at Big Bell. Members will be aware that a miner was killed at the Big Bell mine last Saturday afternoon. I was made aware of the fatality early on Sunday morning and was interviewed by the media later that morning. During the interview, I made general comments about mining fatalities which were reported in the country edition of The West Australian. I quote - I don't also want to indicate who is at blame for these things because a number of fatalities are caused by a whole range of different reasons often, I have to say, because of the stupidity of the person who is killed . . . On the other hand, if the mine managers or mine owners or underground managers are doing the wrong thing they should be prosecuted and they will be. Those comments do not in any way relate to the fatality that occurred at Big Bell last Saturday. They were made in response to a question about the general issue of mine fatalities. I sincerely regret the use of the word “stupidity”. It was extremely insensitive, and I apologise to anybody who may have been upset, offended or angered by my remarks. I have always regarded mine safety as my number one priority as Minister for Mines. This has come about because I spent many years living in mining towns. I vividly remember the impact of the death of our next-door neighbour in Bullfinch. I understand the trauma associated with mine deaths and the significant impact they have on families,

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 565 communities and workplaces. There is no excuse for my totally inappropriate comments. However, by way of some explanation, I am becoming increasingly frustrated at our inability to make more headway in achieving our goal of a fatality-free mining industry. This frustration, the pressure of seeking to achieve the goals I have set, the totally inexplicable reasons for some of the fatalities and the news of another death combined to result in my unfortunate and totally inappropriate comments. ADDRESS-IN-REPLY Amendment to Motion Resumed from 17 August after the following amendment had been moved by Hon Tom Stephens (Leader of the Opposition) - That the following words be added to the motion - And further, this House recommends that His Excellency advise the Government that the Government should not sign any agreement or contract with respect to the provision of power in the West Kimberley region of Western Australia until the results of the Federal Government’s due diligence study into the suitability of tidal power have been released. HON LJILJANNA RAVLICH (East Metropolitan) [4.35 pm]: I welcome the opportunity to continue my remarks on the substantive motion. I found the speech of His Excellency, Hon Geoffrey Kennedy, AO, very interesting, particularly his opening comments that, over the past seven and a half years, the Government has placed a strong emphasis on carefully listening to the community. I had a quiet chuckle at that as the rest of his speech contained no indication that one of the key concerns of the Western Australian community has been listened to or addressed by this Government; that is, accountability. I continue my remarks about the circumstances at the South East Metropolitan College of TAFE and its managing director, Mr Geof Gale. Members might recall that I have already raised in this place my concerns about the qualifications that Mr Gale purports to have. Mr Gale has made an art form of using an honorary doctorate to the benefit of himself and the college. It is widely known throughout the TAFE sector that Mr Gale calls himself Dr Geof Gale. He refers to himself as the “good doctor” in the college’s annual report and reference is also made to his title of doctor in correspondence with the Australian National Training Authority. One of the things that concerns me about this is the lack of scrutiny of and accountability for these qualifications, which Mr Gale claims are legitimate. Anybody who has had anything to do with the public sector would know that the responsibility for undertaking these checks lies fairly and squarely with the Office of the Public Sector Standards Commissioner. When approached by the Sunday Times, the office’s Director of Chief Executive Officer Selection, Mr Brian Boylen, said that his office was not charged with vetting CEO qualifications at the time Mr Gale was appointed - which I assume was some time in 1994. The officer failed to advise the Sunday Times that Mr Gale had been reappointed on Monday, 7 August, and that no check was made of his qualification. I have heard the argument that ultimately it does not really matter as it was not a requirement in the selection criteria for the position that he be a doctor or hold a doctorate. That is not the issue. I refer to the integrity of somebody who takes an honorary doctorate and claims it to be a legitimate qualification. The comment that Mr Gale made in the newspaper was to the effect that he did not have time to do a formal doctorate; therefore, he managed to have one arranged for him. That is part of the issue. People who take the time, spend the energy and meet the intellectual requirements and rigours of these courses legitimately can hold their heads high in the community and say, "I’ve earned this doctorate." People like Mr Gale did not have time to undertake the course. He had one bestowed on him that was arranged through an old mate. He believes that is okay and that he can still call himself a doctor. Of even greater concern is that this matter has unravelled other cases. John Flint's work on this matter has revealed that a teacher at Guildford Grammar School also had dodgy qualifications. As a result of the article that appeared in the Sunday Times on 20 August, Guildford Grammar decided not to reappoint that teacher. Members may be aware of the university lecturer who has been suspended as he also did not have a legitimate doctorate, yet called himself a doctor. I do not know a lot about that case. However, in the Edith Cowan University case with Alan Galbraith, and the Guildford Grammar case with Gary Jackson, the authorities have taken appropriate action: Mr Jackson has not been reappointed, and Mr Galbraith is suspended pending an inquiry. What happened with Mr Geof Gale, the man who broke every rule in the book according to the Auditor General, of whom we should take notice? Mr Gale breached not only the Public Sector Management Act, but also the Vocational Education and Training Act and the State Supply Commission Act. He also breached the code of conduct and the Public Sector Code of Ethics. He has been found to purport to have qualifications which he does not possess. What happened? He was simply reappointed for a further five years. That is wrong. The gentleman's qualifications need to be looked at very carefully as he heads an institution that promotes accredited qualifications of some value. However, he holds a qualification that is not accredited. Although an honorary doctorate has some value, it is not to be used in the manner used by Mr Gale. Hon Geoffrey Kennedy stated in his speech to Parliament that over the past seven and a half years the Government has placed a strong emphasis on listening to the community and reflecting its views and aspirations in government. The Government has not done that. The community's priority is accountable government. When the system is not working to ensure we have accountable government, the Government is not listening. It is certainly not listening in this case. I understand that the Minister for Employment and Training thinks that Mr Gale has been a little naughty.

566 [COUNCIL]

Hon Mark Nevill: Is that nice naughty or bad naughty? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: I do not know the connection, but one must be concerned. All public servants and all lecturers at this college watched the managing director get away with breaches of a number of Acts. He has taken the law into his own hands. He gets away with purporting to be something he is not, and he is then reappointed. He should never have been appointed in the first place. Information has recently come to hand in the form of a business card of the good Mr Gale, presumably from after 1994 as it carries the South Eastern Metropolitan College of TAFE letterhead. The qualifications on the business card do not match those on the curriculum vitae. It reads "DL/tt (Hons)” and “MA”, which I assume is a Master of Arts, although he might have a Master in Rural Development. He also has a “DipEd”. Hon Derrick Tomlinson: Is it capital MA? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Yes. Hon Derrick Tomlinson: One would assume it is a Master of Arts. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Yes. I assumed so. However, according to his curriculum vitae, he has a Master in Rural Development, not a Master of Arts. Hon Derrick Tomlinson: It could be a Master of Arts. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: I give him the benefit of the doubt. However, no degree qualification is outlined. How can one go from a diploma to a masters degree with no degree in between? Hon Derrick Tomlinson: I have a Bachelor of Education and a Master of Education. You will note that my qualification is BA and M Ed; however, the convention is that the inferior qualification is not cited. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: The member could well be right. Hon Derrick Tomlinson: I am right. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: I will give the member the benefit of the doubt. If I had a graduate diploma in strategic management cited on my CV, why not put it on my business card? We already know that the good Mr Gale purports to be a doctor although he is not a doctor. If he is fudging it there, maybe all his qualifications should be examined. They should have been looked at on two previous occasions: First, when he was appointed in 1994, and also by the Office of the Commissioner for Public Sector Standards prior to his appointment on 7 August 2000. This matter reflects very badly on the vocational education and training sector and on the Department of Training. It is a little rich for the Government to claim that it places a strong emphasis on listening to the community when evidence indicates that it has not been listening to the community at all. It is clear from Hon Geoffrey Kennedy's speech that the Government has given little attention to date to accountability, certainly in its future legislative program. The Government has been big on rhetoric and short on delivery in this area. An obvious area which should have been addressed is amendment to the Freedom of Information Act. The Government purports to be an open and accountable Government, yet I was a little surprised and very disappointed - Hon Simon O'Brien: You have had a lot of surprises and disappointments lately! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: I have. Given how much the Government purports to want to be open and accountable, I thought changes to the FOI Act would have been made so that information would be more accessible to the community and Parliament. As someone who uses that Act extensively, I am more than aware of how difficult it can be for people obtaining information. If it is so difficult for me as a member of Parliament, I hate to think of what the average community member must go through to access information when he or she does not know the ins and outs of how government agencies work. If ever there were a time when the Government should be more accountable, it is now. The direction in which this Government is going indicates that more and more responsibility for government is being devolved to the private sector. All members know that the level of government contracting has gone through the roof. Information I received recently from the Department of Contract and Management Services indicates that contract turnover has increased substantially. A sad fact for Western Australians, and for this Parliament in particular, is that it is so difficult to access information on these commercial activities. For example, the expenditure on corporate credit cards - contract turnover - has increased from $34m in 1997-98 to $55.247m in 1998-99, but one can access very little information on that $55.247m expenditure. My greatest concern is that in government agencies very little, or at best superficial, scrutiny of corporate expenditure occurs. The Government would like us to believe that the checks and balances are in place; however, I am sure that is not the case. I had to laugh at the statistics on temporary personnel. The Honourable Geoffrey Kennedy said on page 2 of his speech that during consultations the community sent a clear message to the Government that its priorities in both regional and metropolitan Western Australia were job security and career opportunities for their children. The idea of a permanent, secure job is very much a thing of the past.

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 567

Hon Greg Smith: We have the lowest unemployment. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: I think the definition of “unemployment” needs a bit of a change. One must work only one hour a month to be classified as employed. I had to chuckle at that comment. It is apparent that the Government has a panel contract that is administered through the Department of Contract and Management Services. Temporary staff at levels 1 and 2 are frequently employed for short periods ranging from a day to a number of weeks. It is clear that although the public sector once offered security, particularly to entry level employees, this is no longer the case. I received an answer today from the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Services to a question on notice of 11 August 2000. I asked how many temporary staff had been engaged through an employment agency since 1 January 1999; the response was 18. It is interesting to note that we pay temporary staff between $70 and $80 an hour and some $80 an hour contracts are for long periods. The Government is spending substantial sums of money when it pays $80 an hour for long periods. The point I make is that this Government is spending $17.266m on temporary personnel and, in the Administrator’s speech, it claims to be listening to community members and to be interested in offering job security and clear opportunities for their children. It is clear from my reading of answers to questions and reports of the Commissioner for Public Sector Standards that nothing has changed. The Commissioner for Public Sector Standards found that young people were employed on short-term contracts with some having their contracts renewed up to 17 or 18 times. Nothing in the past couple of years has changed. Where is the detail of these massive expenditures? The detail is never provided. For example, the basic telecommunications services contract turnover for 1998-99 was $83.316m. It gets even better further down the list of contracts: Domestic air travel and associated reservations amounted to $25.99m. The Matrix Group Ltd vehicle fleet leasing arrangement - including motor vehicle acquisition at $146.156m, fleet management services of more than $10m, the disposal service which has gone from $100m to $117.285m and the ex-bowser, bulk and miscellaneous fuels - adds up to a contractual package worth $307.147m. These are substantial sums of money. Frankly, we do not have the foggiest idea about those contractual arrangements. Time and again we ask questions in this place about these absolutely massive expenditures, and we receive no answers. [Continued on page 575.] QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

CONVENTION CENTRE, GOVERNMENT EQUITY PROPOSAL

105. Hon TOM STEPHENS to the Minister for Tourism: (1) Has Multiplex sought government equity participation in the convention centre in order to assist it in its efforts to obtain finance? (2) If not, who proposed that the Government take equity and for what reasons? (3) What potential government liability flows from the Government taking equity? (4) Did any of the other bidders for the convention centre project request that the Government take equity in the project; and, if so, what did the Government advise? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (1)-(4) I have endeavoured to explain the situation to people who have taken an interest in this matter of equity. The original proposal by the Government to encourage the private sector to invest in this project was to make available $100m cash up front and also to provide the appropriate land freehold. The amount of money was changed ultimately when it was decided to include a stadium as a mandatory part of the project. The amount of money was increased to $110m and the land situation remained the same; that is, we would provide land freehold for the project. As members know, the number of proponents went from seven originally down to three. Then the Government negotiated with two, with one in reserve. A considerable amount of negotiation took place with the final two proponents, the Multiplex consortium and the Nexus consortium. The whole negotiation process was based upon a competitive situation between the two proponents whereby the task force and the project team negotiated with each proponent independently to get the best deal for the Government. At the end of the day, a very good deal for the Government was achieved. The amount of money that has been provided will remain at $110m. We will have delivered to us virtually all of what we required. However, dealing with the land, we negotiated back to a position whereby the land would be provided leasehold for 35 years and the whole project would be returned to the Government in 35 years. The situation is that for our $110m, the convention and exhibition centre and the stadium will be built. It will be operated by the consortium and returned totally to the Government in 35 years. The question of equity came up when the Government was considering whether it should have some recognition within the ownership structure of the convention centre and whether it should regard that as being an equity position. The Government gave some thought to whether its $110m should be reflected in some way

568 [COUNCIL]

in the ownership structure. It was discussed with Multiplex, and I understand it was also mentioned to Nexus in the context of the negotiations, that the Government may well take equity - I cannot think of a better word - in the project but on the basis, as I said in the House last time, that the Government would have no operational involvement. It would have no responsibility or no liability for any losses made, and at the same time it would not receive any benefits or profits that might be made. Therefore, equity is probably the wrong word. The concept is a reflection within the ownership structure that the Government owns a proportion of it by virtue of its $110m investment. However, the sort of equity we were looking at was not the normal equity in these projects whereby an equity partner is required to take responsibility for being involved in the management and also in sharing in the profits. The sort of equity we were trying to negotiate would mean that the Government would be totally uninvolved in any of those parts of the operation. That issue has not been resolved; it is still being discussed with Multiplex. It may well be that we will not go down that path. I am a little surprised that the Opposition thinks that something is wrong with it. We tried to explain the situation to the Opposition spokesperson on tourism, who was given an opportunity to attend a briefing about the convention and exhibition centre, but he did not turn up. I am happy to provide him with a thorough briefing of what this is all about, as I always have been. I hope that next time he is offered a briefing he turns up. Hon Ken Travers: Is that the same as the contracts for the Leighton development? Hon N.F. MOORE: I beg your pardon, dopey? Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: He doesn’t understand the language. Hon Peter Foss: No, he could not hear. The PRESIDENT: Order, members! We are still on the first question, so those who think they will be able to ask a question should rethink their position. Hon N.F. MOORE: The document that outlined the expressions of interest request is a public document. The request for proposal, which was the next stage, is a public document. I encourage members opposite to read it some time. Hon Peter Foss: They never bothered to read it. Hon N.F. MOORE: Nobody in the media read it either, which was one of the problems. The process was not understood. Both of those documents have been given the tick by the probity auditor, as has everything else we have done in this project. At every step of the way, everything has been ticked off by the probity auditor. He has also been involved in preparing the documentation. Therefore, the probity auditor has been involved from the beginning of this process and is still involved. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: Wouldn’t there be a conflict of interest if he was involved in preparing documents? Hon N.F. MOORE: Come on! Does the member want me to finish the answer? I am happy to take another half an hour if she wants me to. The PRESIDENT: Order, members! I would like the minister to start winding up. Members should not interject, because other members want to ask different questions. Hon N.F. MOORE: The contract has not been finalised. We are still negotiating with the preferred proponent, which is Multiplex. I hope that contract will be signed within the next few weeks. However, we are still negotiating that, and part of the negotiation is the question of equity. It is interesting that the Opposition has a view on that. If it does not think we should have any equity on the terms I have been describing, that is fine; it can say so. I do not have a problem with that. At the end of the day it is probably as symbolic as anything else. The Government will get the whole thing back in 35 years, which is a very good deal. CONVENTION CENTRE, GOVERNMENT EQUITY PROPOSAL

106. Hon TOM STEPHENS to the Minister for Tourism: (1) Can the minister advise the House what specific issues are now being examined by the probity auditor? (2) Who proposed that the Government have equity in the convention centre; that is, did the Government propose it to the proponent or did the proponent propose it to the Government? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (1) I do not know what the probity auditor is examining now. In fact, I think he has completed his task. To the best of my recollection - I am not involved in this on a day-to-day basis - he has signed off on the process so far. His contract is to be extended so that he will be involved in the process that will lead to the finalisation of the contract, which has taken a little longer than the original planning had envisaged. The probity auditor will have his contract extended, contrary to some suggestions made in the other place today.

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 569

(2) My understanding is that the Government made the proposal concerning equity. A number of government members discussed it, and we thought it may be a worthwhile proposition to say to the public of Western Australia that for its $110m, it would have a form of equity in the ownership of the convention centre. ROAD SAFETY, SOUTH WEST REGION

107. Hon N.D. GRIFFITHS to the Minister for Transport: I refer to the recent observation from the Royal Automobile Club of WA to its members that 10 years ago Western Australia led the nation in road safety; today its record is the poorest of any State in Australia. (1) Is the minister aware that there are significantly more road deaths and injuries in the south west region of the State compared with other regions? (2) If yes, will the minister explain why no RoadWise road safety officer has been located in the south west of the State? (3) Will the minister take action to remedy this situation; and, if yes, what action? (4) Will the current absence of a RoadWise road safety officer jeopardise any funding available to the south west under the black spots program? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: (1)-(4) I have taken a great deal of interest in and responsibility for the issue of road safety. Recently we announced funding of $13m for the black spots program and $3.5m for the local government black spots program. Another $42m is directly related to road safety issues in this year’s budget. I am well aware that there were 218 deaths last year, and that is far too many. There were also about 3 500 serious injuries, but we do not focus on the serious injuries. Because of our standard of living and the fact that more vehicles are travelling on the roads - everyone tells me that these issues are linked - the number of road fatalities has remained steady over the past few years. This year the level is well below last year's level. That is good because people are obviously taking heed of the message that they need to be responsible behind the wheel of a vehicle. They must be responsible not only to themselves, but also to those in the vehicle with them and to other road users. Speed, alcohol, fatigue and seatbelts are other issues. People must ensure that they wear seatbelts, because far too many accidents involve people who are not wearing seatbelts, and that adds to the trauma of the accident. About 20 per cent of the road fatalities and 17 per cent of the serious injuries occur in the south west region. I was in that area the other day to launch a $40 000 commitment for driver training for younger people, and that program has been embraced in the area. I was very impressed with the year 11 students who are involved in that program. The community, the police, the schools and their staff and the companies in the area have taken on board the initiative of road safety. Those companies have put in place three vehicles to help with the training. The member said that there is no RoadWise officer in the area. I was of the understanding that there was, but I will check that information and get back to the member. We have allocated more RoadWise officers throughout the State, and I will check on the location of every one of those officers. KWINANA MOTORSPORTS COMPLEX, FATALITY RISK ASSESSMENT

108. Hon J.A. SCOTT to the Attorney General representing the Minister for the Environment: (1) (a) Prior to the construction of buildings - that is, prior to the completion of earthworks - at the motorplex site in Kwinana, is the proponent required to carry out a further individual fatality risk assessment as stated in ministerial condition 8.1? (b) If so, when was the individual fatality risk assessment completed and referred to the Environmental Protection Authority and the Minister for the Environment? (2) Has the Minister for the Environment approved the new individual fatality risk assessment; and, if so, when? (3) Are two toilet blocks and/or a walkway under construction or have they been completed at the motorplex site; and, if not, what is currently under construction at the site? (4) Has the proponent breached ministerial condition 8.1; and, if not, why not? The PRESIDENT: The last part of the question, if I heard it correctly, seemed to be seeking an opinion. However, as I may not have heard it in its full context, I will leave it to the Attorney General to work through the various answers. Hon PETER FOSS replied: (1) (a) Yes.

570 [COUNCIL]

(b) The final individual fatality risk assessment report was received by the minister on 18 August 2000 and referred to the Environmental Protection Authority on 24 August 2000. (2) No. The Minister for the Environment is awaiting advice from the EPA and the Kwinana motorsport management committee before considering the report. (3) Two toilet blocks and a footbridge are under construction but have not yet been completed. (4) No. The proponent has advised the Department of Environmental Protection that the design of the facility has been changed and that it is not planned to construct any substantial buildings. The DEP does not consider that the current construction of toilet blocks, footbridges, crash barriers and the like is inconsistent with the intent of the condition relating to risk assessment. PRISONS, NURSES’ ENTERPRISE BARGAINING AGREEMENT

109. Hon NORM KELLY to the Minister for Justice: (1) Is the minister aware that the Australian Industrial Relations Commission has urged that the prison nurses’ enterprise bargaining agreement be signed as soon as possible? (2) Will the minister explain why there have been delays in signing the agreement? (3) Will the minister give an undertaking to sign the agreement; and, if so, when will he sign it? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I ask that the question be put on notice. INFILL SEWERAGE PROGRAM, NORTHERN CORRIDOR

110. Hon RAY HALLIGAN to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Water Resources: Can the minister update the House on how the Government's infill sewerage program is progressing in Perth's northern corridor? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Government's infill sewerage program is in its seventh year of the $800m, 10-year period and is performing to expectations. As at 30 June 2000, 54 390 lots had been provided with a service - 41 672 in the metropolitan area and 12 718 in the country. Perth's northern corridor north of Beach Road and west of Wanneroo Road is predominantly sewered, as it was undertaken by developers at the time of land release. Several small pockets, such as a portion of Wanneroo, Quinns Rocks, Mullaloo, Marmion and Sorrento, have been identified for the infill sewerage program. These will be targeted over the next four years. At the completion of the program 3 317 lots in the northern corridor will be provided with this service. BUNBURY HEALTH CAMPUS, TRAFFIC PROBLEMS

111. Hon J.A. COWDELL to the Attorney General representing the Minister for Health: I refer to the traffic problems being experienced at the Bunbury health campus. (1) Is the minister aware of the dangerous traffic situation at the exits to the new hospital? (2) Was the Health Department warned that there would be traffic problems when the hospital was constructed? (3) Will the hospital contribute to a study to find a solution to the problem? (4) If not, what steps will the minister be taking in liaison with the Minister for Transport to relieve this dangerous situation? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am advised that the Minister for Health was not aware of any dangerous traffic situation at the South West Health Campus. (2) No. Main Roads Western Australia advised the project control group, as part of the project planning phase, that it did not see a traffic problem associated with the location of the South West Health Campus. (3) The hospital has been involved in discussions with Main Roads and others to address the potential to modify the speed limit outside the health campus from 80 kilometres per hour to 60 kilometres per hour. The hospital has contributed information on traffic flow onto the South West Health Campus. (4) Not applicable.

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 571

EXMOUTH, AIR TRANSPORT

112. Hon MARK NEVILL to the Minister for Tourism: (1) Is the minister aware that no discounts were offered by Ansett Australia to the major tourist destination of Exmouth, which has over 2 000 beds? (2) Is the minister aware that occupancy rates are down in hotels that rely on visitors by air, whereas the caravan parks have been full for some time? (3) Has the minister asked Ansett to expand the seating capacity for the Perth-Exmouth run to take advantage of the Elle advertisement campaign? (4) Has he encouraged other operators such as Qantas Airways Ltd to service the route either directly or en route to Karratha or other destinations? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (1)-(4) As the member described, Exmouth is serviced by Skywest using F50 aircraft, each of which has 40 or something seats. Those aircraft service Denham, Carnarvon and Exmouth. Regrettably, not enough seats are going to Exmouth. Ansett used to run a jet service into Exmouth on a regular basis in the “good old days”. That is not the case any longer and Exmouth has, in my view, received a diminished service from the airlines. I have consistently requested Ansett to put Exmouth back on the jet route. It has consistently refused to do that. As a consequence, when Ansett recently announced that it was following Qantas with cheaper airfares within Australia, these airfares were available only on the Ansett routes and, as I said, Exmouth is not serviced by Ansett. Where do we go from here? The Tourism Commission continues to put the case to Ansett that it should reintroduce a jet service to Exmouth because it is potentially a very significant tourism destination in Western Australia and - at the risk of being regarded as a little parochial - it is probably the best tourism destination in Western Australia, bar none. I have also spoken to the state manager of Qantas, who visited Broome with me recently, because I think Qantas should also do more in Broome. I have also arranged to take him on a visit to Exmouth as soon as that can be organised, as he is a relatively new manager from the eastern States. I want him to be aware of our tourism capacity and potential in the north west. Qantas has a significant amount of capacity and it should not be too difficult, in my view, for the airline to add Exmouth to some of its existing routes. We are doing our best. We were involved in convincing Qantas to reduce fares in the first place. We are not taking credit for that, but we were active in encouraging the airline to do that. However, the pity of all this is that the destinations serviced by Skywest have not had these airfares made available to them because of the nature of Skywest aircraft. We continue to argue the case with the airlines and hope that eventually they will see the merit of the argument that the destination of Exmouth, particularly, should have a jet air service and considerably more seats going to it. COUNTRY HOSPITALS, FUNDING

113. Hon KIM CHANCE to the Attorney General representing the Minister for Health: Will the minister table the following information for each of the country hospitals - (a) the budgeted recurrent funding allocation for the 1999-2000 financial year; (b) the actual recurrent allocation for the 1999-2000 financial year; and (c) the recurrent funding allocation for the 2000-01 financial year? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I provide the information requested and I table the documents. [See paper No 178.] METROPOLITAN HOSPITALS, RECURRENT FUNDING

114. Hon CHERYL DAVENPORT to the Attorney General representing the Minister for Health: Will the minister table the following information for each of the metropolitan - not country - hospitals - (1) Their budgeted recurrent funding allocation for the 1999-00 financial year. (2) The actual recurrent allocation for the 1999-00 financial year. (3) The recurrent funding allocation for the 2000-01 financial year?

572 [COUNCIL]

Hon PETER FOSS replied: I table the documents as requested. [See paper 177.] BLUE GUM PLANTATIONS

115. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP to the Attorney General representing the Minister for Forest Products: (1) How many state agreement Acts are administered by the Department of Conservation and Land Management to manage blue gum plantations? (2) Can the minister please list those Acts? (3) With regard to each Act - (a) how many hectares of new plantation land have been leased for planting in 1999-2000; (b) how many hectares of new plantation land have been purchased for planting in 1999-2000? Hon PETER FOSS replied: (1) Three. (2) (a) Bunbury Treefarm Project Agreement Act 1995; (b) Collie Hardwood Plantation Agreement Act 1995; (c) Albany Hardwood Agreement Act 1993. (3) (a) New plantation land has been entered into under a sharefarming arrangement - a profit a prendre - and not leased. Land entered into sharefarming agreements for the 1999-2000 financial year is - (i) Bunbury Treefarm Project Agreement Act 1995 - 492 hectares; (ii) Collie Hardwood Plantation Agreement Act 1995 - 2 090 hectares; (iii) Albany Hardwood Agreement Act 1993 - 2 640 hectares. (b) Plantation areas established by CALM on land purchased by investors for the 1999-2000 financial year is - (i) Bunbury Treefarm Project Agreement Act 1995 - 515 hectares; (ii) Collie Hardwood Plantation Agreement Act 1995 - 0 hectares. “THREE STRIKES AND YOU’RE IN” LEGISLATION

116. Hon TOM HELM to the Minister for Justice: (1) Can the minister advise how many people have been sentenced under the so-called “three strikes and you’re in” law? (2) How many of these people are indigenous? Hon PETER FOSS replied: (1)-(2) I have some difficulties replying to the member for two reasons. First, no information has been provided by the higher courts and to some extent we need to know what is in the mind of the judge to find out whether people are being sentenced because of the three-strikes law or because they are adults before the court for the third time, and one would expect them to be sentenced to some form of imprisonment. The other problem we have with the juveniles is that, due to the provisions of the Young Offenders Act, a person has probably had considerably more than three strikes by the time he is sentenced under the three-strikes law, because that is the way that law operates. I can give the member figures but I really had to preface my answer by stating that we cannot really say, because, to a large extent, it does not work out that way, either for young people or for adult offenders. Hon N.D. Griffiths: These figures could mislead them. Hon PETER FOSS: That is why I am being very careful to let everybody know. That is one of the reasons that I thought the sentencing matrix would be very useful, because it asks the judges to tell us what they are doing as opposed to them saying, “You can work it out for yourself”. Up to 30 June 2000, information from the Children’s Court, which has been very helpful in providing us with information, indicates that there have been a total of 119 sentence events involving 92 individuals, of which 81 were

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 573 sentenced to detention, three to imprisonment and eight to a conditional release order. Due to the provisions of the Young Offenders Act, the particular offender may well have had more than three strikes and the court has frequently indicated that it was in any event appropriate to detain an offender. The sentencing remarks of the judges show they definitely go through all the alternatives before finally deciding to detain the offenders. Hon Mark Nevill: When are you tabling a review of that Act? Hon PETER FOSS: When it is ready. Eighty per cent of juveniles sentenced under the provisions of the three-strikes legislation are indigenous. The number of adults sentenced under “three strikes” is not clear due to a combination of difficulties in adequately recording these sentences and rare requests for the provisions of the legislation to be implemented at sentencing, in the knowledge that an adult subject to three strikes is likely to be sentenced to more than 12 months imprisonment anyway. The courts have not cooperated in providing this information. However, home burglary is not one of the five major causes of indigenous imprisonment, which is interesting. There is quite a different sentencing consequence for adult Aboriginal people and juvenile Aboriginal people. The five main causes of imprisonment for adult Aboriginal offenders are more related to alcohol-related offences, breaches of conditional release orders, drink-driving offences and personal assaults, usually on other Aboriginal people. However, for the juveniles - mainly but not entirely in the urban population - home burglaries are a significant cause of detention. GALE, MR GEOF

117. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Employment and Training: Given that the Sunday Times has reported that Edith Cowan University is conducting an investigation into the unaccredited degree of Mr Alan Galbraith and Guildford Grammar School will no longer retain the services of teacher Gary Jackson after his bogus qualifications were exposed - (1) What action will be taken against Mr Geof Gale claiming an unaccredited PhD? (2) If no action is to be taken, why not? (3) What system is in place to reassure the public that the practice of using false qualifications is not more widespread through the TAFE system? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) No action is being taken against Mr Gale, who was awarded an honorary doctorate by Kensington University in the United States. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich interjected. Hon N.F. MOORE: Perhaps we should look at Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich’s qualifications sometime. We have a situation in which a member is questioning the qualifications of a person who holds a senior position in the TAFE system in Western Australia. I am trying to explain the situation while she goes tut, tut. Maybe we should look at her qualifications. The PRESIDENT: Order! Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich knows that I am trying to get to Hon Helen Hodgson so that she can ask a question. Let the first question be answered before worrying about the interjections. Hon N.F. MOORE: (2) Mr Gale, in applying for the position of Managing Director of South East Metropolitan College of TAFE, explicitly indicated that his PhD was an honorary doctorate and did not misrepresent the nature of this award in any way. A PhD was not a requirement for the position and Mr Gale's honorary doctorate was not considered by the selection panel in its deliberations. (3) As indicated, Mr Gale did not misrepresent the nature of his qualifications in the selection process and the minister has no reason to believe such a practice exists in the TAFE sector. The usual process that exists across the state public sector to substantiate qualifications and work experience is in place for TAFE employees.

ROAD SAFETY, CROSSWALK ATTENDANTS

118. Hon HELEN HODGSON to the Attorney General representing the Minister for Police: (1) Of the $55m the Government is putting into road safety projects, (a) will any amount be used to retain crosswalk attendants; (b) will any amount be used for insurance of the Class B crosswalk attendants and students?

574 [COUNCIL]

(2) When schools were invited to provide extra information, what steps did the Education Department take to confirm the reported usage of crosswalks? (3) Did the department consider the number of children residing in proximity to the crosswalk in assessing the usage of the crosswalks? (4) Did the Premier say on 27 August this year that if one life could be saved, it would be worth every cent? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Some $55m relating to black spot funding is provided to Main Roads WA. Crosswalk attendants will not be funded from black spot funding. (2) No additional information has been provided to the Police Service at this time. Crosswalk usage is confirmed prior to making any decision relating to traffic wardens. (3) Surveys are conducted to determine the actual usage of the children's crossing. When children in proximity to a crossing it does not necessarily mean that they will use the service. (4) Yes. KEENE, MR DON, TRIP TO JAPAN

119. Hon GIZ WATSON to the Attorney General representing the Minister for Forest Products: With regard to a recent trip to Tokyo, Japan, in or around July this year by Mr Don Keene, then head of Forest Products Section in the Department of Conservation and Land Management - (1) Can the minister confirm that Mr Keene was there in his capacity as a CALM employee? (2) What was the purpose of this trip? (3) Who did Mr Keene meet with? (4) How much did his trip cost and who paid for it? (5) Were any other CALM representatives involved in this trip? (6) What other visits to woodchip-purchasing countries have been made by CALM employees in the past 12 months? (7) Are any similar visits planned? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) The purpose of the trip was to brief the New Oji Paper Company and Itochu Corporation on the changed management arrangements as a result of the proposed formation of the Forest Products Commission; to inspect the port handling systems used to receive woodchips produced from blue gum plantations established and managed by CALM; to inspect New Oji Paper Company research activities on eucalyptus species; and to progress discussions with and brief Japanese power companies and trading houses on the merits of investing in the maritime pine project and/or the growing of oil mallees to obtain carbon credits. (3) Mr Keene met representatives of Shinetsu Kagaku, New Oji Paper Company, Itochu Corporation, Osaka Gas Corporation, Kansai Electric Power Corporation, Hokuriku Electric Power Corporation, Nippon Paper/Mitsui Corporation and Sumitomo Corporation. (4) The trip cost $4 197.33 and was paid for by CALM. (5) No, the chief of staff from the Office of the Minister for Forest Products accompanied Mr Keene. (6) No visits have been made by CALM staff for the past 12 months. A staff member seconded to the Ministry of Premier and Cabinet accompanied Dr Shea in March 2000. (7) No firm plans for similar visits are currently in place, but follow-up visits will be required to maintain and develop partnerships, particularly for new plantation investments into the future. RM AUSTRALASIA PTY LTD, SOFTWARE REFINEMENTS

120. Hon E.R.J. DERMER to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Education: (1) Has the pilot process used by the Education Department to identify any refinements and enhancements needed to the software provided by RM Australasia Pty Ltd been completed?

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 575

(2) If not, why not? (3) What needed refinements and enhancements have been identified by the pilot process? Hon BARRY HOUSE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question.. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Refinements and enhancements have been identified to customise the generic product to meet particular Australian and Education Department requirements. For example: Administration Manager: Develop Education Department census requirements; modify the letter address block for Australian Standards; provide new reports to departmental requirements; include student access restriction indicator; modify the sibling and parent relationships options; export student data for school library systems on the Education Department panel; streamline data entry for admission of new students; and modify data parameter files to Education Department requirements. Lesson Attendance: Develop period by lesson attendance function. Attendance Manager: Modify student attendance codes to Education Department requirements. Cash Accounts: Match Australian GST requirements; match Education Department FREDA reporting requirements; develop financial reports acquired by the Education Department; and modify batch processing to match Education Department and business processes. Asset Manager: Match Education Department FREDA reporting requirements, and customise Education Department stocktake report. Billing: All aspects of this module will be developed to meet Education Department requirements. Curriculum Manager: All aspects of this module have been developed to meet Education Department requirements. Assessment Manager: Link between this module and the Education Department's curriculum management module. Timetable Manager: All aspects of this module will be developed to meet Education Department requirements.

ADDRESS-IN-REPLY Amendment to Motion Resumed from an earlier stage. HON LJILJANNA RAVLICH (East Metropolitan) [5.37 pm]: I have expressed my frustration on numerous occasions about the lack of accountability by this Government, and today is no exception. It seems to me that the ministers hold the view that they are a law unto themselves and are not accountable and do not need to be accountable. The actions of this Government and its ministers cause me to be even more frustrated than I normally would be.

576 [COUNCIL]

At last count I had 193 questions outstanding on the Notice Paper. I received 15 answers today, but over the course of the past couple of weeks I have added another 30 or 40, which brings it to about 220 questions that are outstanding. Members opposite may laugh. If they think it is funny that one member of this House has put questions on notice going as far back as July, August or even 24 May 2000 and is still waiting for answers to 200-plus questions, and if they reckon that is an accountable government, I ask them to think seriously about their actions and, more importantly, about their lack of action and how they define accountable government. I have not asked particularly technical questions. I have not asked for answers to questions that are unreasonable. I have asked run-of-the-mill questions that would enable me, as a member of the Opposition, to do my job. The worst offender in terms of not responding or providing answers to my questions is none other than the Premier himself. I will cite some examples. On 24 May 2000 I submitted questions to all ministers, in respect of all portfolios under their control in relation to ex gratia, one-off payments that had been approved by ministers during 1998-99 and 1999-2000. I also asked what the payments were for and how much they were. As of yesterday I had received only two answers, both from the Minister for Water Resources and Housing, Hon Kim Hames. No other minister has provided me with an answer to a question that I asked on 24 May 2000. Hon Greg Smith: “No-one takes me seriously.” Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Dead right! I have a funny feeling that I will end up having the last laugh because I am dealing with clowns. The PRESIDENT: Order members! Let Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich have her say. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: They all want a slice of my action! Only one minister has bothered to answer my questions. The first question that springs to my mind is: What is going on here? Of what are the ministers fearful? I have done some background research on act-of-grace payments. It will keep for now and I will put it to one side. The Premier has not responded to my questions in relation to the portfolios under his control. Hon N.F. Moore: When was it asked? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: It was asked on 24 May 2000. I did not receive any answers before Parliament was prorogued. Hon N.F. Moore: Have the questions been asked again? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: They have since been asked again and I have, as yet, received no answers. On 20 June 2000 I asked all ministers about enterprises under their portfolios that had been either privatised or closed. Once again, I am waiting for responses. The situation is a little better, with the exception of Hon Norman Moore, Hon Murray Criddle, Hon Doug Shave, Hon Kevin Prince, Hon Peter Foss and Hon June van de Klashorst, who have not given any answers to the question. Having said that, I received a few responses today, but I do not know who they are from. Once again, the Premier, who listens to people and who wants open and accountable government, must have been too busy to answer my simple question in relation to privatisations and government closures. May must have been a busy month, because on 24 May 2000 I put a six-part question to all ministers with regard to photocopiers and facsimile machines and volume-based agreements. Once again, accountable ministers, Hon Norman Moore and Hon Murray Criddle, have not replied. It has been several months. The Premier also has not bothered to answer. He must have been too busy, yet again. This is the Premier who espouses open and accountable government. If there is one thing that is not true about this Government, it is the fact that it is open and accountable. I have a stockpile of other examples which I could go through. I think that the ministers would agree that it is an absolute disgrace that a member of Parliament has over 200 questions outstanding from government ministers and yet is expected to do his or her job. Quite frankly, this situation is interfering with my ability to do my work properly. I take this opportunity to express my frustration. The Government does not respond to questions asked of it. As a member of the Opposition, when I am told by a minister to put a question on notice, I think that I may as well screw up the question and put it in a bin. Chances are that will be the last I will ever see of it. That is the amount of faith that I have that ministers will take some of the questions on notice seriously. I have other frustrations. Hon N.F. Moore: Do not tell us about them! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: I heard that! Government ministers have refused to give answers to questions. I have asked some fairly straightforward questions in this House in respect of the Matrix leasing arrangements. At every turn the Government has aimed to stop the flow of information to me. On Thursday, 17 August 2000 I asked a straightforward question - (1) Has the State Government requested Matrix to determine the marginal cost of the transaction? It is a simple question. Apparently the Government can only get out of the agreement without incurring a cost if the marginal cost has increased by more than 60 per cent. We need to know if the marginal cost of the transaction has

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 577 increased by more than 60 per cent, at which point it will provide the Government with an option to get out at minimal or no cost. Anything less than 60 per cent marginal cost means that hefty fines will be incurred. I also asked - (2) If yes, on how many occasions has this been sought in the past two years and what has been the response at each request? (3) For a marginal cost rate of 60%, what is the dollar value per vehicle of this increase in cost? It is disappointing that the best this Government can do is thank me for the question and ask me to place it on notice. I know very well that this Government is scheming somewhere on St Georges Terrace and trying to cover up this massive waste of taxpayers’ money. From now on the Government will make it more difficult to access any information. My source advises me - I assume it is accurate - that from now on information cannot be accessed through the freedom of information process or any other process on account of the fact that the Government will define anything to do with the Matrix contract as being either a cabinet minute or material supporting a cabinet minute. It will make it a no-go zone for any member of the Opposition or anybody else. This is what this Government calls open and accountable government. One would have to say, at very best, it is an absolute joke. For the life of me I cannot understand why this Government has got away with so much secrecy. In relation to any project, the minister always wants to table either the tender documents or the request for tender proposal. He is more than happy to give that away. However, if he is asked for the contract or the financial information - because the financial implications cannot be understood without access to that information - it is an absolute no-go zone. This Government knows that. I cannot believe that we, as members of this place, must deal with this level of secrecy and lack of commitment and professionalism. Over 200 questions have not been answered, which reflects on the ministers concerned and makes a joke of their stance as members of an open and accountable government. I have some concerns about the claim in the Administrator’s speech that the Government has been listening to the community for the past seven and a half years. The Government has not been listening. It realises that it is at a certain point in the electoral cycle and is putting on a people-friendly guise. I assure Western Australians that it will not last very long. The Government claims to be interested in job security, yet everything points to the fact that that is the least of its concerns. The Government is suddenly jumping up and down about safer neighbourhoods, but it is too little, too late. The Government would also have Western Australians believe it is taking action in the area of health care. I have grave concerns about the quality of health care in this State and will now move a further amendment to the Address-in- Reply. The PRESIDENT: Order! The House has not yet voted on the original amendment, which refers to the provision of power to the west Kimberley region. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Thank you. I would have liked to be able to move an amendment; however, I am sure the Opposition will have another opportunity to speak on the issue. I have put on the record my disappointment; nevertheless, I will support the Address-in-Reply motion. Debate adjourned, on motion by Hon Muriel Patterson. STATE SUPERANNUATION BILL 1999 Referral to Standing Committee on Legislation HON N.D. GRIFFITHS (East Metropolitan) [5.53 pm]: I move - That the order of the day be discharged and referred to the Standing Committee on Legislation for consideration and report not later than 9 October 2000. A number of clauses in the Bill contain, at the very least, arguable deficiencies that should be dealt with. Amendments to clause 3 have been listed in a Supplementary Notice Paper and issues have been raised about the status of police officers and parliamentary and electorate staff. Clause 6 is the subject of an Australian Democrats’ amendment to ensure the legislation complies with commonwealth standards. Clause 8 refers to membership of the Government Employees Superannuation Board and I am contemplating moving an amendment that will prevent an officer or member of the staff of the board becoming the chairman, employer or director of the board. That issue is partly dealt with by a proposed amendment to the schedule. Clause 12(1)(a) appears to provide very wide powers of delegation. Clause 13 raises concerns about the process of review of decisions of the board, while clause 16 raises questions about the accounting standards. Why are they not spelt out? Clause 18 contains the phrase “assets of the Fund”, whereas clause 19 refers to the “investment of the Fund”. That difference in wording needs examining, which need not take very long. What does clause 23(3) mean? Clause 24 refers to the power to borrow, and an alternative clause 24 is listed in the Supplementary Notice Paper. Clause 26 is also the subject of a proposed amendment. I question whether the heading for clause 30(2)(c) is accurate, although it is not part of the Bill, while clause 33(1)(a) and (b) is very ambiguous. Clause 36 defines “parliamentary purposes”. Will its operation inhibit the obligations of ministers to a House of Parliament? Clause 38(4) raises the prospect that the Treasurer will be able to veto the operations of Executive Council. The regulation making power in clause 38 also raises concerns about the protection to be afforded to and the reasonable expectations of current members of the schemes, particularly regarding disability pensions, which

578 [COUNCIL] are pertinent to police officers. The Australian Democrats have proposed new clause 40, which again deals with commonwealth compliance. Amendments to schedules 1 and 2 listed in the Supplementary Notice Paper also raise issues to which I have already referred. HON HELEN HODGSON (North Metropolitan) [5.58 pm]: The Australian Democrats will support the referral of this Bill to the Standing Committee on Legislation. Superannuation issues are particularly difficult as there is a need to ensure protection for people entitled to certain arrangements so that they are not adversely affected in the future. This legislation has been toing-and-froing between the minister’s advisers. I have had a number of meetings with them, as I am sure have a number of other people. A lot of work has been done on the amendments to try to deal with outstanding issues; however, it would be far more efficient for that to be done in the committee process. We therefore support the referral. HON N.F. MOORE (Mining and Pastoral - Leader of the House) [5.59 pm]: The Government is happy to support the referral of the Bill. It is a way of resolving some of the difficulties mentioned by Hon Nick Griffiths. Question put and passed. Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.30 pm

CONSERVATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT AMENDMENT BILL 1999 Committee Resumed from 29 June. The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Hon Derrick Tomlinson) in the Chair; Hon Peter Foss (Attorney General) in charge of the Bill. Progress was reported after clause 51 had been disagreed to. Clauses 52 and 53 put and passed. New clause 3 - Hon J.A. COWDELL: I move -

Page 2, after line 3 - To insert the following new clause - 3. Objects

(1) The Objects of this Act are - (a) to provide for the protection and conservation of the terrestrial, marine, and aquatic environments of Western Australia; and (b) to promote ecologically sustainable development through the conservation and ecologically sustainable use of natural resources; and (c) to promote the conservation of biodiversity and the maintenance of ecological processes; and (d) to promote a partnership approach to the protection and management of the environment involving governments, the community, land-holders and Aboriginal peoples; and (e) to assist in the co-operative implementation of Western Australia's state, national, and international environmental responsibilities; and (f) to recognise the role of Aboriginal people in the conservation and ecologically sustainable use of Western Australia's biodiversity, by applying best-practice principles of comanagement for the purposes of environmental protection, biodiversity conservation, forest management, and protected area management; and (g) to promote the use of Aboriginal peoples' traditional ecological knowledge with the involvement of, and in co-operation with, the owners of the knowledge. Although in various statements the Minister for the Environment supported the intent of these objects, in another place she ultimately rejected their addition. The clause sets out the Department of Conservation and the Conservation Commission's commitment to ecologically sustainable development and the use of the environment and natural resources and the protection and conservation of the environment. More importantly, the last object of this amendment seeks to incorporate the participation of Aboriginal people in environmental and national park management. Western Australia is the only State in Australia not to have Aboriginal representation in its environmental legislation. The Labor

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 579

Party clearly hopes that the Government will support this amendment and thus rectify the omission of Aboriginal people from the legislation. I commend the amendment to the Chamber. Hon PETER FOSS: The Government considers that the proposed amendment is neither necessary nor desirable and goes beyond the nature of the amendments which have been moved as part of the Bill and is, therefore, not strictly in accordance with the policy of the Bill. Hon NORM KELLY: The Australian Democrats will support the new clause. It is a travesty that this Government has not seen fit to acknowledge in the Bill the role of the Aboriginal people of this State. As Hon John Cowdell said, Western Australia is the only State that does not make such an acknowledgment. The Premier’s recent announcement in the Kimberley of the new national parks highlights the inadequacies of this Government in allowing proper consultation with Aboriginal people to ensure that when lands are declared for such purposes a proper consultation process is in place, as well as provision for ongoing management which recognises the role of Aboriginal people, their culture and their heritage and the future of those lands and the significance those lands have for those peoples. Nothing in what the Attorney General has said tonight or in what the Government has stated in the past few months in answer to what is being proposed satisfies me that we should not also be acknowledging and the Bill promoting ecologically sustainable development in this State. I could go through all the subclauses of this proposed new clause. The Australian Democrats support the amendment. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: The Greens (WA) support this clause, which provides objects for this Bill. It is an important strengthening of the overall objectives of the Bill. We are very disappointed that the Government seems to think they are superfluous. I find it curious that the minister has at various times and places supported most of these objects. I am at a loss to comprehend why everyone would not agree that it makes this legislative package more effective to have the objects clearly upfront as the overall rider to the purpose of the Bill. The announcements two weeks ago of the establishment of the Mitchell River National Park, the Lawley River National Park and the two conservation parks in the Kimberley area were made not only without inviting the traditional owners to be co-managers of those national parks and conservation parks but also without even informing the elders, let alone asking for their consent. It is a real example of exactly why the Bill requires this objects clause. The Government’s lack of support confounds me when the Minister for the Environment in the past has expressed support for the recognition of the land management capabilities of Aboriginal peoples. Indeed, after the public forum that was held on these Bills in March this year, I believe the minister met with Aboriginal people and professed to be very favourably disposed towards the inclusion in legislation of the recognition of their role in co-management of nature reserves and national parks. The minister says it, and it all sounds very good at the time, but when we come to this point in the Chamber when the Government has the opportunity to deliver on these recognised objectives, we suddenly find that the minister is remarkably quiet on the matter. Clearly these objects are to strengthen the Bill and to make it more about conservation than it would otherwise be. It is therefore a real disappointment that the Government does not want to strengthen the Bill and to clearly put upfront the objectives that so many people in the community would like to see. We will be very pleased to support the Labor Party's new clause and we are very disappointed that the Government will not be supporting it also. Hon MARK NEVILL: I shall not be supporting this clause. Although its sentiments may be noble, it would not really achieve very much. In respect of the management of national parks, there is scope under section 33(3) of the Act for management plans for these parks to be set up. I strongly support the involvement of Aboriginal people in those management plans. It is not always simple and it is not always necessarily productive to have specific statutory provisions for this purpose. By Aboriginal people, are we talking about the traditional owners of a particular area? Aboriginal people have a significant role to play in the conservation of these areas but there are some cultural aspects of Aboriginal people that will not necessarily benefit these national parks. I can recall the Department of Conservation and Land Management in the 1980s buying vehicles for particular Aboriginal communities for wildlife protection officers to use to look after these sorts of issues. Those vehicles were the means of some pretty wanton destruction of our fauna. In some areas of the Kimberley in which I worked 40 years ago the kangaroos have been hunted out. If the last two kangaroos on earth appeared from behind a boulder in that area they would soon be roasting in the coals. That is a cultural response by Aboriginals, not something they do maliciously. We must have the right people involved in the management of these national parks. I do not believe that anyone, black or white, should be allowed to hunt endangered native species in a national park, although stranded travellers should be allowed to take animals in order to survive. However, modern hunting involving high-powered guns with long-range sights, motorboats and so on can cause extensive destruction. I have seen wanton destruction over the years, so the situation must be managed, and it can be managed under the existing section 33. The national parks that were recently opened in the Kimberley are the result of 30 years of consultation. Some of the people who did not turn up at the opening have complained to me about their treatment at the hands of the Kimberley Land Council. The council requested them to stay away. Some agonised about whether they would attend because they were torn between different loyalties - they had worked with the Department of Conservation and Land Management for some time and they wanted to demonstrate their solidarity with the body that represents their interests. The

580 [COUNCIL] argument about the Purnululu National Park and Conservation Reserve and who represents the area has been long running, and it will be a long time before a joint Aboriginal management arrangement can be implemented. The sooner that happens, the better. However, any management arrangement must help to sustain that park. CALM has an excellent relationship with Aboriginal groups. I have seen evidence of that from one end of my electorate to the other, even in the Kimberley. The KLC’s boycotting of the opening of those national parks was unfortunate. I do not believe the line it put out about the lack of consultation. There has been extensive consultation about these parks. I sometimes feel that the KLC is its own worst enemy in the way that it deals with these issues. It has almost backed itself into a position whereby it cannot behave in a reasonable manner. It appears to be fighting an eighteenth-century class war or perpetuating an argument that started 30 years ago. CALM is keen to work with the KLC, but it takes two to get things done. Someone has put a lot of work into these amendments and they contain many motherhood statements. After being in Parliament for some time, I have decided to start opposing measures that are not important. Our legislation is laced with myriad provisions which are not necessary and which do not add much. Hon J.A. Cowdell: You will find many more in the sentencing legislation. It is laced with unnecessary clauses. Hon MARK NEVILL: I am the greatest critic of this Attorney General's prosecution of his party's law and order agenda. Hon Peter Foss: I hate unnecessary clauses. Hon MARK NEVILL: In the Attorney's case I am talking about unnecessary Bills. The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (Hon Derrick Tomlinson): Let us return to the clause. Hon MARK NEVILL: Some of the objectives are good and positive. However, the term “ecologically sustainable” is a tautology. I do not see this amendment adding much to the legislation. It confuses the issue and I will not support it. Hon J.A. COWDELL: This amendment is not a charter for rampant four-wheel drive vehicles, speedboats or high- powered rifles in our national parks, as suggested by Hon Mark Nevill. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: I would like to challenge some of the stereotypes Hon Mark Nevill referred to and his statements about the risks in having Aboriginal people involved in land management. He suggested that they will be shooting everything that moves. Hon Mark Nevill: That is the stereotype. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: He is caught in a time warp. Many Aboriginal people are becoming sophisticated in their synthesis of traditional management practices and their understanding of best practice through the science of environmental management. I draw the member’s attention to a short section in the report which I tabled today on behalf of the Standing Committee on Ecologically Sustainable Development and which refers to the 2000 National Conference of Parliamentary Public Works and Environment Committees. The report states - 5.1 Dr Bill Freeland, Director of Parks and Wildlife, addressed delegates on the Northern Territory Parks Masterplan. Dr Freeland said that 25% of Aborigines own 50% of inalienable Northern Territory land, thus, any plan for the environment must involve Aborigines in a meaningful way. 5.2 Dr Freeland explained that one third of his time is spent engaging with Aboriginal groups who have cultural affiliations with many of the parks and that the Masterplan recognises Aboriginal values. He then went on to state that 75 per cent of the members of the ranger force in the Northern Territory are Aboriginal. The only problem he identified stemming from that very strong component of Aboriginal management is that some of the rangers must be relocated because they have a tendency to believe that they own the area they service and see tourists as a menace. In other words, they strongly relate to being custodians of the land. For the member to suggest that Aboriginal people are not able to offer a very - Hon Mark Nevill: I did not say that; there is nothing in the Bill precluding any of that, and it should be encouraged. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Why do we then not encourage that by saying that we will support this objective? As members know, virtually no co-management is occurring at the moment. The member is saying that it is a good thing and he is also acknowledging that it is not happening. Why do members not support it and pass legislation to encourage this development in the management of our biodiversity in Western Australia? Hon PETER FOSS: I totally endorse the remarks made by Hon Mark Nevill. What matters is what we do, not words such as these that signify nothing. Hon Christine Sharp: Then let’s do something. Hon PETER FOSS: The Greens’ problem is that they seem to think that moving amendments such as this will achieve something. They insert useless words in legislation and pad the statute books with provisions that will not do anything

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 581 and think they have achieved something. There are doers and talkers in this world, and the Greens and the Democrats are talkers. As Hon Mark Nevill said, CALM does have a good record. Hon Norm Kelly spouted nonsense about what he read in the newspapers. That is the sum total of his knowledge of the situation. If he had done some research he would know that Purnululu National Park and Conservation Reserve is the classic example. The problem is not that CALM did not try to involve Aboriginal people but that the Aboriginals involved from the beginning quarrelled and refused to have anything to do with one another or to be involved in a committee that included the others. I know that because I launched the management plan for that park. We tried to get the people to meet but they would not deal with one another. Hon Mark Nevill: It is still a problem. Hon PETER FOSS: Does the member believe that we should paternalistically order them to cooperate or pass a law making it illegal for Aboriginal people to object to being on co-management committees and impose a penalty of two years’ imprisonment? CALM is willing to work towards and committed to this objective. Members opposite will not make the slightest jot of difference if they succeed in having this rubbish included in the legislation. We already have far too much of this rubbish in Acts. I have managed to have Cabinet pass a resolution designed to change legislative drafting to ensure that we include only those provisions that must be included. It is a losing battle; the statute books are getting fatter and fatter. Hon Mark Nevill might not like my legislation - Hon Mark Nevill: The presentation is wonderful, but the content is terrible. Hon PETER FOSS: That is how it should be: Only that which is necessary should be included in a statute. I try to introduce Acts of Parliaments which do not include pious statements or words that mean nothing and which do not increase the cost to everyone because that junk must be stored. Verbose legislation also increases the cost of legal services because every lawyer is required to buy more statute books. The Greens and the Democrats will never be in government, but they think they are achieving something simply by including words in legislation. Those words are meaningless if they have no effect, and this amendment will be meaningless. As Hon Mark Nevill said, CALM has a very good record. Nothing prevents this happening and nothing requires it to happen. Hon Christine Sharp: Why not tell us about CALM’s record? Hon PETER FOSS: It is very good. Hon Christine Sharp: What is it? Hon PETER FOSS: The member has wasted time all the way through this process by making pious statements about all sorts of things as though she has all the solutions in the world. She makes pious statement after pious statement. If she is genuinely interested to know what CALM does with Aboriginal people, I will happily arrange a briefing. Most importantly, CALM has tried to involve Aboriginal people in employment in national parks. That was the case when I was minister and Dr Shea was chief executive officer, and I am sure that that is still the case under the management of the present chief executive officer. We are passing legislation, not making pious statements. Let us get on with it. Hon NORM KELLY: I find the comments of the Attorney General totally hypocritical because his Government has said there is no need for this legislation in the first place and he has the hide to say that members should not add to the State’s statutes. If the Government truly believes the existing Act is sufficient, the Attorney General should not waste the time of this place introducing an amending Bill. Hon Peter Foss: You really do not understand. Hon NORM KELLY: I had not intended to speak again on this clause but, given some of the comments made about the use of national parks by Aborigines, I will briefly relate some of my experiences of working in national parks and my encounters with traditional owners and other users. I refer in particular to the Rudall River National Park. The adverse impact in that park is clearly the result of extensive mineral exploration. Hon Peter Foss: What a load of cobblers! Hon NORM KELLY: I am not saying it is permanent damage. The extent of the damage in the Rudall River National Park can be seen on the lines traversing certain areas. I am not saying that it is unacceptable but, in comparison, the impact of traditional owners on that park is minimal. With regard to the preservation of native animals, I can remember once coming across an Aboriginal guy along the Tallawana track who wanted a lift to the Balfour Downs station. He had a rifle, the barrel of which was kept on with a piece of fencing wire, and three bungarras he had shot. As far as I know there is no shortage of bungarras throughout that national park. Of course, there is far greater damage in the national park from camels and goats that have been introduced and are widespread throughout the park. I was aware of certain desecration of Aboriginal sites as a result of people working in the mineral exploration field. Most of the people working in that area were reasonable and responsible, but I am aware that some people were not. That is having a far greater impact.

582 [COUNCIL]

There is no rational reason for the boundaries of the national park. They are simply cadastral boundaries. I am sure that whoever plotted the boundaries had never been near the national park and simply drew some lines to try to encapsulate the Rudall River catchment area. A true boundary would be based on the river catchment area rather than straight lines on a map. The Labor Government found it convenient to change the boundaries so that the Kintyre uranium project, which previously was half a kilometre within the national park boundary, was excised. Hon Mark Nevill: You have your feet on both sides of the fence. Hon NORM KELLY: No, I do not. I am saying we must look at the basis of the whole management of the national park. I can understand why traditional owners are so disenchanted with the way in which white people go about their laws. The Kintyre deposit area is known by the traditional owners as bad country. They will not camp in the area for that reason. That knowledge and information is not passed on by the Department of Conservation and Land Management trying to educate other people about the history of the land. I do not have a foot in both camps, but I am saying it is convenient to remember how to make laws and the way in which to determine national park boundaries. We should make sure it is done for the correct reasons. I see no reason that the objects in the new clause proposed by Hon John Cowdell should not be included. The clause is not just padding; it is an assertion that we value the role of the traditional owners of the land. As I said previously, I find it amazing that Western Australia is the only State that is not willing to acknowledge the traditional owners in land management legislation. It is a disgrace that, given this perfect opportunity to make an amendment, the Government is failing to do so. Hon J.A. COWDELL: I can only concur with the statement of the Attorney General; that is, the addition of extra words in this Bill is no substitute for a change of government. I trust that real change will be effected by the latter course. Hon MARK NEVILL: Nothing in this Bill precludes 75 per cent of the people working in national parks being Aboriginal. Nothing in this Bill or the Act prevents joint management of national parks. It is achievable and desirable under the management plans. There can be difficult situations in national parks when the traditional owners have not been living in the area for 40 or 50 years. Some families who identify with that particular area may be living 400 kilometres away in Derby or Broome. It may be that people living in Kalumburu have a more recent association with the land than the traditional owners. It might be better if they were part of the joint management. If these provisions are set up in statutes it may be necessary to include only the traditional owners, and a whole community may need to be built for them to exercise this right of joint management. We must work out a mechanism whereby these systems will work, and there is ample scope within the Act to accommodate Aboriginal involvement. With regard to the other issue raised by Hon Norm Kelly, in 40 years I have never seen an Aborigine shoot a bungarra. Hon Norm Kelly: They do. Hon MARK NEVILL: They may do, but I have never seen it. They usually chase them and have great fun doing it, especially the children. I have seen vehicles with up to eight Kimberley bustards or bush turkeys in the back in areas where they appear to be extremely rare. The Aborigines manage to knock off large numbers of them, using guns of course. Sometimes I do not see this species for three or four years, but east of Esperance one year I saw about 70 in a paddock. I could not believe my eyes. I do not know whether they are a rare and endangered species, but I do not often see them. I do not know that the conservation ethic is evident. Certainly, the Aborigines understand everything about wildlife and ecology, and it is important that we tap into that in a very positive way. Nothing I have said is against the involvement of Aborigines; it is a question of how it is done so that it is productive. The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (Hon Derrick Tomlinson): The question before the Chair is that new clause 3 be inserted, and that clause has a series of objectives. So far we have heard a discursive debate about bungarras, bustards and the Mull of Kintyre! I suggest we return to debate on this new clause. Hon B.K. DONALDSON: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chairman, for that timely warning. The objectives of this proposed new clause remind me of feel-good, motherhood statements, which are described as mission statements by commercial enterprises. As soon as I read it, I thought Hon John Cowdell wanted to feel warm and fuzzy with this type of interpretation. He must feel an election coming on! I heard Hon Christine Sharp say there had been no consultation on the establishment of new national parks, which was recently announced. That is not correct and it is an outlandish statement to make. She should get hold of the facts before she makes statements such as that in this place. Paragraphs (d) to (g) in this proposed new clause are of concern. I thought we were trying to get reconciliation in this country but, once again, an attempt is being made to create a division between indigenous people and the white population. That is sad. Hon Mark Nevill’s statement is correct; the existing Act is sufficient to accommodate Aboriginal involvement. It is already happening. It is sad that once again an attempt is being made to separate the peoples of this nation. It is unfortunate. I cannot support this new clause. Hon J.A. COWDELL: I must reject the assertion that this is creating a division within the community between black and white. As persuasive as Hon Bruce Donaldson may be on occasion, I cannot see that he has any basis for the argument with respect to paragraphs (d) to (g).

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 583

New clause put and a division taken with the following result - Ayes (13) Hon Kim Chance Hon G.T. Giffard Hon J.A. Scott Hon Giz Watson Hon J.A. Cowdell Hon Tom Helm Hon Christine Sharp Hon Cheryl Davenport Hon Helen Hodgson Hon Tom Stephens Hon E.R.J. Dermer(Teller) Hon Norm Kelly Hon Ken Travers Noes (14) Hon M.J. Criddle Hon Peter Foss Hon Simon O’Brien Hon Derrick Tomlinson Hon Dexter Davies Hon Barry House Hon B.M. Scott Hon Muriel Patterson Hon B.K. Donaldson Hon Mark Nevill Hon Greg Smith (Teller) Hon Max Evans Hon M.D. Nixon Hon W.N. Stretch

Pairs Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich Hon N.F. Moore Hon Bob Thomas Hon Murray Montgomery Hon N.D. Griffiths Hon Ray Halligan New clause thus negatived. New clause 17 - Hon J.A. COWDELL: I move - Page 24, after line 14 - To insert the following new clause - 17. Section 33B inserted New section 33B is inserted after section 33A - “ 33B. Principles on which Department to act (1) In the performance of its functions under this Act the Department must take account of the principles of ecologically sustainable forest management. (2) In this section the “principles of ecologically sustainable forest management” means - (a) decision making processes should effectively integrate both long term and short term economic, environmental, social and equitable considerations; (b) if there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation; (c) the present generation should ensure that the health, diversity and productivity of the environment is maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future generations; (d) the conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity should be a fundamental consideration in decision-making; (e) improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms should be promoted. “. This new clause provides that in the performance of its functions under this Act, the department must take account of the principles of ecologically sustainable forest management. The definition of “principles of ecologically sustainable forest management” is the same as the definition that was added to this Bill by an amendment that was made elsewhere. While the Government accepted Labor's amendment requiring the Conservation Commission and the Forest Products Commission to abide by these principles, it would not accept the same amendment for the department. We hope the Government will now accept this amendment to ensure that the three bodies that will evolve from the restructure of CALM will abide by the principles of ecologically sustainable forest management. I commend the proposed new clause to the Chamber. Hon PETER FOSS: This amendment has some serious logical inadequacies and is falsely conceived. Firstly, the department has many functions that have nothing to do with forest management, particularly ecologically sustainable

584 [COUNCIL] forest management. Also, the department is obliged to act in accordance with the forest management plan to the extent that it is dealing with the forests. The commission will arrive at that forest management plan taking into account the principles that it is required to take into account; and it is then up to the department to execute that plan. Presumably, in view of the measures that have already been put in place, that forest management plan will take into account the principles of ecologically sustainable forest management. It is inherently wrong to then require the department to question the forest management plan just in case it does not follow those principles. The idea of a forest management plan that the department has an obligation to carry out is and always has been the scheme of the Act and is one of the things in which Western Australia has led Australia and the world. To now require the department to start some new questioning or setting of objectives will disturb the fundamental way in which the forests Act used to operate and the way this Act now operates. It is a bit of muddle-headed thinking. Hon MARK NEVILL: I do not support the amendment. It reads wonderfully and seems to lack a few of the other cliches that we find in these sorts of statements. However, paragraph (b) intrigues me. It refers to lack of full scientific certainty. How can we ever get to a stage where there is no lack of full scientific certainty? I do not believe this amendment will add anything to the Bill. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: The provisions in proposed subsection (2)(b) are the precautionary principle, which is much detested by some members sitting close to me, who often speak in this place about this principle of environmental management. However, the precautionary principle is an important underpinning of sound environmental management, because in many cases one does not have full certainty of the irreversible effects until it is too late; for example, extinction is an irreversible process. Therefore, this new clause requires that the forest be managed in such a way that there is no possibility of a species becoming extinct. One known example is the “no regrets” principle with regard to greenhouse policy. I believe Hon Mark Nevill would agree that it is most important in these cases that the precautionary approach be adopted because its omission may have severe consequences. I agree with Hon Mark Nevill that this new clause and the previous new clause have much in common, because they involve a series of principles. Unlike the Attorney General, I like to have principles expressed in law, and I believe that by including this new clause under the functions of the department, the department will be required to adopt an ecologically sustainable approach to forest management. Therefore, I am pleased on behalf of the Greens (WA) to support the insertion of the new clause. Hon NORM KELLY: The Australian Democrats support this new clause. Paragraph (c) states - the present generation should ensure that the health, diversity and productivity of the environment is maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future generations; Part of the current pain that is being experienced by timber communities has been brought about by the failure to apply a precautionary principle. Under the existing forest management plan, timber is being logged at an unsustainable level. When the forest management plan was signed in December 1992, it was agreed that the timber industry could not easily accommodate a drastic reduction in sustainable yield and it would be too painful for the industry and the employees to have the industry downgraded in that way, so it was decided to allow unsustainable logging for a further 10 years to give the industry more time to adapt and prepare for the inevitable downward shift in available logging. It is a pity the industry did not take that on board fully, and that prior to the signing of the Regional Forest Agreement it was arguing once again for unsustainable cuts. Therefore, it is important to include this new clause in the Bill in order to prevent unsustainable logging practices from occurring in the future. New clause put and a division taken with the following result - Ayes (13)

Hon Kim Chance Hon Tom Helm Hon Christine Sharp Hon E.R.J. Dermer (Teller) Hon J.A. Cowdell Hon Helen Hodgson Hon Tom Stephens Hon Cheryl Davenport Hon Norm Kelly Hon Ken Travers Hon G.T. Giffard Hon J.A. Scott Hon Giz Watson Noes (14)

Hon M.J. Criddle Hon Peter Foss Hon Simon O’Brien Hon W.N. Stretch Hon Dexter Davies Hon Barry House Hon Derrick Tomlinson Hon Muriel Patterson (Teller) Hon B.K. Donaldson Hon Mark Nevill Hon B.M. Scott Hon Max Evans Hon M.D. Nixon Hon Greg Smith

Pairs

Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich Hon N.F. Moore Hon Bob Thomas Hon Murray Montgomery Hon N.D. Griffiths Hon Ray Halligan

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 585

New clause thus negatived. New clause 25 - Hon NORM KELLY: I move - Page 29, after line 4 - To insert the following new clause - 25. Section 55 amended

Section 55 is amended by - (a) inserting in subsection (1a) after the word “reserve” the words “must have an ecologically sustainable basis and”; (b) by adding after subsection (2) the following subsection - “ (2a) A continuation of a management plan beyond its expiry by operation of subsection (2) does not apply to a management plan where its purpose, or one of its purposes, is that described in subsection (1a)(c). ”. This amendment was brought about because of concerns of the Australian Democrats and environmental groups about the potential danger that a forest management plan can be extended beyond its original term, thus allowing the continuation of unsustainable logging or outdated silvicultural practices. In the light of my comments a few minutes ago it is imperative that we do not allow that to happen. If we decide to put in place a 10-year management plan we must stick to it. It is imperative that a new management plan be prepared and ready to take over once the original 10- year plan is due to expire. The amendment is in two parts. If this amendment were passed, section 55(1a) of the Conservation and Land Management Act would read - A management plan for an indigenous State forest or timber reserve must have an ecologically sustainable basis and shall specify the purpose, or combination of purposes, for which it is reserved being one or more of the following purposes . . . From that reading we have no reason to expect that that would not be the case. However, in the light of the impact of section 55(1a)(c), "timber production on a sustained yield basis", it is imperative we make that a statutory requirement of this Bill. The second part of the amendment inserts a new section 55(2a). The Standing Committee on Ecologically Sustainable Development investigated this issue when it considered the Bill. As with many of the issues the committee inquired into, it did not reach a unanimous position. However, I note the ability for forest management plans to go far beyond their original expiry date, as highlighted by the industry spokesperson, Hon Bob Pearce, a former environment minister. He referred to the situation in New South Wales and stated - . . . NSW is still working on forest management plans for 1980 for some forest areas because it has been unable to get agreement on a new one due in part to the convoluted nature of the process. That State just keeps working on the old forest management plan by artificially extending it. New South Wales operates under different Statutes. However, the Democrats believe the provisions in the Bill will allow for that to occur in Western Australia as well. Counterarguments to this were put, but the committee’s report refers to clause 58(2) of the Forest Products Bill that directly impacts on this provision. That clause states that a production contract referred to in section 58(1) has no effect after the relevant management plan has expired. This has been used as an argument, and is referred to in the committee report by Dr Wally Cox, the Executive Director of the Department of Conservation and Land Management. He said that this would prevent an artificial extension of the forest management plan. However, section 55(2) of the CALM Act reads - A management plan shall state the date on which it will expire, unless it is sooner revoked, but notwithstanding anything in this section or in a plan, a plan which would otherwise expire shall, unless it is revoked, remain in force until a new plan is approved. That allows the forest management plan to be extended if there is an inability to agree on a new plan. CALM is able to enter into contracts only at the expiration of a current forest management plan. At the moment all existing forest contracts will expire on 31 December 2003 in line with the expiration of the forest management plan. However, I have not been convinced by the arguments of the Government or of Dr Wally Cox that the Government would be unable to extend the forest management plan and enter into new forest logging contracts which coincide with the new expiry date of an extended forest management plan. They are the reasons the Democrats have moved this amendment. It will put more certainty into ensuring that logging contracts and forest management plans for the purpose of logging contracts cannot be extended beyond the original term of the plan.

586 [COUNCIL]

Hon MARK NEVILL: This is the first time I have heard the expression "indigenous state forest". Is that the politically correct phrase for native state forest? Hon Peter Foss: It sounds very politically correct to me. Hon MARK NEVILL: The first part of the amendment to insert "ecologically sustainable basis" does not add anything to section 55(1a). The second part of the amendment that says that a management plan for timber production cannot be extended does not assist the Bill either. What Hon Norm Kelly did not say when he said a management plan had the ability to be extended is that it is required to be done on a sustainable yield basis. That proviso is built into that section. At the end of the day they are only words. We have been debating whether forests are harvested on a sustainable basis for the past 20 years. Some people are totally opposed to logging in indigenous state forests - I hope that is not different from native forests - and dispute that logging in these forests will be done on a sustainable basis. I do not believe the amendment will add anything to section 55. Hon PETER FOSS: This is an interesting amendment. It is another example of the Australian Democrats trying to govern from Parliament. For people who seem to be so keen on the separation of powers - as between the judiciary and the Government - it amazes me how prepared they are on a national and state basis to write legislation that allows the upper House to govern. This amendment is particularly peculiar, because anyone who has ever looked at a forest management plan will know that it is about total management and not just timber protection. It relates to issues like protection from the encroachment of weeds. A large part of a forest management plan is to look after the forest to make sure it does not suffer some irreversible environmental damage. However, as soon as the management plan expires, CALM will not be allowed to step into that forest; it cannot do anything there. The amendment does not just say CALM cannot cut down the trees, it says the management plan no longer has effect. The Democrats are saying, "Blow the forests." As soon as a forest management plan expires and the Government cannot get the next forest management plan through a recalcitrant upper House, the Democrats will say to CALM, "Get out of there. Your management plan does not give you any authority.” What a wonderful idea that is! What sort of Parliament would say that CALM is not allowed to look after a forest once a management plan has expired? Hon Norm Kelly: That is why we refer to timber production. Hon PETER FOSS: Section 55(1) refers to a management plan for any land, and there can be a conservation plan, a recreation plan, a timber production on a sustained yield basis plan, a water catchment protection plan or a plan for any other purpose being a purpose prescribed by the regulations. It refers to not only cutting down trees but also a management plan. Believe it or not, a management plan is all about management. It deals with every aspect of management. The way this amendment is worded CALM cannot look after the forest. If the piece of land happens to be a forest and the management plan came to an end CALM could not touch it. It could not stop the fire or conduct controlled burning. I suppose the Greens (WA) members would love that! Hon Norm Kelly: It allows all that. Hon PETER FOSS: It does not allow that at all. Hon Norm Kelly: The management plan can continue on for section 55(1a) (a), (b), (d) and (e). Hon PETER FOSS: No. Hon Norm Kelly does not understand; this is not about forests. Hon Norm Kelly: It took me long enough to get this draft through the legal minds. Hon PETER FOSS: Maybe Hon Norm Kelly did not tell them what he was trying to do. It does not say that it stops only for that purpose; section 55(1a) says that if it is being reserved for that purpose - A management plan for indigenous State forest or timber reserve shall specify the purpose, or combination of purposes, for which it is reserved being one or more of the following purposes. . . . Once section 55(1a)(c) is included as a purpose, that management plan is out; it is not only the part that talks about cutting down trees. The management plan in its entirety is out, and CALM cannot stop fires; it cannot do anything. Once that proposed new subsection is included the management plan is out. I am not suggesting that Hon Norm Kelly amend it because it shows the stupidity of the Democrats trying to run things. One of the silly things about this is that the Democrats love having the power, but they are not prepared to take the responsibility. The Democrats are prepared to take the power away from CALM to do its job, but if that forest is burnt down because nobody is taking the proper measures will Hon Norm Kelly stand up and resign. Will he say, “It’s the Democrats' fault; we stopped them doing that”? Hon Norm Kelly will be gone many years before then. The Democrats continually try to interfere with the whole concept of government. Democrats love to govern from Parliament. It is important that the Democrats understand the roles of the people who have to manage the forest. The Democrats want to set the guidelines. They try to put these tricky little bits in to trip them up and push them in the back. They do all sorts of little things to upset the outcome. The Democrats have so many tricks they should be in a circus. The Democrats always have these tricky little legal points. Hon Mark Nevill: You let the Democrats build their 750-bed prison.

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 587

Hon PETER FOSS: The Democrats were sensible there, because they understood the Government would build it anyway. They wanted to try to put some parliamentary controls around it. We were appealing to the Democrats’ sense of trying to keep tabs on the Government. We know the Democrats’ tricky little methods. They always want to trip people up and push them in the back, and we will not allow them this time. Hon J.A. COWDELL: I note the concerns raised by the Attorney General with respect to the wording of proposed section 55(2a). It appears that in fact the management plan might encompass purposes set out in section 55(1a) paragraphs (a) to (e), but if one of them happens to pertain to paragraph (c), this may invalidate other worthwhile sections of the plan. Section 55(1a)(c) provides that timber production on a sustainable yield basis is an agreed part of the plan. This proposed new clause could clearly seriously disrupt the legitimate operation of an ongoing forest product industry. As I say, given the Labor Party's concerns about aspects of the management plan pertaining to paragraphs (a), (b), (c) (d) and (e), we will not support this amendment. Hon NORM KELLY: A minor point was raised by Hon Mark Nevill about inserting "must have an ecologically sustainable basis" and that in paragraph (c) reference is made to a sustained yield basis. Something that is done on a sustained yield basis may not necessarily be an ecologically sustainable basis, which is about encompassing all the values of the forest to ensure they are not diminished simply to preserve timber production. Hon Mark Nevill: Have we not separated out most of those representative areas already? Hon NORM KELLY: That does not mean the ecological values cannot be kept within a working forest. That is why the Democrats are making that point. The Attorney General and Hon John Cowdell said that my amendment would rule out the ability to have a management plan that allowed for paragraphs (a), (b), (d) and (e) of conservation, recreation, water catchment protection and other purposes. My understanding and belief is that the Attorney General and Hon John Cowdell are wrong in their interpretation. If a forest management plan were to continue beyond its expiry date, it would have to delete all aspects of paragraph (c) which relate to timber production, but allow those other management practices for things such as conservation, recreation, and water protection in an extended forest management plan. If no agreement could be reached on timber production on a sustained-yield basis, this amendment would require that to stop at that expiry date. However, the Government would then be allowed to amend that plan and allow it to continue under the provisions of section 55(2). I will not labour the point. I was fully aware of the dangers of drafting this in a way that stopped the positive aspects of a management plan such as those promoting conservation and recreation. We therefore went through a lengthy process to draft an amendment to best enable those values and that form of forest management to continue. Without that the timber industry could continue with outdated silvicultural practices or others that are perhaps advantageous to the industry but not to forest management and conservation. Hon MARK NEVILL: We are getting things out of perspective in this debate. As the Attorney General pointed out, part 59 is about management of land. We are going into very great detail about small areas of land. Throughout this State our crown land and pastoral leases, many of which are Aboriginal pastoral leases because they are not worked any more, are being invaded by about 20 major plants, such as mesquite in the Pilbara, parkinsonia in the Pilbara and Kimberley, rubber bush, Noongoora burr, neem tree, leucaena, bellyache bush, thorn apple and Mexican poppy. Feral animals such as wild pigs can be found up and down the De Grey River and throughout the Kimberley. Camels, donkeys, dogs, foxes and cats are also found in large numbers in both areas. The vast part of our State is deteriorating greatly; yet we are focussing on these remaining pieces of forest. We are missing the big picture. I am surprised that you have not ruled me out of order, Mr Chairman! Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: I support the new clause moved by Hon Norm Kelly. I have spoken several times about the difference between ecologically sustainable management and sustainable yield management, so I will not repeat my remarks. Proposed subsection (2a), on which most of the debate has focussed in the past few minutes, is a very thoughtful proposal by Hon Norm Kelly. That is why I am very pleased to be able to support it. I think it is thoughtful because it became clear during the Standing Committee on Ecologically Sustainable Development inquiry that, due to the difficulties with proposed section 60 on the finalisation of management plans and the so-called veto of the Minister for Forest Products over the content of the forest management plan, a serious potential existed for a deadlock to occur. Hon Norm Kelly has investigated further the ramifications for the management plan should such a deadlock occur. This is not an unreasonable proposition. Section 55(2) of the Act clearly requires that a management plan that would otherwise expire shall, unless it is revoked, remain in force until a new plan is approved. It is very clear, therefore, that a deadlock could continue for some time and leave us in the invidious position of being lumbered with the current management plans that have proved to be contentious in many ways. I am very much looking forward to the end of 2003 when we can finally get on with some new ones. I would hate to think that due to a deadlock in Cabinet over some contentious provisions in the plan we would be saddled with the current management plans for some time after that. New South Wales was cited as an example of a State that has a management plan that has been continuing under outdated plans for some years. If the Government intended to avoid the repercussions of the management plan being forced to expire, the insertion of the words in this new clause would enable the department to get on with the business of renewing the management plans. If the Attorney General disagrees with the provisions outlined in this proposed new

588 [COUNCIL] clause, I imagine it will be very easy for him to move an alternative that would avoid a deadlock situation that would mean retaining a management plan that was out of date. There are other ways this objective could be achieved. Unless the Attorney General wishes to come up with an alternative I will be pleased to support the amendment standing in the name of Hon Norm Kelly. New clause put and a division taken with the following result - Ayes (6)

Hon Norm Kelly Hon J.A. Scott Hon Christine Sharp Hon Giz Watson (Teller) Hon Tom Helm Hon Helen Hodgson Noes (22)

Hon Kim Chance Hon B.K. Donaldson Hon M.D. Nixon Hon W.N. Stretch Hon J.A. Cowdell Hon Max Evans Hon Simon O’Brien Hon Derrick Tomlinson Hon M.J. Criddle Hon Peter Foss Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich Hon Ken Travers Hon Cheryl Davenport Hon G.T. Giffard Hon B.M. Scott Hon Muriel Patterson Hon Dexter Davies Hon Barry House Hon Greg Smith (Teller) Hon E.R.J. Dermer Hon Mark Nevill Hon Tom Stephens New clause thus negatived. Schedule 1 - Hon PETER FOSS: I move - Page 56, lines 24 to 27 - To delete the lines. Page 56, after line 27 - To insert the following new subclause -

(2) The Minister, by order published in the Gazette within 4 weeks of the commencement of this Act, may determine the positions (other than the positions determined under subclause (1) - (a) the functions or duties of which related, immediately before the commencement of this Act, to the provision of administrative, policy or corporate services for the purposes of the performance of the duties referred to in subclause (1); and (b) that the Minister considers appropriate for transfer to the Forest Products Commission. This is to correct a drafting error. It would have compulsorily required the entire administrative staff to be transferred from the Department of Conservation and Land Management to the Forest Products Commission. That obviously was not the intent; it should be selective. These amendments, along with the deletions in amendment 5/S1, the insertion in 6/S1 and the consequential amendments in 7/S1 and 8/S1, allows the minister to decide what functions should be transferred. Amendments put and passed. Hon PETER FOSS: I move - Page 56, line 28 - To insert after “(1)” - or (2) Page 58, lines 4 and 5 - To delete the lines. These amendments are consequential. Amendments put and passed. Hon MARK NEVILL: I move - Page 59, lines 12 to 18 - To delete the lines. This amendment is consequential to an earlier amendment accepted by the Chamber which retains the name of the Department of Conservation and Land Management by deleting clause 10 of schedule 1. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: I reiterate that I have mixed feelings about the deletion of the name change provisions that Hon Mark Nevill has moved, both on this clause and earlier. By insisting on preserving the name of CALM, he will create a lot of disappointment within the department. From anecdotal evidence to which I am party, many officers in the department were looking forward to the name change and to a new era that did not bear the weight of public conflict they have had to bear for some time. This Bill was an opportunity for them to have a fresh image. It is a pity that Hon Mark Nevill is robbing them of that opportunity. On the other hand, given that many of the provisions of the Bill are

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 589 seriously inadequate, it is perhaps a good job that those officers have this disappointment because they need to understand that this is not the new era that certainly the conservation movement was hoping for. Therefore, although it is sad, it is a fitting nomenclature and fitting that the name will remain the same. Therefore, I shall probably support the amendment. Hon J.A. COWDELL: The Labor Party has already recorded its opposition to the retention of the CALM name but, as the name has been retained and the change of name to the Department of Conservation rejected, this merely becomes a consequential amendment. In that case we will not oppose it. Amendment put and passed. Schedule, as amended, put and passed. Title put and passed. Bill reported, with amendments. FOREST PRODUCTS BILL 1999 Committee The Deputy of Committees (Hon W.N. Stretch) in the Chair; Hon Peter Foss (Attorney General) in charge of the Bill. Clauses 1 and 2 put and passed. Clause 3: Definitions - Hon MARK NEVILL: I move - Page 3, line 1 - To insert after “Conservation” - and Land Management This amendment changes the name of the department to the Department of Conservation and Land Management, making it consistent with the Bill we dealt with a moment ago. Amendment put and passed. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: I move - Page 3, line 31 - To insert after “tend” - (including thinning) This is to ensure that thinning is in the scope of the definition of the word "manage". Although this is a simple and rather technical amendment, I believe it is a very important amendment. I would like to explain to the Chamber why I think that is so. The definition currently in the Bill before us, which I seek to amend, is the result of a government amendment in the other place. In a series of amendments to this Bill the Government gave the Forest Products Commission very significant powers, which were not in the Bill as originally introduced, with regard to responsibilities for management of the production of forest. I do not remember the total of the suite of amendments - it was perhaps 12 or 15 - that relate to this concept of to “manage” which is defined in clause 3. Management crops up throughout the activities described in the Bill, and although it has a very wide scope of meaning it does not specify the critical meaning to my mind, which is the requirement that management should include thinning. I leave aside the meaning of ecologically sustainable forest management and how it represents a new departure for forest management because essentially it is looking at other forest values than timber production. However, with timber production one of the critical requirements of a sustainable yield, particularly in the way in which forests grow in the south west, is that the sustainable yield will be sustained over several rotations only by including a requirement for thinning. The history of the management of the state forest, which has claimed the adjective sustainable for many decades, indicates that no silviculture management we have implemented to date has delivered a sustainable yield. That is a very sweeping statement and I shall explain what I mean. Until the introduction of the Forests Act 1918 there was no requirement for sustainable yield management. As members know, that was when logging in the jarrah forest peaked before the First World War and when most of the very large trees were taken. After that time there was initially some lip service and then, with the introduction of the Conservation and Land Management Act, more specificity for the requirement of sustainable yield. However, in the management practices in the forest, the argument for the introduction for clear felling is that previous selective logging had continually left behind the culled trees. As a result of that, with subsequent logging the quality of the trees in the forest was continually being reduced. Therefore, over time there was a reduction in the timber quality of the remaining trees. That was clearly not done on a sustainable-yield basis. To solve this problem of the lack of quality of the remaining standing timber we introduced the concept of clear-felling. Since 1973, and in the case of the jarrah forest the late 1980s, we have been implementing silviculture management incorporating the use of clear-felling. That, too, has failed to deliver a sustainable-yield because clear-felling requires adequate thinning of the regenerated forest to produce

590 [COUNCIL] quality timber in the future. Information has been provided about how much thinning has been done in the karri clear- felled stands that have regenerated since the beginning of woodchipping. I am awaiting answers to questions on notice on that topic. We know that a relatively small proportion of that forest area has been thinned. Significant concerns have been raised in some quarters that we are seeing a very strong regeneration of marri, except in the gravel sites that foster the best jarrah trees. The history I have summarised indicates that at every step of the way we are maximising our current take and leaving a depleted resource for the future. The only way to get around that is to stipulate that “manage” must involve thinning and that the cost of that thinning should be incorporated in the royalties paid by timber companies. This is a long-term cost of sustainable-yield logging. To date we have not managed to get timber companies to understand that they are taking a crop now and that the royalties they pay should cover the cost of providing a crop in the future. Therefore, the addition of the words “including thinning” is fundamental. This Bill is designed to ensure that the forest products covered by this Bill are managed on a sustainable-yield basis. That is why I say that this is a very important although simple amendment. Hon MARK NEVILL: I support this amendment for a number of reasons. I have heard anecdotal evidence over the years that CALM has not maintained an appropriate level of thinning in clear-felled areas. The logs obtained from thinning are a very important resource. Including reference to thinning in this definition of “manage” focuses attention on that issue. If that is the case - I have heard from a number of sources that it is - thinning regrowth of clear-felled forest could be done by offenders. That would save CALM a lot of time and trouble and the Attorney General a lot of money. It is a sensible amendment and it is an area with which the Department of Conservation and Land Management could do a better job. I have always said that there is room to improve silvicultural practices and we should always be looking at ways of getting better value-added wealth from harvested timber. It is a worthwhile amendment that I support. Hon PETER FOSS: I oppose the amendment. It is not a question of disagreement with Hon Christine Sharp or Hon Mark Nevill about whether there should be thinning. It is a question of what will be achieved by the amendment. The term “tend” includes thinning. If we put “including thinning” after “tend”, then one has to ask what does “tend” mean if it does not include thinning and one has to put “including thinning” after it? It takes away from the general broad meaning of the word “tend” and causes confusion and ambiguity in the normal way of interpreting statutes. It also does not oblige any greater or lesser quantity of thinning than exists currently. If one wants to change the amount of thinning, one will have to change the management plan for the particular forest. That is a matter of management, not of statutory interpretation. All that is done here is to change the definition. Definitions do not change the statutory effect of what happens. Hon Christine Sharp may not achieve what she intends to achieve. I think one will have the reverse effect because it will cast doubt on the meaning of the word “tend” and its general broad definition. From the point of view of statutory interpretation, the word “tend” includes thin and is intended to include thin. I defend the old silviculturists of Western Australia. It is fashionable to look at what was done in the past and to criticise people for not having the same practices that we have now. The conservation practices of silviculturists of the forest department were, for many years, eons ahead of everyone else in the community. Criticising them now in light of what we see to be the appropriate way to conserve timber is most inappropriate. They fought against agriculture that would have destroyed the potential for any regrowth and would not have allowed for any form of sustainable forestry. If it were not for the silviculturists, we would not have forests to protect. It is only because a long succession of conservators of forest over many years preserved our forests and made sure that they were not all turned into agricultural land that we have any forest today. Criticising them in the way they have been criticised is to deny the historical record of what they did in their time. In the light of current knowledge, what they did would not be done now. It is not right to criticise them for what they did as they stood head and shoulders above everybody else in terms of conservation. It shows a superior belief in our own era that I do not think is justified. I have met many old foresters whose conservation ethic is extremely strong. We should be very grateful that they existed. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: I point out to the Attorney General that if it appeared that I was attempting to denigrate the record, it was certainly not my intention. I wanted to draw attention to the fact that it is human nature to always want to maximise the present gain. That is not something that only existed in the past; it also exists in the current time and is likely to be tempting in the future. I am not casting aspersions on the historical record as being somehow inferior to our current practices. Many people would argue that in some ways the tending of the forests was better in the past than it is now. I see a difference between tending and thinning. The Attorney General is arguing that tending includes the meaning of thinning. It could also be argued that they are different. In that case, it is important to designate both, as they are very important. It is fairly clear what thinning means. I will give a practical example of tending. Nowadays many small trees are removed as part of the process of thinning crop trees in jarrah forests. They are not removed for any productive purpose and remain on the forest floor. Many of them will fall, as part of a haphazard event, against trees that have been designated as crop trees. Standing crop trees have a marking that identifies them so that the faller does not inadvertently remove a tree that has been identified as a timber tree of the future. However, it is commonplace in the coupes for these trees to be surrounded by at least one, if not several, smaller trees that have been felled as part of the

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 591 silvicultural process. After the silviculture is finished, a top burn goes through and the coupe is burnt. As it is a cool burn and the small trees are lying on the floor, they become fuel and begin to smoulder, damaging the crop tree they are touching. I understand that when intensive logging took place in the past, the old-timers were careful to remove the young felled culls from a crop tree to prevent such a thing happening. That does not take place any more because the manpower is not available - if one is allowed to say that sort of thing these days; although I do not know of any women who do that work - and the trees are damaged as a result. That is an example of tending, which is quite different from thinning. If the Attorney General wishes to argue that tending means both of those, why does the definition specify that establish and regenerate are different? Are they not also similar and could one not say that establish is a generic term that includes regenerate? Why are only some parts of the definition specific and prolific? I think it is clear to all members how important the concept of thinning is to sustainable yield management. Could the Attorney General explain why establish and regenerate have two meanings when he does not want to allow any more inclusions in the definition? Could he also show me the statutory definition that he said proves that tending includes thinning? If I have misunderstood him, perhaps he would be so kind as to reassure me, with all his great knowledge, that this definition includes thinning. Hon PETER FOSS: This Bill refers to plantations. There is a big difference between establish and regenerate. Establish means to start something where there was nothing. One establishes a pine forest by planting trees where there was none before. As the word indicates, regenerate means to grow again. One causes it to generate again. To “grow” means to take it from establishment to the time it reaches full size. To “tend” is to deal with the tree itself and its surrounding area. Instead of growing the tree, one may take bits off the tree, especially if it is in a plantation. One may thin the branches if necessary, thin the trees, keep down the suckers and do all the other things necessary. To “protect” includes things such as protecting it from fire. I indicated the lack of benefit in adding any word Hon Christine Sharp wishes to add. I would have thought it was clear that if one is thinning the tree, one is tending the tree. I cannot see what else it could be called. If it does not include thinning, one must ask what “tend” includes. That is the rule of statutory instruction to which I refer. If “tend” is followed by “including thinning”, one adds a meaning it does not apparently already include. If thinning is added to the meaning, the question arises: What does tend mean? Hon Christine Sharp: I explained to you what things it could mean. Hon PETER FOSS: I know. All the things the member said are included in "tend". Hon Christine Sharp thinks that because it includes A, it does not include B. As soon as one says that it includes B, the question is raised: What does it not include? If one said all the world, including greenies - obviously, the world includes greenies - one questions what “all the world” means if it does not include greenies. As soon as one adds something specific, which is obviously included anyway, the broad matter is regarded as more narrow than first thought. We need not say every member of Parliament, including the Greens (WA). Why would one not include the Greens? What does “every member of Parliament” mean if the Greens are not included? I cannot see how "tend" does not include thinning. The rule of statutory interpretation is that once one starts to state that a definition includes the following, it will be used as an aid for the interpretation of "tend". Adding the word "thinning" will raise doubts about the breadth of "tend" in interpreting the provision. All the things Hon Christine Sharp raised as examples of tend are examples of tend - no-one said they were not. I do not say "tend" equals thinning, as it includes thinning. The inclusion of thinning in the provision will take away from the broad understanding of "tend", and will raise the question: What does “tend” mean if it does not mean what we thought it meant? That is my objection. The member wants to add something that is unnecessarily complicated, and that will make it difficult for anyone to work out what is meant by “tend”. It would apply a narrow and clouded meaning. Hon J.A. COWDELL: The Attorney General doth protest too much. The Opposition sees no problem with this amendment. Hon NORM KELLY: Using the Attorney General's argument, maybe we do not need a definition of “manage” in the Bill at all. The definition of manage includes the aspects of “establish, regenerate, grow and protect”. Hon Christine Sharp seeks to make it clear that it also includes thinning. She could have done that in a different way by not including it in brackets after “tend”. Another word could have been added. Hon Peter Foss: It would have been better. Hon NORM KELLY: Given that we are to have this debate, if this Chamber were not to include “thinning” in the Bill, it could be argued in a later interpretation of the statute that Parliament determined that tend should not include thinning. Hon Peter Foss: That is not the way it works. Hon NORM KELLY: I know. Hon Peter Foss: I said in the committee stage that it includes thinning. If you want to take it to that degree, that would be taken into account.

592 [COUNCIL]

Hon NORM KELLY: Hon Christine Sharp referred to the problem that this was a late amendment in the Bill’s progress in the other place. It was understood at the time that “managed” was a term used for the period in preparation for a harvest and the reparation after harvest. This definition refers to the whole of life of those forests to be used for timber production. It adds up to the possible privatisation of state forests. Clause 10(1)(h) refers to functions of the commission to enter into contracts with any person for the management of forest products. Therefore, it will allow the commission to contract out all aspects of forest management, whether it be prescribed burns or the entire gamut of management procedures. It is important that emphasis be placed on thinning because traditionally thinning occurs only if it is commercially viable. That is why the Regional Forest Agreement has special provision for funding non- commercial thinning. Thinning that had been identified as essential had not been done simply because there was no commercial return. That is why it is important that such costs be incorporated into royalty rates, so that when a forest is logged there is a return to the State that allows for whole-of-life management of that forest. This proposed amendment will strengthen the Bill, and the Australian Democrats will support it. Hon MARK NEVILL: The definitions of “harvesting” and “manage” do not add much to the Bill. If they were omitted, it would not affect the Bill at all. I agree with the Attorney General that the word “tend” includes thinning. The reason for amendments is often to highlight something. When a word is added that is probably covered by the previous word - in this case “tend” - it is to highlight something that is ignored or neglected. There is nothing unusual about that, although it could be argued that it is superfluous. There is anecdotal evidence that if people cannot make a dollar out of the activity, it will not be done. I am not saying that the Department of Conservation and Land Management is perfect; far from it. It probably makes many mistakes. I hope the Attorney General will provide a frank answer to the following questions: Is there a significant backlog of thinning in our forests at present? If so, should we highlight it? Hon PETER FOSS: There is certainly an opportunity for increased thinning, and money has been allocated for that purpose. If we are to make this change, I would like to make it absolutely certain, in case anyone refers to Hansard - they will not necessarily do so because the opportunities to refer to Hansard are often limited - that it is not intended by this amendment in any way to decrease the broadness of the meaning of the word “tend”. Amendment put and a division taken with the following result - Ayes (14)

Hon Kim Chance Hon Tom Helm Hon J.A. Scott Hon Giz Watson Hon J.A. Cowdell Hon Helen Hodgson Hon Christine Sharp Hon E.R.J. Dermer (Teller) Hon Cheryl Davenport Hon Norm Kelly Hon Tom Stephens Hon G.T. Giffard Hon Mark Nevill Hon Ken Travers Noes (13)

Hon M.J. Criddle Hon Peter Foss Hon B.M. Scott Hon Muriel Patterson Hon Dexter Davies Hon Barry House Hon Greg Smith (Teller) Hon B.K. Donaldson Hon M.D. Nixon Hon W.N. Stretch Hon Max Evans Hon Simon O’Brien Hon Derrick Tomlinson

Pairs

Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich Hon N.F. Moore Hon Bob Thomas Hon Murray Montgomery Hon N.D. Griffiths Hon Ray Halligan Amendment thus passed. Clause, as amended, put and passed. Clause 4: Meaning of forest products - Hon PETER FOSS: I move - Page 4, line 23 - To delete the line and insert instead - For the purposes of this Act - “forest products” means - Page 4, line 28 - To delete the line. Page 5, lines 1 to 4 - To delete the lines. Amendments put and passed.

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 593

Clause, as amended, put and passed. Clause 5 put and passed. Clause 6: Commissioners - Hon MARK NEVILL: I move - Page 6, line 13 - To insert after “activities” - , the plantation timber industry or labour relations I will own up to something here. I intended to move this amendment on the understanding that Hon John Cowdell had withdrawn his amendment. The information I received was incorrect. Hon J.A. Cowdell: I am working on the principle that I will vote for your amendment half of the way and you can vote for mine all of the way. Hon MARK NEVILL: I will support the amendment I moved. However, I acknowledge that it will essentially achieve the same result as the amendment that Hon John Cowdell will move. I will support my amendment because I have seen too many proposals to link particular organisations to places on boards of statutory authorities, particularly port authorities and like institutions. There should be flexibility. In the amendment, the words “labour relations” refer to a union that represents the timber industry. In view of the way unions have been changing in the past decade, it is a wonder that the Australian Workers Union still exists in name. It is certainly a shadow of its former self. To not prescribe that two members represent the plantation timber industry is probably better because it gives more flexibility. Although I support my amendment, it is basically similar to that which will be moved by Hon John Cowdell, which for some reason I had understood he had withdrawn but which in fact he had not. Hon J.A. COWDELL: I have no trouble supporting this amendment. If it were included, clause 6(1) would read - The Commission is to have 7 commissioners appointed by the Governor on the nomination of the Minister as having such expertise in commercial activities, the plantation timber industry or labour relations as is relevant to the functions of the Commission. That gives a hint - perhaps no more than that - to the minister that it would be valuable to have on the board of commissioners people other than those experienced in only managerial activities. It may well be that people with experience in the plantation timber industry have managerial skills, but a contribution is to be made to management by the representatives of the workers in the industry. In many instances, that is the most valuable contribution in determining what activities should take place and what management practices should change. As I said, I am happy to support the amendment, although that does not mean that I will not proceed to spell out more precisely, in my proposed new subclauses (2) and (3), how the minister may exercise his or her discretion. Hon PETER FOSS: I support Hon Mark Nevill’s amendment, whereas I cannot support the one foreshadowed by Hon John Cowdell. It does not matter how often lawyers advise members of boards that they are not there to represent the people who appointed them but that they owe a duty to the board, it is my unvarying experience that when members are appointed in the way suggested by Hon John Cowdell, particularly when they shall be representative of the plantation industry or nominated by a particular industry, we end up with a stand-off type of situation in which people think that their principal reason for being there is to represent a separate point of view, rather than to get together to try to resolve the problems being faced. There is a world of difference between the two mental attitudes. It is a question of mental attitudes; it is not what the person is, but what that person thinks he or she is there to do. It is important that the person is there for the purpose of supporting the body to which he or she has been appointed and does the best for that body. That is the law. I do not know how many times I have advised people about that or have heard other lawyers advise people similarly. I do not know how many times I have seen people who think they are there not for the good of the body to which they are appointed, but to represent some factional interest. That is not a good idea. I support Hon Mark Nevill's point of view. He is trying to ensure that the commission comprises people who have a particular benefit, knowledge, capacity and skill that they can bring to it as opposed to those who fight the good fight and take directions from the people who appointed them or whom they supposedly represent. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: I also support the amendment in the name of Hon Mark Nevill in preference to the subsequent amendment in the name of Hon John Cowdell. Although the spirit of the two amendments is the same in many ways, I have some concern that if one is too specific with the meaning of “labour relations” in the subsequent amendment, one could leave out other possible nominees who represent other unions that work in some areas of the timber industry. For example, I believe that some members of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union are represented in the timber industry; therefore, it is improper to specify one particular union. I prefer the flexibility of Hon Mark Nevill's amendment. I also agree with the remarks of the Attorney General that it is better not to encourage a sectarian approach on any advisory body, because that prevents consensus being reached on difficult matters. Therefore, I will be supporting the amendment.

594 [COUNCIL]

Hon NORM KELLY: I appreciate the intention of Hon Mark Nevill's amendment. It also has a secondary impact that I support; that is, it broadens the original intent of the commission membership. The current wording in the Bill is that it consist of persons with such expertise and commercial experience as is relevant. It is strictly a commercial expertise- based commission. Hon Mark Nevill's amendment would broaden it so it does not have only that labour relations expertise or representation. There are various environmental and social aspects of the plantation industry - a new and developing industry - which are not fully appreciated or realised. I would like to think that a Forest Products Commission could include representation of people who have expertise in the other important environmental and social aspects of how the plantation timber industry is developing in this State and not strictly the commercial aspects of the industry. For those reasons, the Australian Democrats will be supporting this amendment. Amendment put and passed. Progress reported and leave granted to sit again.

ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE

HON M.J. CRIDDLE (Agricultural - Minister for Transport) [9.55 pm]: I move - That the House do now adjourn. Mandatory Sentencing – Adjournment Debate HON TOM HELM (Mining and Pastoral) [9.55 pm]: At question time today I asked the Minister for Justice a question about the courts’ view of mandatory sentencing. I gave notice of the question and I am grateful that the minister gave more than a cold response. The minister gave his view on the wording of the question as well as the reply. Before the House adjourns I want to get a handle on the minister’s response. The explanation that accompanied the minister’s answer to my question on mandatory sentencing related in one case to how the courts had been uncooperative, and in another to how they had a problem in advising how many people had been sentenced under the “three strikes and you’re in” law. I will use this opportunity to encourage the minister, or a spokesman for the people who think that mandatory sentencing has a role to play in our society, to convince me of how mandatory sentencing will help our society to be a little less lawless. Hon Mark Nevill: I can remember when I was a member of Caucus that you supported it. Hon TOM HELM: My comrade must be getting old, because I have never supported mandatory sentencing. Hon Mark Nevill should not say that because he is misrepresenting the truth, which I know he does quite often. If the member checked the Hansard, he would read that when the Labor Party brought in the Crime (Serious and Repeat Offenders) Sentencing Act, Hon Joe Berinson gave me permission to abstain from voting on it. I never spoke in support of mandatory sentencing. How could I? I lived in South Hedland for nine years and my house was broken into seven times. I would rather stop people from breaking into my house than catch them after they had done it and send them to jail. I have always been opposed to mandatory sentencing. I have tried to be as reasonable as possible in opposing it. I have not been vocal in opposing the Labor Party's position of supporting the coalition in this matter. I want the Minister for Justice to convince me and others that the “three strikes and you're in” rule has an effect when the courts appear to have a difficult role or, as the minister explained it are “uncooperative”, in explaining the effect that legislation has on the laws in our State. It is one thing to try to explain that to me as a member of Parliament and to those people who may support my position; it is another thing to have a problem determining how many people in this State have been subject to that legislation and how that relates to a reduction in the crime wave. The minister went to the trouble to point out that the offence of home burglary was not one of the top five reasons for incarceration of adult indigenous people in this State. It has been explained often enough that one of reasons for the “three strikes and you're in” rule is to prevent home burglaries. In fact we are all aware of a member of the Labor Party in another place who wants to increase sentences for people convicted of home invasions or burglaries against older people - that probably includes me - when it appears we do not have the evidence to support the legislation that is in place now. During the bidding war that happens before elections the coalition will suggest that we should have 2 000 policemen and the Labor Party will suggest 2 250 and we will see who can do the most damage. I want someone to explain to me how mandatory sentencing can decrease the crime figures and what is the attraction for bringing in the “three strikes and you’re in” law when it is added to the intervention programs. If Hon Mark Nevill had opened his ears and closed his mouth he would have heard me talking often enough in the caucus room about the programs which I supported when I lived in Port Hedland and which support to this day. My house is not getting broken into any more, but I always gave credit to the work that the current member for Pilbara, Larry Graham, put into the youth involvement program and the police and citizens youth centres in Port Hedland. The worth of the program is demonstrated by the reduction in the number of youths appearing before the Children’s Court. The fact that we are reducing those attendances in court can in large part be attributed to the work that Larry Graham and my office put in in Port Hedland to try to divert those young people who were in danger of being attracted to a life of crime.

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 595

I use this opportunity - because I will not get many - to thank the Attorney General and ask the coalition if it will explain how it thinks that the legislation supported by the coalition and the Labor Party will help us prevent crime in this State. HON PETER FOSS (East Metropolitan - Attorney General) [10.04 pm]: I do not know that in 10 minutes I will be able to satisfy Hon Tom Helm, but I will try. First I have some good news. I was out at Banksia Hill Detention Centre the other day and there are only 87 inmates out of a capacity of 120. The number of inmates has dropped considerably. A report from the Children’s Court indicates that the number of children passing through the court has dropped considerably. I do not necessarily think that is due to the three-strikes legislation; it is due more to a firm and clear Children’s Court judge. Judge French has probably been the best Children’s Court president we have had. She has not been criticised by the rednecks or the warm and fuzzies. She is clear and firm but fair, and that clarity is often what many juvenile offenders need because they do not get it in their ordinary, everyday lives. Another piece of good news is the only statistic that we could check in relation to re-offending by people sentenced under the three-strikes legislation. We found that the re-offending rate of children who are sentenced but who are given intensive supervision is that one in three re-offend, which is lower than the normal re-offending rate, and only one in 12 is sent to detention. Interestingly enough, that is a four-times better recidivism rate for those who have been sentenced under the three-strikes legislation. That is in part justified by the fact that Banksia Hill Detention Centre is a very good institution. Unlike the old institutions of Riverbank, Longmore and Nyandi, which were terrible places, Banksia Hill is a very pleasant place. For many of the children there, it is a more pleasant place than the place from which they came. They attend classes ranging in size from six to eight students. They also learn metalwork and play sport. For the first time in their lives they have a highly structured day and an educational program that addresses the significant omissions in their education. Having said that, that is not the basis on which the three-strikes sentencing is justified. I have always made the point that we do not justify to a rape victim that the offender should receive a significant penalty because it will stop the amount of rape taking place. The penalty is significant because it is appropriate. I have always justified the penalty for third-time burglary because it is appropriate. Home burglary - I have resisted extending mandatory sentencing to any other form of burglary - is not merely a property offence; it is a personal offence. The impact it has on not only the people burgled but also their neighbours and anybody who knows them and the public generally, is a feeling of considerable fear of what can happen to them in their homes. We have a right to be free of fear of home invasion as much as we should be free of fear of being assaulted, raped or murdered. Hon E.R.J. Dermer: Free of a sense of violation. Hon PETER FOSS: That is exactly the right word. It is not merely a property offence, but a personal offence. With reference to mandatory sentencing versus any other sentencing, more Aboriginal people are in jail due to discretionary sentencing than mandatory sentencing. Even in the Children's Court where mandatory sentencing touches on many children, in the end the court can decide whether a person will go to jail. Invariably, that has been the case. As I said, the decision of the judge indicates that he or she had no alternative because there was nowhere else to send the person. The tragedy is that many of those children have nowhere else to go. The best place they have ever lived in is Banksia Hill. The most important thing about any sentence is that it be fair. It is possible with discretionary sentencing for an unfair sentence to be handed down. Is it better to have a mandatory sentence that is fair or a discretionary sentence that is unfair? One of the complaints about discretionary sentencing is that, notwithstanding the discretion, judges exercise it in different ways. There are well-known “hanging” judges who impose enormous penalties and well-known judges who impose light penalties. The bulk of judges impose something in between. Hon Tom Helm: I would not dare ask what is fair. Hon PETER FOSS: Offenders who commit the same type of crime should receive the same sentence irrespective of which judge they appear before. People who appear before the criminal courts can tell us that there are known good people and known bad people to appear before. That is because they are human beings and, like all human beings, they carry their own baggage, which impacts on their decisions. Although the majority of judges make fairly predictable judgments that would sit about the middle of a bell curve, some judges' determinations are clearly at either end of that spectrum. Hon Tom Helm: No two circumstances are exactly the same. Hon PETER FOSS: Even allowing for that, comparatively, some judges consistently hand down some horrifying sentences. When I make that statement, everybody in the profession knows exactly to whom I am referring. People mention their names. One of the reasons I have recommended the matrix, which many people have criticised as being mandatory sentencing - I do not believe it is - is that it will show the mitigating factors and allow judges to see the bell curve for those offences. It will be possible to predict the sentence an offender may receive. One of the first things that the Sentencing Matrix Bill will do is cut the extremes off the bell curves. When one considers taking the judge’s decisions and factors into account, one says that people should not be subject to those extreme highs and lows. Given those factors, no matter who the judge is, an offender should fall within that range. A

596 [COUNCIL] range of high, medium and low sentences will still apply, but there will not be extremely high and extremely low ranges. Offenders would have the right of appeal in the case of a more severe sentence than the matrix Bill allows for, and the right of appeal to the Crown would be available when a less severe sentence is imposed. In the end, that will be satisfactory to the courts. Those factors will mean that people will get a fairer go. The third stage of the matrix Bill will be fairer because a big problem currently is that Parliament tries to signify the respective seriousness of various offences. It is the role of Parliament to say this offence is serious and that offence is not serious. Parliament is yanking on the cord. What the court does is entirely up to it. Nobody ever receives the maximum penalty. Offenders seldom receive more than half of the maximum penalty. Generally speaking, the mean trots along no matter what Parliament does to the top of the scale. On the other end is minimum mandatory sentencing which, generally speaking, I do not support. I have supported the three-strikes legislation because it always leads to at least a fair result. It would be very hard to say that after three times before the court one should not go to jail for 12 months. I have a problem in that in many cases offenders should receive a sentence of more than 12 months. A minimum mandatory sentence suffers from the problem that it must be a minimum. It must deal with the minimum set of circumstances. The Matrix Sentencing Bill will improve the situation because it will deal with all sets of circumstances and enable one to find out what the judges do and the ranges they apply. If that range is unfair, it is an appropriate role of Parliament to move that range to one side. Essentially, given the same facts, the same offences and the same circumstances, the same sentence should apply no matter who the judge is. The basis of sentencing should not be whimsical or arbitrary; it should be calculated and fair. It does not matter whether that sentence has been given by mandatory sentencing or discretionary sentencing. The touchstone is whether it is fair in the end. If it is fair, it does not matter on what basis it is arrived at. If it is unfair, it does not matter on what basis it is arrived at. The essence of justice is that all people should be treated appropriately before the law, not according to whim or the caprice of the judge; that is, people must be treated fairly. Dairy Industry - Adjournment Debate HON KIM CHANCE (Agricultural) [10.12 pm]: I also will not keep the House for long. Today I received advice relative to the dairy industry. I thought it was an appropriate time to again raise the question of the dairy industry since it has now been operating without a regulated structure for a little over two months. The outcome for the dairy industry has vindicated some of the issues that were raised in debate on dairy deregulation, and has set aside some of the other issues raised. It was suggested that following deregulation, the downward pressure on milk prices for producers would, in the absence of any marketing structure within Western Australia, come not from Victoria but from within Western Australia itself. As my old friend, later senator, Peter Walsh used to say, “A sheep's worst enemy is another sheep, particularly when that sheep is in the same paddock.” It is an apt description. It means that the competition that hurts a person the greatest will be the competition closest to him. Indeed, although a sheep grazing in another paddock may have an affect on one sheep's welfare, it is far more likely to be affected by another sheep grazing alongside it. It is a very relevant analogy. Since we have broken down the regulatory structure of the dairy industry in Western Australia, a prospect launched particularly because of changes in far off Victoria, the structure which used to permit the equitable sharing of premium market access was the key element to disappear from the industry. What that meant was that those people - particularly the former Capel dairy suppliers, mostly producers south of Elgin - have been left with no equity of access whatsoever to the premium domestic milk market. Their prices consequently tumbled to a level of about export parity. It was always foolish to imagine, and we said so repeatedly at the time, that one could protect a price of around 35¢ a litre for those producers who were supplying the domestic milk drinking market while other producers in the same State, effectively the sheep alongside the sheep, were suffering prices of 17¢ or thereabouts per litre of milk because the 17¢ per litre of milk was always going to undercut what was left of the premium price. It is simple enough economics but for some reason we did not seem to want to understand it. Nonetheless, that problem arose. We are now seeing milk at the retail end undercutting the retail milk price. We are now seeing the 17¢ and 18¢ per litre milk appearing on the shelves at the retail level at under $1 per litre. Hon Barry House: That is because of Woolworths and major retailers. Hon KIM CHANCE: If one irritates a dog, the dog will bite. If one offers a supermarket an opportunity to take a profit, it will take a profit. No-one can blame the dog for biting or the supermarket for making a profit. One can blame oneself however for irritating the dog or for giving the supermarket an opportunity to rip other people off. That sub-$1 per litre milk - I think $2.94 for a three-litre container at the retail end - is still providing an opportunity for the supermarkets to make huge profits because the processor who supplies them is buying the milk for only about 18¢ per litre. That was always to be the problem; the sheep grazing alongside the sheep, the worst possible enemy. Our dairy farmers are not suffering from competition from Victoria but from competition right alongside them. I am not advocating a return to deregulation. We all know that that would be a nonsense at this stage, although at some time in the future it may not be a nonsense. We need to take a very close look at the State's price setting powers. We have those powers and the Commonwealth does not. Part of our milk production, I am told as much as 60 per cent, is

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 597 under the commonwealth definition, drinking milk, rather than under the old state definition, quota milk, for which we can conceivably protect the import price parity; that is, the Victorian price plus freight. The Victorian prices at the moment are quite high but that will change in the spring. For 60 per cent of the market we can protect the price and keep the 17¢ per litre milk off the domestic market; in other words, it should go for its proper purpose and not be used to subsume the reasonable price expectation for drinking milk. I have discussed this matter with the minister. Although he has not given me all that I wanted with regard to the terms of reference for the task force, he has left the door ajar. The task force should be able at least to look at issues of that nature. Hon Barry House: Which task force? Hon KIM CHANCE: The new dairy industry task force that resulted from the agreement between the Opposition and the Government. I am happy with the way that is progressing and the minister is meeting his obligations well in that area. The Opposition has had extensive input into that process. The task force will have its first meeting next Thursday. I am pleased that the Minister for Transport is in the Chamber because this is something the Minister for Primary Industry should consider and either debunk or confirm. I was informed today that a memorandum of understanding has been reached between National Foods Ltd (WA), the Challenge Group Cooperative and Capel Dairy Co (WA). The MOU involves a buy out of the Boyanup and Capel dairies using a large proportion - as much as half - of the $12.5m that the Government has allocated to underwrite future industry restructuring. I would be extremely concerned if that were the case. That is why I would like the Minister for Transport to ask the Minister for Primary Industry to respond. If that proposition is correct - I do not warrant that it is - the only possible outcome is farmers’ money and government funding that was allocated to resurrect the industry being spent on nothing more than the retention of two clapped-out dairies - Boyanup and Capel. Under the Challenge Group Cooperative arrangement, the proposed corporation would have nowhere to go because it would be locked out of the drinking milk sector. It would be doomed to failure. Its only function would be to act as a sink for the unwanted milk. If this $12.5m or any part of it is to be used to implement a proposition of that nature, we should be consulted about how that will unfold. I do not condemn it absolutely; I simply say that the spirit of goodwill that has existed between the Government and the Opposition on this matter must be maintained. Dairy Industry Deregulation - Adjournment Debate HON BARRY HOUSE (South West - Parliamentary Secretary) [10.22 pm]: I have some notes on this issue, but not with me. I will make a more detailed contribution on the topic in the next couple of days. I was invited to, and attended, the Challenge Group Cooperative shareholders’ meeting last Friday. The memorandum of understanding between the Challenge Group Cooperative, National Foods Ltd (WA), and Capel Dairy Co (WA) was outlined. That was the first dairy industry meeting I have attended for a few weeks and I came away feeling more positive than I have previously. There was a feeling of optimism that something was being done to resolve the Capel dairy producers’ dilemma about access to white milk. Some clauses of the MOU will provide those Capel producers with access to the white milk sector. I do not have the figures with me, but I believe that for 80 per cent of their milk they will get 26¢ per litre and for the other 20 per cent they will get 20¢ per litre. I will have to check those figures. I do not subscribe to the negative outlook that Hon Kim Chance has adopted. I took it as a positive sign for the industry. We all realise that the Capel dairy producers were in very difficult position and for two months since 1 July they were in a very difficult economic position. There is some personal bitterness within the industry in that, in the words of Hon Kim Chance, one sheep has absolutely no regard for the other sheep. Those that think about the future of the industry recognise that the anomaly with the Capel dairy producers had to be resolved; otherwise the producers in the industry would feed off and destroy each other. I regard the memorandum of understanding as a very positive sign and a move towards resolving the issue and giving the Capel dairy producers some access to the premium supply. Hon Kim Chance: The Opposition wants to be part of the process. It does not want to be seen as negative. If that were the outcome, the Opposition would be very unhappy. Hon BARRY HOUSE: No-one is trying to exclude the Opposition. It is very early days. The announcement is only a few days old. As the member correctly says, it is contingent upon a portion of the state government assistance package of $12.5m being put towards it. One will also find that this is stage 1 in the Challenge Co-operative’s grand plan. It is acknowledged that there is work to be done on the two plants to be bought at Boyanup and Capel. There is a fair degree of obsolescence in both plants. The ultimate plan is for a greenfields site with a modern manufacturing plant that will take the last litre of milk from producers in Western Australia. There is a market for it to act as a sump for the whole industry. Hon Kim Chance: The most important thing that the member has said is that there is an intention that the cooperative have part of the drinking milk market. That is very important.

598 [COUNCIL]

Hon BARRY HOUSE: That arrangement has come about through the memorandum of understanding with National Foods Ltd. Five million litres of milk are going from Capel to Harvey Fresh. There is a window of access to the white milk market. Hon Kim Chance: I have doubts about the legality of that. Hon BARRY HOUSE: The legality? Hon Kim Chance: It is practising an over and under scheme without the legislation to do it. The Trade Practices Act may be offended. Hon BARRY HOUSE: I do not want to get into that. The industry is making decisions of its own volition without regulation to try to overcome some of the insecurities that have crept in. People in the industry have walked on eggshells for the past few years wondering what their future will be. The minister advertised in the weekend press for expressions of interest for the state government assistance package of $12.5m. It is worth reiterating that the money is the only money provided by any Government anywhere in Australia. It sticks in my craw to hear federal members of Parliament carrying on about the Federal Government's restructure package as though the Federal Government were providing the money. It is not. The Federal Government will receive a $45m windfall from the taxation process of that fund. That, however, is digressing into side issues. Over the past few weeks I have been trying to follow the milk industry as it moves into uncharted waters. There are a few other issues connected with the pricing of generic milk which need some comment. I hope to make further comment in the next few days. Dairy Industry Deregulation - Adjournment Debate HON M.J. CRIDDLE (Agricultural - Minister for Transport) [10.30]: I understand that I have been requested to give the Minister for Primary Industry a message about a memorandum of understanding between Challenge Dairy Cooperative, National Foods Ltd (WA) and George Weston Foods Ltd and the assistance they may provide to purchase the dairy factories at Boyanup and Capel, which would allow the Capel dairy farmers access to the white milk in that area. That would have ramifications for the $12.5m funding that is available. I am meeting with the minister early tomorrow and will pass on that message so that he has a clear understanding of what the member is talking about and of the Labor Party’s involvement in the task force. Hon Kim Chance: And that we are entirely happy.

Question put and passed. House adjourned at 10.30 pm ______

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 599

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

Questions and answers are as supplied to Hansard.

PLUMBING LICENSING BOARD, ESTABLISHMENT, BUDGET AND ROLE 37. Hon Bob Thomas to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Water Resources: With regard to the Plumbing Licensing Board -

(1) On what date was this board established? (2) What is its budget? (3) What is its role? (4) Are there plans, or has consideration been given to, the board assuming responsibility for fee inspections? (5) If yes, what are the details of those plans or considerations? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied:

(1) 19 June 2000. (2) $600,000.00. (3) To licence and regulate persons carrying out plumbing work within Western Australia. (4) The legislation provides for this as a regulatory power; however to date no regulations have been prescribed with regard to this matter. (5) The Plumbers Licensing Board is yet to consider this matter. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PROGRAMS FUNDED 72. Hon Tom Stephens to the Minister for Mines:

What funds have been allocated from any department or agency within the Minister’s portfolios, and for what programs, to each of - (a) Chamber of Commerce and Industry; (b) Pastoralists and Graziers Association; (c) WA Farmers Federation; (d) Unions WA; (e) ber of Minerals and Energy; and (f) ciation of Minerals and Exploration Companies, for 1999-2000? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: Department of Minerals and Energy (a)-(d) Nil. (e) $25 000 being sponsorship of Minesafe 2000 conference. (f) Nil. Coal Industry Superannuation Board (a)-(f) Nil. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PROGRAMS FUNDED 75. Hon Tom Stephens to the Minister for Tourism:

What funds have been allocated from any department or agency within the Minister’s portfolios, and for what programs, to each of - (a) Chamber of Commerce and Industry; (b) Pastoralists and Graziers Association; (c) Farmers Federation; (d) Unions WA;

600 [COUNCIL]

(e) Chamber of Minerals and Energy; and (f) Association of Minerals and Exploration Companies, for 1999-2000? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: Western Australian Tourism Commission (a) $2 100. Payment related to a carnet to clear goods through customs, which were used at the Singapore Airlines Travel Fair held in Malaysia from 3 to 5 March 2000. Participation in this fair was aimed at raising trade awareness of Western Australia as a desirable travel destination. (b)-(f) Nil. Rottnest Island Authority (a) $440 for attendance of one staff member at the Certificate Course in Managing Workers compensation. (b)-(f) Nil. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PROGRAMS FUNDED 80. Hon Tom Stephens to the Minister for Transport:

What funds have been allocated from any department or agency within the Minister’s portfolios, and for what programs, to each of - (a) Chamber of Commerce and Industry; (b) Pastoralists and Graziers Association; (c) WA Farmers Federation; (d) Unions WA; (e) Chamber of Minerals and Energy; and (f) Association of Minerals and Exploration Companies, for 1999-2000? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: Department of Commerce and Trade (a) Western Australian Trade Enquiry Service $12 500. Seagrass Mapping of Cockburn Sound $22 000. (b)-(f) Not applicable. Small Business Development Corporation Not applicable. Centre for Application of Solar Energy Not applicable. Gascoyne Development Commission (a) Not applicable. (b) GDC contributed $500 sponsorship to the pastoralist conference. Paid to the Pastoralist and Graziers' Association. (c)-(f) Not applicable.. Goldfields Esperance Development Commission Not applicable. Great Southern Development Commission Not applicable. Kimberley Development Commission Not applicable. Midwest Development Commission Not applicable.

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 601

Peel Development Commission Not applicable. Pilbara Development Commission Not applicable. South West Development Commission Not applicable. Wheatbelt Development Commission Not applicable. CITY OF JOONDALUP, SECURITY LEVY 82. Hon Ken Travers to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Local Government: (1) Has the City of Joondalup provided the Department of Local Government with a legal opinion and other relevant information, regarding charging residents a security levy? (2) If yes, has the Department of Local Government determined yet whether the security levy meets the requirements of the Local Government Act and the Constitution? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: (1) The City of Joondalup has provided the Department of Local Government with information about the service charge it has imposed for property surveillance and security. This includes the purposes to which the charge has been applied. (2) The Department of Local Government has referred the council to legal advice received from the Crown Solicitor’s Office about aspects of the way in which the charge has been applied. The department understands that the city’s solicitors who are advising council on this matter, have accepted much of that advice but are of the view that the charge was validly imposed. The department is examining the current regulations to determine if a change is needed to clarify the purposes for which a security charge may be imposed. HOUSING, SENIORS ACCOMMODATION 83. Hon Ken Travers to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Housing: (1) What is the Ministry of Housing’s current policy regarding the minimum number of bedrooms allowed for in newly constructed seniors accommodation? (2) Will the Ministry continue to build seniors accommodation that is more than single story? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: (1) The ministry allocates accommodation based on the needs of its clients and will provide two bedroom accommodation to seniors clients where required. The ministry aims to have a 40-60% mix of one and two bedroom units in its seniors building program. However, regional managers have discretion in the construction of seniors accommodation particularly in relation to the New Living Program and fluctuations in the percentage do occur from year to year. During 2000-01 the mix will be 82 one bedroom units and 256 two bedroom units. (2) The ministry intends to continue construction of seniors accommodation of more than one storey for inner city areas only. These units will only be allocated to able-bodied clients with no mobility problems and applicants will be able to decline this accommodation without penalty. To restrict construction to single storey units means less units are built in inner city and high demand areas where zoning and densities encourage multi- storey developments. For instance, it would be inappropriate for the ministry to construct only five units on a site that could realistically be developed for 10 units. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PROGRAMS FUNDED 84. Hon Tom Stephens to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Regional Development: What funds have been allocated from any department or agency within the Minister for Regional Development’s portfolios, and for what programs, to each of - (a) Chamber of Commerce and Industry; (b) Pastoralists and Graziers Association; (c) WA Farmers Federation; (d) Unions WA; (e) Chamber of Minerals and Energy; and (f) Association of Minerals and Exploration Companies, for 1999-2000?

602 [COUNCIL]

Hon N.F. MOORE replied: Please see answer to 80. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PROGRAMS FUNDED 86. Hon Tom Stephens to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Small Business:

What funds have been allocated from any department or agency within the Minister for Small Business’ portfolios, and for what programs, to each of - (a) Chamber of Commerce and Industry; (b) Pastoralists and Graziers Association; (c) WA Farmers Federation; (d) Unions WA; (e) Chamber of Minerals and Energy; and (f) Association of Minerals and Exploration Companies, for 1999-2000? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: Please see answer to 80. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PROGRAMS FUNDED 88. Hon Tom Stephens to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Housing What funds have been allocated from any department or agency within the Minister for Housing's portfolios, and for what programs, to each of - (a) Chamber of Commerce and Industry; (b) Pastoralists and Graziers Association; (c) WA Farmers Federation; (d) Unions WA; (e) Chamber of Minerals and Energy; and (f) Association of Minerals and Exploration Companies, for 1999-2000? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: (a) $14 440.00 for staff attendance at seminars and conferences. (b)-(f) Nil. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PROGRAMS FUNDED 96. Hon Tom Stephens to the Attorney General representing the Minister for Forest Products: What funds have been allocated from any department or agency within the Minister for Forest Products’ portfolios, and for what programs, to each of - (a) Chamber of Commerce and Industry; (b) Pastoralists and Graziers Association; (c) WA Farmers Federation; (d) Unions WA; (e) Chamber of Minerals and Energy; and (f) Association of Minerals and Exploration Companies, for 1999-2000? Hon PETER FOSS replied: The Office of the Minister for Forest Products was established on 22 December 1999. Pending passage of legislation currently before Parliament, there are no departments or agencies within the Forest Products portfolio. In relation to the ministerial office, no funds have been allocated to any of the bodies listed. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PROGRAMS FUNDED 110. Hon Tom Stephens to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Commerce and Trade: What funds have been allocated from any department or agency within the Minister for Commerce and Trade’s portfolios, and for what programs, to each of -

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 603

(a) Chamber of Commerce and Industry; (b) Pastoralists and Graziers Association; (c) WA Farmers Federation; (d) Unions WA; (e) Chamber of Minerals and Energy; and (f) Association of Minerals and Exploration Companies, for the period February 1993 to June 1999? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: Department of Commerce and Trade I regret that records for the period February to June 1993 are unavailable, despite an intensive search. Figures are available as follows from the commencement of the 1993-94 financial year. (a) 1993-1995 Trade Match $215 464 1993-1999 Western Australian Trade Enquiry Service $90 000 1995 East Java Exchange Program $2 500 1997 Sponsorship of Facilities Management Group Forum $2 500 1998 Contribution to Industry launch of Best Practice Project $5 000 1999 Railway Rollingstock Industry Opportunity Study $7 500 (b) 1997 Sponsorship of Pilbara Beef Expo $1 000 1998 Sponsorship Annual Pastoral Conference $1 000 1999 Sponsorship of Annual Conference $2 000 (c)-(f) Not applicable. Small Business Development Corporation Not applicable. Centre for Application of Solar Energy Not applicable. Gascoyne Development Commission Not applicable. Goldfields Esperance Development Commission (a) The Goldfields Esperance Development Commission contracted the Chamber of Commerce’s Industry Supplies Office to compile the Goldfields Industries Capabilities Database in the 1998-99 financial year for an amount of $20 455. (b)-(f) Not applicable Great Southern Development Commission Not applicable Kimberley Development Commission (a) Pastoralists and Graziers Association of WA (Inc) $258 Pastoral Conference 1994 $500 Conference Sponsorship 1997 $75 Conference Registration 1997 $1 600 consulting fee – Joe Gibson (industry speaker) to attend Kimberley Division meeting Fitzroy Crossing 1998 (c)-(d) Not applicable Midwest Development Commission Not applicable. Peel Development Commission (a) $810 in payment of a subscription to the Chamber of Commerce and Industry publication “Resource Development Services Directory”.

604 [COUNCIL]

(b)-(f) Not applicable. Pilbara Development Commission Not applicable South West Development Commission Not applicable. Technology & Industry Advisory Council Not applicable. Wheatbelt Development Commission Not applicable. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PROGRAMS FUNDED 114. Hon Tom Stephens to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Regional Development:

What funds have been allocated from any department or agency within the Minister for Regional Development’s portfolios, and for what programs, to each of - (a) Chamber of Commerce and Industry; (b) Pastoralists and Graziers Association; (c) WA Farmers Federation; (d) Unions WA; (e) Chamber of Minerals and Energy; and (f) Association of Minerals and Exploration Companies, for the period February 1993 to June 1999? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: Please see answer to 110. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PROGRAMS FUNDED 116. Hon Tom Stephens to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Small Business:

What funds have been allocated from any department or agency within the Minister for Resources Development’s portfolios, and for what programs, to each of - (a) Chamber of Commerce and Industry; (b) Pastoralists and Graziers Association; (c) WA Farmers Federation; (d) Unions WA; (e) Chamber of Minerals and Energy; and (f) Association of Minerals and Exploration Companies, for the period February 1993 to June 1999? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: Please see answer to 110.

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PROGRAMS FUNDED 117. Hon Tom Stephens to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs:

What funds have been allocated from any department or agency within the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs’ portfolios, and for what programs, to each of - (a) Chamber of Commerce and Industry; (b) Pastoralists and Graziers Association; (c) WA Farmers Federation; (d) Unions WA; (e) Chamber of Minerals and Energy; and (f) Association of Minerals and Exploration Companies, for the period February 1993 to June 1999?

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 605

Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: (a) Albany Chamber of Commerce and Industry $60.00 for publication. Albany Chamber of Commerce and Industry $75.00 for advertising in local directory. Derby Chamber of Commerce and Industry $710.00 for advertising in local directory. (b)-(d) Nil (e) $10 000.00 for purchase of space at the Minerals and Energy Exhibition Week 1997. (f) Nil HOUSING, 462 WANNEROO ROAD, WESTMINSTER 118. Hon Ken Travers to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Housing: What was the sale price of 462 Wanneroo Road, Westminster? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied:

$100 000. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PROGRAMS FUNDED 119. Hon Tom Stephens to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Housing:

What funds have been allocated from any department or agency within the Minister for Housing’s portfolios, and for what programs, to each of - (a) Chamber of Commerce and Industry; (b) Pastoralists and Graziers Association; (c) WA Farmers Federation; (d) Unions WA; (e) Chamber of Minerals and Energy; and (f) Association of Minerals and Exploration Companies, for the period February 1993 to June 1999? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: (a) $1 320 for staff attendance at seminars and conferences. (b)-(f) Nil. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PROGRAMS FUNDED 128. Hon Tom Stephens to the Attorney General representing the Minister for Forest Products:

What funds have been allocated from any department or agency within the Minister for Forest Products’ portfolios, and for what programs, to each of - (a) Chamber of Commerce and Industry; (b) Pastoralists and Graziers Association; (c) WA Farmers Federation; (d) Unions WA; (e) Chamber of Minerals and Energy; and (f) Association of Minerals and Exploration Companies, for the period February 1993 to June 1999? Hon PETER FOSS replied: The Office of the Minister for Forest Products was not established until December 1999. ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS BUDGET, OPERATING EXPENSES 330. Hon Tom Stephens to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs:

I refer to the 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 Aboriginal Affairs Budgets, Cost of Services Operating expenses on p65 and p67 respectively of the budget papers and, in particular, the line item “Grants, subsidies and transfer payments” - (1) What are the reasons for the significant reduction of $2 422 000 in the allocation to this line item from the 1999-2000 Estimated Actual to the 2000-2001 Budget Estimate set out in the 2000-2001 Budget? (2) What impact will this have on the recipients of these grants, subsidies and transfer payments?

606 [COUNCIL]

(3) Is there expected to be a decline in the number of recipients of grants, subsidies and transfer payments in 2000- 2001 as compared to 1999-2000? (4) If yes, what are the reasons for that expected decline? (5) Is there any change in the criteria for grants, subsidies and transfer payments between 1999-2000 and 2000- 2001? (6) If yes, what are those changes and why have they been made? (7) Will the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs table a list of the recipients and the relevant amounts of the grants, subsidies and transfer payments in 1999-2000? (8) If not, why not? (9) Will the Minister table a list of the recipients and the relevant amounts of the grants, subsidies and transfer payments in 2000-2001 to date? (10) If not, why not? (11) What are the reasons for the difference of $2 672 000 between the 1999-2000 Budget Estimate in the 1999- 2000 Budget and the 1999-2000 Estimated Actual in the 2000-2001 Budget? (12) What are the reasons for the increase of $250 000 in the forward estimates (including the 2000-2001 Budget Estimate) between the 1999-2000 Budget and the 2000-2000 Budget? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied:

(1) The reduction is attributable to the transfer to mainstream agencies of programs, which were funded predominantly by grants. The role of the Aboriginal Affairs Department (AAD), in line with State Government policy, is to work with mainstream agencies such as health, education, justice etc, in order to provide them with the information they require to provide services to Aboriginal people. (2) As the transfer of programs is to agencies with greater capacity and expertise in the delivery of infrastructure, essential services, policing etc, these government services will be provided to Aboriginal people more effectively and more efficiently in the future. (3)-(4) The grants will not be issued by AAD but by the agencies to whom the programs have been transferred. (5) No. (6) Not applicable. (7) Yes. [See paper No 179.] (8) Not applicable. (9) Yes. [See paper No 179.] (10) Not applicable. (11) The major reason for the difference is the number of once-off grant payments in 1999-2000 funded from carryover funds from the 1998-99 year. (12) As part of the State Government’s commitment to law and order, the Aboriginal Communities Patrol Scheme received additional funding. EMMAUS HOUSE, BAYSWATER 331. Hon Ken Travers to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Housing:

(1) On what date did the Minister for Housing officially open the new Emmaus House refuge in Bayswater? (2) Was a public relations consultant employed to assist with the opening? (3) If yes - (a) What was the name of the consultant; (b) Who paid for them; (c) How much did they cost; and (d) What services did they provide? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied:

(1) 17 September 1999.

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 607

(2) Yes. (3) (a) Shearman Communications. (b) Ministry of Housing. (c) $4 375.10. (d) Managed opening; order of events, catering, invitations and RSVPs, plaque, tree planting, set-up, sound system, signage, marquee, photographer.

DISABILITY SERVICES, CARERS, CHECKS ON SUITABILITY 334. Hon Ken Travers to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Disability Services:

(1) What police checks does the Disability Services Commission carry out on staff employed as carers? (2) What other checks are in place to ensure undesirable people are not employed as carers? (3) What requirements does the Disability Services Commission have in place that ensure DSC funded agencies carry out police checks, and any other checks for suitability, on people employed as carers? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: The commission engages a range of occupational groupings to give direct care to clients in a range of programs including specific group home and accommodation sites. These staff are recruited using a rigorous process required to meet Public Sector Standards on Recruitment, Selection and Appointment established under the 1994 Public Sector Management Act. The commission provides grants to non-government agencies and families, who are at liberty to engage carers, if required, through their own recruitment processes. Any prospective commission employee is advised that a comprehensive criminal record check is to be obtained before any offer of appointment of promotion can be made. The commission requires the Offender Information Bureau, WA Police Department to provide information on criminal records held against the name of the prospective carer if recorded on the National Names Index including spent convictions - by specific provision of the Spent Convictions (Amendment of Act schedule 3) Regulations 1994. This check offers an assurance that identification of a court history in another jurisdiction than Western Australia is captured. The Western Australia Police Service has indicated they will only be able to perform a state check form 3 August 2000. Arrangements are being put in place to continue to meet a comprehensive criminal records check necessary to reduce the risk of individuals being employed who may pose a threat to clients of the commission. (2) The commission engages professional, qualified and unqualified staff after a comprehensive selection process including an assessment of suitability for the position. Other checks include medical clearance and reference checks. Staff in direct care positions are also trained in the specifics of the client needs and have their performance regularly monitored, by supervisory staff, against policies and procedures to safeguard duty of care to people with disabilities. (3) The requirement is includeed in all Tender documents. A Briefing Paper 11/96 was issued to funded agencies detailing the guidelines to be followed for police clearances for prospective staff. The Purchasing Agreement between the Disability Services Commission and the funded agencies includes a clause that requires documented procedures are put in place to ensure its consumers are protected from abuse, neglect and exploitation.

MINISTRY OF HOUSING, PRIVACY POLICY 337. Hon Ken Travers to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Housing:

(1) Does the Ministry of Housing have a privacy policy? (2) If yes, will the Minister for Housing table that policy? (3) Has the Ministry of Housing held discussions with the Public Sector Standards Commissioner regarding this policy? (4) If yes, will a new policy on privacy be released following those discussions? (5) When will the new policy be released? (6) If a new policy will not be released, why not?

608 [COUNCIL]

Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied:

(1) Yes. (2) Yes. [See paper No 180.] (3) Yes. (4) No, the policy was finalised after these discussions took place. (5) Not applicable. (6) The existing policy was approved in December 1999 by the Ministry’s Board of Commissioners after careful consideration of the comments of the Public Sector Standards Commissioner and the views of the Housing Advisory Committee. HOUSING, WESTMINSTER 339. Hon Ken Travers to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Housing:

(1) Is the Minister for Housing aware of the rapidly increasing prices in the Westminster area? (2) What action is the Ministry of Housing taking to ensure any properties sold in the area reflect these increasing prices? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied:

(1) Yes. (2) The properties sold by the Ministry of Housing reflect the valuations received for each property. TRAINING, FUNDING FOR RESEARCH 351. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Employment and Training:

(1) Will the Minister for Employment and Training advise what arrangements are in place, inclusive of funding, that have been negotiated with the Department of Employment and Training to undertake research work to develop an improved industry training needs analysis methodology? (2) Are these arrangements a duplication of the STB’s funding for non-core services for the building and construction industry? (3) If not, why not? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (1) There are no formalised arrangements in place with the Department of Training and Employment to undertake research work to develop an improved industry training needs analysis methodology. The Building and Construction Industry Training Fund did, however, approach the Department of Training and Employment in January this year with a proposal to share information relating to the building and construction industry. Discussions have since occurred regarding this proposal; however, no formal arrangements have been entered into between the Building and Construction Industry Training Fund and the Department of Training and Employment. (2) No. (3) From the Department of Training and Employment’s perspective, the Building and Construction Industry Training Fund proposal explores an information gathering and analysis model that could potentially be incorporated in, and add value to, guidelines governing the development of industry training plans across all industry sectors. Accordingly, any such arrangements would not duplicate non-core services for the building and construction industry. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, TEMPORARY STAFF 445. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs:

For each department and agency under the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs’ direction - (1) How many temporary staff have been engaged through an employment agency since January 1 1999? (2) For each engagement, what was the - (a) level of the position; (b) name of the employment agency; (c) duration of the engagement; and

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 609

(d) reason why the position was not filled from within the public sector? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: (1)-(2) The Aboriginal Affairs Department engage temporary staff, predominantly through the Department of Contract and Management Services common use contract for the supply of temporary personnel for metropolitan Western Australian Government agencies, Contract No RFT 53/97. Temporary staff may be engaged at the discretion of management to meet operational requirements of divisions within the department and no central recording of the engagements takes place. The temporary engagements are usually at an equivalent to the level 1 or 2 salary range and are for periods of short-term duration. Temporary engagements are utilised when no other staff member is available to undertake a specific job assignment and often occur due to the unscheduled absence of an existing staff member. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, TEMPORARY STAFF 450. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Housing:

For each department and agency under the Minister for Housing’s direction - (1) How many temporary staff have been engaged through an employment agency since January 1 1999? (2) For each engagement, what was the - (a) level of the position; (b) name of the employment agency; (c) duration of the engagement; and (d) reason why the position was not filled from within the public sector? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: (1)-(2) The Ministry of Housing engages temporary staff predominantly through the Department of Contract and Management Services common-use contract for the supply of temporary personnel for metropolitan Western Australian government agencies, Contract No RFT 53/97. Temporary staff may be engaged at the discretion of management to meet operational requirements of divisions within the ministry and no central recording of the engagements takes place. The temporary engagements are usually at an equivalent to the Level 1 salary range and are for short-term durations, generally from one day to four weeks. Temporary engagements are utilised when no other staff member is available to undertake a specific job assignment and often occur due to the unscheduled absence of an existing staff member. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, TEMPORARY STAFF 451. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Local Government:

For each department and agency under the Minister for Local Government’s direction - (1) How many temporary staff have been engaged through an employment agency since January 1 1999? (2) For each engagement, what was the - (a) level of the position; (b) name of the employment agency; (c) duration of the engagement; and (d) reason why the position was not filled from within the public sector? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: Department of Local Government: (1) 14 temporary staff. (2) (a) Five staff in level 3 positions, nine staff in level 1 positions. (b) Employment agencies used were Placer Group, Superior Personnel, Company Solutions, Select Appointments. (c) 21/4/99 - 18/1/00 1/6/00 – ongoing 14/9/99 – 26/10/99 14/9/99 – 26/10/99

610 [COUNCIL]

13/6/99 – 11/7/99 14/6/00 – 28/7/00 28/3/00 – 6/6/00 18/7/00 – 4/8/00 17/7/00 – 3/8/00 1/2/00 – 21/3/00 7/11/99 – 21/11/99 18/7/99 – 1/11/99 8/1/99 – 16/7/99 26/3/00 14/5/00 – 16/7/00 31/3/00 – 14/5/00 (d) Efforts were made to fill the level 3 position from within the public sector but the department was unable to access an appropriately experienced person. The level 1 positions were short term appointments to cover leave and acting arrangements.

Keep Australia Beautiful Council: (1) None (2) Not applicable.

Fremantle Cemetery Board (1) 3. (2) (a) All level 1 positions. (b) PJ Costello and Associates Flexi Staff Drake (c) April to July 2000. (d) All were temporary employment while permanent staff recruitment process was being undertaken.

Metropolitan Cemeteries Board (1) 3. (2) (a) Two level 3 and one level 2. (b) Choice Personnel(2) Drake (c) 25/10/99 - 8/12/99. 31/7/2000 for approximately two months. 11/5/98 – 19/3/99. (d) Two positions were due to long service leave being taken, the other was due to a review of the division’s organisation structure.

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, TEMPORARY STAFF 454. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Services:

For each department and agency under the Minister for Services’ direction - (1) How many temporary staff have been engaged through an employment agency since January 1 1999? (2) For each engagement, what was the - (a) level of the position; (b) name of the employment agency; (c) duration of the engagement; and

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 611

(d) reason why the position was not filled from within the public sector? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: (1)-(2) Since 1 January 1999 the State Supply Commission has engaged 18 temporary staff through the Department of Contract and Management Services common-use contract for the supply of temporary personnel for metropolitan Western Australian government agencies, Contract No RFT 53/97. Temporary staff were engaged at the discretion of management to meet operational requirements of the agency. The temporary engagements ranged from $17.00 to $80.00 per hour and were for short to long term duration, generally from one day to less than three months. As the State Supply Commission did not fill any of its positions while the Review of the State Supply Commission Act was in process, temporary engagements were utilised to cope with the workload. Additionally, the engagement of temporary staff is frequently used when unscheduled absence of an existing staff member occurs or a staff member proceeds on annual recreation leave. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, TEMPORARY STAFF 457. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Works:

For each department and agency under the Minister for Works’ direction - (1) How many temporary staff have been engaged through an employment agency since January 1 1999? (2) For each engagement, what was the - (a) level of the position; (b) name of the employment agency; (c) duration of the engagement; and (d) reason why the position was not filled from within the public sector? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: (1)-(2) The Department of Contract and Management Services engages temporary staff predominantly through a CAMS common-use contract for the supply of temporary personnel for metropolitan Western Australian government agencies, Contract No RFT 53/97. Temporary staff may be engaged at the discretion of management to meet operational requirements of CAMS directorates including the network of regional offices. No centralised recording of the engagements takes place. The temporary engagements are usually at an equivalent to the level 1 salary range and are typically for short- term durations, generally from one day to four weeks. Temporary engagements are utilised when no other staff member is available to undertake a specific job assignment and often occur due to the unscheduled absence of an existing staff member. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PRIVATISED, CLOSED OR CONTRACTED OUT 523. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Minister for Mines:

Since the election of the present State Government in 1993 - (1) Which Government departments, agencies and/or enterprises under the Minister’s portfolio have been - (a) privatised; and (b) closed? (2) Which services under the Minister’s portfolio, formerly performed by Government employees have been contracted out to the private sector? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (1) (a)-(b) None. (2) None. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PRIVATISED, CLOSED OR CONTRACTED OUT 524. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Minister for Sport and Recreation:

Since the election of the present State Government in 1993 -

612 [COUNCIL]

(1) Which Government departments, agencies and/or enterprises under the Minister’s portfolio have been – (a) privatised; and (b) closed? (2) Which services under the Minister’s portfolio, formerly performed by Government employees have been contracted out to the private sector? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: Ministry of Sport and Recreation (1) Nil (2) A Recreation, Camps and Reserves Board Camp at Quaranup near Albany. Western Australian Sports Centre Trust Western Australian Institute of Sport (1)-(2) Nil

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PRIVATISED, CLOSED OR CONTRACTED OUT 525. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Minister for Racing and Gaming: Since the election of the present State Government in 1993 - (1) Which Government departments, agencies and/or enterprises under the Minister’s portfolio have been - (a) privatised; and (b) closed?

(2) Which services under the Minister’s portfolio, formerly performed by Government employees have been contracted out to the private sector?

Hon N.F. MOORE replied:

Office of Racing, Gaming and Liquor (1) Nil (2) Payroll, courier, fleet management. Burswood Park Board (1) Nil (2) Fleet management Totalisator Agency Board (1) The TAB disposed of its shareholding in the following companies – • Western Broadcasting Services (6PR) • 3 Way Sport Pty Ltd (formerly Fairplay Newspaper & Printing Works) • Dynamic Business Resources (2) Preparation and printing of racing form guide (Goodform), and fleet management. WA Greyhound Racing Authority (1) Not applicable (2) Cleaning of grounds/buildings – Cannington venue Lawn mowing services – Cannington venue Lotteries Commission (1) The Lotteries Commission – (a) has not been privatised; and (b) has not been closed. (2) The following services at the Lotteries Commission have been contracted out (previously done in-house) – • Internal Audit • Gaming Draw Supervision • Bulk Cheque Bursting and Mail Out

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 613

• Catering • Vehicle Fleet Management • Some Systems Development Tasks • Some Grant Assessment Tasks

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PRIVATISED, CLOSED OR CONTRACTED OUT 526. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Minister for Tourism: Since the election of the present State Government in 1993 - (1) Which Government departments, agencies and/or enterprises under the Minister’s portfolio have been -

(a) privatised; and (b) closed? (2) Which services under the Minister’s portfolio, formerly performed by Government employees have been contracted out to the private sector?

Hon N.F. MOORE replied: Western Australian Tourism Commission (1) (a)-(b) None (2) The attraction, development and support of conventions, conferences, meetings and incentive travel to Western Australia was formerly undertaken by the Perth Convention and Incentive Unit within the Western Australian Tourism Commission. The Perth Convention Bureau now undertakes this service for the WATC under contract. Some human resource support services – payroll, some recruitment and some classification determination. Some legal services, which cannot be undertaken by the Crown Solicitor’s Office. Internal Audit. Motor vehicle supply and maintenance Some international media and trade familiarisation. Rottnest Island Authority (1) (a)-(b) None (2) The Rottnest Island Authority has contracted out the utilities and operations functions on Rottnest Island previously performed by government employees. These functions include power, water and sewerage, waste management, asset and building maintenance and delivery services. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PRIVATISED, CLOSED OR CONTRACTED OUT 529. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Commerce and Trade: Since the election of the present State Government in 1993 - (1) Which Government departments, agencies and/or enterprises under the Minister for Commerce and Trade’s portfolio have been –

(a) privatised; and (b) closed?

(2) Which services under the Minister’s portfolio, formerly performed by Government employees have been contracted out to the private sector? Hon N.F. MOORE replied:

(1) Nil (2) There is a whole of government common use mandatory contract which all agencies use for personnel and payroll services; travel reservations; recruitment; related human resources services and fleet management. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PRIVATISED, CLOSED OR CONTRACTED OUT 531. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Regional Development: Since the election of the present State Government in 1993 -

614 [COUNCIL]

(1) Which Government departments, agencies and/or enterprises under the Minister for Regional Development’s portfolio have been –

(a) privatised; and (b) closed?

(2) Which services under the Minister’s portfolio, formerly performed by Government employees have been contracted out to the private sector?

Hon N.F. MOORE replied: Please see answer to 529. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PRIVATISED, CLOSED OR CONTRACTED OUT 533. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Small Business: Since the election of the present State Government in 1993 - (1) Which Government departments, agencies and/or enterprises under the Minister for Small Business’ portfolio have been –

(a) privatised; and (b) closed?

(2) Which services under the Minister’s portfolio, formerly performed by Government employees have been contracted out to the private sector?

Hon N.F. MOORE replied:

Please see answer to 529.

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PRIVATISED, CLOSED OR CONTRACTED OUT 535. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Local Government: Since the election of the present State Government in 1993 - (1) Which Government departments, agencies and/or enterprises under the Minister for Local Government’s portfolio have been –

(a) privatised; and (b) closed?

(2) Which services under the Minister’s portfolio, formerly performed by Government employees have been contracted out to the private sector?

Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: Department of Local Government (1) None (2) (a)-(b) Not applicable Metropolitan Cemeteries Board (1) (a)-(b) Nil (2) None of the MCB core services have been contracted out to the private sector. Keep Australia Beautiful Council (1)-(2) None Fremantle Cemetery Board (1)-(2) Not applicable

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PRIVATISED, CLOSED OR CONTRACTED OUT 537. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Water Resources: Since the election of the present State Government in 1993 -

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 615

(1) Which Government departments, agencies and/or enterprises under the Minister for Water Resources’ portfolio have been –

(a) privatised; and (b) closed?

(2) Which services under the Minister’s portfolio, formerly performed by Government employees have been contracted out to the private sector?

Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied:

Water and Rivers Commission and Office of Water Regulation (1)-(2) Nil

Water Corporation (1) (a)-(b) Nil (2) (a) The management of the vehicle fleet and plant and equipment. (b) The provision of surveying services for dam deformation monitoring. (c) The provision of general surveying services. (d) The provision of ground maintenance services for the John Tonkin Water Centre and Mount Eliza Conference Centre. (e) The provision of engineering definition and design services (surface water assets) (f) The provision of engineering definition and design services (water, wastewater and drainage). (g) The provision of operation and maintenance for records management. (h) The provision of operation and maintenance for Perth region, north of the river. (i) The provision of operation and maintenance for Perth region, south of the river. (j) The provision of analytical services and wastewater quality testing. (k) The provision of coordinating services for the photogrammetric mapping services for the infill sewerage program. (l) The provision of information technology support services. (m) The provision of mechanical and electrical maintenance services. (n) The provision of services for ground engineering investigations. (o) The provision of warehousing, distribution and transportation services. (p) The provision of security services for the John Tonkin Water Centre. (q) The provision of drilling services. (r) The provision of metropolitan water meter reading services. (s) The provision of services associated with the supply of land and delivery and stationery. (t) The provision of market research services.

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, PRIVATISED, CLOSED OR CONTRACTED OUT

543. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Attorney General representing the Minister for Forest Products: Since the election of the present State Government in 1993 - (1) Which Government departments, agencies and/or enterprises under the Minister for Forest Products’ portfolio have been –

(a) privatised; and (b) closed?

(2) Which services under the Minister’s portfolio, formerly performed by Government employees have been contracted out to the private sector?

616 [COUNCIL]

Hon PETER FOSS replied:

(1) The Office of the Minister for Forest Products was established on 22 December 1999. Pending passage of legislation currently before Parliament, there are no departments, agencies or enterprises within the Forrest Products portfolio. (2) Not applicable. CENTRAL METROPOLITAN COLLEGE OF TAFE, BREACHES OF STANDARDS 551. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Employment and Training: I refer to the review of alleged breaches of standards lodged by Ms Julie Heeley against Central Metropolitan College of TAFE and I ask - (1) Is the Minister for Employment and Training aware that the Independent Reviewer commissioned by the Public Sector Standards Commissioner found -

(a) that the College breached Public Sector Standards - Grievance Resolution Standards 9.2 and 9.4; (b) that the grievance procedures at the College are inadequate; (c) that the College has no procedures to protect people who lodge grievances from ensuing victimisation; and (d) that Ms Heeley attempted to resolve the situation and have her concerns about victimisation heard at the highest level in Central TAFE but was denied this opportunity?

(2) Is the Minister aware that the independent reviewer made five recommendations to be implemented by the College?

(3) Can the Minister advise whether these recommendations have been implemented?

(4) If yes, can the Minister outline the actions taken to implement the recommendations?

(5) If not, can the Minister advise when the recommendations will be implemented?

Hon N.F. MOORE replied:

(1) (a) I am aware that an independent reviewer, commissioned by the Commissioner for Public Sector Standards, found that the college had: (i) breached Grievance Resolution Standard 9.2, by not implementing a recommendation of the college’s grievance committee to arrange a guest lecturer to address a staff meeting on matters relating to students and equal opportunity; (ii) breached Grievance Resolution Standard 9.4 by not informing Ms Heeley of changes to the procedure being put in place to address her concerns. (b) I understand that the independent reviewer noted that the college has a grievance policy in place and recommended that a management plan be developed for the resolution of grievances and monitoring of their implementation. (c) I am advised that the independent reviewer did not find that in Ms Heeley’s case Grievance Resolution Standard No 9.3 – lodgment of a grievance must not result in unfair treatment of a complainant – had been breached by the college. However, she recommended that the grievance procedures be amended to include guidance as to the steps that should be taken should someone report that they are being victimised as a result of having lodged a grievance. It should be noted that the college's staff code of conduct specifies that employees who, in good faith, make a complaint or disclosure about an alleged breach of the code, will not be disadvantaged or prejudiced by making a report on the matter. (d) The college’s normal procedure in dealing with staff concerns regarding human resource standards is to refer them to the Director Human Resources who is the managing director’s delegate on such matters. This procedure was followed in Ms Heeley’s case. (2)-(3) Yes. (4) Recommendation 1 The claimant be given a copy of the executive summary of the reviewer’s report. Outcome: This has occurred.

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 617

Recommendation 2 The claimant be given a written apology from Central TAFE regarding the delay in implementing all the recommendations. Outcome: This has occurred. Recommendation 3 Agreement be reached between Ms Heeley and Central TAFE regarding the wording and implementation of recommendation 1 in the grievance report. Outcome: The Director Human Resources wrote to Ms Heeley on 11 February 2000 and requested that she contact the acting director Western Australian School of Health and Community Services so that an implementation plan could be agreed. This approach was followed as members of staff had previously been requested not to contact Ms Heeley direct. Ms Heeley did not contact the acting director who considered that as the matter was of some urgency, action to implement the recommendation should proceed and a staff meeting was held on 25 February 2000. Ms Heeley has subsequently expressed concern about this meeting. Recommendation 4 Procedures be developed to provide a management plan for the resolution of grievances which would include the monitoring of implementation of recommendations. Outcome: The college has implemented the changes as suggested by the independent reviewer. Recommendation 5 The grievance procedures at Central TAFE be amended to include guidance as to what steps should be taken should someone report they are being victimised as a result of having lodged a grievance. Outcome: The college has implemented the changes as suggested by the independent reviewer. (5) Not applicable. PLUMBING AND PAINTING TRAINING COMPANY, APPRENTICES 552. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Employment and Training: (1) How many apprentices employed by the Plumbing and Painting Training Company successfully completed a plumbing and gas fitting pre-apprenticeship course in -

(a) 1994; (b) 1995; (c) 1996; (d) 1997; (e) 1998; and (f) 1999?

(2) For each of these years, how many of these apprentices signed on a four years apprenticeship term?

(3) In each case, who in the Department of Training gave approval to waive the three years mandatory term?

(4) In view of the fact that such a waiver is a breach of the Industrial Training Act 1974, will the Minister for Employment and Training table any correspondence from the Minister or the Department of Training and Employment instructing the Plumbing and Painting Group Scheme to put each of the apprentices on a three year indentured apprenticeship?

(5) If not, why not?

Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (1) (a) 7. (b) 11. (c) 12. (d) 10. (e) 9. (f) 10. Figures are based on data held on the Department's Training Records System (TRS) as supplied by each apprentice.

618 [COUNCIL]

(2) (a)-(e) Nil. (f) 10. The Plumbing and Painting Training Company has now converted the 10 apprentices in question 2(f) to three year terms from inception, with wage adjustments.

(3) Regulation 6(2) of the Industry Training Act 1975 states that – Where an apprentice commences an apprenticeship for a trade during or after 1988 and the term of the apprenticeship is shown in Schedule 1 as 4 or 5 years, the term shall be only 3 years if the apprentice has successfully completed an approved pre-apprenticeship course consisting of – (a) 2 or more stages of the course of training for the apprentice’s trade;

There are only four trades covered by this provision – plumbing and gasfitting; cooking; upholstery; and hairdressing. There are currently no pre-apprenticeships in cooking and thus no three year term in this trade.

Although there is an approved pre-apprenticeship Plumbing and Gasfitting course, the 10 persons referred to in question 2(f) did not enrol in this curriculum. Instead, these persons completed an alternative course that did not consist of two or more stages of the apprenticeship training and, as such, the Industrial Training Act 1975 was not actually breached by signing them on to four year apprenticeship terms.

However, as the intent of the Act was that a three year term would apply for apprentices in plumbing and gasfitting who complete a ‘pre-apprenticeship’ qualification, the department instructed the Plumbing and Painting Training Company to convert the ten apprenticeships concerned to three year terms from commencement and to adjust the wages accordingly. The Plumbing and Painting Training Company agreed to make the change and have already done so.

The current situation highlights one of the problems the department has identified with the current pre- apprenticeship arrangements. The department is in the process of reviewing all pre-apprenticeship and pre- vocational training programs to ensure they better meet the needs of industry, students and the new Training Package environment.

(4) These documents are currently being compiled and will be released as part of your current freedom of information inquiry with the Department of Training and Employment.

(5) Not applicable.

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, SEVERANCE PAYMENTS 553. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Employment and Training: In respect of severance payments made to public sector employees -

(1) What was the number of redundancies in -

(a) 1994; (b) 1995; (c) 1996; (d) 1997; (e) 1998; and (f) 1999? (2) What is the -

(a) gender; (b) age; (c) length of service; (d) grade; and (e) payment, received by those employees affected in each year?

Hon N.F. MOORE replied: The following figures are for the Department of Training and Employment and TAFE colleges. Training and Employment figures include the reporting of TAFE International and WestOne Services.

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 619

(1) (a)-(f) Reporting Includes Number Note Period 1994 Figures are not available for this period -- 1995 Training and Employment, and 408 * All TAFE Colleges 1996 Training and Employment, and 141 * All TAFE Colleges 1997-98 Training and Employment for period commencing 40 ** 1 January 1997 until 30 June 1998 and All TAFE Colleges for 1997 calendar year 1998 All TAFE Colleges 32 1998-99 Training and Employment 3 1999 All TAFE Colleges 55 1999-00 Training and Employment * The high number of severances in 1995 and 1996 was due to the outsourcing of functions, particularly in the cleaning, gardening, counselling and child care areas within the TAFE colleges. ** With the establishment of TAFE Colleges as autonomous institutions, under the Vocational Education and Training Act 1996, colleges assumed responsibility for their own reporting requirements in 1997. Aggregate data was collected on a financial year basis from 1997-98 for the reporting of Training and Employment statistics. (2) Nearly 600 voluntary severance applications have been processed by Training and Employment and TAFE colleges since 1995. Detailed data regarding each of these entitlements is not readily available. Provision for this information would require considerable research; therefore aggregate data has been provided for age, grade, payment and length of service. (a) Gender Reporting Includes Women Men Period 1994 Figures are not available for this period -- -- 1995 Training and Employment, and 140 268 All TAFE Colleges 1996 Training and Employment, and 65 76 All TAFE Colleges 1997-98 Training and Employment for period commencing 19 21 1 January 1997 until 30 June 1998 and All TAFE Colleges for 1997 calendar year 1998 All TAFE Colleges 9 23 1998-99 Training and Employment 1 2 1999 All TAFE Colleges 23 32 1999-2000 Training and Employment -- 2 (b) Age The age of employees who elected to take voluntary severance ranged from 23 years at the youngest to 67 years at the oldest. (c) Length of Service This information is not readily available. In view of the number of voluntary severance applications, it would require a considerable amount of research to retrieve this data from archives. (d) Grade The classification of staff who have elected to take voluntary severance, fall into the following categories and include Child Care Workers covering all grades; Cleaners, levels 2-3; Counsellors; Gardeners; Lecturers, grades 9-14; Advanced Skilled Lecturers, levels 1-3; Associate Directors, GOSAC, levels 3-8; Librarians, Public Service Staff, levels 1-9; Storepersons; Technicians; and Tradespersons. (e) Payment The average severance payment for employees was:

620 [COUNCIL]

Reporting Includes Average Period Amount 1994 Figures are not available for this period -- 1995 Training and Employment, and All TAFE Colleges $17 395 1996 Training and Employment, and All TAFE Colleges $38 900 1997-98 Training and Employment for period commencing $45 293 1 January 1997 until 30 June 1998 and All TAFE Colleges for 1997 calendar year 1998 All TAFE Colleges $35 830 1998-99 Training and Employment $40 039 1999 All TAFE Colleges $32 111 1999-2000 Training and Employment $84 484 GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, WA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY MEMBERSHIP OR SUBSCRIPTION FEES 565. Hon Tom Stephens to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Employment and Training: What has been the cost incurred since February 1993 by any department or agency within the Minister for Employment and Training’s portfolio that pays - (a) membership; or (b) subscription fees, to the Chamber of Commerce and Industry? Hon N.F. MOORE replied:

Department of Training and Employment 1993 Nil 1994 $10 000.00 1995 $10 035.25 1996 $10 195.55 1997 $10 141.00 1998 $10 373.25 1999 $10 185.14 The total from 1993 to 1999 is $60 930.19. Central TAFE (a) Nil (b) $200.00. Central West College of TAFE The Central West College of TAFE has incurred $780 since February 1993 for membership fees to the Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Midwest). CY O’Connor College of TAFE (a)-(b) Nil Eastern Pilbara College of TAFE The Eastern Pilbara College of TAFE has been a member of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry at both Newman and Port Hedland. The current annual membership fee is $85.00 at Newman and $130.00 for Port Hedland. Due to the amalgamation of Hedland and Pundulmurra Colleges in 1998, the current Finance System (KCS) contains records from 1997 onwards. A data search prior to this would require reinstallation of an older version of KCS and this would take a number of days. A similar reinstallation of an old finance system holding Pundulmurra records would also be required. For the purposes of this parliamentary question it should be assumed that the total payment of membership fees since 1993 (i.e. eight years) is approximately: Newman Chamber of Commerce $680

Port Hedland Chamber of Commerce $1 040

Great Southern Regional College of TAFE

Membership/subscription fee for membership to the Albany Chamber of Commerce and Industry is $171.50.

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 621

Karratha College of TAFE To be best of our knowledge, Karratha College has paid $1 525 to the Karratha and Districts Chamber of Commerce and Industry for membership since 1993. Kimberley College of TAFE (a)-(b) Nil Midland College of TAFE (a) $1 140.00 (Midland Chamber of Commerce subscriptions) (b) Nil South East Metropolitan College of TAFE (a)-(b) Nil South Metropolitan College of TAFE South Metropolitan College of TAFE is able to supply data based on its financial records from October 1997 to the present. The college has incurred no costs relating to (a) membership; or (b) subscription fees to the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Western Australia. South West Regional College of TAFE (a) 1993 No data available. No access to pre-existing system. 1994 No data available. No access to pre-existing system. 1995 Nil 1996 $650.00 1997 $Nil 1998 $555.00 1999 $720.00 2000 $367.50 Total $2 292.50 (b) Nil West Coast College of TAFE 1993 No data available 1994 No data available 1995 $900 1996 $60 1997 $Nil 1998 $2 000 1999 $1 030 2000 $185 Total $4 175 The college’s database does not differentiate between payments for subscriptions and memberships. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, WA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY MEMBERSHIP OR SUBSCRIPTION FEES 573. Hon Tom Stephens to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Youth: What has been the cost incurred since February 1993 by any department or agency within the Minister for Youth’s portfolio that pays - (a) membership; or (b) subscription fees, to the Chamber of Commerce and Industry? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (a)-(b) Nil.

622 [COUNCIL]

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, WA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY MEMBERSHIP OR SUBSCRIPTION FEES 574. Hon Tom Stephens to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs: What has been the cost incurred since February 1993 by any department or agency within the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs’ portfolio that pays - (a) membership; or (b) subscription fees, to the Chamber of Commerce and Industry? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (a)-(b) Nil.

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, WA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY MEMBERSHIP OR SUBSCRIPTION FEES 576. Hon Tom Stephens to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Disability Services: What has been the cost incurred since February 1993 by any department or agency within the Minister for Disability Services’ portfolio that pays - (a) membership; or (b) subscription fees, to the Chamber of Commerce and Industry? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (a)-(b) Nil.

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, WA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY MEMBERSHIP OR SUBSCRIPTION FEES 580. Hon Tom Stephens to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Local Government: What has been the cost incurred since February 1993 by any department or agency within the Minister for Local Government’s portfolio that pays - (a) membership; or (b) subscription fees, to the Chamber of Commerce and Industry? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT No cost has been incurred. (a)-(b) Not applicable. METROPOLITAN CEMETERIES BOARD (a)-(b) Nil KEEP AUSTRALIA BEAUTIFUL COUNCIL (a) The council pays no membership fee to the Chamber of Commerce and Industry. (b) Council does not pay any subscription fee to the Chamber of Commerce. FREMANTLE CEMETERY BOARD No cost has been incurred. (a)-(b) Not applicable. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, WA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY MEMBERSHIP OR SUBSCRIPTION FEES 588. Hon Tom Stephens to the Attorney General representing the Minister for the Arts: What has been the cost incurred since February 1993 by any department or agency within the Minister for the Arts’ portfolio that pays - (a) membership; or (b) subscription fees, to the Chamber of Commerce and Industry?

[Tuesday, 5 September 2000] 623

Hon PETER FOSS replied: ArtsWA (a)-(b) Nil LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA (a) Nil (b) $1 193 WESTERN AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM (a) $1 425.00 (b) Nil ART GALLERY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA (a)-(b) Nil PERTH THEATRE TRUST (a)-(b) Nil SCREENWEST (a)-(b) Nil GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, WA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY MEMBERSHIP OR SUBSCRIPTION FEES 592. Hon Tom Stephens to the Attorney General representing the Minister for Forest Products: What has been the cost incurred since February 1993 by any department or agency within the Minister for Forest Products’ portfolio that pays - (a) membership; or (b) subscription fees, to the Chamber of Commerce and Industry? Hon PETER FOSS replied: (a)-(b) The Office of the Minister for Forest Products was established on 22 December 1999. Pending passage of legislation currently before Parliament, there are no departments or agencies within the Forest Products portfolio. In relation to the ministerial office, no costs have been incurred for membership or subscription fees to the Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

WATER THEFT, PROSECUTIONS 671. Hon Ken Travers to the Minister for Transport representing the Minister for Water Resources: (1) How many prosecutions were undertaken against people or companies for water theft in 1999? (2) What penalties did each successful prosecution receive? (3) Are any investigations into water theft from -

(a) 1999; and (b) 2000,

still to be completed? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied:

(1) 23

(2) [See paper No 181.]

(3) (a)-(b) Yes

BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY, RESEARCH WORK ON INDUSTRY TRAINING NEEDS ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY 677. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Employment and Training:

Will the Minister for Employment and Training advise what arrangements are in place, inclusive of funding, that have been negotiated with the Department of Employment and Training to undertake research work to develop an improved industry training needs analysis methodology?

624 [COUNCIL]

Are these arrangements a duplication of the STB’s funding for non-core services for the building and construction industry?

If not, what are the differences between the two?

Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (1) There are no formalised arrangements in place with the Department of Training and Employment to undertake research work to develop an improved industry training needs analysis methodology. The Building and Construction Industry Training Fund did, however, approach the Department of Training and Employment in January this year with a proposal to share information relating to the building and construction industry. Discussions have since occurred regarding this proposal; however, no formal arrangements have been entered into between the Building and Construction Industry Training Fund and the Department of Training and Employment. (2) No. (3) From the Department of Training and Employment’s perspective, the Building and Construction Industry Training Fund proposal explores an information gathering and analysis model that could potentially be incorporated in, and add value to, guidelines governing the development of industry training plans across all industry sectors. Non-core services for the building and construction industry cover the provision of strategic industry intelligence and the provision of advice on specific industry skill requirements. It would be envisaged that any information gathering and analysis model would add value to these functions rather than duplicate them.

______