Official Hansard No

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

SENATE Official Hansard No. 2, 2004 THURSDAY, 4 MARCH 2004

FORTIETH PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—SEVENTH PERIOD

BY AUTHORITY OF THE SENATE

INTERNET The Journals for the Senate are available at http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/work/journals/index.htm

Proof and Official Hansards for the House of Representatives, the Senate and committee hearings are available at http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard

For searching purposes use http://parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au

SITTING DAYS—2004 Month Date February 10, 11, 12 March 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 22, 23, 24, 25, 29, 30, 31 April 1 May 11, 12, 13 June 15, 16, 17, 21, 22, 23, 24 August 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 30, 31 September 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 27, 28, 29, 30 October 5, 6, 7, 25, 26, 27, 28 November 22, 23, 24, 25, 29, 30 December 1, 2

RADIO BROADCASTS Broadcasts of proceedings of the Parliament can be heard on the following Parliamentary and News Network radio stations, in the areas identified.

CANBERRA 1440 AM SYDNEY 630 AM NEWCASTLE 1458 AM BRISBANE 936 AM MELBOURNE 1026 AM ADELAIDE 972 AM PERTH 585 AM HOBART 729 AM DARWIN 102.5 FM

CONTENTS

THURSDAY, 4 MARCH

Notices— Presentation ...... 20779 Business— Rearrangement...... 20783 Rearrangement...... 20784 Committees— Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee—Extension of Time...... 20784 Electoral Matters Committee—Membership...... 20784 Electoral Matters Committee—Reference...... 20784 Foreign Affairs: Western Sahara...... 20785 Education: Funding...... 20785 Committees— Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts References Committee—Meeting...... 20786 Australian Labor Party: Centenary House ...... 20786 Committees— Finance and Public Administration References Committee—Reference ...... 20787 Regulations and Ordinances Committee—Delegated Legislation Monitor ...... 20788 Extension of Sunset of Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title Bill 2004— First Reading ...... 20788 Second Reading...... 20788 International Transfer of Prisoners Amendment Bill 2004, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Amendment Bill 2004 and Migration Amendment (Duration of Detention) Bill 2004— First Reading ...... 20789 Second Reading...... 20789 Bills Returned from the House of Representatives...... 20794 Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorist Organisations) Bill 2003— In Committee...... 20794 Third Reading...... 20801 Workplace Relations Amendment (Compliance with Court and Tribunal Orders) Bill 2003— Second Reading...... 20812 Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Administration) Amendment Bill 2004 and Industrial Chemicals (Notification and Assessment) Amendment (Rotterdam Convention) Bill 2004— Second Reading...... 20829 Third Reading...... 20831 Extension of Sunset of Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title Bill 2004— Second Reading...... 20831 Third Reading...... 20834 Australian Crime Commission Amendment Bill 2003 [2004]— Second Reading...... 20834 Third Reading...... 20836 Industry Research and Development Amendment Bill 2003— Second Reading...... 20837 Third Reading...... 20846

CONTENTS—continued

Questions Without Notice— Trade: Free Trade Agreement ...... 20846 Distinguished Visitors...... 20847 Questions Without Notice— Superannuation: Reform...... 20847 Trade: Free Trade Agreement ...... 20848 Australian Defence Force: Remuneration Arrangements ...... 20849 Asia Pacific Space Centre ...... 20850 Trade: Free Trade Agreement ...... 20851 Asia Pacific Space Centre ...... 20852 Health: General Practitioners ...... 20853 Asia Pacific Space Centre ...... 20854 Health: Program Funding ...... 20856 Ministerial Staff: Salaries ...... 20857 Trade: Free Trade Agreement ...... 20859 Migration Review Tribunal ...... 20860 Questions Without Notice: Take Note of Answers— Answers to Questions...... 20860 Notices— Withdrawal ...... 20867 Delegation Reports— Parliamentary Delegation to Japan and the Republic of Korea...... 20867 Committees— Economics Legislation Committee—Membership...... 20869 Bills Returned from the House of Representatives...... 20869 Superannuation: Reform...... 20869 Documents— Consideration...... 20898 Committees— Consideration...... 20899 Documents— Consideration...... 20899 Adjournment— Agriculture: Wheat ...... 20900 Veterans: Entitlements...... 20902 Health: Organ Donation ...... 20904 St Vincent de Paul Society: Book Launch...... 20906 Documents— Tabling...... 20908 Departmental and Agency Contracts ...... 20908 Questions on Notice— Environment and Heritage: Institute of Public Affairs—(Question No. 2043) ...... 20909 Defence: Stockton Rifle Range—(Question No. 2113)...... 20909 Parliamentarians: Entitlements—(Question No. 2497) ...... 20910 Trade: Firearms—(Question No. 2500)...... 20913

Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20779

Thursday, 4 March 2004 includes participating in decision-making ————— bodies and playing a key role in contributing to national government and The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. industry agendas relevant to agriculture, Paul Calvert) took the chair at 9.30 a.m., fishing and forestry. and read prayers. Senator Allison to move on the next day NOTICES of sitting: Presentation That the Senate— Senator Troeth to move on the next day (a) notes that: of sitting: (i) the weight of scientific evidence That the Senate recognises International strongly suggests that: Women’s Day on 8 March 2004 and notes: (A) the global average surface temper- (a) that the idea to hold an International ature increased by approximately Women’s Day first arose at the turn of the 0.6°C in the 20th Century and is century; likely to increase by between 1.4°C and 5.8°C in the 21st Century, and (b) that International Women’s Day is celebrated worldwide as a day for (B) the primary cause of global warming reflecting upon the progress made by is the increased concentrations of women in achieving equal status with greenhouse gases in the atmosphere men, calling for further change and due to human activities, particularly celebrating the achievements of women in the burning of fossil fuels, their many and diverse roles; (ii) the impact of climate change in (c) the major role that rural women play in Australia could include decreased food and fibre production, food security water availability, lost productivity in and the development of worldwide rural the agricultural, fisheries, forestry and economies, women making up tourism sectors, increased fire risk, loss approximately 32 per cent of Australia’s of alpine habitats and species, an farm workforce; increase in severe weather events, degradation and loss of coral reefs, and (d) the contribution of outstanding rural an increased risk of infectious diseases, women, as recognised in the Rural respiratory illness, heat-related Industries Research and Development illnesses and allergies, and Corporation’s Rural Women’s Awards and that consistent with the values of (iii) despite the risk to Australia, the International Women’s Day, the Australian Howard Government has refused to Government actively supports these ratify the Kyoto Protocol and failed to awards and will be celebrating the implement sufficient measures to achievements of the award winners at a reduce domestic greenhouse gas national reception for rural women in emissions and minimise the impact of March 2004; and climate change; and (e) that the Australian Government continues (b) calls on the Government to: to encourage the development of rural (i) ratify the Kyoto Protocol and work women through other initiatives such as cooperatively with the international the Industry Partnerships Corporate community to devise a comprehensive Governance for Rural Women Program, a agreement to reduce global greenhouse program which equips and encourages gas emissions, women to participate in their industries at whatever level they choose and also

CHAMBER 20780 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

(ii) raise the mandatory renewable energy AUSTRALIAN SPORTS DRUG AGENCY target to at least 19 200 GWh for 2010 AMENDMENT BILL 2004 and 40 000 GWh for 2020, Purpose of the Bill (iii) introduce an emissions trading scheme The bill will ensure that Australia complies with and/or a carbon tax, the recently announced World Anti-Doping Code (iv) amend the Environment Protection and (the Code) by enabling the Australian Sports Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 to Drug Agency (ASDA) to perform particular func- ensure approval is required for all tions required as a result of the introduction of the actions that could result in significant Code. greenhouse gas emissions, and Reasons for Urgency (v) develop and implement a broader range The Code obliges national anti-doping organisa- of measures to reduce domestic tions to adopt and implement its requirements emissions and encourage the expansion prior to the commencement of the Olympic of the renewable energy sector. Games in Athens in August 2004. Although not a Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western legal obligation, there will be strong international Australia—Manager of Government Busi- pressure to comply with the Code by this date. ness in the Senate) (9.31 a.m.)—I give notice Non-compliance with the Code by either the gov- that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: ernment or National Olympic Committee of a country may have consequences with respect to That the provisions of paragraphs (5), (6) and Olympic Games, Paralympic Games, World (8) of standing order 111 not apply to the follow- Championships or other major sporting events. ing bills allowing them to be considered during ASDA is Australia’s national anti-doping organi- this period of sittings. sation. Australian Sports Drug Agency Amendment Amendment of the Australian Sports Drug Bill 2004 Agency Act 1990 is required by April 2004 to Customs Tariff Amendment (Paraquat facilitate compliance with the Code and ensure Dichloride) Bill 2004 that ASDA has its revised procedures in place Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Amendment prior to the commencement of the Olympic Bill 2004 Games in Athens in August 2004. International Transfer of Prisoners (Circulated by authority of the Minister for Amendment Bill 2004 Communications, Information Technology and the Arts) Medical Indemnity Amendment Bill 2004 ————— Medical Indemnity (IBNR Indemnity) Contribution Amendment Bill 2004 CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT Migration Amendment (Duration of (PARAQUAT DICHLORIDE) BILL 2004 Detention) Bill 2004 Purpose of the Bill Tax Laws Amendment (2004 Measures No. The bill amends the Customs Tariff Act 1995 to 1) Bill 2004. incorporate Customs Tariff Proposal No. 1 I table statements of reasons justifying the (2003), which inserted an additional note in Chapter 29 of the Customs Tariff to specify that need for these bills to be considered during the pesticide chemical paraquat dichloride, classi- these sittings and seek leave to have the fied to subheading 2933.39.00, may include an statements incorporated in Hansard. added emetic, for safety reasons. Leave granted. Reasons for Urgency The statements read as follows— Alterations contained in Customs Tariff Proposals must be enacted within twelve months of their date of tabling in the House of Representatives.

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20781

Passage of this bill is therefore required before (Circulated by the authority of the Minister for 27 March 2004 (i.e. twelve months after the tab- the Environment and Heritage) ling of Customs Tariff Proposal No. 1 (2003)). ————— (Circulated by authority of the Minister for Jus- INTERNATIONAL TRANSFER OF tice and Customs) PRISONERS AMENDMENT BILL 2004 ————— Purpose of the Bill GREAT BARRIER REEF MARINE PARK In July 2003, the Government announced that as a AMENDMENT BILL 2004 result of its discussions with the US, Australia Purpose of the Bill and the US agreed to work towards putting ar- The bill amends the Great Barrier Reef Marine rangements in place to transfer Mr Hicks or Mr Park Act 1975 in order to provide that the legal Habib to Australia, if convicted by a military liability for payment of the Environmental Man- commission, to serve any penal sentence in Aus- agement Charge (EMC) is placed on tourists visit- tralia in accordance with Australian and US law. ing the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park rather The Government has developed the International than tour operators conducting activities in the Transfer of Prisoners Amendment Bill 2004 to Great Barrier Reef Marine Park and to change the meet this commitment. manner in which the EMC is collected. The Bill seeks to amend the International Transfer The effect of the amendments will be that GST of Prisoners Act 1997 (ITP Act) to facilitate the will not be payable in respect of the EMC. repatriation of Australians serving a prison sentence overseas in places or regions that are under Reasons for Urgency the control or authority of a foreign country but Many tour operators set their prices so that the are not part of the foreign country. The amend- cost of the EMC is passed on to the tourist as part ments will also provide a means by which Austra- of the full ticket price. As most (if not all) tour lians may be transferred to Australia to serve a operators were operating on the understanding prison sentence imposed by a US military com- that GST did not apply to the EMC, tour opera- mission. tors were not collecting GST on the EMC com- A transfer under the ITP Act requires the consent ponent of the full ticket price. of the surrendering jurisdiction, the transferee and On 7 July 2003, the Australian Taxation Office the country to which the prisoner is being trans- made an announcement that those tour operators ferred. who had not collected GST on the EMC compo- The amendments to the ITP Act will: nent of the full ticket price before 1 September 2003, would not be required to remit GST on this • expand the meaning of ‘transfer country’ for component. However, as from 1 September 2003, the purposes of the Act, and all tour operators would be required to remit GST • clarify the meaning of the terms ‘court’ or ‘tri- on the full ticket price. bunal’ under the ITP Act (subsection 4(1)) • This bill is required to be dealt with urgently in expand the list of areas that may be deemed order that the changed arrangements can be in part of a transfer country, and • place by 1 April 2004 (the start of a new quarter insert a provision to deem certain regions to be for the collection of the EMC). Early implementa- a foreign country for the purposes of the ITP tion will provide maximum benefit to the $1.4 Act. billion reef tourism industry, including the cer- Without the amendments the ITP Act will not tainty required to set ticket prices. If the bill is not apply to an Australian citizen sentenced to im- passed in the 2004 Autumn sittings, tour operators prisonment by a military commission or regions will continue to pay GST in respect of the EMC, that do not constitute a foreign country but which creating uncertainty and imposing a burden on the are under the control or authority of a foreign reef tourism industry. country.

CHAMBER 20782 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

The Bill will also ensure that Australia can con- tional methods of calculating the current incurred clude prisoner transfer agreements with a part or but not reported liabilities (IBNR) contribution— region of a foreign country (sections 4(1) and 8) to be re-named the United Medical Protection or areas under the control or jurisdiction of a for- (UMP) Support Payment—and will change the eign country, such as Guantanamo Bay. imposition day. Reasons for Urgency This measure will enable practitioners to continue The US Government has announced that an Aus- to contribute to the taxpayer cost of assisting tralian detainee held at Guantanamo Bay is in- UMP whilst ensuring that this cost is affordable. cluded in the list of six detainees eligible for trial Reasons for Urgency by military commission. That list was signed by The Government has stated that initially there President Bush on 3 July 2003. Although no will be transitional payments in the 2003-04 fin- charges have yet been laid and no trial date has ancial years and that the PSS will come into full been set, it is necessary to have the ITP amend- operation on 1 July 2004. Passage of the legisla- ments in place so that a transfer could occur if an tion as soon as possible will provide certainty to Australian detainee is sentenced to a term of im- that undertaking. prisonment. (Circulated by authority of the Minister for (Circulated by authority of the Attorney-General) Health and Ageing) ————— ————— MEDICAL INDEMNITY AMENDMENT MIGRATION AMENDMENT (DURATION BILL 2004 OF DETENTION) BILL 2004 MEDICAL INDEMNITY (IBNR Purpose of the Bill INDEMNITY) CONTRIBUTION The bill amends the Migration Act 1958 to re- AMENDMENT BILL 2004 move the ability of the Federal Court or Federal Purpose of the Bills Magistrates Court to order the interlocutory re- The Medical Indemnity Amendment Bill will give lease of judicial review applicants from immigra- effect to the United Medical Protection (UMP) tion detention pending finalisation of litigation Support Arrangements and the Premium Support that involves a claim that either the applicant may Scheme (PSS). have a visa or that their detention is unlawful. The UMP Support Arrangements will replace the Reasons for Urgency existing IBNR Contribution and will link the con- It is imperative that these amendments are made tribution amount of liable practitioners to their as a matter of urgency to prevent the continued income and membership time with UMP. This interlocutory release of detainees by the Federal measure will enable practitioners to continue to Court or the Federal Magistrates Court. contribute to the taxpayer cost of assisting UMP whilst ensuring that this cost is affordable. (Circulated by authority of the Minister for Im- migration and Multicultural and Indigenous Af- The PSS will assist in ensuring affordable medi- fairs) cal indemnity insurance for doctors through a Government subsidy to meet 80% of indemnity ————— costs above 7.5% of a doctor’s gross private TAX LAWS AMENDMENT (2004 medical income. MEASURES NO. 1) BILL 2004 The bill will also allow doctors to receive a single Purpose of the Bill bill annually from their insurer including their This bill will amend the taxation law to: insurance premium and UMP support payment • broaden the medical expenses tax offset to (where applicable) less any payment through the cover expenses for guide dogs for hearing im- PSS. paired and other disabled individuals; The Medical Indemnity (IBNR Indemnity) Con- tribution Amendment Bill will introduce addi-

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20783

• allow a deduction for transport expenses in- suant to standing order 78(1), I give notice of curred in travelling between two places of un- his intention, after taking note of answers related income-earning activity; later today, to withdraw business of the Sen- • ensure that the small business capital gains tax ate notice of motion No. 1 standing in his (CGT) concessions apply as intended where a name for today for the disallowance of the small business operates through a discretionary Superannuation Industry (Supervision) trust; Amendment Regulations 2003 (No. 5), as • amend the Energy Grants (Credits) Scheme (Consequential Amendments) Act 2003 to contained in Statutory Rules 2003 No. 251 close a loophole that would otherwise create and made under the Superannuation Industry an unintended entitlement to fuel grants; (Supervision) Act 1993. • ensure that goods and services tax (GST) input Senator Ridgeway to move on the next tax credits are excluded from the cost base and day of sitting: reduced cost base for CGT purposes; That the Senate— • amend the Act to enable the disclosure of protected information from the Australian Busi- (a) notes that: ness Register (ABR) to Commonwealth (i) the Government has committed to a agency heads and heads of State and Territory public review of the economic impact departments; of the free trade agreement (FTA) • allow an income tax deduction for the net between Australia and the United amount of a donation made to a deductible gift States of America (US), and recipient where there is an associated minor (ii) under US trade law, before an benefit; agreement can be ratified, a thorough • amend provisions relating to the taxation of environmental impact assessment must discretionary trusts (including the repeal of be done to review the extent to which section 109UB); positive and negative environmental • ensure that the deduction available under sec- impacts may flow from economic tions 46FA and 46FB continues to be available changes expected to result from the for on-payments of unfranked dividends by a prospective agreement; and resident company to its wholly owned non- (b) calls on the Government to: resident parent; • require that charities, public benevolent insti- (i) conduct a full public analysis of the tutions and health promotion charities be en- environmental impact of the FTA, dorsed by the Commissioner of Taxation in or- (ii) conduct a full public analysis of the der to access all relevant tax concessions; and social and cultural impact of the FTA, • add certain organisations as specifically-listed and deductible gift recipients. (iii) table reports of these reviews in the Reasons for Urgency Parliament for its consideration. These measures need to be enacted as early as BUSINESS possible to provide certainty for business and taxpayers in relation to how the tax law applies. Rearrangement Passage in the 2004 Autumn sittings is required as Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western the matters either relate to the current and previ- Australia—Manager of Government Busi- ous income year or will have a significant impact ness in the Senate) (9.33 a.m.)—I move: on taxpayers from 1 July 2004. That the following government business or- (Circulated by authority of the Treasurer) ders of the day be considered from 12.45 p.m. till Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (9.31 not later than 2 p.m. today: a.m.)—At the request of Senator Sherry, pur-

CHAMBER 20784 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

No. 7 Agricultural and Veterinary Chemi- Electoral Matters Committee cals (Administration) Amendment Membership Bill 2004 Senator BARTLETT (Queensland— Industrial Chemicals (Notification and Assessment) Amendment (Rot- Leader of the Australian Democrats) (9.34 terdam Convention) Bill 2004 a.m.)—I, and also on behalf of Senator Faulkner, move: Extension of Sunset of Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title Bill 2004 (1) That the resolution of appointment of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral No. 8 Australian Crime Commission Matters be varied by omitting in Amendment Bill 2003 [2004] paragraph (2) “1 Senator to be nominated No. 9 Industry Research and Development by the Leader of the Opposition in the Amendment Bill 2003 Senate and 2 Senators to be nominated by Question agreed to. any minority group” and substituting “2 Rearrangement Senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and 1 Senator Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western to be nominated by any minority group”. Australia—Manager of Government Busi- (2) That a message be forwarded to the House ness in the Senate) (9.33 a.m.)—I move: of Representatives seeking the That the order of general business for concurrence of the House in this variation consideration today be as follows: to the resolution of appointment. (a) general business notice of motion no. 787 Question agreed to. standing in the name of Senator George Electoral Matters Committee Campbell, relating to superannuation and retirement income measures; and Reference (b) consideration of government documents. Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) (9.35 a.m.)—I move: Question agreed to. That the following matters be referred to the COMMITTEES Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport for inquiry and report by the last sitting day in Legislation Committee June 2004: Extension of Time (a) the matter relating to electoral funding and Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (9.34 disclosure, which was adopted by the committee on 15 August 2000, and any a.m.)—At the request of Senator Heffernan, I amendments to the Commonwealth move: Electoral Act necessary to improve That the time for the presentation of reports of disclosure of donations to political parties the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport and candidates and the true source of Legislation Committee be extended as follows: those donations; and (a) administration of the Civil Aviation Safety (b) any submissions and evidence received by Authority—to 5 August 2004; and the committee in relation to that inquiry of (b) administration of AusSAR in relation to 15 August 2000. the search for the Margaret J—to 27 May Question agreed to. 2004. Question agreed to.

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20785

FOREIGN AFFAIRS: WESTERN EDUCATION: FUNDING SAHARA Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (9.35 (9.36 a.m.)—I ask that general business no- a.m.)—I, and also on behalf of Senator Net- tice of motion No. 773 today, relating to tle, move: funding for public schools, be taken as a That the Senate— formal motion. (a) notes that: Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (9.36 (i) 27 February 2004 was Saharawi a.m.)—Mr President, I seek leave to amend National Day and the 28th anniversary the motion. of the proclamation of the Saharawi Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (9.37 republic, a.m.)—by leave—I suggest to Senator Alli- (ii) on 30 January 2004, the United Nations son that the opposition have not been advised (UN) Security Council extended by 3 of the nature of this amendment. Unless we months the mandate of the UN mission are given time to consider it through our for Western Sahara, giving Morocco processes then we may be forced to oppose it more time to respond to the latest peace plan for Western Sahara, when in fact we do not oppose it. We need time. I suggest to Senator Allison that she (iii) it is now 13 years since the original consider moving this amendment on Mon- peace plan was signed, day, which would give us a little bit more (iv) Morocco has now accepted a United time to consider it. Nations High Commissioner for Refugees-sponsored exchange of Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (9.37 family visits for Saharawis separated a.m.)—by leave—As I understand it, that is by war, occupation and the 2 720 km not something I am able to do because I am long military rampart erected by not the mover of the motion. If Senator Net- Morocco, and tle would be willing to consider postponing (v) a delegation of 11 Australians will join until Monday, then I would be happy to do the international march to the ‘Wall of that. Shame’ in April 2004 and will visit the 175 000 Saharawis in refugee camps in The PRESIDENT—Is leave granted for Algeria; and Senator Allison to amend Senator Nettle’s motion? (b) urges the Government to: (i) congratulate Morocco for agreeing to Leave not granted. the exchange of family visits, Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) (ii) use its best efforts to persuade Morocco (9.38 a.m.)—I move: to sign the latest UN peace plan that is That the Senate— based on the organisation of a (a) notes that: referendum of self-determination in Western Sahara, and (i) the fundamentally flawed socio- economic status (SES) funding system (iii) provide humanitarian assistance to the has delivered an extra $815 million in Saharawi refugees who need food and Commonwealth funding to non- medicine urgently. government schools, Question agreed to. (ii) the announced expansion of the SES system to catholic systemic schools will deliver a further $362 million in

CHAMBER 20786 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

additional funding to private schools Marshall, G. McGauran, J.J.J. whilst no new money is promised to Murray, A.J.M. O’Brien, K.W.K. public schools, further disadvantaging Ridgeway, A.D. Scullion, N.G. the public system, and Sherry, N.J. Stephens, U. (iii) the SES funding system is based on the Stott Despoja, N. Tchen, T. erroneous assumption that private Tierney, J.W. Troeth, J.M. school enrolments reflect the average Watson, J.O.W. Webber, R. Wong, P. socio-economic status of the areas in * denotes teller which the students live; and (b) calls on the Government to: Question negatived. (i) recognise the need to prioritise funding COMMITTEES for public schools, which deliver high Environment, Communications, Informa- quality education to all students tion Technology and the Arts References regardless of wealth, religion, Committee educational or behavioural needs, Meeting (ii) scrap the flawed SES funding system, which delivers inequitable funding Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (9.45 outcomes to the non-government a.m.)—At the request of Senator Cherry, I school sector, and move: (iii) end Commonwealth subsidies to the That the Environment, Communications, wealthiest private schools. Information Technology and the Arts References Question put. Committee be authorised to hold a public meeting during the sitting of the Senate on Wednesday, The Senate divided. [9.42 a.m.] 10 March 2004, from 11.30 am to 2 pm, to take (The President—Senator the Hon. Paul evidence for the committee’s inquiry into Calvert) competition in broadband services. Ayes………… 2 Question agreed to. Noes………… 43 AUSTRALIAN LABOR PARTY: CENTENARY HOUSE Majority……… 41 Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) AYES (9.45 a.m.)—I move: Brown, B.J. Nettle, K. * That— NOES (1) The Senate calls on the Government to Allison, L.F. Bartlett, A.J.J. appoint a member, or a retired member, of Bishop, T.M. Boswell, R.L.D. the judiciary to review the findings of the Buckland, G. Calvert, P.H. Royal Commission of Inquiry into Campbell, G. Campbell, I.G. Leasing by the Commonwealth of Carr, K.J. Collins, J.M.A. Accommodation in Centenary House, Conroy, S.M. Cook, P.F.S. conducted by the Honourable TR Morling, Crossin, P.M. Denman, K.J. QC in 1994, in the light of later evidence, Ferris, J.M. * Forshaw, M.G. particularly with regard to movements and Greig, B. Harradine, B. trends in commercial rates and leasing Hogg, J.J. Humphries, G. arrangements since 1994. Hutchins, S.P. Johnston, D. (2) The review be empowered and resourced Kirk, L. Knowles, S.C. Lightfoot, P.R. Ludwig, J.W. to seek expert advice from a panel of Macdonald, J.A.L. Mackay, S.M. valuers, one to be appointed by the lessor,

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20787

one to be appointed by the lessee and an The PRESIDENT—That will be done, independent Chairman of the panel to be Senator. appointed by the President of the Australian Institute of Valuers and Land Senator FAULKNER (New South Economists. Wales—Leader of the Opposition in the Sen- ate) (9.47 a.m.)—by leave—I suspect the Question agreed to. reason that government, opposition, Austra- COMMITTEES lian Democrat and other senators, apart from Finance and Public Administration Senator Brown and apparently Senator Net- References Committee tle, oppose this reference is that, a little ear- Reference lier in the business of the Senate today, a Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) reference to an identical matter has been (9.46 a.m.)—I move: passed to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters. Given that circumstance, I That— wonder whether it is in order for identical or (1) The following matter be referred to the near identical references to be agreed by the Finance and Public Administration chamber to be referred to separate commit- References Committee for inquiry and tees. I think I know what the answer to that report by 30 June 2004: is, but I am merely making the point. I think The funding and disclosure of political it is an interesting procedural point, I am sure parties, candidates and elections. you would agree with me, Mr President. (2) In considering this matter, the committee Now we are going to have a sage ruling from examine and report on the following you on this matter. issues: (a) the effect that public funding has had The PRESIDENT—On matters like that, on the overall funding of political it is for the chamber to decide. parties, candidates and elections; Senator Ian Campbell—There is no (b) the effect on the political process of the standing order against stunts. increase in private funding, relative to The PRESIDENT—Yes. There is no public funding, of political parties, standing order, I understand. candidates and elections; Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) (c) avenues for removing the reliance on private funding for political parties, (9.48 a.m.)—by leave—It is quite plain that candidates and elections; Senator Nettle’s motion is substantially different to the one I put. I do want to say for (d) relevant submissions, transcripts and reports of the Joint Standing the record that she, very reasonably, accepted Committee on Electoral Matters that my motion would have precedence, rec- inquiry into electoral funding and ognising the authority and tradition of the disclosure (August 2000 to October Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Mat- 2001); and ters in these matters. I think it was quite (e) any other relevant matter. proper for her to at least put her motion on Question negatived. record but mine was preferred. I appreciate her attitude in allowing me precedence. Senator Brown—Mr President, under the standing orders I ask that my lone supporting Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) vote for that motion be recorded, please. (9.50 a.m.)—by leave—The Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, Senator Faulkner, pointed out that the two references to the

CHAMBER 20788 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 committees were substantially identical. The Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western two references to committees were signifi- Australia—Minister for Local Government, cantly different in that the Australian Greens’ Territories and Roads) (9.52 a.m.)—I move: proposition proposed looking at avenues for That this bill may proceed without formalities removing the reliance on private funding for and be now read a first time. political parties, candidates and elections, a Question agreed to. far more substantial and comprehensive ref- Bill read a first time. erence in relation to the issue of corporate donations than the previously passed refer- Second Reading ence to the Joint Standing Committee on Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western Electoral Matters, which looks at disclosure Australia—Minister for Local Government, rather than—as the Australian Greens sup- Territories and Roads) (9.52 a.m.)—I move: port—looks at the option of banning corpo- That this bill be now read a second time. rate donations. I seek leave to have the second reading Regulations and Ordinances Committee speech incorporated in Hansard. Delegated Legislation Monitor Leave granted. Senator TCHEN (Victoria) (9.51 a.m.)— The speech read as follows— On behalf of the Standing Committee on EXTENSION OF SUNSET OF Regulations and Ordinances, I present the PARLIAMENTARY JOINT COMMITTEE ON delegated legislation monitor for 2003. It is a NATIVE TITLE BILL 2004 consolidated edition of all the monitors that The Extension of Sunset of Parliamentary Joint were produced in respect of each of the sit- Committee on Native Title Bill 2004 extends the ting weeks of the Senate during that calendar operation of the Parliamentary Joint Committee year. on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres During that year a total of 1,522 disallow- Strait Islander Land Fund until 23 March 2006. able instruments were tabled in the Senate. The Committee has played an important role in These instruments were made under the au- the Parliament’s oversight of the development of thority of 192 separate enabling acts admin- the native title system. istered by 17 departments of the state. I wish The numbers of determinations of native title and to particularly draw attention to the quantity indigenous land use agreements are growing at an of this legislation because, from time to time, increasing rate. the Senate is accused of not being necessary. This bill will ensure that the Committee continues I wish to demonstrate the workload that just to play its important role into the future. one Senate committee has to carry out. The Debate (on motion by Senator Mackay) other committees of this chamber do an adjourned. equal if not greater amount of work. Ordered that the resumption of the debate EXTENSION OF SUNSET OF be made an order of the day for a later hour PARLIAMENTARY JOINT of the day. COMMITTEE ON NATIVE TITLE BILL 2004 First Reading Bill received from the House of Represen- tatives.

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20789

INTERNATIONAL TRANSFER OF The Government has developed the International PRISONERS AMENDMENT BILL 2004 Transfer of Prisoners Amendment Bill 2004 to meet this commitment. GREAT BARRIER REEF MARINE PARK AMENDMENT BILL 2004 The bill is facilitative only. At this stage, no Australian has been convicted by MIGRATION AMENDMENT a military commission. (DURATION OF DETENTION) BILL 2004 We know that there are two Australians currently being detained by US authorities in Guantanamo First Reading Bay, Cuba and that one of those men, David Bills received from the House of Repre- Hicks, was included in the 3 July 2003 list of the sentatives. six detainees who President Bush has declared eligible for trial at this stage. Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western Australia—Minister for Local Government, At this time, no charges have been laid against Mr Hicks. Territories and Roads) (9.53 a.m.)—I indicate to the Senate that these bills are being Although Mr Habib has not yet been listed as eligible for trial, the Government understands that introduced together. After debate on the mo- US authorities are expediting consideration of his tion for the second reading has been ad- case. journed, I will be moving a motion to have This bill provides a statutory basis for returning the bills listed separately on the Notice Pa- Mr Hicks and Mr Habib to Australia in the event per. I move: that they are charged, convicted and sentenced to That these bills may proceed without formali- a period of imprisonment. ties, may be taken together and be now read a It is a preparatory step to ensure that both men first time. can, if the circumstances arise, benefit from the Question agreed to. humanitarian nature of the international prisoner Bills read a first time. transfer scheme. The amendments will increase the flexibility and Second Reading application of the international prisoner transfer Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western scheme as it applies in Australia, allowing the Australia—Minister for Local Government, scheme to apply to a broader range of areas. Territories and Roads) (9.54 a.m.)—I move: This will allow the Act to apply to a larger num- That these bills be now read a second time. ber of Australian citizens or persons with community links to Australia who are imprisoned in I seek leave to have the second reading foreign countries. speeches incorporated in Hansard. The amendments will also allow for a larger Leave granted. number of foreign nationals imprisoned in Austra- The speeches read as follows— lia to return to their home countries, thereby pro- INTERNATIONAL TRANSFER OF viding an economic benefit to Australia. PRISONERS AMENDMENT BILL 2004 For example, Australia has been discussing with In July 2003, the Government announced that as a Hong Kong and China the possibility of entering result of bilateral discussions, we would work into an agreement for transfer of prisoners from with the US to put in place arrangements to trans- Hong Kong for a number of years. fer Australian citizens convicted by a military However, the unusual status of Hong Kong, like commission to Australia for the purpose of serv- Guantanamo Bay, precludes the application of the ing any penal sentence in Australia in accordance International Transfer of Prisoners Act 1997 to with Australian and US law. that area.

CHAMBER 20790 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

And, with the breakdown of colonial regimes them in a foreign country, but also by enabling around the world, it is increasingly likely that we prisoners to have more contact with their family. will be confronted with other regions of unusual ————— status with whom we may be interested in finalis- ing a prisoner exchange agreement. GREAT BARRIER REEF MARINE PARK AMENDMENT BILL 2004 To facilitate the transfer of prisoners back to Aus- tralia from Guantanamo Bay and areas with an No government in this nation’s history has done unusual status, such as Hong Kong, it is necessary more to protect the Great Barrier Reef than the to amend the Act. Howard Government. The first amendment, when taken with the third We have done so, principally, through three far- and fourth amendments, address an anomaly reaching and ambitious actions. whereby a region or area that is not a sovereign First, we passed the Environment Protection and country cannot be declared a transfer country for Biodiversity Conservation Act in 1999—opposed the purposes of the ITP Act. by members opposite—which gave this country The second amendment will clarify the meaning its first, national, environment-specific legislation of the terms ‘court’ or ‘tribunal’ under the ITP Act in our history. One of the significant impacts of to clarify a possible ambiguity, in particular the EPBC Act has been to give the Australian whether a military commission can be considered Government unprecedented powers to protect the a “court” or tribunal” for the purposes of the ITP Great Barrier Reef. Act. I note that in the Labor Party’s recently unveiled This will enable the ITP Act to apply to a sen- environment platform that it continues to fall into tence of imprisonment imposed by a US military factual error in claiming that it must protect the commission. Great Barrier Reef from mining, and from mineral exploration. The third amendment will extend the list of areas that are deemed part of a transfer country for the There are two indisputable facts which demon- purposes of the ITP Act. strate that the premise of the claim is flawed— pointless—redundant. This gives recognition to the fact that a transfer country may consist of a range of different re- The first is that the Great Barrier Reef Marine gions which may not be considered a part of that Park Act 1975 explicitly bans mining, and min- country because, for example, it is not a part of eral exploration, in the Park. the landmass that constitutes the mainland of that The second equally obvious and indisputable fact country. that Labor cannot seem to absorb is that the Increasing the flexibility and application of the EPBC Act protects the Park from impacts from ITP Act will provide increased community bene- mining and exploration outside the park to the fits. limit of the Exclusive Economic Zone. It will reduce the impact on Australian families Any proposed activity within the EEZ that has the who have family members imprisoned in areas potential to impact negatively on the World Heri- that the Act currently does not apply to. tage values of the Great Barrier Reef, or that otherwise awakes the provisions of the EPBC Act, is It will also reduce the impact on Australian citi- captured by this Australian law, which provides a zens imprisoned overseas who may suffer due to quantum advance in the protection of the Great the cultural and language differences they experi- Barrier Reef from the sorts of mineral exploration ence in a foreign country. in the region that was actively promoted by Labor Returning such prisoners to Australia increases when it was last in control of this parliament. their chances of rehabilitation, not only by ena- The second massive contribution to the protection bling the prisoner to take part in prison programs of the Great Barrier Reef by the Howard Gov- and services that they may not have accessible to ernment has been the development of a new zon- ing plan for the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20791 that will, if it is not disallowed by this parliament, And that is understandable. The Great Barrier ensure that one third of the reef—a six fold in- Reef is not only a great regional, State, and na- crease—will be protected in so-called “no-take tional tourist attraction—it is a premier destina- zones”—zones where no extractive activity can tion of international tourists. occur. What those tourists come to see is pristine reef. This is a plan that has been hailed internationally. The Great Barrier reef has more pristine reef than It is, undoubtedly, the most comprehensive effort any other coral reef system on the planet—and we to protect and preserve the environmental and have an obligation to maintain the quality of the economic values of a coral reef system, and its reef as best as we possibly can. That is what this associated ecosystems, anywhere in the world. government is doing—more comprehensively This Government is a world leader in this regard. than any other in the history of our country. This Representative Areas Program for the Great And that is in the interests of biodiversity for its Barrier Reef Marine Park has the intent of provid- own sake. It is in the interest of natural beauty for ing the Great Barrier Reef with such a level of its own sake, and it is most certainly in the inter- protection of its unique and wondrous biodiver- est of the tourism industry that the Productivity sity as to give it a high level of resilience in the Commission recently estimated had an annual face of the threats that confront it. value well in excess of $4 billion. The better the overall health of the reef, the better That introduction, to the significance of the tour- it will be able to survive those pressures. ism industry, brings me to the bill. The third great advance that this Government has The Environmental Management Charge (“the made in terms of protecting the biodiversity, and charge”) was introduced in 1993 as a charge on thus the resilience, of this national icon, is the operators using the Great Barrier Reef Marine development in concert with the Queensland Park (“the Marine Park”) to contribute financially Government of the Reef Water Quality Protection to the management of the Marine Park. Currently Plan. the maximum charge imposed is $4.50 per visitor. The intent of the Plan is to first halt, and then The introduction of the charge provided the Great ultimately to repair, the decline in water quality in Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority the Great Barrier Reef lagoon. (“GBRMPA”) with revenue to apply to the management of the Marine Park. Monies collected The aim is to achieve a halt in the decline in wa- from the charge have been applied to research and ter quality in ten years and this is an action that is management of the Marine Park to ensure that it completely synergistic with the Representative is able to manage the increasing pressures caused Areas Program, and the EPBC legislation. by tourism, coastal development, mariculture, Together these actions comprise a suite of meas- shipping, fishing, climate change, and the like. ures to protect the reef that are interconnected and Under the current arrangements, the permission that are singly, and collectively, unmatched. holder or tour operator has legal liability to pay One of the great beneficiaries of this suite of ac- the charge to the GBRMPA. The charge is paid by tions is the tourism industry. the tour operator based on the number of visitors Tourism is, by far, the largest single industry as- participating in excursions each day, and is sub- sociated with the Great Barrier Reef and the Great mitted to the GBRMPA at the end of each quarter. Barrier Reef Marine Park. However, since the introduction of the Goods and Fishing is important. In the catchments of the Services Tax (“GST”) in 2000, there has been Great Barrier Reef mining, and agriculture, are confusion amongst tour operators operating in the extremely important but, when it comes to the Marine Park as to whether or not the GST is ap- reef and the park, and many of the communities plicable to the charge. adjacent to them, tourism is, far and away, the The charge is listed in the Treasurer’s determina- biggest industry. tion pursuant to section 81-5 of the A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999; the

CHAMBER 20792 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 effect of which is that payments of the charge MIGRATION AMENDMENT (DURATION OF made to the GBRMPA directly by the tour opera- DETENTION) BILL 2004 tor are not subject to the GST. However, when the The Migration Amendment (Duration Of Deten- tour operator passes on the charge to the visitor, it tion) Bill 2004 adds a new subsection to section is treated as one of many input costs of the tour 196 of the Migration Act 1958. operator and the GST applies to the full price of The effect is to make unmistakably clear the par- the services provided. liament’s intention that an unlawful non-citizen is These amendments that I am introducing today only to be released from immigration detention in are aimed at dispelling that confusion by restruc- the circumstances specified in section 196— turing the method of payment and collection of unless a court finally determines that the deten- the charge. These amendments will place the le- tion is unlawful or the person is not an unlawful gal liability for payment of the charge on the visi- non-citizen. tor, and not the tour operator. As the Treasurer’s Determination pursuant to section 81-5 of the A The bill substantially mirrors the Migration Amendment (Duration Of Detention) Bill 2003 in New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 operates to ensure that the payment of the its original form. The 2003 bill was ultimately passed with amendments that only prevented the charge is not taken to be the provision of consideration, the GST will not be applicable to the courts ordering the interlocutory release of persons of character concern. charge paid by the visitor. The tour operator will then collect the charge paid by the visitor and During the house’s consideration of the Senate’s remit that money to the Commonwealth through amendments, the then Minister for Immigration the GBRMPA. and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs indi- Given the amount of public money involved, the cated that the government accepted the amendments as an interim measure only. The govern- bill creates a new offence if the tour operator does not submit the money collected from the visitor. ment’s priority was to protect the Australian community against the possibility of people of In addition, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park character concern being released from detention, Act 1975 already contains provisions allowing an with possible tragic consequences. inspector to search vessels, aircraft or premises In accepting the limited scope of the bill, how- for the purposes of ascertaining a person’s liability to charge, and allows an inspector to apply for ever, Mr Ruddock made it clear that the government would be introducing a new bill to cover a search warrant for the same. The bill will increase the scope of those powers in order to allow broader concerns it has on interlocutory release of all persons from immigration detention before inspectors to ascertain that a person has collected the correct amount of the charge from the visitor final resolution of their court proceedings—this is that bill. and to ensure that all visitors have paid the charge. This bill is an important measure in upholding the These amendments clarify the situation regarding principle of mandatory detention for all unlawful non-citizens under the Migration Act. the EMC and GST payments. This will provide greater certainty for the tourism operators who In 1992, the parliament enacted a series of depend on the Reef and provide significant em- changes to the migration act to introduce the pol- ployment and economic benefits. icy of mandatory detention. First, the Migration Amendment Act 1992 introduced mandatory de- It enhances the list of actions being undertaken by this government to ensure fair and reasonable tention of unauthorised boat arrivals. The Migra- tion Reform Act 1992, which commenced on access to a well protected natural and economic asset. 1 September 1994, introduced mandatory detention of all unlawful non-citizens. ————— The Migration Reform Act included section 196, which provides that an unlawful non-citizen must

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20793 be kept in immigration detention until he or she circumstances where a person in detention is: claims not to be an unlawful non-citizen” • Removed from Australia; Further, the court did not accept that section • Deported; or 196(3) by implication denied its power to order • Granted a visa. the interlocutory release of persons in immigra- Subsection 196(3) specifically states: tion detention. “to avoid doubt, subsection (1) prevents the The court was also of the opinion that: release, even by a court, of an unlawful non- “Parliament has not made ‘unmistakably citizen from detention (otherwise than for clear its intention to abrogate the power of removal or deportation) unless the non- this court to protect a ‘fundamental freedom’ citizen has been granted a visa.” by ordering the release……on an The intention of section 196 was to make it clear interlocutory basis, of persons in that there was to be no discretion for any person, detention………”. or court to release from detention an unlawful This bill makes parliament’s intention “unmis- non-citizen who is lawfully being held in immi- takably clear”. gration detention. The bill repeals subsections 196(4) and (4a) Mandatory detention remains an integral part of which were introduced in 2003 to prevent the the government’s unauthorised arrivals policy. interlocutory release of a specific class of persons The government believes that it is necessary to into the community—that is, people of character ensure, as a matter of public policy, that all concern. The repealed sections are substituted unlawful non-citizens are detained until their instead by a new subsection 196(4) that has wider status is clarified. This means that they must con- application to cover all persons in immigration tinue to be detained until they are removed or detention. Sections 196(1) and (3) remain un- deported from Australia or granted a visa. changed. It is not acceptable that any person who is, or who The new subsection makes it explicitly clear that, is suspected of being, an unlawful non-citizen, is unless an unlawful non-citizen is removed from allowed into the community until the question of Australia, deported or granted a visa, the non- their status is resolved. citizen must be kept in immigration detention. This policy sends a strong deterrence message to This applies unless a court finally determines people-smugglers—that Australia’s regularised that: immigration processes will not be circumvented. • The detention is unlawful; or Despite the clear intent of section 196, there has • The person is not an unlawful non-citizen. been a trend by the federal court to order the in- I stress that the amendments do not affect the terlocutory release of persons in immigration court’s powers to finally determine the lawfulness detention under section 23 of the Federal Court of of a person’s detention, or to determine the law- Australia Act 1976. fulness of the decision or action being challenged. An “interlocutory order” is an order made during They are intended simply to clarify the existing proceedings prior to the court’s final determina- provisions of the act. They do no more than what tion of the substantive matter. Where such an the courts have said that the parliament needs to order is made, a person must be released into the do. That is, make its intention in relation to immi- community until such time as the court finally gration detention ‘unmistakeably clear’. determines their application. The government believes that it is in the interests In the case of VFAD of 2002, the full Federal of all parties that such cases are finally deter- Court held that: mined as quickly as possible. “section 196(3) is silent as to the power of The court’s final determination of the case can this court to grant interlocutory release in take anywhere between several weeks and several months. Where the person is subsequently unsuc-

CHAMBER 20794 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 cessful, that person must be relocated, redetained School of Law and Legal Studies at La Trobe and arrangements then made for their removal University. It is headlined ‘Opposition to the from Australia. This is a time-consuming and Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorist Or- costly process and can further delay removal from ganisations) Bill’ and begins: Australia. I am an associate lecturer at the school of law and In summary, the bill implements measures to en- legal studies. Since the September 11 attacks in sure that the parliament’s original intention in America I have intensively researched Australia’s relation to immigration detention is clearly spelt counter-terrorism laws. I have also participated in out and the integrity of the mandatory detention the debate surrounding these laws and appeared at provisions of the act are not compromised. the various parliamentary committees inquiring I commend the bill to the chamber. into such laws. Ordered that further consideration of these He goes on to say that he understands that bills be adjourned to the first day of the next the bill is about to be debated and that the period of sittings, in accordance with stand- Labor Party will support it. He then says: ing order 111. This bill, if passed, will allow the proscription of Ordered that the bills be listed on the No- organisations simply by virtue of the federal tice Paper as separate orders of the day. Attorney-General being satisfied that the organisation is ‘directly or indirectly engaged in prepar- BILLS RETURNED FROM THE ing, planning, assisting in or fostering the doing HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES of terrorist acts’. Message received from the House of Rep- He goes on to say: resentatives agreeing to the amendment I urge you and your party to maintain its firm made by the Senate to the following bill: opposition to this bill for the following reasons: Workplace Relations Amendment (Improved (i) the bill is unnecessary because the government Remedies for Unprotected Action) Bill 2002 presently has the power to proscribe organisa- CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT tions. The Criminal Code Act 1995 presently em- (TERRORIST ORGANISATIONS) BILL powers the government to proscribe an organisa- 2003 tion if such an organisation has been identified by the United Nations Security Council as a terrorist In Committee organisation. More importantly, the government Consideration resumed from 3 March. has at its disposal extensive proscription powers. Under part 4 of the Charter of the United Nations The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN Act 1945 the Foreign Minister, if satisfied that an (Senator Chapman)—The committee is organisation is engaged in terrorist acts, can list it considering government amendments (1) and with the result that the assets of this organisation (2) moved by Senator Ellison. become frozen. Such freezing invariably means Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (9.56 that the listed organisation is shut down. My re- a.m.)—I have had a couple of representa- search into the proscription regimes in Canada, tions—and I am sure that they have gone to New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States of America clearly demonstrates other members—from legal commentators or that the banning powers available under the Char- members of the legal community and I want ter of the United Nations Act 1945 are the broad- to simply ask the minister about those and est found in the anglophone countries. This is the criticisms contained in those on the simply because this act does not define the mean- Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorist Organ- ing of terrorist acts; it leaves it to the Foreign isations) Bill 2003. The first is from Mr Joo- Minister to apply his subjective understanding of Cheong Tham, an associate lecturer in the what constitutes a terrorist act or terrorist organisation in the banning of individuals and organisa-

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20795 tions. Unsurprisingly, the breadth of this regime severe penalties, which in some cases can be up has led to extensive usage. To date 342 individu- to 25 years of imprisonment. als and 141 entities have been banned under this The only question left is: is the minister say- regime. For instance, Hamas and Lashkar-e- ing that the advantage of this bill is that it Tayyiba have been banned under this regime for more than two years. gets around the courts? Before going on to the next point in Mr Joo- Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— Cheong Tham’s letter, I ask the minister: Minister for Justice and Customs) (10.01 isn’t it so that the government presently has a.m.)—When Senator Brown says that these the power to proscribe terrorist organisa- organisations have been ‘banned’, they have tions? What advantage over those present been proscribed as organisations that you powers is built into the current legislation? cannot finance. Senator Brown most probably will take issue with that, and prefer the Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— advice of the associate lecturer at La Trobe Minister for Justice and Customs) (10.00 University, but I can tell Senator Brown that a.m.)—I understand that the legislation that that is the advice that the government has. Senator Brown refers to is in regard to the The legislation he is talking about deals with financing of organisations. That is something the financing of terrorist organisations. What quite different to what we are talking about we are talking about here is something quite here. What we are dealing with here is the different. We are talking about the member- membership of organisations. The legislation ship—someone who is a member of a terror- Senator Brown refers to deals with the fi- ist organisation. They are two different nancing of organisations. I understand that pieces of legislation dealing with two differ- the penalty involved there entails a maxi- ent aspects of counter-terrorism. mum of two years imprisonment. I will correct that if that is not right, but I understand Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (10.02 it to be the case that that is the maximum. It a.m.)—Unfortunately, the minister was not deals with financing. It is a very different listening, so I will go to the second point piece of legislation to what we are dealing again. Joo-Cheong Tham makes the point: with here. You really cannot compare them. Under the Criminal Code Act 1995— It is like comparing apples with pears. which we are dealing with here— Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (10.00 membership and other forms of participation in a.m.)—Not so. As the associate lecturer in organisations judicially determined to have en- law at La Trobe University says: gaged in terrorist activity are criminal offences, punishable by severe penalties, which in some To date 342 individuals and 141 entities have cases can be up to 25 years imprisonment. been banned under this regime. So the point the minister makes is not valid. The second point he makes is: The point I made is that this law is aiming to The bill is unnecessary because membership and get around Australia’s judicial system. That participation in a terrorist organisation are already is the point—and that is why it is obnoxious. illegal. The third point in this letter is that the bill This countermands what the minister has just confers arbitrary executive power: said. The associate lecturer goes on: The bill, if passed, will confer arbitrary power on Under the Criminal Code Act 1995, membership the federal government. First, the power is based and other forms of participation in organisations on vague criteria. Second, it can be exercised on judicially determined to have engaged in terrorist the basis of secret and untested evidence. Third, activities are criminal offences, punishable by

CHAMBER 20796 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 the applicable standard of proof is merely on the Moreover, it should not unduly trespass on rights balance of probabilities and not the ‘beyond and freedoms. This bill fails grievously on both reasonable doubt’ standard that customarily counts and should be rejected. applies to criminal proceedings. Moreover, the Joo-Cheong Tham bill only provides meagre review mechanisms. Associate Lecturer The key mechanism provided is a review under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) School of Law and Legal Studies Act 1977. Such review, however, is likely to be La Trobe University ineffectual. It is limited to questions of legality, I draw the committee’s attention to a letter and does not extend to the merits of the decision to proscribe. Further, the courts have demon- from the Law Council of Australia. It may strated a traditional reluctance to examine help the progress of the committee if the let- questions of national security after an executive ter were to be incorporated into Hansard. decision has been made. The fact that this bill This letter is signed by Mr Bob Gotterson would confer arbitrary executive power was well QC, who is the President of the Law Council recognised last year by Senator John Faulkner, of Australia. It says: the Australian Labor Party spokesperson for home I write in relation to the Criminal Code Amend- affairs, when he said that ‘proposals to erode our ment (Terrorist Organisation) Bill which has been freedoms and our rights— the subject of recent public comment. Senator Faulkner—A very fine fellow, The Law Council of Australia views with concern too. the recent developments in relation to this Bill, Senator BROWN—I hear an interjection including an agreement between the two major which I would agree with. The quote is: parties to support the Bill on condition of a number of legislative amendments. ‘proposals to erode our freedoms and our rights will ultimately erode our security as well. For this It remains the Law Council’s considered view reason we do not accept, and will not accept, the that the new proscription powers contemplated by government’s executive proscription bill. We will this Bill should be open to court supervision, to not accept a regime of secret proscriptions of ensure the power is discharged effectively and decisions in closed rooms of such significance fairly. Although a number of additional safe- and potentially destructive power in the hands of guards have been negotiated between the major one person and one person alone. To have that parties, they do not address this basic concern. kind of power exercised by one person in secret, While the importance of an adequate legislative particularly a member of the government execu- framework to respond to terrorist threats is unde- tive, is not acceptable in a democratic society and niable, the Law Council has serious reservations should never be allowed on the statute books’. in regard to this particular legislative development and its potential consequences both for ba- The fourth point in this letter is: sic rights of the citizens of Australia and for The bill, in conferring arbitrary executive power, members of the legal profession who may be risks undermining fundamental freedoms. The called upon to defend them. mere presence of such arbitrary executive power I will be asking the minister to comment on threatens to undermine political freedoms by both those key points. The letter goes on to chilling political activity. More than this, the arbitrary nature of power conferred by the bill means say: that its exercise is liable to lead both to mistakes To summarise our view, exercise of the proscrip- and abuse. In either case, fundamental liberties tion power should be conditioned upon court ac- like the freedoms of political thought and association, preferably as a pre-condition to exercise of tion are put in jeopardy. Any proposed anti- the power. As an alternative the power could be terrorism measures should be justified as being exercised provisionally for a limited period, say necessary in the campaign against terrorism.

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20797

30 days, with any extension of the period subject the Law Council seeks assurance that the pro- to court sanction. scription process will not abrogate or interfere As you will be aware, the powers contained in the with established legal protections such as the Bill will allow the Federal Attorney-General to privilege against self-incrimination and legal pro- proscribe groups as ‘terrorist organisations’ under fessional privilege. While the protection of Aus- Commonwealth criminal law. tralians against acts of terrorism must remain a paramount concern for the Commonwealth, as The letter goes on to criticise the powers in well as State and Territory governments, any revi- the bill. I draw attention to a paragraph fur- sions to the legislative framework for this protec- ther down the letter, where it says: tion should not interfere more than is absolutely While it is unlikely that any organisations truly necessary with fundamental legal protections involved in terrorist activities would seek the currently enjoyed by Australians. benefit of such judicial review, it would be an I trust you will give this matter your serious con- effective means of ensuring that people exposed sideration. to serious criminal liability through erroneous or I ask, indeed invite, the minister and Senator unjustified listing of terrorist organisations under the Criminal Code would have the benefit of Faulkner to comment on either of those let- some measure of a priori judicial protection. On ters from the legal community. the other hand, making proscription a purely Ex- Senator FAULKNER (New South ecutive act has been described by Dr Jenny Hock- Wales—Leader of the Opposition in the Sen- ing in a submission to the Senate Legal and Con- ate) (10.10 a.m.)—I do not think I can add to stitutional Legislation Committee considering my remarks of yesterday. earlier proscription proposals as: Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (10.10 “subversive of the rule of law in its failure to allow for a trial in this aspect, it breaches the a.m.)—Silence. notion of equality before the law in its creation Senator FAULKNER (New South of groups for which the usual judicial process Wales—Leader of the Opposition in the Sen- does not apply and it breaches absolutely the ate) (10.11 a.m.)—I appreciate that Senator separation of powers in even allowing for such Brown is going to provide copies of the let- a use of Executive power.” ters. He has indicated that he will provide The letter goes on to say: copies to the government. He has not indi- The Law Council urges caution in any expansion cated that to the opposition, I note. I have not of the Attorney-General’s power to list groups as seen them. I think I made my position on this ‘terrorist organisations’ or to otherwise proscribe very clear in yesterday’s debate. I accept that organisations under Commonwealth law. Any there are some differences between Senator such power should be subject to opportunity for Brown and me on this, apparently. As I said prior judicial review, and affected citizens should to Senator Brown yesterday, it is time for be afforded natural justice and due process as part of this exercise of Executive power. We have him to accept that he has won this argument suggested an alternative of provisional exercise with the government that the opposition and subject to court sanctioned extension. This alter- other senators have had. It is time to claim native would facilitate immediate proscription victory. One of the great things in politics, where that might be needed in the national inter- Senator Brown—not that I know much about est but would subject any continuation of the pro- providing advice to people—is that you have scription to court sanction. to know when you have won. I do not win Finally, the Law Council speaks for members of very often. In my experiences in politics I the Australian legal profession who may be called have not had too many wins. But when I do upon to defend people affected by the proscription powers under consideration. In this regard,

CHAMBER 20798 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 win something I try to recognise it, claim manner and according to the legislation victory and move on. which has been enacted. The Law Council I am very happy to read the letters. I look itself recognises that in some circumstances forward to seeing them. They raise important there have been changes to the law in rela- issues and, as you know, I am very interested tion to the privilege against self- in them and I will look at them closely. But I incrimination and professional privilege— am not going to make comment upon matters perhaps not so much the latter, but in relation that have been raised, in at least one case, in to the legislation there have been provisions private correspondence with you. One letter which deal with that. We will not deal with sounds like an identical letter that I have re- those here but I will just say to Senator ceived. Brown that the Attorney-General has a copy of this letter and, I understand, is replying to Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (10.12 it. I have no further comments to add. I have a.m.)—It is incumbent on the government to outlined the government’s position quite get up and say something. As far as the clearly. It is obvious Senator Brown dis- comment from Senator Faulkner is con- agrees with the government’s position and cerned, I am not winning anything here. We will no doubt express that in the usual man- are losing and this nation is losing. ner. Senator Faulkner—You just do not re- Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (10.15 cognise it. a.m.)—Here we are in this chamber debating Senator Ellison—You can lead a horse to a critical piece of legislation. That reply from water. the minister says that the Attorney-General, Senator BROWN—That is the point. It is who is totally empowered beyond the law to serious and the minister might take it seri- label community organisations as terrorists ously. The fact is that this is a massive inva- and to arrest individuals who are members of sion of the rights of Australians. This is, for those organisations in Australia in the future the first time in the history of parliamentary on the basis of very vague definitional pa- procedure that I am aware of, the granting of rameters, is writing back to the Law Council the powers of the courts and the parliament of Australia, presumably implying that the to an individual. It is a very serious matter. I response to my question about this letter will will ask the minister specifically about the be given to the public after this debate takes last paragraph in the letter from the Law place. That is not satisfactory. We are here to Council, to wit: determine on the basis of the information In this regard, the Law Council seeks assurance— available and in debate whether this law from the government and/or the opposition— should pass or not. I ask the minister: will he present the committee with the response to that the proscription process will not abrogate or this letter from the Attorney-General? Where interfere with established legal protections such as the privilege against self-incrimination and is it? legal professional privilege. Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— Does the minister give that assurance? Minister for Justice and Customs) (10.16 a.m.)—I will provide that when it is at hand. Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— Minister for Justice and Customs) (10.14 Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (10.16 a.m.)—The assurance I can give is that the a.m.)—I suggest that the committee adjourns law will be administered in an appropriate until that letter is at hand so that we can take

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20799 it into account and move the debate forward. on such an important issue. We have a right, I move: in this chamber, to be informed on the mat- That progress be reported. ters that are being raised. We have a right to Question put. know whether the time-honoured protections for people in the legal community are upheld The committee divided. [10.21 a.m.] in this law and there is no evidence that they (The Chairman—Senator J.J. Hogg) are. We have a right to know that this law is Ayes………… 8 of itself essential, because the argument is Noes………… 31 that terrorist organisations can be and have been put out of action in the past and will be Majority……… 23 in the future. AYES What is happening here is that the opposi- Allison, L.F. * Bartlett, A.J.J. tion is abrogating its responsibility and the Brown, B.J. Greig, B. government is bringing in a draconian law Murray, A.J.M. Nettle, K. which has no place on the statute books of Ridgeway, A.D. Stott Despoja, N. Australia. It is a disgraceful situation. The NOES denial of the committee of a letter from the Bishop, T.M. Buckland, G. Attorney-General—a critical letter, an abso- Campbell, G. Carr, K.J. lutely pivotal letter in this argument in the Chapman, H.G.P. Collins, J.M.A. committee, a letter which is going to appear Cook, P.F.S. Denman, K.J. after this debate takes place—is a further Eggleston, A. * Ellison, C.M. hallmark of the descent into a loss of proper Evans, C.V. Faulkner, J.P. Ferris, J.M. Forshaw, M.G. parliamentary control and review, which is Hogg, J.J. Hutchins, S.P. the direction that laws are taking under this Kirk, L. Macdonald, J.A.L. government. I could ask about other specific Mackay, S.M. Marshall, G. matters in that bill, but my questions are not McLucas, J.E. O’Brien, K.W.K. going to be answered. The minister did not Scullion, N.G. Sherry, N.J. answer that one; he is not going to answer Stephens, U. Tchen, T. Tierney, J.W. Troeth, J.M. any more. He has the numbers. Labor has Watson, J.O.W. Webber, R. caved in and agreed to it and there the matter Wong, P. is going to end, but we will vigorously op- * denotes teller pose this legislation and look at what oppor- Question negatived. tunities there are further down the line to remove the repugnant components of it. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Chapman)—The question is that Question agreed to. the amendments moved by Senator Ellison Senator GREIG (Western Australia) be agreed to. (10.26 a.m.)—I move Democrat amendment Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (10.24 (1) on sheet 4168: a.m.)—So we have it that the government (1) Page 4 (after line 3), at the end of Schedule and the opposition have voted against the 1, add: chamber being furnished with a letter from Intelligence Services Act 2001 the Attorney-General responding to the Law 5 Subsection 28(2) Council of Australia on the important matters Omit “7 members, 3 of whom must be that I read out. That is a new low in a debate Senators and 4 of whom must be

CHAMBER 20800 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

members of the House of the Government in the Senate, who must first Representatives”, substitute “9 consult with the leaders of recognised politi- members, 4 of whom must be Senators cal parties which do not form part of the and 5 of whom must be members of the government. In making these nominations, House of Representatives”. the Leader of the Government in the Senate 6 After subclause 14(4) of Schedule 1 must give consideration to the desirability of Insert: ensuring the representation of various politi- (4A) The Leader of the Government in cal parties. Despite the fact that there is cur- the Senate must nominate at least rently nothing in the legislation to prevent one Senator who is a the appointment of senators who are not representative of a recognised members of either the government or the political party that is represented opposition, no such senator has yet been ap- in the Senate and does not form pointed. part of the Government or of the Opposition. It is our view that, given the crucial role I referred to this amendment when I spoke which the joint committee will now play in earlier in committee about the concerns we relation to the proscription of terrorist or- Democrats have with the professed robust ganisations—its purview role, as the minister safeguards the minister speaks of. These are has referred to it—it is time to ensure that robust safeguards which the opposition con- this committee is more representative and sents to but which we challenge. One of more diverse. It is our view that this will those alleged robust safeguards is the pur- help to ensure and to provide for greater ac- view which the minister has advised and re- countability of the government’s power to ferred to in terms of the role which the joint proscribe terrorist organisations. We believe intelligence committee has in reviewing a that it is too dangerous simply to leave the listing and in reporting that to the parliament. scrutiny of the legislation to major party rep- But that body—the Parliamentary Joint resentation, to the government and the oppo- Committee on ASIO, ASIS and DSD—is not sition—both of whom, we would argue, have in any real sense a parliamentary representa- questionable records on antiterrorism meas- tive body, because it does not represent the ures. parliament fully. This amendment provides that the Leader This amendment seeks to ensure that there of the Government in the Senate must nomi- is a more diverse and more representative nate at least one—but is not limited to one— composition of that committee. The commit- senator who is not a member of either the tee itself is established under the Intelligence government or the opposition. That is de- Services Act. That act provides that there signed to ensure that the joint committee is must be seven members of the committee, not as exclusive as it currently is. It enables four from the House of Representatives and members of the crossbench to apply the same three from the Senate. The members from the level of scrutiny to the activities of the joint House of Representatives must be nominated committee as we do here in this chamber. by the Prime Minister after consulting with The first part of the Democrat amendment is the Leader of the Opposition. The nominated more of a pragmatic amendment which rec- members are then appointed by resolution of ognises that the government and the opposi- the House. Similarly, in the Senate, the Sen- tion are unlikely to want to give up one of ate members are nominated by the Leader of their current places on the committee in order to facilitate this. What we are seeking to

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20801 do here to facilitate that outcome is to ensure Under this legislation, for the first time in that the new requirement for the Leader of our nation’s history, a minister, behind closed the Government in the Senate to nominate a doors, acting on information from an intelli- senator from the crossbench occurs in that gence agency, ASIO, will be able to decide way. The amendment increases the number to ban a community organisation in Australia of members of the committee by two, thus by placing the label ‘terrorist organisation’ enabling the opposition to retain their current over it and with that ban to criminalise the number of members and ensuring that the members of that organisation. government will retain a majority of the By the fiat of a single minister there will committee, as is required by the legislation. be the ability to make criminals out of or- Our argument essentially is that, if parlia- ganisations and people in Australia before a mentary scrutiny is to be the primary ac- court or the parliament has intervened or countability mechanism in relation to the been referred to. This is a dangerous change proscription power, it is important that we to the way in which our nation works and it ensure that it is genuinely parliamentary has come from a government which has been scrutiny and not simply, as it stands at the eroding the basis of our constitutional rights, moment, scrutiny by the opposition. our civil rights and our political rights in this Question negatived. country in the name of fear in recent years. Bill, as amended, agreed to. Sensationally, on this occasion it has been backed by the Labor Party and opposition, Bill reported with amendments; report which should be fighting this legislation adopted. tooth and nail. Third Reading The parliament has been able to proscribe Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— and has effectively proscribed terrorist or- Minister for Justice and Customs) (10.32 ganisations in this country to now, and the a.m.)—I move: government has not been able to criticise that That this bill be now read a third time. effectiveness. But we have a situation here in Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (10.32 which the power of the parliament has been a.m.)—Section 71 of the Constitution, ‘Judi- set aside and given not just to the executive cial power and Courts’, in chapter III, ‘The but to the Attorney-General, Mr Ruddock. Judicature’, says: We are in a situation where, as I said, he, The judicial power of the Commonwealth shall be acting alone, can criminalise organisations vested in a Federal Supreme Court, to be called and individuals in Australia. It is no small the High Court of Australia, and in such other matter because, having been so criminalised, federal courts as the Parliament creates, and in the individuals will face up to 25 years in jail such other courts as it invests with federal juris- or, in the case of a person who recklessly did diction. not know that the organisation was a crimi- The rule has been—and the Constitution nal one and stayed a member, 15 years in points to it—that judicial matters shall be in jail. the hands of the courts, but we now have a The whole thing is unnecessary. We are all piece of legislation before us which crosses concerned about terrorism. We all want to that boundary. It hands to the Attorney- make this nation safe from terrorists. But we General enormous judicial powers which are have passed laws in this parliament which do not the prerogative of the courts anymore or, just that and, despite repeated requests to the indeed, the prerogative of the parliament.

CHAMBER 20802 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 minister to make it clear why this legislation effectively done that. But a political decision is necessary, when so far the ability to pro- has now been made not to do so anymore. scribe organisations in this country has There are further consequences than we are worked flawlessly and the government has facing today, and I have talked about those. not been knocked back, he has failed to do But, as far as I am concerned, I fear for the so. It is more political than it is a matter of Australian people. We do not have to talk protecting the nation from terrorism. That the about any current or past government in this Labor Party have done a 180-degree about- country but look to what has happened in turn on this matter since June last year, when other democratic countries to see how Senator Faulkner was saying exactly what I quickly a democracy can become a dictator- am saying now, is inexplicable unless you ship. It is always facilitated by loose laws look at it in political terms. When you look at which get around the courts and which set it in political terms, it is the Labor Party say- aside the parliament’s right, obligation and ing: ‘We don’t want to be seen to be soft on duty to be the arbiter of matters of great im- terrorism. The government have a cudgel portance for the country. That is lost here to there that we can’t face, so we’ll join them.’ no gain. That is the problem: it is to no gain, We are on a terrible slippery slope where because people plotting, planning or intent we know that the Attorney-General has more on carrying out terrorist activities in this laws to come which are worse than this one. country can be arrested, put out of action and That is agreed all around. The Attorney- proscribed under the current laws. General says so himself. He said this week A political low point has been reached that his canvas is not yet complete, and he here, and it is very frustrating to see what is did so with a great deal of cockiness, saying happening. It is deeply frustrating to see this that the Labor Party had caved in to the elec- legislation, supported by the opposition, tion on this piece of legislation so he will about to pass this place and to know that take it further. This has been a political mis- more is coming. We have to accept that that take by the Labor Party. But, more impor- is how it goes in a democracy, but a democ- tantly, it will, if the third reading passes, give racy can unravel itself. The check, the bal- to the Attorney—the very person who is con- ance, that one would expect from an opposi- cocting this political situation as we go to the tion in an alternative government has not election—an extraordinary power to inter- been there to prevent this piece of unravel- vene in the election to proscribe organisa- ling. It is a terrible law that is about to pass tions and/or people, which otherwise would in this place. It infringes on the rights of be the business of parliament, out of parlia- Australian citizens, the rights of the judiciary ment in a way which is going to be politi- and the rights of the parliament and it hands cally advantageous to the Howard govern- powers to one member of the executive in a ment in raising fear to its advantage before system which I think has gone much too far the ballot boxes are approached by the citi- along the way of allowing executive gov- zens of this country. ernment in this country its will. It is not just I cannot believe that the opposition could overriding the parliament but now overriding make such a mistake politically, let alone in the rights of the judiciary as well. I hope that the real interests of the Australian people. It the opposition as well as government mem- is the opposition’s job to defend the country bers, who should know better than this, re- against this sort of legislation. Until now— flect upon that. and certainly last year and in 2002—it has

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20803

If we are going to move further through this. I think it illustrates the dangers that are this year with the sale of political and civil inherent in giving people power without ac- rights as an expedient winner in the run to countability. the ballot box as this government purveys We have been told repeatedly in Western concocted fear, as it did in the run to the last Australia that there are enough accountabil- election, then as I said it is a low point in ity mechanisms—enough robust safeguards, politics for this country. Even at this point, I as Minister Ellison would have us believe— would urge the opposition to reconsider, but to ensure that, for the most part, that kind of I know it is not going to. The best we can do corruption is militated against; yet the out- is to insist there be a division and, when we come of this royal commission illustrates yet come back for the next piece of legislation again that it is not enough. In recent days from Mr Ruddock, see whether the opposi- there has been some speculation, not surpris- tion has got back its gumption, whether it has ing to me, that perhaps one of the best ways got back its spine and whether it has got back to address this—one of the best ways; it is its obligation to put the interests of this coun- not the only problem which has emerged in try ahead of a fear of the government being Western Australia—is to ensure that the next able to label it falsely, if it had stood up to police commissioner is not from within this legislation, as being soft on terrorism. Western Australia, not from within the sys- I think the people of Australia are getting tem, not from within the culture, but from sick of this government’s efforts to manufac- outside. ture fear for political purposes. We have to That is what we Democrats believe is the put all our faith in the wisdom of the people, best way to approach the Criminal Code and we have to get out and advocate why it Amendment (Terrorist Organisations) Bill is we make decisions in this place. Instead of 2003—ensuring through the auspices of the doing that, the opposition has just said, UN Security Council that there is an outside ‘We’ll put this aside and we’ll allow that one watchdog, an outside imprimatur and a to go through while we get on with other mechanism which is not a part of the inher- matters.’ It is a very dangerous prescription. ent culture. But the legislation before us en- We will be, and have been in every way we sures that it is an in-house job. It ensures that can in this democratic place, opposing this the proscription process occurs between the legislation. Attorney and the Leader of the Opposition Senator GREIG (Western Australia) and that the only parliamentary committee (10.43 a.m.)—Madam Acting Deputy Presi- which would have any purview over this is dent McLucas, you are probably unaware— one on which there is only Labor and coali- but I am sure Minister Ellison would not tion representation. When I moved an be—that we Western Australians have just amendment a moment ago to widen that to come out the other side of yet another in- ensure cross-party representation, neither the quiry into police corruption in our state and Minister for Justice and Customs nor the that that particular royal commission has in opposition leader voted for the amendment, recent days exposed endemic corruption let alone spoke to it. We saw again the collu- within the Western Australia Police Service. sion about which we have concerns, between Some politicians have expressed surprise at the government and the major opposition this, and the police minister has expressed party in the lack of accountability inherent in surprise at this, but very few citizens in the legislation. Western Australia have expressed surprise at

CHAMBER 20804 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

Madam Acting Deputy President, I quote of the five antiterrorist bills in that original Senator Brandis, one of your Queensland suite of bills in the form in which they were colleagues: originally presented. The removal of the re- There are two simple reasons why the pro- quirement of United Nations listing is the scription of organisations ... is a bad idea: first, it second change that has now been made to is wrong in principle and second, because it proscription power since its introduction. In would be useless. 2002, just two years ago, changes were made It is not the role of the criminal law to ban or- which now enable proscription regulations to ganisations but to prevent crime. Organisations do take effect earlier than they could previously. not commit crimes; criminals do. That elementary We have seen a similar pattern in relation to proposition applies just as much to terrorism as it the ASIO legislation, which has also changed does to any other grave crime. since it came into operation, not to mention There are very few things, I suspect, on the government’s attempts to radically ex- which Senator Brandis and I might agree, but pand the powers of ASIS under the Intelli- that is one of them. I believe that proscrip- gence Services Amendment Bill 2003, which tion is not only abhorrent to basic principles is yet to be debated. of democracy but also bad policy, and there These experiences demonstrate clearly to is no evidence to suggest that it will protect us why caution should be exercised when Australians from terrorism. We Democrats introducing new powers, particularly in the have consistently taken the position that context of counter-terrorism. There is clearly criminal behaviour should be punished, not a tendency for the government to attempt to thought or association. For that reason we expand such powers once they have been are opposed to the concept of proscription introduced. I emphasise that we Democrats with or without a UN listing. But we have are committed, without question, to ensuring said repeatedly that if we are going to have a the safety and security of the Australian peo- proscription regime then it really ought to ple. Our opposition to this legislation should have the requirement of UN listing to pro- not in any way be interpreted as counter to vide the safeguard which we are told is there that commitment. We oppose this particular but which we do not believe really is. We legislation because we consider it bad and believe that the requirement for an organisa- founded on wrong principle and because we tion to be listed by the Security Council is a are not convinced that there is any compel- vital safeguard and we strongly oppose the ling evidence to suggest that it will increase removal of that. the safety and security of Australians against The alternative arrangements agreed to by threats of terrorism. It is our view that the the government and the opposition do not government is taking the wrong approach to provide the safeguard which we believe this and compromising the rights and liber- ought to be there. That illustrates again one ties of Australians without increasing their of the concerns expressed by we Democrats security. at the time the original package of security Minister Ellison was asked yesterday what legislation was introduced. That concern is other forms of legislation of this nature that once new powers are introduced they might be in the pipeline. That was in the con- could be gradually increased or that restric- text of Attorney-General Ruddock saying on tions that are deliberately placed on them the television two nights ago, I think, that his could be removed. That was just one of the canvas was unfinished—that his legislative reasons why we Democrats opposed four out work in this area was unfinished. The minis-

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20805 ter was a little vague in his response but re- This is a cascade to the fear and division ferred to a coming bill on the transfer of that this government has engendered around prisoners. He did not mention that in the the issues of the war on terrorism. As we pipeline is the Telecommunications (Inter- have heard many opposition members say in ception) Amendment Bill 2004, a bill which this chamber in the past, if we succumb and would allow government authorities to ac- take away our civil liberties on so many of cess email, voicemail and SMS messages these issues, we are succumbing to the ter- from citizens without a warrant. He did not rorists, we are succumbing to those who seek mention the Communications Legislation to diminish our capacity to engage freely in a Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2003, enabling the democratic society here in Australia. That is government to shut down any telecommuni- what we now have. We are having it eaten cations carrier or deny individuals access to away by pieces of legislation like the ASIO telephone and email communications. And legislation, and now we see again the two he did not mention the Intelligence Services major parties in this chamber coming to- Amendment Bill, designed to give ASIS the gether to ensure that our right as a parliament power to engage in paramilitary activities to determine what organisations should be and to carry weapons. This suite of future banned and should be labelled as terrorist legislation gives the Democrats concern. We organisations is taken away and given to one do not automatically oppose this coming leg- man. islation but we make the point that there The great safeguard that the Labor Party must be scrutiny and accountability. In our has brought into this legislation is that the view, this legislation lacks that. Attorney-General has to make a phone call. Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) He does not have to listen to what the person (10.51 a.m.)—I rise to add to the comments on the other end of the phone is saying. He that Senator Brown has already made here on does not have to pay any attention or take behalf of the Australian Greens. What we are any notice of what is being said to him on about to see in relation to the support that the the other end of the phone. He just has to opposition has already given to the govern- make the phone call. That is not a safeguard. ment on the Criminal Code Amendment What rubbish for that to be considered as a (Terrorist Organisations) Bill 2003 is an ab- safeguard! The parliament of Australia, the solute sell-out by both the opposition and the Senate of Australia, is the safeguard to en- government in terms of ensuring security for sure that we do not have a whole raft of or- Australians. All of us here want to ensure ganisations, particularly in the lead-up to an that Australians are protected against terror- election, labelled by this Attorney-General as ism. Fundamental to that sits the need to en- terrorist organisations. sure that the civil liberties of Australians are This legislation should go no further than not taken away. We have already taken away it has already. As senators, it is extremely Australian civil liberties in the form of the important that we protect the rights of Aus- ASIO legislation that passed through here tralian citizens to be protected by their par- not so long ago, and now we see another liament against exactly this type of legisla- piece of legislation seeking to take away tion. It is a great shame if we are about to people’s civil liberties with regard to mem- see, yet again—and we saw it on the ASIO bership of organisations and how those or- bill—the opposition join with the govern- ganisations may be banned by one man: the ment and be scared to stand up for the rights Attorney-General, the Hon. Philip Ruddock. and the civil liberties of Australians. Austra-

CHAMBER 20806 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 lians need opposition senators to stand up will look at the course for reform. No doubt and say, ‘We defend your civil liberties, we one of the issues that this panel will look at defend your right to engage in a whole range is reform of the Security Council. Many of of different activities, and the parliament us would argue that the current composition should be the place that determines if that is of the Security Council does not reflect cur- not proper.’ If we are about to see a cave-in rent geopolitical situations. But, of course, it on that, that is a great shame on the opposi- harks back to its post-World War II formula- tion in kowtowing to the government’s fear tion. There are some glaring absences among and scaremongering around the issue of a the permanent members, with no representa- war on terrorism. The Greens will not be a tion for regions such as Africa, South Amer- party to it. We will continue to stand up in ica and South-East Asia. here for the rights and the civil liberties of The way in which the Security Council Australians. currently operates provides a clear illustra- Senator STOTT DESPOJA (South Aus- tion of the reality that the United Nations is tralia) (10.55 a.m.)—I rise as the Australian not a cohesive, independent organisation Democrats foreign affairs spokesperson to which can be criticised in its own right. On support the work of Senator Greig and his the contrary, it is a forum in which member comments on behalf of the Democrats. I states can come together in an attempt to want to put on record today that one of the combat global challenges constructively, most disturbing aspects of the Criminal Code peacefully and democratically. That is the Amendment (Terrorist Organisations) Bill underlying principle of the United Nations. 2003 is the fact that it is part of a pattern of In fact, its goodwill and its future running abrogating what responsibilities we have to depends on the commitment of member multilateral frameworks, in particular the states. The organisation must continue to United Nations. The most significant change evolve if it is to maintain its fundamental that this legislation makes to the proscription role in promoting and protecting interna- regime is to remove the requirement for an tional peace and security. As Kofi Annan has organisation to be listed by the UN Security acknowledged himself, ‘Reform is our sur- Council before it can be proscribed in Aus- vival and our future.’ tralia. The Democrats have made this clear: At this critical time for the UN there are, we think it is a very grave mistake. It reflects unfortunately, some countries which are in- a disturbing pattern of behaviour on behalf of creasingly choosing to abandon multilateral this government over recent years because, processes and act independently of the once again, the government is choosing to United Nations. Rather than rising to the bypass the United Nations. challenges associated with multilateralism, There is no doubt that the UN is facing these countries are simply walking away— one of the most challenging chapters in its and I am so ashamed to admit that our coun- history. There is a growing consensus that try is one of them. Over the years, our Prime the time has come for significant reform. Minister and our federal government have This has been recognised by the Secretary- repeatedly chosen to act independently of the General, who last year appointed a high-level UN in their conduct in international affairs. panel to examine these issues. I note that The most glaring example in recent times is former Minister for Foreign Affairs Gareth the government’s decision to go to war Evans is a member of this panel—indeed, the against Iraq without UN backing—a classic youngest member of this panel. The panel example of a government turning its back on

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20807 the UN simply because its position was income poverty. The decision to abandon this consistent with that of the Security Council. organisation is deeply concerning and As we know, the Prime Minister spent somewhat inexplicable. Membership of months lobbying for a Security Council reso- IFAD carries no obligation to actually donate lution which would sanction military action to the fund. In fact, our government had al- against Iraq. He flew all the way to Washing- ready ceased making donations to the fund ton to meet with President George W. Bush. on the basis of some of the concerns that it He tried to convince the President that any had about the fund. IFAD has demonstrated a attack against Iraq should actually occur genuine commitment to address any con- within the auspices of the UN. However, cerns that Australia actually has and, in many when this became too difficult, he did a cases, has already done so. However, it complete backflip and claimed that no such should be noted that these concerns do not resolution was required. In the face of inter- appear to be shared by other donor countries, national concern, the coalition countries many of which have actually increased their chose not to abandon their misconceived donations to the fund, including, ironically, plans for war; they chose to abandon democ- the United States of America, which recently racy, and that is arguably what we are doing increased its commitment by 50 per cent. today. On the sole basis that other member Given that there is no responsibility re- states did not concur with their position, they quired by or pressure on Australia to donate proclaimed that the UN was irrelevant. In to IFAD, it is hard to understand why our fact, Australia’s Ambassador to the United government insists upon Australia being the Nations recently went as far as labelling it first country ever to renounce its member- impotent. So, while countries such as the US ship of IFAD since it commenced operations and our own can wax lyrical about the irrele- back in 1978. So I am putting the govern- vancy, as they perceive it, of the United Na- ment on notice today that the Democrats will tions, the reality is that it is actually the de- be scrutinising this decision very closely liberate actions of the member states which when the enabling legislation comes to par- choose to act independently of the UN that liament and also indeed through the Joint then result in the UN being irrelevant. Standing Committee on Treaties. There The waning commitment of our govern- seems to be no logical basis for the government to the UN is evidenced by its actions, ment’s decision. However, it is clearly con- its statements and indeed its allocation of sistent with the government’s continuing resources. This government’s attitude is that tendency to snub the United Nations and its it is just too difficult to cooperate with other various agencies. countries. This government fails to recognise Here at home, we have a similar situation that in fact global efforts often produce the with the government’s decision to defund the most effective results, particularly when re- United Nations Association of Australia. sponding to global challenges such as the Everyone knows about the UNAA. We know AIDS pandemic, global warming or indeed about the fundamental, effective role that it the threat of terrorism. Just in the last few performs in educating the Australian public, days we have heard of a new one: the gov- among other things. It plays a critical role in ernment’s decision to renounce its member- facilitating consultation with young Austra- ship of the International Fund for Agricul- lians—for example, through the UN Youth tural Development, a United Nations agency Association and by hosting model UN con- which aims to assist the rural poor to over- ferences for young people. The association

CHAMBER 20808 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 has a distinguished record of service to the it eventually emerged that the government Australian community and its accountability had never even attempted to get these or- for the expenditure of public funds should be ganisations listed by the Security Council. assessed against this record. So the govern- The government complains that the UN Se- ment should reverse its decision to defund, in curity Council can only list organisations that this instance, the United Nations Association are associated with al-Qaeda. Well, why of Australia. doesn’t Australia start lobbying the Security In closing, I want to make the point that Council to expand the basis on which organi- the government’s lack of commitment to sations can be listed? Why not demonstrate multilateralism in the context of counter- some leadership in these multilateral frame- terrorism is particularly dangerous. It has works rather than simply desert them? been argued that terrorism presents the most The Democrats firmly believe that the significant threat to international peace and government’s expressed strategy of abandon- security in the 21st century. It is a threat that, ing the principle of multilateralism is a very as we know, knows no boundaries and is not dangerous path to take, one which puts the confined to the borders of any particular safety and security of Australia at risk. The country. During the past few years, we have United Nations is not a fair-weather friend. witnessed attacks in places such as Iraq, Is- At a time when the future viability of the UN rael, Saudi Arabia, the United States, Bali is under threat, Australia is doing very little and Russia, among others. Terrorism is truly to preserve it. A future without the UN, a an international problem and everyone in this future in which individual countries and coa- place acknowledges that, and it demands an litions of countries can simply do whatever international response. It is vital for the in- they want whenever they want, is a very ternational community to unite in its efforts frightening future indeed. Yes, multilateral- to combat threats of terrorism, but what the ism is fraught with challenges and yes, the government has done today through this leg- United Nations is in desperate need of re- islation is yet another attempt to bypass the form, but these are not reasons to give up on international and multilateral frameworks, it. International peace and security depend on such as the United Nations. Once again the the international community’s ability to work government is shrinking back from the chal- cooperatively to combat the many global lenges of working cooperatively with other challenges we face. We can help build a vi- countries and it is making the grave mistake able United Nations for the sake of future of attempting to address a global threat generations or we can help destroy it and all alone. the hard work that has been done over the This was clearly illustrated last year when last 60 years. The Democrats believe that the government moved to proscribe a num- there is actually no choice for us and this ber of organisations which had not been government, and that is why we are so sick- listed by the United Nations. The govern- ened and disheartened by the decision today. ment used these organisations as examples of It is time for our government to renew its organisations which, while they had not been commitment to the United Nations and, for listed by the UN, nevertheless presented a goodness sake, to take up the challenge of threat to Australia’s security. It was on this trying to make it more effective. basis that the government argued that there Senator FAULKNER (New South was a need to remove the requirement for Wales—Leader of the Opposition in the Sen- United Nations Security Council listing. Yet ate) (11.06 a.m.)—I would like to make a

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20809 brief contribution on the third reading of the the Attorney-General or another member of Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorist Or- the executive. There was no capacity for par- ganisations) Bill 2003 because it is important liamentary disallowance. The original provi- legislation. It achieves a number of things sion provided that after a declaration came and I would like to place those on the par- into force it stayed in force until either it was liamentary record. The principles behind the revoked or, at the beginning of a day speci- amendments to this legislation that have fied in the declaration, the declaration ceased been carried have been insisted on not only to be in force. There was no capacity for par- by the opposition in this chamber but also by liamentary disallowance. That was the origi- minor parties in the Senate. Those amend- nal bill and that is why so many in this par- ments mean that decisions to proscribe or- liament and so many in committees of this ganisations will not be taken in secret. That parliament had such serious concerns about is the fundamental principle: they will not be those provisions. Since that time we have taken in secret. Now such a decision can had parliamentary proscription—first of all only follow after appropriate consultations with the Hezbollah External Terrorist Or- with the Leader of the Opposition and the ganisation, then with the terrorist wing of leaders of state and territory governments. Hamas, and then the terrorist organisation In addition, the Attorney-General will be Lashkar-e-Taiba. All three of those terrorist required to formally consider applications by organisations have been proscribed by this individuals and organisations to delist an parliament through legislation. Why? They organisation, with any subsequent decisions have been proscribed in that way because subject to judicial review. Also, the Attorney- those terrorist organisations could not be General will now be genuinely accountable proscribed under the provisions of the origi- to the parliament for the exercise of his or nal legislation because the organisations ei- her discretion. Suspect decisions to proscribe ther effectively had no direct links to al- organisations, if there are any, will be sub- Qaeda or had not been identified by the jected to proper scrutiny by the powerful, United Nations Security Council as terrorist professional and hitherto bipartisan commit- organisations. tee which has been established by this par- Not one parliamentarian in either the liament—the Joint Committee on ASIO, House of Representatives or the Senate stood ASIS and DSD—and, if those decisions have up and said that the terrorist wing of Hezbol- no sound basis in security and intelligence lah, the terrorist organisation associated with material, they can be overturned in the par- Hamas or the terrorist organisation Lashkar- liament. They can be overturned in the Sen- e-Taiba should not be proscribed. Those pro- ate. And the legislation as a whole will be scriptions were unanimously agreed to by subject to triennial review by the joint intel- both houses of the Australian parliament. ligence committee. In addition, under the That means basically that in terms of the legislation, listing regulations will lapse after original proposition that was put arguing two years. And in addition to that, listing against parliamentary proscription the par- decisions will be subject to judicial review in liament moved on. the Federal Court of Australia. I have heard the debate we have had over When the original legislation that pro- the last two days, particularly the intermina- posed an executive proscription model was ble contributions from Senator Brown. I have introduced into the parliament it did not al- heard how the Greens now take succour from low for the disallowance of any decision by the strength of the pre-existing antiterrorism

CHAMBER 20810 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 laws. That was not Senator Brown’s view pleased that the government agreed and when the opposition moved amendments to brought in legislation. I am also pleased that put those particular antiterrorism laws into we now have a situation where the parlia- place. I was the opposition shadow minister ment has the capacity to disallow a listing if and the senator who moved those substantial it believes a listing should not have been amendments in this place to ensure that par- made and that, around that, we have addi- ticular regime—those provisions—became tional safeguards built. law and had legislative effect. That was not First of all, there will be early warning to the view of the Greens at the time. Talk this parliament. The Leader of the Opposi- about backflips! They did not support them tion will be informed. As we know, the state at all; now they are defending them to the and territory leaders of government will be hilt. They are saying that they are very robust informed. But, if a majority of the parliament and that we should bat on with what we in the Senate or the House of Representatives have. But those amendments were opposed determines, with the benefit of additional tooth and nail at the time by Senator Brown advice from the committee of this parliament and Senator Nettle. that is charged with the responsibility of as- You cannot have it both ways in this busi- sessing and analysing security intelligence ness. Sometimes you are held to account for matters—the joint intelligence committee— what you say and do. The Greens opposed that such a listing should not stand but be these provisions tooth and nail at the time. I disallowed, then that will occur. These are respect their view; I do not agree with it, but substantial safeguards. These are real safe- I respect their view. What I do not respect is guards. These are real advances on the pro- the backflip worthy of Nadia Comaneci in posals that were originally introduced by that the Olympic Games that we have had in this sloppy and hopeless former Attorney- chamber. I do not respect that and I do not General, Daryl Williams, in the middle of think many senators would—but that is what 2002. These are real advances on the in- has occurred. Of course, not only do we have credibly incompetent performance of the no- a situation where the current provisions that hopers in the Howard government who have are being amended now are said to be robust had responsibility for these matters. and excellent and are strongly defended by I have said to the Greens that, just on this the Greens, even though they opposed them occasion, instead of doing what they always when they were introduced; we have a situa- do, which is to whinge and wail and whine tion where parliamentary proscription, which about what is happening, they should recog- they opposed when it was introduced, is now nise that they have got their agenda up. They supported by all of us. Every single parlia- have won. They ought to recognise the fact mentarian elected to the parliament of the that they have won, that these are massive Commonwealth of Australia in both the improvements. These are important safe- House of Representatives and the Senate has guards. These amendments matter and the supported it. It is a fact of life. Greens ought to claim victory, not defeat. Everyone believed parliamentary pro- They ought to claim victory; they ought to scription of the terrorist wings of Hezbollah recognise that they have won. That is one of and Hamas and the terrorist organisation the challenges of politics: to recognise when Lashkar-e-Taiba was justified. I believe it you win. I know: I rarely win anything, but was justified. In fact, it was the opposition’s on the rare occasions on which I have won proposal that we take this initiative, and I am something in the 30-odd years I have been in

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20811 the Labor Party I have at least recognised it, Of course we must play our part in the inter- claimed victory on the odd occasion and got- national community on the challenges that ten on with it. face us in relation to terrorism. The challenge This mob over here should do the same has always been to get the balance right in thing. They should realise that they have relation to this important issue of how one won, they have had a victory. They have deals with terrorist organisations and those changed the legislation, obviously with the who might be involved in their appalling, driving force of the opposition, but they have nefarious activities. I think this legislation joined with us in what has been an essential gets that balance right. crusade, and they should nail it up as a vic- I am not as concerned as others are about tory. But they will not do that. I cannot really what might be coming down the track. I comment on the personality traits of Senator know how Mr Ruddock works. Senator Net- Brown and Senator Nettle. I like both of tle is right about that. Senator Brown is right them very much but I do not understand why about that. Senator Stott Despoja, who men- they are always so negative. The Australian tions the issue, is right about that. Of course Democrats are laughing away down there— one has to question what Mr Ruddock is look at them laughing away. I do not know likely to do. The challenge for the Senate and why they are laughing, for God’s sake. for all of us is to treat that legislation when it Senator Stott Despoja—You’ve got to! is received on its merits, just like we should treat this legislation on its merits and just Senator Greig—We’re not! like we should treat the provisions in this Senator FAULKNER—The laugh of a legislation on their merits. The amendments condemned man and woman. You say you that have been move dramatically improve are not laughing but you look like you are the legislation. This legislation, when you laughing, you really do. I saw an opinion compare it to the original proposals in rela- poll recently and the Australian Democrats tion to executive proscription introduced by scored an asterisk in it, but they are still that buffoon Daryl Williams in the middle of laughing. They know they have won. You 2002— have to give them a bit of credit. If only Senator Ellison—Madam Acting Deputy Senator Nettle and Senator Brown would President, on a point of order, the term ‘buf- realise that this is a fundamentally important foon’ is unparliamentary and I ask the sena- change to legislation. This government—I tor to withdraw it. believe ill-motivated on these things—has accepted important changes to legislation The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT and, as a result, we have better and tougher (Senator McLucas)—I think you should laws. I have never resiled from the fact that withdraw it. we have, all of us—government, opposition Senator FAULKNER—I will withdraw and crossbenchers in this chamber and of it. The original proposals were introduced by course in the House of Representatives—a Mr Daryl Williams, MP, QC, and all the fundamental responsibility to protect Austra- other letters that he has got after his name, lia and to protect Australians. That, at the end and he ought to be ashamed of himself for of the day, is what this is about. his efforts. What a disgrace! I am not confi- Of course as we do that we must balance dent about Mr Ruddock’s motivations, but those absolutely essential freedoms and lib- the challenge for us is that, if legislation erties that are so important to all Australians. comes forward, we should deal with those

CHAMBER 20812 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 issues and treat that legislation clause by * denotes teller clause on its merits. I believe that in relation Question agreed to. to the anti-terrorism legislation in this coun- Bill read a third time. try, this Senate has a very good record. I believe we have done well in this chamber, I Senator Murray—Madam Acting Deputy believe we have done well in the committees President, I was caught up in an interview of this chamber, and I believe this particular and missed that vote. Could my vote be re- legislation and the improvements we are corded with that of my colleagues? I want it dealing with in this bill are a further example on the record that I voted with my col- of that. leagues. Question put: The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— It is on the record now. That this bill be now read a third time. The Senate divided. [11.29 a.m.] WORKPLACE RELATIONS AMENDMENT (COMPLIANCE WITH (The Acting Deputy President—Senator COURT AND TRIBUNAL ORDERS) J.E. McLucas) BILL 2003 Ayes………… 42 Second Reading Noes………… 9 Debate resumed from 14 August 2003, on Majority……… 33 motion by Senator Patterson: AYES That this bill be now read a second time. Barnett, G. Bishop, T.M. Senator JACINTA COLLINS (Victoria) Brandis, G.H. Buckland, G. (11.34 a.m.)—The Workplace Relations Campbell, G. Carr, K.J. Amendment (Compliance with Court and Chapman, H.G.P. Colbeck, R. Tribunal Orders) Bill 2003 imposes severe Collins, J.M.A. Conroy, S.M. and unreasonable new penalties on union Cook, P.F.S. Crossin, P.M. officials and employees for noncompliance Denman, K.J. Ellison, C.M. Evans, C.V. Ferguson, A.B. with commission or court orders under the Forshaw, M.G. Harradine, B. Workplace Relations Act. There are a num- Hogg, J.J. Hutchins, S.P. ber of concerns about this bill, but I will start Johnston, D. Kirk, L. with its one-sided aspect. Whilst the bill talks Knowles, S.C. Ludwig, J.W. about ‘officers or employees of registered Macdonald, J.A.L. Mackay, S.M. organisations’, in practice this simply means Marshall, G. Mason, B.J. McGauran, J.J.J. * McLucas, J.E. unions, and—whilst the government might O’Brien, K.W.K. Patterson, K.C. have hoped superficially to demonstrate Ray, R.F. Scullion, N.G. some level of balance—anyone who has Sherry, N.J. Stephens, U. practised in any way within the industrial Tchen, T. Tierney, J.W. relations field would understand that as a Troeth, J.M. Watson, J.O.W. very obvious fact. Although registered or- Webber, R. Wong, P. ganisations can and do include employer NOES organisations, employer organisations do not Allison, L.F. * Bartlett, A.J.J. engage in industrial action. Employers them- Brown, B.J. Greig, B. selves engage in industrial action such as Harris, L. Lees, M.H. lockouts, but their employer organisations Nettle, K. Ridgeway, A.D. are not directly involved in such action and Stott Despoja, N.

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20813 would not be affected by this legislation. Senate estimates hearing that it had initiated This was confirmed by evidence to the Sen- no prosecutions for nonpayment of employee ate inquiry. The Australian Industry Group, entitlements with respect to the 2,419 com- for instance, admitted that they had never plaints received from July to December initiated industrial action. In answer to a 2003. It is no surprise that this legislation is question by Senator George Campbell about only aimed at employees and officials of un- whether the offences in the bill were aimed ions. Further, this bill is unreasonably puni- at union officials or union employees, Mr tive. The legislation potentially fines union Bennett, from the Department of Employ- officials and employees up to $2,200 for ment and Workplace Relations, replied: even the slightest slip with respect to a pro- I think that is a fair description, yes. cedural direction or order of the commission. So on the government’s own evidence, this Being involved in a contravention triggers bill aims to introduce severe new penalties the punitive measures in the act, and this for unions but it proposes nothing which includes aiding, abetting, counselling or pro- might penalise employers engaging in illegal curing the contravention, inducing the con- lockouts or other industrial action—a point I travention by threats, promises or other will come to later. It is appalling that the means, being in any way knowingly con- government has introduced 12 pieces of leg- cerned or party to a contravention and con- islation into the parliament with one clear spiring with others to effect the contraven- and consistent objective—to weaken the bar- tion. A contravention can be of any order or gaining position of working Australians in direction of the commission or the Federal negotiations with their employers. This gov- Court. Potentially, this could be as simple as ernment has consistently sought to intervene procedural directions. in workplaces relations issues on one side of But of most concern is that the legislation the equation. That one side is obvious—that provides for automatic disqualification from of the employers. I will come to that point holding union office for up to five years for later if I have the time. I hope also to address anyone who is fined under these provisions. some of the comments made by Senator That of course would deny union officials Santoro in his speech during the second read- the right to earn a living if they get even a ing debate on the immediately previous bill minor fine or a minor breach. There is no in this area. precedent for such far-reaching and extreme The one-sided imposition of new penalties automatic disqualification. Similar provi- on union officials and employees for non- sions in Corporations Law apply only to a compliance with commission or court orders serious criminal conduct, in recognition of under the Workplace Relations Act confirms the seriousness of denying someone their once again this government’s biased ap- livelihood. But of course the severity of proach to industrial relations. The govern- these provisions is entirely consistent with ment is entirely unconcerned about any pos- this government’s vehement hatred of un- sible employer wrongdoing. Not only does it ions. It believes anything is fair if it threatens not care to adjust the legislation, but it does and hurts unions, their officials or their abil- not care to enforce the current legislation— ity to assist workers to bargain. another point I will come to in a moment. Another aspect of this legislation is that it The Department of Employment and will allow ministers to intervene in a way Workplace Relations admitted to a recent which could prolong disputes. This legislation allows the minister—not just the em-

CHAMBER 20814 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 ployer but the minister—to continue divisive Senator JACINTA COLLINS—I will legal proceedings long after disputes have give you some evidence for what I am say- been finished and the parties are trying to ing, Senator McGauran. I had some very work harmoniously again. In this respect we recent evidence last week when we heard in know the government has form. The former the building industry inquiry from the Mas- minister, Mr Abbott, wrote to the automotive ters Builders Association of Queensland. It industry and told them that they were not might shock you but in evidence before the muscling up enough in their negotiations on Senate inquiry those employer representa- enterprise bargaining with trade unions, the tives actually said, ‘We look forward to the AMWU in particular. Of course, we all re- prospect of Labor being able to institute its member Mr Reith’s intervention, for in- policy since 1996 to re-empower the com- stance, on the waterfront. Remember those mission to be able to be involved and settle images of dogs and men in balaclavas—this disputes.’ It is as clear and as stark as day. sort of provision would assist that further. This is the problem with this government: it I can recall the occasion some years back is not even going down the path of what sen- when I asked the department for their com- sible industrial practitioners say would help prehension of how interventionist various us effect what our industrial relations is ministers had been over time, and there had meant to be there for and that is to settle dis- been no more interventionist minister in the putes. industrial relations system than Mr Reith. Let me go further to the little evidence to This was under a government that has the support the need for this bill. Legislation rhetoric that we should allow the parties to should not be brought before this parliament sort these things out themselves. So its ac- frivolously, and this is another bill that is tions have been quite inconsistent with its doing just that. The Senate inquiry found that rhetoric, but what its actions have demon- there was little evidence of a pattern of non- strated is that time and time again this gov- compliance with court or tribunal orders. ernment has sought to intervene on behalf of Rates of industrial disputation—we hear employers’ interests. On the occasion I men- about those time and time again from the tioned, the then Minister Abbott was very government as well—are falling and the vast disappointed that his prophecy of rampant majority of industrial action complained industrial disputation in the automotive in- about by the government is legally protected dustry in the context of some 1,400 enter- industrial action and would not be affected prise bargains was not realised—the negotia- by this bill. The industrial action that is oc- tions actually proceeded without industrial curring is the legally protected industrial ac- disputation. But with this legislation the gov- tion within the system that this government ernment could intervene to inflame disputes created. even after a bargain has been struck. An in- In the four-year period thoroughly exam- teresting thing here is that the employers do ined by the department, it could only provide not want these sorts of provisions; they fear a list of 22 potential—and I stress poten- the prospect of politicians getting involved in tial—breaches of section 127 orders. More- their affairs and they would prefer that that over, no finding of a breach was even made did not occur. Let us go to the little evidence in a majority of these cases. Four years and to support the need for this bill. 22 potential breaches, and no finding of a Senator McGauran—Where is the evi- breach was even made in the majority of dence for what you are saying. these cases. There are already a host of pen-

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20815 alty provisions in the Workplace Relations says there is a problem this means there ac- Act as well as detailed provisions about what tually is one. In fact, we have been encour- happens if commission or court orders are aged by past conduct to conclude the con- not complied with. But these apply, unlike trary almost automatically. As I have already these measures, to employers and to unions. outlined, evidence to the Senate inquiry into This bill rehashes provisions that were this bill shows quite the opposite. Disputes taken out of the government’s Workplace are falling and almost all industrial action is Relations Amendment (Registration and Ac- legally protected. countability of Organisations) Act 2002. Since I have some time remaining to They were taken out because they were to- speak to this bill, let me reflect on Senator tally unacceptable, and they remain totally Santoro’s previous comments. Senator unacceptable today. But dealing with these Santoro in his speech on the second reading measures enables me to reflect on how Labor on the earlier bill put forward that Labor, the shares the Democrats’ frustrations about a Greens and, indeed, the Democrats could not lack of a commitment by this government to claim a franchise for concern for the interests the enforcement of employees’ entitlements. of workers and, indeed, for the role of un- The difference between our position and the ions. I thought it might be useful to run Democrats’ position, though, is that we do Senator Santoro through some of the history not believe a case has been made for a new of these matters, of which I am sure Senator regulatory body. We think the government Murray is aware—certainly I am. Senator should get more serious about ensuring that Murray, perhaps you and I are the only peo- the current means of addressing these mat- ple who have been consistently through this ters are being utilised, because there are al- process since about 1996. ready officers with clear responsibility for Senator Murray—What about Senator ensuring compliance with the Workplace Campbell? But he has left us. Relations Act. They are the inspectors ap- Senator JACINTA COLLINS—That is pointed under the act who are currently part right. Now that we have Senator Abetz there of the Office of Workplace Services in the is a new player, but obviously Senator Department of Employment and Workplace Santoro needs to be informed in a few areas Relations. The office have a budget of $9.5 as well. million per year, yet in the last six months of 2003 they did not launch a single prosecution Senator Abetz interjecting— in respect of any of the complaints they re- Senator JACINTA COLLINS—Yes, but ceived during that period. So there is a regu- in a state parliament, Senator Abetz, and lator funded to the tune of almost $10 mil- these issues have been matters of federal lion per year. The question—and it is a very jurisdiction and the federal parliament for serious question for the Senate in this case— several years. When we dealt with the second is: what are they doing? What are their in- wave of industrial relations reforms, the very structions? Why are they not pursuing mat- comprehensive report that was produced by ters through prosecution? the Senate inquiry at that time reflected on a In respect of breaches of provisions of the number of interesting issues. I have gone act relating to industrial action by unions and back to the joint statement that was prepared employees, the evidence does not support the between the Australian Democrats and the assertion that there is a problem. Labor do Labor Party at that time, because I thought it not believe that just because the government

CHAMBER 20816 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 gave us some very good issues to reflect on. but there has been no action. The list contin- At that stage we said: ued: The need to review the impact of the current • the needs of workers vulnerable to discrimi- Workplace Relations Act, as a major part of the nation are adequately protected. Terms of Reference of this Inquiry, was agreed Unfortunately, this is not the case. There is by all members of the Committee. It is therefore one area where we have finally made pro- unfortunate that many important issues were not adequately canvassed in the Majority Report. gress—that is: • The majority report was essentially the gov- adequate standards for Victorian workers are provided. ernment report. It continued: Finally: Labor and Democrat Senators agree that a number of matters need close consideration in the • there is a strong and independent industrial context of the operations of the current act. These relations commission. include that; So we have had one very small area of pro- • industrial relations law should include a so- gress where we have removed the ghetto that cial justice agenda— existed for Victorian workers, but on all of There has not been much change there— the rest of those points we have had essen- • all workers need to be covered by an indus- tially no progress at all. Why is that, one trial instrument. might ask? The reason is the government’s • Australia meets its international obligations. attitude. Let me remind Senator Santoro of some of the rhetoric that comes from those • the industrial relations system should be fo- within his party. We cited this reference at cussed on the prevention and settlement of disputes through negotiation in the first in- the beginning of chapter 4, which related to stance. issues pertaining to the standing of the Aus- tralian Industrial Relations Commission. The However, as we hear from employers time Prime Minister said back in 1992: and time again, their ability to resort to the commission in the latter instance is what is As I’ve said before, I’m going to stab it ... in the becoming more and more problematic in stomach ... how the system operates today. Senator He was referring to the Australian Industrial McGauran, that was the example I gave you Relations Commission. This is the Prime of the Master Builders Association in Queen- Minister’s attitude to the Australian Indus- sland. It is their principle concern. Going trial Relations Commission: ‘I’m going to back to the other principles that should be in stab it in the stomach.’ Yet, again, it does not place in the system, the list continued: represent the views that employers are argu- • the ability of workers to be able to balance ing for. Their perspective was represented by their work and family lives must be pro- Bob Herbert, who recently retired from the moted. Australian Industry Group. This perspective We know what little activity has occurred in was also put forward at the start of chapter 4 in this report. It stated: that area, particularly since the interdepartmental committee leaked a report a couple of Firstly, we do have a unique institution in this weeks ago. No activity has occurred. Even country. It has served us well for 100 years. You the interdepartmental bureaucrats are have to think long and hard about changing its role. We think that the balance that is now in the strongly recommending that to government, current legislation between conciliation and arbi- tration is about right.

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20817

But the government seeks to effect further much not to the liking of Labor then and are changes. Why is that? There is another refer- obviously not to the liking of Labor now. ence to chapter 8 that I thought was very The bill aims to ensure that officers and interesting and perhaps Senator Santoro employees of registered organisations abide should contemplate this. Susan Halliday, by the rulings of the Federal Court of Austra- who was appointed by the Prime Minister, lia and the Australian Industrial Relations John Howard, as the Sex Discrimination Commission—an obviously commendable Commissioner, said this to a Senate inquiry objective. But what does the detail say? Spe- in 1999: cifically the bill creates a number of new It is fair to say that many employers will say that civil penalty provisions applying to the offi- they can now be trusted to manage their employ- cers and employees of organisations who ees without a third party and, my goodness, I subvert an order or direction of a court or think I have even written that rhetoric. But the tribunal. It provides for the automatic dis- reality is that I know some who can be trusted and qualification of persons for five years— some who cannot, and often the ones who cannot are the ones where we have least coverage indus- unless leave has been obtained from the Fed- trially to do something about protecting their eral Court—from holding office, election to workers, and that is what concerns me. office or appointment to office if the court What concerned Susan Halliday on this oc- has imposed a pecuniary penalty on that per- casion was that the government was quite son for matters outlined in the bill. It pro- happy to spout the rhetoric of a bargaining vides for the minister or a person authorised system when it knew that the bargaining sys- by the minister in writing to apply for a court tem would leave some groups vulnerable. order in respect of an alleged contravention Where there was actually some industrial of the civil penalty provision of the Work- militancy, for instance, in the construction place Relations Act. These are serious provi- industry or the maritime industry, then it sions and extend the powers under the act would seek to intervene. That is exactly what quite considerably. happens. There is no honesty in this govern- We should note when we are debating ment’s industrial relations agenda. If it wants these matters that there are already serious a bargaining system then let us have a fair disqualification provisions in the Workplace one. Relations Act. It is not as if we are debating a Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) situation where there is a void in the law or (11.53 a.m.)—The Workplace Relations in the penalties. If we look at the current dis- Amendment (Compliance with Court and qualification provisions in the Workplace Tribunal Orders) Bill 2003 has provisions Relations Act 1996, they are, however, lim- which first formed part of the Workplace ited to offences that are criminal or relatively Relations (Registration and Accountability of serious in nature. These include any convic- Organisations) Bill 2002 but were excised tions for fraud or dishonesty with penalties from the bill to facilitate its passage. We of imprisonment for more than three months, should recall that that bill is one of the only violence towards another person, intentional bills—apart from the youth rates bill, I damage to property and a series of offences think—which has been negotiated between within schedule 1B. That series includes the Labor Party and the government in the matters such as failing to comply with elec- last eight years. These provisions were very toral official requests for information, inter- fering with ballots so as to commit electoral fraud, or threatening or discriminating

CHAMBER 20818 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 against anyone seeking the conduct of an than the judges that determine these matters. election for office. The Bills Digest correctly There have been instances where people who states that it is arguable that adding the fail- have damaged property have been brought ure to comply with civil obligation orders before a magistrates court and have been such as return to work orders will lower the either fined or let off, so the law is working. threshold. The question may be, of course, whether the The government argues that this bill will penalties are adequate, but that is a different provide more effective sanctions, yet we al- issue. We have to be realistic. We have to ready have sanctions at section 178. The recognise that there needs to be a balance question is—and I think this was the theme struck between preventing financial loss to of Senator Collins’s speech—whether there the employer and causing the loss to em- are, if not intended consequences, unin- ployees of one of the weapons at their dis- tended consequences which would severely posal, namely the weapon of direct action. limit the ability of union officials to do their For the Democrats to even consider such a job. That is the essential argument before us. serious penalty as proposed in this bill, we We did touch upon the existing sanctions at would have to see evidence of rampant or section 178 in an earlier debate this week. repeat offenders of noncompliance of court The Democrats attempted to increase the and commission orders. As we have noted at penalties in section 178 in another bill, but other times, these matters are before the Sen- both Labor and the coalition voted them ate committee inquiry into the Cole royal down. There is an interesting swing around commission and its consequent legislation, of positions on these things as we proceed and we do think that the conclusions of that through these bills. committee should influence the view as to As I said in my speech in the second read- how much evidence there is of rampant or ing debate for the Workplace Relations repeat offenders of noncompliance. We Amendment (Codifying Contempt Offences) would urge the government to provide that Bill 2003 yesterday, the Democrats do be- committee with as much evidence on that lieve that the rule of law must apply and front as possible. In a sense, this bill comes have supported, in many instances over the before it should and, in a sense, its consid- years, strongly enforcing the rule of law. If erations are also part of that bigger Cole is- the law is being flouted and it is not a ques- sue. As discussed already in my speeches in tion of enforcement or the resources needed two second reading debates to previous bills for enforcement, we will support stronger this week, the government has not provided law. But increased sanctions must only be us with sufficient evidence at this time, and justified where there is sufficient evidence we do not see that that evidence is in the that a real and significant problem exists. public arena. We are not presented with sufficient evi- I want to briefly outline the concerns we dence, in our view. That does not mean that I have with the three proposed areas of the bill am dismissing or condoning those defiances and then I want to go on to discuss the prob- of the law that occur and the occasions lems of the bill in the context of what I refer where they occur. I am sensitive to the finan- to as the bigger picture. I will start first with cial impact this can have on employers or the scope of orders and directions for which industries. But ultimately it is the courts and offences and disqualification could apply. sometimes the magistrates themselves rather The proposed provisions of this bill apply to any order or direction of the commission or

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20819 court. In their submission to the Senate in- management of an association or organisa- quiry into this bill, the ACTU argued that tion. This bill would extend the application ‘orders and directions’ were ill defined in the of automatic disqualification to civil penalty Workplace Relations Act and used loosely in provisions. Another area in which I have re- the functioning of the Industrial Relations sponsibilities is the Corporations Law. There Commission. This, the ACTU argued, may is no similar provision in the Corporations lead to uncertainty, as parties will not know Act, where it is the regulator who has to whether an order or direction of the IRC or a make out a case for disqualification. The court is an order or direction attracting a civil government argue that disqualification can penalty for noncompliance. only occur for breach of these duties where If we are going to envisage a situation the Federal Court, in its discretion, considers where serious penalties shall apply, the cir- that the conduct warrants the imposition of a cumstances under which those penalties kick pecuniary penalty. As outlined above, the in do need to be carefully defined. This is commission has no guidance as to what or- especially the case, given that the IRC will ders and directions penalties should apply to often make recommendations to parties—for and, even if more guidance were given, instance, to conference—with a suggestion automatic disqualification for a civil offence that failure to do so may lead to them impos- would still be very serious. ing an interim award on the parties. The pol- The government has argued that there is a icy problem, which the ACTU also raises, is process to appeal the automatic disqualifica- that the application of the provisions to all tion. I would like to point out here that, in orders and directions has the potential to im- the case of breaches of civil penalty provi- pose onerous penalties for minor breaches— sions under the Corporations Law, the regu- for example, a failure to comply with a pro- lator, ASIC, carries the onus of satisfying the cedural deadline. In response to this, the court that disqualification is appropriate. government have argued that commissioners This should be contrasted with the proposal surely would not impose a penalty for a mi- in the compliance bill that the onus and cost nor breach. However, there is no guidance is on the disqualified person to convince the for commissioners as to what type of order court that he or she should be given leave to or direction a penalty should apply to if hold office. Maybe the reason that those two breached, and it is with the penalties which are so different is that, in the case of the might be on the cusp of falling one way or Corporations Law, at least we have the sanity another that you need to be careful. We are of a national regulator, whereas in the case of therefore cautious about the effects of this industrial relations matters we have not so provision. We do acknowledge that this area much insanity but a lack of wisdom which could possibly be tightened up to address results in a dispersed inspectorate and a dis- these concerns. persed regulatory ability. With respect to the disqualification provi- The final area of the bill relates to the sions, I note that the existing disqualification minister gaining authority to seek orders. from holding office under part 4 of chapter 7 Currently, applications for orders for of the Workplace Relations Act applies only breaches of penalty provisions can be made in cases of conviction for certain criminal only by the Industrial Registrar or an organi- offences, including fraud, intentional vio- sation. The government argue that the lence, certain ballot offences and offences in amendment is in recognition of the costs and relation to the formation, registration or delays that may be involved in enforcing

CHAMBER 20820 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 orders and directions and that parties are paid and unpaid, to do an essential job with- sometimes pressured not to pursue available out an unreasonable fear as to the risk of do- sanctions and remedies. However, the provi- ing that job. sion appears to be contrary to the govern- One has to wonder what impact this bill ment’s espoused philosophy of keeping third could have on the ability of union officials to parties out of industrial relations, which the perform their job and adequately represent Democrats have supported wherever it is employees. I am referring to what I think appropriate. There does not appear to be a Labor might categorise as intended conse- similar provision in Corporations Law. quences, namely restricting their abilities Again, instead, it is the regulator that pursues even more, or unintended consequences, such matters. namely closing down what is a flexible and, Instead of the employer having to pursue in my view, a fairly well-operating environ- matters and to be put in some commercial ment. So how are union officials meant to and perhaps commercially political embar- represent members who want to renegotiate rassment, if I can use that phrase, we think wages and conditions, and protest uncon- there should be circumstances which would scionable behaviour, and who might face the enable the Industrial Registrar to monitor the situation of losing their job or being made payment of a penalty and the compliance redundant, or workers who have their work- with an order and notify nonpayment or non- ing conditions unilaterally changed or who compliance to the Federal Court for further feel they need to apply pressure in terms of action. In other words, we advocate proper work and safety issues or whatever? How are monitoring and automatic referral back to the they to behave when they are in fear of being very body which we think should enforce disqualified from their positions? We must these laws. It is quite plain to us that there bear in mind, as I have said earlier, that we are circumstances in industrial relations be- do have disqualification provisions for haviour where employees or employee or- proper cause already in the act. ganisations or employers or employer or- Everybody, even Labor, gets irritated with ganisations can find themselves under some some unions and some unionists sometimes. stress not to force an issue because of the But that is a part of life. In the end unions commercial consequences. Frankly, it should and employer organisations play an abso- be taken out of their hands, and we think the lutely essential and valuable role in Austra- Industrial Registrar should be given a greater lian society. We know that occupational role to play in this. health and safety, productivity, efficiency In addition to the issues I raised earlier, I and good working standards are better on also think we should examine the big picture sites or in organisations or enterprises when in considering this bill and indeed other unions and employers are able to work pro- workplace relations bills that are before the ductively together. We know that compliance parliament. First, the Senate has to consider with the law occurs when these things are whether the proposed offence is justified policed by unions and employer organisa- and, importantly, what effect it will have on tions. A World Bank report last year showed the legitimate role of unions and union offi- that in highly unionised areas there was less cials, which is to protect the rights of em- inequality, decreased wage discrimination ployees and to pursue their interests. It is against women and minorities, and improved very important to maintain the ability of the economic performance. The great virtue of men and women who are union officers, both the Australian system is that industrial dispu-

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20821 tation is recognised as an essential part of the thing quite different. The real problem is that bargaining and market process, and parties to no-one is enforcing the existing law. No-one disputation have procedures and the oppor- is doing the job that has to be done right now tunity to work matters through. So the bill is to make sure that entitlements are paid, that concerning if it shifts that balance, if it af- wages and conditions are observed, that fects that outcome, and the government do health and safety is looked after and that themselves a disservice if they do not recog- people do not defy court and commission nise those—perhaps unintended, perhaps orders and other principles. We really do intended—consequences. have a strong act. The penalties can certainly Yes, the bill does apply to registered em- be improved and, as you know, we voted for ployer organisations, but employer associa- that to happen, although the bill went down tions or organisations are rarely direct par- overall. But I do have a serious concern that ticipants in industrial action—it has no prac- we are going in an antilibertarian direction tical effect on them. The bill has gone down when we should be going towards enforcing the path of addressing an area but ignoring existing law and making sure we have the other areas. We are happy to discuss the regulatory instruments to carry through the principles that surround these matters, but I law as it stands. must return again and again to a theme I am Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (12.13 trying to hammer home hard in the work- p.m.)—May I say in response to that issue of place relations and industrial relations arena, a unitary system, where Senator Murray the circles in which I move and the environ- raises the issue about national matters and ments in which I operate. I am a firm be- national issues, that the experience I have liever that we need one unitary system of had is that disputes tend to be, unfortunately, industrial relations. We cannot have any sys- local. Usually the best people to deal with tem of industrial relations unless we have them are those on the ground at that local strong regulators which are able to enforce dispute in the local area, rather than those the law and are sufficiently resourced to do dealing with them from a national perspec- so. tive. That is not to say that there is not a need In contrast to other sectors, where the na- for uniformity or some way of ensuring that tional interest is paralleled by national laws there are similar laws. But what I have with a national regulator, such as finance, mostly found in my experience—and it goes where there is APRA and the Reserve Bank, back some years now—is that in many in- Corporations Law where there is ASIC, stances these sorts of things are in fact local, competition law where there is the ACCC and without local experience, local knowl- and tax where there is the ATO, in workplace edge and local considerations taken into ac- relations you do not have the national inter- count when dealing with many of these est served by a national law and you do not things they are simply not going to be re- have a national regulator. My view is that solved. A dispute in Mount Isa is not going many of the provisions and penalties of the to be resolved if you have to fly from Mount existing act would be far better exercised and Isa to Melbourne because the national office far better implemented if only there were happens to be in Melbourne. But that aside, I somebody to enforce the law as it is at pre- do understand the direction in which Senator sent. My concern is that the government Murray is going. keeps seeing a problem and introducing The Workplace Relations Amendment more law when the real problem is some- (Compliance with Court and Tribunal Or-

CHAMBER 20822 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 ders) Bill 2003 is designed to once again it to deal with workplace relations, whether attack unions and otherwise try to provoke on a national basis—as Senator Murray legitimate unions to respond to unworkable might suggest—or at a local level. legislation. The bill seeks to provide a means The provisions are enforceable in the Fed- by which the minister can seek financial eral Court under section 127(6) of the Work- penalties for noncompliance with orders of place Relations Act anyway. The scheme of the Australian Industrial Relations Commis- the federal act, which is similar to those of sion and the Federal Court. It also provides a the states, has provisions which are designed default disqualification of officers and em- to ensure that an independent tribunal has the ployees of registered organisations who are necessary powers to both issue orders and fined as a consequence of the penalty provi- enforce those orders and, if necessary, allow sion mentioned. the participants in the system to consider The reason for this bill seems to be that whether or not Federal Court action should this element was not proceeded with at the be taken. These matters rely on the parties to time the Workplace Relations Amendment make judgment calls given the nature and (Registration and Accountability of Organi- length of the dispute and what the actual dis- sations) Act 2002 was dealt with—and obedience in relation to the dispute might be, probably for good reason. I think the reason rather than have a third party such as the is as valid today as it was then: it is unneces- minister decide—persuaded by other inter- sary and it is unworkable. This was high- ests or other reasons—to act in relation to a lighted back then. The arguments were put dispute. then, and I think that the reason the govern- What the parties should be doing is get- ment dropped it then was that they were also ting over the dispute as quickly as they can persuaded that it was unworkable and unnec- and getting back to work—dealing with essary. It seems to me that in bringing it up those sorts of issues rather than subsidiary again now Mr Andrews, the Minister for issues whereby either party might have to Employment and Workplace Relations, either deal with a minister who wants to enforce a feels it necessary to have another tilt at the particular order once the dispute itself has windmill or, alternatively, has riding instruc- long gone. You might even have the ridicu- tions from Mr Howard to have another tilt at lous situation where both parties are asking the windmill. In any event, he is tilting at the the minister to desist, should this bill become windmill. law. You need to see that the parties are not The Bills Digest suggests a lack of com- left in the position of being unable to deal pliance with orders issued under section 127 effectively with the dispute on their own of the Workplace Relations Act as one rea- terms, settle it and get on with their work son. However, when you read the report on where it is needed, letting the angst or anger this bill by the Senate Employment, Work- that may have surrounded a particular matter place Relations and Education Legislation slide into the background. Committee you see that very little evidence The reason for the additional provision is has been put forward to substantiate a provi- apparently that employers are, as the minister sion as onerous as this being put in place to might put it, reluctant to enforce their rights deal with those matters. The idea of an inde- in that court. It is suggested that the present pendent tribunal, the Industrial Relations law does not seem adequate. However, I Commission, is that it have the necessary think the onus is on the minister, if he is se- powers within its own jurisdiction to enable

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20823 rious about putting this bill up, to be able to partment. If he does not feel up to doing it say: ‘Here is widespread disobedience in himself in his own name, he wants the de- relation to orders. Here is a pattern of dis- partment to run around with a big stick. obedience. Here is something that requires The question is: why is the government addressing.’ There is none of that. That has pursuing this agenda? This bill has been been highlighted in the committee report, around for some time. I think it was intro- and I will refer to it should I have time. duced back in February 2003. It was first In addition, it seeks to allow a person to introduced by Mr Abbott, who took over the go directly to the Federal Court seeking or- reins from Mr Reith. I think I said the same ders if the original order is not complied thing then in relation to another bill as I have with, and the enforcement is available in the now. There was a unique opportunity for Mr form of an injunction in the Federal Court. Abbott to break with the past—to break with That is already there and available. The par- the views held by Mr Reith in relation to ties to the dispute are able to deal with it un- workers and workplace relations which were der the Workplace Relations Act. In circum- negative and wrong—and to start a reason- stances where industrial action is being taken able dialogue about industrial relations and with the intent to coerce someone to make, take a cooperative approach. Mr Abbott vary or terminate a certified agreement— chose not to do that. That was his decision. section 170NC—or is being taken during the There is nothing I can do about that. I think it life of a certified agreement—section was wrong, I think it was short-sighted and I 170MN—the parties may go directly to the think it was a very poor decision to make. Federal Court to seek an injunction. If the Mr Andrews has been offered the same injunction is not complied with, a person choice. He has the same ability to take a co- may be exposed to a prosecution for con- operative approach in industrial relations and tempt of court, which is punishable by fines to do something different. He could say, ‘I or imprisonment. That is within the act as it am the Minister for Employment and Work- stands. place Relations and I don’t have to follow There are also common law actions avail- Mr Reith and Mr Abbott.’ Unfortunately, it able to employers. These are generally re- appears that he is going to fall into line and ferred to as economic torts. They include march to the same tune. It is a shame, but it interference with contract, intimidation, con- is really not surprising, because all along the spiracy and interference with trade or busi- instructions have been coming from Mr ness by unlawful means if they take unpro- Howard. When you see that pattern develop tected industrial action. So you would have over time, I do not think you can jump to the to say that the scheme of the Workplace Re- conclusion that they all have the same view. I lations Act is comprehensive. Now we have think they have been following the song the minister saying, ‘Notwithstanding those sheet given to them by Mr Howard. It is provisions, I want to be an arbiter.’ If Mr probably time Mr Howard broke with the Andrews wants to be commissioner, I am past and actually put the hat on himself and sure the commission could invite him to said, ‘Not only am I Prime Minister but I am come along or he could certainly put the cap also minister for everything.’ That seems to on himself and go there. I do not think that is be what the coalition allow him to do. It ap- what he wants to be, but that is what he is pears to be a particular Liberal tradition to be setting himself up to be—or at least he will a follower rather than to strike out, do some- pass the enforcement provisions to his de-

CHAMBER 20824 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 thing more innovative, talk to people, be co- it in a piecemeal fashion to take the time of operative and deal with issues as they arise. the Senate. I think the Liberals hanker for the When you break down the reasons for the days when workers were expected to tug bill, I suggest they disappear. There is no their forelock and say, ‘Yes, Sire.’ It seems to reason to put forward this bill. It is not fixing me that is the only reason you would seek an existing widespread problem. It is not the type of legislation that is now before the fixing a slip in the legislation. It is not ad- Senate. A number of bills have been intro- dressing a wrong that might exist. It is sim- duced, all of them designed to provide some ply an onerous provision which is being punitive measure against workers or their placed before the Senate to highlight again unions. how tough the coalition government is on As I have said, we have many workplace workplace relations—or how tough Mr An- relations bills before the Senate. The gov- drews is. I do not think it actually proves that ernment has struck another hole. It is not at all. At a minimum, you would expect that simply a hole in the need for the bill but a the government could demonstrate that the hole in its legislative agenda. All these bills present powers are deficient or lacking in have been hanging around for some time, some way, but the explanatory memorandum and I doubt if the government is particularly does not go there. The government cannot, serious about any of them. The reason for the and have not in this debate, point to any bill can only be either to fill the program as great deficiency. The government have pro- the government has no real legislative duced some rubbery figures about who has agenda or that the minister is trying to fill up not complied with court orders, but that does the program on behalf of his colleagues be- not actually highlight what the issue is. They cause they do not have any legislative have simply plucked out figures and said, agenda. The only other possibility is that Mr ‘Here is a number of court orders that have Andrews is trying to make a name for him- not been complied with.’ But they have not self and whip up a bit of hysteria amongst provided a snapshot of the reasons, such as unions by doing a bit of union bashing. Per- both parties disengaging from the order haps I should give him a little more credit themselves, or the parties settling the dispute than that. Reith tried it and failed; Abbott by deciding to not proceed with the orders tried it and failed. I do not think Mr Andrews because the primary aim was to get back to would do it a third time, but it is always po- work or, in other words, to move on. tentially open to him to consider it. Either It sometimes strikes me that this govern- way, I suspect Mr Andrews is hoping that ment has no workplace relations agenda. recycling the ideological agenda of others Some of these matters really came from con- might help. In fact, it is counterproductive sideration of the provisions of the earlier bill, and reflects badly upon him. the Workplace Relations Legislation Industrial relations in Australia is in need Amendment (More Jobs, Better Pay) Bill of fairness, honesty and integrity—qualities 1999. It was colloquially referred to as the which I think are lacking in the government. More Jobs Better Pay legislation. As I said On the other hand, we have a government earlier, it related in part to the registration of that promotes greed in the corporate world organisations, and it is now a separate piece but that tries to enforce strict compliance in of legislation here. That was also a favourite the workplace relations area, where the rules tactic of Mr Reith: if he could not get an om- and legislation are designed to ensure that nibus bill, he would slice it up and deal with the work force is shocked into complying

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20825 with the wishes of their bosses. The govern- bill is but I think on the whole it has failed to ment is not really serious, in my view, about convince anyone that it is really necessary. It this bill. There are many other areas it could is likely that, given the opportunity, the min- turn its mind to addressing rather than attack- ister will in his summing up plead his case, ing unions or workplaces with this type of but I do not think he will be able to demon- legislation. If the government were really strate that there is a need for this type of leg- serious, it could look at the corporate world islation, and the support that he might other- and deal with that. wise garner is not there to demonstrate its The real sting in this legislation is that the need either. minister, it appears, wants to be an industrial The bill does nothing to ensure that there police person. The bill states that the minister is equity in the workplace. The bill does is to be the person to make an application nothing to ensure there is integrity in the under this part for a contravention of these workplace. The bill does nothing to ensure provisions. The minister has, it seems, taken there is even good-faith bargaining in the the view that the employers are incapable of workplace. One of those areas dealing with engaging in constructive dialogue with their good-faith bargaining is something that the employees about structuring a win-win in the minister could champion if the government workplace. I think at the end of the day what so desired. In February, the Howard govern- Mr Andrews is really saying is that he has no ment decided to advocate in the wage case confidence in the ability of employers to deal before the Australian Industrial Relations constructively in the workplace with indus- Commission a $10 a week increase. The trial relations. There appears to be no great states supported a $20 a week claim, which desire by the employers, or no stampede by also had the backing of federal Labor. This the employers, to support Mr Andrews on case provides a stark contrast. On the one this bill. hand you have a government that says to I alluded earlier to the Employment, workers, ‘What we want to do is introduce Workplace Relations and Education Legisla- punitive provisions. What we want to intro- tion Committee report. The committee dealt duce will ensure that you do not get a fair with three bills, but its report on this bill increase in wages.’ On the other hand you states at paragraph 1.36: have a government that says, ‘Trust us, we know what’s best.’ I think the writing is Further, ACCI supports the provisions of the bill, but indicates in its submission that two amend- clear: this government has failed to deal with ments could be made to enable the Senate to en- workplace relations and has failed to turn its dorse the bill—by limiting automatic disqualifica- mind to how to ensure that there is cooperation to certain types of non-compliance or by tion in the workplace. providing for a general discretion to order dis- When you look at comparisons with the qualification. corporate world, you see that this govern- What they are really saying, as to the main ment has done nothing to rein in the greed thrust of the bill, is that they would rather and excesses that exist there. So on one hand amend it than see it introduced in the form you have the government saying, ‘Look, we that it is currently in. The ACCI have indi- don’t want workers to get more than a $10 cated their view on these sorts of things and I increase,’ but, on the other hand, you have do not think the bill finds general support the ex-CEO of Southcorp, Mr Keith Lam- among other employers. The government has bert, who took home a $4.4 million package been at pains to point out how necessary the after only 18 months in the job; David Hig-

CHAMBER 20826 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 gins, the ex-CEO of Lend Lease, who took Sunday Age, he warned of ‘industrial rela- home $8 million, despite his company re- tions mayhem’ if his government was tossed cording a huge loss that year; and David out at the next election. He said: Murray, who took home $2.5 million from ... you only have to spend a few days in Victoria the Commonwealth Bank, despite a slump of and you pick up a heightened sense of concern 24 per cent in the profits of the bank that about industrial relations, a feeling that the unions year. I think the government sometimes have too much power in this state and the State misses the message, but the people in the Government’s not very resolute in dealing with community do not: they understand very them. well what those figures mean and how much Senator Ferris—And what about the those in the corporate world are getting away teachers strike? with in terms of corporate greed and ex- Senator NETTLE—That’s right. I am cesses—and this government is doing noth- sure that the power workers and their un- ing about it. They also know what this gov- ions—the Electrical Trades Union and the ernment is trying to do in industrial relations, Australian Services Union, who have re- which is counterproductive, hurtful and de- cently been threatened with draconian essen- signed to ensure workers do not get a fair tial services legislation by the Victorian La- and even break. That position that the How- bor government—would question that alle- ard government has adopted is not lost on the gation by the Prime Minister. So would the community. It does not sit well. It is a sad New South Wales rail workers and train story when the government intervenes in the drivers faced with a Labor government that commission but does nothing about the cor- has attacked train drivers and tried to shift porate greed that runs amok. (Time expired) the blame for a failing rail system onto the Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) workers. I am sure the hospital nurses who (12.33 p.m.)—With the Workplace Relations had a stop-work meeting called by the Aus- Amendment (Compliance with Court and tralian Nurses Federation at Moonee Valley Tribunal Orders) Bill 2003 we once again racecourse in Melbourne this week would have before us another of this government’s have a view different to the Prime Minister never-ending attempts to enact discrimina- about the role of the Bracks Labor govern- tory and divisive antiworker legislation. It is ment. So would the New South Wales TAFE part of the government’s attack on trade un- teachers who, along with students, are pursu- ions on behalf of employers who want to ing a campaign, led by the NSW Teachers squeeze and exploit the vulnerabilities of a Federation, against increased fees and at- work force prevented from organising and tacks on public education by the NSW Labor collectively bargaining by the antiunion laws government. They, despite opposition from being put in place by this government. It is the state government, will take industrial also part of this government’s attempt to action next week—and the Australian Greens whip up antiunion feeling in the lead-up to a support them. federal election, trying to find a wedge with I am sure that the Australian Education which it can divide the community and un- Union, which led primary and secondary dermine the support for opposition parties. teachers yesterday in the teachers strike, a Over the weekend we heard the Prime Minis- Victoria-wide strike, would beg to differ with ter attack union action in Victoria, trying to the Prime Minister as the state Labor gov- paint the support of unions as a threat to the ernment attempts to make teachers work security of the economy. According to the more for less. I take the opportunity to put on

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20827 record the support of the Australian Greens what it is: an illegitimate grab for unjustified for the teachers and the Australian Education powers to attack unions’ right to organise. Union as they defend their interests and the It is not the first time that we have seen interests of students—and their parents—in these provisions. The government tried to the public education system. The system introduce these provisions as part of the needs to be defended rigorously, as we see Workplace Relations (Registration and Ac- time and time again this government pouring countability of Organisations) Act 2000. The public funds into private and non- government withdrew the provisions at the government schools at the expense of public time so as to ensure the support of the oppo- school education. We saw it again this week, sition in passing other elements of the bill. with the government boosting funding for We should not be seeing deals on this bill, the non-government sector by $362 million. and I am glad that senators who have spoken This is at a time when 70 per cent of students in this chamber have expressed their opposi- are in the public education system, yet we tion to this bill. Let me place on the record see this government providing the public that I am proud of the Greens’s opposition to education system with only 30 per cent of the government on industrial relations and on total federal funding for our schools sector. a range of other matters. This government has been attacking, and Senator Abetz—You oppose everything. continues to attack, public education. The Senator NETTLE—Senator Abetz can Greens will always support the rights of add up as many times as he likes how many teachers, unions and the public education times the Greens have voted against the gov- system. We express our solidarity with the ernment, because I am proud of that record. I Victorian teachers and the New South Wales am proud to stand up against the attacks of TAFE teachers and with the many students the Howard government on workers and on and parents who have been on the streets this those who come to this country to seek asy- week—and will be again next week—in lum. I am proud to stand up on a whole range seeking to stand up and defend a strong pub- of issues on which the Howard government lic education system in this country. is attacking working Australians, rather than The Prime Minister’s agenda is clear. He supporting them, which is what we should wants to turn industrial relations into an elec- see the government doing. tion issue. He describes it as his job to ‘drive I will turn now to the detail of this legisla- home the risk’ of his government losing the tion. The bill seeks to amend schedule 1B of next election. He can say what he likes. We the Workplace Relations Act in the following have heard it all before. We heard it all with ways. Firstly, it requires the automatic dis- the government’s attack on the Maritime Un- qualification for five years of persons— ion of Australia and we continue to hear it unless leave has been obtained from the Fed- with this government’s multimillion dollar eral Court—from holding, from election to splurge on a royal commission witch-hunt or from appointment to office if the court has against the unions in the building industry. imposed a financial penalty on that person But working men and women in this country for breach of provisions relating to the keep- will not believe the Prime Minister. His tired ing of records, auditing and reporting to excuses and fear mongering are not working members. any more. He is running out of lies, and this bill—as well as other industrial relations Secondly, it seeks to create a number of bills before the Senate—will be seen for new civil penalty provisions applying to offi-

CHAMBER 20828 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 cers and employees of organisations, includ- bution of material to union members. There ing doing anything which would cause an is no attempt to relate the magnitude of the organisation to contravene an order or direc- penalty to the magnitude of the breach of the tion of the commission or the court; doing act. It would mean that, even in cases where anything which would contravene an order if the court might have imposed a very small it had been made against him or her rather penalty, a union official would be automati- than the organisation; contravening an order cally disqualified. or direction applicable to the officer or em- There are already harsh disqualification ployee; and, as an officer or employee of the provisions contained in the act. Part 4 of organisation, being involved in any one of chapter 7 applies to cases of conviction for the above contraventions. certain criminal offences, including fraud, Thirdly, it seeks to create a civil penalty intentional violence, certain ballot offences provision applying to members who breach and offences in relation to the formation, an order or direction applying to them. Fi- registration or management of an association nally, it provides for penalties of up to or organisation. The bill would make dis- $11,000 for an organisation and $2,200 for qualification automatic and, as I said, on the an individual. The workplace relations minis- basis in many cases of minor civil penalties ter has said in relation to this bill: that have been imposed. It is clear that the People of a mind to defy the commission or the government are not concerned about prevent- court ... will face heavy fines and possible dis- ing minor administrative breaches; rather, qualification from office, if this government gets their real agenda is about attacking union its way. organisers and officials that resist employers’ It is clear that the minister and the govern- attempts to drive down wages and condi- ment want the power to wade into any indus- tions. The government will use any barrier trial dispute and take the side of the employ- that it can place in the way of unions, regard- ers against the workers. There is no sem- less of the consequences for fundamental blance of impartiality or responsibility on the rights. part of the government. It is our view that a The International Labour Organisation’s balanced perspective on industrial relations Committee on Freedom of Association is should not support this approach. There is no very clear on this issue. It states that even a need for this legislation—as the speaker be- criminal conviction should not be a barrier to fore me indicated. The driving force behind union office unless it is a criminal act which, this legislation is the government’s desire to by its nature, is such as to constitute a real destroy Australian trade unions. They want risk for the proper exercise of trade union another weapon with which they can go to functions. Clearly, minor civil penalties, war against working men and women in this whilst onerous for the recipient, do not jus- country. tify disqualification. The ACTU, in evidence The disqualification provisions of this leg- to the Senate Employment, Workplace Rela- islation are particularly draconian. Disquali- tions and Education Committee, compared fication from office is a totally dispropor- the provisions of the bill to provisions of the tionate penalty for a breach of provisions that Corporations Act relating to the disqualifica- are largely related to administrative require- tion of company directors. They said: ments—such as failing to keep adequate re- ... automatic disqualification of company direc- cords or failing to meet deadlines for distri- tors and officers occurs only in the case of serious criminal offences, a significantly more limited

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20829 application than the current section 277 of the ture and use and is also required to establish WRA. In the case of breaches of civil penalty certain provisions for the collection and use provisions, ASIC carries the onus of satisfying the of information related to pesticides and other Court that disqualification is appropriate. This hazardous chemicals. In brief, these conven- should be contrasted with the proposal in the tions put requirements on countries, particu- Compliance Bill that the onus is on the disqualified person— larly those that are exporting chemicals to other countries, to ensure that the appropriate Debate interrupted. information regarding their hazardous nature, AGRICULTURAL AND VETERINARY their impact upon human health and other CHEMICALS (ADMINISTRATION) effects are communicated. AMENDMENT BILL 2004 The amendments in these bills provide INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS new penalties for not supplying the required (NOTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT) information or for supplying misleading or AMENDMENT (ROTTERDAM false information. They also require that re- CONVENTION) BILL 2004 cords be kept for up to four years. I under- Second Reading stand that these are not catch-all information Debate resumed from 1 March, on motion bills but relate to those chemicals identified by Senator Ian Campbell: in those international agreements. The Labor Party supports the government’s decision to That these bills be now read a second time. ratify these treaties and therefore we will be Senator FORSHAW (New South Wales) supporting the bills before us today. (12.45 p.m.)—The Agricultural and Veteri- The World Health Organisation has noted nary Chemicals (Administration) Amend- that during the 1990s about one million peo- ment Bill 2004 and the Industrial Chemicals ple across the world were poisoned and a (Notification and Assessment) Amendment further 20,000 died each year after coming (Rotterdam Convention) Bill 2004 make into contact with dangerous pesticides. That provision for Australia to meet our interna- is an alarming figure and it is certainly one tional obligations on the importation, manu- we should be cognisant of to ensure that our facture and export of active constituents or environment and people, particularly those chemical products. In August last year the involved in agriculture, are not affected by government announced that it had initiated the improper use of agricultural chemicals. the process of ratifying two treaties on the Of course, all levels of government have an management of chemicals, those treaties be- important role to play. ing known as the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants and the Rotter- I recall that when I was a union official dam Convention on the Prior Informed Con- there were campaigns being run in the sent Procedure for Certain Hazardous United States by Caesar Chavez, the leader Chemicals and Pesticides in International of the US farm workers, who organised the Trade. The titles are certainly a mouthful, but farm workers in California. Many of them these are very important international con- were very poor people, including immigrants ventions we are signing up to. from other countries, particularly South America. There were some terrible practices Under these conventions, Australia is re- that went on in the agricultural sector over quired to undertake certain action in relation there, including the indiscriminate spraying to pesticides and industrial chemicals related of pesticides and chemicals whilst the work- to their importation, exportation, manufac-

CHAMBER 20830 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 ers were actually in the fields. Some of the persuasions at state and federal level have actions that were taken by the employers at also played their part in improving aware- the time in seeking to prevent the union from ness of the use of chemicals and fertilisers. trying to rectify these terrible practices in- All governments must continue to play a cluded resorting to violence against the strategic role in ensuring that, if chemicals workers and the officials. I am glad to say and fertilisers are used in the production of that the efforts of Caesar Chavez to fix up food, they are used in a safe manner and in the industry will long be remembered. the national interest as well as in the interest The provisions of this legislation will cer- of the farming community. I must say that tainly strengthen our reputation and position Australia’s position in the international mar- as a producer of safe and clean food. The use ketplace is indeed a strong one. We have an of chemicals and pesticides in Australia is image as a clean and green supplier and that substantial. Avcare, the peak industry body has propelled international demand our way representing the agriculture and veterinary when things have gone wrong in other coun- chemicals industry, estimates that the industries. try as a whole has annual sales of $1.9 bil- In conclusion, I want to highlight a shift in lion and that it directly employs over 2,000 the attitude of this government to the quaran- people. These people are employed in large tine regime in this country and the potential and small businesses across the length and impact of that changed approach on rural breadth of this country; many of them are industries and chemical use. In recent weeks employed in rural and regional Australia. the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and There is, of course, a growing public debate Forestry, Mr Truss, has approved pork im- in Australia and throughout the world on the ports from a wide range of countries and has use of chemicals and pesticides in the pro- signed off on draft assessments that support duction of food. It is really a debate that can- the importation of apples and bananas. not be ignored by farmers and by the manu- Senator Troeth—Mr Acting Deputy facturers of chemical products. They must President, I rise on a point of order. The engage sensibly in this debate. comments that Senator Forshaw is making It is a fact that Australian agricultural pro- have nothing to do with this bill and I would duction systems have been developed in the ask you to rule on a point of relevance. past with the use of chemical fertilisers and Senator FORSHAW—If the parliamen- pesticides. In key sectors their use is impor- tary secretary would be a little bit more pa- tant in maintaining the enormous gains in tient, I am actually just about to mention the productivity that have been achieved over relevance in respect of the quarantine ar- the past three decades. Chemical fertilisers rangements and the use of chemicals in the and pesticides are important to the overall agricultural industry, which is entirely rele- profitability of farm enterprises, and I be- vant to this legislation. It is clearly evident lieve it is fair to say that farmers’ understand- that the parliamentary secretary is embar- ing of and skills in the use of chemical fertil- rassed about her minister. isers and pesticides have improved dramatically over the past two decades. Farmers and The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT their representative organisations have taken (Senator Marshall)—Order! Continue, an active role in educating fellow farmers Senator Forshaw. and workers about the use of chemicals and Senator FORSHAW—Thank you, Mr pesticides, and governments of all political Acting Deputy President. There is strong

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20831 opposition to these decisions by the minister, EXTENSION OF SUNSET OF with significant question marks over the sci- PARLIAMENTARY JOINT ence on which they were based. If the minis- COMMITTEE ON NATIVE TITLE BILL ter has got it wrong and the industries have 2004 got it right then, clearly, importing these Second Reading products may well introduce a number of Debate resumed. diseases not present in this country. If that happens, clearly the use of chemicals and Senator O’BRIEN (Tasmania) (12.55 pesticides to combat such diseases will sky- p.m.)—I rise to support the Extension of rocket. That of course will then be the end of Sunset of Parliamentary Joint Committee on our reputation as a clean and green producer Native Title Bill 2004—a very clipped title. of food. That is why the government must It is a simple bill, however. It extends the life get its quarantine regime back on track. It of the Joint Statutory Committee on Native must get science back into the debate. I Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait would urge the parliamentary secretary to Islander Land Fund established under the convey these views to the minister directly. I Native Title Act 1993 for a further two years, know that as a farmer herself she would be that is, from this year until 2006. The exten- vitally interested in that. sion is necessary to ensure the committee’s important work can continue for an interim Senator TROETH (Victoria— period. It is also consistent with the commit- Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for tee’s recommendations to the government on Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) (12.53 its future. p.m.)—I would point out again that those recent remarks by Senator Forshaw have I concur with remarks made in the other nothing to do with this bill. These bills are place by the member for Fraser, Mr McMul- essential to fulfilling the Howard govern- lan, and the member for Lingiari, Mr Snow- ment’s intention that Australia ratify both the don, that consideration should be given to Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed committee alternatives including the estab- Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous lishment of a joint standing committee by Chemicals and Pesticides in International resolution of both houses of the parliament. Trade and the Stockholm Convention on Per- As noted by Mr McMullan: sistent Organic Pollutants. These bills are a That is a matter that will, as a result of this very important step for Australia to be mak- amendment bill, be considered in the next term of ing and they enhance Australia’s credentials the parliament. in this area. I commend the bills to the Sen- It is a matter that I look forward to address- ate. ing as the minister for reconciliation and In- Question agreed to. digenous affairs in the first Latham Labor government, in concert of course with the Bills read a second time. member for Gellibrand and next Attorney- Third Reading General, Ms Roxon. Bills passed through their remaining It is a matter of great concern to me that stages without amendment or debate. the government failed to consult the Abo- riginal and Torres Strait Islander Commis- sion on the proposal to extend the life of the native title committee. In fact the first request to ATSIC for advice on the proposal

CHAMBER 20832 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 came from Labor. When the office of the matter concerning the workability of the na- Attorney-General was questioned on this tive title system relates to the role of native matter Labor was told that the Attorney- title representative bodies. We are all aware General consulted the Aboriginal and Torres that these bodies have a crucial place in the Strait Islander Services, ATSIS, the pre- native title system. During the debate in the scribed agency created by Mr Ruddock on other place, Mr McMullan said that it was 1 July last year in some respects against the desirable for the committee to have a close advice of the Australian Government Solici- look at the support for these bodies. In the tor. I would point out that ATSIS is an ad- short time that I have had the responsibility ministrative body not a representative body. I for reconciliation and Indigenous affairs mat- am not sure whether Mr Ruddock expected a ters on behalf of the opposition, I have re- pat on the back from Labor for consulting an ceived numerous representations on funding executive agency of government—an admin- issues associated with the operation of native istrative body not a representative body— title representative bodies, and I do hope that but, if so, he will be a long time waiting. Mr the extension of the committee’s life will Ruddock understands more than any other give it an opportunity to address these mat- person in the country that ATSIS does not ters in some detail. represent Indigenous interests. As I said, it is I commenced my remarks by noting an administrative body. comments made by Mr McMullan and Mr As a result of administrative changes in- Snowdon relating to the future consideration troduced by Mr Ruddock as Minister for of native title issues. In that regard, I fore- Immigration and Multicultural and Indige- shadow that Labor will support the second nous Affairs, ATSIC cannot issue directions reading amendment to be moved by the De- to ATSIS on any matter. As an agency of the mocrats, calling on the government to give government, ATSIS undertakes the work of consideration to the future of the committee the government, and not ATSIC. That much no less than six months before its expiry. I is confirmed by the advice Mr Ruddock re- must say I am looking forward to consider- ceived from the Australian Government So- ing that matter in government. I am pleased licitor in April last year. It is also confirmed to indicate Labor’s support for the passage of by the recent advice to the ATSIC board this bill. from Mr David Jackson QC. I will explore Senator RIDGEWAY (New South Wales) this matter further at another time, but in the (1.00 p.m.)—I also rise today to speak on the context of the current bill I want to note the Extension of Sunset of Parliamentary Joint government’s failure to consult Australia’s Committee on Native Title Bill 2004, the peak Indigenous representative body, a body purpose of which is to extend the operation which under the legislation is charged with of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on providing advice to government. This body Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres was not asked for any advice on this matter Strait Islander Land Fund until 23 March by the government. But Labor did seek ad- 2006. The Democrats support this bill. The vice from ATSIC. We understand that ATSIC committee has played a vital role in the par- does support the extension of the life of the liament’s oversight of the developments of committee and we are mindful of that in tak- native title, and its continued existence as a ing our decision to support this legislation. monitoring body, in my mind at least, is vi- I want to note another matter raised during tal. the debate on this bill in the other place. The

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20833

When the Mabo decision was handed under the act and the progress of the agree- down, many Indigenous people were heart- ments that are made under the act. ened by the prospect that native title legisla- We have been assured by the government tion would enable them to get a result that that native title is becoming settled and more would deliver better legal protection of our bedded down. They say that recent decisions cultures, especially in relation to significant in the cases of Ward and Yorta Yorta have sites and objects. We did not see that aspect clarified many of the principles underpinning of Mabo, certainly in how the legislation was the act. They say that as the understanding of formed, eventuate. Whilst we ended up with these issues strengthens so does the agree- the Native Title Act, its amendments follow- ment making process. This is the rationale ing the 1996 Wik decision have rendered it used for saying that there is no need for a nonbeneficial in its effects on Indigenous parliamentary committee to continue its people by licensing governments to racially monitoring process for any more than the discriminate against Indigenous peoples. So, next two years and that a decision on any in many ways, I regard it as a spectacular further extension of the committee’s life failure in delivering on its promise. When the would be up to the next parliament. I cannot Australian parliament enshrined the 10-point agree with the government’s assessment that plan in law, it compromised the basic legal everything is now settled down in native ti- principle of equality before the law and un- tle. Sure, there are the success stories, but dermined the goodwill and the potential for taken as a whole the anecdotal evidence sug- Indigenous advancement that had been em- gests otherwise. Native title and its associ- bodied in the Mabo and Wik decisions. I ated processes will be settling in for some think it reminded us of just how vulnerable time to come. I attended the national native Indigenous rights are and how erroneous the title conference in Alice Springs last year, as assumption of a level playing field is. did Senator Johnston—and I believe that he The system is clearly flawed—which is no is still the chair of the joint parliamentary news to anyone in this chamber—but, having committee—and I think it was fairly clear said that, it is important to state that there from all of the stakeholders involved at that have been some important runs on the board conference that there are still many issues in terms of native title outcomes over the last that need to be resolved. 10 years. This is particularly so for ordinary It is important that a committee such as Australians, both black and white, who have the Joint Committee on Native Title and the had to grapple with native title issues at the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land local level. While good working relation- Fund remains in existence as an ongoing ships have been developed between Indige- review and monitoring body. I think this is nous communities, local governments and especially important given the government’s other interest holders in some areas, there are desire in another bill to assimilate the spe- many more stories of ongoing frustration and cialist position of the Aboriginal and Torres despair at the persistence of discrimination, Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner historical denial and disrespect. It is there- of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity fore extremely important to make sure that Commission into a generalist commissioner the monitoring mechanisms remain in place position. I personally consider this to be a to oversee the implementation of this act, the retrograde step not only because of the social effectiveness of the various bodies that exist justice commissioner’s important role in promoting respect and understanding of the

CHAMBER 20834 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 human rights of Indigenous people—and, Senator TROETH (Victoria— indeed, of all of us—but also because of their Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for responsibility to examine legislation, or pro- Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) (1.07 posed legislation, and other enactments for p.m.)—Over the past 10 years, the Parlia- their impact on the human rights of Indige- mentary Joint Committee on Native Title and nous Australians. the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander It is in this context that the social justice Land Fund has played a significant role in commissioner reports yearly on native title providing appropriate parliamentary moni- and, along with the existence of the joint toring and oversight of the native title sys- committee, the role provides a vital monitor- tem. In extending the existing sunset provi- ing mechanism for the operations of the act. sion for the committee by a further two If the government is also proposing to do years, the Extension of Sunset of Parliamen- away with the social justice commissioner, tary Joint Committee on Native Title Bill who looks at this question, then I think it 2004 recognises the value of the work per- highlights the need for someone else to look formed by the committee and will ensure that at it—and the joint parliamentary committee the committee is able to continue to play this has that role. If the bill is not passed in this role into the future. I thank senators in the sitting, the committee will cease to exist on chamber for their support for this legislation. 23 March and this important monitoring The government will be supporting the De- mechanism will no longer exist. I personally mocrat amendment, and I commend the bill regard the extension of the committee by to the chamber. another two years as arbitrary. Why not ex- Question agreed to. tend it by five years or six years, as has pre- Original question, as amended, agreed to. viously been done? It is a time frame that has Bill read a second time. been plucked out of thin air. Neither the former minister, Mr Ruddock, nor the govern- Third Reading ment have provided any rationale for this Bill passed through its remaining stages decision. Hence, the Democrats are putting without amendment or debate. forward a second reading amendment. We AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION will support the bill. I thank the opposition AMENDMENT BILL 2003 [2004] for indicating they will support the proposed Second Reading amendment. I presume the government will also support the second reading amendment. Debate resumed from 4 December 2003, I move: on motion by Senator Hill: At the end of the motion, add “but the Senate: That this bill be now read a second time. (a) notes the importance of ongoing review Senator GREIG (Western Australia) of the operation of native title legislation (1.09 p.m.)—The Australian Crime Commis- in Australia; and sion Amendment Bill 2003 [2004] seeks to (b) calls on the Government to: make a range of changes to the way in which (i) review the need to extend the the Australian Crime Commission operates. committee for a further period, and Senators may recall that the ACC was estab- (ii) commence this review not less than lished to replace the National Crime Author- six months before the term of the ity, the Australian Bureau of Criminal Intel- committee expires”. ligence and the Office of Strategic Crime Assessments. The purpose of the ACC is to

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20835 collect and analyse criminal intelligence and The idea of a police force having a power to to investigate federally relevant crimes. The compel a person to attend a ‘hearing’ and be original legislation proposed by the govern- compelled to provide answers is simply unheard ment raised some very serious concerns. of in Australia. However, significant improvements were It further suggested: made when the government chose to adopt The potential for police interest to dominate key 13 of the 15 recommendations made by the decisions may undermine public and governmen- Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Na- tal confidence in the ACC. tional Crime Authority. The bill was further Mr Denis Lenihan, a former CEO of the improved when the government supported NCA, noted in his submission that, in deter- amendments moved by the Democrats in the mining whether an investigation or operation Senate. is a special investigation or operation, the The bill before us contains a number of ACC board must consider whether ordinary amendments designed to deal with practical police methods of investigation into the mat- difficulties which have arisen since the ACC ter are likely to be effective. He asked the commenced operations on 1 January 2003. question: Many of the amendments are minor and un- Is it not paradoxical—or even suspect—that per- contentious. There are some which the De- sons from those very agencies whose methods mocrats welcome—for example, the addition have been ineffective will now be in the position of the intergovernmental committee to the of authorising the exercise of powers designed to list of bodies on which certain duties, func- remedy those defects? tions and powers under state laws may be During debate on the original legislation, I conferred. During debate on the original expressed the Democrats’s view that we legislation, I expressed the serious concern would like to see the power to authorise spe- of the Democrats that the primary oversight cial investigations and operations retained by of the activities of the ACC—previously the the IGC, and this remains our position. How- NCA—was being transferred from the inter- ever, we do welcome the additional conferral governmental committee to the board of the of powers on the IGC through this bill. There ACC. While the IGC comprises elected minis of course a retrospective provision in the isters who are accountable to the parliament, bill, which dates back to the commencement the ACC board comprises a range of police of the original legislation. The Democrats commissioners and agency heads. This trans- have a long and proud record of opposing fer of responsibility was significant because retrospective measures, particularly where it was essentially a transfer of oversight from they affect the rights and liabilities of indi- an elected ministerial group to an unelected viduals, although we do note on this occa- board of police commissioners and public sion that the retrospective provision con- servants, which lacks the same level of ac- tained in item 17 of schedule 1 is essentially countability, certainly to the parliament. This a transitional provision aimed at facilitating was of particular concern, given that it in- the transfer of power and operations from the cluded a transfer of power to authorise the NCA to the ACC. Item 17 will, for example, use of coercive powers, and this was an issue operate to ensure that any causes of action raised by a number of submissions to the which a person may have had against the committee. For example, the Law Council of NCA will not be affected by the changes to Australia noted: the name and constitution of that organisation.

CHAMBER 20836 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

The explanatory memorandum explains example, the seizure of some 735 firearms that item 17 also fulfils an undertaking made on 15 November last year, following a long- by the Minister for Justice and Customs to term investigation. I take the opportunity to the Senate Standing Committee on Regula- reaffirm that the Democrats will continue to tions and Ordinances. That is because it will monitor closely the operations and effective- facilitate the transfer of telecommunications ness of the ACC. It is an organisation that warrants from the NCA to the ACC. That exercises incredibly invasive powers, which issue was previously dealt with under the I have previously discussed, so scrutiny is Australian Crime Commission establishment ongoing and important. Whilst we retain transitional provisions regulations, and the some of our original concerns in relation to regulations and ordinances committee had this organisation, we will always be open to expressed concern that it was contained in considering genuine proposals to improve delegated legislation. the way in which it operates. In closing with these few remarks I will Senator TROETH (Victoria— take the opportunity to express the Democ- Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for rats’ concern that we are yet to see the first Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) (1.16 annual report from the ACC. This issue was p.m.)—I thank senators for their contribu- recently canvassed during budget estimates, tions to the debate on the Australian Crime and the ACC indicated that the delay has Commission Amendment Bill 2003 [2004] been caused by the requirement for the report and I table a correction to the explanatory to be signed off by the various stakeholders. memorandum. This bill will make some mi- The Democrats appreciate that the member- nor adjustments to the Australian Crime ship of the ACC is broad and that it encom- Commission Act 2002, the Administrative passes different levels of government. Of Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 and course it is important that the annual report is the Australian Postal Corporation Act 1989. agreed upon by all stakeholders; however, The need for these amendments has been we do find the excessive delay in producing revealed through practical experience since the report a little ironic, given that the pri- the establishment of the Australian Crime mary justification for the establishment of Commission on 1 January 2003 and through the ACC was to institute a more efficient and the preparation of corresponding state legis- effective regime. lation. The amendments are necessary to en- At the time of the original legislation, it sure that a workable legislative framework is was unclear whether the establishment of the in place to enable the Australian Crime ACC would actually produce the gains and Commission to effectively combat serious efficiencies claimed by the government. and organised crime across Australia. I There is some reason now to doubt this. commend the bill to the Senate. When the report is eventually released, it Question agreed to. will provide an important insight into the Bill read a second time. operations of the ACC since its establish- Third Reading ment and a vital tool to the parliament in ensuring the accountability of the new or- Bill passed through its remaining stages ganisation. without amendment or debate. The ACC has had some notable successes since it commenced operations. I note, for

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20837

INDUSTRY RESEARCH AND The OECD has noted the clear correlation DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT BILL between the increased intensity of business 2003 funded R&D as a percentage of GDP and Second Reading productivity. The OECD has also observed that increases in the share of business R&D Debate resumed from 1 March, on motion in the overall R&D effort of a country are by Senator Ian Campbell: also a key factor in productivity trends. Un- That this bill be now read a second time. der the Hawke and Keating Labor govern- Senator CARR (Victoria) (1.18 p.m.)— ments, this trend went up consistently. Under The Industry Research and Development Labor, business expenditure on research and Amendment Bill 2003 makes a number of development rose steadily as a direct result constructive changes to the administration of government policy designed to encourage and powers of the Industrial Research and such a trend. Development Board, and the bill will be Our general performance in research and supported by the opposition. However, that is development is also evidence of the Howard subject to the second reading amendment, government’s comprehensive failure to pro- which I will return to later in my remarks. vide support to public sector research. Aus- This bill does not absolve the government tralian research under this government has from blame for the R&D stop-start problems fallen behind that of our international com- that they themselves have created. They have petitors. We have failed to invest in our well- caused a lot of uncertainty for many innova- being and in our future. Not even the much tive small businesses and they should not be heralded Backing Australia’s Ability reforms trying to shift the blame onto the Industry have proven effective in sufficiently turning Research and Development Board. I hope around the problems emerging in this sector this bill does fix those problems, but the of the economy. problems should not have occurred. They occurred because of actions of the govern- After the 2004 federal election, Labor ment, not of the board. hopes to be in a position to reverse this trend and to correct the government’s failures. As The most arresting feature about Austra- we look at where we stand now by interna- lia’s research and development performance tional standards in terms of private sector under the Howard government is that busi- and commercial and public sector R&D pol- ness expenditure on research and develop- icy, we can see a situation that desperately ment has fallen nearly every year since 1996. needs to be turned around. We need to have Private sector expenditure on research and the courage to evaluate our own performance development as a percentage of GDP re- against the backdrop of global realities. That mains below what it was under the previous reality includes the fait accompli of what the Labor government. This is directly contrary government is trying to impose as part of the to international trends and experiences. It is US free trade agreement. We ought to under- an indication of how it is that we are slipping stand the broad-ranging implications of that behind the rest of the world. This is not a agreement. It is a reality that includes the sign of a modern, advanced economy. We continuing buoyancy of the Australian dollar. must invest more in research and develop- Irrespective of the day-to-day trends, the ment because it is one of the key drivers of continuing rise in the dollar has imposed future productivity. considerable pressures on our competitive capacities, particularly for our exporters.

CHAMBER 20838 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

On the national scene we face many chal- produced by the Chief Scientist, highlighted lenges and problems—not just economic those difficulties. challenges but environmental and social The Howard government has fallen down problems as well. We need to lift our rein the discharge of its responsibility in public search performance to address those issues. sector research funding and policy. In my We will not advance the welfare of our citi- judgment it has pursued an agenda that is far zens or the prosperity that they deserve too narrow. It has given priority to short-term unless we do. The bill before the parliament commercially orientated projects which, in goes to private sector research performance. many cases, have not produced the goods. It There are at least 23 individual companies, has neglected the crucial research areas of based in the United States, Germany, the the social sciences and humanities. It has United Kingdom, Japan and elsewhere, pursued competition, rather than encouraging which all invest greater amounts in those collaboration which would maximise the countries than they do in Australia. We have effective use of scarce resources, including a policy framework that does not encourage in particular precious human resources. private sector investment, and the private We have to face up to simple facts. We sector is not responding well by international have a deteriorating research infrastructure in standards. We cannot expect a strong per- this country. Scientists are increasingly hav- formance from business unless it has the re- ing to use patched up and makeshift equip- sources available to do so, and that is where ment. Access to advanced IT facilities is far the government can intervene to assist. too limited. There are places in this country We cannot expect a strong business R&D where our broadbanding capacity is 1,000 performance unless the policy parameters are times behind that of our international com- available to facilitate genuine collaboration petitors. University libraries are reeling from between the public and private sectors with the effects of continuing funding cuts. They regard to research. I think it is important to have had to cut back drastically on acquisi- evaluate where we stand with regard to these tions and services. It is no wonder that our issues. If we look at public sector research senior scientists and other scholars are head- agencies such as the CSIRO, the situation is, ing off overseas at breakneck speed. They do quite frankly, very poor. Many of our young not have to go to the United States. Countries researchers are being forced overseas. Many like Singapore offer hugely more attractive of our young researchers simply do not have research facilities than we can afford to pro- access to the research infrastructure that is vide. Increasingly it is the case that private needed to ensure that they are able to per- firms are choosing to set up manufacturing in form at the top of their field. Singapore because we are not able to provide Public research agencies are generators of that research infrastructure in this country. strategic research. They simply do not have We have a weakening research capability. the capacity to deal with real world problems There has been a continuing downward trend facing this country and Australian industry, in the research capability of many universi- whether it be in the environment, manufac- ties outside the select group of eight, of turing, agriculture or advanced technology which four or five are performing extremely developments, simply because the money well. The government rammed through the that is being provided is not sufficient to Senate in the sittings last year a series of maintain capacity with regard to our research higher education measures that will leave infrastructure. The recent mapping report,

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20839 regional universities and those in outer met- public research agencies. We have a situation ropolitan areas so much the weaker. In a where, in particular, the humanities and the number of key institutions in the outer re- social sciences are essentially left out of the gions of Sydney and Melbourne, this funding equation. If anyone in their right mind tells package actually undermines their long-term you that you can undertake major research in financial viability. The University of Western this country today without an interdiscipli- Sydney and Victoria University of Technol- nary approach, then they are missing the ogy have been badly hit by the changes that whole point. How can you address the big the government forced through the Senate questions like salinity by concentrating only last year. on one aspect of a scientific inquiry? There is There is an erosion of public research a whole range of social and other measures agencies such as the CSIRO. Last year they that need to be examined on issues such as asked for a $120 million increase in their that. We need to have the insights of psy- budget allocation, but they got $20 million. chology, organisational management, eco- For three years in a row they have sought nomics, foreign languages and business cul- triennial funding to give them some security, tures. All of those things are left out of the some measure of confidence, but they have current priorities that the government has set been knocked back. This year they are asking for its research spending. for $170 million. We will see how they go We see a massive decline in the quality of very shortly. If we look at our overall na- maths and science teaching in our schools. tional investment in R&D in comparison We have a situation where there are far too with the United States, the United Kingdom few people being attracted to the enabling or Canada, we are falling behind. We are disciplines of science, engineering and tech- slipping behind our major competitors in key nology within our schools and universities. international performance indicators, such as We have a situation within our primary publications and the capacity to attract world schools where it may well be that up to half leading scientists and researchers. Increasing of our teachers are not qualified in maths and numbers of our experienced researchers are science yet are taking children in those stud- obliged to work overseas. There is a wastage ies. How can you inspire and encourage peo- of our intellectual property, where increasing ple to take up these very important disci- numbers of our great ideas are being com- plines when the teachers are not properly mercialised offshore. We are exporting jobs qualified to teach them? as a result of our failure to turn good ideas We have a problem regarding the atomisa- into jobs in this country. tion of the relationships between research We see a poor uptake of Australian inven- funding agencies and research institutions. tions by Australian business in this country. Essentially, the approach to the funding of There is an extraordinary break in the cul- research in this country of the different agen- tural understanding both in universities of cies of government and our public institu- business and in business of universities. The tions is extraordinarily disjointed. No won- net result has been a loss of opportunities for der it is almost impossible for the private innovation in products and services and for sector to understand how these things are improvements in productivity. We see an actually funded when there is so little under- extraordinary imbalance in the short-term standing apparent within the public sector and long-term research needs of our coopera- itself, and particularly within the main man- tive research centres, our universities and our agers of the public sector—the government.

CHAMBER 20840 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

It is no wonder that we have a massive array this bill, which I understand has the support of reviews under way by the government; of the chamber. I move: some 10 separate reviews into research fund- At the end of the motion, add “but the Senate ing were undertaken last year by the gov- notes the importance of research as a driver of ernment. Four or five key reports have been economic growth and condemns the Govern- suppressed by the government and have been ment’s failure to stimulate private sector invest- sitting on the minister’s desk since October ment in research and development and to ade- last year. No wonder these reviews have quately invest in public research and develop- been undertaken in such secrecy—the gov- ment”. ernment is beginning to hear the message Senator STOTT DESPOJA (South Aus- that the situation with regard to research tralia) (1.34 p.m.)—I indicate formally that funding in this country is a long way short of the Democrats will be supporting the second what it should be. reading amendment that has been circulated In the forthcoming months there will be a in Senator Carr’s name on behalf of the op- major debate in this country about the direc- position. We certainly agree with the senti- tion of research funding. We are looking ments contained in that amendment. If I ever forward to the government’s statements with doubted the worth or power of second read- regard to Backing Australia’s Ability II; we ing amendments, for me today has been are looking forward to seeing just how much another reminder of how they can have an money is allocated. The department of edu- impact: the launch of the ALRC’s review cation has given me an estimate that $1 bil- paper into gene patents and human health— lion per year will be required just to maintain of which I am sure most senators are the funding programs of the current Backing aware—is the consequence of a second read- Australia’s Ability. We look forward to seeing amendment I moved in 2002 to the hu- ing how much of that continues into the new man cloning legislation. That will be another period. We all understand that the financial significant debate in the science area, bio- cliff is approaching, because the money has technology in particular and more specifi- not been put in the budget beyond the current cally the patenting of genes and gene se- forward estimates period. quences—something that members of this chamber know I have been rabbiting on Labor will put forward very strong alter- about since 1996. Perhaps, as a consequence natives to the way in which the government of this inquiry, we might actually have legis- is proceeding. We will be seeking to encour- lation in this field—if not debated then at age the public to take a far greater interest in least introduced—but, having said that, I do these issues, because these are the key driv- have a bill on the Notice Paper. ers of economic growth by driving productivity improvements. These are the keys to In relation to the Industry Research and providing us with some protection from the Development Amendment Bill 2003, Senator shocks of the international marketplace. Carr is right: we should be having a much There are fundamental needs that require the broader debate in this country about the req- reform of research funding and policy in this uisite funding for research and development country. This bill tinkers; it is a tinkering bill. and industry assistance, and of course related issues such as science, biotechnology, higher It is designed to fix a few problems of the government’s own creation. That is why we education and other things. The Democrats are moving a second reading amendment to will be supporting the legislation today. We welcome the bill as it puts in place some

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20841 necessary measures that will improve the In the year 2000, Australia spent 1.48 per operation of the R&D Start program. These cent of our GDP on R&D, ranking us 13th measures are necessary as a result of gov- out of 22 OECD countries. However, our ernment-created problems, as the previous business expenditure on research and devel- speaker indicated, and specifically because opment was only 0.72 per cent of GDP, rank- of the fiasco with the R&D Start program ing us 15th—well below the OECD average that occurred in 2002 when the scheme was of 1.56 per cent. We have failed to address effectively closed down for eight months— that decline, and Senator Carr has indicated that is, from April through to November of that we are going to need many more meas- that year—because of an over commitment ures and resources. Certainly ‘son of Back- of funds. ing Australia’s Ability’ will be the next part As Senator Carr alluded to quite strongly, of that process. Like the Labor Party, as they over the past 20 years Commonwealth in- have indicated today, the Australian Democ- vestment in research and development rats will scrutinise and monitor that process through its agencies and universities has very closely. been in constant decline. Despite the efforts A number of organisations have indicated of this government through the Backing Aus- their concern about the lack of money spent tralia’s Ability program and in part the R&D on research and development in this country Start program, Australia’s business expendi- and the lack of resources to develop the in- ture on R&D, or BERD, in 2002 had still not novative culture to which we all aspire. The recovered from changes to the R&D tax con- Academy of Science recently expressed their cession in 1996. The changes to that tax con- concern at the continual decrease in Austra- cession were strongly opposed by the Austra- lia’s overall expenditure on research and de- lian Democrats for many of the reasons that velopment. It is clear that this government have come through today. At that time, we does not understand the economic impact predicted that it would have a deleterious that research and development can have, impact on investment in R&D in this coun- while other OECD countries are spending try, particularly on private sector investment more on R&D. We only have to look at the in research and development. Unfortunately, EU, which recently announced a target of those predictions came to fruition. spending three per cent of GDP—three per The attempt by the government to arrest cent of their gross expenditure—on R&D. At some of that decline through the Backing a time when they are doing that, the Howard Australia’s Ability measures—if a somewhat government is freezing funding to R&D pro- belated and inadequate response—was wel- grams for up to eight months at a time and comed by the Democrats. At that time, I was disrupting businesses who have been plan- happy to negotiate with the then minister, Dr ning research investment based on the R&D David Kemp, to pass that legislation through Start program. the chamber with some badly needed im- Last night a number of us met with Engi- provements in relation to R&D definitions et neers Australia and, in particular, young en- cetera. People in the industry know what gineers at a function. They were expressing those changes were but, despite the attempts to politicians—and certainly to me directly— of that package to arrest the decline in R&D their concern at the difficulty of recruiting spending, we still have a long way to go. graduate engineers in Australia, partly because of the shortage of students entering engineering courses but also because many

CHAMBER 20842 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 graduates in Australia have decided to take assurances that Flinders University specifi- high-paying jobs overseas. Senator Carr has cally was not going to introduce or increase also talked about the fact that we are seeing its fees? When I talked about my concerns those graduates go offshore. This is still a for my home state of South Australia, Inde- very real problem. I know people have pendent senators indicated that South Austra- mocked the so-called brain drain, but it is a lia was going to be okay. They alluded to reality and something that needs to be ad- some kind of information they had been dressed. There are a number of ways we given by vice-chancellors that the fee in- need to address it. R&D funding is one way creases were not going to happen. How and the education sector as a whole is an- duped are they, and what shame they have other, whether it is science teaching and sci- brought on our state and other states? More ence teachers in particular or, more broadly, importantly, what have they done to the encouraging a climate in which people can hopes of aspiring students, particularly those actually access education that is also publicly from disadvantaged backgrounds? funded. You cannot talk about research and devel- Senator Carr also talked about the damag- opment, you cannot talk about innovation ing—and in fact regressive—higher educa- and you cannot talk about an educated and tion reforms that passed this chamber last enlightened society without first ensuring year and about the fees and charges that are that you have very basic access to educa- sky-high at the moment. Yes, we are one of tion—education that is accessible based on the highest charging countries in the indus- your brains and not your bank balance. How trialised world when it comes to public uni- we have changed the culture in this country versity education. I woke up this morning to when it comes to these issues. We need a see on the front page of my home town pa- government that is serious about publicly per, the Advertiser, the headline ‘Full uni fee funded education and we need a government rise’. What does that mean? It means that that is serious about research and develop- Flinders University, an institution that has ment funding—funding that will help drive previously had quite a long held commitment our economy through innovation and provide to access and equity in higher education by younger Australians, such as those young resisting the temptation to raise fees, particu- engineers that I was privileged to meet last larly in relation to full cost undergraduate fee night, with employment prospects. Hopefully paying courses, and that indicated previously this bill, albeit described as a tinkering bill, that it was not necessarily going to introduce will fix some of the problems. It will lead to or increase fees by the 25 per cent that is a more effective and stable assistance now allowed for under the legislation that mechanism for businesses to invest in R&D passed last year, is going to increase its fees. through improvements to the administration But what have we seen? In a confidential of the R&D Start program. document, which I understand on ABC radio The second reading amendment is sup- this morning Vice-Chancellor Edwards has ported, and the concept of condemning this pretty much confirmed, Flinders University government for failing to stimulate private is considering a full 25 per cent across-the- sector investment in R&D and adequately board fee hike. invest in R&D at a public level is something How duped are those Independent sena- that we support. We will be testing this tors—the very senators who came into this government’s bona fides over the coming place and gave us what amounted to as near months as we deal with the second large an-

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20843 nouncement or instalment of the BAA fund- gram resumed in November 2002—a freeze ing. I look forward to hopefully seeing an of some seven months. The minister at that increase in these measures but also a change time announced a review of the disbursement in the culture. We are becoming a nation that of the R&D Start grants by AusIndustry, and talks about innovation but does not genu- this bill is the direct result of that review. inely reflect that in the policy making and The bill proposes to fix the problems that the funding mechanisms that we have. existed where the board was making deci- Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL (New sions and allocating funds—certainly, in the South Wales) (1.45 p.m.)—When I first government’s view, allocating too many looked at the Industry Research and Devel- funds. That resulted in what the government opment Amendment Bill 2003, which is be- claims was an overcommitment of R&D fore the chamber, I wondered just what it Start funding, leading to the disgraceful was all about and why the government was situation where from April to November no going to the extent of introducing it when, new applications were considered. It became for all intents and purposes, it had appeared farcical, because the minister at the time, for many years that the IR&D board was when asked whether the R&D Start program operating effectively. It was only upon tak- had been frozen, indicated that it had not ing a much closer look at the legislation that been frozen; it was just that no new applica- the underlying purpose of the bill became tions would be considered. Moreover, as it apparent: to clean up the fiasco that occurred transpired, those applications that had been in 2002 with the R&D Start program. I have lodged in the lead-up to and during that pe- spent many hours in Senate estimates ques- riod had to be resubmitted. So many small tioning officials and the minister about why companies in this country, which in many we got ourselves into a mess with the R&D instances provide the impetus for research Start program, and I have not been able to and development, were making plans and get a sensible answer from either the depart- financial commitments on the basis that they ment or the minister as to why it occurred. would be eligible for R&D Start program We had to wait until a bill such as this was funding, and then realised that they would brought into the chamber to understand that not—that they were going to be left in the it was an administrative fiasco within the lurch. department that led to the R&D Start pro- This government has been doing a lot of gram being frozen in that year. analysis and stocktaking of the various pro- It is worth while going back to refresh the grams that were introduced under Backing chamber’s memory about what happened Australia’s Ability. Most of those have spent because, as Senator Carr said earlier, it had very few funds and will, I think, be repack- significant consequences for many of our aged as part of this government’s political small companies around this country. Ex- agenda in the lead-up to the next election— penditure on the R&D Start program is kept again, without any additional commitment of at $180 million a year and is supplemented funds. I wonder if any time has been spent from the budget. In April 2002 the R&D trying to assess how many small companies Start program was suspended due to what the in this country were effectively put to the government said was an overcommitment of sword because of the mismanagement of the funds. No new applications were considered, R&D Start program during that period in and new approvals were suspended until ad- 2002. I know of a few, but no-one has done a ditional funding became available. The pro- stocktake across the whole of our small busi-

CHAMBER 20844 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 ness community to determine how many What has the government done since companies were seriously impacted by the 1996? If you look at page 7 of the Bills Di- mismanagement of that program. gest No. 87 you will see that despite what This is a classic example of this govern- this government says, it has not got the ment’s approach to industry policy. I do not BERD up anywhere near what it was in its want to go into great detail about the many peak in 1995-96. We have asked again seri- industry policy disasters there have been un- ous questions about what is occurring in this der this government. There was the COMET area. At the last estimates we were told of a funding fiasco and the Syntroleum debacle. new measurement that had been introduced, But I am concerned about a story I read in which I am still trying to get three econo- the paper this morning that said that Mitsubi- mists to understand, to show that BERD has shi are now reconsidering their position and been increasing over that period. I forget the that they may well withdraw from this coun- name of the way they measured it, but it was try. If that occurs, we will lose what was a a chain measurement process that I certainly very significant commitment to a new R&D do not understand and, as I said, three facility in the auto industry in the city of economists have had a look at it and they do Adelaide. This is another set of circum- not understand. It is simply a way of playing stances where we are seeing, on a continual with the figures to try to make them look basis under the management of this govern- better than they are. Within three years of ment, the withdrawal of R&D facilities coming to government the coalition’s poli- across the board. We have seen BHP with- cies sliced BERD by more than 25 per cent. draw its R&D facilities and we have seen It has risen slightly since then but, as I said, Telstra withdraw its R&D facilities over the it is still below the peak that it was at in period that this government has been in 1996. The average annual rate of increase in power. We now see the potential for another BERD was 12 per cent in the 1990s, so the major facility—that run by Mitsubishi—to fact that BERD went backwards under the also be withdrawn. coalition in the 1990s is even more amazing. I want to comment briefly on what I think What is the result of the government fail- are two very significant indicators of ing to support innovation? The end result is whether a government’s innovation policies simple: a reduction in the competitiveness of are effective. They are business expenditure Australian industry. Without constant inno- on research and development, and the current vation Australian manufacturers face great account deficit. This government has failed hurdles to export successfully. This decline to encourage and sustain innovation by the in innovation, when coupled with an appre- private sector. The OECD average national ciation of the Australian dollar, has led to a R&D expenditure is 2.17 per cent of GDP. series of record current account deficits. But Australia’s is a pitiful 1.48 per cent and is what has the government done to both rec- outranked by countries such as Iceland and ognise this problem and take action to try Canada. When we look at business expendi- and deal with it? It has refused to do any- ture on research and development—or thing, even to consider alleviating the pres- BERD, as it is more commonly known—it is sures that Australian manufacturers are suf- even worse. When Labor left office, BERD fering as a result of the significant increase was 0.87 per cent of GDP. This represented a in the dollar in the past 18 months. This is 172 per cent increase in BERD compared to despite the fact that one of the most signifi- when Labor took government in 1983. cant industry associations in this country, the

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20845

AIG, is saying that there is a massive prob- Our productivity performance is also impres- lem. The result? A current account deficit of sive—multifactor productivity grew by 2.8% over $1.69 billion in January and $2.55 billion in 2001-02 December 2003. In the seven months to Businesses are recognising the value of January exports of non-rural and other goods R&D—business expenditure on R&D (BERD) were down by $5.6 billion. That is a 10 per rose 13% in 2001-02, up to $5.546 billion, with cent decline compared to the corresponding increases in all major sectors. period in 2002-03. Last year’s current ac- This is the highest level recorded and is the count deficit of $24 billion was the largest in second successive year of significant increase. our history, yet we have a government that Australia’s BERD to GDP ratio also increased simply sits back and does nothing to ensure from 0.73% to 0.78% in 2001-02—a clear indica- that, when there are significant shifts like tion that the Government’s R&D and innovation policies are working. this, action is taken to ensure that the position of our manufacturers, our exporters, is Industry associations such as the Australian not unnecessarily disadvantaged. Industry Group have commented favourably on the improvement in BERD, in recent years and As I said at the start, the Labor Party are point to the importance of innovation as a major supporting this legislation and, as Senator competitive driver. Carr has indicated, we are moving a second Government support for businesses undertak- reading amendment. We have to keep in ing R&D is extensive, and includes programs mind that this is simply plugging another gap such as COMET, BIF, IIF, the Pre-Seed Fund, the in our innovation and industry policy fabric Innovation Access Program, the Innovation which is being caused by this government’s Awareness Program, a variety of sector specific ineptitude and incapacity to put in place a schemes and R&D Start. sustainable policy framework that will last The House of Representatives Standing Com- over the long term and provide the frame- mittee on Science and Innovation’s recent report, work within which Australian industries, Riding the Innovation Wave, The Case for Rais- Australian innovators, can get on with the ing Business Investment in R&D observed that the Commonwealth set aside over $5.4 billion for job of developing and growing sustainable expenditure on science and innovation in industries that will last into the long term. 2003-04. Senator TROETH (Victoria— The Government,, through R&D Start alone, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for has provided more than $1.7 billion support to Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) (1.56 businesses undertaking R&D since the program’s p.m.)—I seek leave to incorporate my re- inception in 1996. marks on the Industry Research and Devel- The R&D Start Program is associated with opment Amendment Bill 2003. many well known success stories, including Co- Leave granted. chlear and Norwood Abbey. The speech read as follows— The House of Representatives report concluded that the Government’s introduction of I am pleased to advise that under this Govern- programs such as COMET, BIF, IIF and R&D ment Australia’s innovation and R&D perform- Start shows that ‘R&D policy over time ... has ance is impressive and growing. evolved in ways that much better meets the needs Indeed, Australia’s innovation performance has of SMEs’. contributed to strong economic growth in recent We are not resting on our laurels—we have re- years; 3.5% a year over the past five years. cently taken stock of our science and innovation system, with the outcomes included in the report,

CHAMBER 20846 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

Mapping Australian Science and Innovation. We Third Reading have also reviewed a range of innovation pro- Bill passed through its remaining stages grams under Backing Australia’s Ability, and the Government is currently considering policy initia- without amendment or debate. tives to improve Australia’s R&D and innovation Sitting suspended from 1.57 p.m. to performance. 2.00 p.m. The Report on Mapping Australia’s Science QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE and Innovation, which was commissioned by the Trade: Free Trade Agreement Prime Minister, found that Australia’s science performance is among the strongest of all coun- Senator CONROY (2.00 p.m.)—My tries, and has been leading-edge in a number of question is to Senator Hill, representing the scientific fields. It notes that Australia has in- Minister for Trade. Minister, is it a fact that vested heavily in ‘public good’ research and that the text of the US trade deal released today the commercial and non-commercial benefits of outlines a long list of agricultural products this have been considerable. that will be subject to price based safeguards The Mapping Report finds that Australia’s for up to 18 years? Can the minister confirm level of government expenditure on R&D is rela- that these safeguard measures will apply to tively high by international standards. According the export of Australian beef, tomatoes, as- to the Report, government support for science and innovation has become more strategically fo- paragus, pears, apricots, peaches, oranges cused, “signalling strong policy interest and rec- and grape juice? Don’t these types of price ognition of the links to economic, social and envi- sensitive measures have the potential to ad- ronmental outcomes”. versely impact on any improved market ac- Australia’s level of government-financed excess to the US that Australia may have penditure on R&D is high by international stan- achieved through this trade deal? Why did dards. In 2000 the Government invested 0.71% of the Howard government promise so much to GDP in public sector R&D, compared to an Australian farmers and yet deliver so little in OECD average of 0.64%. this trade deal with the United States? In 2000-01, Australia’s total gross expenditure Senator HILL—Transitional safeguards on R&D (GERD—the total expenditure on R&D, are a standard part of all free trade agree- both private and public, within Australia) was ments—something Labor would know if 1.53% of Gross Domestic Product, compared to just under 1.0% in 1981. Gross expenditure on they had ever negotiated one. Even with a R&D as a proportion of GDP is now around 50% safeguard, Australian exporters will still be higher than in 1981. paying lower tariffs than they would have Senator TROETH—I indicate that the been without the agreement. They are still government will be opposing Senator Carr’s better off. The safeguard applies to 15 tariff second reading amendment. lines, which represent less than three per cent of the 544 horticultural tariff lines in the The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT agreement. Representatives from the horti- (Senator Chapman)—The question is that cultural industry were part of the negotiating the amendment moved by Senator Carr be team in Washington and they expressed pub- agreed to. lic support of the FTA. Question agreed to. Senator CONROY—Mr President, I ask Original question, as amended, agreed to. a supplementary question. Can the minister Bill read a second time. confirm that, under the trade agreement cra- venly agreed to by the Howard government,

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20847 if the prices in the US fall by 10 per cent for how and when they retire and, if those initia- the 33 horticultural products, an additional tives are not adopted, what other alternatives duty of 30 per cent shall be applied? If prices there might be? fall by more than 75 per cent, an additional Senator COONAN—I thank Senator duty of 100 per cent will apply. Minister, Knowles for her interest in this matter which why did the government agree to such perni- is vital to all Australians. Australia has a cious measures in this deal, which will con- world-class superannuation system that is tinue to deny Australian farmers free access admired by countries across the globe. There to the US market when they get free access are, however, many challenges facing us as a right now? nation, including the ageing of Australia’s Senator HILL—Why does the Labor population and the implications that will Party oppose an agreement that significantly have in areas such as health, aged care and improves access for Australian horticultural our living standards in retirement. People are producers? Labor seems to imply that, if it living longer and demanding higher stan- had negotiated the agreement, it would have dards of living in retirement while, at the got a better outcome, but Labor had 13 years same time, birth rates are falling. and did not negotiate one of these agree- The ageing of Australia’s population does ments. The Howard government, by contrast, not just have consequences for people whose has done it with Singapore, has done it with retirement is imminent; it affects their chil- Thailand and has now done it with the dren and their grandchildren. It will not only United States. The Howard government has affect them; it will affect their families. To been prepared to get in there and negotiate help address the issue of Australia’s chang- an agreement—hard negotiations—to ing demographics, the Treasurer last week achieve a better outcome for Australian pro- announced a range of measures to make Aus- ducers, which was more than Labor was ever tralia’s superannuation more flexible and to prepared to do. Labor still philosophically give Australian workers more choice about opposes free trade agreements. (Time ex- when and how they retire. The skills and pired) experience of older Australians transitioning DISTINGUISHED VISITORS to retirement will make them valuable em- The PRESIDENT—Order! I draw the at- ployees well into the future. From 1 July tention of honourable senators to the pres- next year, Australian workers who have ence in the advisers box of a distinguished reached their preservation age of 55 will be former Treasurer for the state of Tasmania, able to supplement their income by accessing the Hon. David Crean, MLC. their superannuation as a non-commutable income stream. It will help provide Austra- Honourable senators—Hear, hear! lian workers with a higher standard of living QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE and give them more choices about when and Superannuation: Reform how to retire. Senator KNOWLES (2.04 p.m.)—My If you listen to the Labor Party, if you are question is to the Minister for Revenue and nearing 55 you should up stumps and retire Assistant Treasurer, Senator Coonan. Could because, according to them in the debate that the minister please inform the Senate of the has ensued over the last couple of days, you Howard government’s initiatives to provide have reached your use-by date—you no Australians with more choices in deciding longer have anything to contribute once you

CHAMBER 20848 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 have reached 55. But the Australian govern- to put in place flexible policies that will meet ment, which looks beyond these populist the needs of all Australians. catchcries and the next electoral cycle, be- Trade: Free Trade Agreement lieves that older Australians have much to Senator CONROY (2.09 p.m.)—My contribute and deserve some choice about question is to Senator Hill, representing the when they want to retire. The initiatives an- Minister for Trade. Can the minister confirm nounced last week are not about forcing Aus- that the text of the US trade deal released tralians to work longer, as Labor claims, but today outlines a process that requires generic are about giving Australians more choice drug producers to notify a patent owner if about their retirement. they are intending to introduce a generic Choice, it must be said, does seem to drug to the market? Won’t this requirement frighten those on the opposite side of the give rise to legal action by US drug compa- chamber. Labor senators would prefer to pre- nies to prevent the introduction of generic scribe to Australian workers how and when drugs onto the Australian market? Can the they retire and would write them off when minister guarantee— they turn 65. As usual, Labor is inconsistent. Government senators interjecting— Labor senators on the now extant Senate superannuation committee recognised that part- The PRESIDENT—Order! Senators on time work could be an integral step towards my right: there is too much noise across the final retirement—a gradual transition from chamber. work to retirement. But now Labor senators Senator CONROY—Can the minister have started this headline grabbing campaign guarantee that this trade deal will not delay about ‘working until you drop’. This of the introduction of generic drugs onto Aus- course attacks and contradicts the very tralia’s Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme or statements of the opposition leader, Mr will not blow out the cost of that scheme to Latham, but it does show old Labor’s true Australian taxpayers? colours: the ‘one size fits all’ approach to all Senator HILL—I have not yet read all of Australians; not choice and flexibility but the 1,100-odd pages but I can assure the just more regulation and red tape. Senate that the determination of the Howard Apart from making no economic sense, government to protect the PBS was success- we can only wonder what may be in store for ful. I can also assure the Senate that particu- some senators on the opposition benches— lar effort was put in, successfully, to protect Senator Ray, Senator Hogg, Senator Cook access to the market of generic drugs. and possibly Senators Denman, Buckland Senator Conroy interjecting— and George Campbell. Having reached the Senator HILL—I think Senator Conroy grand age of 55, are we about to see the im- can be confident that the Howard govern- minent retirements of these worthy souls? ment would have negotiated a very good This example demonstrates just how unten- outcome. The contrast with Labor of course able Labor’s notion of compulsory retire- is obvious. Labor is trying to pick shortcom- ment is. This government is all about provid- ings in an 1,100-page document that pro- ing more flexibility for older Australians vides better access for Australian producers whether they want to work, whether they to the giant United States market. That is want to retire or whether they want to be what Labor is doing—quarrelling about the semiretired. This government will continue small issues within a massive achievement.

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20849

The contrast is that Labor in its 13 years did Australian Defence Force: Remuneration not even try to negotiate a bilateral agree- Arrangements ment with the major economies of the Senator JOHNSTON (2.13 p.m.)—My world—did not even make an effort. question is to the Minister for Defence and Senator Cook—That is not true. Leader of the Government in the Senate, Senator HILL—Senator Cook inter- Senator Hill. Will the minister update the rupts—he was the trade minister. He failed. Senate on new developments in the govern- He did not believe in it. Labor still does not ment’s ongoing commitment to deliver better believe in bilateral agreements. Labor keeps pay and conditions to the men and women of all its eggs in the multilateral basket and if the Australian Defence Force? Will the min- that does not work, where is the advantage to ister also advise the Senate of his awareness the Australian producers? It does not exist. of any alternative policies on that subject? Any fair observer would applaud the fact that Senator HILL—As the Senate would be the Howard government takes advantage of aware, this government takes a keen interest multilateral trade opportunities but does not in the pay, conditions and welfare of Defence accept that as enough and goes out there and Force personnel. In keeping with this com- negotiates bilateral agreements to get further mitment, Major-General Barry Nunn under- benefit when it can be achieved. It has been took a review of the Australian Defence achieved through agreements with Singapore Force remuneration in 2001. The review and Thailand and it has now been achieved made about 60 recommendations, 26 of through an agreement with the United States. which have already been implemented within It would be much better if Labor came on Defence. I am now pleased to advise the board, processed the legislation that will Senate that, as a result of recent cabinet con- soon be forthcoming and facilitated the early sideration, the government has decided to entry into operation of this agreement so that progress further reforms to the ADF pay all Australians can be the winners. structure. Senator CONROY—Mr President, I ask Some of the most valuable and highly a supplementary question. Minister, is it a skilled professionals within the ADF cur- fact that the text of the US trade deal says: rently receive a proportion of their total pay Australia shall provide opportunities to apply for in the form of allowances. These allowances an adjustment to a reimbursement amount. recognise the unique qualifications and skills Will the minister now inform the Senate pre- that are possessed by groups including pilots, cisely what the impact of the concession will submariners, clearance divers and special air be and what opportunities will be provided service soldiers, as well as the hazards they for an adjustment to the reimbursement face in the performance of their duty. His- amount? torically, these allowances have formed part of income for taxation purposes but have not Senator HILL—On the issue of generic attracted superannuation contributions. I am drugs, I am advised that the provisions will pleased to announce that the Howard gov- not adversely affect generic drug companies ernment has decided to make the qualifica- entering the market with new generic phar- tion and skill elements of these allowances maceutical products that have come off pat- superannuable. This decision applies to the ent. That is the assurance that the honourable flying allowance, submarine service allow- senator wanted and I am very pleased to be ance, special action forces allowance and able to give it to him.

CHAMBER 20850 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 specialist operations allowance paid under vance is potentially payable to APSC? Will section 58H of the Defence Act. the minister now table the contract in the In some instances it will increase retire- Senate? ment income by up to 30 per cent. This deci- Senator MINCHIN—I did mention in the sion will take concrete effect once the neces- previous answer I gave to Senator Carr on sary legislative changes are enacted over the this issue that the government, with strong coming few months. In addition, we have support from people like Senator Carr, Sena- decided to retain the Defence Force Remu- tor Schacht and others at the time, supported neration Tribunal as the primary mechanism a space project on Christmas Island through for determining pay and allowances and to a rigorous process of the award of a strategic retain the position of the Defence Force Ad- investment incentive grant. The total grant, vocate. Reforms to maternity leave entitle- as I said, was $100 million. About $68 mil- ments will also be progressed to align these lion of that was for common-use infrastruc- provisions with those in the rest of the Aus- ture on the island, such as the airstrip and tralian Public Service. things of that sort, and then $31.4 million The Labor Party revealed yesterday that was payable, subject to a lot of conditions, to they do not share the government’s commit- APSC for spaceport infrastructure. ment to providing a comprehensive set of I went on to say that no funds have been salary allowances and conditions of service paid to APSC at all because they have not for the men and women of the ADF. How- met any of the preconditions or milestones ever, combined with recent changes to veter- that are required of them before any of the ans’ entitlements, the implementation by the money becomes available. Some of the pre- government of these additional Nunn review conditions to any transfer of funds relate to recommendations shows the Howard gov- intergovernmental considerations, including ernment’s determination to provide the high- security and safeguard issues; financial clo- est quality facilities, services and employ- sure; government approvals relating to envi- ment conditions to those who have served in ronmental and other issues; planning and the past as well as those who continue to approvals frameworks relating to maritime serve today. and civil aviation clearances for safety; and Asia Pacific Space Centre submission of an application for a space licence from the Space Licensing and Safety Senator FAULKNER (2.16 p.m.)—My Office. If all these five conditions were to be question is directed to Senator Minchin as achieved, that would trigger an initial pay- the Minister for Finance and Administration ment of $6 million. Subsequent payments of and as the Minister representing the Treas- $10 million and then $15.4 million are based urer and the Minister for Industry, Tourism on construction milestones. and Resources. Can the minister confirm that the contract with the Asia Pacific Space Cen- The intended timetable has not been met, tre to build the Christmas Island spaceport as I said before, because market conditions prevents the government from withdrawal have substantially changed and APSC, as until December 2005? Is this irrespective of they have acknowledged and as I have ac- any progress on the project? Given the min- knowledged—and I have expressed my pro- ister’s personal explanation to the Senate found disappointment about this—have not yesterday, can he now advise how much of been able to achieve financial closure and get the $100 million from the Treasurer’s ad- the financial backing they need for this pro-

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20851 ject to proceed. The only funds actually ex- Senator MINCHIN—I would have to get pended by the government were that we went back to you on the detail of the due diligence ahead with the construction of the additional process. I will also get back to you on the port for $4.7 million largely because, as the question you asked before about the contract. opposition knows, we are proceeding to con- I am happy to get you some further informa- struct a detention centre on the island. That tion on that. I did say in the answer I just will necessitate this additional port being gave that the preconditions to any payments built. Anyone who has been to Christmas to APSC were ‘financial close’. In other Island would realise that the normal port is words, they had to satisfy the government unusable for several months of the year be- that they had the finance properly in place cause of weather conditions. This additional before the project could be built. They have port facility on the other side of the island, not been able to satisfy that prerequirement. which has now been constructed and which I It was also a prerequirement that they had to have visited, is a great asset for the island submit an application for a space licence, and for the economy and welfare of the is- which has not yet occurred. There were five land as well as being of great importance in preconditions—all of which had to be met terms of the detention centre we are building. and none of which have been met, as I un- Three hundred thousand dollars has been derstand it—before the first payment of $6 expended on road design work, which was million towards a spaceport infrastructure primarily related to the activities of the Asia- could be paid. The government continue to Pacific Space Centre, but no further work work with APSC in the hope that it will be has been undertaken on that basis. The ques- able to meet these preconditions, because we tion of whether that road should be built would love nothing better than for Australia anyway is a matter that my colleague Senator to be part of the space industry. (Time ex- Campbell might want to consider in due pired) course. Again, I express my profound sup- Trade: Free Trade Agreement port for this project and my earnest hope, on Senator RIDGEWAY (2.23 p.m.)—My behalf of the government, that APSC will question is to the Minister representing the ultimately find themselves in a position to Minister for Trade, Senator Hill. Minister, proceed. I do acknowledge the support we the text of the recently released free trade had from the opposition at the time. We agreement includes an exemption for ‘ser- would love to see this project proceed. The vices supplied in the exercise of governmen- government has been rigorous in its applica- tal authority’. Is the minister aware that the tion of the strict conditions such that, as I agreement uses the same definition as the say, no money has changed hands, no money GATS—that is, ‘any service which is sup- has gone to APSC and no money will— plied neither on a commercial basis, nor in (Time expired) competition with one or more service suppli- Senator FAULKNER—Mr President, I ers’? Isn’t this clearly ambiguous given that ask a supplementary question. Minister, was so many essential public services either have a due diligence study undertaken by the de- been privatised or are in the process of be- partment prior to the signing of the deeds? If coming so under this government and many so, did the government satisfy itself that are supplied in a competitive environment? APSC would undertake basic requirements Can the minister guarantee that the govern- such as securing financial backing or apply- ment has not compromised the ability of ing for a space operating licence? governments at all levels in Australia to de-

CHAMBER 20852 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 liver essential public services to their com- Treasurer and the Minister for Industry, munities? If there is no effective exemption Tourism and Resources. Can the minister for public services, can the minister guaran- confirm that, at the time of the cabinet ap- tee that these have not been sold out? proval for a strategic investment coordina- Senator HILL—I would be confident that tion grant for $100 million to the Asia Pa- I could give that assurance but I think it cific Space Centre in 2001, the secretary to would probably be better to get a more au- the cabinet and head of the cabinet policy thoritative version from Mr Vaile. My confi- unit responsible for coordinating whole of dence is based on this fact: why would the government strategic policy issues was Mr government want to sell out the capacity to Paul McClintock? Can you confirm that Mr provide services? It does not make sense and Paul McClintock is the son of Sir Eric therefore I would have thought it was highly McClintock, who, at the time of the cabinet unlikely, but I will get a response from Mr decision, was a member of the Asia Pacific Vaile as quickly as possible. Space Centre advisory board? Did Mr Paul McClintock make any declaration of interest Senator RIDGEWAY—Mr President, I in relation to this commercial matter? ask a supplementary question. In annex II of the agreement, there is a very general reser- Senator MINCHIN—I wondered where vation for Australia—we reserve the right to the opposition had been coming from on this ‘adopt or maintain’ any measure with respect issue. Now they want to slander Paul to a number of services including public McClintock apparently. Off the top of my education, health and child care. If the gov- head, trying to recollect who held what posi- ernment have recognised the importance of tion when, my recollection is that Paul these services to the extent that they have McClintock may have been secretary of the secured a reservation in the agreement, why cabinet at the time. As industry minister at didn’t they go one step further and exempt the time that these negotiations were taking essential public services from the agreement place, I can say that the secretary of the entirely? Why have other essential public cabinet had no direct role whatsoever. The services such as the provision of water, waste submissions in relation to the negotiations disposal and energy services not been men- with APSC were done with me and the then tioned in this annexure reservation? strategic investment coordinator. I took a submission directly to cabinet and the cabi- Senator HILL—I will add that to my first net approved a strategic investment incentive request to the minister. Of course, I should grant on the terms and conditions which I remind the Senate that there are two parlia- have just outlined in my answer to Senator mentary inquiries pending into this agree- Faulkner. I remind you that it was not a $100 ment, at which there will be an opportunity million grant to APSC: $68.6 million was for to debate the detail, including such issues as infrastructure on the island and the rest was the one that has been mentioned. I suggest, for spaceport infrastructure. I repeat that the with respect, that that might be a better occa- only money that has been spent is for the sion to work through the text than questions wharf on the island. I will have to get further without notice. information about Sir Eric McClintock’s role Asia Pacific Space Centre at the time. My recollection is that he may Senator CARR (2.26 p.m.)—My ques- well be currently on the advisory board of tion is to Senator Minchin as the Minister for APSC. Whether he was on the board at the Finance and the Minister representing the time and whether there was even an advisory

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20853 board at the time that this matter went to Ageing. Minister, what is the current number cabinet, I cannot recollect but I am happy to of overseas-trained doctors practising in Aus- find out for you. tralia, what is the number of GPs who have Senator CARR—Mr President, I ask a left Australia in the last three years, what is supplementary question. Is the minister the number of students enrolled currently in aware of any presentation by departmental all medical schools and universities across officials, including the assistant secretary of Australia and what is the number of GPs the department, to the Russian space agen- who have ceased practising in the last three cies or the Russian government that inferred years? that the Asia-Pacific Space Centre was in Senator IAN CAMPBELL—I thank fact an Australian government agency? Can Senator Harris for the question and I thank the minister confirm that this assistant secre- him for indicating that he may ask a very tary was removed from the department detailed question. Even with the brief warn- shortly after this misrepresentation and sub- ing that he gave me, I do not have all of sequently took up the position of executive those facts at my fingertips. director of the Asia-Pacific Space Centre? In Senator Chris Evans—Even when they his new position with the Asia-Pacific Space give you the question, you can’t answer it. Centre, what contact with the government It’s outrageous! did he have regarding the $100 million stra- Senator IAN CAMPBELL—Comrade, it tegic investment coordination grant? is a very important question. Senator MINCHIN—I keep hearing Honourable senators interjecting— ‘he’—I am not sure whom Senator Carr was referring to when he said ‘he’. I will have to Senator IAN CAMPBELL—It is Com- go back and have a look at the Hansard to rade Evans I was talking to. see if I can work that out and get him an an- Opposition senators interjecting— swer. The Russians are important to this pro- The PRESIDENT—Order! Senators on ject because they supply the rockets. At no my left, come to order. Senator Campbell, stage was there any suggestion that this was ignore the interjections. a government entity of any sort. Obviously, it Senator IAN CAMPBELL—I will, Mr was important to the Russians in their nego- President—most senators are on my left. The tiations with the Australian government that details of the question do relate to very im- the government had made a decision to sup- portant matters that are before the parliament port this project through the strategic in- at this time. Senator Harris talks about the vestment incentive, but at no stage was there number of overseas-trained doctors in Aus- any suggestion on the part of the government tralia. Amongst the government’s measures that this company was anything other than a to ensure that there are more GPs available private company being supported by the to ensure that people do get affordable health government with the offer of this infrastruc- outcomes and can do it in their own areas is ture if certain very serious and stringent pre- MedicarePlus, which is being opposed by conditions were met. Labor in the Senate but which will put in Health: General Practitioners place a number of initiatives to ensure that Senator HARRIS (2.30 p.m.)—My ques- there are more doctors available and particu- tion is to Senator Ian Campbell, the Minister larly that there are doctors available in re- representing the Minister for Health and

CHAMBER 20854 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 gional and remote areas, which I know is at bring in overseas-trained doctors and by en- the nub of Senator Harris’s question. suring that we have, for example, as part of In relation to overseas-trained doctors, the the package, the Rural Retention Program, government, through the MedicarePlus ar- which ensures that doctors have incentives to rangements, want to see 725 new overseas- stay in rural areas. This is in concert with the trained doctors come into service. We are program to fund practice nurses, which, seeking to achieve that through recruitment again, makes it easier for rural doctors to strategies that reduce red tape in approval handle those loads, particularly where the GP processes and assist employers and overseas- to patient ratio is higher. (Time expired) trained doctors in arranging placements. We Senator HARRIS—Mr President, I ask a are improving training arrangements and supplementary question. Minister, what is support programs and creating opportunities the average doctor-patient ratio in Rural, for doctors to stay longer or, very impor- Remote and Metropolitan Areas, RRMA, tantly, to obtain permanent residency through classifications 1 and 2—that is, urban areas? changes to immigration arrangements. That What is the average doctor-patient ratio in deals with the overseas doctors. RRMAs 3 to 7—that is, primarily rural ar- Senator Harris asked a long question, and eas? What process is the government putting I will certainly provide details to him on no- in place to remedy the unacceptably high tice that I cannot provide in the four minutes patient-doctor ratio in general practices? available to me. There are also important Senator IAN CAMPBELL—I have an- measures to create new medical school swered in broad terms some of the questions places, and Senator Harris asked about that. in relation to the Rural Retention Program. The government, through the MedicarePlus The answers for the particular areas that the initiatives and other packages, is making senator refers to I do not have at hand, but available 234 new, publicly funded places in the national average ratio of full-time GPs to medical schools across Australia. Very im- patients is one to 1,388. There was a report portantly for Senator Harris and for the peo- in the Adelaide Advertiser on Monday, about ple of Queensland, whom he represents, which I was expecting a question from the there will be 50 new places in Queensland. opposition all week, containing a figure of That is very important, as Queensland is one one to 746. The difference between the op- of the areas where shortages have been iden- position and the government is that we have tified. Of course, Senator Harris will know— a range of programs. We are investing bil- because he has been working very construc- lions of dollars in programs to ensure that tively with the government to come to a doctors go to areas of shortage. It is a com- MedicarePlus package that helps the people prehensive package involving new university of Queensland and helps people in rural and places, overseas doctors, the Rural Retention remote parts of Queensland—that the bond- Program, increased vocational training for ing system ensures that the people who get practice nurses and bringing GPs out of re- these places do have to give service in the tirement to upskill them and encourage them areas that are in most need. to go back into service. It is a good program. It is commendable that Senator Harris Thanks for the question. (Time expired) takes an interest in bringing new doctors into Asia Pacific Space Centre service by increasing medical school num- Senator CARR (2.37 p.m.)—My ques- bers, by ensuring that we have systems to tion is to Senator Minchin, the Minister for

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20855

Finance and Administration, the Minister vestment incentive program, which the other representing the Treasurer and the Minister side is going to ditch, that is available to representing the Minister for Industry, Tour- support very important strategic projects of ism and Resources. Can the minister confirm this kind. For Australia to be able to set up that the chairman of APSC’s advisory board on Christmas Island a world-class space port is Mr Jim Longley, the former New South capable of launching satellites from that very Wales Liberal member for Pittwater? Can the strategic and important location I think minister confirm that Mr Longley is a close would be an enormous advance for Australia. personal friend of the Prime Minister? Did It would be an enormous fillip for the Aus- Mr Longley lobby the Prime Minister to tralian economy, for Australian technology support the Treasurer’s advance for the $100 and for all the space related industries, many million strategic investment coordinator of which are in my own state. I repeat: the grant? opposition welcomed this at the time. The Senator MINCHIN—I cannot confirm or Labor Party around Australia welcomed this deny that. I cannot really comment on the at the time. On 20 June 2002, Senator Carr question of whether or not Mr Longley is the himself said of APSC: chairman of the advisory board—I honestly It is important that this country does more in re- have no idea—and I cannot comment at all gard to space industries. We have enormous po- on whether or not Mr Longley happens to be tential in regard to the development of our own a friend of the Prime Minister’s. Senator Carr capacities in that regard. can ask the Prime Minister that, if he likes, He said that there is a very important oppor- when he next sees him. I cannot remember tunity here. We agreed with Senator Carr, we the other part of your question. agreed with former Senator Schacht and we Senator Carr—Did he lobby the Prime agreed with the hundreds of people who lob- Minister? bied us to do what we could to support this project from both sides of politics. Lots of Senator MINCHIN—As I said, I do not people lobbied us to ensure that we did seek even know whether or not Mr Longley is the to support this project. We have a very, very chairman of the advisory board. What I am rigorous strategic investment incentive proc- happy to do is stand here and proudly defend ess. The overwhelming majority of appli- the very rigorous process by which the gov- cants for support fail because they do not ernment came to the determination that this satisfy the very strict criteria that are in- is a project which it should support. I think it volved. We were satisfied that this project is a tragedy for Australia that we have not would go to another country if we did not been able to fully engage effectively and provide support. We put in very strict pre- adequately in the space industry. Geographi- conditions to the transfer of any support— cally, this country is ideally located to be a which I have outlined and which are very vital part of the world space industry. rigorous—and, as I say, no money has There have been a number of failed at- changed hands. tempts, many of which occurred when the This is a pretty desperate and grubby at- other side were in power. When we were tempt by the opposition, who have nothing approached about this project we saw the else to talk about, to try to sully the name of enormous potential benefit of it, and I think APSC and all those associated with it. We it is a great credit to this government that we have had names dragged through here to- are prepared to have in place a strategic in- day—Mr Longley, Sir Eric McClintock, Paul

CHAMBER 20856 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

McClintock—quite deliberately leaving a proceed. Senator Carr himself welcomed the stain on those people, which I think is very government’s support for this project and unfair and unfortunate. I think the opposition earnestly hoped that it would succeed. For- should be talking about future policy for this mer Senator Schacht attended dinner with us country, and one of the future policies of this and the Russians when this project was being country should be that we do everything we discussed. So there is plenty of Labor sup- possibly can to develop a space industry. port. I was surprised that Senator Carr was That is certainly our government’s intent. We not at dinner with the Russians as well. We do want to see this project succeed. We are should have sent you an invitation, Senator working closely with the company in the Carr. I know you would have enjoyed it very hope that it can achieve financial closure. We much because you have a lot in common have put a lot of time and effort into the with them. As I say, I am disappointed with question of technology and safeguard ar- the slur that has been cast on this company, a rangements with Russia. Wouldn’t it be fan- company founded by a great Korean success tastic if we really could establish a relation- story, an immigrant from Korea, David ship with Russia that involved an Australian Kwon. He has built a great story for Austra- company, developed, I might say, by an out- lia and he has been very successful in this standing success story? (Time expired) country, and I am sorry about the slur you Senator CARR—Mr President, I ask a are casting upon him. (Time expired) supplementary question. I ask the minister to Health: Program Funding comment in his capacity as former minister Senator ALLISON (2.44 p.m.)—My for industry as well as the minister represent- question is to the Minister representing the ing the current minister for industry. Does Minister for Health and Ageing. Is the minis- the minister acknowledge that there is a dif- ter aware that last year Sexual Health and ference between support for the space indus- Family Planning Australia provided over a try and acknowledging that there is no ex- quarter of a million clinical services in sex- cuse for poor management of government ual and reproductive health—including projects? Can he confirm that he was person- sexually transmitted infections, pregnancy ally lobbied by former senator John Herron and contraception—and provided family to support this project? Further, how many planning training to around 20,000 doctors other members of the ministry lobbied you as and health workers? Given the importance of minister to support this project? these sexual health services, why has the Senator MINCHIN—I have a pretty minister in the last few weeks delayed any clear recollection of former senator Chris future funding of family planning associa- Schacht lobbying me pretty heavily for this tions, reportedly because he does not yet project when he was a Labor senator. He was have a position on them? How can the minis- a great advocate for the space industry, and ter not have a position on the funding of sex- he put a lot of persuasive arguments to me. ual health and reproductive planning? As I said in my previous answer, there were Senator IAN CAMPBELL—It is Sena- hundreds of people very keen to see this pro- tor Allison who is alleging that; I have not ject proceed. Whether former senator John seen anything that would lead me to believe Herron was one of them I have no recollec- that that is the case. I am informed that fam- tion whatsoever. As I say, from people such ily planning services are covered by Com- as former Senator Schacht down, there were monwealth-state agreements called the pub- lots of people who wanted to see this project

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20857 lic health outcome funding agreements, have spent, for example in her state of Victo- which have a very clumsy acronym which I ria, $2.557 million in the past year and $2.28 will not attempt. The next five-year agree- million the year before that, which had in- ment currently under consideration should creased from $1.947 million the year before. start from July this year and is worth $1.3 So it is a significant commitment: $1.3 bil- billion, which is a very significant commit- lion across the whole of Australia. But Sena- ment to those public health outcomes. The tor Allison says, ‘Just give them a blank most effective stream of funding for a whole cheque.’ The state health officials and the range of services, including family planning Commonwealth health officials want to services, is part of this consideration. Under make sure that we get public health out- these arrangements all Australian govern- comes for the money. I think all taxpayers ments have responsibilities and obligations and recipients of those services would like to in relation to the range of services covered be assured that the Commonwealth and the by those public health outcome funding states ensure that we get good value for agreements. The government is very happy money from those service deliverers. That is to hear the views of family planning organi- what we are looking to achieve. (Time ex- sations about the most appropriate arrange- pired) ments for them. I say that on behalf of the Ministerial Staff: Salaries government and on behalf of the minister. Senator ROBERT RAY (2.48 p.m.)—I But I hope they understand that, while the direct my question to Senator Abetz, the Commonwealth, state and territory govern- Special Minister of State. Can the minister ments will take organisations’ interests into confirm that, until 30 January this year, 28 of account, our main duty is to the wider public the government’s own staff were being paid interest. a salary over and above the salary band lim- Senator ALLISON—Mr President, I ask its set by the government itself for staff un- a supplementary question. If the minister der the MOP(S) Act? Can the minister also could answer why it is in the public interest confirm that nine of these 28 staff receiving for family planning associations not to be salaries above the odds were either in the funded, I would be grateful. Given that the Prime Minister’s own office or in the cabinet family planning network has been estab- policy unit? What justification does the gov- lished and funded for over 20 years and that ernment have for paying 28 of its own most in the last three years funding was only $14 senior staff thousands of dollars above the million nationally, will the minister commit government’s own salary limits and, in one to the funding of family planning in the next case, that of a senior adviser to the Prime three-year period to make sure that these Minister, $47,000 above the limit? services are not jeopardised? Senator ABETZ—The Prime Minister Senator IAN CAMPBELL—The Com- approved new salary bands for both minis- monwealth’s contribution has been substan- ters’ and office holders’ senior staff on AWAs tial. I have told you about how we reach an on 30 January this year. Ministers and office arrangement. The post-July period is due to holders were advised of the new bands on be concluded subject to those consultations. 19 February 2004. There has been no secrecy Senator Allison, as a typical person with no about the revised salary bands. The revised feeling of financial responsibility to taxpay- ministerial senior staff salary bands were ers, would say, ‘Just write them a cheque and provided to the opposition and the Australian don’t get any outcomes or responses.’ We

CHAMBER 20858 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

Democrats at the same time the ministers Australian Democrats to ask the Prime Min- were advised. ister to approve a salary above the top of the Senator Robert Ray—You were asked relevant salary band. The Prime Minister about prior to 30 January. Answer the ques- approved a salary above the band for a senior tion! staff member of a member of the opposition in 2002. The former Leader of the Opposi- Senator ABETZ—Senator Ray should tion also requested two other salaries above really stick to his blonde jokes rather than the band as a result of the annual perform- trying to ask questions of this nature. This is ance review in 2002. These were overtaken the first change to the salary bands for senior by a subsequent increase in the salary band, ministerial staff since 26 July 2000. The sal- which made the Prime Minister’s approval ary bands for office holders’ senior staff were unnecessary. last reviewed in January 2003 to bring them into line with the equivalent ministerial sal- The current Leader of the Opposition, or ary bands. That relativity has been main- his office, has been advised on at least three tained in the new bands. The new salary occasions since 2 December 2003 that he is bands were approved in view of the high able to request that the Prime Minister ap- level of responsibility and skill expected of prove a salary above the top of the band. these staff and the need to ensure that appro- Ministers may also request that the Prime priate salaries are available to new staff. Minister approve a salary above the top of the relevant salary band if they feel that the The salaries being paid to ministers’ and skills and responsibilities of the staff member office holders’ senior staff have increased warrant the higher salary. As I have indicated through the annual performance review in my letters to the relevant office holders, I process over the past four years. The bands intend to review the senior staff salary bands had not kept pace with salary movements. each year, following the annual performance Indeed, the need for a review of the salary review, to ensure that they remain appropri- bands was highlighted by the former Leader ate. of the Opposition, the Hon. Simon Crean, MP. In a letter to me on 17 September 2003 Senator ROBERT RAY—Mr President, I Mr Crean requested that the salary bands be ask a supplementary question. Would the revised as they had been static for some time minister like to confirm that the upper band and the band restrictions ‘will create a diffi- for senior advisers has gone up by 31 per culty in the next year’s performance review cent? Will this be the sort of rise that MOP decisions’. In an undated letter to me re- staff employed under part IV of the MOP(S) ceived on 28 November 2002, Mr Crean de- Act will be entitled to? Isn’t it true that eight scribed the upper limit of the salary band as government staffers, as we now speak, are ‘an artificial ceiling’. being paid above these massively revised bands? Why don’t you just come clean with In determining the new salary bands the the fact that these salaries for your staff blew remuneration of equivalent APS classifica- out when every other person in this building tions was considered, and the new bands are abided by the salary bands? on par with those of the APS senior executive service. Under the performance review Senator ABETZ—It is always tragic framework for senior staff of non- when you see a former senior defence minis- government office holders, it is open to the ter descend to asking questions of this na- Leader of the Opposition or the Leader of the ture. Having been in charge of the Collins

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20859 class submarine, he has fallen down to Cen- Senator Robert Ray—Don’t bag us over tenary House, and today he has made his it. name by interjecting blonde jokes during Honourable senators interjecting— question time. He has got a full and detailed The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator answer, a lot more detailed and full than he Faulkner, I am on my feet and I am trying to expected from me. I was prepared for this get some order in this place. sort of cheap shot from Senator Ray. In the few times that he actually does come into Senator HILL—What I was quietly say- this chamber to make a contribution, you can ing is that two parliamentary inquiries are always bet your bottom dollar that it is going going to have the responsibility of work- to be for the cheap shot. At the end of the ing— day, we as a government are treating the op- Senator Chris Evans interjecting— position staff a lot more kindly than they Senator HILL—You can ask questions, ever treated us when we were in opposition. but questions without notice of that sort of Trade: Free Trade Agreement detail on a 1,100-page document released in Senator NETTLE (2.54 p.m.)—My ques- the last 24 hours are, with respect, ridiculous tion is to the Minister representing the Minis- and totally out of order. ter for Trade, Senator Hill. Given that the Senator Brown—Mr President, on a free trade agreement has attached at least 25 point of order: the minister has been asked to side letters making significant commitments answer a question from Senator Nettle, not in a range of areas, from foreign investment from the interjections of the opposition. The to education services, will the minister ex- key point to that question was the status of plain the legal status of these side letters? 31 attached letters and the legal impact that Will, for example, future governments be they have in this. prevented from returning Telstra to full pub- The PRESIDENT—What is your point lic ownership by the text of one of these side of order, Senator Brown? letters, and will the important task of collect- Senator Brown—The point of order is ing and providing blood plasma for use in that that is a very direct question and the Australian medical services be opened up to minister ought to be able to answer it. US corporations as discussed in the exchange of letters on blood plasma products? The PRESIDENT—The minister has three minutes to answer the question. I ask Senator HILL—Again, these are the him to return to the question. There is no sorts of questions that one would have ex- point of order. pected before each of the two parliamentary inquiries. Senator HILL—I will refer the question to the Minister for Trade. Senator Robert Ray—You don’t know the answer. What are you doing here if you Senator NETTLE—Mr President, I ask a don’t know the answer? supplementary question. The minister has earlier today in question time been waxing Senator HILL—If you think it is reason- lyrical about this government’s experience in able to ask questions of this sort of detail on trade agreements. Surely the question about a 1,100-page document which has been re- side letters, which have occurred regularly in leased in the last 24 hours then I suggest you trade agreements for several years now, is are off with the fairies. something that the minister can answer here

CHAMBER 20860 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 today. What is the legal status of these at servicing and resourcing other centres and least 25 side letters that are part of the US- housing the central library and legal services Australia free trade agreement and that have section? What measures have been taken so been part of trade agreements for many years that these services previously provided by previously? the Canberra MRT are still available to cli- Senator HILL—I have already said that I ents and case officers? will refer the question to the Minister for Senator VANSTONE—I will take that Trade to give a considered response. question on notice. Migration Review Tribunal Senator Hill—Mr President, I ask that Senator LUNDY (2.58 p.m.)—My ques- further questions be placed on the Notice tion is to Senator Vanstone, Minister for Im- Paper. migration and Multicultural and Indigenous QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: Affairs. Can the minister confirm that the TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS Canberra office of the Migration Review Answers to Questions Tribunal will be closed on 30 June 2004 and Senator CONROY (Victoria) (3.01 that as many as 60 staff have been relocated p.m.)—I move: to Sydney or made redundant as a result of their functions being relocated? If so, why That the Senate take note of the answers given was this closure never announced publicly by ministers to questions without notice asked today. and what now will be the impact of the How- ard government’s decision to centralise these Today we have finally seen the text of the services in Sydney? How many millions of free trade agreement between the United dollars will it cost to relocate these MRT States and Australia, which has been delayed staff or to make redundancy payments to for the last few days. The key commitment them? that this government will not give about this text concerns this question: why won’t you Senator VANSTONE—I can inform the refer it to the Productivity Commission? If senator that I am not aware of the particular you are so confident that this deal is so good detail that she is talking about, but I am and there are so many ‘big bucks’ in this aware that Immigration do try, in the same deal, as Senator Ian Macdonald says, let us way that Centrelink and a number of depart- put it to the independent test: refer it the Pro- ments do, to centralise their service delivery ductivity Commission. That is all it takes: sometimes in particular places to get spe- one letter. But, no, what are this government cialisation. My state of South Australia has intending to do? They are going to commis- been the particular beneficiary of that in past sion some economic analysis. You may think years before I took on this ministry in certain to yourself: why would they want to com- areas of function delivery; other states look mission separate economic advice when all after other areas of function delivery. I will they have to do is refer it to the Productivity take the question on notice and get back to Commission and not pay a cent? So why do you. they want to set up their own tender process Senator LUNDY—Mr President, I ask a that will cost taxpayers extra money? You supplementary question. Can the minister have to say the answer is very simple with confirm that the Canberra MRT is currently this government. It is because they want to the location of the central office of the tribu- put in the fix. They want to control the terms nal, housing its own complement of staff,

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20861 of reference, they want to control the money What are the terms laid out in these side and they want to control the outcome. letters to do with the Pharmaceutical Bene- We know this because the Prime Minister fits Scheme? What is this new appeals has already said that he has got advice that mechanism to do with the level of reim- this is a good deal for the economy. He has bursements? For those who are not familiar already said that before he has commissioned with trade jargon, the level of reimburse- this new independent evidence. He therefore ments is the taxpayer subsidy that goes to the does not need to spend any money. He would US drug companies. So we asked a simple not be able to set the terms of reference with question today: ‘Tell us, Senator Hill, what is the Productivity Commission, because if this new mechanism? Will it allow the US there is one organisation in this country that drug companies to increase the levels of sub- has modelled free trade agreements and has sidies from Australian taxpayers through the examined this issue up hill and down dale it government to these US drug companies?’ is the Productivity Commission. That is all we asked—a simple question— and he did not know the answer. In fact, he The Productivity Commission do not need did not even understand the question, al- any advice from the government about how though it was a fairly straightforward ques- to conduct a review and what the terms of tion. reference are; they have done it many times before. That is why we will not see this mat- If we have agreed to a system that allows ter referred to them. They are truly inde- American drug companies to get in through pendent, they have done it before and they the back door and get increased subsidies do not need the government’s help in setting from taxpayers, that means every single Aus- the terms of reference. This economic advice tralian out there, because of this US trade that the government want to tender out is deal, will be forced to subsidise American simply putting in a fix to give them the an- drug companies more than they are now. The swer that they have already predetermined. Labor Party has made it quite clear from day So let nobody take any notice of the process one that that is unacceptable. If we have a that they are going through: it is a fix and we situation where the US free trade agreement all know it is a fix. sabotages and undermines the PBS, then we will vote it down. We have said that from What have they got to hide? There are a day one and we continue to say it today. So number of things that have come to light in we asked a simple question today: just give the text today. Bear in mind that it is less us that assurance; just tell us that there is not than 10 hours since this text was actually going to be an increase in taxpayer subsidies released and it is 1,000 pages, so we are still to American drug companies because of this working our way through it. What is the new deal—and we got nothing, just blather. We information that has come up in the last 10 saw that as soon as it got hard they wanted to hours? We have seen extra detail on the take the questions on notice. He did not want Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. We asked to answer a simple straightforward question Senator Hill, ‘Give us some assurances, on the most politically sensitive issue in this Senator Hill, because we would actually like document. (Time expired) to know them.’ Of course, he did not because he has not read it. He has looked at it a cou- Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western ple of times in cabinet but he has not got a Australia—Minister for Local Government, clue what is in it. That is typical. Territories and Roads) (3.06 p.m.)—We have seen today from Senator Conroy and his col-

CHAMBER 20862 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 leagues—both in question time and now in meeting until, I think, 10 o’clock. He needed taking note of answers to questions—the to have a nice warm cup of tea first. He Labor Party’s true colours under the leader- could not have a breakfast if he had had a ship of Mr Latham: they want to be wreck- dinner the night before. ers; they want to drag down the Australian Government senator interjecting— economy. We have seen today two lines of Senator IAN CAMPBELL—And he attack, if you could possibly call it that. One could only have four meetings a day. If Mr was on the free trade agreement, which is Vaile had done that he would still be over in designed to boost Australia’s economy, to Washington. I think Mr Vaile attended mass create new opportunities for companies in on three Sundays in a row and worked Australia to sell goods into the biggest, most through the night, day after day. Senator successful market in the world—new oppor- Cook would not be back until 2008 if we had tunities for thousands of products and ser- sent him to do the job. So Labor would not vices—and to protect the Pharmaceutical have got a free trade agreement—although, Benefits Scheme. whatever else his hotel would had done, it Senator Conroy, after a couple of days in would have made a lot of money out of cups estimates committees, has been trying to find of tea. a reason to vote against it. His whole life is The other concern I have today is that the about trying to find a reason to vote against Labor Party is not only trying to bring down it. The Labor Party want to bring down the the whole Australian economy by opposing free trade agreement. They want to hurt the the FTA but also trying to bring down the Australian economy and hurt the prospects economy of Christmas Island, a small but of Australians who could have more jobs, very important part of Australia. We have more economic security, better quality lives seen them attack Phosphate Resources Ltd and better opportunities because of the work just before Christmas by voting for, I think, a the Australian government has done in nego- Green motion to oppose access by PRL to tiating access for thousands of goods and five very important new leases to ensure that services into that US marketplace. But Labor the mining operations—the number one en- want to oppose it. They are negative, carp- terprise on that island—can go on for some ing, whining and whinging, and they are years. Clearly, it is a crucial business for the bringing things down. They are not building; island. It is a crucial enterprise that employs they are wrecking. That is Labor’s way. a great majority of the people on the island. The Labor Party say, ‘We might have Labor have said, ‘No, we’ll join with the done a better deal.’ We remember the previ- Greens and stop you getting access to further ous trade minister, Senator Cook, who is resources.’ At a time when that company is about to get to his feet. He would not have under pressure because of the exchange rate been able to do it. The previous government and hot competition from other parts of the could not have achieved a free trade agree- world in the phosphate market, what do La- ment because when the previous trade minis- bor do? Labor belt them while they are ter went away on trade missions he gave down. While the government is there trying specific instructions to his entourage—his to help PRL get through a difficult stage in minders and the departmental officials in the the world market by putting new port facili- Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade— ties and infrastructure on the island, they that he was not to be woken too early in the want to bring that company down. morning and that he could not have his first

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20863

The Labor Party are not content to bring free trade agreement which are just not true. down Phosphate Resources Ltd, an important I want to go through some of them—I will company for the island; here they are today not have time to go through all of them, there trying to destroy the other enterprise that this were so many—and correct the record. government is trying to get up—that is, the Firstly, he said that Labor should not ob- space station development run by APSC. It struct the early entry into operation of this was always going to be very difficult to get agreement. Labor has no intention of ob- that enterprise up. So what did the govern- structing anything about early operation of ment say? Did we say, ‘It’s all too hard. this agreement, but through you, Mr Deputy We’re not going to help you. We won’t build President, I remind Senator Hill that there infrastructure and we won’t give you sup- are two parties to this agreement. The other port’? Of course we did not. We want to see party is the US Congress and they have en- a space facility built on Australian soil and shrined in their legislation a period of debate Christmas Island is a very good place to and consideration of up to five months. We build it. The Christmas Islanders are keen to have plenty of time in Australia to give this see it built but Labor’s approach is to drag free trade agreement a proper examination that business down too and not to give them because the Americans will not do anything any support just when they need it. Right for five months. They have to lay it on the when they need bipartisan support from Aus- table for 90 days and they have another 60 tralia to ensure that the Russians know that days to consider it. There is a reasonable they have support and to ensure that inves- possibility—it is a small possibility and I tors from Korea and other places know they hope that it does not occur—that they may have support, what do Labor do? For short- not deal with it at all if it becomes a conten- term, pathetic political objectives, they want tious issue within the US presidential and to drag that project down, and drag down the congressional elections this year. So it is not names of the McClintock family as well. It is true that Labor is obstructing anything; to a disgrace and it is typical of Labor. If it is say that is misleading. typical of the new Labor under Latham then Secondly, Senator Hill said that Labor had they have not really gone very far. 13 years to make an agreement like this and Senator COOK (Western Australia) (3.11 did nothing. That is equally untrue and p.m.)—I will put my record of meetings on equally misleading. Labor set up the Cairns the table against any minister in this gov- Group to negotiate trade liberalisation for ernment and I am pretty sure that the record farmers. Labor participated in setting up and of what I actually did will outshine the lot of delivering the outcome of the Uruguay them. There is an unfortunate strand running Round. That round was not with one country; through parliamentary debate from the gov- that round was with the whole of the world, ernment at this stage of the political cycle, including the biggest economy, the United and that is that if you do not know the an- States. Comparing the outcomes of the Uru- swer you bluster, shout down others, and try guay Round to this feeble agreement is like and drag red herrings across the debate. comparing an elephant to an insect. We got There is no better exponent of that in this the elephant; you got the insect. It resulted in chamber than the Leader of the Government, real gains for all markets, including the sugar Senator Hill. We saw an example of bluster industry. and shout-down today. He made a number of assertions in answers to questions about the

CHAMBER 20864 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

The other thing that Senator Hill said that are excluded from the deal because this gov- is not true and is false and misleading is that ernment pursued another course of action we only believe in multilateralism. Labor where there are minimal gains, and they have believes multilateralism is the best way of got a minimal outcome. So let us not have achieving trade liberalisation because it af- from the government any reflection on the fects everyone else. I remind the Senate that Labor Party’s trade record. It has been far Labor concluded the Australia-New Zealand more devoted to achieving the real interests Closer Economic Relationship, which is a of this nation than anything that has hap- template for all bilateral trade agreements for pened here. That leaves me with just Mr this country. It has stood the test of time. It is Howard, and I may not have time to deal a truly comprehensive agreement that covers with him. (Time expired) all elements of the joint economies and has Senator CHAPMAN (South Australia) succeeded in integrating them. It is not a par- (3.16 p.m.)—In the questions asked of the tial agreement like the US one, where areas government today in relation to the Asia Pa- are off limits. cific Space Centre, the Labor Party clearly Labor set up APEC. APEC is basically a show that, when it comes to policies regard- trade configuration that covers 2.224 billion ing space science and the space industry, people in this part of the world and it has got they are lost in a black hole and have proba- the goals of free trade by 2010 and 2020. The bly returned to the Dark Ages. It is interest- question hanging over the trade debate is: ing to recall what happened with regard to ‘Why did the Liberal party led by Mr How- space science and industry policy when La- ard neglect and sell out APEC, which covers bor were in government. In about their first 2.224 billion people, for a trade agreement seven years they spent $34 million in support with one country that covers 239 million of space industry initiatives and achieved people?’ The benefits to Australia if we had absolutely nothing as a result of that expen- concentrated on delivering free trade in diture. In marked contrast, in their latter APEC, as the Labor government obtained a years in government they ran Australia’s commitment to do by 2010 for developed space program down to nothing, to a big fat countries and 2020 for developing countries, zero. I well recall in the budget estimates would have been far greater. They would committees following Labor’s last budget in have dwarfed any outcome that has been 1995—fortunately their last budget for many achieved here. years—asking questions about the space Of course, Labor wanted to push ahead program and finding that in the forward es- with joining CER to AFTA, the ASEAN free timates there was absolutely no provision trade agreement. We now have a configura- made by the Labor government for space tion with China talking to ASEAN of 10 plus programs. It took the election of the Howard one and China, Japan and Korea talking to government in 1996 to restore some sanity to ASEAN of 10 plus three. But, thanks to the this area of policy, to make some funding bad stewardship of this government on trade provision for space programs and to start the matters, Australia is excluded from that. This much-needed revitalisation of the space in- is the fastest growing market in the world. dustry and space science area in Australia This is the area where we send 49 per cent of which has occurred since that time. our exports. This is the area where the poten- This clearly demonstrates that Labor has tial to increase our exports is far greater than absolutely no understanding of the impor- anywhere else—and what has happened? We tance to a 21st century economy of space

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20865 science and the space industry, not only in been allocated—the $31.4 million—have not terms of the direct benefits it offers in areas as yet been paid because, quite correctly, the like agriculture, environmental monitoring government laid down preconditions and and communications but also in the indirect milestones that had to be achieved by that flow-on benefits that a viable space industry company before any government funding provides. It is to the great credit of the How- would be provided to it. ard government that it is funding programs As yet those preconditions have not been relating to the space industry. In my view, the met. They relate to various aspects of the government could do more in this area but development of that program but they have the fact is that it has provided funds for space not been met, so the taxpayers’ money has industry development as opposed to the for- not yet been provided to that company. The mer Labor government running those pro- company’s intended timetable has not been grams down to a big fat zero. That is a met because market conditions have changed marked contrast between us and the opposi- since the project was initially planned. There tion with regard to this issue. is still the opportunity for that project to suc- We see as a consequence Labor simply ceed, provided investor funds can be ob- engaging in carping and error-riddled criti- tained in the current market conditions. The cism. That has been evident today in their conditions set down by the government will criticisms, as Senator Ian Campbell said a ensure that taxpayers’ money is not wasted few moments ago, of the Christmas Island but, on the other hand, they will be available spaceport. It is a part of Australia that des- to give much needed support to this project perately needs support and encouragement and much needed support to the development and the government is providing that, yet all of the facilities at Christmas Island as a great we get from Labor is carping criticism with boost to that regional economy. So we see regard to the possible winding up of the Asia here quite a clear contrast between the Lib- Pacific Space Centre company. As I under- eral-Nationals government on the one hand stand it, it is true that a notification of the and the Labor Party on the other hand with filing of an application for a winding up or- regard to this very important area of policy, der has been lodged with ASIC by that com- an area that is critical to any 21st century— pany, but it is also true that the Asia Pacific (Time expired) Space Centre continues to work towards ob- Senator CARR (Victoria) (3.21 p.m.)—I taining investor funding to develop the would like to speak today in this debate spaceport on Christmas Island. about the space scam at Christmas Island. I It is also true that the government, much am gravely concerned about the way the Asia to its credit, agreed to a $100 million strate- Pacific Space Centre project has been man- gic investment incentive package covering aged by the Howard government from day common use and space port infrastructure on one. It is a great matter of concern to me. I Christmas Island. But, in contrast to what know it is a great matter of concern to the Labor used to do in government when they Labor Party and it ought to be a great matter would provide funds and then not have any of concern to the Australian people—and I idea of what happened with those funds, this think that in due course it will be. government has kept a close watch over the Here we have a situation where the gov- Asia Pacific Space Centre’s efforts to obtain ernment has extended access to $100 million investor funds to establish the spaceport. of taxpayers’ funds essentially for a project Importantly, the government funds that have

CHAMBER 20866 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 which may well never get off the ground. do not see these sorts of contracts in any Labor support the joint use facilities. Obvi- other major project. ously there is a need for a port on Christmas Here we have a situation where the gov- Island and there is a need to extend the air- ernment has provided access to these funds port. There is a need for roadworks. But that conditional on a number of very perfunctory development has only partially begun. We measures being undertaken, such as safety. also say that Labor strongly support the need Of course those things have to be done. for high-skill, high-wage industries such as These measures are not a schedule of works; the space industries, and we say they should they are not a formal process to ensure that be encouraged in this country. We also say, proper milestones have to be met. Not even a though, that this does not justify poor man- space licence has been applied for. We do not agement by government. It does not justify have proper controls in this contract and we dodgy administrative practices by govern- have a situation where the government can- ment. It does not justify secret deals being not get out of the contract until December done in such a manner that we see no real 2005, irrespective of the progress that is product coming out of the expenditure of made. That leaves the money and the people very large sums of money. We believe there of Christmas Island in limbo. should be investment in research. We say There are a couple of possibilities avail- that we should be investing in complemen- able to us as to why this occurred. Why did tary industries that allow us to develop a such a speculative project get support in an competitive advantage. area where there is such congestion in the I do acknowledge Senator Minchin’s marketplace? Is it because the government statements that this is a risky business. I also was blinded by the prospect of involvement acknowledge his direct personal sponsoring and the glamour of space? Was it because of the spaceport project. I know that specula- people were anxious to get their hands on a tive projects sometimes deserve backing. But casino? Was it because of something much that does not excuse the government for poor grubbier? Was it because serious questions management. The Christmas Island space- were not able to be answered? For instance, port project has been mismanaged by this was it because the Prime Minister came un- government. It has been mismanaged by the der undue influence by the then secretary of Prime Minister, by the Treasurer in his use of the cabinet, Mr Paul McClintock, whose fa- the Treasury advance, by the industry minis- ther, Sir Eric, was on the APSC advisory ter—both the former minister and the current board at the time? Was it because the Prime minister. Senator Minchin, in his capacity as Minister was unduly influenced by his per- the former minister and also in his capacity sonal friend and political associate from the as the finance minister, has direct responsi- Liberal Party Mr John Longley? Was it be- bility for this project. We know that over cause of Mr Borbidge’s involvement? We do $100 million has been expended on this pro- not know the answers to these questions but I ject insofar as they have been provided in the am very concerned about this. Was it because forward estimates and there is a capacity for of the lobbying of Senator Herron and other this government to actually provide a taxable ministers in this government? What pressure grant to APSC. We know that contracts on a was brought to bear to ensure this $100 mil- deed have been issued which do not provide lion grant and this deed were put forward in for a schedule of works to be completed. We such a way with so little concern for the

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20867 normal milestones that should occur in these May, the member for McPherson in Queen- sorts of contracts? (Time expired) sland; Mr Paul Neville, the member for Hin- Question agreed to. kler in Queensland; and Mr Brendan O’Connor, the member for Burke in Victoria. NOTICES We were also accompanied by the Usher of Withdrawal the Black Rod, Ms Andrea Griffiths, and the Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (3.27 President’s private secretary, Mr Don Morris. p.m.)—At the request of Senator Sherry, pur- It was a very hardworking group that made suant to the notice of motion given by me up the delegation. earlier today, I withdraw business of the Japan and South Korea are exceptionally Senate notice of motion No. 1 standing in the important countries for Australia. Whilst we name of Senator Sherry today. were in Japan and South Korea we became DELEGATION REPORTS aware of the enormous change that is evolv- Parliamentary Delegation to Japan and ing, given the strength of the Chinese econ- the Republic of Korea omy. Iron ore and liquefied natural gas are two of the principal components of the eco- The PRESIDENT—I present the report nomic rebuilding of the Japanese economy. of the Australian parliamentary delegation to LNG forms an absolutely crucial and vital Japan and the Republic of Korea, which took part of day-to-day life in both South Korea place from 8 to 19 December 2003. and Japan, particularly Japan. Japan has nine (Quorum formed) nuclear-powered power stations and, in addi- Senator JOHNSTON (Western Australia) tion to that, very large power stations driven (3.32 p.m.)—Mr President, I seek leave to by Western Australian LNG produced at this move a motion in relation to the report that stage by Woodside with, hopefully, Gorgon you have tabled of the Australian parliamen- coming on line in the next 10 years. tary delegation to Japan and the Republic of So the connection between Australia and Korea. Japan and Australia and South Korea is one Leave granted. where we are a reliable supplier of important Senator JOHNSTON—I move: raw materials and energy resources to those That the Senate take note of the document. countries. In South Korea we saw the level of drive that is being given to South Korea The delegation went to Japan and South Ko- through the Chinese quest for the consump- rea on behalf of this parliament from 8 to tion of steel and for shipping. The effect of 19 December last year. The delegation was the Chinese ‘economic miracle’, as I think led by the President of the Senate. May I say, one is bound to call it, has been to lift the Mr President, how delightful it was to have Japanese economy—particularly the Japa- the delegation led by you in all of the various nese export sector—out of the doldrums, meetings and engagements that we had with where it has been for more than 12 years. the various dignitaries and other important The South Korean economy continues to people whom we met in Japan and South grow and remains one of the most vibrant in Korea. Mr President, not only was it a de- East Asia. light; it was an honour to see the way you conducted a parliamentary delegation. The With regard to the specific visits we un- other members of the delegation were: the dertook whilst we were in Japan and South Senator the Hon. Nick Bolkus; Mrs Margaret Korea, at the Toyota factory, just out of

CHAMBER 20868 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

Kyoto, it was quite remarkable to see the tankers every five weeks. This is just a phe- just-in-time industrial philosophy of the pro- nomenal engineering feat. These tankers are duction line manufacturer. To see how raw huge. To be able to produce more than three iron ore, as produced in Western Australia by of them every five weeks when this huge dry Hamersley Iron and Mount Newman Mining, dock is flooded is again a great credit to the is pressed out into car bonnets and car doors achievement of the South Koreans since the and to see the finished product all on one devastation of the war in 1953. We also saw production line was simply astounding. We the newest North West Shelf joint venturers also had the delight of going to Kyoto, the LNG transport ship that goes on line later old Edo capital of Japan, a most beautiful, this year. Lastly, as I have already men- fabulously clean and vibrant regional city tioned, we saw General Motors Daewoo, a and the host of the World Expo next year. I joint venture between General Motors and think the Expo will be sensational for the Daewoo. General Motors, through its Austra- Aichi prefecture. lian owned company, is managing and run- Whilst in South Korea we visited POSCO ning the Daewoo car manufacturing plant Steel. At POSCO Steel we saw six blast fur- near Seoul in South Korea. naces taking raw material, predominantly The trip brought home to me and I am from Australia and in the form of iron ore sure to the other members of the delegation again, and casting it into steel slabs and then the extent of the stress and strain of having pressing it out into hot rolled coil. At the insecure borders. The near proximity of Daewoo car factory, towards the end of our North Korea to South Korea, which is a very delegation’s visit, we saw the cradle-to-grave vibrant, progressive democratic state, is scenario of iron ore from Australia being something that has to be seen to be under- turned into hot rolled coil steel and then be- stood. We visited Camp Bonifas at Panmun- ing pressed out into car bonnets and car jon. Many of us went to stand momentarily doors. It was quite an exceptional insight in North Korea. We saw the level of tension into that process. Being from Western Aus- that is visibly in existence between those two tralia, I know what it is like at Mount New- countries. All of the young people aged 19 man, Mount Whaleback, Tom Price and have to do 2½ years national service in the Paraburdoo. I have seen the raw ore on the army in South Korea, so South Korea has train going to Karratha, Wickham and Dam- many people under arms serving in its de- pier. Then to see it being loaded into the blast fence forces. furnaces at POSCO and ultimately turned We also had the fascinating experience of into motor vehicles is simply to see an indus- visiting one of the four tunnels which were trial miracle. constructed surreptitiously by the North Ko- Further to this, Daewoo Shipbuilding and reans back in the 1970s and early 1980s. Marine Engineering at Busan employs These tunnels extend for more than 20 kilo- 20,000 employees in the shipbuilding yard. metres. They are 300 metres below the sur- We saw a 900-tonne capacity gantry crane. face and they were designed at an inclination That is something that I had not imagined to come out just in the near vicinity of Seoul. was possible. This crane can be seen for The intention obviously was to mount some some many, many tens of kilometres away form of insurgent attack via these tunnels. from the site. It has a huge capacity. The dry Knowing a little bit about mining, I can say dock facility at Daewoo has the capacity to that they would have consumed an enormous produce more than three 300,000-tonne ore amount of explosive, not to mention the level

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20869 of labour and resources required to construct BILLS RETURNED FROM THE them. Having walked along one of them for HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES some three or four hundred metres I can say Message received from the House of Rep- that it was an insight into the psyche of the resentatives returning the following bill North Koreans back when such a surrepti- without amendment: tious and obviously aggressive undertaking Norfolk Island Amendment Bill 2003 [2004] was commenced. It did give the delegation an insight into the type of tension that exists SUPERANNUATION: REFORM on that border. There is simply a cease-fire. Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL (New There has been no peace settlement. That is a South Wales) (3.44 p.m.)—I move: fact that people should remember: it is sim- That the Senate— ply a situation of a cease-fire, which has ex- (a) condemns the Liberal Government for the isted since 1953. underlying thrust of its recently- Lastly, it was a great honour also to attend announced retirement incomes measures, the United Nations war memorial at Busan that Australians should forget full-time where you, Mr President, laid a wreath retirement and work longer and longer— in reality, work until they drop; commemorating the 339 Australian casual- ties. It was most important for us and a very (b) while acknowledging that the Govern- significant event for me personally as a rela- ment’s announced policies may be of value to some retirees, considers that they tively new senator. Thank you. must be implemented with a guarantee Question agreed to. that: COMMITTEES (i) current access ages for superannuation, Economics Legislation Committee 55 for those born before 1 July 1960, phasing up to a retirement age of 60 for Membership those born after 30 June 1964, The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—The (ii) current eligibility ages for the age President has received a letter from a party pension of 62 and 65 years, and leader seeking a variation to the membership (iii) indexation of the age pension to Male of a committee. Total Average Weekly Earnings, Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— shall be maintained; Minister for Immigration and Multicultural (c) notes that: and Indigenous Affairs and Minister Assist- (i) Australia does not face a retirement ing the Prime Minister for Reconciliation) incomes ‘crisis’ resulting from the (3.42 p.m.)—by leave—I move: ageing of the population, because of That Senator Ridgeway replace Senator the efficiency and effectiveness of the Murray on the Economics Legislation Committee combined operation of the age pension for the committee’s inquiry into the provisions of and the 9 per cent superannuation the Textile, Clothing and Footwear Strategic In- guarantee contribution, and vestment Program Amendment Bill 2004. (ii) there is active discrimination occurring Question agreed to. in the workforce against those aged 40 and over who are seeking meaningful full-time employment and for whom retirement is the only option; and (d) is of the opinion that:

CHAMBER 20870 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

(i) all Australians are entitled to retire at a the Treasurer is saying about the ageing cri- time of their choosing to enjoy rest, sis and despite what has been in the newspa- recreation, community activity and pers over the past week or so, there is no family, at their leisure, and crisis. Even the Intergenerational Report (ii) for many Australians, it is impractical makes the point that, in terms of retirement to expect them to work beyond the incomes, Australia does not face a significant current retirement ages because they problem with its ageing population. We will not be able to find either full- or know, for example, that at the moment about part-time work, or the nature of their employment involves a mandatory 11 per cent of Australians are over the age of retirement age or is of such a 65. We know that in about 25 or 30 years the physically and mentally stressful nature proportion of Australians over the age of 65 that employment beyond the current will double to approximately 22 or 23 per retirement age is not possible. cent . But there is a solution, and there has It is very clear from the events of the past been a solution in place to deal with this cri- week or so that the government have no third sis since 1987, when the then Labor govern- term agenda, never mind a fourth term ment introduced universal superannuation agenda, for the people of this country. We for everyone. I make the point that it was a have been waiting for some 2½ years for the policy that was vehemently opposed at the balancing work and family package that was time by the current government. They did not promised. They may well bring it in. They want to see superannuation introduced and may well put it on the table. Then again, they universally applicable across the whole of may not. One would have to believe that that the work force. I am reminded that the Labor has been well and truly buried in the bottom Party had proposed to take the superannua- drawer, if not taken back to Launceston by tion guarantee charge from nine per cent to the former minister responsible for putting 15 per cent in order to increase the level of that report together. retirement savings and to ensure security for The government have failed in so many older Australians in their retirement over the areas that they have created circumstances longer term. where the Treasurer is now talking about an But who abandoned the additional six per ageing crisis. They have failed in industry cent going into superannuation? No-one policy, they have failed in education policy other than the current Treasurer, Mr Costello. and they have failed in economic policy. The He dropped it in 1997 despite the fact that it result of that is the Intergenerational Report was funded and despite the fact that it was and the promotion by the Treasurer of the provided for in the then budget and has been new policy agenda more commonly known provided for in budgets ever since. It was not as ‘work till you drop’. What have we got dropped because of a budget deficit. It was out of it? The government have been project- not dropped because the funding was not ing very significant headlines and have been there to provide for it. It was dropped be- out there making massive policy announce- cause Mr Costello and the Liberal and Na- ments. But all we have simply got is a report. tional parties did not like and could not come As a result of the report, however, we now to grips with the fact that all Australians have the Treasurer saying that there is going were getting access to superannuation and to be no such thing in the future as full-time that that would provide them with the secu- retirement. The reality is that, despite what rity they wanted and needed in their old age in the future. The impact is that Australians

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20871 have 40 per cent less in superannuation sav- work force. That is the person occupying the ings today than they should have. Yesterday big suite at the back of this building—the in this chamber, we heard the Assistant Prime Minister—whom the Treasurer sees as Treasurer, Senator Coonan, trying to explain holding down his job and stopping his oppor- what the Treasurer meant when he said: tunity to work till he drops for the nation. He There’s going to be no such thing as full-time is very keen to see the Prime Minister take retirement. early retirement. But, of course, he is not Senator Coonan demonstrated that she had concerned about the situation of ordinary no idea what the Treasurer meant and I sus- Australians in that set of circumstances. If he pect a substantial majority of the Liberal- were, he would have taken concrete action to National Party government have no idea fix the situation and ensure that people had what the Treasurer meant by that statement. adequate income for their retirement. It is pretty clear to the Australian popula- He has, however, pointed to what we all tion what the Liberal Party’s approach is. know as a mathematical truth: the later you They are saying: ‘We do not want any more retire, the more years you have to build up full-time retirement. We want you to keep your savings and the fewer years you have to working longer and longer.’ There will be no actually run them down. One would say that cost to the public purse because you do not this is an extension of that famous statement collect an age pension when you are in made by a former Liberal Prime Minister: Rookwood. Pensions are not paid in cemeter- ‘Life wasn’t meant to be easy.’ This Treas- ies. This government knows—there have urer is determined not to make life easy for been reports done about it; one was done for working Australians. He is determined not to the then industrial relations minister in New give working Australians the opportunity to South Wales, Mr John Fahey, which clearly leave the work force at an earlier period and demonstrated this—that when people retire to enjoy an adequately funded retirement. early their longevity tends to be greater than Senator Ferris interjecting— that of people who work to a later age and Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL—I work longer. hear Senator Ferris chirping away; the The reality is that, if the policy framework budgie is chirping in the background again. I now being promoted by the Treasurer is in- suppose we will have to put up with it for the troduced, there will be significant pressure next 10 minutes or so while I go through taken off the public purse. There will be these pretty important points. What is the fewer and fewer people collecting the pen- real problem that underlies what the Treas- sion because they will be dropping where urer is saying when he talks about working they are working. They will be carrying them until you drop? The real problem is that there out of the workplaces in wooden boxes and is a shrinking labour supply that we are not taking them straight to the cemeteries. That fronting up to as a community and that this is the policy strategy that is being promoted government has not adopted any policy by this government. This is a new Liberal framework in order to deal with. Ross Git- Party agenda for the third and fourth terms. tens wrote yesterday that the Treasurer is not However, there is one person in the country concerned about the effect of ageing on the whom the Treasurer would not like to see federal budget, and that is correct. But he working any longer and whom he is very never goes out of his way to demonstrate keen to put into retirement and see out of the this—and why? It is because the Treasurer

CHAMBER 20872 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 has built his career on exploiting the public’s stant work force to replace our ageing work economic misconceptions, not correcting force as they retire. them. The real concern of the government is Working until you drop is the soft option the shrinking labour supply. That is why they to the ageing population and shows that the want to keep older Australians in the labour government has given up on getting the un- market longer. Let us say they want to see a employed and those not in the labour force set of circumstances where people are work- into work. To address the ageing population ing until they drop. the government must increase the participa- Senator Watson interjecting— tion of all workers or potential workers. In an Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL—I op-ed piece, for example, last Friday in the have seen a statement today. Senator Watson, Australian Financial Review the BCA said: you may not have read it, but it was on the ... while the focus on raising mature age participa- AAP wire. Treasurer Costello said that Aus- tion in the workforce is important, encouraging tralia is close to full employment. He said participation across the entire population com- that the unemployment rate is down to 5.7 pounds the benefits. per cent, that five per cent is full employ- There are a number of key issues that have to ment and that therefore we are close to get- be addressed if we want to confront the issue ting there. That is what he said. There is an of a shrinking labour supply as our commu- official unemployment rate of 5.6 per cent, nity ages. One is getting more young people which he says is effectively full employment. into work to support our ageing population. Senator Watson interjecting— There are still far too many young people in this country who are not in a job or have Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL—Let never experienced a position in the work me give you some figures about the state of force. employment in the economy today, Senator Watson. There are 600,000 Australians who The second issue is to improve the job are out of work today—that is a work force outcomes for all unemployed workers, espe- waiting in the wings which is an instant solu- cially the mature age unemployed, and to tion to the ageing population. There are over tackle age discrimination at work. We know, 500,000 working Australians who do not or we should know, that there is significant have sufficient work and want to work more discrimination occurring in this country but are condemned to part time and casual against the 40-pluses in terms of their capac- work because of the employment strategies ity to get into the workplace if they are un- of this government. There are hundreds of employed. There are plenty of examples thousands of people over 40 who want work around the country where it is happening. I but are unable to find it and, in fact, are can rattle off a series of people I know per- parked on the disability support pension and sonally who have applied for job after job have been for a long time. This is what you after job. They have the qualifications and call full employment, Senator Vanstone. This live in an area where there is a shortage of is what your Treasurer defines as full em- metal tradespeople and the best they have ployment. The reality is that what the Treas- been able to do is get a job as a labourer. urer is proposing is not a real solution to This is because there is very significant dis- these issues; it is a fallacy. Getting more crimination. They have come to that conclu- people into the work force is the key to tack- sion themselves. One person said to me, ‘As ling unemployment and to providing an in- soon as I tell them my age’—this particular

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20873 person is 47—‘that’s the end of the inter- for too many mature age workers after review. No job opportunity available.’ There trenchment is either unemployment or sim- are plenty of examples like that. Yet this ply withdrawing from the labour market. government has done nothing to confront the Retrenchment and unemployment must be issue of discrimination against aged people tackled in order to get more mature age in the work force. workers participating in the labour force. The The third point is to tackle the increasing House of Representatives Committee on underemployment issue. There are far too Employment, Education and Workplace Re- many people in the Australian work force lations inquiry report entitled Age counts who are getting substantially less than a full said: week’s wages and who would like nothing ... mature-age workers being retrenched, fre- more than the opportunity to work a 38-hour quently experience more significant emotional week but who do not have that available to trauma than younger people. They also are in them. The fourth point is to get greater danger of longer periods of unemployment. workplace flexibility and a better balance One of the challenges we have as a nation is which will increase the participation of to get young people into jobs. That would be women and jobless families. The fifth point a much more effective way of tackling the is to give mature age workers the opportunity labour supply shortage than the govern- to balance their work and retirement. ment’s simple strategy of work till you drop. The sixth point is to make sure that older More young people would substantially ease workers are not making the step from work the pressure on an ageing work force. into unemployment when facing retrench- Youth unemployment in this country is ments. The reality is that, when retrench- still far too high—with something like one in ments occur in this country, we all know the five teenagers out of work. However, the first people that are targeted are the older government’s only policy to help these kids people in the work force. Many of them hold is Job Network. Job Network is probably the important positions in the workplace and only network in the country that is not work- have had long years of experience. It does ing. It is in absolute shambles. The govern- not seem to matter these days to employers ment have been in constant denial about the whether you have that experience or not; the state of Job Network since they introduced it. fact that you are in the mature age bracket Job Network is failing to get young people means you are the first target. into jobs. Only 19 per cent got full-time jobs Let us look at some other issues related to after completing intensive assistance and 57 this: work force participation rates in Austra- per cent were unemployed, in further assis- lia are extremely low, particularly for those tance or so discouraged that they left the aged 55 and over; 49 per cent of people in work force. the age group 55 to 64—or over a million Over one in five unemployed Australians people, if you want to use those terms—are spend more than a year out of work. The not in paid employment; 33 per cent of peo- number of long-term unemployed jumped by ple aged between 50 and 64 are in receipt of 6,000 since December 2003 to reach 124,000 government support payments; and the aver- at the beginning of this year. This govern- age duration of unemployment for people ment has spent some eight years managing over 50 is two years—a year longer than for unemployment, not tackling unemployment. younger people. The reality is that the path Job Network has massively failed to get un-

CHAMBER 20874 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 employed people back into the labour mar- same time—this is where the real worry is— ket. Instead of promoting a policy environ- the growth in population of the traditional ment of work till you drop, which is seeking work force, which are aged from 15 to 64, is to penalise those in the work force who have expected to slow to almost zero. So there contributed substantially to this nation’s se- will be a huge demand for skills from aged curity in the longer term, and blaming the people. They will be in demand as they have victims—the students and the unemployed— never been before. Business will require this government would be better off develop- them. There will be new opportunities. ing a policy strategy aimed at creating oppor- If we allow the prescription promulgated tunities for all of those unemployed people to by the ALP, it will have a profound effect on get back into the work force. (Time expired) the economy. The majority of these people Senator WATSON (Tasmania) (4.04 have great skills, will add to productivity and p.m.)—Mr Deputy President Lightfoot, I will add to the growth of the economy hope you have the opportunity of joining this whereas, if you allow a build-up of an aged debate because we might see a little more population without new injections, you will enlightenment following your great experi- find a situation where aged care spending ence. The thrust of Senator George Camp- will have a negative effect on economic bell’s motion must be very worrying to all growth. Australia, as a young, vibrant coun- thinking Australians. The attitude of the ALP try, cannot afford to turn the clock back and towards the Treasurer’s initiatives gives one ignore the realities of life, as the ALP would the impression that the ALP are now living in have us do. It is rather frightening. a time warp. Where are the fresh ideas of the Yesterday Labor was saying that Austra- Keatings and the Hawkes of this world? You lia’s retirement income system was moving have taken a backwards step. The troglodytes into crisis, but today there is no such crisis— have taken over the ALP—and this is upset- and I welcome that. Perhaps that is one of ting. The new ALP in the Senate are ignoring the big virtues of having a debate—at least it the demographic trends of what is happen- brings some reality or enlightenment—and I ing. If we follow the prescription of the sena- welcome that. Others say it is a flip-flop atti- tors from the other side, it is likely that we tude, but I welcome any progress or change. will deteriorate into a Japanese type econ- But I worry because Labor is still running omy with stagnation, very little growth and the line that the Liberal-National Party wants not much hope. This is sad. all people to work until they drop. This is a We have a rapidly ageing population—this lie: it is a misrepresentation, it is inaccurate should be a warning to all Australians—and and it is a fabrication. But what it does show we must prepare to make changes to meet is that we have now returned to yesteryear’s the challenges of that ageing population. entrenched values and attitudes, which must What are those challenges? With an ageing send a terrible message to those approaching population there is a greater demand for age or in retirement. pensions and health and aged care spending. What does it tell these people? It tells A number of years ago the Intergenerational them that, under Labor, they have a use-by Report was produced alongside the budget date, they are not wanted, they are not useful, by the Treasurer. It showed a number of pro- they cannot make an economic contribution jections, including that over 40 years the and they will effectively be allowed to wither proportion of aged people over 65 will al- on the vine. That is not very encouraging for most double to about 25 per cent but at the

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20875 people who are going to live longer because who cross that threshold of mandatory re- of the advances in medical technology. In tirement. I think this is sad. other words, Labor are saying to the aged, But what is our package about, in contrast ‘We’re going to relegate you to the to the dismal scene I have just pointed out scrapheap without opportunity, without that is available under the Labor Party? We hope.’ We are providing an opportunity for have provided some enlightenment, some hope, recognising the needs of older people, hope and some opportunity. We are provid- because we know that under the current ar- ing flexibility. We are providing adaptability. rangements most people, as a result of living We want to change the retirement income longer, will not have enough retirement sav- system. We want to provide financial ings. It will be a matter of economic neces- changes in terms of the packages that are sity for a number of people—because not all offered. We recognise an increasingly impor- people have the opportunity to work con- tant role for older Australians—not a dimin- tinuously for a 30- to 40-year period—to ished role, as the ALP would have it. How do accumulate sufficient savings. A lot of we do this? It is all about providing some women fall into this category because they choice. It is not about regulation. It is not come into the work force late or because about prescription. It is not about compul- they have broken periods in the work force. sion. It is not about red tape. These are the Many of these people want to have an oppor- things that deregulation has thrown away. It tunity to build up some savings in their re- appears that the Labor Party want to return to tirement years. all this—red tape, prescription and compul- Senator George Campbell failed to recog- sion—which is typical of Labor Party poli- nise what is already available. If people work cies. Where is the enlightenment? Where is on a little later than the normal retirement the hope? Where is the choice? years, they can actually get an increased pen- We in the Liberal Party are not about de- sion. That is already available. What the nying Australians the opportunity to retire at Treasurer is doing in this announcement is the time of their own choosing, as the Labor extending that principle that is already there. Party would suggest. The Labor Party are Rather than by a government augmentation, ignoring the reality of the demographic by virtue of accessing the work force again changes that are occurring. This is the worry- people will have income which they will be ing thing for Australia, and voters should able to use to maintain a standard of living. think about this: with a pension system, you Recently I had the opportunity of conduct- need time. You have got to accumulate sav- ing an international forum. One of the ings over a long period of time, and we are themes that I presented was that in Western ignoring this. The Australian population is countries, with people enjoying higher stan- ageing. It is a reality, and the challenges that dards of living, they will also expect a higher go with it need to be addressed. standard of living in retirement. Measures The new package recognises that the su- must be taken by all in the Western world to perannuation system needs to be more flexi- achieve that, otherwise there will be a great ble to cater for changes in preferences of the disillusionment of people in retirement. I am work force as people age. For example, it worried that the Labor Party is putting in a allows for part-time and flexible work ar- roadblock against providing new opportuni- rangements. It will allow easier access to ties to enter the work force for the people superannuation and enable older workers to

CHAMBER 20876 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 retain some connection with the work annuation committee recognises and con- force—again, if they choose—and not pre- demns that practice and approach. However, scribe them out of it once they cross that with companies such as Westpac the situa- line. The concept that people will work until tion is changing. It is becoming more a certain age and then retire permanently enlightened and it is recognising the eco- from the work force will in future become nomic and demographic realities of today less relevant for many Australians. Under the and the future. Under the previous Labor high unemployment regimes Australia suf- government those over 40 had little hope, but fered under successive Labor governments it under the present government unemployment was easy for some employers to neglect is now below six per cent and there are in- these values, but with employment growing creasing opportunities for those over 40 to steadily this is no longer the case. Things are find work. Given the speed with which the changing. labour market is changing, it may well be the The government believes that older work- case that in the near future labour and people ers have skills and experiences which make skills will be in short supply. In parts of Aus- them valuable. They will add to productivity, tralia they are in short supply even now. The add to economic growth and not necessarily opportunities for older people to remain in or be regarded as a charge on the budget or on rejoin the work force are increasing and are society. The opportunities for older Austra- exciting. They are providing new hope and lians to remain in the work force are likely to new opportunities to save and have a life in grow as the population ages and employers retirement or semiretirement. People will not increasingly value these skills. There is be regarded as a charge on society, and they likely to be a shortage of skills in the future will not have no hope and no means of im- because of the falling birthrate. That is a fact proving themselves or their lot in life. of life and a recognition of what has hap- Under a Labor government, with their pened demographically. Already, many Aus- high unemployment and changing and uncer- tralians with specialist knowledge have cho- tain policies, mature age workers were rele- sen to remain in the work force on either a gated to this use-by date, making them feel part-time, casual or consultary basis. In this unwanted, unneeded and unliked. In our age- way, there is a dual benefit: they can retain ing society people are living longer, but un- their skills, including their social skills, and der Labor older people were regarded only as impart those skills to the more junior or a charge on society. What would happen if newer employees. It can be a means of pass- Labor were in government again? Older ing on corporate knowledge within an or- people would suffer reduced living stan- ganisation. It also must allow older workers dards. They would be denied an opportunity to gradually wind down their hours of work for a better life. How disgraceful. They and enjoy more leisure time. Westpac is an would be alive but not really living to their example of an organisation encouraging this. full potential, as they should. On the other It is beginning to realise that older people hand, this government initiative will ensure can be re-employed because of the value of that the superannuation system caters for the skills they are bringing, and I welcome changing workplace arrangements. It recog- that. nises that older Australians want more flexi- It is unfortunate that in the past some peo- bility, want more choice and want higher ple over the age of 40 have been discrimi- living standards. We are providing greater nated against in the work force. Our super-

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20877 opportunities in this transition from work to now that we have moved to a simpler retirement. scheme of accumulation in the provision of What are we really doing? What are we an allocated pension, there will be reduced offering? We are offering a range of meas- costs. This has got to be better. ures. We are removing the work test for su- We have a number of integrity measures. perannuation contributions before age 65. From 2004, superannuation funds will be We are simplifying the work test for those required to start paying benefits to a person over 65. We are making it easier for indi- as soon as practicable after they reach 75. viduals in the transition to retirement. In What will be the effect of this? It will ensure terms of choices for the financing of that that superannuation benefits are used for retirement, we have introduced a new con- retirement purposes and not for estate cept of the growth pension that will apply planning purposes. We are providing an from 20 September 2004. In other words, we opportunity for older Australians to be able will provide an opportunity for a pension that to participate in the work force in their re- is market linked and payable for the life ex- tirement years. This will provide them with pectancy of the individual. Again, we are extra money, which will improve their increasing the opportunities available for standard of living and quality of life—rather retirees and this will raise the level of com- than providing them with fewer petition in the income streams market, and opportunities, as the Labor Party would that I welcome. There will be changes to the have.What have the Labor Party called for in assets test and exemption for complying in- this motion? They want us to maintain cur- come streams. rent access for superannuation and current It has been noted that there are a number eligibility for pensions. We have not indi- of quite rich people who have taken advan- cated that we are going to take this away. tage of the assets test regime to take comply- What is this motion all about? It is all about ing pensions. We have reduced the opportu- creating scare tactics. At no stage during the nity for double-dipping by the very rich by Treasurer’s announcement of the new retire- reducing from 100 per cent to 50 per cent the ment income measures was there any men- exemption on products purchased after tion of these provisions not being main- 20 September 2004. The current 100 per cent tained. (Time expired) exemption for such income streams has been Senator WONG (South Australia) (4.24 regarded as extremely generous and has pro- p.m.)—I rise to speak in support of the mo- vided the opportunity for exploitation. We tion moved by Senator George Campbell, are taking away that opportunity for exploi- which condemns this government for the tation; we are providing a greater degree of underlying thrust of its recent announcement. fairness to ensure that those who need it This was made clear in a number of com- most get the benefit. ments by the Treasurer—that the answer We are also reducing red tape, for exam- from this government to the challenge posed ple in small SMFs—the concept applying to by Australia’s ageing population is that Aus- allocated pensions and new market income tralians have to forget full-time retirement streams. In the past these funds had to have and work longer and harder. In reality, what not only an audit certificate but also an actu- that means is: work till you drop. After lis- arial certificate. We are going to reduce the tening to Senator Watson’s contribution, you need for the actuarial certificate because, would be forgiven for thinking we were ar-

CHAMBER 20878 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 guing about a range of measures— There is probably no greater example of unemployment, past Labor governments’ how ineffective this government has been employment policies and so forth. But what when it comes to the issue of superannuation we are actually arguing about and debating than that of children’s superannuation. I will today is the approach that has been taken by digress for a moment to remind senators that the Treasurer—his injunction to the Austra- this was one of the centrepieces of the Prime lian people that the way they should deal Minister’s announcement in his 2001 super- with the issue of their retirement savings is annuation policy. Children’s super was going to work longer and harder. to be one of the ways in which this govern- What has the government actually done? ment addressed the issue of Australia’s re- Everyone in this chamber would acknowl- tirement income and savings policy. This edge that Australia’s population, as shown by was one of its great answers to some of the particular demographics, is ageing and that important questions facing Australians when the challenge posed by that over the next 40 it comes to retirement incomes. The centre- years is an important one. But what is good piece of this policy was children’s superan- to remember is that this challenge is not a nuation policy accounts. I believe it forecast new one. This issue has been on the policy 470,000 accounts; it was going to be a great horizon for some time. It was certainly thing for the Australian people. What have something that underpinned the thinking of we seen? We have seen around 500 accounts. the Hawke and Keating Labor governments. Frankly, that aspect of its policy has been a It is a legitimate issue that government pol- complete dud and it is indicative of the inef- icy should address; it is an important issue. fective policy approach the government has But what have we seen from this government taken in this area. on the issue of how we deal with Australia’s What is the policy proposition that we say ageing population to ensure our population is wrong? It is very simple. It comes down to has adequate retirement incomes and that what the Treasurer has been on about when those who are retired do not place an undue he has been on the wires trying to trumpet burden on the tax system? this policy that really is not much of a policy I will tell you what the Treasurer has and does not really deal with the important done; he has requested another report. It is issues—that is, the Treasurer’s indication not a bad report, but it is simply another re- that he believes the way to deal with our report analysing and discussing the problem. It tirement incomes challenge is to make peo- seems to be something that is contagious in ple work longer and harder. I am sure most the Treasury portfolio. I note the Assistant people in this place would be aware that on Treasurer is very adept in her portfolio in 26 February the Treasurer, in answer to a asking for yet another report when it comes question about people retiring, said on the to corporate law reform, and we have seen a ABC: similar approach taken by this Treasurer. The We need you in the work force; stay here. reality is the government’s position can be He then said: reasonably characterised as lots of talk but Those days are over. I guess my message is very little action. The action it has taken has this: there is going to be no such thing as full been ineffective or, at times, completely retirement. wrong. Senator Watson, who preceded me in this debate, seemed to indicate that the ALP was

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20879 misrepresenting the government’s policy and report and analysis—it has few answers but misrepresenting what the Treasurer said. It is it is a reasonable analysis—identifies the there in black and white, Senator Watson. demographic challenge facing this country. The Treasurer said: He announced what I and the Labor Party … there is going to be no such thing as full re- say are useful measures, but they really only tirement. tinker around the edges. When it comes to I am sure all those Australians approaching dealing with the matters in this debate, when retirement, making plans for retirement, it comes to dealing with the challenge faced looking forward to a well-earned rest after by the ageing population and when it comes years in the work force and perhaps hoping to dealing with Australians’ retirement in- to do other things such as unpaid or volun- come, the central issue in this debate is that teer work—all those things that so many of adequacy—that is, ensuring people have Australians do now in their retirement— adequate savings in their superannuation or would have been rather disturbed to hear the have other means to ensure that they have a Treasurer saying, ‘Now what we want you to reasonable retirement income. do is work longer and harder; there is no The central issue that government needs to such thing as full retirement.’ address if it wants to properly deal with the This is one of the fallacies on which the issue of the ageing population is adequacy: government seem to be approaching this is- how do we ensure that we have adequate sue. They seem to assume that what happens superannuation and other savings now and now in Australia is that people retire and into the future so that Australians who move they do not do anything or they do not do out of the paid work force are able to enjoy a anything useful. I think any senator or any reasonable standard of living? It deals with member of parliament who has had anything the national savings problem and it also deals to do with volunteer groups, volunteer asso- with the problems faced by a smaller number ciations, community associations or commu- of taxpayers working at the same time as an nity activities would know that a great many increasing number of people are receiving of these organisations—organisations which the age pension or are over retirement age. do so much that is worthwhile in our com- That is the central issue when it comes to the munity—are staffed by and receive contribu- intergenerational challenge we face. tions from people who have retired. Most The best way to alleviate the burden on Australians already engage in an active re- future taxpayers is to ensure that older Aus- tirement. They do things for the community, tralians have access to reasonable retirement they do things for their family and they do income. The central policy issue in this de- things obviously for themselves—which they bate has been almost entirely avoided by the are entitled to do. After all, they have spent a Treasurer and by this government. The gov- lifetime in the work force. But what they ernment has not done the hard yards when it hear from this government and the Treasurer comes to the adequacy of retirement incomes is: ‘No, we don’t think there is any such for Australians. Some measures were an- thing as full retirement; we want you to stay nounced recently, which we welcome, but at in the work force.’ best they can be described as nothing more I return to the debate on the policy issue than tinkering around the edges. And though of the superannuation and retirement income they may well be useful contributions to the measures. The Treasurer in his very good policy agenda, they really do not address the central issue, which is that of adequacy.

CHAMBER 20880 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

So why doesn’t the government address which it could deal with adequacy. One is to this? Why doesn’t the government actually increase the level of contribution: to increase do something about the adequacy of retire- the minimum amount that people put into ment incomes? In fact, if you look back over their superannuation accounts to save for the last century or more, you will see that it their retirement. What was the Treasurer’s is Labor governments and Labor govern- answer to that? It was to remove the pro- ments alone who have really done the hard jected three per cent increase in 1996—an yards and addressed the issue of ensuring effective cut in the income for working Aus- Australians have adequate incomes in their tralians. older years. It was Labor who introduced the The other option would be to reduce the age pension in 1908, and it was Labor who contributions tax and actually reduce the tax introduced the nine per cent compulsory su- take of superannuation contributions so that perannuation guarantee in 1987. This guaran- there would be more for people in their re- tee first started at three per cent and, as we tirement. This report and the government’s all know, eventually ended up at nine per announcement do nothing to address this cent. That was opposed by this government. issue. Also, the government does not have The most important measure in modern Aus- any effective policy to deal with excessive tralian politics in dealing with retirement fees and charges, which in some sectors of incomes of Australians was opposed by this the superannuation industry eat into the re- government. tirement savings of Australians. Where those Not only did the government oppose it but fees are excessive—and in some cases they the Treasurer cut the additional three per cent are outrageous—we have seen from the co-contribution—which was already budg- Treasurer and the Assistant Treasurer a lack eted for when the government came to power of willingness to address this policy issue. in 1996 and which would have ensured that They are not willing to address massive exit almost all Australians had access to a mini- fees. There have been scenarios put to sena- mum superannuation contribution of 15 per tors in this place, including Senator Sherry, cent That has been this Treasurer’s greatest in which exit fees have eaten almost the en- contribution to the retirement incomes of tirety of a person’s balance. Australians. That has been the Treasurer’s This government is not prepared to do the greatest contribution to the incomes of eld- hard yards when it comes to the issue of ade- erly Australians—those people approaching quacy. It is not prepared to look at how to or in retirement at the moment—and that was increase contributions. It is not prepared to to ensure that they got less money. They had look at how to reduce the tax take on super. three per cent taken off what was already Its central response to this core policy ques- budgeted for in their superannuation pay- tion of how you ensure adequate retirement ments. incomes for Australians is to make them Meanwhile, this government is continuing work longer. It is to say to Australians and to levy an excessive contributions tax on their families: ‘We want you to work longer super. In fact, recent figures demonstrate and harder; there is going to be no such thing how there has been a massive increase in the as full retirement.’ Mr Costello said on 2GB: tax take on super. Why doesn’t the govern- I have no plans whatsoever to retire at 65 and ment do something about this issue? Why everybody I know, particularly those who have doesn’t the government do something about taken early retirement at 55, says after a while I adequacy? There are a number of ways in am bored stupid.

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20881

That is very good for Mr Costello, but I am ernment is that the way to deal with the fact sure most senators in this place would also that Australia’s population is ageing is to know from feedback from constituents that make them work longer and work harder. there are a lot of Australians out there who Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (4.39 are looking forward to their retirement, a p.m.)—There has been a cracked record well-earned break and the opportunity to playing in this place for the last two days. participate with their families and their Sadly, Frank Sinatra has not been singing; communities in ways that they are not able to instead we have heard the dulcet tones of currently because they are in paid work. Senator George Campbell. He played that It is ludicrous for Senator Watson, on the record seven times today. other side of the chamber, to have said in his Senator Coonan—He’s doing it ‘his contribution that the Labor Party is somehow way’. anti older workers. I am looking forward to Senator FERRIS—Yes, he is doing it his Senator Watson or the government moving way. But he actually did not play it as often some amendments to the Workplace Rela- as Senator Sherry played it yesterday. Sena- tions Act to ensure better options for older tor Buckland, I can see you laughing. You workers and ensuring that the commission played it five times yesterday. Senator Kirk can look at the issue of part-time employ- played it four times, but Senator Wong, who ment to give older workers the right to part- is leaving the chamber now, only played it time work if they so wish. I await that with once. You will get a visit, Senator Wong. bated breath, but I doubt it will happen. In This record—and I do not think I need to tell the industrial relations sphere, through the any of those opposite or any of those listen- award simplification process, we have seen ing—is called ‘Work till you drop’, which many awards stripped of a provision that must have come from a focus group some- previously allowed for a request for part- where. time work when people returned from paid maternity leave. Will we now see the gov- Senator Coonan—It must be an old 78. ernment re-regulating industrial relations in Senator FERRIS—It has about as much order to support older workers? If they do, relevance as a 78. There are probably not that would be a welcome initiative but I many record-players in this place that would wonder whether they will put their policy be appropriate to play it. ‘Work till you drop’ money where their mouth is. They are very is the most amazing cracked record I have good at talking about how people should heard in this place for years. The ageing of work longer and harder, but not very good at Australia’s population and the challenges all about talking about how to deal with that we face in maintaining the strength and ensuring that people have a choice to do that integrity of our retirement income system so and, if they choose to do that, how they then that we can cope with the demographic may go about doing it. changes that are facing us is one of the most When you look at this report and the gov- important issues facing our country. But in- ernment’s announcements, when you look at stead of going away to study this issue and what the Treasurer has said on radio and in delivering a response based on sound policy the newspapers, you will see when you boil principles, the opposition have simply played everything down—when you get rid of all the same old tune ever since they got home the smoke and mirrors and bells and whis- from the focus group. We know what that tles—that the central message from this gov- line is. It was so boring when I heard it 11,

CHAMBER 20882 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 four, five, two, seven and one times in the support them to live full, active and independent last 24 hours that I do not think the Austra- lives. lian community needs to hear it again. Any- … … … one would think, Senator Buckland, you had … recognises that most older Australians remain been to a focus group somewhere. healthy and continue to lead full, active and inde- Senator Buckland—I went and talked to pendent lives well into their 70s and 80s. constituents. They are the ones who told me Where would you to expect to find those the story. words? On a Liberal Party web site? Cer- Senator FERRIS—I think you looked in tainly not. They are from the Labor Party the mirror, Senator Buckland. Let me address web site. It is ALP policy on the ALP web the claim. It is completely false, it is mis- site. But there is one fundamental difference. leading spin, it is completely wrong and, On the face of it, we would agree with those what is more, it is cruel. It is cruel to frighten words, until you reach the point where you older Australians in the way that the opposi- find there is no opportunity to work, no tion have frightened them over the last 24 flexibility, no chance—once you are 65—to hours. There is not one aspect to this paper continue to make a valuable paid contribu- released by the Treasurer that compels one tion to the Australian work force as a super- single Australian to work longer than they annuated workplace employee in whatever want to—not one mandatory measure. There form you choose. There is nothing on the is no coercion; it is about choice. Labor Party’s web site that offers these full, active and independent men and women of Labor’s approach is that you work until Australia, living into their seventies and you are 65 and then you retire—no choice, eighties, the choice about how they spend no flexibility and a huge burden placed on their day—not a single word. our retirement income system. The reality is that, if the Labor Party’s policy approach I have always been motivated in my time were followed, the people who would have as a senator by a desire to see future genera- to continue working are our future generations of Australians enjoy even greater options. Labor would have them taxed to sup- portunities and standards of living than those port this huge group of people until the we enjoy today. Just like the humanist theo- younger generation died. rists Maslow and Einstein, I believe that we are motivated by more than just our desire Senator Buckland interjecting— for basic needs, such as food and shelter. At Senator FERRIS—That is right, Senator the peak of the hierarchy of needs that moti- Buckland. That is the way the Labor Party vate us is the need to leave the world in a will run the policy if they have their way. better place than when we arrived. I know They will condemn our future generations to very few parents who do not strive to pro- a far worse future than the one that we have vide their children with more opportunities been able to enjoy. What a mean-spirited and a happier life than their own. It is a great approach from Senator Wong and Senator shame that Senator George Campbell and George Campbell. Senator Wong are not so motivated. I was surfing the Net the other day and I The issue of how we manage the increas- came across the following statements: ing number of older Australians requires … recognises the vital contribution of older Aus- very careful and considered reflection, and tralians to our community and will encourage and not the shallow, scary, empty rhetoric that

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20883 has come from the opposition in the last 24 ditional 5½ years for men and five years for hours. In Australia, demographic change has women over the next 40 years. How do we arrived slowly, but its effects will be pro- as a nation address the challenges of this found and frightening if they are not properly ageing demographic group in Australia? managed. Australia’s population has aged How do we develop a strong and flexible significantly over the last 40 years. For ex- retirement income system to support it? Cer- ample, in 1962 just over 30 per cent of the tainly, we do not say, ‘Crisis—what crisis?’ population was under 15 years of age. Today, We sit down and we do the work. We do not it is 20 per cent. By 2042 it is projected to just come in here with empty, shallow, scary fall to less than 15 per cent. In our lifetime, rhetoric designed to frighten elderly people we have seen a dramatic change in the into quite unrealistic expectations, which this demographics. government has never ever contemplated. By contrast, the proportion of the popula- We have two choices: either we can take tion aged 65 and over increased relatively small steps now to adjust to this challenge or slowly over the last 40 years from around 8½ we can leave it for future generations to deal per cent in 1962 to 12.7 per cent in 2002. with. If we do not address this issue right However, over the next 40 years it is pro- now, Australia will undoubtedly be forced jected that this group will almost double. In into taking far more drastic steps in the years 2042 almost one in four Australians will be ahead. What sort of burden is that to put on aged 65 or older, with the largest increase our children and our grandchildren? We ac- being in the number of Australians aged 85 tually want to engage the whole Australian or older. At the same time, growth in the po- community in a discussion about this issue, tential labour force—something that Senator and that is why our Treasurer released the George Campbell claimed to be extremely Intergenerational Report with the 2002-03 concerned about today; something he was budget. It constitutes for the first time a real not concerned about when one million Aus- attempt to look across the generations to tralians were unemployed under the opposi- identify the challenges that the demographic tion’s term in government—is expected to changes I have foreshadowed previously are fall from around 1.2 per cent per annum over going to bring to our society. the last decade to zero in 40 years time. Con- That is why last week the Treasurer again trary to Senator Campbell’s claims in the released a discussion paper to encourage in- Senate today, ‘Crisis—what crisis?’ contem- formed community debate about Australia’s plate this: today, there are 2,800 men and future work force and what the face of it will women in Australia over the age of 100. In be. That is why he also released a retirement 2040 there will be 38,000 men and women in incomes policy statement, which contains Australia aged over 100, needing very spe- words that are almost unknown to those op- cial care. posite. It contains a ‘flexible and adaptable’ There will be substantially fewer Austra- retirement incomes system: ‘flexible and lians of a working age—between 15 and adaptable’, so that on the day that you blow 64—compared with the number of people out the candles on your 65th birthday you do aged 65 and over. Crisis—what crisis, Sena- not get what used to be the gold watch and tor Campbell? You claim there is no crisis. get ticked off and flicked off—no, not a 65th Australian’s life expectancies, which are al- birthday like that. It is simply the opportu- ready amongst the highest of the OECD nity to engage in useful work in the commu- countries, are expected to increase by an ad- nity in the future, to have the chance and the

CHAMBER 20884 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 choice to continue as you wish in the way But what do we get from those opposite? that you wish, without coercion or compul- A block in this place. This was brought in sion—something quite unknown to those two budgets ago. We are almost lining up for opposite. the third budget and it is blocked in the Sen- The combination of the age pension, su- ate by those opposite while they sing to their perannuation and associated tax concessions same old cracked record, ‘Crisis—what cri- currently provides a firm base for the retire- sis?’ It is an extraordinary set of circum- ment incomes of most people. It is equally stances. These measures were introduced in important, though, that the new system does the 2002 budget, and they have been blocked not encourage people to leave the work force ever since. This is the albatross that will be prematurely, to blow out the candles, pack up around the neck of every Labor senator as their locker and get the flick, particularly if we now try to move forward to address this early retirement results in taxpayers funding issue, as we try to take the steps required and the major part of their retirement. So we can try to engage the community in debate so either plan for our retirement and take small that we do not suddenly discover in 10 or 20 steps now to adjust to the challenges of the years time that we do not have the resources ageing population or take the view espoused to adequately fund and care for our older in this place today—that is, head in the sand, Australians. something else on fire, and say, ‘Crisis— The issue of an ageing population is with- what crisis?’ out doubt a very complex one; that is some- Before I turn to the specifics of Senator thing everybody in this chamber would agree George Campbell’s motion today, let us go with. Demographic change is not something back and look at Labor’s track record on that might happen; it will happen. It is set in these sorts of issues. place. The combination of the baby boomer generation moving through society and the Senator Coonan interjecting— significant drop in birth rates since the 1970s Senator FERRIS—Yes. Senator Coonan has generated this result. There is no doubt makes the point that it will be a short track that, if we do nothing, we will have a crisis. record—it will be. We know from our Inter- It is a challenge that all Western countries are generational Report that we will be opening now facing, some more than others. It will up a five per cent gap between expenditure require in the future greater income within and revenue over the next 40 years, unless society to support our older Australians. we can address that with strong expenditure Economic growth fuelled by increased la- restraint and increased economic growth bour force participation can meet this chal- based on participation and productivity. That lenge, without compulsion, Senator Buck- is why we are trying to make changes to the land, and without coercion. Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and to the The Treasurer’s discussion paper ‘Austra- disability support pension: so that we can lia’s Demographic Challenges’ addresses this take some small steps now to ensure that, issue. With much reduced growth in the when the new and more expensive medical working age population in the future, it will technology becomes available, we will have be essential that we in this country generate enough funding available through the Phar- flexible working opportunities for all those maceutical Benefits Scheme to address those who want them, including older men and issues. women who do not want to blow out the 65 candles, lock up their locker, toss in their

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20885 key, hand in their parking pass and go home change. We agree that making wise invest- and get on the couch. They do not want to do ments in infrastructure, services and pro- that. They do not want to be compelled or grams will provide a legacy of freedom, so- coerced into dreading their 65th birthday. cial cohesion, opportunity and prosperity. They want to continue in the work force. We What we in the Australian Labor Party want to offer flexible work opportunities for cannot agree with is the notion that the way all those who want them. There is nothing in to achieve that legacy is to force people to the Treasurer’s statement that compels one delay their retirement to 65 or 70 and to draw single older man or woman to work beyond down their often meagre superannuation retirement age—not a single word. This pol- funds. We cannot agree that forcing older icy, this discussion paper, is about choice, people into piecemeal job placement pro- opportunity and flexibility. (Time expired) grams without training or long-term support Senator STEPHENS (New South Wales) will achieve that legacy. Labor believe that (4.59 p.m.)—I would like to speak to the retirement income is a basic and universal motion moved by Senator George Campbell service that all governments of advanced in relation to superannuation and retirement economies provide for their residents. Secu- income. There seems to be one point of furi- rity in retirement is a fundamental right of all ous agreement in the chamber this after- Australians. It is a responsibility that our noon—that is, we all acknowledge that the society accepts, much like the responsibility ageing of our population will have a pro- for a universal health care system. Those found effect on the Australian economy and, who have contributed to building the nation potentially, our living standards. We are all over their lifetime—who have contributed to able to see the impact of a rapidly ageing its economic and social development—are population on Japan, not least in the stagna- entitled to a secure retirement and a health tion of their economy. So Australia, like care system that will look after them in their most other developed countries, needs to old age. prepare for these issues. We are in furious I would like to focus my contribution to agreement on that. this debate on the practicalities of the Treas- Treasurer Costello, in his speech last week urer’s remarks for country people. I remind and in the discussion paper he has issued that colleagues that not all Australians enjoy the Senator Ferris just referred to, highlighted privilege of superannuation funds, employer the policy imperatives for Australia. The co-contributions, golden handshakes, sav- Labor Party agree: there are serious policy ings, investments and retirement incomes challenges. The Labor Party agree that these that can be drawn upon to supplement the challenges centre on strengthening our econ- part-time work that the Treasurer is envisag- omy by increasing labour force participation ing. Many working people who have been and productivity. Indeed, Labor agree that loyal to local employers, paid their taxes and there is considerable potential to improve our accepted their below average wages in the labour force participation rates and that there interests of keeping a business in a country are opportunities to improve participation by town, on the basis that they will have the improving the capacity to work, providing security of their age pension entitlement incentives to work and improving flexibility when they retire, are beginning to feel dud- in the workplace. We agree that equity and ded by what the future might hold for them. fairness across generations is particularly They are alarmed to hear that the sacrifices important in times of major demographic that they have been making during their

CHAMBER 20886 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 working lives to secure a dignified and well- spread over an area of approximately earned retirement income are being dis- 800,000 square kilometres. This policy does counted in the current debate about retire- absolutely nothing to address the problems ment security. facing rural Australians today, let alone assist For many country people this tinkering them to plan for their old age. with retirement income policy is almost triv- I know that many people think that the ial. They are looking for a government that drought is over. The perception often is that will commit to regional Australia in positive once it starts raining along the coast the and practical ways—a government that will, problem is solved. The reality for people to use the Treasurer’s own words, make west of the Great Dividing Range is that ‘wise investments in infrastructure, services there are huge areas of Australia still in and programs’ to provide a ‘legacy of free- drought and many communities still strug- dom, social cohesion, opportunity and pros- gling to deal with the impacts. Drought re- perity’. What we have is a government that covery is a long-term process, not just for wants people to work longer or to take up farmers but also for farming communities, part-time work to supplement their retire- small businesses, local governments, service ment income. What we need is a government providers, banks and credit unions, schools, that will invest in youth employment and clubs and sporting associations. Recently, training, regional development, and service Professor Margaret Alston and Jenny Kent delivery. The fact is that in rural and regional from the Centre for Rural Social Research at Australia unemployment rates are up to 20 Charles Sturt University undertook research per cent higher than in growing metropolitan for the NSW Department of Agriculture and areas. These rates are even higher in drought the NSW Premier’s Department into the so- affected areas, which will take years to re- cial impacts of drought. In their report they cover. So the first question will always be: make this very point, quoting, among many where are the jobs that the Treasurer wants examples, a Bourke businessperson explain- people to take up? They simply do not exist. ing that the effects of the drought are far This federal government needs to get more insidious than the terrible direct im- more in touch with the issues in regional and pacts it has had on farmers: rural Australia. The Treasurer’s glib procla- The drought has an effect on other businesses mation—‘Keep working!’—shows that he too—Schools don’t need as many teachers be- really does not understand that for country cause there’s not as many kids there, so more people often there is no choice. Those that people leave town. Because they are not shopping can work already work until they drop and in the stores one of the stores will close down. Once that starts it’s very hard to arrest and to get they are doing this just to make ends meet, to going back up again and the only way to get it contribute to their communities and by par- back up again is industry and employment— ticipating in all the voluntary work that so getting people back to work, their families come many communities rely on to maintain es- back, their kids go to school etc. sential services. Surely the government is Of the 37 economically poorest electorates in aware that the proportion of older people as a Australia, 33 are located in rural regions. percentage of the population is higher in ru- Rural regions simply have fewer job oppor- ral areas than in metropolitan areas, and is tunities for workers. Where towns are domi- increasing. In my own state, New South nated by a single industry or a company Wales, 27 per cent of people aged 70 years there is not a diversity of work options to and over live in rural and regional areas,

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20887 attract a diverse and skilled work force. not rely on the market to restore confidence There is often an over-reliance on that one in regional Australia. That policy was a pa- industry or company, which is problematic thetic attempt to regain the disaffected Na- if, as in my own hometown, it is an abat- tional Party voters who had shifted to toir—always a precarious employer in times Pauline Hanson’s One Nation. In 2001 Mr of drought. Anderson announced his regional policy The 2003 state of the regions report, un- statement entitled ‘Stronger Regions, a dertaken by National Economics for the Aus- Stronger Australia’, which had four broad tralian Local Government Association and goals: to strengthen regional economic and released in November last year, has also fo- social opportunities, to sustain our produc- cused this year on how ageing, migration and tive natural resources and environment, to population growth impact on the economic deliver better regional services and to adjust potential of regions. The state of the regions to economic, technological and government report sets out the serious issues confronting induced change. They sound wonderful in local governments in providing and main- theory. Unfortunately, that is where they re- taining services for our ageing populations. mained. They had no substance and there Ageing people in rural New South Wales was no commitment to putting them into have been left out in the cold by the privati- practice. sation and withdrawal of community ser- The government tried another tack: it held vices. Instead of airy-fairy proposals that a rural summit to develop an improved re- hope that the problems of an ageing popula- sponse to the concerns of regional Australia. tion will just take care of themselves, we The rural summit succeeded in raising com- really need to invest in social infrastructure munity expectations that the Howard gov- so that these problems can be addressed. And ernment was at last taking the stresses being it is very important that the particular needs experienced by regional Australia seri- of rural populations are considered when ously—expectations dashed by the subse- policies, including retirement support poli- quent lack of action. There just does not cies, are being developed. seem to be capacity in this government to I know I have pointed out many times in take a strategic approach. The best demon- this chamber that microeconomic reform, stration of this is the dismal failure of the which has been underpinning policy devel- Sustainable Regions Program. Hailed as ‘the opment at all levels of government in Austra- framework for developing Australia’s re- lia, has had a huge impact on rural communi- gions’, it has become another huge disap- ties. I know that the government is aware of pointment in policy outcomes by this gov- this. The Deputy Prime Minister has paid lip- ernment for regional Australia. service to regional communities for the last So we have a government that wants the six years. But let us look at how regional and population to work longer but will not com- rural Australia has been treated in policy mit to employment generation and sustain- terms. Prime Minister Howard abolished the able regional development that will deliver regional development portfolio in 1996. the jobs required. What I am saying really is Then, having realised his blunder and suffer- that for many rural Australians superannua- ing the backlash from the bush, he released tion is an urban issue. We cannot as a gov- his budget measures for regional Australia ernment or a parliament set down a path that entitled ‘Rebuilding Regional Australia’, is going to entrench a two-class system of acknowledging that his government could the rural and regional poor and others in re-

CHAMBER 20888 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 tirement. We must focus on building policy So we have a government that—through coherence that will improve the situation for its rhetoric of mutual obligation, reciprocity, all our ageing population, regardless of and what the Treasurer calls ‘better incen- where they live. tives for work’—claims that government I am sure Senators Heffernan, Macdonald, policies do not discourage people from McGauran and Boswell will tell you that working. But this is the same government many farmers have to work till they drop as that, through the taxation system and the it is. When there is nothing left, holding onto family tax benefit A, penalises those who try their farms makes them ostensibly asset rich to find additional part-time work or work but cash poor. I have personally spoken to overtime to help improve their household farm families that survived on rabbit stew income. We have a government that says it right through this drought. Let me tell you wants to improve the capacity of people for about a farming family whose two sons have work but which has cut back assistance to gone to Sydney for work. One of them sends supported employment initiatives for mature money home to help his farming parents workers, retraining, literacy and numeracy, make ends meet. This couple have used their and job skills. We have a government that farm as an asset to borrow money, and so has supported redundancies and restructuring they have a debt to service—which their son that has resulted in over 50,000 jobs being is helping them to do—as well as all the lost in regional Australia. We have a gov- other problems of trying to farm under ernment that will not invest in research and drought conditions. The irony of their situa- development that is going to provide the im- tion is that, even with their debt, the farm petus for enterprise development and entre- still counts as an asset and that has affected preneurial skills. We have a government that their ability to claim social security benefits will not even support moves to guarantee or exceptional circumstances assistance. workers’ entitlements, including their superannuation funds—for people like the Wood- Just imagine the reaction of these people lawn mine workers—when companies go to Treasurer Costello’s recommendation that bust and directors cream their directors’ fees they continue to work in their old age. De- with impunity. spite all their problems, these people are actually the lucky ones. If we look at the rela- We have a Treasurer who glibly says to- tive proportion of unemployed, aged and day, ‘We have almost reached full employ- single parents and others dependant on social ment.’ I wonder if he really understands how security benefits in regional Australia, it is cheesed off people in rural and regional Aus- much higher than their city counterparts. For tralia get when they hear that kind of non- these people, superannuation is a nonsense—and how angry people get when they issue—they will not have superannuation have been parked on disability benefits, preserved in any case. There is also the issue without any support from Centrelink or the of Indigenous Australians—who, I remind Job Network, for the past six years, but who the Treasurer, are ageing as inexorably as the now, de-skilled and without support, are go- rest of us. Try as I may, I cannot find any ing to be expected to go out and find non- mention in the policy document of their par- existent jobs. ticular situation or how the government pro- The Labor Party have a strong commit- poses to provide part-time work for them in ment to social infrastructure because we their old age. know that healthy communities are productive communities. It is a fact that the health

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20889 status of people of all ages living in rural and ments can make a difference and that there is remote areas is poorer than for urban people, a role for government intervention in re- with higher rates of hospitalisation. Another gional development. The Howard govern- statistic worth noting here is that people over ment will not accept that fact—their only 45 living in rural, regional and remote areas effort has been to fund a whole range of sup- are more likely to have had all their teeth posedly quick fix solutions to community removed than other Australians. So it is im- and regional development. So what is this perative that policy initiatives to cope with government’s best response to our ageing our ageing population consider the particular population pressures? Just another deftly needs of country people. Labor have released announced policy initiative that shifts the our Medicare and health care policies, in- pressure and stress from government to indi- cluding the restoration of the dental health viduals. It is always the same—deny respon- scheme, which respond to the needs of all sibility, ignore the policy potentials and take Australians. Health services is one policy a punitive approach to those least able to area we need to get right—and education is protect themselves from the impacts of a another. policy shift of this nature. Perhaps the gov- Labor have announced our cradle-to-grave ernment might give greater thought to the commitment to education, training and life- impacts of this policy direction on regional long learning, because we know the regions Australia, or we will get to add this to the can only thrive if they can retain and restore litany of policy fiascos that are ripping the their skills base. We are going to expand fabric of regional Australia apart. training opportunities in TAFE, and we rec- Senator HUMPHRIES (Australian Capi- ognise the important contribution that re- tal Territory) (5.19 p.m.)—Governments in gional universities make. We are committed this country, and no doubt elsewhere, are to delivering more aged care beds and com- often accused of taking a short-term ap- munity services that mean we can keep our proach towards the major problems in our frail and aged at home and in their communi- community. They are accused of looking at ties, near family and friends, in their twilight what the next election holds rather than years. We understand the linkages between thinking about the long-term needs of the healthy and wealthy communities. Labor are society they serve. But I think that that fun- committed to improving business incentives. damentally runs against the grain of what I commend to all my parliamentary col- people expect of their own circumstances leagues the regional business development and what they expect governments should be analysis study—funded by the Howard gov- looking at. In my observation, people are ernment but shelved because it was so criti- concerned about what the world will look cal of this government’s efforts in regional like for their children or perhaps for their Australia. It is an honest, warts and all con- grandchildren. I think they expect govern- sideration of the realities of doing business in ments to think about that too. The issue be- and attracting business to regional Australia. fore the Senate today is: to what extent are Labor are absolutely committed to en- we planning for, are we shaping, a society in couraging investment, research and devel- the future that will be sustainable for our opment. We want to encourage innovation children and that will be capable of provid- and entrepreneurship, and we have to link ing our children and our grandchildren with that to environmental infrastructure and sus- the level and quality of life that we enjoy tainability initiatives. We know that govern- today?

CHAMBER 20890 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

At this point in history, we have lived in a ures’. What is the general thrust of these fortuitous environment in which our standard measures? We are not seeing any words put of living has almost continuously increased down on paper but rather the opposition since the Second World War. Perhaps we chooses to create a bogeyman, a straw man. imagine we can sustain that indefinitely. The That straw man is that somehow the gov- issue which has been raised and is before the ernment is engineering a system where it is Senate questions that assumption. It ques- compulsory for people to work beyond the tions whether in fact Australia is capable of age at which they would choose to retire and delivering a continuously improving stan- forcing them to work longer than they want. dard of living. In fact it poses the very real It only requires the briefest perusal of question of whether our standard of living what has been put on the table by the gov- will decline and whether the quality of the ernment to realise that that is utter unadulter- services provided from the public purse will ated nonsense. There is nothing in this pack- decline because we are not able to manage age which suggests that people should do the balance between the number of people other than what they want to do with their who need those services and the number of retirement planning. What it does do, in very people who pay taxes to support those ser- clear terms, is create options which do not vices. presently exist. That is the point of a sensible The government, in announcing its policy and balanced approach to the task of manag- paper on this question—that is, Australia’s ing this enormous social problem which pre- demographic challenges—has put solutions sents itself to us today: how do we pay for a and options on the table in a very direct fash- quality of life for our citizens—for our chil- ion. It has said, ‘We understand this problem dren and grandchildren and even some of and we want to move forward to consider us—when we reach that horizon 30, 40 or 50 options.’ It has first of all described the chal- years from now? lenge facing Australian in very articulate Senator Hutchins—Have more children! terms. It has laid out options available to us Senator HUMPHRIES—Senator Hut- as a community to address those problems chins is already contributing quite heavily in and has begun, at the same time, to engineer that respect. The children you are having, a level of flexibility in Australia’s retirement Senator Hutchins, will want a quality of life. income policy—which, at the end of the day, The question is: can you and your colleagues can only assist us to begin to face those chal- on that side of the chamber provide it to lenges. That seems to me to be the correct them by virtue of the policies you put for- approach. ward? Our side of the chamber is addressing In this debate so far I have not heard any that issue with this set of policies. We are specific option or idea that has been put for- told by Senator Wong that this problem is not ward by the Treasurer or by the government new, that is has been faced up to for some generally which has been attacked by those time now by those opposite as well. Perhaps opposite. I do not know with any great cer- I missed something in her speech but I do not tainty what it is that those opposite are tar- know what the other side of the chamber has geting to disagree with. What this motion put forward as a solution to these prob- moved by Senator George Campbell refers to lems— as its chief bogeyman is what he terms as the Senator McGauran—Nothing. ‘underlying thrust of the government’s recently announced retirement income meas-

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20891

Senator HUMPHRIES—The answer, as ing each citizen aged 65 years and over. Senator McGauran quite rightly points out, is What will become of the quality of our ser- nothing. We operate in this debate in the ab- vices then? What will be the fate of the ser- sence of any alternative policies from those vices which Labor today in this chamber is opposite. We know they do not like what we supposedly fighting hard to preserve? are talking about. We know they do not like Take, for example, the Pharmaceutical the ‘underlying thrust’ as they put it of the Benefits Scheme. You have been arguing government’s policy paper, but we do not consistently that we should not in any way have the faintest idea of what Labor would reduce the level of subsidy available to the do in its stead. We do not know what they Australian community through the PBS. But would do except, presumably, to return to how do you pay for that when those sorts of their well tried mantra of reduced flexibility demographic changes occur—instead of 5½ in the workplace, make one size fit all and go people approximately to support each retired back to the habits of the past, which clearly person who uses, on average, rather more served Australia very poorly at that time. medicines than other people, you have half Here is the contrast: we have the govern- that number? How do you provide for those ment putting on the table a long-term policy medicines to be available at that price when setting, strategic approaches to Australia’s the number of people supporting the mainte- problems in an attempt to address arguably nance of that scheme through their taxes has the biggest social problem Australia faces halved? How do you do it? In the little time today; and, on the other side of the chamber, that is left in this debate, I would like to hear we have a puerile, absurdly simplistic re- Labor’s answers to those questions. How do sponse to this problem, claiming that the we address the fact that with the current pol- government is talking about forcing people icy settings there would be approximately a to work beyond the age they wish to. You $72 billion deficit between state and federal can almost see the ALP election ads now: an governments in outlays to Australian citizens image of a giant treadmill with elderly peo- by 2040? How do we bridge that gap? How ple being forced onto it by a Peter Costello do we fix that problem? I would like to look-a-like with a whip, little old ladies and know. grannies being forced to work in sweatshops There are a number of approaches that under harsh light, working into the small could be taken and they are outlined in the hours of the morning. The absurdity of the paper the Treasurer has tabled. We can in- simplification we are seeing from the ALP is crease taxes on future generations. We can something that I would not have credited significantly cut government expenditure. would take place in the Australian Senate. We can simply pass the problem on to future But there you go. generations—on to our children and grand- In pouring cold water on this set of initia- children—by running up bigger and bigger tives, the Labor Party downplays the enor- budget deficits. We would need a federal mity of the challenge facing Australia. We deficit in the order of $40 billion a year with have a situation today where about 5.3 peo- no change in settings to cover that gap. Or— ple of work force age support, through taxes, and this is the option that the Treasurer and each person aged 65 years and over, but by the government favour—we can grow our 2043—well within the lifetime of many of us economy. We can be more productive as a in this chamber—that ratio will decrease to society. We can make the economic pie big- about 2½ people of work force age support- ger so it is possible to share more with those

CHAMBER 20892 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 who are no longer able to contribute to its At the same time we need to provide bet- growth. That is a sensible approach and that ter health outcomes for people in older age is what this government has demonstrated in groups so that they have a greater capacity to the last few years it can do. We would like to work if they wish. Poor health leads to early see it continue as a series of policies to de- retirement. In many cases, it leads to spells velop a response to that growing demo- of unemployment, or at least to people losing graphic landmine. their sense of confidence in the workplace, What does the paper that the Treasurer has and that needs to be addressed. Thirty per put on the table actually say? We have not cent of 50- to 65-year-olds who retire in Aus- heard much of that. In particular, we have tralia do so because they have become ill or heard very little from the other side about disabled. We have a number of opportunities what is specifically in the policy to disagree to turn that around. If we can reduce that with. I invite those opposite to latch onto the figure and give people who want to continue things in this paper that they think are inap- to work the option of going further, why propriate and to start to tell us what they shouldn’t we? think is wrong with it. Senator Wong said The second measure referred to is creating she thought the paper was not unreason- better incentives for work—making sure that able—‘not bad’ I think were her words. I am people have the option and are thinking yet to find out what specifically is wrong in about that option, and giving them incentives the paper or the other statements that have to take up that option if that is what they been tabled. Again, I am open to that infor- wish. Around 2.7 million working age Aus- mation being presented to me. tralians are on income support at the present There were three major complementary time—that is, about one in five adults of policy areas that would lift Australia’s labour working age. The challenge for us is to make force participation: improving the capacity sure we design a system to achieve an ap- for people to work, through measures in edu- propriate balance between incentives and cation and in health; providing better incen- assistance where it is required, and obliga- tives for people to work beyond the age at tions that will encourage work force partici- which they otherwise might retire; and pro- pation and assist each person to achieve their viding flexibility in the workplace so that, if full potential. you want to work in a particular way, you The third and very important measure out- have that choice. In relation to the first of lined in the paper is flexibility in the work- those areas—the capacity to work—we now place—that is, being able to make sure that live in a society where people generally un- we have workplaces which are not so struc- derstand that they need to continually up- tured that they discourage people moving grade their skills and engage in some training towards their retirement who wish to work, and development of their understanding of for example, on a part-time basis in different workplace requirements. It happens already. circumstances to others at different stages in The challenge for us is to continue to make their lives. Clearly reducing the amount of that happen, perhaps in greater measure, for regulation, the amount of control and the those in older age groups so they can con- one-size-fits-all model is very important in tribute, if they wish, to the productivity of that respect. Australia’s labour market needs our community. to be flexible enough to address those diverse needs and generate jobs for people who need them. With the low levels of unem-

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20893 ployment and the high work force participa- Australia to be a community with a level of tion rate that Australia enjoys today, it is growth in all age groups is obviously impor- clear that we have the chance to do that. We tant. can make those sorts of changes happen be- I believe that the thrust of what the Treas- cause we are flexible. urer has put on the table is to encourage us to The expectation of my electorate—I can- think of a society for all ages—a society not speak for other electorates—is that peo- which does not consign people to boxes ple want choices. They want to be able to which say that, at a particular stage in your make a decision based on their position, not life, certain things are expected of you and on what someone says to them should hap- you go off and do them—where we say to pen because they have reached a certain individuals in our community, ‘You should milestone in their lives. I have had plenty of be judged on your own capacity and your people come through my door saying: ‘I ambition, and what you want to make of want to keep working, but my workplace your own life.’ We should fashion pathways does not allow it,’ ‘I want to keep working, for those people to the maximum extent pos- but the options are not available to me. What sible. Obviously not every choice can be can you suggest?’ or, ‘I want to take part in taken up—not every person who wants to do this, but it doesn’t seem to be open to people a certain thing will be able to do it—but all at my stage in life.’ The problem is that these too often in the past we have constructed a people are very often up against societal ex- set of expectations that limit people’s real pectations that they do certain things at cer- choices. I believe that what the government tain stages in their lives: ‘You are 55—think has placed on the table is an attempt to break about retiring.’ There is a magic age in the down that model of inflexibility. When I hear public service—is it 54 years and 11 what specifically is wrong with that—not months?—where a large number of people what the members opposite think it can be take retirement because that is the way the caricatured as—then we can have a real de- system has been structured. We need to break bate. Until that point, we are dealing with a the societal expectation that they should do contrast between sensible long-term policy that thing at that time and let them make the making and a very puerile approach which decision for themselves as is determined by seeks to undercut and underplay an ex- their particular set of circumstances. tremely important debate for the Australian It is important for us to acknowledge the community. many factors which are contributing to this Senator HUTCHINS (New South Wales) problem and work out a way of being able to (5.38 p.m.)—There is no doubt that the rea- vary those factors to the extent possible. Ob- son Treasurer Peter Costello decided to make viously, some of those factors are unavoid- an issue of the Intergenerational Report and able and are generally quite desirable in a comment on it at the beginning of this week society like ours. People are living longer— was—as you would know, Mr Acting Deputy technology provides us with a chance to do President, and as I know—that, in the previ- that, drugs do that. We have better education ous sitting of parliament, this government about what sustains a healthy lifestyle into was on the ropes. It was on the ropes not old age—that presents its own set of chal- only in the parliament but in the community. lenges. Birthrates have declined over many That has been testified to by the polls that years, and some people are taking up that continue to trickle out daily, showing how challenge in their own way. To encourage much on the nose it is. So it was decided, no

CHAMBER 20894 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 doubt by PM Central, that what should be I am assured is over 45. What happens in the done is to see if somehow or other the debate work force when you get to that magical could be put onto a plane where the govern- age? If you become unemployed, get re- ment would look like it is taking the high trenched or get terminated, you have no moral ground. chance of finding employment. Do you know Then we had to be treated to the spectacle what happens then? Because the government of the Treasurer on the Insiders program. I wanted to fiddle the figures, over the last few have to say it was a spectacle—someone years they have progressively transferred should talk to the Treasurer about how he men, mainly, onto disability pensions. So should dress when he goes on Insiders. I when the Treasurer gets on the Insiders pro- gather he is from inner city Melbourne but, gram and says, ‘I’m worried about this,’ he with the sort of gear he put on, he looked like should have been worried about it a long he came from Senator McGauran’s electorate time ago. That is what has been happening to out there in western Victoria. How he was mature age workers. When they have been dressed made me take notice, but I took more retrenched, particularly from semiskilled, notice of what he was saying. I knew why he low-skilled or unskilled positions, they can- was saying it—because they wanted to, at not find employment. Where are the jobs? some point or another, try to get this high Where are the jobs for the young people, let moral ground. That has not worked, because alone the mature aged? They are not there. we jerried to it the moment the Treasurer That is what the government have done over said it—and not only us but thousands and the last few years, particularly with regard to thousands of Australians. We knew exactly disability pensions. They have made sure what they were on about. They want to make that the unemployment rate is 5.8 per cent, I sure, when they get their grubby little hands think, now. But if they put in those men and on it, that Australians will not have any women that they bodgied onto that disability choice—they will not have any choice, Sena- pension, they would find the rate would in- tor Humphries and Senator Ferris—and will crease significantly. have to work until they drop. As far as choice goes, what sort of choice I would like to know what choice the do men and women who are unemployed thousands and thousands of Australians who now have, particularly mature age workers? are unemployed now have. My immediate As I said, there are thousands of mature age reaction to the Treasurer’s statement on Sun- workers out there who are looking for em- day was this: because we have this problem ployment now. In January 2004, 1.2 per cent with employment in the future, we need to of the labour force was long-term unem- make people work longer. My question to ployed—about 21.4 per cent of the unem- him is: what about the people who have got ployment rate. Half of those long-term un- no work now? There are thousands and thou- employed have been seeking work for over sands of people out there who are looking for two years. The mature age people seeking work and cannot find it. employment now are not able to get it, let alone young people. So where is the plan for I found equally offensive the statement the future? If we cannot do something about that the Treasurer made in relation to people our mature age unemployed people now, on disability pensions. Every one of the men what are we going to be doing in 20 years that has spoken in this debate is over 45, and time? Are they all going to be working in call I will be followed by Senator Lightfoot, who centres? It seems to be the buzz for a lot of

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20895 people. Are we going to train people from poverty and financial hardship. We heard being in semiskilled or skilled labour force from the Tasmanian Poverty Coalition and occupations to put them to answering tele- the Physical Disability Council of Australia phones? that, if we added up all the unpaid overtime Most of us on this side who came from hours worked in 2002, there would not be union backgrounds worked in blue-collar one unemployed person in this country. But industries before that. None of us, and none that is the choice we have been given by this of the men that we worked with in that pe- government. People are working longer now riod, would be capable of continuing in those and not getting paid for it because of the in- hard jobs. People would not be able to con- dustrial relations laws introduced by this tinue to work in metal shops, on trucks, on government. You have given the boss the building sites or in mines, like Senator choice; you have not given the employees Lightfoot. We are not capable after a certain any choice. You have weakened their bar- age; we just cannot physically do it. What is gaining position and you have forced them to this government’s answer to the mature age their knees. long-term unemployed? We are waiting for The worst thing that is happening in the it. current environment, and which I would like All we saw last Sunday was some public- the government to take note of, is the growth ity stunt by the Treasurer to try to set the of labour hire firms. As I said, we have had agenda for the week. We jerried to it, like significant growth in casual employment and thousands of Australians did, and we knew part-time employment; now we have this immediately that this was a con. I ask the other growth of labour hire agencies. I have government to answer this: where are the seen so many men—mainly men—go and jobs? The only jobs that have been created work in these organisations. The situation is since the eighties are casual jobs. Casual similar to the hungry mile, except for the fact employment has increased by 68 per cent. that you do not queue up one after the other; Full-time employment for that same period you wait in a queue on the telephone. These increased by only 5.3 per cent. Where are the people have no rights, no guarantees and no jobs? Are you really going to have all these permanent work. That is what is happening mature age employees and mature age un- now in our country. employed working in call centres in various I would have taken more from what the parts of Australia? The jobs are not there Treasurer and the government said and I now. You have not answered the question might have believed they were addressing about what these men and women are going some of these problems, except for the fact to do now, let alone in the future. Full-time, that we have these problems now and they permanent jobs have disappeared—and they have no answer to these problems now. The have disappeared significantly under your only choice people have is to be employed in government. The jobs are not there now for casual or part-time jobs or labour hire agen- unemployed men and women, let alone in cies, if they are lucky. I want to remind peo- the future. ple of the Australian Bureau of Statistics I was fortunate enough to head an inquiry definition of an ‘unemployed person’—and I held in the last year or so into poverty and think it probably goes back to when we were financial hardship, and I can tell you that we in power. The ABS defines an ‘unemployed saw some terrible examples of people in person’ as a person over 15 years of age who has worked less than one hour a week in a

CHAMBER 20896 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 surveyed week, has been actively looking for did not put people on disability pensions work and is currently available for work. when it was warranted—and it is warranted; How bodgie would this figure of 5.8 per cent they go through a process that is quite trans- be, particularly if you added in the number of parent with respect to their bona fides—we people the government put onto the disability could well and truly be condemned for not pension or the number of men and women doing it. The motivation attributed to us put- who have just given up? I would be more ting people on disability pensions is rather than interested in this if the government were puzzling. He said it was to lower the unem- fair dinkum about addressing the problems ployment figure. we have now, but they are not. This was just The fact is that wages have never been a publicity stunt by the Treasurer so that he higher. Wage growth has never been higher might set the agenda. than it is with this government. Pension I am very concerned that the government payments have never been higher than they have embarked on this path because, as I are with this government. National debt has said, I—along with Senator Humphries—had never been lower. We have lowered it from the opportunity of seeing first-hand poverty $100 billion, which is what it was when we and financial hardship in this country. The came to government in 1996, to about $35 government would get more credit from us if billion. We have one of the lowest debt to they started to address the problems now GDP ratios of the OECD countries. I think it rather than being high-minded and giving is about five per cent. By contrast, Japan’s is answers for the future. They do not have an 130 per cent and the United States’s is about answer to the problems now. They do not 35 per cent. They are extraordinary figures. have an answer for mature age unemployed If we had disabled people being bodgied people now. How can we be confident that onto the unemployment list, I wonder what they will have an answer in the future? We the result would be. We would have fewer cannot because they do not have the answer. people on disabilities and more people on This was just a stunt by the Treasurer to put unemployment. I do not think that is valid. It himself up in lights, and the government is a point, but I do not think it is valid. I can hoped the Australian community would think also remember when the ALP government they were being high-minded and morally was in power and unemployment was 12 per bound. As I said, it was a stunt. We jerried to cent. I remember when I was paying 23 per it and so did the Australian community. cent interest to Elders Smith and Wesfarmers Senator LIGHTFOOT (Western Austra- and Dalgety; 23 per cent interest to keep my lia) (5.50 p.m.)—I listened to the lead stations going. Times are good: people have speaker on this motion from the other side, never been wealthier and pensions have Senator George Campbell, and his high deci- never been higher, but we are going to do bel twaddle about what the government was better. doing, what it should do and what it was not We are going to let people of my age and doing. The fact is that Australians have never younger and older have a choice about retir- been wealthier. We have the lowest unem- ing. I am 67 and I am not ashamed of that. I ployment rate in many years—certainly since am not in bad nick for 67; I reckon I have got the seventies. Incidentally, I was a bit puz- another 30 or 40 years ahead of me, and I zled by my friend on the other side Senator want to be able to make the choice as to Hutchins, who railed against the fact that so whether I work or not. I would like to be the many people are on disability pensions. If we

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20897

Senator Strom Thurmond of the Australian But over the next 40 years, Australia’s parliament. Senator Strom Thurmond made population is going to go through a major one big mistake: he was 101 when he retired change. A greater proportion of the popula- from the United States Senate and he died tion will be older because people are living within six months. That is a lesson for eve- longer and birthrates have declined over ryone here, Senator O’Brien and Senator many years. There will be an increasing Crossin: do not retire, because if you do the number of older people to support and fewer Grim Reaper is going to come along and get people of work force age to provide that you. I do not want to see the Grim Reaper; I support. There is no need to panic about that do not even want to see a sign of his scythe. because, even in developing countries, the This government is giving Australians a world is becoming more automated. We pro- choice as to whether they want to work or duce more today, with fewer people, than we not in the years that are ahead of them. We ever have in our lives. There are more con- give them that choice because work is good sumers in the world today. Look at the phe- for you. Homo sapiens are actually designed nomenal growth of the People’s Republic of to work; they are not designed to have seden- China this year of nine per cent on an annu- tary jobs or positions all of their lives. But alised basis. Look at our growth; of all the that is the choice we are giving you. We are OECD countries, except the United States, not saying you have to work; we are saying India and China, our growth is slightly over here is the choice. Isn’t life about choice? Of four per cent. Not bad for a government that course it is. It is wonderful to have a gov- is continually denigrated by those on the ernment like this that shows consideration to other side and that participates in this wealth every level of life, particularly to the eld- and which is produced by one of the best erly—I am in that category and I am not systems in the world. ashamed to say that—and shows some re- We are not totally different from Canadi- ward for the efforts of our older people who ans or those in the United States or the Brit- have made this country what it is. This gov- ish Isles or Europeans, or a lot of other peo- ernment did not make it; it is a whole host of ple around the world, but it is our system of previous governments that presided over this government that allows us to enjoy the stan- country and made it the envy of the world. dard of living that we have. We should not I came back from Taiwan the other day. It forget that and we should not denigrate it and is a great country. It does a wonderful job in run it down. It is a great system. We have that part of the world; it is a beacon shining had good governments and we have had bad in what is often a dark cave in that part of the governments, but overall we have had an world. Its average per capita income is about average of very good governments—that is US$12,000 across the 23 million people on why ours is one of the greatest nations in the island. Not good, one would say, but which to live. That is why Australia is one of compared to its big neighbour next door, the the oldest continuous democracies in the PRC, they are good results. But what about world. It is a young country. In 1788 it was a Australia? The average per capita income in most inhospitable country and it was not a Australia is over $30,000—great figures in particularly brilliant group of people to start Australia—and pensions are one of the high- a country off with but, more than 220 or 230 est-paid in the world. Our pensions are years later, this is one of the best countries in greater than 25 per cent of the average male which to live. The government is very con- income in Australia. scious of the fact that the elderly have played

CHAMBER 20898 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 the major role in the development of this Senator Crossin to take note of document country. agreed to. This government and the Treasurer, Peter Department of Immigration and Multi- Costello, are going to make sure that the eld- cultural and Indigenous Affairs—Report for 2002-03. Motion of the Leader of the erly are looked after. We are not only going Australian Democrats (Senator Bartlett) to to look after them; we are also going to give take note of document agreed to. them the choice of whether they want to Wet Tropics Management Authority— work part-time or full-time or whether they Report for 2002-03. Motion of the Leader want to take advantage of their superannua- of the Australian Democrats (Senator tion system and the safety net that is under it, Bartlett) to take note of document agreed which this government endorses, promotes to. and has fostered to the point where it is one Great Barrier Reef Marine Park of the best in the world. Authority—Report for 2002-03. Motion of Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (5.59 the Leader of the Australian Democrats p.m.)—I also join this debate and endorse the (Senator Bartlett) to take note of document comments of the previous speaker, who was agreed to. proud enough to put his age on the Hansard Migration Review Tribunal—Report for record. None of us ever believed Ross 2002-03. Motion of the Leader of the Lightfoot was that age. However, we do not Australian Democrats (Senator Bartlett) to take note of document agreed to. wish him to stay as long as his US Senate counterpart. The debate today has shown the Refugee Review Tribunal—Report for opposition to be bereft of policy. To put for- 2002-03. Motion of the Leader of the Australian Democrats (Senator Bartlett) to ward a general business notice of motion on take note of document agreed to. a Thursday and debate it provides an opportunity to have a full debate, with every Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission—Report for 2002-03. Motion speaker having 20 minutes in which to of Senator Crossin to take note of speak. Yet, during each 20 minutes of the document called on. Debate adjourned till opposition’s contribution, we never heard Thursday at general business, Senator one alternative policy. The time is coming Crossin in continuation. closer—it is an election year—when sooner Indigenous education and training— or later the opposition is going to have to put National report to Parliament 2002. Motion down its policies in this chamber. The oppo- of Senator Crossin to take note of sition cannot constantly attack a government document called on. Debate adjourned till who has the courage to put down a policy. Thursday at general business, Senator Crossin in continuation. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Ferguson)—Order! The time for Migration Agents Registration Authority— the debate has expired. Report for 2002-03. Motion of the Leader of the Australian Democrats (Senator DOCUMENTS Bartlett) to take note of document agreed Consideration to. The following orders of the day relating to List of multilateral treaty actions under government documents were considered: negotiation, consideration or review by the Australian Government as at December Department of the Environment and 2003. Motion of the Leader of the Heritage—Report for 2002-03. Motion of

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20899

Australian Democrats (Senator Bartlett) to 116th report of the Committee of take note of document agreed to. Privileges—agreed to. United Nations—Convention on the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Legislation Committee—Report—Aust- Against Women—Women in Australia: ralian Wool Innovation Limited: Applic- Australia’s combined fourth and fifth ation and expenditure of funds advanced reports on implementing the Convention. under Statutory Funding Agreement dated Motion of Senator Stott Despoja to take 31 December 2000. Motion of the chair of note of document called on. On the motion the committee (Senator Heffernan) to take of Senator Crossin debate was adjourned note of report agreed to. till Thursday at general business. Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2000— References Committee—Report—Voting Renewable opportunities: A review of the on trade: The General Agreement on Trade operation of the Renewable Energy in Services and an Australia-US free trade (Electricity) Act 2000, September 2003. agreement. Motion of the chair of the Motion to take note of document moved by committee (Senator Cook) to take note of Senator Murphy. Debate adjourned till report agreed to. Thursday at general business, Senator DOCUMENTS Murphy in continuation. Consideration Commonwealth Grants Commission— Report—State revenue sharing The following orders of the day relating to relativities—2004 review. Motion of reports of the Auditor-General were consid- Senator Buckland to take note of document ered: agreed to. Auditor-General—Audit report no. 16 of General business orders of the day nos 12 to 2003-04—Performance audit—Adminis- 15 and 17 to 24 relating to government tration of consular services follow-up documents were called on but no motion was audit: Department of Foreign Affairs and moved. Trade. Motion of Senator Hogg to take COMMITTEES note of document agreed to. Consideration Auditor-General—Audit report no. 24 of 2003-04—Performance audit—Agency The following orders of the day relating to management of special accounts. Motion committee reports and government responses of Senator Buckland to take note of were considered: document agreed to. Economics References Committee— Orders of the day nos 3 to 8 relating to reports Report—The effectiveness of the Trade of the Auditor-General were called on but no Practices Act 1974 in protecting small motion was moved. business. Motion of the chair of the ADJOURNMENT committee (Senator Stephens) to take note of report agreed to. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT Privileges—Standing Committee—116th (Senator Ferguson)—Order! There being no report—Possible improper interference further consideration of committee reports, with a witness before the Rural and government responses and Auditor-General’s Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation reports, I propose the question: Committee. Motion of the chair of the That the Senate do now adjourn. committee (Senator Ray)—That the Senate endorse the finding at paragraph 28 of the

CHAMBER 20900 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

Agriculture: Wheat lion tonnes coming from canola, barley and Senator JOHNSTON (Western Australia) lupins. Western Australia’s tally was more (6.05 p.m.)—Tonight I want to talk about the than double that of the next productive state, fact that life on the land has been particularly South Australia, with 6.5 million tonnes, fol- difficult during the last several years with lowed by New South Wales with 5.15 mil- drought conditions gripping vast areas of our lion tonnes; Victoria with 4.5 million tonnes country. Indeed, these drought conditions and Queensland with just a fraction over one have been so severe that last year the total million tonnes. national wheat production fell below 10 mil- What has helped Western Australian lion tonnes. Tonight I bring to the Senate a growers tremendously has been CBH’s ef- good news agricultural story. Wheat growers forts in promoting the state’s reputation as a have now completed this season’s harvest grower of high-quality grain and in develop- and production has increased from 9.7 mil- ing a close working partnership with the lion tonnes to an expected 25 million tonnes. marketers of the various grain pools, particu- This has been a fantastic result for a vast larly the Australian Wheat Board. This close number of our growers; especially those and successful working and professional re- growers in my home state of Western Austra- lationship has enabled grain cargoes to be lia. I pause, Mr Acting Deputy President, to sourced, assembled and shipped in record spare a thought for those growers in the time. I am informed by CBH that three ship- northern parts of New South Wales and the ping records have been established so far this north-west and the southern areas of Queen- year in clearing the record harvest from ports sland where the struggle against low rainfall in Western Australia, an achievement for continues. which CBH and the Australian Wheat Board Western Australia has led the way with can be very proud. this season’s result, seeing a crop of quite CBH has shifted a total of 1,330,881 ton- extraordinary proportions. This harvest has nes of grain from its four export terminals in easily been the best result ever for Western Albany, Geraldton, Esperance and Kwinana Australia and highlights the successful com- during the hectic January period. On 5 Feb- bination of productivity, technology and in- ruary MV Oriental loaded a record 41,800 novation by farmers with a solid rainfall tonnes of wheat at the mid-west port of Ger- coming at the right time. At last count there aldton, which is approximately 400 kilome- had been a grain harvest in Western Australia tres north of Perth. The previous record of of 14.7 million tonnes, which was triple the 39,166 tonnes was achieved in December drought stricken yield of 5.2 million tonnes 1999. The third record saw a total of 574,379 of last year and far exceeded the previous tonnes of barley, lupins, canola, field peas record of 12.2 million tonnes in the 1999- and oats exported in January. The previous 2000 season. record was 459,477 tonnes, which was CBH or Cooperative Bulk Handling, our achieved in 1998. grain handler in Western Australia, has esti- Through these record shippings in De- mated the final tally to be 15 million tonnes cember and January, we have seen the suc- when the final deliveries of storage grain are cessful export of close to one million tonnes taken to the receival points. Of the 15 million of grain with a value of approximately $200 tonnes it is expected that 11 million tonnes million. The significance of this record ship- will be wheat with the remaining four mil- ping activity is that, with efficient through-

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20901 put, CBH has been able to accommodate has appreciated by 30 per cent since this time record deliveries, particularly from the south last year—and concerns that this apprecia- of the state, and to plan with confidence for tion would seriously erode returns that they the storage and marketing of next year’s har- would receive this year. Whilst they are not vest. This planning is absolutely essential as, going to receive the high prices that they had with another favourable season coupled with received several years ago when the Austra- the overall trend of increasing yields, we lian dollar was at a record low, they are could see a further increase in overall pro- nonetheless relieved to hear that they are duction. now going to receive a price that has not The Chief Executive Officer of CBH, Mr been discounted by the full 30 per cent of the Imre Mencshelyi, when reflecting on this appreciated value of the Australian dollar. year’s harvest, said that in 1996 he confi- I must also commend and congratulate the dently predicted that by the year 2005 West- Australian Wheat Board on its chartering ern Australia would produce a 15 million- skill in obtaining the necessary shipping ton- tonne harvest. Of course, many were scepti- nage in a maritime cargo market which has cal of such a prediction, especially last year seen the runaway Chinese economy absorb when the total harvest did not even reach 10 all excess capacity in cargo tonnage, making million tonnes. So confident is Mr Mencshe- life very difficult for all Australian exporters. lyi with the capacity of CBH’s capabilities, Overall, I believe that this result is a credit to he is now aiming to have the organisation the Australian Wheat Board, which has mar- move to world’s best practice by being able keted Australian wheat aggressively and po- to receive a figure of 15 million tonnes in a sitioned Australia as a reliable supplier of 21-day period in Western Australia. He also high-quality grain in what is a highly com- confidently predicts that by the year 2020 petitive and quite cut-throat market. Austra- Western Australia will be producing a har- lia guards its reputation as a reliable supplier vest of some 25 million tonnes, equal to the of high-quality grain to the world. total production achieved by the whole of I pause to note that the AWB officers have Australia in this record year. This is a tre- recently acted very quickly and very profes- mendous result for WA grain growers and it sionally in addressing a particular problem has resulted in a significant boost for the lo- that has arisen with a shipment of wheat to cal economy, with growers already in receipt Pakistan. On 20 and 21 February, PASSCO, of a record $715 million by the end of Janu- the buying arm of the Pakistani government, ary. This is $100 million more than payments rejected the first two cargoes of a 150,000- received by farmers and growers at the same tonne consignment of Australian wheat, time in previous years. claiming the wheat had not met quality The Australian Wheat Board has in the specifications and particularly specifying last few weeks announced further heartening that it was contaminated with a fungus called news for grain growers, with an estimated Karnal bunt. Karnal bunt is not known to price for the benchmark Australian premium occur in Australia and, in accord with AWB’s white wheat of between $190 and $200 per rigid quality assurance controls, the wheat tonne and an estimated $220 to $230 per was tested before shipment and found to be tonne for durum wheat. This news has been disease free and above the specified quality warmly received by growers who, despite the standards. Thankfully, the Australian Wheat bumper harvest this year, have had niggling Board has a stringent quality assurance proc- doubts about the Australian dollar—which ess, and I can assure senators that claims that

CHAMBER 20902 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 the cargoes do not meet specifications can be year are considerable and provide the wel- completely repudiated. come shot in the arm that is needed to re- This matter has been taken very seriously energise country towns and communities. by both the Australian Wheat Board and the From my visits to grain growing areas I am government, as Australia’s worldwide repu- told that the order books are close to full for tation as a reliable supplier of high-quality new machinery bristling with world’s best grain is at issue. I understand that Australia’s technology. With farmers buying the latest high commissioner in Pakistan, Mr Howard and best machinery, they are steadily increas- Brown, has made a series of high-level rep- ing their capacity to increase the yields from resentations to senior Pakistani government their crops. Hopefully we will be able to see figures underlining our concern at the rejec- Mr Imre Mencshelyi’s prediction come to tion of the cargoes and the need to resolve fruition with a future crop in Western Austra- the matter quickly, correctly and completely. lia that reaches the 25 million-tonne figure. Officials from the Australian Wheat Board Veterans: Entitlements and the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries Senator MARK BISHOP (Western Aus- and Forestry are now in Pakistan working tralia) (6.14 p.m.)—I rise tonight to speak to with the Australian High Commission, the the government’s response to the review of importer of the wheat and the Pakistani au- veterans’ entitlements, conducted by Mr Jus- thorities to resolve this matter as quickly as tice Clarke in 2002. The Prime Minister’s possible. announcement last Monday did one thing for There has been a high degree of continu- veterans and war widows in this country. It ing cooperation between the two govern- brought to a stale end the total hoax that has ments in clearly establishing that Karnal bunt been perpetrated. This review has been a is not known to occur in Australia. On this quite unnecessary exercise. The government occasion, the wheat was tested before ship- has deliberately dithered for over 12 months. ment and found to be disease free and, im- Finally, we have an outcome, none of portantly, above the specified quality stan- which is a surprise. The government knew dards for gluten and so on. The wheat was the issues, they knew the solutions and they tested by the importer, whose samples were always knew the costs. All they have done is taken at the same time as PASSCO’s, and sweep the big problems into a bag and give it found to be disease free and above the con- a shake. They have carefully selected some tracted quality standards. Thankfully, the remedies to the problems which were caus- Karnal bunt issue is close to resolution, as ing them the most political grief. Now, after the Pakistani government, as recently as yes- the revolt of the backbench, we have a fresh terday, has agreed to resample and retest the approach. Veterans need to know that of the Australian wheat previously rejected against 109 recommendations, about 42 recom- claims that the wheat had not met quality mended no change. Those, of course, are specifications and was contaminated with the very easy to accept. Of the rest, our estimate fungus. is that the government have accepted only In conclusion, I am extremely grateful that seven. Western Australian grain growers have had a Let us look at the issues covered in the re- wonderful year after several seasons that port and the government’s response. To behave severely tested their mettle. The flow- gin with, the government clearly rejected in on benefits to rural communities from a good total all the recommendations with respect to

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20903 qualifying service. The question now is: why the last three or four years. At least part of did the government even include the matter that discrimination has been removed, but in the terms of reference? The answer is: to the anomaly for prisoners of war incarcer- buy some peace and quiet. There was never ated in Europe remains on the books. They ever the slightest intention of changing pol- are entitled to be angry, and the Howard icy with respect to qualifying service. By far government’s responsibility is to address and away the largest group of representations their legitimate concerns. to Justice Clarke were about extending eligi- Justice Clarke also made extensive rec- bility for access to the gold card. As we ommendations concerning rehabilitation. know, Justice Clarke rejected all efforts to do This has been an area of serious default on so. The next group was war widows. As we the part of the Repatriation Commission for know, the government has now crumbled to many years. The amount of rehabilitation, the pressure of its own backbench with re- particularly vocational rehabilitation, under- spect to war widows. Rent assistance has taken for younger veterans is negligible. This been restored to all of those widows on low is equally true for those persons discharged means via the income support supplement. from the Australian defence forces. In fact it As with all other measures, the Labor Party is tragic that each year 2,000 veterans suc- fully supports this proposal. In fact, it might ceed in gaining a totally and permanently equally have been taken from the current incapacitated pension because they cannot ALP platform, released in January this year work eight hours. They are simply paid and after the last national conference. never ever considered for any retraining or However, nothing has been done about any assistance which might address their younger widows denied the income support plight. For those who are young, it is nothing supplement. They will continue to be the other than a poverty trap for the rest of their most needy veterans and war widows. Nor lives. It is pleasing therefore to see that the will anything be done about those who issue of rehabilitation has been addressed in served with BCOF in Japan after World War the new legislation before the parliament. It II. Atomic veterans might be optimistic, but is pleasing that the government has agreed to the government knew before it wrote the some elements of the TPI Federation’s cam- terms of reference that it could do nothing. It paign for changes to the benefits for TPIs. had already commissioned a cancer and mor- We support the indexation of the above tality study. Again, another stall. Likewise, general rate of the special rate as a means of the same applies to the SAS Regiment and preventing further erosion, although we all others who believe their peacetime train- know that the TPIs are not happy with the ing and exercises are worthy of greater re- splitting of their special rate. There is in fact ward or recognition. There was never ever a contradiction with respect to the indexation the slightest intent of changing policy with of the above general rate portion of the spe- respect to these groups. All we have is the cial rate. Only that portion which is deemed extension of operational service to some to be economic compensation is to be in- groups who should have been recognised dexed by CPI or MTAWE, whichever is the many years ago. The government always greater. The question then is: why wasn’t it knew about them. Some have been recog- also split for the Centrelink exemption? Here nised. Another group is the ex-prisoners of the special rate, as a whole, has not been war from Korea. They, like POWs from treated as income. I make no comment on the Europe, have felt discriminated against for merit of splitting the special rate, but some

CHAMBER 20904 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 consistency would be more than useful in It should be a matter of great pride to the policy terms. TPI Federation that the government have Is it any wonder that the government’s capitulated in part. For the federation, policy is in such a mess with this erratic and though, it does not go far enough. The ex- inconsistent approach? Is it any wonder that emption of disability pensions from the veterans are confused? Is it any wonder that means test at Centrelink is also a victory and the department and the Minister for Family reflects well on their organisation. It is a vic- and Community Services refused to amend tory too for the ALP because, for the last five the relevant act, the Social Security Act? or six years at least, we have been arguing This is why there is no exemption at all from for this particular issue to be resolved. Twice the means test at Centrelink. Instead, veter- in the last five years the government have ans are to be paid a new allowance of rejected our amendments to bills in the Sen- equivalent value by DVA. This will entail ate to bring this about. added complexity and additional cost. This is This is good policy because it addresses the result of ministerial and bureaucratic in- need. The 950 TPIs I have mentioned are eptitude. Wouldn’t it be refreshing if we had, simply a case in point. A large number of for once, a whole-of-government approach to beneficiaries will be people who enlisted for this issue? World War II but who did not serve overseas. Flowing from this is another concern that They are now on the age pension, so this veterans will have with the package—that is, might be interpreted as late recognition. We the dilution of qualifying service. There is welcome the announcements, but they fall also an element of this dilution in the MRCS way short of meeting veterans’ needs. bills currently before the Senate. TPIs with- Health: Organ Donation out qualifying service are treated the same as Senator BARTLETT (Queensland— those TPIs with qualifying service. While we Leader of the Australian Democrats) (6.23 welcome and support the proposal to help the p.m.)—I would like to speak briefly tonight TPI community, we are surprised at the about organ donation, which has been getting backflip on the part of the government, espe- some well-deserved publicity and has been cially given the venom and contempt which the subject of community debate in recent has been directed at this group. times. I note today’s comments by the Na- The Minister for Veterans’ Affairs has tional President of the Australian Medical been running a campaign now against the Association, Dr Bill Glasson, calling on fed- TPI Federation for in excess of two years. eral politicians to show true leadership in the When the TPIs were in Canberra last June, community by signing on as organ donors. neither the minister nor the Prime Minister This issue is both simple and complex at the could make the effort to walk 200 metres and same time. I think many if not most people spend some time with the group. The minis- recognise the simple logic in becoming an ter constantly insisted that TPIs are very well organ donor and enabling their organs to be off, earning around $1,900 per fortnight. available to people who might need them if, Since then, we have noted in the media that per chance, they happen to not need them the minister, at least, has the grace to admit themselves anymore. At the same time, that only 2.8 per cent of TPIs are in this whilst that might seem simple and logical category. from a utilitarian perspective, a lot of people, often for reasons they are not really sure of,

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20905 feel an innate aversion to donating their or- self. A lot of people in varying ways natu- gans. It is an aspect that people can feel un- rally feel that part of their self continues on comfortable with in a subconscious way after they die, and I think that links with without necessarily being fully clear as to some of the reasons why people feel innately why they are uncomfortable. uncomfortable with the idea. Speaking as The fact that Australia has one of the low- someone who is not particularly religious or est organ donation rates in the world, as Dr even particularly spiritual by most defini- Glasson said—according to his figures it is tions of the word, despite that it is still an just nine per million of population in 2003— innate feeling that I myself have. is probably an indication that a lot of Austra- When people are encouraged to think lians do have that unease about the issue. about organ donation from the other way That figure is not even a third of the figure of round, about a part of themselves living on a country like Spain, for example. If people through others after they die, it becomes a are encouraged to think through the issues, to much more positive thing, rather than some- talk through the issues and to consider the thing that people begrudgingly feel they reality behind organ donation rather than just should do because it is the right thing. High- the bad feelings about it, I think the rate of lighting aspects such as the number of people donation would increase significantly. That is who could be helped by even one donor is a why the recent community debate about the good way to demonstrate the positive nature issue is very welcome and very important. of what is in one respect a very simple gift Speaking personally, I have to say that to but in another respect is quite a major gift for date I had not signed up as an organ donor, people to give: actually donating part of perhaps for those sorts of reasons. I had not themselves to someone else. given it a lot of thought. It is something that I I would like to add my voice to the calls did not feel comfortable with, for reasons I by others in the community to encourage was not really sure about, and I did not get people to think further about signing on as round to thinking any further about it. The organ donors. It is something that I have encouragement we are getting from the made the decision to do as a consequence of community debate and from people like Dr the community debate. There was no one Glasson to think through those issues a bit specific light bulb that went on in my head; further and to encourage others to do so is rather, it was just part of a gradual considera- very welcome. As Dr Glasson said, in 2002 tion of the issue and, I guess, a response to in our country 107 patients died while await- Dr Glasson’s call for federal MPs to show ing organ transplants. When you consider leadership in this area. I would like to add that one donor can help up to 32 people, a lot my voice to encourage others in the commu- could be achieved even with a small increase nity to do likewise and to encourage them to in the number of people who are willing to at least think about organ donation. I do donate organs. think it is important to do so in a positive One aspect that is important to emphasise way and for people to perceive this as a gift is the way people feel about organ donation. that they consciously choose to give. Obviously, in many respects people naturally One aspect I am concerned about is the feel a particular affinity or ownership with suggestion that we should perhaps make or- their organs, their own physical body, as an gan donations automatic, unless people con- integral part of themselves and their sense of sciously opt out. Whilst I am sure these sug-

CHAMBER 20906 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 gestions are made with the best possible in- If people want a nice visual demonstration tention, I think it would be quite counterpro- of the positive symbolism of organ donation, ductive. I saw comments by Senator Brown they might like to see the movie Jesus of in the Hobart Mercury today in which he Montreal, which has a component at the end supported moves to have opt out legislation of the story involving donations of organs under which everyone’s organs would auto- and the positive and symbolic aspects as well matically be available for donation unless as the very real, practical, physical benefits it they had specifically indicated they did not can bring to other people’s lives. It is not just want that to happen. While that is well inten- the gift of life but also the gift of sight. It is tioned, I think it would be unwise, very in- not just the difference between living and appropriate really, and also counterproduc- dying but also it is about giving someone a tive. better quality of life. I think that most Aus- It is a very personal issue almost by defi- tralians would be very comfortable with try- nition. I do not think it would be helpful to ing to do what we can to ensure that every- people to feel that their organs were just body has a better quality of life or indeed the there to be automatically harvested by the opportunity to continue to experience life in government or the state as soon as they hap- the face of threats to the contrary. I support pen to die. The idea that people would have Dr Glasson’s call for the community to think the power to simply move in and take some- of it in that way and I encourage them to add one’s organs regardless of the views of the themselves, as I have chosen to do, to the family, simply because that person had not growing list of Australians who are willing filled in a form, is not a perception or a real- to provide that gift should the unfortunate ity of organ donation that would be at all eventuality occur when the opportunity to helpful for people to experience or think was give it might become available. part of the issue. It really should be a con- St Vincent de Paul Society: Book Launch scious choice and a gift, rather than some- Senator HOGG (Queensland) (6.33 thing that people are compelled to do unless p.m.)—I rise briefly this evening to talk they get around to consciously choosing to about an event I was involved in last Friday, do otherwise. the launch of a book entitled Chronicles from Whilst I support the encouragement for the Edge. The launch took place in the sub- people to sign up for organ donation, I ex- urb of Woolloongabba in Brisbane. It was press my opposition to the proposal that has the launch at the diocesan level of the Catho- been put forward to have automatic donation lic Church in Brisbane, but the book was of organs unless a person states otherwise. I launched on a broader basis on 14 November note criticisms in that same article in the last year. The launch last Friday targeted Hobart Mercury from a University of Tas- specifically the Brisbane region. They in- mania lecturer in ethics, Professor Newell, volved me in the project, and I was only too who pointed out some of the ethical prob- pleased to be involved. The book was made lems with that. Our organs are indeed our possible by a grant from the Department of own property, not the property of the state or Immigration and Multicultural and Indige- anybody else. They should be something we nous Affairs from the Living in Harmony choose to donate rather than something that initiative’s community grants program. is just harvested from us by automatic gov- The project was undertaken by the St Vin- ernment fiat regardless of what our own cent de Paul Society. As a result, the book is views might be.

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20907 not for sale as such, as it is a not-for-profit erra Leone who might be the subject of re- organisation. The project’s editorial team prisals. I will quote from a couple of sections sought contributions from young people, from the story, so that people can get an idea including those who were refugees and mi- of the flavour of the lifestyle that this woman grants. The team conducted a series of com- left to come and seek haven in Australia. She munity based workshops to assist in the col- says: lection of the stories for the book. The inter- My role was in sensitising the population on gen- esting thing is that the editorial committee der violence and female circumcision … did very little to alter the sense of what was She goes on: written by the contributors to the book. The During the time they are doing the initiation for project was ably coordinated by Jim Wilkin- the circumcision they use only the one weapon son. The St Vincent de Paul web site, which (instrument) to circumcise the 50, 60 even 100 outlines a bit about the book, sums up what women, this is done without sterilising or even the project was about. It says: changing the weapon. So, through this we thought This publication seeks to provide the reader with that we could come to the rescue of young girls, a unique insight into the private thoughts and knowing that everyone of them was at risk of emotions of writers from diverse cultural back- getting the Aids virus through the use of only the grounds as they made their way to Australia. one instrument. I thought it was worth while to dwell on the She then goes on to say how, because of her book for a moment tonight, so that Austra- activity in trying to save young girls in Sierra lians who do not know about this fine pro- Leone, she and her husband—obviously, duction might have an appreciation of the they were politically active—then became work done by St Vincent de Paul as a result the target of the ruling government of the of the grant they received from DIMIA. It is day. In a very stark statement she says: worth while looking at the foreword, because During that time, my husband was arrested and it states: tortured and then they cut off his head. They then The initiative is designed so that Australians turned to me and asked me to laugh at their cru- everywhere can play their part in the continual elty. But I didn’t know whether I should have forming of our society and to challenge all Aus- laughed or whether I should have cried. I was tralians to: dumbfounded ... take a stand against racism, prejudice and intoler- Obviously, she came out of a very violent ance; background and went through a great deal of help build a peaceful and productive future for trauma, as one reads in the rest of her story. our children by setting an example of how to live The conclusion of her story sums up how in harmony, making the most of our racial, cul- wonderful a country we really have, for she tural, social and religious diversity; and says: put into practice the best of traditional Australian Here in Australia you do not hear gun shots, no- values—justice, equality, fairness and friendship. body searches our pockets, and nobody asks me The book then goes on to relate a number of what I eat, or what I do for the day, like in Africa. stories. Unfortunately, the first story that you So let us love Australia, take care of it, let us be watch dogs, and watch over our country, and pray run into is probably the worst in the book for it. because it is the story of a woman from Si- erra Leone who was born in 1957 in Free- There is a woman who has transited from a town. Her name is not given, because she has very violent community in Sierra Leone, family back in Freetown or elsewhere in Si- gone through untold hardship, seen her hus-

CHAMBER 20908 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004 band murdered before her eyes—and I did pleasure of meeting two of the three young not relate the part where she saw her sons women who contributed to one article in the killed as well—and is accepted into our book. They were fine, upstanding young community as an Australian citizen. It is not people, both still at school and both anxious simply one story, one anecdote; there are a to get ahead in this wonderful country in large number of stories in Chronicles from which we live. I also must put on the record the edge from a range of people across a my thanks to Marie Clark, who is the south number of countries—South Africa, Iraq, diocesan youth representative, for the invita- Zimbabwe, Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailand tion to launch the book; and to Jim Wilkin- and Malta. son, whom I have already mentioned as be- I thought the story from the young person ing the coordinator—he did not write the from Malta, which is only a brief story, book as such, but he coordinated a team to really sums up how some of the people who put this fine production together. For those have sought refuge in this country find it. who would like to read a copy of the book, I Again, no name is given for the young man am sure that if they contact the St Vincent de from Malta, who says: Paul they will only be too pleased to give it to them, and they too will share the wonder- I was born in Malta. I came to Australia when I was three years old. I lived in a caravan for one ful experience that I have shared. year. We travelled around Australia and lived in Senate adjourned at 6.43 p.m. Clermont for a while. When I was four I came to DOCUMENTS live in Mackay. I like living in Mackay because it is safe. Tabling I think, again, that sums up the view that The following documents were tabled by these people have. It is an excellent publica- the Clerk: tion that a lot of thought and a lot of effort Civil Aviation Act—Civil Aviation have gone into. It is a very professional pub- Regulations— lication, put together by the St Vincent de Civil Aviation Amendment Order (No. Paul Society in Brisbane as a result of the 1) 2004. grant they received from DIMIA. It was a Exemptions Nos CASA EX08/2004 and pleasure to launch the book last week. For CASA EX10/2004-CASA EX13/2004. those who are computer literate, it also has a Instruments Nos CASA 55/04, CASA CD-ROM. The good news is that with the 60/04, CASA 77/04 and CASA 86/04. production run they have been able to do it Currency Act—Currency (Royal Australian will be distributed to schools, churches and Mint) Determination 2004 (No. 2). community groups so that they too can ap- Departmental and Agency Contracts preciate the stories of those people who have contributed to this in their path to becoming The following documents were tabled residents—and, in the longer term, citizens— pursuant to the order of the Senate of 20 June of Australia. It is not simply a collage of con- 2001, as amended: tributions from older people but it has a real Departmental and agency contracts for emphasis on youth so that the youth too can 2003—Letters of advice— understand the experiences of these people Education, Science and Training who are new to our shores. portfolio. Whilst there was not a great number of Treasury portfolio. people at the launch last week, I did have the

CHAMBER Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20909

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE The following answers to questions were circulated:

Environment and Heritage: Institute of Public Affairs (Question No. 2043) Senator O’Brien asked the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 15 September 2003: (1) For each of the following financial years: (a) 1996-97; (b) 1997-98; (c) 1998-99; (d) 1999-2000; (e) 2000-01; (f) 2001-02; (g) 2002-03; and (h) 2003-04, has the department or any agency for which the Minister is responsible, including boards, councils, committees and advisory bodies, made payments to the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) for research purposes; if so, (i) how much was each payment, (ii) when was each payment made, and (iii) what services were provided. (2) In relation to each research project or consultancy: (a) when was the IPA engaged; (b) for what time period; (c) what were the terms of reference; (d) what role did the Minister and/or his office have in the engagement of the IPA; (e) was the contract subject to a tender process; if so, was it an open tender or a select tender; if not, why not. Senator Hill—The Minister for the Environment and Heritage has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) No payment has been made to the Institute of Public Affairs. (2) No research projects or consultancies were commissioned. Defence: Stockton Rifle Range (Question No. 2113) Senator Chris Evans asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 15 September 2003: (1) (a) What is the current status of the Defence property at the Stockton Rifle Range in New South Wales; (b) what was the land used for previously; and (c) for what purpose does Defence envisage that the site could be used in the future. (2) What is the size of the site. (3) Has the site been valued by either the New South Wales Valuer-General or the Australian Valuation Office; if so: (a) when did the valuations take place; and (b) what was the estimated value. (4) Is it intended that the site will be sold; if so, when. (5) Is Defence aware of any heritage and/or environmental significance attached to the site; if so, can details be provided. (6) Have any parties, i.e. individuals, organisations or governments, expressed an interest in acquiring the site; if so, can details be provided. (7) Has the Port Stephens Council expressed an interest in acquiring the site; if so, what was the nature of each expression of interest from the Council. (8) (a) Why has the land not been transferred to the Port Stephens Council; and (b) has there been any consultation between Defence and the Council in this regard; if so, what was the nature of each consultation with the Council on this issue. (9) (a) When did the Commonwealth first acquire the site; and (b) what was the purpose of the acquisition.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 20910 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

(10) (a) What was the process for acquiring the site; and (b) did the Commonwealth ever pay any party for the acquisition; if so, how much was paid. Senator Hill—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) (a) The former Stockton Rifle Range is surplus to Defence requirements and is being prepared for disposal in accordance with the Commonwealth Property Disposals Policy. (b) A rifle range. (c) The Commonwealth does not have a view on the future uses of the site. (2) The site is approximately 111.3 hectares. (3) Yes. (a) and (b) The site was valued, on Defence’s behalf, by the Australian Valuation Office in March 2003. The valuation figure is Commercial-In-Confidence as the marketing of the property has not yet commenced. The Commonwealth is unaware if the New South Wales Valuer-General has valued the site. No such request to access the site for the purpose of valuation has been identified. (4) Yes. The property is under consideration for disposal in this financial year. (5) Yes. In preparing this property for the market, Defence ensured consultation with relevant State and local Government planning authorities, through an environmental consulting firm, GHD Pty Ltd, to ensure the environmental and heritage values of the site were identified and documented. An assessment of the significant attributes of the property is nearing completion, and, in accordance with Defence practice, all reports detailing the heritage aspects and significant flora and fauna on the site will be made available to potential purchasers during the tendering process. (6) Yes. A review of departmental files indicates that: • Port Stephens Council had an ongoing interest in the priority sale of the property until 16 May 2003 when they formally withdrew their interest in a letter to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence, the Hon Fran Bailey MP. • A number of other organisations and individuals have written to Defence and requested the land be either donated or transferred for either public or private purposes. (7) Yes. The Port Stephens Council sought to purchase the site under the priority sale provision within the Commonwealth Property Disposals Policy. (8) (a) and (b) On 16 May 2003, the Port Stephens Council advised Defence of its decision to withdraw from priority sale negotiations with the Commonwealth. Council cited concerns with regard to contract conditions and indemnities sought by the Commonwealth as their reasons for withdrawing. (9) (a) The Heritage Assessment of the Stockton Rifle Range completed by Suters Architects, June 1999, notes that the Commonwealth, under the Lands Acquisition Act 1906-1936, compulsorily acquired the land on 18 March 1942. (b) The purpose of the acquisition is listed in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette, No 94, dated 26 March 1942 as “... Defence purposes at North Stockton, NSW.” The Heritage Assessment of the Stockton Rifle Range completed by Suters Architects, June 1999, notes that the land was initially acquired solely for the development of a small arms range. (10) (a) See 9(a) above. (b) The Heritage Assessment of the Stockton Rifle Range completed by Suters Architects, June 1999, notes that the Commonwealth paid £2,250.00 for the site from the North Stockton Land Company. Parliamentarians: Entitlements (Question No. 2497) Senator Murray asked the Special Minister of State, upon notice, on 12 January 2004: With reference to the certification of management reports by current and former parliamentarians:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20911

(1) For each of the following financial years; 1999-2000, 2000-01 and 2001-02: (a) how many reports have not been certified; (b) which parliamentarians have not provided certification; (c) what reasons have been given for non-certification; and (d) what action is being taken to resolve non- certification. (2) With respect to the 2002-03 financial year, how many reports have not been certified as at 31 December 2003. Senator Abetz—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) (a) 1999-2000 10* 2000-2001 21 2000-2001 28 * The answer to Question No.17 of 16 May 2002 showed eight non-certifications. It is now considered that two further cases should be counted – one was a partial certification; the other was an advice of non-certification that was submitted on a certification form. (b) and (c) Where Parliamentarians advised Finance of reasons these are included in the footnotes. 1999-2000 The Hon Arch Bevis MP1 Senator the Hon Nick Bolkus2 Mr Winston Crane3 Mr John Forrest MP1 Senator John Hogg4 The Hon Bob Katter MP The Hon John Moore AO3 The Hon Neil O’Keefe3 The Hon Peter Reith5 The Hon Kathy Sullivan 2000-2001 The Hon Kim Beazley MP The Hon Arch Bevis MP1 Mr Anthony Byrne MP3 The Hon Alan Cadman MP Senator Kim Carr The Hon Ian Causley MP3 Mr Winston Crane Mr John Forrest MP1 Mr Alan Griffin MP The Hon Joe Hockey MP Senator John Hogg The Hon Bob Katter MP The Hon Michael Lee

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 20912 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

Mr Allan Morris Mr Garry Nehl Mr Gavan O’Connor MP The Hon Roger Price MP3 The Hon Peter Reith5 Mr Kevin Rudd MP1 The Hon Warren Snowdon MP The Hon Dr Michael Wooldridge 2001-2002 The Hon Kim Beazley MP The Hon Arch Bevis MP1 Mr Bruce Billson MP Mr Anthony Byrne MP3 Senator Kim Carr Senator Grant Chapman Mr Winston Crane The Hon John Fahey6 The Hon Tim Fischer Mr John Forrest MP1 Mr Alan Griffin MP The Hon Bob Katter MP Mr Tony Lawler Ms Jann McFarlane MP The Hon Dr Stephen Martin3 Mr Allan Morris Mr Gary Nairn MP Mr Garry Nehl Mr Gavan O’Connor MP The Hon Neil O’Keefe The Hon Roger Price MP3 The Hon Peter Reith5 Mr Patrick Secker MP3 The Hon Warren Snowdon MP The Hon Andrew Thomson Mr Ken Ticehurst MP Senator the Hon Judith Troeth The Hon Dr Michael Wooldridge 1 Partial certification

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20913

2 Senator Bolkus advised that he was unable to certify the report due to errors with spouse travel and travel to Lord Howe Island. 3 Senator/Member or former Parliamentarian has advised that certification was provided. Finance holds no record. 4 Senator Hogg stated that he was unable to certify the 1999-2000 end of the financial year management report as he was not satisfied with the data collection methodology and accuracy. Senator Hogg stated further explanation was available on request. 5 Mr Reith advised Finance that he had no reason to accept Finance’s proposed answer. 6 Attribution of some costs not yet resolved. (d) There is currently no legal requirement for Parliamentarians to provide certifications. Finance makes follow-up phone calls to those Senators and Members who have not returned signed certifications. A reminder to Parliamentarians to certify their 2001-2002 reports was included with the April 2003 management reports. Following the introduction in August 2003 of monthly certification Finance sends reminder letters to Senators and Members who have not returned a certification. If a Senator or Member comes back with a query on the report, Finance investigates the issue, and if necessary, amends the relevant page of the report and provides that to the Senator or Member concerned. (2) 128 as at 31 December 2003. Since that time certifications have continued to be received and, as at 26 February 2004, the number of outstanding certifications stood at 94. Trade: Firearms (Question No. 2500) Senator Mark Bishop asked the Minister for Justice and Customs, upon notice, on 13 January 2004: (1) For each of the past 3 years, by state, how many: (a) hand guns; and (b) long arms, have been approved for import. (2) For each of the past 3 years, by state, how many: (a) hand guns; and (b) long arms, have been intercepted as illegal imports. (3) For each of the past 3 years: (a) how many consignments of illegally-imported gun parts have been intercepted; and (b) how many interceptions of illegally-imported replica firearms have there been. (4) How many of the above interceptions have been of items purchased on e-bay. Senator Ellison—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) Table One: Legal Firearms Importations by State 2000-2001 2000-2001 Handgun Rifle Shotguns Military Antique Total VIC 1,650 4,532 1,962 299 22 8,465 NSW 4,395 2,581 1616 713 19 9,324 QLD 2,482 2,281 337 33 5 5,138 ACT 3,264 909 24 548 0 4,745 SA 690 692 882 413 0 2,677 WA 133 114 64 1 0 312 NT 0 0 0 0 0 0 TAS 1 0 4 0 0 5 Total 12,615 11,109 4,889 2007 46 30,666

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 20914 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

Table Two: Legal Firearms Importations by State 2001-2002 2001-2002 Handgun Rifle Shotguns Military Antique Total VIC 3,377 4,916 4,662 23 95 13,073 NSW 2,756 2,455 972 364 7 6,554 QLD 1,994 2,975 550 8 11 5,538 ACT 58 27 0 1981 1 2,067 SA 428 25 0 6 2 461 WA 262 0 28 5 4 299 NT 10 3 6 0 0 19 TAS 2 0 3 0 0 5 Total 8,887 10,401 6,221 2387 120 28,016 Table Three: Legal Firearms Importations by State: 2002-2003 2002-2003 Handgun Rifle Shotguns Military Antique Total VIC 4,580 7,532 2,631 165 276 15,184 NSW 1139 5,081 2,225 55 25 8,525 QLD 1,921 5,422 504 0 260 8,107 ACT 1,336 22 0 3,364 0 4,722 SA 274 29 3 166 8 480 WA 3521 319 4 1 1 3846 NT 62 1 1 0 0 64 TAS 0 8 3 0 0 11 Total 12,833 18,414 5,371 3751 570 40,939 Comments • The data used in these tables relate to the port of entry used to import the items into Australia and do not necessarily reflect the location of the end user of the firearms. • These figures relate to importations of firearms for which permits have been granted. • These figures do not include importations of air handguns, air rifles or air shotguns. (2) In 2000-2001 Customs detected 1407 firearms at the border. Of these detections: • 435 were subsequently seized; • 461 were subsequently released; • 15 were subsequently re-exported; and • 496 were still being processed at the end of the period. In 2001-2002 Customs detected 2536 firearms at the border. Of these detections: • 561 were subsequently seized; • 708 were subsequently released; • 80 were subsequently re-exported; and • 1187 were still being processed at the end of the period. In 2002-2003 Customs detected 2334 firearms at the border. Of these detections: • 177 were subsequently seized; • 834 were subsequently released;

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Thursday, 4 March 2004 SENATE 20915

• 109 were subsequently re-exported; and • 1214 were still being processed at the end of the period. Table Four: Illegal Firearms Seizures July 2000-June 2003 Handgun Rifle Shotgun Antique U/C* Total 2000-2001 204 146 79 4 2 435 2001-2002 172 248 86 46 9 561 2002-2003 58 62 17 38 2 177 Total 434 456 182 88 13 1173 * Un-categorised Comments • These figures relate to importations of firearms that were not accompanied by the correct permits at the time of import. • Illegal firearms statistics are collected bi-annually. Figures for each six monthly period refer to those firearms/parts that have entered the country in that period. At the end of each six monthly reporting period there are a number of detections that have not been fully processed; these are recorded in the statistics as ‘Pending’. These pending firearms detections will have been subsequently released, seized or re-exported in the next data collection period. (3) Table 3A: Illegal firearm parts detections July 2000 - June 2003 Pending Released Re-exported Seized Total 2000-2001 182 754 1 259 1196 2001-2002 1637 1836 25 347 3845 2002-2003 2483 1280 116 641 4520 Total 4302 3870 142 1247 9561 Table 3B: Illegal replica detections July 2000 - June 2003 Pending Released Re-exported Seized Total 2000-2001 31 29 0 118 178 2001-2002 134 36 4 159 333 2002-2003 338 183 8 251 780 Total 503 248 12 528 1291 Comments • The apparent increase in detections of replica firearms is more likely to reflect a change in reporting standards of Customs Stores than an increase of this magnitude in detections. • Illegal firearms statistics are collected bi-annually. Figures for each six monthly period refer to those firearms/parts that have entered the country in that period. At the end of each six monthly reporting period there are a number of detections that have not been fully processed; these are recorded in the statistics as ‘Pending’. These pending firearms detections will have been subsequently released, seized or re-exported in the next data collection period. (4) Forty-five of the above firearms parts detections were items recorded as being purchased on E-bay; one of the above handgun detections was an item recorded as purchased on E-bay.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 20916 SENATE Thursday, 4 March 2004

Comments • E-bay is not the only internet site used by Australians to import weapons over the internet, only the most prominent. The offence provisions under the Customs Act relate only to the restricted goods, not the means by which they are purchased. • Whichever way the goods are purchased, the method of transportation must still be through one of the main transport streams (post, air cargo, sea cargo), which are covered by routine Customs screening procedures. Appendix A: Definitions • Imported Firearms • Firearms imported and for which a customs entry was completed • Figures relating to the number of imported forearms do not include a very small number of firearms legally imported by post or sea or air freight below the threshold requiring Customs entry. These firearms however require all other formalities to be met, including necessary permits, prior to release. • Detected Where Customs identifies goods imported as prohibited or restricted goods and for which appropriate documentation is not available at the time of import. This includes goods that are declared to Customs. • Seized Where goods detected and detained by Customs are subsequently seized as a result of the owner failing to obtain the relevant permits and/or the goods failing safety testing. • Released Where goods detected and detained by Customs are subsequently released to the owner upon production of the relevant permits, successful safety testing and/or the correct entry of the goods. • Re-exported Where imported goods detected and detained by Customs are subsequently permitted to be exported out of Australia following the failure of the owner to obtain the relevant permits and/or the goods having failed safety testing. • Pending Where the status of goods detected and detained by Customs has yet to be determined.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE