COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

SENATE Official Hansard

THURSDAY, 30 MAY 1996

THIRTY-EIGHTH PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—FIRST PERIOD

BY AUTHORITY OF THE SENATE CANBERRA CONTENTS

THURSDAY, 30 MAY

Petitions— Census ...... 1371 Industrial Relations: Reform ...... 1371 Logging and Woodchipping ...... 1371 Forest Protection ...... 1372 Higher Education Funding ...... 1372 Pet Food ...... 1372 Sale of Telstra ...... 1372 How to Vote Cards ...... 1373 Notices of Motion— Consideration of Legislation ...... 1373 Regulations and Ordinances Committee ...... 1374 Uranium Mining...... 1375 Snowy River ...... 1375 Aussie’s Coffee Shop ...... 1375 Banking ...... 1375 Port Lillias ...... 1376 Budget Cuts ...... 1376 Salinity ...... 1376 Tully Millstream Project ...... 1377 Logging and Woodchipping ...... 1377 Drugs ...... 1377 Land Clearing ...... 1378 Higher Education Funding ...... 1378 Commonwealth Ombudsman ...... 1378 Daw Aung San Suu Kyi ...... 1378 Water Pollution ...... 1378 Greenhouse Gases ...... 1379 Murray-Darling Basin ...... 1379 Committees— Selection of Bills Committee—Report ...... 1379 Order of Business— Sessional Orders ...... 1380 Representation of Victoria ...... 1380 Order of Business— Employment, Education and Training References Committee ...... 1380 Government Business ...... 1380 Leave of Absence ...... 1380 Order of Business— General Business ...... 1381 Leave of Absence ...... 1381 Committees— Legal and Constitutional References Committee—Reference ...... 1381 Consideration of Legislation ...... 1382 Consideration of Legislation ...... 1382 Indexed Lists of Files ...... 1382 Committees— Community Affairs Legislation Committee—Report ...... 1383 Community Affairs Legislation Committee—Report ...... 1383 Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee—Report . 1383 Airports Bill 1996— Airports (Transitional) Bill 1996— First Reading ...... 1383 Second Reading ...... 1383 Committees— Sales Tax Legislation Committee—Answers to Questions ...... 1388 Consideration of Legislation ...... 1388 Amnesty International ...... 1398 CONTENTS—continued

Consideration of Legislation ...... 1398 Notices of Motion— Native Title Committee ...... 1399 Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill 1996-97 ...... 1400 Supply Bill (No. 1) 1996-97 ...... 1400 Supply Bill (No. 2) 1996-97— First Reading ...... 1400 Second Reading ...... 1400 Customs Tariff (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 1996— Telecommunications (Carrier Licence Fees) Amendment Bill 1996— First Reading ...... 1401 Second Reading ...... 1401 Crimes Amendment (Controlled Operations) Bill 1996— In Committee ...... 1402 Third Reading ...... 1407 Education and Training Legislation Amendment Bill 1996— Second Reading ...... 1407 Loan Bill 1996— Second Reading ...... 1420 Sydney 2000 Games (Indicia and Images) Protection Bill 1996— Second Reading ...... 1421 In Committee ...... 1422 Third Reading ...... 1422 Australian Sports Drug Agency Amendment Bill 1996— Second Reading ...... 1422 Indigenous Education (Supplementary Assistance) Amendment Bill 1996— Second Reading ...... 1423 Bills Returned from The House of Representatives ...... 1426 Social Security Legislation Amendment (Newly Arrived Resident’s Waiting Periods and Other Measures) Bill 1996— First Reading ...... 1426 Second Reading ...... 1426 Order of Business ...... 1427 Housing Assistance Bill 1996— Second Reading ...... 1427 Questions Without Notice— Sale of Telstra ...... 1430 National Accounts Figures ...... 1432 Budget Deficit ...... 1433 Optus: Foreign Ownership ...... 1434 Housing ...... 1435 Climate Change: Greenhouse Emissions ...... 1436 Kakadu National Park ...... 1437 Land Fund ...... 1437 Higher Education Funding ...... 1438 Equal Pay ...... 1438 Mahogany Glider ...... 1440 Defence Runways ...... 1441 Mining Industry ...... 1441 Women ...... 1442 Higher Education Funding ...... 1443 Australian Defence Force Academy ...... 1444 Budget Deficit ...... 1444 Land Fund ...... 1449 Kakadu National Park ...... 1449 Shipping Grants Legislation Bill 1996— Report of Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee ...... 1451 Access to Internet ...... 1451 Coalition: Election Commitments ...... 1451 CONTENTS—continued

Notices of Motion— Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Regulations 1454 Matters of Urgency— Greenhouse Emissions ...... 1454 Documents— Consideration ...... 1461 Higher Education Funding ...... 1462 Committees— Employment, Education and Training References Committee— Reference ...... 1490 Documents— Australian Law Reform Committee ...... 1490 Committees— Membership ...... 1490 Petitions— Wool ...... 1490 Committees— Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee—Report . 1491 Radioactive Waste Committee—Report ...... 1493 Consideration ...... 1494 Adjournment— Tasmanian Economy ...... 1494 Western Australia: Liberal Party ...... 1496 Second Sydney Airport ...... 1498 Queensland Parliament ...... 1498 Second Sydney Airport ...... 1500 Documents— Tabling ...... 1502 Questions On Notice— Bureau of Meteorology Calendar—(Question No. 32) ...... 1503 SENATE 1371

Thursday, 30 May 1996 In addition we support the ACTU/ANF campaign against the Coalition’s proposals to dismantle other existing industrial protection. The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. by Senator Panizza (from 14 citizens). Michael Beahan) took the chair at 9.30 a.m., Logging and Woodchipping and read prayers. To the Honourable the President and Members of PETITIONS the Senate in Parliament assembled. The Clerk—Petitions have been lodged for We are dismayed at the continuing destruction of old growth and wilderness forests around Australia, presentation as follows: despite the National Forest Policy Statement jointly signed by the Commonwealth and all States except Census Tasmania. To the Honourable the President and Members of Intensive logging, most often to feed a voracious the Senate in Parliament assembled. The Petition woodchip industry is underway or planned for of the undersigned shows: many high conservation value forests. These forests That the current practice of destroying the Census should be protected by the commitments of the is denying future generations an invaluable and Commonwealth and State Governments under the irreplaceable resource of data on medical, histori- NFPS. cal, social, scientific, and demographic factors. These forests include: Your Petitioners request that the Senate should: Coolangubra Wilderness and other areas of the Request the Government to review its current S.E. Forests of NSW along with rainforest and policy of destroying the Census; and support a other N.E. areas of NSW including Wingham, proposal to retain the census forms for release for Mistake, Richmond Range, Chaelundi, North specific research purposes in either 70 or 100 years Washpool, Barrington and Dorrigo. time. The Southern Highlands, Great Western Tiers by Senator Bourne (from 45 citizens). and Tarkine Wilderness of Tasmania. The Karri and Jarrah forests of S.W. Western Industrial Relations: Reform Australia. To the Honourable President and Members of the The Errinundra Plateau and other areas of the Senate in Parliament assembled. East Gippsland forests of Victoria. We the undersigned citizens respectfully submit The rainforests of the Proserpine region of that any reform to Australia’s system of industrial Queensland. relations should recognise the special needs of employees to be protected from disadvantage, ex- We request that the Government act urgently to ploitation and discrimination in the workplace. protect our precious forests by utilising the Commonwealth’s legal and constitutional powers, We the petitioners oppose the Coalition policies including: which represent a fundamentally anti-worker regime and we call upon the Senate to provide an effective Refusal of export woodchip licences check and balance to the Coalition’s legislative Powers to control corporations program by rejecting such a program and ensuring that: Protection of areas listed on the register of the National Estate 1. The existing powers of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC) be Protection and effective funding of areas identi- maintained to provide for an effective fied for their World Heritage values. independent umpire overseeing awards and Genuine and effective action by the Government workplace bargaining processes. to protect these and other old growth and wilder- 2. Paid rate awards be preserved and capable ness forests is critical. A comprehensive plantation of adjustment, as is currently the case in the strategy rather than exploiting native forests is the legislation. way forward for a truly environmentally responsible timber industry. We further request that the 3. The AIRC’s powers to arbitrate and make Government take effective action without further awards must be preserved in the existing delay. form and not be restricted to a stripped back set of minimum or core conditions. by Senator Panizza (from 209 citizens). 1372 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

Forest Protection We believe that increases to HECS will discour- age individuals from enrolling in universities. To the President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled; We believe that university entry should be based This Petition of the undersigned Australian upon relative merit, not relative wealth. citizens respectfully points out that: there is a growing demand for urgent federal government We believe that education has a direct social and intervention, to protect all Australia’s remaining economic benefit and appropriate levels of funding natural heritage forests. should be made available from public revenue. Your petitioners therefore request the Senate Your petitioners therefore humbly petition that to call on the Federal Government to: you will not cut funding to universities or increase immediately implement the moratorium clause HECS fees. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, in the national forest policy statement; will ever ask. permanently protect all remaining high conser- vation value native forests throughout Australia, by Senator Stott Despoja (from 21 citizens). adequate to secure the bio-diversity and natural and cultural heritage, by bringing them under the Pet Food guardianship of indigenous peoples; utilise our extensive plantation timber for Senator DENMAN (Tasmania)—by industry needs; leave—I present to the Senate the following create economic incentives for farm forestry petition, from 544 citizens, which is not in employment on existing cleared lands in the conformity with the standing orders as it is propagation, establishment and management of not in the correct form: sustainable permaculture style, mixed-species timber plantations, inter-grown with a variety of To the Honourable the President and Members of annual crops for fibre and food production; the Senate in Parliament assembled. encouragement investment in the growing and The petition of the undersigned shows: marketing of indigenous, plantation based tree products such as wattle seed, eucalyptus and tea We the undersigned citizens respectfully submit our tree oils, and other medicinal and nutritional opposition to the current imposition of Sales Tax resources; at the general rate of 22% on fresh meat packaged develop educational eco-tourism as a sensitive- for consumption by cats and dogs. The petitioners ly managed industry in appropriate forest areas, note particularly that: and with full respect for Aboriginal heritage and 1. There is no special policy basis for taxing sacred sites; fresh meat packaged for consumption by cats And further support the above initiatives by the and dogs. progressive utilisation of the military to assist rural communities to implement sustainable plantation 2. Cats and dogs as pets play an important and forestry practices. crucial role in many people’s lives. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever Your petitioners request that the Senate initiate a pray. review of the classification of canned meat, dried by Senator Panizza (from 15 citizens). food and particularly fresh meat packaged for consumption by cats and dogs with a view to Higher Education Funding exempting these forms of food from sales tax or to To the Honourable the President and Members of charging the applicable classification from the the Senate in Parliament assembled: The humble current general rate to the taxable rate of 12%. petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever respectfully showeth: pray. That we are opposed to any moves to cut funding to universities. Sale of Telstra We believe that funding cuts to universities can only have a negative impact on society and will Senator SPINDLER (Victoria)—by impede the development of our Nation. leave—I present to the Senate the following Furthermore, we are opposed to any increases to petition, from 10 citizens, which is not in the annual amount payable by students via the conformity with the standing orders as it is Higher Education Contribution Scheme. not in the correct form: Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1373

We, the undersigned, oppose the proposed part-sale NOTICES OF MOTION of Telstra, Australia’s national telecommunications carrier. Consideration of Legislation . In 1995 Telstra made a $1.75 billion after-tax Senator KEMP (Victoria—Manager of profit, paying the Federal Government $1.5 Government Business in the Senate)—I give billion in taxes and dividends. notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall . Profits from public enterprises help fund public move: education, public health, environmental repair, That the order of the Senate of 29 November public transport and other necessary community 1994, relating to the consideration of legislation, services. not apply to the following bills: . Privatisation of public enterprises means less Medicare Levy Amendment Bill 1996 government funds, and therefore more fees and charges for education, health and other essential Income Tax Assessment Amendment Bill 1996. community services. I also table the statements of reasons justify- . Telstra is one of the largest employers in Aus- ing the need for these bills to be considered tralia, with over 70,000 full-time workers em- during this sittings. I seek leave to have the ployed. Privatisation will mean job cuts, higher statements incorporated in Hansard. charges and increased pressure on the remaining workforce to work harder and longer. Leave granted. . A Telstra sell-off will increase pressure to: The statements read as follows— STATEMENT OF REASONS—FOR (a) introduce timed local calls, and INTRODUCTION AND PASSAGE OF THE (b) scrap the cross-subsidised services which MEDICARE LEVY AMENDMENT BILL keep prices down for people in remote areas. 1996 IN THE CURRENT SITTINGS . A partial sell-off of Telstra will undermine and reduce its revenue base, forcing a total sell-off Name of proposed Bill: Medicare Levy Amendment at a later date. We, the public, will lose the Bill 1996. benefit of Telstra’s long-term profitability for a Purpose of the proposed Bill: The purpose of the short-term gain. Bill is to: . Environmental programs can be funded by . increase the rate of the Medicare levy, from cutting Australia’s massive $10 billion annual 1.5% to 1.7%, for the 1996-97 financial year; military spending and by eliminating tax avoid- and ance. . make members of the Defence Force liable to a proportion of the full Medicare levy, equivalent How to Vote Cards to a rate of 0.2%, for the 1996-97 financial year. Senator SPINDLER (Victoria)—by These changes will raise revenue in connection leave—I present to the Senate the following with an agreed scheme between the Commonwealth petition, from 68 citizens, which is not in and the States and Territories, to fund the payment conformity with the Standing Orders as it is of compensation for guns surrendered under a scheme to remove certain firearms from our not in the correct form: community. To the Honourable the President and Members of Reasons for urgency: These measures apply from the Senate in the Parliament assembled. 1 July 1996. Introduction and passage in these The Petition of the undersigned shows: That the sittings will make it possible for amendments to the printing and distribution of ‘How to Vote’ Cards on regulations governing tax instalment deductions to Polling Day in State and Commonwealth Elections be made before that date. The amended regulations is extremely wasteful as the distribution of ap- will increase the rate of tax instalment deductions proximately 40 million pieces of paper during the to take account of the increased levy. In addition, last Federal Election indicates. passage by 1 July 1996 will give the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) greater certainty, which will Your Petitioners request that the Senate should: facilitate the implementation of the increased rates Enact legislation to stop the use of ‘How to Vote’ before the beginning of the new financial year. Cards at Commonwealth elections and that it should prevail on all State Governments in Austral- Result if bill not dealt with in these sittings: If the ia to pass similar legislation for State elections. amendments to the regulations are not in place by 1 July 1996, employers will not be able to incorpo- Petitions received. rate the increased levy in tax instalment deductions 1374 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 from that date, so that most employees will not This statement is circulated with the Authority of begin to "pay" the levy until some time after the the Treasurer. beginning of the financial year. The ATO will not be able to issue adjusted Schedules to employers Regulations and Ordinances Committee showing the increased rates of tax instalment Senator O’CHEE (Queensland)—On deductions until the regulations are made, and it behalf of the Standing Committee on Regula- will be more difficult for the ATO to make the necessary adjustments to other areas of its oper- tions and Ordinances, I give notice that, 15 ations and its computer systems by 1 July 1996. sitting days after today, I shall move: This statement is circulated with the Authority of 1. That Regulation 8 of the Trade Practices the Treasurer. Regulations (Amendment), as contained in Statutory Rules 1996 No. 20 and made under the Trade Practices Act 1974, be disallowed. 2. That the AUSTUDY Regulations (Amend- STATEMENT OF REASONS—FOR ment), as contained in Statutory Rules 1995 INTRODUCTION AND PASSAGE OF THE No. 393 and made under the Student and INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT Youth Assistance Act 1973, be disallowed. AMENDMENT BILL 1996 IN THE 3. That the Air Navigation (Aircraft Engine CURRENT SITTINGS Emissions) Regulations (Amendment), as contained in Statutory Rules 1995 No. 277 and Name of proposed Bill: Income Tax Assessment made under the Air Navigation Act 1920, be Amendment Bill 1996. disallowed. Purpose of the proposed Bill: The Income Tax 4. That the Moomba-Sydney Pipeline System Assessment Amendment Bill 1996 will, make Sale Regulations, as contained in Statutory consequential amendments to the Income Tax Rules 1996 No. 19 and made under the Assessment Act 1936 to allow the payment of a Moomba-Sydney Pipeline System Sale Act proportion of the Medicare levy by members of the 1994, be disallowed. Defence Force, and certain relatives and associates of members of the Defence Force. The amendments 5. That the Health Insurance Commission Regu- are related to the measures introduced in the lations (Amendment), as contained in Statutory Medicare Levy Amendment Bill 1996. Rules 1995 No. 440 and made under the Health Insurance Commission Act 1973, be Reasons for urgency: These measures apply from disallowed. 1 July 1996, and are related to the Medicare Levy Amendment Bill 1996, for which introduction and 6. That the Health Insurance Commission Regu- passage is also being sought in these sittings, lations (Amendment), as contained in Statutory because it will make it possible for amendments to Rules 1995 No. 375 and made under the the regulations governing tax instalment deductions Health Insurance Commission Act 1973, be to be made before that date. The amended regula- disallowed. tions will increase the rate of tax instalment 7. That the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regula- deductions to take account of the increased levy, tions (Amendment), as contained in Statutory both for ordinary levy payers and for Defence Rules 1996 No. 31 and made under the Cus- Force personnel. In addition, passage by 1 July toms Act 1901, be disallowed. 1996 will give the Australian Taxation Office 8. That the Customs (Prohibited Exports) Regula- (ATO) greater certainty, which will facilitate the tions (Amendment), as contained in Statutory implementation of the increased rates before the Rules 1996 No. 32 and made under the Cus- beginning of the new financial year. toms Act 1901, be disallowed. Result if bill not dealt with in these sittings: If the 9. That the Ozone Protection Regulations, as amendments to the regulations are not in place by contained in Statutory Rules 1995 No 389 and 1 July 1996, employers will not be able to incorpo- made under the Ozone Protection Act 1989, be rate the increased levy in tax instalment deductions disallowed. from that date, so that most employees will not begin to "pay" the levy until some time after the 10. That the Ozone Protection (Licence Fees— beginning of the financial year. The ATO will not Imports) Regulations, as contained in Statutory be able to issue adjusted Schedules to employers Rules 1995 No. 390 and made under the showing the increased rates of tax instalment Ozone Protection (Licence Fees—Imports) Act deductions until the regulations are made, and it 1995, be disallowed. will be more difficult for the ATO to make the 11. That the Ozone Protection (Licence Fees— necessary adjustments to other areas of its oper- Manufacture) Regulations, as contained in ations and its computer systems by 1 July 1996. Statutory Rules 1995 No. 391 and made under Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1375

the Ozone Protection (Licence Fees— Snowy River Manufacture) Act 1995, be disallowed. Senator BOURNE (New South Wales)—I 12. That the Australian Meat and Live-stock Order give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I No. MQ64/95 made under section 68 of the shall move: Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1995, be disallowed. That the Senate— 13. That the Australian Meat and Live-stock Order (a) notes that: No. MQ66/96 made under section 68 of the (i) 5 June 1996 is World Environment Day, Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1995, be (ii) the Snowy River has been reduced to an disallowed. insignificant trickle, 14. That the Australian Meat and Live-stock Order (iii) because of the various water modification No. MQ67/96 made under section 68 of the and drainage schemes along the river, the Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1995, be remaining water will be subject to further disallowed. threatening processes, I seek leave to make a short statement about (iv) the ecological value of the river is being reduced because of this decrease in flow, the committee’s concerns with this legislation. and Leave granted. (v) the Snowy River is part of the romantic Senator O’CHEE—The committee’s history of this nation; and concerns with these instruments include (b) calls on the Federal Government to make a real commitment to the environment by possible prejudicial retrospectivity, possible returning the Snowy River to its former invalid incorporation of material, fees with no state. explanation, non-payment of witnesses’ expenses, inappropriate use of regulations, Aussie’s Coffee Shop discretions which may not be subject to merits Senator CHAMARETTE (Western Aus- review, a possible unreasonably short period tralia)—I give notice that, on the next day of within which certain actions must be com- sitting, I shall move: pleted, and the use of blanket rather than That the Senate— specific amendments. (a) expresses its great sadness at the departure from Parliament House of Osvaldo Uranium Mining Meneghello, known to all as Aussie; Senator LEES (South Australia—Deputy (b) notes the enormous contribution Aussie, Leader of the Australian Democrats)—I give Marilyn and all the staff at ‘Aussie’s’ have notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall made to the culture and atmosphere of the move: Parliament; (c) thanks Aussie, Marilyn and all the wonder- That the Senate— fully efficient and friendly staff for the (a) notes that: years of comfort, hospitality, laughs, caf- feine and chatter that so many in the Parlia- (i) 5 June 1996 is World Environment Day, ment have enjoyed; and (ii) the proposal to mine uranium at Jabiluka (d) wishes Osvaldo and Marilyn all the very in the Kakadu World Heritage area is not best for the future. supported by the traditional owners, Banking (iii) there have already been spills and propo- sals for release of contaminated water Senator JONES (Queensland)—I give from the existing Ranger Mine, and notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall (iv) safe long-term storage of mine waste is move: essential, as 80 per cent of the radioac- That the Senate— tivity remains in the tailings; and (a) notes: (b) calls on the Government to demonstrate a (i) the action by the Borbidge minority real commitment to the environment by Queensland Coalition Government in refusing any further export permits for breaking its election promise to retain uranium. Queensland’s public assets, with the an- 1376 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

nouncement of plans to sell its State- (ii) with concern, similar reports that the owned financiers, and annual funding, through the Department (ii) the proposal by the Federal Treasurer (Mr of Defence, of the Strategic and Defence Costello) to hold an urgent inquiry into Studies Centre of the Australian National Australia’s banking and financial institu- University (ANU) will be maintained, tions; and (iii) with concern, the refusal of the Govern- (b) calls on the Federal Coalition Government ment to cut the defence budget when the to refer to the inquiry all national ramifica- preventative work of the Department of tions of the merger of the Metway Bank, Foreign Affairs and Trade is integral to Queensland Industry Development Corpora- reducing reactive expenditure by Defence, tion and Suncorp, and the threat posed to and the nation’s economy by the potential loss (iv) the internationally-reputed work of the of about 1 000 jobs. Peace Research Centre in developing Port Lillias notions of cooperative security, preventa- tive diplomacy, approaches to peacekeep- Senator SPINDLER (Victoria)—I give ing and non-military solutions to conflict; notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall and move: (b) calls on the Government to: That the Senate— (i) maintain funding to the ANU’s Peace (a) notes that: Research Centre at existing levels, (i) 5 June 1996 is World Environment Day, (ii) reverse its stated decision to quarantine (ii) hearings into the proposal to relocate the cuts from the Department of Defence, and Coode Island industrial facilities at Port Lillias, Victoria, have been completed, (iii) review its priorities with regard to the work of the Department of Foreign Af- (iii) nearly all of the submissions were op- fairs and Trade and the Department of posed to this proposal, with the Defence. unsurprising exception of the Melbourne City Council, one industry group and the Salinity State Government of Victoria, (iv) Port Lillias is an important site for the Senator STOTT DESPOJA (South Aus- orange-bellied parrot, tralia)—I give notice that, on the next day of (v) there are only 200 orange-bellied parrots sitting, I shall move: left in the world, and That the Senate— (vi) the proposal to site the chemical facilities at Port Lillias relies on the Common- (a) notes that: wealth’s contributing some $17 million to (i) 5 June 1996 is World Environment Day, the project; and (ii) dry land salinity in Western Australia is (b) calls on the Government to demonstrate a a significant problem, real commitment to the environment by not subsidising such an environmentally-damag- (iii) areas around Esperance and southern ing proposal or, at the very least, conducting Western Australia have salt scalds so a full Commonwealth environmental impact visible they are clear from 30 000 feet, assessment under the Environmental Protec- (iv) salinity can be measured in terms of the tion (Impact of Proposals) Act. cost of lost agricultural production per Budget Cuts year and loss of fertile soil, and Senator MARGETTS (Western Austral- (v) salinity can only be addressed in time ia)—I give notice that, on the next day of spans measured in generations, yet there is still clearing and use of poor agricultu- sitting, I shall move: ral practices which will only worsen the That the Senate— problem; and (a) notes: (b) calls on the Government to demonstrate a (i) with concern, reports that the Government real commitment to the environment by is proposing to cut annual funding for the developing national guidelines for land Peace Research Centre from the foreign clearing and for rehabilitation of salt-affect- affairs budget, ed areas. Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1377

Tully Millstream Project are a reflection of this commitment to unchecked woodchipping, Senator WOODLEY (Queensland)—I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall (iii) the regulations do not provide for a drop move: in real terms in the woodchip quota, and That the Senate— (iv) once regional forest agreements are in place, there will be no national ceiling on (a) notes that: the woodchip quota; and (i) 5 June 1996 is World Environment Day, (b) calls on the Government to put in place (ii) the Queensland Government has been policies and regulations which provide for discussing the damming of the Tully a genuine reduction in woodchipping, and Millstream for a hydro-electric scheme, which provide proper protection for (iii) this would have the effect of drowning Australia’s old-growth forests. part of a world heritage listed wet tropics area and affecting 130 kms of stream Drugs flows, Senator SPINDLER (Victoria)—I give (iv) a further 4 000 hectares of forest listed on notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall the interim register of the national estate would be affected, move: (v) there are alternatives to the scheme and That the Senate— it is therefore unnecessary, (a) notes that: (vi) there is a half a million dollar tourist industry at risk as a direct result of the (i) in 1951, Australia had the world’s highest scheme, per capita consumption of heroin, at 5.25 kg per million people, and (vii) while the Government states that the hydro-electric scheme is better because it (ii) in the 1958 annual report submitted by will not contribute to the greenhouse the State of Queensland to the Common- effect, the latest studies published in New wealth, the Queensland Director General Scientist of 4 May 1996 demonstrate that of Health wrote that ‘all addicts receive dams for hydro power pose a threat, and their supplies from licit sources . . . and (viii) in one case, studies revealed 16 times the as a consequence, control presents no greenhouse potential of an equivalent difficulties’; fossil fuel power station due to the mass (b) notes that in 1995, following an extended rotting vegetation problem; and period of prohibition of heroin: (b) calls on the Federal Government to demon- (i) young Australians were dying in their strate a real commitment to the environment hundreds, by proclaiming the Tully area of the wet tropics to be an area under the World (ii) the Australian Institute of Criminology Heritage Protection Act in order to protect estimated that the annual cost of enfor- it from the Queensland Government’s cing illegal drug use was about $400 hydro-electric proposal. million, (iii) a report into the police corruption in Logging and Woodchipping Queensland found that ‘. . . drugs have Senator CHAMARETTE (Western Aus- caused more incursions into the civil tralia)—I give notice that, on the next day of liberties of ordinary people, more corrup- sitting, I shall move: tion and more interference than almost anything else’, and That the Senate— (iv) organised drug-related crime now presents (a) notes: a serious threat to the rule of law in this (i) with concern, evidence that adherence to country; and the National Forest Policy Statement and the concept of the regional forest agree- (c) calls on Victorian parliamentarians, as they ment is continued adherence to unfettered consider the recommendations of the woodchipping in this country, Premier’s Drug Advisory Council’s report, to reflect upon the fact that prohibition as a (ii) the export control regulations relating to means of regulating the supply of drugs in woodchipping, tabled on 30 April 1996, this country has been a failure. 1378 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

Land Clearing (ii) the effect of this decision will be that Tasmanians will suffer the direct discri- Senator BOURNE (New South Wales)—I mination of being unable to have physical give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I access to the Commonwealth Ombuds- shall move: man; and That the Senate— (b) calls on the Government to recognise the (a) notes that: fundamental importance of the Ombuds- man’s office in providing the opportunity (i) 5 June 1996 is World Environment Day, for all citizens, including Tasmanians, to (ii) the land clearing rate in New South cause government bodies to be accountable Wales is the second worst in Australia for their actions. and is leading to salinity, desertification, erosion and massive land degradation, and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi (iii) land clearing is contributing to the green- Senator CHAMARETTE (Western Aus- house effect and the loss of habitat for tralia)—I give notice that, on the next day of endangered and threatened species; and sitting, I shall move: (b) calls on the Government to show a real commitment to the environment by imple- That the Senate— menting national land clearing controls. (a) warmly congratulates Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, of the National League for Democracy Higher Education Funding in Burma, on being admitted to the Order of Senator MARGETTS (Western Austral- Australia; ia)—I give notice that, on the next day of (b) notes: sitting, I shall move: (i) Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s unwavering That the Senate— struggle for peaceful change in spite of (a) notes that the Minister for Employment, threats to her life and liberty, and Education, Training and Youth Affairs (ii) that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s inclusion (Senator Vanstone), has indicated cuts of in the Order of Australia is a message of between 5 and 12 per cent to the higher support for all opponents of the military education sector which it cannot sustain regime in Burma; and without a massive purging of student num- (c) calls on the Australian Government to do all bers and declining quality in research and in its power to assist in the restoration of teaching; democracy in Burma. (b) supports the 24-hour strike on 30 May 1996 by the National Tertiary Education Union, Water Pollution other education unions and student unions Senator BOURNE (New South Wales)—I against the cuts proposed by the Coalition Government to higher education; and give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: (c) calls on the Government to stop its attacks on the education sector, revise its debt That the Senate— recovery program and reverse its quarantine (a) notes that: of the Department of Defence from funding cuts. (i) 5 June 1996 is World Environment Day, (ii) due to sewage disposal, unacceptable Commonwealth Ombudsman levels of E. coli are found in many coast- Senator LEES (South Australia—Deputy al areas of Australia according to the Na- Leader of the Australian Democrats)—On tional Health and Medical Research Council of Australia’s guidelines for behalf of Senator Bell I give notice that, on recreational water use, and the next day of sitting, he will move: (iii) the technology exists to ensure that only That the Senate— clean water is returned to water systems; (a) notes, with concern, that: and (i) the Commonwealth Ombudsman, Ms (b) calls on the Government to demonstrate a Philippa Smith, has announced that her real commitment to the environment by current agency arrangement with the having national guidelines for water pollu- Tasmanian Ombudsman will cease on 31 tion and for rehabilitation of our rivers and May 1996, and coasts. Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1379

Greenhouse Gases (ii) the changes to river levels, the alteration of flow regimes, the development of Senator KERNOT (Queensland—Leader irrigation schemes and the clearing of of the Australian Democrats)—I give notice native vegetation has led to irreversible that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: changes in the hydrological regime of the basin and many biological systems have That the Senate— been modified or destroyed, and (a) notes that: (iii) that problems now facing the basin range from high salt and nutrient levels in rivers (i) 5 June 1996 is World Environment Day, to rising groundwater tables; and (ii) Australia is the worst offender per capita (b) calls on the Government: for emission of all greenhouse gases and all sources of greenhouse gases, (i) to tackle the many problems faced by the Murray-Darling basin as a matter of (iii) there is no national greenhouse legislation urgency, and to give force to national targets and (ii) to fund the urgently-needed upgrading of international commitments, nor has the irrigation schemes and the mass replant- new Government promised any, and ing of many hectares of salt-prone land in (iv) Australia’s weak and internationally the coming budget, with no strings at- embarrassing response is to argue that we tached. are a special case and point the finger at developing nations, saying they should COMMITTEES reduce their levels instead; and Selection of Bills Committee (b) calls on the Government to make a real Report commitment to the Australian environment by making greenhouse targets with industry Senator PANIZZA (Western Australia)—I mandatory to enable us to meet our obliga- present the third report of 1996 of the Selec- tions. tion of Bills Committee. Ordered that the report be adopted. Murray-Darling Basin Senator PANIZZA—I seek leave to have Senator LEES (South Australia—Deputy the report incorporated in Hansard. Leader of the Australian Democrats)—I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall Leave granted. move: The report read as follows— That the Senate— SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE (a) notes: REPORT NO. 3 OF 1996 1. The Committee met on 29 May 1996. (i) the Murray-Darling basin contains 75 per cent of Australia’s irrigated land and 2. The Committee resolved: agricultural production from the basin is (a) That the following bills be referred to valued at around $12 billion per year, committees:

Stage at which Bill title referred Legislation Committee Reporting date Aboriginal and Torres Strait immediately Finance and Public Ad- 24 June 1996 Islander Commission Amendment ministration Bill 1996 Airports Bill 1996—provisions of immediately Rural and Regional Af- 20 August 1996 the bill fairs and Transport Airports (Transitional) Bill immediately Rural and Regional Af- 20 August 1996 1996—provisions of the bill fairs and Transport 1380 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

Stage at which Bill title referred Legislation Committee Reporting date Social Security Legislation immediately Legal and Constitutional 20 August 1996 Amendment (Newly Arrived Resident’s Waiting Periods and Other Measures) Bill 1996— provisions of the bill

(b) That the following bills not be referred to General, from the Governor of Victoria a committees: facsimile copy of the certificate of the choice Civil Aviation Amendment Bill 1996 of the houses of the Victorian parliament of Customs Tariff (Miscellaneous Amendments) Senator Stephen Michael Conroy to fill the Bill 1996 vacancy caused by the resignation of Senator Education Services for Overseas Students the Hon. Gareth John Evans QC. I table a (Registration of Providers and Financial copy of the certificate. Regulation) Amendment Bill (No. 1) 1996 Housing Assistance Bill 1996 ORDER OF BUSINESS Prohibition of Exportation of Uranium (Cus- toms Act Amendment) Bill 1996 Employment, Education and Training Restitution of Property to King Island Dairy References Committee Products Pty Ltd Bill 1996 Motion (by Senator Chris Evans, at the Telecommunications (Carrier Licence Fees) request of Senator Crowley) agreed to: Amendment Bill 1996 That business of the Senate notice of motion No. Uranium Mining in Australian World Heritage 2 standing in the name of Senator Cowley for Properties (Prohibition) Bill 1996 today, relating to the reference of a matter to the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment Bill Employment, Education and Training References (No. 1) 1996. Committee be postponed till the next day of sitting. The Committee recommends accordingly. 3. The Committee has deferred consideration of the Government Business following bills to the next meeting: Motion (by Senator Kemp) agreed to: (deferred from meeting of 8 May 1996) That the following government business orders Koongarra Project Area Repeal Bill 1996 of the day be considered from 12.45 p.m. till not Parliamentary Proceedings Broadcasting later than 2 pm today: Amendment Bill 1996 No. 3 Loan Bill 1996 (John Panizza) No. 4 Sydney 2000 Games (Indicia and Imag- Chair es) Protection Bill 1996 30 May 1996 No. 5 Australian Sports Drug Agency Amendment Bill 1996 ORDER OF BUSINESS No. 6 Indigenous Education (Supplementary Sessional Orders Assistance) Amendment Bill 1996 Motion (by Senator Kemp)—by leave— No. 7 Housing Loans Insurance Corporation agreed to: (Transfer of Assets and Abolition) Bill 1996 That the sessional orders in force on 30 Novem- ber 1995 operate on Friday, 31 May, Monday, 17 No. 8 Housing Assistance Bill 1996, second June, Tuesday, 18 June, Wednesday, 19 June and reading. Thursday, 20 June 1996. REPRESENTATION OF VICTORIA LEAVE OF ABSENCE The PRESIDENT—I inform the Senate Motion (by Senator Conroy)—by leave— that I have received, through the Governor- agreed to: Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1381

That leave of absence be granted to Senator (a) public education; McKiernan for the period 17 to 28 June 1996, on (b) appropriate exemptions; account of absence overseas. (c) dispute resolution; ORDER OF BUSINESS (d) remedies; General Business (e) the availability of class actions; and Motion (by Senator Kemp) agreed to: (f) review of the legislation. That the order of General Business for consider- (5) The extent to which the Sexuality Discrimi- ation today be as follows: nation Bill 1995 [1996] effectively addresses the issues of sexuality and transgender (1) Consideration of Government documents; discrimination and vilification and the (2) General business order of the day No. 41 nature of any amendments required to make (Higher Education—funding). it more effective. LEAVE OF ABSENCE I seek leave to make a brief two-minute statement. Motion (by Senator Chris Evans)—by leave—agreed to: Senator Vanstone—We are happy for this motion to be made formal, but we do not That leave of absence be granted to Senators Cooney and Colston on 31 May, on account of want a long debate. If Senator Spindler sticks parliamentary business interstate. to two minutes, that is fine. Senator Faulkner—That is all he has COMMITTEES asked leave for. We will give him leave to Legal and Constitutional References speak for two minutes. Committee Senator Vanstone—I am just making the Reference point clear so it does not go on. We can make Senator SPINDLER (Victoria)—I move: it longer if you want to interrupt me. I am only trying to be helpful here. If you want to That the following matters be referred to the Legal and Constitutional References Committee for interrupt, we can take longer by arguing about inquiry and report by the first sitting day of March it. I simply make the point that two minutes 1997: is fine but, in addition to that two minutes (1) The need to protect Australian citizens being fine, depending on the nature of Senator against discrimination and vilification on the Spindler’s remarks other people may want to grounds of their sexuality or transgender follow. Perhaps he could bear that in mind identity, as dealt with by the Sexuality and get through with his two minutes easily. Discrimination Bill 1995 [1996], with particular reference to Australia’s interna- Leave granted. tional obligations in relation to sexuality Senator SPINDLER—The issue of discri- discrimination and transgender identity and mination on the grounds of sexuality and the action required to meet those obliga- tions. transgender identity is an important challenge facing our society. The preparation of the bill (2) Measures which need to be taken to remove any legislative and administrative provisions has occupied much of my time during 1995. which are currently discriminatory on the I wish to place on record my gratitude to grounds of a person’s sexuality or Deputy Clerk Peter O’Keeffe for his patience transgender identity. and effective assistance throughout that time. (3) The extent to which current legislation at a The bill has been acknowledged as being State level addresses discrimination on the comprehensive and well balanced between the grounds of sexuality or transgender identity competing demands of what our community and the extent to which Commonwealth will accept at this stage and the essential legislation should take account of these justice of the principle that all citizens should provisions. be treated as equal before the law. (4) The appropriate scope of Commonwealth sexuality discrimination legislation and, in In some ways, I would have preferred the particular, the need for provisions including, bill to have been simply passed by all parties but not limited to, the areas of: and by both houses. As it turned out, that was 1382 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 too much to expect. The advantage of it year in the central office of that depart- proceeding through this inquiry is that the ment or agency; and consultation process will be continued in a (b) by not later than the tenth day of the very open and public way, leading hopefully spring sittings, an indexed list of the titles to greater understanding of the issues and of all relevant files, including new parts support for an improved piece of legislation. of existing files, created between 1 Janu- ary and 30 June of that year in the central The terms of reference have been agreed by office of that department or agency. all parties in the Legal and Constitutional References Committee. I look forward to (2) For the purposes of this resolution: contributing to the deliberations of the com- "autumn sittings" means the period of mittee, albeit from the other side of the table. sittings of the Senate first commencing on a day after 1 January in any year; Question resolved in the affirmative. "indexed list" means: CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATION (a) a hard copy of an indexed list in which Senator KEMP (Victoria—Manager of file titles may be grouped by classifica- tions used internally within departments Government Business in the Senate)—I ask or agencies, such as "policy", "legisla- that government business notice of motion tion", "advisings", etc.; and No. 2 standing in the name of the Parlia- (b) the same indexed list in electronic format mentary Secretary to the Minister for Social for IBM compatible personal computers Security proposing the exemption of the of 286 processors or above on 3.5" high Australian Federal Police Amendment Bill density 1.44 MB floppy disks in an un- 1996 from the order of the Senate concerning compressed form; the file format to be in consideration of legislation be taken as for- ASCII or, if the departments or agencies mal. have the lists in Microsoft Word for Windows or Microsoft Access, in Word Leave not granted. (*.doc) and Access (*.mdb) formats respectively and labelled accordingly; CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATION where data extends over more than one Senator KEMP (Victoria—Manager of floppy disk, each new disk commences with a new computer file; all disks sub- Government Business in the Senate)—I ask mitted should be scanned for computer that government business notice of motion viruses and it should be indicated on each No. 1 standing in the name of the Parlia- disk that this has been done; mentary Secretary to the Minister for Social "relevant files" includes files relating to the Security proposing the exemption of the policy advising functions of the department or Shipping Grants Legislation Bill 1996 from agency, including any relating to the develop- the order of the Senate concerning consider- ment of legislation and other matters of public ation of legislation be taken as formal. administration, but need not include: Leave not granted. (a) files transferred to the Australian Ar- chives; INDEXED LISTS OF FILES (b) case related files (for example personal Motion (by Senator Harradine)—as representations or dealing with the per- sonal affairs of departmental or agency amended by leave—agreed to. clients or taxpayers); and (1) That, subject to paragraph (2), there be laid (c) files essentially related to the internal on the table, by each minister in the Senate, administration of the department or agen- in respect of each department or agency cy (for example staff or personnel mat- administered by that minister, or by a ters); minister in the House of Representatives represented by that minister: "spring sittings" means the period of sittings (a) by not later than the tenth day of the of the Senate first commencing on a day after autumn sittings, an indexed list of the 31 July in any year; and titles of all relevant files, including new "title" means the name or title of the file, parts of existing files, created between 1 excluding any part of that name or title which July and 31 December of the preceding would necessarily disclose commercially Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1383

confidential, identifiably personal or national Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade security matters. References Committee (3) That this order have continuing effect. Report (4) That, after the first returns under this order Senator CONROY (Victoria)—On behalf are tabled, the Finance and Public Adminis- of Senator Forshaw, I present the report of the tration References Committee undertake a Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Refer- review of the operation of this order to ences Committee on matters referred to the ascertain: committee during the previous parliament. (a) the most efficient and effective method of Ordered that the report be adopted. ensuring that the information required by this order to be tabled, is available on the AIRPORTS BILL 1996 public record (including in electronic form); AIRPORTS (TRANSITIONAL) BILL (b) whether the indexing of file lists across 1996 departments and agencies can be im- proved in consultation with the Australian First Reading Archives to provide uniform methods of Bills received from the House of Represen- obtaining access to government data; tatives. (c) whether the order needs amendment to Motion (by Senator Kemp) agreed to: take into account e-mail and electronic That these bills may proceed without formalities, data storage; and may be taken together and be now read a first time. (d) any legal or practical difficulties encount- Bills read a first time. ered by departments and agencies in complying with the order; Second Reading and that the committee report to the Senate by Senator KEMP (Victoria—Parliamentary no later than the first day of sitting in 1997. Secretary to the Minister for Social Security) (10.00 a.m.)—I move: COMMITTEES That these bills be now read a second time. Community Affairs Legislation I seek leave to have the second reading Committee speeches incorporated in Hansard Leave granted. Report The speeches read as follows— Senator KNOWLES (Western Australia)— AIRPORTS BILL 1996 I present the report of the Community Affairs Legislation Committee on the examination of Government’s Approach to Airports annual reports. The Government recognises that airports are vitally important to the communities and regions which Ordered that the report be printed. they serve. In circumstances where airport usage is increasing Community Affairs Legislation rapidly, passenger and freight users need airports Committee which are operating efficiently, are responsive to user requirements and which deliver the services Report necessary to meet the requirements of the Austral- ian tourism, export and service industries which Senator KNOWLES (Western Australia)— depend on air transport to compete in world I present the report of the Community Affairs markets. Legislation Committee on the matter relating At the same time, airports can generate substantial to the implementation and operation of the adverse impacts, particularly for the communities Health Legislation (Private Health Insurance located in the immediate vicinity of airports. The Reform) Amendment Bill 1995 referred to the Government is acutely aware of the aircraft noise committee during the previous parliament. issues related to Sydney and Sydney West in particular. Our election commitments therefore Ordered that the report be adopted. included that: 1384 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

. Sydney and Sydney West would be withdrawn provide facilities and services required for the from the airport leasing process until there is a operation of the national airways system. solution to the aircraft noise issues there Regulatory provisions authorise the establishment . the east west runway would be opened and monitoring of quality of service performance . a full EIS would be undertaken on Sydney West indicators and Australian Competition and Con- Airport. sumer Commission scrutiny to back up these aspects of the business. We have already taken decisive steps to deal with With the advent of leasing, the Government is also these issues, and processes are underway to ensure aware that significant market power will move from permanent solutions to aircraft noise issues in the public sector to the private sector. The Govern- Sydney. ment is thus committed to putting into place an In essence this bill and the Airports (Transitional) appropriate regulatory framework to protect the Bill 1996 provide the legislative framework for interests of current and future airport users and granting of leases to airport specific companies and local communities. the transfer of assets and obligations associated At present, the Federal Airports Corporation with those airport operations from the Federal operates as a self-regulating Government authority Airports Corporation to the companies. They restart in respect of land use, planning and building and a process which stopped under the previous on-airport pollution control. Post leasing, these Government’s heavy-handed approach to Sydney responsibilities will need to be assumed by the Airport and its role in the sales process. We have Government itself to ensure appropriate public excised Sydney and Sydney West from the first interest regulation of the activities of airport lessees tranche of sales. The process can thus recommence. and other users. The bills before the House substantially match As well as providing a regulatory regime which can those previously put forward by the Labor Party. replace those regulatory functions currently per- The sales process demands continuity, if it is to formed by the FAC, the Airports Bill establishes proceed quickly. Given the familiarity of the House appropriate transparency and reporting obligations with the basic provisions of the regime previously on airport operators. proposed, I will run through the essential provisions and then concentrate on the improvements we have In summary the provisions ensure: made. These improvements meet our election - majority Australian ownership commitments which reflect the interests of airport - a 5% limit on airline (and associate) ownership users; the interests of local communities; and the interests of bidders. - environment strategy requirements Government Airports Policy - financial transparency. These provisions apply to ‘core regulated airports’ The Government’s decision to establish long-term and other airports specified in the regulations. Core leasehold arrangements at Federal airports will regulated airports are: Sydney, Melbourne, Bris- improve the efficiency of airport investment and operations in the interests of users and the general bane, Perth, Adelaide, Darwin, Hobart, Launceston, community. Townsville, Coolangatta, Canberra, Alice Springs and Sydney West. Leasing of the airports will facilitate innovative management and greater local involvement and There are also provisions relating to demand input to decisions on their operation and develop- management, protection of airspace around airports ment. and other on-airport activities. Airports deliver highly specialised services to the Airport Regulation—Post leasing Australian economy. There will be opportunities for I turn now to the essential provisions of the Air- greater autonomy of individual airports post leasing ports Bill. and for airports to cater better for the particular Leasing and management of airports markets which they serve and therefore to meet the needs of local and regional economies. The bill establishes several key rules for the leasing Aviation Regulatory Arrangements of Australia’s major international and interstate gateways including: Leasing of airports does not change the regulatory arrangements in other areas of the Government’s . the lessee must be a company specifically aviation policy nor the fundamental roles played by established to operate the airport the individual agencies. . the terms of the initial leases are to be 50 years, The Civil Aviation Safety Authority will continue with or without an option for renewal for a to have primary responsibility for air safety in further 49 years Australia. Airservices Australia will continue to . only one company will be able to lease an Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1385

airport. the opportunity for all interested parties to comment The bill will make it mandatory for joint ownership on master plans, major development plans and by the same airport-operator company of Sydney environment strategies. The views of airport users and Sydney West airports. The bill allows for such as the airlines and other tenants, State and Sydney and Sydney West to be structured as local Governments will be a significant part of the separate companies and leased together. Other comment process. airports will be leased separately. Environment management Current leasing arrangements for airlines and other on-airport businesses will be transferred with Under no circumstances will airport lessees or other existing obligations and benefits, in accordance persons on airports be able to escape environmental with normal practice. obligations post leasing. Restrictions on ownership of airport-operator The development of airport regulatory arrangements companies post leasing supplements the operation of existing We will be ensuring that airport-operator companies legislation and regulations which cover the curfew, are majority Australian owned with central manage- runway operations, flight path and noise acquisi- ment to be exercised from within Australia and a tion/insulation programs. majority of directors being either Australian citi- zens and/or residents. An important requirement imposed on airport operators will be the need to develop and imple- The airport-operator company will be subject to the ment approved environment strategies. These following ownership controls: strategies will include specific measures which the . a 49% limit on foreign ownership of the airport- airport lessee proposes to adopt to prevent, control operator company or reduce environmental impacts associated with . a 5% limit on airline (and associates) ownership airport operations. of the airport-operator company. In developing such strategies, operators must have The bill includes significant anti-avoidance provi- due regard to public comment requirements and sions to cover schemes to circumvent the leasing, report on consultations held with State and local management and ownership rules. Governments, airport users and others. Environ- mental strategies proposed by airport operators will The Government, in recognition of the excision of be subject to Ministerial approval. Sydney/Sydney West airports from the first set of sales, has not set down cross ownership provisions The bill will also provide the ability to make in the bill. Such restrictions could reduce the regulations on environmental standards and impose number of potential bidders for the first tranche requirements to be complied with, in relation to the airports. prevention or minimisation of pollution at airport Land use, planning and building controls sites. Significant penalties will apply to breaches of these standards backed by the ability for court There needs to be clarity and certainty on processes injunctions if necessary to ensure regulatory which allow Government and community input; and compliance. Monitoring and remedying breaches of a greater compatibility between on and off airport environmental standards is also provided for under development. the bill. Accordingly each regulated airport operator will be required to establish: Accounts and reports of airport-operator com- . an airport master plan—essentially a long term pany land use plan to cover a 20 year period Reporting and accounting requirements within the . major development plans for projects (eg run- bill and the use of common terminology will way, terminal development) at airports which facilitate the comparison of airport performance in can, where significant environmental impacts a transparent manner. Airport operators will be result, require appropriate environmental impact required to publish annually, reports on their assessment processes as is currently the case and operations as determined by the ACCC. . airport operators will also need approval for new building activities on airport sites. Pricing and Quality of Service Master and major development plans, and environ- The Government’s aim is to ensure there is no ment strategies will be subject to Ministerial abuse of the potential market power of airport approval. operators. Our election commitment was to cap The bill ensures that the airport-operator company landing charges at the airports using a CPI-X undertakes a ‘public comment’ process providing system. The necessary prices oversight can be undertaken by the ACCC. The Government is 1386 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 giving careful consideration to the detailed pricing to provide a very high level of public consultation. oversight arrangements. There is a provision, too, which will allow the new Future Airport Operations airport operator to adopt an FAC master plan for the airport as its own draft master plan, but this The bill places a restraint on the Commonwealth plan cannot be approved without complying with not to close or vary airport leases without the the public comment provisions of the bill. consent of the lessee. Under the proposed airports regime, Australia will Demand management require airport operators to meet international air- Demand management is a power essential to service obligations, and if necessary, specific ensuring our election commitment to cap move- regulations can be made to this effect. This provi- ments at Sydney’s Kingsford Smith airport can be sion can cover all major airports in Australia as enforced, should circumstances so require. Import- well as those currently operated by the FAC. antly, we will allow airport operators to provide Regulations can be made under the bill to control their input into any decisions; but the ultimate on-airport activities including liquor, commercial decision remains with the Government. Given the trading, vehicle movements, gambling and smoking. importance of the potential use of demand manage- The Government intends to discuss the control of ment powers for the airport operator, the bill these on-airport activities with the States and includes the opportunity for the airport operator to Territories. In the absence of regulations being provide the Minister with a submission for con- made by the Commonwealth, State/Territory sideration before demand management measures are legislation would apply. introduced at an airport. Protection of airspace Explanatory Statements An important protection for the current and future operation of airports is established in the bill by A small number of Ministerial decisions provided provisions relating to the protection of airspace. for in the bill are not subject to review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, given that the The bill provides that if it is in the interests of Minister is the appropriate final arbiter in these safety, efficiency or regularity of air transport areas of public interest and regulatory control. operations, a declaration of prescribed airspace can be made. To assist with transparency in the exercise of these discretionary powers the bill requires the Minister New Provisions to table in Parliament a statement when exercising The Airports bill 1996 gives effect to the these powers, except where disclosure could Government’s election commitment to access prejudice substantially the commercial interests of provisions for new airlines, and provides more an affected party. certainty and clarity in several key areas. Rescue and fire fighting services Access for New Entrant Airlines Provisions have been included in the bill on access The bill includes provision for Airservices Australia for new entrants which will trigger the access to generally oversee the provision of rescue and fire provisions of the national competition policy fighting services at Federal airports. There is a need reforms. Airport operators will have to satisfy the for flexibility in circumstances where these services ACCC on how they intend to provide access for can be more efficiently provided, working to civil aviation operations; or be deemed a ‘declared standards set by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority facility’ for the purposes of these services. It is the and with relevant equipment and training. Government’s intention to maximise the opportuni- The bill therefore enables the Minister to approve ty for commercial negotiation to solve access these services at Federal airports. issues, but the ACCC may take an arbitration role if negotiation is unsuccessful. This approach will Definition of a Major Development apply at the core regulated airports ie the major Major development approval provisions are includ- twelve FAC airports. ed primarily to allow all such developments to Of course the Government will maintain its discre- which airport operators or other parties are commit- tion to introduce demand management schemes— ted to be examined for their environmental impact. thus access provided would be subject to the The bill now before the House provides that the demand management provisions of this bill. definition of major airport developments encom- Status of FAC Master Plans passes, as well as passenger terminals, all proposed new buildings over $10 million and other signifi- The Airports Bill provisions require Ministerial cant developments. approval of airport master plans, which relate to a period of 20 years. These provisions are designed Defence Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1387

The bill also provides for priority of access to The primary purpose of this bill is to put into place airports for Defence-related purposes and for a framework to facilitate leasing of all Federal emergency and disaster relief. airports effectively as ongoing businesses under a Regulations two stage sales process. It is proposed that Mel- bourne, Brisbane and Perth airports will be includ- While more certainty and clarity has been provided ed in the first phase leasehold sales. Adelaide will in the bill, regulations will still play an important also be added to the first tranche consistent with part in the final regulatory framework. our election commitment, subject to decisions to be I intend to ensure that draft regulations will be taken in the budget. The leasing of Sydney and provided for consultation and comment before Sydney-West airports will be deferred pending finalisation. In this cooperative and responsible resolution of noise issues at Sydney airport and an way, the best outcomes can be achieved for environmental impact study being conducted on Government, the travelling public, potential airport Sydney-West Airport. In the meantime, consider- operators and investors and the community at large. ation will be given to how best to position Sydney Conclusion and Sydney-West airports for future sale. The Airports Bill 1996 will form the central part of The bill provides for the transfer of airport land and the regulatory oversight of the operations at other assets from the FAC to the commonwealth; Australia’s major airports post leasing. the granting of leases over the airports and transfer of associated assets to individual airport companies; The leasing of airports represents an important part and the orderly treatment of the FAC’s debts during of the Government’s transport reform program. The the sales process. Provision has also been made in Government’s Airports Bill 1996 and companion the bill for the transfer of airport staff employed by Airports Transitional Bill 1996 will allow the the FAC to the airport companies. leasing to proceed swiftly and with strong protec- tion of the public interest. The companion bill, the Airports Bill 1996, will establish the regulatory regime for airports post- The Government’s airport reforms will provide a leasing. This regulatory regime is designed to significant boost to employment and investment in improve the efficiency of airport operations while the Australian economy. ensuring the protection of airport user and com- AIRPORTS (TRANSITIONAL) BILL 1996 munity interests. The sale of long-term leases over airports Leasing the airports permits the government to currently operated by the Federal Airports Corpora- retain some control over the land on which the tion (FAC) forms an important part of this airports are located. The long term of the lease will government’s privatisation program. The govern- ensure that sales proceeds are similar to sale under ment is confident that the leasing process for the freehold title. Federal airports offers a number of long-term The sale of long term leases is expected to produce benefits to the Australian people. a significant net offset to outlays in the forthcoming The decision to sell long-term leases offers benefits financial years. Provision has been made in the bill to airport users and the community as a whole. The to allow for the orderly disposal of the FAC’s leasing process should lead to further improvements assets and facilitate and account for the leasing in the operating efficiency and quality of service of process. The transactions associated with these the airports by exposing them to private sector provisions are expected to be budget neutral. As disciplines. It will also provide an opportunity for Honourable Members would appreciate, it would the funds of Australians to be productively em- not be appropriate for the government to disclose ployed in the provision of national infrastructure details of expected proceeds from the leasing of the through the involvement of superannuation and airports, as it is likely this would influence the investment managers. outcome of the sale process, possibly reducing pro- ceeds. The provision of airport infrastructure has tradition- ally been considered the responsibility of govern- As I have indicated, a number of measures de- ment due to the large amount of capital required. signed to facilitate the leasing of the Federal However today, Australia’s capital markets have airports are contained in the bill now before the reached a level of maturity and sophistication House. These measures provide for the land and capable of supporting the evolving infrastructure associated assets of the FAC to be transferred to requirements of airports. The commonwealth’s the commonwealth, as well as provide for the involvement in the provision of such infrastructure commonwealth to grant a lease over land at a will no longer be necessary given the protection to particular airport to a company referred to as an public interest considerations afforded by the airport lessee company. Following this, the bill proposed regulatory regime of the Airports Bill provides the government with a flexible disposal 1996. strategy to grant an airport lease to a company 1388 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 either established by the commonwealth or the are the joint user airports at Canberra, Darwin and purchaser. In both instances when the lease is Townsville which are jointly operated by the FAC granted, the FAC’s contractual rights, obligations and the Department of Defence. The development and liabilities are transferred to the airport lessee of new operating arrangements with Defence will company. be required before the civil facilities at these air- The bill also provides for airport staff to transfer to ports can be leased. the airport lessee companies at the time a lease is It is expected that a number of the second phase granted over the relevant airport. The bill also airports which have been unprofitable in the past, contains provisions to enable transfer of accrued should prove commercially viable under private benefits and leave entitlements post sale. These ownership through cost reductions and improved provisions are designed to ensure fair and consis- revenues. The government will examine options to tent treatment of staff. secure the future of the remaining few airports that may prove to be commercially non-viable by taking To ensure that state and territory governments into account the specific financial characteristics of receive duties to which they are entitled on sale each airport, as well as regional interests and transactions which take place in their state or concerns. territory, the sale of shares in airport lessee com- panies or the sale of leases over the airports will be This bill is intended to provide a framework for the subject to state and territory taxes and stamp duties. sale of leases over the airports currently operated The bill does, however, provide for the transfer of by the Federal Airports Corporation. This bill and the lease or assets that take place while the airport the companion Airports Bill 1996 are designed to lessee company is owned by the commonwealth to promote the most efficient operation and mainte- be exempt from stamp duty. This exemption does nance of Australia’s airport infrastructure, while not cover the sale by the commonwealth of its ensuring that the benefits of increased efficiency shares in the company, nor the transfer of the lease are passed on to airport users and the community or assets to a company where that transfer takes as a whole. The government is confident that these place after sale time. arrangements will ensure a fair return from the airports while allowing it to divest itself of a A number of taxation provisions have been provid- function in which its involvement is no longer ed for in the bill to ensure that both the purchasers essential. and existing lessees of the FAC are not disadvan- taged from a taxation perspective. The government Ordered that further consideration of the has adopted these provisions in respect of transac- second reading of these bills be adjourned tions between the FAC, the commonwealth and the until the first day of sitting in the Spring airport lessee company, to ensure that the tax effect sittings, in accordance with the order agreed of the transactions would be the same as if it were to on 29 November 1994. a sale by the FAC in the private market place. Provisions have also been made in the bill to deal COMMITTEES with the FAC’s debt, which comprises both commonwealth and non-commonwealth debt. These Sales Tax Legislation Committee provisions, along with the existing provisions in the Answers to Questions FAC’s statute, provide the government flexibility to deal with the FAC’s debts in the most appropri- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ate manner. In managing the FAC’s debt during the (Senator Chapman)—I inform the Senate sale process, the government can assure the Hon- that the President has received a request for ourable Members that the FAC bondholder’s access to certain answers to questions taken interests will be taken into account. The bill also provides for the treatment of the debt during the on notice at hearings of the Senate Select sale process to be properly recorded in the Committee on Sales Tax Legislation. The commonwealth’s accounts. committee reported on 19 August 1992 and tabled evidence and submissions but did not Following the leasing of the major Federal airports, the FAC Head Office will continue to have a role table the answers to these questions before it in overseeing the management of the remaining went out of existence. As this material is Federal airports prior to their leasing in the second normally tabled when a committee reports, phase of the sale process. with the concurrence of the Senate, I propose to table it now. Is there any objection? There These second phase airports present specific regional and administrative issues which will need being no objection, I table the documents. to be addressed prior to their lease. Among these CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATION Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1389

Senator TAMBLING (Northern Terri- nationally trading ships while maritime unions tory—Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister have continued to spin out negotiations on the for Transport and Regional Development) promised MIRA reforms. While the grant is (10.02 a.m.)—On behalf of Senator Kemp, I in place, there is no pressure on either party move: to tackle the fundamental issues involved in That the order of the Senate of 29 November reducing Australia’s crewing costs, which 1994, relating to the consideration of legislation, remain among the highest in the world and a not apply to the Shipping Grants Legislation Bill major impediment to international competi- 1996. tiveness. The Shipping Grants Legislation Bill 1996 The government is seeking to halt the repeals the International Shipping (Australian- outflow of taxpayers’ money as soon as resident Seafarers) Grants Act 1995, with practicable. The bill will repeal the scheme effect from 1 July 1996 and amends the Ships with effect from 1 July 1996, as promised in (Capital Grants) Act 1995 to bring forward the coalition’s election commitments. It is the existing sunset provision from 30 June crucial that this legislation is considered in 1997 to 30 June 1996. the winter sittings to give effect to this com- mitment and achieve the significant savings It is essential that this bill be considered in to revenue of some $40 million over the five the winter parliamentary sittings to ensure that years to 30 June 2000. It should be noted that there is no undue delay in implementation of an employer who qualifies for the grant the government’s maritime program, which is during the period up to 30 June 1996 will be not only a vital part of the transport reform able to claim the grant entitlements and be required to sustain and improve Australia’s paid after 1 July 1996, as contemplated in the economic growth but also will make an original act. important contribution to the government’s budget strategy. The ships capital grants scheme was intro- duced in 1987 as an incentive for the shipping The international shipping grants act pro- industry to reduce crewing levels by provid- vides for a taxable grant to eligible employers ing a taxable grant of seven per cent of the who employ Australian resident seafarers on purchase price of a new ship which is crewed Australian operated ships predominantly by Australian resident seafarers at specified engaged in international trading. The grant is benchmark crewing levels. Separate but equal to the notional income tax payable on related legislation—section 57AM of the the earnings of seafarers serving on the ship. Income Tax Assessment Act—also provides This scheme, which came into effect from 1 for a generous accelerated tax depreciation July 1995 but with grant entitlements not regime that allows a ship to be effectively being paid until after 1 July 1996, was part of written off within four years of delivery, the previous government’s shipping program compared to the asset’s useful life being announced in the 1995 budget. The program typically in the range of 15 to over 20 years. included a package of promised employment reforms agreed between shipowners and the The ships capital grants scheme was origi- maritime unions in the maritime industry nally given a five-year life with a sunset date restructuring agreement, or MIRA, aimed at of 30 June 1992. This was considered more yielding savings to shipowners in the same than adequate time to achieve the targeted order as the subsidy from the international upgrading of the trading fleet and reduce shipping grant. crewing levels to make Australian shipping internationally competitive. However, in 1989 The industrial reforms have not been deliv- the then Labor government decided to extend ered. In fact, in important areas such as the the act’s life by a further five years until 30 crew to berth ratio and the implementation of June 1997, without imposing any further an industrial peace accord, performance has efficiency requirements on the industry. The deteriorated. The scheme has become a coalition strongly opposed this extension as windfall gain for shipowners operating inter- the scheme was no longer providing a taxpay- 1390 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 er contribution to promote modernisation and to the tune of $52 million over the next four re-crewing of the Australian trading fleet but years without any tangible improvement in had become an ongoing capital subsidy to the the performance and competitiveness of the shipping industry. Australian shipping industry. Any attempt by The benefits of reform have largely been the Senate not to consider this legislation in siphoned off into substantial pay rises to the current sittings will increase the hole in members of the maritime unions, who already the budget left to this government. receive generous pay and exceptional leave Senator BOB COLLINS (Northern Terri- conditions by Australian community standards tory) (10.10 a.m.)—The opposition strongly and far beyond those of our international opposes the obnoxious action that the govern- competitors. Again, the government seeks to ment is taking in respect of this matter in turn off the tap of taxpayers’ funds to the attempting to exempt this legislation from the capital grants which have not led to the cut-off. The bottom line of our objections to promised expansion in the Australian trading it can be summed up, as far as I am con- fleet. A large part of this subsidy has gone cerned, in two words—Mackay Sugar. If any into the coffers of major, highly profitable, senator wants to understand that a little more vertically integrated companies carrying their fully, I would refer them to the Hansard of own cargoes. It is vital that this legislation the Senate committee which is considering proceed in the winter sittings in line with the this issue at the moment, the reports from coalition’s election commitments to scrap the which, including a minority report, will be capital grants scheme by 30 June 1996. tabled, as I understand it, in the Senate this afternoon. There are two, or possibly three, ships currently under construction overseas which The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister will not be delivered in time to gain an for Transport and Regional Development entitlement to a grant prior to the new sunset (Senator Tambling), I was fascinated to hear, date of 30 June 1996. The companies in- said two things that I want to address. The volved should have been aware of the first was that the repeal of the ships grants coalition’s longstanding opposition to the scheme would be, to quote him, as promised continuation of the capital grants scheme and, in the election commitments of the now like any other business making such long- government prior to the last election. This term investment decisions, would have recog- was an issue canvassed at length in evidence nised the reality of a continually changing given before the Senate committee. The regulatory and economic climate. government comprehensively failed to make However, in an amendment the government its case on this issue. I think I described it in will be introducing to section 57AM of the terms of bush lawyer tactics, which I think Income Tax Assessment Act 1936, these was a pretty fair description. companies will be able to qualify for the accelerated depreciation tax concessions There are three companies that are involved provided the ships are delivered and regis- in what we believe to be, in clear terms, tered in Australia before 1 July 1997 and so detriment under the retrospective, as we long as they continue to comply with the would term it, action that is going to be taken criteria set out in the Ships (Capital Grants) by the government in this matter—Shell, BHP Act. This benefit is worth more than twice as and, as I have mentioned, Mackay Sugar. much as the capital grant to a taxpaying While the detriment to these companies is company. fundamentally the same, as shadow minister for primary industries I make no bones about A delay to this legislation will severely set the fact that my principal concern is with the back the government’s maritime program, an wholly Australian company, Mackay Sugar, integral part of our transport reforms, and and the extraordinarily commendable initia- simply add to the drain on taxpayers’ money tives they took in commissioning the ship in Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1391 regard to which, if this goes ahead today, they from the minister that he did attempt by will be cheated of the grant which they not omission to mislead the committee—and that unreasonably assumed would be theirs. Even has now been corrected—on this crucial issue if the cut-off had not applied, it would have affecting Mackay Sugar. been theirs if it had not been for a fire that Senator Tambling has repeated the nonsense occurred and which delayed the delivery of in here this morning by saying that no-one their vessel, evidence on which was also should complain about the ships’ grants being given to the committee. cut off and these three companies being The attitude of the government to this for cheated of their entitlement under the grants Mackay Sugar was, ‘Bad luck. You only get scheme—and, I might add, in the case of this grant when the ship’s delivered. The ship Mackay Sugar, only because of a fire that hasn’t been delivered—tough.’ Evidence was occurred which caused the late delivery of the given at the time that the committee had its vessel. hearings by the current chief political apparat- chik of the Minister for Transport and Re- Senator Kemp—You have said that Bob. gional Development (Mr Sharp), John Wallis. Senator BOB COLLINS—And I am I have some regard for Mr Wallis and his saying it again, Senator—and it is not a ability, but we were faced with the very matter for trite observations. It is a matter of interesting performance of seeing Mr Wallis great concern to this Australian company. I appear at a Senate committee, sitting at the say again, the company, in fact, deserves to parliamentary secretary’s left hand, and not be applauded for what they did, because they only handing him notes and giving him commissioned a ship unique in the world in advice on how to answer questions, but order to provide Australia with a great plus directly answering questions himself. for value adding an export product. This ship Senator Tambling—When asked. is an extraordinary vessel and it is entirely due to the initiatives of this Australian com- Senator BOB COLLINS—When asked, pany that we have it. The value adding precisely. So we had the chief political head- process can take place on the vessel and kicker of the House of Representatives refined sugar can be delivered in either bulk minister, Mr Sharp, and as I pointed out or bag. Evidence, which was not questioned then—and I do apologise to the Senate for the or rebutted, was given to the committee that inelegance of the language that I used on that the value adding advantage to Australia from occasion— this unique vessel—one of, I hope, a number Senator O’Chee—I hope you are not going that we will have in Australia—was in the to use that language again. order of $2 million of additional income for our country per shipment of sugar on board Senator BOB COLLINS—Absolutely not, this vessel. Senator O’Chee. My only excuse is that I come from the Northern Territory. As I said I would have thought that, in that advantage at the time, if Mr Sharp had so little confi- of a $2 million plus boost for Australian dence in the ability of his parliamentary workers and Australian processing from secretary to effectively represent him at refining the sugar here and delivering it Senate committee hearings, he should cut out overseas in that refined form, the company the middle man and appear before the Senate deserves commendation, not having the committee himself. I thought I spoke on government thumb its nose at them and behalf of all senators, including those from saying, ‘Bad luck. Now you see it, now you the government, in issuing that invitation to don’t. Yes, you commissioned this ship on the the House of Representatives minister to so basis you’d get the money. Yes, you signed appear. contracts on the understanding you’d get it. Leaving that aside, Mr Wallis then attempt- Yes, you knew that an incoming coalition ed by omission to mislead the committee. We would repeal the scheme.’ Evidence, of now know from a letter that we have received course, was given from Shell, BHP and 1392 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

Mackay Sugar that they expected this would fascinating piece of advice was sent out on occur at the expiration of the scheme, which this issue. is next year, 1997, and that they had no One paragraph of that advice contained a understanding given to them by the govern- direct reference to the retrospective applica- ment—none—that grants for the ships that tion of these measures. This was a record of were already commissioned on the basis of a conversation which Lachlan Payne, the getting these grants delivered would be cut ASA, had had with the then shadow off. In fact, each company gave the committee minister’s senior adviser on this issue and was evidence that they had factored the grants into circulated to their members. One paragraph of their considerations of commissioning these that advice said that the government recog- vessels. nised that there was going to be a problem in The government—and it has been repeated the retrospective application of this measure here again this morning—attempted to throw and that they were therefore seeking further a bit of dust in the eyes on this issue and say advice on the issue. The not unreasonable that Mr Wallis specifically said, ‘I told the assumption was that this advice, when it was Australian Shippers Association, the ASA, available, would be made available to the and Lachlan Payne, its executive director, that shippers. this was all going to happen.’ I do not know The ASA said to the minister’s adviser, whether I said this at a Senate committee, but ‘Here’s what we’re going to tell our mem- one thing I learned—and I learned a few bers.’ It was read out over the telephone. A things, actually, in the time I was transport record was kept of the conversation. ‘If we minister—about the maritime industry was don’t hear from you in 24 hours, we’ll as- that if you are going to contest a sequence of sume that you’ve got no problem with the events with anyone from the maritime indus- advice and we’ll send it out.’ Nothing further try, you had better be awfully sure that you was heard and the advice was sent out. keep very good notes. I have to say to his credit, the chair of the I have never seen notes in my life like the committee, Senator Crane, did not question notes kept by representatives of the maritime the necessary delay that we had to have in industry about meetings and things that are order to check this advice from the ASA. The said. I was told by an adviser I had at the result was we got a letter from the minister time, one Jane Harmsworth—this was an confirming the accuracy of the ASA’s advice adviser, I might add, for whom I have the to its members and advising the committee of highest esteem—that this was due to the log- the results of the inquiries that had been made keeping responsibilities of people on ships. In about the problems that would be caused by respect of people, for example, like Bill the retrospective application of this legisla- Bolitho, if you sneezed, blew your nose or tion—but no advice whatsoever that this had left the room to go to the toilet, all of this ever been then communicated to the Austral- was religiously recorded in the notes that he ian Shippers Association. kept of the meetings. Senator Ian Macdonald—Mr Acting We were not surprised, therefore, when Deputy President, on a point of order: I do Lachlan Payne responded to these assertions not want to interrupt Senator Collins, but to by Mr Wallis about what was or was not told save him from himself, I wish to inquire to the Australian shipping industry about whether it is appropriate for the senator to these grants being cut off. What he delivered discuss committee matters and correspondence to the committee was fascinating, because he to the committee before the committee report actually delivered advice by facsimile to his has actually been tabled. I would not want members. He was criticised by Mr Wallis, the Senator Collins to breach the standing orders minister’s adviser, for being derelict in his by mentioning such matters. duty in not letting Mackay Sugar, Shell and The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT BHP know that they were going to be cut off. (Senator Chapman)—On your point of order, And that evidence was given to us, but a Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1393

Senator Macdonald, it would not be appropri- issues for a later debate on the bill proper. ate for Senator Collins to refer to or reveal I am simply addressing, this morning, the any private discussions or documents relating reason why we are opposing exemption for to the committee. But he is quite at liberty to this legislation from the cut-off. As I have refer to anything that occurred in the public said before—and I make no bones about it: hearings. Mackay Sugar is the principal reason. Hope- Senator BOB COLLINS—Thank you, Mr fully that company will be able to take deliv- Acting Deputy President. I will not dwell on ery of its ship shortly, despite the fire that the point in any case, except to conclude by occurred to delay it during its construction. In saying that I am satisfied, and the opposition fact, advice was given to the committee that is certainly satisfied, that the evidence given it hopes to take delivery of the ship in July, by the minister’s representative to that com- and perhaps even sooner than that. Mackay mittee in public hearing is not correct. The Sugar is entitled to receive, under this act, the picture was painted of a number of companies assistance which it factored into its consider- that, at the time they commissioned the ations when commissioning this vessel. vessels, should have fully expected not to have relied upon this grant. I might add, just as a matter of record, the ships grants scheme, which we introduced, I must make this point—it is a point I have was a coalition initiative. It was the former made publicly before, and I made it in a coalition minister for transport, Ralph Hunt, committee this morning. I do not care whether who devised this scheme. That, of course, is it is the shipping industry, the mining indus- why, when the legislation was brought into try, the dairy industry or any other industry: the parliament, the coalition so strongly one of the things that gets up my nose is supported it. I would have thought that, in hearing politicians, political appointees or terms of providing some fruit and some whatever, in Senate committees or anywhere tangible evidence that there is a value at- else, telling business people who do this for tached to the scheme, this unique vessel a living what their business should be and, in chartered by Mackay Sugar has demonstrated fact, saying in evidence to a Senate committee just precisely that. in public hearing that, if they had known what I will not, again, canvass the PAYE issues they were doing, they should have been that Senator Tambling has raised here this ‘prudent enough’ to have factored into their morning. I will do that, again, in the appropri- considerations the fact that this grants scheme ate debate on the committee’s report when might be cut off before they got the ships that is tabled before the Senate. But I will delivered. simply conclude by saying that the opposition I have to say that there was a strong reac- believes that the action the government is tion to this gratuitous advice from the taking against Australian companies in this minister’s adviser to Mackay Sugar, BHP and regard is iniquitous and it should be opposed Shell—and I support the reaction that was strongly. I make no bones about saying this: given. I will not canvass, this morning, the I hope, should this motion succeed and should broader concerns that the opposition have this exemption be thwarted, that Mackay with this bill—and they are far broader. We Sugar will be able to safely secure its vessel are concerned on environmental grounds, we in the meantime and qualify for the grant it is are concerned on strategic grounds; that is, entitled to get. the strategic value of having an Australian Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queensland) fleet which, of course, as evidence which was (10.27 a.m.)—Mackay Refined Sugars is the given to the committee indicated, actively only fully integrated sugar refinery in Austral- cooperates with the Australian Navy to the ia at the present time. Fifty per cent of the point of putting equipment on board some company consists of the Mackay Sugar vessels specifically for the use of the Austral- Cooperative Association Ltd, and that repre- ian Navy in an emergency. I will not canvass sents 1,100 canegrowers in the Mackay any of those issues, because they are properly 1394 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 district of North Queensland. The cooperative Perhaps technically he is right, but in practical is a 50 per cent partner in Mackay Refined commercial terms it is a retrospective taking Sugars. Its shareholders grow the cane. It is away of a grant, the paying of which was a milled in Mackay and North Queensland. The major factor in the commercial decision made raw sugar is produced there and, uniquely in by Mackay Refined Sugars to instruct this Australia, the raw sugar is then refined on site ship to be built several years ago. in Mackay. It is a great industry for Mackay There is some doubt about whether and provides jobs and wealth to the North Mackay Refined Sugars will be able to have Queensland region. the ship registered in a way sufficient to Mackay Refined Sugars then markets the enable it to access this grant by 30 June. The sugar to the domestic and exports markets in reason for that was, as has been mentioned bulk. That is, it ships it out of Mackay in previously, that a fire occurred in the shipyard food grade quality in a ship that is purpose in Amsterdam, in Holland, earlier this year built, involving innovative technology in and that delayed the completion of the ship. bulk-in bulk-out, or bulk-in bag-out. The joint The ship was intended to be delivered by this venture Mackay Refined Sugars constructed time—it was intended to be navigating the that state of the art refinery in Mackay, Queensland coast at this very moment—but building it adjacent to one of the mills. It was by an act of God, over which Mackay Re- built, as I say, for the express purpose of fined Sugars had absolutely no control, that value adding to the raw sugar that is pro- did not happen. So it is a rather difficult set duced. To distribute the finished refined of circumstances that Mackay Refined Sugars product domestically to the main bulk refined see themselves in. sugar receiving facility in Sydney, it had to get a special ship, and Mackay Refined I know the company is looking at trying to Sugars some years ago instructed that this get the ship registered in a state that will quite unique ship be built. enable it to qualify for this grant by 30 June. Hopefully, that will happen in any case. I I do not want to go into the arguments, the sincerely hope that it does happen so that the place for which is really consideration of the company can get its grant without having this bill or perhaps even the committee report that uncertainty. It may well mean that, to do that, Senator Bob Collins has mentioned. But I do Mackay Refined Sugars will have to take have a concern that the uncertainty over this delivery of a ship while it is still in the matter be addressed at the very earliest pos- construction stage—while it is still in the sible time. If the grant to Mackay Refined shipyard—and before any of the sea trials are Sugars, which it tells the committee is in the conducted. Whilst that is obviously a matter order of $5 million, is not paid, it means that for Mackay Refined Sugars and for their it will cost each and every canegrower in the commercial decision and judgment, it would Mackay region—the shareholders of the seem unfortunate if in order to get this grant cooperative who have a 50 per cent share in they were forced to accept a ship still in the the refinery—something in the order of shipyards and without having any trials $2,500. Apart from all the other arguments, conducted. That is of some concern to me. that is an amount which I would be most reluctant to see sugar growers in Mackay miss I have some very grave concerns with the out on. legislation, as other senators also have, and I think that concern should be addressed and There is the element of retrospectivity in dealt with at the very earliest time. I support this grant. I understand the argument put my colleague Senator Tambling in his motion forward to the committee by the Parlia- to exempt the shipping grants bill from the mentary Secretary to the Minister for Trans- cut-off, because I think the bill should be port and Regional Development (Senator dealt with today, or tomorrow, so that all of Tambling). His argument was that it is a grant the parties involved in the particular issue can and you only get the grant when the ship is have the matter resolved. As I understand it, finished; therefore, it is not retrospective. from what I have picked up around the traps, Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1395 all of the opposition parties—that is, Labor, Senator IAN MACDONALD—No, I have Democrats and Greens, the combined opposi- not. I have taken one very clear position on tion—are going to oppose it. The bill, as I this. The legislation should be dealt with read it, is unlikely to succeed in any case. today or tomorrow and the uncertainty re- That being the case, why do we not deal moved. I have expressed my reservations, and with the bill now and get the matter resolved when the bill comes before the parliament—if so that the uncertainty is taken away? That is it does; if you will let it—you will hear my why I think the bill should be dealt with at arguments on the particular matter before us. this very moment. I would hope that one of They are quite clear. My interest is in making the opposition parties would move an amend- sure that Mackay Refined Sugars, particularly, ment to address the problems that Senator and perhaps even the other two companies are Bob Collins said he was concerned about. not affected by what I consider to be the Perhaps then Mackay Refined Sugars could retrospective impacts of this legislation. But go to bed tonight, or tomorrow night, quite that is for the debate. happy and relaxed knowing that the bill has I will vote and debate as I believe is in the been dealt with in an appropriate way. best interests of my constituents, but I want I support Senator Tambling’s motion to to be given the chance of having the debate. have the matter dealt with at the earliest It seems from the way this is going that you possible time. I would like to think that, people are going to put this off into the whatever happens, Mackay Refined Sugars never-never and that it will never be debated. may qualify and may get themselves within I am saying to you that it should be debated the definitions or within the jurisdiction of the today. We should allow my government to get act to enable the grant to be paid regardless on with its program and have this legislation of what happens. In any case, the uncertainty addressed. That is where I stand. That is why should be taken away by the matter being I urge the Senate to allow the cut-off motion dealt with at the earliest possible time. not to be applied to this bill, so that we can get on and debate it and remove the uncer- In conclusion, I refute Senator Collins’s tainty. comments about my colleague the parlia- Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) mentary secretary, Senator Tambling. Senator (10.38 a.m.)—The cut off-motion which the Tambling, in this matter, as in every other Senate has agreed to basically says that there matter, has dealt with the issue in the most are reasons for which the Senate can be asked professional and competent way. Senator to exempt from the cut-off motion. Those Tambling is certainly one of our very best— reasons include that the bill has been present- Senator Bob Collins—You’ll get on, Ian. ed before, that the bill is urgent or that the bill is a budget bill. I have heard nothing Senator Bell—What are you agreeing with? today which indicates that any of those Senator IAN MACDONALD—I am conditions apply. simply saying that your gratuitous criticism of Is it urgent to retrospectively cut off a grant Senator Tambling was quite unwarranted. that companies assume they were going to Senator Tambling is one of the most capable get? Is it urgent to be retrospective? No. The people, and I can think of no-one better to arguments that have been given in the past in take this legislation, and other legislation, relation to retrospectivity that seem to have through this chamber. He is quite undoubtedly some credence have been where there has one of the very best people to do this. I been an unintended consequence of a bill that refute, entirely, the comments made by Sena- is going to cost a leakage of revenue— tor Collins. I heard Senator Bell interject and because it was unintended it was never the ask whom I was agreeing with. intention of the bill. That is not the case here. Senator Bell—I heard you take six differ- Is it urgent to present retrospectivity on ent positions. PAYE? No. If you are saying you have to put it in this tax year, basically you are saying 1396 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 that all of those companies who have worked that this bill will move the Australian ship- on the assumption that they could employ ping industry backwards. There is no argu- Australian seafarers on overseas shipping ment put forward by the government that the routes will have a retrospective tax burden on competitiveness of the Australian shipping them. If you say you have to put in this year industry would be improved. In fact, all the that means that that expectation during the evidence to the committee was that the year has been betrayed. Australian shipping industry would be made So on the basis of the cut-off motion and less competitive by this bill. The government on the basis that there are reasons by which has not at any stage put forward a set of a government can argue to the Senate that the alternatives to improve competitiveness. They cut-off motion should be exempted for a bill have suggested that some time down the track there has been no substantiation. I have a lot they might think about it. Then they come of concerns about the bill and they will forward and say, ‘It is very urgent that we certainly come up when the bill is debated. remove this assistance to Australian ship- There is no reason why the bill will not be ping’s competitiveness but we do not have debated. But on the evidence that you have any ideas at the moment.’ This to me seems given as to why the Senate should exempt the to be a contradictory position. If we want to bill from the cut-off motion you simply have improve the competitiveness of the Australian not substantiated your case. You cannot shipping industry we need to have a formulat- substantiate a case to urgently retrospectively ed plan in place. pull the rug out from industry. I am sorry; We had a couple of furphies put forward in that has not been proven in this case. the committee by the government that all the Senator Ian Macdonald—If you are ready money was going to overseas ship builders to debate it, why not debate it now? because Australian shipping could not get the sized ships it wanted built in Australia so it Senator MARGETTS—I am talking on the obviously had to get them built overseas. This basis upon which the Senate has agreed and again was a reason put forward for urgently your side has agreed to the cut-off motion. A needing to repeal this legislation. Senator proper process has not been substantiated and Collins has dealt extensively with the Mackay according to the process of the Senate the shipping case. I can only reiterate that this is Greens will not be agreeing to the exemption a shameful position being put forward by the from the cut-off motion. government. Companies have acted in good Senator CONROY (Victoria) (10.40 faith. To be lectured, as they were, that they a.m.)—I agree with Senator Margetts. To should have gone into those contracts with quote the Hill cut-off motion: ‘Where the their eyes open is a shameful position to be government wishes to the Senate to depart coming from the government. I am sure that from the general chronological priority the Shell, BHP and Mackay Sugar will remember government should justify each such depar- those words for a long time that came from, ture.’ I agree that no case has been made— I think, Mr Wallace and that were supported not in the committee and not in the chamber by the minister and Senator Tambling. today—to justify this departure. There is one Contradictory statements were made to the point I would like to seek clarification from committee which are also of some concern. In Senator Tambling on, and that is the question the evidence supplied by Mr Payne on behalf of when the grant is payable. I think the of the shipping association, and I quote: discussion in the committee suggested that the grant was only payable after the ships had had Mr Wallace asked that I not race off to my mem- bers until he has considered the position to be put sea trials and had actually been commis- to shipowners in relation to the fiscal arrangements. sioned. So I seek some clarification on that from Senator Tambling. Again, the government seems to be acting with a great deal of haste to try to remove the A number of issues came up during the cut-off and have this debated but still has not course of the committee which clearly showed yet come up with any suggestions to the Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1397 shipowners of what those fiscal arguments problems of the lack of investment in the should be. So I do not think the government Australian shipping industry. at any point in time has justified its request The urgency of changing that has not been for the Senate to exempt this bill from the demonstrated to this Senate today nor might cut-off. I say was that urgency demonstrated to the Senator BELL (Tasmania) (10.44 a.m.)—It committee, and I carefully read the Hansard is quite clear the coalition has not demonstrat- of the committee inquiry. In fact, it was quite ed the urgency for the consideration of this the contrary. Although most of the committee bill. Quite to the contrary, the best attempt at hearing was devoted to a spat between the an argument was presented by Senator Mac- chair, some of the witnesses and some of the donald, who wanted the matter resolved and senators, and although there was quite un- wanted the opportunity for Mackay Sugar seemly exchanges, which did not really Cooperative shareholders to be able to rest illuminate the issue at all, there was certainly easy tonight in knowledge one way or the no urgency demonstrated to that committee. other. The bill was put forward and success- I am sure that the committee will not resolve ful. Its success meant that such people would that this bill needs to be brought on immedi- be either faced with a cost which I think ately. senator Macdonald indicated was $2,500 for The effect of it will be retrospective. We do 1,500 shareholders or, if it was not successful, not have to get too precious about the actual the status quo would prevail and the grant and definition of what it is that is occurring, we conditions upon which they had made deci- only have to look at the effect. It is undoub- sions would continue and the status quo tedly retrospective in that it removes a basis would prevail to suit their plans and the upon which earlier decisions have been made. business that they were conducting. That alone deserves greater consideration and Senator Tambling asserted that such busi- care and, I suggest to the government, greater nesses should be conducted in a way which examination before it is brought to this took account of the continuing changing of chamber. The Democrats are not convinced the economic framework and the taxation that this is urgent and therefore would not regime and other decisions. I do not know support exemption from the cut-off. what sort of business can do that. I do not Senator TAMBLING (Northern Terri- know any business which would make plans tory—Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister based on the situation as it is today suddenly for Transport and Regional Development) changing and their having to revoke the basis (10.48 a.m.)—in reply—I am disappointed upon which decisions were made. I do not that the three opposition parties have collabor- know what sort of business Senator Tambling ated to indicate to the Senate that they are not has in mind, but the businesses that I have prepared to deal with the exemption of the been involved in have been successful be- Shipping Grants Legislation Bill, and have cause they make decisions based on the this matter brought on for good and proper economic and regulatory framework as it is. debate in this area. As I indicated earlier, I Those who are most successful are able to think it is important to put on the record that best fit not only what is happening at the time the dealing of the legislation in this session is but a reasonable approximation of the future. important because of the focus that has been I would suggest, for the reassurance of the given to that important date of 1 July 1996, people that Senator Macdonald is purportedly and the intent of the legislation in that regard. considering—his electors in the Mackay I do not accept the arguments that have been area—that they should be well assured that pushed forward with regard to retrospectivity the Democrats and, as I understand it, the and I believe that was clearly established in Greens and the Labor Party, will defend the the committee in that area. position, the status quo, and will pursue the Both Senator Macdonald and Senator situation which was, with coalition support, Conroy addressed the issue of entitlements passed in this parliament to resolve the 1398 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 under this grant and, whilst we are debating McGauran, J. J. J. Minchin, N. H. this matter largely in absence of the commit- O’Chee, W. G.* Panizza, J. H. tee report which is due to be tabled in this Parer, W. R. Patterson, K. C. L. Reid, M. E. Short, J. R. chamber later today—perhaps it ought to have Tambling, G. E. J. Teague, B. C. formed a very important consideration for the Tierney, J. Troeth, J. actual debates—it is important to put on the Vanstone, A. E. Watson, J. O. W. record that, in relation to the entitlement to Woods, R. L. the grant under the Ships Capital Grants Act, NOES a ship becomes entitled to a grant on delivery Beahan, M. E. Bell, R. J. to the shipowner and registration in Australia. Bourne, V. Burns, B. R. Carr, K. Chamarette, C. The grant is not payable until after the Childs, B. K. Coates, J. commissioning and the meeting of other Collins, J. M. A. Collins, R. L. conditions such as specified crew levels and Colston, M. A. Conroy, S. engagement of Australian resident seafarers, Cooney, B. Denman, K. J. as required by the act. Therefore, if an eli- Evans, C. V. Faulkner, J. P. gible trading ship is delivered, and registered NOES Foreman, D. J.* Forshaw, M. G. in Australia before 30 June 1996, an entitle- Kernot, C. Lees, M. H. ment to a grant would be created. I think that Lundy, K. Mackay, S. is very important in this particular issue. It is Margetts, D. McKiernan, J. P. relevant to the debate and the issues that are Murphy, S. M. Neal, B. J. currently being pursued in appropriate legal Ray, R. F. Reynolds, M. areas by the issues relating to Mackay ships. Schacht, C. C. Sherry, N. Spindler, S. Stott Despoja, N. The date of commissioning of the ship is West, S. M. Wheelwright, T. C. not relevant to the grant entitlement and any Woodley, J. timing of the payment. I think it is a pity that PAIRS the three collaborating opposition parties have Alston, R. K. R. Bolkus, N. precluded the good and proper debate that Ellison, C. Cook, P. F. S. ought to have preceded this legislation either Herron, J. Crowley, R. A. Newman, J. M. Jones, G. N. later today or tomorrow by the indication of * denotes teller how they are going to vote. It is a pity they will not revisit the essential, core issues. Question so resolved in the negative. Question put: AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL That the motion (Senator Tambling’s) be agreed Motion (by Senator Bourne)—by leave— to. agreed to: The Senate divided. [10.55 a.m.] (a) notes the large membership and cross party (The Acting Deputy President—Senator J.P. support for the Australian Parliamentary Group McKiernan) of Amnesty International and encourages all Ayes ...... 31 Members of Parliament to join; Noes ...... 35 (b) congratulates Amnesty International on the —— continued and vital role the human rights Majority ...... 4 organisation plays in campaigning to free —— ‘prisoners of conscience’; for fair trials for political prisoners; to end torture, ‘disappear- AYES ance’, political killings and executions and Abetz, E. Baume, M. E. promoting human rights in general; and Boswell, R. L. D. Brownhill, D. G. C. Calvert, P. H. Campbell, I. G. (c) notes: Chapman, H. G. P. Crane, W. (i) that Amnesty International has approxi- Ferguson, A. B. Gibson, B. F. mately 22 000 members and supporters in Hill, R. M. Kemp, R. Australia and encourages the Australian Knowles, S. C. Macdonald, I. community to support Amnesty Internation- Macdonald, S. MacGibbon, D. J. al; and Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1399

(ii) with regret, the continuing need for Amnes- delay. ty International and the vital role the human Senator CHAMARETTE (Western Aus- rights organisation plays given the continu- ing violations of human rights worldwide, tralia) (11.02 a.m.)—I oppose the formality of such as torture, ‘disappearances’, political this motion. I do it on the principle that the killings and executions as documented in government had not made clear until this Amnesty International’s annual report. point that the bill it was proposing for exemp- tion was substantially the same—I assume CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATION exactly the same—as the bill introduced into Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— this place by the previous government. I Minister for Employment, Education, Training believe that on principle it should not receive and Youth Affairs) (11.01 a.m.)—On behalf formality until that is clear. of Senator Kemp, I move: We received a copy of the bill only yester- day. That was the only opportunity we had of That the order of the Senate of 29 November 1994, relating to the consideration of legislation, actually assessing whether it was in any way not apply to the Australian Federal Police Amend- different. We had not ascertained that. On the ment Bill 1996. principle, therefore, that it was introduced in A bill in similar form introduced by the the previous session of parliament, we do not previous government late last year was aimed propose to object to its being exempted from at addressing corruption within the Australian the order. Federal Police. The 1995 bill, which lapsed Senator CARR (Victoria) (11.03 a.m.)— due to the federal election, was given biparti- The opposition does not object to the exemp- san support at the time. tion. I understand this will be the 26th bill The issues to be addressed remain the same. that has been exempted from the cut-off Nonetheless, time has moved on. Police motion. I therefore would put those views to corruption continues to be a matter of concern the Senate. This is essentially the same bill, for Australian governments and the public at as the minister has indicated. large. Senators are no doubt aware that the Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— Royal Commission into the New South Wales Minister for Employment, Education, Training Police Service has uncovered distressing and Youth Affairs) (11.04 a.m.)—There is instances of corruption and other serious just a slight change of emphasis in one misconduct and that a small number of ser- respect; certainly not one in terms of sub- ving and former members of the AFP have stance. The emphasis is this: a person subject been implicated in corruption. Some senators to the declaration of serious misconduct will, may also be aware of the allegations of under the slight change, be able to seek a corruption within the AFP made on the 60 statement of reasons in relation to the Minutes program by a former member of the commission’s decision to make the declara- AFP, Alan Taciak. tion. However, where the reasons would The core provisions of this bill are focused disclose information that would not be in the on ensuring that the Australian Federal Police public interest to disclose—that is, operation- remains corruption free by providing the ally sensitive information such as identity of commissioner with essential powers to combat informants or current investigations—the corruption within the AFP. Regulations which Attorney may, in the public interest, issue a exempt the AFP from the operation of the certificate under subsection 14(1) of the unfair dismissal provisions of the Industrial AD(JR) Act preventing disclosure of that Relations Act cease to have effect at the end information. of this year, therefore making it very desirable We think this solution reaches a very to achieve fairness for the AFP and to make appropriate balance between the public inter- these changes that will assist in the anti- est in maintaining a corruption free Australian corruption fight. It is desirable that the bill be Federal Police and the rights of any particular passed by parliament with a minimum of individual who may be subject to such a 1400 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 declaration and who therefore should be able speeches incorporated in Hansard to seek that statement of reasons. There are Leave granted. no substantive changes. If anything, Senator Chamarette, I would have thought that that The speeches read as follows— change is one that you would be looking for. SUPPLY (PARLIAMENTARY Question resolved in the affirmative. DEPARTMENTS) BILL 1996-97 The purpose of this bill is to appropriate the NOTICES OF MOTION Consolidated Revenue Fund to provide interim authority for the running costs and other expendi- Native Title Committee ture of the parliamentary departments for the year Senator CHAMARETTE (Western Aus- ending 30 June 1997. The total amount sought is tralia)—by leave—I give notice that, on the $68 million. next day of sitting, I shall move: Details of the proposed expenditures are set out in the Schedule to the bill. That the following matter be referred to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and SUPPLY BILL (No. 1) 1996-97 the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund This bill seeks appropriations of the Consolidated for inquiry and report in conjunction with the Revenue Fund in 1996-97 totalling $14,659 million. committee’s inquiry and report pursuant to para- graph 206(d) of the Native Title Act 1993: Supply Bill (No. 1) provides for interim authority for proposed expenditure on the ordinary annual The proposed changes to the Native Title Act 1993 services of government until about the end of as outlined in the Government’s discussion paper November when it is anticipated that the budget of May 1996, ‘Towards a more workable Native legislation will have been passed. Reflecting the Title Act’. routine and interim nature of supply bills, as well Senator O’CHEE (Queensland)—by as established practice for this type of legislation, leave—I just note that the government has provision has been made at the broad subdivision given substantially more leniency to Senator level rather than at detailed appropriation item level which is the convention for the budget appropri- Chamarette than she gave in relation to the ation bills (except for items of new policy). Australian Federal Police Amendment Bill 1996 the other day when she refused formali- Supply Bill (No. 1) must be passed in this session to ensure funding is available to all agencies from ty of the bill. I hope that she will bear that in 1 July 1996, thereby ensuring the continuity of mind in future. program delivery. SUPPLY (PARLIAMENTARY The provisions in the bill are generally based on DEPARTMENTS) BILL 1996-97 5/12 of the current agreed estimates for 1996-97 with special provision, where necessary, for lumpi- SUPPLY BILL (No. 1) 1996-97 ness in program delivery. However, the government is committed to a fundamental review of its SUPPLY BILL (No. 2) 1996-97 activities and inclusion of a specific amount in the supply bills will not pre-empt the government from First Reading effecting further savings in the August budget in Bills received from the House of Represen- order to meet our commitments to the Australian tatives. people. Motion (by Senator Kemp) agreed to: Clause 5 of the bill provides for the appropriation of the Consolidated Revenue Fund to enable the That these bills may proceed without formalities, Minister for Finance to issue an amount for the may be taken together and be now read a first time. payment of increases in salary and payments in the Bills read a first time. nature of salary arising from awards, orders or determinations made under, or in accordance with Second Reading a law. Senator KEMP (Victoria—Parliamentary Provision has been made in Supply Bill (No. 1) for Secretary to the Minister for Social Security) the possible commencement, during the course of (11.07 a.m.)—I move: the financial year, of the Financial Management and Accountability Bill which is one of a package That these bills be now read a second time. of bills the government is committed to introducing I seek leave to have the second reading to replace the Audit Act 1901. Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1401

Details of the proposed expenditure are set out in Question resolved in the affirmative. the Schedule to the bill. Bills read a first time. SUPPLY BILL (No. 2) 1996-97 Second Reading This bill seeks appropriations of the Consolidated Revenue Fund in 1996-97 totalling $1,720 million. Senator KEMP (Victoria—Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social Security) Supply Bill (No. 2) provides interim authority for (11.09 a.m.)—I move: proposed expenditure on the construction of public works and buildings, the acquisition of sites and That these bills be now read a second time. buildings, certain advances and loans, items of I seek leave to have the second reading plant and equipment which are clearly definable as speeches incorporated in Hansard capital in nature, grants to the states under section 96 of the Constitution and for payments to the Leave granted. Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Terri- tory. Provision is also made, at the detailed appro- The speeches read as follows— priation item level for expenditure on new policy CUSTOMS TARIFF (MISCELLANEOUS initiatives totalling only $38 million for which AMENDMENTS) BILL 1996 legislative authority has not been previously approved by the Parliament. This bill is a technical corollary to the new Customs Tariff Act 1995 which passed the Parlia- As with Supply Bill (No.1) which I introduced ment in the 1995 Spring Sittings with bi-partisan earlier, provision has been made in Supply Bill support. (No.2) to allow for the possible commencement, during the course of the financial year, of the The Customs Tariff Act 1995, which will com- Financial Management and Accountability Bill mence on 1 July 1996, implements over 500 tariff which is one of a package of bills the government classification changes to the Harmonized Commodi- is committed to introducing to replace the Audit ty Description and Coding System of the World Act 1901. Customs Organization. The passage of the act last Details of the proposed expenditure are set out in year provided an effective six months lead time Schedule 2 to the bill. before its commencement and was necessary to Debate (on motion by Senator Foreman) enable the importing community to make the necessary computer and documentary changes adjourned. resulting from the new Tariff Act. It has also CUSTOMS TARIFF enabled the checking and revalidation of 120,000 tariff advices on the tariff classification of goods. (MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS) BILL 1996 The current Customs Tariff Act 1987 will be repealed by Part 3 of the Customs Tariff Act 1995 TELECOMMUNICATIONS (CARRIER with effect from 1 July 1996. There are several LICENCE FEES) AMENDMENT BILL Commonwealth acts which presently contain 1996 references to the Customs Tariff Act 1987 and its provisions. It is necessary to legislatively update all First Reading these references with references to the 1995 Tariff Act and its corresponding provisions, to ensure Bills received from the House of Represen- their continued effectiveness (Schedule 1 of this bill tatives. refers). Senator KEMP (Victoria—Parliamentary There are also several types of instruments, such as Secretary to the Minister for Social Securi- by-laws and Tariff Concession Orders, which ty)—I indicate to the Senate that those bills contain references to the provisions of the Customs which have just been announced by the Tariff Act 1987. These instruments include approxi- President are being introduced together. After mately: debate on the motion for the second reading . 22,000 Tariff Concession Orders and Commer- has been adjourned, I will be moving a cial Tariff Concession Orders; motion to have the bills listed separately on the Notice Paper. I move: . 800 Tariff Concession Order applications; That these bills may proceed without formalities, . 1,000 Determinations in relation to the Passenger may be taken together and be now read a first time. Motor Vehicle Plan; and 1402 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

. 300 by-laws. munications carriers’ share of the Government’s contribution to the ITU. The method used to As these instruments are intended to continue in calculate the share will be specified in the Tele- effect for the purposes of the new Tariff Act, it is communications (Carrier Licence Fees) Regula- necessary in this bill to enact transitional provisions tions. to apply to these instruments. The provisions, in The Government will be acting separately to ensure effect, deem references which are contained in the that radiocommunication licensees also meet their instruments to the 1987 Tariff Act as if they were full share of the ITU contribution. references to the 1995 Tariff Act. Where the tariff headings have changed, the provisions deem the Financial Impact references to be to those changed headings as set Currently, telecommunications carrier licence fees out in a partial concordance (Schedule 2, items 2 include a component to cover the ITU contribution to 5 of this bill refer). In the absence of such a of about $1.2 million in 1995-96 (the amount varies provision, all these instruments will lapse on the each year according to factors including the level commencement of the new 1995 Tariff Act on 1 of the Government’s contribution, the ITU budget July 1996 because the 1987 Tariff Act to which and exchange rate movements). The financial they refer is repealed with effect from that date. impact of the proposed amendment on carriers will be to increase the annual amount payable in licence FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT fees by about $0.9 million in 1996-97. The cost will be shared by carriers on the basis of their share The amendments proposed in this bill have no of telecommunications traffic. I commend the bill financial impact. to the Senate. TELECOMMUNICATIONS (CARRIER Debate (on motion by Senator Foreman) LICENCE FEES) AMENDMENT BILL 1996 adjourned. As part of its election commitments, the Govern- Ordered that the bills be listed on the ment stated that it will adopt a user pays approach to the funding of the Government’s contribution to Notice Paper as separate orders of the day. the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). This bill will assist the Government in doing this. CRIMES AMENDMENT (CONTROLLED OPERATIONS) BILL Carrier licence fees are payable on 1 July 1996. The Government is unable to meet its election 1996 commitments without this amendment to the Telecommunications (Carrier Licence Fees) Act In Committee 1991, because to collect the full telecommunica- Debate resumed from 29 May. tions carriers’ share of the ITU contribution would exceed the amount which the act currently provides The bill. may be collected from the telecommunications carriers. Senator SPINDLER (Victoria) (11.10 a.m.)—Yesterday the committee debated the The ITU is a United Nations specialised agency which is concerned with international cooperation amendments at great length. I am indebted to in the use of telecommunications and of radiofre- Senator Cooney for drawing attention to one quency spectrum, including establishment of central difficulty that I have not been able to standards, and in the development of world tele- resolve, either in my mind or through the communications. Three ITU sectors carry out these advice I sought from other people last night. functions, namely the Telecommunication I refer to the difficulty that is posed by the Standardization, Radiocommunication and Develop- paragraph which states that the person target- ment sectors. ed by the controlled operation is likely to The Government pays an annual financial contribu- commit an offence and that the judicial officer tion to the ITU ($5.8 million for the 1996 calendar year) that covers the work of all three sectors. would have to be satisfied that the officer is satisfied that such an offence is likely to be Given that the major beneficiaries from Australia’s involvement in the ITU are the telecommunications committed. carrier and radiocommunication licensees, it is I do think that example is close to the many appropriate to recover the full cost of the ITU other examples where judicial officers are contribution from those licensees. requested to approve warrants for searches The bill will enable this to be done, through and such like procedures, but it does take it allowing an increase in telecommunications carrier just a step further. I am conscious of the fact licence fees to include full recovery of the telecom- Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1403 that there is a remaining possibility that a cient safeguard. We need the discipline of a subsequent trial could be affected by a judge sunset clause to ensure that the bill and the having made a statement that he or she is operation of the bill is reviewed and to satisfied that the targeted person is likely to determine whether, with hindsight, any provi- commit an offence. sions should be altered or amended, or wheth- Various suggestions were made that one er the bill should be continued. could soften this particular statement, includ- Senator BOLKUS (South Australia) (11.16 ing suggestions made by Senator Cooney. I a.m.)—On behalf of the opposition I would think that is undesirable because that would like to place on record that we do not support weaken the criterion for the controlled oper- the sunset clause. We were supportive of the ation being approved and being instituted. concept of an external accountability mecha- Having considered this difficulty and not nism; but we understand why Senator being able to resolve it, I seek leave to with- Spindler has not proceeded with that. draw my amendments. The concept of a sunset clause in this The CHAIRMAN—Senator Carr, are you legislation is one that is quite inappropriate in a position to tell the chamber whether or for the sorts of operations we are talking not, in the view of the fact that Senator about and for the time over which those Spindler is withdrawing his amendments, operations may operate. By putting a sunset Senator Cooney will now withdraw his clause in you could jeopardise the act of amendment to Senator Spindler’s amend- operations. So, as an alternative to that, given ments? the 12 months of operation, we obviously will Senator SPINDLER—Madam Chairman, be using the mechanisms of the parliament to I should advise the Senate that I contacted assess how the operation of this act has been Senator Cooney earlier today and advised him implemented—mechanisms either in here or that I would be withdrawing this amendment through the committee process. and that he has raised no objection. Senator Spindler, we do share your concern. The CHAIRMAN—Thank you. That concern was driving both of us in terms of the external accountability mechanism. But, Leave granted. failing your amendment, this is not the appro- Amendments withdrawn. priate way to go. We will resort to the mecha- Senator SPINDLER (Victoria) (11.12 nisms of this parliament to maybe check how a.m.)—Concerns about the bill remain be- the process is continuing. If it is not going as cause we are, as has been stated often during well as we would have hoped, then we can this debate, creating a situation where law look at other options that the parliament has. enforcement officers are being authorised to Senator CHAMARETTE (Western Aus- commit unlawful acts. That concern is not tralia) (11.17 a.m.)—I wish to put the Greens’ alleviated and, certainly, I was trying to position on the record. Sunset clauses do not produce a safeguard. Since that has turned out work, or at least they do not work to achieve to be somewhat risky in the circumstances, I the purpose that I am sure Senator Spindler move an alternative amendment, which is now would wish they did—that is, to alert people; being circulated in the chamber. I move: to stand as a signal that this is a bad bill, that 1. Page 2 (after line 3), after Clause 2, insert: bad powers are being put in place and that we should watch it and in two years do some- 2A Sunset Clause thing about it. Sunset clauses simply allow This Act, unless sooner repealed, ceases to have unpalatable bills to be proceeded with and lull effect at the end of 30 June 1998. objectors into silence. Then the sunset clause It has been suggested that the government provisions slip off unobtrusively, leaving the could make an undertaking simply to refer it powers well and truly entrenched. to a committee after two years. But I believe I would prefer to see this bill go through in that that, in the circumstances, is not a suffi- the full position being put so that people can 1404 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 be aware of what a dangerous bill it is. A of scrutiny we gave was very limited. sunset clause merely says, ‘It’s not quite that I would be delighted if any senator in this dangerous, because it has a sunset clause.’ I place could give me an illustration of where remember the state government of Western sunset clauses have succeeded in taking back Australia doing the same thing on the juvenile powers that had been given and about which justice repeat offenders legislation which was people had expressed concerns, because I an international disgrace and made mandatory would be willing to review my position on provisions. Members of the government sunset clauses in the light of such evidence. excused themselves by saying that there was In the absence of such evidence, we indicate a sunset clause provision. At the end of that that we would much rather have supported sunset clause provision the mandatory powers Senator Spindler’s amendments, with the were maintained and the legislation was made questions about them notwithstanding, be- even worse by the next government that came cause we felt that they honoured and tried to into power. put some kinds of controls over the mecha- So I could not speak more strongly against nisms being bestowed by this bill upon the the use of sunset clauses. I do not think they police to actually engage in illegal activities. work for the intention that they are designed I think I have made my position clear and I and desired by people who have concerns thank Senator Panizza in particular for his about bills. The amendments Senator Spindler attention. was moving were very good amendments. Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— The concerns raised about them constitutio- Minister for Employment, Education, Training nally and in this chamber on both sides of the and Youth Affairs) (11.21 a.m.)—I thank chamber are illustrations of the provisions of Senator Spindler for giving further consider- the bill and the unconstitutionality of what we ation to this matter last night. I will not are presently doing by passing this legislation. rehash the arguments made in the very pro- In relation to the Health Insurance Com- ductive debate yesterday. I thank Senators mission’s special powers, we saw how effec- Spindler, Cooney and Bolkus for their con- tive that sunset clause was. Senator Panizza, sideration to the debate on the important issue if you would like to wind me up, you will of the accountability for controlled operations. wind me up. The Health Insurance Commis- The government is very pleased that the sion powers that were given had a sunset accountability mechanisms have been left as clause provision— the government proposed—namely, that Senator Panizza—I raise a point of order, judicial officers will have the opportunity to Madam Chairman. I would like to explain to check over these matters when these things the Committee that I was making signals to come to trial and that the constitutionality of Senator McKiernan. I am very little interested the bill is not put at risk by trying to bring in what Senator Chamarette has to say. judicial officers in at an earlier stage. The CHAIRMAN—That is not a point of I want to briefly comment on why the order. government also will not be supporting the sunset clause proposed by Senator Spindler. Senator CHAMARETTE—I am delighted One reason is that it automatically brings an to hear Senator Panizza’s explanation and I end to the legislation after two years, which am delighted that he is listening so attentively brings down the shutter on the legislation. to what I have to say. The Health Insurance That could operate at a time when it is not Commission’s special powers had sunset convenient to re-enact the provisions—for clause provisions which we were being asked example, when parliament is prorogued. It in this place to remove without even giving follows from that that officers could be in the them the scrutiny that the audit office provid- middle of an operation and the protection ed at a later stage. That report, fortunately, offered to them would be lost; so they might was able to be received before we passed the lose the opportunity to successfully prosecute. bill, removing the sunset clauses. But the kind Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1405

I think it is important to recognise that there very keen to assist us in clarifying a point are other accountability mechanisms, as they think we probably have wrong. We are Senator Bolkus points out. He indicates that prepared to listen to that. We are prepared to the opposition will use those within 12 support a process which puts Customs on alert months. I and the government believe that virtually instantly rather than, for instance, that would be too short a time and that there waiting for a letter which may or may not be may not be enough information available. But the victim of Australia Post or any other such we will know in 12 months time whether mechanism. there is much information available on which Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— to make a sensible review. Minister for Employment, Education, Training The government recognises the difficulty and Youth Affairs) (11.25 a.m.)—I have a with this sort of legislation and would be letter from the Australian Customs Service happy to cooperate with such a review at a addressed to the Secretary to the Attorney- time when there is adequate information. The General’s Department and written by Mr guess at the moment is that it would be Drury, the deputy chief executive officer. I something like two or three years down the seek leave to table that letter. track. But Senator Bolkus may be right, and Leave granted. the committee may find something useful to Senator VANSTONE—With respect to look at within one year. But at least we all clause 15Q(3), page 15, that letter reads: recognise that this place does have the capaci- ty to change things and that a bill, once For accountability purposes we believe that this clause should require the notice to be in writing passed, is not cast into stone forever and a only. This would not present any problems in day. We look forward to parliament exercis- practice and in fact would provide administrative ing its opportunities in that respect. certainty. It also accords with current practice. Amendment negatived. For that reason, we do not support Senator Senator SPINDLER (Victoria) (11.24 Spindler’s amendments. a.m.)—by leave—I move: Senator BOLKUS (South Australia) (11.26 8 Schedule 1, item 2, page 12 (line 2), omit "in a.m.)—Senator Vanstone, you refer to clause writing". 15Q(3). The copy of the bill I have before me 9 Schedule 1, item 2, page 12 (after line 10), after is actually missing that clause, though it was subsection 15Q(2), insert: in the legislation which was introduced by the (2A) The applicant must notify the Chief previous government. Perhaps you could Executive Officer of Customs: clarify whether you will be reintroducing the (a) orally in person; or old clause 15Q(3) or are you referring to another provision? (b) by telephone; or (c) by any other electronic means. Senator Vanstone—I am advised that in the redraft clause 15Q(3) became clause These amendments simply require that Cus- 15Q(2). toms be notified immediately rather than at a later date and are self-explanatory. I commend Senator BOLKUS—All I can say at this them to the Senate. stage is that we will take your word for it. Given your explanation, I think we do not Senator BOLKUS (South Australia) (11.24 need to go ahead with the amendments that a.m.)—The opposition supports those amend- Senator Spindler has moved but that is, of ments. I do not think the government should course, up to him. have too many problems with them. In es- sence, they provide for an instant communica- Amendments negatived. tion to the CEO of Customs as opposed to Senator SPINDLER (Victoria) (11.27 what is provided in the legislation at this a.m.)—I move: stage—notification in writing. 12 Schedule 1, item 2, page 15 (after line 10), I see the officers over there are obviously after section 15T, insert: 1406 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

15TA Evidentiary Certificates that amendment and just put these points on (1) In a prosecution for an offence against the record. There is no desire to excessively section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 or an delay anybody. associated offence, a document purporting to be a certificate authorising a controlled Perhaps I can explain why the government operation, issued under section 15M, is to nonetheless opposes this amendment. The be received in evidence and is prima facie proposed amendment to insert new section evidence of the facts stated in the document. 15TA deals with the admission of evidentiary (2) A document certified in writing by the certificates, but we say the amendment is Commissioner or the Chairperson of the flawed in a number of respects. It refers to a National Crime Authority, as the case may prosecution for an offence against section be, to be a true copy of a certificate referred 233B of the Customs Act 1901 and provides to in subsection (1) shall be received in that a certificate authorising a controlled evidence in a prosecution referred to in subsection (1) as if it were the original operation is to be received in evidence. I warrant. think you have agreed to fix that problem, so— This amendment requires that evidentiary certificates—that means those certificates Senator Bolkus—Do you want that word authorising a controlled operation—issued changed in both subsections? under section 15M must be tabled in court. Senator VANSTONE—I am not sure that This is one of the accountability mechanisms that is the case. I will just take some advice that the Australian Democrats believe are on that. You have changed proposed subsec- desirable in this bill. I commend the amend- tion 15TA(2). But I think the argument is that ment to the Senate. we believe this proposed subsection is not Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— necessary, and I do not see what you add to Minister for Employment, Education, Training by it. and Youth Affairs) (11.28 p.m.)—I wonder whether Senator Spindler could give consider- Senator SPINDLER (Victoria) (11.30 ation to amending his amendment. Proposition a.m.)—In answer to the minister’s question, 15TA has paragraphs (1) and (2). The third we believe that that provides an accountability line in paragraph (2) reads ‘referred to in mechanism and makes sure that a person subsection (1) shall be received in evidence’. issuing the certificate must expect that it will Senator Spindler, would you give consider- in fact be tendered in court and be open to ation to amending your amendment so that scrutiny and challenge. ‘received’ is replaced with ‘tendered’? Senator BOLKUS (South Australia) (11.30 Senator SPINDLER (Victoria) (11.28 a.m.)—Our understanding also is that it to a a.m.)—I seek leave to amend my amendment great extent reflects the current practice in any by replacing the word ‘received’ with event; and I think it is appropriate that these ‘tendered’. certificates are tendered. Whether the word is ‘tendered’ or ‘received’, we are not going to Leave granted. quibble about, but it ought to be consistent for Senator SPINDLER—I amend my amend- both subsections, whichever way we go. With ment as follows: that particular point, we support the amend- ment. Paragraph 15TA(2), omit ‘received’, substitute ‘tendered’. Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— Minister for Employment, Education, Training Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— and Youth Affairs) (11.31 a.m.)—To conclude Minister for Employment, Education, Training this matter, the argument that Senator Bolkus and Youth Affairs) (11.29 a.m.)—Sorry, puts is right, and we would support amending Madam Chairman, I was intending to be on the amendment so that the appropriate word my feet just to put a point with respect to that is used in both cases. That is, ‘received’ is to amendment. I wonder whether we could seek be replaced with ‘tendered’. That is quite leave of the Senate to go back prior to putting Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1407 right. We make the point that in any event it several gold stars for what has been a useful is going to be inevitable that the fact of a contribution. Also helpful were Senator controlled operation will be apparent to the Spindler and Senator Cooney, particularly defence in any trial that depends on that yesterday, because there are subtle distinctions evidence. The defence will then have the right to be drawn and they are not easily made in to oppose the admissibility of the evidence by bold statements. It does take some working challenging the authorisation procedure, and through, and that was done very amicably and that would be done in most cases by a voir we have ended up with a better bill because dire. That is why we say that what you are of it. doing does not add anything but, nonetheless, Senator CHAMARETTE (Western Aus- we have put the point. tralia) (11.34 a.m.)—I ask that the Greens be Senator BOLKUS (South Australia) (11.31 registered as objecting to this bill. We do not a.m.)—I suggest one other change to subsec- intend to call a division, but we just want to tion (2): the last word in it is ‘warrant’, which have that objection on the record. I think should read ‘certificate’. I do not Question resolved in the affirmative. know if Senator Spindler wishes to raise that, but we are talking about a certificate, not a Bill read a third time. warrant. EDUCATION AND TRAINING Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL Minister for Employment, Education, Training 1996 and Youth Affairs) (11.31 a.m.)—That is Second Reading right, Senator Bolkus. Do you want to move an amendment to the amended, amended Debate resumed from 23 May, on motion amendment? How are we going to handle this by Senator Kemp: to make sure we end up with what we want? That this bill be now read a second time. Senator SPINDLER (Victoria) (11.31 Senator CARR (Victoria) (11.34 a.m.)— a.m.)—I seek leave to amend subsection (2) On the surface, the Education and Training of my amendment by replacing the word Legislation Amendment Bill is a very simple ‘warrant’ with ‘certificate’. bill, the explanatory memorandum going to Leave granted. only a few paragraphs. It in essence seeks to repeal the Training Guarantee Act 1990 and Senator SPINDLER—I amend my amend- the Training Guarantee (Administration) Act ment as follows: 1990, and amend the Higher Education Paragraph 15TA(2), omit ‘warrant’, substitute Funding Act 1988 and the States Grants ‘certificate’. (Primary and Secondary Education Assist- Amendment agreed to. ance) Act 1992. In regard to the latter amend- ments in particular, the opposition has no Bill, as amended, agreed to. difficulty in supporting those propositions, Bill reported with amendment; report particularly as they go to providing a rectifi- adopted. cation of an oversight in regard to support for Third Reading the open learning initiative, which facilitates access and increased flexibility for the provi- Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— sion of quality tertiary education throughout Minister for Employment, Education, Training the community, especially in so far as it and Youth Affairs) (11.34 a.m.)—I move: provides computer access to students. There- That this bill be now read a third time. fore, we strongly support that proposition. I thank participants in the debate. I cannot say With regard to the State Grants (Primary that Senator Bolkus was necessarily very and Secondary Education) Assistance Act, the helpful to me yesterday, but he has been bill provides amendments to allow for $20 particularly helpful today, so he can have million in capital funding for non-government 1408 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 schools—which, of course, was a Labor gov- ment. Of course, that has not been followed ernment initiative as well. Those two proposi- by this government. It is not the case in terms tions were, in essence, Labor government of the coalition philosophy at large when we initiatives. The main thrust of this proposal is look at their activities and programs at a state to repeal the Training Guarantee Act 1990, level. They have done everything possible to which was a commitment that the Labor Party undermine and frustrate the work of the made in the election. That, too, will be sup- national Labor government in terms of the ported by the opposition. policies pursued in the education and training Our concerns, nonetheless, go to broader areas. issues which relate to the philosophy of these That is seen quite clearly in the case of measures. In particular, our concerns go to the Victoria, my own state. Commonwealth philosophy of this government in relation to outlays for schools, for instance, which the training and education agenda. For us, the showed a very importance level of commit- issue of training and education stood central ment, increased by 40 per cent, whereas cuts to the political agenda in government, and to state education programs in real terms were that was reflected in expenditure for this about 10 per cent. We saw that pattern right department. across the board. So while the Commonwealth was increasing its commitment to training and This is an issue which is at the very heart education, the states were reducing their of the way in which the government ap- commitment. proaches economic and social issues. If we were to look in broader terms at the main In the 13 years during which Labor was in forces of economic development, one often office, we increased funding to schools by 55 talks about the needs and the rights of capital, per cent in real terms—a huge commitment. but it is not so often the case that the needs In terms of TAFE and the vocational sector, and rights of labour are given equal treatment. the increase was in the order of 56 per cent As far as I am concerned, the issue of training in real terms. In terms of the university sector, and education has to be seen in that context the increase in funding was something like 69 of being of equal importance to the needs and per cent in real terms. In terms of the number rights of capital. of university places, there has been a 70-odd per cent increase in provision. So as far as For those who have nothing else but their Labor was concerned, the philosophy of a labour to sell, the issue of the skill of labour decent, proper and quality education and could not be more basic. Upon that rests the training system was predicated on the pres- capacity of this country to develop to its full umption that there should be an integration of potential. This is particularly important not programs—that all citizens should have access just for the economy at large but for each and to proper education and training at a level every individual in particular. Therefore, the appropriate for their needs. That could be at approach that government takes to the skilling university; it could be at school, through of labour goes very much to the heart of the formal school programs; or it could be issue of what sort of country we are trying to through the vocational education sector. develop. As far as the Labor Party is concerned, we We saw quite massive increases in school are in the business of developing a clever retention rates. We saw quite massive increas- country. That means to the fullest extent es in the number of people enjoying the possible, every person in the country should benefits of apprenticeships and we saw mas- be able to enjoy the benefits of a quality sive increases in the number of people partici- education and training system and, to the pating in tertiary education. At all levels, the fullest extent possible, the state—that is, the increase in expenditure was reflected in government of this country—ought to be increased access and equity for Australian supporting such an approach. citizens. That is precisely what we did in govern- If we look at what has been achieved in terms of training programs in particular, when Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1409

Labor came to office in 1983 there were provisions we are talking about generally 34,000 apprenticeships per year. There were today. Such cuts have to be also considered no traineeships at all. At that point trainee- to the additional programs for schools, ANTA ships had not even been considered. I refer to and other vocational programs. briefing notes of the Minister for Employ- So we have, in essence, a sharp contrast ment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs between the philosophy and approach taken (Senator Vanstone), a copy of which I have by Labor while it was in government and that here. The department advises the minister that taken now by a government seeking, basi- there will be funding provision for 64,000 cally, to bury this very fine record of achieve- program places, which includes 34,000 ment. That concerns me greatly. traineeships and 55,000 apprenticeships. As I understand it, the department is saying to the In the second reading speech there is minister there are ways and means by which reference to a modern and relevant training those programs could be accelerated to im- system. What that really means is open to prove the capacity and momentum of the anyone’s guess. It is one of those nice buzz- training agenda. I am quite happy for that words that bureaucrats come up with and briefing note—a briefing note to the minister which governments seek to trot out from time from the department entitled ‘Labour market to time when they are developing rationales training assistance for the remainder of 1995- for their positions. I am concerned about the 96’—to be tabled, if the minister has no possibility that a relevant and modern training objection to that. system under this government will mean a market driven training system—a system of Senator Vanstone—Perhaps I could look training dependent upon market forces. at it. We have seen a substantial change in the Senator CARR—Certainly. I will come attitudes of employers towards training as a back to that. The whole contrast between the result of the training guarantee levy. A survey approaches of Liberal and Labor could not be was undertaken last year—it might have been sharper when we look at the reports appearing the year before—of some 6,000 businesses daily in the press as to what is occurring in and 17,000 households which showed that, the Department of Employment, Education, whereas in the past, before the scheme was Training and Youth Affairs. I refer specifical- introduced, less than 60 per cent of employers ly to the propositions that the Expenditure were providing adequate funding for training, Review Committee has put to the department that figure had increased to some 90 per cent and which the secretary to the department has as a result of these measures. Prior to the put to meetings of officers around the country introduction of the scheme, employers with a aboconstitution the possibility of indicative payroll in excess of $200,000 provided very cuts of 12 per cent. few structured training programs for their According to newspaper reports—for work force. As a result of the introduction instance, the Australian of 15 May 1996—it and development of this levy that figure rose has been suggested that the targeted cut for to some 90 per cent. It was predicated upon DEETYA should be set at $1.6 billion to $1.8 the assumption that there was an obligation billion. That translates to a disproportionate on employers to meet some of the training contribution by DEETYA towards the costs. That was by way of the introduction of government’s proposed budget cuts. It would this measure which rose, eventually, to 1.5 mean a total contribution of 22 per cent of the per cent of payroll. so-called $8 billion budget cuts from a depart- ment that receives only about 11 per cent of Too often in this country the extraordinary total budget outlays. According to the reports, proposition is advanced by employers that that will involve cuts of $600 million in the only the state has responsibility for contribu- forward estimates of higher education pro- tion towards the payment for training. We see grams and cuts of some $400 million from the that attitude often reflected in the demand that labour market programs which include the immigration programs be changed according 1410 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 to either the skill shortages or surpluses that a failure to provide adequate training on the occur in this country at any given time. We job. Some 10 workers a week are dying as a also see it reflected in the demand that the result of a failure to provide adequate training state provide moneys for apprenticeship and at work. So there is a considerable need for TAFE training generally—that it is not the this parliament to maintain vigilance on these employer’s responsibility to meet any of those issues. commitments. We are now seeing all of those While the opposition supports these propo- attitudes breaking down. I am concerned sals, I believe that there are areas of concern whether we will see a change in attitude back that need to be attended to. I am sure this will the other way as a result of the so-called free be an issue that will have to be attended to in market policies of this government. the future. You cannot have a situation where Another area of concern that I have is the market forces alone determine the level of contrast in the performances of the previous contribution made by employers to the train- government and this government on trainee ing of workers in this country. You cannot wages. In recent times we have seen the have a situation where the government ex- government propose that employees not be empts itself from its obligation to ensure that paid for time when they are not directly all people in this country have adequate engaged in productive work, despite the fact access to proper training and proper educa- that we already have existing awards that tional facilities. cover these conditions in apprenticeship and In my view, we do not have the right to trainee wages generally. I am concerned that turn our backs on issues such as that of if that proposal were taken through to its proper training for workers on the job to logical conclusion, for example, you could see ensure their adequate health and safety. As it an 18-year-old shop assistant have his or her stands, some 655,000 workers are injured wages reduced to some $138 a week. As far every year largely as a result of inadequacy as I am concerned that would be an inad- of the training provided for the use of equip- equate wage and would lead to a substantial ment, and safe work practices. There is, of drop in the capacity of people to earn a course, a range of broader issues that go to decent living. This whole issue of training the issue of proper training. But I would have ultimately goes to the quality of life that thought the issue of occupational health and people can enjoy as a result of the training safety demonstrates just how important it is and their capacity to fully participate in for employers to provide adequate training at society. This parliament ought to be very work, and the government has an obligation concerned about trainee wages being reduced to ensure that that occurs. to such a level that people cannot enjoy the What do we see at the moment? The decent conditions of life. government is cutting back moneys to the This government has advanced proposals in National Safety Council. We have a problem other areas demonstrating a trend towards here costing this economy some $20 billion market domination of training proposals. a year. What does this government do? It cuts Looking at an issue such as occupational $20 million out of the budget of the National health and safety, there are clearly areas of Safety Council of Australia—an organisation considerable need yet to be attended to. It is which is primarily concerned with these my grave concern that, if there is not suffi- matters. We have seen this government cient encouragement from government, there repeatedly talk about cuts and the reduction will be too great a reliance upon the of services. employer’s capacity to pay for training. It is time that this government attended to According to surveys undertaken by the the issue of the effects such cuts would have National Safety Council, in this country some on the quality of services provided. In the 500 workers a year die as a result of occupa- case of training, this is often not just a matter tional work accidents. As has been demon- of improvement to people’s lives but, for strated again and again, that is largely due to some workers, a matter of life and death. Mr Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1411

Acting Deputy President, I ask that this flouting of approved industry standards and document be tabled. practices when it has taken place. We recog- Senator Calvert—On behalf of Senator nise that there is still a need, an increased Vanstone, we will grant leave to table what need, for training in our workplaces, and we would appear obviously to be leaked docu- have long supported a greater role for em- ments. If Senator Carr wishes to table leaked ployers in the provision of training. So today documents, I suppose it is fine. We have no I urge the government to ensure that the objection, but we do make the point that they abolition of the TGL does not occur in a obviously appear to be leaked documents. vacuum; that it is replaced by other initiatives and incentives for business and industry to get Leave granted. involved in workplace training. I concur with Senator STOTT DESPOJA (South Aus- Senator Kim Carr’s comments on that note. tralia) (11.54 a.m.)—The Australian Demo- crats support the Education and Training I believe that, at the time of the TGL Legislation Amendment Bill 1996. One of the suspension bill, the former government first aspects of this bill before the chamber claimed the act had achieved its purpose. today is to provide for the abolition of the While I would like to think that was the case, training guarantee scheme and the training I do take some issue with that statement, and guarantee levy—something that the Demo- I was heartened by Senator Carr’s comments crats have supported. In fact, we put this regarding the increased expectation among forward in our 1994 budget proposal but, in employers that they should invest in training doing so, we not only proposed a three-year schemes. However, we did note that there suspension of the training guarantee levy but were still a number of employers who were advocated a 10 per cent training investment paying directly into the ATO the money that allowance. So we have long recognised that they perhaps should have been spending on the training guarantee levy has become, levies. indeed, a tax on labour. But we believe that I certainly hope that since the introduction our idea would have provided an incentive, of the TGL there has been some kind of an through rebates and other tax incentives, to attitudinal shift in this country. I believe it is encourage investment in labour. reflected in the most recent ABS figures However, the Democrats did support the which note that changes to training expendi- advent of the training guarantee scheme in ture in industries are now most likely to occur 1990, as we saw then, as we do now, a clear because of technological change and quality need for greater input from business and assurance. industry into the training needs of this coun- In the last financial year it seems that try. In fact, at the time of the introduction of technological change had the most impact on the training guarantee scheme, we moved a employers in the communication and public series of amendments designed to devolve the administration and defence industries, where responsibility for the administration of the 81 per cent and 51 per cent of employers training guarantee scheme away from the respectively reported an increase in training Australian Taxation Office. We have always expenditure as a result of this. In the manu- had a concern about the amount of red tape facturing and construction industries, quality involved in the TGL, and that has been based assurance most often caused employers to on extensive consultations we have had with increase training expenditure, with that reason groups in the community—be they business being cited in 30 per cent and 20 per cent and industry groups, or academic or union respectively of these employer cases. How- groups. ever, in the electricity, gas and water industry We have always expressed concern over the it was legislation other than the training somewhat or sometimes dubious accreditation guarantee legislation that most often caused of schemes. Also, we have consistently called employers to increase their training commit- attention, in this place and others, to the ments. 1412 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

I certainly hope that there is a greater all, it is the public or government school recognition given by business and industry sector which is educating more than 70 per groups in our community to the fact that they cent of Australian children. have a responsibility to ensure that quality I take this opportunity to remind the coali- accredited training is available to their em- tion of its election promise—another one—to ployees. It is also essential that this kind of take up the issue of Australia’s low OECD training be available to all workers—and I ranking on government expenditure for school should stress, the newer and younger mem- education. That was going to be taken up at bers of the work force. As I stated in here a the first COAG meeting after the election. number of weeks ago in my first speech, I The promise was to ‘at least maintain’ still believe that there is no other group in Commonwealth specific purpose payments to society which has been more subjected to the schools in line with the forward estimates. I cruel and cutting edge of structural and would like to hear from the minister today, as technological change than that of young part of this debate, as to whether these com- Australians. But of course it is not just young mitments still hold. workers who need constant updating of skills I ask that question in light of recent com- and skill acquisition. I guess that increasing ments by the Minister for Schools, Vocational access to education and training in this coun- Education and Training (Mr Kemp) suggest- try is a prerequisite now—not an option, but ing the possibility of a significant shift in a prerequisite—for today’s work force. government funding away from the public I should add that quality training should not school sector into the non-government school come at the expense of worker benefits, and sector. In fact, just last week the minister it should not be considered an optional extra claimed that the favourable impact on public but an obligatory part of the contract between sector savings of the surge in private school- employees and employer, business and indus- ing is justification for ‘more flexible funding’ try groups. Nor should we see workers—any for non-government schools. workers, but specifically young Australians— I am just curious as to what ‘more flexible penalised for their desire to undertake training funding’ really means. Does it mean relaxing and skill acquisition. I really hope that the the rules so that the well-off non-government coalition bear that in mind when considering schools get more public funds? Does it mean the industrial relations changes that they have increasing funding to the non-government proposed, and also that they stick to their sector at the expense of the government election pledge that no worker shall be worse sector? Does it mean shifting even more of off under their strategies. the costs of education from the government The second part of this bill—I refer to the onto individual parents and students? I am changes to schools—fulfils a commitment by curious to hear from the minister today in the previous government to provide an addi- regard to those issues. tional $20.7 million to the non-government I know that the standard answer is that schools capital program in 1996-97. I should nothing can be revealed until the budget, but add that the Democrats support these propo- I believe the government can at least give a sals. We recognise the ongoing need for commitment that any increase in funding to government expenditure on non-government the non-government school sector will not schools. However, we are firmly of the come at the expense of government schools. opinion that such expenditure should go to the I think that those parents with children in the less well-off non-government schools—those state school system—and that is the vast that are struggling to meet basic standards in majority of parents, I might add—are entitled equipment or facilities. We can see no justifi- to an answer on that particular question. cation at a time when the public school system is crying out for additional resources They are also entitled to know whether such for us to be directing taxpayers’ funds into the an increase is going towards the wealthier well-off non-government school sector. After non-government schools at a time when, as I Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1413 said, the government school sector is strug- the community had barriers such as fees and gling and experiencing real difficulties across charges associated with it. I hope that that is the board. I believe that most parents, despite something else that the coalition will keep in reservations, probably have little argument mind, especially at budget time as they are with the idea of their taxes going towards considering changes and possible cuts to the assisting poorer non-government schools. higher education sector. Most parents believe children should not be They might also want to reflect on their penalised simply because of the decision their promises not to cut operating grants to the parents may have made as to what school higher education sector or their promises not they should attend, where it is or what kind to increase fees and charges such as HECS of school they should be educated in. I do for current students. I say that on a day when believe that parents draw the line at their we are seeing unprecedented academic and taxes going towards well-off non-government general staff strike action around this coun- schools where the services are already of a try—action that is being strongly supported high standard, while their children are strug- by students, many vice-chancellors, I believe, gling to attend government schools that are and of course the Australian Democrats. I resource strapped. So I ask the minister today guess that is relevant in the context of today’s if she is able to reassure Australian parents debate, while we are talking about achieving and the Senate that that proposal is not on the a higher class, quality, contemporary educa- government’s drawing board. tion and training system. The Democrats The last part of this bill corrects an over- know full well that we cannot aim for such a sight which would have prevented the system while we have barriers to achieving minister approving expenditure for the open and developing skills, especially in a work learning initiative. Obviously, the Democrats force that is subject to such massive structural support that plank. In fact, we note that, when and technological change—so much so that the open learning initiative was established by workers do require those skills. then Minister Dawkins, he claimed that all I hope the parliament recognises today the Australians would have access to education if profound changes that have taken place in our they had a television and a letterbox. We work force and the dire need for all workers know that that is not always the case; that to have access to skill development and there are many fees and charges associated acquisition. I hope that the coalition, when with the open learning initiative and many of talking about these issues, bears in mind their those charges occur up front. Certainly, the election promises, especially their promise Australian Democrats have been involved in that no worker will be worse off under a an ongoing debate since the inception of that coalition government. scheme to argue that the minimum course load requirement in order to get a deferred To conclude, it is time we talked about payment option for OLI should be lowered. increased commitments—financial and other- wise—to education and training, not a reduc- We have always argued that the advent of tion in the amount that we are spending on the OLI initiative should be an exciting our schools, on higher education courses, on technological advance, especially for those further education, or on courses such as the groups in the community that have previously open learning initiative. I commend the bill to been disadvantaged or not had access to the Senate. higher education and further education—be it because of home duties, disability or distance. Senator FORSHAW (New South Wales) I urge that we recognise once again in this (12.08 p.m.)—I rise to make a few remarks chamber that fees and charges for education with respect to the bill before the chamber, at whatever level are a psychological and the Education and Training Legislation financial disincentive to enter and pursue Amendment Bill 1996. As has been indicated education. I would hate to see that a scheme by Senator Carr, the opposition is supporting that offers such access to different groups in the proposed amendments. I wish to make 1414 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 some comments regarding the importance of the training guarantee levy when it was first We had massive changes in technology and established. And while it is now being re- the expansion of the global economy. Austral- pealed it was, at that time, a fundamental ia was going through a period of the neces- initiative of the Labor government to get sary removal of tariffs protecting manufactur- investment in training in this country. ing industry and changes in our export base. All of these things meant that unless we had The history of investment by the private initiatives to get investment in training in this sector in training over many years is lament- country our future was looking very bleak. I able. This country ranked very low by inter- think it is still the case that we do not have a national comparison in terms of a prepared- culture in this country in the private sector ness to invest in training and to recognise that that considers investment in training as the the training of employees is good for business highest or one of the highest priorities. I and good for the economy. For too long many would acknowledge that we have made some businesses in the private sector relied heavily very substantial gains towards that, I think upon state governments, state instrumentalities largely because of the introduction of the and the federal government to gain access to training guarantee levy at the time, which was a skilled work force. If one thinks back to the one of those occasions where government had 1950s and 1960s, the post-war era, when to act to force industry to invest in training, much of the major infrastructure development to invest in its own future. in this country occurred in resources indus- tries and in the provision of services, roads At the time the legislation was introduced and electricity and to the development and in 1990, the then opposition, the now govern- expansion of the economy after the war, it ment, was violently opposed to it and many was the state governments, particularly the sectors of industry were opposed to it. Now state instrumentalities—obviously funded both the attitude has changed because of that through their own resources and through the initiative. Employers had to be dragged federal government—that provided the oppor- screaming and kicking to the table but, once tunities for employees to become apprentices there, recognised that they actually did have and gain their skills. One can recall that such a real interest in investing in the training and, bodies as state railways, electricity commis- in many cases the retraining, of their employ- sions and the like were the source of much of ees. the skilled labour. Many employees, for We would not have been able to achieve instance in the metal industry, in the private some of the restructuring of industry that has sector, in the private business area, gained occurred in this country and opportunities for their apprenticeships in such places as state employees to become multi-skilled, to be able railways. to more easily move from one sector of the work force to the other, which is an increas- As we have seen over time, those instru- ing feature of any modern society, without the mentalities or work forces have been cut back impetus of the training guarantee levy and as substantially through restructuring of industry part of that overall broader approach to and, as a consequence, that pool of training, improving education, higher education, and of apprenticeship, has very much disappeared. access to training in this country. Many I can recall in my period of previous employ- employers, I can recall, were violently op- ment in the union movement that the Hydro- posed, firstly, to putting any substantial electric Commission of Tasmania was prob- investment into training and, secondly, to the ably the largest single employer of appren- government, the state or the union movement tices in that state. We have seen over time having any say in this. how there was a shift away from a reliance by private industry on gaining its employees When the traineeship system first started a from the public sector. With a private sector few years back, I, and many other union that was not terribly committed to investment officials, went around this country trying to and training, this country had a real problem. get employers in industry to take on trainees Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1415 under the traineeship system that was avail- the employment, education and training areas, able whereby they were able to be subsidised can turn back the clock. I do not think that over the course of 12 months for taking on there is ever a time when you seriously look additional employees to undertake training. at slashing or even reducing expenditure on Slowly we got them there and I am pleased education and training. But if ever there were to say that in the rural sector, for example, a time that you should refuse to do that, it is where once there was an absolute opposition now. to this sort of a concept where you could This country stands at a very critical point actually have structured training for farm- in its history, having taken on the hard task workers, we now have a situation where my of restructuring industry, of opening up our old organisation, the Australian Workers economy to the rest of the world, and of Union, and the National Farmers Federation, establishing the opportunities for expansion of have a partnership for training rural workers. trade in Asia. If, on the very eve of the 21st I hope the days are gone when rural work- century, we are now going to turn back ers were regarded as jacks-of-all-trades, or because of some sort of blind, ideological jills-of-all-trades, and the masters of none. adherence to the idea of governments backing Just as employees in other industries are able away from their leadership role in education to gain recognition for their skills, whether it and training— be in the metal, mining, hospitality, or clerical Senator Carr—Fightback. industries, or whatever, we are also now looking at farmworkers, in what is still very Senator FORSHAW—Yes, Fightback—I much the productive heart of our export often think that Fightback should have been industry. We are looking at recognising their more aptly named ‘Throwback’. But if that is skills as marketable throughout the rest of the what is in store, then I believe we are in workforce. serious trouble in the future. I am indebted to Senator Carr for raising I believe that education, training and health the issue of safety, and the importance of are the most fundamental responsibilities of training in safety, because the rural sector has government in any society. The old saying is one of the worst records for accidents that if you have got good health and you can amongst farmers and their workers. There is get access to a good education, then things a very high incidence of injuries and acci- will usually flow pretty well from there on. dents, both with machinery and also with the But if we do not have those things, then many use of such things as chemicals and poisonous kids in the future are going to be denied the substances. Through the initiatives of opportunities to participate in this vastly Worksafe Australia and Farmsafe, employees changing technological world. and, indeed, employers, have been able to Whilst quite clearly the opposition is sup- gain the requisite skills needed to look after porting the proposed amendments, we also their own safety and that of their employees. appeal to you—if you can actually listen to an All of these sorts of initiatives have come appeal over there on the other side of the about in recent years and I believe that it is chamber—to rethink your proposals with in large measure due to the initiatives of the respect to higher education and the vast range trade union movement, together with enlight- of employment and training programs that ened employers and the federal and some exist at the moment. state governments, who have pointed out the I close by saying that through Working importance of competency based training. Nation—something that is continuously However, what does concern us is that, attacked by the now government out of some whilst these achievements have been made, blind, ideological view more than a real we now face a situation where the govern- analysis of the success of those programs ment, through its savage budgetary cuts and under Working Nation—we have seen there its attack upon a whole range of programs in the development of a tripartite approach to training and employment. Governments, 1416 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 employers, and employee organisations have we realise this would not have the support of got together in communities with area consul- the chamber, and we will not be opposing this tative councils, as well as at industry level bill, because of the funding arrangements for through industry training bodies, to promote open learning and non-government school training and employment. capital works dependent on the passage of the On the north coast of New South Wales, in bill. the Coffs Harbour area, a rapidly expanding I would like to elaborate on why the Greens population area of this country, the ‘Jobs do not support the scrapping of the training North’ program has been a marvellous suc- guarantee levy without a viable alternative to cess. There have been 1,000 new employment this real policy problem. The policy problem placements in six months—achieved in half is how to ensure that industry and business the time of the target that was set. It was are providing adequate structured training for achieved because of the cooperative approach staff. The training guarantee levy system was of businesses in that area, the local Common- implemented in 1990 and was suspended in wealth Employment Service, DEET agencies, 1994 for two years. It imposed a levy on the trade union movement and the local businesses with payrolls over $226,000 to government representatives, all getting to- spend 1.5 per cent of their payroll on struc- gether and looking at the needs of that area. tured training for staff. The industries that needed to be promoted, such as tourism, did some really great work We admit that the training guarantee levy in providing training opportunities and em- was not a perfect system. There were prob- ployment opportunities for young people. I lems with rorting and misuse. However, any would hate to see that sort of initiative disap- taxation based system has problems of avoid- pear, but I am very fearful that those sorts of ance and of people making use of loopholes. programs are likely to disappear. There were problems associated with infla- In conclusion, I appeal to the government tionary costs for some forms of training, like to rethink its priorities, for the sake of the conferences, especially right near the end of future of this country and for the sake of the the financial year. There were problems of future of the many kids who will want to get compliance, with some 500 businesses opting jobs in it in the future, and, in particular, to to pay the penalty levy to the Australian revoke the proposed cuts in education and Taxation Office instead of spending it on training that it is going to inflict upon them. training. This was pretty illogical considering Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) they could have got a tax deduction if they (12.25 p.m.)—This bill abolishes the training had opted to pay the levy to an educational guarantee levy. It also makes changes to the institution instead. open learning system, fixing an error that was The financial compliance of this scheme made. The minister can actually approve the was quite clever, with compliance disguised money allocated to open learning for 1996, as a levy which could be revenue neutral if 1997 and 1998. The bill does not actually made tax deductible with the benefits going change the amount; it just makes the payment to an educational institution. It is now quite possible. The bill also gives an additional ironic that this scheme will not be renewed $20.7 million to the non-government school when this same government is making the capital program in 1996, which was a com- largest cuts to educational institutions in mitment made by the previous government in decades. 1992. I do not agree with simple assertions that the training guarantee levy should be abol- The Greens do not support the complete ished because ‘it’s a burden on business’ or scrapping of the training guarantee levy ‘business said it would have spent the same without a replacement mechanism to encour- amount of money on training anyway’. This age training by small business and industry. is the simple rhetoric of an ideology that says We will not be moving amendments, because business can be self-regulatory without checks Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1417 and balances in such matters. Business does 500,000 Australians were injured at work as have a responsibility to its work force to a result of the failure to provide adequate provide training and should pay for it. The training in the workplace. This study exam- other alternative is that business is saying that ined 100 injuries and discovered that 56 per the taxpayer should pay for its training. cent of employers did not provide employees If we are to be committed to a culture of with induction training and 70 per cent training, we must tackle this policy problem neglected refresher training. with improvements to the current training We know the training guarantee levy guarantee levy scheme with alternatives to the scheme has been effective because we had a scheme. What is disturbing is that there is 95 per cent compliance rate under the scheme. little or no debate about alternatives coming Prior to the scheme’s operation in 1989, we from either of the major parties. There has had 58 per cent of businesses spending been little attempt to make the scheme work- nothing on training while 74 per cent were able, and the lack of effort has almost been to spending less than one per cent of their set the scheme up to fail. payrolls on training. This was despite the There was also no attempt to challenge government providing $2.5 billion in subsidies rorting opportunities by changing the defini- to employers, yet employers were not giving tion of what constituted legitimate training. anything back on top of employment to There was also no attempt to make the employees. scheme more flexible to live up to its criti- As an aside, I want to see how long it takes cisms by extending the definition of legiti- before industry comes to the government on mate training to include, for example, study particular issues and says, ‘We’ve got a real leave, occupational health and safety and shortage of trained people in this particular industrial relations. The Australian Democrats sector. Please, can you provide an exemption in the past have proposed the replacement of for immigration for those particular workers the training guarantee levy scheme with tax with those skills because we don’t want to incentives for training, such as a 10 per cent have to pay the premiums to attract people in training investment allowance. The Greens that industry back from other industries.’ Just would be concerned, however, that the burden you wait and see how long that takes. I has shifted more to the taxpayer instead of believe that is beginning to happen already. remaining with business. I believe that in scrapping this scheme, There is no sincere attempt to measure the without giving serious consideration to im- effectiveness of the scheme. I have not seen proving it or replacing it with something more any analysis on the amount of training ex- workable, we are throwing the baby out with penditure during the two years in which this the bathwater. The government cannot be scheme has been suspended. We have a dire serious with its training program without such need with such policy matters to evaluate the a scheme that renders business accountable outcomes of such a scheme so we are fully for the amount its spends on training. If one informed in our decision making. I believe were completely cynical, one would say the this has not occurred with this scheme. This government does not require such a scheme therefore explains the rash approach to do because it believes that subsidised jobs with away with the scheme without looking at a large unpaid training component will make whether there is a real need for a more appro- businesses look as though they were training priate mechanism to take up the scheme’s anyway. The Greens believe this approach functions. will mean an increase in the amount of We are now left with no accountability working poor and will result in deskilling and mechanism to ensure business provides heightened occupational safety concerns, adequate training. There is no less need for particularly in blue-collar work. training, especially in blue collar work. A To recap, because there are elements of this National Safety Council study showed that bill which are of benefit to the community, 600 people were dying per year and that we will not be opposing the bill. We very 1418 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 much regret that we are left with this very Office survey of companies’ attitudes to the unsatisfactory arrangement in relation to the training guarantee levy and what it was training guarantee levy, which now has no actually doing to the companies revealed the replacement. following. Seventy per cent said that the act Senator TIERNEY (New South Wales) created more administrative work; 63 per cent (12.32 p.m.)—I rise in this debate to support said they were spending the same amount of the Education and Training Legislation time, or even less time, on training; nine per Amendment Bill 1996. It is quite refreshing cent admitted they were undertaking unneces- to have after three weeks in this parliament an sary training to fulfil the requirements of the uncontentious bill. We are actually going to act; and only four per cent—only four per get through another piece of legislation, cent—had a positive response to the act. It which, I think, is our second piece of legisla- was a very ineffective piece of legislation tion in three weeks. created by the former Labor government. The training guarantee levy, along with the so- Senator Carr—Wrong about that. called Working Nation program, failed. What Senator TIERNEY—Our productivity can they did show was a commitment, under only go up, Senator Carr, from this point. Labor, to off-the-job training. This legislation does three things and I want This government is committed to on-the- to address each of those in turn. First of all it job training. We will set out, as one of our abolishes the training guarantee levy, which highest priorities, to revamp the apprentice- was created by the previous government in ship system in this country, particularly at a 1990. The second point relates to the open time when we have such high levels of youth learning initiative and a technical amendment unemployment. The apprenticeship system to finish off funding for that particular pro- was allowed to run down shamefully by the gram over the next two years. The third point last Labor government. There were only is the provision of an additional $20.7 million 50,000 places a year under the ALP’s scheme of capital grants that have been promised to in 1995-96. That is exactly the same figure as non-government schools. 12 years ago. On the first matter, this bill finally buries Under the training guarantee, employers the discredited and defunct training guarantee have no recognition for taking on apprentices. levy. This measure was introduced in 1991 by Labor had set up a scheme that was supposed the former Labor government and was sus- to guarantee training but they had forgotten to pended by amendment in 1994. There is now, include apprentices in that scheme. No won- as you have heard round this chamber today, der apprenticeships in this country declined so bipartisan support for that approach. The ALP drastically over the period of the previous realised finally that this scheme was ineffec- government. As I indicated earlier, the train- tive. It was best summed up in an article in ing guarantee allowed executives to go off on the Good Weekend,intheSydney Morning stress relief to resorts, and that was claimable. Herald, in 1993. It stated: The scheme became discredited, DEET did This act has spawned an industry in which abseil- not monitor the scheme properly, and what ing down a cliff is called team building; in which should pass as real training in this country, in cosmetics demonstrations are training for reception- ists; in which gym membership is written off as a terms of apprenticeships, was not being done. stress management program and in which the Good riddance to another failed Labor pro- definition of a corporate classroom is a five star gram. resort. The second matter in the bill gives the They were some of the rorts that were occur- minister discretion to approve funding allocat- ring under this particular scheme in the name ed under the Higher Education Funding of training. Amendment Act (No. 2) 1990 to the open Industry was very much opposed to this learning initiative, and in particular to its very blunt instrument to improve training in centrepiece, the Opening Learning Agency of our country. A 1992 Australian Taxation Australia. This is to correct the minor anoma- Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1419 ly to allow money to be spent in the last two Unfortunately, because the system was set years of the program, and then the OLAA is up on a cheap quick-fix basis, this was not supposed to be self-sufficient. going to happen. The sums were all wrong. This was an initiative by the last govern- The amount of money the students paid—it ment in 1992-93 to improve flexibility in was supposed to be self-financing—was $310 higher education. In reality it was at that per unit. Our best estimate for the cost of time—as senators will remember, in the running a university course, even in the arts, depths of the recession—really part of the is from $600 to $800 a unit, and they were government’s quick fix solution to long and only allowing $300 a unit. Worst still, the lengthening unemployment queues. We also participating university got only $185 of this had at that time long and lengthening univer- off the top and the faculties got only $100 to sity queues. People were trying to get into a administer the course. university and could not. When I came into So how can we have quality in that sort of this parliament, 50,000 people were being system? There is not enough money to meet turned away each year from university gates. the cost of running the course. There is not So the last government came up with this enough money for the libraries and there is open learning initiative. Treasurer Dawkins not enough money for administration. It really hailed it in the 1992 budget as ‘creating a worked in only a rough sort of way because new era in higher education’. It was supposed the universities that wanted to participate to do this—and I quote from the budget were prepared to cross-subsidise this system, papers of 1992: which is hardly fair. We need to integrate open learning with the rest of the universities. Every person with a TV or a letter box will have Perhaps, in this revamped form, we could use the opportunity to access higher education. it as a tool to take open learning into other What overblown rhetoric that was. The reality countries and provide those people with is that several years later the Open Learning access, on a fee-paying basis, to Australian Agency, which was supposed to be the sav- university courses. iour of the system and allow proper access to The third and final aspect of this bill that I higher education, had only 5,000 students. It wanted to deal with relates to the amendments has been a pimple on the pumpkin of the to the State Grants (Primary and Secondary system. When compared with universities like Education Assistance) Act, which provides Deakin, where there are 50,000 external another $20 million for the non-government students just in the one area, quite a contrast schools capital works program. This was is created with this particular failed initiative. promised by the last government and this The Senate committee which I chaired government is honouring that promise. It is examined this initiative in 1994 and 1995. It very important because of the very long and brought down two reports: one on the Open proud tradition of the private schools in Learning Agency and one on open learning Australia. more generally. The committee, as a result of When I was young, there used to be great those hearings, did table in the Senate a division in society over whether there should number of unanimous recommendations on be state aid to private schools. When Menzies what the future of the OLAA should be. We was Prime Minister in 1963, he ended this felt that the whole thing needed to be inte- sort of sectarian division that existed in grated more into the university system and Australian society. From that point on, from come under the auspices of the Australian 1963 on, there was agreement that the Vice-Chancellors Committee. The feeling was Commonwealth government should have a that, if we had done that, it would then be role in providing funding for these schools, owned by all the universities and could particularly capital works funding. become a tool for developing open learning right across the whole system. Unfortunately, over the last 13 years under the last government there have been some 1420 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 changes that have put a major brake on the (Senator McKiernan)—Order! It being 12.45 development of new schools in Australia. We p.m., we will deal with consideration of non- had what was called—and I think it is some- controversial legislation. what ironic, given the nature of what it did— the new schools policy. This policy, which LOAN BILL 1996 allows private schools to be set up, was Second Reading administered by the last government. We have renamed this so-called new schools policy the Debate resumed from 23 May, on motion ‘no new schools policy’, because the new by Senator Kemp: schools policy stopped new schools from That this bill be now read a second time. starting up. Senator SHERRY (Tasmania—Deputy It was instructive to hear what the Steiner Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) school people had to say to our committee on (12.45 p.m.)—I expected Senator Short to be employment, education and training. They here for this matter; but I will speak only very said that, if the rules under this government briefly. The opposition supports the Loan Bill. for new schools existed 30 years ago when Over a financial year the consolidated revenue they were established, they would not have fund, commonly known as the CRF, cannot even got off the ground. Out there there is a be in deficit—that is, the expenditure over a whole range of schools which want to get year must not exceed the moneys available in started and the government has stopped it. the fund. Senator Newman—The previous govern- For the information of the Senate, the ment. consolidated revenue fund is named in the constitution. Where there is projected to be a Senator TIERNEY—Thank you for your shortfall in the CRF, governments have correction, Senator. The previous government adopted the practice of supplementing the did stop this because it did not want these CRF with moneys in the loan fund and sectors which were competing with public balancing the loan fund by borrowing. In schools taking too many places. addition, and I think quite peculiarly, defence It is a time-honoured tradition in Australia funding can be made directly from the loan that we have choice and that we have choice fund to reduce the payments necessary from in the school system. Parents want to be the CRF. I am not sure why that is so. It may involved in these schools. When I was chair have something to do with some sorts of of a private school about five years ago, every financial arrangements adopted during war- time we wanted to expand, a major brake was time. put on the expansion. They claimed that we This bill proposes to authorise borrowings all could not find enough pupils in the local to be undertaken and to authorise payments area. We kept telling them that people came from the loan fund, firstly, to support the CRF from all over the region to this private school. if necessary, secondly, to use the borrowings They would never hear that argument. to pay for defence expenditure and, thirdly, to I am very pleased to support the announce- pay for the costs of undertaking the ment made by Dr Kemp last week that we are borrowings. This is a routine machinery going to change all that. If people want to provision that will finance the 1996-97 budget start private schools and they can meet the measures. Such a bill is passed annually, state requirements, the federal government is except where it is unnecessary due to a not going to stop that sort of choice. We will surplus being achieved in the CRF. be supporting it in the term of this govern- Given that the CRF is usually in deficit, it ment and in the years to come. In relation to is arguably archaic to require an annual act this bill, we are quite happy to support this authorising the financing of such a deficit. undertaking to put this funding of another $20 The parliament’s time could be saved by the million into the private education system. passage of legislation which grants standing The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT authority to borrow and to supplement the Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1421

CRF. I will talk with Senator Short about that Senator Kemp: at an appropriate time. It is important that we That this bill be now read a second time. have modern mechanisms in place to save the Senator SCHACHT (South Australia) parliament’s time with respect to what are (12.50 p.m.)—On behalf of the opposition, I fairly standard machinery matters. The oppo- rise to indicate that we will be supporting the sition supports the bill. Sydney 2000 Games (Indicia and Images) Senator O’CHEE (Queensland) (12.47 Protection Bill. Again, I am pleased to see the p.m.)—It is very pleasing to see the support government reintroducing one of our pieces of Senator Sherry for this very important bill, of legislation from last year that had not the Loan Bill. It is very pleasing to see that proceeded through the parliament by the time matters of Commonwealth finances are being the election was called. The remarks made by dealt with as non-contentious legislation. Senator Faulkner on 29 November 1995 on Obviously what we are seeking to do here is that bill still stand and I want to indicate why to make sure that we can reform the finances we believe this bill will be supported. as quickly as possible and to ensure that, as On a personal level, I was a former minister Senator Sherry has said, Commonwealth responsible for the operation of the Australian finances are run on a modern basis. Industrial Property Office, or what most But we are concerned also to ensure that people commonly call the patents office and the level of Commonwealth government the trademarks office. This bill came from the indebtedness is reduced. This is why the powers that the federal government has in Treasurer (Mr Costello) and the Prime dealing with trademarks. Minister (Mr Howard) indicated yesterday that There was considerable debate and discus- they did not consider it appropriate to take the sion during 1995. This legislation was re- view that we could relax our fiscal strictness ferred to a Senate committee to look at what in terms of the budget just because there had protection should be provided to the Olympic been one-quarter of positive growth. We take symbols for the Sydney Olympic Games. the view that it is not the result for this year There was considerable discussion and nego- which is important but it is the expected out- tiation between the Sydney Organising Com- come for the next two years which is critical mittee for the Olympic Games, the New to the way in which the finances of this South Wales government and us to get a country will be restructured. balance in clearly protecting the Olympic We believe that the country has to be put symbols that we all know so well, the images on a firm and solid economic footing, and and the motifs for the Sydney Olympic that is why we are committed to ensure that Games and the rights for ordinary citizens to we do not run a budgetary deficit. That is, use long established symbols in a more therefore, why it is so important we have generic way. some sort of fiscal rectitude and why we do I think at one stage the Sydney Olympics not intend to relax our position. If we relax organising committee probably took a pretty our position, it will only get the nation further expansive view on who was eligible to use into debt. With those comments, I thank what—associated with the Olympic Games— honourable senators for their contributions. for ever and a day. We indicated that we Question resolved in the affirmative. thought some of their requests may have been Bill read a second time, and passed through what we would call an ambit claim; but we its remaining stages without amendment or have negotiated a reasonable outcome. debate. I think the Senate committee’s work on this SYDNEY 2000 GAMES (INDICIA AND last year was most helpful in getting a balance IMAGES) PROTECTION BILL 1996 of competing interests. Therefore, the opposi- tion indicates its support for this bill. Of Second Reading course, we hope it adds to the great success Debate resumed from 8 May, on motion by of the Sydney Olympic Games and ensures 1422 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 that appropriate income goes to the Sydney all know, as the games become closer, the Olympics committee in paying for obviously opportunities for ambush marketing—that is, the great expense of conducting the Sydney people associating themselves with the games Olympic Games. whilst not having a licence to do so—become more of a problem and more of a drain on the Senator CAMPBELL (Western Australia— cash flow to the organising committee. We Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the made it publicly known that we thought the Environment and Parliamentary Secretary to former government was tardy in bringing the Minister for Sport, Territories and Local forward this legislation on the second last day Government) (12.53 p.m.)—On behalf of the of last year’s sittings. I only seek to put that government, I welcome the opposition’s chronology in order. We do welcome the support for the Sydney 2000 Games (Indicia support of the opposition. Since that Senate and Images) Protection Bill. I would like to legal and constitutional committee brought say very briefly in concluding the second down its report, there has been almost entire reading debate that the opposition’s chronol- bipartisanship, as shown by the fact that the ogy of events leading to this legislation is bill is listed today as being non-controversial. slightly awry. This whole issue was brought Question resolved in the affirmative. to a head by my motion that this issue be referred to the Senate Standing Committee on Bill read a second time. Legal and Constitutional Affairs, chaired very In Committee ably by Senator Chris Ellison. The bill. The previous government had refused Senator SCHACHT (South Australia) repeated attempts by the New South Wales (12.57 p.m.)—I am not going to move an government—then under the excellent premi- amendment, but I have to make one further ership of John Fahey—SOCOG and the AOC point in view of what Senator Campbell said to have such legislation giving property rights in his summing up of the second reading not only in relation to the symbols and mo- debate. The issues that the then government tives of the Olympics but specifically for the was concerned about were that, if we had words ‘Sydney 2000 Olympics’ and a range accepted the views of the Sydney Organising of others associated with the organisation of Committee for the Olympic Games, people the games. The coalition in opposition be- with legitimate commercial rights in Australia lieved that, unless there was a serious public who have used associated Olympic symbols debate about this issue, the government would et cetera could have been adversely affected not act on this, as it had refused to do so for within this country. some two years since Sydney, New South We wanted to ensure that the legitimate Wales and Australia were successful in rights to get value from the Sydney Olympic gaining the games. Games were maintained without affecting the So it was through an initiative of the oppo- people I have mentioned. I know many sition that this matter was referred to the commercial firms have been using the term Senate legal and constitutional committee. ‘Olympic’ in their business name for de- That committee did very good work, as cades—and quite legitimately so without Senator Schacht referred to. It brought all the objection. They were afraid that for the period issues into the public arena. Senator of the Sydney Olympic Games they might Vanstone, who is in the chamber, was a have to pay a royalty or whatever. We wanted member of that committee. That committee to make sure there was a proper balance. I made a unanimous report supporting what was acknowledge the committee did help with at that stage the position of the coalition in this. We got the right balance between those opposition in relation to this piece of legisla- legitimate long-term commercial interests and tion. the overall interests of the Sydney Organising We encouraged the government month after Committee for the Olympic Games. month to bring forward this legislation. As we Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1423

Bill agreed to. debate. Bill reported without amendment; report INDIGENOUS EDUCATION adopted. (SUPPLEMENTARY ASSISTANCE) Third Reading AMENDMENT BILL 1996 Bill (on motion by Senator Campbell) read Second Reading a third time. Debate resumed from 27 May, on motion AUSTRALIAN SPORTS DRUG by Senator Kemp: AGENCY AMENDMENT BILL 1996 That this bill be now read a second time. Second Reading Senator SCHACHT (South Australia) (1.02 Debate resumed from 8 May, on motion by p.m.)—I am delighted to speak in support of Senator Kemp: this bill which will provide an additional That this bill be now read a second time. $95.7 million to improve Aboriginal education opportunities. I am especially pleased because Senator SCHACHT (South Australia) this bill is the result of an initiative of the (12.59 p.m.)—Very briefly, the opposition former federal Labor government. To save the will be supporting this bill. As I said a short time of the Senate, I seek leave to incorporate while ago in relation to the Sydney 2000 the rest of my remarks in Hansard. Games (Indicia and Images) Protection Bill, the opposition’s views are already on the Senator Vanstone—Mr Acting Deputy record. I refer honourable senators to the President, we are grateful for the cooperation Hansard of 29 November 1995. of the opposition and other parties in getting Senator CAMPBELL (Western Australia— this matter dealt with in an uncontroversial Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the fashion, but I am not aware that it is standard Environment and Parliamentary Secretary to practice to incorporate a speech on the second the Minister for Sport, Territories and Local reading without other parties having the Government) (12.59 p.m.)—I welcome the opportunity to have a look at it. opposition’s support for the Australian Sports Senator SCHACHT—You don’t want me Drug Agency Amendment Bill. It is an to read it out, do you? The whips will shoot important measure, as the second reading you if you do. debate contributions reflect. It is very import- ant that Australia’s leadership in the fight Senator Vanstone—Mr Acting Deputy against drugs in sport is maintained. President, you might like to give me some advice here. I am certainly not keen to estab- Again, there has been very much a biparti- lish a precedent that it is okay to come in and san approach to the issue of drugs in sport drop a speech on the government with a few since the ground-breaking inquiry by the minutes notice, but I am equally not keen to Senate Standing Committee on Environment, delay Senator Schacht or anybody else. Recreation and the Arts called ‘Drugs in Sport’. The establishment of ASDA has seen Senator SCHACHT—Do you want to have us take a leading role in the world on this a look at it? issue. This legislation advances the original Senator Vanstone—Yes; the point is that legislation, brings it up to date and makes it we would have liked to have had a look at it more effective, which will be quite crucial for so that we could give you the opportunity to Australia and indeed all sporting nations in incorporate it, but it is difficult for me to have the lead-up to the Sydney 2000 Games. I wish a look at it while I am taking the time of the the bill a speedy passage. Senate to make my own contribution. Question resolved in the affirmative. Senator SCHACHT—I know, I appreciate that, but it just turned up my desk one second Bill read a second time, and passed through before I read it out. its remaining stages without amendment or 1424 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT The speech read as follows— (Senator McKiernan)—I am aware, Senator I am delighted to speak in support of this bill, Vanstone, that it has occurred in previous which will provide an additional $95.7 million to times, with not only opposition senators but improve Aboriginal educational opportunities. I am third party senators being given leave to especially pleased because this bill is the result of incorporate speeches in the Hansard. Leave an initiative of the Federal Labor government. has even, in some cases, been given to in- In setting up the National Review of Education for corporate when there was not enough time to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in complete the speech. 1993, the former government was recognising the fact, stated in the 1994-95 report Social Justice for Senator Chris Evans—Mr Acting Deputy Indigenous Australians, that ‘Aboriginal and Torres President, I only recently received a copy. Strait Islander people were. . . the poorest, sickest, Unfortunately, Senator Bolkus, who was most unemployed and least educated of all handling the matter for the opposition, had a Australians’. medical appointment and is unable to be here, The review was established to examine the oper- and his office provided his speaking notes to ation of the first triennium of the National Aborigi- Senator Schacht. I just make the point that the nal and Torres Strait Islander Education Policy opposition has agreed for this bill to be listed (AEP). The AEP began in 1990 as a national effort between the Commonwealth, the states and territor- as a non-controversial item in order to allow ies and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people the government to get the legislation passed. to strategically address the educational needs of In that spirit of cooperation, I briefly spoke to indigenous Australians. Senator Vanstone, asking for permission for The AEP identified 21 goals under four main the speech to be incorporated rather than themes: involvement, access, participation and delay the Senate by having Senator Schacht outcomes, particularly recognising the fundamental read it. I appreciate that it was very short importance of the involvement of indigenous people notice, but, as I say, I did indicate to her that at all stages of decision making. I do not think there is anything controversial The original joint policy statement of the AEP in in the speech, and the request was designed 1989 acknowledged the power of education to to allow the government to proceed with its improve the quality of life for people from finan- agenda. cially impoverished backgrounds: Numerous reviews, inquiries and consultations Senator Vanstone—I have now had an conducted in recent years have all demonstrated opportunity to have a quick perusal of the that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people speech and I have no objection to it being place a high priority on education. They want for incorporated. I just want to reiterate the point themselves and their children no less by way of that my personal view is that it is a very educational opportunity than is afforded other dangerous practice for people to come in and Australians. They expect that educational pro- cesses should lead them to acquire the know- drop a speech. Of course a mate, if told that ledge and skills necessary to realise their individ- there is nothing controversial in it, is going to ual potential, lead satisfying lives, and contribute say that there is nothing controversial in it. actively to the community. They look to educa- Then you find later that you have allowed tion as a means of moving out of poverty and into Hansard something that you would not welfare dependency, enabling them to earn have allowed someone to say were they income through employment or enterprise and to standing in this place. manage the development of their communities. Five years after the AEP was established was a Medical appointments, funerals, luncheon suitable time to consider the extent to which it had appointments—whatever—aside, I fail to see met expectations in terms of the 21 goals. that people not attending in this place should The review praised the AEP for delivering more have less scrutiny from their colleagues than funding stability in the form of triennial rather than those who can make the time to be here. annual arrangements, for fostering co-operation Nonetheless, I have had the opportunity to between governments, federal, territory and state, read the speech and I am quite happy for it to and between education sectors, and for identifying be incorporated. the need for more culturally appropriate curricula. Not surprisingly, it also found that the AEP’s first Leave granted. Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1425 three years held some lessons for its future oper- nal education expenditure in order to access a pool ation. In terms of educational participation and of Commonwealth money in the form of strategic attainment, the review found that improvements, results projects. although evident, were inconsistent across sectors The opposition will be most interested in arrange- and systems. ments made with the states as a result of this bill. It found that many parents now have an avenue for We would expect the government to ensure that becoming directly involved in their children’s commitments made by the states to increase effort schooling through the establishment of over 2,500 are not permitted to lapse due to any reduction in parent committees under the Aboriginal Student commitment by the Commonwealth, or any dimin- Support and Parent Awareness Program (ASSPA). ution of resolve on the part of the Commonwealth. It also found that the co-operative national ap- There is far too much at stake. proach of the AEP had encouraged the development In closing, I would like to congratulate the chair of of Aboriginal studies and Torres Strait Islander the reference group overseeing the review, studies as part of the curriculum in an increasing Mandawuy Yunupingu, the deputy chair, Romina number of educational institutions. Fujii, and the other members of the reference These kinds of improvements were not seen group, on the excellent job they did. uniformly across the country, however, and ad- I would also like to say that real improvements can dressed to only a limited extent the extreme be made in indigenous education if all governments educational disadvantage facing our indigenous work together with Aboriginal and Torres Strait population. Islander peoples. We have come some of the way; The review made 44 recommendations designed to this bill takes us further toward our goal. improve Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— people’s experience of education. Minister for Employment, Education, Training Sixteen of the recommendations apply specifically and Youth Affairs) (1.05 p.m.)—Mr Acting to the Commonwealth, while others involve the Deputy President, before making my contribu- state and territory governments and non-government education authorities. tion, I might make the point to Senator Evans, who is indicating that what I have just said The former government responded to the review in September last year, announcing a package of will be remembered next time we want measures which included those incorporated in this something tabled, that I am quite happy for bill. The response announced the Labor govern- anything I want tabled to be handled in the ment’s intention to make the Aboriginal Education appropriate fashion. Equally, when leave is Strategic Initiatives Program recurrent, and this sought to incorporate something, if it has not measure is a key part of the bill we are considering been shown to the other parties, they are today. It will provide greater stability of funding as entitled to have a look at those matters and well as ensuring that funds remain commensurate with enrolments. ascertain whether they give approval. If people want to make interjections indicating It will also simplify funding arrangements, address- ing complaints made to the review about the time that it is inappropriate, they have to expect a spent preparing submissions. response, and those who want to go to lunch In line with review recommendation 37, the will be unhappy. proposal is to provide funds on a per capita basis, Let me turn to the main issue—the In- and in a way which reflects the differing costs of digenous Education (Supplementary Assist- educational provision across sectors, and in remote ance) Amendment Bill 1996. This is a very and non-remote areas. important bill to have passed. I want to I note that the government intends these changes to commence my remarks by thanking the accompany a more accountable, outcomes-focussed process for the distribution of Commonwealth government, the Democrats and everybody funds. There is no doubt that we need to continue else for their cooperation in getting this bill down the path set by the previous government in put on on a Thursday— placing a high priority on establishing comprehen- sive and up-to-date data bases across all sectors of Senator Schacht—The opposition, you education and training, so that the performance of mean. the AEP in meeting its objectives can be properly evaluated. Senator VANSTONE—The opposition; that is right. I thank the government, of The previous government also obtained agreement from most states to increase their effort in Aborigi- course, for our cooperation; but I should 1426 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 thank the former government—the opposi- Imports) Amendment Bill 1996 tion—for its cooperation. SOCIAL SECURITY LEGISLATION I think this is a positive change for the AMENDMENT (NEWLY ARRIVED funding of Aboriginal education. Funding is RESIDENT’S WAITING PERIODS AND primarily now going to be on a per capita OTHER MEASURES) BILL 1996 basis. That means that you get paid on the basis of the number of indigenous students, First Reading and there will be some extra money for Bill received from the House of Representa- Aboriginal education as approved by the tives. Expenditure Review Committee. The poor Motion (by Senator Newman) agreed to: retention rates, particularly at higher levels of That this bill may proceed without formalities secondary schooling, are a very major factor and be now read a first time. in the educational disadvantage of indigenous Bill read a first time. Australians. At year 12, for example, the retention rate is only 33 per cent, compared Second Reading with 76 per cent for other Australians. Senator NEWMAN (Tasmania—Minister The current funding arrangements under the for Social Security and Minister Assisting the Aboriginal education strategic initiatives Prime Minister for the Status of Women) program are based on submissions which (1.10 p.m.)—I table a replacement explana- obviously fail to provide certainty and conti- tory memorandum and move: nuity. Funding levels have no direct link to That this bill be now read a second time. outcome and do not reflect levels of enrol- I seek leave to have the second reading ments of indigenous students. Now that we speech incorporated in Hansard. are shifting to a per capita basis of funding, Leave granted. it is going to be much more predictable, because it will be based on changes in enrol- The speech read as follows— ment demands and there will be this separate A 26-week newly arrived resident’s waiting money from the per capita money for strategic period for certain social security and other pay- results projects, which are, of course, going to ments has operated for several years. Refugees and humanitarian migrants are exempt from this re- be time limited and outcomes orientated. quirement. It is worth noting that the bill builds on an The government expects that new entrants to agreement, reached at the December 1995 Australia should provide for their own support meeting of the Ministerial Council on Em- during their first two years, 104 weeks, in Australia and, as a result, announced as part of its 1996 ployment, Education, Training and Youth election policy commitments that the newly arrived Affairs, to set literacy, numeracy and employ- resident’s waiting period would be so extended. ment targets within the 1997-99 indigenous This bill implements that commitment. agreements with the Commonwealth for As a general rule, a newly arrived resident’s AESIP funding. I thank senators for their waiting period of 104 weeks will apply to migrants, cooperation. except for refugee or humanitarian migrants, immediate family members of refugees and hu- Question resolved in the affirmative. manitarian migrants at the time that the refugee or Bill read a second time, and passed through humanitarian migrant arrived in Australia or its remaining stages without amendment or existing holders of subclass 820 visas, who arrive in Australia on or after 1 April 1996 or who are debate. granted permanent residence on or after 1 April BILLS RETURNED FROM THE 1996, and who wish to claim certain social security benefits such as jobsearch allowance or sickness HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES allowance. In the case of some other social security The following bill was returned from the and other payments, the 104-week waiting period House of Representatives without amendment: will operate in respect of certain migrants entering Australia from the day of royal assent. Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and The 26-week newly arrived resident’s waiting Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1427 period will continue to apply to migrants who had government is reviewing sponsorship arrangements arrived in Australia and been granted permanent with a view to ensuring that anyone who sponsors residence before 1 April 1996. A newly arrived a migrant should provide financial support for that resident’s waiting period will apply to the following person before any calls are made on the taxpayer. payments: The bill will also implement legislation aimed at . carer pension; streamlining information gathering from third . disability wage supplement; parties and clarify that income data for different financial years may be used in a single data- . widow allowance, excluding cases where the matching program. woman has 10 years residence at some time prior to claiming payment or where both the claimant Section 1307 of the Social Security Act 1991 and and her former partner were Australian residents section 346 of the Student and Youth Assistance at the time when they separated, became di- Act 1973 allow the Secretary to the Department of vorced or her partner died; Social Security to require a person—usually employers and other third parties—to give informa- . jobsearch allowance; tion about a class of persons with a view to: . newstart allowance; . detecting cases in which amounts of pension, . mature age allowance paid under Part 2.12B of benefit or allowance have been paid when they the Social Security Act 1991; should not have been paid; and . sickness allowance; . verifying the qualification of persons who made . special benefit except for those situations where claims for those pensions, benefits and allowan- a migrant’s circumstances have changed signifi- ces. cantly following their arrival in Australia, and for Both sections define the type of information that reasons beyond their control; may be sought. . partner allowance; Currently, information about when people start . maternity allowance; and end their employment may not be sought under . parenting allowance; sections 1307 or 346. The result is that employers are often faced with having to respond to a request . child disability allowance; for information under section 1307 or 346 and then . double orphan pension; having to deal with a follow-up request authorised . mobility allowance; and under another section of those acts if, on the basis of the initial advice provided by them, it appears to . youth training allowance. the Department of Social Security that there has In addition, a newly arrived resident’s waiting been an overlap in payment of a social security period will also be imposed for the seniors health payment or youth training allowance and employ- card, health care cards under the disadvantaged ment. persons scheme and for the payment of more than The government wishes to reduce the paperwork the minimum standard family payment rate. Further burden on business. To that end, it would be more refinements to the operation of some of the newly efficient if only one request had to be made to arrived resident’s waiting periods will ensure that: employers. It would also be beneficial from an . the existing exemption is removed for newly individual’s viewpoint. In many cases, the initial arrived migrants who, immediately prior to their provision of more information about a person arrival, were members of a couple and whose would confirm that the person was legitimately partner has been an Australian resident for at entitled to a payment and so there would be no least 26 weeks prior to their arrival; need to undertake a follow-up that might, quite . the waiting period will commence upon arrival unjustifiably, result in employers drawing adverse in Australia or grant of permanent residence, inferences about a person. whichever is the later; and The bill also serves to make a minor amendment . except for cases stated above relating to widow to the Data-matching Program (Assistance and Tax) allowance, the waiting period will be extended Act 1990 so as to put beyond doubt the ability of by whatever period or periods a person is absent using Australian Taxation Office income data for from Australia, if the person leaves Australia different financial years in a single data-matching after their waiting period has commenced. program cycle. The changes to the newly arrived resident’s It would ensure, for example, that income data waiting periods in this bill are modest and reason- in respect of the 1994-95 financial year could be able and will ensure that taxpayers only pay for used so as to review the entitlement of a person to those in need. As an adjunct to the changes, the family payment for 1996 even though the person might have already lodged their 1995-96 tax return. 1428 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

It would also ensure that income data in respect of legislation. On that basis, it was a surprise not the 1994-95 and 1995-96 financial years could be only to me but also to my colleague the used in a single matching cycle to enable checking opposition whip when this matter was called on student and parental personal income details for 1995 and 1996. on. We understood that the Housing Loans Insurance Corporation (Transfer of Assets and I commend the bill to the Senate. Abolition) Bill 1996 would be adjourned. In Ordered that further consideration of the fact, that was subject to an adjournment second reading of this bill be adjourned until motion moved earlier by Senator Newman the first day of sitting in the spring sittings, during this period of non-controversial legisla- in accordance with the order agreed to on 29 tion. November 1994. For my own part, I am happy to continue ORDER OF BUSINESS with the second reading debate, although I Motion (by Senator Newman) agreed to: believe our convention is to engage in matters That government business order of the day No. of non-controversial legislation only when 7 (Housing Loans Insurance Corporation (Transfer there is agreement around the chamber to do of Assets and Abolition) Bill 1996) be postponed so. To be fair to all parties in the chamber, till the next day of sitting. that is a convention that has nearly always HOUSING ASSISTANCE BILL 1996 been honoured. Clearly, we were given an inaccurate message by the government whip’s Second Reading office in relation to this matter. I state that Debate resumed from 29 May, on motion fact to clarify the reason for Senator by Senator Kemp: Margetts’s concern and for the unusual quor- um call during this period of non-con- That this bill be now read a second time. troversial legislation today. (Quorum formed) Senator FAULKNER (New South Wales— Senator MARGETTS (Western Austral- Leader of the Opposition in the Senate)—by ia)—by leave—I did take an unusual action leave—Mr Acting Deputy President, senators a little while ago. The reason is that the last would be aware that Senator Margetts, a time I was able to get to a whips’ meeting moment or two ago, drew your attention to two nights ago—last night I was in the cham- the state of the chamber when a quorum was ber when the whips’ meeting took place—I not present. I think most senators would also made it as clear as possible that there was not be aware that it is a very unusual circum- yet agreement on this list of bills. It could not stance to have a quorum call now, when there have been more clear. In fact, I stopped the is an agreement not to have a quorum call or meeting and said, ‘We have not agreed to this division during consideration of non-contro- list of non-controversial bills. Senator versial legislation dealt with at lunchtime. Panizza, is what I have just said clear?’ Having made that as clear as possible, I Having said that, I appreciate Senator would have thought that somebody would Margetts’s point. I understand that the cham- have checked the list and got back to us. We ber has not agreed as to whether the second were as busy as everybody else. There is no reading of this particular bill is non- way anyone can say that this list was cleared controversial. I am keen to make a second with the Greens, because it was not. I did not reading contribution to the debate of this bill, say, ‘If we do not get back to you, it will be but I seek leave to make a short statement okay.’ I said, ‘At this stage, these are not before I make this contribution. cleared; we need to check.’ I indicate to the Senate that the opposition We apologise for the fact that we have was informed by the government whip’s been, as we often are, rushed off our feet by office that the second reading of the Housing the volume of work, given the number of staff Assistance Bill 1996 would not be dealt with we have to do it. However, nobody checked today during this period of non-controversial with my office to see whether this list was Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1429 okay. Therefore, when we rang and said, ‘We that. I was just told a joke by Senator Schacht have problems with No. 8; could you please which was very amusing. take it off the list?’ I thought that the right Senator PANIZZA—I go back to the fact thing would be done. I did not think I would that I circulated the letter on 29 May 1996 to come into the chamber and be told, ‘This is all concerned, asking for concurrence that this okay; it is just a second reading.’ That was bill be put on with other bills that were non- not what was agreed to. Whatever your controversial. In that letter I said: arguments are for slotting in a second reading of what we believe to be highly controversial As agreed at the leaders’ meeting— legislation at lunchtime, we do not think it is That was the leaders’ meeting, not a whips’ the appropriate place. Therefore, I request that meeting— this debate be adjourned and that we have of Thursday 23 May, the following bills will be proper time to consider this legislation. debated as non-controversial on the Thursday 30 May— Senator PANIZZA (Western Australia)— by leave—I refer the Senate to the fact that It continues with the loan bill 1996, the we had agreed to pull off No. 7, Housing Sydney 2000 Games bill, the Australian Loans Insurance Corporation (Transfer of Sports Drug Agency bill, the indigenous Assets and Abolition) Bill 1996, which was education bill and the housing loans insurance listed. At no stage did I instruct anyone that corporation bill which was dragged off. No. 8, the Housing Assistance Bill 1996, was Finally, Senator Margetts, if you are interest- to come off too. Senator Faulkner said that ed—I can fax a copy to you if you have lost my office advised his office, or Senator the first one—it says: Evans’ office, that it was to be taken off. I If time permits, second reading speeches only for will check with my office and let you know the Housing Assistance Bill 1996 will commence. what comes of that. I did not get back one letter of dissent, and so Senator Margetts said that no-one consulted we took it that there was agreement. her, but let me say something else first before I remind you that we did not say that this I comment on that. There was no way in this would be non-controversial. Under the previ- world that we ever thought that this Housing ous government it was done time and time Assistance Bill was going to be non-contro- again—Senator Faulkner will remember versial. We sought agreement of all parties to that—we did second reading debates only and have second reading speeches only in this then, if there were to be divisions, they were lunch hour. That is all we sought in the first done when we got back to government busi- place. There was never any intention to try to ness. That was the situation. get agreement that the bill was non-controver- There is one thing that I have got to check sial. with Senator Faulkner. I need to see if my If you look back to the days of the previous office said that this was to be pulled off and government, second reading debates on any I will report back to the Senate about that. If bill were quite often done at lunchtime. So that were the case, the buck stops with me, this is not breaking convention. This is not because I am responsible for everything that creating a convention. That is the situation. I happens. have here a letter that I sent around to all whips in the place on 29 May 1996. Senator Faulkner—I don’t think that it is that serious. Don’t take that burden upon Senator Faulkner—Ha, ha. yourself, Senator. Senator PANIZZA—You doubt that it Senator PANIZZA—Okay, but you are was? normally expected to take it that you are Senator Faulkner—No. responsible for what happens in your office. Senator PANIZZA—You were laughing at I will get back to you on that. what I said so I thought that you might— Let no-one tell me that he or she did not Senator Faulkner—I was not laughing at know—whether it be Senator Margetts, 1430 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

Senator Faulkner, Senator Carr or Senator issue and that ought to be addressed by the Evans. I sent this letter out and I got no government. replies expressing dissent. If someone sent such a reply, I would like another copy of it Senator KEMP (Victoria—Parliamentary because it certainly did not come into my Secretary to the Minister for Social Securi- office. If a copy did come to my office that ty)—by leave—I will make this short. I agree I have not seen I also want to know in my with Senator Evans; I think we can canvass office what happened to it. So that is the for the next half-hour who said what to whom situation and that is why it was on the Notice and what caused the misunderstanding. People Paper between 12.45 and one o’clock. on all sides clearly came to conclusions which were different from the ones that were intend- Senator CHRIS EVANS (Western Austral- ed by the government. We accept that there ia) (1.26 p.m.)—by leave—I want to make a was some confusion about what was going to short statement to try to clarify some of these occur during the lunchtime debate. Of course, issues. I think there has been some confusion the convention, as stated by Senator Faulkner and I am not sure that it is necessarily is correct. These are matters on which we anyone’s fault. There may have been some seek agreement of all the parties so that this misunderstanding because there are two lunchtime debate can go ahead smoothly and housing bills. Just before coming in for the without difficulty. I understand, from what non-controversial legislation, I had a discus- Senator Faulkner has said, that he believes sion with someone from the whips’ office that as a result of what has happened the who indicated that the government was happy debate should now be adjourned. to pull off the second reading debate on the Housing Assistance Bill. Senator Faulkner’s Senator Faulkner—I said, for my part, I adviser was with me at the time and he am happy to make a second reading speech, indicated, given that there were to be some but I respect what Senator Margetts has said. amendments moved in the committee stage, It is up to you. that he was quite happy for that debate not to Senator KEMP—We would, of course, at go on today, if that was generally agreed. this stage, prefer to have the second reading So I came in here on the understanding that debate so that we can get at least your speech the second reading debate on the Housing out of the way. Assistance Bill 1996 was also to be pulled off today. I think there has been some confusion, Senator Faulkner—I am not going to a bit of toing-and-froing, because there are break it up that way. Either we have a debate two housing bills. In terms of that debate, I or we don’t have a debate. Senator Margetts do not think it is worth trying to pursue who is talking about the possibility of opposing it said what to whom and why the misunder- and moving an amendment. standing occurred. Senator KEMP—Okay. That is fine. I am However, I think there is a genuine problem just trying to get an arrangement which is from the Greens’ perspective because there satisfactory. As I understand the arrangement, has been a bit of a misunderstanding in the as it now stands, Senator Margetts believes last couple of days about whether that bill and that we should not proceed and that there- the indigenous education bill ought to be fore—this is my understanding of it—the allowed to be non-controversial. Senator opposition believes we should not proceed at Margetts obviously had a different view from this stage. the opposition. While we are concerned that Opposition senators interjecting— this has occurred, I think there have been some misunderstandings with two bills having Senator KEMP—I understand why. I am similar names and, from our point of view, just trying to make sure that, as we wind this Senator Faulkner has made his point about the up, we have clear agreement on every side. I second reading debate going on. I think am just consulting, Senator Faulkner. You are Senator Margetts’s point is a quite separate a man who often states you like people to Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1431 consult and that is what I am doing. I make always our preferred option. They would the general point that we are anxious to speed certainly have understood, and I would be the journey of the consideration of govern- very confident that they would take the view, ment legislation. Clearly, in future, we will that having a significant slice of private have to make sure that everyone signs on to investment in Telstra would make a very a clear agreement in relation to this Thursday significant positive difference to the value of debate. On the basis of what I understand the company. In no way would their invest- people have just conveyed to me in their ment in bonds be jeopardised. speeches and across the chamber, I move: As the senator well knows those bonds are That consideration of the bill be made an order underwritten by Telstra—if not the federal of the day for the next day of sitting. government—and on my understanding, Question resolved in the affirmative. although I will take further advice on this, Sitting suspended from 1.31 p.m. to unless the value of Telstra actually fell below 2.00 p.m. the value of the bond, the value of their investment could not depreciate. They would QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE always get the guaranteed interest payable and would be able to redeem their bonds when Sale of Telstra they fell due. The only time there would be Senator WHEELWRIGHT—My question a risk would be if the value of the company is directed to Senator Alston, Minister for fell below the value of the bonds on issue. Communications and the Arts. I refer you to I do not think Senator Wheelwright is the Telstra bonds which are listed on the suggesting that on any stretch of the imagina- Australian Stock Exchange with a total value tion Telstra could be worth less than $2 of over $2.6 billion. Can you confirm that billion. I would have thought that all investors there is a requirement under listing rule 3A(1) out there would be looking forward very to provide the exchange with any information much to a privatised Telstra. They would very which might materially affect the value of much like you to do the right thing and allow those bonds as traded or that might influence it to happen, instead of filibustering in 11 an investor to buy or sell them? Can you regional centres around Australia and suppos- further explain why no information has been edly taking advice or evidence about a matter given to the exchange on the proposal dis- on which you have all made up your minds. cussed by both you and the Prime Minister to In other words, this is a huge, costly and set up Telstra in another company? elaborate charade all of which is designed to Senator ALSTON—It is probably no great reduce the value of Telstra. surprise to Senator Wheelwright that I am not The investors out there know that which- particularly familiar with the licensing re- ever path we go down we will always do it in quirements of 3A(1), or whatever else it accordance with the law. At the time of might be. I will certainly seek advice on that. issuing our policy we did not rule out going I am not aware of anyone having brought any down the extraparliamentary route. The real particular concerns to my attention. I am sure answer is that it never occurred to you that you understand that at this stage of the game we might, so you did not call on us to give the ultimate way in which Telstra is privatised any assurances prior to the election. We is very much a matter within the hands of this assumed in good faith that you would under- parliament. stand the overwhelming merits of the case and Those who subscribe to Telstra bonds that you would be prepared—after a proper would have well understood the various examination by a committee—to actually permutations and combinations that could allow Australia to do what every other coun- flow down the track. Undoubtedly they would try in the western world has done—in other have understood—or they could be selling out words, substantially increase the value of the right now—our policy which did not limit us dominant telecommunications carrier by to the legislative route, although that was allowing the injection of private capital, 1432 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 allowing ordinary Australians to take shares ously do that. If it is simply a matter of and allowing Telstra employees to get a return judgment about whether there is likely to be on their own labour input as well as having a depreciation in the value of Telstra as a a direct stake in their own company. result of our current proposals, then I can For all of those reasons, you will find that assure you we certainly do not take that view. potential investors in Telstra—and I presume You asked me whether I thought they should that does not include Senator Wheelwright— be advised and on that basis the answer would would want to see us proceed down the be no.(Time expired) privatisation path by whatever legal means as quickly as possible. Therefore, it would not National Accounts Figures seem to me that there would be any concerns Senator MacGIBBON—My question is to on that score. I will take advice on the matter Senator Short as Assistant Treasurer. In view and if I have anything further to add I will of the stories in today’s paper about the bring it back to the Senate. national account figures for the March quarter Senator WHEELWRIGHT—Mr President, and the assertions that the $8 billion black I ask a supplementary question. I can under- hole no longer exists, how has that affected stand why the minister may be tardy in the medium-term budget strategy announced informing the Senate about what you are up by the Treasurer on 12 March? to with Telstra, but do you not think that you Senator SHORT—I thank Senator have an obligation to all of those mums and MacGibbon for the question because it allows dads out there who own this $2.6 billion me once again to highlight the deceit that worth of bonds to tell them in a very timely Labor is trying to wreak on the Australian fashion in full exactly what you are up to? people for its own shoddy, short-term political Given the fact that the bonds are trading now, gain. The assertion by Labor and the Demo- when exactly are you going to inform the crats that the March quarter national accounts exchange? show that there is no $8 billion black hole is Senator ALSTON—You seem to proceed simply wrong, wrong, wrong. on the basis that the mums and dads ought to be made aware of some bad news. The only What the March quarter figures show is that bad news that those mums and dads have had the economy is growing soundly. The govern- in recent weeks is that you lot are not pre- ment welcomed that yesterday on the release pared to do what anyone else around the of the figures. But it is important to remember world will tell you needs to be done in this not to get too carried away with one quarter’s case. This is simply designed to enhance the figures, however welcome they may be. The value of a major Australian asset. Senator number of factors that contributed to the Schacht thinks it is the biggest company in strong growth of 1.8 per cent in the March Australia. I hope he has learnt that it is not. quarter are unlikely to be maintained, as was acknowledged yesterday, and allowance has The fact is that they are very interested in to be made for those when you are forecasting having a direct stake. They would like an future growth in the economy. investment in the company. They want to be sure that their bonds are secure, and I have no I also point out to the Senate that the trend doubt that they are. I did not hear Senator rate of growth in the GDP in the March Wheelwright take issue with my assessment quarter was less than the trend growth in the that, unless the value of the company was preceding December quarter. In addition, as below the value of the bonds, their investment we pointed out yesterday, government revenue could not possibly be at risk. data for the March quarter is consistent with To the extent that there is any legal obliga- the Treasury budget forecast released by the tion on us to notify whoever is notified in Treasurer on 12 March. Senator Sherry said these circumstances—perhaps it is the Aus- in this place yesterday: tralian Stock Exchange—then we will obvi- The 4.8 per cent growth rate . . . shoots one very Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1433 big black hole in the black hole assertion we have by the Treasurer? heard coming from those opposite over the last three or four months. Senator SHORT—Labor portrays our goal Let me remind Senator Sherry and those of achieving an underlying budget surplus as opposite that they were responsible for not an ideological pursuit. But what could be less just one black hole but a veritable galaxy of ideological than the pursuit of fiscal prudence black holes. In 1991-92, the underlying deficit and fiscal responsibility? What ideology was $11.5 billion; in 1992-93, it was $17 supports Labor’s policy of ballooning public billion; in 1993-94 it was $17.1 billion; and, debt? Our policies are not ideological; they in 1994-95, it was $13.2 billion. All of those are commonsense policies. They reflect the years were characterised by economic growth. well-known benefits of fiscal responsibility and reducing public debt. The benefits that Opposition senators interjecting— those policies bring include easing budgetary Senator SHORT—Those opposite who pressures by cutting the interest payable on a seem to think this is a joke seem to think that reduced public debt, lifting national savings, one quarter of strong growth means that fiscal increasing the availability of domestic funds responsibility should be thrown out the for investment and therefore less reliance on window. For far too long in this country the overseas borrowings, reduced pressure on living standards of Australians have suffered interest rates, stimulating investment and because of the fiscal vandalism of the previ- economic growth, increased job opportunities ous government. We have been able to and the promotion of higher real incomes. If achieve some periods of solid and, at times, that is ideology, I am for it. (Time expired) strong growth but we have always suffered from high deficits in our external accounts Budget Deficit and amongst the highest interest rates in the Senator SHERRY—My question is direct- world. ed to the Assistant Treasurer. Time after If we need any further reminder of just how time—and you have done it again—you far we have still got to go to get out of the loudly assert in this place that an $8 billion economic woods, one can look no further than budget deficit exists. In light of yesterday’s the massive $2 billion deficit for the April national accounts figures, why won’t you now balance of payments announced today. It avail yourself of this opportunity and admit provides further stark evidence of Labor’s you were wrong? utter failure to ensure a healthy economy and Senator SHORT—I am not sure whether an adequate level of national savings. I need to go over the answer I have just The government has put a carefully con- given; it rather sounds as though I do. As I structed medium- term fiscal strategy in place said, the wilfully deceitful assertion by Labor because we have a major short- and medium- that there is no longer an $8 billion black term problem with national savings. That is hole is wrong, wrong, wrong. That figure of reflected in our internationally high interest $8 billion is not a figure that we concocted. rates and in our current account, which have It is a figure that was produced two days after constrained employment growth. As we know, the election by the government’s official it went above a million under Labor and is forecasters, which showed that the deficit for still stuck at 8½ per cent. Those figures have 1996-97 is $7.64 billion. That is the $8 billion constrained growth, they have pushed up black hole. It is not an invention; it is an interest rates and unemployment. That is the official forecast. reason for the strategy that is being adopted The previous Labor government was all too now. (Time expired) happy to rely on official Treasury forecasts. Senator MacGIBBON—Mr President, I They were not going to revise them and come have a supplementary question. In light of the clean with the Australian people. Indeed, that minister’s lucid explanation of that, would he is one of the reasons why you lot on the other now list the benefits to the Australian com- side lost the election—because you deceived munity of the fiscal strategy being followed the Australian people. You knew what the 1434 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 true state of the finances of this country were. years in government that you almost got RSI You refused to come clean, open the books from getting it wrong. The fact is that, as we and reveal the $8 billion black hole which move towards the budget and in the course of you knew about, and which the present the presentation and preparation of the budget, Leader of the Opposition, the former Minister as is always the case, the figures and forecasts for Finance, Mr Beazley, knew full well. As will be reviewed. They always are reviewed far as your assertion is concerned, Senator and the budget will be prepared in the light of Sherry, it is simply wrong. the situation at the time. Senator Sherry—What did Don Argus say? The fact is that the official forecast for a $8 Senator SHORT—As I said in my answer billion deficit in 1996-97 is the deficit you to Senator MacGibbon, those figures are seem to refuse to acknowledge exists. That is official figures. If you want to quote people, the deficit that, whether you like it or not, let me point out to you the statements by very does exist. responsible economic commentators today. I Optus: Foreign Ownership draw particular attention to Alan Wood in the Australian. Senator PATTERSON—My question is Senator Sherry—Ha, ha! What about the directed to the Minister for Communications other economic commentators? What about and the Arts. No doubt you have seen the Don Argus? press release issued yesterday by Chris Schacht, the shadow minister for communica- Senator SHORT—You do not like Alan tions and the arts, calling on the government Wood, do you, because he is a responsible to ensure Optus remains Australian regarding forecaster. He said that your assertion that foreign ownership and control. Is the release there is no black hole and that we can go easy factually based? What is the government’s on fiscal policy, back to the old laxity that response to Senator Schacht’s calls for guar- you had of a $17 billion underlying deficit antees and assurances in relation to foreign two years in a row and almost as large figures ownership and control? in the surrounding two years since 1991, accompanied by economic growth, and you Opposition senators interjecting— believe that that is fiscal responsibility—the The PRESIDENT—Order! Ministers Australian people and anyone who follows the cannot be heard over the constant cacophony finances of this country and is concerned on the left. Ministers have a right to be heard about the future of this country know that you whether or not you like their answers. vandalised the finances of this country and Senator Schacht—I know precisely what you still do not seem to have learnt your he is going to say. lesson. Senator ALSTON—Mr President, I am Senator SHERRY—Mr President, I ask a fascinated to hear Senator Schacht say that he supplementary question. Will you now give knows precisely what I am going to say, a categorical commitment, particularly in light because if he did know that he would not be of your continued assertions that, if budget here today; he would be outside correcting figures demonstrate there is no $8 billion this press release right now. deficit, in other words, if you get it wrong, wrong, wrong, you will resign? He starts off by calling on the coalition to Senator SHORT—You fellows— ensure that Optus does not become a foreign controlled company. He ought to know that Honourable senators interjecting— it cannot because of some changes that were The PRESIDENT—Order! Just take a seat put in place in 1995. Then he goes on, on for a second or two and we will see whether three occasions, to say he is seeking an we can get some silence. assurance that the government will not vary Senator SHORT—You fellows and ladies these rules and thereby guarantee maintaining got it so wrong, wrong, wrong during your 13 Optus in majority Australian ownership. And twice more he goes on to talk on about Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1435 ownership. that we will not vary these rules because you The fact is that he has no idea of the want to maintain Australian ownership. The difference between ownership and control—a fact is you put in place the rules that allow pretty fundamental distinction in this whole Australian ownership to be in a minority. debate. Ever since the 1991 and 1995 changes I can understand Senator Kernot’s despera- made therein, it is certainly possible to have tion in the sorts of scare campaigns we have more than 50 per cent foreign ownership— about BT being a potential buyer for Telstra precisely because of your efforts! when she knows full well that they could not Let me just take you back to the history of possibly, under our bill, buy any more than this matter. Back in 1991 when you were a two per cent. As a strategic investor, a for- not so humble backbencher and Mr Beazley eigner, they would be limited to 1.7 per cent was actually the minister for communications, of the total company and they clearly would your government announced that the success- not have a vote on it. ful bidder for the second telecommunications Senator Schacht’s fundamental problem carrier licence would have to have majority here is that he simply has not done his home- Australian ownership and that the potential work. He does not understand the difference bidder would be required to achieve majority between ownership and control. Why do you Australian ownership within five years. talk about ownership and control in different But, in fact, when Optus won the bid they paragraphs of the same release? What were had a structure that already delivered majority you on about? Australian ownership. Mr Beazley, who I take You want us to ensure that it does not it is still the Leader of the Opposition, granted become a foreign controlled company. It a licence which did not require the mainte- cannot; it cannot because of the rules. You nance of a continuation of majority Australian want us to give you an assurance to maintain ownership. In other words, a massive over- the status quo in relation to foreign ownership sight—absolutely unforgivable. when that very status quo allows for it to happen—all your own work. This is outra- To compound that matter, the Treasurer geous. then went ahead and granted FIRB approval on the same basis. In other words, without I renew my offer to you: if you want a seeking any similar obligation for ongoing briefing on these matters, I am prepared to Australian majority ownership. That remained organise it. It will have to be brief because I the position for four years. It was possible to know that you have a short concentration have had majority foreign ownership from span. If you want to borrow my copy of Mark 1991. Armstrong’s Media law in Australia,itis yours any time you want it. But just get it In 1995, when the government discovered right: I do not have the power to intervene. this massive flaw in the course of preparations (Time expired) for the Optus float, what did they do? They were not game to come clean and change the Housing rules. So, to create a bit of a smokescreen, Senator FAULKNER—My question is they put in place some obligations to require directed to the Minister for Social Security. Australian control but not ownership. In fact, Minister, can you advise the Senate how the they made it worse. They actually introduced government’s proposal to reduce the a scheme that allowed you to have passive Commonwealth’s contribution to public unrelated holdings of five per cent. housing by $500 million, or a third of the So, indeed, ever since 1995 it has been total national housing budget, would impact possible to have up to 80 per cent foreign on the thousands of low income families ownership in Optus as long as they acted in living in Commonwealth government assisted concert. That was the problem. You allowed public housing? Is it not true that, even with that to happen. You were the ones put in the increased cash subsidies proposed, a low place a regime. And you seek an assurance income family in the Sydney area, for exam- 1436 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 ple, could be forced to pay up to 70 per cent those low income earners. The people who of its income in rent as a result of this propo- are in private rental, as you should know, sal? What would be the economic and social Senator, are the ones who are the poorest. consequence of cuts of this magnitude? Something like half a million Australians, the Senator NEWMAN—I am so glad that the poorest half million, are to be found renting shadow minister asked me that question, privately in the very sorts of high rent areas because it gives me a chance to tell him that you are talking about. My concern—and something about the facts of life when it I would hope that the New South Wales comes to housing reform. When this govern- minister would share my concern—is that we ment came into office, we found that the do better by those people than is currently the previous government, to give it its due, had case. already moved some way down this track. We Senator Bob Collins—By cutting half a were supportive of reform in the housing area billion dollars out! and supportive, therefore, of the measures that Senator NEWMAN—We are looking to the previous government took. Since coming negotiate the agreement—and you have a into government, we have pursued the matter problem in the Northern Territory which further, and the matter will be raised by the needs addressing, Senator Collins, relating to Prime Minister with the premiers at COAG in indigenous people. After 13 years of Labor a week or so. rule in Canberra, indigenous housing is a You are talking about matters which, I disgrace to this nation. We are committed to understand, have entered the public arena working with the states and territories to today from the New South Wales Labor achieve better in that area as well. minister for housing. I am not in a position to Senator FAULKNER—Mr President, I ask tell you where the negotiations will end a supplementary question. I ask the minister: because they are genuine negotiations. I will is it true that officials of your government tell you, however— have put to the states and territories a propo- Senator Crowley—So what was all that sal to cut the Commonwealth’s contribution mumbling that you have just gone on with? in this area by $500 million or one-third—that Senator NEWMAN—If Senator Crowley is, 33 per cent—of the national housing would like to stop babbling, I will tell the budget of the Commonwealth government? shadow minister that the aim is to achieve Senator NEWMAN—I am not going to greater equity, greater access to affordable discuss and speculate on matters which are housing by the most disadvantaged. At the between governments. same time—and, I think, with the same aim as your government had—we want to achieve Climate Change: Greenhouse Emissions greater clarity between the roles of the state Senator LEES—My question is addressed and the federal governments in the housing to the Minister for the Environment. Minister, area; we want to make sure that we remove I refer you to a recent report by a United all duplication and waste where that does Nations panel of some 2,500 climate change occur; we want to see that outcomes are scientists and experts who stated very clearly agreed between the Commonwealth and the that climate change is occurring and will state governments for particularly disadvan- continue at a rate that will lead to ‘significant taged groups who currently perhaps do not loss of life’ and ‘possibly the obliteration of get as fair a go as they should under the entire cultures’ unless urgent steps to reduce Commonwealth-state housing agreement as it emissions are taken. I ask: does your govern- has operated. They are the goals that those ment accept that climate change is occurring, negotiations will be pursuing. and that Australia has a responsibility to work I believe that in time—and I do not mean with other industrialised countries to signifi- over a decade or more, I mean in a relatively cantly reduce emissions? Finally, do you short time, and I will not put an exact time agree that, if your government continues the date on it—we will achieve greater equity for previous government’s policy of attempting to Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1437 block international action to cut greenhouse Senator HILL—One way is that I think we emissions, this will leave Australia exposed are the world’s largest coal exporter, or near to international actions over which we would enough to the largest. If you have a look at have no control? today’s current account figures, you will Senator HILL—I think, on the balance of recognise that we have a major problem in the science, climate change is occurring as a our external accounts. If you are advocating result of human intervention—and I say ‘on a course of action that would substantially the balance of the science’ because it is not reduce one of our principal areas of exports, beyond dispute. Nevertheless, the paper that I would say to you that it is not in the nation- is to be presented by the panel to the Geneva al interests. If you are— conference in July comes to that conclusion, and it has been produced by a very eminent Senator Lees—So, forget about it all? group of scientists—and that, I accept. I Senator HILL—I am not saying forget at accept also that it is a global responsibility all. You went on to ask whether we should be and all states, whether they be developed or developing alternative methods of energy. I developing, have a responsibility to contribute answered that: obviously, yes. We are. I am to remedial action and, therefore, look to pleased at the voluntary action that is being ways in which we can internationally reduce taken by a lot of Australian industry not only greenhouse emissions. to reduce emissions but also to develop I think the third part of the question was: alternative methods of energy. I believe there do I fear that Australia may be left out alone is an opportunity for Australia to be an and suffer some punitive action as a result of exporter of that technology. It is starting to our position? What I can say to that is that I happen already and there is great potential for think there are areas of concern for Australia it in the future. (Time expired) because of the nature of our economy. In many ways our particular economy is unique Kakadu National Park among those of the developed world, and we must ensure that we find a formula that not Senator LUNDY—My question is to only makes an international contribution on Senator Herron, Minister for Aboriginal and our part but also protects our economy. Torres Strait Islander Affairs. Is it true that at least one of your ministerial colleagues, We have a responsibility to look after the during a recent trip to the Northern Territory, interests of three-quarters of a million Austral- made statements about the territory ians who are still out of work. If you are government’s desire to have the Common- asking me to adopt a position that will signifi- wealth transfer management control of Kaka- cantly reduce Australia’s international com- du National Park to the territory administra- petitiveness, then I do not think that would be tion? Are you aware of these statements? in our national interest. Were you consulted by any of your col- leagues about this issue? If not, have you Senator LEES—I thank the minister for his been consulted since? answer. I just ask for further clarification: in what way is our economy so unique that we Senator HERRON—I am not aware of any have a right to go on polluting the environ- statements made by ministerial colleagues in ment at a faster rate than any other industrial- that regard. I think you would have to ask the ised country? Do you realise that there is a responsible minister. range of industries that we should be encour- aging, particularly in the solar industry area, Senator LUNDY—I would like to know that could indeed lead the world with new whether you could share with this chamber, technology? If we do not support them, surely Minister, whether or not you support or we are missing out on export opportunities, oppose this proposal? particularly into developing countries and Senator HERRON—Didn’t the senator Japan and the United States. listen to my answer? I just said I was unaware 1438 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 of the statement made. the opposition, with the— Senator Faulkner—Are you aware of Senator Patterson—Laborcrats! anything? Senator HERRON—Laborcrats, and the Senator Bob Collins—It is to transfer the others on that side, have been preventing any Aboriginal parks, including Uluru, to the legislation getting through. We have been Northern Territory government. trying to get legislation through. You have Senator HERRON—How can I support been impeding it. We have had the debate something that I am unaware of, Senator about the Telstra bill. We have been held up Collins? Come back at it. Of course I do. all on occasions. It is in your hands to allow That goes without saying. Aboriginal owner- the legislation to come forward. We have had ship—that is obvious. I am telling you, how this stopping of the legislation coming can I be aware of what statements have been through. We are happy to bring the legislation made? Oh, start again! forward, as we gave a commitment to it. We cannot bring it forward if you are not allow- Land Fund ing any legislation to be considered and Senator CHAMARETTE—My question is debated and allowed through the processes of to the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres the parliament. It is in your hands: start Strait Islander Affairs, Senator Herron. In the behaving yourselves and let’s get on with the light of the guarantee given by Mr Howard legislation that is going through. We are last year that the coalition on coming to happy to introduce it. government would reintroduce the indigenous land corporation bill, as amended by the Sen- Higher Education Funding ate, and increase the allocation for the land Senator DENMAN—My question is to fund by $3 million annually, when is the Senator Vanstone, the Minister for Employ- government going to reintroduce the bill? ment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs. Senator HERRON—The introduction of Yesterday, Minister, in answer to a question the bill, as you know, is not in my hands. The without notice, you said you had had confi- funding is already being committed under the dential meetings with a number of vice- indigenous land corporation act. The cut-off, chancellors. Without revealing their names, as you know, is part of your responsibility; it can you tell us how many vice-chancellors was introduced by you, Senator. There has you have met? How many of them have been no timetable about its reintroduction. If offered savings? Have these savings been you wish to give us permission to bring it in, offered at the expense of student numbers or we are happy to consult with you. research capacity? Senator CHAMARETTE—As a supple- Senator VANSTONE—I indicated to the mentary question, I assume that the Prime Senate yesterday that there are vice-chancel- Minister intended to honour his commitment lors who recognise the need to make a contri- of 2 March 1995 that: bution to shaping any savings proposal that may be required from higher education. I Upon the election of a Howard-Fischer government, whenever that occurs, we will act to amend the further indicated, Senator Denman, that where Land Fund legislation to bring it into line with vice-chancellors chose to make their meetings what has been passed by the Senate. with me public, I was very happy with that. Why doesn’t the minister have some intima- It was asked of me in a question here yester- tion that its introduction is both planned and day whether I had met with some National imminent? I remind the minister that the cut- Party members and the Vice-Chancellor and off motion does not apply to bills that were others from Southern Cross University. They presented in the previous session and are were happy for that to be a public meeting available. It is available right now, as is the and I was happy to indicate it to you. allocation. I further indicated yesterday that, if vice- Senator HERRON—You well know that chancellors want to send me a letter and mark it ‘confidential’, if they want to come and put Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1439 a proposal and say, ‘You should consider coalition to equal pay for equal work of equal this’, but it is not necessarily something that value. Can the minister confirm that this is the university would want to put its name yet another example of a coalition—(Time behind—whatever they want to say to me in expired) terms of there being a constructive suggestion Senator NEWMAN—What was the word to put, if they want to say that it should be you were trying to say? confidential, then I will keep it that way, absolutely. Senator Mackay—Broken promise. Senator Faulkner—What about your So I think that indicates to you, Senator broken promise? Denman, that you have not the opportunity of getting an answer to your question because I Senator Cook—Yes, tell us about your am not going to engage in an exercise which broken promise. I understand people over here would very Senator NEWMAN—I can hear the noise; much like to happen, and that is of trying to I cannot see the broken promise. This is the divide the vice-chancellors by setting one Jennie George line. I have noticed that Jennie against another. If they choose to come and George and some of her friends in the press put a confidential view to me, I will keep it have been running this line for some days confidential and that, I regret to say, means, now. I was wondering when the Labor oppo- Senator Denman, that I am not going to share sition was going to become interested in the it with you. matter. What Senator Mackay has perhaps Senator DENMAN—Mr President, I did failed to acknowledge in all this is the excel- ask for numbers, not names. Minister, yester- lent job which the minister responsible for day you also told this meeting that you were industrial relations, Mr Reith, did in consult- meeting with Don Aitken, the Vice-Chancel- ing with women’s groups very carefully lor of the University of Canberra. Did he during the development of this legislation. I offer any savings? know that it is on the public record in a number of places that women’s groups have Senator VANSTONE—Senator Denman, expressed great satisfaction with the courtesy if the vice-chancellor of the university wishes and time and attention that their concerns to give you an outline of what he has told me, were given. he is welcome to do so. Senator Robert Ray—Which groups? Tell Equal Pay us. Senator MACKAY—My question is Senator NEWMAN—They are in the addressed to the minister representing the newspapers. Go read the newspapers; they are Prime Minister for the Status of Women, in the library. Senator Newman. I refer the minister to the Opposition senators interjecting— Workplace Relations and Other Legislation Senator NEWMAN—Mr President, it is Amendment Bill introduced into the other interesting to compare the noise that is com- place on 22 May 1996. Is the minister aware ing from the opposite side. I did not hear that the proposed law abolishes women’s much noise on behalf of women when the rights to take equal pay cases to the Industrial trade union movement in Australia was Relations Commission? Is the minister aware generally pretty anti-women, pretty lacking in that because of this the commission will lose any interest in women. its power to redress discrimination in over- award payments? To assist the minister with Senator Cook—You opposed equal pay in her answer, I refer her to the statement in the government all the way down the line. Our coalition’s policy document on women of 19 record stands above yours! February entitled ‘Opportunities and choice Senator NEWMAN—I well remember, for women’. This document and the Senator, speaking to the Clyde Cameron coalition’s industrial relations policy entitled College to women delegates— ‘Better pay for better work’ committed the 1440 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator, ad- reconcile their employment and family re- dress the chair, please. sponsibilities. Senator Cook—You opposed equal pay in There is a good deal of confusion, obvious- government all the way down the line. ly, on the other side surrounding the issue of discrimination in over-award payments. In this The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator Cook. regard employees will continue to have access Senator Cook—Tell the truth! to the Human Rights Commission to address their concerns. Moving to the AWAs, Senator, Senator NEWMAN—Mr President, will they are valid so long as they provide for you stop the monkey? When I spoke some certain minima and they do not discriminate years ago as shadow minister on the status of against individuals on the grounds of their women to women trade unionists at the Clyde sex. If an employee feels they are being Cameron College it was a very clearly and discriminated against— loudly expressed view, louder than this monkey, expressing a view about— Senator Jacinta Collins—How will they know! The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator New- man, that level of language does not help Senator NEWMAN—Just listen, I will things. give you the lot. If they feel they are being discriminated against they are entitled to go Senator NEWMAN—Well, no. Perhaps he the employment advocate or to the Human is only a monkey when he is outside here, Mr Rights Commission—(Time expired) President. Those women trade unionists expressed great concern at the lack of support Senator MACKAY—Mr President, I ask that the Australian trade union movement had a supplementary question. Will the minister given to women over many years. For your at least commit herself to fighting to maintain information, Mr President, the Jennie George her government’s election policy of equal pay then of more lowly status was sitting in the for equal work of equal value for part-time back of the room while those 40 or so women workers? were telling me of their concerns about the Senator Robert Ray—You should know; trade union movement and issues to do with you’re a part-time minister. women. Senator Alston—Look at you; you’re not There will be three situations for Australian even a part-time shadow minister. women under our reforms. There will be Senator Robert Ray—That’s right. I’m not those who are on awards, there will be those getting paid; she is. on certified agreements and there will be those on Australian workplace agreements. The PRESIDENT—Order! All right, we Employees currently on awards and certified have had our fun. agreements will continue to have access to the Senator NEWMAN—Under our policy, Industrial Relations Commission for ensuring part-time workers will have a much better that rates of pay conform with the principle status than they had under the previous of equal pay for work of equal value and are government’s policy. It was that government non-discriminatory in other respects. Our that supported the rigidities the union move- legislation requires the AIRC to address ment insisted upon for part-time work. It is discrimination by requiring it to take account the work that women with family responsibili- of the Racial Discrimination Act, the Sex ties, particularly, want to have. You could not Discrimination Act and the Disability Discri- bear to allow the women who wanted part- mination Act. In addition, section 93A re- time work to take on your union mates. Under quires the commission to take into account our legislation, they will have much more the ILO family responsibilities convention, in flexibility. Their working hours, their working particular those relating to the prevention of conditions and their pay are protected. They discrimination against workers who have will have greater flexibility than you or your family responsibilities or helping workers to mates in the union ever gave them. Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1441

The PRESIDENT—Before I call Senator Defence Runways Woodley, I remind visitors to the gallery that Senator FOREMAN—My question is catcalling or any sort of comments from the directed to the Minister representing the gallery, or clapping, is disorderly. If it goes Minister for Defence, Senator Newman. Is on, I will be forced to remove people from your understanding the same as mine that the gallery. I warn you against that, because Defence owns the runways at Canberra, it impairs the rights of others to view these Townsville and Darwin airports? Given the proceedings in silence. government’s decision to continue the previ- Mahogany Glider ous government’s policy of leasing the run- ways, what compensation will Defence be Senator WOODLEY—My question is paid for the leasing of the runways? Can the addressed to the Minister for the Environ- minister guarantee that Defence aeroplanes ment, Senator Hill. As you know, the ma- will continue to be exempt from paying hogany glider is listed as an endangered landing fees at other airfields around Austral- species under the Endangered Species Protec- ia? tion Act. In fact, it is so endangered that the previous government, after much pressure, Senator NEWMAN—I do not have any instigated an $8 million Sugar Coast rescue information on that for Senator Foreman, but package to buy back some coastal lowland I will get it and bring it back to him as soon habitat in North Queensland. This funding as I can. was matched dollar for dollar by the Queens- Senator Troeth—Mr President— land state government and the package was The PRESIDENT—Before I call Senator hailed by cane farmers and conservationists Troeth, could I just mention that Senator alike as a good response to an urgent issue. Troeth did not miss the call earlier on. It was Can the minister inform the Senate whether Senator Woodley who missed the call and it is correct that your government is going to upset things. totally cut or significantly reduce the funding for this package? If funding is not going to be Mining Industry maintained, what action will the government Senator TROETH—My question is direct- be taking to ensure the survival of this spe- ed to the Minister for Resources and Energy, cies? Senator Parer. Could the minister please Senator HILL—As I recall, we promised inform the Senate of the mining industry’s during the election to maintain that program. contribution to the nation’s economy and the role it now plays in improving the quality of Senator Robert Ray—That doesn’t mean life for people living in regional Australia? anything these days. Senator PARER—I would like to thank Senator Faulkner—Another broken prom- Senator Troeth very much for that question. ise. Honourable senators interjecting— Senator HILL—We are a government that The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator Parer, is of a mind to keep its promises. could you take your seat until we get a bit of Senator WOODLEY—Mr President, I ask silence? a supplementary question. I would like the Senator PARER—That is a very good minister to clarify whether that is a yes, that question from Senator Troeth. The mining the funding is going to be maintained. I industry makes an enormous contribution not believe it runs out at the end of the week, and only to regional Australia but to the whole I can confirm that Senator Kemp did promise Australian community and to urban Austral- to maintain the funding? ia—something that often does not get through Senator HILL—If it is the program I think to the people in urban Australia. the honourable senator is talking about, I will just take some of the contributions funding does not run out at the end of the made by that particular industry. Firstly, we week. could look at infrastructure. The mining 1442 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 industry provides roads, rail, ports, towns, that is, the previous discredited Labor govern- communications, water, and so on, in a whole ment— range of communities stretching right across policies toward exploration, mining and minerals Australia—and at no cost to the taxpayers of processing activities are not ‘clever’. It is not clever this country. Often on the tail of that flows a to erect a whole array of impediments to one of the whole lot of other industries, whether they be few industries in which Australia enjoys a clear manufacturing industries associated with advantage relative to many of our competitors. If we could dismantle just some of the barriers mining or tourists in tourism industries them- preventing these activities from realizing their full selves. potential, the Commission has estimated that the The mining industry directly employs value of resource sector outputs could be boosted 86,000 people in Australia, which is 1.1 per by some $5 billion annually, translating to annual gains of the order of $10 billion on an economy- cent of the work force, and it generates 6.8 wide basis. per cent of gross domestic product. From the urban point of view, it is interesting to note It is these impediments which this coalition that something like 300,000 people are indi- government intends to address. rectly employed through the mining industry’s Women efforts. Most of these would be in urban Senator REID—My question is directed to areas. Senator Newman. Is the minister aware that The mining industry now exports some $36 the opposition has claimed that she, as the billion worth of exports, which makes it the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the largest exporter in Australia—35 per cent of Status of Women, has refused to meet with total exports and 46 per cent of merchandise community groups representing women’s exports, a massive contribution. With regard organisations? to the mining industry’s direct contribution to Senator NEWMAN—Yes, I have been the Australian economy by way of direct interested to find that that is what the shadow company taxation, it gives about $1.3 billion. minister, Carmen Lawrence, has been up to. That does not include PAYE taxes through You would think she would hold her tongue the direct or indirect system. on the matter. She has a problem recognising The mining industry makes a contribution the difference between fact and fiction, as we to the states in the order of $800 million in all know. In the House of Representatives the royalties, and that does not include the petro- other night, she said: leum resource rent tax. It is the only industry, . . . women’s organisations have had a great deal I would have to say, that makes those sorts of of difficulty getting to meet the minister . . . She contributions to the states. No other industry has refused, as I understand, to meet with most of does that. the groups. They have been told she will meet with them in a round table discussion. Our major export industry is the coal industry, as Senator Hill referred to previous- She, of all people! She is the one who was ly. It exports about $8 billion worth of coal. not prepared to meet with organisations of That is notwithstanding the treacherous action any kind when she had portfolios. Look at of one Bill Kelty, the secretary of the ACTU, Link in 1995. They said: who represents the industrial arm of the . . . we have never found a Minister, Liberal or Australian Labor Party. He attempted to Labor, that is so elusive and uninterested in dis- undermine the exports of that industry in his ability issues as...Carmen Lawrence. infamous letter to a major coal buyer earlier Look at other organisations that have hit the this year. newspapers saying that they could never meet with Lawrence. Now compare the two of us. The other thing worth pointing out, and the When I was the shadow minister for the status Senate should note this, is that the Industry of women, I consulted with women all around Commission, in its report in February 1991— this country. I edited a book called Australian after eight years of Labor government—said: women speak. I went all over Australia, so Current government— just learn your history. Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1443

Senator Alston—A best-seller. Senator NEWMAN—No. I want to rub Senator NEWMAN—Yes, it was a best- your noses in it. That tells you what Carmen seller. Lawrence’s word is worth. Let it be once and for all known: that woman does not know the Senator Robert Ray—How many copies difference between fact and fiction. did you buy? Senator REID—Can the minister tell the Senator NEWMAN—I will send you a Senate what the government’s policy is with complimentary one if you like. Would you respect to discussing and meeting with com- like it autographed? munity groups, particularly women’s groups? Senator Robert Ray—Yes, thank you. Senator NEWMAN—I am glad Senator Senator NEWMAN—Opposition senators Reid gave me some more time to elaborate on might also be interested to know the number these issues, because I demonstrate by exam- of women’s groups that I have met with, or ple what the government’s policy is. The my senior adviser has met with, at the federal, government’s policy is consultation—wide state and local level since we came into and deep, around Australia, not just peak government. They include: CAPOW, Country groups here in Canberra. We want to hear the Women’s Association, Foundation of Austral- views of organisations all around this country. ian Agricultural Women, National Council of I have set out to hear those views not just Women, Women with Disabilities, Women’s in the status of women area but also in the Electoral Lobby, Council on the Ageing, welfare area. I have gone around Australia, Australian Council for Volunteering, Dr meeting with local welfare groups, the groups Margaret Alston of Rural Women, Soropti- who deliver the services to the people who mists Tasmania, the Jean Hailes Foundation, get income support from Social Security. I am ttrustt—survivors of torture and trauma, busy finding out from them their problems Sandgate Business Women’s Association, and their social security needs for our joint Council of Remote Area Nurses of Australia, customers. My consultation process will be Association of Independent Retirees, National long, continuous and in-depth. Already the Seniors Association, ACOSS, the Catholic women’s organisations are very appreciative, Women’s League, the Federal Liberal and so are the welfare ones. Women’s Committee and the Australian Federation of University Women. And I have Higher Education Funding received numerous written views from other Senator FAULKNER—My question is women’s organisations. directed to the Minister for Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs. Earlier Senator Alston—When do you sleep, in question time, you refused to answer a Jocelyn? question asked by Senator Denman in relation Senator NEWMAN—I do not have time to to even the number of vice-chancellors that sleep; I am meeting them all day and all you had met with. We have just heard Senator night. There are other women’s organisations Newman read out a great long list of organi- that I or my office has contacted, and an sations in relation to her activities. Will you appointment to meet with me has been ar- not only tell us the number of vice- ranged. There is also the round table meeting chancellors you have met with, but who they that was referred to by Carmen Lawrence, were? ANESBWA, the Older Women’s Network, Senator VANSTONE—I have not con- the Carers Association of Australia, the sulted with Senator Newman but I assume Council for the Single Mother and her Child, that she has the same position on these the New South Wales Working Women’s matters as I do, and that is that if she had Centre, YWCA and the Australian Pensioners consulted confidentially with people she and Superannuants Federation. would not just at the whim of the question Senator Bob Collins—Incorporate it in from either this side, as it was, or that side, Hansard. break the confidentiality of those discussions. 1444 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

I did not refuse to answer Senator Australian Defence Force Academy Denman’s question. You were here, Senator Senator NEWMAN—Yesterday, Senator Faulkner; you should have heard the answer Conroy asked me a question about the Aus- but, since you apparently did not or did not tralian Defence Force Academy. I seek leave comprehend it comprehend it, simple as its to incorporate an answer in Hansard. language was, let me repeat to you what I said to the Senate the other day. It is simply Leave granted. this: I have had a number of discussions with The answer read as follows— vice-chancellors and, if vice-chancellors want to make those discussions public, I am per- Response to Question Without Notice fectly and completely happy for them to do Senator Conroy asked the Minister representing so. But I will not do so myself. It is as simple the Minister for Defence, on 29 May 1996: as that. My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, and I ask could you Where the nature of the meeting has be- please explain the nature of the financial relation- come public and, quite clearly, that is going ship between ADFA and the University of New to happen by virtue of the fact that a vice- South Wales? Will ADFA funding be reduced at chancellor is quite happy for that to happen, the same rate as other tertiary institutions? Will you guarantee that ADFA resources will not be then I am not at all disturbed by that. But I used to cross-subsidise the University of New repeat: if a vice-chancellor wants to see me South Wales? confidentially or write to me and put Senator Newman—The Minister for Defence has ‘confidential’ on the top, then those discus- provided the following answer to the honourable sions will stay private. senator’s question: Senator FAULKNER—Perhaps the . The financial relationship between ADFA and minister could explain to the Senate why the University of New South Wales is governed by the 1981 Agreement between the Common- there is one approach from Senator Newman wealth of Australia (acting through the Depart- and one approach from Senator Vanstone. ment of Defence) and University of New South Wales (UNSW). Senator VANSTONE—You might like to ask Senator Newman, Senator Faulkner, but . This Agreement defines the arrangements under which UNSW provides university education to what I have told you is that, if a discussion is officer cadets at the University College of the confidential, I will keep it that way. It is an Australian Defence Force Academy. extraordinary proposition that you are putting . It formally establishes, amongst other things, the to me. What you are asking me to say is that, responsibilities of the Commonwealth for the if vice-chancellors want to write to me confi- provision of facilities and funding for UNSW to dentially, you have a greater right to know provide the University College at ADFA. what is in the letter because you are in this . This Government has no plans at present to place. reduce funding to the UNSW for the provision of tertiary education to the officer corps of the I just repeat for you: I do not think there is Australian Defence Force. any difference between Senator Newman and - This does not mean that the operation and me. If she has had open and public discus- funding levels of the Academy are immune sions with people and she is happy to come from the requirement to pursue measures that and tell you about those discussions or tell improve the cost effectiveness of officer you whom she has met with, fine. But if I education and training. have had letters from people and they have - To this end, Defence is reviewing its strategic marked them ‘confidential’ or they tell me requirement for both undergraduate and post- something in confidence, I will keep it that graduate education of the officer corps into the way. 21st Century, and the resultant roles and functions of the University College. Senator Hill—Mr President, I ask that - The 1981 Agreement is expected to be re- further questions be placed on the Notice viewed as a natural consequence of these Paper. processes. Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1445

- This is in keeping with the Government’s So we have none other than Mr Argus— response to the Joint Parliamentary Committee report "Officer Education: The Military After Senator Bob Collins—That’s Australia’s Next", tabled in both Houses today. (May 30) biggest bank. . Defence Academy resources will not be used to Senator SHERRY—Yes, from Australia’s cross-subsidise the University of New South Wales. biggest bank, an individual who is very close to the Liberal Party, making that statement. Budget Deficit We gave Senator Short an opportunity today, Senator SHERRY (Tasmania—Deputy after his loud assertions in this place about Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (3.03 the alleged $8 billion budget deficit, on the p.m.)—I move: basis of the national account figures yester- That the Senate take note of the answer given by day, to admit that he was wrong; that the the Assistant Treasurer (Senator Short), to a forecast—and I stress the word forecast—of question without notice asked by Senator Sherry an $8 billion deficit will not occur. today, relating to the economy. We then gave him the opportunity, but he Today in question time I raised the issue of did not retract or retreat, although I note that the alleged black hole, which the government he used the words: ‘these matters are open for now seems quite determined not to mention. revision’. I wonder what that means in the We did take a trip through space led by double-speak Star Trek language of the Captain Short of the Enterprise. government. I asked Senator Short whether he Senator Abetz—I raise a point of order. would resign when the budget figures are Could Senator Sherry get his processes right released in August if there is not an $8 billion and tell us which answer he wants to take deficit and he is wrong. He is continually note of? asserting that there is an $8 billion deficit so The PRESIDENT—He did, but for Senator if he firmly believes, even in the face of Abetz you might like to just repeat that. mounting, new evidence over the last few months, that it is not correct, he should put Senator SHERRY—I will repeat it for his job on the line. But all he could say was, Senator Abetz; he obviously was not listening. ‘These matters are open for revision.’ What I did refer in my introductory remarks to the matters are open for revision, Senator Short? answer to my question from Senator Short with respect to the alleged $8 billion black He is not listening to this debate. It is hole, a term that they do not seem to want to interesting that yesterday, in the time for mention any more, particularly following the taking note of answers, Senator Short did not release of the growth figures yesterday. speak at all; he got Senator Hill, the Govern- Following the release of the 4.8 per cent ment Leader in the Senate to defend his growth figures over the March quarter 1995 position—even though he was in the chamber. to the March quarter 1996, it was interesting This latest figure on the economic growth to note what was said today in the radio is yet another figure in a good succession of commentary by Mr Argus—I am sure he is ABS statistics. We have only to look at our close to many in the Liberal government—of inflation rate—amongst the lowest in the the National Australia Bank. On ABC Radio’s OECD now; we have good economic growth AM program, Mr Argus said: with low inflation; we look at the job growth; We’ve just thrown our crystal ball out the window we have had four years of economic growth; and we’ve got some work to do in understanding we look at productivity improvement, research some of the components of the accounts. and development and taxation levels. The He also said that the figures and the strength government is fond of talking about taxation of the economy could mean that the govern- levels: we are the second lowest taxed country ment may not have to make cuts of $8 billion in the OECD—I think Turkey is the only one over the next two years. He said: lower. Interestingly, in the expenditure area, If there’s this sort of growth in the economy that we are second last or last in the OECD, would be a fair assumption. depending on your methodology. 1446 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

So why is the government pursuing this so- Senator Bob Collins—The economy grew, called black hole? What we have here is a you dill. government determined to implement an Senator CAMPBELL—Let Senator Cook ideological agenda—Fightback. It was never respond in a minute, Senator Collins. Could withdrawn. It was never dead and buried. It we also look at the net debt of the Common- is Fightback all over again and Senator Short wealth—a very important measure. is in the embarrassing position in representing the government. Because the government does Senator Bob Collins—Lies, damn lies and not have enough money to pay for its election statistics! promises, it is embarking upon an ideological Senator CAMPBELL—This isn’t a statist- cutback of government programs, an ideologi- ic; it is a raw figure. So there was a 30 per cal cutback of government employment and cent increase. On 30 June 1991, the net debt is also engaged in finding money to pay for of the Commonwealth was $32 billion. By its election promises. now it has risen to $100 billion. You raised Senator CAMPBELL (Western Australia— an extra 30 per cent in taxes and spent all of Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the it. You increased the debt— Environment and Parliamentary Secretary to Senator Cook—That is not government the Minister for Sport, Territories and Local debt; that is private sector debt. Government) (3.08 p.m.)—If the Senate is to believe Senator Sherry when he says that this Senator CAMPBELL—No, this is net policy of fiscal responsibility to balance Commonwealth debt, Senator Cook—$100 Australia’s deficit situation and to bring it billion. It went up $68 billion while Mr back into the black is some sort of ideological Keating was Prime Minister and while you obsession, then perhaps it might be a good and that joke of a former minister sitting next idea. to you were in cabinet. These are the figures. You come back in here and correct me if any That idea is similar to the concept of of them are wrong. environmentally sustainable development, the concept of trying to hand on to the next All of the extra $68 billion borrowed by the generation an environment that is better than Commonwealth was also spent. So all the the one we inherited to ensure that it is taxes were spent and all the borrowings were sustainable. It is equally important for this spent. What about the assets? In the mean- generation to hand on to the next generation time, while you were sitting around the an economy that is sustainable. The absolute cabinet table, Senator Cook and Senator worst thing you can do for young people in Collins—as part of that disgraceful cabinet Australia and for the next generation broadly that put this country into the debt situation is to hand on the sort of economic mess that that we now find ourselves in—the then previous government bequeathed to this government sold $8.7 billion worth of assets. nation. You did not offset that $8.7 billion of asset sales against debt to reduce the debt; you took I wanted to respond to Senator Sherry’s the proceeds of those sales and paid the motion to take note of the answer by quoting butler. You sold the silver to pay the butler. a few statistics, which he and Senator Cook All of that has gone as well. will choose to ignore. I ask Senator Cook when he gets the call next—if, indeed, he So you did not repatriate that $8.7 billion— does—to challenge any of these figures. Back about the range that we will receive when we in 1992-93, when Mr Keating became Prime sell Telstra—against debt to reduce the Minister, Australia’s taxes and charges—the Commonwealth’s interest burden and to income to the federal government—amounted reduce the burden on the Australian taxpayers to $95 billion. At the end of 1995-96 the by way of interest; you just spent it. You did income was $124 billion—a 30 per cent not do what we propose to do with the Telstra increase in the taxes and charges on sale: invest $1.15 billion in another capital Australia’s— asset—that is, the environment—and use the Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1447 rest of the money to repatriate debt. You took budget and, therefore, the most savage cost- the $8.7 billion and spent the whole lot. cutting spree that any government had ever You always spend it before you get it. That undertaken in Australia had to be embarked is what you have done. You have spent over on in order to balance the books. Interesting- $30 billion in new taxes. You have spent $68 ly, this is from a coalition that has never in its billion in increased debt. The money from history balanced the books. $8.7 billion worth of asset sales is gone too, But, in rediscovering their Thatcherite roots and the place is still in significant deficit. nonetheless and in their ideological obsession, What you and the Democrats want to say is, they said, ‘This was necessary.’ They ob- ‘Let us keep those deficits going.’ tained a degree of credibility in Australia We have had four years of growth. Most because the source of their forecast—it was other nations around the world run deficits in never hard economic statistics; it was a times of recession and run surpluses in times forecast, and all forecasts are susceptible to of recovery. What did Australia do under change—was the Australian Treasury. Labor? Run deficits in times of recession and The only way in which you can assess how deficits in times of recovery. What do you the economy is going, broadly, is by going to hand to our next generation and what do we the national accounts every quarter. The say to our young people? You will pay higher national accounts for the March quarter were taxes, you will pay higher interest, you won’t the national accounts for the last quarter of have a chance to go and buy your own home, the Labor government. Therefore they were you won’t have a chance to set up your own the accounts that we, while in government, business because we are paying the highest delivered to this country. They show a growth interest rates in the world. That is the pre- rate of 4.8 per cent for the Australian econ- mium that you guys have put on the young omy. That is a very high growth rate. It will people of Australia. Whenever you go to ensure that the economy finds work for every borrow money in this country, you pay a school leaver and sops up the level of unem- premium over every other country in the land. ployment. Yesterday Senator Short acknow- You stand in disgrace. (Time expired) ledged that this was a very good figure. It Senator COOK (Western Australia) (3.13 blows the cover story that there is an $8 p.m.)—I, too, wish to take note of the an- billion black hole. swers given by Senator Short to the two I notice that it was referred to on the AAP questions from Senator MacGibbon and wire yesterday as the mythical black hole. Senator Sherry. Since I have been invited to Also, I notice that in the Canberra Times comment by Senator Campbell, can I say that today there was the headline ‘Illusory black his contribution today, with the greatest hole’. Even the economic commentators and respect, is a good example of, when you have reporters have pricked the balloon of the got nothing to say, obfuscate. I will be happy government’s contempt for Australia in its to go to the figures any time, Senator Camp- trying to pull a swiftie and pretending that the bell, but I don’t want to be deflected from my economy of Australia is in dire straits. It is remarks now, if you do not mind. not. It is growing faster than most of the Yesterday the cover that this government economies in the Western world and it is had carefully constructed for itself to justify healthier and more robust than most of the a Thatcherite assault on services and expendi- economies in the Western world. If you were ture by the government to important sectors to embark on the cost cutting spree that this in Australia was blown and blown irrevers- government now has set its sights on doing, ibly. It was blown by the statistician, the you would withdraw public sector investment Australian Bureau of Statistics, when it from the economy and bring on a minor brought down the national accounts for this recession in Australia which would put more nation for the March quarter. We heard from people on the unemployment list. the government that the forecast was that But what did we get from the government there would be an $8 billion deficit for the today; any acknowledgment of that? Of 1448 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 course not. We got a story—more of the strengthening in the value of the Australian same; the bad medicine, the harsh medicine, dollar in relation to the American dollar, must continue. This flies in the face of what indicates a high degree of strengthening and respected forecasting agencies and economic confidence in Australia by people overseas. commentators are saying. Let me quote This is something that has occurred in the professors John Nevile and Fred Gruen and period since the coalition came to power. It Mr Fred Argy. In the Australian Financial is not a figure that is three, six or eight Review of 20 May, they said: months old; it is something that has happened . . . the figure of $8 billion is itself not a firm since the coalition came to power. figure. The tragedy for the Australian taxpayer is That is what we have been saying. They go that the previous Minister for Finance failed on: to indicate the full extent of the deficit. In It is a Treasury forecast assuming no policy proper fashion, on coming to government, the changes and a rate of growth of the economy of first thing the coalition had to do was to audit 3.25 per cent . . . a small difference in the assumed the books to see the true extent of that deficit rate of economic growth can make a large differ- and to take appropriate corrective measures to ence in the size of the projected deficit. bring the future budgets back into balance for The assumption was 3.25 per cent. What did fiscal rectitude and to protect inflation from we get? We got 4.8 per cent—a big differ- getting out of control. That was an entirely ence. Therefore, even in your wildest of responsible action by this new government. fantasies that $8 billion black hole does not exist. Education cuts ought not continue. The new government has a great responsi- Welfare cuts should not go ahead. Higher bility in turning around what has been re- education should not be put back. People in ferred to as the chronic deficiency in domestic the environment should not be disadvantaged savings. A major way of doing this is to by having their programs cut. Business pro- return the budget from chronic deficit to grams that stimulate investment and create surplus. This single act will have a tremen- jobs in this country should not be cut back. dous impact in improving the savings level in All of those sectors and everyone else affect- Australia. For example, the previous govern- ed by your cuts should stand up to this ment took credit for every ray of sunshine, in government now and say, ‘Don’t proceed. terms of income, and then spent the proceeds What you’re propounding is a lie. The deficit almost immediately. is not there. There is no need for this type of A financially correct approach is to accu- approach.’ mulate each of these gains progressively until Senator WATSON (Tasmania) (3.19 a surplus is achieved. Over time, with prudent p.m.)—The so-called $8 billion black hole financial management, this responsible was a calculation by Treasury at a point in National-Liberal Party coalition will return the time. Under prudent financial management economy to surplus, improve the level of every Australian would expect an improve- savings and make secure the retirement ment in Australia’s financial position over incomes of all those Australians including time. It is very interesting that this confidence those who now have over $240 billion for is beginning to return to Australia under the future superannuation. new government. Apparently this is a confi- The thrust of the questioning unfortunately dence that the Labor Party is somewhat appears to indicate that every bit of good embarrassed about. The nature of the ques- news in terms of extra income should be tioning in recent days does suggest this. spent at the earliest possible opportunity as It is interesting to look at a number of was the past practice, rather than saved to favourable statistics and trends. One degree of reduce the deficit. I certainly hope that in the confidence that particularly overseas investors coming months we will see a more respon- have in Australia is perhaps reflected in some sible attitude taken by members of the Aus- of the exchange rate figures. For example, the tralian Labor Party currently sitting opposite Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1449 as the $8 billion black hole is diminished and at who got it wrong. We have said all along a budget surplus is achieved.. how imprecise this is. Who got it wrong? Senator Chamarette—Madam Deputy Most of the banks got it wrong. Who got it President, I raise a point of order. I was wrong? Your friends Access Economics, who wondering whether Senator Watson was forecasted a $12 billion deficit. What did they taking note of an actual answer or Senator say yesterday? They said, ‘Woops, sorry. We Cook’s speech to take note or whether he was are now looking at something like $7 billion.’ trying to improve upon Senator Short’s The point I am making is that it is people’s answer. lives and jobs that are hanging on imprecise The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Senator forecasting. John Howard said in question Watson was speaking on the motion moved time in the House of Representatives just a by Senator Sherry. I call Senator Kernot. little while ago—and I am not quoting him— Senator Crane—You will have to go Senator Crane—No, Mr Howard. home, Bob. Senator KERNOT—Sorry, the Prime Senator Bob Collins—I will have to do it Minister; I beg your pardon. Mr Howard, the on the adjournment. Prime Minister, argued that it is somehow inappropriate to rely on previous growth when Senator KERNOT (Queensland—Leader you are building up a black hole but not when of the Australian Democrats) (3.23 p.m.)—I black holes are disappearing. That is not fair had to do that yesterday. It is interesting that and it is not true. the government seems to be in some kind of damage control mode today. Why that is so I agree with the coalition on this point: is made very obvious by headlines such as some deficit reduction is necessary. We did ‘Growth fills $8b Budget "black hole"’, by have unfunded tax cuts. We did have an the heading in the Melbourne Age ‘Oh, come unfunded Working Nation package. But I tell on Mr Costello’ and by the editorial in the you what—it sure ain’t $8 billion that you Sydney Morning Herald headed ‘A shrinking have to find. black hole’. Question resolved in the affirmative. Senator Ferguson interjecting— Land Fund Senator KERNOT—Just like you are, Senator CHAMARETTE (Western Aus- Senator Ferguson, all the time. The point I tralia) (3.27 p.m.)—I move: want to make and have made consistently is That the Senate take note of the answer given by that it is dishonest to say this $8 billion is the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait some fixed amount which, for rigid ideologi- Islander Affairs (Senator Herron), to a question cal reasons, you cannot move from. without notice asked by Senator Chamarette today, Yesterday’s figures blew that out of the water. relating to the instruction of Land Fund legislation. Yesterday’s figures showed the economy is in Senator Herron obfuscated and implied quite such a state that you now have a choice. That erroneously that the delay by the Prime is the problem: you now have to choose Minister (Mr Howard) in honouring his whether you will show a little bit of compas- commitment to the changes to and increase in sion and a little bit of re-prioritising in your funds of the ATSIC Amendment (Indigenous approach to the budget in August. That is Land Corporation and Land Fund) Bill 1994 now the difficulty for you. Michelle Grattan was in some way due to the cut-off motion said in today’s Age: and some degree of obstruction on this side Peter Costello tried to argue the impossible about of the chamber. yesterday’s national accounts. He insisted the I remind Senator Herron and Senator Kemp higher growth figure didn’t make any difference to who ought to know better, as should all other the size of the $8 billion "black hole". government ministers, that this so-called cut- This does stretch belief. off motion does not stop the government I agree with her. Going back to the reliance from, first, preparing legislation; second, on forecasting: it is really interesting to look circulating legislation; and, third, introducing 1450 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 legislation. It stops only introduction and first to know and their wishes in this matter debate in the same session. So far this session would be paramount. the non-government parties have agreed to I would like to commend to Senator Herron exempting 27 bills from the cut-off motion and Senator Hill—and indeed to any other and have refused only five. We have not been senators—a paper that was prepared, at my at all obstructive. request, by the Parliamentary Research Ser- The cut-off motion would not interfere with vice on this question in 1992. The paper the government introducing this bill—a bill to provides a very succinct history and back- which Senator Herron refused to give a ground as to the legal situation concerning the commitment. If a bill has previously been parks. I have always believed in giving introduced in the other place or in the Senate credit—and I have given credit—where credit in a previous session, let alone debated and is due. I want to commend Senator Hill— passed in the Senate in a previous session, as Senator Hill—That’s worrying. That will in the case of the bill we are referring to, it not do me any good. may not even be subject to the cut-off motion. Senator BOB COLLINS—I am sorry I simply wanted to take note of the about that, Robert, but I am quite sincere minister’s answer and express grave concern when I do this. I want to commend Senator that the government does not understand the Hill for the very direct way in which he principles underlying the cut-off motion. I answered the paramount concern of those regret that the minister does not have a people. I want to pass on to him the fact that sufficient grasp of that or of his portfolio. they were extremely thankful and commended Question resolved in the affirmative. him for it. Kakadu National Park The paper lays out the position very suc- cinctly, as papers from the Parliamentary Senator BOB COLLINS (Northern Library normally do. The parks are leased Territory) (3.29 p.m.)—I move: back to the Commonwealth government for That the Senate take note of the answer given by 99 years. The parks are on Aboriginal owned the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait land by virtue of a grant in freehold title to Islander Affairs (Senator Herron), to a question without notice asked by Senator Lundy today, the relevant Aboriginal land trust under the relating to the management of Kakadu National Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Park. Act 1976. These 99-year leases specifically Senator Hill, the Minister for the Environ- include provision for joint management of the ment, recently met with the board of manage- parks by the Aboriginal owners and the ment of Kakadu National Park. At that meet- Commonwealth parks service. Clause 9(b) of ing—he was accompanied by Senator Parer— the lease agreement with the Commonwealth the future management of the park was raised agrees not to transfer, assign, sublet or part not surprisingly with Senator Hill by the with the possession of the park or any part of Aboriginal traditional owners. I have spoken the park without the consent in writing of the to a number of them who were at that meet- lessor of the Kakadu Aboriginal Land Trust. ing. They told me that they were impressed Senator Campbell—Why didn’t you ask with how forthright Senator Hill was in his the question of the responsible minister? answer to that question. Senator BOB COLLINS—I will answer Senator Hill told the Aboriginal traditional that in a minute. A number of other clauses owners, who represent a majority of the are enshrined in the lease to ensure against board, that the Commonwealth had ‘no hidden the enactment of any act or regulations that agenda’ on this issue. He said that there had could substantially be detrimental to the been no formal approach to the federal interests of the owners—that is, the Aborigi- government from the Northern Territory nal people. Any such action could be seen as government and, if there were to be such an a breach of a legally binding agreement by approach, the traditional owners would be the the Commonwealth, and would expose the Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1451

Commonwealth to a substantial claim of SHIPPING GRANTS LEGISLATION damages. BILL 1996 The paper concluded that persuasion and Report of Rural and Regional Affairs coercion would be the more likely tactics to and Transport Legislation Committee succeed in any alliance between the Common- Senator CRANE (Western Australia)—by wealth and the territory government to trans- leave—I present the report of the Rural and fer management against the wishes of the Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation owners. The reason I raise that is that the Committee on the Shipping Grants Legislation paper—it is an excellent paper on the legal Bill 1996, together with submissions, corres- position regarding Kakadu—makes it very pondence and transcripts of proceedings. clear that the most obvious way this would be There is agreement that nobody will speak on done would be through a decline in budget the report at this time. funding for the park. I am assured by the statements made by the Minister for the Ordered that the report be printed. Environment that there is no hidden agenda, and that that will not be the result in the ACCESS TO INTERNET budget. Senator CHAMARETTE (Western Aus- Senator Campbell, in response to your tralia)—I seek leave to ask the President for interjection, we had thought of coming in here a statement relating to the resolution of the today and asking Senator Hill a question on Senate of 28 November 1995 regarding these issues. But, on reconsideration, we senators’ access to the internet. decided that we would direct the question Leave granted. instead to the Minister for Aboriginal and Senator CHAMARETTE—Can the Presi- Torres Strait Islander Affairs (Senator dent inform the Senate of what progress has Herron). At the weekend Senator Hill’s been made on the resolution of the Senate of assurances to the traditional owners got very 28 November 1995, which resolved that prominent coverage in a major national paper, parliamentary departments provide on request the Weekend Australian, where these assuran- from senators and members access to the ces were prominently carried. internet from 30 March 1996? Can the Presi- I was genuinely surprised that the Minister dent inform the Senate from what date for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander internet access will be available in senators’ Affairs, on an issue this significant—it got suites? lots of publicity in the Northern Territory, let The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I will refer me tell you—was completely unaware of the that matter to the President so that he can assurances that his colleague had given to the reply. Aboriginal traditional owners of the park. COALITION: ELECTION These are important matters. We were COMMITMENTS interested in hearing a response from Senator Hill, but it was decided to ask the Minister Senator SHORT (Victoria—Assistant for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Treasurer)—Pursuant to the order of the Affairs if he was aware of these widely Senate of 22 May 1996, I wish to table publicised matters in order to find out just certain documents, and I seek leave to make how much importance the government places a statement in relation to them. on the Aboriginal affairs implications of this Leave granted. major issue. Judging by the performance of the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Senator SHORT—Senator Sherry request- Islander Affairs here in Senate question time ed, and the Senate so ordered, on 22 May that today, the answer is: very little. there be laid on the table by no later than 4 p.m. today all documents prepared by the Question resolved in the affirmative. Department of the Treasury and the Depart- 1452 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 ment of Finance, including since 2 March, behalf of the government not to release these regarding their analyses of the costing of the documents because the potential damage to coalition’s election commitments encompass- the effective operation of government by their ing both spending and saving commitments. release outweighs any public interest in their As I indicated to the Senate at the time that release. These documents are cabinet docu- the motion was debated, in matters such as ments and budget related material. I would this the government wants to cooperate expect that Senator Sherry and the opposition wherever it is proper and reasonable to do so more generally would agree with me that the in providing documents which are appropriate release of such material would not be in the to be in the public domain. Such an approach public interest. As former Senator Gareth is consistent with the government’s strong Evans said on another occasion in this place: commitment to open and accountable govern- It is . . . perfectly understood and accepted that ment. there are legitimate grounds for non-disclosure. Our commitment in this regard is evi- The protection of cabinet and related docu- denced by our intention to establish a charter ments from public release is well established. of budget honesty to increase the accounta- Of course, there is a very close link between bility and public scrutiny of government fiscal cabinet papers and budget material, with policy. That charter will provide a legislative much of the budget related material being framework which will ensure that govern- prepared as the necessary groundwork for the ments are more accountable by increasing the development of the cabinet documents them- quality of publicly available information on selves. fiscal policies through the imposition of In addition, the release of budget material regular reporting requirements on a range of prior to the budget would compromise the fiscal measures. The charter will prevent the government’s ability to deliver a coordinated re-occurrence of Labor’s outrageous tactic of and complete fiscal policy. It could also not releasing updated budget figures in the disrupt financial and product markets by run-up to an election. creating possibly false expectations about Let there be no doubt that we are keen to future decisions affecting such matters as see open and honest government. It is in this prices, interest rates and the like. Release spirit that I table a large number of documents could also encourage groups to influence the today. These documents have been identified budget process in ways which could be by the departments of Treasury and Finance detrimental to the national interest. as being covered by Senator Sherry’s motion. Release of budget material is clearly inap- They relate to the costings of both the propriate. It is a principle which the former coalition’s spending and savings commit- Labor government stood by. I can see no ments. The documents have been prepared by justifiable reason, either for them or for this senior officers of the departments and other government, to move away from it now. As agencies. former Senator McMullan said in this place The documents include material prepared in relation to the release of government for internal information, responses to requests documents: for costings of the coalition’s election com- It is very important that we...make responsible mitments from the offices of the ministers of decisions with a long term view rather than irre- the previous government, and requests from sponsible decisions in the fervent hope that some the departments of Treasury and Finance for short term benefit may flow. information from other agencies. Taken The withholding of budget related material together, they will amount to over 150 pages clearly falls within the ambit of such a state- of information pertinent to Senator Sherry’s ment. request. Finally, I point out that I will not be tabling As I also pointed out when we debated deliberative documents dealt with by certain Senator Sherry’s motion, there are documents ministers of the former government. As I which will not be released. I have decided on made clear during the debate on Senator Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1453

Sherry’s motion some days ago, under long- Senator Sherry—On the point of order: I standing conventions the current government do think Senator Short has gone on for far too is not privy to these documents. Former long. But I do not recall him actually asking ministers, of course, have a right to access to make a short statement, unfortunately, these documents under the Archives Act. It because I am going to have to seek leave to would be a matter for them to decide, first of respond to some of the points he is making. all, whether to access them and, secondly, I will make a short statement, if my request what they might wish to do with them. is granted. Let me emphasise once again that the The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I think government is more than willing to provide Senator Short was given leave to make a the Senate with documents that can be re- statement. It is his judgment as to what is leased in the light of longstanding convention short and what is not. and principle in this place. I must say that Senator SHORT—I did not seek leave to that is much more than the previous govern- make a short statement; I sought leave to ment was prepared to do on many occasions make a statement. But I am within half a in recent years. In that respect I would like to minute of concluding what I wanted to say, quote my colleague Senator Alston when he anyway. had asked for some documents in relation to the media and foreign ownership and received I was saying before those points of order no more than a Foreign Investment Review were taken that it is incredible that the oppo- Board document which was already in the sition should only now be so interested in the public arena. He said at that time: costings that can be prepared by Treasury and the Department of Finance. When the re- The fact is that the government has no justification sources for such costings were available to for withholding those documents. . . them as a government they chose instead to ...... shut their eyes and pretend that that informa- tion was not available because they did not . . . the heavy suspicion has always been that the want to see the stark reality of the fiscal black government’s decisions were motivated by political hole that their ineptitude had created. I could considerations rather than legal or national interest considerations. Senator Evans has come in here and hardly put it better than Prime Minister confirmed that. For all his supposed ability of fast Howard who, in response to the first question footwork, he has not even had the guile to disguise that he received as Prime Minister, stated: this as anything other than a matter of politics. You had all the resources of the Treasury and the Of course, the attitude of Labor on public Department of Finance at your disposal, but what did you do? You chose to close your eyes. You disclosure is well known, the most notable chose not to ask the question. Every time you told cover-up in recent times being the repeated the Australian people the information was not claims by the then Finance Minister and now available, you knew that was wrong. Every time Leader of the Opposition, Mr Beazley, that you told the Australian people that it was too hard the budget was in surplus and would continue to get it together, you knew that that was deceit. to be in surplus, when he knew perfectly well As I say, I could not put it any more clearly that that was not the case. It is an incredible than was put in that way by the Prime irony that the opposition should only now be Minister. We have not and will not be party so interested in the costings that can be to such a deception. We have a clear aim to prepared by Treasury and the Department of be open and accountable to the people of Finance. Australia. Senator Spindler—Madam Deputy Presi- So I reiterate that, in good faith and in dent, I raise a point of order. Senator Short accordance with longstanding convention, I asked for leave to make a short statement. He table these documents today. The task would is now enlarging on his discourse in a manner have been substantially less costly to the which hardly makes this a short statement. taxpayer had Senator Sherry been prepared to Could you ask him to conclude? recognise those conventions in the framing of 1454 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 his motion—a matter that I took up with him We do believe in open and accountable at some length prior to the motion being government. You have talked considerably made formal. But, despite his refusal to do so, about your charter of budget honesty. What- we have cooperated to the maximum extent ever the details of that mean, it is a pity we possible in meeting his request while ensuring have not had it over the last few months that the national interest is preserved. because it would have added to expose the Senator SHERRY (Tasmania—Deputy sham claims of an alleged $8 billion deficit. Leader of the Opposition in the Senate)—I We will be reading the documents with seek leave to make a short statement. interest. As I said, I do thank you, Senator. We will be responding at a later date on the Leave granted. basis of the documents provided. Senator SHERRY—It is not just an oppo- NOTICES OF MOTION sition request: this is a Senate request agreed to by Senator Harradine, the Greens (WA) Classification (Publications, Films and and the Australian Democrats seeking infor- Computer Games) Regulations mation from Treasury and the Department of Senator BOURNE (New South Wales)—by Finance on an analysis of the costing of the leave—I give notice that, on the next day of coalition’s election commitments, both spend- sitting, I shall move: ing and savings. That the Classification (Publications, Films and Why do we need these documents? We Computer Games) Regulations, as contained in believe that the government is embarking on Statutory Rules 1995 No. 401 and made under the a campaign of gross deceit of the Australian Classification (Publications, Films and Computer people. It has largely been exposed in a Games) Act 1995, be disallowed. number of ways, but particularly by the MATTERS OF URGENCY release yesterday of the national growth figure of 4.8 per cent. Greenhouse Emissions Today, I noticed Senator Short uttered The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I inform the faintly, for the first time in three days, the Senate that the President has received the allegation of a black hole. I think he has following letter, dated 20 May 1996, from become a bit embarrassed about the term Senator Lees: ‘black hole’ and other Star Trek meanderings Mr President, through space that he has been using over the Pursuant to Standing Order 75, I give notice that last few weeks. today, I propose to move: I thank you for the documents you have That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following tabled today. But I do note your excuses for is a matter of urgency: failing to table other documents. It is not an As a result of the lack of action by the previous exact quote, but in releasing some of the Labor Government, Australia’s record on green- material you said that it ‘may compromise a house emissions is worse than other OECD coordinated approach to the budget. It may countries, and therefore the new Government pressure or force interest groups to attempt to must put the following position at the forth- coming second conference of the parties of the influence the budget outcome.’ What has the framework convention on climate change: National Farmers Federation been doing? That (a) that Australia supports legally binding is not an exact quote, Senator Short, but it is greenhouse pollution reduction targets for as close as I could note of what you said industrialised countries after the year 2000; without the availability of the Hansard. You (b) that the emission targets be set at levels also said, ‘Or the effective operation of the needed to avoid the dangerous impacts of government may be somewhat thwarted and climate change predicted by the UN Panel that is not in the public interest.’ As a Senate, of 2 500 climate change experts and scien- certainly as an opposition, we will be putting tists; and forward our view of your meaning of those (c) that any strategy developed include provi- particular words. sion for large scale transfer of the best Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1455

available technologies to developing count- at this conference. It is a matter of national ries, importance. I would go so far as to say that and the Australian Government must put in place it is about time we started actually meeting domestic policies consistent with this position. our international obligations under the frame- Yours sincerely work on climate change. Meg Lees Most senators, hopefully all senators, would Is the proposal supported? be aware of the rather unfortunate position More than the number of senators required that the Australian government took last year by the Standing Orders having risen in their to the conference in Berlin. Indeed, the former places— ALP government was responsible for a set of policies which will ensure that, in fact, we do The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I understand not meet the targets that were set. that arrangements have been made for the speaking times which I will ask the clerk to The former government set such a low adhere to. benchmark in this area that there are no domestic mandatory requirements. It also Senator LEES (South Australia—Deputy failed to institute a number of ‘no regrets’ Leader of the Australian Democrats) (3.51 measures—measures such as mandatory p.m.)—I move: building codes or emission controls. This That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following weak position came about as a direct result of is a matter of urgency: very intense lobbying by some sectors of As a result of the lack of action by the previous industry. I stress here that it was as a result of Labor Government, Australia’s record on green- only some but, in particular, they were some house emissions is worse than other OECD countries, and therefore the new Government of the high emission industries and also the must put the following position at the forth- coal industry. This has ensured that Australia coming second conference of the parties of the is the worst per capita offender when we framework convention on climate change: assess the emissions of greenhouse gases. (a) that Australia supports legally binding I remember when first the concept of greenhouse pollution reduction targets for ‘greenhouse’ was put not just before the industrialised countries after the year 2000; Australian parliament but before the Austral- (b) that the emission targets be set at levels ian people, prior to the whole issue becoming needed to avoid the dangerous impacts of a part of the public debate, that there were a climate change predicted by the UN Panel of 2 500 climate change experts and scien- lot of people who were very sceptical and, tists; and indeed, people who denied the existence of (c) that any strategy developed include provi- any such phenomenon. But I think, if we sion for large scale transfer of the best surveyed the Australian public today, we available technologies to developing count- would find that very few now question the ries, fact that our climate is changing; very few and the Australian Government must put in place would question the concept of greenhouse and domestic policies consistent with this position. the greenhouse effect. Before beginning, could I say that, thanks to So the debate has now moved on from other business taking some 20 minutes of our accepting that there is a problem and trying time, we may need to make some adjustments to figure out how bad it could be to what we to those speaking times. Therefore, I will try should be doing about it. Indeed, every to be a little briefer than I had planned to be. parliament and every parliamentarian in the Looking at why this is urgent, we are aware world should take some responsibility for that in July this year the ministerial confer- international moves to mitigate the effect of ence will be held in Geneva and that we will climate change. be making some major decisions in this area. A recent report called Dangerous Interfer- In particular, this government will be meeting ence with the Climate System: Implications of between now and when we resume in a the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate fortnight’s time to decide Australia’s position Change gives us critical information. This 1456 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 meeting of 2,500 climate experts and scien- owner who does not maintain a forest cover on a tists world wide had some unprecedented certain proportion of the land. conclusions which, hopefully, all of us must I am not suggesting that we would impose take with some seriousness. I will just list a such a tax on our farmers, but wouldn’t it be couple, quoting from their paper: nice if they got additional incentives for either With the growth in atmospheric concentrations of maintaining existing vegetation or replanting. greenhouse gases, interference with the climate Yet, one of the most significant parts of this system will grow in magnitude and the likelihood government’s environmental comments is that of adverse impacts from climate change that could it is talking about tying these types of packag- be judged dangerous will become greater . . . the es to the sale of Telstra, instead of proceeding balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate . . . in all cases the to support our farmers and land-holders who average rate of warming would probably be greater are increasing their plantings and their efforts than any seen in the last 10,000 years . . . there in the area of revegetation. will be likely reductions in biological diversity . . . But perhaps the greatest problem for Aus- entire forest types may disappear . . . some forests are likely to undergo irregular and large scale tralia now, as we move into the next round of losses of living trees . . . some species could international meetings, is that the United become extinct . . . there may be increased risk of States looks like leaving us well behind. I hunger and famine in some locations, many of the quote from the Sydney Morning Herald of 15 worlds poorest people are most at risk of increased May: hunger . . . Climate Change is likely to have wide ranging and mostly adverse effect on human health, American State Department officials have with significant loss of life . . . it can have a privately warned the Howard Government that the number of negative impacts on energy, industry, US is moving rapidly to take a tougher, greener transportation infrastructure; human settlement; the position on international efforts to curb emissions property insurance industry; tourism and cultural of greenhouse gases, the cause of global climate systems and values. change. But while America’s historic shift would dra- Finally, there is the sobering point that: matically improve the chances of effective global . . . additionally there is a danger that entire unique action to protect the world’s climate, it would leave cultures may be obliterated... Australia’s diplomatic strategy stranded. However, what is important is that the report Australia would have lost support from its most powerful traditional ally and be left in the company says—and this is why we who are here in the of other fossil-fuel-rich nations such as Saudi Senate should be discussing this today: Arabia and Kuwait, which are seen internationally . . . significant reductions in greenhouse gases are as hostile to tough greenhouse action. technically possible and can be economically Australia is particularly vulnerable to internation- feasible. al pressure to change its stance because of its high greenhouse gas emissions per person and steady Note those words: it is possible, it is techni- opposition to firm action. cally possible to make a difference, and it certainly is economically feasible. America’s shift has been driven by the latest evidence on the greenhouse effect, which predicts But unfortunately in Australia all this is that build-up in the atmosphere of greenhouse faltering for lack of political will. There are gases—carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous just a few intransigent countries with relation oxide—from burning oil, coal and gas will cause to greenhouse, and Australia has the dubious a dangerous shift in the world’s climate. honour of being the most intransigent of all So we are becoming more and more isolated OECD countries. Indeed, looking at what is from countries that we would have considered happening in the Third World, we see many to be our friends and our supporters. of the developing countries taking a far more As for economic feasibility, I would argue responsible stand than we are. Just looking at that there is an enormous potential for us to what is happening in Colombia, I quote from develop alternate technologies—and solar the International Environment Reporter: technology is just one of those. Indeed, if this The Colombian minister of environment has government wanted to take a lead, it now proposed imposing a "green tax" on any rural land could be actively encouraging the use of solar Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1457 technology here in Australia. There is wind challenge—which it clearly does—and that energy, as yet another technology unfortunate- Australia remains committed to fulfilling its ly that could have well been lost. A lot of our obligations under the framework convention. innovations have now been taken on by He said that we are contributing to limiting countries in Europe because previous govern- our emissions of greenhouse gases through the ments failed to support Australian inventions national greenhouse response strategy with and new technology. There are a range of industries’ positive participation. He said that measures being taken to reduce emissions. If the greenhouse challenge program provides Australia was to pioneer some of the technol- companies with the opportunity to show that ogy that is gradually developing in this area, they are taking practical steps to limit emis- we could not only use it here but also, in sions, but that an effective long-term response particular, export that technology to Third to climate change will need to be global, World nations. involving all countries. He made mention of It is imperative that the Senate debates this the fact that, while developed countries have matter today, particularly in light of the agreed to take the lead, by the year 2000 answer of the Minister for the Environment developing countries are expected to be (Senator Hill) at question time which was emitting more than half of the world’s CO2 basically a no-change strategy. He again emissions, and that they too will have to looked at the couple of very outspoken contribute in the longer term. The forth- industries which are determined we do not coming Berlin mandate negotiation should improve but continue to pollute. They believe keep the door open for this. that Australia should maintain the status quo. Finally, he said that the government will Hopefully at the conference in Geneva we campaign for an approach that ensures that all will see a change on Australia’s part and at countries share equitably the burden of ad- last we will support legally binding green- dressing what is a truly global problem. The house pollution reduction targets. Australia government will insist that Australia’s eco- will actually be setting emission targets and nomic and trade interests are safeguarded and ensuring that they are set at such a level to that our specific national circumstances are avoid the dangerous impacts of climate taken into account when implementing the change that I have mentioned today. In convention. particular, any strategy developed for the provision of large scale transfer will make Basically that was what I said in answer to sure that we make the best of Australian a question today from Senator Lees. The issue technology and we export that to developing of global warming and climate change is countries. Finally, Australia must put in place obviously one of concern to the whole com- domestic policies consistent with our interna- munity. The balance of scientific advice is in tional stance. fact that human intervention is resulting for the first time in climate change and the total Senator HILL (South Australia—Minister consequences of that are not fully understood. for the Environment) (4.01 p.m.)—This is an Furthermore, I made mention of the difficulty important subject to raise and I welcome the in remedying the situation, the fact that the opportunity to say a few words on it. It might CO2 emissions caught in the atmosphere are also be of some interest to senators if I let cumulative and therefore the wisdom of them know what the Prime Minister (Mr caution in this important issue. Howard) said last night on the subject when he addressed the minerals industry annual It follows logically that all nation states dinner here in Parliament House. should be seeking to address the issue of greenhouse gas emissions and doing what can Senator Faulkner—Do you want to table reasonably be done to reduce those emissions. it? An interesting aspect of this debate is that we Senator HILL—No, I will not table it. He are not addressing any detrimental conse- said that it is the view of the government that quence in immediate terms, and perhaps not climate change remains a critical global even in the medium term, but when we look 1458 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 a century down the track the generations of that we do not, in a spirit of international that time may well suffer as a result of us not leadership, pull the rug from under our own taking this issue sufficiently seriously at this feet. I would ask those who, in altruistic time. spirit, feel that Australia should, in fact, show That is the way that the Australian govern- international leadership that they also remem- ment is approaching this matter. We accept ber Australians who are dependent upon a the Berlin mandate and we will continue to growing economy in this country and an pursue the negotiations from that. We will internationally competitive growing economy pursue them at the conference of the parties for jobs, for social security and all the other to be held in Geneva in July, through to the benefits that wealth creation can provide for following conference at which protocol is the community as a whole. supposed to be concluded some time in the Sadly, I think that that is the point that the second half of next year. As we address Australian Democrats all too often forget; exactly what developed countries should do, certainly this is an issue, and certainly Aus- we also want to include the issue of develop- tralia has a part to play. Nevertheless, as we ing countries. I know that is criticised by have a part to play we must also recognise some who say that it is important that the that we have particular economic circum- developed world shows the lead. I accept that stances that should be protected. it is important that the developed world shows We can do that, in my opinion, while still the lead, but it is also important to recognise acting in a responsible way and the reference that some of the large developing economies by the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) to these are in fact contributing disproportionately to cooperative agreements with industry is just the growing greenhouse problem. It is import- one of those initiatives. I am pleased that a ant that the developing world accepts that this number of major Australian companies will be is not a problem solely of the developed signing on to the challenge program in the world and is prepared to be part of the solu- very near future; in fact their achievements to tion. date have been very significant and Australian As we address what is the appropriate companies are, without compulsion, showing international regime for this, it is also import- a lead and going out there and setting an ant—and the only responsible position for an example. It seems to be starting principally Australian government to take—to recognise with the larger companies but no doubt is that we should not do so in a way that dispro- setting an example for smaller Australian portionately and detrimentally affects us. I companies. I think that is to be applauded and know there are some who do not take that is something to be recognised in this whole issue into account, but we, as an incoming debate. As the community become better government, do regard Australia’s internation- educated as to this problem and the solutions, al competitiveness as vitally important and we I think you will find a community response recognise, more so than most, that our econ- that is much more conscious of the need for omy is dependent upon high carbon reducing us to act responsibly. products. Lastly, in my very short time, I just want to We are, as I said in question time today, the remind the Australian Democrats that the largest coal exporter in the world. We might worst thing that they could do in this debate not be the largest producer, but we are the is vote down the coalition’s natural heritage largest coal exporter in the world. We are, at trust that is going to commit a huge sum of this stage, still very reliant upon high carbon money to revegetation—something that can fuels for energy production. In a part of the positively contribute to a better outcome—and world that is becoming ever more competitive yet they vote that down and have the hypocri- and with a need to address major economic sy to come in here and bring a motion such problems, which have evidenced simply today as this. (Time expired) in terms of the balance of payments figures Senator FAULKNER (New South Wales— that have been released, it is vitally important Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (4.11 Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1459 p.m.)—I agree with the comments that have tion measures that have net benefits or at least been made by both Senator Lees and Senator have no net cost. Hill that this obviously is one of the very These initial measures included a number of important issues that we face in this country insurance measures to reduce uncertainty and also face in this parliament. about climate change impacts. It included I do want to say in my contribution that I studies and research for which the government will be in fact defending the record of the provided quite a significant amount of fund- previous Labor government which is ques- ing. But we also, always, in relation to the tioned in this urgency motion that has been greenhouse issue, accepted the principle that moved by Senator Lees today. I do not accept it was important to involve that wide range of the allegation that has been made in this interests in the community in the development urgency motion that our record on this par- of our greenhouse response strategy. In order ticular issue was characterised by a lack of to involve all the stakeholders, some of whom action. have quite disparate views on this particular issue, we established the national greenhouse In the first instance, the Labor government, advisory panel. The panel included the key and certainly myself in a previous life as stakeholder groups such as the National federal environment minister, always acknow- Farmers Federation, Greenpeace, the Business ledged that there is no greater environmental Council of Australia, the ACF, the Institute of concern, no greater global environmental Engineers, the Energy Supply Association of challenge, than the issue and threat of climate Australia, the Australian Gas Association, change. We recognised the impact that cli- ACA—the Australian Consumers Associa- mate change resulting from the greenhouse tion—and, of course, the ACTU. effect would have on the environment in this That panel did, I think, underpin our ap- country and of course on the global environ- proach and we maintained a very strong ment. consultative framework in relation to the We are also well aware of the potentially greenhouse issue. We identified the need to significant impacts on the Australian economy concentrate our attention on energy produc- and our approach and our actions on green- tion and distribution because of the very house always reflected those fundamental significant contributions to greenhouse gas understandings, as did our strong and consis- emissions in this country from the energy tent participation in the international efforts to sector. We placed an emphasis on an integrat- solve this particular problem. In the national ed least-cost approach to energy planning and greenhouse response strategy, Australia on the importance of energy pricing better adopted an interim planning target which reflecting economic, social and environmental effectively acts as a yardstick against which costs. the implementation of our greenhouse re- We promoted, very strongly, greater use of sponse can be assessed. It provided a focus renewable energy resources. We identified the for action in Australia and it established a importance of minimum energy performance context in which future planning could be standards for appliances and equipment in the undertaken. household and also in industrial and commer- The former Labor government, in fact, did cial sectors. We identified the importance of adopt a phased response to the greenhouse fuel efficiency, an improvement in new motor issue, and the first phase of that response was vehicles. I believe that the former the national greenhouse response strategy. government’s approach was an integrated one That was a strategy that was adopted by all and it was a responsible one. state and territory governments under the Another important aspect of our approach leadership of the Commonwealth government was to involve all levels of government. As in December 1992. Of course, that strategy I said, the national greenhouse response did concentrate on the so-called no regrets strategy was agreed by all state and territory response measures—that is, omission reduc- governments and by the Australian Local 1460 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

Government Association. We took steps to first conference of the parties on the frame- precisely measure and assess what were the work convention of climate change. Com- sources of greenhouse gas emissions in this bined with the previous measures in place, country, and, of course, the impact of particu- through the national greenhouse response lar sectors on the production of emissions. We strategy, that meant that the estimated growth did this through Australia’s greenhouse gas in emissions between 1990 and the year 2000 inventory, which I first released in September would be around three per cent, much closer of 1994. There was a view right throughout to our target of stabilisation. the international community that Australia’s The inventory process which the Labor efforts in relation to the measurement of our government put in place provides the basis for emissions was second to none. Australia to measure its progress towards I well recall a meeting I had with Dr national and international emission reduction Merkel, the German environment minister— goals. I think the government responded very one has to give credit to Germany as being appropriately to the first inventory report and one of the leaders in this field—when she said I will be very interested, along with Senator to me that she was very keen to be apprised Hill and many others, to read the second of this science, which was at the cutting edge inventory report, which will give the new in the international experience, and of the government a capacity to assess Australia’s work of our National Greenhouse Gas Inven- progress and consider what further measures tory Committee. Certainly, when I was the might be necessary. I, along with so many environment minister, I made much of this others, await both the inventory and the work, and the approach of our Greenhouse response to the inventory with some interest. Gas Inventory Committee, available to Dr I point out the strong commitment the Labor Merkel and others who had an interest in the government had to the reduction of green- approach Australia was taking. We were very house gas emissions. I think the wording of honest and very forthright in the international this urgency motion is rather unfortunate in community about the challenges we faced that it does not give credit for the achieve- with greenhouse in this country. I genuinely ments that were made over recent years in believe that that is going to hold us in very relation to this very important issue in the good stead in the long term in the internation- public arena. (Time expired) al community. Senator CHAMARETTE (Western Aus- It was also very helpful to have the inven- tralia) (4.23 p.m.)—The greenhouse effect and tory because it was useful for us in terms of climate change are, combined, one of the identifying the need for Australia to develop gravest threats facing humanity. Greenhouse a set of additional response measures. The may irrevocably change our atmospheric inventory identified that about half our total systems and weather patterns, creating a emissions came from the energy sector, whole suite of knock-on effects: rising sea making that the largest contribution to levels; changes to landscape and land habita- Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions. It also bility; changes to food crops; an increased identified that Australia’s emissions were spread of disease, especially tropical patho- projected to grow by 82 megatons between gens that thrive in wet, hot climates; an 1990 and the year 2000. Of those, 66 mega- increase in weather extremes such as floods, tons were expected from a growth in emis- hurricanes and droughts; and mass extinctions. sions in the energy sector. A rise in the average global temperature of So that inventory, based on the best science 0.3 per cent per decade is predicted if current in the world, and using the best expertise in production trends for greenhouse gases— the world, provided the basis for the then carbon dioxide, CFC, methane and nitrous government to review its response and to oxide—continue to a two per cent mean introduce further measures, which it did with increase by the year 2100. the greenhouse 21C package that was an- What would a greenhouse warmed world be nounced in March of last year, prior to the like? Before we make a decision on Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1461

Australia’s position on greenhouse measures We alone in the member nations proposed at the COP—conference of parties—con- a non-legally binding outcome for other major ference, let us do a bit of projection. In a initiatives. Australia was perceived to be not world where average global temperature has just a laughing stock but a disgrace. All other risen by up to two per cent, the planetary OECD countries have reduced their emissions resources we take for granted will be dramati- by 12 to 17 per cent against the baseline cally altered. Lakes will shrink or dry up, standard; Japan by 25 per cent. We have water supplies will be dramatically altered, increased ours by one per cent. The hypocrisy streams and aquifers will disappear. The within this stance is obvious. Ready to be a current crisis facing the Snowy River won’t vocal supporter of the protests of the Pacific even compare with the massive scale of Islands against French nuclear testing, we alteration to the world’s water systems. show a scathing indifference to the tragedy Populations will have to move to where water that faces those island nations under climate is available—if it is available at all. change. I use that term of phrase intentional- ly. Projected sea level rise could submerge Forest cover would be changed, or signifi- some 80 per cent of the land of the Majuro cantly reduced, even more than has already Atoll in the Pacific, and many of these islands been effected by humans. At a migration rate, will be dramatically altered, if not rendered through the slow growth of new trees along uninhabitable. forest edges where seeds fall, of 900 metres per year, most forest belts won’t move fast The urgency motion just moved in this enough to avoid being wiped out. If climate place outlines a clear and decisive way in belts move faster than this, or migration is which this government can save the future for blocked by cities and other human barriers, the next generation. This generation is very entire forests of deciduous trees could die out likely to be the last generation that can do it. and release carbon dioxide as they decom- We have a responsibility to act and to achieve pose. This large-scale forest loss would be credibility in proposing the necessary meas- accompanied by a concomitant biodiversity ures. In order to do that, Australia must have extinction. Fish would die in warmer streams an equivalent domestic position in line with and pesticides would concentrate in the lower the following commitments: a legislative water level. framework for climate policy, including domestic implementation of the framework If we compare the last 10,000 years of convention on climate change; legislative and human habitation of the planet since the budgetary support for effective limitations on agricultural revolution to a minute of real further land clearing; increased urban plan- time, this havoc will have been wreaked by ning and budgetary measures that reflect a a single species, us, in only three seconds of lessened dependence on the private car and a that minute. high emphasis on public transport; a commit- ment to increased fuel efficiency for motor In the midst of the alarming predictions I vehicles; and revision of the national electrici- have just shared with you, and in opposition ty market code to remove discrimination to most of the OECD’s determined action to against energy efficiency and renewable prevent those predictions, Australia has the energy. We need to clear our record up highest level of greenhouse gas emissions per considerably. (Time expired) capita of the industrialised world. Australia’s position on reducing these levels in domestic Senator BOSWELL (Queensland—Leader and international fora is inadequate in the of the National Party of Australia in the extreme. The IPCC has stated that carbon Senate) (4.29 p.m.)—I seek leave to move an dioxide cuts of 60 to 80 per cent are needed amendment to this urgency motion. to stabilise global warming, yet we did not Leave granted. support legally binding targets for emissions at the ad hoc group on the Berlin mandate Senator BOSWELL—I move: negotiations. Omit all words after "urgency", substitute: 1462 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

In light of the importance of climate change for National Board of Employment, Education and Australia and the world, the need to urge the Training—Higher Education Council—Report Government to: —Equality, diversity and excellence: Advancing (a) play an active part in international climate the national higher education equity framework, change negotiations to produce outcomes April 1996 which address the environmental problem in National Board of Employment, Education and a way and which, in particular, safeguard Training—Australian Language and Literacy Australia’s economic and trade interests; Council—Report—Language teachers: The pivot of policy—The supply and quality of teachers of (b) pursue avenues to achieve an effective long- languages other than English, May 1996 term response to climate change—this response will need to be global involving all National Board of Employment, Education and countries; and Training—Australian Research Council—Re- port—The Australian Research Council review (c) actively advance the implementation and of the Institute of Advanced Studies, May 1996. development of the national greenhouse response agenda. HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING I have only one or two minutes left in this Debate resumed from 23 May, on motion very important debate. Everyone has recog- by Senator Carr: nised the importance of the motion put before That the Senate— the Senate by the Democrats. I had a signifi- (a) views, with grave concern, the turmoil cant speech prepared, and one of the positions engulfing Australia’s universities as a result that I want to point out to the Senate is that of the Coalition Government’s proposed 15 per cent of the greenhouse effect is caused budget cuts and the mishandling by the by the primary industries, and that carbon Minister for Employment, Education, Train- dioxide makes up 73 per cent, methane 23 per ing and Youth Affairs (Senator Vanstone) of cent and nitrous oxide three per cent. Primary her portfolio; producers are very well aware of the problems (b) notes that these indiscriminate funding cuts that the greenhouse effect is causing. will threaten: (i) Australia’s international reputation and I wanted to point out too that they have higher education export industry, gone a long way to implement policies that (ii) university research capacity and course would take up some of the environmental options, problems caused out there. There is a great (iii) the quality of service for Australian opportunity here. students, ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Sena- (iv) university teaching staff numbers and tor Patterson)—Order! The time for debate morale, on this motion has expired. (v) potential closure of faculties, suspension Amendment agreed to. of building programs and reduction of student numbers; and Motion, as amended, agreed to. (c) notes that the proposed funding cuts breach DOCUMENTS Coalition election promises and guarantees. Senator DENMAN (Tasmania) (4.33 Consideration p.m.)—I wish to speak on this issue because Question resolved in the affirmative on the I find it a very important one. I am concerned following orders of the day without further about the ground swell of feeling being debate during consideration of committee expressed by students and academics on the reports and government responses. imminent slashing by the Liberal coalition of higher education funding in our Australian ANL Limited—Report for 1994-95 universities. Australian newspapers are awash National Board of Employment, Education and with the concerns of students and vice-chan- Training—Higher Education Council—Report for cellors since the infamous comments by the 1995 on the operation of section 14 of the Higher Education Funding Act 1988 and the Minister for Employment, Education and Higher Education Contribution Scheme, May Training, Senator Vanstone, at a briefing 1966 dinner recently. The tactless and inflammatory Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1463 manner in which the minister has dealt with Lord Mayor of Hobart has weighed into the the issue of higher education, exemplified by debate by describing proposed cuts as disas- her flippant comments at the briefing dinner trous for the local Tasmanian economy. with vice-chancellors, is indicative of a Mayor Kennedy said that poor retention rates minister that is intent on riding roughshod of young people in Tasmania had caused without understanding the full implications of considerable concern for several years and what some vice-chancellors envisage could that any reduction in educational opportunities result in the closure of some universities. would exacerbate the problem. The Tasman- This is at a time when enrolments at univer- ian council of state school parents and friends sities are up by 40,000. This is a crucial is quoted as saying that the federal govern- period in higher education. We can do with- ment were pursuing the wrong agenda on out cuts for the sake of cuts. It would be a education. The council called for an increase travesty to think that young people setting out in funds and not a decrease. on career paths could now be frustrated and What we forget in this whole issue is that impeded because of an ideological bent. the budget cuts will affect what some say is Where do the government’s priorities lie when our most vital resource—our young, up-and- the goodwill that was developed between coming generation, those with the best and young people prior to the election is now cast brightest minds. I concur with the views of aside? There is no doubt that many young the Tasmanian Mercury newspaper when the people voted for the coalition because of the editor said: unequivocal statements that operational grants If this magnificent resource— to universities would be maintained and additional funds would be pumped into meaning the University of Tasmania— research and postgraduate scholarships. cannot be maintained, then we risk having our best The government has now welshed on those ideas exported. undertakings to young people by floating I concede that Tasmania will not get far if it these proposed cuts. A 12 per cent cut across seeks exemption from the proposed federal the board would relate to 50,000 fewer uni- cuts on the basis of geographical grounds versity places. The national academics forum alone. In this day and age, for example, with has stated it believed that the coalition information technology advances, many government would be its knight in shining barriers have been removed. In my view, in armour but has now discovered that they are areas of funding cuts to higher education we wolves in sheep’s clothing. Academics may are talking about the possibility of losing have been a little too naive and a little too further young Tasmanians to the Australian trusting, but now the truth is coming home to mainland simply because our only university all and sundry. Prior to the election, academic will not continue to be attractive to them in staff were concerned with salary increases. particular disciplines. They are now concerned about their jobs. Our young people leave the island and they In my own state of Tasmania, students are do not return. We have many examples of marching in the street. They have sat in the young people leaving Tasmania and not office of Senator Abetz and are calling for the returning. The one major attraction that keeps resignation of the minister. This is occurring, our top young achievers in this state must of course, all over Australia. I recall reading come down to the existence of the University in the local press in Tasmania that the of Tasmania and the high quality of education minister will wear education cuts like a crown it has been able to provide in the past. The of thorns. What a spiky crown it will be. current level of education would be jeopar- What has been more irksome for the stu- dised and approximately 135 university staff dents has been the cavalier approach by the would lose their jobs if a 10 per cent cut were minister. Students have found the minister’s imposed. approach to be offensive and demonstrating We heard last week from my fellow Tas- a lack of knowledge and commitment. The manian, Senator Mackay. She gave an excel- 1464 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 lent summary of various research programs alliance with TAFE and the Department of and disciplines and of the highest esteem in Primary Industry and Fisheries. which the university is held both nationally Tasmania’s future, which I must say is and internationally. I do not propose to dwell fairly bleak at the moment, will acutely feel on what the senator said, except to add a few a cut in funding of the university. If there is additional comments. a future, it does lie in the smart, high-tech I received a newsletter the other day from niche industries and companies that can the Tasmanian Minerals Council and in it I develop our natural resources in a clever way read a very positive article about the inaugu- to tap world markets. The University of ral south-east region Australian student Tasmania has provided in the past and can mineral venture that was held in Tasmania. It further provide the impetus to achieve what was judged to be an outstanding success. is really the only viable option for Tasmania’s Twenty-four students from years 10 to 11 economic future. from across Australia spent 13 days in an There is no doubt that the University of intensive introduction to the minerals industry. Tasmania plays a pivotal role in the Tasman- The summer school was conducted by the ian economy. Take away a large slab of Key Centre for Ore Deposits and Exploration government funding and you destroy in one Studies at the university. It was so successful hit the infrastructure that has taken years to that the university has won the right to run a develop. If the university experiences funding similar school next year for 44 students. What cuts, as has been touted, Tasmania will be a concerns me is that ventures such as this in microcosm of what will occur across the which the university has had an involvement nation. now could be jeopardised if the proposed cuts What we discover is a success story in our eventuate. Australian universities that generates in the I do fear that cuts of any magnitude to the order of $1.7 billion a year in higher educa- University of Tasmania will mark the begin- tion exports. The success of our universities ning of the end of quality education in medi- has come about over years of nurturing and cine. I do have real fears that cuts would understanding by the previous government. If severely disadvantage the medical school, cuts of around 10 per cent are imposed, we which has in the past only just survived. In can expect a direct reduction in exports in the my home region of the north-west coast of order of $150 million, let alone the multiplier Tasmania I fear that the proposed cuts will effect of such cuts. damage the availability of, and increase costs Senator TEAGUE (South Australia) (4.44 for, distance education. My area has one of p.m.)—It is no surprise to me, as one senator the lowest rates in Australia of people going who has been actively involved in the educa- into higher education. tion debates in this chamber for the last 18 Last year the previous government allocated years, that there are 18 speakers listed on this the University of Tasmania 20 growth places important motion and this important current for 1997 to help develop its north-west centre, issue, which is to make sure that there is which is located at Burnie. I have a real fear health and prosperity for higher education in that those positions will be subject to review Australia. by the university if the proposed cuts are I stand here today as a Liberal senator implemented. proud that I contributed—some will say significantly—to the promises in higher Senator Abetz—Well, you haven’t spoken education that we took to the last election. to the vice-chancellor, have you? Senator Hill, my close colleague, announced Senator DENMAN—Yes, I have actually. them and it is my objective view—and it is I had dinner with him. The prosperity of the the view of many in this country—that, region also relies on agriculture, and any relative to the status quo, the Liberal and proposed cuts will see a downsizing of agri- National Party policy on higher education was cultural research and a breaking up of any the best policy we have seen for decades and Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1465 was certainly superior to the performance of . review and improve the administration of the then Labor government. AUSTUDY I am not now going to duck away from the Senator TEAGUE—I thank the Senate. policy commitments which I helped formu- This is the official summary of the Liberal late, which I still support and which I urge Party and National Party’s policy for higher upon the ministers of this government to fulfil education. I support it absolutely. There are to the letter. I will not concede $1 short of some 16 points that are highlighted in this fulfilling the promises that we gave to the document. Five of them have direct, specific, Australian public during the last election. I positive funding commitments. Let me name wish to incorporate in my speech the official them. Firstly, a coalition government will summary of the policies for higher education maintain levels of funding to universities in that we made in the last election. terms of operating grants. That means that there are no cuts to operating grants, not just Leave granted. for regional universities but for 36 universi- The summary read as follows— ties. Executive Summary Secondly, a coalition government will A Coalition government will: increase funding for research infrastructure in . promote quality and excellence in both the universities by $90 million over the next three teaching and research dimensions of Australian years as announced—$90 million; it is very universities specific; it is over three years. That is on the . promote diversity and choice within the higher basis of the consultations we made over the education sector last three years that the previous government . ensure student access made insufficient commitments for the re- . support the further development of regional search infrastructure of our universities. universities Thirdly, a coalition government will in- . maintain levels of funding to universities in crease funding for the Australian Research terms of operating grants Council’s collaborative research grants by $30 . establish the Higher Education Council as an million over three years as announced. That Independent authority is highly specific. Fourthly, a coalition . Increase funding for research infrastructure in government will increase funding for post- universities by $90 million over the next three graduate scholarships by $9.3 million over the years, as announced next three years, so more students will have . increase funding for the Australian Research the opportunity to receive an Australian Council’s Collaborative Research Grants by $30 postgraduate award with stipend, as an- million over three years, as announced nounced. That is highly specific. Fifthly, a . Increase funding for post-graduate scholarships coalition government will relax the Austudy by $9.3 million over the next three years so more assets test on farm and business assets in students will have the opportunity to receive an businesses in which the parent is substantially Australian Post-Graduate Award with stipend, as announced engaged. That has a funding tag to it. . Investigate tax status of Industry supported The other 11 dot points on the piece of postgraduate scholarships paper I have incorporated are all positive. . establish the Australia Research Council as an They are about quality, about excellence, independent body and expand its role about teaching, about research, about diversi- . support the development of a national strategic ty, about choice, about access, about main- approach to library infrastructure taining HECS, about maintaining Austudy, . maintain the Higher Education Contribution about maintaining Abstudy and about review- Scheme (HECS) ing and strengthening the Australian Research . maintain AUSTUDY and ABSTUDY Council, indeed, making it an independent body and expanding its role. . relax the AUSTUDY assets test on farm and business assets in businesses in which the parent There is a commitment to the Higher is substantially engaged Education Council to establish it as an inde- 1466 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 pendent authority. After years of complaining Leave granted. about the way the Labor Party had too many Senator TEAGUE—This will be familiar education advisers in their pocket, we want to to anybody because it is already a public have a legitimate independent Higher Educa- document. It was circulated in February this tion Council which is able to speak honestly year. It states: and with integrity to the government of the The Coalition recognises that the significant per day. capita reduction of Commonwealth funds under I want to mention a number of develop- Labor has had a detrimental effect on quality. ments that we have promised. These do not Do you hear that, Senator Carr? Do you hear have particular price tags on them. They are that, Senator Chris Evans? Do you hear that, fairly usual in policy statements from all sides Senator Mackay? of the debate in an election and I concede that Senator Carr—Yes, but it was wrong. they do not have precise dollar amounts The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT attached to them. They are a genuine expres- (Senator Patterson)—Senator Teague, if you sion of intent. They involve such matters as direct your comments through the chair you supporting the further development of region- will not get that sort of reaction. al universities. It is a pleasure to follow Senator Denman in this debate. There are 18 Senator TEAGUE—The policy continues: speakers, but I know that Senator Denman This has been evident in overcrowded lectures, and my colleagues from Tasmania have a unworkable tutorials and inadequate libraries. The very real commitment to the university in financial squeeze also has detrimentally affected research infrastructure, research training and Tasmania and to the students from decentral- research capacity. Overall, this has put at risk the ised parts of the state who go to that universi- quality of both education and research. ty to study. Then comes our Liberal and National commit- Our commitment is to support the further ment: development of regional universities. It is no Higher education in Australia has been and remains surprise to me that members of the National overwhelmingly publicly funded. The Coalition Party have been to see the Minister for Em- accepts the responsibility that flows from this ployment, Education, Training and Youth historical fact and while encouraging a broadening Affairs (Senator Vanstone) with the direct of the sector’s financial base, will at least maintain the level of Commonwealth funding to universities plea that regional universities see the out- both in terms of operating grants and research come. It is no surprise to me that members, grants . . . The Coalition will continue the practice some of them freshly elected, from western of funding universities on a rolling triennium Sydney go as a direct delegation to the basis... minister and urge for their universities not to I could quote other parts of the document, but be let down by anything that would depart it is available for everyone to read. We talk from the promises we have given. about creative measures and reforms, about They are not alone. I want it to be firmly enhancing the autonomy of universities, about understood in this chamber and in Australia new developments and even about new that government members do not sit on their revenue. The promises are best summarised hands when there is a furore—like the one we by the executive summary that has been have seen over the last two or three weeks— incorporated in Hansard. in the Australian public. Every day there are Let me refer to Labor’s $8 billion black headlines and further stories about what is hole. This has been repeated by us every day going to happen to higher education. Govern- since we discovered it after the election. It is ment members see the same developments, not something which is to be disregarded; it have the same consultations and have the is to be responsibly faced up to. I share the same care for outcomes in our higher educa- view with many in this chamber that, if better tion institutions. Let me refer more specifical- growth figures had been announced yesterday, ly to the detailed policy. I seek leave to table the deficit would be a little easier to handle. the policy. Nevertheless, it has to be handled. The eco- Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1467 nomic ministers of this government have to I ascertained this week and last week that that significantly address the structure of the is still on track, that that is still the position Australian economy. of this government, of the cabinet and of the Prime Minister. I urge my coalition colleagues My argument is not that that should not be to ensure that it remains on track. addressed. I am saying: address the deficit problem, giving priority to keeping the There are two important responsibilities: a coalition’s promises made during the election responsibility to get the economy right and a campaign. I do not believe that is an impos- responsibility to fulfil our promises. Let me sible task. I believe there is a majority in the draw an analogy. Let us say you are a father government—at least on the back bench and or a mother devoted to your children and you I suspect in the ministry as well—who want promise your darling daughter for her birthday that to happen. There needs to be more some red ribbons for her hair. Meanwhile, careful discussion prior to cabinet decisions you take every kind of measure to make sure on the August budget to put the two import- that the house is paid for, that food is on the ant responsibilities together. table and that everyone has clothes. You are I am not breaking any confidences when I highly responsible as a parent in making sure say I have spoken to a number of ministers, the family is cared for but, out of a misplaced including the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) sense of priorities, you forget, overlook or do and the Minister for Employment, Education, not place any real emphasis on the promise Training and Youth Affairs, my colleagues in you gave your daughter to give her some red South Australia and the Leader of the Govern- ribbons. I tell you now that that daughter will ment in the Senate (Senator Hill). It is natural not see on her birthday the family’s provision that I speak to all of my colleagues, especially of housing and food and all the matters that those who are involved in this matter and are rightly considered for the economy of that those who helped with and even announced family. She will know one thing: mum and this policy. dad broke their promise and she does not have her red ribbons. I make that point to Firstly, they say this to me—and I make every senator. this very clear in this debate: no decisions have been made. Do not give the game away. Further, the Financial Review of Tuesday The 18 speakers in this debate should speak this week contained an editorial headed with the view that they can have an impact ‘Policy first, cuts second’. This editorial made upon the government. Those students and a comparison between the mandates the staff who are writing to members of parlia- government has been given for the Telstra- ment should not give the game away. They environment heritage matter and to fulfil its should believe that their argument, their promises in education. It says: persuasion, can have an impact upon the . . . in a much broader and crucially important government of the day. sense there is a core element they both share— unfortunately. This is the way in which government Let me refer to an article that was in the policy appears to be being driven solely by an Australian last Friday, 24 May. It was written obsession with delivering financial savings, not by by Laura Tingle, one of the best journalists in wider policy concerns. Australia. She said: I stand with John Howard on this matter in During the election campaign, broadcaster John the undertaking he gave during the election Laws asked Howard— campaign about the priority of promises. I she of course means John Howard— stand with the editorial in the Financial Review on policy first and cuts second. "If you had a choice between breaking election promises and running a Budget deficit, what would Even before this debate emerged in all of you choose?" our universities this month, I had the honour Howard responded: "We would always give of moving the address-in-reply motion in this preference to keeping our promises." chamber. On 1 May I said this in my speech: 1468 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

The second issue I refer to relates to the essential Senate. In my speech on 1 May I said, investment that must be made in education. I stress ‘Thanks for the honour that you all give me that there is ultimately no way to dilute the truth to move the address-in-reply. It is the last that the greater part of education provision must come from the public purse—from the allocation time I can do it. I will be retiring from the of taxpayers’ money through government budgets. Senate at the end of the next month.’ There is no ultimate escape from the budget I stand by everything I said. I urge the foundation that education requires real dollars from government, for the three reasons that I set real governments. out on 1 May, to fulfil its promises, to make The first point from there is that when there the investment and to live up to taxpayers’ is an expenditure review committee, when expectations. cuts are being contemplated, you cannot just go into a spending area of such importance as I address these remarks to every member of education and believe that you can take the the government but especially to the six money away and somehow it will just appear members of the Expenditure Review Commit- from some other means. tee, chaired by the Prime Minister, John Howard, and including three financial There are measures that can be taken—and ministers: the Treasurer, Peter Costello; the I referred to that on 1 May when I said: Minister for Finance, John Fahey; and the Although we may have efficiency reforms, avoid- Assistant Treasurer, our colleague in this ance of duplication, a contribution by students and chamber, Senator Jim Short. John Anderson parents through HECS, incentives for university and Michael Wooldridge are also on the research to win support from the private sector and so on, ultimately the coalition government and all committee. These six members have the governments must keep their promises for universi- difficult political task—and I genuinely wish ties, schools and vocational education and training them well—of providing advice to cabinet so that there will be no reductions in the real with regard to the August budget. I put to allocation of money from Commonwealth funding. them with as much fervour as I can: do not My first point is that taxpayers expect that sell our promises short; do not sell policy taxes are being collected from them for short, just to solve the other responsibility; do essential social services; that taxpayers do not not put all the eggs in one basket. resent taxes being gained by a government of In the minutes that remain, I have a few the day to be spent on education. I put it to remarks that I would like to make about our you again. In parliament after parliament, vice-chancellors. Before I say this, I wish to polling indicates that education is in the top declare a personal interest. It is not true that three issues. The public wants proper public I am seeking to be appointed to a position as provision for education. a vice-chancellor in the next month or so, but I then referred to our promises. If we have I happen to have among my friends many— promised something, let us deliver it. In the maybe most—of the 36 vice-chancellors third and final element of this section of my currently serving in Australia. speech on 1 May I said: Senators know that I was involved in The government’s budgetary commitment to education policy matters through the whole 18 education is a fundamental investment in years of my time here in the parliament, and Australia’s productive future. The challenge is to I still believe every word that I have ever said make sure that that investment is sure. here. I ask for higher education’s understand- It has been fundamental to all 18 speakers in ing if, in opposition, we were not able to this debate that spending on research, teach- achieve as much as we had hoped. We are in ing, higher education is an investment into government now, and I have the responsibility Australia’s future. It is an essential invest- to speak the truth. I have the responsibility to ment, and we must not dilute it, cut it short urge my colleagues to weigh the policy issues or short-change it. I have put those three that are involved in this matter, to take note arguments more explicitly than perhaps I did of the furore out in the community, to take on 1 May but they are there essentially in note of what has been said by every one of what I said as my final speech here in the the 18 senators who have spoken in this Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1469 debate, and not just dismiss it as if it were an when they hear hints of five to 12 per cent ideological knee-jerk reaction and all about cuts to university budgets, given that promises the deficit. were made only a few weeks ago, before the The deficit must be solved but not without election, that there would be no such cuts. We proper, responsible regard for the basis on can imagine their dismay. They are only which we won the election. I could refer human. They have responded to those hints in again to my speech on 1 May. Maybe opposi- the way that any sensible Australian citizen tion members opposite were not convinced would respond. Let us listen to them. They about this point. I mentioned that there were want their institutions to prosper and they some lessons that I was not patronisingly want their advocacy to be effective. giving to members opposite but, to put it on One vice-chancellor has said to me, on the the record, to all of us. I said: basis of there being such a failure to address One, do not mess up the economy; it loses votes. the promises given before the election, when Two, do not break promises; it loses votes. Three, hinting at five to 12 per cent cuts, ‘I feel so do not lie and do not condone lying; it loses votes. much dismayed, so much let down, that I I say that very seriously. think to cooperate in defining where those I say it again today: don’t break promises; it cuts should be would be tantamount to sub- loses votes. In speaking with my colleagues, version of my own university’s outcomes and I am not just commending something because my council would hold me to account.’ I it is a virtue not to break your promise; I am think it is reasonable to give assurances to saying: don’t break your promise or you will vice-chancellors so that they know that what lose votes. There is a political imperative, and they say in cooperation will not be used I mean it. When the l-a-w tax cuts were against them. deceitfully thrown out by the previous It should also be recognised that vice- government, the Australian public heard that chancellors looked at the policies that were bell ringing and they threw out the govern- offered in the last election and made a legiti- ment that did it. mate decision, in my view, that the coalition’s Let me come to the vice-chancellors. As I policies were better. Some of the vice-chan- say, I have got a personal interest. Six months cellors have been so kind or generous to me ago I was elected to the Council of the Uni- as to share that confidence. I will not name versity of Adelaide. I am very happy to serve their names. on that council. I am very happy to serve on Senator Bell—Go on. its finance committee, its personnel matters Senator TEAGUE—You can imagine the committee, its faculty of arts and some other dismay, Senator Bell and Senator Stott areas. I will not say in the Council of the Despoja, if you had said, ‘This is the better University of Adelaide or to any of my policy and I advocate that all of you support friends among the vice-chancellors anything the coalition with regard to higher education that I am not going to be saying here or in because it will clearly be better for us.’ There public. is enlightenment in that. There are promises Of course, there is a place for some appro- in that. To then find there is a hint that this priately confidential discussions, and I will may be quite different means they will be not break confidential discussions. But I will dismayed. not use this broad approach here and not say Finally, I wish to refer to confidential the same thing in any forum in which I have meetings. It is appropriate that there be some commitments. I want our universities to confidential meetings, especially one to one prosper. I want my universities in South or in small groups, with any minister at any Australia, the three of them, to prosper. time. But if a minister of this government or With regard to the vice-chancellors, I think any other government is to give a statement it is only obvious to say it but no-one has to a whole industry, it is appropriate to take actually said this in the debate so far: I can the model that the Prime Minister used last understand the dismay of 36 vice-chancellors night for the mining industry. There was a 1470 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 special list of a couple of hundred mining matter of fact, we had several inquiries executives, and members of the press, ambas- covering that area and the value of education sadors and members of parliament were as an export industry. Any examination of any present. The basic guidelines leading to the of the reports in that area eventually leads to budget were announced by the minister with the conclusion that Australia needs to invest responsibility for mining and the Prime money in that particular aspect of education Minister. because that is a good investment on which In confidential meetings, there is a danger the Australian community obtains excellent that the persons hearing from a minister will returns. be captured and will be breaking the confi- On the second dot point, the university dence if they then discuss it with their own research capacity and course options, I dis- councils and their own universities. I believe tinctly remember Senator Tierney’s keenness there is an appropriateness for a semi-public to participate in that inquiry. The report and level of discussion. the evidence that we received was clear, that I have a number of things to say. My time funding in this area could not withstand any is cut short; I had only half an hour to speak sorts of cuts whatsoever and that, if anything, in this debate. I can only urge my colleagues increased funding should be made available. in government to fulfil the promises that won On the quality of service for Australian us the last election. students, I distinctly remember the inquiry Senator BELL (Tasmania) (5.14 p.m.)—I into open learning in Australian universities, think I am converted. I think Senator Teague in which Senator Tierney was a keen partici- has done it. I think just about everybody in pant. We were given evidence at those inqui- the chamber should see the light. The trouble ries in particular about the shortage of funds is I do not really know whether Senator for Australian university libraries and the Teague was speaking for or against the effect that was having on the quality of motion. I think he demonstrated that there service for Australian students. were some promises made by the coalition. I On the fourth dot point, university teaching do not know what there was in his speech that staff numbers and morale, I distinctly remem- guaranteed that those promises would be kept. ber the higher education research funding He said something about a backbench revolt inquiry where we were given evidence about or backbench unity, but did not quite get to how teaching and research staff were having the stage of being able to report to us that he pressure applied because of the teaching had convinced the Minister for Employment, requirements, the large number of students Education, Training and Youth Affairs (Sena- they were obliged to be responsible for and tor Vanstone) that the promises should pre- how the poorly funded and poorly adminis- vail. tered research funding arrangements meant In the debate I was disappointed that Sena- that often university teachers were compro- tor Tierney, who has an interest in these mised in their ability to properly assess areas, did not stay for Senator Teague’s research projects by their teaching needs and contribution. Senator Tierney has been in- the numbers involved. volved with me and, to some extent, with On the fourth dot point, the potential Senator Carr on a number of inquiries by the closure of faculties, suspension of building Senate standing, references and legislation programs and reduction of student numbers committees on employment, education and that may result from funding cuts, I recall the training. In the time that he and I have shared recent history of Tasmania’s university where membership of that committee, we have some of the variety of options available for addressed all five of the areas listed in Sena- students has been reduced. We have had tor Carr’s motion. reductions in the variety of curriculum—for For example, the committee has examined example, in the area of textiles, the fine arts the first dot point mentioned, the international faculty; the environment studies opportunities reputation of Australian education. As a have been reduced; the classics department is Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1471 no more at the Tasmanian university; and the sive lobbying process. In fact, you would not architecture faculty has been reduced to one have what Senator Teague described as a campus, the northern campus. community furore and daily headlines railing I remind senators that Tasmania is a split against these cuts. Of course, if all these campus with some availability on the north- people had any faith in the government’s west coast, the Launceston campus and the election promises, there would be no need for Hobart campus. Whenever one option is this community furore, daily headlines and available at only one of the campuses, it intensive lobbying. They would all say, ‘The should be remembered not only that Tasmania government promised it and, therefore, we is a regional university but that the campus is have no need to worry.’ But that is not what split with so many kilometres separating it. So happened. The minister hinted at some cuts. any cuts which mean that a subject or pursuit You have to ask whether all these people is offered in only one faculty bring great have got the wrong idea or whether the disadvantage to Tasmania as a whole. I am minister has mishandled her portfolio, as disappointed that Senator Tierney was not Senator Carr’s motion proposes. here to acknowledge that and to see the effect I would suggest that if all these people have because he and other senators present were been led to the wrong conclusion, then it is a enthusiastic participants in inquiries which great example of gross mishandling. The revealed all of these aspects of Senator Carr’s impression in the community and through all motion. I would have hoped that that enthusi- those vehicles that Senator Teague has men- asm could have been carried through to this tioned is direct and quite clear, that this hint, debate today. which was given without a precise number I note that the debate has been enthusiasti- being attached to it—and the minister, cally enjoined by its 18, apparently, potential through questions in this place, has been at speakers. I intended only to speak for five or pains to impress upon us that it might be five, six minutes but, as it seems there is an at- 12 or anything else—has been quite explicit, tempt to talk this out, I will make my points quite strong and quite forcefully delivered. It and I will make them strongly. For that certainly was not a hint that the government’s reason, I will not need to curtail my speech. election promises would be met. Senator Teague reminded us of the We have had Senator Teague’s appeal that government’s election promises by incorporat- careful discussion is needed before the August ing them in Hansard. The contribution from budget, the suggestion that many on the Senator Teague begs the question of why backbench agree with this and the claim that National Party senators have seen the need to no decisions have been made. I think we directly approach their minister. It begs the would all be wise to observe that they were question of why newly elected members and made from the backbench. Otherwise, we senators are going directly to the minister. If would have to ask our questions: is this really there was any faith in the fact that the promis- an elaborate ruse? Are we seeing a ‘bad-cop es would be kept and such funding cuts were good-cop’ scenario taking place within the not hinted at, then there would be no need for one body? Is this an ambit claim? We would special representations rattling off to see the have to ask that question because, unless it is, minister. We would not have the Australian it has all been a waste of time. There has Vice-Chancellors Committee wanting a direct been so much newsprint and airspace wasted audience with the Prime Minister (Mr How- that, unless there is some substance and some ard). We would not have the Australian vice- plan to all this, we would have to ask: how is chancellors leaving this building only a few this portfolio being managed? minutes ago. As a matter of fact, just before I did suggest that I would be short, but I I came down here, I burst into a meeting they will conclude with this as I believe it is were having with Senator Stott Despoja. important: I would not suggest for one mo- If there was any faith in maintaining the ment that the Australian Vice-Chancellors promises, you would not have such an exten- Committee has got it wrong, that the Austral- 1472 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 ian Education Union has got it wrong or that 11. The Higher Education Round Table expressed all of the participants in the recently convened its concern that student housing would be among higher education round table—which my the first casualties of funding cuts. colleague Senator Stott Despoja imaginatively If that group of people reached consensus on convened and fruitfully conducted—have got those points, I think the government should be it wrong. That group of people, the HERT, taking notice of them. That is not just a group included the National Tertiary Education of people who have a particular point of view. Union, the National Union of Students and This round table was able to encompass the the other bodies I mentioned. Because I was full higher education sector and, therefore, its not there, I am not able to give a full list, but consensus should have a weight which should I am sure that can be provided by Senator concern the government—if not that its Stott Despoja. But I would say that group was election promises were not made clear, then comprehensive in its coverage of this particu- certainly that the minister has been unable to lar portfolio. convey to the sector exactly what is going on. To inform the Senate of the 11 points that that round table reached consensus on, I will Senator ABETZ (Tasmania) (5.28 p.m.)—I read them out. They are as follows: am pleased to be able to take part in this debate because a few of the fundamentals The HERT— have been forgotten in it. Also, I will deal that is, the higher education round table— with some of the terminology employed by Senator Carr in his quite disingenuous motion. 1. Agreed that public funding of higher education is in the public good. It would be fair to say that some of the terminology employed by Senator Carr, 2. Called on the Government to articulate their talking about the turmoil, et cetera, has been vision for the higher education sector. deliberately generated by certain individuals 3. Called on the Government to recognise the for their own political purposes. Of course, in economic benefits as well as fundamental cultural, Tasmania we have had classic examples of social and intellectual benefits to the country of that. higher education. 4. Committed to oppose any decline in per student The Liberal Party has a very proud record unit funding and serves notice that we will explore in relation to education. When we went into every legislative avenue possible. the 1993 election campaign, those of us who 5. Demanded that the government honour its remember Fightback will recall that even in promises and ensure that equity and access is that dry economic statement the only area of maintained in our campuses, particularly regional government funding which was to be in- campuses. creased was—what was it? Education. When It continues: we were challenged before the last election as 7. Noted the international reputation of Australia’s to where we would make savings to enable us Universities and the effects that funding cuts would to fund our election policies, the Department have on this reputation. of Education, Employment and Training was quarantined—because that was our commit- 8. Called upon the Government to recognise the need to inform the sector of proposed budgets ment to the area of education. changes: as the August Budget is an inadequate time period in which to implement the planning The Australian Labor Party committed an required for academic year. absolute fraud on the Australian people. They left us with a legacy of $8 billion that we 9. Condemned the impact that funding cuts would have on staff and students. have to find. It gives us no joy as a new government to have all our dreams and 10. Demanded that the Government meet its aspirations for this country absolutely shat- obligations as paymaster for Universities’ general and academic staff and called on the Government tered by the fact that people like Senator to ensure that they are funded appropriately as part Crowley and other ministers wasted all the of a commitment to ensuring quality teaching and money and went into debt, which requires research. repayment before we get on with establishing Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1473 our dreams and aspirations for this great no longer wanted to be members. They took country. the money from the states. That is the starting point in this debate. We I got the figures out of the Parliamentary honestly went to the people on the basis of Library the other day. Some $14.5 million the figures provided to us. It is quite clear was spent on that. I simply say to the Labor that when the Leader of the Opposition, Kim Party, ‘Wouldn’t that have been a lot better Beazley, was the finance minister, he knew taken off the bottom line of the budget?’ But what the black hole was. He refused to tell no! The student union activists fund the Labor us; he said it was not available. Why is it that Party and support the Labor Party, so the when the new Treasurer, Peter Costello, came Labor Party funds the student unions with on the scene he was able to get the figures taxpayers’ money. Indeed the University of within a matter of days? They were always Tasmania would be delighted and would not available, but the Labor Party were too scared even have to face any cuts if they could get to let the people of Australia know the rack that $14.5 million. and ruin that they had brought upon this Senator Calvert—Even half that much country. would do. Senator Crowley—Can we have some Senator ABETZ—Indeed, Senator Calvert. tomorrow? If they are here, if they are avail- But Labor’s commitment is more to student able, let’s have some now with this new unions than it is to the institutions of the figure—1.8 per cent growth. Why don’t we universities. I do not need to give any more adjust again? examples of the Labor Party’s waste, be it on Senator ABETZ—Senator Crowley, you student unions, be it on diplomatic missions really are a living example of a failed or be it on the republican issue—the list minister, aren’t you? No matter how much the absolutely goes on. Labor Party squeal on this issue, they know The classic example of the mismanagement that they bear the guilt and shame of the of Labor was in the Australian national economic ruin that this country is facing railways. For how many months did they because of their overspending. They sold off cover up the fact that they were running at a our assets for recurrent expenditure. They loss? Minister Sharp came into office, opened were prepared to spend $110,000 on a repub- it up, had dreams and aspirations for the lic campaign which was purely party political. Australian national railways and thought he They were willing to spend money on former could do something with them, but he found Senator Michael Tate, on Dr Neal Blewett— they were running at a $160 million loss. So and who was the third one? Minister Sharp, now no longer able to imple- Senator McGauran—Kerry Sibraa. ment all of what he had wanted to do, finds Senator ABETZ—Kerry Sibraa, thank you his first task is to clean up the mess left to very much. People without any qualifications him by the former Labor administration. In for the diplomatic corps in the professional every area of Labor administration we look area, though undoubtedly suited—I do not we see the waste of money and the reason for make any criticism of that—were being paid the $8 billion black hole that we are faced more than the highest professionals in the with. most important diplomatic missions around The Labor Party then have the audacity to the world. Why? Because Labor thought that come into this chamber and move a motion looking after their Labor mates was a lot condemning the fact that we are looking at more important than balancing the budget. cuts. They have acknowledged that they are Indeed, whilst we are talking about universi- only proposed cuts. In fact, they are not even ties, I recall that at one stage the now Leader that. Everything is in the melting pot at the of the Opposition, the former minister for moment; we are looking at all options. It is a finance, introduced legislation, supported by bit like the arsonist who is still at the scene the Democrats and Greens, to refund student of the crime: everything is going up in flames unions moneys that they lost because students and he says to the fire brigade, ‘Don’t, don’t! 1474 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

You might cause some water damage.’ In the you are going to have a consistent approach meantime you would let the whole building you also need intergenerational responsibility burn down. We are responsible. We will put in relation to the economy and finances. water on the fire. We will put the fire out. We There is no social justice in me and this will restore the economy. generation of parliamentarians keeping on But, unfortunately, just as firemen from running up the bankcard and leaving it for the time to time have to create some water dam- next generation to pay off. That is not the age for the ultimate good of putting out the intergenerational responsibility that the Demo- fire, we as a Liberal government are charged crats were talking about on the environment, with causing a bit of pain on the side for the but for some reason they do not want to apply greater good of putting the economy back in it to economic factors. The reality is that the order—something that the Labor Party failed economy is very important and from it flows to do and had no concern about. All they everything else, because without a sound were concerned about was getting into power. economy, without a sound budget, we will not Former Senator Richardson always said, do be able to fund education for the future. ‘whatever it takes’ to try and get back into I still recall as a Liberal student being in power. They bankrupted this nation. Western Australia and that great Australian, It gave me no joy this morning to be on a Sir Charles Court, addressing us. He made a radio interview, broadcasting to Tasmania. I point, it must be 20 years ago or now, but it was discussing the matter with somebody has stuck with me to this day. He said, ‘The from the academics union. Do you know what reason that I place so great an emphasis on he said? He said, ‘I am not interested in economic development for my state is so that whether or not there is an $8 billion black I have got a sufficient business and tax base hole.’ to fund the hospitals, the schools, the univer- It is a pretty fundamental issue. He could sities, the infrastructure, the arts—all those not dispute the fact that there was a black things that people would like to have funded hole, so he just said, ‘I am not interested in from the public fund’. So that is why we as it’. Well, if he is not interested in it, I could a government have set about the task of throw up my hands too, and with due respet¼ restoring the economy and getting the budget to one of my colleagues who spoke before back into balance. Once we have achieved me, that is basically what he did. ‘Yes, there that there will then be a brighter future, not is this big hole but, oh, don’t take it out of only for higher education but also for a whole education.’ We could throw up our hands and lot of other areas. say, ‘Don’t take it out of Aboriginal affairs, It would be fair to say that the university don’t take it out of health, don’t take it out of community is the most articulate within welfare, don’t take it out of defence’. society, the most capable of lobbying, the Do you know, if we were to abide by that most likely to have access to modern technol- we would be taking it out of the future of our ogy, access to editors of newspapers et cetera. children and the next generation. That is the Therefore, they have been making their point gross irresponsibility of those on the opposite very loud and clear, but not once have I heard side who are trying to talk to the Australian them say, ‘We agree that there needs to be a community and say that there is no real cause reigning-in of the budget deficit’. As soon as for concern about this $8 billion deficit. In they acknowledge that point, and they have fact, what is it? It is very hard to imagine, to, the next point is: from what area? It is isn’t it, but it is a huge, huge hole. basically the nimby principle—not in my It is very interesting listening to the backyard, cut somebody else. Democrats’ approach on this. Senator Stott I believe that there are particular institutions Despoja in her first speech mentioned the in this country that deserve to be looked at importance of intergenerational responsibility individually, and I place the University of as far as the environment is concerned, and I Tasmania in that category. I think that there fully agree with that; no arguments. But if are three outstanding reasons. Firstly, it is the Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1475 only university in my home state of Tasman- Labor Party activist in Tasmania, said, ‘We ia. Secondly, it is a regional university, and will return every lunchtime until we meet for a regional university to be able to survive with Senator Abetz.’ I had refused to meet it does need a degree of infrastructure. But if with him until he apologised to my staff even my university needs to suffer a certain member for the harassment that she suffered amount of cuts for the future benefit of all and until he paid the damages bill of $815. Australians and all Tasmanians, I will reluc- Well, Madam Deputy President, I tell you tantly go along with that because I have a what. On Tuesday only six turned up. This vision for the future of this country. great student leader that talked for the thou- It is very interesting that the Labor Party sands of students at the University of Tasman- and Democrats have been asking us to pro- ia could muster all of six. It would not even vide a vision for the future for higher educa- have been half of the Labor club on cam- tion. I think that is very vital and I think that pus—not even half of the Labor club turned is a great challenge facing the minister, up. Do you know how long they stayed for? Senator Vanstone. But I challenge those Ten minutes. Then they trotted over to the people also to provide a plan for the future hotel across the road. about the budget deficit. How are we going to deal with that for the future? How are my Senator Calvert—The old Telegraph. children going to be able to have an Australia Senator ABETZ—Absolutely, Senator which is not that much in debt that they will Calvert, the old Telegraph. The next day there not be able to do what they want other than was not a single soul outside. The demonstra- pay off the international bankcard that we tion did not even last for a week. I issued a have run up for them? media release indicating how pathetic this There is terminology in this motion which campaign had been, how idle the threat was I find offensive. There is talk about the and how this student union leader was clearly ‘turmoil engulfing Australia’s universities’. not speaking on behalf of the students at the Who is generating some of the turmoil? I University of Tasmania. The next threat was, suppose it depends on your definition of ‘We’ve changed tactics; we are going to ‘turmoil’. A street demonstration, no problem inundate Senator Abetz’s office with phone with that; articulating, no problem with that. calls and faxes.’ They issued a media release But when you confront the sort of nonsensical of that nature. activism that my office confronted in recent All the journalists got the media release and times, and then you look behind it, you see thought, ‘You beauty. Let’s see how it is the young people from the Australian Labor working.’ They rang my office, and within Party. I dealt with that in a previous speech. two rings the phone was answered. They But when damage is done to buildings and came to the conclusion that once again the tomatoes brought to the scene and thrown at campaign was an absolute, abysmal failure. the building, you have to ask the question: The sort of turmoil that certain elements how does this assist the debate in any shape within the community are trying to generate or form? It does not at all but it creates a is clearly for party political purposes and not climate of turmoil and that of course is the for the purpose of assisting the universities in plan of the Australian Labor Party. this very difficult time. Senator Calvert—Did they turn up at your I have spent 1½ hours, along with a number place today? Did the students turn up? of my Tasmanian colleagues, with the Vice- Senator ABETZ—Senator Calvert asks Chancellor of the University of Tasmania. We whether the students turned up at my office see the difficulties, and it gives us no joy. I today. Of course they didn’t. Allow me to say to the vast number of genuine students indicate what Senator Calvert was referring who have rung me to make a point—all of to. After their pathetic demonstration, which them, might I add, disassociating themselves required the attendance of police, the student from the student union-inspired activity— union leader, Anthony Llewellyn, well-known ‘Can you imagine any politician going to the 1476 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 electorate and saying, "I am going to cut who wanted to find out some facts. The funding"?’ student union had put out a sheet saying that The nature of the political beast is that you there would be a 12 per cent cut. That is the usually like to hand out the money—like the Labor Party line. They say, ‘There will be a former Labor government, which got us into 12 per cent cut. This 12 per cent cut will have this mess, did. We are saying that rather than such and such an effect on the University of simply handing out largess, there is the Tasmania.’ I told him that no decision has necessity for responsibility. We are willing, been made, that everything is still in the even if it is for short-term political pain, to melting pot. We are still considering what we get the benefit and the recognition for taking have to do because of Labor’s mismanage- the hard and tough decisions that are undoub- ment. Labor’s mismanagement is the cause of tedly required. our considerations. A lot of people within the small business The first thing any government coming into community, the farmers and the shopkeepers, office would want to do is to fulfil their ask me, ‘Why is it that over the past decade dreams and aspirations. Instead, we opened our incomes have fallen so dramatically, yet the cupboard and found an absolute mess. We those who live off the public sector have not are now, in a proper, genuine way, going really had to make the sorts of substantial cuts about overcoming the difficulties. that we have had to endure?’ I believe this Senator Mackay—A 4.8 per cent growth government has led by example. Junior rate? ministers have had pay cuts. Do you remem- Senator ABETZ—Senator Mackay asks ber the National Media Liaison Service? How about the growth rate. It was a great result. many millions of dollars did that cost? It was Everybody is happy about it. But you know the propaganda machine of the ALP, funded what you did. You ran up the debt whilst we by the taxpayers. It was abolished by us, were having negative growth. Whilst we had saving money. It would have been politically positive growth, you continued to run up the astute for us simply to have kept it, to return debt. What you do when you have positive the compliments to the ALP. But, no, we are growth is repay your debt—something you committed to getting this country back on people never comprehended. track. That means sometimes taking some hard and difficult decisions. The Labor Party needs to realise the basic economic principle that every small business This motion talks about proposed budget knows. When you have a good month, you cutbacks. What is the proposal? It also talks use that to pay off the overdraft you incurred about indiscriminate funding cuts. What during the bad month. But the Labor Party indiscriminate funding cuts? What is the does not do that. If they have a bad month, it percentage figure? Which aspects are going to will be the overdraft. If they have a good be cut? You don’t know. month, they will spend all that and increase Senator Campbell—They know all about the overdraft. There has to be an end, and it indiscriminate tax rises; that is their business. will either be the big crash or a sensible Senator ABETZ—Yes. The reality is that reduction. That is what we are setting out to we on this side do not know either because do. we are still in the situation of public consulta- Senator Campbell—They flog a few assets tion. Everything will be revealed on 20 and still keep the overdraft up. August in the budget. I suppose the budget, Senator ABETZ—Exactly, Senator Camp- in rough terms, will be put to bed in early bell. It amazes me that the Australian Labor August. There is still another two full months Party has no sense of shame at the way they of community consultation that can and will dealt with our economy. You would have take place. thought that, if there was any ounce of decen- I was late to the AMEC dinner last night cy within them, they would not wish to because I was talking to a genuine student engage in any debate that in any way touches Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1477 upon the economy. They just seem to say, lobbying wherever you can. You can do those ‘We’re out of government; it’s not our fault sorts of things. anymore.’ I remember the last question time But Senator Mackay would understand that before the election. The senators who were that sort of lobbying is not assisted by pro- sitting on this side then—Senator Cook and ducing a crate of tomatoes and damaging others—were still blaming Malcolm Fraser public offices to the extent of $815, as was and John Howard for the economic ills, when inspired by Labor students at the University the Liberal Party had not been in government of Tasmania. That does nothing for the cause, for 13 years. but a peaceful rally outside our state Parlia- Now that Labor Party senators are in ment House with 2,000 in attendance is opposition, and just out of government for a clearly a proper, peaceful way to make your few weeks, they are straightaway blaming us point. for the economic ills. It really is a duplicity Senator Mackay—What about a debate at that the people of Australia can see through. the university? You are exposed and shown for the poor economic performers that you really are. Senator ABETZ—Senator Mackay asked, ‘What about a debate at the university?’ I I believe that a sensible approach needs to think Senator Mackay wants to go back to the be taken to all areas of government, and that dreamtime. A few people around here might is currently what we are embarking upon. not be aware of this, but Senator Mackay and There are no specific proposals at this stage. I were at university together. We used to have There are no indiscriminate funding cuts and, debates but, come the student election results, if there are, you should tell us about them. who used to top the poll, Senator Mackay? But of course there are not any. The Labor Who used to lead the AUS delegation each Party knows there are not any, and they know year? And I am more than happy to go back that we are currently in the consultation stage. and give you another dose. I would have Senator Mackay is trying to interject but, if thought that, after a gap of about 15 years, she had been in parliament a bit longer, she you would have learnt your lesson and would would have realised that we used to play the not want to go back into that sort of forum. game on the other side as well. The ministers Senator Mackay, I am willing to debate you would be asked just before the budget, ‘Can anywhere that is suitable to me, but—and this you give a guarantee that this won’t be cut or is the caveat—it will not be sponsored by the that won’t be cut?’ And Senator Cook would irresponsible University of Tasmania union get up, very high and mightily, puff out his until such time as they have paid for the little chest and try to use the latest buzz word damage to the building in which I have got that he had learnt—he usually could not my office and have had the decency to apolo- pronounce it, which was very embarrassing. gise to my staff member. That aside, he would say, ‘I will not give you an insight into our budgetary considerations.’ Senator CROWLEY (South Australia) (5.58 p.m.)—Thank goodness that is finished. Senator Campbell—Wait till budget night. In Senator Abetz, we saw a person who Senator ABETZ—‘Wait till budget night,’ managed to address not at all the breaking of was his line. ‘You wait till the budget.’ promises in education, while he trawled across just about everything else that might be Senator Mackay—Good. a distraction. Before you leave, Senator Senator ABETZ—Senator Mackay is now Abetz, there are a number of things I want to agreeing that that is appropriate. That is say. It was not the Labor party that started the exactly what I am saying to Senator Mackay hares running in this debate. It was the and the Australian Labor Party: do not engage Minister for Employment, Education, Training in this deliberate scare campaign. By all and Youth Affairs, Senator Vanstone. Nobody means, you should put the case of the univer- else but the minister. That is the first point. sity as strongly as you can and assist with the The minister started it herself. 1478 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

Senator Abetz can say what he likes, but thing. You want to talk about balance and you this debate has nothing to do with the Labor want to talk about a proper budget— Party, the vice-chancellors, the staff or the The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— students. The furore, the chaos, the confusion, Order! Senator Crowley, to call someone a the anxiety and the panic were started by the ‘disgraceful little thing’ is unparliamentary. I minister. She has told us on a number of ask you to withdraw it. occasions that the number might have been five or 12 per cent—whatever figure she Senator CROWLEY—I am sorry. His dropped in the friendly debate. That is why thinking is disgraceful. Thank you very much, we are raising this: the minister started this. Madam Acting Deputy President; I am ad- vised by you again. What is the issue? I am Senator Abetz is departing this place having not going to get distracted too much by made his contribution. He said that the coali- Senator Abetz, because that is a big distrac- tion is the responsible government and that tion. He had to come in here and float that they are now going to cut expenditure. Let me red herring around because he did not want in remind you of what you did in my area late any way to address the motion, and he par- last year just before the election. You actually ticularly did not like to follow Senator voted— Teague, who is making the motions very well for us: very good support! Senator Campbell—Madam Acting Deputy President, on a point of order: I have been There were a couple of points that Senator very impressed with the way you have kept Teague had to point out. I am sure that the control of the chamber throughout your time Labor opposition will be interested to read his in the chair. However, I note that Senator quote exactly. But, as I can generally recall it Crowley has referred to Senator Abetz direct- and represent it, Senator Teague pointed out ly across the chamber on a number of occa- that the recent quarter’s figures of growth sions in the last couple of minutes. Under show that there is the potential for an adjust- standing orders, she is required to direct her ment in the figures for what the government remarks through the chair. now might have to find. In other words, Senator Teague, who made a remarkably The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT honest speech for his contribution, actually (Senator Patterson)—Thank you, Senator pointed out that those growth figures quite Campbell. There is a point of order, but I clearly mean that the $8 billion dollar black would also remind Senator Abetz that he is hole—which was not there before—is very not actually sitting in his own seat. Two certainly gone for all time now. wrongs do not make a right. I would ask him I noted that the government when in oppo- to return to his seat, and I would tell Senator sition said during the election campaign that Crowley that it would be helpful if she direct- we could have those figures very quickly. I ed her remarks through the chair. would like in passing to challenge them to let Senator CROWLEY—I take your instruc- us have them in the next day or two—and tion on this, and I would also ask what on adjusted for those changed figures for growth. earth Senator Campbell is afraid of that he Most people around the place put the differ- has to be up on his feet and cutting down my ence at about $2 billion or $2½ billion: an time when I have only been going for a over one per cent difference in your estimates minute. He does not like it, and he does not for growth. I do not think we should push that like the fact that one of the things that he and line too hard because, if we did get the his colleagues did when they were on this figures—and we know we will not, because side of the chamber was to come in here and you are not about to give them—you would vote against a savings measure of $140 see that there is a lot of merit and justice in million that we proposed in the child-care what Senator Teague had to say. Going back area. I am glad to note that the aforemen- to the issue, this motion asks us— tioned Senator Abetz does not put that on his Senator McGauran—We don’t know what waste watch list. He is a disgraceful little he was saying. I couldn’t understand it at all. Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1479

Senator CROWLEY—Just you wait your cavalier disregard for consequences and turn, Senator—through you, Madam Chair— started the hares running herself. And the you will get your turn in no time at all. The interesting question is this: what is the point first part of this motion concerns itself with of all this furore and chaos? Is it possible that the turmoil engulfing Australian universities the minister has just done this to distract as a result of the coalition government’s people in some way, so that we are all going proposed budget cuts. I say for the record to be terribly busy rushing around having once again that it is not a plot of the Labor public campaigns, launching all sorts of Party, students or anybody else to stir the programs, appeals, meetings and goodness possum here. This has been done by Minister knows what, but there will really not be any Vanstone herself, all alone and unassisted, cuts at all? No-one in their right mind could with an absolute display of incompetence and expect that the minister would make those insufficiency that is unmatched, I believe, in remarks off the cuff, set all this chaos hap- terms of starting the hares running, having no pening and then say, ‘Oh, well, we thought policy and there being a complete vacuum in about it and there were not going to be any which you might even be considering these cuts anyhow. What we will do is just keep to cuts. You do nothing except say, ‘Well, our promise: no cuts.’ everyone’s got to share in the cuts.’ Why? It could be, indeed, that this minister has Why is it, if that be the case, that the betrayed such a level of skill—heavy irony Defence budget—we are told—will not have here—and such a level of incompetent man- to share in the cuts? Why, if you are looking agement that she may be causing this amount to the future of this country, would you put of chaos just for the fun of it, but I do not a wall around guns but cut the butter? Why believe so. I believe Senator Vanstone has a would you want to choose that? I do not very clear game plan, and that is that she has know the thinking in the government party on to deal with the absolute embarrassment she this, or why their minds would prefer to finds herself in of having to find cuts in the protect defence and cut education, but it face of an absolute promise that there would certainly does seem to be a curious position be none. That is her problem. That is one of to hold, particularly when we have heard in the problems she really has got. Say what you here the passionate pleading from the other like about why this has got to be the case, but side on the importance of education. Mr Howard said that, out of cutting to reduce If you are serious, fix it. Fix what you think the deficit and keeping promises, his prefer- is wrong and certainly do not make any cuts. ence would be for keeping the promises. Do not make those cuts. Simply keep your Well, Mr Howard, act on your preference. promise. It is all right, Senator Patterson, I’ll If you are truthful about the budget deficit be gone when you make your remarks but I’ll figures, you will know there is no black hole. listen contentedly from down the road, or You will know that, and that within a year or maybe I’ll read it next week. As Mr Howard so all would come right. Those programs said—Senator Teague quoted him so nicely— were well in train— when asked about whether he should deal with the budget or keep his promises, ‘Our Senator Patterson—Ha, ha. preference is to keep our promises.’ That is Senator CROWLEY—No, no! You go and all you have to do. All the minister has to do read those figures of the forward estimates for now is to come out and say, ‘Right. I’ve got a year or two under the Labor government’s the message. It is not the right thing to do for last budget, and you will find that there is no us to be looking at cuts in education, creating need to be in this kind of panic. The reason chaos in our universities and uniting vice- the government is in this kind of panic is that chancellors, staff and students as they have it has to have a fall-back position in case not been united or politicised in many years.’ Telstra is not sold. Certainly, any money from We have actually had such a change, and Telstra’s sale will not be forthcoming for this why? Because this minister went out with budget. 1480 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

But, importantly, you made promises— Senator Teague. Do not get distracted by heroic, huge promises—and you got your Senator Abetz’s contribution. He is way off fundings wrong. Even in the estimate of the mark. savings from extending the waiting period from six months to two years for newly There are a few points that I would like to arrived Australians to be eligible for benefits highlight about why you should not proceed in this country, you got those figures wrong with these cuts. There is a very important by nearly $300 million. They are your own reference on the front page of last Saturday’s costings now. You estimated $600 million business section of the Age. Unfortunately, I plus, and the figure came in at around $250 do not have the quote here. It was written by million or $280 million, as I remember. Then an American adviser, whose name I do not you added a few extra bits and pieces in—not dare hazard a guess at. He is an adviser to the the promise of not changing anything except United States government. He was urging the six months to two years—and you have countries like Australia to seriously consider thrown in some more benefits that people will not rushing to make savage reductions in not be eligible for. All that has done is get the deficits or to cut public expenditure because figure up to $350 million. mostly the cuts fell in the very areas that were needed to promote growth, development, You have got your own near-$300 million recovery and expansion of the economy. hole on wild promises. ‘We’ll buy our way across the election barrier’. Well, you are over The last thing you would want to be doing there. You would be much better off, as is cutting education. It is the very last place Senator Teague said, telling the truth. You you should be cutting, because you would be would be much better off in education if you stopping Australia’s young—and now many put out the bushfire as quickly as you could older people with different qualifications, and got down to doing the sorts of things in different talents and different capacities—from education that you should. going into the marketplace and into the world and providing that wealth, that support, that I again quote Senator Abetz’s great contri- development and all the sorts of things that bution. ‘One of the things that we have got to are going to increase the productivity of the have,’ he said, ‘is a vision. A vision is im- nation. It is quite daft to be cutting that area. portant and that is a challenge for Minister It should be, as Senator Teague said, one area Vanstone.’ We have been saying all along that has a very strong wall around it. that the minister does not have a vision, but I did not think Senator Abetz would say it for Senator Abetz might want to say what he us, too. ‘One of the things the minister has to likes about the Labor government—and I do get is a vision’—spot on, Senator. not think any government is exempt from She has not got a vision; she has got a criticism—but I remind him that the Labor policy vacuum and into that vacuum she sails government dramatically increased expendi- and says, ‘Cuts, cuts.’ Boom! Can she give us ture in education. It nearly doubled it over its a clue? In what direction, Minister? Would time in office. It certainly saw the Common- you like us to cut anything in particular? wealth funded places double to over 454,000, ‘No’—boom!—‘Cut the lot’. It really is an I think, and there are 650,000 students now in extraordinary thing. There is no policy. There tertiary education in this country. That is a is no program. There is no clear outline. huge increase on what it was when we came There is no discussion paper. There is no into office in 1983. sense of where people might be led by the I urge Senator Abetz to look at what the minister to see more efficient, different or Malcolm Fraser government did to education alternate ways of doing education. There is funding when it was in office between 1975 none of that; just—boom!—cuts. and 1983. We feel so passionately about cuts I think the chaos is very properly sheeted in the tertiary sector because we have fought home to the minister in this motion, in all the and struggled to get that education system up contributions from this side and, indeed, from and running. That is another dimension of Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1481 why it would be so bad to have the cuts don’t make these cuts.’ In South Australia the proposed by Senator Vanstone. economy is probably more sluggish than most It is so easy and quick to stop the machi- other places across the country. For whatever nery of the tertiary sector and so difficult to reason—I have a lot of reasons why, but I set it moving again that you cannot dare to will resist the temptation of mentioning cut away these dollars without appreciating them—it is still an area in which you would that it is not all ‘Oh, well, we’ll crank it up not want to do anything to create more risk or next year’: you will not. If you wind that more hazard in that economy. machinery back overnight, it will take five If you took $20 million or $30 million out years, if not longer, to get it even back to of the South Australian economy—which is where it was before the cuts. what the cuts proposed would mean for South Australia—the impact would be dramatic. No, Even crazier though, the vice-chancellors you do not just send three professors home tell me that, if the minister’s cuts go ahead as from university. No, you do not just stop proposed, there will be in the short term a some x-thousand students being unable to get dramatic increase in outlays. The idea of there. You also stop a whole lot of businesses postulating cuts that are going to cost you bang in their tracks, because those dollars are more has to be one of the most remarkable not being spent in those businesses anymore. proposals that this new government has come up with. Housing will slacken. Mortgages will not be able to be paid. It has a very significant effect It is also critical to note that, as well as on the local economy. If you are not sure winding back that machinery of tertiary sector about that, look at what has happened to education—knowing how long the lead time Canberra since the announcement of the will be to get it going and knowing how Public Service cuts in this town. You all important it is to the ongoing development know that it is true. You must talk to Comcar and expansion of the economy, let alone the drivers, as I do. Many of them run businesses minds and hearts of the men and women who in this town—not just building, buying and are in this country—cutting universities will selling houses but secondary businesses. They have a savage effect on local and regional will all tell you what has happened to the economies. economy in Canberra—and that is not saying Those regional economies need not be put anything about housing prices. That can down to the University of Western Sydney at happen in South Australia, too. Dr Such Penrith, Kingston, the Northern Territory, knows it and he is desperate for it not to Lismore or Tasmania; those regions can be happen. put down to something as significant as a Senator Campbell—You know all about it state. Let me read what the Minister for after the State Bank. You know all about it Education in South Australia, Dr Such—not after John Bannon. a Labor minister, but a member of the Liberal Senator CROWLEY—It took you a long government in South Australia—had to say in time, senator. It is not the only reason. You last Saturday’s edition of the Adelaide Adver- have been there for a very long time. Madam tiser: Acting Deputy President, a minute ago I was The universities contribute $555 million to the chided because I did not direct my remarks South Australian economy and employ 6,500 through the chair. I would like you to suggest, people and are key contributors to the state’s economic, intellectual, social and cultural life . . . if Senator Campbell gets carried away again, Drastic cuts would have a severe impact on teach- that he should also direct his remarks through ing and research programs and affect our pursuit of the chair. academic excellence, economic growth and devel- The other important point about the impact opment. of the tertiary sector on the regional economy And so it would. Dr Such has been one of the is the very large and growing expenditure into most passionate people appealing to his state research. One of the best things South Aus- colleague Minister Vanstone, saying, ‘Please tralia does, better than anywhere else in 1482 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

Australia, is grow wine. It produces some- in Australia’s manufacturing and scientific thing like 60 per cent of Australia’s wine. Of endeavour. course, amongst that is the best of Australia’s I am absolutely sure the government sup- wine. The very best wines come from South ports those ventures and would not like to see Australia. anything cutting them back. But you cannot Senator Patterson—No, Senator Crowley. talk about benefits to the economy and try to I have to interject on that. make sure that the economy is in the very best situation and then take decisions that are Senator CROWLEY—You can ring the immediately and dramatically, with a multipli- world. Grange Hermitage, from South Aus- er effect, going to cut back the economy of tralia, has just won the world prize for the this country. It is for those reasons—let alone very best wine. We produce absolutely brilli- the fact that one of the very best investments ant wine. We produce at least 60 per cent of we can make in the future generation is to Australia’s wine, maybe a bit more than that. make sure our children have the opportunity This year the wine industry is thundering of a tertiary education, if that is what they towards $500 million worth of exports. That choose, and to make sure that more and more industry has grown from almost zero exports of them have that opportunity, because of the a few years ago to this dramatic increase. increased number of places—that we should That has been largely because of the enter- look at the so-called multiplier effect on prise in that industry, which has been support- development, investment, research, industry ed and encouraged by export development and export if we cut back in the areas of program grants and all those sorts of things research and university investment. that the Labor government did on behalf of I would also like to make clear the impact that wine industry. It is also assisted by the of cuts on two or three sectors that grew splendid research done through the University dramatically under a Labor government. I of Adelaide, at the Waite Institute, and would hate to see any cutback in those sec- through the wine and brandy institute. tors. Some 20 or so years ago, if you finished These are the bits and pieces of the equa- your schooling and left, that was about it for tion that must be taken into account if we are your education for the rest of your life. You talking about the impact of cuts in our tertiary had very little opportunity to get back into the sector. We need to talk about the impact of education system. Over the last 13 years of cutting back research dollars. There is not Labor government there has been a very only an impact on the people who are doing significant and intentional change so that the research—the loss of young researchers people do have the opportunity for education, and the possible brain drain—but also the including tertiary education, over fairly much very immediate effect of the loss of that the whole of their life. research on our industry, our productivity, our Tertiary education for mature age students manufacturing and our exports. I mention the has been not only personally very satisfying wine industry because it is such a very good for those people but also of tremendous example in South Australia; but there are any contribution and importance to this communi- number of those examples across the country. ty. I read in the paper yesterday or the day The other thing the Labor government did before that an Aboriginal man in South was to establish cooperative research centres. Australia has graduated as a doctor. I think he There are a number of them around the is in his 50s. He has had a life of any number country. Again, these are the very best asso- of things, but he was not presented with the ciations, or they are very good associations— opportunity of an education when he was a perhaps there is always room for the better to much younger person. Under the Labor be the best. These cooperative research government’s program there was much more centres are a splendid coming together of flexibility for people in and out of education industry and tertiary sector university to over the whole of their lives. That is one promote research and to apply that research important area. Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1483

Another very big and very significant area happen. It clearly indicates that something of growth was the special programs for will happen. It will quite clearly be damaging, disadvantaged people, particularly people with difficult and destructive for our tertiary sector a disability. There was much better access. and, in every way you look at it, a negative For people from non-English speaking back- for this country. grounds there was the importance of assist- Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (6.24 ance in English as a second language, certain- p.m.)—I also rise to contribute to this wide ly as it was the language of their studies in ranging debate in which Senator Crowley many cases. Also terribly important was the took the opportunity to talk about the South dramatic increase in the number of women Australian wine industry. Congratulations on who had the opportunity for the first time to parts of your speech, Senator Crowley. In get into tertiary institutions. certain parts of it you showed great passion, I still find it very poignant meeting families which makes me think that opposition suits who say that a family member—an aunt, an you well. You never showed the same passion uncle, a daughter or a niece—is the first in and care for administration when you were on their family to have the opportunity of getting this side of the house and you were in charge a tertiary education. It is poignant because of your own portfolio. As I say, being in they are the first. It is dramatically exciting opposition suits you well. It is where your because they are the first and because they passion is best brought out. will not be the last. Not unexpectedly the speakers from the We have seen hard-won gains in education other side of the house have used this motion for our daughters as well as our sons. There to simply sink the debate to its base level of are much better retention rates. The number politics and to launch an attack on ministers. of girls and boys completing year 12 has gone When people from the education sector read from 37 per cent to about 80 per cent. There the Hansard they will no doubt see that very has also been a very significant increase in little real, constructive contribution has come the number of girls and women who are able from the other side. Those on the other side to take up tertiary education—they now have continually denied the economic impera- number over 50 per cent in our institutions. tives this government now faces and have That is a significant increase compared with thrown in platitudes about the worth of even the 1983 figure. I would hate to see any education, which of course we all agree with cuts in the tertiary sector, but I would also and support. It is unlikely that the mover of hate to see those gains lost. We know full this motion and the many people who have well that the people who are always most spoken about it will get any thanks from vice- likely to lose when there are cuts are those chancellors for simply crowding the issue and who are the poorest, those who are the most taking base political opportunities. marginal, those who are the least able to I know members of the Labor Party love to argue their case. join a demonstration. If they see a banner, This motion deserves our strongest support. they will join it. Only yesterday they were in The minister’s behaviour in relation to the full support of the building workers’ demon- tertiary sector deserves our strongest condem- stration, let alone today’s demonstrations, and nation. Not only has there been chaos but supported their tax rorts. If they see a banner reputations could well be in jeopardy. Univer- up a street, they will get right behind it. It is sity research is certainly jeopardised. The one of the Labor Party’s great traditions and quality of service for students is jeopardised. loves. Teaching numbers and morale will be hit for There are times when demonstrations are six. worth joining, but I cannot accept that the It is well and good for senators opposite—I vice-chancellors and the demonstrators, the preclude Senator Teague from this—to say students, really believe they will get any that all those are just promises. This is a huge comfort from or owe any sort of debt to amount of chaos for something that may not members of the other side of the house for 1484 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 their administration of the education portfolio. was: where are you on the government’s In every budget they brought down in their rankings? Newcastle University had to say, long 13 years in office funding per student ‘We’re down near the bottom.’ fell. The evidence of that has been borne out That was the sort of disadvantage placed on by the fact that the student-staff ratio some 13 regional universities. So the rich got richer year ago was around 10 students to one and the poor got poorer in the education staffer. That ratio has climbed to 18 students portfolio. As I said, that scheme has since to one staffer. So the ratio nearly doubled been abandoned. I ask the vice-chancellors to during the previous government’s term. cast their minds back to when that scheme Further, without doubt the greatest losers in was established and how poor and wacky the this area have been regional universities. That criteria really were. They should not place of course is my primary interest. There was themselves in the hands of the opposition no equity in funding for universities. The when they make their approaches to this regional universities were the ones that lost government, because the truth is that much of out. For example, funding for students of city the heat in this debate has dissipated, has died universities like Melbourne University has down, even before the demonstrations started been higher than that for those attending today. regional universities such as Ballarat Universi- The vice-chancellors have sought a meeting ty. There never was any equity in the previ- with the Prime Minister (Mr Howard). That ous government’s funding. The losers were meeting will take place in the next week or always the regional universities. Ballarat so. The Australian Vice-Chancellors Commit- University are still waiting for funding com- tee now says it is ready to work cooperatively mitted by the previous government for their with the government. Perhaps on those two establishment as a university. They are yet to points they have cast their minds back to the receive that. Regional universities which were record of the previous government and they created during the previous government’s term know only too well that they should not side were never backed up with the funding with the opposition or take any comfort from necessary to carry out their duties at the level this motion by the opposition. They know the that is expected of a university. record only too well. I also mention the equality assurance In order to reassure the education sector— mechanism—another scheme the previous the vice-chancellors, the staff and the stu- government introduced. I cannot believe the dents—I wish to paraphrase the words of the vice-chancellors think they can gain comfort Prime Minister. I am sure he will reassure the from support from the previous government, vice-chancellors when they meet with him in now the opposition. They should cast their a week or two. The Prime Minister recon- minds back to that scheme, whereby universi- firmed only last week that the coalition’s ties were ranked and placed in bands. They policies will be upheld. He is patently aware were ranked in bands of one to six. Of course, that governments must return to upholding those ranked in the bottom bands—that is, their commitments, if for no other reason than those ranked five or six—were all regional the great cynicism that the Australian public universities. have towards politicians and parliaments The criteria were very shonky. All the which was set rock hard after the 1993 elec- regional universities ended up at the bottom tion when the Labor government broke their of the ranking. The inequity of this criteria, promises wholesale and increased taxes which have since been abandoned, was shown wholesale. The Prime Minister said that the in the case of Newcastle University. It has forthcoming budget will show only too well one of Australia’s best medical schools and it our commitment to our belief in upholding has a high rating engineering school. Yet it the thrust of our policies. was No. 5 in the rankings. So when it publi- It should be noted that the coalition did cised itself overseas to try to attract students signal some changes in education, if people to its medical school, the first question asked care to read a little more closely—particularly Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1485

Senator Crowley—our policy document. Some nation. For all those reasons, the truth prob- changes were signalled and there will be some ably is that both sides of the parliament restructuring within the education department, believe in the priority commitment to higher such as the winding up of the National Board education. of Employment, Education and Training. The Regardless of how we pull and tug on this enormous task of bringing down the budget issue, although it could be much better, in surplus is the No. 1 strategy of the govern- Australia does have one of the best university ment—due, of course, to the legacy left to us infrastructures, if not in the world, at least by the previous government. within Asia. That is something we can be The education sector, along with all sectors, proud of. That has been built up over 50 must meet new efficiency levels. I noticed years. As a National Party member, the area only yesterday in the higher education section that is of most concern to me is student of the Australian newspaper—a well- respect- access to higher education. The coalition ed and well-read section of the newspaper—in policy gives great assurances regarding their regular column ‘Your say’ they posed a student access. It is one of its three major question to the sector: could your colleagues goals. I place it as my No. 1 goal. Following be more efficient in their work? I do not hold on from access to education comes equality this up as the definitive poll of the education and choice. sector, but it is interesting and it is a guide For the rural and regional population, the towards efficiency. In reply to that question, question of access is supported, firstly, by 60 per cent answered yes. As I say, I do not Austudy and, equally important, its regional hold that up as the most definitive poll of the universities. At the risk of stating the obvious, education sector but obviously that is a fair it is worthy to note that the rural community indication that there are efficiencies to be holds education for its children as the single made in that sector. most important issue. There was great evi- It should not be lost on those involved in dence of this during the drought—and I do the education sector that we do have a policy, not doubt that in many parts of the eastern a primary commitment, a promise that we board of Australia the drought is still at its have made to the Australian people for fiscal height. During the height of the drought some responsibility, which does translate into a 18 months ago, farming families in all their balanced budget. While I do not seek to get troubles saw their priority as maintaining their bogged down in the broader economic argu- children’s education through access to ments, frankly, the vice-chancellors should Austudy, which, under the then rules, was realise that that is the angst in the community being denied to so many drought stricken at the moment. We want to sheet home the farmers. broader economic situation that we are faced The coalition believes that Austudy is one with. I hope some time will be left for Sena- of the most important tools for accessing tor Campbell to pick up on that point. education. Yet we have been left with a The vice-chancellors should also realise that system that has become complicated and is the reward for bringing the budget into not meeting its original, worthy goals. This surplus—unless no vice-chancellor or student stems from the introduction by the previous has a mortgage or a credit card—is downward government of the actual means test, which pressure on interest rates. So our priority has led to an administrative nightmare. Unfor- commitment to all Australians is for a bal- tunately, this government is left with the anced budget or a budget in surplus. actual means test that we did not design and Nevertheless, the foundation stones for our that has caused a logjam of some 3,000 higher education policy remain in place. Our unprocessed applications for Austudy, and yet policy shows that the coalition understands the academic year has already started. the work and are committed to the support of In relation to regional universities, I am high-quality universities for the intellectual, sure Senator Vanstone will not mind my cultural, economic and social benefit of the mentioning that the National Party MPs have 1486 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 stoutly presented a very worthy case for their outside the metropolitan cities," Senator Vanstone funding. Probably more than city based said. universities, regional universities link closely In conclusion, I am very confident that the with the community. While so many people opportunism of this particular motion will be have been claiming today—from the Demo- seen for what it is out in the education sector: crats to the ALP—that they have been seeing base, political opportunism and an attack vice-chancellors and others in the education against a good minister. system, I can fortuitously and perhaps even coincidentally say that I have met representa- Senator McKIERNAN (Western Australia) tives from the Bendigo district. I would like (6.43 p.m.)—It is always a pleasure to follow to take time out to wax lyrical about the my National Party Senate colleague from Bendigo campus because it is a case in point. Victoria in debates in this place. His ances- tors, just as mine do, come from a place There are university representatives on the called Cavan in Ireland, although mine were board of Bendigo Art Gallery and the science there more recently than his. Nevertheless, museum, which shows the close links to the neither of us, to the best of my knowledge, community. Moreover, the local council in has had an invitation to go to the homestead conjunction with the university will be build- close to here which bears the same name as ing a very high quality athletics track for both the town and county whence our ancestors public and university use. The same universi- came. We live in hope. If we keep dropping ty, Bendigo University, is undertaking a study hints, perhaps it will happen. on the impact of gaming machines on the local economy. Such are the many uses of Senator McGauran—You won’t ever regional universities. educate the Irish. The Bendigo University feeds other major Senator McKIERNAN—They still can’t centres, such as the Mildura and Shepparton speak English as well as we can, can they? area where courses are undertaken under the Another reason I am pleased to be following stewardship of the Bendigo University. In all, Senator McGauran in the important debate on the Bendigo University campus directly and this matter is that this is something on which indirectly contributes some $100 million per the National Party and the Australian Labor annum to the local economy and, just as Party can stand up together when we are importantly, if not more importantly, it em- supporting rural Australians. ploys over 430 staff. In his contribution which has just conclud- Having stated the importance of the region- ed, Senator McGauran mentioned the Austral- al campuses, I say for the information of the ian of yesterday’s date, 29 May. He quoted opposition that no regional campus will be some statistics from the education section of forced to close. To the contrary: this is noth- that publication. I am more pleased to quote ing short of a scare campaign. Senator the front page of yesterday’s Australian Vanstone has been very supportive and where, again, evidence is shown of the Aus- understanding in regard to the importance of tralian Labor Party and the National Party regional universities. I quote verbatim from a having together stood up to the government, press statement she issued on 22 May, which stood up to its slash and burn approach to the states: budgetary cost cutting and saved the diesel . . . Senator Vanstone . . . today reaffirmed the fuel rebate scheme for the farming community Coalition’s recognition of the importance of regional universities. of this great country. We will do the same thing and stand together on regional universi- Senator Vanstone said speculation that regional universities were under threat was nothing more ties. Perhaps we might go a little further and than an attempt by the Labor Party to create an talk about metropolitan universities as well. atmosphere of panic in regional areas. But that will not in any way denigrate our "The Coalition recognises the important contribu- support for the great regional institutions that tion regional Australia makes to the nation and abound in the wonderful state of Western understands the individual needs of people who live Australia, which include, as Senator Campbell Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1487 would know, those branches of universities in never going to be broken. The promises were places such as Broome and Bunbury. going to be all-important on things. If they It is very sad that the Australian parliament are brought to fruition—and indeed some cuts should have to debate such a motion which, are already taking place in different types of I remind the Senate: programs; I mentioned the training area of skillshare—it will rebound on the Prime views, with grave concern, the turmoil engulfing Australian universities as a result of the Coalition Minister (Mr Howard). In the very near future Government’s proposed budget cuts- he will in turn find that he has alienated the We know that today universities around this community because they do not accept the country are in a state of great turmoil, and not right of politicians to make promises prior to only universities. The whole of the education elections, receive an overwhelming support sector is in turmoil because they are under the for the programs they put to the people and grave threat of their budgets being slashed. then, in a matter of a few short months, reject and repudiate what they put to the people in It is not only universities and educational order to encourage them to vote for them in institutions. Today, I have had calls in my the election. electorate office in Perth and here—although the people have not been able to contact me A great deal of debate has occurred in this as readily over here as they have in Perth—on place in the past few days through questions the skillshare program. Enormous concern, to the minister on her negotiations with the fear and worry has been put into the minds of vice-chancellors of our universities. A large the great people that run those institutions number of questions have been addressed to because of Costello’s con—a fictitious and her and very little information has been shameful campaign by the government to forthcoming from the minister on the current fulfil the Fightback agenda which was so views of the vice-chancellors. dramatically rejected by the electorate in The Australian media have to be given 1993. It is now back on the agenda but this credit for the fact that they are publicising the time under the subterfuge known as Costello’s other side of the coin, namely, the worries in con. the minds of the vice-chancellors. Questions The subject matter that we are debating were asked of the minister who replied that which, unfortunately, Senator McGauran did some vice-chancellors are supportive of them stray quite substantially from, continues on. sharing the burden of the need for savings. I have quoted part of it about the proposed But, when pressed on that, she will not budget cut. It continues: identify any of those vice-chancellors whom, she says, will bear what she describes as their and the mishandling by the Minister for Employ- ment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs share of the savings. (Senator Vanstone) of her portfolio; We do have some vice-chancellors who (b) notes that the indiscriminate funding cuts will certainly have not said that they will share the threaten: burden. The Vice-Chancellor of the University (i) Australia’s international reputation and higher of Canberra, Mr Don Aitken, said last week education export industry, on Canberra radio that he was appalled by the (ii) university research capacity and course options, government’s attitude. That was repeated (iii) the quality of service for Australian students, yesterday by Michael Osborne from La Trobe (iv) university teaching staff numbers and morale; university. Senator Campbell will be very and pleased to hear that there is very little support (v) potential closure of facilities, suspension of coming from the vice-chancellors back in our building programs and reduction of student num- home state of Western Australia for the bers; and proposed cuts. (c) notes that the proposed funding cuts breach I had talks with one individual at the airport Coalition election promises and guarantees— a couple of weeks ago. He has not given me Those election promises and guarantees were permission to use his name, so I will not supposed to be written in blood. They were press it any further. But he certainly would 1488 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 not have been one of the people I would have tralia who are willing to stand up to the put in the category of meeting with Senator federal government. Vanstone and expressing support for the cuts. As I said in my opening comments, I am But one person who has put his concerns in more than happy, again, to stand beside our writing to me is the Acting Vice-Chancellor National Party colleagues who are going to of the University of Western Australia, Pro- take the fight up, internally as well as exter- fessor Alan Robson. In a letter dated 23 May nally, to the government of which they are a 1996, he wrote to me as follows: part. I appreciate the difficult positions they Dear Senator might find themselves in. But some of us who I am writing to seek your support in the face of the were in government previously got quite used severe funding cuts currently mooted for the higher to that—that is, being somewhat of an opposi- education sector. tion party in government. It can be quite As you will be aware from recent media coverage, difficult from time to time, but I do commend the federal government has foreshadowed massive members of the National Party for doing it. budget cuts in order to reduce Commonwealth As I indicated earlier, they have had some expenditure by $8 billion over the next two years. success with the diesel fuel rebate scheme for Cuts of between 5 and 12% have been rumoured the farming community. for the higher education sector. If imposed, cuts of this magnitude would seriously compromise our That fight has not yet been completed. ability to deliver a high quality education to the There is still a very large sector of rural people of Western Australia and to attract full fee Australia which is quite dependent on the paying international students which represent a diesel fuel rebate scheme. That is the mining major source of export income. sector, which was quite highly praised here In its pre-election campaign the federal coalition today by Senator Parer, the Minister repre- promised that it would maintain universities’ senting the Minister for Primary Industries operating grants at their current levels and would and Energy (Mr Anderson). increase funding in some specific research areas. If the coalition does not honour these promises, the Parliamentarians, like my colleague Senator higher education sector will be forced to make Campbell, will be receiving the same repre- drastic reductions to the service it provides. The sentations on that scheme from his constitu- sector is unable to absorb any more funding cuts without a detrimental effect on the quality of ents, as well as mine, back in our home state. tertiary education. Already since 1983 universities I am sure that he will not be letting them have absorbed cuts of approximately 10% per down, although he might have to contain his student, together with a 2% unfunded salary representations somewhat differently to the increase late in 1995. Further cuts will jeopardise way I might be able to handle them. Nonethe- the quality of educational opportunities available to less, I am pretty certain that all Western young people in this State. Australian parliamentarians will be able to The University of Western Australia needs your stand together in the interests of Western support. I would be very grateful if you would join Australia and, indeed, Australia as a whole the University in this campaign and register your and the people of our great country to ensure concerns, either verbally or in writing as appropri- ate, with the federal government. that we have a future. Yours sincerely It is very important with election campaigns that the policies put to the people by the Alan Robson. winning political party are going to be hon- As an individual political representative of oured by it. It is equally important that the Western Australia, I am very pleased to join vanquished who are elected to parliament in with Mr Robson, the University of Western opposition put a strident defence to the Australia and those other universities in my policies and platforms that were put to the state in standing up to this federal government people at election times. A good opposition which is taking a slash and burn approach to will make for good government, although I destroy this country’s higher education sys- think our best efforts will not be rewarded too tem. Further, I am happy to join with other greatly, judging by the performances of the university vice-chancellors throughout Aus- ministers in this government. Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1489

Nonetheless, I am sure that everybody on and perhaps now step back, return to their this side of the chamber and on the opposition election promises and get on and give good side of the other place will do their very best government to this country. They have got to bring the fight up to the government. They good examples to follow. The examples were will do their best to keep each of the individ- put there by the previous administrations, and ual ministers on their toes and to ensure that it will not be too difficult for them to copy the ministers certainly do their very level best those examples. to honour the promises that were put to the Senator CAMPBELL (Western Australia— people just three short months ago—that is, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the to ensure that those promises are kept. Environment and Parliamentary Secretary to The fallacy of what colloquially is known the Minister for Sport, Territories and Local of as the ‘black hole’ was exposed yester- Government) (6.59 p.m.)—Previous speakers day—very dramatically exposed yesterday. It did indicate that they would not speak for is unfortunate that the script writers for the long. But it was good to see Senator ministers are still active and still using those McKiernan feel so strongly about this that he very inaccurate figures that projected there spoke for 27 minutes. That, of course, leaves might be a deficit of in the region of $8 me only something like 3½ or four minutes of billion. Growth figures that were released time. I can be quite a succinct speaker at yesterday prove again just what a mistake it times, but I doubt that I can cover the import- is to rely on one quarter’s figures. I am not ant issues that are to be covered in this debate one of the people who do go out and claim in that time. So, clearly, they will be covered that everything in the garden is now rosy on another occasion. Everyone will have to because we did have a good set of figures stay tuned and in a couple of weeks time yesterday, because the next set of figures come back to the same station here on the might not be quite as good and, of course, parliamentary network. will change things again. I just make a couple of early responses to But that is what it is all about: that the some of the points that Senator McKiernan projected deficit figure will change, it will made and some of the points that were raised continue to change and, because of that, there in this debate. One of them is this continuing is no earthly reason now why our higher political fray relating to the black hole and education system or, indeed, our welfare the state the budget has been left in. Ultimate- system or our training systems should be ly, the Australian people will see the truth subjected to the slash and burn approach that about this and they will see whether they has been projected by the current government. need to believe Senator Crowley, who is There is no earthly reason why that slash and using United States terminology to say that burn approach should be allowed to continue. the budget will whirr back into balance There is no reason why the people of this because all of a sudden we have had a good country—be they vice-chancellors in our set of numbers and the upturn in income tax academic institutions right across Australia or receipts and tax receipts will see the $8 the students or other workers within those billion deficit just disappear overnight. institutions—should be caused to have the Senator Woods—There are fairies at the fears that they have currently in their mind bottom of the garden. because of what has been projected by Senator CAMPBELL—I am sure that, as minister and other ministers of this govern- Senator Woods says, people who would ment. believe Senator Crowley in relation to that The turmoil that Australian universities are would believe that there are fairies at the suffering today is an experience that should bottom of the garden. Ultimately, the budget not be allowed to recur. The government and, papers will come down; the governments indeed, the minister should stand up now, commission of audit will tell the Australian realise the mistakes they are making, the fears people exactly where the problems are. What they are putting into the minds of the people we would like to do in one of our important 1490 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 election commitments is to ensure that we do cus Clarke, Senator Crowley, and what hap- have a charter of budget honesty so that pened with Brian Burke and Peter Dowding people do see the true position and do not in Western Australia. You will wear what you have to rely on politicians who, of course, have done to this country, month by month, have a great personal interest in having this week by week. You will wear what you have confusion and this fight over who is right and done to the youth of Australia, with high who is wrong: is it $8 billion or is it $7.8 unemployment rates and the high debt rates billion? Is one month’s figure of a 4.8 per and the high interest rates. We will remind cent growth all of a sudden going to take $2 you here, hour after hour, because you are not billion out of it? going to get away with what you have done The reality is: when you go program by to Australia, what you have done to this great program and department by department, when nation. you look into the books of this government, The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT which I have had the responsibility to do in (Senator Teague)—Order! The time allotted the Department of the Environment, Sport, for the consideration of general business has Territories and Local Government, you find— expired. and this is probably far more relevant to individual Australians, rather than talking COMMITTEES about figures like $8 billion—that it is very Employment, Education and Training hard for people to get their minds around. It References Committee is very hard to get $8 billion in context. Reference Senator Crowley—So what have you been saying it for? Motion (by Senator Crowley)—by leave— agreed to: Senator CAMPBELL—I am just putting That the following matter be referred to the it into context for them, Senator Crowley Employment, Education and Training References because you are short on helping them. Committee for inquiry and report by 17 October Look at all of the promises that were made 1996: by your government and programs that were The private and commercial funding aspects of funded and how you left the last budget. You government schools, with particular reference to: had so many programs that just had no fund- (a) the nature and extent of fundraising mecha- ing this year. That is the real disgrace. You nisms—such as voluntary contributions, cut the sports budget, just to mention one, by levies, sponsorships and other marketing a third and left no money for it. You go out arrangements—used by government schools and their associated organisations; to the Olympic athletes and tell them what happened to the $30 million that was slashed (b) State and Territory policies and regulations regarding the collection and use of private from the sports budget. funds received by government schools, the Senator Carr—Is this an attack on the adequacy of existing State and Territory Olympic athletes? Undermining the Olympic legislation regulating such practices, and the athletes. implications, if any, for the role of the Commonwealth; Senator Crowley—Has he no shame? (c) the purposes for which government schools Senator CAMPBELL—Over the coming raise and expend private funds, and the months and the coming years, we will go impact of private revenue on the curriculum through program by program and say how and teaching resources deployed in those you left the budget. That is where the $8 schools; billion black hole comes from and it is made (d) the extent to which private funds contribute up of lots of little amounts of $30 million. to differences in the quality of curriculum and services between government schools, People will come to realise that. People will and the implications of this for equity and come to realise that, just as they did with access; your old friend Joan Kirner, Senator Carr, and (e) the implications of expanded private funding your old friends John Bannon and Tim Mar- of government schools for the implementa- Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1491

tion of the National Equity Strategy for Petition to the Federal Minister for Primary Schools and for the achievement of the Na- Industries and Energy tional Goals for Schooling; and To the Honourable the President and Members of (f) the implications of increased private funding the Senate in the Parliament assembled. of government schools on Australia’s obli- gations under relevant international agree- The petition of the undersigned citizens and ments such as the Convention on the Rights residents of Australia respectfully showeth that: of the Child and the International Covenant We, the undersigned, petition the Federal Minister on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. for Primary Industries and Energy to intervene to require Wool International to fulfil its quarterly DOCUMENTS allocation of wool to be sold of 187,000 bales, Australian Law Reform Committee by— Senator HERRON—I present report No. offering the wool for forward sale only until the end of the quarter prior to which it must be 78 of the Australian Law Reform Commis- delivered sion, entitled Beyond the door-keeper— the unsold residue of the quarterly allocation standing to sue for public remedies. to then be spread evenly over the current COMMITTEES quarter’s rostered auction sales, and selling centres, and auctioned Membership all wool so offered at auction to be sold The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— without reserves The President has received letters from party And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever leaders nominating senators to be members of pray. various committees. Petition received. Motion (by Senator Herron)—by leave— COMMITTEES agreed to: That senators be appointed to standing commit- Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade tees as follows: References Committee Environment, Recreation, Communication and Report the Arts Legislation Committee—Senator Lundy (from 1 July 1996) Senator WOODS (New South Wales— Environment, Recreation, Communication and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the Arts References Committee—Senator Lundy Health and Family Services) (7.07 p.m.)—I (from 1 July 1996) move: Substitute member: Senator Carr to replace That the Senate take note of the report. Senator Ray for the Inquiry into Telstra (Dilution of Public Ownership) Bill 1996. RAAF Nomad A18-401 was on a local Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation training flight from Committee— Edinburgh Air Force Base near Adelaide on Substitute member: Senator Cook to replace 12 March 1990 when it suffered a massive Senator Jones for the consideration of the Ex- failure of the tailplane assembly. the pilot, port Market Development Grants Amendment Bill (No. 1) 1996. Flight Lieutenant Glenn Donovan, was killed Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legis- in the crash. There was a history of a long list lation committee— of separate inquiries following this. The most Participating member: Senator Sandy Mc- recent is the one in front of us, which was donald conducted by the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee. PETITIONS This plane, the Nomad aircraft, has acquired Wool the reputation and nickname of being the Senator BROWNHILL—by leave—I widow maker because in its history some 60 present to the Senate the following petition, or so deaths have been associated with crash- from 370 citizens, which is not in conformity es of this plane. The aircraft which is the with the Standing Orders as it is not in the subject of this report crashed because of a correct form: litany of errors out of negligence from several 1492 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 of those involved, in particular from the There is a long history of problems with the RAAF, from ASTA—that is, AeroSpace tailplane in the Nomad. ASTA had tried to Technologies of Australia Ltd, the newer control this with a number of developments, name for the former government aircraft in particular modification N663 which was factory—and the CAA, as it was then known. fitted to only eight aircraft at the time of the crash and also with 100-hour interval inspec- ASTA, the government aircraft factory tion of the tailplane. successor, was the designer and manufacturer and, for much of its life, the user of this ASTA also ignored inquiries from the CAA. particular aircraft. Scientific evidence has The CAA, as a result of a report from a major subsequently shown that the fatal cracking in aircraft operator, had put queries to the ASTA the tailplane originated during the use of the organisation. But there was never, apparently, plane by ASTA. ASTA had arranged a loan any response to the CAA—there certainly is agreement with the RAAF and used the plane not in any written form—and the two requests under this loan agreement for some time. It is from the CAA were essentially ignored by not clear how much of the cracking had ASTA. So here we have an accident basically propagated by the time that A18-401 was waiting to happen—a plane with a faulty transferred back to the RAAF at the end of tailplane assembly waiting, essentially, for the the loan agreement. It is, however, clear that tail to fall off. there were a number of discrepancies in the It was transferred back to the RAAF and loan agreement. It required an evaluation at the RAAF, which I think in contrast to ASTA the time of the beginning of the loan agree- were very cooperative with the inquiry, ment and at the end. None of those evalu- accepted partial corporate responsibility. They ations were carried out either by ASTA or by accepted there were systemic problems in the the RAAF. Monthly, I think it was—certainly way they maintained the plane and handled regular—reports were required during the the plane, in the way they handled the transfer period of the loan. It seems that none of these of the plane, and they accept, I think, that the reports were forthcoming either. process was pretty defective. ASTA largely used the aircraft as a test On top of the corporate responsibility, aircraft, with the stresses and strains that that however, a number of individuals in the placed upon the aircraft. It was also subjected RAAF, as evidenced in the report, displayed to a lot of ground running—ground running evidence of negligence in terms of their duty. being where the plane is kept stationary but For example, when the RAAF took over the the engines are run for a number of different plane there was no acceptance report made. research reasons. The number of hours of Nobody made a careful evaluation of the ground running was never completely clear, status of the plane. It looked okay, so they but it was probably in the order of 170 or 180 assumed it was okay. It is rather like kicking hours. the tyres on a car that you buy from a used car yard. The committee took evidence about the stresses and strains that ground running places An S17 service was due on the plane prior upon various aspects of the plane but, in to the crash. This service is a no-tolerance particular, the tailplane. It seems very clear to service, which means it has to be done and the committee that the cause of the tailplane the plane should have been grounded prior to failure was directly resulting from that ground it being done. But that service, of course, was running. Sadly, the extent of that ground not done and individuals within the RAAF— running or the use of the aircraft as a test and the details are in the report—basically aircraft was never made clear to the RAAF made unilateral decisions that the S17 service either during or after the loan agreement. The was not necessary and was not appropriate. plane was clearly transferred with a cracked They did not inform the pilot and the pilot tailplane, which subsequently failed and therefore took off unknowingly with a plane caused the crash. which was overdue for a no-tolerance service, Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1493 and which subsequently crashed as a result of For the day-to-day management of disci- the tailplane failure. pline in the defence forces, three years may There is some doubt about whether the well be enough, but our recommendation is service would have actually picked up the that the period should be extended to five fault in the tailplane. The truth of it is that the years to allow for circumstances like this. We manuals used by the RAAF were so poorly are not implying that a number of inquiries written that it is not clear whether in fact an were instituted so that the statute of limita- inspection of the tailplane assembly—the tions should be exceeded, but certainly it internal aspects of that—was in fact part of would be possible in theory for the defence that servicing. On balance, the committee felt forces to use that action as a delaying pros- that it would have been necessary to inspect pect to prevent any charges being laid. There the tailplane parts and that the tailplane was always the possibility that charges were cracking would have been detected. But there not laid against fairly junior members in the is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the RAAF because in fact the culpability should servicing should have been done and that have been held by more senior members who there would have been a significant chance of were protected by the lack of information picking up the tailplane defects and in fact available to the committee. The Defence saving the life of Glenn Donovan, who was Force view is that the Defence Force Disci- the pilot of the plane. pline Act should be left with a three-year statute of limitations, but we strongly feel that Bearing in mind that there were a number that change is inappropriate. of negligent actions which took place in this time, one of the questions was: should The sadness about this is that a very fine charges have been laid? The conclusion the young pilot, Glenn Donovan, is now dead as committee came to was that clearly charges a result of a litany of errors, misjudgments should have been laid at the time. One of the and negligence on the part of ASTA, on the problems was that there was such a long list part of the RAAF and on the part of the of inquiries into the issue. There was a board CAA. Nothing can bring Glenn back, and I of inquiry into the crash, there were another would like to take this opportunity to express couple of internal RAAF inquiries, there was my own personal sympathy to his family. I an ombudsman’s report and then subsequently know I speak for the rest of the committee in this final report from a Senate committee. The this regard. question of whether charges should be laid I also think words of commendation are was considered by a number of those. The needed for Glenn’s brother Phil, who really conclusion of the RAAF was that charges was the reason why so many inquiries actual- should not have been laid against individuals. ly were conducted. I know that Phil is un- The conclusion the committee came to was happy that charges have not been laid against that this was a wrong decision, that indeed certain individuals and he feels that the charges should have been laid under the committee has not really increased the know- Defence Force Discipline Act. ledge of the situation to the extent which he The committee felt, however, it was not would like. I can understand his views on possible, as was suggested by the pilot’s that. I think there is extra information which brother, Phil Donovan, that charges should has come out as a result of this inquiry and have been laid for manslaughter, the problem we have pointed the finger at one or two of being that the manslaughter charges, of the issues here. I would like to take this course, would have no time limit on them but opportunity to commend him on his enthusi- under the Defence Force Discipline Act there asm and his diligence on behalf of his bro- is a statute of limitations of three years. The ther. main recommendation we made in fact was I would also like to take this opportunity to that this three-year statute of limitations is thank Paul Barsdell and the staff of the clearly not long enough in a situation where Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Refer- there are a number of inquiries going on. ences Committee, who during this inquiry, 1494 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 and indeed in other inquiries as well, have recommended that an up-to-date inventory be shown enormous diligence and devotion to compiled. their task and have completed it with a great Some conservation groups argue that the deal of success. They deserve our commenda- way to eliminate radioactive waste is to tion. eliminate the use of radioactive materials Question resolved in the affirmative. altogether. This is not realistic because of the important uses of radioactive materials. Radioactive Waste Committee Nevertheless, that does not diminish the Report importance of minimising the creation of Senator CHAPMAN (South Australia) radioactive waste and safely managing the (7.17 p.m.)—I move: waste that has been created. We can achieve both. Our report stresses this need to That the Senate take note of the report. minimise the creation of radioactive waste. I The report of the Select Committee on the notice that the Senate is due to get on to the Dangers of Radioactive Waste was tabled out adjournment debate, Madam Deputy Presi- of session on 29 April. It is timely that this dent. I am just wondering whether, with the report was tabled on the 10th anniversary of leave of the Senate, I might briefly continue the then Soviet government’s admission of the into the adjournment time to conclude my Chernobyl disaster. remarks. Australia does not have a nuclear power The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—There are a industry and the amount of radioactive waste number of speakers for the adjournment created in Australia is only a minute fraction debate, Senator. I think you will have to of what is produced in some other countries. continue next time. Therefore, fortunately, it is not possible for Senator CHAPMAN—What I might do is Australia to experience a Chernobyl-type finish this paragraph and seek leave to in- accident. Nevertheless, the disastrous conse- corporate the balance of my remarks in quences of Chernobyl are a salutary reminder Hansard. of the need for adequate regulation of radioac- tive materials. Radioactive materials used in The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I think you industry and medicine, some of which save should seek leave to continue your remarks lives, do provide benefits. However, they also on the next occasion. have potential health risks if the radioactive Senator CHAPMAN—Our report stresses waste is not managed safely. this need to minimise the creation of radioac- Radioactive waste cannot be destroyed. tive waste. The hierarchy of waste manage- Radioactivity occurs naturally over periods ment—that is, reduce, reuse, recycle and treat that may take millions of years. before disposal—should apply as much to radioactive waste as to any other category of Senator Panizza—It is called the half-life. waste. Research projects which create radioac- Senator CHAPMAN—It is the half-life, as tive waste in hospitals, for example, should you said, Senator Panizza. In using radioac- undergo rigorous justification processes to tive materials to obtain the benefits, there is weigh the likely benefits against the difficulty a price to be paid. That price is eternal vigi- of handling the waste. lance in managing the waste. Debate interrupted. The committee was concerned at the lack of Consideration up-to-date information on Australia’s radioac- tive holdings. A national inventory of radioac- Question resolved in the affirmative on the tive waste has not been prepared since 1986. following orders of the day without further The committee was told that radioactive waste debate during consideration of committee is stored in approximately 100 places around reports and government responses: Australia, but it seems that the exact figure is Legal and Constitutional References Commit- quite uncertain. The committee has therefore tee—Report—Inquiry into the Commonwealth’s Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1495

actions in relation to Ryker (Faulkner) v The that the State has often been overlooked for reloca- Commonwealth and Flint tion or establishment of federal agencies. Legal and Constitutional References Commit- In this context the Coalition will review the Labor tee—Report—National well-being: A system of Government’s decision to close HMAS Huon in national citizenship indicators and benchmarks Hobart. Having said that, we know that we have been ADJOURNMENT confronted by cuts in Tasmania as a result of The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order! It the proposed cutbacks in the budget and in being 7.20 p.m., under sessional order I put response to this so-claimed $8 billion hole, the question: which seems to be disappearing at a rate of That the Senate do now adjourn. knots, almost like the fog on a good morning here in Canberra with a very strong wind Tasmanian Economy blowing. We have had to confront the closure Senator MURPHY (Tasmania) (7.20 of the Family Court in Launceston and the p.m.)—I rise tonight to raise the plight of my closure of the tax office, and, most recently, home state and to appeal to the government, we have had a major cutback in employment and in particular government colleagues from programs. my state. I don’t want to sound repetitive, but The only employment we can find that has my state is in a very bad economic situation. been generated in Tasmania over the last three It has the highest unemployment rate in the years has been as a result of Working Nation country. It has a declining economy, almost programs. We think that we can attribute becoming a recessed economy. almost 7,000 jobs to that. In Bass alone, Senator Panizza—It started in 1983. which is where my office is based, I have sought information from all of the training Senator MURPHY—It has a Liberal and employment placement providers who government and has had one for some time. have been acting on behalf of Working I guess a lot of Tasmanians who voted to Nation programs—particularly the skillshare, elect Mr Warwick Smith to Bass and those jobskills, new work opportunities, jobtrain, others who voted conservative in the state of joblink and jobclub programs. When you tally Tasmania would have taken a great deal of up the number of people who have gone note of the Tasmanian package that the now through those programs in the last 12 months, Prime Minister, Mr John Howard, launched the number is nearly 2,000. Also, the direct on 7 February. I would just like to remind employment of the people implementing those government senators of it, and I hope the programs is quite substantial. Regardless of government in general takes note of what this what we have been told by the minister—and package says. It says: even though we have been told that some $30 Tasmania has a unique place in the Common- million is being brought forward—we know wealth. The Federal Government has a special that a number of jobs will go. I think that is, responsibility to achieve equality for Tasmanians quite frankly, a total misunderstanding of in developing opportunities for their state. The Coalition accepts this responsibility and in Govern- what the program is about. ment will implement the initiatives detailed in the The other fact is that the Commonwealth Tasmanian Package. Labor government committed some $14½ The Tasmanian package amounted to $67.15 million to the AMC, the Australian Maritime million over three years. It made mention of College, for the Australian Maritime Engi- a number of things, and there are two that I neering Cooperative Research Centre. They would like to draw attention to. One of those were told when the coalition came into related to the issue of Commonwealth facili- government that that funding would be up for ties in Tasmania. It states: review. They have already commenced work A Coalition Government will examine high profile but can proceed no further to obtain contracts capital works projects for Commonwealth depart- for that work for when and if this thing is ments and agencies already in the pipeline that ever completed. To this day they still have could be located in Tasmania to redress the fact not received an answer as to whether or not 1496 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 that funding will be forthcoming. This is in a Warwick Smith, the member for Bass, did say state, and in an electorate—Bass—which has that if the coalition won the election then we a very depressed economy. It simply is not would have a Family Court judge based in good enough that a government cannot re- Launceston. I got an answer back today from spond to the needs of Tasmania. Mr Williams, the Attorney-General, to a The other important aspect of this Tasman- question I asked a week or so ago and he says ian package was the $49½ million over three that it is a matter for the Federal Court. He years for the implementation of what was also implied in his answer to my question that called, I think, the Bass Strait passenger Mr Smith did not say those things. I will dig equalisation scheme. I want to refer to a few out Mr Smith’s public statement and send it press clippings to indicate how some com- to Mr Williams so that he will be aware of mentators in my state believe things are going exactly what Mr Warwick Smith, the now in Tasmania. I refer to an article on 21 May federal member for Bass, said. which was in response to a plea from the I want to go back to this subsidy and the mayor of the Tasman Peninsula—which was time it was launched. I found it very interest- where the Port Arthur tragedy occurred—and ing. Part of the document says how it will the Tasmanian Premier to Mr Howard, as work. There will be a rebate that is payable Prime Minister. That plea was a request to for fares paid for the driver and the vehicle bring forward some of the funding that would where the fare exceeds $150. It also says that be available under this particular election the first $150 is paid by the driver. I thought promise. A spokesman for Mr Howard evi- I had better do some sums here and just dently indicated that Mr Howard was sympa- ascertain exactly what that means. Under the thetic to bringing forward this subsidy and current fare structure on the Spirit of Tasman- using it to assist with the very difficult situa- ia, a TT-Line vessel which operates across tion that Tasmania—but, more importantly, Bass Strait, the only way you could actually the Tasman Peninsula—found itself in as a get a $150 rebate would be if you used the result of the Port Arthur tragedy, and also top two cabins—that is, the suite and/or the using it to assist in the general economic deluxe cabin. There is no way that you could condition of the state. An article headed get a $150 rebate on a one-way fare under the ‘Tourism Fear’ in the Mercury on 25 May other three fare structures. Yet the dollar stated: figure—$49½ million over three years—is The crisis in Tasmania’s tourism business is based on every vehicle that crosses Bass Strait deepening because potential visitors are stalling their trips until the promised Bass Strait passenger getting a $150 rebate on a one-way fare. I subsidy starts. contacted Mr Sharp’s office today and asked if they could explain to me how it worked. With the state facing one of its toughest tourism winters, it is believed the wait for the Federal They said that they could not but that they Government subsidy could be holding back a tide would get someone from the department to of visitors. ring me and explain it. I hope they do, be- Further down in that article, a spokesman for cause $49½ million over three years—(Time the Minister for Transport and Regional expired) Development, Mr Sharp, said that the subsidy was not likely to start until September. There Western Australia: Liberal Party are a host of those types of articles in the Senator CRICHTON-BROWNE (Western local papers. Australia) (7.31 p.m.)—I rise to respond ever I think it is very disappointing. The Tas- so briefly, as is rarely my wont, to two arti- manian people must be totally disappointed in cles that appeared in the Australian over the the actions of their federal government repre- last two days written by that well-known sentatives. Not one of them has come out and Labor Party hack Nigel Wilson. made a public statement with regard to any of these election promises, any of the funding Senator Wheelwright—There are not programs. I must say, however, that Mr enough of them. Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1497

Senator CRICHTON-BROWNE—There senior. The national affairs and economics are more than enough party hacks like Nigel correspondent, Mr John Hyde, is quoted as Wilson, I can tell you. He writes that I or saying that it would be damaging if Mr people associated with me were about to Barnett went. Who is Mr Hyde? Mr Hyde dump the WA Deputy Liberal Leader, Colin happens to be an intellectually crippled writer Barnett. Of course that is a total fabrication. for the Australian. He is a poor man’s Bert I have no knowledge of any suggestion of any Kelly. He would pursue an ideological ideal move against Mr Barnett. This is a contrived, and dream he does not even understand concocted and spurious story written by himself. He reads the books of Burke and Wilson. Like all these concocted stories, you others and then quotes without understanding never ring up the person responsible and ask what he is saying. them if it is true, because it spoils a good Here is this dry Right from Western Aus- story. The first I knew about it was when I tralia who supported bottom of the harbour read it in the paper. schemes. He supported retrospective tax. That story was headed ‘Lib deputy leader’s Where is his political and economic integrity? position under threat’. It went on to talk about The first time he was tested, he went snivel- all the terrible things I am about to do to ling to Howard and voted for bottom of the Barnett. The next day the headline in the harbour schemes. His great political soul mate Australian is ‘Court forced to back deputy’. happened to be Fred Chaney, who knifed this This jerk writes a story saying the deputy is dry John and put in the wet Andrew. Talk about to be knocked off. Then, when Court about a political harvest! says it is not true, the headline is ‘Court This article also says that, as long as I had forced to back deputy’. It is the sort of jour- direct influence over the activities of the nalistic licence that brings discredit to journal- Liberal Party, it faced a virtual fundraising ists. drought. Without getting into the fine details I listen to Senator Murphy quoting the of the Liberal Party, I can tell you— media. I often wonder why senators with Senator Wheelwright—No, get into them. some intellectual and political skills think they are reinforcing their arguments by quot- Senator West—Don’t be modest. ing some hack journalist who has got a story Senator CRICHTON-BROWNE—You off the back of a truck, has fabricated it or don’t spend 25 years building something up has got it from some loose-lipped fool. But, to kick it down for fun, I can assure you. invariably, it is given with such great authori- When I stepped down after four years unop- ty as if they were citing God. posed as state president in Western Australia, On the second day Wilson tells us that Mr we had the largest membership of any politi- Court was forced to endorse his deputy to cal party in any state in Australia. We were head off mounting criticism within the Liberal the wealthiest state organisation in the Liberal Party. What a bunch of nonsense! Then he Party in Australia, yet we have this jerk here goes on to say that the national affairs and saying that the party faced a fundraising economics correspondent—I love these drought. The truth of the matter—everybody quotes. It is like being a senior Liberal. You knows it—is that the party is almost bankrupt only have to be in the party for two years and over there now and they have got one-sixth of you are a senior Liberal. the membership they had when I was the state Senator Panizza—Two years? Two weeks. president. Senator CRICHTON-BROWNE—Two Poor old Hyde lost the federal seat of weeks, yes. Moore. How did he lose that? Because he went around the mortgage belt in the Senator Faulkner—We don’t mind if those metropolitan seat of Moore and said that the Liberal sources are senior or not. government in those days, the community Senator CRICHTON-BROWNE—Of generally and society generally were investing course, everybody in the Liberal Party is too much in capital stock and housing. 1498 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

Finally, it is observed in this article that I was being kind to him, Senator Panizza. In people sympathetic to me—and I do not know the same way as the point of order was taken what ‘sympathetic to me’ means; they cannot by Senator Hill to defend Ian Viner QC, who say people who love me or support me—are as a lawyer publicly disclosed documents and understood to have sought to bring new knowledge given to him by my wife, I make members into key party branches in Mr no apology for attacking Hyde, Viner or any Barnett’s safe Liberal electorate of Cottesloe. of his other spivs who stick their nose into That is absolute nonsense. I never put any- politics and seek to attack me. body in a branch who got knocked back. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—There is no Everybody I put in got there and had a vote. point of order. There are other steps that can The truth of the matter is that nobody sought be taken by people if they wish to do so. to stack any branches. Then there is Dame Rachel Cleland, whose Second Sydney Airport claim to fame is that she was married to the Queensland Parliament first federal director of the Liberal Party—as if in some way that reflected glow of glory Senator CHILDS (New South Wales) (7.40 gives her some imprimatur to make some p.m.)—I had responsibility before the last profound ex cathedra statements about the election for the Sutherland area of Sydney. events of the Liberal Party. Like most of us, Before question time yesterday I was speaking when she gets to 87 she does not understand about the opposition of the people in the that it is probably wiser to be more discreet south-west of the state to the proposal by the and more retired in her comments. She used government to have an airport at Holsworthy. the blue rinse set to stack out two branches in I was referring to the fact that Mr Tickner, Cottesloe against the virile, active, energetic who was the member for Hughes before the young people in the branch, as I understand. last election, Sutherland council and others in But there was certainly no attempt by people that area had put to me arguments against that sympathetic to me to stack out any branches. proposal for the airport. I would like to con- I would like to think that there are people tinue to emphasise in the Senate the points sympathetic to me in most branches already. that they made. The studies have been done. Holsworthy has been rejected as a suitable I raise these matters only because it is a site since the 1970s. The only reason to do type of journalism that shows the utter level another EIS is as a sop to the coalition’s big of corruption and the decay and the destruc- business constituency, and that is either the tion of integrity that we see ever so often. I existing airport organisations or the new do not know whether Mr Wilson made this up consortium. or it was given to him by some unknown source. But the truth of the matter is that it is Senator Faulkner—Did the Lawrence utterly a fabrication. Mr Wilson did not have Hargraves mob come and give some evidence the courtesy, but he did have the good sense, to the committee? not to contact me. He would have not been Senator CHILDS—Yes, they all gave able to write the story if he had. evidence in the sense that they are hesitant Senator Panizza—I raise a point of order. about the second Badgerys Creek airport— There is no protection for former members of that is really the bottom line. Of course, the either house, but calling a former member an consortium itself has not been sighted. I do intellectual cripple is a bit rough. Senator not know who they are or what they are up Crichton-Browne might like to take the to. It is a mystery at the moment because we chance to withdraw that particular remark for had no indication before the election of the good common courtesy to all Western Aus- devious deal that has been done by this tralians, especially some former members on government. either side of the chamber. Senator Parer’s pre-election promise to the Senator CRICHTON-BROWNE—I think people of Sydney that Badgerys Creek will go he is totally and utterly intellectually crippled. ahead is put on hold now by this government. Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1499

Is this just an excuse for further delays of associated with clearing up unexploded Badgerys Creek? That is the worry, because ordnances in the military site. There are that is a threat to all the people in the inner topographical problems. The land is very city of Sydney who at the moment have the uneven, with deep ravines. This is the mad- problem of noise arising from Mascot. ness that this government is proposing in the An EIS is not necessary. We know Hols- geographic area that is proposed for Hols- worthy is not suitable. While the proposed worthy. airport at Badgerys Creek will be 15 kilo- Waste cannot be used to fill the ravines metres from the nearest houses, the Hols- because of settlement problems. One hundred worthy site is within three kilometres of some and forty million cubic tonnes of earth landfill of Sydney’s fastest growing suburbs, includ- would have to be found to level the site. ing Wattle Grove, which is only a stone’s Sutherland council told the Senate aircraft throw from the site. In the last 10 years noise committee that they doubted whether 300,000 people have moved into the suburbs there was enough landfill anywhere in Sydney near the site. to fill the ravines. The area already has Australia’s only The southern part of Holsworthy was nuclear reactor, which I have referred to rejected as a possible site in the 1980s be- earlier, and the largest garbage tip in the cause of the constraints already mentioned. Southern Hemisphere. The site has significant The northern part of the site was advocated cultural value; it contains a number of Abo- by the Pickrell group, which I have referred riginal sites. A recent unpublished survey by to earlier, but that part is too close to the the Australian museum of the Holsworthy site residential areas. In contrast, the MANS study shows that the land supports examples of in the 1970s pointed to Badgerys Creek as a sandstone vegetation and rarer Cumberland suitable site for a second Sydney airport. The Plain vegetation. Living in this environment same report rejected Holsworthy, as I have are endangered frogs and reptiles, koalas and said already. Although there is some local quolls. I know that Senator Brownhill is opposition to an airport at Badgerys Creek, concerned about those sorts of things. In fact the proposal has a great deal of local support. this is one of the few remaining healthy koala Liverpool council, a very large council in colonies in the Sydney region. Sydney, and other local bodies in the area The Holsworthy site is part of a catchment have welcomed Badgerys Creek and indeed area for the Georges River. The western site have planned infrastructure on the assumption of the airport will sit almost on the bank of that the airport would go ahead. In contrast, the river. The erosion and siltation due to the Liverpool and Bankstown councils have construction process will be more than the vowed to fight the Holsworthy proposal. It is river can bear, not to mention the effect of not insignificant that the Liberal Party has increased aircraft and car pollution in the dodged the by-election in the Bankstown area. area. The Georges River supports a number of They know the people of Bankstown know sensitive mangrove bird and fish breeding they will be affected and are angry about this grounds. The residents of south-western government’s betrayal. Sydney have objected to the airport on envi- The federal government has already spent ronmental grounds and because it will affect $800,000 on the Badgerys Creek site. No-one the quality of life, as I have already men- will be living within 15 kilometres of the tioned, of 430,000 people. Badgerys Creek airport site. That contrasts the From a more pragmatic perspective, how thousands who currently live within 15 would an airport at Holsworthy cope with the kilometres of Kingsford Smith airport. Sub- massive floods which historically affect the urbs such as Sutherland, Engadine, Waterfall, Liverpool-Holsworthy area? How will the Menai, Woronora, Lucas Heights, Milperra, flood plains be affected by the massive Panania, Revesby, Padstow, Picnic Point, earthworks required by the airport and associ- Fairfield, Granville, Hammondville, Chipping ated infrastructure? There are high costs Norton, Moorebank, Guildford, Chester Hill, 1500 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996

Parramatta and Lidcombe will be affected. estimates committee process, in which I and The proposed east-west runway points directly other senators participated on several occa- at Minto and Macquarie Fields. Planes will sions. This was done under a Labor govern- fly over both Westmead and Auburn hospitals ment as part of the development of the checks and the long-established retirement village of and balances needed for executive govern- Hammondville. ment. So much for getting away from it all by But the barbarians are back in Queensland. going bushwalking or camping in the Royal The sons and daughters of Bjelke-Petersen are National Park. This national park is one of the now turning back the clock, and Michelle oldest in the world, but to the Minister for Cornwell—who many senators will recall Transport and Regional Development (Mr worked in the Senate as a senior officer with Sharp) and this government it is just another impeccable, professional impartiality—has flight path. Minister Sharp is calling Hols- been crudely sacked. I support her work in worthy ‘an insurance policy’. That is the the development of a code of conduct for ultimate insult. Meanwhile, there is no insur- members of parliament. I feel shock and ance and no security for the thousands of horror if the review caused her sacking. A people who would be affected by this propo- review of the pecuniary interests of members sal. Their lives are on hold. They cannot sell of parliament might have been the catalyst for their homes. They could not move out of the her elimination. Whatever the reasons, it is a path of destruction even if they wanted to. scandal. (Time expired) Mr Sharp has added fuel to the fire by emphasising Holsworthy’s supposed advanta- Second Sydney Airport ges as a site. One of those advantages is that Senator FORSHAW (New South Wales) the site is big enough to accommodate future (7.50 p.m.)—Firstly, I am very indebted to expansion—whatever that means. It is cold my colleague Senator Childs for tonight comfort for the people of south-western making some comments about the proposed Sydney. Holsworthy airport. I am not sure whether this I must comment on the member for Hughes, is the first time in the Senate’s history that it Mrs Danna Vale, who is a Liberal member of has had two adjournment speeches on the parliament. She says that, when she was a same topic, but I also intend to make some candidate, she did not know about the pos- comments in regard to what is a disastrous sible Holsworthy airport site. Robert Tickner proposal for the people living in the Suther- certainly did. He spoke out. The Sutherland land shire and in and around the Holsworthy council spoke out. I know she does not live area. in the electorate, but that is not the real In yesterday’s matters of public interest problem. The real problem is that she is not debate I made a speech with respect to this believable because she has no excuse for not issue. I detailed the fact that, during the defending the people of her electorate. hearings of the Senate Select Committee on I would now like to completely move away Aircraft Noise in Sydney, Senator Parer, the from the Holsworthy airport issue, but I do chairman of that committee and also at that want to speak about another injustice. time the shadow minister for transport, never Michelle Cornwell was a deputy clerk of the once raised the proposal to construct an Queensland parliament. She is a conservative, airport or to consider an airport at the Hols- non-radical person devoted to the enhance- worthy site. ment of parliamentary democracy, but this is Some evidence was presented by a group too much for the National-Liberal Party known as the North Shore Action Group, government of Queensland. She has been which was represented by a Mr Pickrell. sacked. Tonight my colleague Senator Childs also Michelle Cornwell organised a number of referred to Mr Pickrell’s evidence. That group seminars to assist the Queensland parliament put to the committee the possible option of set up a committee system, including an having an airport at Holsworthy. Indeed, Mr Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1501

Pickrell identified in his evidence to the proposal was made: it was not unique; they were committee all the reasons why we would not the only ones who made it. I have forgotten never want to put an airport at Holsworthy how many people actually put that proposal to our committee, but it was quite a number, as Senator and then proceeded to try to argue that we Forshaw will know. might be able to overcome some of the issues, such as by moving mountains to put airports ‘How many’ he asked of me, and I interject- where those mountains once were. ed, ‘Two.’ Senator Parer continued: Two. Did you check them out, Senator Forshaw? I, like every other member of the commit- We asked the question, naturally, in the commit- tee, was surprised that this was even raised tee—this is all on the record—why Holsworthy was during the committee’s inquiries. I understand not the final choice. that the proposal for an airport at Holsworthy He went on to outline the reasons. Senator had been dismissed many years ago. Indeed, Parer’s memory on that occasion was a bit in the early 1980s there was an examination hazy. But it is very clear on the record that of possible sites for a second airport in Syd- the proposal with regard to Holsworthy was ney, and Holsworthy was ranked ninth out of not something that was advocated by a lot of 10 possibilities in a study conducted by witnesses to the committee. It was raised by Kinhill and Stearn. one group, the North Shore Action Group. As I was surprised, and I think most people I said, at no stage were they questioned, nor were surprised. I think Senator Parer was was any comment made during the proceed- surprised at the time. Senator Parer never ings by any of the coalition senators— asked any questions and neither did Senator particularly Senator Parer, as chairman of that Woods, who was a member of that commit- committee—regarding this proposal. tee. They never made any comment at all Indeed, in the majority report of the com- when this evidence was given. Indeed, I can mittee, comprising coalition senators Parer, recall—and I have checked the Hansard—that Woods and Sandy Macdonald, together with on that day Senator Parer was most anxious Senator Bourne from the Democrats, there to conclude the hearing as it was getting was really only one relevant mention of rather late in the day when the submission Holsworthy, and that is at page 324 of the was put up. I certainly gained the impression committee’s report. It states: that coalition members of the committee were In response to doubts about the suitability of totally uninterested in this proposal. Badgery’s Creek, Airservices Australia advised the Subsequently, I raised the issue in the Committee that these two issues were addressed in committee’s deliberations when the Suther- the 1985 EIS. land Council gave evidence, because I ques- They were issues in respect of fog and winds. tioned them very closely about this proposal. The majority report continued: Again, neither Senator Parer nor any other Others proposed sites in various forms which coalition senator asked any questions or they considered more suitable. These included commented. Holsworthy, Richmond, Goulburn and a Sydney seadrome floating approximately 5 kilometres east In a huge Hansard record of over 1,300 of the North Head of Botany Bay. pages, there is no other situation where the The Committee notes that a number of these proposal for an airport at Holsworthy was put locations were examined and rejected in 1984. The before the committee as a realistic proposi- Committee is satisfied that Badgery’s Creek is an tion. I raise that because, in answer to a appropriate site for a second Sydney airport. question earlier this week, Senator Parer gave Embarking on another lengthy process of site the impression to the Senate that this had evaluation will only postpone a now quite urgent been raised on a number of occasions. Last decision. Tuesday he said: I emphasise those last two sentences: the There is no doubt that another airport is required committee was satisfied that Badgerys Creek in the Sydney region. That is the reason why Mr was an appropriate site and, further, that Sharp has done this. Any implications of secret embarking on another lengthy process of site agreements are absolute rubbish. Certainly, a evaluation would only postpone a now quite 1502 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 urgent decision. Those were the comments of the Senate committee himself. He did so as the majority of members of the committee. Of the member for Bennelong and also in his course, the members who put forward a capacity as the Leader of the Opposition. He minority report—Senator Neal, Senator Childs was most concerned about the effect on his and I—naturally agreed with that part of the own electorate of the aircraft noise issue. But report. he never once told the committee about this secret meeting, this secret agenda for an In light of what has now become public airport at Holsworthy. Indeed, in his evidence, knowledge regarding the secret proposal made he restated his commitment to Sydney West to the then Leader of the Opposition, John airport. He said there was a short-term solu- Howard, Senator Parer and others, that state- tion, which was reopening the east-west ment in that majority report was made even runway, and a long-term solution to build a though the coalition was clearly considering second airport, and his party was committed putting Holsworthy back on the agenda. But to the building of that airport at Badgerys they had to keep it a secret because of the Creek. electoral and political consequences if it had He was on the record in the committee as been made public before or during the elec- supporting that situation—never once men tion campaign. I am very familiar with the area of the Hughes electorate. I happen to live in it. I have made that known quite clearly to mem- bers of the Senate and the committee at the time. I know the outrage that would have been generated if such a proposal had been made public. That outrage is now being generated by the community in the Hughes electorate. Local issues were important in the Hughes electorate in terms of this campaign, particularly issues regarding road access and services. My colleague Senator Childs has referred to some of the characteristics of this electorate—the Lucas Heights reactor, the military range, the army base, the unexploded ordnances, the Heathcote and Royal national parks, the environmental and Aboriginal heritage sites, and the Woronora Dam and catchment area, which provides water for up to half a million people in the Sutherland Shire and surrounding areas. There is no doubt that if this proposal had been on the table during that election cam- paign, there would have been absolute com- munity outrage. I have no doubt that Danna Vale, the Liberal candidate for Hughes, would not now be the member for that seat, because Robert Tickner was on the record with respect to this proposal. But nothing ever came forth from the candidate for the Liberal Party, from Mr Howard or from Senator Parer—people who were aware of this proposal. I point out also that Mr Howard, the then Leader of the Opposition, gave evidence to Thursday, 30 May 1996 SENATE 1503 tioning Holsworthy, but knowing all along that there were people who had come to him and to Senator Parer, put up this proposal and asked them to keep it secret. The community will be outraged at the hypocrisy and the lack of honesty and integrity in respect of this issue by the then opposition. (Time expired) Senate adjourned at 8.00 p.m. DOCUMENTS Tabling The following documents were tabled by the Clerk: Taxation Determinations TD 96/23 and TD 96/24. Taxation Rulings TR 96/16-TR 96/19.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

The following answers to questions were circulated:

Bureau of Meteorology Calendar (1) Yes. (Question No. 32) (2) No similar errors have been detected on the 1996 calendar. Senator Colston asked the Minister for the (3) 23,000 copies were produced in 1995 at a Environment, upon notice, on 2 May 1996: cost of $148,000 and 23,000 copies of the 1996 Did the Bureau of Meteorology produce a Calendar were produced at an estimated cost of calendar for 1995 and for 1996; if so: $158,000. (1) Did the calendar for 1995 indicate that there (4) Approximately 7,200 copies of each of the were 31 days in November, with 31 November and 1995 and 1996 Calendars were distributed to the 1 December both being listed as falling on a Bureau’s volunteer rainfall observers and coopera- Friday. tive observers around Australia, in recognition of (2) Were there any similar errors on the calendar their contribution to the national climate data base for 1996. and in order to assist in their appreciation of the (3) How many copies of the calendars were significance of their efforts in support of the public produced for each of the two years and what was the cost of production in each case. (4) How many copies of the calendar were distributed free of charge for each of the two years. (5) How many copies of the calendar were sold, and at what price, for each of the two years. (6) If copies of the calendar were sold, what was the total net profit or loss on the production and sale of the calendars for each of the two years. Senator Hill—The answer to the honour- able senator’s question is follows: 1504 SENATE Thursday, 30 May 1996 weather and warning services network. A further 3,000 copies each of the 1995 Calendar and 2,150 of the 1996 Calendars were distributed on a complimentary (in several cases exchanged) basis to overseas National Meteorological Services, Australian Heads of Missions overseas, Federal and State Environment Ministers, Parliamentary col- leagues of the Minister (1995 only) and to agencies that the Bureau of Meteorology works closely with (e.g. State Emergency Services, Fire Authorities etc.) in the delivery of forecast and warning services to the community. (5) Approximately 12,800 copies of the 1995 Calendar and 13,500 copies of the 1996 Calendar were made available for sale through the Public Relations Unit of the Bureau’s Head Office in Melbourne and through its Regional and Field Offices in each State and the NT. These copies are offered to the public for $12 over the counter without cylinder, $13 over the counter with cylin- der, or $15 if postage within Australia is required. Copies are sold to Bureau staff for $10 and a limited number (200) are sold to the Australian Me- teorological and Oceanographic Society (AMOS), which makes an ‘in kind’ contribution to produc- tion of the Calendar, for $6 each. (6) The primary purpose of the Calendar is to promote greater understanding of the science of meteorology and to improve the effectiveness of community understanding and application of meteorological information and services. The price of the Calendar is set at a level which enables the Bureau to recover the costs of production and distribution. The setting of the price of the Calendar is based on careful pre-estimates of the costs of staff time, printing and distribution. Some allowance is made for damaged stock and the return of unsold stock. In the past two years, damaged stock has been small and most of the available stock sold, resulting in a small profit. For the 1995 Calendar the profit was $7,599 and for the 1996 Calendar a profit of around $9,500 is estimated.