PROOF ISSN 1322-0330

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

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

Subject FIRST SESSION OF THE FIFTY-SECOND PARLIAMENT Page Wednesday, 7 March 2007

PETITIONS ...... 677 TABLED PAPERS ...... 677 MINISTERIAL PAPER ...... 677 Integrated Planning Act ...... 677 Tabled paper: Report by DJ Oshea, dated 6 February 2007, titled ‘Second Report, Compliance with the Integrated Planning Act 1997 by the Gold Coast City Council’...... 677 MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS ...... 677 Scientific Major Incident Response Unit ...... 677 Population Growth ...... 678 Ku Klux Klan ...... 678 Tabled paper: Copy of leaflet titled ‘Become a Klansman or Klanswoman Today’...... 678 Tabled paper: Copy of article from Toowoomba Chronicle, dated 5 March 2007, titled ‘Klan spreads its message of hate’...... 678 Tabled paper: Copy of article from Toowoomba Chronicle, dated 5 March 2007, titled ‘Klan on the hunt for members’...... 678 Fairfax ...... 679 Cross-Border Partnership ...... 679 Tabled paper: Copy of Memorandum of Understanding between the State of New South Wales and the State of Queensland, dated 27 February 2007, relating to Services in the Tweed-Gold Coast Region...... 679 Cyclone Larry ...... 680 Firewire Surfboard Company ...... 680 Clean Up Australia Day ...... 681 Willprint ...... 681 Montgomery Watson Report ...... 682 Tabled paper: Copy of report, by Montgomery Watson for the Queensland Department of Natural Resources, dated November 2000, titled ‘Improving Water Use Efficiency in Queensland’s Urban Communities’. 682 Montgomery Watson Report ...... 683 Montgomery Watson Report ...... 684 Scientific Major Incident Response Vehicle ...... 685 Patel, Dr J; Compensation ...... 685

L J OSMOND N J LAURIE CHIEF HANSARD REPORTER CLERK OF THE PARLIAMENT Table of Contents — Wednesday, 7 March 2007

Small Claims Tribunal Guide ...... 686 Tabled paper: Brochure titled ‘Small Claims Tribunal a consumer guide’...... 686 Professional Standards for Teachers ...... 686 Equivalent Salaries Report ...... 686 Energy Industry ...... 687 Fire Safety Legislation ...... 687 North Queensland Roads ...... 688 Security Improvement Program ...... 688 Surf Safety Initiatives ...... 689 Gold Coast Housing Company ...... 689 NOTICE OF MOTION ...... 690 Health ...... 690 CIVIL LIABILITY (GOOD SAMARITAN) AMENDMENT BILL ...... 690 First Reading ...... 690 Second Reading ...... 690 PRIVATE MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS ...... 691 Water Crisis ...... 691 Commonwealth State Territory Disability Agreement ...... 691 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ...... 692 Montgomery Watson Report ...... 692 Montgomery Watson Report ...... 693 Tabled paper: List of dates and titles of media releases...... 693 Willprint ...... 693 Tabled paper: Various brochures published by Mr Gary Hardgrave MP...... 694 Queensland Health ...... 694 Willprint ...... 695 Tabled paper: Various Liberal Party brochures...... 695 Queensland Health ...... 696 Traveston Dam ...... 696 Tabled paper: Report, by ACIL Tasman, dated February 2007, titled ‘Scoping Economic Futures— Traveston Crossing Region.’...... 696 Public Hospital Beds ...... 697 Irrigators, Rebates ...... 697 Police and Corrective Services, Disciplinary Action ...... 698 Electricity Industry ...... 699 School Community Development Fund ...... 699 International Women’s Day; Body Image ...... 700 Pest and Weed Control Funding ...... 700 Foster and Kinship Care Week ...... 701 Queensland Police Service, Midyear Crime Statistics ...... 702 Moreton Bay Marine Park Zoning Plan ...... 703 Crazy Ants ...... 703 MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...... 703 Woodford Correctional Centre, Staff Gymnasium; Interlock ...... 703 Tabled paper: Copy of Question without Notice on 8 February 2007 from Mr Messenger to Ms Spence, and Ms Spence’s reply...... 704 Tabled paper: Copy of circular letter dated 23 February 2007 from Alex Scott, General Secretary, QPSU to QPSU members...... 704 Tabled paper: Copy of letter (undated) from F P Rockett, Director-General, Department of Corrective Services to Mr Alex Scott...... 704 Tabled paper: Copy of circular letter dated 2 March 2007 from Amanda Hefez, Manager of Professional Services, Interlock, to Queensland Corrective Services Staff...... 704 ORDER OF BUSINESS ...... 705 SOUTH EAST QUEENSLAND REGIONAL PLAN ...... 705 GOVERNMENT OWNED CORPORATIONS AMENDMENT BILL ...... 713 Second Reading ...... 713 PRIVILEGE ...... 716 Liberal Party ...... 716 GOVERNMENT OWNED CORPORATIONS AMENDMENT BILL ...... 717 Second Reading ...... 717 Consideration in Detail ...... 717 Clauses 1 to 62, as read, agreed to...... 717 Schedule, as read, agreed to...... 717 Third Reading ...... 717 Long Title ...... 717 MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...... 718 Plane Crash, Indonesia; Willprint ...... 718 Table of Contents — Wednesday, 7 March 2007

BODY CORPORATE AND COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL ...... 719 Second Reading ...... 719 Consideration in Detail ...... 732 Clauses 1 to 4, as read, agreed to...... 732 Clause 5, as read, agreed to...... 732 Clauses 6 to 9, as read, agreed to...... 732 Clause 10 (Insertion of new ss 101A and 101B)—...... 732 Clause 10, as amended, agreed to...... 732 Insertion of new clause— ...... 733 Question put—That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to...... 735 Non-government amendment (Mr Nicholls) agreed to...... 735 Division: Question put—That the amendment, as amended, be agreed to...... 735 Non-government amendment (Mr Nicholls) negatived...... 735 Insertion of new clause— ...... 735 Amendment agreed to...... 736 Clauses 11 to 18, as read, agreed to...... 736 Clause 19, as read, agreed to...... 736 Clauses 20 to 22, as read, agreed to...... 736 Clause 23, as read, agreed to...... 737 Clauses 24 to 67, as read, agreed to...... 737 Clause 68 (insertion of new sch 1A)— ...... 737 Division: Question put—That the amendment be agreed to...... 739 Non-government amendment (Mr Nicholls) negatived...... 739 Clause 68, as read, agreed to...... 739 Clauses 69 to 77, as read, agreed to...... 739 Clause 78 (Insertion of new s 35)— ...... 739 Tabled paper: Explanatory Notes to Ms Keech’s amendments to the Body Corporate and Community Management and Other Legislation Amendment Bill...... 739 Clause 78, as amended, agreed to...... 739 Schedule, as read, agreed to...... 739 Third Reading ...... 739 Long Title ...... 739 ORDER OF BUSINESS ...... 740 ADDRESS-IN-REPLY ...... 740 MOTION ...... 744 Health of Queensland Schoolchildren ...... 744 Division: Question put—That the amendment be agreed to...... 753 Resolved in the affirmative...... 753 ORDER OF BUSINESS ...... 754 ADDRESS-IN-REPLY ...... 754 ADJOURNMENT ...... 773 Katsidis, Mr M ...... 773 Eat Well, Be Active ...... 774 Queensland Fuel Subsidy Scheme ...... 775 International Women’s Day ...... 775 School Induction Ceremonies; Organ Donation ...... 776 Opera Queensland ...... 776 Charters Towers Electorate, Petition ...... 777 Kedron-Wavell Services Club ...... 777 Moggill Electorate, Safety of Schoolchildren ...... 778 Skilling Queensland ...... 778 ATTENDANCE ...... 779 07 Mar 2007 Legislative Assembly 677 WEDNESDAY, 7 MARCH 2007

Legislative Assembly Mr ACTING SPEAKER (Mr J English, Redlands) read prayers and took the chair at 9.30 am.

PETITIONS

The following honourable members have lodged paper petitions for presentation—

Forsayth to Georgetown Roads, Sealing Mr Knuth from 121 petitioners requesting the House to require the Minister for Transport to give priority to sealing the Forsayth to Georgetown Road.

Mount Larcom, Cement Australia Mrs Cunningham from 130 petitioners requesting the House to support a grout curtain, close to the Cement Australia East End and pump back good quality water under recharge conditions to the Wallaby Lane injection site for the for the Mt Larcom District.

TABLED PAPERS

MINISTERIAL PAPERS TABLED BY THE CLERK The following ministerial papers were tabled by the Clerk— Minister for Tourism, Fair Trading, Wine Industry Development and Women (Mrs Keech)— • Report to the Queensland Parliament on India Mission 27 January-3 February 2007 (Overseas trip) Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Infrastructure (Ms Bligh)— • Minister’s Report—Property Solutions (Australia) Pty Ltd Ministerial Call In Under Chapter 3, Part 6, Division 2 of the Integrated Planning Act 1997 Minister for Transport and Main Roads (Mr Lucas)— • Response from the Minister for Transport and Main Roads (Mr Lucas) to a paper petition (775-07) presented by Mrs Stuckey from 44 petitioners regarding a request for on- and off-ramps at Nineteenth Avenue, Elanora

MINISTERIAL PAPER

Integrated Planning Act Hon. AP FRASER (Mount Coot-tha—ALP) (Minister for Local Government, Planning and Sport) (9.31 am): I lay upon the table of the House the latest report into compliance with the Integrated Planning Act 1997 by the Gold Coast City Council. Tabled paper: Report by DJ Oshea, dated 6 February 2007, titled ‘Second Report, Compliance with the Integrated Planning Act 1997 by the Gold Coast City Council’.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Scientific Major Incident Response Unit Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.31 am): Today after question time the minister for police, Judy Spence, and the police commissioner will launch the latest forensic tool in the fight against crime. Outside parliament, the Queensland Police Service will have on display its new $200,000 scientific major incident response vehicle. This Ford F250 truck has been heavily modified and is now a completely portable forensic laboratory. It is unique in Australia and has been locally designed so that forensic scientists and equipment can be deployed immediately to crime scenes, natural disasters or terrorist incidents. At the touch of a button, a hydraulic stainless steel lab bench can be lowered from the truck for use in complex forensic examinations at the scene. The truck is fully self-contained, with a generator that provides refrigerated storage for reagents, which can be used to test crime scene samples on the spot. The truck will be used alongside a forensic services forward command post and contains a series of pop-up tents that are used as a complete on-site crime scene management centre. Only yesterday the police minister, Judy Spence, tabled the latest mid-year crime statistics for Queensland for the period from July to December last year. The statistics showed decreases in most major reported offences including drops in drug offences, robbery, assaults, sexual offences and car theft. To solve many of those offences, police rely heavily on the forensic material gathered at the crime scene, which they then use as evidence in the courtroom to prosecute offenders. 678 Ministerial Statements 07 Mar 2007

My government is committed to giving police the tools, the technology and the resources they need. This fully portable forensics unit is yet another way we are providing our officers with more sophisticated equipment to crack crimes. I am sure that the police minister would be only too happy to inform members of any more details. Population Growth Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.33 am): In relation to population figures, the latest data available from the Australian Bureau of Statistics confirms that Brisbane continues to be the population growth capital of Australia. The latest regional statistics for 2005-06 show that Queensland had four of the nation’s top 10 fastest growing regions in terms of local government areas. Brisbane was the nation’s fastest growing region in 2005-06 with a population increase of nearly 14,000 people. The Gold Coast was the nation’s second fastest growing area with a population increase of more than 13,500 people during the year. Ipswich and Cairns were also in the nation’s top 10. Overall, Queensland’s population grew by 1.9 per cent over the year to the June quarter 2006, which is well above 1.2 per cent for the rest of Australia. In Queensland this translates into a population increase of 76,400 people in 2005-06, or nearly 1,500 people per week during this year. That is one of the reasons we have developed an SEQ plan, established the Office of Urban Management and are working through a future five-year plan in addition to the previous plans that we have undertaken. I seek leave to incorporate further details in Hansard. Leave granted. Of this, net interstate and overseas migration contributed more than 900 persons per week. Queensland’s lower cost of living, such as lower petrol prices and house prices, as well as a competitive taxation environment, have all been important in encouraging high rates of interstate and overseas migration. Of course our climate and relaxed lifestyle have also contributed to encouraging high rates of interstate and overseas migration. Queensland’s annual population growth reached a peak of 2.5% in March quarter 2003, which translated into an increase of more than 1,700 persons per week. This coincided with the peak of the housing boom, which saw many interstate migrants from southern states, such as New South Wales, migrate north to take advantage of relatively lower house prices in Queensland. While interstate and overseas migration has eased since that time, other economic factors suggest the Queensland will continue to record much higher levels of interstate migration relative to any other state. In particular, the greater job opportunities created through Queensland’s sensational economic growth is likely to maintain high levels of interstate migration going forward. Ku Klux Klan Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.33 am): This week I was saddened to read of a hateful, horrible publication being distributed in Toowoomba. Titled Becoming a Klansman or Klanswoman Today, it is a racist diatribe that saddens and angers me, and I hope all members. I do not believe for one minute that the Ku Klux Klan has any presence in Toowoomba, which is a very modern and progressive city, but it is important to highlight the existence of this garbage so that we can act quickly to stamp it out and send a clear message to those perpetrating it. I will not go into all the specific details, but their hypocrisy is evident when this group calls for new members. They say that homosexuals need not apply, law violators need not apply and people in interracial relationships need not apply. Ironically, they go on to say that hate mongers need not apply either. Apparently if you are filled with hate, you are a liability! I suggest that they take their own advice. The people who wrote this garbage should be ashamed of themselves. There is no place for racism such as this in modern-day Queensland. I make it very clear that my government is committed to multiculturalism. I also make it very clear that the Anti-Discrimination Act clearly states that vilification on the grounds of race, religion, sexuality or gender identity is unlawful. I seek leave to incorporate further details in Hansard. I also table this group’s garbage, and I want those people to understand what the law is. Tabled paper: Copy of leaflet titled ‘Become a Klansman or Klanswoman Today’. Tabled paper: Copy of article from Toowoomba Chronicle, dated 5 March 2007, titled ‘Klan spreads its message of hate’. Tabled paper: Copy of article from Toowoomba Chronicle, dated 5 March 2007, titled ‘Klan on the hunt for members’. Leave granted. The Member for Moreton may be concerned about African faces at the bus stop but most Queenslanders are far more tolerant and multicultural. I suggest he stops irresponsible scaremongering and concentrates on coming up with some answers on how he has been spending taxpayers dollars. 07 Mar 2007 Ministerial Statements 679

Mr Speaker, We have some of the strongest anti vilification laws in the country. The Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 clearly states that vilification on the grounds of race, religion, sexuality or gender identity is unlawful. It states that a person must not, by a public act, incite hatred towards, serious contempt for, or severe ridicule of, a person or group of persons on the ground of the race, religion, sexuality or gender identity of the person or members of the group. Mr Speaker, I know that the matter has already been referred to the Queensland Police Service and the Federal Attorney General. Attorney-General Kerry Shine has also referred it to the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner Susan Booth. I can only hope the perpetrators are caught and the book is thrown at them.

Fairfax Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.34 am): As members of the House would be aware, I have always been a strong supporter of media diversity. Later this morning I will be joining the Chief Executive Officer of Fairfax, David Kirk, who is here to make a major announcement on Fairfax’s decision to expand its presence in Queensland. I seek leave to incorporate further details in Hansard. Leave granted. While the details of the announcement will remain confidential until later this morning I want to put on the record my support for the company’s decision to expand its presence in Queensland. Healthy democracies are built on a number of planks including a free and vigorous media. Queenslanders can only benefit from an addition to the media voices in their state.

Cross-Border Partnership Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.35 am): On Tuesday 27 February, at the border crossing in Currumbin Valley, I met with the New South Wales Premier, Morris Iemma, to sign a landmark cross-border memorandum of understanding. I was accompanied by Christine Smith, the member for Burleigh. Our aim is to improve the quality of services for the people of the Gold Coast and the Tweed by tackling three of the top issues for the cross-border regions: taxis, trains and health services. Communities near the border need their state governments to work together to find practical solutions, and that is what Morris Iemma and I are doing. For the information of the House I table the memorandum of understanding that I signed. I have asked for copies to be distributed to all members. Tabled paper: Copy of Memorandum of Understanding between the State of New South Wales and the State of Queensland, dated 27 February 2007, relating to Services in the Tweed-Gold Coast Region. I hope members will take an interest in this issue because it is about an important region in southern Queensland and northern New South Wales. I seek leave to incorporate further details in Hansard. Leave granted. The Memorandum of Understanding is a significant step towards ensuring that the services in the region meet the needs of people living in, working in and visiting the area. This MOU delivers short and long-term plans to improve transport and health services in the region. Thanks to unprecedented cooperation between our governments, we have established a dual taxi ranks plan. This will mean that passengers can choose their taxi depending on which state they’re travelling to. Taxi operators will also be able to pick up passengers on both sides of the border, so they will no longer lose money by taking passengers into another State. These dual taxi ranks will be operating by 30 June this year. We are also looking at practical ways of improving cross-border public transport with a focus on identifying a Queensland-NSW rail corridor. Work is also underway to simplify fare arrangements for people travelling across the border. The Qld and NSW Health services are also working tighter to ensure the highest quality services and facilities are available to all residents and visitors in the Gold Coast/Tweed region. We can do better through cooperation and integration of health services. Services such as renal dialysis, radiation and chemotherapy, mental health and women’s and children’s health will be the focus. This Memorandum of Understanding is an important step forward for the Gold Coast/Tweed region. It is one of the most beautiful and prosperous areas in Australia, and I look forward to working with Premier Iemma—the NSW electorate willing on March 24th—to ensure the needs of residents and visitors in this cross-border region are met—lines on a map should not be a barrier to providing the best health and transport services possible. 680 Ministerial Statements 07 Mar 2007

Cyclone Larry Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.36 am): The first anniversary of Cyclone Larry will take place on 20 March. We have learnt a lot of from this. I go on record to thank all those who have made a contribution and I do so by seeking leave to incorporate further details in Hansard. Leave granted. On 20 March 2006, the lives and livelihoods of thousands of people were suddenly struck by tragedy. An immediate relief effort was mounted to rescue residents, remove debris and restore essential services. Mr Speaker, since those first days, an enormous recovery and reconstruction effort has been underway. There is still work to be done but the first anniversary sees huge progress being made. This is an important time to again acknowledge the contribution of all those involved, working in very difficult circumstances during the emergency, recovery and long-term reconstruction. Over the past 12 months there has been an enormous community effort involving residents, business and industry, community and aid organisations, thousands of individuals, Queensland and Commonwealth Governments. The spirit of cooperation stands out and is a credit to all. It is also an important aspect in planning and preparing for any future incident. To acknowledge the hard work by so many people on-the-ground, the Queensland and Commonwealth Governments initiated a Commemorative Pin and Certificate of Special Commendation. More than 9000 Pins and 400 Certificates have been dispatched to over 100 nominating organisations who are currently issuing the Pins and Certificates. On Tuesday, 20 March 2007, an official function will be held in Innisfail to reflect on the many achievements over the past year. Arrangements are currently being finalised. I’d also like to thank the Cyclone Larry Operation Recovery Taskforce who will meet for the last time in Innisfail on 20 March. The Taskforce has coordinated the recovery program, ably headed by General Peter Cosgrove and including Mr Sandy Hollway, the Honourable Terry Mackenroth, Mr John Mulcahy and my Director General Ross Rolfe. The wind-up of the Taskforce does not mean the work is finished. Services will continue to be provided by the Queensland Government and others to ensure the recovery process continues. Mr Speaker, a range of activities are planned for the first anniversary by local councils and community groups. These include art exhibitions, sausage sizzles, and an open faith church service. General Cosgrove will be visiting the area from Saturday 17th of March through to Wednesday 21st of March to join commemoration activities and attend the Feast of the Senses celebrations. The anniversary of Cyclone Larry marks a time when the community of Far North Queensland should be praised for their courage and resilience during the past 12 months. Moreover, on 20 March 2007, I encourage all Queenslanders to take a moment to remember the impact Cyclone Larry had on the community and all those who took part in the heroic relief effort.

Firewire Surfboard Company Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.37 am): I wish to acknowledge a Smart State company in action, which is a real role model. Last week, a number of my Gold Coast members and I visited the Firewire Surfboard company at Burleigh Heads. That company is behind a new breed of high-tech surfboards. I highlight this because it is the sort of Smart State ingenuity that we are encouraging. I seek leave to incorporate further details in Hansard. Leave granted. Made from a smart fibre composite technology, and using a revolutionary design and robotics, the company is another example of the Smart State at work. I am pleased to report Firewire Surfboards has secured its largest export order to date—1,400 boards worth more than $700,000. And this order is going straight to the United States of America—the world’s most lucrative surfing market. This company is on track to becoming the largest manufacturer of surfboards in the southern hemisphere. The Department of State Development has supported Firewire in its decision to set up in Queensland over Asian and American locations. It has provided mentoring assistance, referrals to networks and helped in developing research collaborations. The Queensland Government will continue to work closely with industry and looks forward to hearing many more success stories from innovative companies like Firewire Surfboards. 07 Mar 2007 Ministerial Statements 681

Clean Up Australia Day Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.38 am): I pay tribute to the estimated 130,000 Queensland volunteers who took part in the annual Clean Up Australia Day event last Sunday, March 4. It was estimated that one million Australians were involved. I seek leave to incorporate further details in Hansard. Leave granted. For my part, I joined an enthusiastic team of people from my local community to collect and dispose of rubbish in the Eildon Hill Reserve near my home. The Eildon Hill service reservoir was constructed in 1930 and the reserve is well known locally for its excellent city views and walking tracks. It was one of 1334 sites in Queensland that were registered for this year’s event. Well over 8,000 tonnes of rubbish was collected nationally last weekend. Clean Up Australia reported that 6 out of every 10 items collected nationally were recyclable items such as bottles and cans—and unfortunately that was also our experience at Eildon Hill. In these days of climate change we need to recognise that collecting litter and rubbish isn’t all we have to do to Clean Up Australia. I note that Clean Up Australia Chairman and Founder Ian Kiernan challenged every volunteer to also reduce their green house gas emissions by 25 per cent by 2010 and I wholeheartedly endorse his challenge. Willprint Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.39 am): The events surrounding Printgate are becoming murkier by the minute. Today the focus seems to have shifted onto Andrew Laming, the member for Bowman, but why were the offices of two other members of parliament raided as well? Members should remember that three members’ offices were raided. What was their involvement? I notice that quite a number of issues were raised today in the press. One that I think needs to be answered by the members involved is: are ghost employees the connection here? Was the ghost connected to the family of the member for Moreton? There are many, many unanswered questions. Before anyone gets too excited, I notice that today’s Australian states— Australian Federal Police warrants served at the offices of the three MPs—former minister Gary Hardgrave— and I wonder why he got sacked— Andrew Laming and Ross Vasta—allege at least $67,000 was rorted by Mr Laming from electoral printing allowances. Apparently, that is what the warrant said. They are not my words; the Australian has said that. That raises very serious issues about Printgate and the operations of the Queensland Liberal Party. It is also important that we do not forget the innocent victims of Printgate. No. 1 is the Queensland taxpayer, who paid for these things. No. 2 is the failed Liberal candidates for last year’s state election. They went in very wide-eyed and optimistic, naively confident that they would be supported by their own party headquarters. They were betrayed. If they were not in the targeted seats such as Chatsworth, Mudgeeraba, Broadwater and Clayfield, favoured by the so-called Santoro faction within the Liberal Party, then they were on their own. The Courier-Mail hit the nail head on 16 March last year when it revealed— The Queensland branch of the Liberal Party had been torn apart by factionalism amid claims of missing money, secret spending and a failed coup. The results of this infighting and division are now becoming evident in the whole sorry and sleazy Printgate affair. If the allegations are true—that the money was funnelled from federal MPs’ allowances into state Liberal Party coffers—we need to know who benefited. Clearly, I think the Leader of the Liberal Party should come clean on this. I have challenged him again. In terms of who benefited, obviously the Liberal candidate for Burleigh did not benefit. He was so desperate for funding support that he sent a letter of request to the Labor member for Burleigh, our own Christine Smith, seeking some money. That is not bad! He wrote to one of our members seeking money to defeat us. I did not know that anyone would really do that. Obviously, the member was not in the right faction. How ironic that the letter was printed by—and members guessed it—none other than Willprint. So the letter that was sent to Christine Smith was printed by Willprint. In the run-up to the last state election, the Liberal Party forced its members and candidates to sign up to a campaign package. Apparently, the package cost each member and candidate $40,000. The Liberal Party undertook to contribute to the package if they signed up. What was their contribution? It was the cost of printing! I wonder who paid for the cost of the printing? I have been told that the poor, sad old taxpayer was paying for this. I say to the Liberal Party: this is a rort in anybody’s language and we are not going to let it go. I cleaned up my own party when there were people who were trying to rort. I will make absolutely certain that we clean up the Liberal Party, too. 682 Ministerial Statements 07 Mar 2007

Mr Mickel: At least they answer the phone when you ring. Mr BEATTIE: Hear them bray. All I can say is that at least the party secretary answers my call. I do not know whether the Leader of the Liberal Party has got a call back. Has the parliamentary secretary rung Bruce back yet? I would say that he probably has not even rung back the Leader of the Liberal Party. We have Willprint which won’t pay. That is what is going on. The haves and the have-nots is not just an economic policy of the Liberal Party; it is obviously a policy that it applies to its own party. I understand that the rumours are that the member for Bowman will resign from his membership of the Liberal Party. That is the story doing the rounds. I am not interested in any of that; I am interested in making certain that this Liberal Party rort is fully and properly examined. I repeat what I said to the Leader of the Liberal Party yesterday: he has an obligation to send this material to the CMC today. I am trying to give him the opportunity to adopt the same standard that I have followed myself. I am not asking the Leader of the Liberal Party to do anything that I did not do. He should have the courage of a leader and send the matter to the CMC. I made it clear that I will give the Leader of the Liberal Party the appropriate time in which to do so, because I think he should be given a chance to lead. But if he does not lead then I will because, if the matter is not dealt with, we will not let it go. We will not have any political party involved in any improper, sleazy behaviour such as this. Opposition members interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Hear we go. I have to say that the Leader of the National Party is really delighted to have the member for Moggill as his deputy. I tell you what, he is really happy. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Premier, please direct your comments through the chair. Mr BEATTIE: I can see that the Leader of the Opposition is so excited to have the member for Moggill as the Leader of the Liberal Party and have the Liberal Party as the Nationals’ partner. I bet every morning the Leader of the Opposition gets out of bed, looks in the mirror, kicks the dog, kicks the cat and says, ‘Damn Liberal Party.’ That is what he says every morning. I have to say that every morning I get out of bed and look in the mirror and say, ‘Lord, thank you for the Liberal Party.’ Honourable members interjected. Mr BEATTIE: We are Christians, too. We can share that. We just have different prayers to the same God, that is all. Montgomery Watson Report Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.45 am): A lot of fuss— Honourable members interjected. Mr BEATTIE: I need to focus on water. Stop making me too happy. This morning, a lot has been said about a report on water efficiency. I want to spend a bit of time putting the facts on the record. Let me start with the report Improving water use efficiency in Queensland urban communities and what that was about. I table the report. Tabled paper: Copy of report, by Montgomery Watson for the Queensland Department of Natural Resources, dated November 2000, titled ‘Improving Water Use Efficiency in Queensland’s Urban Communities’. I should say that it is on the web and it has been for some time; it is not secret. The report was not focused on south-east Queensland; it used five pilot case studies in Toowoomba, Emerald, Mackay, Maroochy and Ingham. I would have thought that Ingham does not have a water problem. At the moment, Ingham’s only problem is that it has too much water. The Montgomery Watson report was published in November 2000 as part of a strategy to inform local governments of demand management options and benefits. What was the water situation in south- east Queensland in late 2000? Let us get that in perspective. I will come back to the Courier-Mail report in a minute, because I think we need to be really clear about this. The Courier-Mail has pursued the issue of water—and so it should. It is an important matter of public interest and I acknowledge that it has pursued this issue appropriately and properly. However, on a number of occasions the Courier-Mail has beaten up stories, and this is one of them. We cop these things on the chin, but I think to be fair criticism needs to be put in context. I acknowledge that the Courier-Mail has made a significant contribution to this matter, and so it should. This is not one of them. In late 2000 Wivenhoe Dam was at 93 per cent. A few months later the dam was 99 per cent full. So was there a water crisis or a problem at the time this report was written? The answer is no. Can anyone seriously suggest that councils should have imposed water restrictions on south-east Queensland families at that time, bearing in mind that the councils involved were Toowoomba; Emerald, which is not in the south-east corner; Mackay, which is not in the south-east corner; Maroochy; and Ingham, which is not in the south-east corner? So three out of the five councils were not even located in 07 Mar 2007 Ministerial Statements 683 the south-east corner. Can anyone seriously suggest that the state government should have overriden the councils, which at that time had responsibility for water, and forced them to spend millions of dollars on water-saving devices? Did this report tell us that south-east Queensland was facing a water crisis? No, it did not, because it was not. It was demand focused; it was not supply focused. Twenty-twenty hindsight is a wonderful thing, but we have to bring some common sense to this debate. There can be no question that when the drought hit my government took action when the councils failed. In mid-2002 we initiated the south-east Queensland water supply process. As the drought deepened, we took further action. In October 2005 we provided local government with $32 million to start getting their water management systems in order. This money was allocated to address leakage problems. By February 2006 the councils had spent $7 million, $6 million of which was spent in January 2007. So in other words, prior to this year the money had not been spent, even though it was allocated in October 2005. By mid-2006 we had to step in and take control of water management to ensure that a regional plan was implemented to secure water for now and for the next 50 years. The Water Amendment Regulation (No. 1) was enacted in August, forcing councils to manage water resources more efficiently and effectively to maintain their water assets. I return to the technical report, which did not go to cabinet. That report was made available to the participating local governments and put on the Department of Natural Resources and Water web site as a resource for all councils. So was this report somehow secret? No, it was not. It was on the web site. The whole world knew about it and it has been there for some time. In case there is any doubt about this, look at the recommendations which were targeted at local government. Recommendation 3 says, ‘Development of water efficiency initiatives should be fully planned and implemented as a partnership between the local government and community.’ The report has been used to assist local governments with their water-planning activities and policy development responsibilities. Following the report publication, the government has undertaken a number of steps including mandatory water use efficient standards for new construction in the residential sector; statutory requirement for water service providers such as local governments to reduce losses in their water distribution systems; water use efficiency standards for new residential subdivisions throughout Queensland; and a wide variety of rebate schemes which go well beyond what was outlined in the Montgomery report. It has improved the water sewerage subsidy scheme for local government to allow subsidy to be paid for demand management programs such as those outlined in the Montgomery report. To reiterate, at the time of the report in November 2000, the dams in south-east Queensland were full and local councils were in control of water supply. They are the facts. We do not see those in the Courier-Mail report, but they are the facts. The situation today could not be more different. We are in the worst drought on record, and my government has stepped in and taken control of water management. I thank the current councils for their partnerships and the work that they are doing with us. Most of them are being constructive. There are some playing a few silly little political games, but most are being constructive. As a result of the drought a massive water infrastructure program is underway, the likes of which has never been seen before in the history of this state. Councils have received significant financial support to fix their infrastructure, and the community is working with us to massively decrease demand as the drought deepens. I am always happy to take responsibility where the responsibility is mine. I do, however, draw the line at people rewriting history to suit some other argument. I say to the Courier-Mail that it has done a constructive job by and large, but when it beats these things up it does itself and the community a disservice because we are prepared to listen to constructive criticism but not to unfair criticisms.

Montgomery Watson Report Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Infrastructure) (9.51 am): There are suggestions today in relation to the Montgomery Watson report, the subject of media speculation, that the Beattie government should have had very different spending priorities in the year 2000. I thought it useful to outline to the House the circumstances that prevailed in the 1999, 2000 and 2001 years and the priorities the government had. In the 1999-2000 budget we had a small forecast surplus of about $21 million. Unemployment in that year was running at 7.7 per cent. This government had a mandate and a clear duty to secure employment for Queensland families. In 1999-2000 the Beattie government pumped $80 million into Breaking the Unemployment Cycle as the single biggest priority of that budget. Further in that year we put an extra $25 million into modernising our Fire and Rescue Service—a long overdue initiative that was aimed squarely at helping our emergency services save lives around Queensland. We also allocated an extra $25 million to provide a free ambulance service to older Queenslanders—another life-saving initiative and an election commitment. 684 Ministerial Statements 07 Mar 2007

In 2000-01, the following year, unemployment was running at eight per cent. We had a budget deficit as a result of the HIH collapse. In that year we continued our assault on unemployment, with another allocation of $80 million to Breaking the Unemployment Cycle and a $5.25 billion capital works program. We also extended funding for families, with the Putting Families First program getting $300 million over four years, and we continued our response to matters raised by the Forde inquiry with a further allocation of $100 million. There cannot really be any serious suggestion that we should have diverted funds from jobs programs at a time when unemployment was running at eight per cent to subsidise local governments for shower heads when the dams were above 99 per cent in some of those years. This government is proud of the initiatives that we took to break the back of unemployment in this state. We have helped deliver a record low level of unemployment of four per cent. We got our priorities right. Ask any of the hundreds of thousands of Queenslanders who are able to get back into the workforce as a direct result of funding initiatives by this government. Opposition members interjected. Ms BLIGH: They do not want to listen. They never want to hear us talk about unemployment because they had an unemployment rate close to 10 per cent. Mr Rickuss: Howard solved the unemployment problems. Ms BLIGH: Then why won’t he do it in New South Wales? Why won’t he do it for the people of South Australia? This government put the economic and financial security of Queensland families first, second and third in our priorities. We were elected on a platform of jobs, jobs, jobs—and we have delivered them. Every budget for every Treasurer at every level of government of all political persuasions sees good and worthy ideas end up on the cutting room floor. Why? Because we have a responsibility to be fiscally prudent. At a time when, as I said, we had a deficit as a result of the HIH collapse, we prioritised. We were responsible financial managers and we prioritised. We prioritised unemployment programs unashamedly. We prioritised family support for vulnerable families. Those who suggest that at a time when the south-east dam levels were above 90 per cent we should have put funds into anything other than unemployment when it was running at eight per cent are nothing short of economic knuckleheads. Montgomery Watson Report Hon. CA WALLACE (Thuringowa—ALP) (Minister for Natural Resources and Water and Minister Assisting the Premier in North Queensland) (9.55 am): I rise to add to the Premier and Deputy Premier’s comments regarding the Montgomery Watson report. To meet communities’ water use needs both water supply and demand management options need to be considered. As part of informing local government about the benefits of demand management strategies, my department commissioned a report titled Improving water use efficiency in Queensland’s urban communities. The report was published in November 2000 and is available on my department’s web site. Contrary to reports, it was not a study into water use in south-east Queensland. It was a statewide report looking at five pilot case studies—in Toowoomba, Emerald, Mackay, Maroochy and Ingham. It was developed as a technical, information report and did not go to the cabinet. The executive summary for the report makes it clear who the report was aimed at. It says— Development of water efficiency initiatives should be fully planned and implemented as a partnership between the local government and the community. It also says— Local regulations are best aimed at uses of water such as landscaping, retrofitting and restrictions. Toilet and urinal flush settings could also be controlled at a local level. The report continued that ‘the following are listed for further consideration by communities’ and the list that followed included plumbing fixtures, car washes, landscaping, water reuse and property retrofit. Subsequent to the report publication, the government has undertaken a number of steps including mandatory water use efficient standards for new construction in the residential sector; statutory requirement for water service providers, such as local governments to reduce losses in their water distribution systems; water use efficiency standards for new residential subdivisions throughout Queensland; and a wide variety of rebate schemes which go well beyond what was outlined in the Montgomery report. It has improved the water sewerage subsidy scheme for local government to allow subsidy to be paid for demand management programs such as those outlined in the Montgomery report. I repeat: to meet communities’ water use needs both water supply and demand management options must be considered. This has clearly been the practice of the state government in recent years and is highlighted in the approach to meeting the water use needs of south-east Queensland in this, the worst drought in history. At the time of the report in November 2000, the dams in south-east Queensland were full. Dam levels in late 2000 were over 90 per cent full. 07 Mar 2007 Ministerial Statements 685

Scientific Major Incident Response Vehicle

Hon. JC SPENCE (Mount Gravatt—ALP) (Minister for Police and Corrective Services) (9.58 am): As the Premier has announced, after question time we will be launching the new $200,000 scientific major incident response vehicle for police. This vehicle is the envy of other Australian states. It is saving police time as they can process evidence at the crime scene. It also reduces the likelihood of evidence being lost or destroyed. The truck is used alongside a forensic services forward command post, and contains a series of pop-up tents which are used as a complete on-site crime scene management centre. These tents will also be on display this morning. At a crime scene, they are used to house additional equipment and examination areas, exhibit handling, information technology and rest areas. Queensland has a good story to tell in terms of solving crimes using DNA, which is why I was astonished to read an article in the Courier-Mail last month by criminologist Paul Wilson. He wrote, ‘Queensland is woefully behind in integrating into the national DNA data bank.’ Mr Wilson could not be more wrong. Queensland was the first state to integrate into the National Criminal Investigation DNA Database. We did this in September 2003. Western Australia soon followed and we began matching DNA information with them. The Northern Territory and the Commonwealth have since followed. It is giving our police a better chance to crack unsolved crimes through DNA. Queensland is a leading jurisdiction in Australia for DNA interjurisdictional matches. We currently have more than 86,000 person samples and 10,000 crime scene samples uploaded to the national DNA database. To date, interstate people have been linked to 109 Queensland crime scenes through the national database—from break and enters to serious sexual offences and robberies. Since 2002, DNA matching in Queensland has been used to generate more than 8,783 suspect matches in homicides, sexual crimes and property offences, including 959 prisoner profile links. In fact, last year Queensland’s DNA legislation was recognised nationally by the Australasian Police Ministers Council as the preferred model for successful interjurisdictional matching on the national database. Queensland is leading the country with our DNA matching models and I look forward to updating the house on the results from continued use of this vehicle that we are launching today.

Patel, Dr J; Compensation

Hon. KG SHINE (Toowoomba North—ALP) (Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and Minister Assisting the Premier in Western Queensland) (10.00 am): A further 20 claims for compensation by former patients of Jayant Patel are to be mediated in Bundaberg this week. As I reported to parliament last month, 175 of the 383 claims received have already been settled. The Queensland government remains committed to providing fair and reasonable compensation to these former patients for any adverse outcome they have endured. I stress that no former patient is forced to accept the compensation offer being made to them, nor are they forced to settle immediately. Under the special process, former Patel patients who have had an adverse outcome can access free legal fees up to an agreed amount, free medical reports and expert mediators provided at no cost. The payments are informed by the set injury scale values, but not limited to them. Indeed, Ian Hanger QC, who has mediated many of these claims, said former patients were receiving ‘more than they would get from the court.’ The medico-legal reports used in this process assist to determine whether the former patient was treated by Patel and whether an adverse outcome was endured as a result. There are 48 claimants whose claims are currently considered ineligible for compensation. Another three are currently being re-examined. I urge any of those 48 claimants to provide any additional information to support their claim. The government is also committed to considering claims from patients who do not have an adverse outcome at the time but develop medical problems in the future. I will be writing to former patients who have lodged a claim but do not have legal representation and whose claim has not been finalised. Former patients decide whether they want legal representation or not. I am reaffirming the government’s commitment to assist with these legal fees. Legal representatives can provide independent advice on legal issues arising from the claim. I will be meeting with former patients in Bundaberg next week. 686 Ministerial Statements 07 Mar 2007

Small Claims Tribunal Guide Hon. KG SHINE (Toowoomba North—ALP) (Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and Minister Assisting the Premier in Western Queensland) (10.03 am): I would like to commend to honourable members Legal Aid Queensland’s new Small Claims Tribunal consumer guide. The tribunal aims to provide a quick, low-cost way—without lawyers—to make a claim of up to $7,500. Last financial year, 2005-06, more than 16,400 small claims applications were lodged with the tribunal throughout the state. These applications are mostly for disputes between consumers and traders, among traders and for tenancy disputes. I table a copy of the guide. Tabled paper: Brochure titled ‘Small Claims Tribunal a consumer guide’. Professional Standards for Teachers Hon. RJ WELFORD (Everton—ALP) (Minister for Education and Training and Minister for the Arts) (10.03 am): Education is currently in the spotlight in this federal election year and I welcome the debate. We are all committed to a quality education and a clear vision of the future for education in Queensland. It is important that we all recognise that no matter what changes occur, educational outcomes will always centre on the capacity and quality of our teachers. I am proud of the quality and professionalism of our teaching workforce in Queensland and the standards of education we are achieving. However, if we are to continue to improve the quality of education available to students in Queensland schools then ongoing professional development for our teachers is absolutely essential. Last week I was pleased to launch new professional standards for Queensland teachers as part of our government’s comprehensive reforms of teacher registration. The standards outline the abilities, knowledge and professional values expected of teachers in Queensland schools. They have been developed by the new Queensland College of Teachers, which our government established last year, to oversee changes to the system of teacher registration. As members are aware, teachers now have to renew their registration every five years. To gain renewal they will have to show that they have maintained their professional skills through ongoing professional education and recent teaching experience. These new professional standards will provide the benchmark for the profession in Queensland and give teachers a common framework to reflect on and renew their commitment to their professional practice. They will be used to test first-time teachers in their application for provisional registration and full registration, as well as supporting preservice teacher education programs. They capture the essence of a teacher’s work, its complexity and diversity, as teachers manage the learning and teaching process for individuals and groups of students. Importantly, these standards provide a means to demonstrate to parents, school communities and the public at large the knowledge, skills and abilities our teachers are expected to have in our schools today. The standards are based upon the three areas of professional practice: teaching and learning; relationships with students, families and colleagues; and professional development. With these new professional standards teachers have more tools and more support to make a positive difference to students’ lives and to help shape a smarter Queensland. Equivalent Salaries Report Hon. RJ MICKEL (Logan—ALP) (Minister for State Development, Employment and Industrial Relations) (10.06 am): There has been a lot of community and media interest lately in rising house prices and the general cost of living standards around the country. There have been several reports comparing the cost of living, including housing, in Brisbane with new hotspots around the state, including the mining areas such as Moranbah. Now a new report has been released comparing Brisbane with the other capital cities, showing for the first time that Brisbane is cheaper to live in than Sydney, Melbourne or Perth. The report was commissioned by the Queensland Department of Employment and Industrial Relations and researched by Dr Paul Henman from the University of Queensland. The aim of the research was to estimate equivalent salaries that allow the achievement of a similar standard of living in Adelaide, Perth, Melbourne and Sydney. Overall, the report found that living in Sydney requires significantly more income than in Brisbane to maintain a similar living standard, ranging from about 25 per cent up to 55 per cent. The gap between Sydney and Brisbane to maintain the same living standard has reduced in the last 12 months. Melbourne households generally require a greater income than Brisbane households to achieve identical living standards, averaging between four and 10 per cent. This has remained fairly constant since 2003. Living in Adelaide requires about five to 10 per cent smaller incomes than in Brisbane to obtain the same living standard and this, too, has remained fairly constant since 2003. The figures for Brisbane and Perth have changed over the past 12 months to the extent that Perth is now generally a more expensive place to live on the same salary—about seven per cent higher. 07 Mar 2007 Ministerial Statements 687

The results show that despite the housing boom in Brisbane, the situation here is comparable with that in other Australian capital cities—except perhaps Sydney—when it comes to living standards. That, of course, is looking at the figures from an objective financial viewpoint. If we were to factor in the climate, the people, the jobs growth in this state, the prowess of our sporting teams—and, of course, this government—why would you want to live anywhere else?

Energy Industry

Hon. GJ WILSON (Ferny Grove—ALP) (Minister for Mines and Energy) (10.09 am): As we move towards full retail competition in Queensland’s energy market on 1 July this year, there will be significant marketing activity from energy retailers competing for new customers. Competition is a good thing. It creates new service and price offerings and more choice for consumers, but there must be a clear set of rules about marketing conduct. Retailers need and expect a level playing field with clear boundaries, and consumers need to have confidence in the market by knowing they have rights and protections as well. To ensure that consumers get the best out of the new competitive energy market, the Queensland government has drafted the Electricity Industry Retail Marketing Conduct Rules which commenced on 19 January this year. These rules outline when retailers can telephone or visit potential customers and how they must identify themselves, and they provide fair and accurate comparisons and easy to understand information and contracts. Most importantly, these rules also outline a standard cooling-off period of 10 days for any customer contract. While no contract can legally take effect until FRC starts on 1 July, electricity retailers can approach potential customers with offers and contracts right now. The experience of FRC in other states tells us that most retailers and their marketing contractors will behave responsibly, but there may be a minority that do the wrong thing. Even so, the rules are also designed to prevent misleading and deceptive marketing, pressure tactics or harassment of potential customers. Consumers can make complaints about marketing behaviour to the Energy Consumer Protection Office of my department or, from 1 July, to the new Energy Ombudsman for investigation. Penalties for breaches of the conduct rules are severe—up to $100,000 for individuals and $500,000 for corporations. Both the Queensland Competition Authority and the Energy Ombudsman have consumer consultative groups to ensure that the interests of everyday Queenslanders are looked after. These rules are an important safeguard for domestic and small business customers in the new retail environment in Queensland. They deliver certainty for retailers and customers alike.

Fire Safety Legislation

Hon. PD PURCELL (Bulimba—ALP) (Minister for Emergency Services) (10.11 am): This week marks the 34th anniversary of the 1973 Whiskey Au Go Go nightclub fire, and everybody would remember that fire. In those 34 years, building fire safety has come a long way in Queensland. The year after that nightclub fire, which killed 15 people in Brisbane’s Fortitude Valley, the first building fire safety legislation was introduced. This was backed up by regulations in 1975, and in the past 30 years Queensland has developed some of the toughest fire safety regulations in Australia.

Building fire safety is not just about words by lawmakers; it is also about the ability to educate, monitor and, where necessary, prosecute those who do not comply. Figures from the compliance and prosecution section of the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service show that in the past two years 50 successful cases have been brought against commercial building owners and occupiers throughout Queensland for noncompliance with fire safety regulations. Of these, the non-compliant commercial buildings include budget accommodation houses, aged-care premises, licensed premises, factories, warehouses, shops, shopping centres and offices. Just last Wednesday, a Brisbane boarding house owner and his company were fined $18,000 after being found guilty on nine charges of not complying with building fire safety regulations. I highlight this case because it shows that this government and the fire service are serious about building fire safety, and so are the courts.

This work in the area of building fire safety has not been carried out alone. In the area of budget accommodation and aged-care premises, the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service works very closely with local councils, the Department of Local Government, Planning, Sport and Recreation, the Office of Fair Trading and the Department of Housing. In the area of licensed premises, the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service works closely with police and the Liquor Licensing Division of the Department of Tourism, Fair Trading and Wine Industry Development, just to mention a few.

Building fire safety has certainly come a long way since 1973 and we make no apologies for our tough approach—it is about saving lives. The smoke alarm legislation which will come into effect on 1 July this year will further reduce the loss of lives. 688 Ministerial Statements 07 Mar 2007

North Queensland Roads Hon. PT LUCAS (Lytton—ALP) (Minister for Transport and Main Roads) (10.13 am): There has been a lot of discussion about the future of the National Highway between Cairns and Townsville after flooding closures on the Bruce Highway last month. Following Cyclone Larry last year, the federal government provided $220 million for some flood immunity projects on this vital National Highway link. Canberra also provided $148 million for an upgrade of the highway south of Tully. Again, I thank the federal government for that funding. As I have pointed out a number of times—and as the federal government has noted as well—the extra funding clearly will not provide absolute flood immunity for the Bruce Highway between Townsville and Cairns, but it will substantially reduce the time that the link is closed due to flooding. That is why it is important to talk to the community about what they can expect from these works and what they want in the future. For that reason, I will be visiting north Queensland tomorrow and Friday to inspect flooding trouble spots and to meet with peak groups, including local mayors, to discuss upgrading and flood immunity issues. This is not an opportunity to play politics. I am not going to go up there, putting it on the federal government and having a go at it. This is an opportunity to undertake consultation and talk to the community about the issues. I will be on the road, driving from Townsville to the Cardwell Range and into Cairns inspecting flood-prone areas of the Bruce Highway. I am keen to talk to the groups along the Townsville to Cairns corridor about the planning for the flood immunity upgrades and involve them in the decision-making process. Rest assured, I will be taking every opportunity in the future to raise road projects that the federal government could have constructed with the money it has wasted building a bypass of the Ipswich Motorway that is $1.2 billion more expensive than the preferred alternative. But that is not the purpose of this trip, and I do not propose to do it that way. Given that the funds being provided for the National Highway will not provide a flood-free route between Townsville and Cairns, it is important the community be consulted so that they understand that point. An integral part of this is establishing a widely accepted flood immunity objective for future upgrades to be consistently applied to projects along the whole link. The state government has already made progress on a number of projects, including a $53 million federally funded package of safety works. Planning and design work for major flood immunity projects has also begun on a number of other projects, including the Mulgrave River at Gordonvale and several crossings on the Herbert River flood plain north and south of Ingham. Planning and design work has also been completed for a four-lane upgrade between Woodlands Shopping Centre and Veales Road. Main Roads has sent a separate funding submission to the federal department of transport for this project. I should also clarify some comments the Leader of the Opposition made on radio when he was in far-north Queensland recently. Mr Seeney interjected. Mr LUCAS: Just listen to what I say. He said that the state government had received the funds from the federal government and should get construction underway. While it is true that the federal government has provided funding in advance of actual works—which is not normally done—Canberra still needs to decide which projects will actually be constructed. It is like lawyers or accountants receiving money in a trust account. They cannot go off and just spend it. I would love to go off and spend this money and do what I like, but I cannot do that. I need permission from Canberra. Main Roads met with federal transport representatives on 7 December last year to discuss the various projects. We are yet to hear from the federal government about how it would like to proceed. I have written to the Deputy Prime Minister, Mark Vaile—and I specifically raised this with him last week—regarding the need for the federal government to give us permission to proceed further. I would like to reiterate the importance of involving the local community in addressing the broader issues—which is exactly why I am travelling to far-north Queensland tomorrow and Friday.

Security Improvement Program Hon. AP FRASER (Mount Coot-tha—ALP) (Minister for Local Government, Planning and Sport) (10.16 am): The Beattie government is determined to ensure that each and every Queenslander lives in the safest possible community—a fact affirmed by the minister for police in this House yesterday. Local governments play a key role, and the Beattie government seeks to support them through the Security Improvement Program. That is why today I can announce that busy pathways will be illuminated and surveillance cameras will be installed in known metropolitan and regional trouble spots in a statewide security initiative designed to increase the public safety of all Queenslanders. The Security Improvement Program sees 31 councils across Queensland today receive subsidies totalling almost $2 million toward public safety and security initiatives. Councils can access subsidies of up to 60 per cent of the costs under this program. They nominate the projects and we assist with funding supplementation. 07 Mar 2007 Ministerial Statements 689

All Queenslanders have a fundamental right to feel and be safe in their communities, and the state government is committed to helping councils improve safety and security in their regions. This program assists councils put in place the measures to achieve just that—to install the equipment needed to help reduce crime in public places and to ensure that local communities remain safe and secure. In many ways this is a vital program—an important program—which goes a long way to helping councils improve safety for ratepayers and visitors alike. In this latest round of SIP funding, key projects include: $203,00 for installation of closed-circuit television cameras and security lighting in Cairns; $176,000 for street lighting in the foreshore and parks along the Mooloolaba Spit; $118,000 to install eight CCTV cameras in the Townsville CBD; $88,000 for security lighting throughout Laguna Park at Palm Beach on the Gold Coast; and $120,000 for eight CCTV cameras in Ipswich’s Brisbane Street precinct. Increasingly, CCTV surveillance has become a necessary component of street safety in our key cities and larger towns. It is systems like these which allow a more rapid response to antisocial behaviour like vandalism and alcohol related violence. They also provide police with a critical tool for use in their investigations. In the bigger picture though, it is systems like these that afford all Queenslanders peace of mind and offer us all a safer community in which to work and play. We join with local government in providing these improvements to communities across Queensland. Surf Safety Initiatives Hon. MM KEECH (Albert—ALP) (Minister for Tourism, Fair Trading, Wine Industry Development and Women) (10.19 am): Each year, millions of tourists visit Queensland’s beaches, which are acknowledged as the best in the world. That is why the Beattie government is determined to further improve surf safety on Queensland’s beaches. A recent meeting of a government working group focused on visitor safety set in motion plans for a range of new surf safety initiatives. The plans were formulated following a summit to improve visitor water safety which I convened in early January. I called that meeting after two tragic drownings and five near drownings on the Gold Coast. Sadly, there has been another drowning and scores of serious incidents on beaches since. One of the outcomes was a plan to target key airlines to help us communicate safety messages to passengers on incoming flights. We will also be approaching major airports about displaying safety messages. We will also discuss with Main Roads the possibility of including simple surf safety messages on road signs, reminding visitors to swim between the flags and to check conditions. Educating lifesavers and lifeguards about how different cultures behave on the beach is another option. Last week I told inbound tourism operators from around Queensland and Australia attending an Australian Tourism Export Council familiarisation meeting on the Gold Coast that they had a vital role to play in educating tourists. I told them that they were in a position to save lives. I also told them that I want the tourism industry and lifesavers to work in a very strong partnership. Including representatives of Surf Life Saving Queensland at major industry events, such as the Australian Tourism Exchange to be held in Brisbane in May, would give the inbound tourism industry an insight into the role of lifesavers and increase awareness of the absolute necessity to swim between the red and yellow flags. I want lifesavers to have access to tourism industry seminars on international markets to help them understand different cultures and visitor behaviours. Other initiatives we are considering include extending the existing beach walk scheme for large tour groups. We want to have safety information included with electronic travel authority visas and improve information available for inbound operators and tour guides to pass on to tourists. Although the number of drownings on Queensland beaches continues to decrease, one drowning is one too many. The Beattie government is committed to looking at new approaches to help achieve the goal of zero preventable deaths and injuries on the state’s beaches. In the Year of the Surf Lifesaver, on behalf of the tourism industry I thank the thousands of volunteer surf lifesavers and lifeguards on patrol around Queensland for the absolutely tremendous job they do in protecting our visitors. Gold Coast Housing Company Hon. RE SCHWARTEN (Rockhampton—ALP) (Minister for Public Works, Housing and Information and Communication Technology) (10.22 am): I am pleased to announce today that the Queensland government will provide assistance of $15 million over the next three years to the newly formed Gold Coast Housing Company. The first part of this assistance will be approximately $3.3 million to provide an additional 10 properties to further boost the service it provides. The Gold Coast Housing Company is a not-for-profit charitable company formed in 2006 when the Department of Housing funded the Gold Coast Vision Housing Ltd and the Gold Coast Community Housing Association amalgamation to form a housing company to better meet the needs of low-income earners on the Gold Coast. The Gold Coast has experienced enormous population growth in recent years, and this has placed significant pressure on housing in the region. 690 Civil Liability (Good Samaritan) Amendment Bill 07 Mar 2007

Average private rental rates on the Gold Coast have increased by more than 50 per cent over the last five years and more than 22,000 households are experiencing housing stress. Clearly, there is a need for innovative housing solutions to address this crisis. I am delighted that the Gold Coast City Council has grasped this opportunity by making $3 million of assistance available to the Gold Coast Housing Company over the next three years. I am also delighted to announce today that I have approved a one-off grant of $30,000 that will allow the company to employ a project worker to assist it to amalgamate with other housing providers in the area. This Queensland government funding will assist the Gold Coast Housing Company to both increase its portfolio and broaden service delivery and provide a platform for growth into the future.

NOTICE OF MOTION

Health Mr COPELAND (Cunningham—NPA) (10.24 am): I give notice that I shall move— That this House notes that the Queensland Government believes "Queenslanders are more than ever embracing a healthy lifestyle; eating more fruit and vegetables, undertaking greater physical activity, giving up smoking and being more responsible with their alcohol intake" as quoted in the Queensland Public Hospitals Performance Report 2005-06 Page 4, and considers— 1. Mandatory physical activity must be introduced for all Queensland schoolchildren; 2. All Queensland schools should have an immunization register providing information on the immunization status of all attending children; and 3. Drug and Alcohol education must be provided to all Queensland schoolchildren.

CIVIL LIABILITY (GOOD SAMARITAN) AMENDMENT BILL

First Reading Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (10.25 am): I present a bill for an act to amend the Civil Liability Act 2003. I present the explanatory notes, and I move— That the bill be now read a first time. Motion agreed to. Second Reading Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (10.25 am): I move— That the bill be now read a second time. The bill which I present today amends current civil liability legislation in Queensland so that legal protection is afforded to persons in our community who, without fee or reward, or the expectation of such, assist others in emergency situations. Currently, the community is, in the main, cautious about assisting others in need because of the fear of being accused of causing further injury and, in turn, exposing themselves to legal liability. The threat of litigation has also perpetuated within the community an attitude that it is best not to get involved. Such reluctance to assist runs contrary to the Australian way of life and our renowned willingness to look after our mates. This legislation will allow us to look after our mates without the threat of unnecessary litigation. I seek leave to incorporate the rest of my second reading speech in Hansard. Leave granted. The principal instigation for this legislation occurred in March last year, when the prominent Queensland opera singer, Delmae Barton, suffered a medical attack and lay for more than five hours on a bus stop seat near Griffith University’s Nathan Campus. Ms Barton, or “Aunty Delmae” as she is affectionately referred to, was finally assisted by a group of international students, who alerted authorities and ensured that Ms Barton was taken to hospital. On 7 March 2006, the Premier, in answering a question put to him by the Member for Mansfield concerning Ms Barton’s incident, said: When I read the report this morning I was really disappointed not just because a lady was allowed to lie unattended near a bus station for so long, but because it actually says something about our society. We have all gotten so busy in our lives that we have forgotten, to some extent, to care for those around us. This is really quite sad. It is an opportunity for us to say to the community: please, the whole thing about the human race is that we are a community; we support one another. We need to be caring for one another. If someone is lying on the road, we obviously need to give them help… … it really does say something about us. I want to appeal to Queenslanders today: if there is someone lying on the side of the road, do the good samaritan thing. We should not leave them lying there. Australians are noted for their giving of a fair go, their commitment and their compassion. We should never lose it. Even in this crazy 21st century in which we live we should not lose the dignity, respect and support that goes with the traditional values we hold. I urge people to think about those traditional values. In concurrence with the Premier’s statement, the Opposition seeks to amend current civil liability legislation in Queensland so that such “traditional values” are ensured. 07 Mar 2007 Private Members’ Statements 691

Currently in Queensland, Part 5 of the Law Reform Act 1995 (Qld) extends legal protection to medical practitioners, nurses and other persons prescribed under regulation in respect of an act done or omitted to be done in the course of rendering medical care, aid or assistance to an injured person in circumstances of an emergency. In order to attract protection under that Act, the care or aid must have been done or omitted in good faith and without gross negligence. Where services are performed, they must have been done so without fee or reward or expectation of fee or reward. The circumstance of emergency covered by this Part must have arisen at or near the scene of an incident or other occurrence constituting the emergency or while the injured person is being transported from the scene of the incident or other occurrence constituting the emergency to a hospital or other place at which adequate medical care is available. Under the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld), s 26 of that Act provides that liability does not attach to persons rendering first aid or other assistance while performing duties to enhance public safety for an entity prescribed under a regulation. Such entities include the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service, the Royal Life Saving Society and St John Ambulance Australia. Section 27 of the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) offers similar protection to that provided by s 26 except that it extends to entities prescribed under regulation. The prescribed entities are seemingly the same as those just listed. Unlike jurisdictions, such as Victoria and Western Australia, no legal protection is afforded in Queensland legislation to other persons who, without fee or reward, or the expectation of such, assist persons in emergency situations. This legislation seeks to rectify that. While the term “Good Samaritan” is not specifically used in the operational provisions of the bill, it is the intention of this legislation that protection will extend to persons such as passers-by or those who witness an accident and offer well intended assistance without actual or contemplated financial reward. With the Christmas holidays not long passed and the Easter break soon upon us, the presentation of this bill is timely. In any holiday period, with many families travelling on our roads; a significant portion of Queenslanders and tourists lining our beaches; and Queenslanders generally enjoying the holiday period, it is unfortunately likely that emergency situations will arise. While some tragedy is inevitable, assistance should not be discouraged by legal uncertainty or the threat of liability. Although there has been no successful litigation against Good Samaritans in Queensland to date, the threat nevertheless persists. The community deserves the legislative certainty that if they reasonably assist persons in distress, they will be legally protected. I commend the bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Shine, adjourned.

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

Water Crisis Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (10.26 am): Much effort has been made this morning in the parliament to distance the government from the latest piece of evidence that it was warned over and over again about the impending water crisis. Not only was it warned over and over again by the opposition but it was also warned over and over again by its own departments. No matter how much those opposite try to run and wriggle and hide they cannot hide from the words in the report itself. I heard the argument put this morning that this report was just for local governments. It says on the very first page— This report has been prepared solely for the benefit of the Queensland department of natural resources. It says in the first paragraph of the executive summary— The aim is to identify an appropriate balance between capacity expansion and increasing the efficiency of water use. It was about achieving a balance between capacity expansion and water efficiency. The Beattie government achieved a balance all right. It achieved a perfect balance. It did nothing about capacity expansion and did nothing about water efficiency so nothing balanced nothing. On balance it did absolutely nothing. It did absolutely nothing about any of the options. It did absolutely nothing about any of the recommendations that were made by its own departments. It did absolutely nothing about any of the warnings that were given to it year after year after year. It did nothing at all. Those opposite come into this parliament this morning and try to wriggle, hide and run away from that, but their efforts mean nothing because the people of Queensland know who is responsible for the water crisis. They know who is responsible for the water crisis. When we finally find out the impact of level 5 restrictions they will know who is responsible for that as well. Commonwealth State Territory Disability Agreement Mr HINCHLIFFE (Stafford—ALP) (10.28 am): On behalf of the thousands of Queenslanders living with a disability and their families, I express my extreme disappointment in the federal government’s failure to respond to the urgent and apparent need for an increased contribution to the fourth iteration of the Commonwealth State Territory Disability Agreement. As parliamentary secretary to the minister for disability services, late last year I gave evidence to the Senate community affairs committee’s inquiry into the funding and operation of the CSTDA. I stressed to senators from all parties Queensland’s concern that the Commonwealth contribution to disability funding had dropped to less than 20 per cent, leaving the states and territories to provide over 80 per cent. As at today the Commonwealth’s level of funding to Queensland represents 16 per 692 Questions Without Notice 07 Mar 2007 cent. The senators heard this plea and unanimously reported on the overwhelming unmet need and called upon all governments to increase funding. In the life of the current agreement, due to expire in June, Queensland has provided disability funding in the order of $338 million more than required under CSTDA3. However, Howard government minister Mal Brough has turned his back on these pleas and refused to provide additional money towards services for Australians living with a disability. Instead of helping Australians living with a disability and their families, Mal Brough’s response has consisted of blaming the states and territories and questioning the accountability of the disability service providers. I urge Mr Brough to read the Senate report and genuinely return to the negotiating table with the states and territories; otherwise fair-minded Queenslanders, especially those in Longman, will turn their back on him.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Montgomery Watson Report Mr SEENEY (10.30 am): My first question without notice is to the Premier. Premier, I refer to this report that was commissioned in 1999 by the department of natural resources which lists as its objective, and I will quote it for the House again in full— The aim of Least Cost Planning or Integrated Resource Planning is to identify an appropriate balance between system operation/ capacity expansion costs and the savings associated with programs aimed at increasing the efficiency of water use. Can the Premier confirm that his government did nothing about capacity expansion or water efficiency in the years following that report being released? Why did the Premier do nothing while the dams ran dry? Mr BEATTIE: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. A government member interjected. Mr BEATTIE: It is not quite a dorothy dixer; it is easier. The reality is that of course my government has been planning over a long period of time and delivering over a long period of time. As members know, and as I have said before, we are the only state in Australia in the last 10 years to have built a dam and we built the Paradise Dam. That is one. No-one is going to argue about the Paradise Dam because— Mr Messenger: We shamed you into it! Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Member for Burnett! Mr BEATTIE: Please do not be rude. Just behave yourself once in a while. Mr Seeney: He might be rude but he’s right. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Leader of the Opposition! Mr BEATTIE: No, he is just permanently rude. Mr Seeney: No, he’s right. Mr BEATTIE: Is there a Paradise Dam? Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Premier, please direct your comments through the chair. Mr BEATTIE: Through you, Mr Acting Speaker—is there a dam? Mr Seeney: Yes, because of us! Mr BEATTIE: I promised the Paradise Dam in an election campaign and delivered it. It was never promised by the opposition—never funded, never talked about. Mr Seeney: Oh, rubbish! Mr BEATTIE: What a lot of nonsense! Next those opposite will be claiming responsibility for Christmas. I went up there and promised it and delivered it. Until then the people in that area had given up on the National Party. What a joke! I promised it personally and we delivered it. What a joke! Do not talk to me about nonsense. Let us come back to this report. There are many things that have been delivered since this report came out, and I was just talking to the minister for primary industries about a project in Mackay—it is one of the places referred to, by the way—worth $38 million for a water re-use plant. If members read this report—and I urge members to do so—nowhere in this report does it talk about some looming crisis about water. Do members know why? This report was not about supply. This was not about supply. I remind everybody— Ms Bligh interjected. 07 Mar 2007 Questions Without Notice 693

Mr BEATTIE: Let me tell the House that at the time Wivenhoe was at 93 per cent. A few months later the dam was at 99 per cent. What we are getting out of this is the usual distortion by the Leader of the Opposition. He takes the front of the document and he says, ‘This report has been prepared solely for the benefit of the Queensland department of natural resources.’ But he did not finish reading it. If one goes on, it says— No liability is accepted by this company or any employee or consultant of this company with respect to the use of any other person. The disclaimer shall apply notwithstanding ... Do members know what that is? That is the normal legal disclaimer that is actually handed out by lawyers. It is the normal statement in a document regarding intellectual property. I have to tell members— Opposition members interjected. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Opposition members interjected. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! I am on my feet! Mr BEATTIE: This is about who pays the bill. That is what this is about. This is about the normal legal liability. Who pays the bill? Who controls the intellectual property? How can we believe the Leader of the Opposition when he cannot even read the introduction! He cannot even understand the introduction! Montgomery Watson Report Mr SEENEY: Desperation. My second question without notice— Mr Beattie: Maybe Willprint will pay for the document. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition has the call. Mr SEENEY: My second question without notice is to the minister for natural resources. Can the minister confirm that in the year 2000 his department put out 39 press releases and 13 of them were about the drought? To help jog his memory, I will table a list. Tabled paper: List of dates and titles of media releases. Some 30 per cent of the press releases that his department put out were about the drought. At the same time his government completely ignored the recommendations of the report that has been the subject of debate this morning. Can the minister tell the House how much water would be left in Wivenhoe Dam if the recommendations of that report had been adopted when they were made rather than six years later when we have a water crisis? Mr WALLACE: I cannot recall that in 2000 because I was not actually in this place. I was somewhere else. So I cannot actually comment on the leader’s question. The Deputy Premier, the Premier and I made some comprehensive statements this morning regarding this issue. The Montgomery Watson report was part of a strategy to inform local governments about demand management options and benefits. It was not focused on south-east Queensland, as has been pointed out. It used five pilot studies in communities throughout the state—in Toowoomba, Emerald, Mackay, Maroochy and Ingham. In late 2000 Wivenhoe was at 93 per cent. It was at full capacity not long afterwards. No-one could seriously suggest that the state override councils at the time and force them to spend millions on water-saving devices. Since the report was produced this government has taken over control of water management. We have taken comprehensive steps to address both demand management and water supply issues. It is surprising to hear the opposition hounding us on this when it does not support the western corridor recycling project. Willprint Ms MALE: My question without notice is to the Premier. Premier, printed material is a key component of any election campaign. Is the Premier aware of any audit process of this activity undertaken as part of the recent state election campaign? Mr BEATTIE: I think this is an important question, and I know the opposition would not want to ask the $67,000 question which is referred to— Mr Messenger: How about the $300,000 question? Mr BEATTIE:—in the Australian this morning. Mr Messenger: We’ve heard about that one. Mr BEATTIE: I tell you what: we have heard about you, too, and I will deal with you a little bit later. The opposition does not want to know about this rort within the Liberal Party—this rort which frankly all Queenslanders should be concerned about. The whiff of corruption in the Liberal Party is getting stronger and stronger and the state Liberals are being drawn into it. I call again on the member 694 Questions Without Notice 07 Mar 2007 for Moggill to refer this whole sorry affair to the Crime and Misconduct Commission and the Queensland Electoral Commission as I have done in the past. I call on him to follow my lead. At the least he could provide invoices by the Queensland division of the Liberal Party for printing material produced at the state election campaign. Do they even exist? Is this part of the Australian Federal Police investigation? Let us clear this all up today. I call on all political parties, including the Queensland National Party, in the Queensland election to table what they spent on printing costs and table receipts and supporting documents. I will come into the House and table it for the Labor Party next week. I challenge the National Party and the Liberal Party to do exactly the same thing. Come on! If those opposite have nothing to hide, come in here and do it. The member for Moggill was on ABC Radio last year— Mr Messenger: What about the government advertising? Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Member for Burnett! Mr Messenger: What about the— Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Member for Burnett, I warn you under standing order 253. Mr BEATTIE: I might just alert everyone that, in relation to the member for Burnett, the patients of the Bundaberg Hospital have actually asked him not to be involved anymore. I think that says a great deal about him. The member for Moggill was on ABC Radio last year and was asked— I’ve heard from a few people too that some contestants handed over up to $100,000 in money to the party to be returned through advertising in their own electorates and that money went maybe to other seats higher up the priority list. Will you investigate those claims? What did he say? What did the member for Moggill say? He said— I think there needs to be a thorough and frank examination of the election. Well, I agree with him. I agree with him, and now is his chance to do it. There is no time like the present, member for Moggill. You said it; let us have it. I think there needs to be a full investigation. You need to have the courage to get the material from Liberal Party headquarters if they will ever ring you back, get it in the car and take it down to the CMC or to the Electoral Commission. Old documents certainly show that Willprint is the state Liberal Party preferred printer of choice. In fact, returns to the Queensland Electoral Commission show it is donor, creditor and contractor. Not bad: it is donor, creditor and contractor, and we are having a good look, let me tell you, Leader of the Liberal Party. Documents show that there were payments to Willprint of more than half a million dollars in one year, and that was not even in an election year—not even in an election year! One can understand why Gary Hardgrave is trying to run around and hide from all of this. All of this material was printed by Willprint, and I will table it so members can have a good look at it. Tabled paper: Various brochures published by Mr Gary Hardgrave MP. I cannot understand why those opposite have not had the courage to do it. Time expired. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Prior to calling the Leader of the Liberal Party, I acknowledge in the public gallery students, staff and parents from Wondall Heights State School in the electorate of Lytton, represented in the chamber by the Hon. Paul Lucas. Queensland Health Dr FLEGG: My question without notice is to the Acting Minister for Health. I refer the minister to the Queensland public hospitals performance report that she tabled yesterday. The report shows a dramatic increase in the number of clinical staff over the past five years, yet amazingly it shows that fewer elective operations have been performed and that there was a decrease in response times for patients in emergency departments. Why are we spending billions more on health and employing thousands more staff, but getting less than we did five years ago? Ms BOYLE: I appreciate the question, because there is so much within the first Queensland public hospitals performance report that should be discussed, and it should be discussed widely amongst health professionals and also in the parliament. The Minister for Health, Stephen Robertson, and the Beattie government can be very proud that we have laid out all of this information for discussion. We can look at the major 42 hospitals around the state, see what they are doing well and see how the millions of dollars in increased funding is making a difference to our health system. The elective surgery figures are very interesting indeed and the member is right to raise them. Elective surgery in public hospitals has remained stable over the period 2000-01 and 2005-06. In fact, there is only a small drop of a couple of hundred. It is a marginal decline and the pattern shows stability. Why is that so? Because emergency surgery, which of course is the most urgent type of surgery, has escalated rapidly. It is being provided as a priority over elective surgery cases. In fact, there has been a 21 per cent growth in emergency department presentations, which translates—wait for this—into a 35 per cent growth in emergency surgery over the same period. 07 Mar 2007 Questions Without Notice 695

If we take the figures in balance, nearly the same number of elective surgery procedures are being performed while, at the same time, with increased resources and an increase in staff numbers, the system has managed to deal with a 35 per cent growth in emergency surgery. Therefore, congratulations all round are deserved. Clearly some years ago in Queensland there was no projection of the huge growth in demand that would be placed on health services, let alone the huge growth particularly in emergency surgery. My compliments go to all those associated with coping with that huge growth, which is reflected in the public hospitals report that is before us. In terms of elective surgery, what are we doing? We are having further discussions with the private sector about how we may use their spare capacity in order to increase elective surgery in the future. While I am on my feet, I would like to thank the AMA. Yesterday Dr Zelle Hodge issued a media release in response to this report. I agree with all of the comments that she has made. She gives recognition to the government for the improvements that have been made. Of course, she and the AMA wish for further improvements to be made and recognise that further resourcing is necessary in the years to come.

Willprint Mr FINN: My question without notice is to the Premier. The revelations regarding Printgate appear to show a gross misuse of taxpayer funds. I ask: is the Premier aware of any similar examples? Mr BEATTIE: The answer to the question is, yes, I am. If we look at the sad and sorry story of the Liberal Party, we will see that back in 1998 the then state director of the Liberal Party was caught red- handed at Liberal Party headquarters unloading boxes of stationary from the boot of his car. The stationary was from the office of Senator Warwick Parer, who happens to be the current President of the Liberal Party. We can see the trend emerging and smell the stench of corruption that hangs over the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party was so broke that it had to use stationary from a senator’s office to operate its headquarters. That senator is now the President of the Liberal Party. Now they are broke again and they are at it again. Mr Lucas: They need an extension cord to plug in the photocopier. Mr BEATTIE: That is right. They run an extension cord from the senator’s office to the Liberal Party headquarters to save on power. The member for Moggill and the Liberal Party state director are at it again. I say to the Leader of the Liberal Party that I have looked at these documents and he needs to come clean. Who printed them all? I will table them. There are two of his, and one for Marie Jackson, a candidate for the Liberals, and for Lynne Jennings, the Liberal candidate for South Brisbane. They are all there. Tabled paper: Various Liberal Party brochures. I ask the Leader of the Liberal Party: were they funded by taxpayers through the federal members of parliament? He should come clean. I make it very clear to the Leader of the Liberal Party that if he does not show some leadership and send these matters to the CMC, I will. We will be sending them tomorrow. He needs to explain this to the CMC. Today the Australian states— The offices of three Brisbane-based government MPs, a printing firm and a graphic artist were raided on Friday amid allegations bogus invoices and a ‘phantom’ electoral staff member were used to build a political slush fund for the Queensland division of the Liberal Party. We need to know: did they work for the member in the last state campaign? Do they work for anyone at the state Liberal Party headquarters? Do members remember the Vasta free vouchers? Ms Bligh: The Vasta vouchers! Mr BEATTIE: They were printed by Willprint. They were free vouchers. Mr Welford: A free Cold Rock. Mr BEATTIE: Exactly, you got the lot. You got a free icecream from Cold Rock. The way that the member opposite is going, he might get a bit of hot rock. All of these free vouchers were printed by Willprint. In our view, this is one of the most serious corruption crises facing any political party. You need to come clean. If you have nothing to hide, you should gather up all of the free vouchers and get Willprint’s accounts, go down to the CMC and give them the documents. You have to come clean. We now have suggestions about ghost employees. The corruption and stench of the Liberal Party will hang over you— Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! The Premier will direct his comments through the chair. Mr BEATTIE: Through you, Mr Speaker—until you have enough courage to go to the CMC and have it cleared. If he is worried about it, he should read the Australian because a Liberal Party member has already been to the CMC. A Liberal Party member has more courage than he has. 696 Questions Without Notice 07 Mar 2007

Queensland Health Mr LANGBROEK: My question without notice is to the Acting Minister for Health. I refer her to the Queensland public hospitals performance report that she tabled yesterday, and I ask: does she consider it a success that her government is making some of Queensland’s people who are the most sick wait 20 per cent longer for urgent category 1 operations? How does she explain that her government has spent more than $120 million extra on its elective surgery program, which has obviously failed because of longer waits for urgent surgery? Ms BOYLE: I am pleased to have a further couple of minutes to address some of the issues concerning elective surgery, surgery, staffing and the better performance of our Queensland public hospitals. In particular, I am pleased to have the opportunity to address some recent statements made by the member for Surfers Paradise about the government’s $95 million election commitment to provide elective surgery centres at QEII, Redcliffe and Caboolture hospitals. The member for Surfers Paradise criticised this government’s plan to build elective surgery centres, despite the fact that those centres will deliver thousands of additional operations each year once they are fully up and running. The elective surgery centres at Redcliffe and Caboolture hospitals are already delivering additional elective surgery. The 30-bed elective surgery centre at QEII will provide dedicated beds to be used exclusively by patients requiring elective surgery. Design and scoping for this project is already underway. It is apparent that the opposition wishes to complain but contributes absolutely no positive ideas on further reducing elective surgery waits and, of course, has no idea about how capital works are actually delivered. On the issue of greater flexibility within the health system in order to better deliver elective surgery, which must perforce be given a second rating behind emergency surgery and category 1 procedures, I have to compliment the Bundaberg Base Hospital. I wish to inform honourable members of an initiative that that hospital has taken up. The Director of Nursing at the Bundaberg Hospital is Debbie Carroll. She and her team have come up with the 23-hour concept, which is the first of its kind in regional Queensland. It is recognised that the theatre in which the elective surgery is carried out is used for only part of the day, generally during the main business hours of the day. Instead, that hospital is going to experiment with rolling staff so that surgery, particularly elective surgery, can take place day and night, particularly on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays. The elective surgery waiting lists for Bundaberg in the past quarter are positive, with no category 1 patients waiting longer than recommended. The hospital has already had reductions in both category 2 and 3 patient waiting lists. This type of initiative is indeed welcome. It is reflective of the flexibility that now exists in our hospitals. Local hospitals are encouraged to come up with their own way to solve the problem of the huge demand in our public hospital system. Traveston Dam Mr WELLS: My question is to the honourable Treasurer and Minister for Infrastructure. This week the ACIL Tasman report into the economic future of the Traveston Crossing Dam has been released. Will the minister provide information about identified benefits that the dam will offer? Ms BLIGH: I thank the honourable member for the question. Members may well have seen that a report commissioned on the economic impact of the Traveston Crossing Dam was released to the community futures group this week. I table a copy of that for the benefit of the House. Tabled paper: Report, by ACIL Tasman, dated February 2007, titled ‘Scoping Economic Futures—Traveston Crossing Region.’ As the report outlines, a $1.7 billion investment into this region is a once-in-a-lifetime economic opportunity for the Mary Valley and the Gympie region. I was not surprised to hear dam opponents being very dismissive of this report. But I would have to say that I was very surprised to read recent comments of the mayor of the Cooloola shire, Mick Venardos, dismissing the report as some kind of spin that was written by the state government. ACIL Tasman is a very well recognised economic policy— Mr Lucas: Internationally. Ms BLIGH: Internationally recognised policy team. I think its work is very helpful in our understanding of this material. According to ABS data, the mayor of Cooloola shire presides over one of the most depressed economies in Australia. According to the ABS index of relative socioeconomic advantage and disadvantage, the Cooloola shire is in the lowest 10 per cent of all shires in this country. What does that mean? That with a state unemployment rate of four per cent, the Cooloola shire has a rate of 8.2 per cent—double. Mr Gibson: Shame, Beattie government, shame! Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Member for Gympie! 07 Mar 2007 Questions Without Notice 697

Ms BLIGH: The Cooloola shire has a higher percentage of low-income earners with an average of $30,000 compared to a Brisbane average of $37,000 and a welfare dependency rate— Mr Gibson: And the solution’s a dam? Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Member for Gympie, I warn you under standing order 253. Ms BLIGH: And a welfare dependency rate of more than 35 per cent compared to a Queensland average of 23 per cent. Pool old Mick Venardos. As I said, there he is presiding over one of the lowest and most depressed economies in the country. Someone offers him $1.7 billion worth of investment and he thinks that it is a bad idea. What does this study show? That the existing agricultural sector is mature and that the dam offers new horticultural opportunities in areas such as fruit growing, macadamia nut farming and turf farms owing to new water allocations. It also puts into perspective some of the claims of those opposite, because it demonstrates that only 1.7 per cent of the agricultural land will be used by the dam. Mr Gibson interjected. Ms BLIGH: I note all the opposition to the dam. Public Hospital Beds Mr McARDLE: My question is to the Acting Minister for Health. I refer to the Queensland public hospitals performance report, tabled by the minister yesterday. The minister’s government always blames population growth for its dismal failure to make any inroads into waiting lists. Yet yesterday’s report shows Queenslanders have lost 500 hospital beds in 10 years. How does slashing 500 hospital beds help us to provide health services in a period of significant population growth? Ms BOYLE: I am indeed pleased to answer the question asked by the honourable member, because there are several tables related to the numbers of beds in our 42 major public hospitals in Queensland and this is an opportunity for me to explain them. Overall, since the early 1990s there has been no increase in hospital bed numbers in Queensland. In fact, there was a period of decrease in the number of beds, and that period occurred over a number of years, including the years of the Borbidge government. This was owing to the belief at the time, which was shared by all the states of Australia and the Western World, that there was going to be a very much shorter stay in beds in public hospitals. So even allowing for some growth, we would not need as many beds. Women would—as they do now— have their babies and go home very quickly. Even after surgery, women would be moved out of hospitals really fast. I would have to say that at that time these reports were accepted by all in the health systems. They were written by doctors and, as has been proven to be so, they were excessively optimistic. In Queensland, these reports also did not allow for the increase in demand, with the 1,500 people coming to Queensland each week. We have been remedying that situation. I would like to draw the attention of the honourable member to the increase in the number of critical care beds, which is reflected in our public hospitals’ report. I also have to inform honourable members that the bed numbers in the report do not include the 1,490 psychiatric beds in our hospitals and mental health facilities. I also remind honourable members that we have already committed to 860 new beds across the state by 2007-08, which is not so far away, and, on top of that, a further 499 new beds by 2011-12. The report also does not include the 750 beds at the new Gold Coast Hospital, the 650 beds at the new hospital on the Sunshine Coast, plus 400 beds at the new Queensland Children’s Hospital. Our $10 billion Health Action Plan is rolling out the beds and the additional staff as fast as it can. However, while I am on my feet I might take issue with one small point that was mentioned in the AMA’s press release yesterday in relation to the report. The AMA said that poor performance by a hospital may mean that it is not appropriately resourced. Although that may be true, there may well also be other reasons. It may be through a particular cohort of patients, it may be due to staff changes, it may be owing to the level of expertise in a specialty available to a hospital, and it may be a flow-on problem in terms of other hospitals to which patients may need to be referred. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Prior to calling the honourable member for Keppel, I welcome to the public gallery staff, students and parents from the Wondall Heights State School in the electorate of Lytton, which is represented in this House by the Hon. Paul Lucas. Irrigators, Rebates Mr HOOLIHAN: My question is to the Hon. Minister for Natural Resources and Water. Can the minister outline to the House the current position with rebates for drought-affected Queensland irrigators? 698 Questions Without Notice 07 Mar 2007

Mr WALLACE: I thank the honourable member for his question. I know that he is a tireless advocate for irrigators and other users of water in his electorate. The Beattie government is doing all that it can to assist primary producers who are affected by the current drought. Between the years 2001- 02 and 2007-08, the total drought assistance from this government is expected to be $221 million. In December, as part of a $32.5 million package, the Beattie government announced rebates on part A tariffs for irrigators who are receiving an announced allocation of 20 per cent or less. The good news is that, beginning today, irrigators will be able to submit their applications for rebates under this scheme. QRAA—the old Queensland Rural Adjustment Authority—will start assessing applications for the three quarterly bills that have already been paid by irrigators since 1 July 2006. I congratulate QRAA for taking rebate applications sooner rather than later by starting on these past payments. The guidelines and application form will be available on the QRAA web site from tomorrow at www.qraa.qld.gov.au. To reduce red tape, irrigators will have to make only a one-off application for the whole rebate period, which runs from 1 July 2006 to 30 June 2008. The Beattie government introduced the irrigators fixed water charge rebate scheme to provide rebates in areas where there is low or has been low water availability due to the prolonged drought. Under the scheme, eligible irrigators can receive up to $10,000 per year on invoices that are paid during the two-year rebate period. Irrigators must be customers of SunWater or another water service provider or a water licence holder of the Department of Natural Resources and Water. They must be paying fixed water charges and meet the 20 per cent or less low water availability threshold and have paid their water charges invoices from 1 July 2006. The rebate will be calculated on the period of time irrigators have received the 20 per cent or less announced allocation. In some cases, irrigators could receive a rebate of 100 per cent of the fixed water charges due to the lack of water available in the current bill period and the previous three financial years. Where irrigators are suffering financial hardship and are unable to pay their water charges invoices up-front, the rebate amount will be made payable to the water service provider or the Department of Natural Resources and Water. This is good news for irrigators and good news for farmers. It just goes to show that the Beattie government stands up for irrigators and farmers in Queensland. We did that when we went to Canberra a couple of weeks ago and met with the Prime Minister. I congratulate the Premier for the stand he took at that meeting, standing up for irrigators and farmers in Queensland.

Police and Corrective Services, Disciplinary Action Mr FOLEY: My question without notice is to the Minister for Police and Corrective Services. Police officers accused of committing criminal offences are allowed to continue to work or are suspended on pay, whereas a Corrective Services officer was suspended without pay whilst on stress leave and then terminated over allegations of administrative offences. Could the minister explain why police officers accused of committing criminal offences are treated more favourably than Corrective Services officers accused of committing administrative offences? I fear that unless this duplicitous situation is addressed the career option of becoming a Corrective Services officer could become about as popular as lunch with Brian Burke. Ms SPENCE: I thank the member for Maryborough for the question. Before I answer the question, I would like to pass on my best wishes to Constable Wong. In Wynnum yesterday Constable Wong chased a man who had just been sentenced to four months jail time and he took off from the court. Constable Wong, while chasing this offender, fell over and is very seriously ill in hospital today. I am sure I pass on the best wishes of all members of this House to him as he was badly hurt in the course of doing his basic duties. With respect to the assumption behind the member’s question, he is basically saying that Corrective Services officers are treated more seriously and more harshly than police officers in disciplinary matters. I reject that assertion absolutely. I do not know the particular incident or the officer that the member is talking about. I am happy to look into that and give him a more detailed explanation of why the officer was given that kind of discipline. Usually when I look into the facts of the matter—and I do from time to time as these cases are brought to my attention—I concur with the actions that are taken by the department. At the end of the day, it is the department, the police commissioner or the director-general of the Department of Corrective Services who makes the decision about these disciplinary matters. Every week during my weekly updates with either the commissioner or the director-general, the issue of disciplinary matters is regularly raised, so I am appraised of those decisions every week. I think that it is important that I as minister am aware of those kinds of decisions. At the end of the day, I do not interfere in that decision making. 07 Mar 2007 Questions Without Notice 699

The member will find that the Police Service in particular has a whole panel of people who make these disciplinary decisions and make recommendations to the minister. With respect to the Department of Corrective Services, it has a whole ethical standards division as well as the chief inspector who all together look at these matters before making a recommendation to the director-general. I am very satisfied that in both departments we have very thorough processes before decisions like this are made. Of course when any public servant is going to be disciplined in any fashion they do have the opportunity to respond to the panel and put their side of the case to the panel. These decisions are not made without the person being given a fair go to make their own representations. I invite the member to come and see me about that particular incident and I will have a look at it.

Electricity Industry Mr FENLON: My question is to the Minister for Mines and Energy. Queensland’s booming economy and our population growth have presented a number of challenges to government. One of those challenges is the ability to meet peak demand for electricity. While the government’s investment in electricity generation is acknowledged, could the minister please outline the private sector’s contribution? Mr WILSON: I thank the honourable member for the question. The Queensland energy market is the second largest energy market in Australia and the fastest growing. A key part of the energy market is the electricity generation industry. The importance of the energy market and electricity generally is related to the growth of the Queensland economy and the future prosperity of Queensland. So it is important that this area be properly addressed. The Queensland government is very committed to an efficient electricity market with the active participation of both the private sector and the government owned corporations on a level playing field. With the addition of the 750 megawatt Kogan Creek Power Station coming online later this year, Queensland’s total generation capacity will rise to over 11,000 megawatts. This is well in excess of the recent peak demand of 8,370 megawatts recorded in January this year. A recent report by the independent market operator NEMMCO, the National Electricity Market Management Company, confirms that Queensland has sufficient generation capacity and reserves for peak demands for the next few years. NEMMCO highlights this very interesting fact: Queensland’s growth is the highest in the NEM—the national electricity market—and it is almost twice that of the southern states, reflecting the 4.5 per cent growth of the Queensland economy, which is double the growth of the Australian economy. It also recognises a recent investment in Queensland’s energy sector—$7.8 billion has been committed to new generation investment since the inception of the NEM in 1999. Of that $7.8 billion, $6 billion has occurred in Queensland. More than half of that $6 billion has been through private sector projects, such as the $1.5 billion Millmerran Power Station, the $340 million Braemar Power Station and a number of public-private joint ventures, such as the $250 million Tarong North Power Station. There are a number of future generation proposals under consideration by the private sector, such as Origin Energy’s 1,000 megawatts at Spring Gully Power Station, 480 megawatts on the Darling Downs, the AGL’s 370 megawatts at Townsville power station and the NewGen Power Station proposal of 450 megawatts at Braemar. All of this investment is a sign of the strength of Queensland’s electricity market. We are delivering real benefits to Queenslanders and providing an important stimulus to investment across the state.

School Community Development Fund Mr COPELAND: My question is to the Minister for Education and Training and Minister for the Arts. I refer to the School Community Development Fund announced as part of the government’s Tomorrow’s Schools—Providing for a Smarter Future package. Can the minister please confirm that funding from that program will in fact be given to schools for capital works, or can the minister instead confirm that a committee has been established to plan the rationalisation of Queensland schools under the guise of this development fund? Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Prior to calling the minister, I welcome to the public gallery students, staff and parents from St Augustine’s College in the electorate of Bundamba, represented by the honourable Jo-Ann Miller. Mr WELFORD: I thank the honourable member for his question. I can assure him and other members of the House that the development fund under the Tomorrow’s Schools program—the billion dollars that our government is committing to upgrading educational facilities in government and non- government schools across the state—will be allocated for capital works in schools. That is what it will be about. It will be about ensuring that we have world-class school facilities right across the state. 700 Questions Without Notice 07 Mar 2007

We have already allocated $100 million to the non-government sector, and it will make its own decisions about where to allocate those resources. Of the remaining $950 million, we have already distributed $50 million to state schools right across the state so that they can get started addressing the most urgent needs that schools and P&Cs have identified for their schools. Some of that money is being used to supplement facilities that schools want for their early childhood and prep years. Some of that money is being used to supplement other funds that schools have raised to put in special facilities such as playgrounds, auditoriums, gymnasium facilities or sporting equipment. The money that we are providing ensures that our schools have the best possible facilities and equipment to support teachers in providing high-quality education. The remaining money will be allocated over the next four years to undertake substantial upgrades of schools according to need. We will be looking at a number of schools where we will be piloting projects to identify the best ways to invest this money to ensure that we get value for money and that schools that are most in need receive it and to set an example of how schools can work together to provide facilities that meet the needs of clusters of schools in different regions. It is about investing the money to ensure that we get the best value for money wherever we spend it. Every community will have the opportunity to participate. International Women’s Day; Body Image Ms van LITSENBURG: My question is directed to the Minister for Tourism, Fair Trading, Wine Industry Development and Women. In recognition of tomorrow’s celebration of International Women’s Day, I understand that much has been said about the body image of young women and girls and the problems that obsession with weight can bring. I note that doctors have now joined the chorus of critics, and I ask: does the minister support initiatives to present more natural images as being the norm? Ms KEECH: I thank the honourable member for her question and for the strong interest and support she shows for women in Redcliffe. The response to the question is that I do support initiatives to present more natural images as the norm. The Beattie government has an important role to play in promoting a positive body image and active healthy lifestyle for young Queensland women and girls. On the eve of International Women’s Day, I applaud recent moves, both interstate and overseas, to discourage the use of super-thin models in fashion shows. Emaciated models do not reflect the true beauty of Queensland women. Instead, they promote an unhealthy body image. I support the AMA’s call this week for the federal government to ban sickly, skinny models from the catwalk. Victorian health minister, Bronwyn Pike, is to be congratulated on her calls for such models to be dropped from the Mercedes Fashion Festival in Melbourne. Here in Queensland we are making ground. I was pleased to learn that conditions for designers entering the National Retail Association Fashion Design Awards required them to ensure their garments were a standard side 10. I was even more pleased when organisers this week announced they would soon release their policy relating to underweight models. I am glad to see this fantastic Queensland event aiming to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. I believe we need to do more. Queensland women are among the most beautiful in the entire world. Mr Beattie: No argument about that. Ms KEECH: Thank you, Premier. Our active, outdoor lifestyle means the state is filled with stunning women in a healthy weight range. These are the types of women we want to see showcasing the clothes of Queensland’s talented fashion designers. Ensuring fashion models are within the healthy weight range sends positive messages about body image to teenagers and young girls. Super-thin models send the wrong message about good eating and exercise habits. The kind of dieting involved in attaining such a radical body shape does not promote healthy lifestyle practices. We need to send young women the message that the key to good health is eating well and exercising regularly. They should be aiming for a body mass index within a healthy range for their height and frame, not to look waif thin. Encouraging extreme thinness can have potentially deadly consequences for young women. The Beattie government continues to promote positive body image with an emphasis on healthy eating and lifestyle habits. Discouraging the use of waif thin models at fashion shows is a great step forward. Turning to International Women’s Day events, I thank those members on both sides of the parliament who joined with my parliamentary secretary, Jan Jarratt, in listening to a very courageous woman, Malala Joya. Pest and Weed Control Funding Mrs MENKENS: My question is to the Minister for Environment and Multiculturalism. In the minister’s answer to question on notice 1433 she stated that only $4.5 million has been budgeted for the express purpose of controlling pests and weeds in state parks rather than the $10 million that the 07 Mar 2007 Questions Without Notice 701 minister regularly claimed, over half of which is actually allocated for fire management. Does the minister still believe that spending less than 65c per hectare per year is adequate to control the spread of pests and weeds in the seven million hectares of state parks under her department’s control? Ms NELSON-CARR: I thank the member for her question. I find it quite diabolical that you would ask a question like that when we are spending five times as much as your government did a few years ago. As far as pests and feral animals are concerned I think you have actually gone a bit feral on feral pigs and horses. Opposition members interjected. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Ms NELSON-CARR: I really do not believe that you are taking this very seriously at all. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Could the minister please refer to the member by her correct title and direct your comments through the chair. Ms NELSON-CARR: I apologise. To suggest that the Queensland government is not taking the management of parks seriously is absolutely ludicrous. Nothing could be further from the truth. Mr Copeland: It is absolutely true. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Member for Cunningham! Ms NELSON-CARR: Pests will never be totally removed from the Queensland landscape. Opposition members interjected. Ms NELSON-CARR: As we can see here today in the opposition. However, record spending on this task has been sustained over the last three years and the QPWS continues to make successful inroads into this significant problem. More than $4.5 million has been expended in the 2006-07 financial year to manage pests on the QPWS estate and another $5.5 million on fire management. Protecting our lands from feral animals and pests is a job for everyone, as those opposite know— landholders and government agencies alike. Major programs are in place across the state and many of these are conducted cooperatively with rural communities, neighbours and other agencies. Despite opposition mistruths reported in the media, to date the community and QPWS staff have not indicated an explosion in feral pig numbers, for instance—which the member has been very vocal about—in coastal and national parks. However, we are committed to working with landholders who have problems. Rangers are continuing to monitor pig activity and maintain their— Mr Rickuss interjected. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order, member for Lockyer! Ms NELSON-CARR: It is amazing that this causes so much grief to the opposition. It did not do anything and suddenly it has become an issue. To give members an example, in the Hinchinbrook electorate feral pig control programs are occurring in Edmund Kennedy National Park, Girringun National Park, Ingham State Forest, Paluma Range National Park, at various locations in the Mission Beach area, on Hinchinbrook Island National Park and Dunk Island National Park. There are 17 pig traps available for loan free of charge to park neighbours. Time expired. Foster and Kinship Care Week Mr HINCHLIFFE: My question is to the Minister for Child Safety. I understand that the celebrations for Foster and Kinship Care Week will kick off at Roma Street Parklands this Sunday. Can the minister tell the House why this event is so important and what else is happening to celebrate Foster and Kinship Care Week? Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I welcome into the public gallery staff, students and parents from Springfield Lakes Primary School in Bundamba, which is represented by Jo-Ann Miller. Ms BOYLE: I thank the honourable member for the question. He is one amongst those members of parliament who does recognise the tremendous importance our foster carers in Queensland make. With more and more notifications of child abuse each year and with now more than 6,800 children in care, Queensland’s foster carers are very important indeed. The Beattie government has contributed $44,000 for celebrations right around the state during Foster and Kinship Care Week, which is next week. These grants range from $300 through to $2,000 and have been distributed by PeakCare Queensland and Foster Care Queensland. I am pleased to say that in most cases community organisations are teaming up with their local child safety service centres to host an event. That means that, as well as celebrating foster carers, everyone involved in child protection will be getting together in an informal way, and that of course will hopefully make local networks stronger for the longer term. 702 Questions Without Notice 07 Mar 2007

There will be everything from a barbecue lunch with face painting and farm animals out at Roma to a bush dance at Wondai, a tea party in Mount Isa and scrapbooking classes in Hervey Bay. Next Tuesday in Brisbane, I will be meeting seven special foster care families who will be recognised for their commitment to children at the annual Foster Care Excellence Awards, and on Wednesday I will meet with carers at a lunch at Greenbank. There will be many other events across the length and breadth of Queensland. We have presently about 2,900 foster carers in Queensland but we need more. This is the Year of the Surf Lifesaver, and previously we have had the Year of the Outback and the Year of the Indigenous People. I think it is about time we had the Year of the Foster-Carer. I am informed it is the federal government that makes that decision, so today before foster-carer week I call on the federal minister for families and community services to recognise the great contribution foster-carers make right across Australia. I ask Mal Brough to take up the cause and work on creating the year of the foster-carer. Foster-carers should be recognised as unsung heroes. They should have the national spotlight shone on them. Our foster-carers look after kids in loco parentis with care and love, in good times and bad times. They fight for them to have a good education, to develop a better family life, to climb over the difficulties that have led to them being placed in foster care in the first place. The awful truth is that we need another 400 foster-carers in Queensland. Shining the spotlight on our foster-carers and thanking them and recognising them may help us find some more foster-carers to add to their number.

Queensland Police Service, Midyear Crime Statistics

Mr MESSENGER: My question without notice is to the Minister for Police and Corrective Services. Minister, I refer you to your media release from yesterday, where you claim a one per cent drop in the rate of sexual offences in the last half of 2006. Minister, how did you arrive at this when your leaked ‘confidential’ report reveals sexual assaults soaring across the state, and in Brisbane spiking by more than a third—by 34 per cent—during the third quarter of 2006? Minister, isn’t this a clear case of you taking the credit for good figures, massaging the bad and saying nothing about the shocking climate of fear that now exists for Brisbane women? Ms SPENCE: I thank the honourable member for the question. I thought I explained this yesterday in my ministerial statement and I thought I had made it clear, but obviously I did not so I am happy to do it again today. Ms Bligh: You did for the rest of us. Ms SPENCE: The rest of the members worked it out, but that is okay; I would prefer to explain it again and let the member get it right than have him go off and talk about this in incorrect terms. What the Courier-Mail did is FOI some crime statistics and use those crime statistics to build a story for yesterday’s paper. The story was not inaccurate; it said that sexual assaults in the north Brisbane region had increased in the last few months of last year—and that is accurate and we all know that. Shockingly, there have been a number of serious sexual assaults against women, particularly while they are out jogging in public places and particularly in the north Brisbane district. There is no secret about that. The police have Operation Echo Shine, which I mentioned yesterday, and they are putting all their resources into solving those cases. As a result, they are getting some good apprehensions, although they have not cleared up all the cases and they recognise that. So that is the story in the Courier-Mail. They had FOI’d and talked about the statistics in the north Brisbane region. What I detailed and tabled in parliament yesterday was the whole statewide picture of crime statistics. If we look at the statewide picture, we actually see a reduction in sexual assaults of one per cent. I said yesterday that we really do have to be careful about how we interpret crime statistics. I acknowledged that. The police would prefer that we did not analyse crime statistics in small time frames like three months or even six months. They would prefer that we looked at crime statistics over at least 12 months, or even four years, because we would see different spikes and different patterns of crime around the state over different periods. So these short time frames are not necessarily a very good way of studying crime trends. That is why when we release the annual crime statistics in November every year, which are the 12-month statistics, I also put out graphs covering a four-year period. That is the simple explanation. I am sorry that the member could not pick that one up yesterday, but I do hope that in future when he looks at crime statistics he actually does a bit more work on it and gets a briefing from the police—which they are always happy to do—on the real picture and how they would interpret the figures. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Before calling the honourable member for Cleveland, I would like to welcome in the public gallery students, staff and parents from Wondall Heights State School in the electorate of Lytton, represented by the Hon. Paul Lucas. 07 Mar 2007 Ministerial Statement 703

Moreton Bay Marine Park Zoning Plan Mr WEIGHTMAN: My question is directed to the Minister for Environment and Multiculturalism. Minister, now that the Moreton Bay Marine Park zoning review has been launched, can you please update the House on what the process will be over the next couple of months? How will you ensure that all stakeholders and interested groups will be heard in this process? Ms NELSON-CARR: I thank the honourable member for the question, and it is a very good one indeed. The current Moreton Bay Marine Park Zoning Plan has been in place for nearly 10 years and will expire on 1 September 2008. Times have changed since the first zoning plan was developed and south-east Queensland is growing rapidly. There are many more recreational boats and commercial operators using the marine park, and scientists have more knowledge about how coastal ecosystems respond to human and natural pressures. This review is about achieving sustainability for our marine environment, our lifestyles and our livelihoods. I urge anyone interested in the future of the Moreton Bay Marine Park to get involved in the process. I noted the interest of the federal member for Bowman, Mr Laming, in this state marine park zoning process, and I wondered why he would want to involve himself in a matter that has no Commonwealth involvement—apart from playing politics of course. But now I know why. It is better to try to get some media on an issue that he has no role in than to get the sort of media he has had in the last couple of days. It is better to try to get a run on a state issue than to rort your taxpayer-funded electoral allowance. Over the next month, public information sessions will be held at eight locations around the south- east, including Brisbane city, Stradbroke Island, Southport and Kawana. At all of these sessions, staff will be on hand to explain the review process and provide information on the process, how people can contribute, and the uses, values and history of the marine park. Over the next few months, our first priority is to gather scientific, social and economic data to get a full picture of what activities and natural values are important in the marine park. We are also obtaining advice from an expert advisory panel, chaired by Professor Paul Greenfield of UQ, and from stakeholder reference groups. I have been very pleased with the response to the process so far and congratulate all stakeholders on their support. I was also happy to read a recent media release from the chair of the Moreton Bay Access Alliance, Bruce Alvey, which said— We feel confident that the EPA are genuinely including stakeholders in this review process rather than simply consulting with them once draft recommendations are released. Members of the alliance are committed to contributing industry and community knowledge and data to the EPA to ensure the agency has full information available to assist them to make appropriate recommendations to the government. We appreciate these comments and look forward to working with the alliance and all stakeholders during this very important process.

Crazy Ants Mr HORAN: My question is directed to the Minister for Primary Industries and Fisheries. The department of primary industries has attempted a major fire ant eradication program for some years with extensive financial assistance from the Commonwealth and other state governments. Crazy ants— which kill livestock, destroy marine animals like crabs, undermine crops, attack bee hives and destroy forests—have now been found in six south-east Queensland locations. Minister, why have you walked away from a major eradication program for crazy ants? Mr MULHERIN: I thank the honourable member for the question. I will have to get some information from the department. As the member is aware, that was the responsibility of the department of natural resources and that area is now the responsibility of Biosecurity Queensland. Biosecurity Queensland commenced operation on 1 March. I will provide a detailed briefing to the member. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Question time is concluded.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

Woodford Correctional Centre, Staff Gymnasium; Interlock Hon. JC SPENCE (Mount Gravatt—ALP) (Minister for Police and Corrective Services) (11.30 am), by leave: I need to correct a number of assertions that appeared in the Sunday Mail on 25 February this year. The newspaper wrote a story about the staff gym at Woodford Correctional Centre being closed. This issue was raised four years ago and was resolved in the last quarter of 2003. The gym at the Woodford Correctional Centre was closed in 2003 because of increasing concerns about the operation of the social club and the possible liability exposure faced by Queensland Corrective Services. 704 Ministerial Statement 07 Mar 2007

Woodford Correctional Centre’s social club used to operate licensed premises and a gymnasium from an unused building located outside the perimeter fence. In 2003 the licensed club was closed for compliance reasons. The social club was asked to organise public liability insurance if it wished to continue to operate a gymnasium. The social club was unable to secure the required insurance. Queensland Corrective Services therefore advised the social club that it could no longer use the building as a gymnasium. The agency, like other organisations, has been forced to examine the issues of legal liability as the community in general becomes increasingly litigious. This was never a case of shifting the goalpost as the Sunday Mail reported but rather a reasonable response to the social club’s inability to secure adequate insurance. It would be quite irresponsible of Queensland Corrective Services to expose itself to possible legal action because there was no adequate insurance cover. The fact that there had not been any serious incident in the gym at Woodford or any other gym on QCS property is irrelevant. The fact remains that no insurance coverage was provided. This was the responsibility of the social club, not QCS. There are no plans to reopen the social club gymnasium at Woodford Correctional Centre. The building formerly used by the social club is now used to accommodate two workplace health and safety officers and is also used for staff training. The social club is yet to decide what to do with the equipment from the former gymnasium. Queensland Corrective Services no longer maintains gymnasium equipment at any of its correctional centres for staff use. I table my response to the member for Burnett’s question regarding Interlock. It followed the member for Burnett tabling one page from an Interlock report and an Interlock brochure. Interlock is a contracted counselling service which provides services to Queensland Corrective Services. The first service it provides is an employee assistance program. This is a generic service available to all employees and their immediate family and is paid for on a monthly basis calculated on employee numbers. The second service it provides is to support staff experiencing traumatic events. That is provided on a fee-for-service basis to QCS by specifically skilled professionals. It is accessible on site 24 hours a day, seven days a week. This service is designed to ensure that employees involved in critical incidents receive immediate support and that QCS meets its duty of care obligations to those employees. However, what the member for Burnett tabled was a pamphlet produced by Interlock and a critical incident stress management form from Interlock. This form is provided to managers to ensure that they meet their ongoing obligations to workplace health and safety following a critical event. The form simply states the type of service provided to the employee—in this case, to defuse the employee’s immediate emotional stress. It notes that both employees participated well and engaged with the counsellor in discussion. It recommended the employees seek follow-up counselling if required, at the Interlock office locations that were provided. This information is of a summary nature only and details phases of the intervention rather than specific statements. Such reports are held confidentially on local file by the management unit and are not placed on personal files or workers compensation files. I think it is reasonable that a local manager understands whether an employee is fit for work after a critical incident has occurred. We are talking about employees who have access to guns and other equipment. I think it is very reasonable that management is aware of their emotional state. While elements of the document that the member tabled were deleted it clearly showed that the event was a prisoner escape during a 2006 incident at the PA Hospital secure unit. The member for Burnett repeated his problem last night when, in a speech, he said that this man had exemplary service. We are talking about a prison officer who let a murderer escape from a prison van because he had not properly locked the door. That is the kind of person that the member is standing up in parliament and supporting. As there is only one event of that nature, the potential for public identification of the particular officer involved has been promoted by him. I think it is quite appropriate that Queensland Corrective Services has commenced an investigation into how a confidential document of this nature was released. Today I am tabling again my answer to a question without notice asked on 8 February, a letter to all staff from Interlock, a letter to QPSU members from the general secretary of that union and a letter from the Queensland Corrective Services director-general to the QPSU.

Tabled paper: Copy of Question without Notice on 8 February 2007 from Mr Messenger to Ms Spence, and Ms Spence’s reply. Tabled paper: Copy of circular letter dated 23 February 2007 from Alex Scott, General Secretary, QPSU to QPSU members. Tabled paper: Copy of letter (undated) from F P Rockett, Director-General, Department of Corrective Services to Mr Alex Scott. Tabled paper: Copy of circular letter dated 2 March 2007 from Amanda Hefez, Manager of Professional Services, Interlock, to Queensland Corrective Services Staff. 07 Mar 2007 Motion 705

ORDER OF BUSINESS Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Acting Leader of the House) (11.35 am): I move— That government business orders of the day Nos 1 to 13 be postponed. Motion agreed to.

MOTION

South East Queensland Regional Plan Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Infrastructure) (11.36 am): I move— That this House: 1. Notes the regulatory provisions of the South East Queensland Regional Plan 2005-2026 Amendment 1 (the amendment) that were tabled in the Legislative Assembly as part of the amendment on 31 October 2006; and 2. Ratifies the regulatory provisions of the amendment as required under section 2.5A.17 of the Integrated Planning Act 1997. The South East Queensland Regional Plan was released on 30 June 2005 to help build a better future for south-east Queensland. Since releasing this landmark plan the Queensland government has continued to work with councils and the community to further investigate the Mount Lindesay-North Beaudesert area to determine how growth in this part of the region can be sustainably managed. Today our government is ratifying the regulations that support the final preferred development option for the area. Located just south of Brisbane city, the Mount Lindesay-North Beaudesert area extends from Park Ridge in the north to Veresdale in the south and from Wolffdene in the east to New Beith in the west. It is approximately 520,000 hectares and is currently home to more than 37,000 people. Finalised after extensive public consultation, the preferred development option for the area is outlined in what was released on 31 October as the South East Queensland Regional Plan Amendment No. 1. Amendment No. 1 outlines that the preferred development option for the Mount Lindesay-North Beaudesert area is expected to accommodate around 80,000 people over the next 20 years. It provides positive planning for the future of the area, building on the strengths of the South East Queensland Regional Plan. Like the rest of south-east Queensland, planning for this area aims to achieve a delicate balance between developing urban areas for future growth and protecting our environment and its landscape. This area now has a sustainable planning framework comprising four new urban areas at Park Ridge, Flagstone, Greenbank and Yarrabilba, with supporting industrial and commercial precincts as well as rural residential open space land. This amendment provides certainty to the future planning requirements of the region and continues the principles of the regional plan to provide land for industry and economic activity as well as for residential development to allow people to work where or near where they live. Like the rest of the regional plan, this area also contains about 80 per cent green space, preserving for future generations the environment that this region is justifiably renowned for. Aside from planning for the Mount Lindesay-North Beaudesert area, amendment No. 1 also incorporates minor changes to the regulatory maps for south-east Queensland to reflect existing committed urban designations in local government planning schemes as well as some amendments to the regulatory provisions to improve the workability of the entire regional plan. For example, the amended plan now permits some larger development in the regional land use categories if it caters to local demand or has a direct connection with the land, is a small sport and recreation facility or if it expands on existing tourism, sport, recreational or educational facilities, or a place of worship. This change was made in response to calls from the community to provide greater flexibility of land use without compromising the South East Queensland Regional Plan’s goals. As I told the House when the regional plan was ratified last year, the regional plan provides an excellent blueprint to enable all of us to pass on to successive generations the lifestyle and prosperity that we already enjoy here in the great south-east and this amendment has continued those principles for the people in the Mount Lindesay-North Beaudesert area. I commend the motion to the House. Mrs SCOTT (Woodridge—ALP) (11.39 am): I second the motion. The South East Queensland Regional Plan is a blueprint for planning for this vital region for the next 20 years. Amendment No. 1 now gives the Mount Lindesay-Beaudesert region the same benefit the rest of south-east Queensland has had for the last 18 months—that is, a definitive plan and sustainable framework for the development of industry and residential dwellings as well as ensuring that the green spaces which the area is now renowned for are kept for future generations. The amendments to the regulations have met the requests of rural councils to allow for some additional non-urban activities to take place in non-urban areas and to enable existing activities such as schools or existing small industry developments to expand. As the Deputy Premier has already stated, these changes do not impact on the intent of the plan. It is simply a common-sense response to community requests. 706 Motion 07 Mar 2007

Dr FLEGG (Moggill—Lib) (11.40 am): Let me say at the outset that the South East Queensland Regional Plan has largely enjoyed support from this side of the House, and I note the intent and content of these amendments. I might say to the Deputy Premier that we do not intend to be opposing these amendments here today. I note the comments made by the previous two speakers in relation to the flexibility of the plan and I do not think fundamentally anyone is going to have any objection to that, even though it may be seen as a liberalisation of the plan because most of us in our electorates— certainly those who have larger electorates in the south-east like me—will have encountered specific issues because of a perceived inflexibility in the plan. So the ability to provide some of these community services in areas outside the urban footprint I think would be something that most of us would see emerge as a need for change. I would draw the House’s attention to one particular issue which I am somewhat surprised previous speakers have not alluded to, and that is a significant change in the growth projections for the population in south-east Queensland. The projections contained in the document tabled yesterday show a significant upward revision in population estimates for the south-east. This in itself may be reason to contemplate some of the other associated provisions of the plan which are designed to cater for population, especially areas such as water planning, road planning and in particular public transport planning. When the plan was introduced by a previous Treasurer, one of the key reasons for introducing this plan was to ensure that increasing population was associated with an increased population density around particular nodes, not simply a spread of population across the countryside. The chief reason for doing this was to ensure that we were able to provide public transport, roads, water and other services. I note in particular the public transport nodal developments contained in the plan. Those population changes are actually quite significant and by 2026 could indicate between another 180,000 and 350,000 residents in the south-east. These are pretty dramatic numbers by anyone’s measure and they certainly deserve some consideration. I note also that the first five-yearly review of the south-east Queensland plan is due by 2010. Again, we on this side of the House would acknowledge the need to periodically review a plan and its underlying assumptions. I note that this motion was moved yesterday. I think it is appropriate that this matter comes before the parliament as a motion. There are few more important documents in some respects than the South East Queensland Regional Plan because it dictates not simply where people can develop but but also a lot of aspects about how everyone in south-east Queensland lives. It dictates development around transport and the underlying transport needs for that. It dictates things even down to whether people live in high-rise, medium-rise or low-rise accommodation. Potentially, this is something that affects every person in south-east Queensland. I think it is appropriate that the matter is brought before parliament for discussion. There is concern expressed in relation to some of the developments that occur outside the urban footprint. Some of these are occurring because there is pre-existing approval or in some cases simply because there was some pre-existing activity leading to an approval. One of the obvious controversial ones would be the Co-You/Devine development in the Currumbin Valley which is outside the urban footprint and will in fact more than double the population of that rural area. I note that community concern is still very high in relation to these matters. Perhaps some thought ought to be given to producing an accessible document that details any pre-existing approvals for large-scale developments that are outside the urban footprint so communities can better understand why these events happen in an area where they were led to believe under the plan they ought not to happen. With those few words, I indicate that we on this side of the House do not have any intention of opposing the motion but would like those comments noted. Hon. KR LINGARD (Beaudesert—NPA) (11.46 am): First of all, let me say to the Deputy Premier that I have had discussions with the Beaudesert Shire Council and the Boonah Shire Council. They are in support of this amendment and therefore I will certainly be supporting the amendment, even though I would like once again to express some concerns. My first experience of urban plans came when I travelled with a committee from the Queensland parliament to Western Australia quite a few years ago to look at urban sustainability. We met with the Premier’s office and a newly appointed CEO who immediately said to us that Western Australia and, in this case, Perth had to contain the development which was occurring in a strip formation from Perth southwards and that the government would try to stop that development and bring the development back into the inner-city areas. When we asked why, the CEO said that if they allowed the developers to continue in Perth the way they were going the government could not supply the infrastructure and the government would obviously have massive costs of infrastructure which it could not sustain, so the government had to contain that development and bring that development back into the inner city. If anyone has been to Subiaco and seen what has been done there, they would understand exactly what that person meant. When we asked how it would be controlled, they said that they would develop the inner-city areas which at that time had been downgraded. We asked how and were told that the government would develop bus stations, railway stations and renew those inner-city areas allowing private developers to move in and therefore contain the development occurring in the outer areas. Someone at that meeting then 07 Mar 2007 Motion 707 immediately said, ‘You in Queensland are going to have trouble if you allow what is happening to continue. If you continue to allow this development to occur in a strip development between Brisbane and the Gold Coast and Brisbane and the north coast, the government cannot maintain the necessary infrastructure.’ If that is the premise for what occurred after I travelled to Western Australia, which was that Terry Mackenroth brought in these controls, I am concerned that the government is making a decision based upon the economic infrastructure that it knows it will have to pay for if it allows this to continue. Alternatively, is the government making a decision about our lifestyle? Let us look at what is happening in places like Newstead, Subiaco, the South Docks in Melbourne and even the harbour area of inner Sydney. Those sorts of developments are of concern to people who value homes with backyards that are big enough for games of cricket or tennis. Our style of living is changing completely. Whether that be good or bad is another discussion. However, I am concerned that the government is making these decisions based only on the cost of infrastructure. I am concerned that the government is saying that people cannot develop areas like Beaudesert and Boonah, which are only 40 minutes from the inner city of Brisbane. Recently many people have moved to Boonah and bought 40-acre properties. They are magnificent people who contribute well to the rural area and are living a great lifestyle. According to the government’s plan, there will be no more development at Park Ridge, which is the northern part of Beaudesert and which I can drive to in 25 minutes. The development that has occurred so far is all that there will be. There will be no more development there. I hear people say that that is good, and it is okay for those who want to live an inner-city lifestyle in places such as Newstead. However, it limits the number of people who want their children to live a rural lifestyle with a few horses and so on, because there will be no more development. There are 100-hectare properties in the northern part of Boonah shire. That is a lot of land. Many of those properties were old dairy farms. In this plan the government has said that those areas can no longer be subdivided. What has happened at Ripley, just south of Ipswich, is amazing. The people have been told that they can no longer break up their properties but will have to move to inner-city areas such as Newstead if that is the lifestyle that they want. Some people will say, ‘Good’, because they believe that Newstead can provide a better lifestyle than we can provide in the northern parts of Beaudesert shire, and that is an argument that we can go on and on with. Now the government has said that the developers have to support the infrastructure development of the area between here and Ripley. They will have to add to the infrastructure costs of roads, bridges and so on before the area can be developed. That is good for the developers and the area. Massive development is already occurring and it will continue for some time. The government has said that the northern parts of Beaudesert and Boonah shires can develop if the private developers pay for the infrastructure. The development at Yarrabilba, which will be home to 60,000 to 70,000 people, can continue only if the developer wants to pay for the infrastructure, which includes roads, water, public transport—the whole lot. That involves a massive cost and clearly that will not happen. The developers are being told that Yarrabilba cannot access the south-east expressway at Yatala because we do not want people driving between Yatala and the Smith Street exit as it is only a small corridor and that would add more pressure to the corridor. It would be a massive project for developers to provide a road from Yarrabilba to the Smith Street exit. A private developer would not be able to do it. If the government tells a private developer that it will not provide any infrastructure for water but that the developer must provide it, the area will never be completely self-sufficient. The Yarrabilba developers might say that the development will be completely self-sufficient, and there are developments in South Australia that it is claimed are completely self-sufficient. However, I know what will happen. Yarrabilba will start out on the premise that it will be self-sufficient, but halfway through the project the developers will say that they cannot do it and must access the eastern corridor pipeline. Therefore, the Yarrabilba development will not continue. What the government has really said is that it will support the development between here and Ripley, but it will not support the development at Yarrabilba or the development of Mundoolun Road. The government has also told many private people from the northern areas of Beaudesert, ‘You have 20 or 40 acres and that is good, but we will never allow you to subdivide it.’ Many of those people bought 40- acre properties close to the inner town areas with the thought that in the future they would be able to subdivide the land and that would provide them with a good superannuation nest egg. However, with one foul blow the government has said that that is a no-go. The Beaudesert Shire Council probably agrees with the fact that at least the government has given people some certainty, and that is why the shire council has told me not to fight the plan. They are happy with the plan and will allow it to continue. However, the government must remember that it has 708 Motion 07 Mar 2007 hurt many private people from the northern parts of the Beaudesert and Boonah shires, simply because 100-hectare properties can no longer be subdivided. The government will not even allow the subdivision of 100-hectare properties so that owners can give five or 10 acres to a member of their family. Generally in the past people have been entitled to do that. Some harsh decisions have been made. The Deputy Premier has made some concessions in her amendment and I will support it. There are some areas that we agree with. However, there is another area that the Deputy Premier and I have always disagreed on. She is aware of it and I do not want to continue the fight now. I refer to the old fight about Flagstone High School and Jimboomba. Ms Bligh: Let it go. Mr LINGARD: I will not continue it, but I suggest that when the Deputy Premier next drives down that way she looks at what has happened. Her figures on Flagstone are nowhere near what she predicted. I have always said that Flagstone will not go ahead as fast as she said it would. If the government provides a road from Springfield and Undullah to the back of Flagstone, Flagstone will go ahead. Governments have decided to develop the four-lane Mount Lindesay Highway to Jimboomba, yet this report states that Jimboomba will not go ahead. I say this to the Deputy Premier: a commercial property that sold for $1.2 million was resold not long after for over $7 million. That is what is happening in areas like Jimboomba. The minister should go to Jimboomba and look at the massive hole that will be the new Coles shopping centre. There is also a massive Woolworths. The area is experiencing massive commercial development, but she has said that Jimboomba will not be a node. She has said that Bromelton and Flagstone—which has always been her favourite, even though it has been developed by MTIA—will be nodes. During the time that we have fought over this issue, Flagstone has not developed. It has only two little shops. It is in the electorate of the member for Lockyer. Jimboomba, which the Deputy Premier says is not a node, has experienced massive development. The Deputy Premier says that Yarrabilba will be a node, but at this stage there is not a house at Yarrabilba. She also talks about Park Ridge and Beaudesert. I believe that in the end the private developers will prove these value judgements to be wrong. They will certainly prove the Deputy Premier wrong in an area such as Jimboomba. I ask that these plans be looked at continually to review the situation, because at this stage I believe that the minister has misread it. I would even say that of the Beaudesert Shire Council. In the olden days it was thought that the development of Beaudesert would come from Greenbank, in the electorate of Lockyer, and Flagstone. However, because the private developers did not develop that land, it has not happened. The development has come down the Mount Lindesay Highway. I believe that the government has made a couple of very basic mistakes and, if it continues its dominant attitude, it will regret that in the future. I support the legislation because my councils agree with it, but I believe that in 10 years time some of the comments that I have made today will prove to be right. Mr RICKUSS (Lockyer—NPA) (11.59 am): I rise to speak to these amendments that were tabled last year. As the member for Beaudesert said, a lot of the area in question is contained in my electorate—Greenbank central; New Beith Forest-Round Mountain; Greater Flagstone; North Maclean; Gatton north; Plainlands; Rosewood, which is covered by my electorate as well as the electorate of Ipswich West; and Warrill View, which is covered by my electorate as well as the electorate of Beaudesert. A lot of these areas are very important. Some of the conditions that the government has imposed on this area have made it very frustrating for landholders. There is a piece of land up on the Toowoomba escarpment that is located in the Gatton shire. On both sides, the area is zoned rural residential. The owner of this land thought that a little easement that went into his land was zoned rural residential, but it is actually attached to his 100-acre block. Unfortunately, the owner cannot cut off those two acres into a separate parcel of land. Yet the owner of this land can fly a spray plane over the area, even though he has neighbours living beside his land. Members could imagine what would happen if this person decided to do some agricultural spraying over his land. This matter has to be looked at realistically. I have written to the minister about it. I understand that the area in question falls outside the plan, but I think common sense has to come into it. That is part of the problem. As the member for Beaudesert said, some common sense has to come into it. Mrs Sullivan interjected. Mr RICKUSS: Yes, but not all plans work. The bloke who planned the Annexe put only two lifts in it. That does not really work well, does it? Plans do not always work, do they? We have to be realistic. Gatton shire is extremely short of industrial land. I have been asked to make sure that the investigation area that is north of Gatton is looked at posthaste. It is all right for the area to be an investigation area, but the council wants a result. The area cannot be held as an investigation area. The same situation applies with land at Plainlands. There are some real concerns there. The same situation 07 Mar 2007 Motion 709 has happened in the Beaudesert shire. The main highway becomes a trigger for growth. As the member for Beaudesert has mentioned, that area is a fairly good tributary for growth, with the modernisation of vehicles. Development in the Laidley shire has occurred more in the areas located outside the township than inside the town. I see Lindsay sitting over there with a couple of other people. I must admit that Lindsay has always been very helpful whenever I have questions. I would like to thank him for that. I also find David Rowland very helpful as well. There is another David, too; I cannot remember his last name. In terms of the change in planning to allow for tourism, would that include something along the lines of a B&B? If someone wants to put up a B&B, can they deed that off or does it have to be on the same deed? If it is a 100-acre block with a B&B on it, can the area on which the B&B is located be cut out and placed on a separate deed? What if cabins and that sort of thing are located on a block? Can the area on which they are located be placed on a separate deed and be regarded as a separate entity? I would be interested in the minister’s response to those questions. I notice that in the original south-east Queensland plan separate precincts were allowed. At first, I thought that was a very good idea but I do not think any of the councils have taken up that option. I would be interested if the minister could let me know about that. I am referring to the establishment of a horticultural precinct on a small block or a horse precinct for, say, four horses. Unfortunately, 100 hectares—which in old money is 250 acres—is really too large for a person who just wants to have a couple of horses to ride at equestrian events and all of that sort of thing. That person would want only 10, 15 or 20 acres. Have any of the shires cut up some of their areas into precincts? I know that councils can do that under the plan. I know that Tracy Ryan is a town planner for the Gatton shire. She works extremely hard. All the shires are struggling to get town planners. I think the Beaudesert shire—and Mr Lingard would be able to confirm this—went to Darwin to acquire some town planners just to give them some assistance. I wonder if the minister could give some of the councils and their town planning departments some assistance with understanding these new amendments to the legislation. The smaller shires have only one or two people in their town planning departments. Those people are struggling to keep up with the changes that have been made quickly to the legislation. It is a lot of work for those town planners. With the way the building boom has been going in the south-east corner, those people are struggling to keep up. I encourage the minister to think about giving some of these smaller councils some assistance from the Office of Urban Management so that they can understand the full complexity of these amendments. Unfortunately, some of the complaints that I have had from people result in a letter war. The council says that it is the OUM’s problem and the OUM says that it is the council’s problem. That goes on for six months before we can get someone to sit down and have a talk about it. I think that the Gatton, Laidley and Esk shires should be able to review their town plans and some of their development areas because of the new super jail that the corrective services minister has planned for the Gatton area. Some little communities such as Coominya in the Esk shire and Glenore Grove and Kentville in the Laidley shire and Gatton are going to be close to the super jail. I think that the councils should be able to review their town plans simply for the fact that that area is going to get this infrastructure. I notice that down at Willowbank the Amberley school is being closed. That has probably occurred under the federal jurisdiction, because the federal government wants the land at the Amberley school. Land then has to be acquired for the school. I think the community would prefer the school to be located in Willowbank, because that is the biggest residential area around the place there. I think we have to make some allowances for the change in the planning that occurs quite quickly. I realise that there will be a review in 2010. I am sure that the minister will receive a lot of applications in relation to that review. I really encourage the Deputy Premier to look at the changes that are going to occur in the Gatton-Laidley-Esk area, particularly when the super jail is built. There are also some interesting problems around the Ripley area, which is part of my electorate. Ms NOLAN (Ipswich—ALP) (12.06 pm): I rise to speak, I promise very briefly, in this debate. I rise to respond primarily to the comments of the member for Beaudesert, who, while indicating the opposition’s support for the regional plan—and we note that that support has been ongoing—seemed to oppose the notion that infrastructure costs should generally be borne by developers and those people who profit from the development of what was previously agricultural land in new and growing areas. I was intrigued by that position. I think that is symptomatic of the opposition’s approach to these matters. On the surface, we see support from the parties opposite for the regional plan all the way through, except in so much as we get speeches such as those from the member for Beaudesert that appear to question the principles which underlie the regional plan. We also had the opposition shadow spokesman—I think it was the member for Warrego at the time—during the last election campaign writing to developers implying that there would be changes to the regional plan if only some cash were to flow the National Party’s way. I think that really says it all. The opposition supports this plan on the surface, but it does not think that developers should generally have to pay the infrastructure cost. 710 Motion 07 Mar 2007

I am an enormous supporter of the regional plan and of the discipline of urban planning in general for environmental, economic and social reasons. The era of urban sprawl in south-east Queensland simply must end and it must end for a number of reasons. The first is that we now know that climate change exists. We know that we cannot have people commuting for an hour to an hour and a half to work every day. We know that that is damaging our environment. We also know that we have to have quite a high density of urban living—I think around 15 properties per hectare—if public transport is to work. If we continue to have urban sprawl, we will inevitably have houses scattered and people having to drive to work. That is something that obviously has a serious social cost. In the longer term, however, we also know that world oil supplies will peak and begin to decline, something that will massively force up the cost of oil to the individual. That will mean that ordinary families who live in the outer suburbs, where there is no access to public transport, will find themselves each week with a massive fuel bill—a cost that they cannot possibly sustain. There has already been some very good work done by the Urban Research Institute at Griffith University which shows where the people who are vulnerable to higher petrol prices live. They are people who live in the outer suburbs on average incomes—that is, they have no choice but to drive to work and they have a large mortgage and fixed average incomes. For those people, a rise in the cost of oil would absolutely devastate the family budget. It would cause them to lose their houses. What is being advocated by the member for Beaudesert with the continuation of the concept of urban sprawl is that we leave those people to their own devices. We leave them to continue pumping out greenhouse gases and ultimately to face the risk on their own of losing their houses because they can no longer afford to drive to work. That is what is being proposed when it is proposed to reject the discipline of urban planning. I think that is something that we as a government cannot accept. Similarly, we cannot accept that it is reasonable to continue to pay for the roads, the railway lines, the water and the other infrastructure to prop up the short-term profits of the development industry. That is why there is a regional plan. So the reasons for having a regional plan include the effect on people’s household budgets in the face of the peak in oil prices. There are environmental reasons, particularly in light of climate change. There is a bunch of social evidence that says that people are happier when they live and work in a reasonably close space, when they do not drive an hour to work, which is what a rural residential development gives them. And it is unreasonable that the taxpayer should continue to bear the infrastructure cost of far-flung urban development. The Howard government has just committed to spending $2.3 billion on nine kilometres of road. The idea that we will continue to have urban sprawl 40 and 50 kilometres from the city and that we will continue to prop that up with taxpayer-funded roads is fundamentally irresponsible. For that reason, we must stick to the discipline of this regional plan; otherwise, we will leave both individuals and governments of the future with a massive and unsustainable cost to bear. Mr WELLINGTON (Nicklin—Ind) (12.12 pm): It gives me a great deal of pleasure to participate in the debate on the amendment to the regulatory provisions of the South East Queensland Regional Plan 2005-2026. I note that the next formal review of the regional plan will be undertaken in 2010. I intend to come back to that later during my short submission. It is great to see that on page 8 there is clear identification of the important role that Nambour will play in the growth of the Sunshine Coast. I note on map 8 on page 27 of the regional plan that Nambour is identified as a major regional activity centre. It is very important that Nambour is identified as a major regional activity centre. As we speak, the Maroochy Shire Council has submitted an application to the minister for local government for some funding assistance so that we can better plan for the future role that Nambour will play in the Sunshine Coast region. The application for funding was made under the Regional Centres Program. So I am asking the minister to join me in lobbying the minister for local government to see whether we can have a win with this application. I understand that $2 million of state government funding has been applied for. The local council has been prepared to allocate $2 million of ratepayer funds so that in a genuine partnership we can redevelop the town of Nambour to make sure that at this very crucial time we get the right infrastructure in place that will carry Nambour through to the future. It is great to see that the government has recognised the future role of Nambour but, more importantly, we now need to see the state government put some money on the table to match the council. I understand that the council has applied for $2 million of state government funding but it will be prepared to put in significant dollars up-front as well. That leads me to maps 13, 15 and 17 on pages 34, 36 and 37 respectively. These various maps identify the important role that Nambour will play in relation to the National Highway and the upgrading of the National Highway but, more importantly, the upgrading of the national rail link. It is very timely that I am speaking about this matter at 12.15 pm today because a few hours ago a number of vehicles got punctured tyres as they drove down this National Highway. Do members know why? They got punctured tyres because the pavement failed. As we speak, Main Roads officers have had to go out and close off part of a lane on this National Highway. It is a disgrace that in Queensland, the growth centre of Australia, our federal government is not prepared to put money on the table and our state government is not prepared to make sure that these national highways can be travelled on safely. I hope there were no serious accidents as a result of the failure of the pavement due to the recent rainfall. 07 Mar 2007 Motion 711

I note that on these maps there is reference to the future upgrading of the road and also reference to the investigation of the upgrading of the railway corridor from Landsborough to Nambour. I take this opportunity to urge the government not just to move forward on the investigation of the upgrading of the railway corridor but to put some dollars on the table so that the duplication of the railway corridor can be continued from Landsborough to Nambour. On our main railway line that travels from Brisbane to Cairns and beyond, at the moment we have one track in the Sunshine Coast railway corridor. It is a very narrow corridor—one could almost touch both sides of the boundary. It is time that we moved forward on the investigation and then put dollars on the table so that we can duplicate this very important railway infrastructure. I would hope that as soon as possible those potholes—the pavement failure of the National Highway near Nambour—can be rectified. One other matter I wish to raise in this debate is the investigation of Bridges, which is a site on the Sunshine Coast, becoming an economic activity centre. As we speak, I understand that newsletters have been distributed—they are in the mail or may have arrived at the homes of hundreds and hundreds of people in the Sunshine Coast hinterland surrounding Bridges, Yandina, North Arm, Eumundi, Belli, Eerwah Vale and Mount Ninderry—informing them of the next round of meetings, which I understand are due to be held on 20 March at the Yandina RSL hall. I urge members of the community to come along and attend those meetings. It is imperative that they come along and express their views to let the state government, the department and consultants know full well what their views are about the investigation of the Bridges area as a future economic activity centre. Notwithstanding the view of the Maroochy Shire Council—because I know it has its own proposals for what it wants to see happen at Bridges—I believe that this plan is in direct conflict with the 2025 consultation process that was recently undertaken in the Maroochy shire when thousands of residents took the time to say what their vision and their view was for the future of the Sunshine Coast and, more importantly, of the Maroochy shire. I believe that this proposal is in direct conflict with what our current Maroochy shire residents want to see happen in their own backyard. The real issue of concern is the proposed magnitude of the development. If we see a future economic activity centre at Bridges, the next natural progression, in my mind, is changes that will happen around this proposed economic activity centre. I have always said that if this major development takes place in Bridges there will be an automatic request at a future time for the land use that surrounds this site to be significantly changed. What we will see is a major change in the very make-up of the hinterland of the Maroochy shire. Resident after resident tells me that they relocated from Cairns, Melbourne and Sydney to come to the Sunshine Coast because of its amenity— its lovely outlook and atmosphere. I believe that if this proposal goes ahead it will directly clash with the aspirations of the residents that I represent. Interestingly, only recently I heard one of my colleagues, the member for Maroochydore, Fiona Simpson, talk about the need for population capping in part of her electorate. I believe this is an important issue that we need to be very much aware of. Whilst talking about the issues of Bridges and the investigation of the area, when the investigation is complete and the information comes to hand—which I believe will say that there is need for a major allocation of money to upgrade the water, sewerage, and electrical systems and to build major intersections on the National Highway so that there can be safe and easy access to the proposed industrial estate should it happen—what criteria will the minister compare that with as against the other sites on the Sunshine Coast which we believe are more suitable? I believe there will be a significant cost factor for that infrastructure. It will cost a lot of money to provide the water and sewerage services needed, a whole new electricity system and to upgrade the roads. More importantly, how are we going to compare that with other land? I understand at the moment that the terms of reference do not allow the consultants or the staff of the Office of Urban Management to look outside the limited scope that they currently have. The next review is to be undertaken in 2010. When this investigation of the Bridges site is completed and the consultants prepare a report, how will the minister be able to evaluate whether the site should be changed to another use if she has not had an opportunity to evaluate any other alternative sites which may be outside the footprint? I have no doubt that the consultants will say part of the land is suitable, part of the land is not suitable and some of it we do not know because of the cost of providing the infrastructure. I believe that the minister will be significantly restricted in her ability to make an accurate evaluation of the proposal if she is not able to consider information about other sites outside the current restricted area. I would urge the minister to take those comments on board. I am aware of the Maroochy council’s view about Bridges. I do not share that view at all. I know what my constituents are saying and they are certainly sending me a very clear message. They do not want to see a major economic activity centre happening in Bridges in the hinterland of the Sunshine Coast, the hinterland of Maroochy shire and in my heartland. I will continue to fight any proposal that will result in a major change to the future of the Sunshine Coast. At the moment we have something very unique. There is only one Sunshine Coast; we need to protect and preserve it. I congratulate the government for trying to restrict development in some areas. I do believe we now must ensure that the Sunshine Coast is aligned, as best it can be, with the visions, desires and wishes of the people who live there. 712 Motion 07 Mar 2007

If it is the case that the government wants to go down the road of building and providing land for more economic activity centres, can I suggest having smaller centres on the Sunshine Coast. What is wrong with that? That is what the residents say they want. That is what I believe is the message in the 2025 vision statement. Residents want to see smaller industrial estates from Noosa to Caloundra. They do not want to see major economic activity centres because that will significantly destroy the very Sunshine Coast that we all love and treasure and want to see protected. I commend my views and thoughts to the Speaker, the minister and the government. Hopefully the minister will support me to ensure that Maroochy council is successful in receiving financial support from the state government through the minister for local government for its application for the revitalisation of Nambour, which is identified as a major regional activity centre. Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Infrastructure) (12.25 pm), in reply: I start by thanking contributors to the debate. It is an important opportunity for us to focus on the South East Queensland Regional Plan and the way that it underpins all of the decisions that we make, not only at the level of state government but also at the level of local government and the planning that it is undertaking as well as on the lives of the individuals whom we represent. I thank the opposition for its commitment to support the amendment. It is an amendment, as the member for Beaudesert pointed out, that does have the support of the affected councils and it is important that we do this in partnership with them. I will address some of the questions that were raised with me by a couple of speakers in the debate. Firstly, in relation to questions raised by the Leader of the Liberal Party regarding increased population growth projections, I advise him that the state updates its population projections every year. He is correct in saying that the amendment identifies that the 2006 population projection sees an increase of 250,000 people over the previous projection over the life of the plan. I can advise him, however, that the urban footprint in its original form—that is, before this amendment—did have a 20 per cent leeway for increased population and it does have, in its existing form before amended, the capacity to accommodate that additional growth. The capacity of the plan to accommodate that additional 250,000 is augmented by the amendment which provides for growth of 80,000 in the northern Beaudesert area. We are very confident of being able to accommodate that extra growth. It is something that we monitor. That is why we carry out two-yearly updates. We will be publishing them into the future. Dr Flegg raised the issue of his support for the five-year review. We will be conducting that review. We want it to be finalised by 2010. I thought today was a good opportunity for me to indicate to members who are interested in and affected by the plan that we will begin some of that work in 2008. That process will be in place for us to finalise in 2010. In relation to the contribution by the member for Beaudesert, I agree with the member for Ipswich. I know that the member for Beaudesert has not been a prominent supporter of much of the underpinning assumptions and motivations of the plan. Specifically in relation to the points that he raised with regard to Boonah I say two things: firstly, there is nothing in the amendment that is before the House that changes the arrangements in relation to anything in the Boonah shire, but the existing South East Queensland Regional Plan does provide an urban footprint for the township of Boonah that will see it almost double in size. It certainly does provide for significant growth in the Boonah area, and I endorse his comments that it is townships like that that we do need to see growth in. We also have an entire classification of land—rural living area—where we do anticipate to see growth in residential activity in some of the areas that he mentioned. In relation to the questions asked by the member for Lockyer, the amendment that is before the House in relation to the tourism change will provide for the capacity to run a small B&B but it will not provide for that facility to be a subdivision. I think that answers that question. In terms of the opportunity for councils to explore the development of precincts within their area, there has to date not been any precincts declared by councils but that is because the draft guidelines are currently out for public comment. Those are publicly available. Councils have them with them at the moment. I think in all fairness to councils they have applied themselves as a priority to their local growth management strategies in the first instance, so I am not surprised to see they have not taken up those precincts yet. That is a much longer-term part of the planning, but I would be equally surprised in the future if we do not see some of those taken up. The draft guidelines are out there at the moment. As soon as they become final, I expect that councils can then start to apply them to the particular circumstances of their own shire. In relation to the concerns and issues raised by the member for Nicklin, I endorse his comments that Nambour is a very important regional hub. It currently is and it was before the south-east Queensland plan, and we certainly envisage that it will continue to be a very important regional hub long into the future. In fact, we would expect its importance to grow in significance in terms of the role that it plays in its region. 07 Mar 2007 Government Owned Corporations Amendment Bill 713

In relation to the request from the council for access to funds under the Regional Centres Program, I think the member himself identified that this is a funding program administered by my colleague, the minister for local government. I am very happy to raise the importance of that application with that minister in the context of the broader south-east Queensland planning process. In relation to the land at Bridges, as members will be aware the investigation of land at Bridges for long-term industrial purposes is occurring as a result of an identification of a pretty serious shortfall of industrial land into the future for the Sunshine Coast. I know that the member for Nicklin does understand that we need to ensure that there is the capacity for further industrial development if we are going to see jobs for people, but we do need to get the locations of those industrial areas right. His question in relation to how we can identify whether Bridges is the right place if we have not identified what possible alternatives may exist and therefore done some comparison between the two is very legitimate. I am pleased to advise him that after discussing the matter with advisers here today from my Office of Urban Management it appears his arguments have been very convincing, because they advise me that they have prepared a submission to come to me next week for me to approve a widening of the process to allow that to happen. I have not seen that submission yet, but without reading it can I say on the face of it that I have every reason to believe that I will be approving it. I will certainly advise the member formally when that occurs. The member for Ipswich started her contribution by saying that the era of urban sprawl in south- east Queensland must come to an end. I conclude my comments by saying that the era of urban sprawl in the south-east corner of our state has come to an end. It came to an end with the south-east Queensland plan. We are never going back to that. It is incumbent on every one of us in this House to understand the importance of this document and this planning instrument and to accept that, even though from time to time there will be difficulties and challenges as people on one side or the other of that footprint seek to have it changed, holding that line is actually imperative to the long-term security, lifestyle and prosperity of the entire region. I conclude by thanking all of those officers in the Office of Urban Management. Their task is often a very thankless one, but they do their duty and I was very pleased to see the member for Nicklin recognise the contribution they make. They are often at the front line of the complaints, and I think they manage them very well. They have done an excellent job with the amendment. As members would imagine, it was quite an extensive task. They have done a great job of working with the local councils concerned, and I thank the councils for their cooperation. They have approached this task with a great degree of willingness and applied themselves and their resources to it accordingly. I commend the motion to the House. Motion agreed to.

GOVERNMENT OWNED CORPORATIONS AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading Resumed from 31 October 2006 (see p. 297). Mr NICHOLLS (Clayfield—Lib) (12.33 pm): I rise to make a few points in relation to the Government Owned Corporations Amendment Bill and to outline to the House that the opposition will be supporting the bill as it has been presented. The original Government Owned Corporations Act was drafted in 1993 based upon the existing Corporations Law at the time. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr O’Brien): Order! Has the member for Clayfield already spoken on this bill? Mr NICHOLLS: Not on the Government Owned Corporations Amendment Bill. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: My apologies. I call the member for Clayfield. Mr NICHOLLS: I am happy to speak twice. Government members interjected. Mr NICHOLLS: I understand the government members want me to speak more than once. I will be brief about it so that the Deputy Clerk will not have to listen to me for too much longer. She obviously expressed her opinion in very forceful terms. Government members interjected. Mr NICHOLLS: It is certainly better than some of the comments I receive from the other side of the House. As the Corporations Law has evolved since 1993, it has obviously become necessary to update and amend the current legislation. There are a number of changes brought about by the legislation which I would like to comment on. 714 Government Owned Corporations Amendment Bill 07 Mar 2007

Firstly, obviously the bill abolishes the concept of statutory GOCs and converts those GOCs that have not yet gone through the full process of corporatisation to company GOCs. I note from the explanatory notes and the minister’s second reading speech that the difficulty in doing so was overestimated at the time the bill was brought into place, and it is now much easier for those corporations that were statutory corporations to convert to company government owned corporations. I also note that the bill removes the requirement for chief and senior executive appointments to be made by the Governor in Council. It now enables the boards of those corporations to appoint those senior executives with the prior shareholding minister’s approval. There are some issues in relation to the Ombudsman’s oversight. The act allows the Ombudsman to require information from corporate GOCs and still requires those GOCs to provide information in respect of an investigation. One of the issues that was raised in the minister’s second reading speech is the ability for the Ombudsman to have oversight of the service delivery of those government owned corporations. The minister indicated that that is something that might be looked at in the future. It might help us if we had some indication of which way the advisers were proposing to proceed in relation to that oversight given the Ombudsman’s role in relation to government owned corporations—and there are some that provide very vital services to Queenslanders. Some other changes will be made in relation to streamlining the dividend approval process. We know that in the past there has been some controversy in relation to dividends paid by statutory government owned corporations and the appropriateness of some of those dividends, particularly in the early parts of this century, in 2001 and 2002, and particularly some of the big payments that were made. I notice that this legislation proposes amendments to allow the streamlining of that and removes the requirement for prior consultation with the shareholding minister before those dividend announcements are made. I am sorry if I have not picked it up, but I would not mind an explanation on what the government proposes to undertake in relation to that dividend approval process. Finally, I also note that the legislation requires a statement of adjustments to profit to be made before a profit recommendation is made—that is, any subsequent change since the original recommendation for payment of profit has to be taken into account before a final profit is declared and obviously available for distribution to the shareholding minister and back to the state. Overall, the opposition is pleased to support the bill. It brings the legislation for government owned corporations up to date. It abolishes the concept of the statutory owned corporations. It saves a lot of administrative process and it makes a lot of sense in this day and age. Mr MOORHEAD (Waterford—ALP) (12.38 pm): I rise to speak in support of the Government Owned Corporations Amendment Bill. This bill is an important measure to ensure that government owned corporations are operating in a legislative environment that is up to date with recent amendments to the Corporations Law. These changes are important to ensure that government owned corporations are able to operate on a competitive and efficient basis. Queensland was a relatively late starter in implementing government owned corporations as a means of delivering government services through independent business units. In 1990 the Goss government issued the Queensland green paper on government owned enterprises to look at the process of what was described as corporatisation. The label ‘corporatisation’ is really a misnomer, as most public enterprises at that time were already bodies corporated. The underlying principle is expressed in the green paper on page 4, where it says— Public Sector bodies will be established as enterprises in a form akin to public companies. Their primary objective will be to operate in a commercial manner. The underpinning philosophy is to establish a relationship between the minister and GOCs similar to the relationship that exists between shareholders and board members in a private corporation. This is an important principle. In order to be able to compete with private enterprise, GOCs must be subject to similar accountability regimes. GOCs should be accountable for outcomes for the community rather than every decision made along the way. However, this principle does not always fit comfortably within our system of Westminster responsible government. Our system relies on the principle that the actions of executive government are held to account through the legislature. GOCs are a mechanism designed to reach a balance between these competing aims and ensure accountability for outcomes whether these are financial outcomes for the GOC or strategic outcomes for the benefit of the state as a whole. Since the model of GOCs underwent major reforms by the British government after World War II based on the research and writings of Herbert Morrison, most governments have been trying to get the balance right. The model used by the British government before World War II, that being entirely independent GOCs, was not a success. It is important that GOCs can be both responsive to the public which it supports as well as ensure that their business is outcome focused. This bill maintains this fundamental principle while finetuning the operation of GOCs to make sure the balance is right. These changes will see GOCs which have operated in a commercial environment move from statutory GOCs to company GOCs to ensure that their accountability regimes are similar to those in the private sector. So as well as independent regulation from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, shareholding ministers will still be able to take an active interest in the governance of GOCs. 07 Mar 2007 Government Owned Corporations Amendment Bill 715

It is important that GOCs can have the best of both worlds—the benefits of public ownership and the structures and operations of their private sector competitors. GOCs represent a large public investment in industries of public importance. It is important that we get this right. We should be careful to ensure that GOCs are not put at a competitive disadvantage due to excessive red tape. This change before the House is not about reducing accountability; this move will actually increase accountability through the application of the Corporations Law for those statutory GOCs that will become company GOCs. Those people who know this legislation will understand the continuous and rigorous accountability regime that it includes. I am one who is a strong supporter of GOCs. There are some strategic and important industries where government control and investment are important. These reforms allow GOCs to compete on an equal footing. We must face the facts of national competition policy that our GOCs are open to competition. Third-party access to industry is a reality, but it is a reality that Queensland’s GOCs are meeting head on. GOCs are also major employers in Queensland and a major provider of skilled workers to our workforce. Unfortunately, GOCs have been dragged into the federal government’s WorkChoices system. I thank the Deputy Premier for her assurance that this change will not affect the entitlements of workers employed by GOCs. I congratulate the Deputy Premier on this bill and congratulate her on working to ensure the long-term viability of government owned enterprises. I commend the bill to the House. Mr ROBERTS (Nudgee—ALP) (12.42 pm): The Government Owned Corporations Act 1993 was brought into existence to provide a corporate governance framework for newly formed government owned corporations. GOCs were established to provide more accountability and transparency to the management and operations of government owned businesses such as electricity authorities, ports, Queensland Rail, the Golden Casket Agency and the Queensland Investment Corporation. The GOC structure is designed to ensure both the efficient use of resources and the efficient and effective delivery of services for Queenslanders. Overall the corporatisation agenda has served both the government and the people of Queensland well. It has placed government owned businesses on a firmer commercial footing and enabled efficient and effective management arrangements to be put in place. Last financial year GOCs delivered dividend revenue of $623 million to government, representing a little over two per cent of government revenue. This is a relatively small but important revenue stream for government and it is therefore essential that the GOC sector is efficient and effective in carrying out its responsibilities to government and the people of Queensland. The provisions outlined in this bill are a progressive step towards achieving that objective. It is worth digressing at this point to acknowledge the spectacular success of the recent sale of the retail businesses of Energex and Ergon. In total the energy sales process has grossed more than $3 billion and, but for stamp duty and related sales costs, adjustments and any relevant debt repayments, these proceeds will be deposited into the Queensland Future Growth Fund for investment in key aspects of the Queensland economy. Key areas of investment will include clean coal technology, water and other transport and energy infrastructure—investments which will add to Queensland’s economic output. I take the opportunity to add my congratulations to all involved in the sales process— the staff from Ergon and Energex, the sales team and the advisers. It was an exceptionally professional transaction process and a credit to all those involved. Many of our GOCs now operate in direct competition to well-resourced private sector companies, particularly in the electricity industry and rail freight industry. This is a significant risk factor for government and as a consequence the future employment security, revenue streams for government and the delivery of quality services is more and more reliant on GOCs operating efficiently and effectively. GOCs must operate under professional management and appropriate corporate governance arrangements. The governance arrangements for GOCs is, in the majority of cases, identical to publicly listed companies but with some key differences. One of the key differences is that the shareholders, being the Treasurer and the appropriate line agency minister, have overarching public interest considerations to take account of when they exercise their decision-making powers. Some of these issues relate to investment decisions of the GOCs, community service obligations, board appointments and directions given about compliance with various government policies. Although similar interventions exist in many privately owned companies, there is no doubt that being in government ownership does present additional challenges to the management of GOCs and their boards, and our GOC governance arrangements need to reflect this. With the benefit of experience, the government has made changes to the governance arrangements to streamline the relationship between shareholding ministers and the boards. This bill is a further example of how changes can be made to improve accountability and efficiency. When the GOC Act was established it effectively mirrored the provisions of the then Commonwealth Corporations Act. It 716 Privilege 07 Mar 2007 established two categories of GOCs—statutory GOCs, which includes ports, Queensland Rail and company GOCs, which captured all of the electricity authorities. The GOC Act provided that once an entity was established as a company GOC it was, except so far as the GOC Act applied, subject to the provisions of the federal Corporations Act, a situation which did not apply to statutory GOCs. Since its original establishment the federal Corporations Act has changed dramatically following both court decisions and major reviews by the Commonwealth. This has led to some significant differences between statutory GOCs and company GOCs on issues such as governance arrangements, the existence of independent regulation and duties of boards and directors. This bill seeks to address many of those differences by applying a consistent framework across the entire GOC sector. The bill proposes the abolition of the concept of a statutory GOC and provides for their conversion to company GOCs with the attendant changes to governance arrangements and accountability. One key outcome of this is that all GOCs in Queensland will now be subject to the provisions of the federal Corporations Law. The bill provides a range of other changes, including a streamlined process for appointing senior executives, alignment with provisions of the Corporations Act and the transfer of assets between GOCs. All of these matters are covered in some detail in the minister’s second reading speech. With those few words, I commend the bill to the House. Interruption.

PRIVILEGE

Liberal Party Dr FLEGG (Moggill—Lib) (12.49 pm): I rise on a matter of privilege suddenly arising. Today the Premier came into the parliament and made allegations that in effect accused Liberal members of criminal conduct. The leader of a political party does not have direct access to campaign funds or accounts. The Premier knows that. That is a basic tenet of our party from its foundation. As such there is not direct access by the leader of the party and nor should there be. This is a right and proper dissociation from the financial conduct of campaigns held by the organisation of a party which is the right and appropriate body to deal with funds. However, this matter has been raised and I have taken the following actions. I have spoken to each member of the parliamentary Liberal Party and I have been given an assurance that none of them have any information in relation to federal government printing allowances or any information that should be brought forward to investigating officers or to the CMC. I have approached the President of the Liberal Party, Mr Warwick Parer, and the state director of the Liberal Party and I have asked for and been given a guarantee that there was no use of any federal member’s printing funds in any aspect of the state campaign to the best of their knowledge and belief, and I have asked for that undertaking to be confirmed to me in writing. I have also contacted the CMC to satisfy myself of what my obligations may be in such a matter and to establish in my own mind that there are no matters that it would be currently appropriate for me to refer to the CMC, and I have taken that action in contacting it. The Premier got up yesterday morning and read the Courier-Mail and decided to conduct a smear campaign against the Liberal members to get himself some headlines, which he may well have achieved but at the cost of lowering the standards in this place. In relation to these scurrilous allegations that the Premier has made against Liberal members, there is a very real challenge. That challenge is: whatever information he has to back up his scurrilous accusations about members on this side of the House, he should supply that information to the CMC or the Federal Police or whoever is appropriate for that information. If he has no information backing up those claims, the Premier should be ashamed of introducing them with absolutely no information. There is a Federal Police investigation into this matter and it should be allowed to conduct that inquiry without a political campaign being overlaid on top of its investigation. But let me make it very clear standing here today that I will not tolerate and nor will members of the Liberal Party on this side of the House tolerate any misuse of public funds. We will have a zero tolerance for any misuse of public funds and anyone who is shown to have misused public funds will receive no succour, support or sympathy and will pay the full price for their misdoings, and we give that undertaking here today. The other undertaking that I will give here today is that myself or any members of the parliamentary Liberal Party on this side will fully cooperate with those investigations. I would trust that if the Premier had any information he, too, would seek to do that. But I give an undertaking that we will fully cooperate with investigating officers in the Federal Police or the CMC, if the matter goes to the CMC. 07 Mar 2007 Government Owned Corporations Amendment Bill 717

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr O’Brien): I think it is appropriate that you write directly to the Speaker about your matter of privilege. I will ensure that he is aware of it and can start preparing a response for you. Mr Beattie interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, I have asked the member to write to the Speaker with his matter of privilege. Ms Bligh interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: My ruling stands.

GOVERNMENT OWNED CORPORATIONS AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading Resumed. Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Infrastructure) (12.53 pm), in reply: I rise to thank the coalition for its support for this bill. It is, I think, a very important bill in terms of ensuring the future efficient, transparent and accountable operation of the GOC sector in the Queensland economy. There was one question raised by the member for Clayfield that I can clarify in relation to dividends. There are two changes that are occurring. The first is basically to streamline the process so that it becomes more efficient and manageable. There is currently a formal requirement in the legislation for consultation. This, because it is a legislative requirement, requires all of that to be done in writing. There is correspondence backwards and forwards before the matter can be settled—and if members can imagine that in the lead-up to the budget across that many GOCs—and is in my view and my experience a very ineffective and inefficient way to do it. All of the chairs understand and will be advised formally by me that they are required to consult with the Treasury, but there are more efficient ways to do that than to have board meetings, send the correspondence, the correspondence comes back et cetera. So that is a streamlining process. Obviously any government decisions about dividends, to accept the recommendations or otherwise, then become public, so there is no change to that. The other key change has been driven by changes made to the Australian accounting standards. The implementation of these standards means that changes in the value of some assets may directly affect profit, potentially impacting on a GOC’s dividend recommendation even though the gains or losses of the asset are not realised. The GOC Act does not currently contemplate these impacts. The proposed amendment requires a GOC’s board to submit to shareholding ministers with its dividend recommendation a statement of the amount of any adjustments made to its estimated profit and reasons for those adjustments. That will enable each GOC to address the accounting issues particular to their circumstances. That is the only other change to the dividends and it is to accommodate changes to the Australian accounting standards in terms of how the value of some assets and the effect that that value has on profits can be accommodated in dividend recommendations. With those comments, I thank other members for their support and commend the bill to the House. Question put—That the bill be now read a second time. Motion agreed to.

Consideration in Detail Clauses 1 to 62, as read, agreed to. Schedule, as read, agreed to.

Third Reading Question put—That the bill be now read a third time. Motion agreed to.

Long Title Question put—That the long title of the bill be agreed to. Motion agreed to. Sitting suspended from 12.56 pm to 2.30 pm. 718 Ministerial Statement 07 Mar 2007

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

Plane Crash, Indonesia; Willprint Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (2.30 pm), by leave: A number of members, if not all, would be aware that there has tragically been an aircraft crash in Indonesia. On behalf of all members, I want to pass on my condolences and thoughts to those who have lost loved ones. I understand that there are some Australian journalists and others on board. So my thoughts and the thoughts of all of us go to those who have lost loved ones in that crash in Indonesia. Earlier this afternoon the member for Moggill indicated that he had put in a quick call to the Crime and Misconduct Commission. I want to make it very clear that Queensland voters deserve answers to what I call Printgate. The Leader of the Liberal Party has not answered any of the questions that I put to him and this matter will not go away. The Leader of the Liberal Party needs to know that there will not be a cover-up of this matter. A simple quick call to the CMC by the Leader of the Liberal Party is not good enough. Every day the Leader of the Liberal Party lectures me about issues of integrity and honesty. I want to highlight to him that my standards are well known. Clearly, anyone who has ever breached the rules in my government I have dealt with. The point is what a leader does when they find out about these matters. Inevitably, any leader of a political party who is the leader for some time will be confronted by matters and issues that they do not like. The test is whether the leader covers them up or the leader deals with them. I have always dealt with them. The Leader the Liberal Party is not doing that. That is not good enough. He should not be looking for a backdoor way to squirm out of his obligations. The member is the leader of a political party. Although I do not share all the views of that political party, it is a very important political party in our democratic system and a political party that has made significant contributions to this state and this country. So the leadership is not something to be simply glossed over. The member for Moggill has to refer everything on this issue to the Crime and Misconduct Commission and the Electoral Commission of Queensland. The obligation is not on those bodies; they do not have the documents. The obligation is on the member for Moggill. The obligation is not on me; I do not have all the documents, either—although I have to say that there are sections of the Liberal Party who believe in sharing. The obligation sits squarely on the shoulders of the member for Moggill. He should have the documents and, if he does not, he is the one who can get them. Often when matters such as these come up a leader does not know the full details, but appropriately a leader demands them and is provided with them. I did this in terms of the Labor Party when the rorts issue arose in 2000-01. The party knew clearly what my views were and it responded appropriately, for which I will always be grateful. When I say that the member for Moggill should provide this information, that information includes receipts, supporting documents and any other scrap of material relating to this very sleazy affair. If the member for Moggill has been kept in the dark, he needs to get to the bottom of it. This is a very serious matter and deserves his full attention. If the member for Moggill cannot get the state director on the phone, he needs to get in his car and get over there and see him very quickly. Queensland taxpayers deserve answers. It is not the time for the member for Moggill to duck and weave and cover; it is time for him to show some leadership and integrity. As I said to the member for Moggill earlier—and I tried to give him a chance to do this—if he will not refer this material, then obviously I will. I do not have all the material, but I will refer the debates of this House to the CMC and to the Electoral Commission of Queensland. I have listened to the Leader of the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party made the extraordinary revelation that he knew nothing about the Federal Police investigation into the rorting of federal members’ massive printing allowances until he read yesterday’s Courier-Mail. That says a lot about the member’s standing and influence in the Liberal Party. The Prime Minister knew last Thursday. The raids were carried out on Friday. I knew about it on Monday. The media knew about it on Monday. The Leader of the Liberal Party did not know about it until Tuesday morning. He is still waiting for the Liberal state director—or he was earlier this morning—to return his phone call. Since yesterday, the member for Moggill has been trying to downplay the investigation. He wants the people of Queensland and his own party to believe that it is an investigation into just one MP, the member for Bowman. It is not. I know what is going on in the Liberal Party. It is trying to say that Mr Laming is the only person who is really involved. Mr Schwarten: A scapegoat. Mr BEATTIE: Mr Laming is becoming exactly what the Leader of the House said, the scapegoat. I am not here to defend Mr Laming. He has some very serious explaining to do. Members might have noticed in today’s Australian that there was speculation that the Prime Minister’s office wanted Mr Laming to resign. So these matters are very serious. 07 Mar 2007 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 719

The Leader of the Liberal Party needs to explain why the Federal Police raided the offices of three members as well as the Liberal Party’s printer of choice. I am told that the raid on the printer, which the printer has downplayed as almost a social call, involved six or seven Federal Police officers. I hate to say it, but I would not regard that as a social call. The allegation that I have made stands. The matters I have raised stand. I am happy for the Leader of the Liberal Party to correct me on these matters, but he has not made any direct denial of any of the matters that I have referred to. Therefore, they stand on the record. The Liberal Party is under investigation for the gross misuse of taxpayers’ funds. The allegation is that some of the Liberal Party’s printing costs, including election campaign costs, had been met by the fraudulent misuse of federal members’ $125,000 printing allowance—recently increased to $150,000. That is the point. But as I said this morning, it gets even more interesting. In the run-up to the last election, the Liberal Party forced its members and candidates in quite a number of seats to sign up to the campaign package. The package cost each member and candidate in the vicinity of $40,000. The Liberal Party undertook to contribute to the package if members and candidates signed up. What was the Liberal Party organisation’s contribution? As I said this morning, it undertook to meet the cost of the printing. I have to say that this smells. If the allegations now being investigated are proven, then every Liberal MP and candidate will become involved in this fraud that the Liberal Party is being investigated for. Their embarrassment and discomfort will not be eased by the knowledge that their contribution, paid in some cases by mortgaging their homes and businesses and the hard work of their supporters, was matched by the party machine through a fraud perpetrated on the taxpayers of Queensland and Australia. Is it any wonder that the member for Moggill wants to shut down this whole matter. I have bad news for him: this is just the tip of a large iceberg and we are not going to run away from it. As I say, although I do not always agree with the Liberal Party, it is a proud political party in the history of this country. In the days of Gordon Chalk, it was known for its honesty and integrity. I have to say that we are not going to let this matter go. A lot of decent Liberal Party candidates mortgaged their homes and got into hock to run as candidates. They are good people. Under those circumstances, they are entitled for this matter to be investigated fully. Let me assure members that investigated fully it will be. The statement by the Leader of the Liberal Party is not good enough.

BODY CORPORATE AND COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill Resumed from 6 March (see p. 651). Mr LAWLOR (Southport—ALP) (2.37 pm): I support this bill. It is quite logical and acceptable as far as its goes. However, I consider that it does not go far enough in its review of the Body Corporate and Community Management Act. I intend to refer in my contribution to a particular issue of concern to many in the community and also to several members of this parliament, and this is the issue of the process for the adjustment of body corporate entitlements. That is, the proportion which each lot owner must contribute to the cost of running a scheme. In other words, owners of a property which comprises a residential lot have an entitlement to lots which determine the proportionate share of the lot owner to the common property and, therefore, to the contribution to be paid for the costs of maintaining and providing services to the building and also for capital works. This is an important issue, because there are over 33,000 community titles schemes in Queensland, which account for over 300,000 individual lots. The South East Queensland Regional Plan endeavours to concentrate higher-density housing where the infrastructure, such as water, sewerage and so on, is located to contain urban sprawl. Therefore, the community titles sector of the housing market assumes even greater importance for the future as effect is given to the objectives of the South East Queensland Regional Plan. This bill misses that opportunity to rectify what I consider to be the unintended consequences of the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997. That act provides that there should be two sets of lot entitlements for each apartment in a community titles scheme: contribution schedule lots and interest schedule lots. The first is the means by which the respective contributions of the apartment owners to the maintenance and running costs of the building are determined and the interest schedule is the means by which the respective owners’ interests in the common property are determined. I have raised my concerns about what I considered to be an unfair system for adjusting body corporate lot entitlements over the past two years with both the minister’s office and the department. I am grateful for the minister’s undertaking to have her department review the issues relating to lot 720 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 07 Mar 2007 entitlements and adjustment thereof and also body corporate fees. However, other responses and comments I have received give me no confidence that the problem is understood, and I will refer to a few examples. The case which established the present regime for adjusting body corporate lot entitlements is the Centrepoint case and the decision of the Court of Appeal, which was delivered in June 2004. I quote from the decision of Mr Justice Chesterman in this contribution. It is important to note that this is a Court of Appeal decision—that is the law on this particular issue. Anyone who says that the legislation must be working okay because there has been only one court case is completely missing the point. It is a complete non sequitur of a comment. This case did not go the further step to the High Court because the judgement correctly interpreted the provisions of the Body Corporate and Community Management Act. Anyone who took a further case to court would be a complete madman or madwoman or a multimillionaire with a sense of humour. The fault is not with the judgement in the Centrepoint case; it is with the legislation, which gives rise to the present unfair situation which is set out in the Centrepoint case. In the Centrepoint case there was an application pursuant to section 48 of the act to adjust the lot entitlement schedule. In the building there were 51 units. As a result of the decision, a lot entitlement for a one-bedroom unit went from 97 to 185, an increase of 90 per cent. Similarly, the penthouse or a three-bedroom unit—I refer to a penthouse because that is referred to in the judgement; I am not trying to be dramatic about it—went from 295 to 211, a reduction of 29 per cent. One of the criticisms I get is that most unit lot entitlements do not change significantly. That is just a trite comment because of course most units in any building will be around the mean lot entitlement and they will not change greatly. Even in the Centrepoint case, of the 51 units I would guess that about 30 change very little. It is only at the extremes that it becomes significant and, in the case of, say, a one- bedroom ground floor unit, unfair. The penthouse or large unit comes down and the one-bedroom ground floor unit goes up. Under previous legislation lot entitlements were set by the developer and essentially fixed in concrete when the plan was registered. Yes, they may have set the levies of the penthouse artificially high and cheaper units artificially low. But so what? A purchaser of either unit, when entering into a contract, gets details of the lot entitlements et cetera. Those details form part of the contract. The purchaser is fully informed and aware of the liability to pay an extent of the levies. What could be fairer? On the other hand, what could be more unfair than entering into a contract and thereby being informed what your liability for the body corporate levies were on completing the purchase only to find that six months, six years or 20 years down the track an application is made to vary the lot entitlements and your levies might double. It could be enough to force you to sell your unit and move out, as happened with a constituent from Burleigh Heads who appealed to their member, Christine Smith, about the situation. I have heard an argument that lot entitlements ‘should not be used as a marketing tool’. Why not? By that I presume it is meant that you should not use the higher entitlements of, say, a penthouse to subsidise the ground floor units lot entitlement and therefore make them more attractive to a purchaser. What is wrong with that? The entitlements differential cannot be too ridiculous as the developer still has to sell the penthouse. But if the developer’s objectives—that is, to sell his units—coincide with the objectives and policies of various groups, including this government, to provide more affordable housing, what is wrong with that? There are also some negative responses to the word ‘marketing’ and developers ‘marketing their product’. Maybe it is associated with ‘marketeering’, which of course is illegal. But there is nothing illegal or negative about marketing. In fact, we all went through a marketing exercise fairly recently—it was called an election. The proper use of lot entitlements and the certainty provided under the old Building Units and Group Titles Act could contribute greatly to the provision of affordable housing, which is in greater demand today than it ever was. Another comment I got was that ‘in many cases lot entitlement adjustments result in lower costs for unit holders and result in more affordable housing not less’. That is just rubbish. It may result in more affordable housing for millionaires. I would be happy to be proved wrong on this point, and I could be proved wrong and would admit that I was wrong if I could be given just one example of the lot entitlements of a penthouse going up as a result of an application under section 48 of the act. The simple fact of the matter is that there is only 100 per cent of anything including lot entitlements in a building. If someone’s lot entitlement is reduced then someone else’s must be increased and, as a result, the proportion and amount of the levies which an owner is liable to pay is adjusted accordingly. What am I to make of a comment that appears to confuse body corporate levies with lot entitlements, and I quote— Inflexibly fixing body corporate levies at the rate set by developers deprives unit owners of any opportunity to review lot entitlements should the circumstances of their scheme change. This is something out of a Monty Python sketch. Firstly, section 48 of the act—and indeed the courts are not concerned with body corporate levies; levies are set by the body corporate itself—relates to lot entitlements which determine the proportion of levies that each unit owner must pay—the 07 Mar 2007 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 721 proportion of the administrative fund and the sinking fund. Secondly, whilst the original developer sets the amount of the levies—and indeed the lot entitlements—they are not set in concrete and they are not inflexible. As units are sold off plan, so the control of the body corporate and responsibility for setting levies passes to the unit owners represented by the body corporate management committee. They then adjust the body corporate levies and set budgets on an annual basis. Unfortunately I know this. I am on the body corporate management committee of my own building. It is a bit of a chore, but it has to be done. They do not and cannot review lot entitlements which, as I have said before, determine the proportion of the total levy which each lot owner pays. Again I hear people confusing body corporate levies with lot entitlements. I get told things like, ‘The quantum of body corporate levies changes for a variety of reasons, particularly in response to the changing capital priorities of bodies corporate and not solely or primarily because of adjustments to lot entitlements.’ Of course the quantum of the body corporate levies change and sometimes in response to changing capital priorities. These are often addressed by special levies. For instance, a building might require repainting and there is not enough money in the sinking fund to cover the cost. Also, pools and lifts can be expensive and may require special levies for maintenance. But this is not an issue relating to quantum of body corporate levies. To relate it to the quantum of the levies shows a basic misunderstanding of the problem. It relates to the proportion of the levy that each lot owner must pay which is governed by the lot entitlement. As I have said previously, I thank the minister for her undertaking to review the issue of the adjustment of body corporate lot entitlements, and I hope that this will be undertaken as a matter of urgency. Mrs SULLIVAN (Pumicestone—ALP) (2.50 pm): I rise in support of the Body Corporate and Community Management and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2006. This bill provides important and constructive improvements to the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 and the community titles sector in Queensland. The community titles sector constitutes a large proportion of Queensland housing stock. Statistics show that it is growing rapidly. The recent review of body corporate and community management issues highlighted the need for improvements to alternative dispute resolution for body corporate disputes under the body corporate legislation. Effective alternative dispute resolution supports productive relationships in bodies corporate and reduces further conflict. Firstly, the bill will require that a person makes a reasonable attempt to resolve their issue internally within their body corporate. This may be done, for example, by writing to their body corporate to advise them of the issue or presenting a motion for consideration at a general meeting of their body corporate. Secondly, the bill proposes that the Office of the Commissioner for Body Corporate and Community Management, or the BCCM office, will provide a conciliation service which encourages parties to a dispute to arrive at their own resolution and agreement in line with the self-management focus of the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997. Conciliation will encourage the prompt and informal resolution of disputes, improve communication between parties and provide parties with a better understanding of their rights and responsibilities under this legislation. This, in turn, is expected to minimise future disputes. Under the bill, conciliation will be compulsory for most body corporate disputes before an application is made for adjudication. The BCCM office has been trialling a pilot voluntary conciliation project in anticipation of amendments contained in this bill. Since the commencement of the trial project four months ago, it has delivered immediate improvements for parties seeking alternative dispute resolution for their body corporate disputes and demonstrates the benefits conciliation will provide to the sector. I appreciate the work done by the minister, the Hon. Margaret Keech, and her staff. I am on the backbench committee and we are always well informed of any changes in relation to the legislation. We are provided with detailed information and, as I say, my thanks go to the minister and her staff for that consideration. I believe the changes are on the right track and I commend the bill to the House. Mr WETTENHALL (Barron River—ALP) (2.52 pm): I am pleased to take this opportunity to support the Body Corporate and Community Management and Other Legislation Amendment Bill. The main objective of this bill is to improve the dispute resolution processes for community title schemes. The bill achieves this by providing for informal processes, such as self-resolution of disputes, conciliation and improving access to justice by expanding the jurisdiction of the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal. We know that other pieces of legislation that adopt those methods and mechanisms of dispute resolution have resulted in a more efficient, cost-effective and fair process for litigants. The bill is timely against the backdrop of the increasing popularity of community title schemes. In Queensland there are over 33,000 community titles with over 303,000 individual units. Community title schemes are found in many different forms, such as home units, duplexes, townhouses and high-rise apartments and in some commercial premises. 722 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 07 Mar 2007

I am very pleased to say that the bill also recognises the important role that community titles play in the tourism market, in particular through the provision of short-term holiday accommodation. Clause 4 of the bill encourages bodies corporate to consider tourism issues in the administration of the schemes by expanding the secondary objects of the Body Corporate and Community Management Act. Encouraging the tourism potential of community titles is of particular significance in towns like Cairns that depend heavily on the tourism industry for employment and economic prosperity. To give some indication of the dimension of the market, some 17 per cent of new unit sales recorded in the September 2006 quarter were for short-term accommodation, a substantial increase since the June 2006 quarter in the Cairns local government area. Not only is it timely because of the particular circumstances that pertain to Cairns and the increasing tourism in that city and in that region but also the increasing popularity of unit development altogether. As an indicator of that, in the six months to September 1996 and the six months to September 1998 there were about 200 sales of units in the Cairns local government area. In late 2003 sales activity peaked at 1,827 units in the six months to September in that year. In the six months to September 2006 there were 2,023 units sold. That activity demonstrates the importance of streamlining the processes in the current act to assist people to resolve their disputes because there will be more of them. There is little doubt that units are offering affordable housing options with price points, again the Cairns local government area, concentrated for units in the $200,000 to $300,000 price bracket. In fact, 85 per cent of sales of units are under $500,000. Demand is particularly strong in the northern beaches area of Cairns, most of those suburbs located in my electorate of Barron River. That demand reflects the continuing strong population growth in the Cairns area. In the year ended June 2005 the Cairns population increased by nearly 3,000 people to reach just over 128,000 people. The population has grown by 2.2 per cent over the past five years. It is estimated that by 2026 the population in the greater Cairns area will reach 186,000, an increase of some 58,000. Significantly, well over 16,000 of those are expected to be aged over 65 and many of those will, of course, choose to live in the types of residences and dwellings that will be governed by the provisions of this bill. Population growth of this magnitude is expected to create demand for nearly 1,200 new dwellings each year. Over half the population growth has been from migration from other areas, reflecting the strong labour market in Cairns and also our enviable tropical lifestyle. Against that backdrop of more and more people choosing to live in unit-style residences, it is important that the mechanisms to resolve disputes are fair to all parties, accessible and efficient. That is the key focus of the bill. The objectives of the bill are to encourage people to resolve their disputes without any formal intervention. The bill requires that a person must make a reasonable attempt to resolve the dispute within that person’s body corporate prior to making an application to the commissioner. That attempt must be demonstrated when the application is made. The commissioner may not proceed with the application until the person undertakes reasonable steps to resolve that dispute. The bill also introduces a conciliation process which will be conducted by the Office of the Commissioner for Body Corporate and Community Management. The conciliation is designed to facilitate prompt and informal resolution of disputes, encourage parties to disputes to arrive at their own resolutions and agreements in line with the self-management focus of the BCCM Act and improve communication between parties, their understanding of rights and responsibilities under legislation and, in turn, minimise future disputes. For most of those body corporate disputes, conciliation will be compulsory before an application is made for adjudication. In my previous occupation as a lawyer, in both private practice and as a volunteer at community legal centres, there was a constant stream of people seeking advice and assistance who had encountered difficulties involving their body corporate. This bill will certainly result in a lower number of people needing to seek advice. The bill also extends the jurisdiction of the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal to determine complex BCCM disputes currently resolved compulsorily by specialist adjudication and to enable appeals of adjudicators’ orders currently only determined in the District Court. That change will alleviate stakeholders’ concerns that the current costs of specialist adjudication and the costs and formality of District Court proceedings inhibit the ability of parties to access justice. That is another important aspect of this bill; it enhances the access to justice for people who do find themselves in a dispute. The definitions of ‘parties to a dispute’ have been tightened and will remove the confusion that previously existed about that. The bill clarifies the parties by clearly defining the parties as the applicant and the respondent. An affected person who may be directly and materially affected by relief sought in an application is not a party to a dispute. The bill also addresses the uncertainty about when a dispute exists for the purpose of dispute resolution. The parties to a dispute must have standing under the BCCM Act when the application is received by the commissioner. If a party ceases to have standing during the dispute resolution process—for example, when the unit is sold—the commissioner or an adjudicator may dismiss the application if the relief sought is no longer meaningful. That is a very sensible change to the act. 07 Mar 2007 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 723

The bill also changes the adjudicator powers. The power of an adjudicator to award costs against a person who makes an application that is dismissed on the basis that it is frivolous, misconceived or without substance is extended to permit an order for costs in favour of an affected person or the body corporate which has incurred costs regarding the application. That will deter those types of nuisance applications that tie up people and unnecessarily cause inconvenience and expense. Significantly, the bill also enhances the statutory code of conduct for body corporate managers by including a requirement that body corporate managers must not attempt to unfairly influence the outcome of body corporate committee elections. A code of conduct for voting members of a body corporate committee will be introduced in response to concerns raised by many people about the expertise and knowledge of voting members. It provides guidelines for voting committee members without increasing their existing obligations. That code contains some common-sense provisions, such as requiring voting members to act with honesty, fairness and confidentiality, to act in the body corporate’s best interests, to comply with the act and the code in performing their duties, to not create a nuisance on scheme land or otherwise behave in a way that unreasonably affects a person’s lawful use or enjoyment of a lot or common property and to disclose a conflict of interest they may have in a matter before the committee. It also provides that a body corporate manager must not attempt to unfairly influence the outcome of an election for the body corporate committee. All of those are common-sense provisions inserted in a code of conduct to significantly improve the operation and functions of body corporates and provide guidance and assistance for voting members of the committees. As we have heard in this debate, the South East Queensland Regional Plan has as one of its objectives and outcomes the consolidation of urban areas and higher density living. Without pre- empting the outcomes of the far-north Queensland statutory regional plan that is currently under development with its terms of reference being considered, it is reasonable to expect that the trend from the South East Queensland Regional Plan will apply elsewhere in this state. The result is that we will have more and more of these community title schemes with a substantial number of older people living in them, and all of these changes will assist them to resolve their disputes without having to seek costly advice and resort to going to the courts. That is a very good outcome. I commend the bill to the House. Mr STEVENS (Robina—Lib) (3.04 pm): As the member for Robina—an electorate which encompasses the many unit complexes in the Broadbeach area and many other unit complexes across the Gold Coast—I am pleased that we have an attempt at establishing a code of conduct for body corporate operators before the parliament. The Body Corporate and Community Management and Other Legislation Amendment Bill is a small step in addressing the great dissatisfaction that is being felt by thousands of unit owners at the operation of their respective body corporate managers. As we move to higher and higher density in the development of our cities as a direct result of government policy and deliberate government planning for urban consolidation, governments will be confronted by an increasing number of complaints about unsavoury behaviour in the unit management industry. It is a fact that, whilst most body corporate operators act in good faith and use best practice within their industry, there will always be those who are involved in rorting and dodgy deals to further their financial return and who will use a weak and susceptible regulatory regime to disadvantage and rip off hapless individuals. These nefarious types thrive in a system where the rights of the individual can only be protected and enforced through expensive and long-term legal challenges. I note that the previous speaker in this debate, the member for Barron River, may have made humungous amounts of money in his time from legal fees on behalf of these unit owners, but unfortunately some of these people are small people and they need protection. These nefarious types know full well that a small individual cannot afford a huge legal challenge to fraudulent charges and cannot access many spurious financial costs other than through a difficult and cumbersome process to enforce an accounting audit. This convoluted system is further compounded by the recent development of public company entry into body corporate management—and, as everybody knows, public companies, their chief executives and their boards are driven by the bottom line of profit, profit, profit. There is nothing wrong with making a profit, as long as it is done in legitimate ways with accountability, clarity of process and a regulatory regime that enforces the protection of small individuals who do not have the financial capacities and resources to protect themselves against any deliberate and predatory tactics employed by body corporate bullies. As much as I am philosophically opposed to the unnecessary burgeoning growth in bureaucratic regulatory regimes, I am firmly convinced that the only real solution to the growing and consistent number of complaints about body corporate matters is a fully resourced and funded policing body that has real teeth through criminal punitive legislative options to enforce a crackdown on the few and unwanted rogue operators that are a blight on a growing and important industry. Big public corporations and large body corporate operators can spend unlimited money on high-powered lawyers to protect their money-making practices and high-profile reputations. The little guy owning a unit and being charged excessively and unfairly by Big Brother operators is at the mercy of a system which at best can deal with a complaint only through the commission and at worst will force him to band together with 724 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 07 Mar 2007 other little unit owners to protect themselves from this unsavoury behaviour. Instances where some unit owners have been charged with multiple changing of light globes, where unit owners have incurred replacement of curtains without receipts being kept and new bed covers being charged to owners when existing bed covers are more than satisfactory are just some of the rip-off tactics that are employed to bolster the bottom-line profit for the body corporate businesses. In 2003, unit owners won the right to have independent returning officers in secret ballots for committees et cetera, instead of the body corporate manager acting as the returning officer. This was to stop manipulation which can be achieved even with secret ballots, as managers have all the necessary papers and secret envelopes to easily substitute the ‘yes’ vote for a ‘no’ vote just by knowing the postcode. Instead of respecting the reform and allowing truly independent returning officers to officiate where contentious issues are to be voted on, body corporate managers can use close personal friends, former employees and even people who contract to the body corporate managers as consultants and search agents as returning officers, which is occurring at present, for so-called secret ballots. The ramification of this practice is that the intent of the act to provide independence and propriety is negated by using pliable and compliant returning officers who will not disagree with management for fear of reprisal or loss of favouritism. The biggest companies are usually the ones that gain the ear of the minister when she is putting together her policies. They have a track record of being the worst offenders when it comes to inappropriate behaviour in the industry. Because of their size naturally they are the ones who generate the most complaints. Fortunately, small unit owners have a white knight in the shape of the Unit Owners Alliance which runs a free help line that is open 60 hours a week. More than 80 per cent of the complaints against managers involve the same half dozen well known companies. I might add that the alliance advises me that because the commission is so bureaucratic in its responses to complainants and its standard response to most inquiries is to quote the act verbatim and say that it cannot help most complainants with their problems, the alliance is snowed under helping unit owners everywhere. That is a poor indictment on the success of the commission. Some old favourite tricks of managers, such as the padding of accounts, are far too common. Charging the tenants for cleaning and then deducting cleaning from the owner’s monthly account is a perennial favourite. The owner never knows that the tenant he has had for whatever period has paid for cleaning and that money goes straight into the back pocket of the manager. Similarly, there is the trick of telling the tenant that the unit he has occupied has been withdrawn from the letting pool but he can shift to another unit in the complex. Unfortunately, the tenant has to pay a weeks rent on departure or even a whole month’s rent if gullible or susceptible enough. Again, the owner never knows or sees the money from this rort of the system. In one complex, the caretaker was caught by an owner who regularly drove past his own rented unit. He inquired why he had no income for that particular month to which the letting manager replied that there had been no tenant in the unit for that month. The owner then said that he had driven past every second night for the month and had seen lights on and people in the unit for the whole month and he would pursue the matter further if appropriate remuneration was not forthcoming. The manager did not deny it and said that if the owner would let the matter rest he would give the owner first priority for lettings for the next three months to make up for his attempt at chicanery. To sum up, the manager had offered to cover one theft with another unethical practice and the sad part of it all is that this legislation will not stop these indecent acts occurring on an ongoing basis. I am advised by the Unit Owners Alliance that some 10,000 disputes come before the commission every year with at least half of these involving body corporate managers. It is obvious that there is great unrest and disagreement in this rapidly growing section of our community. Importantly, as our older population moves more and more to the sanctity of unit house living for their retirement years, it is this vulnerable part of our population who are being increasingly targeted as easy victims of scams and rorts because of their incapacity to financially fight off savaging body corporate grave robbers. I reiterate my call to the minister to get fair dinkum about a defendable solution to this increasing field of subterfuge and white-collar crime and to put in place a piece of legislation that gives punitive muscle and regulatory standards that must be adhered to by industry participants whose failure to do so would result in penal servitude as the ultimate deterrent to their unethical practices. Just as the Australian Securities and Investments Commission provides the corporate watchdog so necessary to keep a vigilant eye over rogue traders in the company world and as the Australian Consumer and Competition Commission provides a watchdog over price rorters in the consumer world, the unit owners of Queensland need real protection from unscrupulous body corporate managers in the form of an adequately funded policing and investigative body whose mission statement is to deliver fair and equitable determination of appropriate and honourable behaviour in one of our fastest growing and most susceptible industries. 07 Mar 2007 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 725

Mr McARDLE (Caloundra—Lib) (3.14 pm): It gives me pleasure to rise today to support the comments made by the shadow minister and congratulate him on the content of his address. Primarily the Body Corporate and Community Management and Other Legislation Amendment Bill aims to enhance the dispute resolution process in body corporate disputes. Every member of this House has had numerous constituents come to them and complain about their body corporate, the committee structure, the levies and other matters undertaken by the body corporate which they cannot understand but perceive in many cases not to be in the interest of themselves or other unit holders. Body corporate disputes are often the most difficult to resolve because they incorporate a large degree of emotional involvement by all parties for a lengthy period of time. The body corporate system has a positive principle—that is, individual unit holders dictate, as much as possible, the future of their complex and protect the rights of individual unit holders. In many cases, this does not occur as a consequence of power structures or power cliques developing within communities and those cliques in essence controlling the committee, the processes of that committee and ultimately determinations and decisions of that committee. The review of the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 actually commenced in 2004 with a discussion paper being released in July of that year. I note that 177 stakeholders expressed views on a wide range of body corporate issues. It cannot be ignored that it is now March 2007, a period just short of three years, and this bill is only now being debated in the House. Given the number of complaints that each member, their offices and those people who have fallen into the dispute resolution process have made, the delay highlights the deplorable attitude this minister has to the concerns and needs of many people right across south-east Queensland and, in fact, throughout the whole state who live under a body corporate structure. Ms KEECH: I rise to a point of order. I find the comments of the member offensive and I ask him to withdraw them. Mr McARDLE: I withdraw. More and more people, given we are living longer, move into structures in which a body corporate is required. The minister would have been painfully aware of the number of complaints and concerns with regard to body corporate disputes, yet it has taken a lengthy period for the bill to be debated. As the shadow minister pointed out, in 2004 there were 30,000 individual schemes and over 303,000 individual lot owners in Queensland. This is an industry that is expanding by necessity. As people get older they tend not to want to have large yards and be concerned with mowing and having to care for large gardens. They long for the simpler life with a smaller garden and the security of living in an area with people their own age. Against that background, it is difficult to comprehend why this bill was not introduced and debated in a more timely manner. The bill is here now. The key elements of the bill are to alter the dispute resolution process for community title scheme disputes; introduce a code of conduct for committee-voting members; and allow new evidence to be introduced in appeals to the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal in certain circumstances. The Parliamentary Library produced a research brief in relation to these items. With regard to dispute resolution, the library highlights the following from the minister’s second reading speech as improving the dispute resolution process: firstly, most people must make reasonable attempts to resolve their dispute internally before seeking formal government intervention; secondly, departmental conciliation will be able to be conducted by the Body Corporate and Community Management office; thirdly, the jurisdiction of the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal will be extended to determine complex body corporate and community management disputes; fourthly, the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal, rather than the District Court, will hear appeals and orders made by adjudicators; fifthly, definitions will be amended to clarify whom the parties to the dispute are and whether the dispute exists for the purposes of dispute resolution; sixthly, the parties to a dispute will be allowed to refer their dispute to a court or tribunal with appropriate jurisdiction; and, seventhly, an adjudicator will be able to award costs against a person who makes a frivolous or misconceived application or one without substance in favour of an affected person or body corporate who has incurred costs in the course of the application up to a maximum of $2,000. In relation to the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal, the bill clearly places the hearing of appeals from adjudicators in the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal rather than the District Court. There have been many people who have approached me, and I assume many members, concerned about taking matters to the District Court given the exorbitant cost and time involved in the process. In that regard, the bill certainly removes an impediment to many people taking the matter further due to the cost involved in the current process. The bill goes on to extend the tribunal jurisdiction in a number of areas that have already been canvassed by the shadow minister. Interestingly, the bill introduces codes of conduct for body corporate managers and caretaking service contractors together with committee-voting members. It is with the latter that clause 68 deals and proposes a code of conduct comprising six guidelines, including an obligation to understand the act, to act honestly, to act in the best interests of the body corporate, to comply with the act and code, not to commit a nuisance, and to disclose any conflict of interest. The new 726 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 07 Mar 2007 section 101B provides that if a member breaches the code of conduct the member ‘may be removed from office in the way prescribed under a regulation’. My concern with this clause is that the method of removal from office is left to a regulation. There is nothing in this bill—nothing as I understand it—which provides that mechanism. I would have thought that the process of removing a member from a committee should have been covered in the bill. It should have been dealt with in the legislation itself and not merely left to a regulation. I would ask the minister to explain why this is not covered in the bill, when it can expect to be regulated and what the terms of that regulation may well be. Clause 10 also inserts a new section 101A that provides that a committee member is not civilly liable for an act done or an omission made in good faith and without negligence in performing the person’s role as a committee member. I note the Alert Digest’s comments in relation to proposed section 101A and the existing section 45(4) of the Body Corporate and Committee Management Standard Module Regulation 1997, and I ask the minister if she could in her reply canvass the question addressed in the Alert Digest. Finally, the bill amends the Liquor Act by inserting a new section 35 allowing the tribunal when hearing an appeal against a decision of the chief executive to grant a party leave to present new evidence in certain circumstances being, firstly, the party did not know and could not reasonably have known of the existence of the new evidence before the decision; secondly, the new evidence is relevant and likely to have affected a decision; and, thirdly, it would be unfair not to allow it to be presented. The Alert Digest does state that the provision enhances the positions of appellants, enabling a much larger range of material to be considered by the tribunal and in fact allowing new material to be entered. My concern is that the appeal could in fact become an entirely new hearing, thus placing the respondent at serious disadvantage and has the potential to allow the floodgates to be opened. I ask the minister in her reply to turn her mind to the reasons why new evidence is to be placed before a tribunal on an appeal basis and the potential bias that gives an appellant in the appeal process. I commend the shadow minister for his efforts with regard to this bill. Mr CHOI (Capalaba—ALP) (3.22 pm): I rise to speak in support of the Body Corporate and Community Management and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2006, a bill which will improve the dispute resolution process in place under the current act. I thank the Minister for Tourism, Fair Trading, Wine Industry Development and Women for introducing these amendments. Considerable community consultation has been undertaken in the process of drafting this legislation. Key stakeholder groups such as the Unit Owners Association of Queensland, the Community Titles Institute of Queensland and the Queensland Resident Accommodation Managers Association were approached for their input and, importantly, response to the new changes. This legislation has three main objectives: firstly, to minimise disputes between community title holders by encouraging internal dispute resolution in a self-management fashion; secondly, to decrease the number of disputes that require formal adjudication by the commissioner or tribunal by requiring compulsory conciliation to be attempted prior to any application to the commissioner; and, thirdly, to decrease the current experience of dispute resolution which sees the cost and formality involved inhibiting people’s access to the means of resolution. In contrast to the present position, this bill will enable the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal to hear complex body corporate disputes and appeals on points of law. Community titles are a very important area of the infrastructure and consequently the economy of this state. Higher density residential development is a growth industry. More people means more housing. Indeed, Australia-wide a recent survey showed that Queensland accounted for 33 per cent of population growth and 25 per cent of completions in the housing sector. Recent survey results also showed that people tend to move in and around cities and large towns to be closer to their place of employment, so the development of new land on the urban fringe as well as the redevelopment of land within existing urban boundaries has seen the strata unit development industry, amongst others, go from strength to strength. More units also impact on the tourists who come to sunny Queensland. Holiday apartments are a great way for a family to take a break and unwind together and cost wise can compare favourably to booking into a resort. This legislation is going to improve the current status of the way in which we look after strata and community title holders. It will further provide more flexibility for parties who wish to take their grievance beyond internal measures, an opportunity for title holders to discuss and resolve their grievances in committee, and an improvement in my view in the range of choice for people who seek a more formal hearing and the opportunity to state their case before an impartial adjudicator. Measures that will impact on the manager of a body corporate who, after all, are usually residents themselves will be protected by this government’s foresight with liability limitations put in place for actions taken, including those required to comply with these new regulations. The secondary object of this bill achieves this by establishing a sufficiently flexible administrative and management arrangement and a legislative framework that can accommodate future trends in community titling. The end result is that community titling remains accessible and an attractive option for future investors and those who are looking for an alternative income-making venture. I once again congratulate the minister for introducing this legislation and commend this bill to the House. 07 Mar 2007 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 727

Ms BARRY (Aspley—ALP) (3.26 pm): I rise to support the Body Corporate and Community Management and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2006 and particularly want to concentrate on the body corporate management aspect of the bill. The bill has as its primary objective to enhance the dispute resolution arrangement under the act and does it through a number of ways—focusing on self- resolution of disputes and conciliation, expanding the jurisdiction of the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal and introducing a code of conduct for voting members of body corporate committees. The review of the Body Corporate and Community Management Act commenced in 2004 and a considerable number of stakeholders made comment. A number of those submissions came from constituents of mine. Aspley is home to over 1,600 residents who reside in their own units regulated under the Body Corporate and Community Management Act. Many of them have moved to their units and town houses not only for the convenience of the location but also for the peace of mind that they hope to achieve by living in a secure and well-maintained home. They often sell the family home and properties because they cannot or do not wish to continue to maintain large yards and gardens and hope to purchase homes that provide security and often hope to find companionship in closer-built communities. For many of those residents, they achieve that peace of mind through the hard work and professionalism of body corporate managers who provide and care for facilities in good condition and the willingness of their neighbours to be flexible in accommodating everybody’s needs in a close-living community. However, there is always the exception, and I am quite disturbed at the distress that many body corporate residents come to my office in as a result of ongoing and often extremely personal and intimidating disputes in body corporate facilities. It is unreasonable in my view for people to have to consider selling their home and moving just to find relief from the side effects of disputes arising from body corporate matters. It is not acceptable for residents, whether they be younger or older residents, to be subjected to bullying and intimidation from neighbours or, worse, body corporate managers, nor is it acceptable for body corporate managers, particularly those who live on site, to equally be unable to earn a fair living by being subjected to unreasonable conduct and harassment by other residents. So I am delighted that the minister has produced changes to the act that will focus on improved communication between parties in body corporate titles that will require them to take reasonable steps to resolve the matter before involving the commissioner of the Body Corporate and Community Management Act. The bill provides for conciliation to occur with the assistance of the body corporate office, increases the knowledge of the parties of the legislation with a view to reducing the acceleration of disputes, and allows for hearings of appeal of orders by the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal rather than the District Court. Importantly, it introduces a code of conduct for committees and body corporate managers that makes it implicit that they must not seek to unfairly influence processes and outcomes. I understand that continuing research by the department is being undertaken in relation to regulatory options for body corporate managers, in particular in large schemes. I know in areas such as the Gold and Sunshine coasts there are real issues in relation to large unit developments that are being built for both the permanent and the tourist market. That research will inform the minister in her future deliberations. This legislation is a win for residents and for body corporate managers. It is a great help to MPs such as me in order to provide guidance to constituents on both sides who come to me for help. It affirms the positive effects that have arisen from the body corporate legislation moving to the portfolio of the Minister for Tourism, Fair Trading, Wine Industry Development and Women. In my opinion, that was a very sensible decision by the Department of Natural Resources and the Office of Fair Trading. Once again, it is my pleasure to congratulate the minister on these sensible, considered and consumer focused but balanced changes to an act that comes within the jurisdiction of her portfolio. They will make a real improvement for many people in the Aspley electorate and others across Queensland. I thank the minister and her department for her efforts. I commend the bill to the House. Mrs SCOTT (Woodridge—ALP) (3.30 pm): It is my pleasure to make a short contribution to the Body Corporate and Community Management and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2006. This legislation is very timely. The Beattie Labor government has taken a long-term planning view to south- east Queensland, as evidenced by the South East Queensland Regional Plan. We have a blueprint for development in the south-east that protects our green zones and ensures that we protect the Queensland lifestyle that we all hold very dear. Those who have called Queensland home for many years are not the only ones who find our natural beauty, climate, lifestyle and people exceptional. Indeed, many people throughout Australia and from around the world are flocking to our state, creating stress points that we as a government need to manage to ensure that in 20 years time—in fact, in 50 years time—this state is still a desirable place in which to live. Over the years our housing options have changed. Many individuals and families are now opting for high-density dwellings. The inner-city area, as well as many suburban areas, now feature multiunit complexes. If this progression is handled in a well-planned way, our population growth will occur through well-designed corridors and the city precinct, thus retaining our green zones and enabling many people to live closer to their workplace. That is good planning. 728 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 07 Mar 2007

It is inevitable that on occasions disputes will arise within community title complexes and that both body corporate and body corporate managers will have to deal with a wide variety of issues. Should the parties be unable to work through their issues, intervention is first of all sought through the body corporate. That needs to be carried out promptly with the aim of that mediation being to retain good relationships and to ensure that the issues are not ongoing and will not escalate. Many members would have heard of a recent court case in which one unit owner took action against a neighbouring unit owner who was a heavy smoker. The stale air impacted adversely on the nonsmoker. The court made a decision in favour of the nonsmoker. No doubt, this decision may have an impact on future disputes relating to the impact someone’s lifestyle can have on neighbours. To live in a unit complex, each tenant must realise that they have rights and also responsibilities. For an issue to end up in the District Court, that obviously not only escalates that issue to a very adversarial level but also can involve considerable court costs. This bill ensures that, should the dispute require conciliation at a departmental level, it be done by the body corporate and community management office and for more complex issues or appeals to be referred to the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal. Recognition has also been given to the importance of our tourism industry, with a massive number of visitors to our state occupying unit dwellings. A balance is required to be struck between the encouragement of tourism development and the existing rights of unit owners. The body corporate committee is often the source of disputes. This legislation introduces a code of conduct as well as the ability of the body corporate to remove a committee member if that became necessary. As our population grows and people live in closer proximity to one another, it is imperative that we have laws in place to deal with interpersonal relationships. We probably all know of individuals who simply should never live in a unit because of their challenging behaviours. In fact, I well remember a gentleman who lived in four separate complexes over a number of years. On each occasion, he was the source of untold grief for his neighbours, the complex manager and the body corporate. He was constantly at war with neighbours over the slightest thing and the manager was never able to satisfy his bizarre requests. He was everybody’s nightmare tenant. Yes, he was always the common denominator and, no, it never occurred to him that he was the problem. A well-run complex has efficient management with good people skills, a body corporate that is responsive and tenants who have an awareness of their own responsibilities and the needs of others. But when problems arise this legislation will go a long way towards ensuring that issues are dealt with promptly and at an appropriate level. I have much pleasure in commending the bill to the House. Mr FENLON (Greenslopes—ALP) (3.35 pm): I rise to speak in support of the Body Corporate and Community Management and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2006. This bill is certainly of interest to me as the member representing the electorate of Greenslopes. This electorate has a significant concentration of units and various strata title residences. Perhaps it is one of the pioneering areas in Brisbane and even in the state for having such a concentration of developments within its boundaries. Our cities are going through a revolution in terms of the way in which we live, the way in which we build our cities and in the way in which we plan our cities. This is an inevitable feature of our cities, simply because to allow our infrastructure, such as our transport, to be viable into the future we have to have a higher concentration of human beings, especially in the inner-city areas, living around transport corridors. People wonder why we do not have the same sort of underground network as that which exists in Berlin, London, or wherever else in the world. The simple answer is that we have not had the concentration of human beings to make such a transport network viable. Historically, our city is based on the quarter-acre block. As the generations secede, often one surviving family member remains in one house on a large block of land. Despite the fact that that is a very idyllic situation for some people, the simple reality is that that is not viable in terms of making our cities work. Our transport corridors and the planning of our cities are certainly dependent on having higher concentrations of people living in one place. But that higher concentration of living should not occur at the expense of our quality of life. We have seen a radical transformation in our society in that people are accepting the reality that if we are going to live in large cities such as Brisbane, in the future we will need to live closer together. Over the years, the Brisbane City Council has changed its planning laws, which has met with some resistance. But probably an equal or greater number of people have openly welcomed the transformation of our planning requirements which has allowed the splitting of blocks and various other deviations from the conventional planning processes, which has brought people closer together. People living in Brisbane have certainly seen a change in lifestyle not only directly in the way that people configure their houses and units et cetera but also due to the fact that the concentrations of human beings in inner-city areas have resulted in a different social milieu in that there is now the so- called coffee shop culture and people can easily walk to their local restaurant or bar or whatever other social gathering they might wish to get to. That is a significant move away from the Brisbane that many of us have known from our youth, and it is the future. 07 Mar 2007 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 729

This legislation certainly reflects those pressures and goes a long way to anticipating those pressures in terms of the requirements for various body corporate and community management arrangements. Having represented an area with a high concentration of various unit dwellings et cetera, I believe that the current arrangements have worked pretty well. The configurations that I have encountered over the years I must say have not resulted in a lot of disputation, and the disputation that has occurred has been able to be resolved fairly smoothly. I see that the minister is affirming my comments. The legislation has worked pretty well in giving people the capacity to resolve those disputes in various ways without having to end up in expensive litigation. Certainly anything that can be done now to anticipate the future pressures that come with this form of living and thereby mitigate problems that may be encountered in the future is a step in the right direction. That is what this legislation is about. We should be ensuring that people who live in these circumstances have a trouble-free life and that where there are troubles there is a ready way of resolving those troubles. People do not want to be bogged down relentlessly in unnecessary disputation with their neighbours and be tangled up in more formal processes. They want a simple life. They want to get on with their lives while at the same time ensure that their rights and their assets are well protected. This legislation certainly goes a long way to improving those demands on the system. The legislation focuses on self-resolution, provides for departmental conciliation, enhances the role of the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal, clarifies the definitions of the parties who may be in dispute and clarifies when a dispute exists. Anybody in the community should be capable of going through the dispute resolution process without getting too tangled up in formality, and this legislation helps to achieve that. We will see even more pressures in areas like the Greenslopes electorate with the advent of the eastern busway. I think the eastern busway is a great project— Mr Weightman: Hear, hear. Mr Bombolas: Hear, hear. Mr FENLON: I thank the members. I have certainly commended the transport minister for his great work and vision in bringing this project to reality. The busway from Stones Corner through the suburbs of Coorparoo and Camp Hill in my electorate will encourage a greater densification along that corridor. It will encourage the rejuvenation and rebuilding of areas such as the Coorparoo Junction around the corner of Cavendish Road and Old Cleveland Road. I hope that what we see out of that is some new forms of living, new developments that allow for the densification that is being demanded in these areas. I trust that this legislation will allow those people whom we anticipate will live in those environs to live in harmony and to resolve any issues that they have. This is a good piece of legislation that is about making our communities work better. I commend the legislation to the House. Ms STONE (Springwood—ALP) (3.45 pm): I rise in support of the Body Corporate and Community Management and Other Legislation Amendment Bill. I wish to declare that I am involved in a number of bodies corporate as an owner-occupier and an investor in units. I have never taken any positions on the body corporate management committees, but I want to take this opportunity to thank those who have. It is because of those who do that we have a lot of complexes that are tidy and safe, and have comfortable environments. These people are protecting not only their own assets but also the assets of others, and I know how hard that work is. They are the people who are running around getting the tradesmen, getting the lawns mowed and the gardens maintained—doing all those jobs that I certainly do not have time to do. If it were not for them, there would be a lot of people out there living in chaos in some complexes. Those people on the committees also take on the complaints that residents have. I have just had an issue with security gates not working and not being able to get my car in and out. The poor chairperson of my body corporate was the one who had to handle all the complaints and do the leg work to get that fixed, and I thank her for that. At the end of the day, there will always be disagreements but it is through their hard work that we do have such great complexes and that we do have that quality of life. If it were not for those people, I am sure that there would be a lot more disputes. I want to thank all of those residents who have taken on committee jobs and are doing the right thing by their neighbours. The bill amends the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 and the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal Act 2003. The Body Corporate and Community Management Act was passed in 1997, establishing a more flexible framework than had previously existed for community titles schemes. Because of the legislation’s complexity, the government of the day committed to review the act to ensure that its objectives were being achieved. I am pleased to say that reviews have continued in order to ensure that the bill keeps up to date with the complexities that arise as this type of housing continues to change and develop. The success of a community titles scheme, and the success of related investments, relies on a strong working relationship between the resident manager, the body corporate and individual owners. Unfortunately, this does not always happen. With two distinct owner types—those who live in their 730 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 07 Mar 2007 properties and those who use them as investments—tensions can arise because of their different priorities. Today we see more and more unit complexes with residential and commercial properties, adding another complexity to the scheme and another area where disputes can arise. I am aware of that because I am involved in a situation where we have a restaurant situated on the ground floor of a residential complex and over the years the restaurant has grown, has taken over common property and has taken on more functions. So there have been disputes about parking and about people using common property. These sorts of disputes will only continue to grow as we see the different types of mix come into these complexes. I am pleased to say that that situation is still being looked at by the body corporate and they are trying to work out some solutions to benefit everyone, but that was not before there was a dispute. These types of situations will certainly grow as the mix in these community titles schemes continues to change. Firstly, the bill requires that a person must make a reasonable attempt to resolve a dispute within the person’s body corporate prior to making an application to the commissioner. I do believe that that is the best way to go—when you deal with the resident manager or the body corporate first, often it is something that can be fixed. Departmental conciliation will be conducted by the Office of the Commissioner for Body Corporate and Community Management. Departmental conciliation will facilitate prompt and informal resolution of disputes and encourage parties in the dispute to arrive at their own agreement and resolution. The Commercial and Consumer Tribunal will have the jurisdiction to determine complex BCCM disputes, and this should alleviate costs of specialist adjudication and District Court proceedings. I know this will be welcomed by the community, as costs such as those I have mentioned do impact on the ability for those in dispute to access justice. As I stated earlier, the mixture of residential and commercial properties is growing and will continue to grow. There are also the complexes that are predominantly holiday letting that have their own unique complexities. I believe that as the mix continues to develop in this type of housing, body corporate managers, committees and resident managers will need to have expertise to balance business needs with those of the quality of living for residents. I certainly support the separate examination of the regulatory options for body corporate managers that is currently being undertaken. As I stated earlier, these types of complexes will only continue to change in their structure. I am sure that we will be presented with challenges in the future that today we have not even thought of. That is why it is important that this legislation is reviewed regularly. Certainly ongoing review is needed. This bill was created by the review of a range of emerging issues impacting on the community titles sector today. With those comments I commend the bill to the House. Hon. MM KEECH (Albert—ALP) (Minister for Tourism, Fair Trading, Wine Industry Development and Women) (3.51 pm), in reply: I thank all members for their contribution to this very important piece of legislation. In particular, I thank government members for appreciating the importance of the need for the Beattie government through this legislation to recognise the tremendous growth of the body corporate and community management style of living in Queensland. With 1,500 people coming to Queensland every week the need is greater than ever for the government to look at a range of legislation that will ensure that those newcomers to Queensland are able to take up opportunities to live in a community with a management style that provides them with a lifetime of enjoyment. I recognise the opposition’s contribution to the debate. In particular, I thank the member for Clayfield for supporting the bill. I recognise the member for Nicklin for his contribution and his very strong support not only of the bill but also, in particular, the amendments to the Liquor Act and his very positive comments regarding the tribunal members. As I said in my second reading speech, this bill comes about after a review of the current legislation. More than 177 submissions were received. The most pressing issue raised in those submissions was with respect to dispute resolution. I am pleased that all members of the House, both government and non-government members, are supporting dispute resolution. The amendments before the House will result in fairer, more flexible and effective dispute resolution. Unfortunately, the contribution from the member for Clayfield as the shadow spokesperson is where the positive contribution ends. One would have expected that with a new member taking over responsibility for shadowing my portfolio we would have at last had a new round of energy and focus on the legislation. Unfortunately, supporters of the Liberal Party and the stakeholders whom he purports to represent have been very sadly let down. The arguments of the opposition are based on three premises which are all completely false. In fact, they are so outrageously false they could be accused of misleading and deceptive conduct which, as we know, is an issue that the Office of Fair Trading should be investigating. For example, the member for Clayfield has proposed that his amendments and his comments are based on broad consultation. That is purely and absolutely wrong. He also argues that the regulation of body corporate managers is a 07 Mar 2007 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 731

Liberal Party in opposition policy. This would be a first and is completely wrong given that I foreshadowed in my second reading speech that the government had acknowledged during the consultation period of the act that a review of body corporate managers and their conduct will be investigated. The other deceptive and misleading conduct that the member for Clayfield has presented to the House in his arguments is that the office of the body corporate commission’s activities are based on corrupt practices which favour body corporate managers. Again, an argument which is outrageous. Mr NICHOLLS: I rise to a point of order. I made no such comment in my speech and I ask the minister to withdraw. Ms KEECH: I withdraw. Unfortunately, as I said, those stakeholders who have been offering their skewed evidence to the member for Clayfield have been very poorly let down. More seriously than that in his deception of this House is the fact that he has had discussions with a range of stakeholders and in particular I refer to— Mr NICHOLLS: I rise to a point of order. I have been listening to the minister allege misleading and deceptive conduct on my behalf and I find those comments offensive. If one is not entitled to debate a bill what is the point of being here? I ask her to withdraw. Ms KEECH: I withdraw. I am getting to my point. The member for Clayfield has noted, and he can read the Hansard, that he has had extensive consultations and has actually spoken to the major stakeholders. In particular, I refer to the Unit Owners Association of Queensland, the Community Titles Institute of Queensland and the Queensland Resident Accommodation Managers Association. Mr NICHOLLS: I rise to a point of order again. I did not say I spoke to the Community Titles Institute of Queensland. In fact, I quite clearly said I had not spoken to the Community Titles Institute of Queensland. I ask that she withdraw. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Darling): There is no point of order unless it is personally offensive to you. Mr NICHOLLS: I find the minister’s comment that I did not speak to the Community Titles Institute of Queensland offensive and I ask that she withdraw. Ms KEECH: I withdraw. I understand why the member is getting quite hot under the collar because I can assure members that the stakeholders have their feathers very much ruffled. They are outraged that they are being verballed in this House. Allow me to let the stakeholders speak for themselves. Mr NICHOLLS: Again I rise to a point of order. I find the comment that I am verballing someone, which is something that is attributable to incorrect police behaviour, offensive and I ask that the minister withdraw. Ms KEECH: I withdraw. Let me allow the stakeholders to speak for themselves. Garry Maynard, the chairperson of the Unit Owners Association of Queensland, in relation to the contribution to the debate by the member for Clayfield and Liberal members, said that he does not support the opposition position. He stated— I am frankly appalled by the ‘information’ the coalition has sprouted. Please don’t let anyone think that the stuff they talked about came from UOAQ. He believes that the coalition is completely uninformed and out of touch and shows evidence of no consultation whatsoever. Mr Maynard continued— I note in the introduction from Tim Nicholls that he did not even acknowledge anyone from the body corporate managers as providing information to him. In other words, he and the coalition speakers have gone on and on about body corporate managers without actually talking to one or to the body that represents them. I note that the Lamont alliance incorrectly advised the opposition that there is no penalty for breaches of the code of conduct of body corporate managers. Coalition speakers all followed the flawed advice without checking for themselves. This is an example of the coalition’s main adviser not having any depth of knowledge of the act and regulations. In fact, if the code is breached, the contract between the body corporate and the manager is breached, which is therefore grounds for consideration of termination. Let me comment on what was said by Community Titles Institute Queensland and its president, Mr Tim Carrigg. He is very angry indeed about CTIQ being attacked in the debate and believes that this was just a diversion. He stated— I have had no dealings with Tim Nicholls. Tim Nicholls has made an allegation about a member of the CTIQ without naming the person, but at the same time trying to discredit the only professional organisation representing body corporate managers in Queensland. It was a cheap shot. I agree with Mr Carrigg. Mr Carrigg continued— I am dismayed that CTIQ as an organisation is being targeted by members of parliament who are unfortunately the tools of an individual. The attacks on the CTIQ are unfortunate and designed to deflect attention away from the real purposes of the act. 732 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 07 Mar 2007

I will continue with more examples. The executive officer of the Queensland Resident Accommodation Managers Association, Mr John Anderson, said— I did not assist Mr Nicholls in preparing for debate. I have never met Mr Nicholls. My only contact with Mr Nicholls was to accept a telephone call from Katherine of his office on 25 October 2006 when she asked if QRAMA supported the bill and then went on to ask a number of other questions on BCCM matters. I realise that under parliamentary privilege statements made and persons named do not need to be accurate or substantiated. If answering a telephone call from a staff member leads to me being named in parliament, it does not enhance Mr Nicholls’s understanding of the industry. Mr Anderson is also offended about being named in the same sentence as Colin Lamont. I quote from Mr Anderson— He has made the position worse by naming me in the same sentence as Mr Lamont, which does show a considerable lack of industry awareness. One would have thought that the opposition would have done more homework instead of relying on a very narrow range of consultation. On the other hand, the government has had extensive consultation, we understand the complexity of the issues and we have sought to introduce fair and balanced amendments. Question put—That the bill be now read a second time. Motion agreed to. Consideration in Detail Clauses 1 to 4, as read, agreed to. Clause 5— Mr NICHOLLS (4.04 pm): Clause 5, which is an amendment of section 48, deals with the provisions so far as they apply to applications for reallocation of lot entitlements. I have to say that I was most impressed with the dissertation given by the member for Southport in relation to that clause. I agree with a lot of what he said in relation to the wisdom of those reallocation clauses, particularly following the Centrepoint case. In respect of section 48, I want to raise the provision in the bill—which is perhaps unintended, perhaps not—which allows the very wealthy to seek a reallocation of lot entitlements to reduce their contribution and which penalises those who are on more modest incomes. Will there be any changes to section 48 to take into account the matter raised by the member for Southport and the Property Council of Australia in its submission to the minister? Does the minister consider that to be a very complex matter or a straightforward matter able to be resolved by the CCT? Ms KEECH: I thank the member for his question. As I have indicated with respect to adjustment and distribution of lot entitlements, I am prepared to consider a discussion paper on those issues. I look forward to contributions not only from the Property Council of Queensland but all other interested stakeholders. Mr NICHOLLS: In response to that, I would ask the minister if she could indicate when she expects that to be the case. Given that this round of consultation has taken a long time to get through and she has foreshadowed other changes that she says her department is considering in relation to the regulation of body corporate managers, is there a time limit that the minister anticipates? Ms KEECH: There is not. Clause 5, as read, agreed to. Clauses 6 to 9, as read, agreed to. Clause 10 (Insertion of new ss 101A and 101B)— Ms KEECH (4.08 pm): I move the following amendment— 1 Clause 10 (Insertion of new ss 101A and 101B)— At page 11, after line 27— insert— ‘(2) In this section— act done or omission made, does not include the publication of defamatory matter as mentioned in section 111A(1).’. Mr NICHOLLS: We support the amendment obviously because it addresses the issues raised in the Alert Digest in relation to defamation arising for committee members who are acting. I just wanted to ask the minister if she could provide us with an example of how she envisages the section would work in practice. Is there a real life example that might explain the reasons why that change is necessary? Ms KEECH: I do not have a real life example. Amendment agreed to. Clause 10, as amended, agreed to. 07 Mar 2007 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 733

Insertion of new clause— Mr NICHOLLS (4.09 pm): I move the following amendment— 1 After clause 10— At page 12, after line 12— insert— ‘10A Insertion of new ch 3, pt 2, div 2A Chapter 3, part 2— insert— ‘Division 2ALicence for particular body corporate managers ‘121A Definitions for div 2A ‘In this division— division 2A body corporate manager means a body corporate manager for a community titles scheme who— (a) is not an authorised deposit-taking institution within the meaning of the Banking Act 1959 (Cwlth); and (b) under this Act, carries out a financial function for the body corporate. division 2A licence means a licence issued under this division. financial function means the holding or management of amounts for a body corporate. Example of amounts— amounts levied on owners of lots in the community titles scheme ‘121B Requirement to be licensed ‘(1) From the start day, unless a division 2A body corporate manager is the holder of a division 2A licence, the division 2A body corporate manager must not— (a) carry out a financial function for the body corporate; or (b) charge a fee for carrying out a financial function for the body corporate. ‘(2) If a division 2A body corporate manager contravenes subsection (1) (a) or (b), a dispute exists under section 227(1) (b) and the body corporate may apply under chapter 6 for a resolution of the dispute. ‘(3) In this section— start day means the later of the following— (a) 1 July 2007; (b) the day this section commences. ‘121C Application for division 2A licence ‘An application for a division 2A licence must be— (a) made to the commissioner in the way prescribed under a regulation; and (b) accompanied by the fee prescribed under a regulation. ‘121D Eligibility for division 2A licence ‘(1) A division 2A body corporate manager (the applicant) is eligible for a division 2A licence if the applicant— (a) satisfies the eligibility requirements for a division 2A licence prescribed under a regulation; and Example— An individual who applies for a division 2A licence, or each officer of a corporation that applies for a division 2A licence, may be required to hold particular professional qualifications or to have undertaken a course of study approved by the chief executive. (b) is an appropriate entity to hold the division 2A licence. ‘(2) An applicant is not an appropriate entity to hold a division 2A licence, if— (a) the applicant is an insolvent under administration within the meaning of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cwlth); or (b) if the applicant is an individual—the applicant has been convicted of a relevant offence and the conviction is not a spent conviction; or (c) if the applicant is a corporation—each person who is an officer of the corporation would be an appropriate entity to hold a division 2A licence if the person applied for the licence. ‘(3) In this section— officer, of a corporation, means— (a) a director, secretary or executive officer of the corporation; or (b) a person who can control or substantially influence the conduct of the corporation’s affairs, including, for example, a person on whose directions or instructions the corporation’s directors usually act. relevant offence means an offence for which a custodial sentence was imposed on the applicant, whether or not the term of custody was suspended wholly or partly. spent conviction means a conviction— (a) for which the rehabilitation period under the Criminal Law (Rehabilitation of Offenders) Act 1986 has expired under that Act; and 734 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 07 Mar 2007

(b) that is not revived as prescribed by section 11 of that Act. ‘121E Other provisions about division 2A licence ‘A regulation may provide for other matters for a division 2A licence, including, for example, the following— (a) the payment, or provision, of a security deposit to the commissioner; (b) the amendment, suspension, cancellation or renewal of the licence; (c) the fees payable to the commissioner for the licence.’.’. This amendment addresses the concern of stakeholders and many unit owners about the competency and level of expertise of body corporate managers and the absence of a regulatory system to provide a level of protection to all unit owners. Body corporate managers are responsible for collecting and allocating large sums of money. The act provides that body corporate managers are contractually obliged to adhere to the code of conduct in the act, as I said in my speech in the second reading debate. They are required to attend committee meetings and liaise with unit owners, caretakers and letting agents. Due to the complexity involved in this role it is simply the coalition’s view that having a knowledge of the act is not enough and that a licensing regime would greatly strengthen the reputation of the industry and give greater protection to unit owners. The amendment requires managers to undergo an approved course of training and subsequently apply to the commissioner for a licence. It also requires a body corporate manager to pay a security deposit to the commissioner in order to reassure the members of the body corporate—that is, a security bond—of the performance of their duties. This is the case for travel agents, motor dealers and real estate agents. I turn to the provisions of the proposed amendment. I turn first to proposed section 121A. Section 121A gives the definition of a body corporate manager for division 2A. The definition excludes from being a body corporate manager a financial institution registered under the Banking Act. Just because a bank or a building society or another organisation that is capable of taking deposits takes that deposit, they are still excluded from being a body corporate manager. For the purposes of the definition it includes the carrying out of a financial function. The financial function is defined in this amendment as the collecting or holding of funds on behalf of a body corporate. A lot of body corporate managers actually do receive funds on behalf of their bodies corporate. The levies are paid to them and they maintain a bank account. Often it is their own bank account but sometimes they establish separate bank accounts. It depends on the size of the body corporate and the size of the body corporate manager. Section 121A provides the definition of who division 2A contained in the proposed amendment applies to. Proposed section 121B actually inserts the requirement for a body corporate manager to be licensed. This is what I call a light touch regulatory regime. It does not impose or include a massive inspectorate, which is what some people would like to see. It provides that for a body corporate manager to actually be paid for doing their job they must hold a licence. If they do not hold that licence then they do not get paid. The penalty is that they cannot legally recover as a debt their fees for carrying out that work. That should be an incentive enough for them to be licensed. If there is a dispute under this proposed section then a dispute exists under section 227(1)(b) and the body corporate can apply under chapter 6 for resolution of that dispute using the new resolution procedures which the coalition supports. This amendment was drafted when the bill was introduced in October. We were anticipating an earlier date for debate and commencement of the legislation. I proposed the commencement of this provision as 1 July 2007. It may be that that date would not give sufficient time for the establishment of the necessary licensing provisions and regulations. However, I think the intent is clear. This amendment allows for a light touch regulatory regime that requires body corporate managers to be licensed if they are to recover the fees they charge for carrying out their obligations. Proposed section 121C sets out the way in which an applicant for a licence must proceed. It provides for the commissioner to prescribe how an applicant must make an application. It also provides for a fee payable. That fee would be on a cost recovery basis. The fee would meet the cost of processing the application. Proposed section 121D sets out the eligibility requirements for a body corporate manager to obtain a division 2A licence as satisfying the eligibility requirements for a division 2A licence prescribed under a regulation. I have not had the draft regulation prepared but I have provided an example. The example is that it requires that they have a professional qualification or have undertaken a course of study. It is my view that perhaps a TAFE course or a similar type of vocational education course would be at least a starting ground for consideration of someone as a body corporate manager. That would include recognition and training and awareness of the act. It may include also an understanding of decisions made by the courts and the tribunal in relation to the application of that act as well as some ethical obligations and some understanding of trust accounts and accounting, the need to keep money separate and the need to account properly—the fiduciary duties that a body corporate manager owes a body corporate to act in an ethical way. 07 Mar 2007 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 735

Subsection (2) of proposed section 121D sets out quite clearly who is not an appropriate entity to hold a division 2A licence. Someone who is an insolvent under administration is not a person who should, in our view, be handling the moneys of a body corporate. If the applicant has been convicted of a relevant offence—and that is defined—for which a custodial sentence has been applied and the conviction is not a spent conviction so they have not completed their period of imprisonment or rehabilitation or whatever, then they are not an appropriate entity. If the applicant is a corporation the corporation is not able to hold a licence. There is an error in this part. A person who is an officer of that corporation would not be an appropriate entity to hold a division 2A licence. I am not sure if we have to amend the amendment now. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Hoolihan): You can move an amendment to the amendment. Mr NICHOLLS: I propose the insertion of the word ‘not’ after the word ‘would’ in subparagraph (c) of proposed section 121D(2). It should read ‘each person who is an officer of the corporation would not be an appropriate entity’. That makes more sense. If a company applies for a licence and their officers— that is, their director, secretary or executive officer—have been convicted of an offence then that company would also not be able to hold a licence. That is for the sake of consistency between a corporation and an individual. Proposed subsection (3) deals with more definitions. Proposed section 121E provides for a regulation to be made providing for other matters for a division 2A licence. It includes: the payment of a security deposit, which I mentioned before; the grounds for the amendment, suspension or cancellation of a licence; and the fees payable to the commissioner for the licence. Obviously those are things that can be dealt with by regulation by the commissioner in consultation with the industry. They can decide what is appropriate. They can consult about what the actual course should be and the cost of checking those things. The amendment supports what many speakers on this side have identified as the problems with body corporate managers. It is a light touch regulatory regime. It is a minimal regulatory intervention in the affairs. It goes some way to serving the needs and the purposes of the industry. This is not to say that this is the only way of regulating it but this is the way we suggest for consideration. Question put—That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to. Resolved in the affirmative. Non-government amendment (Mr Nicholls) agreed to. Ms KEECH: I note the member for Clayfield’s amendment with respect to the licensing of body corporate managers. The government will not be supporting his amendment. We believe that it is very important that both government and industry work together to get this right. As I said in my second reading speech, I am considering options in terms of the regulation of body corporate managers. I do not believe a simple knee-jerk reaction and no consultation with industry is the right way to go about it. I also acknowledge that the member has amendments before the House not only with respect to the licensing of body corporate managers—that is, amendment No. 1, the one that we are debating now—but also amendment Nos 2 to 5. I will make extra comments with respect to body corporate managers during the debate on those amendments. I also want to comment on the claims that the opposition made with respect to the fact that the body corporate and community management office of my department favours body corporate managers. This is completely inaccurate. In fact, there are only a very small number of disputes between bodies corporate and body corporate managers—in fact, five per cent of the 1,143 disputes lodged. Division: Question put—That the amendment, as amended, be agreed to. AYES, 27—Copeland, Cripps, Dempsey, Elmes, Flegg, Gibson, Hopper, Horan, Johnson, Knuth, Langbroek, Lee Long, Lingard, McArdle, Malone, Menkens, Messenger, Nicholls, Pratt, Seeney, Simpson, Springborg, Stevens, Stuckey, Wellington. Tellers: Rickuss, Dickson NOES, 55—Attwood, Barry, Beattie, Bligh, Bombolas, Boyle, Choi, Croft, Cunningham, Darling, Fenlon, Foley, Fraser, Gray, Hinchliffe, Hoolihan, Jarratt, Jones, Keech, Kiernan, Lavarch, Lawlor, Lee, Lucas, McNamara, Mickel, Miller, Moorhead, Mulherin, Nelson-Carr, Nolan, O’Brien, Palaszczuk, Pearce, Pitt, Purcell, Reeves, Reilly, Roberts, Schwarten, Scott, Shine, Smith, Stone, Sullivan, van Litsenburg, Wallace, Weightman, Welford, Wells, Wendt, Wettenhall, Wilson. Tellers: Male, Finn Resolved in the negative. Non-government amendment (Mr Nicholls) negatived. Mr NICHOLLS: Amendment Nos 2 and 3 are consequential amendments which would only have had relevance if the first amendment had been passed, so I will not persist with those two amendments. Insertion of new clause— Ms KEECH (4.29 pm): I move the following amendment— 2 After clause 10— At page 12, after line 12— insert— ‘10A Insertion of new s 111A 736 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 07 Mar 2007

‘Chapter 3, part 1, division 4— insert— ‘111A Protection of body corporate and committee from liability for defamation ‘(1) This section applies if— (a) the committee for the body corporate for a community titles scheme publishes required material for a general meeting of the body corporate under the regulation module applying to the scheme; and (b) the required material contains defamatory matter. ‘(2) Each of the following is not liable for defamation by the publication of the defamatory matter as mentioned in subsection (1)— (a) the body corporate; (b) the committee, or a member of the committee, other than a member of the committee who submitted the motion or explanatory note containing the defamatory matter. ‘(3) In this section— committee or member of the committee, for a community titles scheme for which a body corporate manager is engaged to carry out the functions of a committee for the body corporate and each of its executive members, means the body corporate manager. required material, for a general meeting of the body corporate, means any of the following required under the regulation module applying to the community titles scheme to be published for the general meeting— (a) a motion submitted other than by or for the committee for the general meeting; (b) the substance of a motion mentioned in paragraph (a); (c) an explanatory note for a motion mentioned in paragraph (a) prepared by the submitter of the motion.’.’. Amendment agreed to. Clauses 11 to 18, as read, agreed to. Clause 19— Mr NICHOLLS (4.29 pm): Clause 19 relates to exclusivity and inserts a new section 229 relating to exclusivity of dispute resolution provisions and provides the remedy. In fact, subsection (5) says— Subsection (3) does not affect a right, under section 289, to appeal to the District Court on a question of law. During the course of the debate I indicated that the coalition would be looking to move an amendment that does in fact reinstate the right of appeal to the District Court from simple matters to complex matters. My question, Minister, on that is this: would that then impact on subsection (5) relating to section 229? I realise it is quite complex, so if the minister needs to speak to someone about it I accept that. Ms KEECH: I thank the member. The current bill does not specifically provide for a right of appeal from the CCT. However, the reason for this is that the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal Act 2003, which establishes the tribunal, already includes provisions for appeals from decisions of the CCT. Parties to a non-complex dispute that is determined by an adjudicator will be able to appeal the adjudicator’s decision to the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal on a question of law. If a party feels aggrieved by the decision of the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal about the appeal, that party will be able to appeal that decision to the District Court on the grounds of an error of law, or excess or want of jurisdiction. The power to appeal the determination of the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal stems from section 100 of the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal Act, not from any current or proposed provisions of the Body Corporate and Community Management Act. In summary, although the government supports the desire of the member for Clayfield to ensure that parties to non-complex disputes have adequate rights of appeal, it considers that the matter is already catered for under the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal Act and in that regard no amendment to this bill is necessary. Mr NICHOLLS: I thank the minister for her answer. In giving that answer she has obviated the need to move the other proposed amendment that related to including the right of appeal, which was amendment No. 5 circulated in my name. On the basis of the minister’s assurance that that is the case, I will withdraw that proposed amendment. Clause 19, as read, agreed to. Clauses 20 to 22, as read, agreed to. Clause 23— Mr NICHOLLS (4.33 pm): In my contribution to the second reading debate I indicated the coalition’s concern about clause 23, which inserts a new section 236 and, in particular, new subsection (7), which deals with the definition of ‘appropriately qualified’. At that time I indicated that there had been concerns raised with me about the appropriateness of the qualification of adjudicators and that some people had perceptions that there were difficulties with the adjudicators. 07 Mar 2007 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 737

I want to emphasise that that is a concern, or a perception, that has been raised. Whether or not it is real is not something that I am prepared to comment on, or would comment on. I think departmental adjudicators do a pretty good job under pretty ordinary circumstances most of the time. In fact, I know one of the adjudicators. The body corporate unit owners who read this legislation and who look for some clarity as to the appropriateness of the qualification of the people they refer their disputes to would like some certainty. I believe that new subsection (7) is a somewhat circuitous way of defining ‘appropriately qualified’. It states— ... for appointment to conduct a dispute resolution process, means having the qualifications, experience or standing appropriate for conducting the dispute resolution process. There is no benchmark, if I can put it that way, that says, ‘These are the types of qualifications we are looking for,’ or ‘This is the experience we are looking for,’ or, ‘This is the background we are looking for.’ We believe that it would be appropriate for the minister to give some indication of the people whom she considers to be appropriately qualified under new section 236. At this stage the coalition does not propose to move an amendment to this clause. We think that it would be useful if the minister could give an indication of the qualification of those whom she considers would be suitable for appointment. Ms KEECH: Firstly, with respect to the member’s comments regarding adjudicators, I thank him for his fair and balanced comments. Like him, I believe that adjudicators do an absolutely excellent job under very difficult circumstances. I welcome the member’s positive comments and join with government members and the member for Nicklin in acknowledging that adjudicators do a very good job under difficult circumstances. I am not saying that we get it right 100 per cent of the time, but I can say that the office is constantly looking at ways of improving its service to Queensland consumers. With respect to adjudicators, they are bound by the principles of conduct for adjudicators that have been developed in conjunction with the commissioner. These principles include respect for the law, fairness, independence, respect for others, diligence and efficiency, integrity and accountability, and transparency. In addition, we are looking at advertising for more adjudicators. In fact, I can inform the honourable member that we will be advertising for additional adjudicators in the near future. Clause 23, as read, agreed to. Clauses 24 to 67, as read, agreed to. Clause 68 (insertion of new sch 1A)— Mr NICHOLLS (4.38 pm): I move the following amendment— 4 Clause 68 (Insertion of new sch 1A)— At page 53, after line 8— insert— ‘(2) If the committee voting member has a conflict of interest in the matter, the member must not vote on the matter at a committee meeting unless it is an exempt matter. ‘(3) Subsection (4) applies if— (a) the matter is not an exempt matter; and (b) there are insufficient committee voting members present at the meeting who do not have a conflict of interest in the matter to form a quorum to pass a resolution on the matter. ‘(4) The committee must refer the matter to a vote of the body corporate in general meeting. ‘(5) In this section— exempt matter means a matter for which the committee has obtained the commissioner’s written approval that a committee voting member may vote on the matter regardless of whether the member has a conflict of interest in the matter.’.’. This amendment deals with the insertion of the code of conduct for committee-voting members. We already have a code of conduct for body corporate managers which, by virtue of the legislation, is incorporated into their contract. As I said in my speech, and as the minister pointed out in her response, a breach of the code of conduct for body corporate managers is a contractual dispute. That involves all the requirements for taking action for a breach of contract. The minister said that it may, in very extreme circumstances, lead to termination. That situation is quite different in respect to the code of conduct for committee members. In relation to the code of conduct for committee members, I flagged our concerns that the code of conduct only requires, so far as paragraph 6 is concerned, that voting members of a committee disclose their conflict rather than absent themselves from the vote on the matter with which they have a conflict. The amendment that I am introducing requires a committee member to be excused from a debate, vote or discussion if the member is conflicted. The amendment also requires that the member with a conflict of interest does not influence or seek to influence a vote. 738 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 07 Mar 2007

The amendment additionally addresses the issue of when all members of a committee have a conflict of interest, and that may occur on very small committees, where it is impossible to find someone or a quorum who does not have a conflict of interest. In this instance, the committee must refer the vote to a special general meeting of the whole body corporate. Occasionally that may lead to some expense necessary to conduct a special general meeting. However, in the circumstances where it is likely to happen—that is, in a small body corporate—the cost of convening a small body corporate special general meeting would be minimal, and it would be appropriate in those circumstances where all committee members have a conflict of interest for that small cost to be incurred in order to pass a resolution. Additionally, the proposal that I put forward, unlike the clause in the bill, does not clash with the regulation. This amendment does not clash with the regulation. It strengthens the regulation by ensuring that when all members of a committee have a conflict of interest the matter is referred to a special general meeting. So for those reasons I think the amendment is well worthwhile. The provisions insert the details in relation to giving emphasis and impact to that. Conflict of interest is something that we as members of parliament have an obligation to declare. As I said in my speech addressing the bill, many organisations require not only a declaration of a conflict of interest but a removal from the vote. Ms KEECH: I thank the honourable member for his comments with respect to amendment No. 4 to clause 68. The code of conduct does not displace the obligations a committee member may have under the regulations. Under the regulation model, committee members are not entitled to vote on an issue if they have an interest in an issue being considered by the committee. The broader terms in the code of conduct in no way diminishes the requirements of the regulations. The code of conduct is not intended to be an exhaustive list of obligations of committee members. Instead, it lists the main ethical obligations of which committee members need to be cognisant. Under the code, committee members are required to take reasonable steps to comply with the act and to have a commitment to acquiring an understanding of the act. Part of this obligation would include being aware of and complying with the provisions of the act and regulations that stipulate procedures and powers of the committee, including processes for dealing with conflicts of interest. The government does not believe it is necessary or desirable for the commissioner to be given the power to approve a committee member voting on a matter for which the member has a conflict of interest. It is preferable that these issues be dealt with through the current provisions of legislation which allow issues that cannot be determined by the committee to be taken to a general meeting of the body corporate. Despite understanding and recognising the member for Clayfield’s genuine concerns with respect to this issue, the government will not be supporting the amendment. Mr NICHOLLS: I listened carefully to what the minister said. With respect, I disagree in the sense that voting members of a committee of a body corporate are not trained lawyers and are not trained arbitrators. They are people who we all acknowledge are trying to do the best for their community titles schemes. People genuinely would look at the code of conduct and regard that as a defining set of rules and principles for them without necessarily going to a lawyer or going to see the commissioner or making that inquiry. They would more than likely read that as something that defines and puts a limit on their obligations, notwithstanding section 34 of the standard regulation module. So that is a question of understanding and, if you like, ease of use for ordinary everyday people. I accept that this is complex legislation dealing with complex problems and there are no easy answers to some of these things. But the code of conduct that people can look at and say, ‘Here is the code of conduct’—and maybe it will be circulated amongst them when they take on the role—does not clearly say, ‘But you must not vote on those matters.’ The standard module regulation—perhaps the small lot regulation does not require the exclusion of a voting member—does say that. The other concern I have is with a technicality. The code of conduct is a schedule to the act and it sits over the regulation. So there is a sort of conflict between the two in relation to the act being the governing piece of paper and the regulation sitting subordinate to it. I did ask the question of the Office of Parliamentary Counsel about the precedence of those incidents and they said to me, without giving specific legal advice, that in general the schedule to the act would take precedence over the regulation module. That is the reason it was put in there. I am just happy for a clarification and a clear understanding. I think body corporate members who look at that code of conduct would appreciate it clearly setting out what their obligations are. We are talking about trying to achieve the same thing. I just think this is the clearest way of doing it. Ms KEECH: I am pleased that we are getting towards the end of the debate and we are getting closer and closer to concurring on a range of issues. I agree with many members in this House that members of body corporate committees do excellent work. As the member indicated, in the majority of cases they are not lawyers or accountants; they are ordinary residents who are volunteers. The member for Springwood indicated the great work that members of the body corporate management committees do as volunteers. 07 Mar 2007 Body Corporate & Community Management & Other Legislation A’ment Bill 739

The government has invested an additional $1.6 million per year in information products for body corporate members. We also have online a terrific training program for body corporate members. I know that they have been very successful, with many people taking up the opportunity to gain extra information about their responsibilities and about the conduct of body corporate committees through that online training program. Given this, the government believes that the bill before the House is at this stage the right way to go. However, I do acknowledge the member for Clayfield and the opposition’s genuine interest in this area. Division: Question put—That the amendment be agreed to. AYES, 29—Copeland, Cripps, Cunningham, Dempsey, Elmes, Flegg, Foley, Gibson, Hopper, Horan, Johnson, Knuth, Langbroek, Lee Long, Lingard, McArdle, Malone, Menkens, Messenger, Nicholls, Pratt, Seeney, Simpson, Springborg, Stevens, Stuckey, Wellington. Tellers: Rickuss, Dickson NOES, 52—Attwood, Barry, Beattie, Bligh, Bombolas, Boyle, Choi, Croft, Darling, Fenlon, Fraser, Gray, Hinchliffe, Jarratt, Jones, Keech, Kiernan, Lavarch, Lawlor, Lee, Lucas, McNamara, Mickel, Miller, Moorhead, Mulherin, Nelson-Carr, Nolan, O’Brien, Palaszczuk, Pearce, Pitt, Purcell, Reeves, Reilly, Roberts, Schwarten, Scott, Shine, Smith, Stone, Sullivan, van Litsenburg, Wallace, Weightman, Welford, Wells, Wendt, Wettenhall, Wilson. Tellers: Male, Finn Resolved in the negative. Non-government amendment (Mr Nicholls) negatived. Clause 68, as read, agreed to. Clauses 69 to 77, as read, agreed to. Clause 78 (Insertion of new s 35)— Ms KEECH (4.56 pm): I move the following amendment— 3 Clause 78 (Insertion of new s 35)— At page 60, lines 25 to 28— omit, insert— ‘(b) in the circumstances, it would be unfair not to allow the’. In moving amendment No. 3 circulated in my name, I thank all members of the government who have supported the bill. I also thank the member for Clayfield and the other non-government members for their contributions. In particular, I thank the stakeholders who have done a tremendous job in supporting the discussion paper and the amendments: Garry Maynard, who is the president of the Unit Owners Association of Queensland; Tim Carrigg, president of the Community Titles Institute of Queensland; and John Anderson, the executive officer, Queensland Resident Accommodation Managers Association. In addition, I would like to thank from my own office Michael Caldwell, David Smith and Ryan Robertson. Although it does not seem to be the flavour of the month, on behalf of the government I sincerely thank the public servants who have done an outstanding job in the presentation of the amendments and who continue to do excellent work for the community titles scheme in Queensland. In particular, I thank Nicola Domanny, who is a commissioner with the Commission for Body Corporate and Community Management and whose passion and hard work I admire and applaud. I also thank Ivan Catlin, Belinda Giunea, Peter Dowling, David Reardon and Chris Irons from my department who, at different stages, have been very much involved in the amendments. I congratulate them on their excellent work on behalf of all stakeholders and the Queensland government. I formally table the explanatory notes for amendments to be moved during consideration in detail. Tabled paper: Explanatory Notes to Ms Keech’s amendments to the Body Corporate and Community Management and Other Legislation Amendment Bill. Amendment agreed to. Clause 78, as amended, agreed to. Schedule, as read, agreed to.

Third Reading Question put—That the bill, as amended, be now read a third time. Motion agreed to.

Long Title Question put—That the long title of the bill be agreed to. Motion agreed to. 740 Address-in-Reply 07 Mar 2007

ORDER OF BUSINESS Hon. MM KEECH (Albert—ALP) (Acting Leader of the House) (5.00 pm): I move— That government business order of the day No. 3 be postponed. Motion agreed to.

ADDRESS-IN-REPLY Resumed from 6 March (see p. 670). Hon. KR LINGARD (Beaudesert—NPA) (5.01 pm): I am delighted to be re-elected for the ninth time and I have the pleasure of again representing the people of the Beaudesert electorate. On behalf of the people of Beaudesert, I thank the Governor for her support of organisations within my electorate over recent years. I also sincerely thank my friends, my staff, my family and all those who helped in this last election. The electorate of Beaudesert has changed demographically quite dramatically since I first became the member for Fassifern. In the old days, I used to take in part of the electorate of Springwood, the south-east motorway was not there, and I took in Mabel Park, parts of Woodridge and parts of Kingston. These were obviously very difficult areas for me, and the beautiful areas as far as a National Party person is concerned were Boonah, Beaudesert, Mount Tamborine and the electorate south of Beaudesert. Because the electorate has changed so dramatically, I have always lost those northern areas. When Wayne Goss became the member for Logan in 1986, he took a large area there and had probably an 80 per cent majority. Tom Barton took Waterford and then Margaret Keech came in as part of Albert. So my electorate has always changed. Ms Keech: So I am your member. Mr LINGARD: No, you are not my member. Ms Keech: Aren’t I? Shucks. Mr LINGARD: I had to take that comment away; I certainly live in my electorate. Those areas were always difficult for me, but the pleasure of them was that they were areas which continually changed. So whether it was new schools, new police stations, whatever, there was always something happening there. Now that I have lost those northern areas, it is quite amazing how different my electorate has become. However, I still have those areas of Logan Village, Jimboomba and the northern parts where the numbers continue to dominate in my electorate. I have no doubt that, with 36,000 or 37,000 people, this electorate will change again dramatically once the redistribution comes in at the end of this year. I was completely amazed to find that, immediately after the election was announced, the Minister for Health came into Beaudesert and said that he would not reopen the Beaudesert Hospital maternity section. He said that he would not reopen it until there was a significant increase in demand for the service. Mr Robertson said that the state government was acting on advice which suggested that patient safety could be compromised if the ward was reopened now. I have spoken about this particular topic in this parliament many, many times. I know that I have basic differences on this to many people. In the debate on the south-east Queensland plan this morning, I noticed the Deputy Premier said that the period of urban sprawl has finished. For a person to say that, we have to obviously look at the definition of ‘urban sprawl’. If the bureaucrats look at that comment, any application for change in an area like Park Ridge and down to Beaudesert will always be met with a negative. One of the worst things about the rural electorates is that when a school gets down to a small size it is obviously easier to take those remaining children by bus into a town and close the small country school. It is similar with the post office and similar with the Beaudesert Hospital. The Beaudesert Hospital opened in 1988 as a brand-new hospital with 40 beds, and now we find that the Beaudesert Hospital has only three or four genuine patients and they are not patients who need to stay overnight. The Beaudesert Hospital has 40 beds but now only 22 are being used, with 16 or 17 of those being used by interim care people—in other words, older people who need to go into an aged-care service are taken to the Beaudesert Hospital to serve some time there until a position becomes available or patients go there for rehabilitation after an operation. The minister said that the demand is not there. When the Beaudesert Hospital opened as a brand-new hospital, there were 400 maternity cases per year. Now these people are taken into Logan Village, down to Helensvale or into the Mater. They are not taken to the Beaudesert Hospital and of course the demand is not there. Any service which requires an overnight stay at the Beaudesert Hospital is not provided, so ambulances continue to bypass the Beaudesert Hospital and go into Logan, into the Mater or down to the Gold Coast. Whilst that policy continues, there will never be the demand there. 07 Mar 2007 Address-in-Reply 741

Of course, what does this result in? It puts stress on the Ambulance Service, which has to bring people from Beaudesert into the city. It puts pressure on the RSLs to run bus services to bring people into the city. Also, when this situation arises, the hospital does not have a full complement of doctors, so anyone can say that the quality of service is not there and they cannot guarantee that the quality of service will be there. If bureaucrats continue to dominate with this sort of attitude—saying that it is easier to bring people from Beaudesert and those areas into the city—we will continue to see these services in these rural areas downgraded. So it is up to the people who are elected to those areas to continue to fight. I am alarmed when I heard ministers saying that the period of rural sprawl has stopped. Okay, depending on the definition of the word ‘sprawl’, I understand what the minister meant, but bureaucrats who implement that policy will look at rezoning applications, applications for commercial development or applications for industrial development and, even if they are within the urban sprawl, they will say, ‘No, it’s against government policy. We will knock it back.’ So we will continue to find that these rural areas do not receive the services and the support from government that they honestly deserve. When I heard the Minister for Health making a statement—with photos in the paper and everything—within 26 days of the election being called that he would not reopen the maternity section at the Beaudesert Hospital, in some sort of way I honestly felt sorry for the ALP candidate. It is similar with the water situation. We had two situations down there with the Rathdowney Dam, called Tilley’s Bridge, and the Wyaralong Dam. In 1990, reports were done which showed that the Wyaralong Dam was the best of the two alternatives. What did the government do? It opened up the complete discussion again on the Tilley’s Bridge Dam at Rathdowney, knowing that the 1990 and 1991 reports were there which showed that Wyaralong was the better of the two. I am not saying that the Wyaralong Dam is still the only alternative. In fact, I think the Senate committee which is meeting to discuss Traveston will probably show that the figures on Wyaralong are not completely correct. Why aren’t they correct? Because in the olden days when we built Maroon Dam and Moogerah Dam they were storage dams. They were built for agricultural viability. That meant that if it rained this year and did not rain for another three years water was maintained in those dams. They were there for storage and they were there for agricultural viability. But then a group like SunWater comes in and can sell off water every year. So industrial development has come into the area of Beaudesert, with AJ Bush and Davis Gelatine being put there by the ALP government when it took them away from Lytton. They were dumped there. They were dumped there during a period when Tommy Burns was sitting over on that government side and Tommy said, ‘I’ll get rid of this AJ Bush,’ and he took it down to Beaudesert. He did not put any more water in there. He said, ‘I’ll give another allocation of water out of the Maroon Dam.’ So when Wayne Goss was in government and he wanted to get rid of Davis Gelatine out of Sydney and he had to dump it somewhere else, where did he dump it? He dumped it down at Beaudesert. Did he put in any more dams? No, he did not. He just said, ‘We’ll take another allocation out of the Maroon Dam.’ Because this is high-priority water and those industries pay a lot of money for it, the water is allocated out of the dam—and it is continually taken out. They do not worry about getting water to fill that dam every four or five years. There are other industries that have not had dams built to cater for their water use, and the government is not worried about that. That is the problem. Naturally, dams such as the Wyaralong will not get rain every year—probably only every five or six years. If the dams are not treated as storage dams there is going to be a problem with their yield. I am sure that the yields that have been indicated by the government reports will be found by the Senate committee to be completely incorrect and completely dishonest. There are other services that I ask the government to look at, especially relating to hospitals. The Ambulance Service is under massive pressure. Because ambulances have to travel into the city all the time, obviously the RSL is under pressure. Those volunteer groups should be supported if this government is going to put hospitals on bypass. I was always concerned about the hospital councils because, first of all, Beaudesert has always belonged to the south Brisbane council. Members can imagine that as the Mater, Logan and Beaudesert hospitals are in the same area and only a certain amount of money is allocated, when it came to a new hospital clearly Logan was the one that was preferred. Beaudesert once again fell back. As soon as we moved into the south coast, Helensvale became a priority and Beaudesert fell back. Now we have come into a regional area with the bayside, with QE II and Logan. There is no doubt that a rural council with a committee of 24 people, eight from each of those areas, is obviously going to decide that any new doctor to be placed should go to Logan, and when the decision has to be made as to where money should be allocated it will go to those other areas and not Beaudesert. That is why I have always said that a hospital board is probably the only way to serve the people in Boonah and Beaudesert. As to dams, I am also concerned that the government is only looking at the Logan River. At this stage 93 per cent of the water from the Logan River goes out into the ocean. At this stage only the Logan and the Teviot, which comes from Boonah, are going to be dammed. The old site of Wolffdene is still a marvellous site. Now that people have moved into that area the Wolffdene will never be able to be built—or it would be extremely controversial. 742 Address-in-Reply 07 Mar 2007

The other dam site is called Glendower. The government has bought 95 per cent of the land required for this dam. It is upstream from Wolffdene. The water comes from the Albert River system. There is the three-river system—the Albert River system, the Logan River system and the Teviot. Teviot is where Wyaralong is being built, Logan is where the Logan weir is being built, but nothing is being built on the Albert. That water simply goes through Beenleigh and out into the ocean. I know that the Wolffdene is extremely controversial, but this is not the Wolffdene site; it is a site upstream. Some 95 per cent of the land required for that dam has been bought by the government. I listened to the Deputy Premier today in her discussions about south-east Queensland. One of the highways to receive an upgrade is the Mount Lindesay Highway. This will become a four-lane highway and will come straight through to Jimboomba. There is no doubt that Jimboomba is in a period of massive development. As I said, recently a block of land sold for $1.2 million. Very shortly after it sold for $7 million. That is the price of industrial land and commercial land. I would ask the government to look very closely at the development of the Mount Lindesay Highway and the four-lane highway that comes through to Jimboomba. The two-lane highway from Canungra to the Gold Coast needs further upgrading. Similarly, the stabilisation work on the goat track from Mount Tamborine to Canungra needs to be hurried along. I want to make a final comment in relation to my shadow portfolio of seniors. I ask that the government continue to look at whether a fair arrangement can be made to give pensioners now living in a leasehold retirement village a discount on their portion of the village’s rates. We are well aware that the Local Government Act 1993 defines a pensioner receiving a discount on rates as one who is the owner of the property. Of the 12 retirement villages in the area of Cleveland, for example, only one of those is a strata title village. Many more retirement villages are being planned for that area on a leasehold basis. The majority of people in these retirements villages previously owned their own homes and, as pensioners, now no longer receive any pensioner discount on their portion of the village’s rates. It might be said that they are saving the government money, but for many of these people their Centrelink or Veterans Affairs pension is their only income. That is a real concern for many seniors. Mr FENLON (Greenslopes—ALP) (5.15 pm): It is with great pleasure that I rise to speak in this first session of the 52nd Parliament to respond to the address by the Governor of Queensland, Her Excellency Quentin Bryce AC, which was delivered on 10 October 2006. It is a great pleasure for me to be part of this Beattie government and to play a role in this Beattie government as a parliamentary secretary to the Minister for State Development, Employment and Industrial Relations. It is a great honour for me because they are very important portfolio areas, especially State Development. I believe that State Development has a very fundamental role in any government, especially in relation to driving our economy, making sure that jobs are created and making sure that we have a front door for business in Queensland. In that role, I have had the honour of representing Queensland at a trade function interstate and promoting Queensland whenever possible. It is great to see the development in this state. We had the pleasure of seeing this as recently as last week when I accompanied Minister Mickel and members of the minister’s committee for state development to the Brisbane Airport. Government members interjected. Mr FENLON: I thank members for their interjections. It was a great insight for all of us to see in such concrete terms what it means to grow specific industries in Queensland. We saw the development at Brisbane Airport as a result of the incentives that were originally provided to Virgin Airlines—Richard Branson’s outfit—to come to Queensland. I know that at the time that had its knockers. I can only say that those knockers should now see that they were very wrong. That initial investment into Queensland by Virgin has resulted in such incredible leverage in Queensland that we can now see various spin-off industries. This is a direct result of that initial encouragement of a single entity to come to this state. We can see various arms of training in aviation, manufacturing and assembly in aviation, with Tiger helicopters, for example, and the maintenance of various aircraft that are now brought to Queensland for that specific purpose. This is a great industry employing many young people. It was tremendous to see the young apprentices at the airport—male and female—who were in jobs that were nonexistent before this government had a great role in creating them. To see that is very heartening. In a similar vein, after the Atherton community cabinet I travelled to Mackay to see similar development in the mining industry. I was shocked to see what I remembered from my youth to be the sleepy coastal hamlet of Mackay. It is now a vibrant industrial centre. It is forging ahead. Its only problem now is making sure that we have enough labour and supplies to keep that hub going. To see the expansion of the mining industry centre south of Mackay was certainly an eye opener. To see the problems that the centre confronts in terms of planning and development is certainly an eye opener. It 07 Mar 2007 Address-in-Reply 743 shows the wisdom of the policies of this government, enumerated in the Governor’s speech, that we leverage off our strengths in Queensland. One of our strengths is mining and we are not going to let that industry develop in an ad hoc way. We are intelligently and strategically going about the business of leveraging off that strength. We see that concretely with the government’s policy in relation to the centres of enterprise. There are six of them are located around the state. As I have mentioned, the Mackay-Whitsunday region is one of those. We have a policy that will build on the strengths in those centres. To develop new enterprises that can be leveraged off those strengths is a very intelligent and strategic way to go about the development of this state. We will have a great future in Queensland as a result. There are similar prospects in each of the enterprise centres around the state. I commend this government for having foresight in that regard. We certainly face some very significant challenges in this term of government. Of course we do not have to go very far through Hansard and media reports to see that water will be a very significant issue. I note the comments of the Governor in relation to the construction of dams in south-east Queensland to cater for our future needs. We have a very strategic policy in this regard. It will centre on the multifaceted approach to sourcing water. This includes desalination, maximising the use of our dams by developing pipeline networks between them, through to new innovations in the conservation of water. This is a very important area not only in terms of sustaining our cities but also in terms of ensuring our economic growth is maintained in Queensland. Of course, health was a very major issue leading up to the state election last September. It is pleasing to see the progress being made in the area of health given the very stark reality and terrifying statistics on what we have to do to keep up with the growth in demand for health services in Queensland. This is almost a terrifying prospect for a state that has to deal with incredible growth. The latest report tabled in this parliament indicates that we are keeping up with the demand. We have to ensure that we have services in the new areas of medicine that we are confronting. I was very pleased by the Governor’s reference to the new Mater Children’s Hospital. I am certainly very pleased with the proximity of the hospital to the Greenslopes electorate. Some $28.6 million will be spent on that new facility. The south-east corner of Queensland is facing some very significant challenges in a number of areas as a result of the growth in our population, especially in the area of transport. The constructive way this government is going about the business of working with the Brisbane City Council, as the major authority involved, has to be commended. We are seeing this vision exhibited with the busways. I have already spoken about the South East Busway. We are moving towards a busway network in south-east Queensland that will essentially be the envy of the world. This busway network will have interconnections across the city. It will service the decentralised population in the greater Brisbane area. There will be the flexibility for buses to exit the busway to do local runs and then enter the busway to have a fast service the city. It is an ideal balance for this city in terms of the structure, composition and growth we are faced with at the present. The vision exhibited with the use of tunnels to minimise disruption in our communities is also to be commended. It is also important to recognise that these busways will be built to a specification that will enable them to be used for light rail in the future. This is important for our communities. People in our communities wish us to keep in mind the light rail option. They want us to have this as a real option in the future. To be able to adapt these busways in that way is certainly a great option and shows great vision. The vision of this government for this term will ensure that people in our communities who are vulnerable and require attention will not be forgotten. This government will ensure that disabled people and people with specific needs in our communities will be well catered for and well looked after. There is growth in the relevant budgets predicted over this term. I am very pleased with the vision that we are exhibiting in terms of education. The prep year has been implemented smoothly. The education minister is in the House at the moment and I compliment him on that smooth implementation. I compliment the minister on the fact that I have not had a single complaint or problem referred to my office concerning the implementation of the prep year. I can see other members in the House affirming that experience. People were nervous last year but the planning was very sound. I am extremely pleased, as is my community, with the way that my local schools prepared for prep. We have seen bricks and mortar and purpose-built buildings constructed for the introduction of prep. I commend the teachers at those schools. I have been out this week meeting some of the teachers in the Greenslopes area who have made the adjustment—some have been big adjustments. All those people have worked with their communities to assure parents that their children will be safe in their new environments and assure them of the great care and attention they will receive educationally. This will be an exciting three years of government under this Beattie government, with a great vision for the future and great policies to be implemented over this term. Debate, on motion of Mr Fenlon, adjourned. 744 Motion 07 Mar 2007

MOTION

Health of Queensland Schoolchildren Mr COPELAND (Cunningham—NPA) (5.30 pm): I move— That this House notes that the Queensland Government believes "Queenslanders are more than ever embracing a healthy lifestyle; eating more fruit and vegetables, undertaking greater physical activity, giving up smoking and being more responsible with their alcohol intake" as quoted in the Queensland Public Hospitals Performance Report 2005-06 Page 4, and considers— 1. Mandatory physical activity must be introduced for all Queensland schoolchildren; 2. All Queensland schools should have an immunization register providing information on the immunization status of all attending children; and 3. Drug and Alcohol education must be provided to all Queensland schoolchildren. It gives me great pleasure to move this motion because it is a proactive motion and it is a positive motion. It will have tangible and lasting effects on young people in the Queensland community, on the long-term requirements on the budget in terms of the public health system and on the long-term health of Queenslanders right around the state. I was hoping that the government would support this motion in a bipartisan way. We often hear the government call for bipartisan support, and quite often we give it. As I said last night in my address-in-reply speech, as shadow minister for education I have in the past supported policy and legislation that the government has introduced, and I will continue to do that where it is good and sound policy that holds benefits for the people of Queensland. I hope that from time to time the government will actually reciprocate, because it is not the only one who has some contribution to make. It is not the only one who has some initiatives in policy that will have a beneficial effect on the people of Queensland. It is not the only one, for example, who will have some ideas about how we can improve the education system, the health of our young people and the health of all Queenslanders. I can in fact only once remember any amendment, any motion, any initiative that has been adopted by the government which was put forward by the opposition. I might be wrong—and I am quite happy to be proved wrong—but there has only been one occasion, and that was an amendment that I moved as shadow minister for health to the antismoking legislation a couple of years ago to ban the sale of bongs and the making of bongs in Queensland. That was a sound proposal and the government supported that, and I commended it at the time for doing that. But that, I think, is the only thing that it has ever adopted while I have been in parliament as a proposal from the opposition. I think that is a shame, because it certainly is not the only worthwhile suggestion that has been made from this side of the House. I would suggest that the motion that I have moved tonight, which the shadow minister for health, the honourable member for Surfers Paradise, will second, is one that is worthy of support. However, I do note that the minister did provide his proposed amendment to me before the debate started, and I thank him for that. That has given me a chance to read the contents of it. I think there are some differences between the two and I still think that the motion that we have moved is worthy of support. Obviously there has been increased focus in recent times on the health of our young people. There have been growing health problems with young people that are extending into adulthood. There is the problem of obesity. There have been problems with increasing drug and alcohol use amongst young people. These problems have long-term consequences on young people’s lives. The Queensland coalition has had as part of its policy since the 2004 election a Healthy Kids, Clever Kids policy. That is a really worthwhile policy. It is something that I have been pursuing for some time. I have to say that I do feel a little bit of a fraud sometimes because I am not the fittest person in the House, but it is a recognition that I do value regular physical activity and make an attempt to do more of it every day. Mr Welford: Honesty noted. Mr COPELAND: That is right; honesty noted. I have to be honest. That policy is one that would give mandatory physical activity to all Queensland schoolchildren and it would do so in a sensible way. There is a minimum requirement of 20 to 30 minutes per day for prep to grade 3 students and then 150 minutes per week for grades 4 to 10. That gives flexibility to those older students in grades 4 to 10, so it does not have to be, for example, 20 to 30 minutes every day but can be done in blocks, because we recognise that the delivery of curriculum in our schools can be a difficult thing for teachers to do. We need to give schools the flexibility to be able to deliver that program in the way that they see fit. The 20 to 30 minutes per day for those younger children is a very important thing to do. Many schools already do it. Many schools do it very well, but there are also many schools that do not do it at all, and they are the schools that we need to be targeting. I visit many schools and I have seen these programs in action working every day of the week. There are two examples that I want to refer to. I have been visiting schools in my own electorate over the past couple of weeks and a number of those schools already do these sorts of programs. One school in particular does half an hour before the school day starts, which was introduced to address behavioural problems for that school. That school was 07 Mar 2007 Motion 745 confronted with a number of issues when it came to behaviour management. It introduced a physical activity component every morning for half an hour. That school has seen remarkable results in terms of an improvement in behaviour and the learning standards. What is more, a by-product has been the fitness levels at that school. That has been an excellent outcome. Other schools that I have visited have introduced it to address fitness levels and ongoing fitness levels, and they are seeing a marked improvement in those fitness levels. But what they are seeing is the added benefit of better concentration in class, better behaviour in class and great outcomes for those students. That is a perfect example of a practical, tangible policy implementation that schools can do which is targeted for individual students. We have said physical activity, because I know some people have concerns about team sports and competitive sports. I do not share those concerns. I actually value the benefits of team sports and competitive sport. But we do need to make sure that we recognise that physical activity in this proposal is to be targeted at each different skill level of those students, because obviously some students have disabilities, for example, and different programs need to be targeted for those students. I note that the minister has set up a review of physical activity in state schools. That was done— and I have the ministerial media statement—on Thursday, 9 March 2006. It is now Wednesday, 7 March 2007 and we still have not seen any results from that committee. I note that the member for Mansfield, the chair of that committee, is in the chamber and is on the list to speak. We have not seen the results of that review. We have not seen any recommendations. We certainly have not seen any implementation of it. Rather than just reviewing it, it is a very simple thing to do because there are schools already doing this and they are reaping the rewards. It is something we can do right now very easily and very quickly. With regard to what the minister said in the Courier-Mail at the time, I agree with virtually everything that he said. The only thing that I disagree with is that we needed the review. I think we can just go ahead and do it, and that is reflected in this motion before the House tonight. There was the Obesity Summit held by the government last year. I have to say that not a lot of tangible evidence that much has been done has come out of that. I note that the minister’s proposed amendment does refer to some of the things from that summit, and the Parliamentary Library has provided me with some details of the obesity increases over that time. It is estimated that 25,000 children aged five to 17 in Queensland are obese. That is a significant number. In the minister’s own words, 20 per cent of students do no sport or activity at all either at school or out of school. That is a real concern, because that is something like 97,000 students in our state school system. It is a huge number of students who are not getting those benefits. With regard to the second point of the motion relating to immunisation, the shadow minister for health obviously will deal with this in some detail. Our current generation has not been exposed to many of the vast epidemics that really caused havoc in the past in Queensland. While immunisation is a very personal choice for parents to make, we need to be very cautious about rates of immunisation lowering and exposing our children and adults to increased risk of illness, and the shadow minister will go into that issue in further detail. The third point of the motion relates to the provision of drug and alcohol education to all Queensland schoolchildren. The government will say that this already happens, but I have to argue that I do not think that it happens as well as could happen. While I have been shadow minister for education we have continually pledged that we would fund the Life Education Centre to provide drug and alcohol education to Queensland schoolchildren in both the state and non-state sector. Unfortunately, back in 2000 this state government discontinued funding to Life Education. I do not know why it did that. I simply do not understand why that was done. At the time Life Education was defunded, the member for Murrumba was the minister for education. Subsequently, Anna Bligh became the minister for education. She said that the defunding occurred because the Life Education Centre did not comply with national guidelines for drug and alcohol education delivery. That is completely inconsistent with the fact that other state governments provide funding for Life Education. It is absolutely vital that we provide our young people with the very best information that we can, in as great a number as we can, about the risks of drug and alcohol abuse. It is a massive problem in our community and we need to address it. I urge members to support the motion before the House. Mr LANGBROEK (Surfers Paradise—Lib) (5.40 pm): It gives me great pleasure to rise to second the motion moved by my colleague the honourable member for Cunningham and shadow minister for education. The theme of this motion is that prevention is better than cure. The Queensland public hospitals performance report shows that, although this year in Queensland we are spending $6.65 billion in the health sector, clearly, some of the things that we are doing are just not working. This morning the acting health minister acknowledged that, although elective surgery procedures have decreased over the past five years, that was because of the number of emergency procedures increasing. But we see in the report that, in terms of triage, only 67 per cent of people involved in category 2 emergency procedures are assisted within 10 minutes when 80 per cent should be the target. When we talked about the fact that the number of beds has decreased from 10,000 12 years ago to 9,600 now, the acting health minister said that the number of critical care beds has increased by 60 over that same period. So over the past five years, five per cent of the 10,000 beds that we have lost 746 Motion 07 Mar 2007 have been replaced by 60 critical care beds. Clearly, we need to look at different ways of doing things. As I said, prevention is better than cure. Yet only a fraction of the $6.65 billion Health budget is spent on prevention. All the other state governments spend only a fraction of their health budgets on prevention. The first part of the motion refers to mandatory physical activity. The shadow education minister mentioned that the Healthy Kids, Clever Kids initiative requires schoolchildren from prep to year 3 to undergo 20 to 30 minutes of physical activity per day—and the member spoke in detail about that—and 150 minutes of physical activity per week for students in years 4 to 10. That initiative would become integrated into the school’s curriculum. The member referred to the statistics of childhood obesity becoming an endemic problem and the number of children who are not exercising at all. This policy would give children the best chance of fighting obesity. Like most of us who try to exercise a lot, after a while we want to exercise instead of having to do it. That is why I think this initiative is very important for our kids. The second part of the motion refers to the immunisation register. I note that the government, in section six of its amendment, refers to introducing the school based vaccination program. I note that the amendment states ‘with parental consent’. We have decreasing rates of immunisation. It is important that kids be immunised. If they are not being immunised, it is important for schools to be aware of a child’s immunisation status so that other kids are not exposed to these dangerous diseases. In New South Wales that system works very well. I commend the government for its vaccination program, but I think it has a different thrust from what is contained in our motion. The third part of the motion states that drug and alcohol education must be provided to all Queensland schoolchildren. Currently, there is a bill before the House which I introduced that relates to restricting the supply of alcohol to minors. I will not refer to that. I note that last year at a forum held after schoolies week the minister pointed out that education was the best preventive measure that we could take. We agree that it is a great preventive measure, but we think that the drug and alcohol education that is currently taught in high schools is inadequate. So we seek to ensure that drug and alcohol education is ramped up in Queensland schools, particularly in the junior years, because when the kids get to the senior years, when they are more exposed to alcohol and drugs, they will remember the things that they were taught. That will help them to be more resistant to the temptations that they face. I call on the Labor government to facilitate enhanced drug and alcohol education by providing the necessary material and resources to ensure that this important life education becomes a critical part of the school curriculum. In the time available to me, I want to note many of the initiatives contained in the motion. I share the concern of the shadow education minister about the review of sport and physical activity not having gone anywhere for over a year. It is indicative of this government: it conducts lots of reviews, but we would like to see some action. Certainly, the amendment contains some very nice words, but it is important that we be seen to be doing things for our kids. I commend the motion before the House. Hon. RJ WELFORD (Everton—ALP) (Minister for Education and Training and Minister for the Arts) (5.45 pm): I move the following amendment— That all words after ‘and’ are deleted and the following words inserted— ‘further notes that the Government— 1. is undertaking a review of sport and physical activity in schools; 2. has introduced a Healthy Food and Drink Supply Strategy for Queensland schools; 3. is implementing a comprehensive $21 million campaign of initiatives to combat obesity, particularly among children, as a result of the Obesity Summit convened by the Premier in May last year; 4. is issuing self help packs to every Queensland household to promote healthy lifestyles and prevent obesity; 5. is working with school communities, community groups and local government to open up access to school sport and recreational facilities; 6. has this year introduced a $2.5 million school–based vaccination program to ensure that, with parental consent, every unvaccinated year 8 student is immunized for hepatitis B and chicken pox, and year 10 students will be vaccinated for diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough; 7. is providing cervical cancer vaccinations, with parental consent, to female students in Years 10, 11 and 12 this year.’ I thank the honourable shadow spokesperson for putting this matter on the agenda. I share his interest in ensuring that our education system plays a role in addressing the issues of obesity, health, drug education and wellbeing generally which are affecting the young people of Queensland. These days our schools are more than just places of academic achievement; they are places in which the whole person is nourished and developed. That is indeed the approach that I am taking to education. We are doing much to expand upon the essential academic achievements of literacy and numeracy as well as looking at a range of other issues that are important to developing the health and wellbeing— intellectually, physically and emotionally—of young people into their postschool years. Before I focus specifically on the motion and the health issues contained in it, I want to refer to the issue of environmental sustainability and the awareness of a person’s identity and their capacity to communicate and relate to others. These are important skills and capabilities that are essential to the 07 Mar 2007 Motion 747 wellbeing of young people in our state today. They are the skills that young people need to chart their course throughout their lives and be effective citizens in our community. But nothing takes children anywhere without their health. All of us in this place know that our health is our wealth. No matter what capabilities or potential we may possess individually, very little of that can be brought to fruition unless our health is taken care of. I note the sensitivity of the member for Cunningham in relation to bipartisan support. I have a huge amount of empathy for the motion that he moved, which is why I have accepted the first half, which acknowledges what the Queensland government public hospitals performance report said. I am happy to give bipartisan support for what that report says. That is the one aspect of the member’s motion that is accurate. But the remainder of it is a grab bag of items. Obviously, as the member walked out of the opposition’s office this morning, he thought of them as being good ideas. An honourable member interjected. Mr WELFORD: Perhaps someone else thought of them and gave them to the member as he walked out of the office. Although none of the proposals contained in the motion are inherently flawed, I thought I would help him out. My amendment to the motion is not to contradict or countermand the genuine interest of the honourable member, for which I give him bipartisan support, but simply to help him out in providing a motion that really does tell the full picture and talk about all the things that government— Mr Lawlor: He appreciates your assistance. Mr WELFORD: I am sure he appreciates my assistance. I want to give the member an indication of the much broader range of things that government can and should be doing—and, indeed, our government is doing—to address these issues. In response to the member’s motion, there is a national immunisation register. That register is used at a state level when needed. Duplicating that register in our schools is not necessary. The department of education has a specific policy that requires our state schools at least to implement drug and alcohol education in every school. I know that there is constant lobbying for Life Education, and the member mentioned it again. But Life Education is not the only one that is capable of delivering valuable drug education in our schools. I do not think that we should becoming blinkered— Mr Copeland interjected. Mr WELFORD: I think that is fair enough. In relation to physical activity, as the member picked up, I have a particular interest in this issue. All I can say is: watch this space. There will be more action yet. Mr Copeland: We’ve been hearing that for 12 months. Mr WELFORD: We have to take the time to talk to people. I know that those opposite do not want to consult anyone in schools; they just want to dictate to them. That is what Julie Bishop does. The federal education minister just wants to dictate to everyone what they are doing. We are going to consult and then come up with the best package. Hon. D BOYLE (Cairns—ALP) (Minister for Child Safety) (5.50 pm): As the Minister for Child Safety and as Acting Minister for Health, I am pleased to second the amendment to the motion. In fact Queensland Health is at the forefront of the Beattie government’s efforts to ensure that Queensland children live healthy and active lives. As a result of the Queensland Obesity Summit, held in May 2006 and which I attended, the Beattie government committed $21 million over three years for partnerships, grants, facilities and other resources to encourage our children to live healthy lifestyles and help fight obesity. Key initiatives included developing healthy weight information packs to be mailed to every Queensland home to increase awareness about food and nutrition, physical activity and healthy weight; and a Fit and Fuelled in Schools program that includes healthy food and drink supply for tuckshops and grants to promote physical activity. In 2005 we also launched an Eat Well, Be Active—Healthy Kids for Life strategy, which has over 100 initiatives for healthier children. One of these initiatives is a Healthy Kids for Life survey underway in Queensland schools to measure the eating habits and physical activity of Queensland children. The Healthy Kids for Life program seeks to create an environment that helps children and young people to be active and eat well. And our Go for 2&5 fruit and vegetable campaign is paying dividends by encouraging Queenslanders to eat two serves of fruit and five serves of vegetables a day. Queensland Health surveyed 2,500 Queenslanders last year and compared the results with a baseline survey taken before the Go for 2&5 campaign started in 2005. For those who sometimes doubt the benefits of government advertising, the results are instructive. The results show that Queenslanders are getting the message about a healthy daily intake of fruit and vegetables. More than 72 per cent of those surveyed were familiar with the campaign and 27 per cent said that they had made an effort to eat more fruit and vegetables. The survey also found a 10 per cent increase in those eating three or more serves of vegetables per day and a five per cent increase in those eating fruit more than four days a week. 748 Motion 07 Mar 2007

In my portfolio of Child Safety there is another initiative to improve the health of children. A new system of child health passports was launched in January 2007 and will help to better manage and treat the multiple health problems of children who come into care. A six-month trial highlighted the need for the new system, which is a joint initiative of the Department of Child Safety and Queensland Health. Queensland is again taking the national lead in child protection reform. The child safety passport is the first of its kind in Australia for children in care. Children who spend time in out-of-home care as a result of abuse or neglect generally have poorer health than other children. Children who have been abused often come to us with no medical records. With the child health passport, each child entering care will undergo a full check-up. A health plan will then be developed to meet the child’s needs. For as long as the child remains in care the health plan will be reviewed at least yearly and more often if required. The health plan, medical records and information on how to meet the day-to-day health needs of the child will be contained in what is called the child health passport. A copy of the passport will be given to any new carer or to the parent if the child returns home. The child health passport is now being progressively implemented for all children in our care. Through Queensland Health’s Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drug Services we invest more than $50 million every year in the prevention and treatment of drug and alcohol misuse. And we are also making it harder for young Queenslanders to take up the habit of smoking. In fact, we have the toughest smoking laws in Australia, and these are helping to reduce smoking rates across the board in Queensland. The honourable member also raised the question of whether all Queensland schools should keep a register providing information on the immunisation status of all attending children. While on the topic of immunisation, I would like to inform the House that Queensland’s new school based vaccination program for 2007 has already begun. In fact, this year starting in April the program will roll out the first free vaccinations against cervical cancer to Queensland’s schoolgirls. The vaccine was first developed by Queenslander of the Year Professor Ian Frazer and could save the lives of hundreds of Queensland women. The cervical cancer vaccinations will be provided to female students with parental consent in years 10, 11 and 12 this school year. Next year it will be offered to girls in years 8, 9 and 10. I join the opposition in its concern for the health and safety of our children. Time expired. Mr McARDLE (Caloundra—Lib) (5.55 pm): It gives me great pleasure to rise to support the motion moved by the member for Cunningham. It is important to understand that the motion is geared towards children so that they do not become statistics in a future Queensland public hospitals performance report tabled at a later date in this House. One only has to look at the statistics contained within the document to understand that bed numbers in the last 10 years have decreased by 500 and that elective surgery waiting lists are growing longer than ever before. At the same time, the Queensland Health budget in 2005-06 was $5.3 billion and has now increased to $6.65 billion in 2006-07. What we do not want is the children of this state to be any more afflicted by this government’s crippling inability to provide health services to the people of this state. Accordingly, the motion proposes very simple steps that will provide long-term health and benefit to our children. No-one in this House is going to deny that physical activity is essential to both physical and psychological wellbeing. A prime example in this building is the gym located on level 7. I wonder if a straw poll were taken of the members how many could say they consistently use the equipment, because if we are going to be debating an issue of this nature then I would have thought MPs should also set the example. Children watch and mimic adults more than we realise. Between the ages of five and 12 physical activity is most important for a number of reasons. They include promoting healthy growth and development, improving cardiovascular fitness, improving posture, building strong bones and muscles, together with improving self-esteem. The federal government’s Department of Health and Ageing recommends that children need at least 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity every day and to spend no more than two hours a day in front of the TV, computer games, internet et cetera and certainly not more than two hours during daylight hours. I do not believe that it is practical for schools on a daily basis to provide that form of physical activity. However, there is without a doubt a place for schools in this very important process. More and more, schools are becoming part of the wider growing process of children. Schools have always, by definition, been the primary education facility that our children attend. If the children are healthy, if the children are receiving a good and adequate diet, then clearly it assists them in getting through the day, dealing with their lessons and undertaking other activities associated with modern schooling. It is common sense that physical activity at schools be introduced on a regular basis. It first and foremost benefits the children and ultimately must be a cost saving to the public purse. 07 Mar 2007 Motion 749

On the question of the use of drugs, recently Sydney saw the very tragic death of a 20-year-old young woman who had taken the drug ice. Teenagers and young children today have an inherent belief that recreational drugs are simply that—for recreation. Nothing could be further from the truth. In addition, other drugs and alcohol constitute a major threat to our children’s lives. If they do not succumb to an overdose of heroin, ice or some other amphetamine, then there is a real risk—much greater than the balance of the population—that they will be killed by a drink driver or cause the death of other young people by drink driving. It is therefore important that at a very young age children be educated about drugs and alcohol. Drug education must incorporate legal drugs—tobacco and prescription medicines— and not just illegal drugs. Legal drugs will kill you or cause you long-term harm and detriment just as surely as illegal drugs will. The National School Drug Education Strategy, which was developed by the Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs in May 1999, has listed a number of principles for drug education in schools. Some of those principles include the belief that it is best taught in the context of the school health curriculum; that it is important that programs are not just a one-off but continue throughout schooling; that drug education messages across the school environment be consistent and coherent; and that drug education strategies be related directly to the achievement of the program objectives. In all, some 15 principles have been outlined to provide an overall drug education program in schools. The necessity for this becomes obvious when one looks at the statistics on people who are using drugs irrespective of type. More and more young people are placing themselves at risk as drugs become more readily available. Youth has two beliefs: the first is that they are invincible and the second is that they will live forever. Anyone who has seen the effect of drugs on young people knows that neither is correct. Mr MOORHEAD (Waterford—ALP) (6.01 pm): I rise to speak in favour of the amendment moved by the minister to this motion. The Beattie government has a strong history of delivering innovative initiatives to promote healthy lifestyles in primary and secondary schools, whether they be government or non-government schools. As the substantive motion makes clear, significant improvements have already been made to promote healthier lifestyles in our community, whether in schools or the community more generally. In my electorate, schools have taken to the 2007 Healthy Food and Drink Supply Strategy with great gusto. Many know it simply as the traffic light scheme or the red, amber, green scheme. At P&C meetings, parents and schools have agreed on when red and amber days will be programmed throughout the school year. This is an important strategy that I know from experience is already working. Not only does the strategy ensure healthy eating at schools; it also promotes education about healthy eating for young people outside of schools. Importantly, it also educates families about healthy eating. Schools in my electorate have advised me that these changes have seen increases in attention and alertness in schools. This should come as no surprise. Healthy eating and the application of an appropriate diet will control the extreme highs and lows associated with blood sugar levels. When local charity groups from my electorate commenced providing breakfast to schools such as Mabel Park State School, the schools reported a marked improvement in both attendance and behaviour. Programs such as this make an important contribution to a complex problem. Diseases like diabetes are major challenges for our community and our health system. Those diseases are preventable, but they are also a response to our modern lifestyle. Complex problems require complex solutions. There is no magic bullet for the promotion of healthy lifestyles. Only a combination of well thought out education and support strategies can alleviate a problem of lifestyle and culture. Tonight the motion moved by the opposition shows a misunderstanding in both form and substance. The opposition’s motion suggests that these reforms are simply out there waiting to be implemented. The fact is that the government is addressing every possible avenue to promote healthy lifestyles in our schools. Whenever they get a chance, opposition members say that the government has not consulted the people who are affected by change. This state government consults and consults and consults whenever it can. This government knows that consulting stakeholders upfront is an important prerequisite to change. In 2006 the minister for education established a review of sports and physical activity, headed by the member for Mansfield, Phil Reeves. The review included input from physical education teachers, parent groups, government departments and the relevant sporting bodies. I understand that those matters are being given careful consideration by the minister and I look forward eagerly to the recommendations of the report. The fact is that drug and alcohol education, as mentioned in the motion, are already a feature of our schooling programs. Physical activity is already a core component of health and physical education in years 1 to 10. Even the federal government has addressed this need, with a requirement that schools provide at least two hours of physical activity each week. Mr Copeland: It is a recommendation, not a requirement. 750 Motion 07 Mar 2007

Mr MOORHEAD: In my experience, this recommendation is a great deal more constructive than the requirement to have a flagpole in schoolyards. As the Acting Minister for Health has already stated, immunisation programs are already in place. Those programs are implemented through cooperative programs with local, state and federal governments and include programs such as the National Childhood Immunisation Register. The amendment moved by the minister repeats the words ‘has introduced’, ‘is implementing’ and ‘is provided’. It is clear that this government is already delivering quality improvements for healthy lifestyles in our community, particularly among our schoolchildren. I commend the motion, as amended by the minister, to the House. Mr GIBSON (Gympie—NPA) (6.05 pm): I wish to pick up on a point made by the member for Waterford, which is that if this government consults, consults, consults, it certainly forgot to do that over the Traveston Crossing Dam. It just came in and announced it. However, I turn to the motion and support what has been addressed here today. In the media we see many negative images and reports about the state of health of our children and our youth. After listening to the speakers so far tonight, I have no doubt that all members of the House are concerned about those reports and are concerned about the future of our youth, although often we are not sure why this is happening. International research indicates that, in spite of increasing economic prosperity enabling greater access to opportunities for all of our children, many key indicators for the healthy development and wellbeing of children and youth are not improving, with complex diseases such as type 2 diabetes, obesity, anxiety, suicide and eating disorders on the increase among our youth and children. Mandatory physical activity is an important element of a healthy lifestyle. Today’s children and young people are growing up in an environment that is filled with technology. As a parent of three young children, I know myself that their days are filled with television, radio, CD players, computers, the internet and Tamagotchi electronic pets, and their leisure time is devoted to computer games, surfing the net, chat rooms that I have to monitor frequently— An opposition member: Reading Hansard. Mr GIBSON: Reading Hansard to see what their dad is up to, messaging, mobile phones, school projects— Mr Hinchliffe: ‘He’s up to no good’ is the answer. Mr GIBSON: Defending the people of Gympie is the answer. School projects that they are involved in often require the use of a computer at a very early age. My son, who is in grade 6, can master Powerpoint presentations far better than I can. All of those activities result in less physical activity during leisure time. Recent studies have indicated high rates of childhood obesity. Proposals like healthy food in school canteens and using prominent sports men and women as role models for preventing and treating childhood obesity are key pieces in the puzzle. I commend the government for implementing a wide range of initiatives, but we need to go further. Turning around these alarming statistics requires an overhaul of the way we live, what we eat and what we do. Placing sole responsibility for this change on individuals or parents will not work. Instead, governments must lead. Rises in the number of children and adolescents who are overweight or obese or who have type 2 diabetes have been so dramatic and so recent that it has caught us napping. Last year’s Obesity Summit showed that. Research by the Centre for Overweight and Obesity shows that parents are aware of the importance of physical activity for their children, but the complexity of their lives and time pressures make it a difficult issue. Barriers such as lack of transport, safety fears about walking to school or playing in local parks now prevent children from participating in more physical activities. Most of today’s children spend far less time exercising than we did. They spend more time riding in cars and sitting in front of computers and television screens. To reverse this trend, we need to start early. Mandatory physical activity in schools would be one element of this and would help prevent chronic illnesses later in life. Children’s hearts, lungs, muscles and bones cannot develop without physical activity. When you compare children who lead sedentary lives with active children, the active children tend to have bigger and stronger hearts, greater muscle mass, less fatty tissue and stronger bones. Research from the past 40 years clearly links heart and lung fitness with reduced rates of stroke and heart disease. As an interesting side note, the Queensland Cancer Council conducted a survey on mandatory physical activity. Over 95 per cent of respondents said that they would support the state government regulating mandatory hours of physical activities in schools—that’s right, 95 per cent of respondents. To move on to substance abuse, information about alcohol, tobacco and drug abuse in young people is imprecise and comes from surveys done every few years. The most concerning data comes from research conducted by the Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer Council in Victoria, which reported on trends in the use of alcohol amongst Australian secondary school students between 1984 07 Mar 2007 Motion 751 and 2002. It revealed that the proportion of young people using alcohol has not really changed over the past two decades. What has changed is that their drinking levels are now harmful and have increased significantly. Binge drinking is up, with unfortunately girls showing higher rates of hazardous drinking activities than boys. Recent Australian data also suggests that around 30 per cent of adolescents have used illicit drugs. We must educate our youth. These patterns are most concerning and they show marked increases at dangerous levels involving younger and younger children. The member for Surfers Paradise quite rightly pointed out that we need to shift the focus from cure to prevention. We acknowledge this link and this motion goes to that. Mr GRAY (Gaven—ALP) (6.09 pm): I rise tonight to speak in support of the amendment and against the motion. I can appreciate the sentiment of all members of this parliament who are concerned about the health of children. The vast majority of us have children so we have been concerned for a very long time, and I think when you are a parent you are always going to be a parent and you are always going to be concerned. People must realise that not all education takes place in the classroom. Having spent 38 years in the education department as a primary and secondary teacher, as a guidance officer, a senior guidance officer and a district guidance officer providing guidance services and acting in many other roles in the department, I realise that changing the culture of the lifestyle of people is a very hard and difficult practice. What we get from the opposition is simplicity. They come into the House and stand up and say some nice things about kids in school—about how they are not fit enough and we need to make them exercise more and we will impose that upon them, and then we will encourage them to eat more fruit and vegetables so we will have a lesson or two about that, and then we will encourage them not to drink, and we do all of these things. A government member interjected. Mr GRAY: And then they go to dinner, and we witness some of the events that we have witnessed in this place. It is a great concern. This government is on about changing lifestyles. We live a lifestyle from the point of birth until the day on which we are removed from this mortal coil. This government wants people to enjoy life and have the best possible level of fitness through all of that lifestyle, so there is a raft of legislation addressing each of these issues. Members of the opposition tend to forget that every time they have a good idea they want to put it into the curriculum. If we listened to all of these so-called good ideas that members of the opposition have, we would have a curriculum that ran for about 14 hours a day for every one of the 200 school days and it would possibly stretch into 52 weeks a year. Everyone who has a good idea wants to make it an educational priority. This government realises that education does not take place in just the school, so it has a raft of initiatives which other members have explained here tonight in detail. But the government also knows that we need to change the culture of parents and change the culture of our society. We need to have a society in which drinking is not looked upon as a glamorous activity, and we are certainly working towards that. We have seen the smoking legislation make great inroads into reducing the number of adults who smoke in Queensland. I am extremely pleased to see that, because that not only flows over to the health of those adults but means that the example that parents set for children in the household is followed. Parents are a very dominant force in the values that their children adopt. Teachers are a dominant force as well, but there are limits on what we can do. Schools are confined in hours. We would like to run before-school and after-school programs, and some schools can. I point out to the member for Cunningham that many children arrive at school by bus—and they do this in his electorate as well as mine—and there are set times at which they can access these activities. Mr Copeland interjected. Mr GRAY: Of course, but there are limits in city schools and country schools. I would suggest that time limitation before and after school is a real problem. We have a whole raft of encouragement measures that we need to use and which we have put in place to assist our schools, parents and students to live healthy lifestyles. This government has legislation in place and it is working. The minister’s amendment demonstrates very clearly seven very coordinated steps that are currently in place which are leading towards the betterment of the quality of life of our students and therefore their quality of life as adults. I close my comments on this matter by encouraging all in this House to set a good example for the children that they care so deeply about. Miss SIMPSON (Maroochydore—NPA) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (6.15 pm): The coalition has a positive approach to this, contrary to that outlined by the previous speaker, the member for Gaven. We believe it is possible to have a greater impact on the health of our children, and that is why we have this motion before the parliament. We believe that tackling childhood obesity can be 752 Motion 07 Mar 2007 achieved by mandating physical activity in Queensland schools. We also propose that Queensland schools should have an immunisation register providing information on the immunisation status of all attending children and that drug and alcohol education must be provided to all Queensland schoolchildren. I understand that the education minister wants to amend our motion to endorse a ‘review’ of sport and physical activity in schools, among other amendments, and I wish to address that point first. A review of sport and physical activity in schools is just code for delay, because the evidence is already available to support the need for mandatory physical activity for children, and I will outline that in a moment. The previous speaker tried to tell us that it is too hard to have mandatory physical activity. The way he was painting it, the obstacles were too great. It concerns me that he was painting a picture of great obstacles, rather than one which we believe is full of opportunity. Even in schools where children are bussed in, as we heard from the shadow education minister, it has been possible to put in place physical activity programs for children. It is possible to do. It does require a positive approach and commitment. We are saying that a step further is to make it compulsory. The shadow education minister’s motion, seconded by our shadow health minister, is an example of the coalition’s strong policy platform and our desire to continue to promote an alternative plan for Queensland, a proactive plan. It aligns with our Healthy Kids, Clever Kids policy, whereby we would require a minimum of 20 to 30 minutes exercise per day for prep to grade 3 students and then 150 minutes per week for grades 4 to 10. Children need adults to guard their health and to help them develop healthy and strong bodies at this critical time of development. Obese children face a higher risk of heart disease, hypertension, diabetes and cancer. However, environmental and social factors seem to be ganging up on our children, with childhood obesity for the first time threatening to reduce their average life span after hundreds of years of improvements. Children often cannot walk to school because of safety concerns, they are more likely to consume takeaway and processed food than their parents did as children, and they are more likely to spend more of their leisure time in front of computers and computer games. Forty per cent of children between the ages of five and 12 watch an average of two hours or more of television per day, according to a technology and physical activity report. Only 56 per cent of Queensland children are apparently involved in sufficient physical activity, which is lower than the national average, according to the Premier’s own statement to parliament in 2004. It is disturbing that after all the advances in modern health technology researchers are predicting that life expectancy could drop for the first time in 1,000 years. According to an article in the Sydney Morning Herald on 18 March 2005, quoting the New England Journal of Medicine— Australians could be eating themselves to an early death, with new research suggesting life expectancy will decline for the first time in 1,000 years due to the obesity epidemic. However, the research also shows that it is possible to reverse these trends if the child gets back to a normal weight before adolescence according to the Australian Doctor magazine of 26 August 2005. There are a range of chronic illnesses that will plague a child into their adult life if we do not take a more proactive approach now. I recognise that there have been moves to improve access to healthier foods in schools. We think that is commendable, but it needs to go far further and address physical activity in schools. That is why the motion before the House should be supported. As to the need for drug and alcohol education for all Queensland schoolchildren, I find it interesting that the minister has not mentioned this in his amending motion. That is significant because we believe not enough is being done to address this issue. When we raised this previously the government used to say that school health nurses were doing the job. We believe the nurses do a good job but more is necessary as well as major programs with resources. Time expired. Mr REEVES (Mansfield—ALP) (6.20 pm): It gives me great pleasure to rise and support the amendment moved by the minister for education. I had the pleasure of being appointed by the minister to head the review of sport and physical activity in schools. I say to the member for Cunningham: watch this space. The member might remember that there was a certain little thing called an election that got in the way in September that probably delayed us slightly. I am not complaining that the election was on obviously, but the member should watch this space. This is a very important debate. I congratulate the member for Cunningham for bringing on the issue of physical activity and sport in schools to be debated tonight. I know the education minister is firmly focused on the report that he will be receiving shortly. He has a strong interest in this area. At the outset I would like to thank the member for Fitzroy, the member for Mount Coot-tha and the member for Broadwater for their assistance in the development of the report. I also want to thank numerous people from a range of backgrounds who were involved in a lot of focus groups and surveys that we conducted. 07 Mar 2007 Motion 753

I am going to talk about the research findings in the areas. Some of them will obviously back up a number of the claims made here tonight by both sides of parliament. I think we all agree that it is very important that we get more physical activity and sport in our schools and our general community. Schools cannot be, as the member for Gaven said, the vehicle to solve all of society’s problems. That is impossible. There is simply not enough time. The important thing is that, yes, the federal government has a requirement that at least two hours of physical activity occur in schools each week. We all agree that this is not occurring in all schools, but in some schools it does occur. The litany of research shows that there is overwhelming support for increasing the physical activity level of children and young people to provide them with greater opportunities for increased fitness and lifelong involvement in physical activity. Research indicates that policies should be established to promote lifelong physical activity by introducing daily physical activity, health education for students, employment of training staff and conducting appropriate activities for the abilities of students. Daily physical activity is the theme that is consistent across all research and literature on the topic of childhood obesity and school physical education programs. The Canadian government guide to healthy living for children and young people recommends that children should build up to 90 minutes of daily physical activity. Schools cannot possibly be responsible for that alone. Research conducted by Griffith University through focus groups with classroom teachers identified a number of barriers that limit participation and diversity of physical activity—time priorities, non-contact time, attitudes, lack of knowledge in the health area and lack of knowledge in the PE area. A total of 110 schools participated in our surveys from state primary, state secondary and special schools in metropolitan, provincial and rural schools. The findings were that 49.6 per cent of all students participated in physical activity for two hours or more a week, 36 per cent participated in one to two hours and 12.1 per cent participated in less than one hour of physical activity. Some 2.3 per cent of students participated in no physical activities during the survey period. These students were all in years 9 to 12. All students from years 1 to 8 participated in some type of physical activity. The highest level of participation occurred with year 8 students with 70 per cent recording two hours or more. Year 2 students were the most active with 61 per cent in the one to two hours of physical activity. I could read more of the findings, but members will see them very shortly. I want to talk about the one big barrier that we must address. We can all pick an example of a school that really concentrates on health and physical activity, but a lot of that is due to the leadership of the school. No matter what we do it is very important, if we really want a fundamental change, that we encourage the leadership of the school, and the leadership needs to encourage the rest of the school to come up with the change. That will take some time. That changing— Mr Copeland: Speed it up. Mr REEVES: The culture of some people and some groups of people cannot be changed overnight. The only way this will work is if we start changing the culture within some of the leadership in the schools. Division: Question put—That the amendment be agreed to. AYES, 51—Attwood, Barry, Beattie, Bligh, Bombolas, Boyle, Choi, Croft, Darling, Fenlon, Finn, Fraser, Gray, Hinchliffe, Hoolihan, Jarratt, Jones, Keech, Kiernan, Lavarch, Lawlor, McNamara, Mickel, Miller, Moorhead, Mulherin, Nelson-Carr, O’Brien, Palaszczuk, Pearce, Pitt, Purcell, Reeves, Reilly, Roberts, Schwarten, Scott, Shine, Smith, Spence, Stone, Sullivan, Wallace, Weightman, Welford, Wells, Wendt, Wettenhall, Wilson. Tellers: Male, Nolan NOES, 29—Copeland, Cunningham, Dempsey, Elmes, Flegg, Foley, Gibson, Hobbs, Hopper, Horan, Johnson, Knuth, Langbroek, Lee Long, Lingard, Malone, McArdle, Menkens, Messenger, Nicholls, Pratt, Seeney, Simpson, Springborg, Stevens, Stuckey, Wellington. Tellers: Rickuss, Dickson Resolved in the affirmative. Motion, as amended, agreed to, viz— That this House notes that the Queensland Government believes “Queenslanders are more than ever embracing a healthy lifestyle; eating more fruit and vegetables, undertaking greater physical activity, giving up smoking and being more responsible with their alcohol intake” as quoted in the Queensland Public Hospitals Performance Report 2005-06 Page 4, and further notes that the Government— 1. is undertaking a review of sport and physical activity in schools; 2. has introduced a Healthy Food and Drink Supply Strategy for Queensland schools; 3. is implementing a comprehensive $21 million campaign of initiatives to combat obesity, particularly among children, as a result of the Obesity Summit convened by the Premier in May last year; 4. is issuing self help packs to every Queensland household to promote healthy lifestyles and prevent obesity; 5. is working with school communities, community groups and local government to open up access to school sport and recreational facilities; 6. has this year introduced a $2.5 million school–based vaccination program to ensure that, with parental consent, every unvaccinated year 8 student is immunized for hepatitis B and chicken pox, and year 10 students will be vaccinated for diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough; 7. is providing cervical cancer vaccinations, with parental consent, to female students in Years 10, 11 and 12 this year. Sitting suspended from 6.32 pm to 7.30 pm. 754 Address-in-Reply 07 Mar 2007

ORDER OF BUSINESS Hon. LH NELSON-CARR (Mundingburra—ALP) (Acting Leader of the House) (7.30 pm): I move— That general business notice of motion No. 1 be postponed. Motion agreed to.

ADDRESS-IN-REPLY Resumed from p. 743. Mrs REILLY (Mudgeeraba—ALP) (7.30 pm): Before I begin my address I just want to pass on my condolences to the people who were injured and the families of those who were killed on the Garuda Airlines flight. I have learnt tonight, and many members would have seen the news, that Australian journalists and public officials were badly injured and possibly lost. Having been both a journalist and a public servant, I was distressed to see what happened to these people from those professions undertaking their normal duties. I express my sympathy to all those involved and wish them godspeed recoveries. My prayers are with them. I cannot begin to express the pride I feel in being here as a third-term member of this great Labor government—a government for all Queenslanders. It is an enormous honour and a privilege to be returned as the member for Mudgeeraba. As the foundation member I recognise that it is also an enormous responsibility. I thank my constituents for keeping their faith in me and allowing me to continue doing what I love—that is, working for the people of Mudgeeraba and this great state of Queensland. Of course, my deepest gratitude is reserved for my family and friends, staff and supporters and especially my husband, Bernard, who is a very hands-on dad and a man of infinite patience. He is also a dab hand at putting up bunting and handing out how-to-vote cards and all those campaign things. Last year we celebrated our 12th wedding anniversary and, in fact, 20 years together by watching the NRL grand final and a brilliant Broncos win. This year we look forward to barracking for our new local team, the Gold Coast Titans. We have already bought season tickets for their first season at Carrara Stadium. We watch in excitement as the new stadium, Skilled Park, funded by the Beattie government, takes shape at Robina. There has been a lot to celebrate in the Reilly household in recent times. I wake every day knowing just how lucky and blessed I am. 2006 was a very big year for us with the arrival of baby Annika, who is now 14 months old and a fixture that everyone has become quite familiar with around this House. Last year there was a very tough election to run in. It is fair to say that many people did not expect me to win, but as always I like to surprise. Government members interjected. Mrs REILLY: Except for my darling colleagues, of course. I have never for a single day since I was first elected in 2001 taken the electorate of Mudgeeraba or my position for granted. I know that my electorate is not what could be considered a Labor electorate and that is what I love about it. I know that the people of Mudgeeraba work hard and take great pride in their piece of hinterland paradise, and that is what they expect in their elected representative. I was delighted to double my albeit thin margin. As someone reminded me the other day, it was still a 100 per cent increase. It is true that none of us would be here without the help and support of our families and friends. I thank want to thank my mum and my brother Jim for all the babysitting, pizza runs, campaigning and housework. I especially acknowledge the ongoing support of my parents-in-law. Grandma May, whom many people have come to know, is here caring for Annie while I am in the chamber. That is really what allows me to continue to do my job. I also want to acknowledge that the current and previous Speaker gave and continue to give a lot of support for those of us in this place who have young families. There are many members on both sides of the House in that situation. I hope that that will continue to increase as we see more and more capable young women elected to this place. I thank the Speakers for helping to make this a much more family friendly place and much more reflective of our general community. My campaign team really put in a magnificent effort. To my staff, Olga Thompson and Kathy Cardona, Ken Sanders who ran the best postal vote campaign ever seen, my organiser Kyam who came all the way from South Australia, David Anthony, Nic Henrikson and all my volunteers—especially Amanda, Frank, Reg and Vi—who spent hours folding and sorting, my branch members, supporters and friends and everyone who stood in the sun for hours at polling and prepolls and walked the hills of Mudgeeraba doorknocking, I say thank you. I am also extremely grateful to the ALP campaign team and the crew from Cutting Edge, particularly state secretary, Milton Dick, for always being there and always believing in me and my colleagues on the Gold Coast, who I am delighted were all re-elected, and my dear friends and 07 Mar 2007 Address-in-Reply 755 colleagues in this place who provided endless support, advice and positive reinforcement. I would like to acknowledge that both the Liberal and Family First candidates conducted themselves with dignity and grace during the election campaign, and I very much appreciated the opportunities we had to talk to the community and to each other about policy matters and local issues. I want to go on to some of those local issues now. We have had some very decent rainfall on the Gold Coast. In fact, my husband and I are starting to joke that perhaps the dam should be placed somewhere around Rivett Court in Mudgeeraba because we have had so much rain where I live. But of course not so long ago there was not that much rain on the Gold Coast. While Hinze Dam, which is in the middle of my electorate, is at a very healthy level now, three or so years ago it was also struggling and fell to about 30 per cent. There is no doubt, and everyone knows, that we are in the grip of a drought in south-east Queensland. With our expected continued growth, the government has to plan to ensure a sustainable supply of water is available for the future and we meet our current needs. Our plan is comprehensive. It includes new dams, desalination, recycled water, a statewide water grid, the southern regional pipeline and improved conservation of water. The WaterWise Rebate Scheme has been very well subscribed. With all the rain falling in Mudgeeraba, lots of people have been jumping in and buying tanks. Tanks are going into thousands of homes throughout the state. The long-term security of our water supply is a concern for everyone. It requires the participation and cooperation of all of us—individuals, families, farmers, business and industry. The water plan and indeed the water issue is enormously complex and continues to evolve. That is why this government is considering all possible options to secure water for all Queenslanders well into the future. Health is also a very important issue in my electorate and the whole of the Gold Coast. The Gold Coast region is growing rapidly with increasing numbers of seniors as well as young families with small children. The government’s health reform agenda will be achieved through our $9.7 billion Health Action Plan. It is already yielding results—delivering more doctors, nurses, allied health professionals, more surgery, more beds and improved community and preventive health and a strengthened and improved health system. One of the issues that has been talked about a lot in the last couple of years is our nation’s problem with obesity and particularly obesity in children. Tonight we had another debate which focused pretty much exclusively on the issue of obesity in children. Governments, the media and health professionals have all highlighted this issue. Yes, it is a very serious issue that is having a considerable impact on the health of our community. This concern is understandable. But I have become worried that as a society we have are almost too concerned with this one aspect of community and children’s health to the exclusion of other important areas. We are all so obsessed about who is fat and how fat each other’s kids are that we are becoming far too body conscious. Recent media reports, including in the Gold Coast Bulletin—and I thank them for highlighting this—show that there is an alarming increase in eating disorders with children—boys and girls, as young as eight and nine presenting with anorexia. One just has to listen to kids talking to each other or watch them in the playground to see that this is true. I have seen it and heard it myself. It scares me. I am concerned that the way we have sold this message about obesity—and it is everyone’s fault; politicians, media, health professionals—has opened the door to increased bullying and prejudice in the community if a person happens to be a little overweight. I have seen an example of this. One of my dear friends’ little boys is the same age as my son. He was only six at the time. He is a solid, strong little kid with a healthy appetite. He has that little bit of puppy fat that we have all seen healthy kids have. The kids at school beat him up and told him, ‘We can’t have chips at school anymore because of fat kids like you.’ At the age of six he went home and told his mum he was not going to eat anything but lettuce because he was too fat. This little kid is not obese. He plays Rugby Union, he is in nippers, he swims like a fish and his mother hardly ever treats her boys to fast food or takeaways. I am really concerned that, unlike obesity, which is very easy to pick, we cannot really measure the proliferation of eating disorders as easily because boys and girls who are starving themselves hide it very well and often do not get on the radar until their early teens when they have lost so much weight that they have to be hospitalised. Some people starve themselves to death. We have to be really careful about how we communicate these messages, because young people can read, too. Five- and six-year- olds now call each other ‘obese’ rather than ‘fatty’ like we did when I was in the playground. They now say, ‘You’re obese. You’re disgusting.’ We have let this happen. We have nurtured this view without talking to young people about the dangers of depriving themselves of food, of the need to eat well to be able to grow and be strong and have healthy bones and a healthy body. We have to look at building young people’s self-esteem and confidence in the face of a society that is obsessed with body image. We have to be vigilant and watch out for kids who say, ‘I’ve got a big fat tummy, Mummy,’ or ‘I’m not hungry today,’ when we know that 756 Address-in-Reply 07 Mar 2007 they have not been eating. We have to stomp on any bullying related to weight or any bullying very quickly. As a government we have to recognise that this is a serious mental health issue and that there is not enough support in the community for sufferers of anorexia or bulimia and their desperate families. It is a psychological disorder, but it is one that can be influenced or even triggered by messages received in popular culture—media, television, teen magazines—and indeed from people in authority like us and like teachers. Clinical support for anorexia sufferers usually involves mental health wards or acute wards, but they are not always appropriate for those people’s needs. That is something that I am very concerned about. But I do congratulate the government on the healthy foods regime in our state schools and I commend the way that our schools have adapted to that. Our independent schools have also taken up the healthy food options and in many cases are a little bit better in making the kids sit down at lunch to eat before they go out to play. There are very simple things that we can do to make sure that our children are getting a healthy, nutritious, balanced diet both at home and in school. We are very fortunate in Mudgeeraba to have a great many excellent schools both public and private providing a quality of education to a very high standard with a lot of choice for local parents. The rollout of the full-time prep this year has been widely welcomed, and I have been very impressed with the new facilities that I have seen that have been built to accommodate prep. I have also been very impressed with the ability and the will of the local department of education to accommodate those children who may have just missed out on getting into prep. While I had a few inquiries and there were some hiccups at the start, they have stopped coming. If people still have issues, I want to hear from them about it, but it seems to have run very smoothly so far. That is largely due in part to the enormous consultation and the partnerships that have been built with C&Ks and private providers of day care and all of the negotiations and discussions with stakeholders. If you live in a city traffic is a fact of life, and traffic at peak times is unavoidable. We have to make sure that drivers can negotiate that traffic safely and arrive at their destination. That is our responsibility. The road networks need to be as safe as possible and public transport has to be efficient and accessible to provide an incentive for travellers to get out of their cars. It is an enormous challenge to do this in a growth area, and that is why the Beattie government has committed $354 million to Gold Coast roads just this year. That is why we are pressing ahead with planning and designing the Pacific Motorway upgrade, improving the TransLink bus network, planning a rapid transit system and taking the rail line through to Coolangatta. I recognise—because I have been a commuter on that rail as well—that the Gold Coast rail service is a victim of its own success. There is significant crowding at peak times, but at other times you could throw anything through the middle of the train and not hit anyone. However, we are working to address that with extra carriages coming on line and line duplication to increase frequency. I remember—and I want to remind the House about being a commuter before the rail line to Robina was built by our government—catching the coach from Southport to Brisbane and sitting in bumper to bumper traffic on an old, winding and woefully inadequate Pacific Highway. Of course the Gold Coast had a rail network once before. That is why my office comes off Railway Street, because it went all the way to Mudgeeraba. But a National Party government ripped it up and a Labor government has put it back and is committed to improving the system to cater for the region’s ever-growing population, which is more than can be said for the Commonwealth government which barely recognises that the Gold Coast exists. The missing-in-action federal members for Moncrieff and McPherson have been spectacularly unsuccessful when it comes to lobbying Canberra for Gold Coast infrastructure and service needs. In fact, the member for Moncrieff, Steven Ciobo, sporting the second highest margin in the country, does not even pretend to fight for Commonwealth money for the Gold Coast for roads, or public transport infrastructure, or nursing home beds, or child-care places, or Medicare offices, or anything else that the Commonwealth government should be providing to the country’s sixth largest city. No piece of infrastructure is more vital than the upgrade of the Pacific Highway from Nerang to Tugun and the interchanges on Nielsens Road, Tallai, Mudgeeraba and Robina Parkway, and on this issue the member for Moncrieff has let his constituents down. The RACQ, the Gold Coast City Council, businesses, chambers of commerce and my residents have all called for Commonwealth funding towards this project. The Beattie government has already put in almost $400 million to this project and is busy planning and designing the upgrades with the Nielsens Road interchange ready to go. But we want and deserve to see a Commonwealth contribution. We deserve it as much as the residents of northern New South Wales where the Howard government is happy to pledge $160 million over the next 10 years to upgrade the same stretch of road, but that is the bit that is over the border in marginal federal electorates. There is not a cent for the Gold Coast for the Pacific Highway and there has not been any federal money for major roads projects since the Commonwealth contribution to the Tugun bypass nearly four years ago. At the same time, the Commonwealth is lavishing $2.4 billion on the Ipswich Motorway—the Goodna bypass—the road that no-one wants except the member for Blair, who is obviously a better lobbyist than the member for Moncrieff who cannot squeeze a penny out of his own government for a 07 Mar 2007 Address-in-Reply 757 road that everyone wants because he is too busy running state campaigns for Liberal candidates and distracting his constituents with state based issues. But just like any amateur magician, his audience will one day stop being distracted by the wand waving and insist on knowing exactly what happened to the disappearing gold watch. Moncrieff desperately needs a voice in Canberra to fight for the region’s fair share, and Labor’s candidate for Moncrieff, Sam Miszkowski, will be that voice. He will fight for Moncrieff. He will fight for the Gold Coast. He will stand up for this powerhouse region, and he will be heard by a Kevin Rudd-led Labor government. Our population growth is an economic driver, but it brings many pressures and challenges. There are families struggling to get affordable housing. There is family breakdown and transience. There has been an increase in antisocial behaviour coming from young people who are neglected and disaffected. There are community groups and organisations working to help these young people. Many of them are supported by increasing state government funding through the departments of Education, Communities and Child Safety’s many programs. There are too many to name all, but I want to salute all of those who are involved in supporting our young people on the Gold Coast. But there are still some young people who have proved hard to reach so we are seeing more graffiti and more vandalism of public and private property and, sadly, an increase in drug use and alcohol and general public nuisance in some areas. Our Police Service and our community are working together and working hard to address these problems. Just last night I launched another Neighbourhood Watch group in Merridown with over 50 people attending who have a real commitment to their neighbourhood and a desire to work together to discourage this behaviour in their area. I want to congratulate all of them. I have seen good results from Neighbourhood Watch in the past and I am delighted to be part of the police minister’s Neighbourhood Watch Review Committee which is seeking to further support and enhance this great initiative. We are pretty fortunate in Mudgeeraba that we are relatively safe from serious crime, but we do have issues with hoons using our hinterland streets as raceways and local speedsters who care little for their own or other’s safety. My local police at Mudgeeraba and Nerang are a very dedicated bunch with a strong community focus. They are active and proactive and very well respected, as they should be by all community members. But it is a big electorate and there is a lot of ground to cover, even with local cars patrolling 24 hours a day. So I was delighted with the Beattie government’s election commitment to establish a new police division in the southern part of the electorate covering Reedy Creek and other fast-growing areas, and that is something I have lobbied hard to see. That means that we will get another $6 million police station in the southern part of my electorate and a further $1.5 million upgrade for the Mudgeeraba station. There are many more issues that I could speak passionately about when it comes to Mudgeeraba. One of the things that is unique about Mudgeeraba is the World Heritage listed national park on Springbrook Mountain. This small and fragile park boasts an enormous and diverse range of flora and fauna, and we as a government are committed to its conservation for future generations so they can enjoy everything it has to offer. It is a fine balance—this sustainable visitation and tourism with conservation—but it is one which I believe the Beattie government is achieving. There is a program to acquire land which adjoins the national park to increase the size of the national park and provide further protection as well as rehabilitate depleted areas. That means that we will have a better park and an enhanced protected park for the future to save, share and enjoy. Some local community members have been concerned that some of the properties acquired have included tourism facilities and they fear that the government has a nefarious plan to shut down business and tourism on the mountain—the lifeblood of many of the people who call Springbrook home. There is a real community there. I have done my utmost to work with all sides of this debate and will continue to do so. But that is not at all what the government is doing. The properties that have been bought by the government that have tourism facilities on them will continue to be run as such. Contracts will be let to operators to run those enterprises so that tourists can come to the Gold Coast hinterland and see what we have in our national parks. It is very sad that the federal government does not have the interest in tourism that this government has. The federal government did not even include the Gold Coast—its waterfalls, its rainforests, or its beaches—in its Australian advertising campaign. I simply want to end by saying that, as the patron of the Motor Neurone Disease Association, I encourage all members to look at its web site and support this organisation. The Parliamentary Lions Club is holding a fundraiser this year and the Motor Neurone Disease Association will be the recipient of the funds raised at that event. I want to encourage all members to either attend or donate to that very worthy cause. There are so many more things that I would like to say, but I have run out of time. Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (7.50 pm): I rise to participate in this address-in-reply to the Governor’s address at the opening of parliament. I think it is worth noting that the Governor gave her speech back on 10 October. We are now in early March and we are still making our response to the Governor’s speech. I do not believe that that is an appropriate response to somebody in 758 Address-in-Reply 07 Mar 2007 the Governor’s position. I believe that the way the parliament has operated since then could easily be seen as a slight, or an insult, to the Governor. I feel particularly saddened by that, because I think that the processes and the traditions of this parliament should be respected. The reply to the Governor’s speech has traditionally been the first debate of any parliament. The fact that we are still mucking around—for want of a better term—with the address-in-reply to the Governor’s speech some four months after that speech was made does not reflect well on any of us. It certainly does not reflect well on the Leader of the House, whose responsibility it is to organise these debates and to ensure that the traditions of this House are protected and maintained. I think the member for Rockhampton should hang his head in shame at the fact that this address-in-reply to the Governor has been so protracted, so disjointed and treated with such frivolity and little respect in this parliament. I have an enormous amount of respect for this parliament and its traditions. I also have an enormous amount of respect for the Governor. I think our current Governor, Quentin Bryce, has brought a style and personality to the position that has warmed the hearts of many Queenslanders, and certainly many Queenslanders in regional Queensland where the Governor has been a constant and regular visitor. The respect that I feel for the Governor is mirrored by so many of my constituents. I think that this parliament, and the Leader of the House especially, could have treated the Governor and the Governor’s address and our response to it with a lot more respect. I am honoured to have been returned as the member for Callide in the election—albeit an election that was held almost six months early. During the previous sitting week I did not make the observation that the election should have been held in February. If the government had run its course, the election should have been held in February. So we should now be attending the official opening of the new parliament. But we have been here for almost five months because of the Premier’s opportunism. Parliament was prorogued early and we went to an election. That made an absolute mockery of the Premier’s commitment to four-year terms, about which he has spoken so often. That illustrates the extent to which those philosophical values are held so lightly and can be sacrificed so readily for political opportunism. I am certainly honoured to have been re-elected for the fourth time as the member for Callide. I have a lot of people to thank as a lot of people assisted me in that re-election. Like so many other members who have contributed to this debate, I want to pay particular regard to my family, because our families bear the brunt of the role that we play. I want to pay particular regard to my wife, Therese, who is such an enormous tower of strength and who provides such an enormous amount of support. I also thank everybody who makes up the Callide electorate council. They are great supporters. The representative roles that they play in the party branches and in the electorate council are part of the democratic process. They are the real grassroots of our democratic process. The contribution that they make to my electorate council and to my re-election can never be underestimated. I also want to pay particular regard to my electorate staff. Those of us who represent regional electorates know full well the degree to which we depend on and trust our electorate staff. In my case, I have two very good staff, Mary and Jyotika. Mary has been my electorate secretary for many years now. I hope she never decides to go into politics and stand against me because, like so many other electorate staff, she does an enormous job and has an enormous amount of respect in the electorate. Our electorate staff are the people who make our jobs easy. They make our jobs possible. My electorate staff have also made it possible for me to get re-elected. When I listened to the Governor give her address in which she outlined the government’s program for the term ahead, I ticked off in my mind the number of commitments that I have heard before. In the successive terms of the Beattie government, it always seems to promise but it never seems to deliver. The government took to the election a whole range of commitments that we have all heard before. No issue affects my electorate more than the issue of water infrastructure. I have spoken about water infrastructure in this parliament probably more times than I have spoken about any other issue. Back in 1998 in my maiden speech I spoke about water infrastructure. At that time I spoke about the importance of projects such as the Nathan Dam. I said there was a critical need for the government to progress the Nathan Dam. Again in 2006, the Nathan Dam was part of the government’s election promises—as it has been every year since 1998. Mr Rickuss: They’ve got a plan. Mr SEENEY: The government always has a plan, but it never has any progress. The government always has a plan, but it never delivers. There is no greater symbol of the government’s failure to deliver on those plans in my electorate than the Nathan Dam. Again, in what should have been my first speech for this parliamentary term, I put on record the great need and the great desire of the people in my electorate and in the Dawson Valley generally to see that water infrastructure completed to allow the progression of the economic development that we want to see happen throughout that area of central Queensland. 07 Mar 2007 Address-in-Reply 759

The Callide electorate extends north to Biloela and Moura and takes in the bottom end of the Bowen Basin. That area is experiencing an enormous amount of growth and economic activity as the resources boom extends across the entirety of central Queensland. It brings a whole range of problems to towns like Biloela, Moura, Banana and Theodore, all of which I represent. It brings a lot of problems in terms of accommodating the people who come to the Bowen Basin to work in the coalmines. But it also brings an enormous amount of economic activity and an enormous number of opportunities for my constituents. It is something that has really changed the face of that area of my electorate in the years that I have been representing it. It is wonderful to see the opportunities that are presented to young Queenslanders. It is wonderful to see the opportunities that young men and women can take advantage of in terms of the well-paid jobs and apprenticeships that are available in the mining industry. I well remember when I first came into this place and was shadow minister for mines and energy the derision and criticism of the mining industry as though it were some sort of a sunset industry that was going to fade away. We were going to be the Smart State and biotechnology was the future. The people who made up the government at that time had very little respect and very little admiration for the mining industry. We fought a whole range of issues like native title and land access issues on behalf of the mining industry. It was hard to get their voices heard. The contribution that they are now making to the state is enormous, with the coming of the resources boom, especially in the coalmining industry. That industry is making a contribution to the state and to every one of us as the returns from the coalmining industry pay for things like roads, schools and hospitals right across the state. But the most gratifying thing to me is the boost that that industry has given to the communities and the towns that I represent and most of all the opportunities that it has given to young people who now drive trucks and dozers, run drilling rigs and have apprenticeships as electricians and diesel fitters and in all of those other trades that provide them with such wonderful opportunities. My electorate consists of some 14 small communities. It is somewhat unique in that there is no major centre—there are 14 small communities. Biloela is the largest and it is the one that is growing because of the resources boom. There is a whole range of other communities down the Burnett Valley from Monto to Eidsvold, Mundubbera, Gayndah, Wondai, Biggenden and across to Gin Gin and Wallaville in the east. They are all small rural communities that have struggled with the decline of rural industries and more especially the decline in rainfall. The continuing drought has impacted harshly on a lot of those communities. I really do admire the way that the leaders in those communities and community groups have worked hard to keep their communities together and to make those communities great places to live. The southern end of my electorate across the South Burnett—places like Wondai, Murgon and Kilkivan—is now starting to feel the benefits of what has become known as the tree change, where people are moving from the major urban centres to take advantage of the lifestyle. They are moving there to enjoy the benefits of living in a small community—where they do not have to lock and bar their windows, where they can walk down to the supermarket, where they do not have to worry about parking, where they do not have to worry about personal security issues that are such an enormous part of living in the major urban centres. Not too long ago when I was first elected to represent that area Wondai was very much a small struggling community. Because the local council and the local community have been proactive in facilitating the development of that tree change phenomenon, Wondai is now bustling and developing. In the last year the Wondai Shire Council considered applications for some 27 new houses in the small town of Wondai. That is probably more than the council has considered in the previous five years. But it is an indication that people are recognising the great lifestyle that is available in those communities. As the population grows, the businesses that have struggled for so long now have the opportunity to finally make a bit of progress themselves. But there is a range of issues that comes with that growing population. There is a range of issues that has always been faced by people in those communities, and those issues have got progressively worse under this Labor government. Foremost amongst those issues of course would be health. There is no doubt that what happened at the Bundaberg Hospital shocked everybody in Queensland. It shocked all of us in the Callide electorate because, by and large, we depend on the Bundaberg Hospital as our major regional hospital. Except for the extreme northern end of the electorate where people from Biloela may go to Rockhampton, the rest of the electorate, by and large, uses Bundaberg Hospital as its regional hospital. Some of my constituents were caught in extremely distressing situations, and it distressed me as the local member to have to try to deal with those situations. I have said many times before, and I will say it again in this address to the parliament, that any government that presided over the sort of tragedy that happened at the Bundaberg Hospital did not deserve to be re-elected. Any government—irrespective of its political colour, irrespective of anything else—that presided over that sort of tragedy does not deserve to be re-elected. We have had to come to 760 Address-in-Reply 07 Mar 2007 terms with the fact that not only were the people responsible for that tragedy at the Bundaberg Hospital re-elected but also the people who were directly involved have never been brought to justice. That still upsets a great many of my constituents. It upsets me and it is a continuing source of angst and anger amongst the people whom I represent. We have seen some changes to the health system in recent times. We have seen an increasing tendency for our country hospitals to become first aid posts. If you turn up at the hospital requiring anything more than two stitches and a bandaid, you are put in an ambulance or in a helicopter and you are out of there. They have become evacuation centres rather than hospitals because Queensland Health has not been able to provide the staff or the resources to ensure that people can be treated in their own local hospitals. So they are very much now a first aid post and an evacuation centre. That is disturbing. It is not acceptable that people have to be evacuated for what should be standard medical treatment. It is not acceptable that people cannot get basic treatment in places like Monto, Gayndah and even Biloela, one of the major towns where evacuation is now the norm rather than the exception. But that is the sort of decline in services that people in my electorate have seen from the Labor government, and it is something that they will never accept. It is probably one of the reasons only a little over 20 per cent of the people in my electorate voted for the Labor government. The people that I represent clearly were not impressed with the performance of the Labor government and nor should they have been. But the health issue is only one such issue. Let us look at the issue of roads. There has been no major expenditure on road infrastructure in the last four or five years. I was deputy mayor of the Monto Shire Council for six years. We used to have a Main Roads job every year. Every council had a Main Roads job every year on the major highways. Now you can drive down the Burnett Highway from Biloela to Kilkivan or to Esk and you will not find any roadworks—you will not see a grader or a machine—whereas eight or nine years ago when I was on the local council every shire had a Main Roads job every year. It no wonder that those shires are now facing the real prospect of amalgamation. I believe that the Labor government has an agenda that will be devastating for the shires and shire councils that are such a crucial part of the communities that I represent. In my electorate, the local councils are at the centre of their communities. Each shire council is not only a major employer but also the fabric that holds the community together. It is becoming increasingly clear that this government has an agenda to amalgamate those councils into super councils. The question that I pose now, and I will pose it continually as this debate unfolds, is this: will my constituents be better off because of that amalgamation? It is almost impossible to see how the type of amalgamations that are being proposed will improve things for the people of Mount Perry, Biggenden or Wondai. They are certainly not better off after eight and a half or nine years of the Beattie Labor government and I fear that the next three years will not see them any better off. However, I will continue to do what I can to bring their concerns to this parliament. I will continue to do what I can to ensure that those people get a fair go and a fair slice of the resources of this great state of ours. Time expired. Hon. DM WELLS (Murrumba—ALP) (8.11 pm): It makes one’s heart sing to hear the National Party, and its leader no less, talking constitution. The Leader of the Opposition just told us that there was a constitutional imperative that the reply to the address of Her Excellency the Governor should be the first business that this parliament dispatched. He appears genuinely concerned that Her Excellency might be sitting on the edge of the vice-regal chair at Government House fretting that we have not yet completed this debate. In fact, I am sure that Her Excellency wants what every governor and every parliament wants from an address-in-reply debate, which is that many members should have great latitude and range over the very many topics of interest to them and their people for as long as it takes. I can assure the Leader of the Opposition that Her Excellency will not take our thoroughness for discourtesy, nor will she mistake the fact that we allow a little time to lapse to consider many issues as any kind of insult or deviation from Westminster traditions. I would like to use the great latitude that this debate allows to address a matter that I have raised outside of the House. Section 280 of the Criminal Code is supposed to protect parents who smack their children. Whatever one thinks of smacking, to smack or not to smack is a question on which honest minds can come to different conclusions. The trouble is that section 280 of the Criminal Code protects a great deal more than mere smacking. I invite honourable members to consider a hypothetical. Imagine that one of the honourable members of this place gets himself into a towering rage—not that such a thing would ever happen—and walks out on to the main street. Ms Jones: I cannot think of anyone. Mr WELLS: I take the interjection from the member for Ashgrove. I cannot think of anyone either. Such a thing would never happen, but let us say that that member walked out into the main street, ripped off his belt and started flailing into passers-by. What would happen? He would be arrested and 07 Mar 2007 Address-in-Reply 761 charged with assault under section 246 of the Criminal Code. Section 245 of the Criminal Code defines assault. It occurs when a person strikes, touches or moves or otherwise applies force of any kind to the person of another. Members should note that any striking is an assault. On the other hand, if the same honourable member maintained his rage until after the House had adjourned and then went home, ripped off his belt and started flailing into his children, uttering by way of context some words of criticism of their recent behaviour, either he would not be charged with assault or he would have a defence to assault under section 280 of the Criminal Code, which states that it is lawful for a parent to use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances for the purposes of domestic discipline, correction, management or control. Looking a bit more closely at the case where the honourable member was flailing into members of the public in the main street, at least those members of the public would be able to defend themselves. Under section 271 of the Criminal Code, when a person is unlawfully assaulted and has not provoked the assault it is lawful for that person to use such force against the assailant as is reasonably necessary. The honourable member’s children would have no such recourse. The assault against them, though it is an assault by the definition in the Criminal Code, is actually a lawful assault because section 246 states that an assault is unlawful and constitutes an offence unless it is authorised, justified or excused by law. The assault against the children is excused or justified by section 280 of the Criminal Code. Therefore, the unprovoked belting of a stranger is an offence but the unprovoked belting of one’s own kids is the act of a law-abiding citizen. This cannot possibly be right, but it is the law. The harsh and morally objectionable reality of our criminal law is that a whole range of assaults, from minor slapping to painful and even injurious blows, are unlawful if perpetrated against an adult but are lawful if perpetrated against a child. Those whom society should be most concerned to protect are, in fact, most vulnerable to violence of a certain kind and are authorised by the law to be its routine victims. We have a law that permits too much violence. Section 280 of our Criminal Code has an exact parallel in section 59 of the New Zealand Crimes Act. At the moment, a bill to amend section 59 is before the New Zealand parliament. That bill passed the second reading stage with a majority of 70 to 51. That majority included all of the Labor members and half a dozen National Party members. The committee stage of the debate commences next week. Of very great interest to us are the court cases that preceded the move for law reform in New Zealand, and I will give members some examples. In 2001, a jury in the Napier District Court acquitted a man who beat his son on the buttocks with a lump of wood. The paediatrician in the case testified that the man had used considerable force and inflicted injuries on his son. After the acquittal, the Paediatric Society called for a change in the law. Again in 2001, the Hamilton District Court acquitted a man who had bashed his daughter with a horsewhip. The jury was shown prosecution photos of the 12-year-old girl and the raised 15 centimetre lump across her back. The jury found that the force was reasonable in the circumstances. The New Zealand Children’s Commission pointed out that if he had done it to his wife it would have been a crime. On the other hand, the defendant said that his acquittal proved that the public supported parents’ rights to discipline their children. In 2002, a man was charged with assaulting his son with a stick. In that case the jury was unable to make a finding and the prisoner was discharged. Members will remember that a jury’s finding has to be unanimous for a conviction to be reached. If anyone thinks that such things cannot happen here, I ask: how do you know that it does not? How do you know that it will not? Why would you not do that little thing that would prevent it from happening, which is that little thing that they are doing in New Zealand? It is worth pausing here to look at the concept of reasonable force which is contained in section 280 of the Criminal Code. Reasonable force is what you are allowed to use to deal with a home invader, it is what you are allowed to use in self-defence against somebody who is trying to kill you and it is what you are allowed to use on your children. What is it? It is what a jury would consider to be reasonable in all the circumstances of the case. Our law is set up so that if somebody is charged with assaulting a child in their care, they only have to plea that the force was reasonable and the Crown has not only to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the child was assaulted but also to prove that the force was unreasonable, thus doubling the obstacles to conviction. This means that the prosecution has to jump over a bar that has been set very high. People may say to me that perhaps such assaults on children are not occurring in Queensland and point out that I have only cited New Zealand cases. They may ask: where are the Queensland cases that show that repeal is necessary? Perhaps those cases are not even getting to court because the prosecution knows how high the bar is set. It only takes one juror with a guilty conscience or one juror who has, at some time in his or her past, lost it and beaten the living daylights out of their kid, and the jury would be unable to agree on a conviction. As a result, we have a law that protects too many people, particularly people who do not 762 Address-in-Reply 07 Mar 2007 deserve to be protected and who constitute a danger to society. This is apparently what happened in the New Zealand case that I just mentioned. The jury was unable to reach a verdict. I do not know if there was only one juror unwilling to convict, but it would have only taken one. We are setting the bar too high. Perhaps out of the mildness of their nature some honourable members might think that we should not be criminalising parents who unacceptably assault their children and that rather we should try to understand them and educate them. If they think that, they should consider this. Law has more functions than merely regulating and punishing specified kinds of antisocial behaviour. Law also has a normative aspect; it is also a way of setting a standard of what society expects. If we have a law which provides carte blanche to parents as to how they should deal with their children, what we are doing is giving a nod and a wink to bad parents as well as providing what is actually unnecessary security to good ones. Our laws should not address merely the lowest common denominator. Our laws should inspire that action which will lead to a better society without of course actually requiring the behaviour of saints and heroes. While section 280 is lauded by some as providing protection to parents, it is actually a section that provides protection to people who would be classed as criminals if they did it to anyone else other than their own children. Sure, parents have a right to discipline their children. I would not for one moment say that a parent did not have the right and indeed the responsibility to discipline, set boundaries, guide, train and effect the upbringing of their children without interference from the community. However, nobody has an inalienable human right to do physical or psychological harm to another person. Such acts of violence are not self-regarding; they are other regarding. Such acts are not private; they are interpersonal. Such acts are not within the province of the human rights of parents; they are within the province of the human rights of the children. Nobody has a right to violate the human rights of somebody else, even if they happen to have brought that person into the world. While dramatic cases like the New Zealand cases I have referred to make a very powerful argument, people of goodwill might nevertheless have reservations about removing the domestic discipline defence. They might say that it is undesirable to have a law that criminalises the vast bulk of the population. After all, most people have either experienced or administered corporal punishment at some time in their lives. To oppose corporal punishment, first of all, people have to be prepared to negate some of their own life experience. That is a pretty heavy barrier for some people to get over. Most people who would be moved by the argument that we should not validate the excesses that the New Zealand cases that I have referred to represent would nevertheless want to be sure that we did not open the floodgates to the prosecution of a large proportion of the population who occasionally smack their children. However, there are no floodgates. That is not how the legal system works. That is not how the legal system would work if we were to abolish the domestic discipline defence. The removal of a defence for those who assault their children does not open any floodgates. It just puts those children in the same situation as adults who receive minor or trivial assaults. It just standardises the law across the population. It just provides children with the same protection that is now enjoyed by adults. After the abolition of the domestic discipline defence in Queensland, there would not be an opening of the floodgates and there would not be the prosecution of every parent who occasionally smacks their child. These cases would not be prosecuted for the same reason as we now do not prosecute every push and shove that takes place between adults. If our work mate tries to grab our pen or our mobile phone and we slap his hand, the paddy wagon does not arrive, the watch-house keeper does not jingle his keys, the Director of Public Prosecutions does not sharpen her quill. Neither would these things happen if we removed section 280 and people smacked their kids. The factors that are taken into account before a prosecution is launched have become more widely known in Queensland as a result of a number of celebrated prosecutorial decisions taken by the Director of Public Prosecutions recently. There are many factors which affect the decision to prosecute. These are written down in guidelines issued by the Director of Public Prosecutions and in the police operations manual. The main two are the likelihood of achieving a conviction and the public interest in prosecuting a case. The factor relating to the likelihood of achieving a conviction is a complex one. In our legal system, a defendant must be acquitted unless it can be proven beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the offence. The prosecutor must decide whether it is, on the whole, more likely than not that he or she will be able to demonstrate beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the offence. A mere prima facie case is not by itself sufficient to justify a decision to prosecute. Consideration has to be given to the question of whether the magistrate or the jury would entertain a reasonable doubt. The public interest test can, when overlaid on the former test, move the decision either for or against the prosecution. For example, while the prima facie case might not be a strong one, there might be clear reasons why in a particular case the guilt or otherwise of the defendant should not be decided behind closed doors by lawyers with a prosecution brief on their desk and should be decided in the clear light of day by a jury in an open court. Sometimes public confidence in the legal system requires that the air be cleared by allowing the victim of a particular crime to have their day in court. 07 Mar 2007 Address-in-Reply 763

Other factors are also taken into account, such as the triviality of an offence. Magistrates and juries would take a very dim view of a prosecutor who brought a charge that wasted the time of the court—like, for example, an isolated case of smacking whether the recipient was an adult or a child. But that is the point. Adults have more rights than children in this respect. The most vulnerable members of our society, the people we have the deepest obligation to protect, have the least protection of the law in this regard. While a prosecutor or a police officer might occasionally be required to turn their minds to the question of whether an assault against an adult should be prosecuted or the case simply dropped, children never have the benefit of having a prosecutor or a police officer turn their mind to such a question. Let me give an example. If a constituent comes into a member’s office and complains that his next-door neighbour was beating their children, and if the story was that every morning before he went to work and every afternoon when he came home from work he heard yells from the parent followed by the sound of smacking and the beating of the child, and if he went on to say that there were cries and pleas and wails coming from the child, then what would we do? We would refer our constituent to the appropriate authorities, and what would the appropriate authorities say? They would say that there is nothing that can be done because section 280 of the Criminal Code allows parents to discipline their children. Unless our constituent has proof that actual harm had been done, the parents have the protection of section 280 and the authorities would not even make inquiries on behalf of the child. We could safely just get rid of section 280. We could replace it with other words, like the words of the Swedish statute which validates mere smacking, if we wished. I think we can simply do away with it without any loss and with some gain. It tends to socially engineer the wrong sort of society. It allows rage to masquerade as parenting, violence to masquerade as domestic discipline and cruelty to masquerade as normality. For now what we are wanting is a watching brief. I am calling on all of my colleagues both here in this place in Queensland and in the rest of the nation to watch what is happening in our kindred nation next door. If reform is needed in a country more similar to ours than any other in the world, then I think we all have an obligation to consider whether it is needed here. Mr HOOLIHAN (Keppel—ALP) (8.28 pm): In 2004 on my initial election to this House, I had the honour to move the address-in-reply debate. It is of no less satisfaction or no less humbling to stand here today following my re-election on 9 September 2006. It was a great personal honour to be re- elected by the people of Keppel, particularly in view of the campaign waged against me. At the outset, I thank all of those people who were prepared to recognise the hard work undertaken to support the electorate from 2004. I must also say that it was a pleasure to see so many of my hardworking colleagues returned to this House on 9 September. I would also like to thank the Premier, Peter Beattie, for accepting me as part of his team. I thank the state secretary, Milton Dick, and the Labor Party office for the assistance given to me in the election campaign. I will have more to say on that later. I also thank the many ministers with whom I have worked since my initial election to provide to all the voters the benefit of the good government of the Beattie Labor government. I look forward to their assistance during the 52nd Parliament. My support for our Governor, Quentin Bryce, is meant to be outlined in this speech. She is a gracious person and is highly respected by the people of Queensland. I fully support her program as outlined. As most people would be aware, my electorate of Keppel covers a wide area of central Queensland and includes urban, rural and seaside communities. There are many different dynamics in meeting the expectations of all those communities. Hopefully I have met, and will continue to meet, those expectations. Major expectations are health, roads, education, law and order, and jobs and community infrastructure to enhance day-to-day lifestyles. Health is a regional as well as a local obligation. Rockhampton Hospital has been the recipient of substantial funding both for work that has been completed and is to be completed. That is our hub hospital. It provides excellent medical services and care to people in our region. By working with the member for Rockhampton and the Minister for Health significant funding for a new Yeppoon hospital was secured, but difficulty arose with the site. The staff at the present hospital provide superb care and treatment, but the premises have grown tired and are becoming too small for our population. Our government had provided $17 million for a new construction but, owing to the obstruction raised by the local council, a new site was required. Further delay was experienced. For whatever reason it was necessary to acquire land by legislation. The subject of the hospital was the basis for a shameful approach by the National Party. It appeared that the Livingstone Shire Council and the National Party did not want a new hospital. Why? No-one knows why but the people who were involved in the National Party campaign. I know that the National Party leadership and its candidate, who had been a Livingstone shire councillor, need to look at its actions. 764 Address-in-Reply 07 Mar 2007

A new hospital was an election promise that I was determined to keep, and it has been met by the government. It would be instructive for people to read the speech of the member for Darling Downs in the debate on the hospital site acquisition to consider whether the problems in the hospital construction, which are well known, were engineered by the opposition or by the Livingstone Shire Council. The people of Keppel know that our government lives up to its promises. The hospital site is now being prepared to commence construction. Current funding stands at an estimated $22.5 million, an increase of $5.5 million. Together with the Rockhampton Hospital and the allied health providers, the Yeppoon Hospital will meet the aspirations and needs of the people of Keppel. Roads are always a bone of contention, but substantial funding has been earmarked for both major and minor roads. Some $26 million is earmarked for the western bypass at Yeppoon and the upgrade of Tanby Road and the Tanby bypass alone. Mr Schwarten: The Hoolihan highway. Mr HOOLIHAN: I will take that interjection, the Hoolihan highway it has been termed. The Rockhampton-Yeppoon Road and the Rockhampton-Emu Park Road have already had moneys expended, or to be expended, and many smaller roads have been upgraded. The people of the region, which also includes the Fitzroy electorate, are reaping the benefits of the funding, and they are driving on better and safer roads. Sadly, people will still lose their lives on those roads, but I do not believe the quality of the roads these days contributes entirely to that problem. Lakes Creek Road in Rockhampton and the Thozet Road intersection, which was a notorious intersection, received traffic lights. Some of these road upgrades also included school access and new traffic lights at the corner of Beasley Street and Frenchville Road, which was an election promise. These were installed over the Christmas break and hopefully will resolve a long-standing problem to keep our children safe. All of the great schools in my electorate received funding for a variety of projects including Cooler Schools funding for an extension of airconditioned classrooms and the removal of asbestos from roofs, particularly Yeppoon State School, which is one of the oldest schools in my electorate. I have a strong personal commitment to education and our youth, and I was pleased to see the government support for our schools. Major funding was earmarked for Frenchville State School for a portion of construction of their school hall and $1 million for an ICT building. Both of those buildings have been completed and are in use. Emu Park was promised an administration block for $875,000. It is also completed and in use. Schools in the Keppel electorate received over $536,000 in government funding from the $50 million promised in the state budget in 2006, making a big difference to many small and medium sized schools. Many schools received new buildings, or buildings were upgraded, for the commencement of the prep year. I had the pleasure of visiting Parkhurst, Lakes Creek, Mount Archer and Frenchville state schools on the first day of prep to present packs to the children. I went to St Anthony’s school on Friday of that week to present certificates, and I visited Farnborough and other coast schools over the second week. One result of being the local member is that you get to see the dedication of our teachers and the real values that are being taught in our schools. During my first term the school at Parkhurst was vandalised and two classrooms were burnt. That building was completely refurbished by Q-Build as a prep building. I noted during my visit the quality and attractiveness of that work. I challenge any person, either inside or outside this House, to come and inspect this building. The building is a credit to the minister for public works and housing and his field staff. Q-Build provides jobs and apprenticeships for Queenslanders. In actual fact, we all know that Q-Build is the largest employer of apprentices in the Southern Hemisphere. Private schools also received substantial assistance through capital funding. St Anthony’s and Sacred Heart schools, St Brendan’s College and St Ursula’s College were also part of the mix of funds injected into the region. TAFE funding of $1.3 million was provided for a Capricorn Coast campus. Hopefully the staff are providing quality training for the 2007 year. There was a delay in building that building, which has been overcome, but it shows the people of the electorate that they are being cared for. We cannot forget emergency services. We heard so much criticism of the funding for our Ambulance Service. However, we can see the benefit of that in the new vehicles that have gone to Emu Park and Yeppoon and the $1.15 million Emu Park station that is now open. During my first term $2.1 million was expended for eight public housing units in Yeppoon. Anyone who wants to make any comment about public housing should have a look at the units because if anyone was a private investor they would be proud to own them. There is also provision for 20 lower cost studio apartments for single people who are in danger of becoming homeless. The department has acquired land at north Rockhampton, Taranganba and Emu Park to construct further public housing. 07 Mar 2007 Address-in-Reply 765

Law and order is always a pleasant bleat in this House by the opposition, but I can say categorically that the central police region has been well funded to look after our citizens on both land and sea. I was pleased to receive funding for a new patrol boat and fast runabout in the 2006 budget which will enhance the operational abilities of our water police. Although based in Yeppoon, our patrol covers areas both north and south of Rosslyn Bay, which is used by large numbers of both tourists and local watercraft. I overlooked watercraft in relation to schools. I made a speech in this House during the last sitting week relating to North Keppel Island’s Environmental Education Centre. It also received $657,000 for a new boat. That boat will be provided by approximately May this year. It will greatly contribute to the number of schools and environmental groups that will be able to travel to North Keppel Island. A new police station at Yeppoon is long overdue and is presently well advanced in planning. It should be completed by the end of 2008. Contrary to the shameless allegations raised by the opposition in this House over time, most of the police officers in our district work well with elected representatives. I have a good working relationship with our officers, as do most of the members in our region. Other funding for a new boat ramp at Keppel Sands was forthcoming to assist boaties. I am presently working towards securing money for a floating pontoon at Rosslyn Bay and to secure funding for a new or upgraded ramp at Cawarral Creek. However, once again I am being beaten over the head, and the government is being pilloried by the local shire council which seems to have everyone’s answer to the world’s problems. Each year we see substantial funding for the retraining of our less skilled people. Whilst it started life as Breaking the Unemployment Cycle in 1998, the Skilling Queensland program is turning out some very competent and talented people. I know it has provided in excess of 100,000 full-time jobs as I consistently attend the graduation classes for these people who sometimes have been long-term unemployed and have lost so much self-confidence because of that situation. It is great to see these people, some of whom have given up on working, regain their self-respect. They realise that this is from the very substantial support of government. We care about them as an integral part of our community. In dealing with these training programs it would be remiss of me not to mention council staff of Livingstone Shire Council and Rockhampton City Council. The field staff from those councils provide training and assistance to these trainees. In a number of cases they have provided assistance and employment to people because they know of their expertise. My election will help with the legislative program outlined by the Governor at the opening of parliament, as was certainly the wish of the people who voted for me, but I act for all Keppel residents whether they live at The Caves, Keppel Sands, North Rockhampton, Byfield, Emu Park or Yeppoon. One instance of that is my campaigning for funding for a pipeline from the Fitzroy River to the Capricorn Coast. I was successful in obtaining funding for one-third of this under the National Water Initiative and the federal government has also met its one-third share. Livingstone Shire Council has pumped water from two environmentally sensitive creeks, often to the detriment of those creeks, and its actions in that regard convinced me, after talking to residents, that a pipeline would be an acceptable alternative. I know that some people in Rockhampton feel that we are taking their water, but that is not the case. It is a case of neighbours helping neighbours. Very often some people forget that we all live in this state. The Beattie Labor government does not forget and I am proud to be part of a team which looks after the whole state. Owing to the impact on Livingstone ratepayers in Keppel I did secure a promise for an increase in state funding to $20 million for the pipeline which is the normal level of state assistance for councils. With a promise of $36.4 million from the state and federal governments, Livingstone Shire Council still cannot or will not provide full details of funding for their share. I call on them and their mayor to tell the people where it will be raised. It should be available from head works contributions by developers but the ratepayers look like they will have to wear it. I have a wide group of organisations which I support, not the least of which are our aged-care facilities. My belief is that we owe our greater obligations to our children in every aspect of their future and we owe a similar obligation to our aged because they are the sum of what we are today and what our community is. Many of them have made sacrifices which some people in this House could not even conceptualise and they would fade into the sunset if the same sacrifices were asked of them. We have heard from the many speakers of the many people who contributed to their election or re-election, and Keppel is no different. From the time of my original election my office has been administered by Thelma Humphris and Teresa Jones. People in Keppel know that a call to either of them will be sensitively and appropriately addressed. Some people talk of having a right-hand person. I have a right- and left-hand person and I would not be able to offer the level of assistance or support I do without their hard work. Thank you to both Thelma and Teresa. My full team is too numerous to mention by name but I thank each and every one of those people who supported my campaign in any way, whether with financial or personal support. I once again thank the Labor Party team and I would be remiss if I did not mention some local people who pulled out all 766 Address-in-Reply 07 Mar 2007 stops to bring about my re-election. My first thanks in actual fact go to someone whose family has been very supportive of me over a long period. I speak of the member for Rockhampton, the minister for public works and housing, the Hon. Robert Schwarten. He has faith in my campaigns and has been a great support. My campaign manager, Tom Hall, and his wife, Carmel, have a deep and abiding love and support for the ideals of the Labor Party and were always there to help. Matthew Flanagan became my new right hand as a temporary organiser and he was a tower of strength. His cheerfulness and ability to get the job done made many of our campaigning actions very enjoyable despite the despicable actions of some of our opponents. I thank Allan Clarke—and, believe it or not, Allan will get up my ribs for naming him; he usually does—and Ray and Janice Murphy who spent all of their free time either in my campaign office or home advancing our cause. Those who do not know the Murphy family ought to go out and meet them. They are the heart and soul of the Labor Party. To Anthony White, Keith Sleeman and the other people who sat at pre-poll at Yeppoon and Dave Thomas and Keith Hoolihan—who like my other uncles had a bit of a hand in my upbringing and whom I must thank for his guidance in Labor Party principles—and the cheerful people who covered Rockhampton for Robert, Jim and me I convey my deep thanks. The members of all my branches—Yeppoon, North Rockhampton and Emu Park—are all very supportive and gave unstintingly of their time to ensure that I was re-elected. There are some very hardworking supporters who are not even members of a branch who give full support. People like Bernie Misztal at The Caves and the various members of the Queensland Teachers Union who turned out en masse on election day to assist candidates because they wanted to protest against the WorkChoices legislation I thank for their ongoing support. Last but not least I thank my wife, Elizabeth. Her support as part of the team was greatly appreciated by the other people I have thanked. Her close and very deep belief in those things I stand for are appreciated every minute of my life and my service in this House. We went through deep trauma with her health problems and we saw it through together. I know she was not back to full health at the time of the election but she did not stint on her time or work. We all thank our spouses or partners, but I am the only one who knows how she dealt with the vicissitudes of a nasty campaign and always managed to keep me focused on the end result. That is the result which returned me as the member for Keppel with the help of 50.19 per cent of the primary vote, which has never been achieved in that electorate before. I noted the speeches of the member for Gregory and the member for Redlands about the results of the election and their references to people who do not vote for us. But we all know that we must represent all people in our electorates. I have always done that and will continue to do that as the member for Keppel. In closing, I would like to say welcome to the new members in this House. I think some of them have a lot to give the people of Queensland. I look forward to addressing the needs and welfare of the people of Queensland as a proud member of the fourth Beattie Labor government. Mr RICKUSS (Lockyer—NPA) (8.46 pm): I rise to speak in the address-in-reply debate. I am pleased to be re-elected by the voters of the Lockyer electorate. It is a great honour to be a member of this parliament. I am sure that every member realises that. I congratulate all members on their election and congratulate the Speaker and Deputy Speaker. The National Party and my family and friends assisted me in the election campaign. It was a great honour to have so many people come out on polling day. I have 37 polling booths. That is a lot of polling booths that we have to man. I had support and help at all of those polling booths. A lot of people put a lot of work in at other times as well. They are good, hardworking people. It is great to see so many come out. Some of the new members that we have on this side of the House are exciting members of parliament. I am sure the member for Hinchinbrook will be a great member of parliament for a long time. The member for Bundaberg is a great down-to-earth politician. I am sure that the member for Gympie will also perform very well. Some of the new Liberal members have shown a lot of promise. The member for Clayfield did a wonderful job in handling a bill today. I have a large area to look after. It covers Greenbank, Flagstone, Harrisville, Willowbank and Amberley. They are diverse areas that are facing great expansion. I now have over 30,000 constituents on the electoral roll. I have five shires—Esk, Laidley, Gatton, Ipswich and Beaudesert. These shires are very important to the south-east Queensland plan. A lot of people are moving into these areas for lifestyle reasons. Areas like Willowbank, Ipswich-Harrisville, Esk and Laidley provide a great lifestyle. People can have a horse or pony for the kids. Unfortunately, quite a few families have motorbikes which seems to create a few problems for the neighbours. They are really good areas in terms of lifestyle. Water is one of the big issues for all of south-east Queensland. In my maiden speech I promoted the recycled water project, and I know that the member for Toowoomba South has been promoting it for a long time as well. Before I came to parliament I was secretary of the City to Soil group for the Lockyer Valley, an organisation concerned with recycled water. Now, unfortunately, this government has procrastinated for so long on the recycled water project it is going to be needed for drinking water rather 07 Mar 2007 Address-in-Reply 767 than irrigation and will cost in excess of $2,000 a megalitre to be pumped into the dams for drinking. This unfortunately could leave farmers and other rural industries that should have had that recycled water six to eight years ago out in the cold. It is just a shame. It is a real shame. Not only that; if the government had stipulated the use of water-saving devices such as tanks we would not be in the position we are in now. I have talked to some irrigators in my area on the Brisbane River. These irrigators know that up until 12 months ago the Brisbane River was flowing 12 inches higher than it is now. Therefore, those 12 inches of water were just running out to sea day in, day out. These irrigators live on the Brisbane River so they know what is going on. Effectively, there were hundreds of megalitres a day flowing out to sea. We realise that there have to be environmental flows, but when the prediction is for below average rainfall and the dams are down to 40-odd per cent surely it is time to start realising what we have to do. Roads are also a big issue in my area. Roads like the Old Goodna Road that hooks up Greenbank to the new Springfield area is a council road, but I am sure that the state government should be assisting the council to upgrade this road, because once the developments in Springfield such as the shopping centre and the university are in full swing this road will become a major thoroughfare. Teviot Road is the same in that it is a council road and is a thoroughfare. These roads have in excess of 10,000 cars a day on them. The Ipswich-Boonah Road, which leads out of Ipswich, has not only a high amount of traffic but also very dangerous corners. I receive many complaints about some of the quarrying trucks that travel along the Ipswich-Boonah Road. There are always improvements to be made to the Cunningham Highway. Unfortunately, much of it is only two lanes and that creates problems whenever there is an accident. There are always problems on the Cunningham Highway when the V8 races are at Willowbank. That creates a lot of congestion and a lot of confusion. The Warrego Highway is a major thoroughfare through my electorate. With regard to the section of road from Blacksoil to Toowoomba, I have some statistics from the main roads department. There have been over 23 deaths and over 500 people injured in the last five years on that stretch of road—that is horrific—and 100 people a year are hospitalised. That is a large number of people. Roughly five people are killed every year on that 80-kilometre strip from Blacksoil to the top of the Toowoomba range. There really needs to be some major planning done by the state government on interchanges such as the Plainland interchange. The member for Toowoomba South would realise how great the Plainland interchange is. It makes such a difference to the whole area in that the through traffic can keep going. That is the sort of thing that has to be done in more places. Mr Malone: You need another crossing. Mr RICKUSS: That is right. The Toowoomba range crossing is very important. The number of heavy trucks that travel that road every day is just astronomical. We definitely need a second Toowoomba range crossing. I also want to see some rail reports. I asked the transport minister last year for the report on the green corridor along the railway lines to New South Wales—that is, the interstate corridor. That has been looked at to see if it is possible to put a passenger corridor right beside the New South Wales corridor. This would be of great relief to the population in terms of public transport in the Flagstone, Greenbank and Jimboomba area. It really is needed. I know that Madam Deputy Speaker van Litsenburg would love a rail corridor to Redcliffe. I am sure that that is very high on her priorities. We can see that a lot of rail infrastructure needs to be put in place by this state government. I want to see the electrification of the rail line taken past Rosewood into the Lockyer, even if it is not taken up the range immediately, because I know that is in the long-term plan. If it were taken to Gatton or Helidon or Grantham it would actually be of benefit to the whole area. The super prison is now going into the Gatton area, and that would be a great asset for that, too. I feel that it should be a bit of a trade-off—that is, we should have the electrification of the rail lines through to at least Gatton seeing that we will be stuck with the super prison. There are many schools in my area. There is some concern about the teacher aide hours. I have actually received quite a few emails about teacher aide hours, particularly for the prep year. A parent rang me who has taken their child out of a school in my area because a grade 4 boy was having to take prep girls to the toilet because there were only two teachers at the school and they just could not cope with all of the kids. The father felt uncomfortable about his grade 4 boy taking prep girls to the toilet so he actually pulled his son out of that small school and sent him to one of the bigger schools in the area. That is a concern for me. I must congratulate the education minister on the number of fibro roofs that were removed from the Lockyer high school. The Lockyer high school had something like— Mr Schwarten: Public Works has done that, thank you. Mr RICKUSS: Thank you then, Mr Schwarten. I will take that interjection. Actually, Minister, they worked very quickly too. I must congratulate the men. They did 15 roofs in 16 weeks. They had some pretty good gear, though. They had some pretty big cranes. It was one of those high schools that was 768 Address-in-Reply 07 Mar 2007 expanded greatly—I think it has been going for about 80 or 90 years—in the 1950s and it had a heap of super six fibro roofs. They replaced those roofs and that is a great relief to many parents. There are still another 50 roofs to be done though, Minister, if you want to get into some of those roofs in the other schools in my area. The admin staff go unrecognised in our schools. The admin staff work very hard and quite often have to handle many abusive parents in the schools. They do not have quite enough hours at times and they are almost underpaid, too. I do have a bit of sympathy for the admin staff. They do a lot of work, particularly in some of the bigger schools. I realise that there are principals, but admin staff are the first port of call so they do cop a lot of flak from parents and some parents can be quite unreasonable at times. The Gatton campus of the University of Queensland is a great campus, but unfortunately numbers are down. I am sure they will start to grow. I think they have actually gone up two students on last year. They are only up a couple of students on last year, but it would be nice to see a turnaround in that. Unfortunately the trades are taking many uni students at the moment, particularly from rural universities aimed at the OP 6 to 15 range. The police in our area cover large areas. They are mostly small stations. Gatton and Laidley would be the two biggest stations in my electorate. They handle a lot of my electorate. The police from Harrisville, Ipswich and Moreton areas do a great job in the local area. I offer great support to the police and they offer great support to me, so if there are ever issues I can always ring up the local sergeants and they are very conciliatory. It was a bit of a shame about the Hurley affair. I think it was disgraceful the way that poor old Sergeant Hurley was handled, but unfortunately when politics comes into it good common sense gets thrown out the window. Gatton is one of the busiest police stations in the state that issues drivers licences where there should be a stand-alone Queensland Transport licensing centre in the Lockyer Valley. Some of the biggest trucking companies in Queensland are based in the Lockyer Valley. Unfortunately, Queensland Transport will not build this stand-alone transport centre. It is so busy. The police want the transport office out of the police station. They are snowed under with transport work all day every day. To get a driver’s licence in Laidley you have to wait until 16 June. How ridiculous is that—three months to get a driver’s licence in Laidley! Mr Hopper: Did you lose yours? Mr RICKUSS: No, I did not lose it. We need a stand-alone driving centre in the Lockyer Valley. Like I said, my electoral roll now has over 30,000 names on it. This area is growing rapidly and it could support a stand-alone transport centre. The five councils in my area work extremely hard. A lot of extra work is legislatively passed down to them from the state and federal governments. Some of the smaller councils have only 6,000 or 8,000 ratepayers in their base. So they work fairly hard. Unfortunately, the Department of Natural Resources and Water and the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries are not sufficiently resourced to make them really efficient. That could be resourced a fair bit more. The shadow spokesmen for those portfolios mentioned that in their contributions. The Minister for Communities is sitting across from me in the chamber. He is going to spend a fair bit more money on respite help in the Lockyer Valley. That will be great for my area. I thank the minister for that. It is very welcome. The department of environment is a bit of a concern. It is all about being a policeman and not about assisting people. I would like to thank my wife, Ann. She has been a great asset to me over my last term in this parliament and I am sure she will be a great asset in this term. I also thank my family. My electorate staff, Julie, Dana and Hope, have also been great assets to me. They are very efficient and work wonderfully well. I just hope that this government can deliver some of the infrastructure projects that it has promised to deliver. Hon. RE SCHWARTEN (Rockhampton—ALP) (Minister for Public Works, Housing and Information and Communication Technology) (9.01 pm): I rise to join in this debate and place on record my thanks to the electors of Rockhampton for again placing their faith in me. I also want to thank my family: my wife, Judy, and our sons, Evan and Christopher, for their support and encouragement. I am fortunate, too, to still enjoy guidance from my Labor stalwart parents: my mother, Bonnie, and my father, Evan. My brothers, Stephen, Peter and Mark and my sister, Christine, are also there whenever I need them. I thank them for that ongoing support. Although there is no shortage of Labor helpers to run my campaign, I want to particularly thank Dave Thomas, Keith Hoolihan, Mick McMahon and Garth Zurvas, who staffed the prepolling and, of course, my loyal and trusted mate Greg Evans, who has successfully managed all of my campaigns. The unflappable Ann McDougall also deserves credit for keeping the wheels on track. I certainly do not wish to diminish the efforts of others such as Bill Byrne and Noel Keegan or Charlie Broughton, or indeed any other branch member, unionist or supporter who did everything that was asked of them. They, too, deserve credit for helping us secure the seat again for the Labor Party. 07 Mar 2007 Address-in-Reply 769

I also thank the donors and fundraisers who contributed to the campaign. As every member in this House knows, election campaigns cost a lot of money. So I am thankful for the generosity of those who supported me. At the outset, may I say that the National Party candidates in my area did not do themselves or their party any credit by scandalising the health issue. The opposition also made wild promises that could not be delivered in issues such as radiation oncology, which were not costed, planned or even possible. Thankfully, the electors saw through them as the hollow and insincere promises that they were. I might also point out that there has been an elaborate dupe over the issue of radiation oncology with a local failed radio identity delivering a petition to the National Party on this issue. This person had collected signatures over 12 months previously, sat on them until election time, then delivered them to the National Party candidate. Sadly, these petitions, except for the one forwarded from Woody’s Store in Yeppoon to the member for Keppel, who did as any decent member does and tabled it in parliament, have never made it into this place. That not only illustrates a lack of ethical standards on the part of the failed radio and TV announcer and businessman but also proves that the National Party is interested in politics and not patients. Let me make it clear. I have said this time and time again. Rockhampton will get radiation oncology services only when it has the staff and throughput to sustain them. I have consulted widely on this issue and every expert has the same view. The AMA, the then Liberal health spokesman, Dr Flegg, the Queensland Cancer Fund and every doctor and specialist with whom I have spoken tells me that radiation oncology in Rockhampton is at this stage not feasible. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I must agree. But I will continue to ensure that it is part of our forward health plan. I might say that recently the Austin family told me exactly the same thing. They should know. They have experienced it firsthand down here. I turn now to more positive things. During the campaign I was delighted to have the Premier announce an extra $6 million for the Riverbank development. Rockhampton’s history is about its river, yet up until now most of its citizens had no access to this remarkable asset. During the last electoral term I committed $9.5 million to the first stage of the Riverbank redevelopment and the extra $6 million for the second stage will make both sides of the river accessible and interesting. Just last week I viewed the progress on the various projects. I am delighted to say that the whole project has been designed and built by the Department of Public Works, with involvement from Project Services and Q-Build and RoadTek. Queens Park has been transformed from a harbourage for undesirables to a very family friendly area and on the other side the whole of Huish Drive has been relaid. I thank RoadTek for its quality work. Fishing and viewing jetties are being constructed and the park completely redeveloped. The site of the old Coker Hall is the next area to be redeveloped. By the time stage 2 is complete, we will see better facilities at the old Sand Wharf site, the North Rockhampton Bowls Club car park will be resurfaced and a fishing/viewing jetty added to the Queens Park redevelopment. There will be a link from the old Fitzroy Bridge to enable people to cycle, push a pram, walk, jog or run to anywhere from the Sand Wharf to the Victoria Park Bowls Club and back across the river to the southside boat ramp. As I said, this project gives the river back to the people, who will be able to enjoy it regardless of their age or ability. I turn now to the Rockhampton Showgrounds. Again, this has been a focus of my government, with an extra $3 million being promised—and which will be delivered—at the last election to further develop this site for events, most importantly our world famous Beef Expo, which brings in millions of dollars and large numbers of international visitors to the city. Geoff Murphy, the chair of the Beef Board, is an iconic figure in Rockhampton. He has donated a huge slab of his time—time that he can ill afford to spend away from his very successful building company, JM Kelly, which, I might add, aside from the state government, is the biggest employer of apprentices in Rockhampton. During its time in government this government has committed over $11 million to this project. I believe that the facilities we have been able to develop there are first rate and of world standard. Also at the last election I promised $1 million for the redevelopment of the Botanical Gardens Zoo. This was, of course, supposed to tie in with money promised by the federal government of which, to date, I have heard nothing more about. That is a typical approach from the National and Liberal government. It has always ignored us in Rockhampton. While like most people I get no pleasure out of seeing animals locked away, I must applaud the Rockhampton City Council for its involvement in breeding endangered species and seeking to improve conditions for the animals. Our investment will help that process. On the subject of the Rockhampton City Council, I must also point out that yesterday I announced an extra $1.9 million for the Rockhampton Community Resource Centre—or the library— redevelopment, which comes hot on the heels of the $400,000 that the government is supplying to renovate Rockhampton’s most famous landmark, the Customs House. 770 Address-in-Reply 07 Mar 2007

Yesterday, Queensland Health released a performance survey that rates the Rockhampton Base Hospital favourably on 27 out of 28 indicators. In fact, in the mental health area our hospital rates favourably against every other hospital in the state. As we know, health has been an important issue for this government. I am delighted that the Rockhampton Base Hospital has been a focus of attention. Since 2005, the number of staff has increased to 817 from 751 and the number of allied health professionals has increased from 116 to 124. I must congratulate the dedicated staff at the hospital for their work, especially those in the accident and emergency area for their high standard of work. Something like 1,500 people a week come into the hospital and many of them require accident and emergency services. Regrettably, the accident and emergency building is far from satisfactory, but the good news is that it is being replaced by a new facility as well as some 30 new beds. There is major rebuilding going on at the hospital, with new staff accommodation, a new dental clinic, 30 additional beds, a revamped maternity section—and the list goes on. That investment is somewhere around $70 million, which reinforces this government’s commitment to public health in Rockhampton. On the issue of sporting facilities, I am pleased that the government’s sporting grants have given the Rockhampton electorate some of the best sporting facilities to be found in regional Australia, with Kalka Shades Hockey Field now at a standard to host international events, which says volumes also about the commitment of the people involved. Recently, Brown Park, Rockhampton’s Rugby League home ground, also scored a new stand as part of an ongoing partnership with Rocky Rugby League. Others such as Rocky Basketball are in the running to receive grants. I hope the government is able to assist. Rockhampton’s schools continue to produce quality students. Recently, I was at school leadership functions at Rockhampton State High School and Frenchville State School and I was impressed by the high quality of the students. The issue of a behaviour management centre has now been resolved. I thank the Queensland Teachers Union for its cooperation, especially its hardworking organiser Barry Thomson. Late last year I was delighted to be asked to officially open one of the first prep schools in the city at Crescent Lagoon State School. This initiative by this government will make a terrific difference to our future generations. I am proud to be part of a government that has done that. Rockhampton is currently going through a boom in real estate. While this is good news for everyone who owns a home, the sad fact is that our private rental market is starting to show signs of great stress. Since becoming the minister for housing nearly a decade ago, I have spent $63.7 million on public housing in this city. While I am proud of this contribution, nevertheless it is the case that the Howard government’s private rental policy of rent assistance is failing the people who need low to moderately priced rental housing in Rockhampton. While rents continue to soar, which is good news for the investor, poor families are being left behind as rent assistance has gone up by around $8 in five years. This will hurt our local economy as lower paid workers eventually get forced out of our area. We will all pay the price when that happens. Again, I call on the Liberal Prime Minister, John Howard, to revisit my homelink plan, which addresses this issue. I now turn to a couple of other issues of concern. Firstly, honourable members will know that the Court of Appeal has ruled on a matter to do with Indigenous fishing which has become known as the Yasso case. Fundamentally, this decision of the Court of Appeal entitles an Aboriginal person to use monofilament nets to take whatever fish stocks they like. This has resulted in some—and I might add a tiny minority—Aboriginal people who are doing just that. While according due respect to our courts and their independence from parliament, I nevertheless call on Indigenous people—any people for that matter—to cease this practice. While the minister for primary industries is working on this matter to try to find some resolution, it would be no problem if those who have been using this court ruling to carry on these undesirable activities simply cease doing it. I say to those people, including Mr Yasso, that by continuing this practice they are harming fish stocks and attacking the very essence of Aboriginal culture which is about sustainability. They are also marginalising themselves in the community. They have no support in our community to continue this practice. I might add that local Darumbal elders, including Lester Adams, do not support this practice and have labelled it disrespectful. We should all be entitled to live free from the fear of crime, and I am pleased to say that the number of offences against property in the Rockhampton police district went down by 300 cases in the last six months. Unfortunately, however, offences against the person rose by over 200. While our local police are doing a great job—in fact there is a 95 per cent to 100 per cent clean-up rate in some areas— we have to confront the reality: much of this is to do with drunkenness and substance abuse. I must point out that our statistics include Woorabinda, and the truth is that for a small community it has an alarming rate of crime. Governments can only do so much. Our police budget went up by 10.3 per cent this year and we now have over 9,400 police compared with 6,800 when we came into government. But the fact is that while increasing the number of police helps—and we will keep doing just that—there has to be a 07 Mar 2007 Address-in-Reply 771 community approach to resolving the issue of public drunkenness and public harassment due to substance abuse. I point out that my brother is a councillor on the Rockhampton City Council, Councillor Stephen Schwarten, and he came up with a very good proposal just this week that needs to be looked at. We can ban spray cans and all of the rest of it. But, in reality, when we see Aboriginal kids as young as 12 in front of my electorate office sniffing petrol out of soft drink bottles supplied by an adult, we know that there is a long hard road ahead of us in solving this problem. I must point out that initiatives like the one approved by the local government minister today which granted our council $75,000 worth of surveillance cameras, which will tie in with the surveillance system I have had installed in the Rockhampton Riverbank Redevelopment Project, will help in the fight against those who want to use our public places as their own and treat them accordingly and who want to use members of the public as punching bags. I might add that the police move-on power also assists in this process. I am honoured to be the member for Rockhampton and, indeed, further honoured to be a minister in this government. While I have never claimed to be perfect—and, in fact, I get things wrong from time to time for which I am always prepared to apologise—I can guarantee that I will always work hard and do my best for those whom I represent regardless of whether they voted for me or not. I congratulate my mates Paul Hoolihan and Jim Pearce. We are very good mates, as I said. As a team, I believe we represent central Queensland well. I particularly congratulate Paul Hoolihan, the member for Keppel, on running a very, very good campaign. He ran it straight down the line with all sorts of obstacles placed in his way by the local mayor and others. The National Party ran a very hefty campaign, but he remained dignified and true to it. Pearcy, my old mate, is true rolled gold and is a great representative of the worker. As I say, the three of us work very well together to represent the area well. Rocky is indeed a very unique place in my view—it is a university city, it is a beef capital, it is a service hub, it is an attractive city with one of the finest rivers in the world. While people in south-east Queensland struggle with buckets and traffic, we enjoy a wonderful lifestyle. I look forward to the day local government has the maturity to face up to the reality of amalgamation—the Size, Shape and Sustainability exercise in my view is an exercise in futility as it means someone out of the four mayors or 32 councillors have to give up their jobs. The bottom line is that our ancient boundaries need aligning now for the sake of our future. Again, I thank all of those mates, true believers and my wonderful family, whom I am very fortunate to be blessed with, who along with the majority of electors gave me the right to make this speech tonight. Mrs LD LAVARCH (Kurwongbah—ALP) (9.16 pm): This year marks the 10th anniversary of my election to this parliament as the representative of the people of Kurwongbah. It is the fourth occasion that I have spoken in the address-in-reply debate and, as I have on previous occasions, I wish to place on record my appreciation to the electors of Kurwongbah for their faith in me. It remains a great privilege to serve in parliament, and I will continue to do my utmost to advance the interests of my local community. The address-in-reply debate is one of the few parliamentary occasions which enables members to address a wide range of issues which they believe to be important. In my period in this House I have used this debate as an opportunity to reflect on some of the challenges facing our state and our nation. It is interesting to note how the public debate has shifted in the last decade, but in many respects the underlying challenges remain with us. In my first speech to parliament following the Kurwongbah by-election in May 1997 I concentrated on what I believed at the time to be a deep unease in the community about the performance of public institutions. This was not only the institutions of government but also the private institutions such as the church, major business entities, trade unions and the banks. I argued that there was a real sense of disillusionment with these institutions which I thought was symptomatic of a nation which was in a profound state of transition. This transition was from the certainties of the old Australia—what Paul Kelly in his 1994 book The end of certainty called the Australian settlement, which featured belief in white Australia, economic protection for industry, centralised wage fixing and the arbitration system and began at the time of Federation in 1901. These initial pillars of Australian public policy underpinned the federation of the states. This old Australian settlement had by 1997 largely given way to a new policy model based on multiculturalism, economic openness and enterprise bargaining. I argued that many in the community longed for the old certainties and were unconvinced that Australia was on the right track. If this feeling of disillusionment had a name then it was Pauline Hanson. In 1999 I spoke in my first address-in-reply debate. This followed the 1998 state election, which saw the election of 11 One Nation MPs and the narrow defeat of the government of Bob Borbidge and the first term of the Beattie Labor government formed with the support of the member for Nicklin, Peter Wellington. The underlying sentiment of discontent in the mid-1990s had exploded into political action in the form of One Nation. 772 Address-in-Reply 07 Mar 2007

The problem with One Nation was that it was a collection of views about what people did not like and, as a political movement, One Nation never had a positive underlying core belief. Opposing things will get a fair way in politics, but ultimately one has to stand for something. An old proverb says that he who stands for nothing will fall for anything. Judging by the number of conspiracy theories espoused in the debates in this House during the time of the One Nation members, that could not be more true. In my 1999 speech I argued that the response to the unease and uncertainty that brought about One Nation required leadership and I explored what leadership consisted of. By 1999 Queensland and Australia were in the seventh year of economic growth and, while unemployment was falling slowly, jobs, jobs, jobs and the five per cent unemployment rate target were the mantra of the day and of the 1998 state election. I note that in 1996 in the electorate of Kurwongbah the unemployment rate was 8.2 per cent and at last report in December 2006 it was 3.4 per cent. Kurwongbah reached the five per cent unemployment rate target long before the rest of the state and the nation, and it has enjoyed low unemployment for more than six years. The revolutionary Beattie Labor government Breaking the Unemployment Cycle program, which was introduced in 1998, has created more than 1,300 jobs in the Kurwongbah electorate alone. In 2001 I used this debate to contrast the differences between the symbolism of our system of government and the reality. The fact that this debate is in response to the speech of the Governor is part of the symbolism of our system. The Governor has no role or responsibility to actually determine the program of the government, yet Her Excellency’s speech is couched in terms of ‘my government will do this’ and ‘my government will fund this program’. The reality is very different as, of course, the Premier and the ministers determine the policies and priorities for this state. The gulf between the reality and the perceptions of what government can and cannot do actually goes beyond the forms of our constitutional structures. The forces of globalisation, the power of international corporations and the inevitable decline of state power compared to federal power means that Australian state governments have limited scope to actually shape events. Members of the public think that we have much greater power than we really have. Sure, we can do good things and help individuals and communities in a range of ways, but real power is not found in the hands of state governments in a small nation. In 2004, my contribution focused again on the reality of the situation in Queensland and the need to ensure that, as a state, we played to our strengths and maximised our natural advantages. This is the essence of the Smart State strategy and it remains as essential to the government’s program now as it was three years ago. From this short trip down memory lane, I think I can make some observations about the shifts in the public debate and the challenges confronting this state. Firstly, a further 10 years of economic growth, falling unemployment and a vibrant private sector have impacted positively on the mood or sentiment in the Queensland community. The disenchantment that led to One Nation’s success in 1998 is still present, although to a much lesser degree, and at least unemployment is not feeding into the problem. However, in 1997, hand in hand with high unemployment rates came strong feelings of job insecurity—that is, those who were unemployed were uncertain that any jobs would be there tomorrow. Ten years on and the Howard government’s WorkChoices legislation has once again undermined the confidence of workers. Insecurity is now felt on two fronts: job security and security of maintaining working conditions. Twenty-six March marks one year since the WorkChoices legislation was introduced and as we celebrate International Women’s Day tomorrow I am mindful that it is the women of Queensland who are at the greatest risk from the erosion of their working conditions by virtue of the Howard government’s WorkChoices legislation. I believe that there is still much to be done to build public confidence and understanding in our system of government and our public institutions. Just as importantly, the system needs reform. Before I speak a little more about the reforms of our system of government, I want to touch on public perception and the reality of those who make up our parliament, that is, all of us here—the elected members euphemistically known as politicians. In my first speech in 1997, I said that the election of each of us here is not a victory for the individual or the party to which we belong, but it is a victory for democracy. While we come here from different backgrounds and with different beliefs and values, I would like to believe that we have one thing in common—a commitment to our free democratic society. I would also like to believe that we have each stood for public office not for personal aggrandisement but because politics and being a member of parliament gives us the chance to do good, to make a difference in our communities and to improve our state. Of course, the paradox is that while Australians and Queenslanders uphold and cherish our democracy, politicians are scorned. In other words, we love the system but hate the people whom we elect to ensure our democracy. But the system endures to provide our freedoms and opportunities, and that is the promise of politics. 07 Mar 2007 Adjournment 773

However, the question remains that, if government is a chance to do good, how do we close the gap between the promise of politics and the negative perceptions of politics and politicians in the community? Of course, we are each responsible for our own behaviour and the image we project as members of parliament, and we are only trustees of our democracy. It is our individual actions as trustees that will determine the health, wellbeing and shape of our system of democracy for future generations. We owe a fiduciary duty to our electorates and future Queenslanders to make the best decisions possible for the right reasons and for the public good. If the first point is about the role of government, the second is about how we govern. Someone once said that state governments in particular campaign in poetry but govern in prose. If one stops and thinks about it, that is very true. Through the grab for power by the Howard federal government, the most centralist federal government since Federation, state governments are finding themselves more and more relegated to service delivery agents. State governments are and should be more than just about service delivery. State governments are community builders. Returning to my previous point about the need to reform our system of government to ensure public confidence and understanding, I take this opportunity to endorse the Premier’s call for a constitutional convention. The WorkChoices decision of the High Court confirmed that the reach of the federal government in areas initially given to the states really means that we need to revisit our constitutional structures and, in particular, the division of power between levels of government. The federal government can effectively legislate in all areas of life in Australia. Be it through the use of corporations power, the interstate trade and commerce power or by acting on international obligations, the national government has close to unfettered power. For one, I do not think that that is a bad thing as Australia needs a powerful national government. However, it is not a good thing to be without a corresponding counterweight to balance that national power. A balance of power between the states and the Commonwealth was the central design feature of the federal compact and, if states are now unable to counterbalance the national government, some new mechanism needs to emerge. That is why the Premier is to be commended for his foresight and leadership in promoting the constitutional convention. It is said that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Therefore, it is critical for the health and prosperity of our nation that there be checks and balances on power. Our federation has served us well to diffuse power and ensure that we have a balanced system of government, and it is imperative that we retain those checks and balances on absolute power. Along with the Premier’s proposals which go to counterbalance strong federal powers, I would add that at the proposed constitutional convention consideration should be given to a federal bill of rights. A bill of rights operating at a national level could be a further mechanism by which a diffusion of power is achieved. For the good of all Australians it is critical that John Howard commits to such a convention. I look forward to observing the work of the 2008 proposed constitutional convention. In conclusion, over the past 10 years I have been privileged, humbled and honoured to serve the electorate of Kurwongbah. Since 1998 when the Beattie Labor government came to power, Kurwongbah has seen a frenzy of activity in the provision of state government infrastructure and services. I will continue to lobby hard to get results for my electorate. I thank my campaign team, my family, my electorate staff past and present, and good friends and family for all their support. Debate, on motion of Mrs Lavarch, adjourned.

ADJOURNMENT

Hon. RE SCHWARTEN (Rockhampton—ALP) (Leader of the House) (9.29 pm): I move— That the House do now adjourn.

Katsidis, Mr M Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (9.29 pm): On 17 March at Wembley Stadium before 11,000 fans, Michael ‘Mick’ Katsidis of Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia, won the World Boxing Organisation’s interim lightweight world title. He defeated the No. 1 contender, Graham Earle, in a fight described as the fight of the year. Through six rounds of tumultuous action, with the fans screaming for their English champion, Mick gave a brilliant display of non-stop punching. Earle did not come out for the seventh round. Mick was crowned the interim world champion and the English crowd then cheered for the champion Aussie. Current world champion, Acelino Freitas of Mexico, has 90 days to defend his title or it goes to Mick. Freitas is in his mid-30s and many expect him to retire. If he watches the video of the fight, he will see Mick throw an unbelievable 187 punches in round 4, with 137 hitting the target. 774 Adjournment 07 Mar 2007

Mick was educated at Downlands College and has fought with the PCYC Toowoomba and with his current trainer, Brendan Smith. He represented Australia at the 2000 Olympics, and since turning professional has been undefeated in 23 fights. He won the Queensland lightweight championship at his first attempt and won the Australian title against his former Olympic team mate, James Swan of South Australia. Michael’s story is one of the great boxing and sports stories. He had a serious and difficult setback due to an indiscretion but, to his enormous credit and through the support of his family, his trainers, Brendan Smith and Brandon Wood, his friends and the people of Toowoomba, he has now achieved his dream. Mick is fortunate as an elite sportsman of natural talent and speed to have the wise and disciplined guidance of his trainer, Brendan Smith, and his second, Brandon Wood. Both men epitomise the sportsmanship, discipline, dedication and work ethic required of boxing champions. Mick believes in and trusts Brendan in a magnificent partnership. Their journey to Wembley included weeks of training at the famous Gleeson’s Gym in Brooklyn, New York, which boasts 19 former world champions. Mick met great world champions like Emile Griffith, Jake LaMotta—‘The Raging Bull’—and Zab Judah who beat Kostya Tszyu. Experienced American judges at the gym were highly impressed by Mick’s ability and Brendan’s training methods. Mick’s home training base is Brendan Smith’s gym in a shed at the back of the Bronco motel at Charlton on the west side of Toowoomba. From the shed at Charlton to Gleeson’s Gym in New York to Wembley and an interim world title is a remarkable story, against all odds, and is a credit to a young man who has learnt the lessons of life, harnessed his brilliant talent and achieved his dream. Mick Katsidis has accepted his success with great humility, but all Australians should be bursting with pride for our interim world lightweight champion, Toowoomba’s own Mick Katsidis.

Eat Well, Be Active

Mr BOMBOLAS (Chatsworth—ALP) (9.32 pm): I would like to concur with the member for Toowoomba South and congratulate Mick Katsidis and of course his brother, Stathi, who is one of the champion jockeys here in Queensland. Recently, the Premier and former tennis ace Pat Rafter joined forces to launch the state government’s Eat Well, Be Active initiative to help more Queenslanders embrace healthier lifestyles. It is about encouraging all of us to make small changes to our everyday habits, finding the right balance between food and activity. The Eat Well, Be Active campaign is the latest initiative under a package totalling more than $21 million over three years announced after the Queensland government’s Obesity Summit last May. It is all part of the government’s commitment to help Queenslanders beat the obesity epidemic, which I am sure all members of the House agree is a serious problem and one which requires urgent attention. I was particularly pleased that the Premier and the Minister for Local Government, Planning and Sport chose my electorate and more precisely the Belmont State School to make the initial announcement. Belmont State School is very progressive and a shining light. Under principal Noel Seawright and an active P&C, the tuckshop took the initiative some time ago to change its menu, opting for healthy food. I applaud this. Students have obviously embraced the changes because figures presented by the P&C treasurer indicate that the tuckshop is still well and truly patronised. That is a huge plus for Belmont State School and its forward thinking, and it is a sign of the added care the teachers and administrators are prepared to deliver. Another huge tick for Belmont State School is the Belmont School Aged Child Care Service, which has been involved in the Active After School Communities Program for two years. It received funding to purchase sporting equipment for the children, and for eight weeks each term trainers involve the children in activities such as martial arts, Rugby, AFL, funk dancing, hockey, multi skills, gymnastics, cricket and many more. The push for a healthier approach to life requires a concerted community effort involving families, schools, health professionals, sports groups, urban planners, food producers, retailers, advertisers, employers and the media—all working in partnership with government. State government grants are encouraging our councils, schools, child-care centres, sports clubs, Indigenous organisations and other community groups to work together and deliver their own obesity-fighting initiatives at the local level. Approved partnership applications receive grants of up to $50,000 and the lucky recipients will be announced in the next month. I hope that other schools in my electorate and throughout the state follow the example shown by Belmont State School. On another front, I look forward to attending Belmont’s school leader badge ceremony next Tuesday morning. Proudly, I can report to the House that I was honoured to take part in similar ceremonies at Whites Hill State College and Carina State School. 07 Mar 2007 Adjournment 775

If I may indulge the House, I can give an update on the NBL grand final series. In game three at Boondall earlier this evening, the Brisbane Bullets defeated the Melbourne Tigers 113-93 to lead the series 2-1. The championship is on its way to Brisbane. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Hoolihan): I thank the member for Chatsworth for the continuation of his sporting abilities.

Queensland Fuel Subsidy Scheme Mr SPRINGBORG (Southern Downs—NPA) (9.35 pm): Tonight I wish to raise my concerns about the Queensland Fuel Subsidy Scheme and petrol pricing in Queensland. On Monday of this week, I had the opportunity to be in Tenterfield on parliamentary business. One thing I noticed before I left Tenterfield was their petrol price of 113.9c per litre. Then I came north towards the Queensland border, and the last fuel station in New South Wales before I got to Queensland proudly boasted fuel at Queensland prices—that is, 112.9c per litre. As I travelled 100 kilometres further up the road into Warwick, I noticed that fuel prices got more expensive. They were 114.9c per litre in Warwick and on the outskirts at an independent fuel station they were about 109.9c. As I got closer and closer to Brisbane, I saw petrol at $1.09 and $1.10. To me, it is very obvious that Queensland motorists are being ripped off and the Queensland government is being ripped off with regard to the Fuel Subsidy Scheme. You cannot tell me that fuel prices in Queensland should be more expensive than comparable fuel prices in New South Wales when we have an 8.3c a litre Fuel Subsidy Scheme in this state. It is nothing but daylight robbery. What we have is big fuel companies in Queensland taking the government and taxpayers for a ride. I am not suggesting that we throw out the Fuel Subsidy Scheme, because I do not believe that any sort of offset system would see us being delivered what the 8.3c a litre would amount to. What we do need is some form of government inquiry—a la a royal commission. I know there has been an inquiry in the past by well-meaning members of parliament, but we need a royal commission with royal commission powers engaging forensic accountants who can actually sit down and find out what is going on. The simple reality is that when you talk to these absolute extortionists in the big fuel companies they pull the wool over your eyes every time. It is basically like taking a bowl of spaghetti, tipping it out on the table and trying to decipher it. These people have got corporate communications divisions bigger than anything that the Queensland government has got, and that is saying something. They have made an art form out of deception, they have made an art form out of absolute lies, they have made an art form out of absolute spin, and the Queensland motorists are the absolute losers out of this. This is a serious issue. It should have been 15c a litre more expensive in northern New South Wales due to the cost of transporting fuel out of our refineries in Brisbane. In actual fact, it was cheaper than fuel I saw on the outskirts of Brisbane. People are being ripped off. Something needs to be done. It is not good enough. We have got big companies profiting and profiteering and taking that 8.3c a litre fuel subsidy and putting it in their coffers. They are topping up their greedy corporate profits as a consequence.

International Women’s Day Ms JARRATT (Whitsunday—ALP) (9.38 pm): In rising tonight in celebration of International Women’s Day, I share the stories of two wonderful but very different women. This week I met a most remarkable woman, Malalai Joya, who as the youngest member of the National Assembly of Afghanistan courageously speaks out against the cruel and misogynist fundamentalist government that would deny Afghani women an education, a voice and even the right to show their faces in public. Ms Malalai Joya is without doubt the most courageous and remarkable woman I have ever met. She has survived four assassination attempts, one of which occurred on the floor of her own parliament when she spoke out against the drug dealers and war lords who have taken their places at the helm of political control in Afghanistan. Ms Joya does not expect to live to an old age, but while she lives her mission is to speak out about the corruption and cruelty of the Taliban inspired Northern Alliance and those of their ilk who would deny ordinary, peace-loving Afghani people the right to a democratic government and the basic human rights that you and I take for granted. We should celebrate our democracy and never, never take it for granted. The second woman I want to acknowledge tonight is the 2007 winner of the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation Rural Women’s Award, Ms Sonya Maley. The Rural Women’s Award, which is supported by the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, recognises women with strong leadership skills, a positive vision for the future of agriculture and an ability to make a difference in their chosen industry. 776 Adjournment 07 Mar 2007

Sonya Maley owns Resis Australia, a company that uses cane separation technology to create juice concentrates and healthy, functional foods containing increased dietary fibre. She will use the bursary award to undertake a study tour in the United States to further her research into cane separation technology. Ms Maley was one of five fantastic finalists who represented almost every part of the state. Runner-up Linda Jaques, for example, owns a coffee and agritourism business at Mareeba in north Queensland. I salute each of the finalists who demonstrate the character of the modern rural women. Like rural and regional women right throughout this great state, the five finalists have had to learn to practise the arts of patience, persistence and tenacity in order to overcome the challenges of living in a rural environment. One of the challenges for rural women that most worries me is the increasing incidence of depression in men—their husbands and sons—who are simply despairing in the face of years of unrelenting drought. While I acknowledge the pain of the men in this situation, it is inevitably the women who struggle to hold the family together, to keep spirits up and to find work off farm to prop up the failing budget. Maybe the plight of these families is not as catastrophic as that of many Afghani families, but they are just as deserving of our care and thoughts this International Women’s Day.

School Induction Ceremonies; Organ Donation Mr WELLINGTON (Nicklin—Ind) (9.41 pm): I use this opportunity to say how proud I am of all the state and private schools that are in my electorate. Since the last sitting of parliament I have had the privilege of attending school student leader induction ceremonies at the Chevallum State School, Nambour Christian College, Eudlo State School, Palmwoods State School, Kenilworth State Community College, North Arm State School and Bli Bli State School. We have great student leaders who have pride and confidence who I know well. I know that these student leaders will do well during their term as leaders. Also last week my wife and I had the opportunity to join with members of the Palmwoods- Woombye Lions Club to hear students speak in the Lions Youth of the Year Quest. The winning students were from the Nambour St John’s College. We all wish them well as they progress to the next level in the regional competition. During last month I had the privilege of flagging off cyclists who cycled from the Sunshine Coast to the Brisbane Princess Alexandra Hospital. The cyclists were riding to help lift community awareness of the importance of organ and tissue donation in Australia. We had heart and liver recipients cycling, organ donor family members cycling with doctors, and nurses and children all participating. I understand that as I speak tonight there are over 1,700 Australians currently waiting for a life-saving organ transport and that last year 128 Queenslanders received life-saving organ transplants. I use this opportunity to urge all Queenslanders and all Australians to think about registering their consent to donate. I understand that most of the world religions including Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judism, Jehovah’s Witness, Sikhism support organ and tissue donation and transplantation as an act of generosity, merit and benevolence. The Catholic Pope has endorsed organ donation as a compassionate choice. To register, people only need to contact the Australian Organ Donor Register on 1800777203. Please tell their family, partners and friends that they wish to donate.

Opera Queensland Mr FENLON (Greenslopes—ALP) (9.43 pm): The year 2006 saw Opera Queensland toast its 25th anniversary. To mark this significant milestone, Opera Queensland delivered a spectacular program for this season boasting three of the most celebrated works in its repertoire Romeo and Juliet, Die Fledermaus and Lucia di Lammermoor. In addition, it continued its commitment to regional Queensland with its tour of Die Fledermaus, the largest ever undertaken with over 45 people on the road. This was again a great success. Its community outreach program delivered over 60 concerts across the state travelling as far north as Undara. Opera Queensland, formerly the Lyric Opera of Queensland, was founded in 1981 with funding from the Queensland state government. The company was established following the closure of the Queensland Opera Company in December 1980 and the state government’s expressed desire for a professional state opera company which presented all forms of opera including light opera and musical comedy. Recent years have been marked with many sell-out seasons such as Madama Butterfly in 1999, Cosi fan tutte in 2000, Carmen in 2004 and La Boheme in 2005. Other artistic highlights have included Andrea Chenier in 2002, Sweeney Todd in 2003 and, as I just mentioned, Lucia di Lammermoor in 2006. 07 Mar 2007 Adjournment 777

Opera Queensland offers the largest professional development program for young artists. This unique and much sought after program provides up to 10 places annually for some of the most talented young people we have to offer. On top of these outstanding achievements, Opera Queensland runs the most extensive education program from any single producing company in Australia, and it has attracted a continuing level of growth when touring and in young audiences. Opera Queensland enjoys a wonderful partnership with Education Queensland, and 2007 is no exception. Exploring Opera is Opera Queensland’s multifaceted opera education program that introduces school students as well as adult and community groups to opera in relevant, involving and accessible ways. Amongst its 15 programs are include a two-day art and literacy workshops. The year 2007 also sees a continuation of this great enrichment with a season of pure opera that boasts four wonderfully diverse works. To fit the theme of creativity in its purest form, these works blend pure love, magic, faith and revenge—it sounds like the Queensland parliament—and include Madama Butterfly, Nabucca and the outstanding new opera Love of the Nightingale composed by the Toowoomba born Richard Mills. In addition, Opera Queensland will tour 12 centres in the year, over 68 concerts will be given, local choral groups worked with, emerging artists trained and 30,000 children enchanted. This marks the beginning of another exciting 25 years as a Queensland’s flagship. From the words of the company’s Chief Executive and Artistic Director, Chris Mangin— As we look to the future with such excitement and optimism, our vision is to continue enriching the lives of Queenslanders of all ages through the truly unique artform of Opera. Time expired. Charters Towers Electorate, Petition Mr KNUTH (Charters Towers—NPA) (9.46 pm): This morning I tabled a petition on behalf of the residents of Forsayth, Einasleigh and Georgetown calling on the minister to recognise the urgent need to seal the Forsayth to Georgetown road. These districts are facing unprecedented changes due the expansion in mineral development with three new mining operations currently in production stage. This industry expansion and increased tourism has increased traffic on the route between these towns. The expansion in the mining industry has also ensured that vehicles that were rarely seen on this road are now commonplace. Heavy vehicles and wide loads are frequently using this road to access the operation. A large number of contractors also use the road to service the mining operations. Tourism has increased with the Savannahlander becoming increasingly popular. Forsayth is the end terminal for the Savannahlander train and is also home to the spectacular Cobbold Gorge. Einasleigh is also home to the popular Copperfield Gorge. Both towns are promoted as part of the Savannah Way tourism venture that stretches from Cairns to Broome in Western Australia. The experience to visit these attractions is denied for many tourists due to the poor state of the road. Less than 30 kilometres is to be sealed. It is excessively corrugated. Every year the region hosts the Forsayth show, which is one of the great traditional bush shows known throughout the region. I call on members of parliament to venture up there and see a true traditional Australian way of life. Students must travel from Einasleigh, Forsayth and Georgetown regularly to participate in sporting and cultural events. The wear and tear on family vehicles is a great burden. The high cost of fuel and the cost of maintaining vehicles shaken to bits by the corrugation are preventing students from these areas from participating in more events out of their home town. The signatories on the petition respectfully request the minister for transport to give priority to sealing this section for the safety of all road users, the promotion of the area as a tourism venture and the efficiency of the mining industry. Kedron-Wavell Services Club Ms BARRY (Aspley—ALP) (9.49 pm): I had the real pleasure recently to join fellow local members Stirling Hinchliffe and Neil Roberts at the launch of the Kedron-Wavell Services Club registered training organisation launch. As a newly created RTO for the hospitality industry, Kedron- Wavell Services Club has taken on an important but exciting responsibility. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the accommodation, cafe and restaurant industry provides around 107,000 jobs in Queensland—that is, around 5.3 per cent of jobs. Hospitality is among the group of industries predicted to account for 80 per cent of employment growth to 2007. But this employment growth will only be realised if the industry can attract and train skilled workers. Chronic skills shortages of chefs, cooks and pastry chefs remains a feature of the Queensland hospitality industry. The $1 billion Queensland Skills Plan launched in March last year establishes a policy framework to meet the challenges presented by the skills shortages and a skills formation strategy is already underway for the hospitality and tourism industry. But government alone cannot solve the problem. Only partnerships with private training organisations, employers, unions and the community can better meet this challenge. In short, we need more organisations like the Kedron-Wavell Services Club to work with employers and the industry to deliver high-quality hospitality training. 778 Adjournment 07 Mar 2007

It is hardly surprising that the Kedron-Wavell Services Club has stepped up to this challenge and has been a positive force in the community since it was first established in 1968. It has contributed more than $12 million in the last 10 years to community based projects such as the nearby public swimming pool, the Chermside library, the Prince Charles Hospital and various affiliated sporting groups and clubs. The Kedron-Wavell RSL subbranch, along with the services clubs, is not only one of the most generous and supportive clubs in the Brisbane north community but also one of the most progressive employers. The club was quick to recognise the importance of training and the benefits of a highly skilled staff. As a large employer of around 230 staff, Kedron-Wavell Services Club developed their RTO as a service to their employees. All trainers within the RTO are existing employees of the club who have become accredited trainers. Their focus is to deliver much needed hospitality and business training programs. They attained their accreditation as a RTO in May 2006 after 18 months of research, planning and implementation by their management committee. Kedron-Wavell is committed to promoting hospitality as a real career with exciting and diverse opportunities for many people both young and experienced workers. I support its commitment wholeheartedly. I was delighted to have been asked to launch Kedron-Wavell’s training organisation to the industry and the community. I would like to thank them for listening to the needs of industry. I congratulate Chris Satori, Jennifer Anderson and the Kedron-Wavell Services Club team. They have taken on the responsibility of working with business partners to provide quality training. I look forward, as I know both Neil Roberts and Stirling Hinchliffe and all residents of Brisbane north do, to watching the development process of this organisation to realise the vision that they are working towards. Moggill Electorate, Safety of Schoolchildren Dr FLEGG (Moggill—Lib) (9.52 pm): I am concerned about the safety of schoolchildren crossing Moggill Road from Our Lady of Rosary Catholic School. It is a sobering experience to stand at the school crossing across Moggill Road and look at a narrow crossing with traffic stop bars that are less than two metres from the legs of children, a driveway opening onto the crossing and an acute angle intersection coming across from the other side only metres away from a terribly dangerous signalised bend in the road. This is an intersection that the school has made representations about many times to the minister in this government. There was a fatality on this crossing many years ago. There was a near miss just recently. It is not acceptable that we continue to expose our children to the risk of death crossing the road outside their schools. This crossing also services Kenmore State High School. Children from this school were recently injured at another nearby dangerous intersection on the same road. The school community has done a wonderful job. The headmaster, backed by his students’ parents, turns out every morning and afternoon to try to see that the children survive crossing the road. However, not all children are going to be supervised and this is a highly dangerous experience. The school community has taken every action it can. It has banned right-hand turns out of the school, banned through traffic from Kenmore Road, and has had local police enforce the 60-kilometre an hour speed limit. However, at this narrow little crossing that is poorly signposted we continue to see numerous cars running the red light. We have asked many times for this minister to put a school speed zone on this road, which is dangerous and threatens to claim the lives of children. He refused to do so. I repeat that appeal to him. I will write to him following my speech tonight. He needs to reconfigure this so the lights signalise the intersection and the driveway and not just the crossing. He needs to do some other work. Representatives from the department came to see me yesterday. I appreciate their time in coming to see me. I made these points to them. I repeat them here. I say very strongly: this is dangerous and this government is on notice that a child will be killed at this crossing unless it takes action. The school has been chasing it year after year and has got absolutely nothing. I will hold the government responsible if there is a tragedy on this crossing. Any person who stands there and looks at the stop bars that are less than two metres from the legs of a crowd of children—and they are supposed to stop heavy vehicles from hitting them—could not come to any other conclusion. Time expired. Skilling Queensland Mr WEIGHTMAN (Cleveland—ALP) (9.55 pm): I rise to thank the Minister for State Development, Employment and Industrial Relations, the Hon. John Mickel, on implementing the Skilling Queensland initiative and for providing funding for innovative programs in my electorate. The programs are run by Jobs Association Inc., better known in the Bayside as the Redlands Employer and Placement Service, 07 Mar 2007 Attendance 779

REPS. I am proud to say that REPS is based at Cleveland in the very heart of my electorate. I thank the minister for providing REPS with $145,760 to run the Mature Employment—New Directions, MEND, and the Mature Aged Retail Industry Employment and Training, MARIET, projects to help 126 mature-age people seek and secure long-term employment. These two projects play a major role in assisting mature-age job seekers in the Bayside. REPS ought to be commended for developing these two innovative programs. The MARIET program provides specialised retail industry assistance in partnership with major shopping centres in the Bayside. REPS’s other program, MEND, is a case management style program where job seekers are assisted in their attempts to develop a new direction in seeking employment. REPS is undertaking these two projects which are innovative and flexible. It is innovative because the MARIET program was created in partnership with local shopping centres after REPS executive officer, John Conley, developed the Redlands Retail Awards to highlight the importance of the retail sector to jobs and jobs growth in the Bayside. The MARIET program addresses the needs of employers, employees and the industry by preparing job candidates so that they meet industry needs. The MEND program likewise is a product of working with industry across several sectors, including transport logistics, tourism and other skill shortage areas. I would like to commend REPS as a true community organisation that is focused on getting results for a variety of stakeholders in our community. REPS seldom works alone. The strength of REPS and its strong outcomes are the results of alliances with industry and now a partnership with the Metropolitan South Institute of TAFE. REPS has already achieved success for 19 of the 25 participants who have started this new program. A key diving force behind REPS is John Conley, who is also the chairman of Redlands Tourism and who recently won the national and state award for the Keep Australia Beautiful Awards with the ban plastic bags campaign on Straddie. The Bayside community is lucky to have hardworking locals like John Conley and strong community organisations like REPS. Through these people and organisations our strategy of returning experience to the workforce is in good hands for the future. Motion agreed to. The House adjourned at 9.58 pm.

ATTENDANCE Attwood, Barry, Beattie, Bligh, Bombolas, Boyle, Choi, Copeland, Cripps, Croft, Cunningham, Darling, Dempsey, Dickson, Elmes, English, Fenlon, Finn, Flegg, Foley, Fraser, Gibson, Gray, Hayward, Hinchliffe, Hobbs, Hoolihan, Hopper, Horan, Jarratt, Johnson, Jones, Keech, Kiernan, Knuth, Langbroek, Lavarch, Lawlor, Lee Long, Lee, Lingard, Lucas, McArdle, McNamara, Male, Malone, Menkens, Messenger, Mickel, Miller, Moorhead, Mulherin, Nelson-Carr, Nicholls, Nolan, O’Brien, Palaszczuk, Pearce, Pitt, Pratt, Purcell, Reeves, Reilly, Rickuss, Roberts, Schwarten, Scott, Seeney, Shine, Simpson, Smith, Spence, Springborg, Stevens, Stone, Stuckey, Sullivan, van Litsenburg, Wallace, Weightman, Welford, Wellington, Wells, Wendt, Wettenhall, Wilson