Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

THURSDAY, 12 NOVEMBER 1987

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

Papers 12 November 1987 4063

THURSDAY, 12 NOVEMBER 1987

Mr SPEAKER (Hon. K. R. Lingard, Fassifem) read prayers and took the chair at 10 a.m.

PETITIONS The Clerk announced the receipt of the following petitions— Central Place Development From Mr Beanland (38 signatories) praying that the Parliament of Queensland will ensure that the Brisbane City Council's town-planning processes will prevail especially in relation to the proposed 107-storey Central Place development. Balance between Public Ownership and Private Enterprise From Mr Beanland (1 886 signatories) praying that the Parliament of Queensland will take action to repeal the Land Act and the Integrated Resort Development Act so as to maintain a balance between public ownership and private enterprise, particularly on Barrier Reef islands. Withdrawal of Section of Land Act Amendment Act From Mr Comben (1 380 signatories) praying that the Parliament of Queensland will withdraw that section of the Land Act Amendment Act 1987 which allows land to be leased in perpetuity for tourist development purposes. By-pass Road Linking New England and Warrego Highways to Bruce Highway From Mr Sherlock (38 signatories) praying that the Parliament of Queensland will publish plans for public examination of the proposed city by-pass road linking the New England and Warrego Highways to the Bmce Highway. Cut-backs in Teacher Aide Hours From Mr Beard (1 327 signatories) praying that the Parliament of Queensland will take action to reverse the Budget decision on cut-backs in teacher aide hours. Petitions received.

PAPERS The following papers were laid on the table, and ordered to be printed— Reports— North Queensland Racing Association for the year ended 30 June 1987 Water Quality Council of Queensland for the year ended 30 June 1987 Report and Financial Statements of the Queensland Coal Board for the year ended 30 June 1987 Miners Pensions Tribunal for the year ended 30 June 1987 Queensland Cultural Centre Tmst for the year ended 30 June 1987 Brisbane Market Tmst for the year ended 30 June 1987 Hen Quota Committee for the year ended 30 June 1987 Sunny Queen Egg Farms for the year ended 30 June 1987 Queensland Commercial Fishermen's Organisation for the year ended 30 June 1986 4064 12 November 1987 Questions Upon Notice

Department of Primary Industries for the year ended 30 June 1987 Queensland Fire Brigades Employees' Superannuation Plan for the year ended 30 June 1987 Rural Fires Board of Queensland for the year ended 30 June 1987. The following papers were laid on the table— Order in Council under— Industrial Development Act 1963-1981 and the Statutory Bodies Financial Arrangements Act 1982-1984 Regulations under— Racing and Betting Act 1980-1987 Architects Act 1985.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Use of Kenaf in Production of Newsprint Hon. N. J. HARPER (Aubum—Minister for Primary Industries) (10.05 a.m.), by leave: During the debate on the Estimates of my department, and at other times, mention has been made of the potential of the Burdekin irrigation area and of a crop known as kenaf, which my department is co-operating with private enterprise in developing. Yesterday I received a copy of an American newspaper, the Bakersfield Californian. According to the editorial, this paper never saw a forest. It was crafted from kenaf fibre that was harvested from an irrigated field in the Rio Grande valley of Texas. I table a copy of that paper because I believe it is of interest to honourable members in this Chamber. I believe—and the Queensland Govemment believes—that there is a tremendous potential for the development of kenaf as an altemative crop in north Queensland. It has the potential to produce a very high-quality, strong paper. I draw the attention of honourable members to this illustration of its capacity to produce a full run of newspapers in America. Whereupon the honourable member laid on the table the document referred to.

PRIVILEGE Reopening of "Black hole" at Brisbane Prison Mr WARBURTON (Sandgate—Leader of the Opposition) (10.07 a.m.): I rise on a matter of privilege. The Minister for Corrective Services, Administrative Services and Valuation, Mr Neal, is reported as intending to reopen the Boggo Road gaol block known as the "Black hole". As that action can be described only as barbaric, I advise the House that I intend to refer the matter to the Human Rights Commission today.

QUESTIONS UPON NOTICE

1. Royalties on Export Coal Sir WILLIAM KNOX asked the Premier and Treasurer— "(1) Is he aware that the New South Wales Government has given royalty relief to export coal miners in that State in order to meet worid market competition? (2) Is the Queensland Government considering royalty or freight rate relief for existing export coal miners so that they may hold and expand their market share?" Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: (1) Yes. Questions Upon Notice 12 November 1987 4065

(2) Cabinet recently approved substantial changes to the Govemment's export coal rail freight concession scheme, providing major additional concessions for the industry. The revised arrangements provide for substantial immediate rail freight reductions for major mines built since 1978 and future escalation of freight rates for these mines at only half the normal rate. This is estimated to benefit the Queensland export coal industry to the extent of $850m in today's dollar terms over the next 10 years. This is in addition to the existing rail freight concession scheme that has already been given to the industry and was introduced in 1984, which has resulted in concessions of $ 190m to date and will result in further concessions estimated at $180m over the next few years. There is provision for the new freight rates to increase more than the half-escalation rate if export coal prices increase to a pre-determined extent above the prices applying in early 1986. The "pre-determined extent" aUows for the first part of any price increase to be retained by the coal company to cover cost increases with 75 per cent of the remainder of any price increase also staying with the company. The revised scheme arrangements were determined in consultation with the coal industry and were designed to give the maximum possible relief while at the same time providing a reasonable level of protection to the State's revenue base. The Government recognises that the new arrangements will mean a substantial loss to the State in terms of coal freight revenue forgone. Nevertheless, it recognises the difficulties currently being faced by the coal industry because of price reductions and has been determined to support the industry to the maximum extent possible. The new arrangements have been accepted by the Queensland Coal Association, which thanked this Govemment and me very much.

2. Work in Return for Dole Payments Mr ALISON asked the Minister for Family Services, Youth and Ethnic Affairs— "With reference to the reported statement by Mr Justice Ambrose in the Supreme Court on 26 October that the country's payment system to the unem­ ployed and others had contributed to street crimes in Brisbane and that society, in its wisdom, had contributed to a particular person's lifestyle in receiving social security payments without being obliged to do anything productive or useful— (1) Is there much tmth in the reported comments of the leamed Judge? (2) Would it not be best for our Community—particularly young unemployed people—if the Federal Govemment introduced a scheme whereby people on the dole had to do something productive in exchange for the dole?" Mrs CHAPMAN: (1) I thank the honourable member for his question and for bringing this matter to my attention. I concur completely with the reported statement by Mr Justice Ambrose Mr R. J. Gibbs interjected. Mrs CHAPMAN: I hope that the honourable member has not been gambling illegally again. As I was saying, I concur completely with the reported statement by Mr Justice Ambrose that the welfare mentality in Australia today is contributing to crime and to a life-style of receiving social security benefits without being obliged to do anything productive or useful. It is both significant and encouraging to see someone in such high office speak out on this matter. The honourable member would recall that I have spoken about this on a number of occasions and there is no doubt that young people in particular would welcome the opportunity to do some work in the community in retum for the dole. Public opinion polls have shown that up to 90 per cent of young unemployed people would be prepared to do this. 4066 12 November 1987 Questions Upon Notice

(2) The matter, of course, is one for the Federal Govemment, and I hope others will follow the judge in trying to bring the present Labor Govemment in Canberra to its senses. The hand-out mentality started in the disastrous Whitlam years in the early 1970s and the Hawke Govemment has encouraged it further. It was interesting to hear the present Labor Govemment's Treasurer in Canberta, Mr Keating, admit this on national television and radio earlier today when he blamed Australia's current economic ills on the Whitlam Govemment and the inadequate policies of his own party. The concept of people having to do something constmctive for the dole has been highly successful and widely accepted in the United States and other overseas countries. It is not only good for the individual in terms of self-esteem, pride, discipline and the development of skills but also is advantageous for the community as far as public attitudes and support services are concemed. There is an amazing amount of work that can be undertaken by young unemployed people in the welfare area alone. In the past 12 months I have come across dozens of organisations—welfare groups, charities, service clubs, senior citizens clubs and sporting bodies—that would welcome this type of assistance. Even the Hawke Govemment toyed with the scheme following a much publicised phone-in associated with one of its many major flops called Priority One. Honourable members witnessed the spectacle of the present Prime Minister, in one of his theatrical displays in front of the television cameras, give a commitment to introduce such a scheme but, of course, when the pressure came on from the union bosses, he and his colleagues, including some of the honourable members opposite, caved in again. A vast majority of Australians favour some sort of scheme along these lines and it would not cost people jobs because the type of work that would be undertaken is now done by overworked volunteers who would have their current burden lightened. It is my hope that something will be done about it soon after the Hawke Govemment gets its just deserts and is thrown out of office at the next election.

3. Remodelling and Refurbishing of Executive Building Mr BEANLAND asked the Minister for Works and Housing— "(1) Has the estimate for remodelling and refurbishing of floors 13, 14 and 15 of the Executive Building in George St., Brisbane exceeded the original estimate of $3m and is now approaching $5m? (2) What is the estimated cost of this work?" Mr I. J. GIBBS: (1 and 2) This question demonstrates once again just how misinformed the member for Toowong is. It reinforces the earlier impression that he has given in this Parliament on matters relating to works projects. I inform the honourable member that refurbishing and remodelling work is under way at the Executive Building in George Street. It does not involve work on three floors; it involves work on only one floor of the building. It also does not involve costs of anywhere near the amount of $3m to $5m bandied around yesterday in this Chamber by the member for Toowong. The work that is being undertaken wUl be completed at a cost of less than $lm. The work that is under way at the Executive Building is taking place on the 13th floor. As the honourable member is no doubt aware, next year is Expo year and Queensland will be on display to world leaders and commercial investors. This area of the Executive Building includes a major reception centre which will be visited by many of these very important people. The work on the 13th floor includes the refurbishing of this reception centre. It is important to note that the Executive Building was opened in 1971 and has suffered the wear and tear to which a busy area is subjected. The honourable member's Questions Upon Notice 12 November 1987 4067 question indicates once more that he is prepared to judge others in terms of his own experience that he gained when he, as deputy mayor of the Brisbane City Council, had unlimited money to spend on public relations.

4. Government Office Space in Central Place Development Mr BEANLAND asked the Premier and Treasurer— "With reference to newspaper reports that his Government is taking 40 000 square metres of office space in the so-called 'world's tallest building', that is, the proposed 107 storey development on the comer of Ann and Turbot Streets, Brisbane— Why does the Govemment need so much office space in a building that will have the highest rentals in Brisbane?" Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: I have already informed the House that when the arrangements have been finalised for the leasing by the Government of any space in this development, details can be released.

5. Underground Mining under Urban Areas Mr R. J. GIBBS asked the Minister for Mines and Energy and Minister for the Arts— "With reference to what can only be described as a grim outlook for Queensland coal on both national and international markets— Taking into consideration the current glut of coal available, will he give an assurance that he will not give approval for underground mining under urban areas?" Mr AUSTIN: Before answering the question, I wish to congratulate all my colleagues who today have served 10 years in this Parliament. In answer to the honourable member's question—there is no grim outlook for Queensland coal in the intemational market other than current selling prices and in fact our production continues to rise. No assurance will be given to restrict underground mining under urban areas. A number of mining leases carry the right to mine under urban areas. Extraction of coal from such mining leases can only be carried out in accordance with prescribed conditions. It is not the Government's intention to attempt to revoke the rights of those lessees. Any new mining leases granted will continue to be appropriately conditioned to protect urban areas.

6. Cancellation of Contract between Works Department and Telecom Mr MACKENROTH asked the Minister for Works and Housing— "With reference to the contract recently signed by the Works Department and by Telecom which was later cancelled in favour of a contract with Q-Net, which is now with the Parry organisation— (1) How much was the initial contract with Telecom worth and for what period was it to mn? (2) How much did it cost in penalty/cancellation fees to get out of the contract with Telecom?" Mr I. J. GIBBS: (1 and 2) My department entered into a contract with Telecom Australia to provide a megalink service of 30 voice channels to interconnect its PABXs in Brisbane with Townsville and Caims at a cost of $26,595 per month. The decision to sell Q-Net and consequently cancel the Telecom contract at a cost of $55,371 was taken after considering all the options that were avaUable. There was substantial financial advantage to the Government in taking this action. 4068 12 November 1987 Questions Upon Notice

7. Repossessions by AMEV Finance Mr FITZGERALD, on behalf of Mr HINTON, asked the Deputy Premier, Minister Assisting the Treasurer and Minister for Police— "With reference to a matter I recently raised in this House, namely, the scurrillous use of an unlicensed repossession agent by the finance company, AMEV Finance, to conduct illegal repossessions, in respect of which the unlicensed repossession agent concerned, Mr T. Halpin, has since been convicted— WiU he thoroughly investigate the incident and the actions of this company so that the finance company can be brought to account for its part in these Ulegal activities, and report back to this House on the findings of this investigation?" Mr GUNN: I understand the activities of the finance company AMEV in using an unlicensed agent named Halpin to conduct illegal repossessions was investigated by officers of the Justice Department attached to the Registrar of Auctioneers and Agents. I have been informed that the registrar will have the officer who conducted the investigation contact the member for Broadsound with advice on this matter.

8. Provision of Communal Halls in Public Housing Developments Mr YEWDALE asked the Minister for Works and Housing— "With reference to the development of two and three bedroom units to accommodate supporting mothers, pensioners, family units and, in particular, large constmctions of up to 70 units— Has his department given any consideration to the provision of a communal hall to allow tenants to congregate for activities among themselves as well as providing a venue for the many organisations that may wish to visit these areas to advise and assist the families with social and family problems?" Mr I. J. GIBBS: As the honourable member would know, despite the provision of an increasing amount of public housing annually, the number of applicants listed continues to increase. The provision of housing is therefore the first consideration, and the commission is achieving this by constmcting or purchasing a range of housing types. A number of factors influence the types provided, and large blocks are avoided wherever possible. However, in instances where that has not been possible, experience has shown that after a settling-in period, there are few problems and tenants coexist in harmony. I see little difference between a block of private units—and there are many in excess of 70—and similar public housing. In both cases it is a matter for the owners and tenants to resolve their difficulties and act responsibly to each other and the whole group. The housing provided by the commission is excellent and is equal to or better than that provided through the private sector. Adequate space and facUities are provided and the areas are attractively landscaped and maintained by the commission. In all the circumstances, particularly the need that exists for public housing, it is not possible to provide a communal hall or unit for use by tenants or for counselling.

9. Subsidies for Sporting Organisations Mr YEWDALE asked the Minister for Tourism, National Parks and Sport— "With reference to the distribution of sports subsidies from his department— (1) Why are sport subsidy cheques from his department made available to Government Members and not to other Members of Parliament? (2) Does he intend to continue to discriminate against Opposition Members when he disburses future subsidies in Queensland?" Questions Upon Notice 12 November 1987 4069

Mr POWELL: On behalf of the Minister for Tourism, National Parks and Sport, the answer is as follows— (1 and 2) There are now 10 measures of financial assistance to sport under the Government's Encouragement to Sport Scheme. That financial assistance can be made available for an approved project by way of a subsidy or a grant to the recognised State goveming body of each of the 81 acknowledged sports and their various affiliated stmctures, that is, zones and clubs. Each and every member of this Parliament has always been informed on an annual basis as to the project approvals for sporting clubs in their individual electorates and, at this juncture, it is my intention to continue this practice. I do not intend to change the manner of distributing the subsequent cheques in payment.

10. Domestic Violence Task Force Mrs NELSON asked the Minister for Family Services, Youth and Ethnic Affairs— "(1) How far has the Domestic Violence Task Force progressed in setting up the working committee? (2) Which community personnel will be involved in working on the task force?" Mrs CHAPMAN: (1) I thank the honourable member for her question and her interest in this very important social problem. The Domestic Violence Task Force, which has been established under the auspices of my department, has set about its task very enthusiastically and with a great deal of commitment. In the few weeks since its appointment, it has met on five occasions, has called for submissions publicly from any organisation or individual in the community and is in the process of planning a number of other strategies to gather information and ideas from persons with specialist knowledge of the problem. (2) The task force is chaired by a senior officer of my department. Miss Ruth Matchett, who has had extensive experience in handling social issues. The other six members comprise representatives of the Police and Justice Departments, a further officer of my department and three community representatives— Mrs Gay Walker, a lecturer in law at the Queensland Institute of Technology; Mr Ian MacDonald, Director, Queensland Marriage Guidance Council; and Mrs Claris Burrows, Secretary of the Combined Womens Refuge Group. All of those people have a great knowledge of the problem and I am sure that they will do an excellent job. They also have the power to call on anyone who they consider could make a worthwhile contribution to their deliberations. The terms of reference given to the task force were purposely left very open to enable it to examine and make recommendations on as many aspects of the issue as possible, including— • the law and the policies of Govemment relating to domestic violence; • the adequacy and co-ordination of current services provided by Government and non-Government agencies; • the training of professionals and others who are required to deal with the problem; and • strategies and initiatives to reduce the incidence of domestic violence. It will be well within the committee's charter to suggest legislative changes if it concludes that these are necessary. Our Government's initiative in facing up to this most sensitive problem has been widely acclaimed, and I am confident that the well-balanced and experienced task force 4070 12 November 1987 Questions Upon Notice that we have appointed will submit a comprehensive and constmctive report which will lay the foundations for a very positive approach to minimising these unfortunate incidents.

11. TuUy/Millstream Hydroelectric Scheme Mr VAUGHAN asked the Minister for Mines and Energy and Minister for the Arts— "With reference to the proposed TuUy/Millstream hydroelectric scheme— (1) Is he aware that, in an article in The Daily Sun of 7 April, it was reported that Cabinet had decided not to proceed with this scheme because of the costs involved, the rain forests in the area, and the availability of an altemative source of power? (2) Was he correctly quoted in The Courier-Mail of 2 July, wherein he is reported to have said that an immediate result of the World Heritage listing of North Queensland rain forest was the suspension of the $4.3m feasibility study of the TuUy/Millstream hydroelectric scheme and that nothing would happen until the listing issue had been resolved? (3) If so, what is the position regarding the feasibility study—has it been suspended or is it still proceeding? (4) What private consultants have been, or are, involved in the feasibility study? (5) Was the work involved let out to tender and, if not, what is the reason? (6) What monies are being paid to private consultants for their work? (7) Has the original scheme been amended in any way and, if so, in what way and for what reasons? (8) Will the scheme divert water from drier areas of the State? (9) Will the cost of power produced by this scheme be substantially higher than power produced by a coal-fired power station using coal from a source west of Townsville?" Mr AUSTIN: (1) Yes, but that article was incorrect. (2) Yes. (3) The feasibility study was suspended in June following the Federal Government's proposal for World Heritage listing. However, environmental and archaeological work continued. The feasibility study was recently recommenced as investigations have shown that the scheme would not endanger the environment. (4) The major private consultants are Environment Science and Services and a consortium comprising the Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation and Mclntyre and Associates. (5) No. The consultants and consortium are the only Queensland-based organisations with the necessary expertise with hydroelectric schemes and knowledge of the project. (6) Private consultants are being paid for hours worked on the study, charged at quoted hourly rates and with reimbursables charged at cost. (7) Yes. As a result of the environmental investigations the initial proposed scheme has been modified on a number of occasions. (8) No. The proposed scheme would use water from the Tully and Herbert Rivers, which flow to the eastern seaboard. (9) No. The extra cost to electricity-consumers, if the TuUy/Millstream scheme is prevented from being built and has to be replaced by a coal-fired power station, will exceed $500m. Questions Upon Notice 12 November 1987 4071

12. Overseas Visit by Premier and Treasurer Mr VAUGHAN asked the Premier and Treasurer— "With reference to his trip overseas to Romania and other places in August— (1) What countries besides Romania did he visit? (2) With whom did he have discussions in those countries? (3) Were such discussions entirely devoted to promoting the sale of Queens­ land coal and other products? (4) Who accompanied him on his trip? (5) What was the cost of the trip?" Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: (1) The United Kingdom and Switzeriand. (2) In the United Kingdom—primarily British Aerospace and the British National Space Centre. In Switzerland—banking and financial institutions. (3) No. (4) Sir Sydney Schubert, Sir Leo Hielscher and a member of my personal staff. (5) The expenditure involved will be a charge to the departmental accounts and, as the honourable member would know, is subject to audit by the Auditor-General.

13. Japanese Language Instruction in State High Schools Mr STEPHAN asked the Minister for Education— "With reference to the interest in, and demand for, Japanese language instmction in State high schools, for example, Gympie State High School's growth which will exceed 30 periods per week in 1988 on current estimates, with only one available teacher and, bearing in mind the trade and communications between the two countries, what are the prospects for adequate teachers with qualifications to teach Japanese where adequate demand exists in 1988?" Mr POWELL: Regional staffing officers are currently assessing estimated demand for teachers of all subject areas in State secondary schools at the moment. Present indications suggest that very few additional teachers of Japanese will be required for 1988. This being the case, it is likely that the demand for teachers of Japanese across the State will be met.

14. Waiting-lists in Public Hospitals Mr STEPHAN asked the Minister for Health and Environment— "With reference to the growth in waiting lists for the pubUc hospital system, particularly since the de-regulation of the private hospital system by the Federal Govemment who have taken away bed subsidies from private hospitals in March— Has the Federal Govemment allocated any funding to compensate for the increase in demand on the public hospital system as a direct result of the withdrawal of funding to these private hospitals?" Mr AHERN: The short answer to the honourable member's question is, "No". When the Federal Govemment withdrew its bed-day subsidy for private hospitals, the health insurance funds had to increase their benefit levels accordingly. This additional outlay by the health insurance funds was no doubt due to subsequent increases in health insurance contribution rates. Progressive increases in health insurance contribution rates have continued to contribute to the decline in the percentage of the population carrying private health insurance. This in tum increases the demand for public hospital services. While the Federal Govemment has made a recent offer for a cost-shared program of day surgery, no specific funds have been provided for any movement from the private to the public hospital sector, which is very real. I have recently used the expression 4072 12 November 1987 Questions Upon Notice

"savage onslaught" with respect to the Federal ALP's treatment of private hospitals, and that view is shared by many in the industry. There has been, under Hawke, a long string of policies enforced that have savagely undermined the viability of private hospitals. Private hospitals throughout the nation are suffering from what I can only describe as the empty bed blues; whilst clearly, as a result again of Federal Government design, public hospitals are literally bulging at the seams and showing dangerous signs of extraordinary pressure. There is an increasing number of beds lying vacant in the private sector. More and more Australians who would wish to use private hospitals are being forced to go public because of the cost flowing from the ALP's policy of creeping socialisation of Australia's health system. It is no wonder that the private hospital organisations in Australia are seeking a complete review of Australia's health-care system, which will enable them to survive the current economic climate and policies. I completely concur with their view.

15. Traffic Accidents in Gold Coast Area Mr MILLINER asked the Deputy Premier, Minister Assisting the Treasurer and Minister for Police— "With reference to the number of fatal and serious accidents in the area commonly described as the Gold Coast hinterland and Mudgeeraba— (1) How many accidents have been reported to the Police so far in 1987? (2) How many of these accidents have involved injuries, serious injuries and fatalities? (3) How many people have been killed in these accidents? (4) Have the Police accident appreciation units investigated all of the fatalities? (5) In the opinion of the Police, what are the major contributing factors to the accidents in this area? (6) What action does his Government plan to take to reduce the number of accidents in this area?" Mr GUNN: (1) 204 accidents from 1 January to 31 October 1987. (2) Four fatalities and 82 serious injuries. (3) Four persons. (4) Yes. (5) Excessive speed, driving under the influence of alcohol, driving without due care and attention and improper overtaking. (6) Traffic enforcement including regular radar speed-checks and RID surveillance have been conducted in the Gold Coast hinterland and Mudgeeraba areas. Increased enforcement action will occur throughout the approaching holiday period to curtail life- endangering offences.

16. Railway Passenger Services between Mount Isa and Townsville Mr MILLINER asked the Minister for Transport— "(1) Has the Railway Department held any meetings in North Queensland with coach operators with the view to withdrawing passenger railway services between Mt. Isa and Townsville and replacing these services with coach travel? (2) If so, when did these discussions take place and who were the companies involved? (3) Will he give a guarantee that rail passenger services presently provided by the Railway Department on that line will be maintained at their present level?" Mr AUSTIN: On behalf of the Minister for Transport, the answer is as follows— (1 and 2) I am advised that no meetings have taken place between senior Railway Questions Upon Notice 12 November 1987 4073

Department officers and coach operators in north Queensland with a view to withdrawing passenger railway services between Mount Isa and Townsville. (3) The Railway Department has recently revised the schedule of the Inlander services to better cater for the needs of people in this region. There is no intention to reduce or eliminate the bi-weekly service that is being provided by the Inlander between Townsville and Mount Isa.

17. Technology-based Industries Mr SHERRIN asked the Minister for Industry and Technology— "With reference to the Govemment's policy to introduce technology-based industries to Queensland— What is the range of programs under his portfolio to stimulate the estab­ lishment of technology-based industry in our State?" Mr McKECHNIE: The Government has introduced a significant number of pro­ grams to stimulate the development and facilitate the use and growth of technology- based industry in Queensland. In addition to the normal assistance measures that are provided through the Department of Industry Development, the following initiatives and programs have been initiated to foster the development of technology-based industry— (a) A Queensland Centre for Manufacturing Technology is being established on the Mount Gravatt Research Park. An amount of $2m has been allocated to that project this financial year. (b) Research and technology parks have been established at Mount Gravatt adjacent to Griffith University, at Eight Mile Plains and at Labrador on the Gold Coast. (c) A teaching company scheme has been introduced. (d) The Queensland Innovation Centre has been established with major financial support from the Government. (e) The Queensland Centre for the Development of Entrepreneurs within the University of Queensland is being funded by the Government. (f) The Queensland Enterprise Workshop program, with funding from the Government, provides business training to assist the marketing of new innovations. (g) Direct financial assistance has been provided to the University of Queensland and the Queensland Instititute of Technology to further development work in chip and micro-electronic circuitry design. (h) The technology magazine Technique, which covers news of developments in technology in Queensland, is published quarterly. (i) An offsets and defence unit is being established within the Department of Industry Development to increase the level of technological-based offsets placed with Queensland industry. (j) Major studies into new technologies have been undertaken to identify new opportunities for Queensland industry. These include investigation into— (i) advanced technologies; (ii) robotics; (iii) biotechnology; and (iv) advanced materials. In addition, the department is mnning a number of programs in quality control and quality assurance, value-added manufacturing, design and manufacturing management techniques to help improve the productivity and competition of local industry. I thank the honourable member for his continuing interest in the development of technology-based industry in Queensland.

77194—133 4074 12 November 1987 Questions Upon Notice

18. Neighbourhood Watch Scheme Mr SHERRIN asked the Deputy Premier, Minister Assisting the Treasurer and Minister for Police— "With reference to the pilot Neighbourhood Watch Scheme conducted on the Gold Coast in 1986— When will the Police Department's assessment of the scheme be completed and what support is the Police Department prepared to provide to communities establishing "Community Watch" schemes in their areas?" Mr GUNN: A meeting will be held on Tuesday, 17 November 1987, between the acting deputy commissioner of police and the Neighbourhood Watch scheme co-ordi- nators to discuss guide-lines for the implementation of the scheme. It is expected that those areas in which the public has expressed interest in the scheme will then be considered in order of priority, having regard to budgetary considerations.

19. Hold-ups in Logan City Area Mr GYGAR asked the Deputy Premier, Minister Assisting the Treasurer and Minister for Police— "With reference to cuts in police overtime introduced in the recent State Budget— (1) Have armed hold-ups increased dramatically in the Logan City area since these cuts were implemented? (2) Were there eight armed hold-ups in this area in a recent two week period? (3) Were police who had responded to a call concerning an armed hold-up at a Logan City building society summoned back to their station before they had obtained details of the crime because they were at the end of their shifi and would have gone onto overtime if they had stayed to investigate the crime properly? (4) Which police stations have reduced their hours of opening since these cuts were ordered and, in each case, by how long and on what days? (5) How many police patrol cars have been taken off the road as a result of these cuts, in which areas, at what times and by how many cars has this reduction in patrols occurred?" Mr GUNN: (1) No. (2) No. From 1 September 1987 to 6 November 1987, 10 armed hold-ups were committed in the Logan City area. (3) No. Two detectives who were detailed to assist the two detectives who were the principal investigators were recalled to their station at Slacks Creek to terminate duty. The principal investigators continued with the investigation. (4) The hours for which police stations are opened is a matter for district officers to decide. Police stations provide a service having regard to levels of staff at particular stations and local requirements. Every effort is made to cater for the needs of the public by providing an effective service at all times. (5) Budget allocations have necessitated a review of police patrols which were being carried out, and police resources have now been tailored to give priority to areas of greatest need. Considerable research would be required to ascertain whether there has been any reduction in the level of patrols and, in view of the work involved in this research, it is not practicable to obtain the information. Questions Upon Notice 12 November 1987 4075

20. Export of Sandalwood from Queensland Mr GYGAR asked the Minister for Lands, Forestry, Mapping and Surveying— "With reference to tenders called for the export of sandalwood from Queens­ land known as "Queensland Proposal 2/87 for the purchase of sandalwood from Crown Areas in Queensland" which was called in Febmary and recently awarded— (1) Why was there such a delay between 3 August when the tender closed and when it was awarded? (2) Was this tender the subject of negotiations and discussions after the closure date and, if so, between whom and what was the content and purpose of those discussions? (3) Was the tender awarded to a partnership between a Mr John James, a Moroccan formerly of Fiji and now resident in Sydney and a Mr Yuen of Taiwan and, if so, what is the reason? (4) Is it tme that the James/Yuen syndicate operates out of a kitchen in Sydney and has no plant, equipment or employees to fulfil the contract? (5) Is he aware that existing suppliers with extensive capital investments will now have to close sawmills and lay off workers as a result of this decision? (6) Will he review this decision?" Mr GLASSON: (1) Six proposals were received, which varied considerably in terms of price offered. Departmental officers considered it necessary to interview all proponents before making a recommendation. Under the circumstances there was not an undue delay. (2) Departmental officers held discussions with representatives of each proponent for the purpose of clarifying proposals put forward. (3) The tender was awarded to Unex Industries (Australia), a Sydney-based company, the official representative of which was a Mr John James of Sydney. The price submitted by this company was well in excess of other prices offered. (4) While he is new to operating sandalwood in Queensland, Mr James provided evidence of considerable experience in trading in sandalwood. With this experience, it would be expected that he will be able to satisfactorily arrange harvesting and processing of the product. Mr James' Sydney address has little relevance to the matter. The wood will be processed in Queensland. (5) In arriving at a decision on this matter, all the known relevant facts were taken into account. It is expected that bush workers experienced in sandalwood operation will be in demand—so a net loss of job opportunities is unlikely. Previous suppliers did not process the wood through sawmills, and had neither expensive equipment nor large numbers of employees involved in processing the wood. (6) 1 have no reason to review the decision.

21. Home-loan Interest Rates Mr BOOTH asked the Minister for Justice and Attomey-General— "With reference to interest rates on home loans and particularly to the Suncorp Building Society, since it has been brought to my notice that loans taken out two to three years ago are at a much higher rate than loans taken out recently— Does this mean that the older loans are pegged for all time and will not come down with the fluctuation in interest rates?" Mr GUNN: On behalf of the Minister for Justice, the answer is as follows— As the Queensland Government no longer seeks to regulate interest rates charged by building societies, negotiation of a particular rate is a matter for the building society and the borrower. 4076 12 November 1987 Questions Upon Notice

Building societies need to balance the rate that they charge borrowers against the rates which are paid to investors. At a time when interest rates are declining, new bortowers can be serviced from moneys obtained from investors being paid the new reduced rates. Existing borrowers have often been funded from investments, particularly fixed-term deposits, which pay a higher rate of interest than is currently offered to obtain funds. Provided that interest rates continue in a downward path, the rates for existing borrowers will be expected to reduce in due course as the overaU cost paid by the building society to obtain funds similarly reduces.

22. Penalty Interest Rates for Higher-risk Borrowers Mr BOOTH asked the Deputy Premier, Minister Assisting the Treasurer and Minister for Police— "With reference to current trading bank interest rates and, in particular, to penalty rates for higher risks— Is he able to ascertain the guidelines used in regard to these higher risk penalty rates, particularly in regard to their application in the primary industry area?" Mr GUNN: Trading banks do charge a margin over their prime rate commensurate with the assessed risk of the borrower, regardless of the borrower's industry. In making assessments, banks will normally consider— • quality of security offered; • viability of the business, particularly in relation to the cash flow; • management skills of the borrower; and • gearing of the bortower; together with any other relevant factors to determine the borrower's ability to repay. Accordingly, they do not have a uniform margin over the prime rate applied to borrowers, including primary producers. The particular industry of the borrower is relevant only through its effect on these factors; that is, the outlook for commodity prices will affect assessed viability and cash flow, and land prices will affect security. Consequently, the margin over the prime rate will vary from nil for prime-quaUty borrowers to around 3 per cent per annum for what banks regard as lesser-quality borrowers. The movement to variable margins has resulted from the deregulation of financial markets. Higher risks, which would require a higher margin, would generally be serviced by non-bank financial institutions. The current prime rates offered by the major trading banks are— Per cent Westpac 14.00 ANZ Bank 13.75 Commonwealth Bank —overdraft 14.00 —lending rate 13.75 National Australia Bank —base rate (lesser corporates) 14.50 —benchmark rate (prime corporates) 13.75

23. Tourism Development on Penrith Island Mr CASEY asked the Minister for Tourism, National Parks and Sport— "With reference to the recent advertisements by the Queensland National Parks and Wildlife Service calling for expressions of interest for the development and operation of a low-key tourist facility on Penrith Island— In view of the interest in this project and the lack of information from his department contained in the suggested guidelines, will he give this House more Questions Upon Notice 12 November 1987 4077

information regarding (a) the proposed ovemight accommodation numbers and the proposed day-tripper numbers that will be catered for, (b) the building limitations that will be imposed, (c) the size and type of jetties, landing stages or moorings that may be used and (d) any other information regarding the development?" Mr POWELL: On behalf of the Minister for Tourism, the answer is as follows— Action to call for expressions of interest for the development and operation of a low-key tourist facility related to the Penrith Island national park was taken in response to strong interest expressed in the tourism potential of this island over many years. Any expressions of interest received will be subject to the most careful scmtiny by the National Parks and Wildlife Service to determine whether an environmentally sensitive proposal can be found. The retention of the scenic and conservation values of the national park will be given the utmost priority. The service is merely offering those people in the community who have expressed an interest in providing tourists with better access to Penrith Island an opportunity to state their case.

24. Transport Department Inspectors on Gold Coast Mr HYND asked the Minister for Transport— "In view of his recent visit to the Gold Coast region, is he or his department aware of the necessity to have a full-time inspector from the investigations branch (classification 11-23) together with a transport analyst (1-6) from his department in Brisbane due to the growth factor in buses, drive-yourself vehicles etc., with inspectors from the investigations branch travelling to and from Brisbane on a regular basis?" Mr AUSTIN: On behalf of the Minister for Transport, the answer is as foUows— The Commissioner for Transport is aware of the increasing transport activity associated with development on the Gold Coast and the need for departmental officers to be adequately represented there. At present, there is one position of transport analyst, which was recently vacated. An officer has been relieving in this position and a formal appointment is expected in the near future. In relation to the transport inspectors who are attached to the investigations area— they are primarily employed to enforce the licensing provisions of the State Transport Act and Regulations and related Acts, including the operation of drive-yourself vehicles, cabs and buses. There are four such officers for the whole of the State. As such, they are based in Brisbane and are required to travel to other centres on a random basis to maximise their enforcement impact. With the current constraints on public funds, it is not expected that additional resources would be available in the short term to establish full-time transport inspectors at the Gold Coast.

25. Superannuation Accumulation Allowance for Railway Workers Mr D'ARCY asked the Minister for Transport— "As he has often mentioned the increased performance of Queensland Railways and, given this performance and the decision of the Industrial Com­ mission in Queensland to grant an increase to workers by way of a 3 per cent superannuation scheme based on productivity, does this mean (a) that employees in Queensland Railways will be granted the 3 per cent increase, (b) do the employees in Queensland Railways stand alone from the remainder of the Queensland Public Service, (c) will Queensland Railway employees still be eligible for the retiring allowance with the introduction of the 3 per cent scheme and (d) will Queensland Railway employees have separate representation on any board set up to administer the superannuation fund?" 4078 12 November 1987 Questions Without Notice

Mr AUSTIN: On behalf of the Minister for Transport, the answer is as follows— (a) All Queensland Railways employees will be granted the 3 per cent accu­ mulation allowance. (b) For the purpose of the accumulation allowance, Queensland Railways employ­ ees wiU not stand alone from the remainder of the Queensland public service. (c) Those Queensland Railways employees who contribute to the State Service Superannuation Fund do not now have an entitlement to a retiring allowance whereas those who do not contribute to the fund have the entitlement. The latter will still have the entitlement to retiring allowance when the 3 per cent accumulation fund is introduced from 1 July 1988. (d) Queensland Railways is not represented on the board set up to administer the accumulation fund.

26. Queensland Coal Industry Mr D'ARCY asked the Minister for Mines and Energy and Minister for the Arts— "With reference to the article in The Courier-Mail of 17 October, wherein he reportedly urged the Federal Govemment to scrap the Coal Industry Tribunal— (1) Did the State produce a record tonnage of coal in 1986-87? (2) In 1986-87, did the State export a record tonnage of coal? (3) Although there were 334 fewer persons employed in the State's coal mining industry, was output per man shift worked overall the highest ever? (4) In March 1985, did the Queensland Govemment in fact enact special legislation to set up the Electricity Authorities Industrial Causes Tribunal which is a one-man industrial tribunal at present headed by Judge Pratt, similar to the Coal Industry Tribunal?" Mr AUSTIN: (1 to 4) Yes, coal produced in Queensland in 1986-87 was a record 68.8 million tonnes with exports also a record 53.5 million tonnes and output per man­ shift a record 24.96 tonnes. The Coal Industry Tribunal exists under legislation drawn up in 1948 and is hopelessly out of date in almost every way. It does little to resolve industrial problems in the coal industry. Papers put out by the honourable member's Federal colleagues show that the coal industry has the worst record in Australia of disputation and they, too, ponder why the industry has the luxury of its own but ineffectual tribunal. On the other hand, the Queensland electricity industry is being well served by its tribunal.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Reopening of "Black hole" at Brisbane Prison Mr WARBURTON: I ask the Minister for Corrective Services: is it a fact that, as the royal commission into Aboriginal deaths in custody begins today in Canberra, the Queensland Government is said to be preparing to reopen the infamous "Black hole" of Boggo Road to incarcerate certain prisoners, including Aborigines who might protest in regard to their rigbts during Australia's Bicentenary year? If that is correct, is it to be assumed that, while the rest of Australia seeks an answer to the alarming problems of Aboriginal deaths in custody, this Government is set to throw Aborigines indefinitely into unlit, unventilated cells? Government members interjected. Mr WARBURTON: Members opposite should go and have a look at it. I ask: will the Minister, as a matter of urgency, reverse this barbaric decision, which is a gross infringement of basic human rights and which must irteparably damage Questions Without Notice 12 November 1987 4079

Australia's image before the entire world at a time when Brisbane is hosting Expo 88 as the highlight of our nation's Bicentenary? Mr NEAL: Let me say first and foremost that if the prisoners do not play up they will not be in there. The cells are being opened up because of increasing bashings of warders. In relation to the honourable member's reference to the royal commission—the Queensland prisons service does not—and I repeat "does not"—categorise prisoners according to racial backgrounds. Regardless of their racial backgrounds, they are prisoners in our system and they are all treated equally in that regard. As far as I am concemed, I am more interested in the rights of prison officers and in the rights of the victims of some of the crimes that have been perpetrated by criminals who are now in the gaol. The decision to reopen those punishment cells was not taken lightly. Those cells were closed down in 1984. The alternative detention cells were not proving effective for the smooth and efficient mnning of the prison. As I have said, this is an interim measure only, until such time as new detention cells can be built. In the meantime, there has to be somewhere to place the prisoners who offend against the mnning of the prison and assault the warders. I intend to support the warders. They have a very, very hard and difficult job to do. It seems that the Opposition is more interested in the rights of prisoners than in the rights of the warders, their safety and the safety of the public. Reopening of "Black hole" at Brisbane Prison Mr WARBURTON: My second question is also to the Minister for Corrective Services. I remind him that he is quoted as saying that the decision to reopen the "Black hole" was influenced by reports that trouble was expected during Expo 88, especially from Aboriginal activists. That is what the Minister is supposed to have said. I now ask: is it correct that he has also indicated that he does not intend to provide light and ventilation into that cell block? Is that what he has said? Is he now denying what is reported in this moming's newspaper, that is, that his actions are the result of an expected Aboriginal problem at Expo next year? Mr NEAL: My actions are as a result of consideration of quite a number of factors, one of which was named by the Leader of the Opposition. Many other factors were considered. As I said earlier, my department does not categorise prisoners according to their ethnic or racial backgrounds. As far as I am concerned, they are all prisoners in the same system. They will be treated equally, regardless of their class, colour or creed. Those detention cells have been opened for a specific purpose, that is, for the more efficient mnning of the prison. Teacher Aide Hours Mr FITZGERALD: In asking a question of the Minister for Education, I refer to the present campaign being conducted by a certain Mr Ardill of the Miscellaneous Workers Union about teacher aide hours. I now ask: what is his department's priority— additional teacher aide hours or additional teachers? Mr POWELL: Naturally, the priority for the Education Department is to have enough money to make sure that it has an adequate number of teachers to cover the number of children who come into the State's schools in 1988. For that matter, those comments apply to 1987, too. Everybody in this place should understand the reasons for restrictions in the Budget. I know that members on both sides of the House have received representations from people about the reallocation of teacher aide hours in the State, and I wish to say categorically that the way in which that categorisation has been done is very fair and equitable. 4080 12 November 1987 Questions Without Notice

Teacher aide hours have been reallocated so that those schools that have the greatest number of problems—that is, the smaller schools with one, two, three and four teachers— have received an increase in teacher aide hour allocations. The allocations were first made in 1973. The step-and-stair arrangement that was introduced then has, in the intervening years, taken no account of the increasing resources that have been given to larger schools. It has not taken into account that there has been no increase in resourcing to the smaller schools. So, when the opportunity came to reallocate teacher aide hours, it was done on a steady graph rate so that, according to the size of school, the number of teacher aide hours increases. That meant that more aide hours could be given to the smaller schools. Therefore, it is not correct to say that the majority of schools have had their number of aide hours cut. Opposition members: Rubbish! Mr POWELL: It is interesting to note that those who shout "Rubbish" are those who have probably only three schools in their electorates, anyway. Mr Eaton: I have nine in my electorate. Mr POWELL: The honourable member for Mourilyan interjects. Of course, he has many smaller schools in his electorate. He would know that those smaller schools have had more teacher aide hours allocated to them than has previously been the case. The vast majority of schools are in the size of class 4 and 5, not class 1 and 2. Those schools in class 4 and 5 have received extra aide hour allocations. I believe that the allocation has been done properly in that the bias, if there has been one, has been towards the smaller schools in the country areas, where there are distance education problems. In addition every one of those schools, of necessity, has to have multi-age groupings. The only problem resulted from misinformation that was given to me. I have now corrected that. That was in the class 3 schools that have a teaching principal. The department had given those schools an extra aide allocation of 30 hours a week. That was not communicated to me. I have now had the scale revised so that those class 3 schools with a teaching principal will receive extra aide hours. Yesterday 1 received a deputation from the Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union, which is representing some of the teacher aides in Queensland schools. That particular union was trying to insist that if there was more money in education, it would go towards teacher aide hours. I make no apologies for saying in this place that if extra money is allocated to education in this State, the priority will be the further employment of more qualified teachers so that the children will receive a qualified teacher in front of them and class sizes will decrease rather than increase.

Central Place Development Mr BURNS: In directing a question to the Premier and Treasurer, I refer to this morning's Daily Sun front-page headline "Joh blocked on tallest building", which claimed that yesterday National Party MLAs put on hold special legislation aimed at clearing the way for the worid's tallest building, and to the first edition of the Telegraph this morning, which carries the headline "Tallest Building—Joh Says It Will Go Up!", in which it is reported that nothing would stop the world's tallest building project in Brisbane. I now ask: will the Premier provide this House with the facts to end confusion on this issue? Have the National Party back-benchers demanded and obtained restrictions on the project, or is the project to go ahead as the Premier originally planned? Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: I could answer that question in a number of ways, as the honourable member knows very well. The point is that the project has commenced and there is nothing wrong or contradictory in any shape or form in relation to the conditions and requirements. They are all being met, and have been met. Questions Without Notice 12 November 1987 4081

As to the matter related to the meeting yesterday—certain information was sought from the Minister. He has obtained that information and I believe that he will pass on and discuss the information that was sought. The other article to which the honourable member made reference relates to the fact that the building is under way. A considerable amount of money has been committed. The media contacted me this moming and I informed them that the Govemment would be up for very heavy damages if it even attempted to stop the project, if that was the wish. It cannot be stopped. It has started, and it will proceed. In other words, the information sought by members of the party and the organisation is in order and will be provided. I am quite sure that it will be accepted on that basis, because there is no other altemative, anyway.

Police Complaints Tribunal Report on Visit to Ravenshoe by Senator Richardson Mr BURNS: In directing a question to the Minister for Police, I refer to his release yesterday of the so-called findings of the Police Complaints Tribunal in relation to the disturbance involving the Federal Environment Minister, Senator Richardson, in Ravenshoe in September. I ask: how could the tribunal possibly reach the conclusions announced yesterday without even trying to interview the Federal member for Leichhardt, who accompanied the Minister at the time of the disturbance? How is it that police were unaware of the Environment Minister's movements when they were well known to the media of Australia, and why was no attempt whatsoever made to seek such information from the office of the Federal member for Leichhardt? How is it that no mention was made in the so- called findings of the actions of the Premier, who deliberately incited public disturbance in the north prior to the visit? Finally, are honourable members to assume that from a situation in which the Premier himself inflamed community tempers, the only recommendation from the tribunal is that law and order is so scarce in Queensland that Federal Ministers of the Crown must phone ahead for police protection before they cross the border at Tweed Heads into the State? Mr GUNN: I am told that the member for Leichhardt is always very difficult to find. The fact is that the Police Complaints Tribunal has investigated this matter. One thing is loud and clear: Senator Richardson, as a Minister, is a raw prawn. I repeat: he is a raw prawn. He does not understand how things work. Whenever a Minister of the Crown visits an area, it is only right and proper that the police be notified. My police will then play their part. However, Senator Richardson went there in a taxi. Why did he arrive in a taxi? Why did he not have an official car? The police were looking for an official car. The senator arrived in a taxi. He was trying to duck the crowd. He was frightened; he was scared. The senator had nothing to be scared of My police would have looked after him, if only he or his secretary had had the decency to let the police know that he was coming. We will give him the protection he deserves, if he would only let us know. He has learnt a lesson. If he ever enters north Queensland or any other part of Queensland again, the police will know, and I can promise the honourable member that the senator will receive all the protection in the world.

Raine Island Beacon Mr McPHIE: 1 ask the Minister for Northern Development and Community Services: as Minister responsible for Queensland's heritage, has he had discussions with the Minister for Tourism, National Parks and Sport for the development of appropriate joint action to ensure that the Raine Island Beacon, built in 1844, is not removed illegally by the Royal Australian Navy under instmctions from the Federal Government, 4082 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates) as happened when the heritage vandals in Canberra recently ordered the removal of the Cape Bowling Green Lighthouse? Mr KATTER: The Federal Government has qualified for the heritage vandal prize of this century by moving miners into Kakadu national park. That was a decision that I agreed with, but many people who are very vociferous about heritage matters would object very strongly to the mining of Kakadu. The Federal Government is proposing to put a monorail around Ayers Rock; it moved the blue tarps and old-car set into the World Heritage areas in an extremely attractive region of Tasmania, which up till that stage were extremely well looked after; it painted over the Wandjina 16 000-year-old archaeological paintings in the Northern Territory with Berger Breeze—it is a very good paint, and I am not knocking it—and thereby wrecked the most valuable archaeological paintings in Australia; and, more recently, it thieved the Cape Bowling Green Lighthouse which was legally, morally and in every way, part of the heritage of this State and owned by Queenslanders. The monument on Raine Island was built in 1844. I commend the work of the honourable member for Toowoomba North for bringing this matter to the attention of the House and for having done the background work to protect this part of Queensland's heritage. Many Torres Strait Islanders are disgusted with the Federal Government, because their great grandparents and grandparents wrote their names in the cement when the monument was erected in 1844. This monument is of great value to them. The Queensland Government gives full and frank warning to the Federal Govern­ ment that it is watching that piece of Queensland's heritage. People are watching it at this very moment and if any efforts are made to prostitute the armed forces of Australia by using them as thieves and vandals, they will be confronted on Raine Island and will not be allowed to remove that part of this State's honour and heritage. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The time allotted for questions has now expired. At 10.58 a.m., In accordance with the provisions of the Sessional Order, the House went into Committee of Supply.

SUPPLY Estimates—Thirteenth Allotted Day Estimates-in-Chief, 1987-88 Mines and Energy and the Arts Department of Mines Hon. B. D. AUSTIN (Nicklin—Minister for Mines and Energy and Minister for the Arts) (10.58 a.m.): I move— "That $24,259,000 be granted for 'Department of Mines'." Mr Comben: A big difference from the Health Estimates. Mr AUSTIN: It is, isn't it? Mr Comben: You have gone down in the world. Mr AUSTIN: I am in one of the money-earning departments, not one of the money- spending departments. It is particularly appropriate that the Committee should consider the Estimates for the Department of Mines in this debate, coming as it does at a time of substantial reorganisation within the department and of searching reviews of the principal legislation under which it operates. I will return to those matters later. Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4083

I doubt that there would be any disagreement with the proposition that Queensland's obvious prosperity and high living standards are founded upon our natural resources, among which the aggregate endowment of mineral riches must rank at least equal to the land itself, the agreeable climate and the natural beauty of coastline and hinterland which attract tourists in ever-growing numbers. The Department of Mines has many responsibilities that I will not attempt to detail in this speech. The department is charged with the management of vast and immensely valuable resources that are vital to the economic and physical well-being of our State and, indeed, to the nation, now and in the long-term future. That management role is carried out on behalf of the people of Queensland—not a select group of mining companies, not overseas investors, and not the 50 or more countries that import the output from our mines and processing plants. The massive development of the mining industry over the past few decades, and its demonstrated resilience in the face of difficult intemational trading conditions, provide living endorsement of this Govemment's policies in relation to the development of natural resources in a private-enterprise system. It is important to realise that this endorsement flows on to the work of the Department of Mines in implementing our policies, ensuring fair treatment of all parties involved, public benefit, job safety, and the greatest possible protection for the environment. For many years the ex-mine value of production has provided a reliable indication of development and performance in the mining sector of the State economy—and, as members may be aware, the ex-mine value of production has gone up year by year to edge over the $4 biUion mark for the first time in 1985-86 and is to reach $4.17 billion in 1986-87. Given the strained condition of the world economy, depressed commodity prices and fierce competition, this performance overall is deserving of great credit. I believe that it underlines the efficiency and fighting qualities of our principal mining organisations and, one might add, the tenacity and drive of their marketing-managers. At the same time, the component figures of ex-mine value tell us something about the fluctuating marketing conditions that have long affected the fortunes of mining enterprises in Queensland and in many other parts of the world. By way of illustration, take the Queensland coal industry, which had another record year in 1986-87 in terms of production and export tonnage, producing 68.8 million tonnes as against 64 million tonnes the year before and selling 53.5 million tonnes to customers in a record 39 countries. The CHAIRMAN: Order! The Chamber will come to order. There is too much movement and audible conversation, especially on my right. I ask honourable members to resume their seats. Mr AUSTIN: The ex-mine value of coal production, however, remained the same for both financial years at $2.7 billion, reflecting the downward pressure on export prices overall. In contrast, the gold industry has been expanding rapidly under the impetus of high demand and rising prices with the additional expectation that recent gyrations in intemational stock-markets will cause some investors to look for safety in gold metal rather than in share scrip. The value of gold production in 1986-87 reached $260m, or about 50 per cent more than the figure of $ 173m for 1985-86. Significant new mines opened during 1986-87 at Red Dome, Far Fanning and Mount Leyshon. More new mines, notably Pajingo, Starra, Horn Island and Agricola, are on target to come into production during the current financial year, adding an aggregate 230 000 ounces a year to the State's annual gold production capacity. It appears quite likely that we will reach an output of 25 tonnes in 1990, thus easily eclipsing the record of 21 tonnes established in 1900. Not surprisingly, gold is the main target of mineral exploration in Queensland today, expenditure having reached nearly $45m in the year to 30 June. At that date, some 80 per cent of 763 authorities to prospect for minerals in force were for gold. These contrasts 4084 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates) give some indication of the complexity and realities of the mining scene—good, and not so good. Returning to the coal industry—it has been heartening in recent weeks to note that at least some industry-leaders consider that the intemational market has at last bottomed out. If this is tme, the future becomes a little brighter, particulariy in view of the greater productivity now being achieved. On the latest figures provided to me by the Queensland Coal Board, the industry is likely to produce in excess of 70 million tonnes during 1987 with output per man- year working out at 6 861 tonnes, compared with 6 227 tonnes in 1986. Employment in the industry is down this year by some 450 to 10 211, so this is a clear case of fewer men producing more coal. Surely this is something that is far more likely to help the industry than a Commonwealth Government marketing authority as proposed by leaders of the coal-mining unions. I say "leaders", because I am not at all convinced that the marketing authority idea has anywhere near the full support of union rank and file even though mass meetings have voted to support it. We all know about mass meetings, and we know also that about the only positive aspect of a coal marketing authority would be cushy jobs for some of the very union officials who are trying so very hard to promote it. The coal industry in this State is far too important to face dismption—or even the threat of dismption—over the marketing authority proposal. In my opinion, the great majority of coal-miners are a good mob of hard-working blokes who want no more than to get on with the job and take home regular pay-packets to support their wives and famiUes. In regard to the Mining Act 1968-86 and the Mining Regulations 1979—the department undertook a comprehensive study early this year and I later released the results of that study in the form of a Green Paper for public and industry pemsal. The study was initiated against the background of industry expansion which had occurred since the introduction of the current Mining Act in terms of the intensity of exploration and development, technical advancement, and financial investment required. The Green Paper provided a basis for discussion of ideas and options that might result in a strong and concise legislative framework for small and large-scale exploration and project development and mining, having due regard to the rights and entitlements of other land-users and the community generally. The six major issues identified were— • availability of and access of land; • rationalisation, simplification and security of titles and relevant dealings; • definition of powers and jurisdiction of relevant officials and courts; • regional framework for the effective administration of regulatory requirements; • royalties, rentals, returns, fees and charges; and • compensation for affected land-owners. I am delighted to inform the Committee that the Green Paper has generated some 200 responses from mining companies, prospectors, mining wardens, lawyers, mral groups. State and local government bodies and many organisations and individuals with an interest in the mining scene. The responses are now under careful study in the Department of Mines, a process which, due to the number and complexity of the issues involved, will take several months. Bearing in mind that we are dealing with the most detailed and comprehensive examination of the Mining Act ever undertaken, I would not expect any draft legislative proposals to come forward before the new year. It would be inappropriate for me at this stage to foreshadow any possible changes which might be made to present legislation, but I will say this: I am confident that we will wind up with a better and more readily workable Act that will be immensely relevant to our times. It will be sympathetic to the needs and aspirations of mineral exploration and mining industries while recognising Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4085 and safeguarding the basic rights of all Queenslanders in the area of natural resources development. Procedures similar to that adopted for the Mining Act review are in train in relation to the Gas Act, on which a Green Paper has been released. Other legislation Usted for reviev/ includes the Explosives Act, the Petroleum Act, the Mines Regulation Act and the Coal Mining Act. I said earlier that this debate comes at a time of substantial reorganisation within the Department of Mines. That might well have been an understatement, because the review of performance began in April 1986 and has been followed this year by a program of strategy development and the most far-reaching redevelopment in the 113-year history of the department. This is now virtually complete, and the department is constmcted in terms of program-management systems that emphasise results, services to the industry and the public and optimum use of all resources. There has been no increase in staff numbers; and while no officer has been displaced, the reorganisation will lead to a reduced level of staffing. The Director-General, Mr Wolff, now has the immediate support of two highly experienced assistant directors-general and a team of 10 program managers. Basically, the old stmcture was founded on professional requirements in administration, geological assessment and mining engineering. Services established under that stmcture are still provided. I point here to responsibilities that include administration of exploration and mining tenures, the screening of development proposals and mining plans, supervision of mine safety, administration of the Explosives Act and the Gas Act, support for mineral and petroleum exploration through programs of regional geological mapping, metallogenic mapping and deep stratigraphic drilling and continuing operation and development of the Safety in Mines Testing and Research Station at Redbank. The new organisation is designed to address what we perceive to be priority tasks— development and utilisation of mineral and energy resources, including our varied minerals, natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas, and greater emphasis on the acquisition and dissemination of basic information and economic advice to assist organisations and individuals in their assessments of commercial opportunities in the field of resources development. The bold, composite initiative in restmcturing the Department of Mines and reviewing the legislative framework under which it operates is probably unequalled in the history of public administration in Queensland. Certainly, the organisation we have put in place must come under public scmtiny as to performance, effectiveness and value to the community, but I believe it is entirely capable of meeting our needs to the end of the present century and possibly well beyond that. I turn now to the electricity supply industry. In recent years, the electricity supply industry has gone through a period of consolidation made possible by the Govemment's decision to amalgamate the State Electricity Commission and the Queensland Electricity Generating Board. The two-tiered stmcture consisting of the Queensland Electricity Commission and seven electricity boards is proving effective in controUing costs and keeping prices down. The figures speak for themselves, with the industry reducing staff from 13 200 to under 10 400 in just three years and holding price increases to no more than half the Consumer Price Index. In 1986 the price increase was 3 per cent and the CPI increase was 6.5 per cent. In 1987 the price increase was 4 per cent and the CPI increase was 8.6 per cent. The industry's present goals are to reduce the price of electricity in real terms by at least half the level of inflation over the next five years, and to ensure stability in the pricing of electricity. Price increases in the period to 1992 will be no greater than half the increase in the Consumer Price Index. Electricity-consumers in Queensland can expect no price shocks in their household electricity bills, and businesses can plan their operations confidently. 4086 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

The industry now suppUes over 99 per cent of Queensland homes with electricity. It is entirely self-financing, with no moneys transferring either to or from the Government. Almost all revenue is derived from the sale of electricity, which last year amounted to $1,351.5m. Revenue from other sources, mainly interest on temporarily available funds, was $ 100.4m. Operating expenditure in 1986-87 totalled $ 1,435.2m, of which debt-servicing took the greatest share, 35 per cent. Other significant operating expenditures were on generation, 25 per cent; provision for capital works, 20 per cent; transmission and distribution, 10 per cent; and management, 10 per cent. The reduction in employment of over 20 per cent is one of the policies that has produced the tangible cost reductions contributing to the industry's current price performance. No adverse inference has been drawn from this. Any efficient, well-managed business has a lean and hungry look, and the Queensland electricity supply industry is beginning to look like this. Electricity supply is a capital-intensive undertaking. Capital spending last year amounted to $701.9m. Forty-seven per cent of this total was spent on generation works, and electricity transmission and distribution projects accounted for 36 per cent of the total. The remaining 17 per cent included the acquisition of land, buildings, and plant and equipment. The source of funds for capital works was loans, 43 per cent; intemally generated from sales revenue, 41 per cent; and other sources, including contributions fr-om consumers, 16 per cent. Funds from new loan borrowings are substantially below those of recent years when three major power stations were concurrently under constmction. As at 30 June 1987, the total value of loans outstanding was $3,874m. Coal is by far the most important energy source for electricity generation in Queensland, with almost 98 per cent of the energy generated being produced in coal- fired power stations. Of the remaining energy generated, 2 per cent is produced by the hydrostations in north Queensland, with a further small amount produced by intemal combustion and gas turbines. The electricity industry is the largest consumer of coal in the State, using about 9'/2 million tonnes in 1986-87. This was about 80 per cent of total local coal consumption. Electricity usage—units consumed—during 1986-87 was 6 per cent above the previous year. Excluding requirements of large industrial users, an average growth of 6.6 per cent has been achieved over the past decade. During this period, population growth was high and many mining developments came on stream. The outlook is for growth of about 5 per cent per annum for the coming 10 years. It reflects a subdued outlook for economic activity and less rapid population growth. However, it is substantially higher than growth rates of about 3 per cent being forecast in other States. Provided the rapid expansion of tourism, continued expansion in the commercial sector and ever- increasing usage by existing consumers continues, this high growth rate will be achieved. Downward revisions to the forecast of the State's electricity needs have occurred since the heady resources-boom days of the early 1980s. Therefore, flexibility in planning is given high priority within the Queensland Electricity Commission. Such flexibility has, for example, allowed the timing of Stanwell Power Station to be adjusted so that instaUed plant will be just sufficient to meet the electricity load at that time—a simple business necessity. As part of its long-term strategy, the industry is encouraging consumers to move consumption away from the critical peak periods. These measures will benefit the industry by reducing the need for capital spending on generation and transmission facilities. But it is not only the individual consumers who shift load from the peak and get cheaper electricity who will benefit from this; every customer is the ultimate winner, through lower overall prices. In November 1986, Queensland's newest power station, Tarong, was completed to its design capacity of 1 400 megawatts when its fourth 350-megawatt generating unit Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4087

began supplying power to the main grid. In 1986-87, the station generated 10 610 gigawatt hours, or about half of the State's total generation, achieving a remarkable availability factor of over 90 per cent. In the same year Gladstone Power Station generated 8 588 gigawatt hours, or 40 per cent of State requirements. Wivenhoe pumped storage has fulfilled all expectations. This station, which is the first of its kind in the State, has effectively carried out its task of reinforcing peak load capability and improving system flexibility. Good progress is being achieved on the 700-megawatt Callide B Power Station, with the first of two 350-megawatt generating units expected to be commissioned in March next year. The all-up cost of this project is expected to be $8 30m. Work on the 1 400 megawatt Stanwell Power Station is progressing on schedule for a 1993 commissioning date for the first of its four 350-megawatt generating units. The overall cost of this facility is currently estimated at $ 1,650m. These two stations currently under constmction, along with existing stations, will ensure that adequate supply of energy is available to meet the forecast growth in energy needs for the next 10 years. 1 am pleased to report that there have been no black-outs because of industrial disputes for over 2'/2 years. The Government's strong employment policy could not have been more successful. It has also given the industry and its employees a more stable basis upon which to plan and build. This is evidenced by the improved productivity, which has risen from 1.3 gigawatt hours per employee to 2 gigawatt hours per employee in the last three years, an increase of 16 per cent each year. 1 am happy to remind the Committee that all Queenslanders, whether they live in Brisbane or Birdsville, Townsville or Charleville, now pay the same price for electricity. The Government is convinced that the benefits of this move are encouraging widespread development of the State. The wisdom of this policy has now been recognised in New South Wales, where a similar tariff equalisation scheme has recently been commenced. Rural electrification continues apace. Electricity boards are implementing the Government's policy of making a reticulated supply of electricity available to mral dwellers, where practicable. Large capital contributions are required from consumers, but these are heavily subsidised by the electricity boards out of moneys received from consumers generally. I am sure that no tme Queenslander begmdges this cost to give electricity to mral dwellers, whether they be graziers or railway fettlers. Most honourable members will have personal experience of how much these people appreciate this amenity, which we in the cities just take for granted. The safe use of electricity by the public has been strenuously promoted by the Government and the electricity supply industry for many years. As Minister, I have contributed to this by an extensive electrical safety awareness campaign. Judging by the feedback, the message is getting through. There was a significant reduction in electrical fatalities in the last year. Finally, I would like to give credit to the managers and employees within the electricity supply industry who have taken up the challenge to build a stronger, leaner and more commercially oriented industry. The benefits are flowing to all Queenslanders through low-cost electricity and better service. I am often asked what relationship, if any, there is between the two seemingly unrelated areas of my portfolio, namely Mines and Energy, on the one hand, and Arts on the other. At first glance it might seem that the relationship is very tenuous, but this is not so. Both contribute significantly to Queensland's economy and there is a close involvement between the two, as the mining industry is an important sponsor and supporter of the arts. The private-sector assistance for the arts complements the Queensland Government's support, which is based on a realisation that the arts contribute to a full and enjoyable life for Queenslanders and play an important role in the State's economic growth. The 4088 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates) development of the arts in Queensland has not come about by chance, but from a decision that a responsible arts policy should be developed in the context of overall Government planning. I have the concerns of a multitude of arts organisations under my portfolio umbrella. This personally gives me an amount of pleasure because it is an aspect of life in which I take an enjoyable personal interest. I use the term "arts organisations" as a generic term applied to a broad range of artistic and cultural organisations. These may be large, established performing arts companies, repertory theatre groups, craft organisations, museums, galleries or libraries—of all sizes and styles. They may operate in a variety of fields, namely, crafts, films, literature, music, theatre, visual arts, multiart forms, etc. The list is endless, but arts involve people, artists, performers, producers, production staff, administrators and audiences. It is a labour-intensive economic activity. The Queensland Government is pleased to continue its support for the arts in Queensland. Over the last 10 years the growth in funding through the Division of Cultural Activities has increased by some 284 per cent. Queensland, once regarded by some as a cultural desert, is now leading the field in arts development. The essential themes and principles in Government support for arts development through the Division of Cultural Activities are— • continued and secure funding base for our arts organisations; • commitment to public access and community involvement; • opportunities for people living in regional centres; and • support of community, amateur and youth arts activities. In an endeavour to ensure that as wide a cross-section of the population as possible is able to take advantage of arts opportunities and facilities, the Government has initiated several new schemes of assistance. The Touring and Remote Areas Access Scheme and the Minister for the Arts Encouragement Awards, introduced in 1986, are designed to assist people disadvantaged by distance or other factors to participate more fully in arts activities. The Govemment encourages all major-funded companies to tour regional Queensland. It also provides generous financial support to its major arts entrepreneur, the Queensland Arts Council, to service smaller regional centres throughout the State. In addition, it also funds a professional theatre company and dance company based in Townsville— New Moon Theatre Company and Dance North—to service far-north Queensland. I am proud that Queensland is one of only two States to support amateur arts organisations and to support major and local festivals under the Arts portfolio. Provision has been made for a total of $6,574,000 in this Budget for the functions of the Division of Cultural Activities. I would also like to mention the Cultural Capital Development Fund, administered by my colleague the Minister for Works and Housing, under which assistance is made available for the constmction of buildings for cultural activities. Undoubtedly, the main centre of cultural activity in the State is the Queensland Cultural Centre, which comprises the four corner-stones of the State's cultural heritage—the Queensland Museum, the Queensland Art Gallery, the Performing Arts Complex, and, from the next year, the State Library. The concept of accommodating these institutions in one complex is a world first for Queensland and is unique in blending the visual and performing arts with museum and library services. The Queensland Cultural Centre Tmst is the umbrella body which administers the common services for the centre. It has been allocated $8.439m from consolidated revenue in the State Budget for this purpose. I propose now to speak about each of the four user bodies at the Queensland Cultural Centre. The (Queensland Museum wiU receive a total of $4,737,900 towards the provision of its services and to cover the cost of its permanent staff for 1987-88. The museum has operated from its new building within the Queensland Cultural Centre since 7 Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4089

October 1986 and has already catered to the needs of more than 750 000 visitors. The museum's north Queensland branch opened in Townsville in June 1987 in the Great Barrier Reef Wonderland complex. Already it is averaging more than 1 000 visitors each day, regardless of the small, nominal charge required for its specialist exhibition. The board of the Queensland Museum will begin the operation of a further specialist branch, the Cobb and Co. museum, in Toowoomba and I will have the pleasure of opening this branch early next month. Again, a small entry fee will be charged in keeping with the precedent set at the Woodworks branch in Gympie and the north Queensland branch. A Government doUar-for-doUar subsidy scheme will be maintained to the extent of $100,000 per year to encourage monetary donations to the museum. Also maintained will be the State Government grants to the local museums scheme, to the level of $150,000 for 1987-88. Although limited to $3,000 for any single project, this scheme has been of enormous value to the more than 100 small, public museums around the State. Turning now to the Queensland Art Gallery—this institution is regarded as the finest art venue in the country. It has become one of Brisbane's leading tourist destinations, attracting over half a million visitors each year—the highest attendance per capita of any State gallery in Australia. As the State centre for the visual arts in Queensland, the Queensland Art Gallery continues to attract major international exhibitions drawn from art museums, national galleries and private collections throughout the world. Internationally, the gallery had firmly established its reputation as a competent and successful exhibitor of world treasures. The Queensland Art Gallery's activities extended well into the country area. In the past 12 months, the extension services program toured exhibitions throughout the State, providing lectures, workshops, loan exhibitions and consultancy services to meet the needs of about 22 800 Queenslanders living in some 27 regional centres and remote townships. In 1987-88, the Queensland Art Gallery will hold a spectacular festival of art exhibitions to celebrate the Australian Bicentenary and World Expo 88. The art gallery allocation for 1987-88 wiU amount to $3.6m. The next body about which I intend to speak is the Queensland Performing Arts Trust. The first two-year period of the tmst's operation has seen the completion of major capital works and the commencement of other significant projects designed to make the Performing Arts Complex more flexible in its operation and to increase potential revenue from theatre rentals. The Expo authority will hire the three auditoriums in the complex for the six- month period. The Expo programs, plus bicentennial events, activities by the tmst's major hirers and the tmst's own presentations will place extraordinary demands on the theatres and staff and will result in an increased level of costs and income, including recoverable costs. The tmst has sought to extend the range of its activities by joining forces with other arts organisations such as the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Musica Viva, Kite Pre-school Threate, the Queensland Theatre Orchestra, etc., and to minimise costs by arranging joint presentations. It has not sought to compete with commercial entrepreneurs, but has worked with them to provide educational experiences for the young involving such companies as the Royal Shakespeare Company and artists such as Marcel Marceau. Local artists gain employment through the tmst's activities by participating in foyer entertainment, special concerts and school performances. The Queensland Performing Arts Tmst, in presenting its budget Estimates for 1987- 88, has sought to contain cost increases whilst continuing with ongoing capital projects and making its halls available to hirers at a reasonable rate. The consolidated revenue grant for 1987-88 to the Queensland Performing Arts Tmst is $4,693,000. The fourth user body at the Queensland Cultural Centre will be the State Library, which will be officially opened on 8 April 1988. The State Library has been granted an 4090 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates) additional budgetary allocation of just over $lm this financial year. One of the many additional features of the new State Library will be a children's library, which will provide a Statewide focus for children's literature and which will recognise that children have special library needs. Currently, owing to a lack of space, the State Library does not operate a children's library in its WUliam Street premises. The new children's library will provide a focus for children and their expanding information needs. It will contain a collection of the best currently available books. Other features of the new library will be the special collections of rare books. As previously announced, the James Hardie company has agreed to donate its library of Australian fine arts to the Government and people of Queensland in recognition of the company's centenary in 1988. It is hoped that the State Library will be able to acquire the Pat MuUins' cricket collection. There are probably only eight notable cricket collections in the world. Included in the select group is the collection of Mr MuUins, a Brisbane solicitor, which he has developed as a labour of love over his life-time. From my comments, it should be clear to honourable members that the Library Board of Queensland recognises the fact that it is responsible for operating a library to service all of the State and not just the Brisbane area. An amount of $8.3m, or almost half of the library's Budget allocation, has been directed towards assisting local authorities throughout the State in the provision of library services. This assistance takes the form of either direct cash subsidies under a number of subsidy schemes or, alternatively, the provision of books on an exchange basis to small local authorities. The Brisbane City Council is the principal beneficiary of the cash subsidy assistance, as it received in excess of $2,090,000 last financial year. The State Library is entering an exciting phase in its development. The library board, the staff of the State Library and, I hope, all Queenslanders are looking forward with eager anticipation to the opening of the new State Library next April. The CHAIRMAN: Order! 1 desire to inform honourable members that, on the Vote proposed, I will allow a full discussion on aU of the Minister's departmental Estimates, Consolidated Revenue, Tmst and Special Funds, and Loan Fund. For the information of honourable members, I point out that the administrative acts of the department are open to debate, but the necessity for legislation and matters involving legislation cannot be discussed in Committee of Supply. Mr VAUGHAN (Nudgee) (11.30 a.m.): The first matter about which I wish to speak in this Mines and Energy Estimates debate is the coal-mining industry. In the financial year ended 30 June 1987 the State produced 68.8 million tonnes of saleable coal worth approximately $2.7 biUion. Exports to 39 countries accounted for 53.5 million tonnes of this production and 11.9 miUion tonnes was consumed within the State, leaving a surplus production of 3.4 million tonnes. According to the 1985-86 Queensland Coal Board's 35th annual report, as at 30 June 1986 there were 29 open-cut coal mines and 18 underground coal mines operating in the State. However, in the last 12 months two trial open-cut mines commenced operations, and production at three underground mines has been scaled down or ceased. As at 30 June 1987 a total of 10 342 persons—334 fewer than at the same time in the previous year—were employed in the State's coal-mining industry—1 412 under­ ground and 8 930 in open cut. The number of persons employed in underground coal mines fell by 410, of whom 355 were in the West Moreton area, whereas the number of persons employed in open-cut mines increased by 76. Although 68.8 million tonnes of saleable coal was produced in the State in 1986- 87, the estimated total saleable coal production capacity of the State is approximately 85 million tonnes. That means that this State has the capacity to produce at least 17 million tonnes more coal a year if markets could be found for that coal. Further, I understand that a number of existing mines are capable of substantially increasing their production capacity at a cost considerably lower than the cost of Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4091 establishing new mines. However, as all honourable members are aware, the State's coal­ mining industry is going through difficult times. There is an oversupply of coal on the world market which it appears wiU continue for several years, increased competition from existing producers in other countries and new producers who are moving into the already overcrowded world coal market. This has resulted in a substantial reduction in coal prices as buyers, particularly the Japanese— who are our biggest customer, taking 42 per cent of our total exports last financial year— play one seller off against the other. Because of the situation that exists, there is a need for the coal industry collectively to look for ways and means to overcome or alleviate the problem. Unfortunately, none of the parties involved in the industry appear able to get together to attack the problem. The mining unions, which are naturaUy concemed about retrenchments that have taken place in the industry over the last 12 months and the loss of opportunities for employment in the industry, are arguing for a national coal authority. For the record, the number of persons employed in the industry in Queensland has decreased as follows— 26 July 1986 10 693 persons employed 27 December 1986 10 620 persons employed 27 June 1987 10 342 persons employed 25 July 1987 10 296 persons employed That is a reduction of 397 in 12 months. The coal-producers, however, are opposed to a national coal authority. They are seeking to maintain their share of the market and stay in business by reducing production and marketing costs. The State Govemment also is opposed to a national coal authority and supports a reduction in production costs, but has exhibited a distinct reluctance to reduce the extremely high tax it imposes on coal-producers via coal rail freight rates. Although the Govemment has tried to create the impression that it is trying to help the State's coal industry by obtaining new markets in Turkey and Romania, unfortunately the indications are that, if the Turkish deal actually becomes a reality, current Queensland coal-producers may not get an opportunity to supply any of the contract. Information that I have received indicates that a new mine, possibly on the Ensham deposit, will be developed to supply any Turkish contract. As for the much-publicised Romanian coal deal, for which the Premier undertook a special overseas trip last August—if this deal ultimately eventuates, as the Premier has previously indicated, that coal will probably be supplied from a new mine also. However, the Romanian coal deal is as confused as the Turkish coal deal. On his retum from his August trip to Romania, the Premier was reported, on Sunday, 23 August, as stating that Romanian leaders would visit Queensland in a few weeks to sign a coal deal, which initially involved the supply of 3 million tonnes of coking coal increasing to up to 10 miUion tonnes a year. In the Australian on 3 October it was reported that initially coal would be supplied from existing mines. Later when tonnages built up, Hancock Mining—Lang Hancock's company—would build a new mine and a rail link to the coast where a new port would also be built. However, in the Australian on 10 October it was reported that, according to the Premier's Department, the Romanian Government had not expressed firm interest in taking regular shipments of Queensland coal when the Premier met representatives in August. I point out that in the Daily Sun on 3 October, in response to reports by Austrade that his discussions with the Romanian Govemment were "at the most cursory level", the Premier was quoted as saying that he talked to the President of Romania. Regarding Hancock Mining building a new mine in central Queensland—while I am not aware what coal-mining leases Mr Hancock may now hold, I am aware that in 1982 Mr Hancock was interested in the Roper Creek steaming coal deposit and was 4092 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates) reported to hold a lease on a coal deposit west of Blair Athol. At that time he was also promoting a proposal to build a standard gauge railway line to the coast, a steel-mill, a port and a coal-loader. As I indicated at the start of my speech, Queensland has the capacity to produce at least 17 million tonnes more coal than it produces at present from existing mines. Therefore I believe that, having regard to the economic problems facing the State's coal- producers, everything possible should be done to get sales for that production so existing mines can operate at maximum efficiency. I do not believe that new mines should be developed which would be in competition with existing mines, and I am certainly opposed to the constmction of a private railway line as proposed by Mr Lang Hancock and the Premier. Since a national coal authority is apparently not acceptable to anyone except the mining unions, perhaps consideration could be given to the establishment of a marketing authority to sell surplus coal production capacity. I emphasise that. At present Queensland has coal-producers in this State and in New South Wales competing against each other for sales around the world. The Premier is jetting about the world allegedly lining up sales of coal on behalf of no particular company or companies, and obviously getting himself and the State into all sorts of tangles. A bit of control, co-operation and co­ ordination would go a long way towards assisting the coal-mining industry out of its problems. If that 17 million tonnes of unused production capacity could be sold it would be worth more than $700m to the State. However, Queensland should try to find sales to countries other than Japan, because this State relies too heavily on Japan for coal sales and, as a result, it has too much bargaining power over Queensland. It is about time that the State Government did more than pay lip-service to help the State's coal industry out of its problems. While the Government is quick to blame the coal unions for the situation in the industry, it is mercilessly squeezing every dollar it can out of coal-producers through coal rail freight charges. According to the Queensland Railways 1986-87 annual report, last financial year the railways carried 61.3 miUion tonnes of coal, that is 2.3 million tonnes or 3.8 per cent more than in the previous year. Rail freight revenue derived from the carriage of coal amounted to $726.8m, that is $82.6m or 12.8 per cent more than the previous year. So while the tonnage of coal carried increased by 3.8 per cent, revenue increased by 12.8 per cent. The average freight rate charged per tonne worked out at $11.85, compared with $10.91 the previous year. However, as the profit margin on the carriage of coal is about 60 per cent, the amount of profit the Government made on the carriage of coal worked out at $436m, which was $49.5m or 12.8 per cent more than the previous year. For every tonne of coal carried the railways made $7.17. As total railway revenue from fares and freights, etc. in 1986-87 was $ 1,003m, that shows the extent to which the State's coal industry is contributing to railway revenue. Yet the Government has the hide to portray itself as a low-tax Government and to contend that the Coal Industry Tribunal is responsible for making the coal industry uncompetitive. I also point out that the Government charges export coal rail freight rates for coal carried to the State's power stations, which is another hidden Government tax on electricity-consumers. So much for this so-caUed low-tax Government. The coal-mining industry is vital to this State and the nation and it is extremely important that we do not kill the goose that lays the golden egg. I will now make a few comments about another mining industry, which is predicted to become the State's second-most important mineral export earner after coal, that is, gold-mining. According to reports, Queensland is on the edge of a gold msh and by 1990 it wiU be earning about $2 billion from gold exports. It is predicted that, by 1990, gold mines in Queensland will produce more than 1.2 bUlion ounces of gold, which substantially exceeds the 963 000 ounces a year recorded during the gold msh at the turn of the century. At present there are eight gold-producing mines in the State, with 10 more mines scheduled to commence production by the end of the next year. There are even plans Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4093

to reopen the old Woolgar gold mine, which is north of my home town of Richmond. In 1985-86, the value of gold produced in the State amounted to $ 173.3m. Out of that sum the Govemment received royalty, which is paid in arrears, amounting to $2.4m. Last financial year, the value of gold produced increased to $240.5m. However, the amount of royalty received is not currently available. In 1985-86, the Kidston mine, which is the State's largest gold-producer, produced gold worth $ 129.6m and paid royalty amounting to $2.3m. However, in answer to a question I asked on 24 Febmary this year, the Minister for Mines and Energy informed the House that, because Kidston was the initial major gold-mining project using modem mining and treatment techniques to develop low-grade gold-bearing material and because the manner of determination of royalty was amended subsequent to the compilation of feasibility studies by the company, Kidston had been granted royalty relief for a period of five years from 1 July 1984. As it was reported earlier this year that Kidston looked like making a huge $60m profit for the year, I would have thought the Govemment would have related any relief from royalty to company profit. In other words, while under the circumstances it was not unreasonable to extend some relief to Kidston, I believe that there should have been a cut-off point. As things stand at present, I do not believe that the State is receiving a reasonable retum from the exploitation of its gold resources. As I have indicated on numerous occasions in the past, I consider that the present method of levying royalty on minerals is out of date and should be changed to give the people of this State, who own the resource, a better retum. As I have spelt out in State Labor Party policy since 1979, I believe that there should be a two-tiered royalty stmcture based on (a) the level of production and (b) the profitability of the operation. In that way, every mining company would be aware right from the outset of the extent of its commitment in relation to a base royalty. If a mining operation turned out to be marginal only, the base royalty would be charged, whereas if the mining operation turned out to be highly profitable, such as at Kidston, the second tier royalty would apply. However, as the Government is currently reviewing royalties, I can only hope that it will give serious consideration to the introduction of the two-tier royalty stmcture that I have outlined. In what is left of the 20 minutes for which I am allowed to speak in this Estimates debate, I would like to comment on the State's electricity industry. According to the 1986-87 Queensland Electricity Commission annual report, the total generating capacity of the State as at 30 June was 4 621 megawatts, which was 1 287 megawatts above the maximum demand of 3 334 megawatts recorded on 29 June this year. Of that total generating capacity, 81 per cent, or 3 752 megawatts, is coal-fired, and it is interesting to note that 98 per cent of all electricity generated in 1986-87 was produced by coal- fired power stations. While fuel costs accounted for 14.9 per cent of total industry operating costs, coal costs per tonne rose by only 3.1 per cent. Despite the fact that the Govemment has closed down 520 megawatts of generating capacity at Swanbank and Tennyson Power Stations this year, we still have 1 287 megawatts surplus generating capacity. This surplus generating capacity is one of the reasons why electricity-consumers in this State have, since the reorganisation of the electricity industry in 1977, been forced to pay excessively high electricity charges. Although the Government boasts that the last two electricity price increases have been less than Consumer Price Index increases, the fact is that, since the reorganisation of the electricity industry in 1977, the average domestic consumer's quarterly bill has increased by 203 per cent. Prior to the last two increases, every increase since 1977 has been well in excess of Consumer Price Index increases. For example, in April 1978 the increase was 18.4 per cent, in June 1981 it was 15.8 per cent and in June 1982 it was 20.2 per cent. 4094 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

It was only because of the concerted campaign by the Australian Labor Party that the Govemment was forced to reduce the level of electricity price increases. The Australian Labor Party was also instmmental in forcing the Govemment to introduce pensioner electricity rebates. As I have done on so many occasions in the past, I would also point out to electricity-consumers that 20 per cent of their electricity bill is a hidden Govemment tax. While the Govemment claims that it is a low-tax Govemment, the fact is it is a Govemment which taxes by stealth. As I have already pointed out, the Govemment charges export rail freight on coal that is transported by the railways to power stations. That represents approximately a $20m per year rip-off of electricity-consumers. In addition, through the capital works levy, which is imposed on retail electricity- consumers only, the Govemment during the last financial year ripped $291.7m off electricity-consumers. Since this tax was introduced in 1977 it has raised $1.5 billion. Despite the substantial increases in electricity charges since the reorganisation of the electricity industry in 1977 and despite the capital works levy rip-offs, because of gross mismanagement and bad planning by the Govemment, the State's electricity industry is in debt up to its ears. For example, as at June 1979 the gross loan debt of the then State Electricity Commission was $920.6m. As at June of this year, the debt stood at $4,158m—an increase of 351 per cent. As I pointed out earlier, as at June of this year we had 1 287 megawatts of surplus generating capacity, and that was at the winter peak demand. This year the Govemment closed down 400 megawatts of generating capacity, even though it had many years' working life left. Tarong Power Station, which is going to cost electricity-consumers an extra $259m, is now fully operational. However, the extremely poor coal that is bumed at Tarong has already caused problems, and I predict that it will be the cause of more serious problems in the not-too-distant future. Next year, Callide B No. 1 unit, which is currently under constmction, comes on line, adding a further 350 megawatts to an already oversupplied electricity generating system. In 1989, Callide B No. 2 will add a further 350 megawatts. However, Stanwell Power Station, which was initially scheduled to come on line this year and on which $79m has been spent to date, is now not due to commence operation untU 1993. Unfortunately, time does not allow me to refer to the many other matters about which I so very much wanted to comment. However, other speakers on this side of the Chamber will be referring to such matters as the Govemment's desire to proceed with silica-mining at Shelburne Bay, despite the fact that the present silica-mining project at Cape Flattery, which I visited recently, has 100 years' reserves and, as a result of recent expansion, is capable of meeting any anticipated increase in demand. They will also be referring to the amazing sale of the Irvinebank treatment works, which the Government sold to a Mr F. Hilla four years ago for $120,000, of which to date only $12,000 has been paid. The terms of the sale, other than price, are still under negotiation. That is certainly a strange way of selling off a Government enterprise. The operations of the South East Queensland Electricity Board will also be getting a mention, along with the proposal by the Govemment that the Coal Industry Tribunal should be abolished because it is a one-man tribunal like the Electricity Industry Causes Tribunal, which the Government set up in March 1985. Reference will also be made to the findings of the Moura mine disaster inquiry released last June. As it appears that I will be removed from this shadow portfolio in the near future, I must say that 1 have had much pleasure in handling it and in dealing with the various departmental officers. Mr BORBIDGE (Surfers Paradise) (11.51 a.m.): The Estimates before the Committee today relate to a very important area of Government endeavour. In particular, the Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4095 mining industry and electricity generation have been areas of significant achievement for the Queensland Government and will be addressed later in this debate by my colleagues on this side of the Chamber. My comments today in supporting the Estimates before the Committee will refer mainly to those matters under the Minister's jurisdiction relating to the arts in Queensland. At the outset, 1 take this opportunity to thank the Minister and his departmental officers for their considerable support and assistance in the administration of the department. As the Minister indicated a short while ago, over the past decade funding made available by the Queensland Government to the Division of Cultural Activities has increased by 284 per cent. In 1975, the Queensland and Federal Govemments were equal partners in funding, with amounts of $ 1,126m being allocated from both Govern­ ments to this area of cultural endeavour. Today the disparity in funding is now $4m in favour of the State Government. So let there be no doubt in the minds of the people of Queensland which Government—State or Federal—gives a higher priority to the advancement of the arts in the State of Queensland. In recent times, we have seen a considerable change in emphasis in funding to reflect the needs of people in regional Queensland and the special assistance being made available for talented artists disadvantaged by distance and other factors. We have witnessed a deliberate policy designed to encourage the greatest possible number of Queenslanders to enjoy the arts, acknowledging that this would be best realised through funding amateur arts organisations and community activities throughout the State. The Government's encouragement of the arts rejects elitism. In fact, the arts in Queensland have developed into an exciting and challenging industry under the stew­ ardship of this Government that is increasingly attracting support from the corporate sector. The Division of Cultural Activities has a small but dedicated staff, ensuring that administration costs are kept to a minimum, with a majority of funding going directly to arts organisations. Many honourable members have acknowledged the outstanding commitment to the arts by this Govemment in the creation of our cultural centre, which is generally recognised as the finest such complex of its type to be built anywhere in Australia. The new museum, the Queensland Art Gallery, the Performing Arts Complex and, soon, the library have generated a renewed interest and enthusiasm in our cultural heritage by a great many Queenslanders and visitors to our State. They have had a significant impact on the community—not only the people in Brisbane but people throughout Queensland, and indeed visitors to the State. It is worthy of recognition in a debate such as this that the most popular exhibition yet staged at the Queensland Art Gallery, the Twentieth Century Masters from the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, attracted more than 126 000 people to the gallery during its eight-week exhibition. The Jack Manton Prize 1987 was recognised as a landmark exhibition for the Queensland Art Gallery, with that display of Australian modern art curated by the gallery being the first to be accompanied by a major publication. The exhibition received positive and widespread critical acclaim. Another exhibition to receive wide national acclaim was Painters and Sculptors: Diversity in Contemporary Australian Art. This exhibition represented one of the most important curatorial projects yet undertaken by the Queensland Art Gallery and was part of the cultural exchange with Queensland's sister State, the prefecture of Saitama in Japan and, in particular, the Museum of Modem Art at Saitama. That institution received the exhibition which was opened by His Excellency the Governor of Queensland, Sir Walter Campbell, early last month. Significantly, this is the first major exhibition of contemporary Australian art to be seen in Japan, and represents a new initiative for the State gallery overseas. It is a significant achievement which should be recorded in this Parliament. 4096 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

Other exciting exhibitions include: masterpieces from the Louvre, France; master drawings from the Royal collection at Windsor Castle; Japanese ceramics from the collection of the Idemitsu Museum of Fine Arts in Tokyo; and the Inspired Dream- Life as Art in Aboriginal Australia, as well as the Great Australian Art Exhibition. I welcome the allocation by the Government for a number of major items in the performing arts centre this financial year. Those include the completion of the winching system in the concert hall, improvements to the acoustics and other major items. This year the performing arts trust will play a major part in the presentation of special bicentennial and Expo programs. With hire of its halls by the Expo Authority, the tmst will be involved with the presentation of a spectacular artay of intemational and local talent. People from throughout the world and other parts of Australia will be able to join Queenslanders in enjoying the magnificient facilities provided by the Queensland Government. I particulariy welcome the initatives of the trust in formulating programs of arts activities for the disabled and understand that this work will extend to both the north coast and Gold Coast this financial year. The tmst's arts programming activities have been developed to fulful the objects of the tmst as outlined in the Queensland Performing Arts Tmst Act. The relevant objectives are— to produce, present and manage the performing arts in the building occupied by the tmst at the Queensland Cultural Centre, as defined; to establish and conduct schools, lectures, courses, seminars and other forms of education in the performing arts; to teach, train and instmct persons and promote education and research in the performing arts; to promote and encourage public interest and participation in the performing arts; and to promote and encourage, either directly or indirectly, the knowledge, understanding, appreciation and enjoyment of the performing arts. In pursuing these objectives and in selecting programs, the tmst has sought to bring to local audiences events which they would not have seen without the Queensland Performing Arts Tmst's involvement. I refer to the London Philharmonic Orchestra, the Berlin State Symphony Orchestra and the Australian Dance Theatre as only three examples. The tmst has also sought to— select artists and performing companies for their artistic excellence; provide employment for local performing artists; complement the range of performing activities being presented in Brisbane; present facets of the performing arts which, because they are not commercially viable, would not be shown by private entrepreneurs; and ensure that the complex is being utilised to present performing arts events which will appeal to a wide cross-section of the community, such as children, the elderly, disabled people, and family groups. It should be acknowledged that with the financial resources at its disposal, the tmst in its first two years of operation has presented or co-presented an enormous variety of international and AustraUan talent. Highlights have been visits by the Royal Danish Orchestra, the Nexus Canadian Percussion Ensemble and a screening of the silent movie classic Napoleon with music composed and conducted by Carmine Coppola, played by the Queensland Symphony Orchestra. Performances have been given by artists such as violinist Pinchus Zucherman, classical guitarist Julian Bream, baritone Haken Hagegard, the Pendyms Male Voice Choir from Wales, the PhUip Glass Ensemble and the Brass Band from San Francisco demonstrate the diversity in the range of entertainment that has been provided by this Government through the performing arts centre for the people Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4097 of Queensland. I believe that the Government is to be very strongly commended for those efforts. It is significant that the Division of Cultural Activities, which was established in 1968, was the first such body to be created by a State Government to provide separate funding for the arts and building projects associated with the arts. I commend the Government for the assistance that it has made available in my own area. For example, under the Major Cultural Capital Subsidy Scheme the Gold Coast City Council received a contribution of $1,401,144.47 for The Centre in Surfers Paradise, a fact that is not frequently acknowledged. No doubt, throughout the vast distances of Queensland many other local authorities have received similar assistance for similar projects. I am sure that many Gold Coast residents would be unaware of what has been a very substantial contribution by the Govemment to the advancement of the arts on the Gold Coast. Since its official opening in December 1986, The Centre has established itself as the civic and, indeed, the cultural heart of the city. I note also that the Division of Cultural Activities has provided financial assistance towards the arts component of the Gold Coast Tropicamival festival, with total grants to date since 1982-83 of $24,000. I recognise the efforts of the Minister in fostering new initiatives in the arts in recent times, particularly the radio program Arts on the Move, the Touring and Remote Areas Access Scheme, the Minister for the Arts Encouragement Awards and funding towards a regional exhibits co-ordinator. In all, 1 consider that the record of this Government in fostering the arts in the State of Queensland and, more than that, bringing the arts to the people, gives an example to the rest of Australia. On the south bank of the river is a superb complex that has no rival. Schemes are in place to make sure that wherever people live in this great State, they are not disadvantaged by the tyranny of distance and the remoteness of certain localities. I commend the Minister and the Govemment for a period of considerable achievement in regard to the arts in the State of Queensland. Mr SMYTH (Bowen) (12.04 p.m.): On behalf of coal-miners in Queensland, I rise to express their concern and mine to this Government. I am concerned that the coal industry is not stable in this total free-enterprise environment and that there is a need for this Government to support a national coal-marketing authority. That is a belief that I personally hold as a proud member of the Queensland Colliery Employees Union and as a person who worked within the industry for some 15 years. Mr Austin: You carry their brief in here, do you? Mr SMYTH: If the Minister would like to take on board the comments that I make here today and relate them to his Govemment, he may well realise that the best thing for the coal industry in this State is the setting-up of a coal-marketing authority. The present crisis in the coal industry began in 1982 with the first round of retrenchments. Since that time, growing excess productive capacity has caused competition between Australian mines and has led to very low prices being set by Australia in the international market. The most severe price falls have taken place since September 1986. In that month, when renewing contracts with Japan, MIM Holdings Ltd agreed to a reduction of $US4 per tonne in coking coal prices for its Oaky Creek mine. There was no competition with other countries and there was no price precedent. Other Australian companies were the first in the coal-exporting nations to consolidate this price-cut when they settled with Japanese steel-mills in January 1987. In May 1987, in negotiations with the Steel Authority of India, Australian exporters—Utah, CSR, MIM and others—undercut other nations. Not content with this, they continued price-cutting against each other, forcing the price of coking coal down a further $US5 per tonne below the price agreed to for Oaky Creek coal. In May 1987, Ulan offered the Japanese steaming coal at a price of $US29.40 per tonne and, in doing so, broke a verbal agreement with other Australian exporters, who were all at that time negotiating with the Japanese. 4098 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

In all of these settlements the Australian Coal Association relied on gloomy Japanese forecasts of steel production and energy requirements as the justification for offering such low prices. In September this year, after settling their last contract, the Japanese steel-mills conveniently revised their estimates and announced much more optimistic forecasts. The low prices have been the direct cause of the job losses that have occurred since last September. Many coal companies are now demanding cuts in earnings and conditions and in Government charges so that they can accommodate the new low prices. The cost-saving they are seeking is a minimum of $ 10 per tonne. In many cases that is more than the wage component in total costs per tonne. Some of these companies led the prices down by competing with other Australian mines. This Government is obsessed with the earning levels of mine-workers. Historically, mining unions have agreed to reductions in earnings and conditions when mines have been in difficulties. The present crisis is no different and the mining unions have made substantial concessions. Some companies have informed the Federal Government that labour costs have been reduced as far as possible and that they can see no way of further reducing their costs. To emphasise this, a delegation of unions and employers from the western district in New South Wales went to Canberra on 18 September and presented Minister Kerin with detailed information proving that labour costs have been substantially reduced. At the same time, Australian mine-workers are the most productive in the world, with an increase in the OMS figure since 1982 of 30 per cent. That is reflected in the record tonnages that have been produced annually for the past seven consecutive years. The attack upon Government charges and wages is meant to divert attention from the real solution to the crisis, that is, the control of excess capacity and the implementation of export price controls by a national coal authority, which would centrally plan investment in productive capacity, administer a system of export price controls to prevent Australian producers from leading the market down, maintain detailed data on markets and coal types and supply marketing support. Because the coal companies themselves are unwilling and unable to coherently plan capacity in the interests of the coal-mining industry as a whole, the industry needs centralised planning. Mr FitzGerald: You don't Uke the companies, do you? Mr SMYTH: 1 can tell my friend that I like the companies. Absence of long-term planning of capacity is the cause of the present crisis, and has been the cause of all the previous crises. Historically, the boom and bust economic cycle has, for two reasons, been more extreme in the coal-mining industry than in other industries. The first is that the response to changes in demand is hampered by the long lead-time in increasing and reducing productive capacity. The second is that the planning of capacity is done by individual companies. It is in the interests of customers to overstate forecasts of demand and thus create a buyers' market. Many mines, both in Australia and in other coal-producing countries, have increased capacity to serve a single forecast market. An individual mine should produce as close to capacity as possible. Unused capacity is a huge capital cost burden which threatens investments and causes large write-downs of capital. Excess capacity leads to cut-throat price competition between Australian exporters as well as between Australia and other countries, causing the closure of mines, loss of reserves and investments and mass retrenchments. The Australian Coal Association identifies the causes of the current crisis as being a classic price/cost squeeze. However, this so-called squeeze is only the symptom of underlying structural inefficiencies in the industry. Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4099

Long-term centralised planning of capacity would more efficiently match capacity with demand than the present ad hoc company-by-company arrangement. It can only be achieved by a statutory body with independent powers and would be the major task of a national coal authority. It would remove a major cause of price competition between Australian producers and reduce fixed costs. However, the first criterion must be to match capacity with demand. This would involve the establishment of a broad database covering resources, customer-country demand profiles and industry stmcture information, including cost data. A decision made by a central body with all available information will be more accurate than the sum of decisions made by individual companies all chasing the same market. Mr FitzGerald: Wouldn't the companies be better off if the industry was nationalised? Mr SMYTH: I am not advocating nationalising the coal industry. Mr FitzGerald: But control them completely first. Mr SMYTH: Hopefully, if the honourable member listens to what I have to say, he will end up agreeing with me. Mr Ardill: He's never seen a coal mine. Mr SMYTH: That is tme. The honourable member for Lockyer has never seen a coal mine. The second criterion must be to seek balanced development of our coal resources. The proportion of Australian coal reserves winnable by open-cut methods is only 30 per cent. At present, about 70 per cent of coal is mined by open-cut methods, and efficient underground mines are being forced to close. At this rate, open-cut coal will all be mined in 20 to 30 years' time, causing the industry to go underground again, at a time when underground mining skills and capital investments have been lost. The third criterion must be efficiency. These criteria are not mutually exclusive and are of equal importance. Excess capacity increases fixed costs per tonne of coal. Even the Australian Coal Association acknowledges it to be a severe cost problem. Nevertheless, it is an area of cost reduction that the coal associations ignore because it can only be achieved by centralised planning. Reducing excess capacity would significantly improve the viability and competi­ tiveness of the Australian industry in the international market simply by reducing fixed costs per tonne of coal and by removing a major cause of division among Australian negotiators. A national coal authority does not need the power of direct marketing of coal. I am sure that the National Party Government of this State is worrying about a marketing authority controlling the marketing of our resources. We can prevent prices for export coal from falling to the extent that an authority could prevent price-cutting between Australian exporters. It could not prevent a tendency to general price falls owing to factors such as world oversupply or falls in demand based on technological change. However, it could prevent Australian coal being sold for unnecessarily low prices. Coupled with efficient planning to reduce capacity problems, the implementation of a system of export price controls would form the basis of a very viable and competitive industry. Buyers of Australian coal have never demonstrated a willingness to forgo economic advantage on the grounds of philosophical objections. Japan trades with the Soviet Union and China, and Australia's major competitor in Europe is Poland. The coal industries in those countries are State-owned. Japan's other major suppliers, Canada and the United States, enjoy a special relationship with Japan, due either to Japanese participation in joint ventures or to political pressure. Other north Asian markets for Australian coal operate on a basis similar to that of Japan. 4100 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

The proposal that I put forward for a national coal authority will improve the long- term viability of the industry, make it more cost efficient and make Australia a cheaper and more reliable coal resource. Australia's markets will grow, not diminish. Underground mines are not inefficient compared to open-cut mines. The most important determinant of efficiency is investment levels in modem mining techniques. The cost differential between the large central Queensland open-cut mines and the New South Wales westem district underground mines was only $1.48 per tonne at the time of the last cost study by working party No. 7 of the Australian Coal Consultative Council. Nevertheless, it is the westem district of New South Wales that is experiencing the most serious difficulties at the present time. This area includes Ulan, which is one of the most efficient mines in the world. New South Wales underground mines in all districts except the upper Hunter could produce coal cheaper than the West Moreton open-cut mine in Queensland does. Just to clarify the point that underground mining does not necessarily mean that it is dearer to mine Australia's resources—techniques are available today, such as long- wall mining which could be used in certain parts of Australia's underground system and coal could be mined as cheaply as it is mined in open-cut mines. The Australian coal industry is very proud that it is a low-cost industry now and that it will be a low-cost industry in the future, but the mnning down of the underground industry will undermine this position. Seventy per cent of Australia's coal reserves can be won only by underground methods. The future clearly lies in the underground sector. If the underground industry is to die now, it will be inefficient and unsafe in the future. Simultaneously, a reliance upon open-cut mining will mean that the industry cost stmcture will spiral upwards as overburden ratios increase and open-cut reserves dwindle. Mr Henderson: That is nonsense. Mr SMYTH: That is very clear and easy to understand. A very shallow seam of coal is relied on in open-cut mining. Govemment members probably do not understand the coal-mining industry. The coal that is being mined at the moment, for cost efficiency, begins at the shallowest part of the seam and the mines generally move eastwards as they get deeper. The older the mine, the longer the operation, the more cost is involved and there is more overburden for a smaller amount of coal. Mr Gately: We do it more efficiently in Queensland than your friends in New South Wales. Mr SMYTH: Government members are still confused. It appears that they are as thick as two short planks. Mr Henderson: If they are that good, how come all the underground mines throughout the world are closing down? Mr SMYTH: The older mines throughout the world are using a pillar-extraction operation and are not concentrating on modern technology. That is what Queensland needs to do for its underground system. The determinants of efficiency are investment decisions, the age of the mine and geological conditions. Consistent with long-term strategy, a national coal authority would have to consider both efficiency and potential for efficiency of any mine. The object of a national coal authority would not be to keep mines open that are not efficient. That is not the object of the exercise. It is purely to plan and guarantee that Australian coal companies do not undercut other Australian coal companies at the expense of the Australian people. Mr Henderson: The name of the game is to keep miners in jobs in New South Wales regardless of the cost. It is exactly the same scheme that they employed in Germany and other countries and it has been a failure. Mr SMYTH: No, it has not. Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4101

I talk to my friends and workers in the coal-mining industry in my electorate. Mr Hinton and Mrs McCauley should do that. Mrs McCauley's electorate of Callide includes a coal-mining area. The workers in the coal-mining industry are very worried at present because the Queensland Govemment has a short-term vision for the coal-mining industry. The Govemment has adopted an attitude of get in, grab the dough, and go. Proper planning and a national coal authority are needed. At the beginning of the year the Minister, in this House, in one breath said that the Government would not contemplate having a national coal authority; in another breath he said that a national coal-marketing authority would be introduced. Mr Slack: Are you saying that Mr Hinton and Mrs McCauley don't talk to coal- miners? Mr SMYTH: I did not say that at all. I am saying that the Govemment should talk to the coal-miners about the future of their industry. The Government should also talk to the small-business people in the coal-mining towns. Mr FitzGerald: How about the management, too? Do you think they should talk to management as well? Mr SMYTH: I have no complaints about the management of coal mines. There are many good, progressive people in the coal-mining industry. I am concerned that the Queensland Government does not talk to coal-mining companies—not to the manage­ ment—about the future of that industry in this State and nation. Mr NEWTON (Glass House) (12.23 p.m.): Mr Temporary Chairman Mr Prest: This will be a beauty! Mr NEWTON: The honourable member for Port Curtis does not realise that I have an interest in this matter because I am on the Minister's mines and energy committee. Mr Vaughan: I bet you're going to talk about the arts. Mr NEWTON: I am. I point out to the honourable member that I have a considerable interest in the arts. Quite a few arts centres in my area are trying to establish themselves at present. I hope that the Minister will give consideration to that. In supporting the Honourable the Minister for Mines and Energy in the presentation of his Estimates, I will refer to gold production. The gold-mining industry will contribute greatly to the development of Queensland. Mr Prest: I am waiting with bated breath; let's hear it. Mr NEWTON: I will provide the honourable member for Port Curtis with some facts and figures. It might be of interest to him that the Queensland Govemment is in the process of developing that industry further. In 1986-87 gold production will be worth $260m to Queensland. That is a great deal of money and represents 50 per cent more than the $173m that was derived from the gold-mining industry in 1985-86. By 1990, it is hoped that gold production in Queensland will increase to 25 tonnes a year. Previously, it was estimated that by 1990 gold production would reach 21 tonnes. That estimate was based on old gold-mining methods. I will refer to that later in my speech. Today, expenditure in the gold-mining industry is approximately $45m. The gold- mining industry generates a large number of jobs. Opposition members are constant knockers of the Queensland Govemment. The National Party Government is involving itself in the gold-mining industry so that jobs will be created in this great State. The gold-mining industry in Queensland will expand. Mr Vaughan: How many people are employed in it? 4102 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

Mr NEWTON: I know that there is a great deal of mechanisation in the gold- mining industry. A new mine is being opened in my area. I will come to that later. Mr Prest: You are going to come to everything later. Mr NEWTON: The honourable member should not worry about that. The mine will be opened shortly. Approximately 80 per cent of the 763 prospecting licences issued in Queensland were for gold-prospecting. That represents a significant proportion of those licences. As I have said, I have much pleasure in working with the Minister, his committee and his departmental head. I endorse everything that the Minister said about the role and performance of the Department of Mines in the assessment and development of Queensland's natural resources. Most honourable members would be aware that, for many years, the Mines Department has carried out specific programs of basic investigation that will make this State great. Exploration drilling and geological mapping, which will assist and encourage the 'mineral exploration industry, have been targeted on petroleum and coal. I am aware that problems exist in the coal industry, and I am sure that other speakers will cover that aspect during this debate. Exploration work has been of immense value to private organisations. As a result, many jobs have been created in my own electorate. Those organisations have gone on to further detailed appraisal of resources and, ultimately, to investing many millions of dollars in production facilities. As honourable members would be aware, Queensland has entered a new age of gold. It is not surprising that the heavy emphasis on gold exploration, which was mentioned by the Minister, has the support of the department's regional geological mapping program in the areas of north Queensland that are of major mineral interest. I am aware that the problems that are experienced in those areas must be discussed. The regions that are of major mineral interest are Mount Coolon, Clarke River, Einasleigh, Atherton and Mossman. Perhaps prophetically, a team of gold-seekers in the Campbell Creek area north­ west of Mount Carbine has already reaped the benefits of a procedure under which preliminary information is made available to the mineral exploration industry at various stages—through our excellent departmental heads—before a revised geological map is drawn up and published. Mr Prest: Where is Mount Carbine? Mr NEWTON: The honourable member lives too far down the coast. Mount Carbine is in the far northern region of the State, and I have been past it many times on the way to the cape. Those particular explorers noted that a departmental geological mapping party had pin-pointed a possible gold source in the Hodgkinson formation, which is adjacent to Mount Elephant. I suppose that the honourable member for Port Curtis is now going to ask me where Mount Elephant is. It is far too big for him to know about. Samples from that area yielded encouraging gold assays. The enterprising—not to mention lucky— claim-holders have now entered into an exploration agreement with the "big Australian", BHP. All honourable members would be aware that exploration is a very costly business. That story can rest there. However, it is interesting to note that BHP is not resting when it comes to gold. The company is putting its scientific and technical expertise and its financial muscle behind a joint exploration venture in an old-time gold-mining area of Gympie. All honourable members know that, because that development will require increased manpower, jobs will be created in that area. There has been little or no mining in the Gympie area for approximately 40 years. BHP is spending $20m on deep drilling. Anybody who travels through Gympie will realise that that is occurring. Together with Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4103 shaft development and deep underground exploration, that project wiU amount to the most expensive and ambitious program that has ever been undertaken in the history of the Gympie fields, which yielded the first worthwhile discovery of gold in Queensland in 1867, a year that is significant to Parliament House. That discovery of gold saved the State from a financial catastrophe. Given the uncanny way in which history can repeat itself—particularly in relation to mining—Gympie could well emerge once more as a booming gold city standing tall alongside other major established gold-producers such as Kidston, Cracow, Red Dome, Mount Leyshon, Mount Morgan, Far Fanning and Clermont, together with those that are soon to come on stream at Pajingo near Charters Towers. Mr Hayward: With all this gold about, do you think the Government might increase royalties? Mr NEWTON: That is something that the honourable member will not have to worry about. This Government will look after that—don't you worry about that. Bob Hawke was going to introduce gold tax, which would have killed the industry altogether. Other major established gold-producers that are soon to come on stream are situated at Starra, south of Mount Isa, and Hom Island, in the Torres Strait. I was in that area in June and 1 inspected the exploration work. Mr Scott: Keep out of my electorate. I don't want you up there. Mr NEWTON: As a Government member, I travel all over the State. It is good to see all of those projects coming on stream. I even flew over Hom Island and I saw all of the exploration for gold that is occurring there. Mr Vaughan: What is the name of the gold-mining company in your electorate? Mr NEWTON: I will come to that later. I can certainly agree with the Minister that Queensland appears to be on track to achieve greater annual output of gold than it ever did during the bustling and colourful era at the turn of the century. But, as we approach the turn of another century, it is becoming apparent that our modern gold industry based on scientific exploration, more efficient mining of low-grade deposits, and new methods of ore treatment will be a steady source of prosperity for many years. I have been involved in that. Low-grade deposits, which were not profitable years ago, can now be brought into production. It is easy to understand people being caught up in gold fever—perhaps I have a touch of it myself—but, at the same time, it is pleasing to observe that our Minister for Mines and Energy has not become sufficiently infected as to ignore other values which might be taken into account in an area where gold is to be found. I am referring, of course, to his decision only a few days ago to deny a company the right to mine gold in the Cania Gorge, near Monto. It is significant that the Opposition spokesman for the environment is not in the Chamber. Mr Smyth interjected. Mr NEWTON: I must continue, otherwise I will not finish my speech. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Booth): Order! I draw the attention of the honourable member for Bowen to the fact that the member for Glass House is not accepting interjections. Mr NEWTON: The Minister's assessment, based on a personal inspection, was that the long-term environmental and recreational values of the gorge were greater than the short-term value of the proposed gold project and, therefore, it should not be subject to any disturbance by mining. The Opposition does not mention such things. I have 4104 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates) had many dealings with the Opposition spokesman for the environment. I have always said that he should get his facts right. In my view, the Minister's statesmanlike decision should have the support of all members. I commend the Minister on a good decision on that matter. Mr Simpson: Some of your schoolchildren are listening to this. Mr NEWTON: It is pleasing to see the Caboolture State primary school students visiting the Chamber. They are in the gallery at present. The Minister's Cania Gorge decision proves that the Government and the Depart­ ment of Mines do consider environmental aspects very carefully indeed when mining proposals come forward in sensitive areas. In that regard, I can attest to the fair but extremely rigid approach of the Minister and the department in setting conditions for the operation of the Agricola gold mine—I hope that the member for Caboolture, Mr Hayward is listening—now under development in Kenilworth State forest, which is in the Conondale Range, some 90 kilometres north west of Brisbane. I mention that, because some members might not know where Kenilworth is in this great State of Queensland. I have studied the operational requirements imposed on the mining company. They are the most demanding ever drawn up by the department to protect the surrounding area in general and the water quality of streams in the vicinity. I pay tribute to the departmental officers on the report, which is extensive. As I said previously, I notice that the Opposition spokesman for the environment is not in the Chamber. The operation is confined to an area 600 metres by 300 metres. A drainage system to trap and contain storm-water run-off is designed to cope with an event occurring once in every 100 years. When compiling the report, the departmental officers studied weather patterns over a 100-year period. As constmction commences its latest stage, the company has demonstrated both a willingness and an ability to meet all requirements to the full. I feel confident that the project—though not large by comparison with Kidston, for example—will go on to make a very worthwhile contribution. I have mentioned previously the contribution that gold-mining is making to the economy of Queensland. During the 1986-87 financial year, gold production was worth $260m to the State of Queensland. With all the other factors involved in mining, combined with the way that gold-mining is coming to the fore, I have to say that mining will make a big impact on the economy of Queensland and on the balance of payments of Australia. I must commend the Minister and the staff involved in the Department of Mines— in fact, all those officers who assist the Minister with his portfolio responsibilities—for their administration and handling of the Estimates that have been presented today. Mr HAYWARD (Caboolture) (12.36 p.m.): It goes without saying that minerals are of major importance to the economy of Queensland. Members of the Opposition certainly acknowledge that fact. The total value of mineral production in 1986-87 was in excess of $4 billion. The mining industry directly employs 21 500 people in this State. This substantial production and wealth generation is all well and good, but in the newly competitive environment created by Australia's currency devaluation and decreasing unit labour costs, a very determined strategy needs to be implemented to explore, plan and encourage the very great potential that exists for secondary processing of Queensland's minerals. The result would be the generation of export products of greatly enhanced value. Clearly, this is the only way for Queensland to go. Why should Queensland, with its present competitive edge, import finished products derived from minerals that have been dug up in Queens­ land's own back yard? Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4105

The benefits of such on-processing are legion. Besides the immediate economic benefits of the newly established processing plant, these new industries also support equipment and raw material providers, and are often very large consumers of electricity. That is of particular relevance to power-station-rich Queensland. Economic activity in downstream industries—for example, fabrication, ceramic manufacturing and many others—is also generated. The subsequent multiplier effect on the State's economy is obvious. However, the benefits do not end there. I am talking mostly about export and import replacement industries—industries which are essential in reducing balance of trade deficit and in forging a new export-orientated culture in Australian business and labour. The expansion of Queensland's technological and skills base which flows from such industries has a snowball effect in generating even more opportunities. The sort of value-adding mineral-processing I am talking about is already occurring for some mineral products in Queensland. Copper concentrates from Mount Isa are refined to copper for local use and for export from Townsville, thus doubling the value of the raw material input. Nickel ore is refined to nickel/cobalt sulphate and nickel oxide sinter at Yabulu for export. Only recently, high quality coating kaolin mined and processed at Weipa has begun generating $20m per year in export income. Also there are apparently one or two value-adding mineral projects on the horizon. A gold, silver, platinum and palladium refinery at Townsville has been proposed by Harrington's Metallurgists Ltd to process locally produced precious metals. Hopefully, it will be on the ground floor to handle gold concentrates from Papua New Guinea, a nation which is apparently set to become the Western World's largest gold-producer by the mid-nineties. This sort of initiative is essential for Queensland to gain maximum value from its gold deposits. Potential for added-value processing also exists at the Kunwarara/Yaamba magnesite prospect near Rockhampton. The deposits in that area are apparently of world significance and the opportunity certainly exists to establish a calcined magnesite plant—the first step in the value-adding process. I would like to see this project complete the entire processing route to the stage of producing valuable magnesium metal for export as well as for import replacement. Recent projections suggest that magnesium may be making somewhat of a comeback on its chief rival, aluminium. An increase in its usage in high-purity, corrosion-resistant alloys and in die-castings is expected. Certainly, that is anticipated by the rest of the world. Competition will be fierce for any Australian processor; but now is the time to pursue vigorously this opportunity in Queensland. I might mention that I am aware of the Government's ad hoc top-level working party which is looking into the potential of the Kunwarara/Yaamba prospect. These already existing and potential mineral-processing projects certainly exemplify the way that Queensland has to go. Looking at the marvellous diversity of Queensland's mineral products, I cannot but think that there are many more opportunities for value-added processing just waiting to be seized upon. The way to identify and exploit this potential is through the sort of comprehensive strategy that I hope to talk about today. The sort of opportunities that 1 allude to may be, for example, in on-processing of our rich deposits of mineral sands in Queensland. Those sands contain economic quantities of three minerals. Mr Austin: Your mates won't let us mine them. Mr HAYWARD: That is not tme. In a moment I will come to that. It is a question of compromise. It is a question of doing a deal. The Minister is aware of that. Mr FitzGerald: Compromise, all right—we've been compromised! Mr HAYWARD: No-one is ever compromised.

77194—134 4106 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

Those three minerals are mtile, ilmenite and zircon. It is not widely known, of course, that Australia dominates the world production of those minerals and holds about 80 per cent of the known world reserves. Last financial year—and this is in response to the statement that the Govemment is not allowed to mine them—Queensland produced 108 000 tonnes of mtile, which was valued at $57. Im to this State, and 187 000 tonnes of ilmenite, which was worth $5.8m. All of that was exported without any more processing, simple separation or concentration. That is not good enough. Overseas processors get this stuff, they then add value by a factor of 3.8 through processing to what they call titanium dioxide pigment, which is the sort of white pigment that is used in practically everything from paint, duco, laminate, plastics, enamel and even cosmetics. World demand is very strong. Mr Austin: I presume from that that the honourable member for Windsor doesn't paint his house. Mr HAYWARD: World demand is currently very strong, especially in the USA. World production capacity, which is currently 2.6 million tonnes, is fully utilised. Some people must paint their houses, because by 1990 usage is forecast at 3 million tonnes with strong demand especially in south-east Asia. Queensland and Australia should not stay on the easy dig-it-up-and-ship-it-out merry-go-round to support value-added titanium dioxide pigment industries in other countries. Surely now is the time to grasp the unique opportunity at our doorstep of coupling abundant mtile and ilmenite resources with our increased competitiveness, which has come about through the devaluation of the dollar, and tapping the titanium dioxide pigment export market. Mr FitzGerald: Does the Govemment set up a processing plant, do you suggest? Do you believe in that? How should it come about? That is what I am asking. How do you believe it should come about? Mr HAYWARD: I intend talking about the strategy for doing that. Mr FitzGerald: Do you believe the Govemment should initiate it or that the Govemment should have a processing plant, or how are you going to encourage it? Mr HAYWARD: I am coming to that. In relation to that, I would merely say that private enterprise has to be encouraged to do it. Mr Austin: That's a shocking word for you to use. Mr HAYWARD: Not for me. The widely used sulphate process for TI02 pigment production is gradually being phased out worldwide—that is important—on economic and environmental grounds, and that presents further advantage to new producers using the modem and more acceptable chloride process of production. Queensland has a great opportunity, because the methods that are now being used overseas are being phased out and new methods have come in, so some planning should be done. Mr Austin: Tell us which deposit we should mine to start this new industry. Which one? Mr HAYWARD: Queensland is already producing 108 000 tonnes and 187 000 tonnes. To be fair to the Minister, I should note that some hints have been dropped recently about the possibility of a major TI02-producing smelter at Gladstone. I am concerned that this idea will join the already long list of Gladstone phantom projects. No doubt Mr Prest is aware of a number of Gladstone's phantom projects. The third mineral-sand component, zircon, opens up a treasure chest of possibilities. Current Queensland production is 92 000 tonnes, valued at $ 15.4m, aU of which is exported in unprocessed form. Australia supplies 70 per cent of the world's zircon market. Zircon's main potential lies in conversion to zirconia, which is zirconium Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4107 dioxide, and further processing to what is called partially stabilised zirconia—PSZ— which is an advanced wonder ceramic with remarkable strength and durability. PSZ has revolutionary potential in replacing the metal components of turbine and diesel engines to create much lighter engines which require neither coolant nor lubricants and are therefore many times more fuel and energy efficient. Japanese manufacturers have asserted that by the 1990s the market value of PSZ ceramics for car engines will be more than $1 billion. That is an enormous amount of money—an enormous amount of money that this country should get. PSZ wiU have many other wide-ranging uses. In fact, for virtually any application that requires components to be subjected to harsh, corrosive or erosive conditions, PSZ will come to be the preferred material. Australia and Queensland are clearly well placed to establish zirconia-processing plants to take advantage of the large zircon sand reserves and get in on the ground floor of the very high projected demand for PSZ ceramic products. It should be especially noted that zirconia is worth 50 times the value of the zircon concentrate. With the aid of a new and improved technology developed by the CSIRO, such a processing plant has already been established in Western Australia. In spite of this development, it seems very likely that room still exists in Queensland for the development of a similar export- oriented plant to meet the increased usage of PSZ ceramics. I want to move away from mineral sands and consider the prospect of a Queensland zinc refinery. At present, Mount Isa Mines produces 407 000 tonnes of zinc concentrate valued at $ 101.9m, all of which is exported in an unprocessed state. Mount Isa Mines has substantial reserves of 49 million tonnes of silver/lead/zinc ore and the Thalanga prospect near Townsville is sitting on 9 million tonnes of zinc/copper ore. Surely the possibility of a zinc refinery in Queensland to treat the large quantities of high-grade zinc concentrate currently exported should be examined. Given the competitive edge of devaluation of the Australian dollar, which favours local smelting, why continue to ship zinc concentrate to overseas smelters, which have high energy and operating costs? Why not take advantage of the 2.1 times value-added factor provided by processing zinc concentrate here in Queensland? Many other opportunities may be out there waiting to be identified and exploited. Another that comes to mind deals with the sapphire industry. Australia produces 70 to 80 per cent of the world's sapphires. The Anakie field is the major Australian producer of high-quality stones, but at present most of these are exported for processing. Involved in processing is heat treatment, cutting, mounting and marketing. The establishment of a home-grown sapphire-processing industry is certainly not beyond the capabilities of this State and should be vigorously pursued. In this direction, I support the initiative of a recently formed Queensland company, Australian United Gems, which has established a factory in Ipswich to cut sapphires for international markets. I am further encouraged to hear that the company hopes its initiative will be the first stage to bring value-added production of sapphires to Australia. Let me contrast the need for a mineral-processing industry with the present Government's ad hoc approach to mineral development. Typical of this short-term, visionless and shallow approach has been the reported, mshed, six-week review of mining industry royalties. The review is concentrating on the boom minerals which, at present, are gold and mineral sands. The member for Glass House spoke about what a boom mineral gold is. The review is aimed simply at raising more revenue. Currently the royalty on those minerals is 5 per cent. Time and again in this Chamber members from all sides have pointed out that the current economic problems in Australia and Queensland come from one source—the enormous deficit in the current account of our overseas balance of payments. If all honourable members agree on that, why does the National Party Govemment pursue a high-tax policy against mining companies, particularly companies producing products for the export market? Taxes introduced by this Govemment, be they in the form of rail freights, port charges or royalties, substantially increase the cost of production for 4108 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates) the competitive export market. Now the Govemment has moved to impose a port lease royalty and to impose a profit-making port charge on coal-producers. As every member of this Chamber knows, coal rail freights are tied to tonnage, not to price. It has been reported that the high level of pipeline royalties charged to cmde oil producers at the Jackson field in far-south-west Queensland has forced those producers to tmck their cmde oil. Now the Govemment is considering the imposition of a tmck tax and, would you believe it, the Govemment is even thinking about regulating against the use of tmcks in this area to stop this loss in revenue. The infrastmcture costs and the competitive world market make ad hoc decisions and indecisiveness on royalty increases intolerable. That is what I am talking about: ad hoc decisions and indecisiveness. The industry is crying out for a clear and precise State Govemment strategy on royalty and tax-planning. Mrs McCauley: Wouldn't you agree that excessive labour market costs have stifled a lot of the industries that you say we should have in this State? Mr HAYWARD: I have just spent 14 minutes talking about the importance of the value-added industry. In all seriousness, what the Govemment has to do is get on with things. Mrs McCauley: That is what I am saying. Mr HAYWARD: When one is talking about 50 times value-added production, surely the honourable member for Callide would not seriously argue that employment of labour is a problem. Surely what all honourable members want is the creation of value-added industries in this State. The stage has now been reached at which, even in conservative terms, Australia has a competitive unit-labour cost. Members of the Govemment have to consider these matters seriously instead of dragging out the same cliches time and time again. While this Govemment dithers, Australia's export position is further eroded Mr Gately: I'm going to have a ball with you after you've finished. Mr HAYWARD: I am not quite sure what the honourable member means by that. I mentioned earlier the need for a comprehensive strategy to identify and assist in the exploration of mineral-processing opportunities in Queensland. That is what I am saying. A comprehensive strategy is needed. I am certainly not talking here about a direct-Une private telephone call to the Premier, a word in the ear of a National Party functionary for some special one-off Govemment-assisted special deal, ad hoc flights in Govemment planes to eastem Europe and subsequent beat-ups about phantom coal deals. Mr Gately: What nonsense! Mr HAYWARD: It is not nonsense. It has all happened. I am not talking about the cargo-cult development mentality. What I am talking about is Mr Gately interjected. Mr HAYWARD: Mr Gately The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Booth): Order! The honourable member for Caboolture will address the Chair. Mr HAYWARD: What I am talking about is an all-embracing opportunity-creating strategy. Surely the honourable member for Curmmbin believes that there should be an all-embracing opportunity-creating strategy. If he does not believe that, he does not believe anything. I am talking about an all-embracing opportunity-creating strategy that actively seeks input from the full ambit of interested parties, including Govemment Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4109 departments, industry groups, worker representatives and even environmentalists. Why not get environmentalists involved in it? Then the deal can be sorted out. Things can get done. The compromises can be made before crazy political issues emerge. Only with such broad-based input and approval can the strategy and opportunities identified be confidently pursued. Mr Austin: What you are really saying is that you are into tokenism. Mr HAYWARD: No. I want to get things done. I want to see an end to this fooling around and the implementation of a strategy. The sort of strategy that members of the Labor Party envisage would be developed by a task force composed of relevant Gov­ ernment, industry and union leaders Mr Gygar: Another quango. Mr HAYWARD: Surely honourable members are interested in the implementation of some sort of strategy for our mineral development. I have cited a number of instances in Queensland in which people are missing out. The Govemment is simply not interested. I am talking about the sort of strategy that would, through publicity and communication, identify for the private sector Mr Austin: Is this your policy or your party's policy? Mr HAYWARD: This is the party's policy. As I was saying, it would identify for the private sector the opportunities Mr Austin interjected. Mr HAYWARD: The Minister should listen. The strategy envisaged would identify for the private sector the opportunities that exist in this State for mineral-processing. Naturally, the private sector itself must eventually exploit the possibilities that do exist. However, the Government itself, as part of a strategy, can play a very major role in stimulating new processing industries. Government input can be in several areas, including Mr Austin: Where do you think the money is coming from? Mr HAYWARD: I am about to go through what the Govemment can do. Govemment input could include simplified approval procedures and regulatory mechanisms. The member for Glass House, Mr Newton, spoke about the extremely rigid approach of the Minister. I heard him talk about it. Government input could also include a one-stop venue in either the Mines Department or the Department of Industry Development or for potential processors to avoid the complications of dealing with numerous authorities, which is one of the problems; a role for the QIDC in joint-venture arrangements or in providing flexible financial packages; direct Government incentives for industries requiring electricity or rail transport; and support of public and private research and development in specifically targeted mineral-processing technologies. There should also be Mines Department research into mineral products and markets in order to hone in on emerging or previously unidentified opportunities and active promotion of identified mineral-processing opportunities. Surely these things should be promoted. There should be the promotion of wide consultation between all interested parties, including worker and community representatives, to ensure that opportunities are identified and quickly seized upon without unnecessary industrial or community dislocation or resistance. That has to be got away from. There has to be encouragement of new entrepreneurial motivation for highly skilled Mines Department employees and professionals. At present they are under threat from Savage's privatisation recommendation No. 88, which has been so quickly embraced by the present Government, to the extent that it has said that the proposals do not go far enough. The Govemment wants to get rid of the people in the Mines Department and 4110 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates) replace them with private people. The Labor Party wants to beef-up the professionalism of the department and I am sure that is what members on the other side of the Chamber also wish to see. These are a few of the sorts of Government initiatives that could be included in a dynamic strategy to promote mineral-processing in Queensland. I stress the importance of total involvement of all interested parties every step of the way and a new way of Queenslanders working together instead of against each other. Time expired. Mr GATELY (Curmmbin) (12.56 p.m.): I listened with great interest to the nonsense from the honourable member. Before I begin to answer a few of the nonsensical comments that he made, I thank the Minister for giving me the opportunity to speak to his Estimates. His department has been well mn and organised and is to the benefit of every Queenslander. I turn now to the comments made by my friend next door, the honourable member for Glass House. The diatribe that I have listened to is a blueprint for the reason why Australia is going down the tube. Mr FitzGerald: Caboolture. Mr GATELY: I am sorry, was it Caboolture? I got it wrong. My apologies. I will put it straight on the record; it was the honourable member for Caboolture. This is a blueprint of the reason why this nation has gone back to front. The honourable member cannot understand why these things are not being done. The facts of the matter are that this country has gone down the tube because of what the Federal Labor Government has done through the implementation of excessively high interest rates that were brought on by Mr Hayden's redistribution of the wealth of this nation. He is on record as having said, "We will redistribute the wealth of this nation by having the commercial interest rate at a high level." He achieved that by keeping the Australian bond interest rate at that level to force up commercial rates to unrealistically high levels. The Federal Government was not satisfied with that. Mr Vaughan: What has this got to do with mining? Mr GATELY: The comments made by the honourable member for Nudgee were off the mark as well and I am answering his criticisms. The Federal Govemment introduced high taxation and the fringe benefits tax. As a result every person who tries to achieve the things in industry that Mr Hayward referred to has been hit. If the honourable member is fair dinkum, he should go down to Canberra and talk to some of his mates down there and get them to be realistic. I draw the attention of the Committee to a matter which I feel has been generally overlooked by most people, especially the media in Queensland. I refer to the remarkable success of the development of the South East Queensland Electricity Board in recent years. The board is one of seven in this State and is part of the two-tiered stmcture consisting of the Queensland Electricity Commission and seven electricity boards. Mr Ardill: That is a lot of mbbish they have given you. I wouldn't use it. Mr GATELY: The honourable member for Salisbury would not know how to use it. All members of this Chamber—even those who find it difficult to understand and yap like little blue heeler dogs—would have recently received a document published by SEQEB entitled A Story of Achievement. This small publication contains many interesting facts. Sitting suspended from 1 to 2.30 p.m. Mr GATELY: For those honourable members who have not had the opportunity to study the paper to which I referred earlier, 1 point out that it can be said that the Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4111 performance of SEQEB cannot be equalled by any other electricity industry organisation in Australia. The record list tells all. The growth in the sales of electricity has risen significantly. Let me take the last five years. Before 1 July 1981 and June this year, sales were up from 6 334 gigawatt hours—which, in monetary terms, was $373m—to 8 011 gigawatt hours. This year, sales have increased to a figure of $735m, which is almost double the 1981 figure. SEQEB has not lost one second in industrial disputes since the 1985 ETU dispute. In the 1984-85 period, 90 000 man-hours were lost. That, in itself, tells a story. The Govemment should be commended for being able to have such meaningful liaison and discussions with a union that would reduce so significantly those lost hours. Let us look at SEQEB today. It has a clear and envied performance status in its present supply and maintenance area. The reliability of electricity supply reached its highest level in 1986-87 with a loss of 125 system minutes, compared with 175 in the previous year. And, despite the severe electrical storms which cause regular havoc in south-east Queensland, it was interesting to note that almost 90 per cent of consumers in black-out circumstances had their power restored within two hours. SEQEB has become a viable business incorporating private-enterprise principles. It has contributed to the electricity industry's push to keep price rises to less than half the CPI and, as I said before, it is continuing to provide an efficient and reliable power supply to its 600 000 consumers. In 1986, the increase in the price of electricity was 3 per cent, compared with an increase in the CPI of 6.5 per cent. In 1987, the price increase was 4 per cent and the CPI increase was 8.6 per cent. It is obvious that SEQEB was once a growing bureaucracy—and now it has been trimmed to be a lean and hungry business where the people are accountable for their output. From my personal observations, I can say that SEQEB is successfully meeting the challenge of development on the Gold Coast and in other areas of Queensland. The growth of tourism can be clearly seen in the number of intemational hotels being built or in the planning stages. Five have been completed in the past two years, including the Conrad Intemational Hotel and Jupiters Casino, which, when it opened, had a staff of 2 000. That has been trimmed in much the same way as SEQEB trimmed its sail to ensure its continuing economic viability. The new Sheraton Mirage resort on the Southport Spit has also been completed. A number of other projects have been completed. Systems augmentation works carried out with the Sheraton project will ensure an adequate and reliable electricity supply to the Spit, which has become a very important electricity load centre with big demands from the sand by-pass scheme. Sea World, Fisherman's Wharf and Mariners Cove. Mr Hayward interjected. Mr GATELY: The honourable member wants to be told about the Gold Coast and tourism. The little blue heeler dogs alongside me are yapping. They say, "We do not want sand-mining." They should have a look at the (jrold Coast today and cast their minds back to the time when its sand was mined from the top to the bottom. Because of its tourism industry, the Gold Coast is probably one of the greatest contributors to the economy in Australia today. I hope that I am not intermpted any more on that subject. Much of the all-electric Sanctuary Cove project is due for completion by Christmas, and the first permanent residents have already moved in. Ultimate power demand for this development will exceed 8 megawatts, equal to the electricity consumed by almost 3 000 average domestic homes. Although much of the present coastal development is nearing completion, negoti­ ations are under way to build more major hotels, including one at the Sea World complex, three in the central Surfers Paradise area and a hotel resort on an island in the Broadwater. The Palm Beach Intemational Hotel project is coming on stream. A 4112 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

Zarro development is proposed in Coolangatta. Suncorp is expected to establish a multimillion-dollar complex in that region. The reliability of SEQEB's supply is an important factor in the developer's decision to proceed—unlike what happens in New South Wales, where they are not game to start anything; and, if they do, they are told by the Planning and Environment Minister, Mr Carr, and others that they cannot. Other major developments include the De Laurentiis film studio at Cades County, the Palm Meadows resort at Carrara, the Pines Lakes resort at Ashmore, the Southport Mall redevelopment, extensions to Pacific Fair and Sundale shopping centres and high- rise office buildings at Southport. The establishment of the Pines shopping centre in the Elanora or Pines estate, which was developed by the Bond Corporation, is one of the fastest-growing residential areas in my electorate. The coastal development experienced an increase in housing activity with underground supply being made available to 1 500 new residential aUotments in 1986-87. In the Southport area alone, the electricity load is expected to increase by more than 50 megawatts, equal to 17 500 average domestic homes. I believe that SEQEB is confident that last year's record sales of 21.7 per cent in the commercial sector should rise even further. It is obvious that SEQEB has developed a record which clearly establishes that it has the capacity and the vital operational skills to meet the challenges of the future. I believe that every electricity-consumer in south-east Queensland can be proud of SEQEB's achievement in providing power and service at the lowest possible tariff. That is being done despite what the unions and others would have had us believe when the SEQEB dispute was settled. I turn now to a matter that is of grave importance to the pensioners of Queensland. I must commend the Minister for the forthright way in which he handled some inquiries that I made of both himself and his department earlier this year. In 1986 this Government made an election promise to introduce a pensioner electricity rebate scheme. Mr Vaughan: Most reluctantly. Mr GATELY: Never mind the reluctance. It is in place, and this Government put it there. The honourable member could not do anything in Opposition, so never mind any of that nonsense. As it applied to all accounts issued after 31 January 1987, customers benefited for the full calendar year. The scheme provides a rebate of $6 per month on electricity accounts of eligible pensioners if they are customers of an electricity authority. In addition, eligible pensioners who live in a residential home park or in multi-unit residential premises but are not electricity board customers may still be eligible for the rebate. Eligible pensioners are those people who hold a current pensioner health-benefits card. Mr Ardill: How much do you get in caravan parks? Mr GATELY: If the honourable member were to take notice of the scheme, he would understand it. I can understand how he would be having extreme difficulty understanding this. As 1 was saying, those eligible pensioners must also be in receipt of one of the following social security benefits— • an age pension; • invalid pension (including persons receiving a sheltered-employment allowance or a rehabilitation allowance); • civilian widow pension; • spouse carer's pension; • supporting parent pension; or • service pension. Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4113

Otherwise, they must hold a current personal treatment entitlement card or dependent treatment entitlement card and be in receipt of a war widow's—including widowed mother—pension or special rate TPI—including blinded disability—pension from the Department of Veterans Affairs. The scheme is the most generous scheme offered by any mainland State. An electricity-consumer who is a rate-payer is also eligible for the rebate which the State Govemment funds to help pensioners pay their local authority rate bills. It is estimated that, during the current financial year, electricity rebates worth $11.5m wiU be given to about 160 000 eligible Queensland pensioners. The cost of pensioner rebates is funded by State Treasury out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund. 1 believe that this Government has lived up to its responsibility of ensuring that there are no rorts and that only eligible pensioners are entitled to and receive that benefit. I have had experience with people who have been trying to rip off the system. In liaison with the Minister, 1 was able to prove without any doubt that those persons who claimed to be entitled to a rebate were, in fact, not eligible at all. They were trying to claim a rebate on both sides of the border. That was against the content and the spirit of the legislation. Mr Ardill: Half of your pensioners missed out. Mr GATELY: I will take the interjection. If the honourable member is not capable of representing properly the people in his area, he should not be their representative. I was able to sort my constituents out. When any pensioner made representations to me, 1 approached the Minister and the problems were fixed up. If the honourable member had half a brain in his head, he would be talking to the Minister—or isn't he game to approach Government Ministers? Mr Ardill: You are misleading the Committee. Mr GATELY: I am not misleading anyone. I am answering the honourable member's interjection. Any pensioners who have approached me have had their representations put to the Minister, who has made sure that they were looked after. If the honourable member was prepared to make representations to the Minister, I have no doubt that the Minister and the Government would look after the pensioners in his electorate. There is no doubt about that. However, "bottlebmsh" does not know, so I will proceed. Mr Ardill: Half of your pensioners missed out. Mr GATELY: I will take the interjection. Let the honourable member stop misleading the Committee and tell me who the pensioners were in my electorate who missed out. 1 will then tell the Committee what the tmth is. The honourable member should stop going on with nonsense. No representation has been made in my electorate that has not been properly taken care of I refute the honourable member's ridiculous statement. The electricity board ensures that control of improper claims is maintained through regular checks with the Department of Social Security and the Department of Veterans' Affairs on the eligibility of claimants. Those verification practices ensure that the rebate is allowed only to eligible pensioners. Perhaps some of those pensioners to whom the honourable member referred earlier could well have been ineligible. If he fronts up with their names, I will take the matter up with the Minister. Mr Ardill interjected. Mr GATELY: I never said that. It is under the standards set down by the Government. I understand that the improper claiming of rebates has been a real problem in some other States in which a proper checking procedure was not introduced from the inception of the scheme in that State. 4114 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

Earlier, I referred to the Government's being able to reduce by proper controls the amounts of expenditure through the department. The two-tiered stmcture consisting of the Queensland Electricity Commission and seven electricity boards is proving to be effective in controlling costs and keeping prices down, and will do so in the years ahead. The benefactors of that proper control will be the people of (Queensland. My electorate will also benefit greatly. The figures speak for themselves, with the industry reducing staff from 13 200 to under 10 400 in just three years, and holding price increases to no more than half the increases in the Consumer Price Index. That cannot be said for any of the Labor-held States in this country. They would not know how to reduce or trim the sail. The industry's present goals are to reduce the costs of electricity in real terms. Price increases in the period to 1992 will be no greater than half the increase in the Consumer Price Index, which was stated previously. The industry now supplies over 99 per cent of Queensland homes with electricity. It is entirely self-financing, with no moneys transferring either to or from the Government. Almost all revenue is derived from the sale of electricity, which last year amounted to $1,351.5m. The operating expenditure in 1986-87 totalled $ 1,435.2m, of which debt-servicing took the greatest share, being 35 per cent. Other significant operating expenditures were on generation, 25 per cent; provision for capital works, 20 per cent; transmission and distribution, 10 per cent; and management, 10 per cent. The honourable member for Nudgee cannot show me any Labor State that can match those figures. I do not believe that he can even come within a bull's roar of those figures. The honourable member probably does not know what a bull's roar is anyway, and I will not tell him. Mr Vaughan: I am hearing one now. You are getting worked up. Mr GATELY: The honourable member for Nudgee would not know the difference between a quiet, placid, sensitive little member and a bull's roar, so he has caught himself Other members of this Parliament have already said what a quiet, placid little chap I am, so the honourable member must not do anything to upset that. Mr Vaughan: Seeing is believing. Mr GATELY: The tmth of the matter is what the honourable member is hearing with his own ears. The reduction in employment costs by 20 per cent is one of the policies that have produced a tangible cost reduction and have contributed to the electricity supply industry's current price performance. No adverse inference has been drawn from that policy. Any efficient, well-managed business has a lean and hungry look, and the Queensland electricity supply industry is exactly that. It works in the best interests of its consumers. No-one can doubt that this Government has done everything it said it would do in relation to electricity supply, particularly in its prevention of the many black-outs that used to occur. Some honourable members have the ability to have black-outs most of the time, and others have to feel sorry for them and ensure that this Govemment will continue to look after the consumers of this State. Mr INNES (Sherwood—Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party) (2.47 p.m.): I wish to deal with two topics: electricity and coal. Metalliferous mining will be dealt with by the honourable member for Mount Isa, and the arts can wait for another day. Some important topics have been mentioned in relation to electricity. Important considerations continue to apply in Queensland in relation to electricity. I wish to deal firstly with the issue of the proposed Turkish power plant. Although it is not expected to affect directly the Queensland electricity industry, suggestions have been made in the past that it will provide a place for the sale of technology or replacement of plant that could have.gone to Queensland. Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4115

In dealing with the fundamental economic considerations, it can be seen that embraced by that proposal is an almost desperate attempt to find new coal markets. It casts an interesting reflection on the economic conditions in two countries and on their different ways of meeting those economic considerations. Australia has a massive balance of payments problem, which is recognised by parties on both sides of politics. All political parties have commented on this problem ad nauseam. The balance of payments problem is something for which the Federal Labor Government has been rightly taken to task, and it is something for which non-Labor Govemments are criticised for not having anticipated earlier. Either way, on either side of the political fence, there is no debate among people who think about economic matters that Australia is experiencing economic problems and has a massive balance of payments problem. Australia is a federation. There is a temptation—in fact, an active political partici­ pation—to divest responsibility from one part of the equation to the other. The State's economies play a very significant role in the total nation's weU-being. National indebt­ edness is a combination of the debt that is carried both by the Federal Govemment and by the State Govemment, local government and even private companies. Unless hon­ ourable members want to be totally and persistently dishonest, they should view these national problems in their tme light and accept that a very important component of the balance of payments problem is created by State Govemments. State expenditure and loan-raisings are involved. One only has to look at the reports on the electricity industry that are tabled annually in this Parliament to recognise the magnitude of State Govemment operations and State Government participation in national indebtedness. The Queensland electricity supply industry's accumulated indebtedness is worth $3.5 billion, which is an amount similar in magnitude to the indebtedness of the electricity supply industry in other States. I do not have the precise figure for intemational indebtedness, but it is something in the range approaching one and a half billion dollars. By looking at the records of the Queensland electricity industry it will be found that the component that throws up, shall I say, quirks in the computer or on the graph are those unforeseen problems caused by very massive changes in the values of the currencies in which contracts are made and loans are raised. At times in the last three years the debt relating to borrowings for equipment for our new power stations has increased in an unforeseen way by sometimes up to 60 per cent, which was the figure a couple of years ago. In short, the size of the debt nationally is significant; so significant as to cause worries to all people concerned about the health of the Australian economy. The size of the State components is very significant. The electricity industry would be one of the most significant single aspects of indebtedness that one could find. Turkey is a country that has had historically a massive problem with its balance of payments. I think I have said in this Chamber before that that has existed for far longer than my knowledge of that country goes back, which is 30 years now. Its problem emanates from a different background than ours. Ours is a voracious demand for growth, a voracious demand for increased living standards. We have raised massively against our future development. Turkey's problem is of a totally different kind. Turkey has few raw materials and a very poor agricultural base. Its agricultural sector is confined to a marginally fertile rim around the Black Sea and the Mediterranean, and a vast area of semidesert in Anatolia, which is the Asian part of Turkey. Its raw materials are little more than chrome, manganese, some brown coal and minor—not significant—deposits of oil and gas, for which it relies mostly on its other Middle East neighbours. Its continual problem is that it lives in a modern world; its appetites are tuned in, shall I say, to the modem world, and it has no real way of producing the wherewithal to supply those appetites. Over the years Turkey's response to that situation was to take an almost classic, old-fashioned view. It tried to hang on to every foreign dollar and 4116 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

every bit of hard currency that it got out of tourists or whatever else. It tried to stop imports. Mr Hayward: Postage stamps. Mr INNES: Yes, postage stamps. It really was a desperately poor country with an absolutely enormous military appetite. Mr Hayward: They tend to go hand in hand. Mr INNES: They can go hand in hand. However, Turkey had the peculiar problem of having daggers drawn against almost every one of its neighbours, namely, Bulgaria, Greece, Russia, Iran—but that was not a bad situation—and Syria to the south. Turkey had particularly appalling relations with Greece, Bulgaria and Russia. Therefore, it had a need, as so often happens, for massive intemal consumption and extemal consumption just in relation to military hardware alone. As I said, its solution was simpUstic. At times coffee was unable to be purchased in Turkey because it is not grown there and, because it was imported, it was not allowed to be bought. Because there were no raw materials, major modem industries could not be developed. Turkey would not allow the importation of the raw materials necessary to add value to its economy. Because it had a very poorly paid work-force, it could have used its labour component very effectively. The present Prime Minister of Turkey, Mr Ozal, has engaged in the Thatcher experiment. It is not confined to Mrs Thatcher. It seems that the President of the USSR, Mr Gorbachev, is trying the same sorts of things, which are being replicated all over the world, even in socialist countries. It is an attempt to get back to a capitalist motivation and an attempt to come up with imaginative ways of overcoming a country's enormous demand for the wherewithal that goes with modern life, such as the demand for the generation of electricity and aU that goes with its consumption. Mr Ozal, recognising that he did not have the capital with which to buy the boilers, the turbogenerators and those other very expensive pieces of equipment in the modem world, decided to meet his balance of payments problem, in the provision of power stations, steel-mills and a variety of other massively expensive proposals by allowing capital from outside to come in and do the job for him. Those who provide the capital take the risk and he gets the benefit through the production of electricity. Anybody who wants to read about this should go back to a series on Turkey in the London Financial Times about 18 months to two years ago. Mr Ozal's country has exactly the same problem as Australia—a massive balance of payments problem. The reasons for it are quite different, but the solutions are not too different. Queensland, as part of a country that has got a problem with its economic competitiveness that will be exacerbated in the future, is compounding the problem by providing the wherewithal— the capital—to solve somebody else's balance of payments problem. That capital is moving out of the State that itself is carrying a $3.5 billion burden of fund-raising needed to build massive new power stations for what was seen to be an unlimited electricity- consuming future. To me, that seems to be not sensible. Sure, it might get the benefit of increased coal sales. However, the amount of capital that Queensland had to put up front went from $60m that was quoted initially to $120m. For that, Queensland gets one-third of the action on a $1.8 billion enterprise, which means that Queensland must have some contingent liability for at least $600m. I have said before: Heaven only knows in what currency that will be written. Nobody can know what will happen if some antic of political instability occurs in the future that means that the power station that Queensland has paid for is seized. That power station is necessary, shall I say, for the consumption of the coal supplied under the contract that appears to be the major bait in the deal. I do not tmst, if I can put it as high as that, an unsophisticated Queensland Premier to be involved in sophisticated financial deals because they have a very obvious but simplistic political advantage, that is to be able to announce a new coal deal that means Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4117 sales of two million or four million tonnes per year. We in this Chamber have a responsibility to act, dare I say it, conservatively, because what we are looking after is public money. To do something conservatively means to anticipate those things that can go wrong, to look at the fine print before a contract or deal is entered into and not to be consumed by the thought of some short-term political expedient or to be embarrassed by not having announced a mega-dollar proposal for a couple of months. People in this Chamber have a right to be worried about the fact that this State is solving the problems of other people without the people of Queensland having had fully explained to them the magnitude and implication of that arrangement. Mr Newton: You don't think we would go into a deal without getting the full facts, do you? Mr INNES: The member for Caboolture has just asked if we on this side would think that the Govemment would do a deal without having the full facts. Mr Hayward: It is not the member for Caboolture. Mr INNES: I am sorry; I mean the member for Glass House. Perhaps people in glass houses shouldn't throw papaws. I will defer to him in the techniques of growing papaws, but that is not necessarily a very sound basis for entrance into the intemational market for building and financing power stations and for entering into long-term coal deals. Mr FitzGerald: What are your credentials? Mr INNES: The honourable member asks what are my credentials. I will condescend to answer that question. When I was in daily active legal practice people would come to me with a contract and ask me to explain the implications of that contract; they would ask me by what provisions their position was secured; and they would ask me what the implications were from the point of view of finance. If one were entering into an overseas contract, one would have to consider matters such as the variable price that is paid, the currency in which it is written and currency fluctuations. If these deals were being left totally in the hands of the professionals in the Treasury Department or in other Govemment departments, one might have fewer misgivings. However, if they are totally in the hands of those professionals, members of this Parliament have not been privy to that information and allowed to understand the implications. Honourable members are aware—and the Government is stmggling with the con­ sequences—that there are very significant political fingers in the workings of major deals. It is those political fingers that worry me because I do not believe that politicians do understand the sophisitication of the modern world and of multibillion-doUar enterprises and arrangements. It is all very well for the Premier to have a strong friendship with Mr Hancock. However, I can tell honourable members what the end result of his friendship with Mr Hancock is: it goes Mr Hancock's way. It is Mr Hancock's dollars and Mr Hancock's bank account that he is thinking of not the bank account of the people of Queensland. Mr Newton: I can't accept that. Mr INNES: I invite the honourable member to go to the people of Queensland at any time with an election policy that the Government believes that what is good for Mr Hancock is good for Queensland. That is what the honourable member is saying. Members of the Government know damed well that one of the implications of Port Petersen is that this proposal will allow an individual to build a railway with a gauge that has not been used before in this State, the possibility of a private deal to his benefit, a private railway line with a private operation at a private port, no doubt carefully 4118 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates) insulated from such social evils as coal rail freights, which one has to pay if one uses the normal Queensland railway system. Mr Vaughan: A nice little deal. Mr INNES: A nice little deal. That is what the jungle is about. That is what private enterprise is about. Mr Hancock wants the best deal possible for Mr Hancock. I do not believe that that is necessarily the best deal for Queensland, and I do not believe that the Honourable the Premier is the most sophisticated commercial giant and brain in this State. If the Premier is going to commit this State to major deals, I want to see what the contract is and what the deal is before it is done because (Queenslanders will have to live with the consequences of some of these deals. In the past, sophisicated minds more openly dealt with the electricity industry in this State. However, even with the best will in the world and the best that they could do by way of anticipating demand, this State has mn into very significant financial problems as a result of that error. This State is even shuffling firm contracts in relation to the hardware for the Stanwell Power Station. Firm contracts have been written for the hardware at that power station. Hundreds of millions of dollars worth of equipment is firmly committed. Quite rightly, the Govemment is trying to shuffle that down the track so that we do not have the full financial ramifications adding to the problems that are revealed by the balance sheets of the Queensland Electricity Commission at present. We know that we can get into trouble. Why compound it? Why look for more trouble? If the Govemment intends going into new deals, let us all have a look at them. The Govemment can then obtain the wisdom or the benefit of a cross-questioning of people from a number of angles. I turn to coal. Despite the combined wisdom of everybody who was involved in examining that industry, say, from the steel production angle, it is known that people were alarmingly wrong. For many years coking coal was this State's premier export commodity. History reveals that people throughout the world totally overestimated the consumption of coking coal and what would be required at this point in time. I will give the Chamber an illustration. I refer to the 1980 world steel production. In 1972 the forecast by the International Iron and Steel Institute was that 939 miUion tonnes of cmde steel would be consumed in 1980. The corresponding coal consumption is therefore obvious. In 1980 the production of steel was 710 miUion tonnes. In 1976 the European Economic Community forecast that 892 million tonnes of cmde steel would be consumed in 1980, and in 1978 Japan estimated its consumption at 819 mUlion tonnes. In 1978 the forecast by the EEC was 760 million tonnes, and they were still out. There was a disturbingly massive and erroneous estimation of world steel production and consequently massively erroneous estimations of the amount of coking coal that would be required. The enormous financial implications of incorrect economic forecasts and assessments have to be realised, and this Govemment has to be far more critical in planning ahead Queensland's infrastmcture and future. Queensland has to become far more conservative, and I do not use that word in a political sense. Mr Comben: They couldn't become more conservative than you. Mr INNES: Some people would argue with that. I will terminate my remarks at this time because I have only one more minute left. Mr FITZGERALD (Lockyer) (3.07 p.m.): In speaking to the Estimates of the Minister for Mines and Energy and Minister for the Arts this afternoon, the previous speaker has indicated to the Chamber how difficult it is for any Government to accurately forecast the requirement for power and electricity generation in any State. He failed to point out that electricity generation and the planning for it must be done over the long Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4119 term. He indicated that this Govemment should be more conservative in its planning— or that is my interpretation of what he said—and he has drawn the attention of the Committee to the fact that, because of the downtum in electricity consumption over the years, there may be an overcapacity in the generation of electricity. I do not recall that member making any speeches in this Chamber in the early 1980s when Queensland was desperately short of generating capacity and when the Tarong Power Station was buUt. I will refer to that power station later in my speech. In my opinion, that power station was built far too late. It should have been built earlier and the money that was eventually spent on refurbishing old power stations need not have been spent. Everyone can be wise with the benefit of hindsight. The consumption of electricity increased dramatically with the opening up of the coal mines, owing to the enormous amount of power required for the draglines operating on the coal-fields. It is surprising how much electricity is consumed by that industry. I challenge the honourable member for Sherwood to go on record now and say exactly what generating capacity this State will require in 10, 15 or 20 years' time. It is no good his telling this Committee what he believes it will be in five years' time, because this Govemment is already past the point of planning for five years ahead. I challenge him to tell this Chamber what he believes Queensland's capacity should be in 20 or 25 years' time. That is what I am concemed about. I believe that as many options as possible should be kept open, and I congratulate this Minister, the previous Minister and the commission for what they have done towards planning for the electricity supply for this State. The right decisions have been made at the right time, and I know that the future needs for power in Queensland are being considered. If there is suddenly an increase in requirement, the capacity will exist to meet it. The Government is trying to trim its sails whilst the capacity has tended to fall off, even though there is still an annual increase in electricity consumption. I support the comments made by the member for Curmmbin about the South East Queensland Electricity Board. It is evident that when good things happen in today's society, it is not always seen as good news. Although a few years ago SEQEB had a bit of a stmggle, I say without any reservations that it has emerged as one of the most positive-thinking organisations in this State. Perhaps the most exciting new facet of SEQEB would have been the establishment of the Business Development Team in 1986. That team was developed to carry out an aggressive thmst intrastate and interstate to attract new industries to south-east Queensland and to encourage existing industries to expand within its area of supply. In its first 12 months of operations, the team secured 20 firms, representing a total additional electricity load of 60 megawatts. That represents enough electricity load for more than 21 000 new homes. The member for Caboolture said that he believed that incentives in the form of cheaper electricity rates should be given to developing new industries to process minerals and things such as that. Is that what the honourable member said? Mr Hayward: In simple terms, yes. You have oversuppUed the power completely in this State. That is what Mr Innes said. Now, all the fixed costs have been incurred. Now what we are going to have are direct costs. It is important that we do not miss an opportunity to provide the incentives, because all your fixed costs have been incurred; you know who is paying them—the consumers in (Queensland are paying them, because we have the highest electricity charges in Australia. Mr FITZGERALD: I thank the honourable member for Caboolture. He has clearly indicated that he was speaking as one of the senior spokesmen for the Labor Party in this Chamber. It is encouraging to think that the Labor Party Mr Austin: He says it's Labor Party policy. 4120 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

Mr FITZGERALD: It is Labor Party policy. Unless the Opposition spokesman cares to deny it, that will be interesting. I commend him for what he said, because I think it has a great deal going for it. Perhaps the best spin-off from attracting new commercial and industrial enterprises to Queensland is the creation of jobs for more than 1 000 persons. Compared with the positions in other States, Queensland's industrial scene is fairly harmonious. A good example of industrial peace is the electricity industry, in which not one second was lost during 1986-87 owing to disputes. In any terms, that is an enviable record. SEQEB's aggressive and innovative program to attract interstate and overseas business to establish in Queensland has been most successful. While the board is making progress in that direction, it is also heartening that it has a strong service commitment to its customers. I emphasise that it is now very much customer orientated. Some of the features of this service include the 24-hour on-call electronic media service in the event of black-outs so that people can be advised of a situation through the medium of transistor radios. The customer technology centre at Milton and the new appliance information centre at 444 Queen Street are just two locations where customers can obtain free professional advice on electricity. A few weeks ago, SEQEB launched the "Reddy help" campaign whereby field staff are now available to assist the public, from senior citizens to children, who encounter trouble in the streets of our cities and towns. It is interesting to note that research in June this year confirmed previous research findings that SEQEB's community standing remains high. In fact, a solid 67 per cent of all respondents listed SEQEB service as "very good". SEQEB is committed to maintaining its position as leader of the field in technology and innovation. Some of the main technology features include— • Its staff are encouraged to develop products and methods to improve supply and service. They share in royalties on new inventions. One staff innovation now saves SEQEB $350,000 a year and is being tested by electricity authorities in Europe, the United Kingdom, south-east Asia and the US. • An Innovation Award Scheme has been introduced to encourage staff to promote initiatives to further reduce operational costs. • State-of-the-art technology is constantly under review in all areas and is assessed and introduced on the basis of cost-effectiveness and increased efficiency. • Storm and lightning tracker systems provide immediate information for engineers— and, through the media, to the community, if required. • Aerial bundled cable has been introduced and is being used in treed areas as an environmental protection. I notice that the honourable member for Windsor is most interested in that. Next— • Insulators resistant to lightning damage are being introduced. • Concrete poles have been designed and are now used to replace ageing wooden poles. However, one contractor in my electorate still supplies power poles of excellent quality to the industry. I imagine that those poles will be satisfactory for many years to come, provided they are treated, are of good quality and their life is reasonably long. I understand that, in many places, the life of wooden poles is somewhat limited. Other technology features are— • Narrow-based lattice steel towers are also being used to replace wooden H- frame stmctures. Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4121

• The introduction of state-of-the-art major substations, such as the one opened recently in Charlotte Street, to service the CBD and Expo 88. • The use of compact electronic protection relays. SEQEB's success is a combination of initiative and drive, which has resulted in a decrease in permanent staff numbers and a reduction in industrial disputes. Absenteeism is low and enthusiasm among SEQEB staff is high. Controllable operating costs per unit of electricity sold in SEQEB have reduced by 25 per cent below those of 1983-84. That is very significant. SEQEB is to be congratulated on its effort in continuing to supply reliable power to south-east Queensland. I turn now to the Tarong Power Station, which I have been particularly interested in. Tarong Power Station is not sited in the electorate of Lockyer. It is not even sited in the Premier's electorate, as many so-called spokesmen for the Opposition—not in this Chamber—would have us believe. In fact, the Tarong Power Station is located in the electorate of Somerset. However, Yarraman, in my electorate, is the closest centre of population to that power station. In fact, the electorate boundary extends almost to the gates of the power station. As the Minister for Mines and Energy mentioned earlier, the State's newest power station, Tarong, generated about half of Queensland's energy requirements last financial year. The entire project, which includes Boondooma Dam and associated pipeline with pumping station, high-voltage transmission lines, roadworks and other community facilities, was completed on time and within budget. In fact, the $1,135m project cost $200m less than the original estimate, even though it will be remembered that Tarong's constmction program was shortened by 17 months. The high efficiency and availability of the Tarong plant compare more than favourably with similar plants in power stations throughout the world. Honourable members would be well advised to visit a power station such as Tarong to inspect the installation and the planned maintenance programs that exist. I visited the Tarong Power Station on one occasion. It was fascinating to see the Hitachi boilers and turbines and the control rooms. Not only are there many computers in this modem power station—naturally enough—and not only are the entire operations computerised, but if a problem arises at the power station, it has the capacity to link up with Hitachi's computers in Japan. Because that company has a number of similar plants operating in power stations throughout the world, it provides a service whereby its computer in Japan can actually monitor through the power stations' computers the pressures, temperatures and speeds of the equipment that is operating in the power stations. In that way, if faults have occurred previously in other power stations, a record can be kept of the likely causes. As a result, equipment can be programmed as to exactly what has to be done and what steps should be taken. It is interesting to note that the down-time of modern power stations is significantly less than it was in the past in the old power stations. Operators can actually ascertain when a valve is starting to go and is not holding pressure in the way that it should. It is also possible to have on hand all replacement parts and equipment that are needed to service that particular valve. That is one indication of how modem technology can reduce much of the down-time in those power stations. The location of the coal mine adjacent to the power station helps to keep the delivered price of coal as low as possible. Last year, some 5 million tonnes of coal were consumed at Tarong. I notice that the Opposition spokesman, the member for Nudgee, was rather critical of the fact that the power station consumes very low-quality coal which has a very high ash content. I agree that it has a very high ash content, but the power station has been designed to consume coal of that particular quality. I remember some of the debate that occurred in this Chamber when the Opposition criticised the location of the power station on that site. It would have built a power station somewhere else in Queensland that consumed coal that was suitable for many other purposes. The low-quality coal at Tarong is not suitable for export or for conversion into petroleum products. It is suitable for burning. The ash is left on site and, provided that the power 4122 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates) station can consume that quality of coal, it is the best possible use to which it can be put. Because of the Tarong plant's efficiency and availability, coupled with the comparatively low cost of coal, the cost of generation per kilowatt at Tarong is lower than that at any other thermal power station in the State. Accordingly, the Queensland Electricity Commission ranks Tarong top of its generating stations. The considerable water requirements for Tarong are supplied from Boondooma Dam through a one-metre diameter pipeline, almost 100 kilometres in length. To reduce the demand and consequent cost of fresh water used, selected effluents are being recycled, others are treated for use in different areas and yet others are being used as altemative sources of water for dust control. Water used in ash-sluicing is reclaimed from the ash dam and recycled in the furnace hoppers and sluices, thereby reducing the total inflow to the ash dam and prolonging its useful life. Another recent installation of a stormwater dam upstream of the ash dam will provide seasonal augmentation of cooling water supplies and further prolong the ash dam life by reducing water inflow. They are some of the matters that I am concemed about at Tarong. I was rather pleased about the actual setting for the site. As one drives to Tarong, one can observe the recreational facilities and trees and shmbs surrounding that water storage. It is very picturesque. Mr Hamill: Did the Minister tell you about the ash content in the coal? Mr FITZGERALD: The honourable member for Ipswich mentioned that the coal had high ash content. If he had been listening—he can read it in Hansard—he would have heard me cover that area adequately. The coal has a very high ash content. It is not suitable for anything else. Contrary to what the ALP is saying, it is possibly the best use for that coal. It cannot be exported. The Minister is also responsible for the State Library. I know that he is as excited as Opposition members seem to be at this stage that on 8 April next year the fourth stage of the Queensland Cultural Centre will be opened. That day will be a red-letter day for Queensland. One by one the facilities on the south bank have all come into place. In his presentation, the Minister mentioned the children's library. It is excellent that a special children's library has been incorporated in the State Library. Mr Austin: We might be able to get the member for Brisbane Central to go there to research his speeches. Mr FITZGERALD: Some of the Opposition members could research speeches and also learn how to read. That would be excellent. Children need that encouragement. All jokes aside—I could claim, as a proud parent, to be interested in children's books. My son is actually in the throes of having his first book published, which is a children's book. I know how important it is that young children learn how to read. Not only is the State Government spending much money on Ubrary facilities in Brisbane; it also has a policy of supplying funds, through a subsidy scheme, for libraries throughout Queensland. In my area, two libraries have received grants from the subsidy schemes that are available to assist shire council libraries. I speak of the Gatton Shire Council library and the Crows Nest Shire Council library. At the end of last year, I had the privilege of opening the Crows Nest Shire Council library, which provided a facility for the use of the residents of the Highfields area. Recently, I had the honour of declaring that facility open. Although I was not surprised, some people were surprised at the demand that was placed on the new library. An estimate had been made of how many books should be made available and how many people would visit the library. In no time, the use was more than double the estimate and the use of the library has continued at an increasing rate. When these services are provided, people take advantage of them. 1 think it is important that this Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4123

Govemment should continue to look after not only the people who Uve in the metropolitan area of Brisbane—and there are many monuments to the good work that this Government is doing in that area—but also people who live in mral areas. To that end, the State Government assists shire councils to provide services throughout Queensland. In conclusion, I congratulate the Minister. I am a member of the Minister's committee and I commend him for the enthusiasm with which he has embraced his portfoUo. I express also my high regard for the officers of his department who work tirelessly to support the Minister in carrying out his portfolio responsibilities. Mr SMITH (Townsville East) (3.27 p.m.): I also should congratulate the Minister, but not for the reasons given by the previous speaker. 1 should congratulate the Minister on being able to get a member of his committee, who probably knows very little about this subject, to say the right words. I can only hope that the honourable member for Lockyer will reciprocate after the next State election by coaching the Minister in establishment of his hobby farm. The Govemment appears to have taken a recent interest in hydroelectric generating stations. However, I suggest that its interest has not arisen as a result of innovative or forward thinking on the part of the Govemment; rather I suppose that the Govemment's public relations staff have sold to members of the Government the proposition that it is a good idea to start talking about hydroelectric generation because of the public's preference for pollution-free generation, compared with the adverse effects of conven­ tionally fuelled coal stations and emissions of CO^ that will cause a greenhouse effect. Mr Austin: Do you support the proposal? You do not want to end up like Bill Eaton. Mr SMITH: I have no intention of answering the Minister because he will be given an hour and a half in which to sum up, whereas I have only 20 minutes. The argument is not a simple one; unfortunately the facts are quite complex. I shall refer to them during the course of my speech. In the days when electricity was used primarily for lighting and there was very little use of electricity for industrial equipment, the limited power available from hydroelectric schemes was certainly attractive. At that time, the base load was small and the peak load which occurred in the evening was not sustained for a long period. As industrialisation spread, there came into being a need for ever-increasing base- load capacity. Swanbank, the first of the larger stations, was designed to supersede the 30 megawatt local generating stations at places such as Howard, Rockhampton and Townsville. Most people are fairly familiar with the growih pattem of the electricity industry from that stage because it certainly has been fairly dramatic. During the period prior to establishment of Swanbank, small hydroelectric stations had been installed in the north Queensland area under the auspices of the Caims Electricity Board and later the Northern Electric Authority. Prior to the interconnection of the NEA group with the southem and central grid, the small hydroelectric stations played a useful role by contributing to north Queensland's peak demand. During the later part of the period since Swanbank took over from the local stations such as Howard and Rockhampton, CoUinsville was supplying the base north Queensland load. The arrangement in north Queensland worked well. Accolades were plentiful and, at the time, also justified. However, what few people realised was how little power, in an overall sense, was supplied by hydroelectric stations. The myth lived on and began to grow, and everyone thought that hydroelectric stations were major contributors. I can recall that during the period that I worked for the electricity authority and during the period of power restriction because of industrial action, a threat was made which, incidentally, was taken seriously by the authority. The threat was that business interests in Cairns were considering dynamiting a critical pylon that carried the 4124 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates) interconnecting transmission line which tied the northem hydrogrid in with the grid supplied by the CoUinsville thermal station. The argument—a fallacious argument, of course—was that the hydrostation would adequately supply far-north Queensland and all that would have to be done was that the water valves would have to be opened. The business interests saw themselves as being immune, therefore, from the problems that might arise from the coal deliveries that were causing the problem of the inability of the CoUinsville Power Station to generate at that time. I only mention that because it is an attitude that prevailed. Of course, sanity prevailed and nothing untoward really happened. I have simply used that to illustrate how badly informed most people, including otherwise well-informed people in business and industry, are about the concept and role of hydrostations. The reality is that even in far-north Queensland, where there was relatively little industrialisation, if the area had had to rely on the output available solely from the hydrostations, the reserves of water would have dropped dramatically over a comparatively short period and the balanced use of water for hydro and agricultural purposes would have quickly moved out of the designed equilibrium. Because the people in far-north Queensland had that misguided faith—although honestly held—in hydro, it does not make them unique. Southern people held the same misconceptions about the mighty Snowy River scheme, which so far is the greatest civil engineering project completed in Australia. I can recall one occasion—and again this was due to industrial disputation—when the Snow7 scheme was used on a 24-hour basis to supply the State grid, instead of being used in its usual role of contributing to peak demand for two or three hours a day. The result was that in two weeks the dams were almost depleted of water and the scheme's continued ability to revert to its traditional role once the coal station came back on line was in serious doubt. Hydroschemes are incredibly expensive in terms of dollars per installed megawatt. Even places such as New Zealand and Tasmania had to rethink their position. Thirty years ago, because of the availabUity of surplus hydrogenerated energy, serious consideration was being given to supplying Victoria from Tasmania via an undersea cable. In recent years, studies have been carried out on the feasibility of supplying Tasmania from Victoria by the same method. Mr Austin: Do you think the member for Mourilyan supports the TuUy/Millstream scheme? Mr SMITH: Just wait till I get to the end of it. What needs to be understood is that there is a role for power generation other than being fuelled by coal, but the adaptation of that alternative energy source has to be considered on a case by case analysis. There is no mle of thumb on energy availability or suitability. Pumped storage schemes can be appropriate because modern coal-fired power stations work best in terms of efficiency and pollute less when they operate close to their designated optimal output. Under those conditions surplus power is channelled into giant pumping stations—I know that most people know that—which recycle water back to the dam storage so that it can be released through water turbine driven power stations to meet peak demand. That, of course, occurs already at Wivenhoe and, as far as I am concemed, it is certainly the way of the future. I would certainly advocate more of that. Two years ago, on 29 November, the then Minister for Mines and Energy, Mr Gibbs, announced approval in principle of three new power stations, namely, Herbert River, TuUy/Millstream and Burdekin Falls. I can remember reading reports about the Herbert and the Burdekin schemes 20 years ago. The Tully/ Millstream proposal is the only one that is of recent origin. Mr Eaton: That is in my electorate, too. Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4125

Mr SMITH: That is right. The honourable member for Mourilyan is not fussy about which projects he gets. I want to discuss the relative merits of two of those proposals, the TuUy/Millstream and the Burdekin Falls. That is the reason for my previous explanatory comments. In overall terms, the installed thermal power station capacity in Queensland is well in excess of the State's present or projected needs. Nevertheless, I agree that an economic argument exists for new, non-thermal contributing capacity. What has received little publicity, particularly in the southem media, is the fact that security of supply to the north Queensland area is not satisfactory. When CoUinsviUe is fully closed down, the nearest thermal and base-load station will be hundreds of kilometres away in central Queensland. Frankly, nobody buys the excuse that there are two transmission lines. Nobody accepts that that is good enough. This Government has a not very enviable record on the consistency of its actions in north Queensland. First there were the assurances about the future of the CoUinsviUe Power Station. That area saw heavy Government expenditure in the form of the new home constmction for Govemment workers, not to mention the constmction of a new high school at CoUinsviUe, which cost several millions dollars. That was followed by misleading statements from the Govemment about closing down only some of the CoUinsviUe station. As soon as the Govemment thought that a reasonable time had elapsed, it revealed its tme plan, which was in fact to shut down the whole show. I always remember the time when that final decision was taken. In the last couple of days there has been mention made of people hiding in toilets. My understanding is that Mr Katter did not attend the Cabinet meeting at which that decision was taken. Mr Scott: Is that the time he dashed onto the airport mnway and left the engine of his car mnning? Mr SMITH: That is only one of the many occasions. There is, therefore, a need for a firm commitment to the constmction of a thermal station in the Townsville district, which is strategically and centrally located in the north Queensland area. In looking at what could be a logical source of energy from Queensland power stations, the abundance or otherwise of the State's natural resources must receive full consideration at the political, as well as the planning, level. The facts are that coal is plentiful. Natural gas, particularly with the work being undertaken by Curtain Brothers, could well become viable. Water is becoming an increasingly scarce commodity, which the State cannot afford to let mn to waste. Even the Minister for Northern Development, Mr Katter, has correctly recognised that fact by stating his opposition to the TuUy/Millstream proposal. The same considerations would apply to the Herbert River proposal. There are still some unresolved matters relating to that scheme, which have been mentioned in reports that have existed for 20 years. It becomes clear that the only type of water-powered electricity generation that meets the criteria of coping with peak demand and conserving precious resources is a pumped storage scheme such as the one proposed for the Burdekin. The Burdekin scheme has the advantage that preparatory work has already been undertaken at the site and the infrastmcture, particularly access roads, is in place. The Burdekin scheme would have a capacity of between 500 and 1 000 megawatts, and the interconnecting transmission grid is already in place. It would not only be wasteful of natural resources to consider the other hydro schemes at the present time—I stress "at the present time"—but also it would be wasteful not to use the equipment already in place and available for the Burdekin project. I think that is the answer to the question that the Minister asked before. I do not dispute the fact that at some future time that project could be a viable proposition. I am simply saying that in the order of priorities it is at least No. 3. The political nature of the Government's decision to recommence the Tully/ Millstream study is a sham and a fraud. 4126 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

Mr Scott: 11/11/85. Mr SMITH: The history of the project is that it was first mentioned, as the honourable member for Cook said, on 11 November 1985. It was then dusted off again in late 1986 as part of the National Party's effort to shore up its failing electoral fortunes in the north Queensland area. As soon as the election was out of the way, on 6 April it was axed. I support the reasons that were then given for axing the project. The Minister said that the costs were too high, there was rainforest in the area and that alternative sources of power were available. I agree with all of the Minister's reasons, which were professional ones. Today the Minister claimed to have been misquoted, but I recall his Cabinet colleague the Minister for Northern Development welcoming the decision at about the same time. If the Daily Sun was misinformed, the Minister's Cabinet colleague was misinformed as well. The Minister's reasons for claiming inaccuracy in the article would be fascinating to hear because he now claims that the study was suspended in June following the Federal Government's proposal on World Heritage listing. I also find misleading the final paragraph of the Minister's answer to a question asked by the shadow Minister today. The claim of an additional cost of $ 500m for the altemative power station constmction at Townsville to the Millstream proposal would need a lot of detailed supporting information before I could buy it. In fact, I really do not see how the two projects can be comparatively costed. One would be a designated base load station and the other would be a contributor to peak. The question that I would like the Minister to answer is: how does he claim that the Millstream project would compare with the more logical implementation of the Burdekin pumped storage project? That is where the cost differences should be explained. The tmth about the Millstream project is that the Govemment had already abandoned it, quite correctly, but then the Minister, who is one of this Government's principal Canberra-bashers, decided that he would mislead the community by dusting off the project and blaming Canberra for stopping a project when in fact there was no intention whatsoever at any stage to go ahead. Mr Austin: I will be turning the first sod this time next year and you won't get an invitation now. Mr SMITH: Do not be so heartless. It has now gone the full circle. The Govemment again says that it will proceed with the project and hopes to put the Federal Government in a difficult position by saying that it is obstmctionist. The project will not proceed but the reason why it will not proceed will not be obstmction by the Federal Govemment or World Heritage listing; it will not proceed for the reasons correctly given on 6 April and endorsed by the Minister's Cabinet colleague. I emphasise that. 1 want to return to a topic that I introduced briefly in discussing a possible fuel source for the next north Queensland thermal generating station. Curtain Brothers, who are based in Townsville, as the Minister is well aware, are engaged in an exciting ]^roject to tap vast and as yet untapped quantities of natural gas. When 1 say "vast", I am informed that the potential reserves of the field are greater than the North West Shelf If that gas does come on stream, it could well put a new focus on industrial development in north Queensland. It could mean that whatever port on the coast the gas is brought to could become a major exporter of the product to countries on the Pacific rim. It can certainly be argued that the North West Shelf has been a major headache for the Westem Australian Government. However, that arose out of a contractual obligation for local use of the product and the fact that estimates of requirements were wildly inaccurate. They were in fact greatly overestimated. Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4127

Curtain Brothers will certainly need all the assistance that the Govemment can provide. Being a Townsville-based company, it wants to pipe the gas to the city. There have been disturbing reports that the Govemment has been less than co-operative and I believe that it has indicated that unless the gas is piped to a destination other than Townsville, the company cannot be assured of the full co-operation of the Govemment. The city of Townsville has been singled out for unfair treatment in recent times, first by the Minister for Maritime Services, Mr Tenni. I note with interest that that has only occurred since Mr Burreket was elected as the member for Townsville. Prior to that, Mr Tenni was a fairly reasonable Minister. The more surprising in recent days was the Minister for Local Govemment and pretender to the throne, Mr Hinze. Therefore I would welcome a statement of support from the Minister, as the responsible Minister, particularly in view of his less than helpful actions during the time he held the Health portfolio. I am hopeful that the Minister's experience in that area will make him more amenable to this particular project. Mr Austin: I was right about the Kirwan Hospital after all the bagging you gave me. Mr SMITH: No, I do not believe that the Minister was right. Mr Austin: The people up there love it. Mr SMITH: Only the other day I looked at it and thought to myself how out of place it looks. It looks like something that should be out in the sticks, not in the second largest city in this State. Recently there have been calls by Utah that the Coal Industry Tribunal should be replaced and absorbed into the Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission. Senator Parer took up the cry, as did the New South Wales Opposition. Then, of course, the Queensland Minister for Mines and Energy chimed in with a similar call that was entirely predictable. The element of the Minister's statement that made it less credible than the statement made by his associate was that he argued that the one-man tribunal should be replaced by a more representative body. Mr Austin: I answered that this moming in the Parliament—adequately, I thought. Mr SMITH: I must have been absent from the Chamber. The Minister must think that Queenslanders have short memories, because in March 1985 the Government to which he belongs introduced legislation that took the electricity industry out of the control of the State Industrial Commission and placed it under the Electricity Authorities Industrial Causes Tribunal, which is itself a one-man show. The Minister cannot have it both ways. He has to decide whether he favours the one-man electricity tribunal or a wider representative group. I tum now to Shelburne Bay. This Government has made a lot of noise about Shelbume Bay and talked about lost opportunities. The coal industry is an excellent example of the Govemment's adopting the same sort of attitude. Too many coal mines have been opened and too much money has been tied up through overcapitalisation. This Government wants to do exactly the same thing with Shelbume Bay. There is a large commitment by the Govemment to service that area. It wants to do the same thing with Shelbume Bay as it did with the coal industry, that is, commit millions of unnecessary dollars to the project. Time expired. Mrs McCAULEY (Callide) (3.47 p.m.): I rise with pleasure to speak on the Estimates of the Minister for Mines and Energy and Minister for the Arts. Mr Scott: Did your husband write this one or the Minister? Mrs McCAULEY: No, I wrote it. 4128 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

I congratulate the Minister because, even though there is a lot of legislation in the pipeline concerning amendments to the Mining Act, only a small amount of legislation has come from his department this year. I firmly believe that less, not more, legislation and red tape is needed, and I commend the Minister for adopting his present attitude. Mines and Energy has particular relevance to my electorate, because of the coal mines and power stations in it. First of all, I wish to refer to the Department of the Arts, National Parks and Sport, which is also very relevant to my country constituency, as it is to all country areas in Queensland. A few weeks ago, in Biloela, I opened a regional conference of the arts council. The regional representative for central Queensland is a lady by the name of Dominique Tan. She lives in Biloela and has always had a keen interest in the arts. I was happy to be able to tell the conference that the Minister regards his Arts portfolio to be just as important as Mines and Energy. I know that country Queenslanders as well as people in the city of Brisbane will benefit from this. The Department of the Arts, National Parks and Sport is doing a tremendous job at present in country Queensland by arranging for talented people such as Gilbert Spottis­ wood to come to country areas and present large-scale pageants and produce many plays. Some of those pageants have been produced in Barcaldine and Longreach. The most recent one was held in Longreach in September of this year. It contained a cast of many hundreds of people. Mr Goss interjected. Mrs McCAULEY: If the honourable member for Logan ever went out that far, he would find that the holding of a pageant of that kind is a tremendously exciting way to get the history of the State across to the people. Queenslanders are very lucky that the Department of the Arts, National Parks and Sport provides people such as Gilbert Spottiswood to do that kind of work. Mr Prest: Were you there? Mrs McCAULEY: No, I was not. I could not go that week-end and it was a shame. Pageants have been held in Biloela, and it is hoped that one will be held for the Bicentenary next year. Mr Gilbert Spottiswood, who produces these pageants, stays with me when he comes to Biloela. He is a very talented fellow. Recently, he won a Churchill Fellowship and he has been to France to study more about producing these pageants which bring art to the country people of Queensland. Mr Hynd interjected. Mrs McCAULEY: No, they do not. This is a very good example of what can be done on a small budget. It is a very cost-effective scheme and the country people of Queensland are very lucky to have this. I look forward to the special event next year, the pageant, that will provide the history of the Callide and Dawson valleys, and Biloela hopes to have a royal visitor for that occasion. This is strongly supported by the Banana Shire Council and the bicentennial committee. I look forward to this event with a great deal of anticipation, and I congratulate the Minister on this cost-effective scheme that is of such benefit to Queensland's country people. In moving on to the Mines and Energy part of the Minister's portfolio, I make the observation that the mining industry provides a unique strata in the different layers that make up Queensland society. I have lived in mining towns all my married life. Although I do not consider Biloela to be totally a mining town, the mining industry makes a very important contribution to its economy. Eariier, it appeared that Mr Smyth thought that many Govemment members have not been to mining towns. Recently, with the member for Broadsound and Mr Lester, I visited many mining towns in central Queensland, such as Dysart, Emerald and Tieri! I will not go on to sing the praises of the well-mn Callide coal-fields lest I be thought to be biased. Suffice it to say that I have always had a very good working relationship Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4129 with the general manager of Callide Coalfields, and I consider him to be very capable and efficient. That has nothing to do with the fact that I am married to him. Callide Coalfields is a joint venture operation, which is owned 55 per cent by CSR, 30 per cent by Shell and 15 per cent by AMP. In August this year, Callide Coalfields was awarded a 44.5 million tonne contract to supply steaming coal to three power stations, namely, Gladstone, Callide A and Callide B. A QEC spokesman has said that that contract will provide for the power stations' needs up to the year 2005, with an option for an additional 20 million tonnes, which would meet demand up to the year 2018. Recently, at the behest of the unions. Senator Gareth Evans visited Biloela. The unions wanted Senator Evans to talk about the need for a national coal authority. Senator Evans told them, "We don't need a national coal authority. Pull your heads in." Those were his exact words. I do not think that the unions were very happy about that and I do not think that they will ask him to return to the area. Seven years ago, Callide B approved constmction of a 700 megawatt coal-fired power station to commence operation in the 1980s. There were sound reasons why the Callide site was chosen. I will provide honourable members with a brief history of the matter. Tarong Power Station was already under constmction and programmed to have four units commissioned between May 1984 and November 1986. The normal design and constmction requirements time would not allow the constmction of a power station of new design for early 1986. This problem was overcome by exercising options under the Tarong boiler and turbogenerator contracts for the supply of two additional units, which reduced the lead-time from 7 years to 5V2 years. Tenders were invited for coal supplies for those two units, which resulted in their being located at Callide B. Callide coal was being supplied to both Gladstone and Callide A Power Stations, and operating experience provided a high level of assurance that it would bum safely, reliably and economically in Tarong contract boilers with minor modifications. The contractor agreed to guarantee the operation of the Tarong boiler on Callide coal. The Queensland Electricity Commission was therefore well placed to provide a reliable new power station on a short lead-time program. The commercial load date for Callide B's first unit was deferred to March 1988 following a revision of the load forecast in 1982. The generating units at Callide B are identical to the Tarong units, which are already setting very high availability records. Stringent environmental safeguards have been taken to ensure that the project's impact on the surrounding Callide Valley is minimal. With commissioning in progress, project staff, the Queensland Water Resources Commission and the Queensland Water Quality Council are implementing the zero waste discharge requirements. Procedures are also being established to monitor and control water use and disposal. The first Callide B unit reached full load under test one month ahead of schedule in early November. It has been very interesting living in the Callide Valley in recent months and hearing the steam being mn through. I can assure honourable members that it has had an impact on the whole community. The commercial load date is March 1988 for the first unit and March 1989 for the second unit. I am very pleased to have that facility sited in Biloela. I invite the Minister to visit the Callide electorate at any time in the near future. I would be happy to show him the new power station, which stands out very nicely on the landscape. A 1 400 megawatt power station for central Queensland was proposed as part of a development program to expand Queensland's generating system to meet estimated load growth into the 1990s. In October 1981, the State Govemment approved the siting of the Stanwell Power Station, which is situated about 28 kilometres south-west of Rockhampton but still within my electorate. The site was considered to be the most suitable following nine months of feasibility studies and economic assessments of possible locations in central Queensland. Stanwell is presently on a program that will see the first commercial 4130 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates) electricity generated in March 1993. Flexibility in the contracts has allowed defertals to occur without serious penalty. I would like to provide honourable members with an update of progress. All preliminary siteworks have been completed. Briefly, they include works such as clearing and levelling of the site, provision of sealed access and on-site roads, constmction of building foundations for the first two units, establishment of a sewage-treatment plant as well as provision of water and electricity supplies. Stanwell will have four 350 megawatt units of the same size and make as for Tarong and Callide B. Detailed boiler and plant design is substantially complete. Preliminary site investigations for the cooling-water dam begin this month to test foundation conditions, and tenders closed last week for fabrication and erection of a turbine house and stmctural steelwork. Eariy next year, tenders will be called for further building foundations, with further constmction starting in mid-1988. Early in 1989, erection of the turbine house steel will begin and constmction of foundations for boiler units will commence. Expenditure on the Stanwell project to date has been $86.5m out of a total cost of $ 1,650m at present price levels. To accommodate the constmction work-force, two types of accommodation have been provided. For married workers, a QEC-owned estate at Red Hill in north Rockhampton is able to accommodate up to 35 mobUe homes. The estate also has ablution facilities and a manager's residence. In Westem Street, Rockhampton a 280-bed single men's hostel has been constmcted. Total infrastmcture commitments by the QEC amount to more than $7m, which is composed of $5m for regional roads and $1.3m to the Fitzroy Shire Council to help to provide a 1.4 million litre service reservoir for Gracemere and a sports and recreation reserve. I know that Councillor Rod Douglas, the Chairman of the Fitzroy Shire Council, and the other worthy men who serve on that council have been very happy with that infrastmcture. In addition, more than $lm will be provided to the Rockhampton City Council. These contributions will benefit central Queensland residents as a result of the establishment of Stanwell Power Station. Mr Ardill: What about emission standards at Stanwell? Why aren't they as high as those for Callide? Mrs McCAULEY: There is no emission from the Stanwell power station yet, because it has not been built. The Capricornia Electricity Board is well on the way to being an organisation that is ready to handle the challenges of the 1990s. Now that the period of major extension works is easing in central Queensland, the board is consolidating its position in the market-place. By concentrating its efforts towards maintaining and improving its distri­ bution system, it aims to continue to ensure a reliable supply of electricity and, at the same time, offer a high standard of service to central Queenslanders. Despite difficult economic times, the Capricornia Electricity Board showed a healthy growth in energy sales of 8.1 per cent in 1986-87. This increase in demand for electricity, which is a substantial improvement in operating efficiency, allowed the CEB to produce an operating surplus which will assist in the development of future projects. Through the adoption and implementation of a corporate strategy which embraces cost-saving measures, performance improvement initiatives and marketing activities, the Capricornia Electricity Board's overall performance has risen. I pay tribute to the former manager of the Capricornia Electricity Board, Mr Rol Oxenham, who recently retired. He was held in high esteem in central Queensland for the many years that he held that position. He has done an excellent job. I am sorry to see him retire, and I wish him a happy retirement. To improve reliability of supply to its customers, the Capricomia Electricity Board carried out unspecified system augmentation costing in excess of $2m, while expenditure on urban development amounted to some $1.6m. The board continued its rural Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4131 development program, investing a total of $6.6m. To meet the demand of property- owners, the Capricornia Electricity Board, in conjunction with the State Government and the Queensland Electricity Commission, developed an electricity supply scheme to supply the townships of Agnes Water and Seventeen Seventy. I led a deputation to the Minister from people in the area who were concemed at the high cost of connection of power, but it really comes back to the user-pays principle. It was expensive for those people to have the power connected, but there was a subsidy factor involved, which has certainly made their life a lot easier. A contract project involving expenditure of $lm was commenced on estabUshing a zone substation at Blackall and a new feeder of 108 kilometres from Barcaldine to Blackall. During the 1986-87 year the board carried out major upgrading work on the transmission network in the Gladstone area, which was made necessary because of the increased industrial electrical load growth in the Gladstone area. In addition, work associated with the Queensland Railways electrification project was undertaken by the board at a total cost of $lm. Work carried out by the CEB involved modification of high-voltage and low-voltage crossings and the provision of electricity supply for Stage 2 of the main line electrification. This project will be used primarily to haul coal from central Queensland mines, and ultimately the railways will be a major CEB customer. Work commenced on installation of the Capricornia Electricity Board's load control equipment at Rockhampton and Gladstone. The total project will be completed in stages throughout the board's region at a total estimated cost of almost $12m. As a tribute to the pioneers of the electricity supply industry in the central west, and to commemorate the connection of transmitted supply to the coastal grid, the board constructed a monumental gateway at the entrance to the 132 000 volt transmission substation at Barcaldine. The gateway incorporates a flywheel and crankshaft, relics of the two eras of electricity generation in the far west. During the 1986-87 year there were no major disturbances to the Capricomia Electricity Board's supply system, and performance was extremely high, with an availability of 99.9 per cent. Mr Scott: Couldn't you have tabled this? Mrs McCAULEY: Does not the honourable member want to learn about central Queensland? In part, the improvement was due to the transfer of the Barcaldine system to bulk supply, which removed problems associated with diesel generators during storms. The Capricornia Electricity Board, in striving to continually improve performance, has taken a number of initiatives to utilise new technology and improve work practices. During the year the board received and accepted a proposal for ICL Australia to upgrade its main computer system. The application of the upgraded computer system should result in significantly less down-time and, together with faster response times, will allow the board to offer an improved service to its consumers. The CEB has entered the age of technology with the installation of a computer- aided drafting system, which will enable it to access the land information system from the Department of Mapping and Surveying. Having visited that department when I entered Parliament, I understand why that will be of enormous benefit in the planning and constmction of new power lines. The CEB has also investigated the applications of new technologies such as electronics meter-reading with portable data-entry equipment and the development of geothermal generating plant utilising the heat energy of artesian water. These technologies will allow further cost-saving and improve the board's service capabilities to its customers. 4132 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

The Capricomia Electricity Board has a fervent commitment to on-the-job safety and improved safety performance of six operational sections within the board. That was recognised by the attainment of National Safety Council awards. Mr Ardill: That is very important. Mrs McCAULEY: Is the honourable member saying that safety is not important? Mr Ardill: No. I said it was very important. Mrs McCAULEY: It is very important indeed. CEB's record is a very good one. The Capricomia Electricity Board is in the business of supplying the people of central Queensland with a most vital energy medium—electricity. Although a slowing- down of major extensions to the board's supply network is being experienced, the board is concentrating its efforts towards maintaining and improving its distribution system to ensure a reliable supply and a high standard of service to its customers. The requirements of the future have guided the board's management decisions and have emphasised the need for improved productivity and tight resource management. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Campbell): Order! I call the honourable member for Logan. Mr Hynd: We will have a few pearls of wisdom now. Mr GOSS (Logan) (4.06 p.m.): The honourable member for Nerang is very astute to recognise that fact, even before I have spoken. I think his prediction will prove to be correct. In May this year, under the smiling face of the Minister, the Govemment introduced a Green Paper in relation to mining legislation. I will address my comments today to one particular aspect of that Green Paper. The Green Paper concept is obviously one that is a very healthy exercise and an important part of the process of government, as I am sure all honourable members would agree. If more Ministers circulated Green Papers, I am sure that the wheels of Government would tum much more smoothly and that the community interest would be better served. I understand that, in response to the Green Paper, the Minister's department has received a couple of hundred submissions from a wide cross-section of people, including miners, prospectors, lawyers, community groups and local authorities. Such a response clearly indicates the value of undertaking the exercise. Irrespective of whether one agrees with any or all of the contents, I stress, nevertheless, the importance and healthiness of the exercise to the democratic process. Hopefully, when the submissions have been reviewed, the result will be a much better piece of legislation and one that reflects the needs and aspirations of the whole community and, in particular the relevant competing interest groups. It is obvious in relation to the submissions that the Government cannot keep everybody happy with the forthcoming legislation. However, the important thing is that a fair balance is struck between the interests of those various competing groups. In the Minister's introduction to the Green Paper, he mentions maintaining sustained growth and development of the mining industry in the future which will present significant administrative, operational and technological changes, particularly in a rapidly changing and highly competitive international scene. The Minister's comments are very true and his comments in relation to the importance of the industry are also tme. Although it is important, as I have said, that the Government should do all within its power to ensure that the industry operates efficiently and, in particular, competitively, it is also important that a fair balance between all the interests is stmck. The specific section of the Green Paper to which I wish to refer, and to which 1 will confine my comments, relates to the proposals in relation to the introduction of the Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4133 concept of mining registrars to replace the Mining Wardens Court or, on the other hand, the appointment of mining registrars instead of having a specialised division of the Magistrates Court. At page 15 in the Green Paper, reference is made to a concem about granting mining leases. Page 15 states— "Part of the delay is caused by the inability of applicants to accurately describe the ground applied for and translate such description to an approved chart." It goes on to refer to other delays that are being caused by hearing of the application in the Mining Wardens Court and compensation negotiations, and the necessity to provide adequate conditioning to protect the environment. Although some concem may be felt about those matters, I think it would be a mistake to take this step in relation to mining registrars; to adopt an administrative approach rather than a judicial one. Having said that, I accept that scope still exists for reform and improvement of the present system. The Green Paper contains proposals that have a good deal of merit in relation to requiring applicants to give a decisive commitment to the commencement of operations and also to accompanying the proposal with detaUs of the mineral resource, financial commitments, the concept infrastmcture requirements and so on. The Green Paper also mentions requirements in respect of security and many other matters that will affect the application. All of that should go in. The proposal about which I have concem is that section of the Green Paper which states— "To achieve the objective of reducing delays, any hearing of the Applications would be removed from the arena of the Courts. The hearing of the Application would be vested in a Mining Registrar who would be required to conduct a inquestorial hearing without the necessity for any judicial determination. The hearing would be in the nature of a coronial enquiry whereby the applicant would be required to produce evidence of compliance with the provisions of the Act..." After that the registrar would make findings in relation to the facts in the same way as a coroner would. Without making any recommendation he would send those findings to the Minister. It seems to me that, if that exercise is to be carried out, it should be done by a person who is more qualified than the proposed mining registrar. After that process has been followed, it would seem to me only appropriate that the officer, whether he be a judicial officer or whatever, make appropriate recommendations. The Green Paper goes on to refer to the concept of a compulsory conference. That is a proposal that I am happy to support. I think there is scope for compulsory conferences. I have had experience in other jurisdictions, particularly in the Family Court, with compulsory conferences, which are a more recent but very successful innovation and which have a very high success rate in resolving disputes, particularly on financial matters. The latest figures, I have heard, indicate that 80 to 90 per cent of cases are resolved and settled at the conference stage thereby reducing costs, delays and also the hostility that can be generated out of a trial in the Family Court. So, there is scope for that, and I would support that concept as outlined in the Green Paper. On my reading of the Green Paper, it is not made quite plain whether or not the proceedings of the conference would be without prejudice. If that is not the view that is being considered at present, I would certainly urge that on the Minister and his advisers. Mr Austin: We are not going ahead with the proposal for mining registrars. We have taken note of the objections. That is the purpose of the Green Paper, really. Mr GOSS: Right. Has that been placed on the record before today? Mr Austin: No. Mr GOSS: So, for the first time it is being placed on the record? 4134 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

Mr Austin: Yes, but we haven't finished assessing all the submissions. It is a fair dinkum Green Paper. Mr GOSS: I hope that the Minister appreciates that I am allotted 20 minutes in this debate and so far I have been speaking for only seven minutes, and the rest of my speech—in fact, the whole of my speech—relates to my objection to mining registrars. As the Minister would be aware, from time to time in this place people have said harsh things about him. I have never been such a person. However, things may have to change because I have spent hours reading the Queensland Government Mining Journal, the Green Paper and the High Court decision in the case of Sinclair against the Mining Warden at Maryborough, from which I have extensive quotes from the Chief Justice, Sir Garfield Barwick. Mr Gately: I suggest you table them. Mr GOSS: No. I can think of an even shorter way to deal with my speech, that is, to congratulate the Minister on the wisdom of accepting my arguments. I can only think that they must have been very persuasive to have had such an effect when I was only a tenth of the way through them. Seeing that this highly satisfactory result has been reached already, I do not propose to bore the Committee or waste its time. Mr HINTON (Broadsound) (4.15 p.m.): It is my pleasure to rise in support of the Estimates for the Mines Department. I congratulate the Minister on his speech in the presentation of his Estimates, which covered the department's activities extremely well. I am particularly pleased with what he covered on the coal-mining industry, which is my particular interest. It is the largest industry in the Broadsound electorate, one that is critical to the two major towns of Dysart and Middlemount. I was very pleased to hear the Minister's comments about that area. I wish to commend the member for Callide on her speech, particularly as it related to power generation. She demonstrated to the Committee a most able knowledge of both the coal and power generation industries, as they relate to the town from which she comes, which is Biloela. Mr Scott: Compliment the writer of the speech. Mr HINTON: I say to the member for Cook that I originally lived in Biloela before I moved to the Broadsound electorate. I know the area very well and I know how well the honourable member for Callide is regarded in that district. She knew her topic very well, and I commend her on her speech. As I said, my electorate contains the two mining towns of Dysart and Middlemount. It has three large coal mines, Saraji and Norwich Park mines, which are owned by Utah, and the German Creek mine, which is owned by CapCoal, which built the mining town of Middlemount. Both these beautiful towns are a credit to the companies, to the Broadsound Shire Council, which is the local authority for the area, and to their residents, who are very civic-minded people. Because of their remoteness, the residents of those towns suffer enormous disad­ vantages. Now there is only one daily air service to the area and the bus goes into the area only twice a week, so people have to travel out of the area by car over what are indifferent roads. I am pleased to see that the Minister for Main Roads is in the Chamber, which gives me the opportunity to remind him that the Dingo-Middlemount road urgently needs upgrading. It originated as a beef development road, and these two towns have been built on it. The road is slowly being upgraded. I commend the Minister for the work that has been done on it to this stage, but there are still very narrow sections that cause considerable problems to the residents of those towns, as they do to the mral community of that area. I would certainly like the upgrading of that road to be expedited. The residents of the area have great difficulty with the heavy transports that use the road. The Dingo-Middlemount road is a major inland route for traffic going north to the Townsville and Cairns areas. A considerable amount of mining traffic also uses Supply (Estimates) 12 November 1987 4135 the road. When very big vehicles carrying wide mining equipment travel over what is only a narrow road with a single lane of bitumen, that creates difficulty for the residents of the area, particularly in wet weather when many of them have been bogged. The development of that road is progressing, and I urge the Minister for Main Roads to devote what funds he can towards its continued upgrading. Dysart and Middlemount are both particularly attractive towns. They are also towns that are very sports minded. One of the problems with remote communities is that there is not a sufficient diversity of interest for many of the people who live in them. Because of that, sport is a major pastime. I commend the companies and the council for the standard of the sporting facilities that they have provided. They are really excellent. In fact, the football ground at Dysart is as good as the Melboume Cricket Ground. It is really beautiful. In fact, lawn bowls could be played on it. The population of the area is very proud of its sporting facilities, and I believe that the mining companies and the council can be similarly proud. The people of the area face problems caused by increased costs. Although, relative to people living on the coast, the people in those towns are well paid, they have to cope with very high living costs. In that area petrol is 62c a litre. Virtually every telephone call that is made attracts a long-distance charge. When people have to travel to the coast to receive specialist medical treatment, they have to meet considerably higher costs. Although wages in the industry have increased, they have not kept up with the increase in the cost of living, so their relative position has fallen behind. That is of great concem to me and to the people in the area. Mr Scott: The Minister could not hear you when you mentioned that bit about wages. Could you speak up? Mr HINTON: I am sure that the Minister took full note of what I said, and I am sure that when he replies to the debate he will agree totally with me. I also wish to mention what the Minister said about a national coal authority. I think that idea was first floated by Keith Wright, the member for Capricomia. Of course, he floats a lot of things. Mr Austin: He floated it at election-time. Mr HINTON: Yes, he likes to float these sorts of things at election-time. Unfor­ tunately, after the election they sink. That is his style. He floats things around for the media. I have to congratulate him on the amount of media coverage that he receives. However, a couple of days ago somebody asked me, "What did he ever do as the member for Rockhampton that was a physical improvement to his electorate and what has he ever done as the member for Capricomia that is a physical improvement to his electorate?" I point out that Keith Wright promised the people of Rockhampton $10.7m towards the constmction of a domestic airport. The deal that was stmck with the council was that, as soon as the council agreed to take over local ownership of the airport, the $ 10.7m would be paid to the council and it could hold it in fixed deposits The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Campbell): Order! I ask the honourable member to return to the Estimates. I do not believe that an airport has anything to do with the Estimates being debated. Mr HINTON: I take your point, Mr Temporary Chairman. It has to be borne in mind that Rockhampton is the major centre for the coal­ mining districts of the Central Highlands. Therefore, the Rockhampton airport is the major airport for the coal industry. That airport is critically important to the coal- miners. I thought that honourable members were talking about the coal-mining industry. Now that I have explained the relevance of it, I will complete my point. 4136 12 November 1987 Supply (Estimates)

The funds were promised to the council for an interest-bearing deposit. Like most of Keith Wright's promises, those funds have never materialised. Keith Wright in fact floated the national coal authority as the panacea for the problems of the coal industry. I was quite surprised—and perhaps I should not have been—by the comments of the honourable member for Bowen. I certainly enjoyed listening to his speech. He made some remarkable observations on that coal authority. I point out that the concept of a national coal authority is not supported by the rank-and-file unionists of central Queens­ land. I can assure honourable members that I move amongst the rank-and-file unionists. 1 attend their sporting functions and I talk with them regulariy. In fact, I have attended some of their union meetings. A national coal authority is not supported by the rank and file. It is only supported by the leaders of some unions, particularly the QCEU. Those unions are concerned about protecting the jobs of workers in New South Wales mines rather than jobs in Queensland mines, particulariy central Queensland mines. The people need to understand that. I recommend to the union movement and the mining industry in Queensland that they dissociate themselves from the New South Wales industry and start looking after themselves. If they did that, they would be a lot better off. Most of the endeavours to establish a national coal authority are concemed with protecting inefficient mines in New South Wales to the detriment of Queensland mines and the safety of Queensland jobs. That is a very important point and one that the rank-and-file unionists should understand. The member for Bowen made some quite remarkable statements in relation to the proposed national coal authority. In fact he said that there are stmctural inefficiencies in the industry and that these can be overcome by long-term centralised planning; in other words, by getting an army of public servants in Canberra to do the job that is presently done by the people of the mining companies who know their job and who are experts with a life-time of experience. Mr Ardill interjected. Mr HINTON: The honourable member has never been to a coal mine in his life. I doubt that he has ever been outside the slums of Salisbury, or wherever it is that he comes from. Mr Vaughan: What a shocking thing to say. Mr HINTON: It is tme, though. I return to the points made by the member for Bowen. He stated that in fact centralised planning was the objective and the panacea for all the evils of the coal industry and its present problems. Of course, the present problem is that there is a world oversupply—a glut—which cannot be solved by creating quangos. That has been tried elsewhere. I refer to the meat industry's establishment of the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation. That is a worthy body that is doing its best to promote the sale of meat. It has promoted it well around the world. I point out, however, that it has never sold one kilo of beef, and a national coal authority would never sell one tonne of coal. It cannot and will not achieve that objective. The honourable member for Bowen stated also that a national coal authority could reduce the industry's fixed costs. I would like someone to explain to me how that could be. If it was ringing Canberra for its orders every day, I do not understand how the fixed costs could be reduced. What he and his coUegues on the Opposition side of the Chamber need to understand is that coal is not one product; it is a very variable product. For example, coal from Goonyella is not necessarily sold in competition with coal from Saraji or Norwich Park. It is sold in competition with coal of similar quality from other parts of the world. The mines within Australia are not necessarily competing as fiercely as the honourable member would believe. They are competing with similar classes of coal from other countries in the world. Those problems will not be solved by the creation of a national coal authority. Building Act Amendment Bill 12 November 1987 4137

The honourable member for Bowen stated that a national coal authority would reduce the excess of capacity within the industry. That gem made me think hard for a moment or two. If the honourable member proposes to reduce the excess capacity in the industry, he must be considering the closure of inefficient mines. That is the only thing it can mean. If capacity is to be reduced, mines have to be shut down or production from existing mines has to be reduced. Assuming that the latter is not an efficient way to go, he must be referring to the reduction of inefficient mines. On the other hand, preventing the closure of those mines is what the national coal authority is all about. It is a classic situation and the honourable member for Bowen should be invited back to the Chamber to explain exactly what he meant. He also stated that an authority would enable Australia to provide cheaper coal. That remark is something that the gentlemen opposite should be scratching their heads about. In the same breath he said that a national coal authority would be a mechanism by which Australia could bargain for a better price of coal on the world market. I cannot imagine how Australia can have a better price coal and at the same time cheaper coal. I suggest that the honourable member for Bowen has not represented his constituents very well. He comes from a coal-mining area that includes the town of Moranbah and I believe he should go back and talk to his constituents about this. Another statement he made was that, at a time when there is a world glut, companies should be forced to mine underground. He believes that companies that are mining on surface cuts should be forced to mine deeper seams because of some perceived long- term lack of technology in the industry. I can assure him that there is plenty of technology in the industry relating to underground mining. One only has to inspect the long-wall mining techniques employed at German Creek to appreciate that, where coal can be mined underground economically, that is being done—and expanded. German Creek has a new, $100m southern colliery for underground mining. At a time of industrial recession, companies such as Utah cannot be forced to mine underground in open-cut country, which has more shallow seams, and create uneconomic mines. I suggest to him that he give that a considerable amount of additional thought. Despite the problems of lower prices and oversupply in the industry, in some respects the industry is in better shape today than it has been for many years. I refer to its fighting trim and clear determination to win against fierce competition in the world market-place—competition that has caused the problems of oversupply and lower prices that Australia suffers from today. Nobody goes into business to lose money, and no organisation or individual Time expired. At 4.30 p.m.. Under Standing Order No. 307 and the Sessional Order, progress was reported.

BUILDING ACT AMENDMENT BILL Second Reading Debate resumed from 14 October (see p. 3175). Mr SHAW (Manly) (4.31 p.m.): The BiU provides for some minor changes to the Act. One small change is very important because it creates what to my mind will be a very important committee. The names of bodies that will provide representatives on the Building Advisory Committee will be changed, but the Bill does not change the type of representation of members on that committee. The committee will still comprise a representative from the fire-fighting area and a representative from the building constmc­ tion area. It is obvious that the Minister has formed the opinion that the representation is appropriate representation. Although he has not said so, as the committee will have virtually the same type of representation as existed previously, I think honourable members can assume that the Minister has found the representation to be appropriate and that it is therefore sensible for that to continue.

77194—135 4138 12 November 1987 Building Act Amendment Bill

The second purpose of the Bill is to estabUsh a new appeal body that will sit in judgment on the discretional decisions made by councils. For a long time, councils have found it difficult to make those decisions. Very often, they have been the subject of much heartbum. Decisions are made as to what constitutes a constmction that is in conformity with the amenity of a district and whether it is aesthetically acceptable. Of course, that is very much a matter of opinion, so it is a matter that can always be argued. Decision-making on what is a fair constmction for someone to build and what would be detrimental to his neighbour is an ongoing problem. One can ask: how far should a council go in dictating to people what they should do if it restricts their individuality? How far should a council go in protecting neighbours? They are questions that wiU be asked for a long time. Acceptance of the principle of controls has been quite clearly demonstrated in many areas. Perhaps the most notable is the restriction placed on developments such as Sanctuary Cove. A seUing feature of some developments is that a person cannot build whatever he likes. He may not be able to buUd a stmcture that will cast a shadow over someone else's home, spoil a neighbour's outlook, interfere with a neighbour's privacy or in some way spoil a feature that has been built into the design of a neighbour's house. It appears that the people at large are prepared to accept a loss of liberty to do whatever they like if, at the same time, it involves protection of the investment in their own home. As to protection of an amenity—the Minister said that no such by-laws have been approved. Although that is tme, it is also tme that a number of councils have endeavoured, through the use of town-planning guide-lines, to impose a restriction on what can be done in particular areas. That concept has had its successes and failures, but in the long mn it is probably a more appropriate way to govem the types of houses that people can build and the types of constmction that they can use than the one we are discussing today. .Perhaps the ultimate answer lies in a combination of the two. As the Minister has pointed out, the main aim of this Bill relates to the removal of old homes from certain areas and their re-siting in other areas. In the past, that has been a difficult aspect to deal with. Some councils have seen fit to completely ban the re-siting of homes in their localities. That is not the right way to go about things, and it is most unfortunate. Because each case is not considered on its merits, that practice is open to criticism. It means that, no matter how good a home is, it cannot be moved into a particular local authority area, which is most unfortunate. It must be argued that it is very doubtful whether some of the small, modem brick boxes that exist these days—and which are acceptable in so many estates—are more aesthetically pleasing than some of the very weU built old colonial homes. That is becoming more evident as more and more modem homes are being built with some of the features of the homes that were so popular in days gone by. It is very difficult to argue that a timber home that follows colonial architecture should not be built because it is not in keeping with the amenities of a particular district. It is clearly a very difficult value judgment. Discretion is the only way to go, and each case should be judged on its merits. Much of the development that is taking place at Sanctuary Cove—which is selling at such high prices—is following old colonial lines, which many councils declared were not suitable 10 years ago because they did not fit in with the particular type of constmction in the surrounding district. This Bill stipulates that it has coverage only in cases of extremely adverse effect. Such a case would be very rare indeed. Not all problems wiU be overcome by this Bill, and the number of cases in which the committee will have to sit in judgment will be small. Because of some factors that I will mention later, that is fairly important. The aim of this legislation is that the council make a decision as to whether or not a particular application is aesthetically acceptable, and, if the council's decision is not satisfactory to the applicant, the applicant can appeal to a panel, which will then make a final decision unless an appeal has been lodged with the Local Government Court, Building Act Amendment Bill 12 November 1987 4139 where matters of law are decided. I complement the person who was responsible for that provision. The Local Govemment Court should not be making decisions that are based on law when they should not be based on law. What is aesthetically acceptable in an area is not a question of law, and it is appropriate that only cases involving questions of law should go before the Local Govemment Court. I believe that the make-up of that panel could be improved. The Bill provides that the chairman—who will also be the chairman of the Building Advisory Committee—or his nominee, will be a member of that panel. That will provide a measure of consistency to decisions of the panel, which is very acceptable. He is the only permanent member. He will be the only one who will have to make decisions throughout the whole of Queensland and he will bring to the panel a measure of consistency from place to place. However, the consistency could be extended. It would be a good idea to appoint a second permanent member of the panel. The Bill provides that one member will come from the building profession and one from a council background. After discussion with the appropriate bodies, the Minister decides whom he appoints. The Bill provides that the persons will have those types of background. I do not believe that is essential. I hope that the Minister will use his discretion by appointing people who will use common sense rather than merely appointing someone who has a professional background. I question whether it is necessary that the nominee of the chairman of the Building Advisory Committee be an architect. As the chairman has a discretion either to attend or to appoint his nominee, who could, quite clearly, if the chairman sees fit, be an architect—and obviously the Minister is of the opinion that in most cases an architect is the most appropriate person—I see no reason why the legislation should not go one step further and not exclude anyone other than an architect. I can foresee circumstances in which it may be advantageous to have somebody other than an architect, so I hope that the Minister will consider that matter further. On the panel there will really be nobody who clearly represents the house-holder. There wiU be representation from the public service, the building profession and the council—and I suppose all of those representatives to some degree represent the house­ holder. However, none of them have the long-term experience and a history of a sympathetic view towards the house-holder. It is most important that that view be contained in the panel. I ask the Minister, when he is making the appointments, to look for a person who is experienced in these matters and is sympathetic towards the house-holder, and who also recognises the problems and needs of the building professions and the councils. I do not know whether such a person exists. However, if the Minister can find such a person, he should appoint him to the panel. Knowing the Minister's background, I believe that he would agree with me. It would not matter whether the person had a background in building or in the council, provided he is someone who is not easily snowed and is able to judge each case on its merits. An opportunity would still exist for a local person to be appointed. I said earlier that I did not believe that the committee would be called on to make many investigations and decisions. However, it is important that its members be prepared and able to visit sites and make inspections. The Minister has said that that is what he would expect them to be doing. Given that they would not be called upon to make many investigations— and I believe that is so—the argument that to lower costs it is necessary to appoint people from the areas concemed is diminished. The argument has been advanced that it is necessary to have some sort of consistency to avoid problems arising from having different committees making different decisions in different areas. It therefore would be quicker and more efficient if permanent appointments were made to the panel, because it would only be a matter of members of the panel knowing that they would be called on. It is probably quicker for two people from separate areas of Queensland to go to the area in question with one local person in attendance than it is to call together a number of people from the area concemed 4140 12 November 1987 Building Act Amendment Bill who would meet the qualifications that are specified in the Bill. I refer to someone who is not a member and is not associated with any of the parties involved but nevertheless has the expertise to make a worthwhile decision. Those arguments are well worth consideration by the Minister. It is not my intention to move amendments along the lines I have referred to. I am quite happy to leave this matter to the Minister's discretion. I think all honourable members would agree that this Bill sets out to provide home- buyers with greater protection. They are entitled to that kind of protection. Generally, the Opposition supports the legislation and will be taking note of its progress. Mr BEANLAND (Toowong) (4.47 p.m.): On behalf of the Liberal Party, I am very pleased to support the Bill. It is pleasing that this amending legislation has been brought forward because I know that concem has been expressed for some time within the community about building legislation. I have no doubt that some people in the community will be concemed that local authorities will, in some way, use these extended powers against them, particularly those people involved in the building industry. It is fair to say that the Minister has very carefully ensured that sufficient checks and balances are contained in the legislation. It is pleasing that those checks and balances have been provided to protect the builders and the rights of the individual. The proposed amendments to the Building Act relate to houses—that is, single detached dwellings and outbuildings. The Minister mentioned in his second-reading speech that the amendments have been brought about largely by the removal of old houses into areas of new development. In areas around Brisbane, more and more of that kind of activity is taking place—probably more in Brisbane than other parts of Queensland. This amending legislation will certainly give local authorities more discretion in deciding upon the types of buildings that they will allow in particular neighbourhoods. If the local authority rejects an appUcation on aesthetic or amenity grounds, an applicant will have the right to appeal to a panel to have the matter considered. As part of the checks and balances provided in the Bill, the Minister has very carefully set up a panel to review decisions that are made by local authorities. An important provision of the Bill is that within 14 days of receipt of the application, the local authority has to deal with the matter, or it will be assumed that the application has been approved. That provision will ensure that the delays that one hears about so often on the part of local authorities do not occur. I must point out, however, that many delays are in fact the fault of the applicant when problems arise that are beyond the jurisdiction of local authorities. Nevertheless, delays do occur. The provisions of this legislation will ensure that the applications will be handled expeditiously by local authorities. It is probably fair to say that applications made under the provisions of the Bill will not be rejected by local authorities on the grounds of amenity or aesthetics of an area or neighbourhood without just cause. If that were to occur, the applicant would surely win an appeal brought before the panel. The local authority will then be seen to be delaying the matter unnecessarily. I am sure that, for that reason, no local authority would refuse an application without having given it careful consideration. In many provincial cities and in Brisbane, the character of neighbourhoods, suburbs and areas is changing. It is therefore particularly important that differing styles and types of development should be catered for. The particular provision will give greater discretion to neighbourhoods and to local authorities to ensure that developments that do occur are in keeping with the type of development that should occur within that neighbourhood. I am a Uttle surprised at two or three of the amendments. On many occasions over the years the Building Act has been amended. It is probably noted for the amendments that are made to it. Because of the discussion that has been taking place in recent weeks in relation to the so-called world's tallest buUding, it would seem that this would have been an ideal occasion for the Minister to amend the Building Act to cover that building. Building Act Amendment Bill 12 November 1987 4141

Several people, including the Premier, have said that one of the things that is required before that building can be erected is an amendment to the Building Act. Although the Building Act is now being amended, none of the amendments relate to buildings of more than 60 or 70 storeys. In fact, the amendments relate mainly to the amenity and aesthetics of an area to ensure that the types of dwellings in a neighbourhood are in keeping with the type of stmcture and development in that area. On behalf of the Liberal Party I am very pleased to support the amendments. Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing) (4.52 p.m.), in reply: I thank the honourable members who have made a contribution to the debate. I will comment on the matters refered to by the honourable member for Manly, the Opposition spokesman, who suggested that persons other than an architect be used on the panel. Traditionally architects are the advisers on aesthetics in building matters, and the Royal Australian Institute of Architects requested that that provision be included. That is one of the main reasons that provision was inserted in the first place. There is adequate provision for views of other disciplines and lay persons on the panel. The other comment that was made was about the need for a second permanent member. Although I take the honourable member's point, I point out that one of the primary aims of the Bill is not to penalise the ordinary home-owner with costs; and, if the costs of travel became excessive, as all honourable members would agree is possible, the inevitable result would be pressure for a user-pays system. I have no further comments to make about that. I take on board the points made by the honourable member for Toowong. Motion agreed to. Committee Hon. R. J. Hinze (South Coast—Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing) in charge of the Bill. Clauses 1 to 11, as read, agreed to. Clause 12— Mr HINZE (4.54 p.m.): I move the following amendment— "At page 5, line 23, omit— 'Queensland Branch of the Housing Industry Association' and substitute— 'Housing Industry Association (Queensland Division)'." The sole purpose of this very minor amendment is to insert the correct title of the association referred to in the clause. Mr SHAW: The Minister referred to this clause in his reply to the second-reading debate. Proposed subsection (a) in part states— "... the chairman of the Building Advisory Committee, or his nominee (who shall be an architect)..." I understand that the Minister is saying that the part in brackets was inserted at the request of the Royal Australian Institute of Architects. I am not really impressed by that. I know that architects think that they are the only ones who are really competent to make decisions on aesthetics. I do not agree with that. As the Bill stands, I am more concemed that, as this person will be the only permanent member of the committee, naturally he will have a great influence on the other members. Because of that I think that architectural views will come across a little stronger than those of the house-holder. Perhaps the Minister might consider that. One sour note, if I might call it that, was introduced into the debate by something the Minister said in his reply to the second-reading debate. He pointed out that it was 4142 12 November 1987 Local Govemment Superannuation Act Amendment Bill a case of user pays and that, because it would inflate the costs, it would not be possible to have an additional permanent member of the committee. I would not like to see somebody in Mount Isa burdened with the cost of paying even the air fares of one person from Brisbane as only one part of the cost of an appeal that was held in that city. I hope that the principle will not be that the fees to apply for an appeal in these instances will be sufficient to cover the costs incurred. This should be an instance when the community will have to accept the burden of some of the costs; otherwise some of the smaller people will be excluded from the right to prosecute an appeal. Amendment agreed to. Clause 12, as amended, agreed to. Clauses 13 to 16, as read, agreed to. Bill reported, with an amendment. Third Reading Bill, on motion of Mr Hinze, by leave, read a third time.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT SUPERANNUATION ACT AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading Debate resumed from 14 October (see p. 3176). Mr SHAW (Manly) (5 p.m.): Although the Bill is very small, it is notable, and for somewhat different reasons than those that usually prevail. This legislation is an example of what I hear members of the public often saying that they would like to see. However, on many occasions they do not ever know that they have got what they have asked for. I often hear people saying that they do not think that in this House we should be continually fighting, throwing brickbats at one another and abusing one another; that sometimes we should be a little constmctive. Unfortunately, when a member is con­ stmctive, it usually does not constitute what some people believe to be news. The Bill is such an instance. I suppose it will be most unusual if the public gets to hear about this legislation, too. When the legislation was first debated in the Parliament, the Opposition made what I believe were constmctive suggestions that should have been incorporated. The Opposition advanced arguments to support its points. I recall stating at that time that it was the intention of the Oppostion to divide on the matter because members of the Opposition felt so strongly about it. I remember the Minister's saying that he really saw no objection to the arguments put forward by the Opposition but that he was not prepared to accept them at that time. However, he did undertake to investigate them and, if they were found to be worth while, he would allow them. Obviously, the Minister has found those suggestions to be sensible ones. He has kept his promise. The result is the Bill being debated. The Bill is largely, although not entirely, in line with the suggestions of the Opposition. I notice that the BUI fails to identify the employee organisations. It is probably only notable from the point of view of the philosophy of the Govemment, which is to take great pains to point out which employer organisations will be involved in negotiations; but, when it comes to the employee organisations, it merely states "those that are appropriate". I suppose there is an advantage, in that a decision can be made as to which employee organisations would be appropriate. Nevertheless, that is a very minor matter. The Bill very, very closely follows what was suggested by the Opposition. Perhaps it is an example of what joint party committees could do in this Parliament, if honourable members were blessed with such a facility. Brisbane and Area Water Board Act Amendment Bill 12 November 1987 4143

As I have said, the Bill is a good-news story. Along with other honourable members, I look forward to tomorrow's banner headline saying, "Minister keeps his promise; Opposition is being constmctive". Like many other things, honourable members will never see that. The Opposition receives a great deal of criticism for not being constmctive. The Opposition welcomes the Bill and supports it. Mr BEANLAND (Toowong) (5.03 p.m.): On behalf of the Liberal Party, I am very pleased to support the legislation. It is very pleasing to note that the Minister will include two members to represent the contributors on the superannuation board. Of course, that will increase the size of the board from three to five. I would be interested to hear from the Minister how he will choose the members to represent the interests of the permanent employees. I have done a bit of checking and I notice, for example, of the union organisations which represent the various members in the local government area, the Australian Workers Union has somewhere in the order of 10 000 members. It and a couple of other organisations have just over half the members who are not affiliated with the Trades and Labor Council. The other unions, one of which is the Municipal Officers Association, which has about 5 500 members, are affiliated with the Trades and Labor Council. A large number of unions with many members are involved in the local govemment area. I would be interested to hear how the Minister will go about deciding from which employee organisation he would choose the representatives, and also whether or not the Minister would be including any females amongst those members. I understand that approximately 1 200 females are involved in the local government area who contribute as permanent employees of the superannuation fund. As I have said, the Liberal Party is very pleased to support this legislation. However, I would be interested to hear the Minister's views on how he will select the employee representatives. Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing) (5.05 p.m.), in reply: I thank the honourable member for Manly for his contribution and congratulatory remarks. I clearly recall the discussion in this House on a previous occasion when he raised the matter. At that time I said that I would give consideration to it at a later date and the result is the Bill that is now before the House. I should comment that the chairman of the board, Mr Fynes-Clinton, passed away recently. On the previous occasion I acquainted the House with the fact that a new chairman was to be appointed. Within the last few days I have had discussions with the new chairman and he told me that he proposes to meet with some of the contributors' organisations and to make a recommendation to me. Under those circumstances the honourable member can rest assured that he will be taking on board the statements made today in this House before appointments are made. That is the only comment I wish to make at this time. Motion agreed to. Committee Clauses 1 to 7, as read, agreed to. Bill reported, without amendment. Third Reading Bill, on motion of Mr Hinze, by leave, read a third time.

BRISBANE AND AREA WATER BOARD ACT AMENDMENT BILL Second Reading Debate resumed from 14 October (see p. 3172). Mr SHAW (Manly) (5.09 p.m.): As the Minister has pointed out, the Act as it presently stands provides that the board is required to have its annual financial statements 4144 12 November 1987 Brisbane and Area Water Board Act Amendment Bill prepared and audited by the Auditor-General and laid before the Legislative Assembly prior to making them available for sale. The Minister pointed out quite correctly that this causes a delay in the publication of the report, which is completely unnecessary. The Minister has stated that this amendment, which will permit the board to print its report and release it prior to its being tabled in this House, will improve accountability from the board. I hope the Minister is correct, because it is a matter of record that there have been instances in the past where the accountability of the board has not been perfect. If this brings about an improvement, it will be a good thing. It is timely to bring to everyone's attention that statements have been made that at present the board has available to it a supply of water for only 18 months. The situation is becoming critical. It raises a question which has been asked in the past and which has never been answered satisfactorily. A number of councils are involved with a board that does not have the power to impose restrictions on how water is used. It is a matter for each individual council whether it should impose restrictions and cut back its water supply. Councils have not accepted equal responsibility in that regard. In this instance, I hope that the Minister will use his influence to ensure that each council accepts its responsibility to reduce its water supply on an equal basis. As I said, the situation is serious. If the drought in the catchment area continues and if Inigo Jones' predictions that we have another couple of years of water shortage ahead of us are correct, a critical situation will be reached by the time that the dams start to fill again. The measure contained in the Bill is sensible and it is supported by the Opposition. Mr FITZGERALD (Lockyer) (5.12 p.m.): I wish to make a few comments on the Bill. The member for Manly said that the Bill contained simple provisions. It will enable the financial statements of the Brisbane and Area Water Board to be passed around before they are tabled in this House. I am sure that that will receive the approval of all honourable members. The Brisbane and Area Water Board supplies water to the city of Brisbane and a number of shires in south-east Queensland. Reference has been made to the fact that the amount of water that is available to service those local authorities will be restricted. It is absolutely horrendous that over the years the Brisbane City Council has placed restrictions on rate-payers but has never been fair dinkum about it. It has adopted a system of imposing bans in certain areas by enforcing restrictions based on house numbers. However, the council has not had the fortitude to install water-meters. Mr Shaw: It's a waste of time. Mr FITZGERALD: The member for Manly said that it is a waste of time. I know that the next member to speak in this debate has been a deputy mayor of Brisbane. I do not know whether or not he will agree that the installation of water-meters is a waste of time. Many towns and cities that faced an increase in water consumption did not have the capacity to meet that demand. The small town of Gatton is one example. The Toowoomba City Council bit the bullet and installed water-meters. The Mayor of Toowoomba is also the member for Toowoomba South. He can quote the exact drop in consumption at the time that water-meters were installed. He said that the installation of water-meters in Toowoomba was very cost-effective. In all the towns in which water- meters have been installed, the user can determine the hour of the day or night that he uses water. It is absolutely ridiculous to nominate certain hours during a day when people can use water. If a council has a problem in supplying water down a tmnk main or through the distribution system, it can then regulate the use of water. However, if the supply of water is limited, why should people not be allowed to manage their own affairs? That is a much better system to adopt. I plead with the Brisbane City Council to examine that system so that a responsible approach is adopted. I foreshadow that in the very near future towns in the West Moreton area will draw water from Wivenhoe Dam. Those towns have a right to use that water. It does not Brisbane and Area Water Board Act Amendment Bill 12 November 1987 4145 belong to the city of Brisbane; it belongs to the whole region. In some of the towns in which water-meters have been installed, the residents are accustomed to very stringent restrictions being placed upon the amount of water that they can use. Why should those people have to become accustomed to using limited quantities of water when their fellow citizens—the people of the Brisbane area—have virtually no water restrictions placed upon them at all except time limitations? It is often very inconvenient for people to have to get out at certain hours so that they can hold a hose or put a sprinkler on. I live in a town in which the residents have not been allowed to use sprinklers on their lawns for well over 12 months, and hand-held hoses have also been banned for most of that time. Water usage must be considered very thoroughly. Those people who are scared stiff of managing water supplies properly should have another look at the problem. Everybody has a right to use water. Mr BEANLAND (Toowong) (5.16 p.m.): The Liberal Party is pleased to support this proposed minor amendment that will allow the Brisbane and Area Water Board to sell copies of its annual report prior to its being tabled in this House. 1 was a foundation member of the Brisbane and Area Water Board. The Minister would have to agree that that board has been very successful as a regional water authority. In recent times the Gatton and Laidley Shires have indicated that, in the not-too- distant future, they will require additional water supplies. 1 can well understand that. Because of the dry period that has been experienced in Queensland, those areas are very quickly using up their underground water supplies. Whichever system is chosen by the Govemment to supply those areas with water—whether it decides to take water from Lowood to Gatton and Laidley or from Mount Crosby through the Moreton Shire to Gatton and Laidley—the people of the shires of Gatton and Laidley will not be able to afford to foot the bill for that water supply in the immediate future. It is clear that the Government will need to come to the party—at least in the short term—to enable those shires not only to raise the capital but also to pay the huge interest bills. As inflation takes effect and more consumers in those areas come on to the system, people in the Gatton and Laidley Shires—and perhaps the Moreton Shire if the Govemment decides to take water through there—will be able to meet the costs involved with the water supply that is going to be needed there. It would be preferable if the water supply were to be taken from Mount Crosby. In that way, the Moreton Shire, which is probably expanding at a faster rate than the other two shires, would be able to benefit from that additional supply. If the Government decides to go the other way, I hope that the Gatton and Laidley Shires will not allow major urban developments to occur in their very rich agricultural areas. Over the years, particularly in the Redland Shire and other areas around Brisbane, rich agricultural areas have been developed into urban areas. It is interesting to visit those areas and to hear people talk about the wonderful vegetables, trees or flowers that they can grow in their back yards; and well they might, because the soil in those areas is so very rich. I would not like to see the food bowl of south-east Queensland and beyond, namely, the Gatton and Laidley districts, developed into an urban area. I believe that their rich agricultural lands must be retained. At the same time, though, it is essential that those districts are guaranteed an adequate water supply in the long term. We all know that the most important resource in this country is an adequate supply of water. It will not be long before the Redland Shire will need to consider once again its long-term water supply. Initially, Redland decided not to join the Brisbane and Area Water Board. However, it is proposing a number of schemes. Like the Gold Coast scheme, they are all good in the short term. However, because of the rapid development of the Redland Shire, it is clear that it will need to acquire an adequate long-term supply of water. It is equally clear that it will eventually join the Brisbane and Area Water Board so that it is assured of a long-term supply of water. 4146 12 November 1987 Local Authorities (1988 Elections) Bill

At this stage, I will not discuss when the Wolffdene Dam might be required. I know that the Minister and the officers of his department are keeping a close eye on when the next major dam might be required to supply the whole region. I was surprised to hear the previous speaker state that he thought the installation of water-meters was a great idea. Of course, water-meters have not proved very successful in a number of areas in which they have been introduced. At this stage, it would not pay to have water-meters installed in this region. That would be an inefficient way of supplying water to households. I inform the member for Lockyer that large industrial consumers, multiple dwellings and flats have water-meters installed. In Brisbane, it is only single detached dwellings and households that do not have water-meters. Apart from anything else, it does not pay to install water-meters in households. However, a handful of commercial and industrial users in the city use over half the water that is consumed in the city. Water- meters have been installed in those premises. On behalf of the Liberal Party, I am happy to support the Bill. Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing) (5.23 p.m.), in reply: I listened attentively to the member for Toowong making comments in regard to the member for Lockyer. I know whom I would rather have shifting irrigation pipes for me if I had to do a little job on my property. The member for Gatton would give the member for Toowong, who would not know where to put them down, a stitching. The honourable member for Manly referred to the accountability of the board on past occasions. He was not very critical. He said that it has not been entirely perfect. I am not aware of any problem in that area. I consider the board to be particularly weU managed under the chairmanship of Mr Carl Robertson. All in all, the Govemment should be commended for the setting-up of the water board. It brought a number of local authorities together with the city of Brisbane, set up the board and made provision for the Wivenhoe Dam to provide water for the area in the future. As the Minister responsible, I commend the board and its officers for the way in which they have administered the affairs of the water authority. I hope that they continue to work in the way that they have in the past. Motion agreed to. Committee Clauses 1 to 3, as read, agreed to. BiU reported, without amendment. Third Reading Bill, on motion of Mr Hinze, by leave, read a third time.

LOCAL AUTHORITIES (1988 ELECTIONS) BILL Second Reading Debate resumed from 14 October (see p. 3173). Mr SHAW (Manly) (5.27 p.m.): Immediately the changes in school holidays in this State were announced, many people—including me—were in touch with the office of the Minister for Local Govemment about what effect that would have on local govemment elections. The Bill presently before the House is an obvious and sensible solution to the problems that may otherwise have arisen in the future. I notice that the Minister for Education and the Minister for Local Govemment are the only Ministers present in the Chamber. Perhaps they might take this opportunity to get together and discuss the compatability of school holidays and local govemment elections to ensure that no further changes will occur which will make this Bill redundant. Local Authorities (1988 Elections) Bill 12 November 1987 4147

I agree that it is a good idea to have fixed dates for local authority elections. The fact that the date of elections has been spelt out in legislation for a number of years has been a good thing. It is a practice that is supported very strongly by the public. No doubt people would wish the same practice to be extended into the State and Federal Govemment levels as well. However, I could never see any State Govemment being prepared to give up the privilege of being able to decide when it will hold elections. It is tme to say that the holding of local government elections on the first day of school holidays would be nothing short of disaster. A number of problems would arise, and some have been outlined quite clearly by the Minister already. I agree with every point that he made and I could probably add a few more. I am tempted to take this opportunity to deal with some of the other aspects of local government elections that certainly need to be aired in this House. It is unfortunate that whenever Bills relating to local govemment come before the House, it is usually at a time when there is an urgent need to get on with other parliamentary business. Honourable members are not given the opportunity to deal with local govemment legislation as fully as they would wish. That fact is clearly demonstrated by the amount of support that is evident during the debate on the Local Govemment Estimates. Many honourable members take that opportunity to express concem about a number of problems that exist in local govemment. Many of those problems relate to issues that should be investigated. Some aspects relating to local govemment elections will be addressed by my colleague the honourable member for Port Curtis. During my speech, I will take the opportunity to repeat calls that I have made previously in this House to draw to the attention of the Minister the need for a review of local govemment administration in this State. I refer the Minister to my notice of motion on the business paper. I believe that such a review is long overdue. Any review would certainly include a consideration of the elections and, beyond that, the local govemment boundaries throughout the State and the intemal gerrymanders that exist in many local authorities which have a far-reaching effect. I will not stretch your patience, Mr Deputy Speaker, by going into that at this time. The costs of administrative decisions being made by councils throughout the State at the present time should also be considered. A great deal of publicity has been given to the conflict that exists sometimes between elected representatives of councils and their staff. Councils have been moved to sack members of their staff, often senior members such as town clerks and engineers, and they have been prepared to accept the cost of doing that, saying that they would not give any reasons and that the cost would be bome by the council. It is not a cost to be paid by the elected representatives but a cost to be paid by the community. In the last 12 months such decisions have cost the community around $lm. I would like to see many aspects of local govemment reviewed, but I will not stretch your patience, Mr Deputy Speaker, by going too deeply into that subject now. However, I think it is tme to say that many of the things that should be reviewed by this ParUament or by the Local Govemment Department are presently in the too-hard basket. That is probably as a result of the problems that other States have had when they have tried to look at things such as reorganising local authority boundaries. I know that it is a difficult problem, but it should not remain in the too-hard basket. A start should be made on doing something about it. Once again, I think that the Bill, as it stands is entirely sensible. The Opposition supports it. Mr BEANLAND (Toowong) (5.32 p.m.): The Liberal Party is very pleased to support this amendment. I must say that back on 1 May when I first raised this matter I was rather surprised to see the statements attributed to the Minister at that particular time when he indicated that the Government in fact would not be changing the Act in 4148 12 November 1987 Local Authorities (1988 Elections) Bill regard to the date for elections and that people would have to apply for a postal vote or stay at home. With local authority elections it is not quite that simple. I am pleased to see that the Minister for Education is in the House. After those statements were made he had to get in for his say, too. He indicated that the holiday dates for Easter 1988 would make little difference to the elections. He accused me of clutching at straws in order to get publicity. I would have thought that as a former schoolteacher he would have known a little bit about the need for amending the date for the local govemment elections. He went on to say that he saw no reason to be unduly concemed as the people who would usually vote, but who were unable to vote on that day, would make prior arrangements. We all know that when it comes to local government elections it is not so easy to make prior arrangements. Many people forget to do so before they go away. When they do make arrangements, they have to make them in their local authority area. On 7 May the Minister still insisted that a change in the date of the elections would be unwarranted because people could cast their votes before they went away on holidays. In local authority elections voting is compulsory and people cannot vote outside their local authority area. That does cause problems that do not occur with State and Federal elections. Because of those things I for one and other people made a series of submissions to the Minister to have the date reconsidered. I am pleased to see that the Minister gave it further consideration and that in his wisdom he has introduced an amendment to the Act so that the voting date in 1988 will be changed. I hope and tmst that prior to the conclusion of the review of the Local Government Act the Minister for Education can sort out what he is going to do about holidays so that the Local Govemment Minister can, as he has indicated in his second-reading speech, incorporate any amendments into the Act. With schools dispersing for holidays next year on 25 March, not only was there the problem of electors going away prior to 26 March, which was the date previously scheduled for the local authority elections, but also schoolteachers, many of whom act as officials on poUing-day right around the State of Queensland, may have been unavaUable. Without the schoolteachers, the Govemment would have faced a very serious predicament. Changing the date of the election to 19 March will allow schoolteachers to participate as polling clerks and that sort of thing and it will certainly solve the problem of people having to vote before they go away. As I have said, there is no absentee voting in local authority elections. People have to vote within their own local authority. Many people do not know how to go about getting a postal vote. When many of them are away on holidays they go to a polling-booth at a coastal resort and find that it is impossible for them to vote for their own local authority, be it at Longreach, Mount Isa or elsewhere. Mr Lee: They are disfranchised, aren't they? Mr BEANLAND: They certainly are disfranchised. What is before the House is an example of democracy taking place. I am pleased to see that the election date has been brought forward. Mr PREST (Port Curtis) (5.37 p.m.): I am very pleased to speak in this debate, even though the Bill, which is very small one, simply changes the date of the next local authority elections. In his second-reading speech the Minister said that the whole purpose in the future is to examine the question of election dates as part of the process of review of the Local Government Act. I would hate to see the day that local authority elections could be called on the same basis as State and Federal elections, which can be called at the whim of the Premier or the Prime Minister. I believe that the period between elections should be a fixed one. At present, it is three years. The only change that should ever be made is to change that period to either two years or four years, whichever period the Minister wishes to put before the House. I do not believe that the notion of a fixed period should be altered. Local Authorities (1988 Elections) Bill 12 November 1987 4149

If the Minister wishes to make changes to the holding of local authority elections, he should look at the manner in which local authority boundaries are drawn up and also at the method of conducting ballots in the State's 134 local authorities. At the moment there are so many different and unfair ways. In most shires the composition of the council is determined by the way the boundaries are drawn up. In every case, from day one the council will be dominated by the country members, who are usually members of the National Party. Before people go to vote, they know that those who represent the townspeople in the shire will be outnumbered because of the composition of the local authority. That is caused by the way the boundaries are drawn up. Because of the way the divisions within shires are drawn up, whereas 1 000 or 2 000 votes are required to elect a person who represents a town, it may take only 20 or 30 people to elect a representative from a country area. As the divisions are set, most local authorities have two people representing the town and seven or eight from the surrounding country areas. That is something that the Minister should consider. One of the paramount considerations of the Minister should be the amalgamation of some local authorities. I believe that even Longreach has been seeking an amalgamation with the Ilfracombe Shire since 1920. The Ilfracombe Shire has only 165 residents. They like having a smaU council. However, it is very costly. I remember quite well attending a local govemment conference in Rockhampton on 5 and 6 July 1984. A motion was put to that local govemment conference by Barcaldine Shire that amalgamation of local authorities should be considered in an endeavour to offset rising administrative costs. Of course, the background information was that councils must be conscious of all costs that effect the operation of local government. The cost of administration is now a significant proportion of overall costs, and the possibility of reducing it by amalgamation of existing local authority areas should be considered. It was stated that receipts are not enough these days to cover administrative costs, let alone carry out the works. The rest of the work is being done by grants or subsidies provided through the Local Govemment Grants Commission. Of course, that is another matter. It has been much voiced of late that amalgamation would ensure fairer representation on the councils. That takes me to the Peak Downs Shire, which in 1983 issued a public notice that it wanted to give Tieri—which had the biggest population in the area— representation on the council. It was decided to create two divisions. One division was the Tieri township, which would have two members, and the rest of the shire would have six representatives. Although the rest of the shire did not have the population and the number of voters, at least it would have the majority of the representatives on the Peak Downs council. Mr Shaw: A gerrymander. Mr PREST: It is another gerrymander. This is something that the Minister should be considering. The Perry Shire is a good example. I think that there are more representatives on the Perry Shire Council than there are voters in the area. Mr Hamill: They are all related. Mr PREST: That is very tme. It is virtually a family council. I am talking about big grants—a lot of money. The Minister has said that if ever things were not operating well in local authorities, he would pull the mg out from under some of the councils. That is long overdue. The honourable member for Callide, Mrs McCauley, is present in the Chamber. Mrs McCauley is a councillor on the Banana Shire Council. The Banana Shire is to introduce a new voting system for the 1988 poll. I am told that there has been no consultation with the townspeople about why the changes should be made. I would like 4150 12 November 1987 Sanctuary Cove Resort Act Amendment Bill (No. 2) the Minister or Mrs McCauley to tell me the tme reason—I emphasise "the tme reason"—why there is to be a voting change within the Banana Shire at the 1988 poll. Mrs McCauley: Your sources are terrible. I know nothing about it either. Mr PREST: I did not hear what the honourable member said. Mrs McCauley: Your source of information is very poor. Mr PREST: My source of information could be very poor. It is the Gladstone Observer. The joumalist is Marie Lahman. I do not know that person. I am referring to a press release in the Gladstone Observer on Saturday, 7 November. If I am concemed, the people of the Banana Shire and Biloela in particular should be very concemed as to why the changes are being made. The Opposition is au fait with the reasons why the local authority election is being brought forward, but I sincerely hope that when the Minister stated, as he did in his second-reading speech, that he is contemplating further changes to the Act, he means that he will go into it in depth and make the changes necessary that will bring equality to all the local authorities and electors of Queensland. Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing) (5.46 p.m.), in reply: I thank the honourable members for their contributions regarding the amendment to the Local Govemment Act elections. I take on board the comments made by all honourable members. Motion agreed to. Committee Clauses 1 to 4, as read, agreed to. Bill reported, without amendment. Third Reading Bill, on motion of Mr Hinze, by leave, read a third time.

SANCTUARY COVE RESORT ACT AMENDMENT BILL (No. 2) Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing) (5.48 p.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— "That leave be granted to bring in a Bill to amend the Sanctuary Cove Resort Act 1985-1987 in certain particulars." Motion agreed to. First Reading Bill presented and, on motion of Mr Hinze, read a first time. Second Reading Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing) (5.49 p.m.): I move— "That the Bill be now read a second time." This Bill is for the purpose of extending the area of application of the provisions of the Sanctuary Cove Resort Act onto adjoining lands that have been purchased by the resort development company. Discovery Bay Developments Pty Ltd. Collectively, the additional lands, which have an area of 241.87 hectares, provided a logical extension area for the original resort area. This development will enhance not only the amenity of the whole development by including increased water and pine forest landscaped areas but also the recreational facilities that will be available to both the residents of, and visitors to, the resort. Sanctuary Cove Resort Act Amendment Bill (No. 2) 12 November 1987 4151

In accordance with normal practice relating to the undertaking of developments of this type, the subject land has been included in an appropriate zone under the town- planning scheme in force in the area of the Albert Shire, and suitable appropriate infrastmcture development agreements have been entered into between the company and the shire council for the provision and the upgrading of services extemal to the site. The provision of intemal infrastmcture services will be the responsibility of the company and will be installed at no cost to the council. These requirements are similar to those which applied to the original site. The Bill provides for certain Crown land and private freehold lands owned by the company to be exchanged and for the granting of title of such Crown land to be made in priority to the company on terms and conditions approved by the Govemor in Council so that the alignment of the boundary of the site with the Coomera River may be regularised. The land use controls which will apply to the site are contained in the relevant schedule to the Act as amended by this Bill. As was the case with the original development, the matter of approving of subdivisions within the residential zones of the extended site will rest solely with the Albert Shire Council in accordance with the relevant powers of the existing Act. These provisions have been found to be both practicable and desirable to allow proper controls to apply to the use of land and also to permit innovative design concepts to be used within the site. The company proposes to develop the extended site by establishing a further 600 residential lots in a totally planned environment with landscaped aspects over water and a proposed new golf-course. Honourable members are informed that a new zone is proposed to be introduced into the total development. This is the Administration zone. Because of the extended area of the development, it has been found necessary to make special provision on site for an area to be set aside for the establishment of management, maintenance and warehouse facilities for the day-to-day operation of the resort. The management stmcture for the operation of the resort as provided in the current Act is to be maintained. The provisions of the Bill do, however, extend the membership and voting entitlements in the principal body corporate and the primary thoroughfare body corporate to cater for the new development. The voting entitlements in the principal body corporate will be increased from 900 to 1 500, while the total voting entitlements in the primary thoroughfare body corporate will be increased by 800 with the Golf Course zone and the new Administration zone each being assigned 100 entitlements. The additional land will include some secondary thoroughfares in the form of canal development within the Harbour, River and Waterfront residential zone, and the Bill provides for these to be under the control of the principal body corporate. Provision is made in the Bill to allow these areas to be surrendered to the Crown as canals under the Canals Act, subject to certain conditions, in the unlikely event that the resort should fail. Honourable members will be aware that similar provisions in relation to the dedication of secondary thoroughfares as roads are contained in the present Act and that these are necessary to protect the interests of all parties. Because of the increased responsibilities flowing to the principal body corporate and the primary thoroughfare body corporate, the BiU requires that the insurance cover carried by each body be increased from a minimum of $5m to a minimum of $ 10m in respect of each claim. Provision is also made for both the principal body corporate and the primary thoroughfare body corporate, by resolution at a general meeting of each body, to appoint a body corporate manager. This right is presently provided for in the Building Units and Group Titles Act and it is considered that this should be extended to apply to this resort as the use of professional management services are considered to be an appropriate option for the residents. The success of the Sanctuary Cove Resort development concept is beyond question, and those honourable members who have had the opportunity to inspect the development would no doubt have to agree that the quality of development, the employment provided, 4152 12 November 1987 Local Govt., &c., Redland Shire Town Planning Scheme Bill and the general standard of design are matters of which we can all be proud. The Govemment is satisfied that this proposed extended area will further enhance the overall development. I commend the Bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Shaw, adjourned.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (VALIDATION OF APPLICATION FOR REDLAND SHIRE TOWN PLANNING SCHEME) BILL Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Government, Main Roads and Racing) (5.55 p.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— "That leave be granted to bring in a Bill to validate an application by the Council of the Shire of Redland for the approval of a town planning scheme." Motion agreed to. First Reading Bill presented and, on motion of Mr Hinze, read a first time. Second Reading Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Government, Main Roads and Racing) (5.56 p.m.): I move— "That the Bill be now read a second time." In terms of the provisions of the Local Government Act, when a local authority prepares a new town-planning scheme for its area and before that scheme may be submitted for consideration for approval by the Govemor in Council, it is required to place it on public exhibition and give notification thereof by advertisement published in the Government Gazette and in a newspaper circulating in the area. The Redland Shire Council, in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act referred to, has prepared a new town-planning scheme to replace a scheme which has been in force for very many years. The council failed, however, to properly carry out the advertising procedures that are required by the Local Government Act in that it omitted to publicly notify in a newspaper circulating in the area the fact that the new town-planning scheme was on public exhibition. Legal advice that was obtained by the Department of Local Govemment indicated that the failure to so advertise the new town-planning scheme would prohibit the Governor in Council from approving the scheme and that it would be necessary for the council to carry out fresh advertising procedures. That would involve the scheme being on display for a further period of 90 days and give new objection rights in respect of the proposed new scheme. Those new objections would have to be processed by the council and the whole proposal resubmitted to the Department of Local Government for consideration. When the proposed new scheme was previously on public exhibition, although the formal newspaper advertising was not carried out, considerable media attention was given to the fact that the scheme was on public inspection, and in fact a total of 600 objections were lodged to the scheme. In my view, that clearly indicates that there was sufficient public awareness of the proposed new scheme. It would seem unnecessary, therefore, to submit the shire to the time-consuming and costly exercise of readvertising the scheme. The Bill accordingly provides for the validation of the application that was made by the Redland Shire Council for approval of the new town-planning scheme and for authorisation for the Governor in Council to deal with the scheme, the objections lodged thereto and the representations which accompanied those objections, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Local Govemment Act. Local Government (Chinatown Mall) Act Amendment Bill (No. 2) 12 November 1987 4153

I commend the Bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Shaw, adjoumed.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (CHINATOWN MALL) ACT AMENDMENT BILL (No. 2) Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Government, Main Roads and Racing) (5.58 p.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— "That leave be granted to bring in a Bill to amend the Local Government (Chinatown Mall) Act 1984-1987 in certain particulars." Motion agreed to. First Reading Bill presented and, on motion of Mr Hinze, read a first time. Second Reading Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Government, Main Roads and Racing) (6 p.m.): I move— "That the Bill be now read a second time." The Local Government (Chinatown Mall) Act of 1984 provided for the establishment of a pedestrian mall in Duncan Street in Fortitude Valley between Wickham Street and Ann Street. That mall was subsequently constmcted and was opened in the early part of 1987. In terms of the Act, the Brisbane City Council may, as a function of local govemment, do all things necessary for or incidental to the management, maintenance, cleaning, operation, promotion, development or use of the mall. In accordance with those provisions, the council has made arrangements with an organisation in the Fortitude Valley area concerning, amongst other things, the promotion of the mall. Representations have, however, been made by major Chinese organisations in the city expressing concern at the apparent failure of the Chinatown Mall to operate in such a way as to attract substantial numbers of visitors to the mall area. There is no doubt that the mall has achieved architectural authenticity, but it is claimed that it is lacking the real Ufe that people bring to an area such as this. It has been claimed also that this failure may mainly be attributed to a lack of understanding by the organisations having responsibility for the operation of the mall of the ethnic interests and desires which might go to make the mall a success. It has been stated that for the mall to be completely successful there is a need to attract, firstly, more Chinese traders into the area so that the Chinese people themselves will frequent the mall, thereby creating an atmosphere which will bring others to participate in mall activities. The Government is of the view that there is some merit in the claims which have been made in this area and, with the approach of Expo 88, considers it important that the cultural theme of the Chinatown Mali be fully developed to present the city in its best light. It has been decided, therefore—and the Bill accordingly provides—to arrange for the involvement of people with Chinese background in mall promotion activities, particularly in relation to the many Chinese festivals which occur during the year and the particular needs of the Chinese community in celebrating those festivals. In broad terms, the effect of the Bill is to remove the function of promotion of the mall from the list of functions for which the advisory committee constituted under the present Act is responsible and create a new committee which will be entirely responsible for advising the council on promotional matters. That committee is to consist of a Government representative, a Brisbane City Council representative and five persons nominated by the Minister as representatives of the Chinese community of Brisbane. 4154 12 November 1987 Local Govemment Act Amendment Bill

I think that honourable members will agree that the further development of the Chinatown Mall will be in the best interests of the city generally and that this development will be assisted by the action that it is now proposed to take. I commend the Bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Shaw, adjoumed. Sitting suspended from 6.04 to 7.30 p.m.

RACING AND BETTING ACT AMENDMENT BILL (No. 2) Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing) (7.30 p.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— "That leave be granted to bring in a BUI to amend the Racing and Betting Act 1980-1987 in certain particulars." Motion agreed to.

First Reading BiU presented and, on motion of Mr Hinze, read a first time.

Second Reading Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing) (7.31 p.m.): I move— "That the Bill be now read a second time." The Honourable the Premier and Treasurer in his Budget Speech announced that the rate of tum-over tax and club levy by book-makers at metropolitan race meetings would be reduced from 2.25 per cent to 2 per cent. The implementation of this proposal means that there will be a uniform rate of tum-over tax throughout the State. The Racing and Betting Act presently requires every book-maker to pay to the Crown a tum-over tax calculated on the aggregate of all bets made by a book-maker at the rate of 1.41 per cent in the metropolitan area and 1.33 per cent in other areas. The Act also requires book-makers to pay to the Commissioner of Stamp Duties a club levy on every bet made on which book-makers' tum-over tax is levied and charged. The present rate of such levies is 0.84 per cent in the metropolitan area and 0.67 per cent in other areas. This Bill accordingly provides for the rate of tum-over tax in respect of metropolitan race meetings to be reduced to 1.33 per cent and the club levy in respect of such meetings to be reduced to 0.67 per cent. As I have said, this will have the effect of applying a uniform rate of tum-over tax and club levy right throughout the State. I commend the Bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Mackenroth, adjoumed.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT AMENDMENT BILL Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing) (7.32 p.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— "That leave be granted to bring in a Bill to amend the Local Government Act 1936-1987 in certain particulars." Motion agreed to.

First Reading Bill presented and, on motion of Mr Hinze, read a first time. Local Govemment Act Amendment Bill 12 November 1987 4155

Second Reading Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing) (7.33 p.m.): I move— "That the Bill be now read a second time." This Bill provides for the repeal of the existing provisions of the Local Govemment Act relating to the constitution of joint local authorities under the Act and the inclusion of new provisions in relation to this matter. Certain consequential amendments also have been necessary to other provisions of the Local Govemment Act. The main thmst of the new provisions is to provide greater discretion for the Governor in Council in constituting what will now be termed a joint board to determine how that constitution should be effected. The Bill provides— that, in constituting a joint board, the Govemor in Council may nominate that the mayor or chairman of a particular local authority shall be a member of the joint board. The Bill also provides— that the election of a president of the board shall be made either— (i) from among the members of the board; or (ii) from the members of a particular component local authority or group of component local authorities; or that the chairman of one of the component local authorities shall be president of the joint board; or that the chairman of two or more of the component local authorities shall be president of the joint board in rotation in the manner specified in the Order in Council constituting the board. Honourable members will no doubt be aware that, in relation to the proposal to constitute a joint board for the purpose of exercising the function of bulk water supply in the areas of the city of Gold Coast and the Shire of Albert, the Govemment is desirous of creating a board with equal representation from each local authority concemed. It is also the Goverament's intention, because this function is of such importance in this heavily populated area of the State, that the mayor of the city and the shire chairman should be members of that board and should share the presidency of the board. It is a fact, however, that there is some indication that the Gold Coast City Council might be reluctant to accept the Govemment's view in this area and may not nominate the mayor of the city as one of its representatives on the joint board. The Govemment is firmly of the view that the mayor or chairman of a particular local authority holds a special position in that he is elected by the electors at large, as distinct from a representative of a particular division and, as I have already stated, should participate in the activities of a board of this nature. The provisions of this Bill will enable the Govemor in Council to exercise a wide discretion in determining the constitution of any joint board in the future and would enable him, if he so wishes, to accept a recommendation for the constitution of a joint water board in the Gold Coast/Albert area along the lines that I have stated. In broad terms, the general principles contained in the existing provisions of the Local Government Act relating to joint local authorities have been retained in the new provisions, although there has been some updating and clarification of certain aspects of the existing legislation. 1 commend the Bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Shaw, adjoumed. 4156 12 November 1987 Townsville/Thuringowa Water Supply Board Bill

TOWNSVILLE/THURINGOWA WATER SUPPLY BOARD BILL Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing) (7.36 p.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— "That leave be granted to bring in a Bill to consolidate and amend the law relating to the planning, further development, administration and operational control of bulk supply of water by Townsville/Thuringowa Water Supply Board to Local Authorities and major consumers and for related purpose^." Motion agreed to. First Reading Bill presented and, on motion of Mr Hinze, read a first time. Second Reading Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing) (7.37 p.m.): I move— "That the Bill be now read a second time." This Bill provides for a new board to manage the distribution of bulk water in the areas of the cities of Townsville and Thuringowa to replace the existing board, which is a joint local authority constituted under the Local Govemment Act. Before giving honourable members information as to the more important provisions of the Bill, I think it would be helpful for me to give some background to the proposal for the setting- up of the new board. As members will be aware, water is a very valuable resource at any time but no more so than at this time in the Townsville region, which has experienced one of its driest periods on record. Concerns have been expressed to the Govemment that, with the major decisions which it is likely will have to be made in respect of water supply matters in this area in the future, perhaps the current type of water supply board is not appropriate. The major decisions referred to will relate primarily to a further raising of the level of the Ross River Dam, the provision of water from the Burdekin scheme via the Haughton channel and the provision of an adequate water supply to the major industrial and commercial developments which, through the initiatives of my colleague the Honourable the Minister for Community Services and Northem Development, it is anticipated will be attracted to the area. Control of the distribution of bulk water will, in these circumstances, be of paramount importance, and the Govemment has accordingly decided that a water supply board along the lines of the board established in the Gladstone region in 1984 might be more appropriate than a joint local authority. There are, of course, many similarities between the industrial expansion of the Gladstone area and the anticipated major expansion in the Townsville area to which I have referted. I will now proceed to outline to honourable members the principal provisions of the Bill. The Bill provides for all rights, duties, responsibilities, etc., which have been incurred by the existing joint local authority to be preserved and devolve upon the new board to be constituted. Thus, all existing contractual and other obligations of the current board will be preserved. Membership of the new board will comprise— • the Mayor of the Townsville City Council and another alderman nominated by that council; • the Mayor of the Thuringowa City Council and another alderman nominated by that council; and • a chairman, approved by the Governor in Council. Townsville/Thuringowa Water Supply Board Bill 12 November 1987 4157

Mr R. J. Gibbs: What does this delay mean? Mr HINZE: It simply means that I have lost a page of my speech. The honourable member for Chatsworth having handed a document to the Minister— Mr HINZE: Before I proceed, I want to refer to that rather Christian act of my colleague and friend. At least there is one gentleman opposite. He is a good old racing type at that. Mr R. J. Gibbs: What about me? Mr HINZE: I will come to the honourable member later. Mr Mackenroth: Would you put into Hansard what that Christian act was? Mr HINZE: I had five pages of my speech still to read but I misplaced them. The honourable member for Chatsworth quite happily brought over his copy of my prepared speech and handed it to me. I will be for ever grateful to him for that. He is a scholar and a gentleman who is worthy of distinction and consideration. Where is Warburton tonight? Why can't he see what is going on in this Chamber? Appointment of members will be for the usual triennial period, continuing through until 30 June following local authority triennial elections. The operational area of the board will comprise the city of Townsville and the city of Thuringowa. The Bill describes the functions and powers of the board. These are basically to obtain, conserve, store and supply untreated water in bulk to local authorities within the board's operational area and the major consumers. The board is also empowered to treat and supply treated water in bulk to local authorities and major consumers. Other parts of the Bill deal with the financial provisions under which the board will act and requirements for the board's taking and holding land for its purposes. The Bill provides that the Govemor in Council may make regulations after con­ sultation between the Minister, the board and each local authority in which the board's reservoirs are situated, prescribing guide-lines to be observed by the local authorities in the preparation and implementation of town-planning schemes with a view to protecting the quality of waters in such reservoirs. The board is also empowered to make by-laws relating to land use in catchment areas. By-laws by the board will have to be approved by the Govemor in Council and will be subject to tabling in the House. The board will also be subject to the provisions of the Financial Administration and Audit Act goveming the accounting practices, audit and annual report of statutory authorities. Comprehensive provisions are contained in the Bill relating to employees. The Bill provides that any existing employees of the board will continue their employment. The intention is that the board will not become a large organisation and that it will use the resources of the local authorities concemed, wherever possible, in carrying out its activities. The Bill provides that, within seven years from the date of its coming into effect, an examination be made of the question of the need for its continued existence or whether its functions might be better performed in some other manner. As I have previously stated, there are a lot of important decisions to be made in the Townsville/Thuringowa area in the future in relation to the continuance of an adequate supply of water, and the Govemment is confident that the constitution of a board of the nature proposed in this Bill is the most appropriate method of dealing with the matter. I commend the Bill to House. Debate, on motion of Mr Shaw, adjoumed. 4158 12 November 1987 Electricity Authorities Industrial Causes Act Amendment Bill

ELECTRICITY AUTHORITIES INDUSTRIAL CAUSES ACT AMENDMENT BILL Hon. B. D. AUSTIN (Nicklin—Minister for Mines and Energy and Minister for the Arts) (7.44 p.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— "That leave be granted to bring in a Bill to amend the Electricity Authorities Industrial Causes Act 1985 in certain particulars and to repeal certain provisions of the Electricity (Continuity of Supply) Act 1985 and for other purposes." Motion agreed to. First Reading Bill presented and, on motion of Mr Austin, read a first time. Second Reading Hon. B. D. AUSTIN (Nicklin—Minister for Mines and Energy and Minister for the Arts) (7.45 p.m.): I move— "That the Bill be now read a second time." Following the troubled days of Febmary 1985, new industrial legislation covering the electricity supply industry was passed by this House. Two Acts are involved—the Electricity (Continuity of Supply) Act and the Electricity Authorities Industrial Causes Act. The Electricity (Continuity of Supply) Act had one real purpose—to put on the statute-book the provisions of a state of emergency proclamation made under the State Transport Act to ensure that a reliable supply of electricity was restored to the public of Queensland and the industrial anarchy that existed at that time was brought under control. As honourable members know, it achieved this purpose. On the other hand, the Electricity Authorities Industrial Causes Act was at that time, and still is, seen as permanent and substantive legislation designed to create a separate industrial tribunal for the electricity supply industry and to recognise that people employed in the electricity supply industry are simply not entitled to inconvenience the public at will by strike action, whether this involves actually stopping work, reducing output from power stations, or failing to restore supply where this has been lost through faults in, or damage to, the distribution system. The results of the Acts speak for themselves. In an industry that employs about 10 000 people, only two man-days have been lost through industrial action since this legislation came into force. However, it is simply not reasonable to retain emergency legislation on the statute- book in perpetuity. Conversely, it is most desirable to make a few minor changes to the substantive legislation to make it even more effective. What the Bill now before the House sets out to do is repeal most of the Electricity (Continuity of Supply) Act, particularly those sections that were enacted to deal with the serious emergency existing at the time. These sections include the power of direction given to the Electricity Commissioner, the offences relating to failure to comply with directions given by him pursuant to those powers and offences relating to obstmcting and harassing electricity employees in the course of their work. However, it is necessary to retain the provisions that confirm the dismissals of the striking workers and the contracts of service made as a condition of the retum to work of many of them. The changes to the Electricity Authorities Industrial Causes Act, which is the substantive legislation, are fairly minor in nature. Clauses 3 and 4 of the Bill substitute the tribunal for the Minister or commissioner, as appropriate, as the authority to whom appeals may be made by employees who have allegedly participated in a strike and been penalised accordingly by the employer. At present, the right of appeal is to the Minister in respect of commission employees, and Libraries and Archives Bill 12 November 1987 4159 to the commissioner in respect of other employees in the electricity industry. There is not now, nor is it intended to provide, any appeal against the actual severity of any penalty imposed by an employer. Clause 5 preserves contracts made pursuant to section 7 of the Electricity (Continuity of Supply) Act and deems them to be contracts that comply with the provisions of this Act. Finally, clause 7 of the Bill replaces the power of direction of the commissioner in section 3 of the Electricity (Continuity of Supply) Act with a provision that makes it quite clear that it is a condition of employment of every employee in the electricity industry to obey all directions of his employer to provide, maintain or restore the supply of electricity if the employee is suitably and properly qualified and trained to take such steps. The changes are made because there is a need to have legislation in place to protect the continuity of electricity supply. The emergency legislation, which the people of Queensland unreservedly supported at the time it was passed—and still support—has brought some concemed comments in the Commonwealth Industrial Commission and also has been claimed to contravene ILO conventions which contain forced-labour provisions. As I mentioned, I think the people of Queensland require a continuous provision of this essential service and are not too concemed about any of these comments as the legislation has been weU administered, but in the stable industrial situation that now exists in the electricity supply industry, it is better to replace provisions that evoke unfavourable comment provided these are replaced with equally effective and less emotive provisions. If there are any bloody-minded people about who feel that this action is a sign of weakness by my Govemment, I ask them to remember that the emergency provisions of the Transport Act have served weU Govemments of the colour of those on this side of the House and, in the dim past, of those on the other side of the House. I commend the Electricity Authorities Industrial Causes Act Amendment Bill of 1987 to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Vaughan, adjoumed.

LIBRARIES AND ARCHIVES BILL Hon. B. D. AUSTIN (Nicklin—Minister for Mines and Energy and Minister for the Arts) (7.49 p.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— "That leave be granted to bring in a Bill to provide for the State Library of Queensland and the Queensland State Archives and to promote libraries and archives and preserve public records." Motion agreed to. First Reading Bill presented and, on motion of Mr Austin, read a first time. Second Reading Hon. B. D. AUSTIN (Nicklin—Minister for Mines and Energy and Minister for the Arts) (7.50 p.m.): I move— "That the Bill be now read a second time." This Bill is intended to facilitate the operations of the State Library of Queensland in the foreseeable future. On 22 January 1988 the State Library will close the doors of its William Street premises for the last time. The following two months will be spent in moving to the library's new premises at the Queensland Cultural Centre, where it will officially open for business again on Monday, 11 April 1988. 4160 12 November 1987 Libraries and Archives Bill

The move to modern, new premises will provide badly needed increased space for housing the collection. In addition, seating for library-users will be increased significantly and new and improved services will be introduced. It is not surprising that space constraints exist at the William Street premises, as that building has been the home of the library since 1902. Centennial Hall was added in 1959 to mark Queensland's one hundredth year of Statehood, but this small additional space has not been nearly sufficient to cater for 85 years of expansion. The State Library has grown from a staff of four in 1902 to its presently approved staffing complement of 217 as at 1 July 1987. Its budget has increased from £800 in 1902 to more than $17m this financial year. Honourable members may be interested to know that the first chairman of the board of tmstees of the then Brisbane Public Library was Sir Samuel Griffith, a former member of this House, Chief Justice of Queensland at that time and later the first Chief Justice of the High Court. The library was administered by a board of tmstees until 1906, when that board became a board of advice, which was abolished in 1916. When the present Libraries Act was enacted in 1943, the Library Board, as it operates today, was re-established. The present board chairman is Dr John Trace, who is chairman of the Burdekin Shire Council. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to the present and past members of the Library Board and to thank them on behalf of the (Government for their valuable contribution to the development of library services throughout the State. As the State Library physical headquarters have been in need of modemisation and upgrading, so also has been the legislation under which it has operated for 44 years. The existing Libraries Act, which largely dates back to 1943, and the Oxley Memorial Library of Queensland Act of 1946 are therefore both being repealed. The former Act is being replaced by the Bill now introduced into the House. The latter Act was enacted in 1946 to vest in the Library Board of Queensland the assets of the Oxley Centenary Fund, which was a tmst fund established in 1925 comprising, at that time, the balance of unspent moneys collected in 1923 for the purpose of celebrating the 100th anniversary of John Oxley's discovery of the Brisbane River. The vesting of the assets of the Oxley Centenary Fund in the Library Board of Queensland was done with the agreement of the then tmstees of the fund. The primary purpose of the Oxley Memorial Library of Queensland Act has therefore been fulfilled and this opportunity is taken to repeal that legislation. The present John Oxley Library will be housed in a prime position on the top level of the new State Library premises. Special air-conditioning has been installed to ensure that the important historical material in the John Oxley Library is appropriately conserved. The John Oxley Library will be a feature of the new State Library, along with the rare books section, the children's library and, of course, the reference library. Included in the rare books section will be the James Hardie collection of Australian fine arts which has been so kindly donated by James Hardie Limited of Sydney to mark the company's centenary in 1988. The Oxley Memorial Library of Queensland Act provided for the appointment of an advisory committee consisting of members and associate members of the Library Board of (Queensland. This provision of the Act has been disregarded in practice, as only the chairman of the Library Board is a member of the advisory committee. Indeed, it would be pointless to have an advisory committee to the Library Board which was comprised of members of the Library Board—the members would be advising themselves. The new Act therefore formalises the existing practice and authorises the Library Board to appoint advisory committees of its own choosing. I take this opportunity of thanking present and past members of the Oxley Advisory Committee who have provided such valuable advice to the Library Board over the years. I am confident the new Libraries and Archives Act will enable the library to meet the challenging times it will face with the move to the cultural centre and with the ever- increasing advancement in technology that is having such an impact on the delivery of information services. Libraries and Archives Bill 12 November 1987 4161

The word "archives" is included in the title of the Bill to give recognition to the increased importance now attaching to the preservation of Queensland's public records. Queenslanders are showing an increasing interest in tracing their ancestry and in studying the early history of Queensland. It is expected that the Australian Bicentenary will develop this interest even further. Public records are an invaluable source of information relating to Queensland's early settlers. The preservation and care of these records is an important responsibility of the Library Board of Queensland. The State Archives are presently located at Dutton Park, but investigations are currently being carried out into the possibility of relocating the State Archives into a new building which will be designed for archival use. A number of sites are being considered. When introducing the Queensland Art Gallery Bill and the Queensland Performing Arts Tmst Amendment Bill earlier this year, I pointed to the desirability of the legislation governing the user bodies at the Queensland Cultural Centre being as standardised as possible. The Libraries and Archives Bill has been drafted with this principle in mind. The provisions of the Bill fall into seven major areas— (a) the constitution and membership of the Library Board with ancillary provisions such as term of appointment, casual vacancies and appointment of staff being provided for; (b) the functions and powers of the board; (c) the proceedings and business of the board, which incorporates a number of standard machinery provisions to enable the board to operate its business within an appropriate legislative stmcture; (d) financial provisions, including the establishment of a tmst fund; (e) the declaration of the establishment, maintenance and conduct of a library facility as a function of local govemment; (f) the preservation, management and utilisation of the public records of the State; and (g) a requirement that a copy of material published in Queensland is to be lodged with the State Library and with the Parliamentary Library. Provision is made in clauses 8 and 9 of the Bill for the Library Board to continue in existence and for the present members of the board to remain in office. The chief executive of the State Library is now known as the State Librarian. It is proposed that this title be changed to Director and State Librarian for two reasons: firstly, because the chief executives of the other four user bodies at the Queensland Cultural Centre are termed directors of their respective organisations; and, secondly, in recognition of the increasing management responsibilities of the chief executive in a large and complex organisation such as the State Library. In these times of financial stringency, it is becoming more and more necessary for the State Library, and indeed a large number of Govemment instmmentalities, to raise an increasing part of their operating expenditure from their own efforts, rather than to rely on total Govemment funding. I envisage therefore that future appointees to the position of Director and State Librarian will be selected as much for their entrepreneurial and management skills as for their knowledge of library resources. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to the present State Librarian, Mr Laurie Ryan, who will be retiring within the next year and who has been a guiding light in the growth of the State Library since his appointment to the position of State Librarian in 1970. I am pleased that Mr Ryan will still be in office at the time of the opening of the new State Library on 8 April 1988, as he has played a very significant role in the planning of the new premises at the cultural centre. As I have already mentioned, increasing importance is attaching to the preservation of the State's public records. The provisions in the present Act goveming this matter have been strengthened and updated. Special protection is given in the Bill to records 4162 12 November 1987 Bond University Act Amendment Bill over 30 years old. Such records will have to be deposited with the State Archives unless the State Archivist grants a special exemption. These 30-year-old records will remain at the State Archives unless the public authority which deposited them can demonstrate that their retum is necessary for the proper conduct of the business of the public authority. The present Act contains a section requiring the publisher of a book published in Queensland to lodge copies of the book with the State Library and with the Parliamentary Library. That particular section has been expanded and modemised to take account of advances in technology that have resulted in revolutionary changes in the methods of storage of information. I am confident that the Bill provides an appropriate framework in which the State Library will be able to operate for the benefit of aU Queenslanders. I commend the Bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Underwood, adjoumed.

BOND UNIVERSITY ACT AMENDMENT BILL Hon. L. W. POWELL (Isis—Minister for Education) (7.57 p.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— "That leave be granted to bring in a Bill to amend the Bond University Act 1987 in certain particulars." Motion agreed to. First Reading Bill presented and, on motion of Mr Powell, read a first time. Second Reading Hon. L. W. POWELL (Isis—Minister for Education) (7.58 p.m.): I move— "That the Bill be now read a second time." The recently established Bond University Council has sought the Govemment's support in amending the Bond University Act 1987 to provide for the formation of an academic staff association. The association would have as its primary responsibilities the fostering by staff of the objectives of the university, the negotiation on behalf of the academic staff of suitable conditions of employment and the development in consultation with the employer of procedures for the settlement of industrial disputes. The salary stmcture for the employment of academic staff at other Australian universities is subject to the Federal award, the Australian University Academic and Related Staff (Salaries) Award 1986. According to the Bond University CouncU, this award has given rise to rigid salary stmctures with little regard to levels of salaries in the market-place and with little opportunity for rewarding individual achievement. These rigidities make it very difficult to recmit the first-class staff needed in high demand areas such as computing, accounting and business, law, medicine and certain high-technology areas. The Bond University Council wishes to establish from the outset at Bond University what it perceives is a more positive and flexible relationship with its staff members than is at present the case in any other Australian university. For example, it is proposed that employment contracts will include an assurance safeguarding academic freedom, that provision will be made for appraisal of staff performance, and that tenure will be linked to performance. The university also intends to have regard to market factors when negotiating salary packages individually with staff members. The university council believes that in this way it will be able to attract and retain the best staff available and, in tum, create a world-class education and research institution. If the rigid stmctures and systems of the past are imposed on Bond University by extension of existing Federal award coverage, the university's development could be seriously impeded. Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill 12 November 1987 4163

Bond University is unique in the Australian context by being a fully private institution, whereas the existing Federal award covers public universities only as these were the only type of university in existence at the time the award came into being. The private status of Bond University, together with formal recognition and support of an academic staff association in the Bond University Act, is seen by the university council as lending credibility and weight to any case the university may need to argue before relevant tribunals against extension of Federal award coverage. This Bill does not require the association to be formed, nor does it require any person to be a member of the association. The Bill simply requires that once an appropriate association has been established, the university must recognise it as the appropriate entity to represent the interests of academic staff. I commend the Bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Underwood, adjourned.

QUEENSLAND MUSEUM (NEWSTEAD HOUSE ACQUISITION) BILL Second Reading Debate resumed from 6 October (see p. 2822). Mr UNDERWOOD (Ipswich West) (8.01 p.m.): I am pleased to join in the debate on this Bill, which repeals the Newstead House Tmst Act of 1939. This is very important legislation not so much for what it actually does as for its whole concept. The Opposition does not agree with the plan that the Govemment is laying down through this legislation for the future of Newstead House. For that reason, it will be opposing the legislation and will give reasons for that during this debate. This House will later be treated to what I suspect will be a most cynical display by members of the Liberal Party in this House. Honourable members have already witnessed their Liberal leader. Lord Mayor Atkinson, jumping up and down in front of television cameras. Her role in the management of Newstead House was quite clearly exposed by the Minister himself when this Bill was first introduced into this House. I am sure that the honourable member for Toowong will be participating in this debate. All honourable members would be aware that he recently left the Brisbane City Council. It has been made quite clear that the role of the council under the Liberal Party regime in assisting, looking after and maintaining Newstead House has been quite slack. One must congratulate Clem Jones, his administration and successive Labor admin­ istrations on the work that they did in initially restoring Newstead House and making it what it is today. The honourable member for Salisbury, Len Ardill, who was a member of the board of tmstees, has been a very good worker for Newstead House. Of course, we all know what happened to Mr Ardill and why he is no longer a member of that board. By a purely political act he was thrown off that board and replaced by the Liberal Lord Mayor, Sallyanne Atkinson, much to the detriment of Newstead House. Mr Ardill took a very keen participatory interest in the affairs and welfare of Newstead House and he was replaced by Lord Mayor Atkinson, who has hardly ever attended a board of tmstees' meeting. That lack of attendance and lack of interest in Newstead House demonstrates the attitude of the Brisbane City Council towards Newstead House. When Liberal Party members speak in this debate later—no doubt with some fervour—we must bear in mind their track record. Their actions speak louder than their words, and their actions are either non-existent or very paltry indeed. So much for those people. As all honourable members would be aware, Newstead House is one of Queensland's most historic buildings and it is possibly the oldest extant house in Brisbane. That is 4164 12 November 1987 Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill why this is such poor legislation. Honourable members have witnessed the magnificent role that the Friends of Newstead have played and are continuing to play in fund-raising and their dedication and care for Newstead House and its fitting out. It is quite a remarkable experience to attend and view the work that has been carried out there and the objects that have been purchased and placed in that house. It is a veritable treasure chest of wonderful items. In fact, a visit to Newstead House is one of the significant events on the itinerary of important visitors to Brisbane. That venue is well used by the Premier's Department protocol section. It is supported by people of all walks of life in Brisbane. Everyone appreciates the historic nature of Newstead House. In 1985, an intemal operational audit was carried out. The report found a number of problems with Newstead House. The purpose of the house has changed markedly since the introduction of the current Act under which it operates. The report found that the composition of the board of tmstees no longer reflects accurately the support base of the house. Some provisions of the Act are either too vague or narrow in their intent and coverage; for example, in relation to the employment of officers and in relation to investment. Because of its age, the Act does not provide an adequate base for current and future operations, that is, the range of provisions is not sufficiently extensive. The report recommended that the Newstead House Tmst Act of 1939 be either substantially amended or repealed and replaced; that should action be taken to abolish the board of tmstees, the repealing legislation should ensure the clear identification of subsequent ownership of Newstead House, the resource centre and other board assets and should provide for the formal registration of any change of ownership and long-term protection of Newstead House and its integrity by a formal arrangement. Those recommendations are fine, but the Opposition proposes a totally different concept of management. It proposes an historic houses tmst, which is a proper and fitting way to manage houses such as Newstead House. In New South Wales, such a tmst has been a great success in managing historic houses. One of the proposals by the Govemment is that the house would have access to the museum's collection and be able to use its storage facUities and, as such, collections would be under the protective mantle of the museum legislation. People who have been so willing to give of their time and money over the years—and I am talking about the Friends of Newstead in particular—are very concemed about the Govemment's intent. Their great feat is that the collection that they have put so much into and that everybody so enjoys, from Govemment members to ordinary Queensland citizens, will be split up and spread around the country, taken on travelling shows round the State or taken to other branches of the museum. The Opposition does not agree with that proposal. It believes that, if the collection is split up, it will detract from Newstead House. The collection is an integral part of Newstead House and should remain there. In his second-reading speech the Minister outlined a number of benefits from the legislation. However, the proposal that the city council looks after the land and the museum manages the house is unworkable. The member for Caboolture will address those matters in his speech. As anyone knows, it is very difficult to live in a house if one does not own the land around it. Certain distinct management problems arise immediately. The Opposition proposes house-and-land packages, to use the latest marketing phrase. It believes that an historic houses tmst is the way Newstead House should be managed. Tonight, the legislation provides us with a golden opportunity to adopt a proper management plan for our historic houses, and we should start with Newstead House. It is not the role of the museum to manage historic houses. The role of a natural history, anthropology and history of technology museum is: (i) as a repository for representative collections of specimens and objects to do with natural history, anthropology and the history of technology; (ii) to undertake research on these specimens and objects; and (iii) the provision of educational facilities concerned with these fields of interest. Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill 12 November 1987 4165

The role of the Queensland Museum should not include the management of historic buildings. Such a course would be almost equivalent to the natural history staff of the museum managing the State's national parks. What I have just said outlines the Opposition's point of view. Management of historic house properties requires a specialised combination of property management, architectural, historical and building constmction skiUs. Those skills are best brought together by a specifically established historic houses tmst. If required, the Queensland Museum could certainly care for a display of historic objects from the house in the same way as it cares for a display in the Old Govemment Printery Museum, but management, restoration and/or repair of the property and the buUdings is an unwarranted and unwise expansion of the role of the Queensland Museum. Although I concede that the Queensland Museum could care for historic objects, such a proposal contains inherent dangers. People such as the Friends of Newstead are very concemed about that matter. Members of the Opposition share that concem and object to the Govemment's proposal. The continual adding of responsibilities to the Queensland Museum has been a trait of the Queensland Goverament's management over the years. Administration by the Queensland Museum requires close monitoring to ensure that the museum does not become a dumping ground for a variety of educational, conservation and scientific pursuits that really do not belong together. I tum now to point out the diverse nature of fields already managed by the Queensland Museum. The Queensland Museum already manages the specialised Cobb and Co. Museum in Toowoomba, the site of the failed Queensland Transport and Technology Centre at Coomera, the forestry museum at Gympie, a genuine branch of the Queensland Museum at Townsville, and a display centre at the Glenlyon Dam. In addition, the Queensland Museum will soon take over the Old Govemment Printery Museum in George Street. All these additional responsibilities clearly require extra professional staff. The Govemment has not provided that extra staff. Page 18 of the 1986 annual report of the Queensland Museum states in part as follows— "A major problem yet to be overcome is the provision of staff for this and other Branches." Clearly, the Govemment has been remiss by adding responsibilities to the operations of the Queensland Museum without providing additional staff. Honourable members should bear in mind the fact that the Queensland Museum situated on the south bank of the Brisbane River has expanded its role and taken on extra responsibilities. Obviously its staff is being spread too thinly. All honourable members would know that for a long time the Queensland Museum has not been provided with proper staff and adequate funding. Page 36 of the Estimates of Receipts and Expenditures for 1987-88 shows that the total budget for the Queensland Museum, including assistance to local museums, has been increased from $4.653m to $4.824m. In anyone's language, that is a pathetic increase of only 3.6 per cent, which is less that the rate of inflation. It is hardly in line with a continuing and expanding branch stmcture of the Queensland Museum. The Opposition only needs to cite the Govemment's Estimates to prove its case. To be quite frank, the proposed management of Newstead House that has been outlined in the Minister's second-reading speech is rather messy. The grounds of Newstead House will be looked after by the Brisbane City Council, but what happens if the original garden layout or the original roadway to the house have to be restored, which is what happened at Vaucluse House in New South Wales? It is clear that management of an historic house and its grounds cannot be separated. The fabric of the building will be looked after by the Works Department. The curator, presently employed by Newstead House Tmst, will be retained, but staff from 4166 12 November 1987 Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill the Queensland Museum will take over while he is on leave. The Friends of Newstead will still be involved but, presumably, in a voluntary capacity. However, due to a lack of consultation by the Govemment with the Friends of Newstead, it would not be surprising if that support were to wither, particularly if they believe that their traditional role has been taken away by this legislation. If they feel that they have been left out in the cold, they may act accordingly. Although I do not know whether that will be the case for certain, it was the feeling of the people involved when the Govemment first introduced this legislation. The presently proposed artangements treat Newstead House as a detached building, useful as a display centre but not forming part of a unified historical site. The fact is that no house, especially one of historical significance, can be detached from a setting. The answer to this problem, which the Govemment has tried to tackle but has made worse, is the establishment of an historic houses tmst similar to the one that exists in New South Wales. It is a statutory authority established within the New South Wales Premier's Department and operates within the guide-lines of the Historic Houses Act of 1980. The tmst was formed in July 1980 with the purpose of managing and maintaining as house museums the buildings vested in it, having regard to, their historic and architectural interest, and to manage and maintain their associated grounds. Another purpose is to provide such educational and cultural services in relation to those buUdings as in the opinion of the tmst would increase public knowledge and enjoyment of those buildings and their place in the heritage of the State. The tmst is made up of seven tmstees appointed by the Govemor of New South Wales. The majority of the people on that board of tmstees—architects and so on—are experts in the field of managing houses, particularly old houses. Mr Milliner: We have seen this Govemment's commitment to the heritage with what they did to the Bellevue ovemight. Mr UNDERWOOD: That is correct. Many, many historic buildings have been knocked down in Brisbane. It is no wonder that the Government is not interested in an historic houses Act. Hopefully it will be when it considers the position. In New South Wales the tmst's role is one of conservation, management and interpretation of the fabric, contents and grounds of the houses in its care and of the society in which they were built and occupied. It should be noted that the grounds are included. The tmst seeks to explain its properties to the public by establishing expertise in the history of New South Wales and the history and conservation of buildings, gardens and the decorative arts. The tmst, through its houses, seeks to show visitors the domestic environment in which people lived in past times and to bring that environment alive through a lively interpretation program. In order to give the fullest view of domestic experience, the tmst is endeavouring to acquire a range of houses representing different periods, styles and sizes and from different geographic areas. The tmst seeks to encourage and support other institutions with similar aims and to promote discussions on the methodology of the conservation, preservation and interpretation of these house museums. It also endeavours to disseminate the knowledge and expertise that it has acquired. It is interesting to note that all tmstees of the New South Wales Historic Houses Tmst are appointed by the Govemor of New South Wales and that no tmstee received any remuneration during the year. That shows the dedication of those people. It shows how the public resource that is out there in the community can easily be called upon to manage an historic houses tmst with great success. Any officers of the Minister's department who have been to any of the historic houses in New South Wales will acknowledge that they have been a great success. The Historic Houses Tmst was set up about 1980. Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill 12 November 1987 4167

A pemsal of the annual report of the New South Wales Historic Houses Tmst wiU show that that tmst has gone from strength to strength. It has a gradual process of acquiring historic stmctures and historic houses. It began with one house—Vaucluse House. The Queensland Govemment should start with the setting-up of a tmst to acquire Newstead House. Shafston House, on the other side of the river, could also be considered. A month or two ago, the president of the National Tmst, Mr Noel Hobson, called on the State Govemment to amend legislation to ensure the preservation of Shafston House at Kangroo Point. This month the Federal Govemment is expected to auction the 105- year-old property, which is occupied by the RAAF. Real estate sources predict that the sale may realise approximately $1.5m. Obviously that is a very valuable and historic property, one that should be saved for the people of Queensland and future generations. The National Tmst has clearly stated that it is gravely concemed that Shafston House could be acquired by a developer and destroyed ovemight, as has happened on many occasions in Brisbane over the years, both under National/Liberal Govemments and under National Party Govemments. The annual report of the New South Wales tmst clearly states how successful its last year has been in the field of education, both with schools and with the general public. The manufacture and design of teaching aids is a very important aspect of the work of that tmst. Its educational kits are very much sought after by people in education. The research that the tmst carries out is of major importance. Particular areas of primary research during the year that is reported on were oral history programs for Meroogal and Rouse Hill, colonial food and drink from 1788 to 1901 for an exhibition at Elizabeth Bay House, a history of Elizabeth Bay House for an education kit and audio-visual, Macleay and Wentworth families for bicentennial publications and education programs, women in the Colony for bicentennial programs, domestic servants in the Colony from 1788 to 1850 for education programs, and work associated with house building from 1788 to 1850 for the bicentennial program. That was just one year's work in the research of that tmst. That was very valuable research for the people of New South Wales and the people of Australia. Another major aspect of the work of the tmst—it might be called the dollars and cents—is tourism and promotion. Of course, the historic houses of New South Wales are a major tourist attraction for that State. Earlier I pointed out how important Newstead House is to tourism in Queensland. With the State's other historic houses in Brisbane, Ipswich and other provincial centres, a great deal of work needs to be done, work that is too much for the National Tmst. A specific stmcture needs to be set up to look after these houses, namely, a tmst. A heritage week and the Bicentenary featured prominently in the work of the New South Wales Historic Houses Tmst over the last year. Specific activities are also undertaken at these venues. At Elizabeth Farm a special activities program was continued to add an extra dimension to school excursions. These activities allow students to participate in some of the duties and occupations that would have formed part of the daily life of people living in the colonial period. This year it was proposed to introduce a similar program to Elizabeth Bay House. The Opposition believes that the Queensland Govemment has the right idea but is going in the wrong direction, a direction that is not in the best interests of the future of Queensland's historic houses. The Opposition also believes that the move will be detrimental to the objects, the practice and the work of the Queensland Museum, because it will draw away from the Queensland Museum valuable staff and resources that, with its ever-increasing workload and its ever-expanding number of branches, it finds it is already short of The Opposition believes that the only sensible and sane way to move in this matter is to set up an historic houses tmst of Queensland to manage, firstly, Newstead House and subsequently other houses as that tmst grows and prospers. On that basis, the Opposition opposes the legislation. 4168 12 November 1987 Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill

Mr BEANLAND (Toowong) (8.24 p.m.): I rise on behalf of the Liberal Party to oppose strongly this legislation now before the House. An interesting fact is that this Bill has been brought on for debate ahead of seven other Bills on the business paper. It has been brought forward in great haste this evening by the Minister. Obviously he feels the chill winds blowing, and I can well understand why. This is an outrageous grab not only for Newstead House but also, down the track, for Newstead Park. Many statements have been made about that wonderful home, Newstead House. I am reminded of Russell Cowies' statement in his book Discovering Brisbane— "On the basis of the authenticity of its condition, the richness of its furnishings, and the timeless serenity of its settings, Newstead House must rank as one of the most imposing relics of the nineteenth century in the whole of Australia." Clearly this is not a residence that one would want the Queensland Govemment to get its hands on. This is not a residence that one can let the Queensland Govemment grab. The Queensland Government's record is one of, "Call in the Deen brothers. C^all in the Deen brothers". All that remains are the memories. Newstead House is the best loved and the most visited of historic sites, attracting in excess of 60 000 visitors per annum. Since its constmction in 1846, the building has played a number of roles. However, in recent years—especially since 1975—it has had lavished upon it the attentions of the Friends of Newstead, a totally voluntary committee whose members are drawn from all walks of life and who are totally committed to giving the residence its own personality. For 48 years Newstead House has been administered by a board of tmstees on behalf of the people of Queensland. Now the Queensland Govemment seeks to abolish the board, without any consultation at all with the tmstees and, of course, without consulting the Friends of Newstead. Not a word has been said to the Friends of Newstead. The Minister is fully aware of that. This is only one of the options available. The other suggestions—made by the Minister himself—were for a new Newstead House tmst with an enlarged board, an increase in funding and an increase in the current staff of one. If the Minister is so unhappy about the Newstead House tmst, three options are available to him, but no, not this Minister! What this Minister decided to do was to msh in and take it over— the big grab of the century. Of course, one will look back on this in years to come and see just what the Govemment's real intentions were Mrs Harvey interjected. Mr BEANLAND: The honourable member for Greenslopes will live to me this day. It is clear that what the Government wants to do is bring politics into it and get its greedy hands on Newstead House. The Newstead House tmst is a non-political organisation Mr Innes interjected. Mr BEANLAND: I will deal with that chapel shortly. Reference has been made to the need to ensure the long-term protection of Newstead House. If that means the provision of increased funding and the availability of additional staff, such measures would be welcome. There would be no need for the changes proposed. All that would be needed is money. However, honourable members know that that is not the real intention. If one examines the small increase in funding for the museum for this year, one will find that, in real terms, the Govemment is cutting back. There has been no real increase in funds for the museum; in fact, there has been a decrease. So Newstead House will not in fact receive a large injection of funds, as the Minister would have honourable members believe. Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill 12 November 1987 4169

The Friends of Newstead make a major contribution to the mnning of Newstead House. The Govemment itself through its tmst pays the salary of the curator; it pays the insurance premiums in respect of the property; and it pays the service rates and electricity charges. For their part, the Friends of Newstead staff the property on a voluntary basis every Sunday, on public holidays and on two days during the week. They have purchased the bulk of the treasures that are displayed in Newstead House. The Friends of Newstead were not consulted in this matter at all and were treated with contempt. The Minister has suggested that it will be an advantage for the Queensland Museum to take over Newstead House, because Newstead House will have access to a full range of professional and technical expertise. To infer that such facilities are not currently available or are not made use of is, to say they least, less than honest. For many of the school-children who visit Newstead House the highlight is a visit to the cellar section of the residence, because on display are syllabus-orientated and interpretive displays funded by the Friends of Newstead. These displays trace the origin of Brisbane and the full history of Newstead House. In addition, a selection of audio-visual programs can be booked by groups visiting the house. The talking fig tree has been judged to be one of the most innovative teaching aids in the State. Comprehensive guide-books of Newstead House are also available to the visitor. They contain a great deal of information. One has to ask whether the provision of these books will continue after the cuts are made in Govemment funding across the board, and there have been many cuts this year. I have a copy of this magnificent book entitled A Guide to Newstead House, which is currently produced. One has to wonder what the situation will be in the future. No doubt significant cut-backs will be made. The public has also been told that the Newstead House collection will come under the protective mantle of the museum legislation. Indeed, the Minister for the Arts has aUuded to that fact. But at the present time the tmstees of Newstead House do have power to seU off the collection. It is interesting to note that under section 12 (2) (b) of the Queensland Museum Act 1970-1985 the Queensland Museum is given the same powers. The section states that the board may— "... sell, exchange or otherwise dispose of any objects of natural history, applied sciences, technology and history and exhibits and other personal property under the care or control of the Board;". What is the Minister really up to? As mentioned previously by the honourable member for Sherwood, one could ask whether or not this will be another exercise like the one involving the chapel at Clayfield which is being dismantled and taken off to Buderim. Of course the Minister will find that, because of the stmcture of the building, the chapel at Clayfield will not be dismantled easily in its current condition. If one looks at the furniture, objects of art and other treasures purchased for Newstead House by the Friends of Newstead one can see that they can be easily disposed of or removed to other parts of the State. Moreover, items presented to Newstead House in good faith by members of the general public can similarly be removed, thereby betraying the tmst of the donors. There is nothing contained in this legislation to say that this will not happen. Mrs Nelson interjected. Mr BEANLAND: By her interjection, the honourable member for Aspley is indi­ cating that that is the kind of thing that she would get up to. On Newstead Point is situated the John Oxley landing, a facility which cost about $40,000 and was funded mainly by contributions. Apart from the $10,000 provided by the Queensland Govemment, this facility was funded by donations from the individual members of the Friends of Newstead, the organisation itself, the Utah Foundation and others. Apparently there is some question as to the viabiUty of this landing, despite the fact that currently some 12 cmise vessels use it on a regular basis to bring visitors to Newstead House and Newstead Park. Under the control of the Queensland Museum,

77194—136 4170 12 November 1987 Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill what assurance is there that this community-funded pontoon will not be sold off to the highest bidder? The Govemment's record speaks for itself Government members interjected. Mr BEANLAND: This action would surely deny other cmise vessels access with their cargoes of schoolchildren and tourists. There is no guarantee at all that this will not be the case. It is all very well for interjections to fly around the Chamber tonight, but everyone knows what happens when the Govemment is desperate for funds. The Minister in his second-reading speech indicated that all financial matters of Newstead House would be handled by trained administrative staff. I put it to honourable members that matters at Newstead House are handled very capably indeed. The facts are that records are being properly kept at present. I inferred from the Minister's speech that he suggests that that is presently not the case. The fact is that Newstead House already maintains an accounting system with receipts, record cards and registers, which, as the Minister would well know, are inspected as part of the annual audit. Until the present distraction, the Friends of Newstead were considering endowing the residence with a fully computerised accounting system. In his second-reading speech, the Minister implied that, under the control of the Queensland Museum, the fabric of the house would be the responsibility of the Works Department. Mr Menzel interjected. Mr BEANLAND: I suggest that the member for Mulgrave go back to his electorate. He has a few problems with a sugar-mill there. I suggest that he should go back and fix them up. I have heard all about those problems. I would not be too happy about them, if I were the honourable member. If one examines the Minister's statement that the fabric of Newstead House will be the responsibility of the Works Department, what a disaster it will be for Newstead House. In 1982, during the Commonwealth Games, all sorts of promises were made about refurbishing the south-westem wing of Newstead House. It was agreed that the Works Department would undertake that work. An official opening date was set for the Prime Minister, Mr Fraser, to perform the opening. Half-way through the work, before anything had been completed, the Works Department employees were taken off the job and sent to another project. The people of Newstead were told that the work would proceed after the Commonwealth Games. It was only through the intervention of the Friends of Newstead—their own painters, floor-polishers and electricians—that the work was finished on time. The Works Department was responsible for Newstead House—hardly likely! The Minister referted also to security at Newstead House. It could be inferred that at the moment, under the tmstees' control, there is a deficiency or a total lack of security. At present, Newstead House is protected by a most sophisticated series of perimeter and space alarms that are monitored 24 hours a day. In addition, the Works Department security service visits the residence more than four times a night and also attends in the event of an alarm. There is provision for caretakers, and the Newstead House curator makes a point of attending each and every alarm call. So much for the Minister's nonsense about a lack of security at Newstead House. Reference is also made in the Minister's second-reading speech to access to con­ servators, restorers and display production staff, which implies that perhaps the contents of Newstead House are, like the park, looking somewhat dilapidated. I will deal in a moment with that most untmthful statement by the Minister. What nonsense it was. Again, and for the most part. Friends of Newstead happily pick up the accounts for any repairs and restoration. No complaints have been made in respect of the coUection as displayed. The Minister pretends that he is going to save money in that area. It is another pretending exercise to create perception in the community that the Govemment is going to save large sums of money. Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) BUI 12 November 1987 4171

Then there is the much-touted offer of a doUar-for-doUar subsidy on cash donations that have been promised once Newstead House is taken over by the Queensland Museum. I know that the present offer fascinated the Friends of Newstead, but some months ago when, for the very first time, the Friends of Newstead sought a doUar-for-doUar subsidy to build an aftemoon tea facility in Newstead Park to remove the pressure from the verandas of the homestead, the request was ignored totally. It was just wiped aside. It is noted that the friends will be free to continue their valuable assistance to the controlling board. Take away the contribution made by the friends since 1975 and there would by very little to see at Newstead House. However, this work, Uke agreement with this proposal to repeal the existing Act, is taken for granted by the Govemment. That is yet another example of the arrogance of this Govemment. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Row): Order! The honourable member for Greenslopes will lower her microphone. The presence of more than one active microphone in the Chamber diminishes the effectiveness of the one that is being used. As well as that, there is a great deal of surplus noise in the Chamber that is being picked up by the other microphone. Mr BEANLAND: That is typical of the manners of the honourable member for Greenslopes, and is particularly characteristic of the attitude of Govemment members to the debate on this Bill. Members of the National Party know that the public of this city and the public of Queensland are not fooled by this grab, and are certainly not fooled by the Minister for Education. Some 13 organisations presently use the Newstead House Resource Centre. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Apparently my hint about the stray noise in the Chamber was not acknowledged by honourable members. The Chamber will now come to order. There is far too much audible conversation in the Chamber. Mr BEANLAND: It is clear that the 13 organisations that use the Newstead House Resource Centre have been given no guarantees that they will be able to continue to use that centre. In fact, the Govemment is taking over the entire complex without any guarantees whatsoever being given to the general public. Naturally, those 13 organisations that use the Newstead House Resource Centre are concemed about their present arrangements, whether or not those arrangements wiU continue and what guarantees they will be given. Presuming that this legislation is passed, either today or tomorrow those organisations could be thrown out of that centre. Of course, Newstead House is a lived-in home. It is not a museum, as we have been led to believe by this legislation; it is alive and it is breathing history. A visit to Newstead House on a Sunday reveals that music is provided by the Friends of Newstead on a magnificent piano that has been paid for out of donations that were received from schoolchildren who visited that house during the 1986 school year. I have already spoken at length about the teaching aids in the basement. It is worthy of note that the Friends of Newstead started with four friends. They have now grown to four teams of 14 active friends—56 members in all. Those people work on Sundays and other days of the week to provide services and maintain facilities. In fact, they even own the teapots that are used in the Sunday aftemoon teas, which are provided through the courtesy of the Friends of Newstead. Newstead House is open on certain weekdays and on Sundays from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. I wonder how the Govemment will continue to provide those services without mnning up a large overtime bill. Perhaps it will cut out some of those services and some of the hours during which Newstead House is currently open for inspection. History reveals that, since Febmary 1975, the Friends of Newstead have spent $180,000 of their funds on Newstead House. It is hardly a home for the museum to manage. Museums throughout Australia do not step in and manage historic homes. 4172 12 November 1987 Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill

The Govemment is presently unable to employ additional teachers. It is cutting back savagely on the number of teachers. Next year, no teachers will be taken onto the Govemment pay-roll. We are all feeling the effects of the cut-backs in the hours that are being worked by teacher aides. There have been cut-backs in the police force. It is understaffed. There have been cut-backs in equipment for the police force and in Govemment funds right across the board. It is a huge joke on the people of Queensland, the Friends of Newstead and Newstead House to pretend that the Govemment is suddenly going to make large injections of funds into Newstead House. Of course, it will not happen. In recent months, I have visited Newstead House several times. In recent weeks, since the Minister brought in the legislation, I have noticed many interesting remarks in the visitors' book. People have indicated clearly their strong opposition to the Govemment's taking over Newstead House. On 6 October, in this House the Minister was asked a question about Newstead Park, which surrounds Newstead House. It is an absolute disgrace for a Minister of the Crown to rise in this House and say, "If honourable members were to go out and have a look at the park now, they would see that it is an absolute disgrace." That is a blatant, outright untmthful statement. It is a shame that the word "lie" cannot be used in this Chamber, because it is unparliamentary. I do not use it, but perhaps it would be a more fitting word in this case. It is a blatantly untmthful statement by the Minister for him to say Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I do not appreciate the honourable member's method of circumventing the mles by using the very word that he claims he cannot use. I ask him to withdraw the word. Mr BEANLAND: I withdraw the word. Why is the Minister doing this? Why is he trying to mislead the people of Brisbane? Clearly, in the near future he wants to control Newstead House. Why else would he mislead the people of Brisbane? The day after the Minister's statement, I visited Newstead Park. Even with the dry weather that Brisbane is experiencing, the park was in magnificent condition. At one stage the Minister owned a property at Ascot. I am sure that he drove past Newstead Park and Newstead House regularly. He would have seen what fine condition Newstead Park was in. To say otherwise would be totally untme. Clearly, the Minister was trying to mislead the members of this House and the people of Queensland. His statement on Newstead Park was also an attack on the dedicated gardeners employed by the council to keep the area looking so beautiful. I understand that three gardeners are employed at Newstead Park on a continuous basis to present the park in its immaculate condition. The Minister stated that the Govemment's record in preserving historic buildings is great, and that my record is appalling. I would let my record stand against the Minister's record any day. His record is far from good. In fact, all that remains of the Minister's record is the memories, as the Deen brothers keep saying. That is all that will remain at Clayfield when the Minister attempts to shift the chapel—the memories. The Minister cannot say that his word is his bond. He will teU us that as Minister he will be doing all sorts of wonderful things. However, we know that this Minister, of all Ministers, cannot claim that his word is his bond, because that is certainly not the situation. Unfortunately, it is tme. It is dreadful that it is tme, but in this case it is very accurate indeed. Mr Innes: No fence is too high for him to jump. Mr BEANLAND: As the honourable member for Sherwood said, no fence is too high for him to jump. Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill 12 November 1987 4173

In a letter to the council, the Govemment stated— "Obviously there would be advantages in placing the House and the surrounding land under common control and the Minister has instmcted me to write to you to seek an indication of the Council's attitude to a proposal that the Council vest its existing freehold areas in the State Govemment and that there be a general consolidation of the various tenures..." In view of the fact that the Minister expressed those intentions in that letter to the Brisbane City Council, in a few months' time, when some problems emerge, he will not like the council having control of the road or the park. The Minister wiU then take the final big step to make a grab for the park itself The people of Brisbane know what a magnificent area it is and what a great job the Brisbane City Council is doing in Newstead Park. They also know what a tremendous job the Newstead House Tmst is doing for Newstead House. Tonight, the Minister wiU plunge the dagger into the Newstead House Tmst; he will stab the Newstead House Tmst in the back in a very clear and concise way by ramming through this legislation, which has been brought into the Chamber this evening ahead of a number of other BiUs. The Minister makes a great play of the council's letter of 3 September. Of course, the council indicated that it was not prepared to hand over Newstead House but it was prepared to have some discussions in relation to it. The Minister did not bother to go back to the council. He charged forward and said, "That will be good enough for me. I want that house, and by Heaven I am going to have it." The Minister did not worry about the council, the Friends of Newstead or the tmst. No doubt the Govemment will claim this legislation as a victory. If this Govemment is given an inch, it will take a mile. Tonight, members of the Govemment will ride on as though they are a bunch of wild cowboys as they make a grab for this magnificent old living and breathing house. This home is very much part and parcel of Brisbane and Queensland's living history. The Queensland Museum should be left to look after the museum, and the current tmst and Friends of Newstead should be allowed to continue to mn Newstead House. Mrs HARVEY (Greenslopes) (8.53 p.m.): Mr Deputy Speaker, I do apologise for having caused some inconvenience by having my microphone raised. When I noticed that the member for Toowong based the first half of his speech on the Newstead House guide, I thought that he would be only a couple of minutes. I was so keen to speak to this legislation that I thought I might as well leave the microphone raised. The member for Toowong decided, as it tumed out, to be the Mark Antony of the Parliament and put up a very pleading case. He suggested that the Minister was the Bmtus of Newstead House, plunging daggers into all kinds of innocent people. His speech became very emotional, which surprised me. It is such a tiny Bill and it concems such a tiny issue; yet such a big deal has been made out of it. Mr FitzGerald: He has that lean and hungry look too. Mrs HARVEY: He does a bit, too. This Bill is not a land-grab. The Bill does not provide for the taking of any additional land. I want that point to be made clear. The BUI merely provides for a transfer of land, on which the house and the resource centre stand, from land under the ownership of the Newstead House Tmst to Crown land. I believe that the member for Toowong was creating a great deal of emotionalism. He knows perfectly well what the real situation is. The council is making a lot of noise about this issue, and I wonder about its motives. After all, what has the Brisbane City Council been elected to do? Has it been elected to start pretending to be the State Government and to take over State Govemment properties; to start assuming ownership of something that is a State Govemment province? I thought it was supposed to look af^er parks, which, under the provisions of this BUI, 4174 12 November 1987 Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill is exactly what the Govemment has left it with. The park surrounding Newstead House still belongs to the council and its job is to mow lawns and plant trees and flowers. The council should do what it is supposed to do. If it did its job—the job that it was elected to do—Brisbane would probably be a much more attractive city. The Brisbane City Council should stop pretending to be a govemment. National Party members in this House constitute the Govemment and will continue to do so. If the honourable member for Toowong cannot sort out which level of govemment he belongs to, he had better have a think about it. This whole issue is a misconception that is apparently shared by the Lord Mayor and some others who believe that the Brisbane City Council is in some way involved in the ownership of the house and land. It is not. The council merely owns or controls the surrounding park area, as the council should. If it is found that the park area around Newstead House warrants a little bit more attention then, no doubt, the Brisbane City Council will co-operate with the Govemment in sorting out any problems in that area. The Govemment is quite happy to leave it in the council's jurisdiction, which is the right thing to do, and we in this Govemment do the right thing. The council was requested to consider relinquishing control of the surrounding park in the interests of unified administration, but it declined. Fair enough. That has been accepted. Newstead House is part of the heritage of all Queenslanders—not special little interest groups, not just the residents of Brisbane, but all Queenslanders. The Brisbane City Council has no proprietary rights in that house. In effect, the new legislation passes control of the house not from the Brisbane City Council to the State Govemment, as the member for Toowong was trying to make out, but in effect from one State Government tmst to another. Surely that is not a radical change. I cannot see what everyone is becoming excited about. The Govemment is not an ogre that is doing anything terrible to anyone. Mr Powell interjected. Mrs HARVEY: The Minister mentioned the Queen Alexandra Home. This is a deal that I would love to have for the Queen Alexandra Home. Imagine us at the Queen Alexandra Home getting a doUar-for-doUar subsidy. It would be Heaven-sent. I would welcome the day that that happened. Instead, I have a committee of 50 people. I inform Mr Beanland that we have been going for barely 12 months yet we have 50 people who are friends of Queen Alexandra Home. They are knocking themselves out to raise money. We do it with our own sweat. We do not ask for a doUar-for-doUar subsidy or look to somebody else to look after us. We look after that home. We are attending to its restoration and we are paying for everything right down to even the toilet rolls and the soap. We would welcome this sort of a deal. To be honest, I do not know what anyone has to complain about. I think this legislation is a very good deal. Any time that the Minister decides to help us out, we would be happy to welcome his attention to Queen Alexandra Home as well. I feel that this legislation represents a good offer and I would imagine that most of the people involved in the Friends of Newstead would see it in the same light. I think that they would feel that they are being looked after by this State Govemment. The council's direct responsibility for the administration of Newstead House was willingly—note the word "willingly"—ceded 47 years ago. I was not even bom then. So what is everyone going on about? Its role since then has been limited to providing one member of a three-person board Mr Davis interjected. Mrs HARVEY: No. It was many years later. The honourable member should be able to tell that. As I was saying, its role since then has been limited to providing one member of a three-person board operating under State legislation, and so it should. But the State Govemment generously offered to relieve the council of the burden, an offer that was Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill 12 November 1987 4175 flatly rejected by the Lord Mayor. Let us look at the Lord Mayor's record. Mr Beanland was getting excited and saying that she stands on her record. Where has this State Govemment created facades in Brisbane? The Lord Mayor has a town plan fuU of historic facades. As long as a little bit of mortar is left on the front and a plaque with her name on it is displayed on the building, she is quite happy. Honourable members should look at the George Street precinct that the State Govemment has been looking after. It comprises complete buildings, not just a little bit of a facade. Look at the Old Govemment Printery. Look at this buUding that we are sitting in now. The State Govemment has a record that it can stand on and it does not need to make a lot of noise about it. It is a tangible thing that people can see. When it comes to historic buildings, how can anyone dispute the Govemment's record? Sure, in the past one or two have been lost—buildings that have been eaten out by the West Indian termite. Look at the Queen Alexandra Home at Coorparoo. In another few years it would have been eaten out by the West Indian termite to the extent that it could not have been saved. The Govemment was just in time to save that building. Over a number of years some things have gone wrong. But people should look at the things that the Govemment has done. It has done a lot more things right that it has done wrong. Very few people have been willing to give this State Govemment the credit for what it has done right with heritage. Mention was made of one building that was pulled down. I can show honourable members a dozen buildings that have been restored. Today I walked down Adelaide Street looking for a particular building and I came across the building in which the Housing Commission is situated. I thought that it looked an interesting building. I saw the marble on it so I walked over to it for a closer look. There was this beautiful building and I did not even know what it was called. I know that it contains the Housing Commission and some other Govemment departments. It contains some most unusual marble. I wandered through it. It is being painted and refurbished throughout. It is all being beautified. Not one person has discussed that building. Not one person has given the Govemment credit for it. Not one peson has said, "Hey, there is something interesting going on down there in Edward Street." Perhaps the Minister knows the building to which I am referring. The State Govemment is doing these things quietly and efficiently. Nobody even bothers to say, "Look what the Govemment is doing. It is creating a really good Brisbane." The Govemment is not allowing developers to knock down the back portions of buildings and leave the facades. I dispute what the member for Toowong said about the Govemment's record. There is no better record than the one held by this Govemment. If the city council was allowed to mn Brisbane, the city would be fuU of facades. Over the years assistance from the council has been a pittance. If the council really wants to acknowledge its role, it should look at the sort of assistance it has provided—a rate reduction of a few dollars per annum. What sort of assistance is that? If the State Govemment gave that sort of assistance, it would be laughed at. Mr De Lacy: I might say that you have a better record than Beimt. Mrs HARVEY: I do not think that it is a very intelUgent comment at all. After years of virtually ignoring the house, the council's cynical interest has mani­ fested itself only since the Govemment announced this legislation. Just as I have, I imagine that most people in this Chamber have been through Newstead House, which is an excellent building. I congratulate the Friends of Newstead for playing the role that they have played in looking after that building. No-one disputes the fact that people have worked very, very hard. The Govemment will make the administration of that house a lot easier. For people who want to go through Newstead House more than once, the Govem­ ment will ensure that different displays will be featured. That will mean that people can make many retum visits. For people who do that now, by and large they see exactly the same thing. With the communication and co-operation with the Queensland Museum, 4176 12 November 1987 Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill people will be able to go again and again and see a different historical aspect. I think that is an intelligent approach. I do not agree with boring, static displays that once people have seen they do not want to see again. An Opposition member interjected. Mrs HARVEY: Do not worry; if I was in charge of it, it would be pretty good. The Minister's permanent head wrote to the Town Clerk on 18 August 1987 outlining in full the Govemment's intentions. So this legislation is not something that the Govemment whipped up just last week. The council's reply of 3 September 1987 stated that the matter had been discussed with the Lord Mayor. Allegations of a secret or hasty coup are therefore quite ridiculous. The opposition voiced in this debate is an obvious nonsense. The control of the house will vest in the board of tmstees of the Queensland Museum, which is govemed by its own Act of Parliament and is restricted to purposes associated with the collection and display of the State's natural history, historical and technological collections. Devel­ opment of high-rise real estate proposals is clearly not a function that the museum board can contemplate. The Town Clerk's letter of 3 September 1987 admits that "the Council sees some merit in Newstead House falling under the management of the Queensland Museum". So what is the member for Toowong arguing about? The Minister's second-reading speech set out the positive advantages that will accme to the house. The museum board has an excellent track record in the stewardship of its collections and has successfully developed other branches. As a matter of fact, at least two years ago, when efforts were being made to put the building together, I approached Dr Bartholomai of the Queensland Museum and asked if some items from the museum could be placed on loan to the Queen Alexandra Home. The museum was very co-operative. At some stage in the future I would be very pleased to be able to do that, but the home faces the problem of security, which is addressed in the Minister's second-reading speech. The value of something unique is such that those mnning Queen Alexandra Home could not possibly afford the insurance cover. That would mean that several people would have to sleep ovemight in the building to guard the item. Even though the State Govemment's own security people come by at regular intervals, the value of these sorts of articles is such that it would make the custodians of the home very nervous. If an upgraded security system is to be provided to Newstead House, it would be very, very advantageous. Having custody of a building such as this with valuable items of historic interest in it is a very big responsibility. As I have said, the periodical changing of items in the house will help its eaming capacity because people, knowing they will see a different display from time to time, will visit it more than once. As I have said, the museum board has an excellent track record in the stewardship of its collections. I would think that the expertise of that board would be such that a lot of interesting innovations would take place within that building. Just because something has been mn one way for many years does not mean that it has to continue to be mn that way for ever. Once again, I say that any suggestion of improper or sinister motives is entirely without foundation. I will deal with some of the comments made by members of the Opposition. As I understand it, the Opposition says that it opposes the Bill only because the Govemment is leaving the gardens under the control of the Brisbane City Council. So this is one of the few occasions on which the Labor Opposition and the Liberal Opposition did not actually agree with one another. The Opposition wants an historic house tmst, a statutory authority, like the one in New South Wales. I believe that the option that the Minister has chosen is far superior to that. He has provided something that will be helpful to the Friends of Newstead. He has acknowledged their role in the building. He knows that they take great pride in it. Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill 12 November 1987 4177

I believe that the people who started off that building would be very pleased to see it moving in this direction. As the Minister said in his second-reading speech, Newstead House will have access to and input from a full range of professional and technical expertise and its financial affairs will be handled by trained administrative staff. I know from mnning the Queen Alexandra Home what a burden it is to look after the administration of a building such as that, and that has been in operation for barely 12 months. We have already managed to raise $20,000 for the Queen Alexandra Home, but it has been a massive effort. Mr Comben: Have you been down there to talk to them? Mrs HARVEY: Yes. I have been down there regularly. As a matter of fact, I have been to all of the historic homes in Brisbane and quite a few in the country as well. In regard to the pontoon—I give an assurance on behalf of the Minister and the Brisbane River Committee that not only is this Govemment committed to the idea of maintaining pontoons but also to building more of them. As chairman of that committee, I would say that there is no suggestion whatsoever that that pontoon is under any threat. As a matter of fact, I draw to the attention of the House that this is another occasion on which the council comes in and claims some sort of ownership, the same as it tries to claim ownership over the Brisbane River. There are three councils involved with the Brisbane River, not one. That river flows through two other council areas, yet the Brisbane City Council tries to make out that it has some special rights over the river, the same as it is trying to make out that it has some special rights over Newstead House. I suppose that it will not be very long before the Brisbane City Council is claiming some special rights in other areas as well. If that council would get on with the job that it is elected to do and leave the Govemment to do its job, everyone would benefit. Mr Davis interjected. Mrs HARVEY: No, thank you. As I have already indicated, a great deal has been made out of very little by the Opposition in the debate on this Bill. The Government has produced something that is constmctive and positive and that will enable Newstead House to go from strength to strength. The Govemment does not want to see it standing still. Anything that stands still in today's economic climate and in today's community starts to decline. The Govemment wants to see Newstead House developed. It wants to see more interest expressed in Newstead House and it wants Newstead House to become a greater tourist attraction. The Brisbane River Committee would like to see more boats pulling in to the pontoon at Newstead House and it would like it to be included in the committee's map, which will be sold at Expo, detailing Newstead House as being of major historical significance. Opposition members interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Row): Order! There is too much audible conversation in the Chamber. Mrs HARVEY: Thank you for your protection, Mr Deputy Speaker. I was getting a bit hoarse from shouting over the top of that noise. I must admit that when I weigh up the pros and cons of this legislation, I do not know how anyone in all conscience could oppose it. I am excited about this prospect and welcome it. I hope more can be done for Newstead House. It is not for the want of trying, and the Govemment is trying to get the best out of this. This Govemment is proud of Newstead House and I imagine that everyone in this Chamber is proud of Newstead House. I acknowledge the efforts of the people involved in Newstead House in the past and at the present time and thank them for their efforts. 4178 12 November 1987 Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill

The Govemment is not taking over what they have achieved by their efforts; it is merely assisting them in their efforts. Mr Henderson: Enhancing. Mrs HARVEY: Yes, that is the right word; it is enhancing those efforts. This Govemment looks forward to a very bright future for Newstead House. Mr HAYWARD ((Caboolture) (9.11 p.m.): I rise to support the comments made by the honourable member for Ipswich West in opposition to this Bill which proposes that Newstead House and the land on which it is situated, the Newstead Resource Centre and the John Oxley landing be transferred to the control of the Queensland Museum. For the information of the honourable member for Greenslopes, I point out that the Opposition's contention is simply this: historic house properties should not be managed by the Queensland Museum. The Opposition believes that the role of the museum is concemed with natural history. Its role is very clear; it is to display, research and act as an educational institution. Mrs Harvey: Why? Have you been to the new one? Mr HAYWARD: I can explain that simply to the honourable member for Green­ slopes. The Opposition believes that the museum should not be used as a dumping ground for the Govemment, and certainly the function of a museum is not to manage properties. For the interest of all members, I will give an example of the dumping-ground mentality which has applied to the museum. A special Act was guided through this Parliament by the Honourable the Premier specifically relating to the now failed Coomera air museum, which has been transferred across to the Queensland Museum. The other important point that the honourable member for Greenslopes should take on board is made in the 1986 annual report of the Queensland Museum. It is very important. Mr Veivers: Are you saying that these lovely paintings in the Chamber are no good? Mr HAYWARD: For the interest of the honourable member for Southport, I make the point that on page 18 of the annual report of the Queensland Museum—and if Govemment members had done any reading they would know this—there is reference to a lack of staff for museum activities, particularly branch functions. Already there is a staffing problem, and that is clearly shown in this report. The Bill proposes that the control of Newstead House be detached fi-om the control of the grounds. This is important because the control of historic houses should not be detached from control of their grounds. The job of maintaining the driveway, restoring the garden and doing things of that nature could be made difficult, if not impossible. A good example of this is Vaucluse House in Sydney where restoration is taking place in an area that is outside the vicinity of the house. Mr Newton: The Mansions have been fixed up. Mr HAYWARD: For the information of the honourable member for Glass House, I point out that this leads to a very messy and confusing situation, something which no doubt he has been used to for a long time. The proposal is that Newstead House wiU be taken over and managed by the Queensland Museum. Presumably the present curator will be retained. I assume that is intended. I was looking at the Minister for a nod, but I could not get one. Newstead Park itself wiU be managed by the Brisbane City Council. Even the honourable member for Mansfield would realise that Newstead Park is the actual setting for the home. It is interesting that the fabric of the building—the constmction—is to be looked after by the Works Department. What happens to the Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill 12 November 1987 4179

Friends of Newstead, who had that matter covered completely before? What an unbeUevable mess it will be. Quite simply, as proposed by the honourable member for Ipswich West, the obvious solution to these problems is to set up an historic houses tmst so that the situation can be developed and co-ordinated as it applies to historic homes. Every State has houses of historic importance. Usually, they are mansions that were owned by important citizens. More often than not, they were owned by people who were wealthy. An historic houses tmst would have the simple function of managing historic homes with duly appointed and appropriately qualified people. I envisage that the qualifications of the members of an historic houses tmst would be historic ability— they would be historians; some knowledge of architectural and building skUls; and, importantly, knowledge of property management. Let us be realistic about what is happening in Queensland. If we are going to maintain historic homes and have an historic houses tmst, in most cases the user must pay. Some property management must be organised so that an entrance fee can be charged. If that is done, the tmst itself can be self-financing. Obviously some purchases would be paid for out of consolidated revenue. Queensland has many historic houses. A separate tmst is being created for Newstead House. The National Tmst looks after at least two properties, namely, Clermont in Ipswich, and Wolston House. We are not really sure who looks after other historic houses in Queensland. This State does not have a body that can identify properties that are of major historic interest. That is another reason for the establishment of an historic houses tmst. I think that everyone is interested in our heritage. It should be given serious consideration. I am not talking only about houses that belong to the wealthy merchant class who lived in Queensland many years ago. The surviving working-class cottages— I emphasise the word "surviving"— are fast disappearing from the Queensland scene. Since 1980, New South Wales has had an historic houses tmst, the purpose of which has been to identify and purchase historic properties for the people of New South Wales. That tmst has the experience and management expertise to present historic houses for public viewing. Earlier I said that my comments would be brief I conclude by reiterating that the role of the Queensland Museum is not to manage historic properties. Historic houses should not be looked after by legislation such as the Bill before the House. I have shown clearly that there has been a lack of co-ordination, and that could have serious consequences for the development of Newstead House. What is typical of the Queensland Govemment is that it has absolutely no vision for the future. Mr Sherrin: The gloom and doom boys. Mr HAYWARD: I would challenge the honourable member for Mansfield to tell me Queensland's strategy for historic houses. The honourable member for Mansfield has no idea. He is interested only in the world's tallest building. Mr Davis: Look at what's happening to the good old Canberta Hotel. Mr HAYWARD: Exactly. This Bill does not address the problems of Queensland's historic homes, which we are losing by the week in areas where it is not noticed. I am referring to cottages and other things that are disappearing around Brisbane. They are being demolished on a daily and weekly basis throughout Queensland. Mr ARDILL (Salisbury) (9.21 p.m.): Because I was confident that the honourable members for Ipswich West, Caboolture and Toowong would put forward a good enough case, I did not intend to join in this debate. However, I did not know that this House was going to be subjected to a great deal of misinformation from the honourable member for Greenslopes. I believe that the Minister has made a mistake in introducing this Bill. I am not accusing him of any malpractice. 4180 12 November 1987 Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill

Mr Lee: Don't call him a liar; you can't do that. Mr ARDILL: I am not calling the Minister anything, but I believe that he has been misinformed. I am not calling him what the honourable member for Toowong called him or anything like it. In the interests of the people of Brisbane and the people of Queensland, this Bill should be reconsidered. What is being put forward is not in the interests of this State. The honourable member for Greenslopes said that Newstead House was State property and not city council property. It is not State property. A tmst, which consisted of representatives from the State Govemment, the Brisbane City Council and the Royal Historical Society of Queensland, was set up in 1940 to manage Newstead House. The honourable member for Greenslopes said also that the museum should look after Newstead House because it is a museum. I assure the honourable member that it is not a museum; it is a living house and a living centre of Brisbane. It is part of our past that has been restored and maintained. Newstead House was built in 1846 as the town house for Patrick Leslie, who was the first settler on the DarUng Downs. When it was built, it was not in its present form; it was a very smaU cottage. It was added to to accommodate Brisbane's first Govemment resident. Magistrate J. C. Wickham, who represented the Govemment of Brisbane until Queensland became a separate State. As such, Newstead House was the social centre of Brisbane and, to a certain extent, it has remained so. Subsequently, Newstead House was taken over by various merchant families in Brisbane and was maintained as Brisbane's social centre. It was certainly a cultural centre where orchestras played and where people came together to celebrate certain events or to attend dances. As such, it became the social and cultural centre of Brisbane. As it stands at present, Newstead House represents the love, care and attention of a large body of people in Brisbane and in Queensland. It should not be tumed into a cold museum, as the honourable member for Greenslopes expects it to become. She even suggested that it should have a changing display. That is not what Newstead House is about. It is there to show the people of today and the people of the future what Ufe was like in Brisbane during the last century. The collection that currently graces Newstead House cost $250,000 of the com­ munity's money—not the money of the Govemment or the Brisbane City CouncU, but money of the community of Brisbane. It was put there with loving care and attention. It will not receive that if it is handed over to the museum to be used as a museum, as envisaged by the member for Greenslopes. I was becoming more irate by the minute as I heard her indicating her abysmal lack of knowledge of what Newstead House is all about. Mr Beard: They just don't understand what you are talking about. Mr ARDILL: No. Unfortunately, that is right. I am sure that the Minister does know and that he has a feeling for this type of thing. So I am disappointed to see that he is the one who has brought this legislation forward. Certainly it has been talked about in the past. I agree with him that it is necessary to make changes to the legislation goveming the Newstead tmst. Mr Scott interjected. Mr ARDILL: I do not think that that is so. I do not think that he wants to do that. However, changes are needed, as the Minister has said. But those changes do not mean that the house has to be changed. That is what this legislation is doing; it is changing the house into a museum, which should not be allowed to happen. The member for Ipswich West mentioned the complicated ownership at Newstead. That was brought about because in 1940 the Brisbane City Council ceded the ownership of the section of the land on which the house stands to the tmst which was set up in Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill 12 November 1987 4181 good faith by the Govemment and the councU, including the Royal Historical Society. It is unfortunate that the Govemment intends to ignore the reason that the tmst was set up and now tum the house into a museum. The Minister says that he will guarantee that the Newstead collection remains there. That is not what the member for Greenslopes said. The trouble is that the Minister cannot give that guarantee, because the museum legislation says that the museum board—not the Minister—will control whatever goes on in that house and whatever is in the house. It is important that that should be realised. I hope that the Minister wiU consider that fact. The Royal Historical Society of Queensland has been totaUy ignored by the legis­ lation. Through its representative. Commander Norman Pixley, that society spent many years working to maintain Newstead House. In fact, its members were the principal people involved in it until the time when the present curator was appointed. Since then, he has been the principal guiding light in the house. ExceUent members have been on the board, including the late Arch Guymer of the Education Department. It used to be the Education Department that provided the Govemment representative on the board. Unfortunately, that has ceased. The director of the museum is now the Govemment representative on the board. I have nothing against the person presently in that position, but there is nothing to say that somebody who would take future control of the museum would have the same sort of attitude as Dr Bartholomai has. I should also mention a third member who has contributed in a major fashion to the activities in that house—the former Lord Mayor of Brisbane, Clem Jones. He put much effort into Newstead. He also persuaded the council to hand over a very real asset to Newstead House, that is, the resource centre, which is now a community centre for the northem suburbs of Brisbane. If the Queensland Museum takes over that resource centre, no guarantee will be given to all the bodies who use it that they will be able to continue to do so. The resource centre used to be council property, but it is now owned by the tmst. It was transferred on a peppercom basis. If the Queensland Museum takes over, there will be no guarantee that anyone will be avaUable to go down to the resource centre night after night, as the present curator of Newstead House does, and open it up for use by community bodies from suburbs such as Newstead. That is another asp>ect of the problem of Newstead House being made a museum instead of being retained as a living home. It is a Uving home to the people of Brisbane and to the people of Queensland. People from throughout Queensland have donated to the Newstead House coUection because they believed that a tmst body would look after the house and its objects. Mr Gately: They will still be there. Mr ARDILL: The tmst will not be there. Those people believed that a tmst body, which has real feeling for such an individual place, would be in charge of that collection. The Friends of Newstead work day after day, week after week to provide funds, care and attention for that house. The Minister will destroy that body if it takes over Newstead House and makes it a museum. As I said earlier, the Minister cannot provide any guarantees. As soon as he hands Newstead House over to a board of tmstees of the Queensland Museum, it will no longer be safe from changes that may be made. The honourable member for Greenslopes suggested that changes should be made. Perhaps she has in mind neon lights to show the place up. I notice that both the park and the driveway will remain under the ownership of the Brisbane City Council. Newstead House also controls a pontoon which is located on the Breakfast Creek side of the park. Without councU representation on the board, considerable logistic problems will emerge in trying to maintain Newstead House as a living home, which is what it is at present. 4182 12 November 1987 Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill

I eamestly urge the Minister to look at what he is doing and to make sure that a separate tmst is set up for the purpose of looking after historical homes. I ask the Minister to ensure that the people who have a real feeling for Newstead House be allowed to play a part. Newstead House should not be tumed into a museum of the past, because that is not what Newstead House represents. Historic homes offer something entirely different from the attractions of a museum. I urge the Minister to make sure that those who have a feeling for Newstead House, such as the Friends of Newstead and the Brisbane City Council, which is involved in the logistics of maintenance, for example, continue to be involved. Contrary to what has been said by the honourable member for Greenslopes, the Brisbane City Council did put thousands of dollars into Newstead House every year. For almost nine years, I served as a member of the board of Newstead House. I spent a great deal of my own time working for that body. I say "almost" nine years because, unfortunately, my last three-year term was cut short at very short notice. A meeting was due to be held and I received a notice from the former Minister for the Arts, Mr McKechnie, saying, "Don't come Monday." For some reason, I was taken off the board before my term expired. I was replaced by the present Lord Mayor of Brisbane. Contrary to what has been said by the honourable member for Toowong, the present Lord Mayor of Brisbane has not shown the care and attention that is required of people who serve on the board of Newstead House. She has not been able to contribute much care and attention. In fact, she would have been well advised at the time my last three- year term expired to have nominated her deputy, the former Alderman Beanland, who is now the honourable member for Toowong. I am sure that the honourable member has much greater affection for Newstead House than the Lord Mayor has. Again, I urge the Minister to think about what he is doing. Newstead House is a treasure of the State of Queensland. It is treasured by the people of Brisbane. I ask the Minister not to destroy it by tuming it into a museum. Mr INNES (Sherwood—Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party) (9.35 p.m.): Two words taken from each of the Acts involved, the one that is being repealed and the one that is taking over, really encapsulate the whole debate. The word from the Act being repealed is "tmst". The word in the proposed Act is "acquisition". The word "tmst" takes on quite a new meaning when in the hands of this Govemment, because the word "tmst" no longer means tmst. A tmst is quite a well-known concept and quite a well- known legal entity. Mr McPhie: You didn't talk about tmst in 1983. Mr INNES: The honourable member would not know. The word "tmst" is an important word. The word "tmst" means tmst. What this Govemment is doing is demonstrating that it is untmstworthy. The reality is that Newstead House used to be owned by the Brisbane City Council, which gave it into a tmst. It said, "We will give up our property rights because we are going to give it into the tmst of people representing three bodies that will in perpetuity carry on the house's interests." Those three bodies were the Brisbane City Council, the Royal Historical Society of Queensland and the Queensland Govemment. The council did not give it to the Queensland Govemment; it gave it to a board of tmstees on condition that the house was under the care of three bodies in perpetuity. Mr McPhie interjected. Mr INNES: I will use the word "tmst", because the honourable member does not know what it means. Every time he opens his mouth he demonstrates that he does not. The word "tmst" is a legal word which means holding things on the terms on which they are given. It obviously has a different meaning up on the Darling Downs. The member for Toowoomba North used to be a flight-controller, but it is his flights of fancy that he cannot control. Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill 12 November 1987 4183

The reality is that two of the present tmstees do not agree with this acquisition. Nobody can say that the tmstees have let dovm the terms of that tmst. The tmst is not one that has fallen by the wayside because the object of the tmst no longer exists or because the tmstees themselves wish to stop being tmstees. It is a tmst that honoured its tmst; that carried on and embellished that building in terms of its tmst; that received the active support of all the parties to the tmst to make something better than was originally received and to make something which has become a treasured part of the history of this town, and obviously it is of interest to everybody in the State. But it is no better argument than saying that the people at Charters Towers should give up their stock exchange. We all appreciate that the people of Charters Towers did something with their history which can be shared by those people who visit it. Everybody in Queensland can go to Newstead House. It was the property of the Brisbane City Council, which agreed to give up its property right oiUy on certain terms, namely, the tmsteeship of three entities. One of those entities, the Govemment, against the wishes of the other two tmstees, is acquiring—and that is the word, "acquiring"— property without compensation being paid. The motive is jealousy. The motive is that this Govemment cannot stand to see anything successfully mn by any body other than itself There is no other explanation. Nobody can say that Newstead House is not being used for the purpose for which it was intended. Nobody can say the tmstees failed. An honourable member: What about Ardill? Mr INNES: At the end, Mr Ardill went off the rails a little, with a bit of political jealousy, but nobody doubts that he took his tmsteeship seriously. It is known that he manifested a very special personal interest in that place, which he demonstrated tonight— far more than the member for Greenslopes has ever shown in Newstead House. She might have her own little things that she is interested in, for whatever motives. The reality is that this is an acquisition—an acquisition against a reluctant body of people in whom the legal entitlement exists today. Mrs Harvey: How many buildings have you saved? I have saved two. Mr INNES: The honourable member has saved two buUdings. Only if she is given a car will she save buildings. The reaUty is that there is no satisfactory case and nothing that appears in the Minister's second-reading speech to demonstrate any proper justification for the Gov­ emment, which forms only one-third of the tmstees and was not the original owner of the property, to take over this property against the will of the other two tmstees. It is morally wrong. It is only dressed up into something right because the Govemment has the legislative power. It should not happen. The Liberal Party will be voting against it. Hon. B. D. AUSTIN (Nicklin—Minister for Mines and Energy and Minister for the Arts) (9.40 p.m.), in reply: I thank honourable members for their contribution to the debate. One would never have expected that a BiU of eight clauses in which there is nothing at all sinister would create so much debate and so much innuendo in this Chamber. Mr Prest: We don't tmst you, you know. Mr AUSTIN: I will talk about tmst in a minute. When one listened to the debate, one wondered whether any of the participants had ever read the existing Act. I would venture to say that not one had read the Act— Mr Ardill: Come off it. Mr AUSTIN: I am sorry. I know that the honourable member has this at heart and would have read the Act. I apologise. The honourable member would be the only one who has read the Act and understood it. 4184 12 November 1987 Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill

If honourable members had read the Act and understood it, very few of the statements made this evening about what might and might not happen to Newstead House would have been made. Mr Palaszczuk: Calm down. Mr AUSTIN: I was only starting to wind up. It can be clearly seen that most of the information that was portrayed in the House is part of a scare campaign orchestrated initially by the Lord Mayor, whose nose is out of joint. It is as simple as that. She orchestrated this little campaign, saying that it is a gigantic land-grab. I am not sure how the State Govemment can grab land when it itself already controls that land. I was very intrigued by some of the facts about the Lord Mayor's press conference at Newstead House. I happened to receive a phone call from one of the members of the Friends of Newstead House, who told me that the Lord Mayor was having a press conference on the grounds of Newstead House. She was highly offended because there were lawn-mowers, tractors and gardeners, which had not been seen there for weeks, feverishly working early in the moming to get the grounds ready for the Lord Mayor's press conference. The woman was highly insulted at the fact that the house had been used for political purposes. Mr Gately: Do you think that she had a Fourex feeling of an election coming on? Mr AUSTIN: I suspect there could have been a little bit of politics in her statements, just as there has been a bit of politics around the Chamber this evening. Mr Innes: Do you think the photographs that were taken of the gardeners on the same day were a mock-up? Mr AUSTIN: No. She brought the gardeners in that day. I must say to the Opposition spokesman that his proposal for some sort of heritage legislation or tmst Mr Underwood: Historic houses tmst. Mr AUSTIN: That does have some merit. In this instance the Govemment is doing away with a statutory authority rather than creating another one. However, I will take on board the comments made by the honourable member for Ipswich West. The area is not in my total responsibility, but I will take on board the comments and sentiments of the Australian Labor Party. Much has been made this evening about the house being tumed into a museum. Quite frankly, that is utter nonsense. I do not know whether honourable members in this Chamber really are aware that the museum staff already do the accounts and the bookwork for Newstead House, and have done so for the last 12 months. So it is pretty clear that, although there is a transfer of the house to a new board of tmstees, that board of tmstees is already having a direct input into what goes on. I am pleased that really the Labor Party does not object to the propositions being put forward in the Bill but that it has suggested an altemative. I cannot but comment on the speech made by the honourable member for Toowong. Before he spoke he was overheard to say to his leader, "I am going to tip a bucket on Austin tonight." If it was an examination in bucket-tipping, he failed miserably. Mr Casey: Was that on a car phone, too? Mr AUSTIN: No. I am coming to that. He did say something about the Minister sticking a knife in the back of Newstead House. He and his colleagues should be the last ones to talk about knife-sticking. Last week the honourable member for Redcliffe was talking to the would-be member for Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill 12 November 1987 4185

Toowong, Mr Santo Santoro, about knifing the Liberal Party leader. No doubt, while they were talking on the car phone, the honourable member for Toowong would have been knifing his colleague the honourable member for Sherwood, because everyone knows that they are all trying to knife Sir William and get his job. Talk about knifing! I have never heard anything like it. Mr Beard: You're on the right subject. You know what you're talking about. Mr AUSTIN: I do, and I am proud of it. In the last election I got 50 per cent of the primary vote and the Liberal Party candidate got 14 per cent. If members of the Liberal Party say that I cannot be tmsted, I say to them: have a look at the form of the Liberal Party. Its members can only get 14 per cent of the vote. How good are they? I happen to know about tmst. That is why I am in the National Party. There are 10 different factions on the other side of the Chamber. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Row): Order! I suggest that the Minister debate the Bill. Mr AUSTIN: I do not want to prolong the debate. However, I must say that Newstead House has really been under the administration of an Act of the State Govemment for 47 years. Nothing will change in the administration of that house. If I did not do so in my second-reading speech, I acknowledge now the Friends of Newstead. They have done a tremendous job and they have made an enormous contribution to Newstead House. There is nothing—I repeat "nothing"—in relation to the museum that will discourage those people from doing exactly the same work as they have been doing. I certainly hope that they continue to do that because there are already committees operating in the museum such as the Friends of the Museum and other volunteers. I certainly hope that the Friends of Newstead will continue with their fine work. I can assure them now that there is nothing sinister at all in the legislation. Motion agreed to.

Committee Hon. B. D. Austin (Nicklin—Minister for Mines and Energy and Minister for the Arts) in charge of the Bill. Clause 1— Mr UNDERWOOD (9.48 p.m.): I want to raise with the Minister the matter of the collection of items and artefacts that are held in Newstead House. Will the Minister give some sort of unconditional guarantee now, or in the regulations, that the collection will be maintained in Newstead House and that it will not be split up and taken away to other venues? This is a very serious concem held by the Friends of Newstead. Mr AUSTIN: It is my personal view that the collection ought not to be split up. I can give an understanding from a personal ministerial point of view that the collection ought not to be split up. However, I will certainly investigate legal means by which that can be tied up. If it could be done by regulation or some other means, I would be happy to do it. Clause 1, as read, agreed to. Clauses 2 and 3, as read, agreed to. Clause 4— Mr BEANLAND (9.50 p.m.): Clause 4 of the BiU is, in fact, the clause that abolishes the present Newstead House Tmst and wiU put the BiU into effect when it is passed. It is the clause that allows the whole taking-over of the Newstead House complex and the disbanding of the present Newstead House Tmst. This clause is the core of the Bill. The Liberal Party is strongly opposed to this clause and this Bill. 4186 12 November 1987 Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill

It is interesting to note that in his speech the Minister said that contained in the make-up of the Newstead House Tmst is a representative of the Brisbane City Council, one of the Royal Historical Society of Queensland and one of the State Govemment, through the museum representative. This tmst was taken over from the city council 47 years ago. It was city council property and the city councU gave this property to the Newstead House Tmst, a tmst set up by the State Govemment through the Newstead House Tmst Act. This Act and tmst are being repealed, and two of those tmstees are totally opposed to the acquisition of the Newstead House complex by the Govemment. The Govemment is paying no funds whatsoever for the acquisition. And it is clearly an acquisition. The city council gave the complex to the tmst in the belief that it would continue indefinitely in the name of the tmst. The council's faith in that tmst has been broken here tonight with the repeal of the Newstead House Tmst Act. The Govemment has given no indication at all that it will make any payment to the Newstead House Tmst or to the Brisbane City Council in compensation for the take-over of this magnificent Newstead House. The Liberal Party is strongly opposed to this clause. Question—That clause 4, as read, stand part of the Bill—put; and the Committee divided— AYES, 72 NOES, 9 Ardill McCauley Beard Austin McElligott Innes Beinhofer McKechnie Knox Bjelke-Petersen Mackenroth Lee Booth McLean Lickiss Borbidge McPhie Schuntner Braddy Menzel Sherlock Bums Milliner Burreket Neal Campbell Nelson Casey Newton Chapman Palaszczuk Comben Powell Cooper Prest D'Arcy Randell Davis Row De Lacy Scott Eaton Shaw Elliott Sherrin Fraser Simpson Gately Slack Gibbs, I. J. Smith Gibbs, R. J. Smyth Gilmore Stephan Glasson Stoneman Goss Tenni Gunn Underwood Hamill Vaughan Harvey Veivers Hayward Warburton Henderson Wamer Hinton Wells Hinze Yewdale Hobbs Hynd Tellers: Tellers: Katter Littleproud Beanland Lester FitzGerald Gygar Resolved in the affirmative. Clause 5— Mr UNDERWOOD (10.02 p.m.): It is quite clear that the Liberal Party members do not reaUse what is going on. I wonder who is mnning their tactics. Will another division take place on clause 5 simply because members of the Liberal Party missed the Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill 12 November 1987 4187 boat on the second reading? That is clearly what the division on clause 4 was all about— they missed the boat on the second reading because they were asleep. All evening they have been parading around and beating their breasts about this, and suddenly they were so inattentive that they missed the boat. That represented appalling tactics on their part. They put the Committee through an unnecessary division. Why did the members of the Liberal Party not call for a division on clause 1, which related to the title of the Bill? It took them three clauses to wake up to the fact that they had made a mistake; that they were at fault and that they had mucked it up. None of them knows what is going on. They are all too busy in the Bill Hewitt memorial toilet. Let us see if they can do a better job on the next occasion that they try to muck something up. Clause 5, as read, agreed to. Clause 6— Mr BEANLAND (10.03 p.m.): Clause 6 relates to Newstead House becoming a branch of the Queensland Museum. I have already indicated very strenuously the Liberal Party's objection to Newstead House—that wonderful, magnificent and beautiful building, which is a living home for all Queenslanders—becoming a branch of the Queensland Museum. Therefore, the Liberal Party is very strongly opposed to clause 6. Mr UNDERWOOD: Clause 6 of the Bill states— "Newstead House Complex a branch of Queensland Museum. Upon the commencement of this Act the Newstead House Complex shall become and be a branch of the Queensland Museum and shall be deemed to have been established as such a branch by the Museum Board pursuant to the Queensland Museum Act 1970-1985." Opposition speakers made it quite clear that we are opposed to this particular clause. We made a full and proper submission in relation to the establishment of a historic houses tmst that would operate Newstead House. I thank the Minister for taking that proposal on board for future consideration. Clause 6 quite clearly contradicts the Labor Party's proposal and we will not be supporting it. Question—That clause 6, as read, stand part of the Bill—put; and the Committee divided— AYES, 41 NOES, 38 Austin McCauley Ardill Milliner Berghofer McKechnie Beanland Palaszczuk Bjelke-Petersen McPhie Beard Prest Booth Menzel Braddy Schuntner Borbidge Neal Bums Scott Burreket Nelson Campbell Shaw Chapman Newton Casey Sherlock Cooper Powell Comben Smith Elliott Randell D'Arcy Smyth Fraser Row De Lacy Underwood Gately Sherrin Eaton Vaughan Gibbs, I. J. Simpson Gibbs, R. J. Warburton Gilmore Slack Goss Wamer Gunn Stephan Hamill Yewdale Harvey Stoneman Hayward Henderson Tenni Innes Hinton Veivers Knox Hinze Lee Hobbs Lickiss Hynd Tellers: McElligott Tellers: Katter Littleproud Mackenroth Davis Lester FitzGerald McLean Gygar Resolved in the affirmative. 4188 12 November 1987 Queensland Museum (Newstead House Acquisition) Bill

Clause 7— Mr BEANLAND (10.11 p.m.): This clause vests the assets of the tmst in the Queensland Museum as part of the take-over. It is quite clear that the Govemment will pay no compensation for those assets to the council. The tmst was set up when the Brisbane City Council handed over Newstead House. Prior to 1939, Newstead House was owned by the council, which gave it to the Newstead House Tmst. At that stage, the tmst had been set up by the Govemment. Representatives from the Royal Historical Society, the Brisbane City Council and the State Govemment were members of the tmst. The Govemment is now completely taking over those assets and is paying no compensation at all to the council. The Govemment is being quite unfair and outrageous. The Liberal Party is totally opposed to this clause. Mr UNDERWOOD: I need to speak only briefly to this clause because members of the Opposition covered this matter well during the second-reading debate. The Opposition is concemed about the assets being split up and taken away by the museum to various parts of the State. The Opposition wants items that comprise the collection at Newstead House to be retained for display so that visitors to Newstead House can enjoy looking at them. The Opposition wants the collection to be held as part of the overall concept of Newstead House. It does not want the assets to be split up. I believe that members of the Liberal Party are again trying to make as much as they can out of the fact that they failed to call, "Divide!" at the end of the second- reading debate. Members of the Liberal Party slipped up with their tactics, which are an absolute debacle. No-one is mnning the show. AU the members of the Liberal Party want to be leaders but no-one could find enough voice to call for a division on the second reading. The Minister has given an assurance to the Committee that he will look into the provisions of subclause (1) to ascertain the legality of ensuring that items comprising the collection are maintained as a whole unit and held at Newstead House. Question—That clause 7, as read, stand part of the Bill—put; and the Committee divided— AYES, 42 NOES, 39 Austin Lester Ardill Milliner Berghofer McCauley Beanland Palaszczuk Bjelke-Petersen McKechnie Beard Prest Booth McPhie Braddy Schuntner Borbidge Menzel Bums Scott Burreket Neal Campbell Shaw Chapman Nelson Casey Sherlock Cooper Newton Comben Smith Elliott Powell D'Arcy Smyth Fraser Randell De Lacy Underwood Gately Row Eaton Vaughan Gibbs, I. J. Sherrin Gibbs, R. J. Warburton Gilmore Simpson Goss Wamer Glasson Slack Hamill Wells Gunn Stephan Hayward Yewdale Harvey Stoneman Innes Henderson Tenni Knox Hinton Veivers Lee Hinze Lickiss Hobbs Tellers: McElligott Tellers: Hynd Littleproud Mackenroth Davis Katter FitzGerald McLean Gygar Resolved in the affirmative. Clause 8 and schedule, as read, agreed to. Bill reported, without amendment. Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, &c., Amdt. Bill 12 November 1987 4189

Third Reading Hon. B. D. AUSTIN (Nicklin—Minister for Mines and Energy and Minister for the Arts) (10.18 p.m.), by leave: I move— "That the Bill be now read a third time." Hon. Sir WILLIAM KNOX (Nundah—Leader of the Liberal Party) (10.19 p.m.): We have attempted to correct the injustices of this legislation, but we have not been successful in our efforts. The legislation is defective, and we must now oppose it. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I was unable to hear the honourable member for Nundah. Will he please repeat it? Sir WILLIAM KNOX: We are opposing the legislation. We have not been successful in our efforts. The legislation is defective. We will be voting against it. Question—That the Bill be now read a third time—put; and the House divided— AYES, 43 NOES, 39 Alison Lester Ardill MiUiner Austin McCauley Beanland Palaszczuk Berghofer McKechnie Beard Schuntner Bjelke-Petersen McPhie Braddy Scott Booth Menzel Bums Shaw Borbidge Neal Campbell Sherlock Burreket Nelson Casey Smith Chapman Newton Comben Smyth Cooper Powell D'Arcy Underwood Elliott Randell De Lacy Vaughan Fraser Row Eaton Warburton Gately Sherrin Gibbs, R. J. Wamer Gibbs, I. J. Simpson Goss Wells Gilmore Slack Gygar Yewdale Glasson Stephan Hamill Gunn Stoneman Hayward Harvey Tenni Innes Henderson Veivers Knox Hinton Lee Hinze Lickiss Hobbs Tellers: McElligott Tellers: Hynd Littleproud Mackenroth Davis Katter FitzGerald McLean Prest Resolved in the affirmative.

INDUSTRIAL CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION ACT AND ANOTHER ACT AMENDMENT BILL Allocation of Time-limit Order Hon. L. W. POWELL (Isis—Leader of the House) (10.25 p.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— "That so much of the Standing Orders and Sessional Orders be suspended to enable the following Bill to be passed through all its remaining stages on this sitting day. At the times so specified Mr Speaker or the Chairman, as the case may be, shall put all remaining questions necessary to pass the Bill including clauses en bloc and any amendments to be moved by the Minister in charge of the Bill, without further amendment or debate— Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act and Another Act Amendment BiU, second reading by 10.35 p.m.; report from Committee and third reading by 11.15 p.m. Mr McLEAN: I rise to a point of order. On numerous occasions the Minister for Employment, Small Business and Industrial Affairs gave his guarantee, not only in the House but also publicly outside it, that this Bill would be debated in full in the House. Through you, Mr Speaker, I would like to ask him where he stands now. 4190 12 November 1987 Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, &c., Amdt. Bill

Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Mr BURNS (Lytton—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (10.26 p.m.): Mr Speaker, I want to debate the motion that has been moved. There is a question before the House. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The question is that the motion moved by the Leader of the House be agreed to. As many of that opinion say "Aye" Mr BURNS: Mr Speaker, I am asking to be allowed to debate the motion. I am on my feet, and I am asking to debate that motion. I have a right to do so. The Standing Orders allow it. If the Minister wants to stop me, he must gag me. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I seek advice. The question is that the motion moved by the Leader of the House be agreed to. I call the honourable member for Lytton. Mr BURNS: The Parliament of Queensland sits very rarely, and when it does honourable members always find that in the last few days and the last few hours of the session, the Govemment continues to gag debate. The people of Queensland elect members to debate legislation in this Parliament. This legislation will affect a large number of working people and men and women in this State. It will affect the living expenses of the families of this State. The Opposition is entitled to debate it fully. The Bill contains a large number of clauses that the Opposition should be entitled to vote on. The Opposition should be entitled to debate each of the clauses. When clauses are put en masse, as they were last night when clauses 11 to 123 of a Bill were put, it means that major sections of the legislation are never properly debated. Clauses are a very important part of legislation. One of the Standing Orders of this Parliament allows for a proper debate. It allows the House to ask that the Speaker leave the chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole so that all honourable members can debate each clause and the sections of each clause. It is wrong for the Govemment to be gagging the debate on this Bill in this way when it is such an important Bill that will affect so many members of the community. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Those of that opinion say "Aye", against say "No". Mr McLEAN: I rise to a point of order Mr SPEAKER: Order! The "Ayes" have it. Mr LICKISS: Mr Speaker Mr SPEAKER: Order! Mr LICKISS: Mr Speaker, I rise to a point of order Mr SPEAKER: Order! Mr McLEAN: Mr Speaker Mr SPEAKER: Order! Honourable members, the question has been resolved in the affirmative. Mr McLEAN: Mr Speaker Mr SPEAKER: Order! A division is required. Ring the bells for two minutes. Mr LICKISS: Mr Speaker, I rise to a point of order. Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order during a division. The honourable member may speak afterwards. Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, &c., Amdt. Bill 12 November 1987 4191

Mr LICKISS: Mr Speaker, the division has not yet taken place. The bells have not ceased ringing. Mr Speaker, I rise to a point of order. The bells have not ceased ringing. Therefore, a division is not taking place at this stage. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member will resume his seat. Question—That the motion be agreed to—put, and the House divided— AYES, 43 NOES, 39 Alison Lester Ardill Milliner Austin McCauley Beanland Palaszczuk Berghofer McKechnie Beard Schuntner Bjelke-Petersen McPhie Braddy Scott Booth Menzel Bums Shaw Borbidge Neal Campbell Sherlock Burreket Nelson Casey Smith Chapman Newton Comben Smyth Cooper Powell D'Arcy Underwood Elliott Randell Davis Vaughan Fraser Row De Lacy Warburton Gately Sherrin Eaton Wamer Gibbs, I. J. Simpson Gibbs, R. J. Wells Gilmore Slack Goss Yewdale Glasson Stephan Hamill Gunn Stoneman Hayward Harvey Tenni Innes Henderson Veivers Knox Hinton Lee Hinze Lickiss Hobbs Tellers: McElligott Tellers: Hynd Littleproud Mackenroth Prest Katter FitzGerald McLean Gygar Resolved in the affirmative.

Second Reading Debate resumed from 29 October (see p. 3789). Mr SPEAKER: I call the honourable member for Maryborough. Mr CAMPBELL: I rise to a point of order. I refer to standing Order No. 154, entitled "Division Demanded only by Minority", which states— "A division shaU be called for only by a Member who has given his voice against the majority as declared by Mr. Speaker." No-one on this side of the House asked for a division. It was asked for by the Leader of the House. I believe that the division was out of order. Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. I call the honourable member for Maryborough. Mr ALISON (Maryborough) (10.34 p.m.): I rise with pleasure to take part in this debate with what time there is left and thank the Opposition for taking up my time. The Opposition wanted to debate this legislation Mr McLEAN: I rise to a point of order. Democracy has been prostituted once again in this House, and there is no better example of that than what is happening now in this House. The next speaker on the Ust was the honourable member for South Brisbane and you, Mr Speaker, have allowed a Govemment member to speak when it is the Opposition's tum. The Opposition has witnessed your actions in this debate so far, Mr Speaker, and I believe that Mr SPEAKER: Order! I do not have a list in front of me and have not been given a list. I have given the call to the member for Maryborough, who was the first to stand. There is no point of order and I call the member for Maryborough. 4192 12 November 1987 Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, &c., Amdt. Bill

Mr ALISON: I try again to speak to this legislation and congratulate the Minister on the manner in which this legislation has been handled. He has given ample time for public debate on the legislation and it is an example of how sensitive legislation should be handled. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The House will come to order. Honourable members, as the time is 10.35 p.m., I put the question that the Bill be now read a second time. Question put; and the House divided— AYES, 43 NOES, 39 Alison Lester Ardill Palaszczuk Austin McCauley Beanland Prest Berghofer McKechnie Beard Schuntner Bjelke-Petersen McPhie Braddy Scott Booth Menzel Bums Shaw Borbidge Neal Campbell Sherlock Burreket Nelson Casey Smith Chapman Newton Comben Smyth Cooper Powell D'Arcy Underwood Elliott Randell De Lacy Vaughan Fraser Row Eaton Warburton Gately Sherrin Gibbs, R. J. Wamer Gibbs, I. J. Simpson Goss Wells Gilmore Slack Hamill Yewdale Glasson Stephan Hayward Gunn Stoneman Innes Harvey Tenni Knox Henderson Veivers Lee Hinton Lickiss Hinze McElligott Hobbs Tellers: Mackenroth Tellers: Hynd Littleproud McLean Davis Katter FitzGerald Milliner Gygar Resolved in the affirmative. Committee Hon. V. P. Lester (Peak Downs—Minister for Employment, Small Business and Industrial Affairs) in charge of the Bill. Clause 1— Mr LESTER (10.41 p.m.): Firstly, I take issue with members of the Liberal Party who have been carrying on about the lack of time allotted for this debate. A total of 20 honourable members have spoken to this Bill, which is the largest number of speakers to have taken part in a debate in the House this year. The members of the Liberal Party broke their agreements with the Leader of the House during the debate on the previous Bill. They indicated that they would be finished by 9.30. They broke their agreements; so they should not start sitting on the fence—on the barbed wire—being pious, because they are not. I want to make that very clear. Mr GYGAR: 1 rise to a point of order. The Minister has told the Committee that an agreement was entered into by the Liberal Party to terminate some debate in this House tonight by a set time. I am the Liberal Whip, and I took no part in any discussions or agreements of that nature. I find the Minister's remarks offensive and I ask that they be withdrawn. The CHAIRMAN: Order! The honourable member for Stafford has offered an explanation. I ask the Minister to accept that explanation. Mr LESTER: My comments were based on information that was given to me by the Leader of the House. However, if it pleases the honourable member, I will withdraw those comments. The Liberal Party members, by their recent actions, have voted against voluntary employment agreements. They cannot go out amongst the public and start telling people Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, &c., Amdt. Bill 12 November 1987 4193 how they have started to support business people. The Liberal Party's efforts in this Chamber this evening are thoroughly disgraceful. Mr LICKISS: I rise to a point of order. We are now in Committee and we are debating a clause. Can I ask what clause the Minister is debating? The Minister has not indicated to which clause he is speaking. I believe that he is delivering a second-reading speech. The CHAIRMAN: Order! I called for debate on clause 1, and the Minister began to debate clause 1. Mr UNDERWOOD: I rise to a point of order. When I sought to debate clause 1 during previous debates, I was mled out of order by the Chair. A precedent has been set on this matter. There is no way that the Minister can give a second-reading reply on clause 1. I believe that you, Mr Chairman, were the gentleman in the chair at the time when I was mled out of order. Sir WILLIAM KNOX: I wish to speak to clause 1. The CHAIRMAN: Order! An honourable member has risen to a point of order in relation to clause 1. During the point of order that was taken by the honourable member for Ipswich West, he referred to certain actions that were taken by an occupant of the chair. I do not feel that a precedent has been created for me in that respect, so I will permit debate on clause 1. Mr CASEY: I rise to a point of order. I would like to jog your memory, Mr Chairman. In actual fact, you did the very same thing to Mr Tenni during the debate on the legislation amending the Harbours Act. The CHAIRMAN: Order! There is no point of order. Mr LESTER: The contribution from members on this side of the Chamber is to be commended. In particular, I mention the honourable members for Mount Gravatt, Roma, Curmmbin, Nerang, Mansfield, Gympie and Aspley. It is because of the signif­ icance of this piece of legislation that I must express my disappointment at the approach taken by the Opposition. It has wasted this opportunity by directing its attention to irrelevant matters raised in documents that were produced long before the Bill took shape. Mr McLEAN: I rise to a point of order. It is quite obvious that the Minister is going beyond his rights in speaking on clause 1. The matter has been brought up previously. However, I point out that this Bill is one of inexcusable deceit even by the standards set in this Chamber by the Minister on previous industrial relations legislation. Now he has the hide to stand up and make a reply speech on clause 1 of the legislation when he has applied the gag to stop the debate in 30 minutes' time. He will make a 25- minute speech that he could incorporate in Hansard at a later date. He is prostituting the procedure of this Committee. I move— "That the Minister be no longer heard." The CHAIRMAN: Order! I am obliged to make a mling, according to advice, that any person, including a Minister, speaking on the clauses of a Bill—in particular, clause 1 of this Bill—must confine himself to the provisions of that clause. Sir WILLIAM KNOX: I wish to speak to clause 1, which is, of course, the substance of the Bill. I wish to reply to the statement the Minister made a moment ago. Mr Elliott: Are you about to do the same thing that you were accusing him of? Sir WILLIAM KNOX: No, I am not. 4194 12 November 1987 Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, &c., Amdt. Bill

The CHAIRMAN: Order! There is too much audible conversation in the Chamber. I am having difficulty in hearing the honourable member for Nundah. The Chamber will come to order. Sir WILLIAM KNOX: The Minister referred to the fact that there had been agreement. There was not, and he has withdrawn that statement. Obviously, he has received information that there was no agreement. As far as the Bill is concemed, let me make it quite clear that, as has been said in the previous debate, the Liberal Party supports the legislation. We protest very vigorously at the procedure of closing the debate in the way in which it has been closed. We have demonstrated that and will continue to demonstrate that. There is no justification for closing the debate. The Liberal Party wishes to move amendments. I hope that there will be no filibustering by the Govemment and that those amendments will be considered by the Committee. Clause 1, as read, agreed to. Clauses 2 to 6, as read, agreed to. Clause 7— Mr McLEAN (10.49 p.m.): This clause deals with proposed new section 94A, which is headed "AppUcation of Part" and covers the exemption of members of the ambulance transport brigades, fire safety officers, firemen or other members of fire brigades, registered nurses, persons employed by local authorities and persons employed in any other such callings as are declared by Order in Council. It also covers proposed new section 94B, which is headed "Variation of effect of award or industrial agreement by voluntary employment agreement" and proposed new section 94C, which is headed "The making of voluntary employment agreements". In speaking to this clause, I point out that the reason why we agreed to the previous clauses is that, once again, we have seen in the late hours of the night this Govemment attempt to ram legislation through—particularly important legislation such as this is. I stated before that this Bill is an example of inexcusable deceit, even when it is judged by standards that Opposition members have come to expect from this Govemment. This Bill represents probably the greatest change in direction for industrial relations that this State has yet seen. This Bill has been created by a handful of extremists with selfish and greedy intent, who have the ear of the Premier on most occasions and the ear of the Minister on this occasion. I know what the legislation is all about, the Minister knows exactly what it is all about, and so does the trade union movement. Members of the Labor Party know why this legislation was formulated and how it was put together. They also know what the end result is designed to achieve. This legislation is aU about smashing the trade union movement in Queensland and about breaking down the workers' conditions and wages. Right throughout the whole debate, even since the time that the Minister circulated the Green Paper earlier in the year, the Govemment has been completely deceitful. Right from the start, the Minister has been deceitful. He came out and said that the legislation would create flexibility. He said that it would create all of the things expressed by the terminolgy contained in the Green Paper. Not once did the Minister come out and say what the basis of this legislation was. As I have said, it was formulated from submissions from a greedy bunch of extremists—extreme Right Wing activists who have the ear of this Government. As I said before, it is aimed at smashing the wages and conditions of workers in this State. Clause 7 contains three major sections. The first section, "Application of Part", provides for the exclusion of ambulance officers, fire brigade officers, and registered nurses from the provisions of this legislation. Clause 7 also applies to any other callings declared by Order in Council. In respect of that provision, I feel that the Minister has an obligation to tell the Committee and the workers of this State where the cut-off point occurs. Will exclusion apply to statutory bodies by virtue of a joint arrangement between Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, &c., Amdt. Bill 12 November 1987 4195 the Govemment and the private sector? Could arrangements be made with universities, colleges, and port authorities to cover people employed in those organisations? In the Minister's second-reading speech, he referred to exclusions that would apply in some sections of the public sector where workers provide a continuous 24-hour service. The Minister should explain the ramifications of this provision. Clause 7 provides the Minister with a means of excluding some sectors of public service. The real reason for this exclusion is that, because of the action that this Govemment is taking, pressure has been applied by people who work in those areas, and it was beginning to tell on some back-bench members of the National Party. I would like the Minister to put on record how teachers in public schools will be exempted when teachers in private schools, who are doing exactly the same job, will have to work under a contract system if required. The same could also be said to apply to nurses who work in public hospitals, who will be exempted, whereas nurses who work in private hospitals, who perform exactly the same work under exactly the same conditions, will not be exempted. The ramifications of this clause could go even further when it is considered that bus-drivers, guards, nightwatchmen and attendants provide a 24-hour continuous service. The difficulty is that no mention has been made of those workers in the exemption provisions of clause 7. In his reply, I hope that the Minister will explain to the workers of this State why the provisions do not apply uniformly and where the cut-off points occur. Clause 7 also describes the three types of voluntary employment agreements that are proposed in this legislation. The first type of agreement could be classed as a union and employer contract. It will be a contract between registered employee organisations and registered employer organisations. The second agreement is a VEA that will be a contract between the employer and 60 per cent of its employees. The third is an employer/ employee contract that can be signed in a particular calling or with a prospective employee. The Minister has plenty of explaining to do about the contents of this section of the Bill. It contains many inconsistencies. I would like to pose a few questions to him that he may be able to answer in his reply, that is, of course, if time permits. I ask the Minister to explain how employer/union VEAs will apply, if for instance, more than one union is a party to the same calling. Although it would be quite simple for a contract to be drawn up between an employer and a union on that basis, I pose the question: what happens when one union enters into a VEA in respect of a calling to which another union is also a party? The Bill does not cover that aspect. The provision for a VEA covering "any business, establishment or undertaking" is also more than confusing. I ask the Minister to explain whether an undertaking has to be physically separate. Does it have to have different management? Does it have to have different accounting? How wide will it allow an employer to stretch his business or his coverage? At this stage of the debate it is important that some clarity be given to those matters. Confusion certainly exists in proposed section 94B (1) (c) and (d), which states— "any calling or callings in respect of which the industrial union of employees is registered; or any business, establishment or undertaking where the employees are members of the industrial union of employees." I ask the Minister: do all employees have to be members of the union, or only some of them? If so, what proportion of the workers have to be members of the union? Also, does the VEA continue to be legal if the employees cease being union members during the term of the agreement? If so, once again, does it relate to all or some of the members? The Bill makes reference also to 60 per cent of employees. This is a classic. No mechanism is provided as to how that 60 per cent is determined. The Minister has said that that matter should be left to the parties concemed. To my way of thinking it is 4196 12 November 1987 Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, &c., Amdt. Bill totally unrealistic to introduce legislation such as this—as I said before, it is an enormous change in direction for this State's industrial relations—which leaves open to interpretation one of its major clauses. As I see it, it is only common sense to believe that that type of contract will be more likely to be in conflict than either of the other two that I have mentioned. The type of contract that involves agreement between an employer and a group of workers who have no outside assistance could not be compared with a contract being signed by a registered union and a registered group of employers. It is not hard to imagine that the problems that will exist in a contract based on the 60 per cent proposal will be much greater than the problems that will exist in contracts that are signed by a group of unions and an employer or a group of employers. It seems to me that this clause wiU give an opportunity to a percentage of employers to exploit workers. I do not say all of them, but a percentage. This matter has been discussed before in this Chamber. Some employers are known to exploit workers. They are known to be crooks. I believe that this clause will only further help them to avoid obligations to their workers, as they are doing now. I feel that it is also safe to say that disputes will evolve because of the 60 per cent provision. Firstly, the make-up of the 60 per cent is not specified. No machinery has been set up for that. No pattem has been established to work out the 60 per cent or the eligibUity of people who will vote on it. The legislation does not outline how people will vote, where the vote will be taken, how the ballot will be mn or who will mn it. Even more importantly, the legislation contains nothing to stop an employer putting pressure on his employees. I am concemed that the people this legislation will affect most are those who are already disadvantaged— those workers who are now being exploited. They will have no power whatsoever to ensure that a decent agreement is executed with their employers. The clause should contain protection for those sorts of people. I ask the Minister to explain how he could possibly present this clause to the Committee without offering that protection. The clause deals with agreements made between employees and employers relating to a calling or callings in respect of which the particular union of employees is registered at any business, establishment or undertaking. That is a most complicated set of circumstances. That provides a set of circumstances that could qualify someone to be part of a contract that has been agreed to by 60 per cent of employees. An employer could have an establishment away from his usual place of business. He could have an undertaking up in north Queensland. All those premises would be covered by the agreement. There is a great need for the meaning of the clause to be clarified during this debate so that, when at some later stage the legislation is being interpreted away from this Chamber, the Minister will have placed on record exactly what he means by the wording of the clause. I believe that goodwill may exist when the contracts are first signed. I imagine that a few carrots will be dangled around the place when they are drawn up. I can understand that in the initial stages there will be quite a deal of goodwill. However, I do not believe that that will continue, because after 12 months, or whatever period an employer and his employees agree upon, when the agreement has to be renegotiated, all those anomalies that I have already pointed out will come into play. Who is covered by what award? What wage rises will have occurred in other awards? What agreements will have changed over that period? What mixture of establishments, undertakings or businesses will have come into being since the contract was signed? The legislation provides no answers to those questions and the Minister has no intention of supplying the answers. I am sure that even if time permits, the Minister will not answer those questions. At this point I must say that I was quite disgusted with the attitude of the Leader of the House and the Minister. The Minister said that 20 members of the Opposition had spoken to the Bill. The Minister said publicly that he would not stop debate on the legislation at any stage. It does not matter how many members spoke to the second- reading debate. The most important part of the debate on this Bill is taking place now. Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, &c., Amdt. Bill 12 November 1987 4197 at the Committee stage, which presents the Opposition with an opportunity to ask questions of the Minister about what is contained in the Bill. That enables members of the Opposition to ask specific questions about what the Minister and the Govemment meant. However, the Opposition will not be able to do that. The Committee will not be given the opportunity to debate further clauses. As with all the other industrial legislation that has passed through this Chamber over the last couple of years, once again it will be interpreted in a tribunal somewhere up town. That interpretation will be made by someone who has no idea of what took place in this debate and no idea of the Minister's interpretation of the legislation. The Govemment's actions to msh the clauses through the Committee are an absolute prostitution of the democratic, parUamentary system. The magnitude of this Bill is that it represents a major change to industrial relations in this State. It is abundantly clear that if the Minister wishes to continue with the 60 per cent proposal, the machinery that I spoke of before is absolutely necessary. It is necessary to determine the relevant employees; it is necessary to ensure that all those involved in the VEAs are fully informed and understand all the issues; and it is also necessary to conduct in a fair and just manner a ballot of the employees. A proposed subsection in clause 7 deals with employer VEAs. This is probably a better example that the first two that I gave. The door is once again being left open for the exploiters among the employers. It is a shame that I do not have the time to read the clause. This subsection is most definitely open to rorts. Under this particular subsection an employer could draw up his first contract with a prospective employee. From then on, every employee that he employs in his factory, undertaking, business or whatever the length of his coverage is—the Opposition is waiting for the Minister to fill honourable members in on that later—is then covered by that first agreement with a person who has not even started work yet. It is possible that his wife, his daughter, his son or his best mate could have signed that first contract. Of course, the scope of that VEA will be written by that employer without reference to any current employees that he may have or any unions, and that VEA could cover more than one calling. It could include duties and classifications as well as wages and conditions, and it could be for all or part of one or more of his businesses, establishments or undertakings. The only requirement would be that those people employed before the VEA was issued must be paid award wages. That clause allows an employer to interview someone, sign a contract with him and that contract will apply to whomever he employs in the future. It goes further. If and when more than 60 per cent of the employees in that calling, business, establishment or undertaking are employed under the VEA, it is then possible to convert the VEA to a 60 per cent VEA and, in so doing, bind the pre-existing employees to it. It is an absolute disgrace that honourable members are being restricted to another five minutes in which to debate a Bill of this magnitude. The Opposition has picked out only one clause for debate, which was clause 7. The Opposition did not debate the first six clauses. Now there is a msh and the Minister will have no time to answer even the few queries that I have raised. The Opposition has not covered more than one clause. I could be the only member on the Opposition side who has an opportunity to speak. Many other members of the Opposition have queries that they want to raise and points that they want to make and have recorded in Hansard regarding the future interpretation of the intent of this Bill. Mr Eaton: He hasn't told us what they are going to do with the 50-year age group. They are going to throw them on the scrap-heap. Mr McLEAN: The Govemment has already done that, and it will most certainly extend that provision. The proposed contract system is most certainly the next move towards throwing people on the scrap-heap. 4198 12 November 1987 Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, &c., Amdt. Bill

Mr VAUGHAN: Unfortunately, I wanted to seek clarification on five or six clauses. I believe that, having regard to the speed at which this legislation is passing through this Parliament, it will be brought back again in no time at all for amendment. The question I wish to ask the Minister in relation to clause 7 relates to the part on page 4, lines 7, 8 and 9, where it states— "Where an employer employs or proposes to employ one employee in a particular calling in a business, establishment or undertaking, the employer and employee or prospective employee may enter into an agreement of a type specified in this subsection which, upon registration, shall, subject to this Act,"— these are the key words— "bind any other person who may thereafter be employed by that employer in that calling in that business, establishment or undertaking." I ask the Minister: since this agreement will be made with one employee, does this provision mean that a subsequent employee is bound for the term of the initial agreement only, or that a subsequent employee or employees are bound by the terms of that agreement for three years—the maximum term of the agreement—or thereafter? I wish to have that provision clarified. If that is the case, God knows where we will go. People should realise that this legislation will do away with working hours as they are currently prescribed under the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act. This Bill provides for working on any or every day of the week, for working any hours of the day or the week and for working more than eight hours a day. It also does away with rest pauses and mixed functions. The honourable member for Roma, Mr Cooper, has been mentioned as one of the architects behind this legislation. The other day in this Chamber during the second- reading debate he stated— "The member for Nudgee spoke about the protection of the worker. I am very happy to give the member the Govemment's assurances that this legislation will give workers far more security than they had before. At present an employee can be sacked with a week or two's notice. These agreements will give them at least 12 months' security." That is utter garbage, because the Bill says that at the present time the employee's employment can be terminated the same way as it can be under the awards. The very people who are supposed to have advised the Minister on this legislation stand up and say that it will give workers 12 months' continuity of employment. In addition there is another clause of the Bill that refers to the fact that the VEAs will be for a minimum of 12 months or a maximum of three years. The Bill goes on to say that the VEAs will continue after expiration until terminated. As I understand it, that applies to VEAs of less than three years' duration, but what is the point of having a provision in this legislation that states that the maximum term of the VEAs will be three years and tuming around and stating that they will continue after expiration until terminated? These are but a few of the provisions contained in this legislation which need to be answered, but unfortunately they will not be answered in this Chamber tonight. The Govemment will close this debate down very shortly. It is a damned disgrace. I say to the Minister that he will get himself into such tangles over this legislation that he will not know where he is going. Mr Prest: He cannot get any more mixed up than you. Mr VAUGHAN: Of course he cannot. This legislation has obviously been hastily drawn up. Legislation has been introduced into this House tonight to repeal certain provisions of the Electricity (Continuity of Supply) Act. I believe that that is being done due to the heat that is being applied to the Government and particularly to its back-benchers by the people in the community. Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, &c., Amdt. Bill 12 November 1987 4199

People are beginning to realise what this Govemment has done to them over a period. As I stated previously, legislation of this kind is beginning to bite and when this legislation is passed—as it will be tonight—and put into effect by employers, it wiU open the floodgates and will begin to bite back on the Govemment. It will come back to this Chamber for clarification. I venture to say that there is no way in the world that the Industrial Commission will be able to handle all of the problems that will arise as a result of this legislation. Mr LESTER: I have slightly more than seven pages of a comprehensive reply, but in view of the circumstances I seek leave to have them incorporated in Hansard. Opposition members: No! Mr LESTER: If the Opposition does not agree to that, it shows its hypocrisy. Question—That clauses 7 to 16, as read, stand part of the Bill—put; and the Committee divided— AYES, 51 NOES, 30 Alison Knox Ardill Yewdale Austin Lee Braddy Beanland Lester Bums Beard Lickiss Campbell Berghofer McCauley Casey Bjelke-Peterser I McKechnie Comben Booth McPhie D'Arcy Borbidge Menzel De Lacy Burreket Neal Eaton Chapman Nelson Gibbs, R. J. Cooper Newton Goss Elliott Powell Hamill Fraser Randell Hayward Gately Schuntner McElligott Gibbs, I. J. Sherlock Mackenroth Gilmore Sherrin McLean Glasson Simpson Milliner Gunn Slack Palaszczuk Gygar Stephan Scott Harvey Stoneman Shaw Henderson Tenni Smith Hinton Veivers Smyth Hinze Underwood Hobbs Vaughan Hynd Tellers: Warburton Tellers: Innes Littleproud Wamer Davis Katter FitzGerald Wells Prest Resolved in the affirmative. 4200 12 November 1987 Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, &c., Amdt. Bill

Reporting of Bill Mr LESTER (11.23 p.m.): Mr Chairman, I move— "That you do now leave the chair and report the Bill without amendment." Question put; and the Committee divided AYES, 51 NOES, 30 Alison Knox Ardill Yewdale Austin Lee Braddy Beanland Lester Bums Beard Lickiss Campbell Berghofer McCauley Casey Bjelke-Petersen McKechnie Comben Booth McPhie D'Arcy Borbidge Menzel De Lacy Burreket Neal Eaton Chapman Nelson Gibbs, R. J. Cooper Newton Goss Elliott Powell Hamill Fraser Randell Hayward Gately Schuntner McElligott Gibbs, I. J. Sherlock Mackenroth Gilmore Sherrin McLean Glasson Simpson Milliner Gunn Slack Palaszczuk Gygar Stephan Scott Harvey Stoneman Shaw Henderson Tenni Smith Hinton Veivers Smyth Hinze Underwood Hobbs Vaughan Hynd Tellers: Warburton Tellers: Innes Littleproud Wamer Davis Katter FitzGerald Wells Prest Resolved in the affirmative. Third Reading Hon. V. P. LESTER (Peak Downs—Minister for Employment, Small Business and Industrial Affairs) (11.27 p.m.): I move— "That the Bill be now read a third time." Question put; and the House divided— AYES, 52 NOES, 30 Alison Knox Ardill Yewdale Austin Lee Braddy Beanland Lester Bums Beard Lickiss Campbell Berghofer McCauley Casey Bjelke-Petersen McKechnie Comben Booth McPhie D'Arcy Borbidge Menzel De Lacy Burreket Neal Eaton Chapman Nelson Gibbs, R. J. Cooper Newton Goss Elliott Powell HamUl Fraser Randell Hayward Gately Row McElligott Gibbs, I. J. Schuntner Mackenroth Gilmore Sherlock McLean Glasson Sherrin Milliner Gunn Simpson Palaszczuk Gygar Slack Scott Harvey Stephan Shaw Henderson Stoneman Smith Hinton Tenni Smyth Hinze Veivers Underwood Hobbs Vaughan Hynd Tellers: Warburton Tellers: Innes Littleproud Wamer Davis Katter FitzGerald Wells Prest Resolved in the affirmative. Queensland Government Industrial Gazette Act Amdt. Bill 12 November 1987 4201

QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE ACT AMENDMENT BILL Hon. V. P. LESTER (Peak Downs—Minister for Employment, Small Business and Industrial Affairs) (11.32 p.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— "That leave be granted to bring in a Bill to amend The Queensland Government Industrial Gazette Act of 1961 in certain particulars." Motion agreed to. First Reading Bill presented and, on motion of Mr Lester, read a first time. Second Reading Hon. V. P. LESTER (Peak Downs—Minister for Employment, Small Business and Industrial Affairs) (11.33 p.m.): I move— "That the Bill be now read a second time." The Acts Interpretation Act requires that Proclamations and Orders in Council approved by the Governor in Council be notified in the Queensland Government Gazette. The Queensland Government Industrial Gazette Act 1961 authorises the printing of the Queensland Government Industrial Gazette. It also provides for the notification of any Industrial Act and the publication of any Proclamations, Orders in Council, Regulations, Rules, etc., under such Acts. Section 4 of the Queensland Government Industrial Gazette Act provides that publication in the industrial gazette of any Proclamations, Orders in Council, Regulations, Rules, etc., shall have the same effect as publication in the Queensland Government Gazette. The CJfUeensland Government Industrial Gazette Act lists certain industrial Acts to which notification in the Queensland Government Industrial Gazette is to apply. In addition, there are number of other Acts which have been prescribed by the Governor in Council by Order in Council as Acts for the purposes of the Queensland Goverament Industrial Gazette Act. Clause 3 of the Bill updates the various industrial Acts to which the Queensland Government Industrial Gazette Act applies. There have been amendments to the titles of various Acts over the years. Some Acts, for example, the Bread Delivery Act—and that has got to be a jolly good Act, Mr Speaker—and the Electrical Workers and Contractors Act, are no longer in existence. Clauses 4, 5 and 6 purely clarify that the publication in the industrial gazette shall have and always has had the same effect as publication in the Queensland Government Gazette for Acts prescribed as well as those specified. This amendment Bill is only a minor one. It updates the list of industrial Acts and clarifies the Act in order to remove any confusion or doubt which may exist in connection with the publication of Proclamations, Orders in Council, Regulations, Rules, etc., in the Queensland Government Industrial Gazette as against publication in the Queensland Government Gazette as required by the Acts Interpretation Act, which is a most interesting Act. I commend the Bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Vaughan, adjouraed. The House adjourned at 11.37 p.m.

77194—137