Queensland Parliamentary Debates [Hansard] Legislative Assembly THURSDAY, 27 OCTOBER 1988 Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy 1998 27 October 1988 Ministerial Statement THURSDAY, 27 OCTOBER 1988 Mr SPEAKER (Hon. L. W. Powell, Isis) read prayers and took the chair at 10 a.m. PETITION The Clerk announced the receipt of the following petition— Compulsory Wearing of Safety Helmets by Cyclists From Mr Booth (18 signatories) praying that the Parliament of Queensland wiU legislate for the compulsory wearing of safety helmets by cyclists. Petition received. MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Allegations of Mistreatment of Chicken-farmers by Queensland Government Hon. N. J. HARPER (Aubum—Minister for Primary Industries) (10.02 a.m.), by leave: In the Federal Parliament on 12 October 1988, the member for Bowman, Mr Sciacca, made claims that two Queensland chicken-farmers have been unfairly treated by the Queensland Government. It is unfortunate that Mr Sciacca used only a one-sided version of this case to engage in a cheap political exercise and demonstrated a total lack of understanding of the industry committee which he had slated. The problem arose foUowing disputes between the chicken-farmers, Messrs MacDonald and Williams, and Inghams Enterprises, more than four years ago. The Chicken Meat Industry Committee investigated the disputes and agreed that Inghams Enterprises was acting in accordance with the provisions of the growing agreement when it terminated its suppliers' agreements. Messrs MacDonald and Williams have raised their dispute with me and my predecessor as well as with the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administrative Investigations. The Parliamentary Commissioner for Administrative Investigations has stated that in his opinion the committee acted correctly when it held that Mr MacDonald's agreement had been properly terminated. Following investigations, both MacDonald and Williams have been advised that there is no further action that can be taken to assist them. The Chicken Meat Industry Committee was established in 1976 to provide the industry with a mechanism for resolving its own differences. The committee comprises an independent chairman and three representatives each of growers and processors. While I appoint the members of the committee, I can assure honourable members that it has been my practice and that of my predecessors, and is indeed a requirement of the legislation, to consult with the industry before making any appointments. The representatives of growers and processors appointed to the committee are nominated by the Queensland Chicken Growers Association and the major processing companies, and I personally have no knowledge of their political persuasions. Before the introduction of the Chicken Meat Industry Committee Act 1976 there had been continuing disagreement between processors and growers conceming the amount to be paid to growers as a growing fee by the processor and the renewal of growing agreements. The committee was established to provide a fomm in which processors and growers could meet and resolve differences and determine any issues in dispute between an Ministerial Statement 27 October 1988 1999 individual grower and a processor. Under its powers the committee is responsible for approving of growing agreements, setting growing fees and resolving disputes. At times there have been some concems expressed over the lack of extensive regulatory and enforcement powers. However, when the legislation was enacted it was decided to leave the industry as unfettered as possible and to leave some flexibility to allow close consultation between all parties to the industry to ensure that no one section is disadvantaged. Experience has justified the Govemment's confidence in the ability of industry- leaders to resolve their differences by goodwill and common sense and their willingness to abide by the spirit rather than the strict letter of their agreements. The continued success of the Govemment's policy of allowing the industry to regulate itself depends on a continuation of that goodwill. While Mr Sciacca has referred to this committee as another quango, he should be aware that the committee was established at the request of the industry, that its operations are funded by a levy on growers and processors, and that it receives no financial support or assistance from the public purse. The Chicken Meat Industry Committee has been successful in negotiating adequate growing fees to be paid by processors and satisfactorily resolving all disputes placed before it, with the exception of the dispute involving Messrs MacDonald and Williams, who have not been prepared to accept the umpire's decision. MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Presence of Whale in North Kennedy River, Lakefield National Park Hon. G. H. MUNTZ (Whitsunday—Minister for Environment, Conservation and Tourism) (10.06 a.m.), by leave: I take the opportunity to inform the House that the National Parks and Wildlife Service has informed me that an 8-metre whale in seemingly good health has been found swimming 40 kilometres upstream in a river on Cape York Peninsula. The whale, which has not as yet been positively identified, is in a branch of the North Kennedy River in Lakefield national park, Queensland's second-largest national park. Opposition members interjected. Mr MUNTZ: That might seem insignificant to some members, but the eyes of the world could well be on north Queensland and Lakefield national park, as they were on Alaska in the rescue of three whales. I would indicate that the whale is not stranded; that it is in a 50-metre wide salt­ water section of the river; and that at this juncture it does not appear to be in any way distressed and is being watched constantly by park rangers. The advice which I have received from my officers indicates the whale could be either a false killer whale or a minke whale, both of which are found in the waters of north-eastem AustraUa. Officers from my department are now in contact with the Boating and Fisheries Patrol, Project Jonah and marine scientists of the James Cook University in Townsville to determine what action is appropriate in the circumstances. Meanwhile, I have asked to be kept informed and have instmcted park staff on Lakefield to restrict public access to the area in order to reduce interference with the animal. It appears that the whale has found its way upstream of its own accord and, whUe still in good health, could find its way back to the sea. Most long-term residents of Cape York cannot recall any past instances of this kind. Again, I feel it is my duty to inform the House of these circumstances and particularly to mention that I will be stating to the public that access to the area will be restricted in certain circumstances. 2000 27 October 1988 Ministerial Statement MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ALP's Policy on Town-planning Hon. J. H. RANDELL (Mirani—Minister for Local Government and Racing) (10.08 a.m.), by leave: Recently, at its policy conference, the Queensland branch of the Labor Party determined its local government policy. I believe that there are many aspects of that policy document which reveal the total hypocrisy of many of Labor's public statements about local government matters, but my statement today concerns only one. Section 7 of that policy document is headed "Town Planning" and asserts— "Town planning is primarily the responsibility of local government with the local council exercising normal controls over land use in its region whether that use be by public or private ownership." Because it has the benefit of sounding good and meaning nothing, the use of the word "primarily" is interesting. By lacking definition, it can be given any definition. The perspectives of an opportunistic Opposition and the perspectives of a power-hungry socialist Govemment can both be served by that term. It is worse than meaningless; it is devious. It gives the Labor Party the indulgent luxury of appearing to be all things to all people, albeit not at the same time or place. On the one hand, it can be paraded before councils as a ringing defence of the absolute integrity of their town-planning powers Mr De Lacy interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Caims! Mr RANDELL: On the other hand, it can be used by the Labor Party to ingratiate itself with private enterprise and particularly the property-development industry. This town-planning policy also sits oddly with the announcement by the honourable the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Goss, that he believes that so-called regional planning agencies should be established. However, the policy document adopted by the Labor Party makes not the slightest reference to those agencies any more than the previous Labor Party town-planning policy did. Mr Goss: Your back-benchers are not even listening to you. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Mr RANDELL: I would like honourable members opposite to listen to what I have to say. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Minister will continue with his statement. Mr RANDELL: During the South Coast by-election campaign, Mr Goss announced that the Labor Party shadow Cabinet meeting on the Gold Coast had endorsed plans for a regional planning agency to control development on the tourist strip. According to the Gold Coast Bulletin, under the heading of "Planning agency for coast promised by Labor", Mr Goss grandly announced that this new proposed quango would "be given sufficient staff and resources to effectively discharge its cmcial planning role". Mr Goss said that the agency would have equal representation from the State Govemment and the Gold Coast City and Albert Shire Councils and that it would, in his words— "Draft and implement a Gold Coast regional development strategy to integrate the interests of coast residents and tourists in two main areas—property zonings and their impact on residential and rental prices and the provision of adequate community services." That proposal horrified the Mayor of the Gold Coast, Alderman Lex Bell, and he publicly attacked it.