COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

SENATE Official Hansard

WEDNESDAY, 27 AUGUST 1997

THIRTY-EIGHTH PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—FIFTH PERIOD

BY AUTHORITY OF THE SENATE CANBERRA CONTENTS

WEDNESDAY, 27 AUGUST

Higher Education Funding Amendment Bill (No. 1) 1997— Second Reading ...... 5745 Excise Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 1) 1997— Second Reading ...... 5760 In Committee ...... 5773 Third Reading ...... 5782 Matters of Public Interest— United Nations: Contracts ...... 5782 South Australia: Leader of the Opposition ...... 5786 Global Electronic Commerce ...... 5789 Industry Policy ...... 5792 X-rated Videos ...... 5795 Questions Without Notice— Superannuation: Fringe Benefits ...... 5796 Taxation Reform ...... 5797 Distinguished Visitors ...... 5798 Questions Without Notice— Sale of Commonwealth Buildings ...... 5798 Taxation Reform ...... 5799 Firearms Buyback ...... 5800 Australian Public Service ...... 5800 Privacy Scheme ...... 5800 Senate: Press Photographs ...... 5801 Australia on CD Program ...... 5801 Women ...... 5803 Long Range Cruise Missiles ...... 5804 Social Security Income and Assets Test ...... 5805 Copyright ...... 5805 ABC Weekend Regional Weather Reports ...... 5806 South Pacific Cruise Lines Ltd ...... 5808 Education: Indigenous Students ...... 5809 Answers to Questions Without Notice— Australia on CD Program ...... 5810 Fitzroy River: Proposed Dam ...... 5810 Long Range Cruise Missiles ...... 5810 Access to House of Representatives by Senators ...... 5811 Answers to Questions Without Notice— ABC Weekend Regional Weather Reports ...... 5811 Petitions— Logging and Woodchipping ...... 5818 Notices of Motion— Textile, Clothing and Footwear Industries ...... 5818 Mr Michael Doohan ...... 5819 Legal and Constitutional References Committee ...... 5819 Mr Geoff Nicholas ...... 5820 Aboriginal Delegation to the United Nations ...... 5820 Community Affairs References Committee ...... 5820 Jabiluka Uranium Mine ...... 5821 Textile, Clothing and Footwear Industries ...... 5821 Order of Business— Migration Regulations ...... 5821 Committees— Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee—Extension of Time ...... 5821 Information Technologies Committee—Appointment ...... 5821 Superannuation Committee—Extension of Time ...... 5822 Higher Education: Undergraduate Fees and Abstudy ...... 5822 Matters of Urgency— CONTENTS—continued

Privacy Legislation ...... 5822 Committees— Scrutiny of Bills Committee—Report ...... 5836 Ministerial Statements— Visit by the Prime Minister to the United Kingdom and the United States of America ...... 5836 Constitutional Convention (Election) Bill 1997— Consideration of House of Representatives Message ...... 5843 Documents ...... 5862 Adjournment— South Australia: Leader of the Opposition ...... 5862 South Australia: Leader of the Opposition ...... 5864 Schools and Literacy ...... 5867 South Australia: Leader of the Opposition ...... 5869 Fitzroy River: Proposed Dam ...... 5870 Documents— Tabling ...... 5871 Questions On Notice— British Commonwealth Occupational Forces—(Question No. 625) . . . 5872 Logging and Woodchipping—(Question No. 634) ...... 5873 Defence Force: Entitlements—(Question No. 645) ...... 5873 East Timor—(Question No. 649) ...... 5875 Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs: Mr Dean McCarthy—(Question No. 655) ...... 5875 Tasmania: Regional Telecommunications Infrastructure Fund—(Question No. 659) ...... 5876 Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission—(Question No. 661) 5876 Turkish Incursion into Northern Iraq—(Question No. 666) ...... 5880 Indian Port Facility—(Question No. 670) ...... 5881 Papua New Guinea: Export Finance and Insurance Corporation—(Question No. 672) ...... 5882 Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families—(Question No. 683) ...... 5882 Department of Veterans’ Affairs: Appeal Mechanisms—(Question No. 692) ...... 5883 Telstra: 1996 Atlanta Olympic Games—(Question No. 698) ...... 5885 Minister for Resources and Energy: Media Monitoring Services—(Question No. 727) ...... 5886 Answers to Questions Without Notice— Austudy ...... 5886 Austudy ...... 5886 SENATE 5745

Wednesday, 27 August 1997 triennium funding structure for higher educa- tion in this country. The Democrats will be supporting the The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. simplification of the remission of debt for the Margaret Reid) took the chair at 9.30 a.m., open learning scheme. I note that this govern- and read prayers. ment is the first government to preside over HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING a universal up-front fee payment for under- graduate education with the introduction of a AMENDMENT BILL (No. 1) 1997 gap fee. A gap fee is one that open learning Second Reading students have no opportunity to defer. So Debate resumed from 26 August, on motion although it can be argued that open learning by Senator Minchin: is one way of making higher education more accessible to, say, traditionally disadvantaged That this bill be now read a second time. groups, particularly those in remote or region- Senator CARR (Victoria) (9.31 a.m.)—To al areas, the lack of opportunity to defer those conclude, the Labor Party believes that the payments is sad. Senate should carry a second reading amend- ment. Accordingly, I move: This government is also continuing the tradition of user pays begun under the former At the end of the motion, add: Labor government. I note the amount that the "but the Senate: Commonwealth is granting towards the open (1) is of the opinion that a properly resourced learning system is only $218,000 in this bill, university sector is vital to Australia’s compared with around $9.5 million as recent- economic and social well-being; ly as 1995. I am dismayed to see a diminution (2) expresses deep concern at the damage in the resources being allocated to open caused by the Government’s funding reduc- learning in this bill. In fact, it puts Australia tions to higher education, which are forcing universities to seek alternative sources of at odds with the rest of the world which is funds, such as undergraduate fees, which in increasingly recognising the joys and the turn are reducing access to universities at possibilities of open learning and distance the very time when Australia needs to be education. This bill also allows for the 25 per broadening such access; cent discount on some course contributions. (3) expressed particular concern at the ending Probably one of the biggest features of this of the successful Commonwealth Industry Places Scheme; and bill is the rationalisation and restructuring program—$26 million over the next four (4) condemns the Government for failing to recognise the importance of education to years. While the Democrats support that addi- Australia’s future and for continuing to tional money, particularly for regional and withdraw public investment in it". remote institutions, we treat this as an ac- Senator STOTT DESPOJA (South Aus- knowledgment, as basically a concession by tralia) (9.32 a.m.)—The Australian Democrats this government that, in fact, its regressive will be supporting the measures contained in budget cuts have hit hardest at regional and the Higher Education Funding Amendment remote institutions. Bill (No. 1) 1997. There are a number of The Democrats will be supporting the Labor measures in this bill to which I will refer. Party’s second reading amendment and we First of all, I note that this particular higher will seek to amend that with a second reading education funding bill departs from tradition; amendment of our own. We endorse the that is, it represents a break from the tradi- sentiments expressed by Senator Carr in his tional structure of higher education bill amendment, but we recognise, as our second funding in that it allows for the provision of reading amendment does, that this path of funds for 1998 and earlier. I note there is no user pays was begun under the Hawke and allocation for 1999 and 2000. I think you will Keating governments and simply entrenched find that a number of advocacy groups are at a rate of knots by the current coalition very concerned about that change to the government. 5746 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

I am also glad to see that the second read- sentative organisations that this is not the ing amendment moved by the opposition case. In fact, I note that today’s paper refers makes recognition of the Commonwealth to 36,000 overenrolments. Certainly the industry places scheme, CIPS, which has been government has been quite keen to encourage cut by this government. Under that scheme overenrolments, especially if it does not have industry funded 40 per cent of a university to pay the full HECS liable load cost. I think place while the student and the Common- it is outrageous that institutions have not only wealth made up the remaining 60 per cent. had to deal with funding cuts but are now The loss of this scheme will hit specific expected to cater for massive levels of institutions harder than others. For example, overenrolment, never mind the impact that Charles Sturt University is losing 1,076 this has on course quality and teaching stand- places, Deakin University is losing 505 places ards. and Swinburne University of Technology is So we have not heard the real story of what losing 528 places. It certainly puts paid to the is going on at universities from the Minister government’s rhetoric that somehow we are for Employment, Education, Training and seeing an additional allocation of places, be Youth Affairs. We do know that 10,000 fewer they undergraduate or others, around the mature age students have applied for places country this year. this year; that is, they were turned off from Substantial losses like this cannot be over- applying for university. They did not apply come. It has been suggested by this govern- for enrolment this year, and I would bet my ment that the rationalisation and restructuring bottom dollar that it was the prohibitive cost program will go some way towards addressing of studying that has meant many of these the loss of places like CIPS places. Certainly, students did not pursue the enrolment process. while we welcome that package, it will not I take the University of Newcastle as an address any of the other symptoms of the example. Presumably, this is an institution coalition’s savage budget cuts. We welcome that would be targeted by the rationalisation the admission by the coalition that there is a and restructuring package, but many of the funding crisis in our universities across the changes that have already taken place—the country, with regional and remote institutions cuts that have been made—have radically being hit hardest, but this package will not go affected this institution. So even these kinds far enough. of programs are not going to provide enough We have heard a lot from the minister who resources to make up for the cuts that have has responsibility for enrolments. I am sur- already been suffered. I will refer to just a prised to see that still the minister insists that few of the staffing and funding cuts which enrolments—that is, the final enrolments in have to be taken into account. These cuts are institutions—certainly are stable or up in a direct result of the government’s budget some places, but would not a better indicator changes last year. of demand for higher education places be In the faculty of art and design, nine aca- applications for enrolment? As has been said demic staff have been lost; in the faculty of many times in this place, certainly by the education, 15 academic staff and three general Australian Democrats, applications for enrol- staff have been lost; in the faculty of engi- ment in tertiary education around this country neering, 11 academic staff and 20 general this year are down. They are down across the staff have been lost; in the faculty of medi- board. In particular, mature age students have cine and health sciences, 14 academic and 30 been hit hardest with up to a 17 per cent general staff have gone; in the faculty of decline in some states and territories in nursing, there is $340,000 worth of cuts, and relation to applications for enrolment. six staff and three general staff have gone; in I was stunned to see the minister’s press the faculty of science and maths, 18 academic release last week which claimed that universi- staff and 13 general staff have gone. ties were ‘thriving’ in light of all the informa- These universities are not thriving, contrary tion we have had from institutions and repre- to the minister’s claims last week. The Uni- Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5747 versity of Newcastle is not thriving with 95 In many cases, the staff needed to ensure academic staff and 198 general staff being meaningful assessment are no longer there— made redundant. It is shameful, and blame certainly, at the University of Newcastle. can be directly attributed to the federal Libraries have been cut and important means government for these radical cuts and regres- of educational assistance and support are sive changes. going. Certainly at the University of New- castle this is the case, and this is not an So the university may have fewer staff but, unusual situation. The staff levels are such as the minister continues to maintain and that there are not the human resources to certainly today’s papers and overenrolment accommodate any extra students. stories confirm, enrolments have been main- tained. In fact, overenrolments in some insti- In the Hunter region, the education sector tutions are incredibly high, class sizes have employs more people than BHP. So this jumped, student contact hours have been government is responsible for the enormous reduced, and tutorial times and access have upheaval and trauma as a direct result of been reduced. This is the reality; these are the funding cuts by this government in previous consequences of rising enrolments. budgets which face all those who live in that particular region. Whether it is their own job The library at the University of Newcastle that is lost or whether it is a family member has cut its budget by $900,000 and up to 21 who is denied access to education or any one library staff may be lost. So I am curious to of the many activities, such as research and hear the minister’s response to that case study development which flow on from campus life, of a particular institution which has suffered that region is affected. It is not an isolated from funding cuts over the last 12 to 18 example. The destruction and pain in regional months. Australia can also be seen at the Northern Territory University. Continually, there is this focus on final enrolments. When are we going to hear from The Northern Territory University has been the government an explanation for the drop in forced to abandon its English department. It enrolment applications, in particular the drop is extraordinary that in the Northern Territory, in enrolment applications among mature age as far as we know, there is not an English students? When I asked the minister in esti- literature department or access to English mates whether she was concerned about the literature at an undergraduate level. This number of enrolments and perhaps that it was decision has been made in response, apparent- not such a benefit to have overenrolments in ly, to the coalition’s funding cuts. It has institutions that had suffered so many cuts, already been instituted over the recent semest- she replied: er break. Staff from other disciplines, none of them . . . if you have a lecture theatre in which there related to English literature, will now be are—just for the sake of argument—20 spare seats, and you have got the lecturer, then the additional required to take on the existing load. That is cost of overenrolling and filling up those seats is not my idea of quality in education or access negligible, because you are only talking about extra to courses and stability needed for universities course materials. Your infrastructure and all the rest to develop and, indeed, to thrive, to use the of the stuff is there, the lights and everything are minister’s terminology. So now we have an on in any event. education sector where a university does not The lights may be on, but what if nobody is have an English department, in the case of the home when a student needs assistance? What NTU, and where an entire territory population if there is a lack of resources, tutors or lectur- does not have an English department. ers to help? What use is that? It takes more This afternoon I will be going to the Aus- than a few spare seats and a light on to fill tralian National University where they are those extra 20 places and to run a universi- facing the closure of their classics department. ty—something that I think this government is So it is not an isolated case. This is not just yet to grapple with, let alone comprehend. restricted to regional universities. The quality 5748 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 of our education is under threat and yet was rewarded to such a degree that the weal- students are paying more for this privilege. thy were afforded a substantial advantage. So That disdain for equity and fairness is also I do acknowledge that this government is contained in another measure in this bill. perhaps trying to evenly distribute or make On 15 May Senator Vanstone issued a more widely available some of those dis- challenge to the Australian Democrats and the counts that were introduced by the former opposition to vote down—dare we vote government. But it is an extension of a down—the introduction of a 25 per cent privilege that is not available to those students discount for up-front payments of HECS debts who do not have money. of over $500. If the media reports are cor- Not content with lowering the threshold at rect—and I am always willing to place a little which people repay their HECS debt to 27 per degree of scepticism when reading the me- cent less than average weekly earnings—a dia—then the minister stated that this change measure which came into effect on 1 July—an was good news for students and that this additional burden which again raises the ire would not favour those richer students—that of HECS debtors against this government, is, those students who had ready access to they have now decided to make it easier for wealth or cash. those people with money. If you cannot afford The introduction of a 25 per cent discount the up-front discount on your band one HECS for payments over $500 is only fair in the debt for a three-year degree you will owe context that this same discount is already $10,069. If you can afford to pay it upfront it available for those students who have access will be $7,425. At the other end of the scale, to the wealth required to make a full and up- take band three, the HECS debt at the end of front payment of their liability before the three years is $17,682. The amount that you census date. We described it as a bit like a will have to pay courtesy of the discount for mugger leaving you a tip. payment upfront is $12,375. For the majority of students who cannot Put simply, on graduation a student who has afford to pay their HECS upfront this is a no choice but to defer their payment will have regressive measure. You only have to look at a HECS bill 43 per cent greater than the the statistics of the types of students who are payments made by their more wealthy class- making up-front payments to realise that. As mate. So if the person standing right next to recently as 1995 there is public policy advice them in the graduation ceremony has more on this that clearly shows that the students money they will have less of a debt. Accord- who have the ability to make those payments ing to Swindler’s List, a recent study, that I tend to be older, professional and, in many am sure the minister is familiar with, by the cases, working students. We do argue that it Deakin University Students Association: rewards those students who have access to People earning well below average earnings could wealth more so than others. That is the pay nearly 70% more for the same degree as overwhelming direction of this government. someone earning $37,263 and more than three times the figure of someone who pays their HECS We now have a higher education system upfront... where students are not charged according to The government argues that they are not their eventual earnings but they are charged rewarding those with access to money. Since a combination of the cost of their course and most women will earn less than and take their expected earnings, their potential earn- longer than men to repay their HECS debt, ings. I do not think that happens anywhere ‘. . . more women will pay much more for else in the world. The differential HECS is a their degrees than men’. That is the finding of tax on the income a student or a graduate may Swindler’s List. We know that women are never earn. It is a system where someone less likely to repay their HECS debt. By the doing secretarial studies or science is charged age of 30, they are five times less likely than at the second highest level of HECS. men to repay their HECS debt. I am sure I acknowledge that the Labor Party created those statistics have altered only slightly since the HECS system where up-front payment the NATSEM modelling of 1992. It is a bit Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5749 ironic considering this week is blue stocking complain when they are still waiting to week when we not only commemorate the receive an Austudy payment. No-one can first female academics but we seek to remove convince me or them that it is appropriate that the barriers to participation and entry into students who applied for their Austudy, say, higher education for women. in January or February should still be waiting I was also amazed to hear the rhetoric in for it in the middle of the year. We do have this chamber on Monday when the minister many examples of people who were still responded to a dorothy dixer about the fact waiting for their Austudy notice of assessment that this government was not intending to in, say, June or July. They are still waiting leave young people with a great amount of today for reassessments or appeals. So the debt because they had cleared the so-called media attention may have been moved on, but budget black hole. This generation is the debt I can assure you that those students will never generation. More than ever before, young forget how they were treated by this govern- people are leaving universities, schools and so ment and how this government handled their on with debts on their heads—debts the size affairs. of their parents’ houses if you take into These changes are indeed like the mugger account a combination of HECS and Austudy leaving you a tip. Australian universities have loans. been mugged of six per cent of their operating If you are a poor university the government grant from now until the year 2001 and now is saying to you, ‘We will offer you a small they are being given a tip of $26 million in amount of the moneys that we ripped away the restructuring package. Students are being from you last year,’—in the form of the told, ‘If you have ready access to wealth, we restructuring package—‘but we will continue will give bonus too.’ That is another slap in to rip you off for the next four years anyway.’ the face for those who are not able to pay. If you are a poor or average student then the Unlike the coalition, the Australian Demo- good news from this minister and this govern- crats believe in intergenerational equity. We ment is that you will get a discount on an up- believe in social justice, the right to a fair go front payment of more than $500. I presume and to participate fully in society regardless that the government is hoping that the stu- of wealth. That includes access to education dents who cannot afford $500 are not able to regardless of background. We will support do the sums to see that yet again they are the this bill today, but we will continue to do our ones who are being hit hardest and missing utmost to restore quality and accessibility to out. the education system. I move: I feel that the government is rubbing salt At the end of the amendment, add: into the wound. I have said that we will "and support this measure today because we will (e) notes that these cuts have been made to a do anything to give some people an oppor- higher education sector which was already tunity to repay their HECS debts, but what we under immense pressure as a result of the funding decline of thirteen per cent of object to vehemently is the fact that it is Equivalent Full Time Student Units over the constantly the rich who are rewarded. Wheth- thirteen year term of the Hawke-Keating er it is by this higher education policy under government". this government or the former government, Senator DENMAN (Tasmania) (9.51 the discounts benefit those with ready access a.m.)—I rise to speak in the second reading to money. debate on the Higher Education Funding It added salt to the wounds when the Amendment Bill (No. 1) 1997. There appears minister dared us to vote down this measure. to be a perception that, over the 13-year She added a double dare claiming that stu- period that the Labor government was in dents have a tendency to want to complain power, there was a winding down of support and therefore we should support the measures. for tertiary education. Nothing could be That tendency has never been more justified further from the truth, as funding was mas- than it is now. Students have the right to sively improved to this sector of education. 5750 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

By the close of the previous government’s 13- students and families who do not have ad- year period in office, doubling of the tertiary equate funds. intake was attained. That was no mean feat. As has been said, students from lower I mention this because I am concerned that, socioeconomic bands who require assistance as we all know, this government has been will not get it. There will be a shutting out, as tinkering in the tertiary education sector; the in the old days, of those individuals from result of which could not be better exempli- these bands. It is a shame, because it will not fied than by the introduction of this bill. assist in developing our intellectual base. The I cannot fathom to what end this govern- cuts to the operating grants will not neces- ment has targeted the tertiary education sector sarily be felt immediately; they will have so vigorously. The whole manner in which more of an impact in the years ahead. The the universities have been treated by the cuts to operating grants have not stopped, government is saddening. We built up the either. In the year 2000, a further funding tertiary sector over 13 years, and the govern- reduction of one per cent, realising $47.3 ment seems to be on track to destroy it within million, will be imposed. half that time. The government claims that, It has been a tough period for young adults because of their efforts, they have strength- with these cuts and savings being realised. ened the framework of this sector. It is They are in the front line. It must be hard for claimed that this bill builds on this strong students, for example, to pay up-front fees for framework by supporting rationalisation of attendance at optional study sessions. But then programs and joint development of infrastruc- it has not been easy for the hardworking ture. We have now witnessed a massive mums and dads who only want the best for cutting of funds, and savings made by chan- their children in what is becoming an increas- ges to HECS. That will cause a curtailment in ingly competitive environment. growth that I expect will be felt in the years I understand that there are now 25 per cent ahead. It is difficult to gauge the effect of fewer non-fee paying university places avail- these cuts on the nation as a whole. Certainly, able than there were a couple of years ago. I rural Australia has felt the changes. do not know how accurate that figure is, but The strong framework that this government it is very disturbing. I expect that parents talks about having built is a furphy. We know from wealthy backgrounds will not be too that institutions are struggling to attract concerned, but it is certainly going to be investment capital for new technologies and difficult for those parents who are less fortu- teaching materials. We now know that the nate. demands have become so great because of It has also been a tough period for our vice- these cuts that the only way to get universities chancellors. They are alarmed about the way back up to speed and competing international- this government has caused future investment ly is by a large injection of Commonwealth in the sector to be placed in doubt. The government funding. university administrators will find it difficult The funds provided under this bill are a to put into place concrete plans to cope with step in the right direction, but they are a drop the cuts because of the absence of an alloca- in the ocean as to what is required to clean up tion of funding amounts beyond 1998. There the mess that this government has initiated. is no doubt that there must be accountability Our young people have experienced and in how we spend the tertiary sector dollar. continue to experience first hand increases in But, for the federal government to cut to a their HECS charges with the introduction of stage whereby that cutting fundamentally the double whammy of lower repayment damages the sector resulting in the necessity thresholds. It is difficult to see how the for there to be a redressing of the imbalance implementation in this bill of the budget by introducing measures such as those con- proposal of a 25 per cent discount for partial tained in this bill, defies explanation. up-front HECS payments of at least $500 or This bill does not go anywhere near far more will assist many of those struggling enough to assist higher education institutions Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5751 that have been crushed and will be further gaining revenue by selling life memberships crushed, as I have explained. My home they found out in the end that they had so institution, the University of Tasmania— many people on life memberships they were which should be playing a leading role in not getting in any new revenue. ensuring that our youth in regions like the We have a similar kind of problem in this North West Coast of Tasmania remain and case in that what you have is an expected receive quality education—has suffered repayment at some stage. When you get short because of the reduction of 160 jobs. All the of money, you try to draw in that expected social and economic commentators within the payment earlier but, of course, that leaves state are advising that a major problem is the potential problems in the down years for that retention of our young adults at tertiary level, expected revenue which will no longer be so it is sad that the budget cuts have been coming at a later date. It is simply shifting the levied so hard on the island of Tasmania. problem. It is not providing extra revenue; it Let us hope that the provisions in this bill is shifting the problem to later years. will at least go some way towards ameliorat- We have had long-term concerns about ing the damage caused. But, unfortunately, I providing incentives for richer students to pay will not hold my breath. off their HECS debt. Although it reduces their Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) debt, which the Greens (WA) support, it does (9.58 a.m.)—The Higher Education Funding not reduce the debt for all students, only those Amendment Bill (No. 1) 1997 is not one on who can afford to pay. We then end up with which I feel enthusiastic about voting either a situation where poorer students who cannot for or against because both are problematic. pay their debt are suffering the full debt while Voting ‘no’ votes against slight increases in students who can pay receive a 25 per cent funding and the discount in clarification of discount or more on their HECS debt and are the debt. There are potentially some positive paying far less. This clearly is not an equi- measures, but I will explain what some of table repayment system. these issues are. A related issue is the level of HECS repay- The bill does three things: it provides an ments. Four per cent, five per cent or six per additional discount for students making cent of a middle income is more than a tax on voluntary contributions of $500 or more some people repaying their HECS debt in- towards their HECS debt; it makes amend- voluntarily. One of my constituents put the ments to supplementary funding; and it high HECS repayments threshold as the clarifies when students’ HECS debts can be reason why he and his wife may go bankrupt waived. First of all, the provision of an over the next fortnight. With the increase in additional discount for students making the HECS repayment threshold from 1 July, voluntary contributions of $500 or more the bank will foreclose on them with more towards their HECS debts. You need to have money coming out of their bank accounts some basic economics to look at this kind of involuntarily. This puts enormous pressure on measure. families where the ex-student trying to pay off This is not the first time that such measures their HECS debt is the sole income earner for have taken place. I remember seeing similar the family. This is where the HECS debt does things under Labor. You have to wonder not just affect the person who is receiving an about long-term planning when it is necessary education but it also affects their ability to to bring forward expected payments of such support their families. a nature. It does not mean that extra money In this case, the sole income earner also is coming into the system. Of course, when paying the debt is a woman with a husband you give extra discounts, the total revenue and children. They believe what the federal that is coming in will in fact be less. It is a government is doing is very unfair. When she bit like what happened a few years ago when took a degree under the HECS system she a great many health clubs in Australia got believed the government at the time that the into financial trouble. Although they were HECS repayments would be affordable for 5752 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 people, but they are not. It is now an open results of the higher education review in matter that HECS is a tax on education, but December 1997. The higher education sector for some that tax is crippling. It is ironic that is still in the throes of dealing with the even a conservative government which pur- government’s 1996-97 budget changes which ports to represent families does not look at the cut a total of $623 million over four years impacts of the increased HECS repayments on from the budget. young couples and families. Operating grants are to be cut by one per In relation to amendments to supplementary cent in 1997, three per cent in 1998 and one funding, the $10.2 million in 1997-98 for per cent in 1999. These budget changes have restructuring and rationalising activities is no already had a massive effect on the student sweetener. It is to help universities implement intake and socioeconomic background of the $1 billion in cuts by sacking staff, down- students, course quality, courses offered, staff sizing departments and so on. The money cuts and university infrastructure. At the same may also be used to help ex-colleges of time, operating grants have been cut. The advanced education which ran the bulk of government forced universities to over enrol shared industry places to restructure courses. to mask the fact that the usual intake of The Commonwealth industry places scheme, students amongst higher scores was down. which paid for 60 per cent of an industry This means that limited dollars have to be place while the industry funded the rest, has stretched even further. been scraped. The Greens found it difficult to For those students who have been prevented see why the government would be subsidising from attending university because of the cost, industry training at universities and hope that the youth allowance changes means that if industry will meet the shortfall in funds if they cannot afford to study they will not have they want university level training in their an income at all. This is a callous and irre- sectors to continue. It is funny, isn’t it, that sponsible government that does not want to people are being asked to pay for services invest in young people unless they are all of which you would normally expect taxpayers’ a particular social class. money to pay for but industry is being subsi- I, therefore, will find myself out of the dised for training which actually benefits chamber when the vote for this bill takes them. place. But I would like to indicate that I will In relation to circumstances under which be supporting the ALP second reading amend- HECS debts can be waived, it is important ment and the amendment to that amendment that students are not charged for units they do that has been moved by Senator Stott Despoja not complete. However, under part 4, subsec- for the Australian Democrats. tion 20(2)(c), the onus is on the student to Senator CARR (Victoria) (10.07 a.m.)—I apply to the secretary but this will not func- would like to speak against the amendment tion well unless students know their rights in moved to my second reading amendment by this regard. I hope the government makes debt Senator Stott Despoja for the Australian remission a part of the HECS literature that Democrats. This is an amendment which is sent to each student periodically about their argues that there was a funding decline of 13 debt so that students can act in their own per cent of equivalent full-time student units interests. over the 13 year term of the Hawke-Keating Normally, the legislation that is before us governments. I put to the Senate that this provides funding for the next triennium. amendment should be opposed because it is However, this bill provides funding only for factually incorrect. 1998 and not for 1999 and 2000. We talk Essentially, there will be those around who about the necessity for certainty and for some would always argue that there should be more sort of security within business, but it is money allocated than has been allocated—and interesting that the university sector is being I do not dispute that claim that is often made. held on tenterhooks. Why is this? One view But to state, as it does, in this amendment is that the government is waiting for the that there was a funding decline of 13 per Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5753 cent for effective full-time student units over propaganda that the minister has been trying 13 years I maintain is just wrong. If the to push about in recent times. Democrats were arguing that there was a All of the particular funds were transferred funding decline of seven per cent for the back to the universities. That is a fact. The operating grants if measured on a per student funds into universities actually increased basis, then I could argue the toss about that. dramatically under Labor. Capital funding in But I would essentially have to acknowledge 1997 in the last year of the triennium of the that there was a seven per cent decline in the Labor government was $284 million—an operating grants if you measured them on that increase of 440 per cent in terms of the base particular scale. What that statistic does is figure of 1983 which had capital funding of misrepresent the total amount of money that $52 million. Capital funding per EFTSU more was actually spent in higher education under than tripled during the period of the Labor the Labor government. government from $200 in 1983 to $670 in Higher education funding is measured on a 1997. The research funding increased fivefold student basis. That part is accurate, but there from $78 million in 1983 to $385 million in is a total amount of money that needs to be 1997. On a per EFTSU basis, research fund- considered, not just one particular measure. ing increased by 200 per cent from $300 in Commonwealth higher education expenditure 1983 to $910 in 1997. increased by four per cent between 1983 and Of course, we do see the statistic pumped 1997. That is more accurate. The increase was out every now and then in a more complete from $12,110 per student to $12,530 per form in terms of the use of operating grants. student. But such figures take into account the I repeat: that figure can be accounted for full spending on higher education, not just simply by the changes in the calculations that one aspect of it. were made. The measurements that were used What occurred was that the Commonwealth were measuring different things. If you look increased expenditure on higher education at at the total amount of funding spent on higher a greater rate than it did on student places. education over the period of the Labor Funding increased in real terms by 69 per government you see a change of 69 per cent cent from $3.1 billion in 1983 to $5.3 billion in total expenditure by the Labor government in 1997 under the Labor government. Over on higher education—a massive shift in the same period, Commonwealth funded expenditure which reflected Labor’s view that student places increased by 63 per cent from there should be a mass higher education 260,000 EFTSU in 1983 to 424,500 EFTSU sector in this country, that we should move to in 1997. a democratic higher education sector in this As I say, operating grants per EFTSU did country, and that there should be an oppor- decrease by seven per cent from 11,600 in tunity for as many Australians as possible to 1983 to 10,730 in 1997. But this decline in go to university. I think in a large measure operating grants, the share of the total higher the Dawkins reforms were able to see that education funding, is due to the dramatic introduced. increases in funding for capital and research What you saw under Labor was the in- activities under the period of the Labor creased capacity for ordinary Australians to government. There was a massive transfer of actually attend a university. It was not perfect. research funding previously included in the I have made this point many times. We hear operating grants to the Australian Research from the minister this red rag view that she Council from 1989, so it was a matter of now expresses that university should be open changing one particular column to another in to the proletariat. I commend her for that. The terms of the way in which these calculations truth of the matter is that the funding policies were made by the department. That accounts of this government prohibit that. They actual- for the drop in this particular statistic. It was ly work in the opposite direction. We see a measurement change that resulted in what from this government a move back to an appears to be a drop, as indicated in the elitist model of the 1950s that discourages 5754 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 working people from participating in the participate in university, by the removal of higher education sector in this country. 21,000 places from the higher education But it does the Democrats no service sector. whatsoever to come into the Senate and put As a result, it has seen a drop in Common- a position on the table here which is factually wealth contributions from her department, as incorrect. It is a distortion and a distortion a whole of government expenditure, from which I would expect from the minister but about 11.1 per cent to about 8.7 per cent. As not from the Democrats. I might point to the a priority, this government is spending less distortion put by the minister. Recently we and less on education. It is lowering that saw a similar sort of exercise undertaken at priority as we see each successive budget the estimates committee when the minister measure being introduced. It is a commitment brought in a very large sheet of paper— that this minister has fully supported. Senator Campbell—Mr Acting Deputy Senator Campbell—Mr Acting Deputy President, on a point of order: I draw your President, I take a point of order as to rel- attention to the fact that Senator Carr is evance. You have already directed Senator addressing a quite specific amendment to the Carr to address his remarks to the amend- second reading motion. I would think in terms ment. The amendment does not refer in any of relevance he would need to keep his way to the subject that is now being can- remarks fairly strictly to the amendment vassed by Senator Carr. It is an amendment proposed by Senator Stott Despoja. I do not by the Democrats which refers specifically to think that something the minister said in funding under the previous Labor government. estimates could possibly be termed relevant to If Senator Carr wants to remark upon the this quite specific debate. I think Senator percentage decrease in per capita funding Carr, from memory, has already made a very under his previous administration, we wel- eloquent contribution to the second reading come him doing that, but he must be relevant debate in general terms. He should restrict his to the amendment. You have already ruled on remarks to the quite specific terms of the that point of order. I would ask you again to Democrat amendment. draw Senator Carr’s attention to the relevant standing order and ask him to address his The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT remarks to the amendment. (Senator Foreman)—You need to speak directly to the amendment, Senator Carr. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— There is no point of order. The amendment does cover a broad area but I will ask you, Senator Carr, to relate your Senator CARR—Thank you, Mr Acting remarks directly to the amendment. Deputy President. I am speaking directly to the amendment, which says that there was a Senator CARR—Thank you very much, decline of 13 per cent equivalent full-time Mr Acting Deputy President. What I was student units over the 13 years. The amend- indicating is that the minister tried to propa- ment makes this claim. It is a claim that the gate this myth, tried to propagate this distor- minister has propagated at recent estimates tion, tried to propagate this untruth that there committee hearings. It is a claim which was was a decline in expenditure under the Labor advanced in what I would have thought was government—a proposition which is quite quite an expensive little exercise which tried contrary to the facts and is quite contrary to to get the department to run out these distor- the fundamental logic that one would expect tions, to suggest that somehow the action a minister to have understood. And she taken by this government is to be legitimised produced a chart which suggests concentrating in a manner that would suggest other than the on operating grants rather than on the equiva- facts—that this government has substantially lent full-time student units, which is the basis cut moneys to the higher eduction sector, it of funding across the full gamut of higher has substantially undermined the quality of education expenditure. the university sector and it has substantially What this chart highlighted was that, under undermined the capacity of Australians to her government, there has been a decline in Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5755 the operating grants measured on an EFTSU contrary to Senator Carr’s assertion in a basis, a decline which is quite significant and blatant attempt to be an apologist for the quite clear for all to see. It gives the lie to the former government, which did introduce user suggestion she constantly makes that, some- pays education in this country. how or other, higher education funding has not been cut. Her own department’s figures Leave granted. prove that what she has been putting to this Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— Senate is quite clearly wrong. There has been Minister for Employment, Education, Training a substantial reduction in expenditure, a and Youth Affairs) (10.22 a.m.)—The Higher substantial reduction in commitment and a Education Funding Amendment Bill (No. 1) substantial reduction in the priority that this 1997 does a number of things. As senators government gives to education. have outlined, it has provisions relating to I would urge the Senate not to support price movements for a number of university Senator Stott Despoja’s amendment. It is quite grants, the introduction of a 25 per cent clearly wrong. I would ask the Senate to discount for partial up-front HECS payments support the second reading amendment as of $500 or more, streamlining of arrange- proposed by the Labor Party. ments for students applying for the remission Senator STOTT DESPOJA (South Aus- of their HECS debts, and the introduction of tralia) (10.20 a.m.)—I seek leave to make a the government’s rationalisation and restruc- few brief remarks. turing program. Senator Faulkner—Mr Acting Deputy In response to comments made by senators, President, I take a point of order. Would I want to make a number of brief comments Senator Stott Despoja mind quantifying for us on these changes. Senator Stott Despoja what ‘brief’ means? We can grant leave for leaves me in a constant state of confusion as a particular time limit. to what her views really are. On the one hand, Senator Stott Despoja puts out press releases Senator STOTT DESPOJA—Mr Acting saying, ‘Oh, this move by the government to Deputy President, I am happy to be restricted give people a 25 per cent discount if they pay to one minute, if that is acceptable. their HECS up front and can only pay $500 Leave granted. is unfair. This will benefit the rich.’ On the other hand she says, ‘Well, if other people Senator STOTT DESPOJA—I reject most who pay all their HECS up front can get a 25 of the assertions put forward by Senator Carr. per cent discount, then in that context it is fair However, if he is true to his word, he will be because, if you haven’t got the money to pay willing to accept the second reading amend- all of your HECS up front, why should you ment moved by the Democrats with the miss out on the discount?’ amendment to the amount of funding. How- ever, I do state that the National Tertiary We understand that. That is why we have Education Union and many other advocacy introduced this change. Not everybody has the and representative organisations widely use money to pay all their HECS up front. We the 13 per cent figure because it is indeed want to help people who have less money and correct. It is even in the coalition’s policy give them the same opportunity to get a document—not that I expect that to sway discount. Senator Stott Despoja seems to Senator Carr, but it is a widely accepted understand that. She says, ‘In the context of figure in relation to the amount of funding this other discount being available if you pay decline under the former government in it all off up front, then we will allow it and relation to EFTSU places. I do seek leave to support it,’ but in the next breath she rushes amend the amendment so that in the third out and says, ‘This is advantaging the rich.’ line, instead of ‘of Equivalent Full-Time However, the whole purpose of this amend- Student Units’, it reads ‘per Equivalent Full- ment is to ensure that more people can choose time Student Unit’. But I am happy to leave to have the option to pay a portion of their the amendment because the facts are correct, HECS up front and still get the discount. 5756 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

While I am on the subject of HECS pay- I turn now to operating grant funding per ments, I will respond to some of Senator student. The Labor Party cannot have it both Margetts’s comments. Senator Margetts ways. We have produced a graph which has rightly points out that some people, in any already been incorporated in Hansard. That event, will not have the money to pay up graph shows that when Labor came into office front. Even with the greater access we expect it structured university funding so that operat- to get by virtue of this change—and we are ing grants—otherwise generally described as grateful for the support of it—some people funding primarily available for teaching, will still not be able to pay up front. I under- although I understand that that can be disput- stand that. But as I am advised, and as I ed—were reduced per student. understand it, the reason why the discount is You could cut a lot of money from univer- provided up front is that it is roughly the sities tomorrow and, if you cut the equivalent equivalent value of giving a student a long- in students, your funding per student would term, no real interest rate loan. be the same. Equally, you could give a lot Many people in this chamber will under- more money to universities—and there is no stand that the HECS debt is the contribution doubt that the higher education sector has you make to your education; it is not the full been the beneficiary of more public funding cost. You do not have to pay it up front. One for a very long time—but if you put in a of the most creative aspects of Labor’s time bigger increase of students than money, you in office was the introduction of HECS, with would debase the funding per student. the realisation that people could not necessari- I know, and we all know—although perhaps ly pay up front, and thus allowing paying it the boys in here don’t know, but all the girls back later and not putting a real interest rate know because we are good shoppers— on it. Senator Carr—What a sexist remark! If you want to borrow money to buy a house, a car, a motorbike or whatever, you Senator VANSTONE—When we are ahead will not be able to borrow it with no real we are allowed to say we are ahead. Have a interest rate unless you borrow it from your little bit of a sense of humour, Senator Carr. family—from your mother or grandmother or Just try to relax a bit and enjoy life more. someone. A bank will always want a real A good shopper will always be able to interest rate. Giving young Australians a loan, confirm that, just because you pay more for in effect, to cover their HECS contribution something, it does not mean you are getting and saying, ‘You don’t have to pay this back more. I know that the amount of dollars you until later,’ and not having a real interest rate spend on something is not always an indicator on it, is a real gift. I understand that the value of quality, but it is one indicator of quality, of a no real interest rate loan that can be paid and it should be taken into account. The facts off over a very long period of time roughly are that, while more money was put into equates to the 25 per cent discount. higher education—and nobody doubts that— That would obviously change depending on the real test of how much is available to teach what real interest rates were at any particular your son or daughter going to university is time—and we only have to remind ourselves what the funding is per student. On that basis, how high they were under Labor. I remind the Labor government failed. Senator Margetts that that is the reason that In operating grant terms, funding per stu- has been given to me for pitching it at that dent was around the $12,000 mark when level. In a sense, both groups get a benefit: Labor came into office in 1983. You took it the student who wants to pay up front forgoes down to under $11,000—to about $10,800 or the opportunity of a long-term no real interest $10,900—in 1991. That was the funding per rate loan and, in exchange for forgoing that, student, so there was less money per student gets 25 per cent off HECS. However, I to teach them. Without doubt, you then understand the difficulties you were referring started to repair the damage, but the changes to. we have made have largely been misunder- Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5757 stood in the community, and misunderstood I come briefly to Senator Stott Despoja’s as a consequence of the sorts of comments remarks about the Northern Territory not peddled by Senator Carr. It is true that this having a full range of courses available. It is government has made significant savings in this government’s view that there should be higher education. It is not true that we have more diversity, freedom and choice in the cut money drastically from universities. Both higher education sector. We think the changes of those statements can be true. Anyone who we have made have encouraged universities understands higher education funding will to follow that path. It was a farce from day appreciate that. one to suggest that we had a unified national What we have done is broaden the base of system, that 37 universities around Australia funding. We have asked students to pay more, were all the same. They never were and they and students are now paying more. But never will be. More importantly, this govern- universities around Australia have undoubted- ment is prepared to say, ‘We don’t want them ly got more money this year than they had to be.’ We want them to be different. We last year. The university sector is estimated to want each university to follow the path that have—we can all argue at the edges—some it feels is special for its course. $33 million more this year than last year. The I am pleased to see that in Western Austral- savings we have made—in a sense, reducing ia, for example, the universities are getting the contribution we put in—have been together and, as I understand it, moving very achieved by getting the students to pay more, closely towards having a real focus on explor- not by cutting money from universities. ation, mining and petroleum research. What When universities say, ‘We will have a one a perfect example of what Western Austral- per cent, three per cent, one per cent and one ia—the mining and exploration state—would per cent cut over four years,’ what they are want to focus on. If you said to me, ‘Would saying is that it is a cut to the money they you be sorry if every university in Western thought they were going to have. If someone Australia didn’t offer an MBA?’ I would say, said to me, ‘You’re getting a cut in your pay,’ ‘No. Why do we want every university or if someone went up to a man or a woman offering the same thing?’ So they will not all on the street or a person on the Balmain ferry be offering the same thing. They will have to or in a Clapham omnibus—which is what I cut down. think it used to be described as—and said, If you are a smaller university and you try ‘You’re getting a cut in your pay,’ they would to offer everything to everyone, my prediction think and I would think that you meant a cut is that you will not be successful at it. You in this year’s pay. They do not think you are have to pick your niche and be good at that. talking about not getting a pay rise they were That is what has to happen. So there is not an hoping to get. In effect, I think that is a fair expectation that students will simply be able way to characterise what has happened to to walk into the university next door and do universities. They are not getting the pay rise whatever subject they like and that universi- they thought they were going to get. Their ties have some obligation to offer every plans for their future operating grant funding course. That makes them all the same. It have been cut, but this year they end up with makes them all plain. It does not allow any of more money than they had last year. them to pursue their particular paths of excel- On that basis, I find it very, very difficult lence. when universities say, ‘We have to shut this I think I have covered most of the points I department because of what the government’s wanted to respond to. I did want to highlight, done.’ I want to say, ‘Hold on. Universities as I have said, that operating grant funding have got more money than last year. Why is per student has been kept stable by us. I think this so?’ Universities have to be responsible that is vitally important. We have increased for managing themselves and what they do. research funding—as you know, Senator You do not want a federal education minister Carr—over and above the increases that Labor trying to run 37 universities. put into it, which were falling to decreases, 5758 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 incidentally, in your out years. We have, not have the same resources as the big nonetheless, in a very difficult budgetary metropolitan universities. climate, managed to put in more, as we have As I have said before, regional universities in a number of areas. In particular, I would are a very vital part of Australia’s higher like to highlight in this debate that we have education system, and they highlight the managed, in this very difficult budgetary differences that there are. How stupid was it climate, to put more money into indigenous to say that we have a unified national system higher education, and I welcome the support and to pretend that a small regional university on all sides for those commitments. would be the same as a large metropolitan I come lastly to the rationalisation and one. It was just crazy from the beginning. restructuring program that is dealt with in this Ten of the 36 publicly funded universities bill. It has been presented by some as some in Australia are located in regional and rural sort of sweetener that the government dreamt areas. Some of these institutions are, under- up after the changes it made last year. Clear- standably, amongst the smallest universities ly, it has been presented as that by people in Australia, but all of them are as important who either wanted to deceive or could not be to us as the biggest. That is very important to bothered reading last year’s budget docu- repeat: they are amongst the smallest, but they ments, because we indicated in the very are as important as the biggest. When you beginning that we would be looking to a realise that the theme for our education policy rationalisation and restructuring package. and direction is freedom, diversity and choice, you will understand that we are very keen to When you encourage more freedom in ensure that diversity in the sector is promoted universities, when you encourage more and protected, and that means the small are as choice, when you encourage change, when valuable to us as the big. you give more flexibility to universities, there is going to be some change. If you are a The Northern Territory University, for larger university or a larger corporation with example, is a vital part of the economic infra- greater wealth, obviously you can withstand structure of the Northern Territory. Without change financially more than others can, and it, access to benefits of higher education we recognised that from the very beginning. would be severely restricted. University Change can be expensive, and people who campuses are a vital part of the life of other need to accommodate it but who do not have regional communities like Launceston, Lis- as great a resource as others may need assist- more, Dubbo and Ballarat. In these regional ance. So we indicated in the very beginning— areas, university campuses improve access to this is not some last-minute budget suggestion higher education. A campus in a regional for this year; we indicated this last year—that town can, in fact, increase interest. Simply we would be putting forward such a package. having it there can increase interest in univer- sity study. We have committed $26 million over the next four years to fund this program. It is The funds from this bill will allow projects being funded to assist higher education which can strengthen the viability of small institutions to reposition themselves through regional institutions. You only need to speak the rationalisation of courses and infrastruc- to Shane Stone or Minister Adamson in the ture. We want that to be happening. We do Northern Territory to see how strongly they not want every university to try to be the would urge the federal government to imple- same as everyone next door. ment this scheme because they realise the vital part that the Northern Territory Universi- This program will help universities achieve ty plays in the Northern Territory. I would not long-term efficiencies and enhance the effec- say that you are sick of the representations tiveness of the provision of higher education. from them, but sometimes a point is made That is what this is for. It is an important part and it does not need to be repeated. That is of the government’s commitment to regional fair enough. The people from the Northern communities. They are the universities that do Territory always argue their case strongly. Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5759

The investment that the Commonwealth The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— makes to these communities does, in fact, The question now is that Senator Carr’s flow on to the economy of the regions. As amendment, as amended, be agreed to. has been recognised by a recent report to the Question put: West committee, all studies suggest that the activities of regional universities produce That the amendment (Senator Carr’s), as significant increases in regional economic amended, be agreed to. activity. This government recognises how The Senate divided. [10.45 a.m.] important universities are to regional commu- (The Acting Deputy President—Senator nities. Through this program, we are standing B.K. Childs) by these communities to ensure that they Ayes ...... 32 continue to have access to higher education. Noes ...... 32 We are safeguarding access to higher educa- —— tion for regional Australia. Universities which Majority ...... 0 are less able to finance restructuring from —— their own resources will be given priority AYES under this program. This includes the small to Allison, L. Bishop, M. medium sized higher education institutions Bolkus, N. Bourne, V. Brown, B. Carr, K. that are located outside state capital cities. Childs, B. K. Collins, J. M. A. Conroy, S. * Cook, P. F. S. There is nothing more I want to say other Cooney, B. Crowley, R. A. than to simply repeat: universities have more Denman, K. J. Foreman, D. J. money this year than they had last year. The Forshaw, M. G. Gibbs, B. cuts were to their plans for future funding, not Hogg, J. Kernot, C. to the money they have this year. They will Lees, M. H. Lundy, K. end up with a bit less in total in a couple of Mackay, S. Margetts, D. McKiernan, J. P. Murray, A. years time, but the important point is that Neal, B. J. O’Brien, K. W. K. operating grant funding per student has Ray, R. F. Reynolds, M. effectively been maintained at 1995-96 levels, Schacht, C. C. Stott Despoja, N. which is good news for higher education. West, S. M. Woodley, J. That is, of course, recognised by students. NOES Abetz, E. Alston, R. K. R. That is why, even though we are providing Boswell, R. L. D. Brownhill, D. G. C. more government funded undergraduate Calvert, P. H. Campbell, I. G. places this year, we have trimmed the number Chapman, H. G. P. Coonan, H. Eggleston, A. Ellison, C. of postgraduate courses we are prepared to Ferguson, A. B. Ferris, J pay for, but we are providing more govern- Gibson, B. F. Heffernan, W. * ment funded undergraduate places this year Herron, J. Hill, R. M. than last year, and we will provide more Kemp, R. Knowles, S. C. again next year. Despite that increase in the Lightfoot, P. R. Macdonald, I. number of government funded undergraduate MacGibbon, D. J. McGauran, J. J. J. places—that is, HECS places—universities Minchin, N. H. O’Chee, W. G. Patterson, K. C. L. Payne, M. A. have overenrolled. That tells you that students Reid, M. E. Synon, K. M. around Australia, young Australians, under- Tierney, J. Troeth, J. stand that higher education is a very good Vanstone, A. E. Watson, J. O. W. investment under this government. PAIRS Collins, R. L. Parer, W. R. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT Evans, C. V. Newman, J. M. (Senator Childs)—The question is that Faulkner, J. P. Crane, W. Senator Stott Despoja’s amendment be agreed Murphy, S. M. Macdonald, S. to. Sherry, N. Tambling, G. E. J. * denotes teller Question resolved in the affirmative. Question so resolved in the negative. 5760 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

Bill read a second time, and passed through ment. The economics legislation committee its remaining stages without amendment or has conducted some hearings into this, and I debate. would like to acknowledge the work of my Senate colleague Senator Hogg, who was EXCISE TARIFF AMENDMENT BILL involved in those hearings. I believe he will (No. 1) 1997 be speaking on this issue in the second Second Reading reading contributions. Debate resumed from 20 March, on motion What is noteworthy about the report is that by Senator Alston: the chair of the Senate committee—a govern- ment senator, Senator Ferguson—said in his That this bill be now read a second time. recommendation: Senator SHERRY (Tasmania—Deputy In making the recommendation that the bill pro- Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) ceed, the committee agrees that any loophole in the (10.51 a.m.)—The Excise Tariff Amendment principal legislation that allowed a class of alcohol Bill (No. 1) 1997, which we are considering, beverage to escape the revenue net should be seeks to ensure the continuing excisability of closed. all beverages which contain distilled alcohol, Here we have a situation where the including spirits, regardless of their alcohol government’s own chair of the committee content. The government has introduced this which inquired into this bill has pointed out bill in response to what is known as the CUB, the ludicrous situation that exists in the bill. Carlton and United Breweries, sub ZERO So what does the government do? It ignores case. CUB challenged the Customs Service him. It is obvious to us that Senator Ferguson declaration that sub ZERO was a spirituous is eminently more sensible than the minister beverage for the purposes of sub-item 2(H) of and can see the glaring anomaly that the the tariff act schedule. CUB was successful at government has created but refuses to fix. I both the AAT and the subsequent Federal note that Senator Ferguson is here in the Court appeal which held that sub ZERO was chamber and I give him due credit; he was not a spirituous beverage and therefore was particularly wise on this occasion in respect not subject to excise. to the legislation we are considering. This bill seeks to reverse the Federal Court Senator Ferguson—You are ruining my decision and make such beverages subject to future. excise, effective from 3 February 1996, by Senator SHERRY—The only way I can removing the term ‘spirituous beverages’ from probably help you, Senator Ferguson, is to the schedule and ensuring that the liability to ensure the resignation of a few ministers or pay excise is imposed upon all beverages government parliamentary secretaries. And which contain distilled alcohol, except forti- you should be in the promotion stakes. On the fied wine. performance on this legislation you should be The problem with this bill is that in the up there, Senator Ferguson. government’s usual ad hoc sloppiness when Why would the government want to pursue it comes to tax related legislation they have a bill that will actively encourage product created an anomaly within what are known as substitution and therefore the legal avoidance the P5 food standard categories under which of excise tax and as a consequence a multi- these designer drinks fall. This anomaly is million dollar loss to government revenue? created due to the fact that, while designer This highlights the farce that this bill repre- drinks that are made from a distilled alcohol sents. base—they are also known as RTDs—will be The government is rapidly demonstrating subject to excise, those made from a ferment- what a joke it is when it comes to farcical ed alcohol base will not. legislation. We have had the government As usual, this government proposes to do maintain a charade for many months that the nothing and in the process encourage product new $1.4 billion supertax was in fact a sur- substitution and a revenue loss to the govern- charge and not a tax. In the recent context of Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5761 the goods and services tax debate, we have Secondly, from a health perspective, all had the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) refer to RTDs should be taxed in accordance with the his concept of a GST as a BBIT. I notice he alcohol content so as to encourage moderate was very careful on this occasion to avoid and responsible alcohol consumption. Thirdly, using the description: a goods and services the bill does not establish a taxation system surcharge. whereby a progressive excise is levied upon We have error upon error, mistake upon all P5 beverages in accordance with their mistake, when we get down to the application increasing alcohol content. of this new tax—this is in respect to the new These three concerns basically encapsulate superannuation tax. Due to its failure and all that is wrong with this legislation. From a incompetence, the government cannot even social perspective, it is manifestly irrespon- collect tax from the defined benefits schemes, sible of the government to be promoting the yet they now parade around as the party of consumption of high alcohol excise-free RTDs efficient and fair tax reform. compared to low alcohol excisable RTDs. If the government wants to demonstrate its This bill ensures that young people, who are tax reform credentials, here is a golden very price sensitive, will choose the cheaper, opportunity on a very basic piece of legisla- high alcohol product as against the more tion to show those credentials, but I doubt expensive low alcohol product. This is an that the government will take the opportunity, absolutely ludicrous position and a recipe for as so far it has not demonstrated any propen- disaster, as the community struggles to con- sity to do so in any way, shape or form. front the all too common problem of binge I do not know whether Senator Campbell, drinking and general alcohol and drug abuse. who is handling this legislation for the government, has read the economics legisla- I would have thought that this government tion committee report. He was not in here would be doing everything in its power to when I referred to it earlier, but he should ensure that young Australians are encouraged examine the analysis of my colleague Senator to drink alcohol in moderation rather than in Hogg—who, as I said, did an excellent job at excess. Yet when presented with the oppor- that committee—and also particularly the tunity to do something socially responsible as recommendation of the committee chair, well as be consistent in terms of tax treatment Senator Ferguson, who did draw attention to of light alcoholic beverages, the government the problems with this particular legislation. presents the Senate with a bill full of anoma- lies. I move on to the social consequences of this bill. At a time when there is increasing The anomalies are, firstly, that it is detri- community concern regarding both alcohol mental to government revenue; secondly, it and drug abuse, particularly by young people, actively encourages product substitution to this bill in its present form is socially irre- avoid the excise tax; thirdly, it makes higher sponsible when it comes to encouraging alcohol products much cheaper than low moderate alcohol consumption by young alcohol products. By inference, this has been people. criticised by the government’s own chair of the committee which inquired into the bill, It is worth noting that the University of Senator Ferguson. New South Wales in its submission outlined three principal concerns relating to the bill. The bill has all these faults and the govern- Firstly, the bill would see high alcohol con- ment presents it to the Senate expecting it to tent RTDs produced from a non-excisable be passed in the interests of good public alcohol base from which no excise will be policy. If this is the best the government can paid, while low strength RTDs produced from do under the pretext of correcting a taxation a distilled alcohol base will be subject to anomaly in the excise tax regime, I cannot excise duty at the same rate that applies to wait to see the outcome of the Prime full strength spirits. Minister’s secret tax reform task force. 5762 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

If the government cannot even get it right have moved this amendment. However, the on the basic taxation of RTD products in the opposition will not be supporting it for the P5 food standard, what hope have we got? following reasons. What faith should the Australian people have Labor does not support retrospective legisla- in the government overhauling the Australian tion lightly and the government should not taxation system and Commonwealth-state take this as a sign that the opposition will financial relations? The mind boggles as to support retrospective legislation as a matter of what the Prime Minister’s secret tax reform course—far from it. Retrospective legislation task force is going to come up with based on should always be used rarely and should be the legislation we have before the Senate. the exception rather than the norm. The There are a number of amendments before reason why Labor has chosen to support the the Senate regarding this bill. The Greens, I retrospective approach contained in this bill believe, have circulated an amendment which is that simply not to do so would mean a will close the anomaly that the government windfall gain to RTD manufacturers of $12.6 refuses to acknowledge even exists. From my million. So they would be able to claim back understanding, the amendment will introduce the excise which they have already paid based a two-tier excise taxation regime so that any upon the sub ZERO ruling. It is not that product classified under the P5 food standard different in principle, frankly, from the other that has an alcohol content of five per cent by problems we are faced with as a result of the volume or less, regardless of the alcohol recent High Court decision with respect to source—be it from fermentation or a distilla- state licensing fees, which I understand we tion process—will attract the same excise at will be considering, perhaps this week. the rate of $15.89 per litre of alcohol. Pro- The simple fact is that this money does not ducts which have an alcohol content of belong to the manufacturers; it belongs to the greater than five per cent by volume will consumers. As the manufacturers have no attract excise at the rate of $31.59, when practical means by which to return this money mixed with brandy, and $36.99, when mixed to their rightful owners, we unfortunately are without brandy, per litre of alcohol. left in the position of supporting the best of Labor considers this proposal to be emi- two bad options which will see the govern- nently sensible. Frankly, I am surprised that ment retain the excise it has already collected. the government has left the Greens, hopefully This being said, we would hope that what is the Democrats, Senator Harradine and Labor now in effect a windfall gain from the to clean up their mess. This measure will, in government of $12.6 million will be put to effect, see the introduction of a progressive good use, to help restore in some manner taxation regime based upon alcohol content as some of the programs that the government has opposed to being based upon the production savagely cut in the last two budgets. source of the alcohol. Consequently, less I suggest the government look in this excise will be paid on lower alcohol products context at employment generation programs, than on higher alcohol products. Labor be- which this government seems to have taken lieves this is an entirely appropriate approach delight in cutting, thus helping ensure that to the problem at hand. It also demonstrates unemployment—which remains an intractable a degree of social responsibility which the problem to which this government has no government was either unwilling or unable to answers or solutions—is at least addressed address. with respect to this windfall gain of $12.6 A further amendment before the Senate is million. a Democrat proposal, a simple amendment One other possible use for the $12.6 million which will remove the proposed retrospectivi- would be for the government to devote it to ty from the bill and make the commencement drug abuse programs. We think it entirely date 3 February 1997 instead of 3 February appropriate, given the current debate on drug 1996. The opposition is sympathetic to the abuse—alcohol is a drug, albeit a legal drug intention of the Democrats and to why they that should be used responsibly—that drug Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5763 abuse is another very important and socially ance with the law of the day as interpreted by desirable alternative area to which the $12.6 the Federal Court. million windfall gain which the government In 1994 when Carlton and United Breweries will obtain from the opposition’s support of commenced manufacture of sub ZERO, they retrospective legislation could be devoted. argued that it was not excisable. The Austral- Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) ian Customs Service disagreed and imposed (11.06 a.m.)—The first thing I would like to an excise. Not surprisingly, CUB appealed the say is just how disappointed I am with the ruling with the AAT—the Administrative way in which the government has dealt with Appeals Tribunal—and were vindicated. As the Excise Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 1) a consequence, the government returned the 1997. As soon as I had the opportunity to excise moneys collected from CUB for this examine the bill, I noted a number of prob- purpose. lems. I immediately referred it to the Senate Customs, however, have ignored the impli- Economics Legislation Committee. Looking cations of the AAT decision and continued to back, I am very glad I did so. Once again, the impose excise duty on all other similar low Senate Economics Committee secretariat did alcohol beverages. In the meantime, they a first-rate job. The quality and objectivity appealed this decision with the Federal Court they bring to their task is always extremely and lost. The government is now refusing to helpful to the Senate. accept the implication of decisions by both the AAT and the Federal Court; namely, that Submissions to the committee and witnesses the excise was not dutiable on such beverages at the public hearing on 30 May 1997 identi- under the law at the time. It is insisting that fied numerous problems, problems which its interpretation of the law was correct and could have been fixed prior to tabling of the not the interpretation of the AAT or the bill in the Senate and, even more to the point, Federal Court. prior to this very debate. Unfortunately, the political will to do so was missing and re- The government is insisting that, by back- mains missing. I fear the shadow of macho dating the law to 3 February 1996, it is Treasury intransigence when we need the simply clarifying what it believes was the substance of practical pragmatic common- status quo on that date. It seems to me that sense. Fortunately, the minor parties and the the Federal Court has already clarified what opposition and, in this particular bill, my was the status quo on that date. In fact, it colleague Senator Margetts, have not lacked cannot really be argued that excise was the political will to attempt to repair the payable until 3 February 1997, when the government’s legislation. government changed the law with its an- nouncement. It is a longstanding principle of I will quickly run through what I think are the Senate that it will generally accept chan- the key problems with this bill. The first is ges the government makes to the collection of the issue of retrospectivity. The bill makes the revenue from the date of the announcement. changes effective from 3 February 1996, yet the changes were announced in the Common- Of course, it is no surprise that the govern- wealth Gazette on 3 February 1997, which ment does not want to hand back the $12.6 was the day they were made effective by the million it has collected retrospectively in this excise tariff proposal No. 1 of 1997. manner. The government has sought to add moral persuasion by saying that, if it handed Why is the government seeking to backdate this money back, it would represent a windfall the changes? Such backdating offends every gain to the industry because it is unlikely to principle concerning unjust and unjustified be passed on to the consumers of the product. retrospectivity that the Senate holds dear. The It is true that it would be unlikely to be answer is simple: the government wants to passed on to consumers. Such taxation re- retain revenue that it has already collected. turns, Senator Sherry, never are. Governments The problem stems from the fact that the are unable—and the industries which receive collection of this revenue was not in accord- the excise returns are unable—to pass them 5764 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 back to each individual consumer. It is a excise duty. The taxation of beverages in the nonsense to think they could. P5 category is anomalous. I feel the govern- However, the money should go to the ment should use the opportunity afforded by person who was legally entitled to it at the this bill to rectify the situation. time, which is the company. That person is The government, while acknowledging the the manufacturer who has paid the money anomaly, is refusing to rectify the situation. under protest and who has been vindicated by It simply wants to ensure that the proportion both the AAT and the Federal Court. If the of a beverage comprised of distilled alcohol money is retained by the government, it will be made subject to excise. It wants to do so constitute a windfall gain to the government even though it will provide a competitive since the government is not legally entitled to advantage in terms of excise duties for ready- those moneys, unless, of course, we pass this to-drink products containing fermented alco- bill unamended and change the law retrospec- hol as distinct from distilled alcohol. tively. Evidence has been produced showing that Although the industry has not made much many drinks of this type already on the fuss about this issue, I do not think it should market are imported from New Zealand, be ignored. Organisations such as the Institute giving them a further competitive advantage of Chartered Accountants and the Law Coun- which detrimentally impacts on our balance cil of Australia have pointed out the dangers. of trade. Moreover, domestic manufacturers, They argue that it sets a very unpalatable such as Bundaberg Distillers, who are com- precedent by effectively leaving the interpre- peting in the same market will be encouraged tation of law to public sector officials. to substitute foreign fermented alcohol for Those officials are not, with great respect distilled alcohol from Australia in so-called and regard for their other abilities, renowned ready-to-drink or premixed beverages—for for their fight for civil rights, for personal example, rum and cola—in order to minimise liberties or for justice; the parliament and the tax. courts are. There is no point challenging a Bundaberg Distillers have also indicated ruling or interpretation by Customs officials that, as they do not have brewing facilities at in a court of law knowing that, if you win, their plant, they would be encouraged to the executive government and their like- import fermented products from overseas. In minded bureaucrats will override it by means time this will have a negative impact on of retrospective legislation. Australian investment. In the long run this Retrospectivity is warranted if rorting, fraud will result in significant revenue losses. It has or illegality were involved. In this case there been estimated that the Commonwealth could is no suggestion of this at all, nor is it the face a revenue loss of about $30 million over case that large revenue losses are involved. the next three years if substitution occurs. I Handing back the $12.6 million which the have been unable to understand why the government is not entitled to will not result in government is happy to see this happen. serious repercussions for Australia’s excheq- Unfortunately, this is a government which uer or its economy. For this reason, I will be has yet again lost sight of the long run and moving an amendment to make changes focused on the short run. Decisions to abolish effective from 3 February 1997, which is the bounty assistance for the computer, book, day they were brought into effect by the machine tools and robotics industries, deci- excise tariff proposal and the day they were sions to reduce the 150 per cent tax conces- notified in the Commonwealth Gazette. I note, sion for research and development, and deci- however, that I am likely to lose that. sions to wind back the export market develop- The second issue I would like to raise is ment grants programs are all examples of that of substitutability and associated con- short run decisions. The Democrats told the cerns. As the bill stands, it fails to rectify a government it was wrong and industry tells tax anomaly which is perpetuating the growth the government it is wrong, but that macho in designer drinks which do not incur any intransigence prevails. Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5765

Those were the decisions to ensure that, in proach the government has taken. Had they the short run, budget savings would be im- tabled a bill which was properly thought proved. The fact that in the long run they will through this would not be necessary. have the opposite effect has been of little While the Democrats support the specific concern to this government. So it is not measures of the bill, with the exclusion of surprising to see the same short-sighted retrospectivity, we want the anomalies in the approach being adopted yet again. excise regime rectified. The amendment of the Thirdly, I would like to stress that, if the WA Greens attempts to do this with regard to bill goes through unamended, it will also fail category P5. I have encouraged the govern- to impose an incentive to produce lower ment to do the necessary groundwork and alcohol beverages. This issue is of significant extended an offer for dialogue. Despite the concern to health and community organisa- much better attitude of the new Minister for tions, a number of whom made submissions Customs and Consumer Affairs (Senator to the Senate committee inquiry on this point. Ellison) they have collectively decided to Health and community organisations share the bury their heads in the sand, in my opinion. above concern because they want drinks taxed Fortunately, my colleague Senator Margetts progressively in accordance with their level of has done the government’s work for them. alcohol and not in accordance with the She has devised an amendment which seems method of production. They see this as being to resolve a number of the problems I have important from a health perspective because raised. It also has the approval of industry and it encourages moderate and responsible community and health organisations. For this alcohol consumption. reason, I will be supporting the amendment to The University of New South Wales has be moved by the WA Greens. I will also suggested the bill be amended so that a move an amendment to remove the retrospec- progressive excise is levied upon all P5 tive provisions of the bill, which I hope will beverages in accordance with their alcohol win the support of the Senate after senators content. This is a position shared by the have heard my arguments. Alcohol and Other Drugs Council of Austral- It has been my view that this bill concerns ia. In the majority report of the Senate com- practical matters and should have been re- mittee inquiry into this bill, government solved by the government. It is a sad reflec- senators acknowledged the relevance of the tion on this government when minor parties concerns raised by industry and community in the Senate, operating with minimal re- organisations and the potential adverse social sources, are forced to do the corrective legis- and economic consequences. Yet they did not lation which should have been quite possible recommend that the bill be amended to rectify for the government and for a major govern- identified problems. Instead, the majority of ment department to do, especially after the the committee recommended the bill be very helpful work done by the Senate Eco- passed unamended and that a further inquiry nomics Legislation Committee and its wit- take place. In other words, they toed the nesses. Treasury line. In conclusion, I will read to the Senate a The Democrats see no reason for these letter I wrote to the new Minister for Customs matters to be the subject of an identical repeat and Consumer Affairs on 25 July 1997. It inquiry. This would simply be a waste of time reads: and resources. Moreover, it would be unfair to witnesses and those who made submissions Dear Senator Ellison, and it would also be unfair to subject industry ...... to unnecessary delays and uncertainties in This bill is yet to be debated, but the amendments resolving acknowledged concerns. I also have been circulated. regret that valuable Senate time will be My impression of the Senators views at the Senate wasted needlessly today. I have been forced Economics Committee hearings into this bill were to speak out on this bill because of the ap- that they felt that the issues were of a practical not 5766 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 a political nature. Unfortunately the Majority drinks, which are usually bought by the bottle Report did not reflect that feeling. rather than by the glass as a standard drink. May I recommend that you consider reviewing the I do not wish to penalise these drinks espe- submissions, the Hansard Hearings record, the cially heavily but it is clearly time to stop Majority and Minority committee reports, and the favouring them by allowing them to escape circulated amendments. When I discussed the tax treatment. My amendment would assure matter in June with officers from Customs, they felt that with the expectation of the Bill being debated that they are taxed. last Senate sitting, that it was too late to change The primary issue in relation to the tax course. treatment of these drinks under the excise act The Winter break provides a breathing space for is that they fit no clearly defined category. the Government to reconsider its position. I would They are an industrial product rather than a certainly be willing to attempt to facilitate an early and amenable resolution of this Bill. product of a traditional pre-industrial process such as brewing, wine making or the making The minister and his department came to me of spirits and liquors. They fundamentally just this week and I regret to say that we have no get ethanol, either distilled or fermented in progress in terms of changing the bill. some combination, and whack it into a car- Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) bonated soft drink or fruit juice. It need not (11.18 a.m.)—The major issue here is the fact be sourced from grains, hops, grapes, honey that so-called designer drinks currently pay no or anything specific. Other drinks are defined excise. This is because they fall outside the by the source of the alcohol and the process definitions designed to put different excise used to make the drink. The ethyl alcohol in rates on different sorts of drinks. These designer drinks could conceivably be pro- designer drinks are a new phenomenon, duced chemically or from sawdust using developed in part precisely because they fell genetically modified bacteria—doesn’t that through the cracks of the excise regime. They sound yummy. The manufacturers will use are also ways for brewers, primarily of beer, whatever is cheapest and if one source is to utilise surplus capacity and alcohol. taxed and another not, that may determine the source. As drinks, they have been something of a worry to the health community and those It is clear that it has been the intention of social agencies with a focus on young people. government to tax alcoholic drinks produced This is because, unlike traditional drinks, for sale on the open market. Government has these alcoholic drinks emulate common non- even gone after home brewed drinks when alcoholic soft drinks—drinks consumed by home brews started to be sold in shops as a children. They are effectively alcoholic number of recipes, with the materials and lemonade, alcoholic cola and alcoholic soda facilities for brewing it. This was taken as a water. Not only are they alcoholic, many are commercial operation and a tax applied. It actually very strong—substantially stronger was never the intention of government to than beer. create a special category of tax exempt de- The marketing of these drinks, such as sub signer drinks. I think that has been clear from ZERO and XLR8, has definitely been targeted the outset. at youth, and female drinkers have been The government decided, perhaps unwisely, especially well attended to. In short, there is that it did not need to create a new class of a major marketing effort to develop a new drinks to apply excise to the new designer class of drinkers in the 18 to 25 age group. drinks. It announced that they fit in the cur- Given the problems of alcoholism and the rent classification as a spirit. Clearly they particular success companies have had in have little relation to spirits as the community promoting drinking and smoking to women, instinctively define them: very strong alcohol- it is socially problematic. It is more so be- ic drinks distilled from natural plant products. cause of the association with kids drinks and Admittedly, the process of spirit manufacture the tendency to think of them in similar ways now bears more resemblance to chemical pro- and knock down quite a few of these potent cesses than to traditionally produced goods. Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5767

For example, Bacardi is known in the drinks. They did in fact impose such a tax. Caribbean as ‘rum industrial’. It is something This was challenged, and a legal loophole was made chemically from refined sugar. Real found after the government was taken to the rum is ‘rum agricol’. It is made from mashed Administrative Appeals Tribunal. I do not sugar cane and, like good wine, partakes of think closing this loophole from the point it the minerals and trace elements found in the was legally created fits the same category as soil, and the growing conditions. Apparently retrospectively applying a new measure. I do connoisseurs can tell by taste what side of not accept the arguments about retrospectivity what island a rum comes from. Industrial rum in this particular case. I think the issue is or whisky, or whatever, does not have such about how to successfully tax these drinks. qualities. It is a strong alcoholic drink, typi- Nevertheless, in my first amendment, I set the cally around 30 per cent alcohol, made by commencement for the new P5 based classifi- distillation of fermented plant mash. I am not cation at the time of royal assent. It is clearly a rum drinker, but I have heard these distinc- prospective, not retrospective. I have also tions made loudly. noted Senator Sherry’s comments in relation I think it is indicative of what has happened to the issue of retrospectivity. and is happening in the industry. I understand There is no reason such drinks should not Australian rums are usually more like rum be taxed. It is entirely consistent and equi- agricol than like industrial rum. These new table. These are commercial and highly drinks are nothing like traditional spirits. They competitive products. They should not con- are made from alcohol produced in one way tinue to get a major tax break unavailable to or another, and the alcohol is then taken and their competitors. Within the Excise Act there whacked into lemonade, fruit juice, soda are discriminations parliament has seen fit to water or cola. They are an entirely fabricated apply. Beer, cider and wine are taxed at a product, which is where the government came lower rate than spirits. In part, this reflects the unstuck. social desirability of discouraging the drinking Predictably, the designer drink manufactur- of strong liquor. Wine is treated differently ers appealed against the government, claim- from beer. This reflects the differences in ing—in my opinion, correctly—that these production, employment and return to local drinks were not spirits. The judges found for economies. It reflects a difference in industry the designer drinks and against the govern- profiles and economic outcomes. There is ment. The government then tried to redefine some special treatment for traditional drinks ‘spirits’ to catch the designer drinks. It moved with very small markets. away from the definition which was instinc- There is no special case to make designer tive and culturally understood—the common- drinks tax exempt. They are industrial com- use interpretation of the term. It tried to say mercial products. They are alcoholic drinks. that a spirit is anything containing distilled They are products intended for a mass market. alcohol. The designer drink manufacturers Their industry profile is similar to that of immediately converted to using fermented beer. They are a particular social problem to alcohol. It does not matter where their alcohol the extent that they encourage binge drinking comes from; it is not a natural outcome of a of high strength drinks by young people. natural process relating to what gives the There is no reason to exempt them and drink flavour. It is usually simply a blank significant reason to include them at a fairly bland alcohol which is added to a drink. The high relative rate of tax. source only matters in commercial economic I accept that the government intended to tax terms. For the drink, it makes no substantial these drinks, thought it had a mechanism to difference. tax them and announced that they owed tax. On the question of retrospectivity—this Tax was paid. Subsequently, a judicial case relates to Senator Murray’s amendments—it decided that there was a loophole and that, is my view that this is a case where it was the under the letter of the law, these drinks were clear intention of government to tax these not taxable under the existing legislation. This 5768 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 is not a conclusion that they should not be Most mass market beers and ciders are less taxed or that the government was wrong in its than five per cent alcohol. This market meas- intention. It was wrong in the letter of the law ure was supported by various health agencies. that it used. This is not an issue the Greens will be Unfortunately, the government is now trying spending a great deal of time on because we to rewrite the law and make an ineffective cannot. It is not a political issue from our classification effective. It has already failed in perspective; it is an issue of simple common- this. When the government announced its new sense and one that will protect government measure to catch these drinks in the tax net, revenue. It is also an issue that will benefit the manufacturers simply changed the process. the community both through providing rev- The government measure will generate no enue and reducing problematic alcohol con- revenue from designer drinks. sumption. I am tired of this designer drinks issue. A There is really not much more to say on couple of years ago there was a clear consen- this measure. Most players in the drink sus on how to tax them: through the use of industry support this as a means of finally the P5 food standard on drinks. It is clear and determining what will happen. The alternative unambiguous and catches any commercial is to refuse this amendment and to try yet alcoholic drink not in another category. It another measure next year. It is likely to be does not matter what industrial process they another different measure, whether or not it is use; they will be taxed. It will create stability as effective, because it would look too stupid and a measure of predicability in the market. to reject this and then bring it back next year. I think it will be a welcome relief not to have to continually rejig production to take advan- I have no agenda other than to resolve this tage of vagaries in the tax system. and a belief that the P5 standard is the method for clear resolution. While I think the The amendments I will put contain a simple two-tiered rate system is good on social and two-tier approach to taxing designer drinks. health grounds, I am not tied to any particular It is a model that got the basic approval of the rate of tax nor to any particular commence- committee looking at this bill. It would ment date. I think the level and timing of tax certainly catch these drinks, and it could be applied is far less of an issue than that some administered. It does not affect any of the category be developed to allow this class of current classifications. I am not suggesting drinks to have excise applied. I would like to changing all classifications; I am suggesting see this issue resolved. I do hope that our creating a new classification. amendments will be passed. As well as creating a classification that Senator HOGG (Queensland) (11.31 could be applied to designer drinks regardless a.m.)—Before I speak on the Excise Tariff of the process, my model has the advantage Amendment Bill (No. 1) 1997, I indicate that of being a two tier system based on alcohol I have declared on the register of interests that content. The lower tier—for drinks with less my sister-in-law is a director of Southcorp than five per cent alcohol—is set at the beer which, I believe, is involved in P5 limited rate. This is because such drinks are equiva- productions. Let me assure you that in no way lent to beer, both in manufacture and in their has clouded my view here today as I am alcohol content. They are probably direct renowned as a red wine and beer drinker and competitors with beer. do not touch P5s. Primarily as a health measure, however, drinks with an alcohol content above five per Senator Conroy—And a teetotaller. Does cent would be taxed at the spirit rate. They that count? are not classed as spirits, but they are taxed Senator HOGG—And a teetotaller as well. at the same rate per unit of alcohol content. Having got all those interests out of the way, Hopefully, it will be a major disincentive to I think it is worth while to take a few minutes high strength alcoholic pop, and an incentive in this debate to register my very great con- to keep alcohol content below five per cent. cerns about the bill that the government has Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5769 brought forward for debate today, particularly show unanimity—there was a minority report the effects that will be felt by sugar producers by the Labor Party and the Australian Demo- in Queensland. I will come more particularly crats—nonetheless the government should to that later on. take cognisance of the weight of the evidence If the government is serious about being that came before that committee. fair and fair-minded in this issue, then the We should look, firstly, at the cost to the first thing it should do is concede that the industry, particularly in Queensland. It was proposition that is being put forward by the pointed out that Bundaberg, which is the Greens is, in effect, a fair solution to the focus of this industry in Queensland, will problem that we are presented with today. suffer badly. Bundaberg is already a region The fact is that equity in its greatest sense which suffers badly from unemployment. By would dictate that the amendments of the proceeding with this bill, the government will Greens should be passed and passed over- do nothing more than exacerbate the unem- whelmingly by this chamber so that we can ployment situation. get rid of this curse once and for all. There is This was clearly spelt out by Dr Muller, no doubt that it is an anomaly that is now who was appearing for the Bundaberg Distil- starting to hang around like a bad smell and ling Company—he is also the chairman of the should be disposed of as quickly as possible. District Tourism and Development Board. At The essence of the argument addressed by page 75 of the Hansard, he is reported as this piece of legislation is: is alcohol alcohol? saying: The fact is that alcohol is alcohol, and I will We would point out that Bundaberg currently has go into that later on in this debate. What is of one of the highest unemployment rates in Australia. concern in this piece of legislation is not the The Wide Bay region is recognised as being one of fact that it is alcohol but the source of the the most economically deprived areas in Australia, alcohol, and the source of the alcohol being currently with an unemployment rate of 17.2 per either fermented alcohol or distilled alcohol. cent, compared with the national average of 9.8 per cent. We believe that any impact whatsoever on Of course, the particular concern for the local economic activity can only be of serious producers in Queensland is that they are detriment to our region. primarily involved in the production of distilled alcohol. They are not primarily Dr Muller was very much of the view that the involved in the use of fermented alcohol. action being taken by this government would do nothing more than add another blow to the As I understand the evolution of this total unemployment problems that currently exist argument, the brewers of beer and the like in the Bundaberg region. Further on in the from fermented products found that they had hearing that day we heard other instances of an excess of alcohol to their needs and want- the economic effects spelt out. Mr Woodward, ed to use that excess of alcohol in some other the Director and General Manager, Business means of production. Thereby came about the Development, Bundaberg Sugar Ltd, and the P5 ready-to-drink products that we now see Director of Bundaberg Distilling Company, on the market. At the same time we had the said—and this shows the impact of what the distillers producing ready-to-drink products by government is doing: way of a different process and this attracted Just as an indication, sales of molasses to Bunda- an excise. In effect, we had two drinks which berg Distilling amount to $1½ million to $2 million were ostensibly the same in terms of alcohol in the current year. We know that there is going to and alcohol content but they were being taxed be a knock-on effect if the bill, as proposed, goes under a different tax regime. through. Having said that, substantial evidence was The reality is that if this bill goes through given at a hearing of the Economics Legisla- then the production of distilled alcohol into tion Committee which I believe unequivocally ready-to-drink products will cease or will supported the fact that there should be a fair more likely go offshore. So we have a direct regime in the way in which P5s are taxed. economic impact on the Bundaberg area. But Whilst the report of that committee does not it is interesting that Mr Woodward goes on to 5770 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 say at page 78 of the Hansard of the legisla- end up with a fair system by which the two tion committee meeting of 30 May: different forms of drinks are taxed. More Southern Sugar Manufactures is an association of importantly, I think we must accept that this about five or six different sugar milling companies, is a responsible approach being taken in terms which includes the Sugar Milling Cooperative in of the health of young people and others in northern New South Wales, ICIS Sugar Milling our community if we can get a fair and Cooperative, Maryborough Sugar, Rocky Point, equitable system of taxation for the P5 drinks. which is privately owned, and ourselves. That association can see that the knock-on effect of this The last thing I want to make some refer- can potentially impact on the molasses sales in the ence to is the fact that if the government were region. They have thought so strongly of the issue that they have written to the committee as well. to accept the Greens amendment they would not in any way be breaking their promise, It is not just something isolated to one par- which they generally hold so firmly to. They ticular company. There are broader interests do not like breaking promises. They have in the outcome of this particular piece of become experts at it in the past, but this is legislation. Then Mr Woodward went on to one case where they would not break a sum up—and I think this is the real crux of promise to introduce a new tax on the beer the whole argument. He said: and wine industries. Neither of these indus- In summing up, both for Bundaberg Rum and tries will be affected by what we see being Bundaberg Sugar, in particular, but also the other put forward by the Greens today. sugar millers and Bundaberg tourism, our message is pretty clear: fix up the tax anomaly and don’t put The fact of the matter is—and I will quote into law an incentive for the production of low tax from what I said at page 84 of the 30 May hybrid products. hearing—that I believe the proposal being put I think that really spells out what the govern- forward by the Greens ‘quarantines the ment have missed on this occasion: they have government’s promise not to impose any new an anomaly, they have to fix the problem up taxes on the wine industry, the non-grape fruit and what they are doing is not addressing the wines and wine products. It purely quaran- problem. The issue is that you have two tines it to the P5 bracket.’ The fact that some different types of ready-to-drink products that people have enjoyed an advantage previously are going to end up being taxed at a different does not mean that that advantage should not tax regime. All this will do is severely impact now be withdrawn. Again, quoting from my on an area that is already the subject of quite comments of that day: difficult problems in terms of unemployment That seems to me to be an eminently reasonable in that region of Queensland. approach to take. Of course, the anomaly that is It seems to me there is no debate about the created here is the difference between those that are fact that alcohol is alcohol in this case. We fermented and those that are distilled. Of course, what we are trying to do is bring a level playing also had medical evidence before the commit- field into place otherwise, as the evidence that was tee on 30 May which clearly showed that it put before us today shows, those that may well be was a sound proposal to have the sort of distilled currently will downgrade the amount of regime that is being advocated by the Greens distilled product within the product itself and go to as a taxing regime for these P5 drinks. There a fermented base so that the government will lose is no doubt about that at all. They supported whatever income they have counted on there. the concept that we had in the P5 drinks a The fact is that the evidence which came out measurable quantity of alcohol and people at that hearing showed beyond doubt that were therefore getting, if one could say in people will seek to get around whatever crudest terms, a prescribed dose of alcohol. regime the government put in place. I do not There was no mixing and matching; there was think the approach of the government is either a prescribed dose. logical or responsible. I do not think it ad- If we can accept the Greens amendment, dresses the anomaly, and I do not think it that will give us two regimes of taxation and fixes up the problems that we are confronted those two regimes of taxation will see that we with. Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5771

I want to refer to this last quotation because them, particularly where drinks with a higher I think it really sums up what happened at the level of alcohol are available at a cheaper hearing. After I had made those previous price than those with a lower level of alcohol. comments, the chair said: I think we need to remember that this bill Can I just reinforce what Senator Hogg highlights. was designed specifically to close an existing Already we are seeing ready-to-drink designer drinks being imported from overseas which fit into loophole which had been brought about this category of non-excisable and into the lower because of a High Court decision. The legisla- range. I think there were two or three drinks from tion committee inquiry heard a lot of evi- New Zealand that they put in front of us that are dence. I do not think anybody could be already being imported, and they are made from the anything but sympathetic towards such evi- fermentation process. I do not think there are any dence, because of the nature of the current of us who would like to think that there was taxation treatment. encouragement given to allow an imported product to come in and compete directly with ours because What was said in the recommendations of of a differentiation in the way it was treated on a tax basis. the committee’s majority report was that the bill should be passed now in order to close Interestingly, the parliamentary secretary who this loophole. It is a matter of remedying was present said, ‘I do not disagree with what something which was brought about by a you are saying.’ So the fact is that the High Court decision, and it is an instant government are really at odds with them- remedy. The issues that have been raised by selves. Really, they should be embracing the Senator Sherry, Senator Hogg, Senator approach that we have adopted—the approach Margetts and Senator Murray are issues which to categorising the P5s as outlined in Senator we thought, on balance, deserved some further Margetts’s amendment. I believe that is a fair inquiry, because there were a whole range of and equitable approach. It will remove some issues which could not be looked at in a one- strain in the Bundaberg region. The testimony day inquiry by a legislation committee which before the committee clearly outlined that was dealing with one piece of legislation. people felt there would be further unemploy- ment in that area if the government were I am sure there were people who would successful in having their bill passed by this have liked to make submissions regarding chamber. I implore the Senate to knock back what we intend to do at some stage in the the legislation as proposed by the government future with regard to the taxation of ready-to- and to support the Greens’ proposal. drink and designer drinks who did not have an input that day. In fact, the input to the Senator FERGUSON (South Australia) inquiry was concentrated particularly on (11.47 a.m.)—I rise to speak to the Excise distillers and on people involved in dealing Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 1) 1997 partly with alcohol abuse, whose evidence was very because my name has been mentioned, in my compelling. capacity as Chair of the Senate Economics Legislation Committee. I feel there are some I am pleased to note that one of our recom- matters that have been raised to which I mendations was that the loophole should be should respond. Let me say at the outset that closed immediately. That is why we wanted I do not resile from anything I said during the bill to be passed. However, the majority that one-day committee hearing. I do not report noted a number of serious concerns think there is any senator in this chamber who raised by the industry. We know those con- would not want to do everything possible to cerns are there, that they are genuine and that make sure that we prevent the potential abuse they do have to be addressed. But we also of alcohol, particularly by younger people, said that the tax treatment has social conse- who are those who tend to be the consumers quences. We recommended that the matter of ready-to-drink and designer drinks. I do not should be the subject of an immediate review think we would want to do anything that by government and that the review should would make it more likely that they would look at the equity of tax treatment between have a cheaper form of alcohol available to ready-to-drink products and designer drinks in 5772 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 the P5 category, with reference particularly to and designer drinks where the amount of three areas which I will not outline at present. alcohol taken in is measured, thus avoiding A Greens amendment was proposed before situations where people mix their own drinks that inquiry was held. The third part of our and put a lot of alcohol in them. As I said, recommendations referred to the possibility of this particularly affects people of a very introducing common taxation treatment for young age. That is another important issue RTD products with an alcohol content of that we support in this very critical area. more than five per cent, and one for those I will close by saying that the committee with less than five per cent. It is interesting made this recommendation because the that the Greens have amended their amend- immediate purpose of this bill is to close an ment so that it contains only those two cate- existing loophole. We want to do it straight gories. We think they are trying to do things away. We think all the other measures which a little too quickly. I understand why they have been raised—some of which I have have come up with that scheme—below five sympathy for, as senators will know from my per cent and above five per cent—and I do comments at the hearing and in the report— believe it has some merit. But I am of the are matters for a later stage following further view that we should have more time to input from other people and organisations. consider this matter and that more people The government at some future time can then should have the opportunity to have some make a decision based on all of that evidence. input. Senator Hogg said he might interpret this Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— proposal as not being a new tax, but the Minister for Customs and Consumer Affairs government might interpret it differently. We and Minister Assisting the Attorney-General) have said consistently that there will be no (11.53 a.m.)—I thank honourable senators for new taxes in this term of government. their contribution to the debate on Excise Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 1). At the outset Senator Sherry—You’ve broken that may I thank Senator Ferguson and the Senate already. Economics Legislation Committee for the Senator FERGUSON—Senator Sherry says work they have done on this bill. we have broken it. That is an argument that we have had for a long time. You believe Might I say that the call for an inquiry that; we do not. Senator Murray said that the contained in the committee recommendation report only toes the Treasury line. Senator predated the recent announcement by the Murray, you ought to know that those of us Prime Minister (Mr Howard) that there will who were on that committee did not just toe be a comprehensive debate on tax reform and the Treasury line. We did have a view of our that the government will lead it. In view of own, which is why the report was couched in that statement, it is the government’s view such terms, because we tried to find what we that any inquiry into excise on alcohol should thought was a reasonable position for the be looked at in the context of a comprehen- government to take in light of the fact that sive tax debate. I appreciate that this is an they said their immediate concern was to area of some complexity. That is mirrored in close the loopholes in the bill. the report of the Senate committee and by the differing standpoints taken by various parties Along with other senators, I am particularly in the Senate. concerned to say that I think the buying of ready-to-drink and designer drinks in a ready- The government is not inclined to support to-use form will actually control the abuse of the amendments foreshadowed by the Greens alcohol. It will control it in a way that might and the Australian Democrats. It is perhaps not otherwise be possible, particularly in the better that I go into the detail of the reasons case of young people who mix their own for that opposition when we go into commit- drinks and who do not know how much tee. Suffice to say that this bill, as Senator alcohol they are mixing in their drinks. So Ferguson pointed out, is designed to correct there is a case to be made for ready-to-drink an anomaly brought about by the sub ZERO Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5773 decision. That is the purpose of the bill, and If I may, I will draw attention to those there is no wider purpose than that. elements which we regard as requiring atten- Regarding the Greens’ amendment, the tion in terms of retrospective effects. Firstly, government is of the view that, if it were to there is the element of natural justice, where support that, it would be in breach of its retrospective legislation offends against the undertaking not to introduce any new taxes. principles of natural justice and trespasses That undertaking was given prior to the last upon the basic tenet of our legal system that election. those subject to the law are entitled to be treated according to what the law says at the As to the question of retrospectivity, that relevant time and according to what the law was dealt with by the Senate Committee for means at the time as declared by the courts. the Scrutiny of Bills which, in its usual The second area is that of uncertainty, manner, looked at the subject very well and where retrospective legislation brings uncer- thoroughly, but the government is of the view tainty to the environment in which the com- that this bill clarifies the position in the form munity and business operate. The third area that people understood it to be prior to the of retrospectivity concerns personal rights and sub ZERO decision being handed down. I liberties, where retrospective legislation has think perhaps the detail of our opposition to the potential to trespass unduly on the person- the amendments of the Greens and the Demo- al rights and liberties of people. The next area crats should be given more so in the commit- concerns the circumvention of recovery tee stage. proceedings, where retrospective legislation Question resolved in the affirmative. defeats the judicial process by circumventing Bill read a second time. recovery proceedings to the financial disad- vantage of the claimants. In Committee The next area is an unusual area for com- The bill. mentary in the parliament. It is the area of sovereign risk, whereby retrospective legisla- Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) tion raises the perception internationally of (11.57 a.m.)—by leave—I move: sovereign risk in Australia. Sovereign risk is (1) Clause 2, page 1 (line 11), omit "3 February the principle that laws cannot bind the sover- 1996", substitute "3 February 1997". eign, and the government, by taking a stand (2) Schedule 1, item 5, page 7 (line 2), omit "3 such as this on sovereign risk, risks being February 1996", substitute "3 February 1997". seen as irresponsible and Australia runs the (3) Schedule 1, item 5, page 7 (line 16), omit "3 risk of being seen as an unsatisfactory place February 1996", substitute "3 February 1997". to do business—in other words, you are changing the rules of the game retrospective- I will not address the Democrat amendments ly. at length because I have covered, in my speech on the second reading, my grounds for In relation to transparency, retrospective proposing that retrospectivity apply from the legislation is not transparency, since it is date of the government’s announcement and based on past liabilities. Mr Feil, representing not from the date of February 1996. There are the Institute of Chartered Accountants, argued two principal reasons. Firstly, it is a Senate in evidence to the Senate Economics Legisla- and a parliamentary principle not to approve tion Committee that Australia cannot create retrospectivity except in instances of fraud, uncertainty in its legislation on a retrospective illegality or exceptional circumstances, and, basis and continue to encourage multinational secondly, it is a Senate and a parliamentary and national companies to invest in Australia. tradition—and a correct one—that retrospec- My amendment fixes all those problems, and tivity in terms of revenue raising announce- I commend it to the Senate. ments should apply from the date of the Senator SHERRY (Tasmania—Deputy announcement and not from some prior date Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) determined by courts or any other mechanism. (Midday)—I do not want to take a lot of time 5774 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 on the issue of alleged retrospectivity, but I government will get the 46 per cent company do wonder if Senator Murray could deal with tax,’ so you are not entirely a loser on the the issue that I raised in my speech during the matter. So perhaps the net effect is around $6 second reading debate. The approach Labor million. The third aspect that you relate to is has taken is that there was a tax that was the much more complex and difficult one of legal until the court ruled otherwise in the sub the High Court’s decision. ZERO case. We have a lump of money Senator Sherry—It was the Federal Court; collected that cannot be refunded to consum- it was my mistake. ers. There will effectively be a very signifi- cant amount of money kept and retained by Senator MURRAY—Yes, the Federal the producers, which is an unexpected profit. Court and the High Court. Frankly, I do not have enough expertise in that area to respond Can Senator Murray differentiate on this to you on my feet—and I do not have any occasion between his approach and the prob- advisers I can call on for that particular lem we are faced with from the recent High aspect—but it is my view that this is an issue Court decision in respect of licensing fees and which has been dealt with adequately by the charges by the states, which were ruled courts before. It has never caused a constitu- illegal? How does Senator Murray differ- tional, management or government problem entiate between those two, accepting that I and fixing the date of retrospectivity, as I think the principle is the same—that is, the have in terms of the date of the announce- return of moneys to consumers, which is just ment, has ample precedent and would cover not possible? How does Senator Murray the problem that has been outlined. propose to deal with that particular problem that has arisen from the High Court case? I have understood clearly the argument Senator Sherry put—indeed, the argument Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) Senator Margetts put—but I think the greater (12.02 p.m.)—I did try to do that in my risk you establish of allowing a precedent to speech on the second reading debate. I raised go through on retrospectivity should over- my voice, Senator Sherry, when you were come any qualms you might have about speaking to your advisers—as you are now— giving money to a number of companies that in the attempt to attract your attention, be- you might not be sympathetic to. cause I did deal with that particular issue. There are three issues I think you raised. Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) The first one you did not raise explicitly. The (12.05 p.m.)—I would just like to reiterate first issue is that this is not the first time that that I am unable to support Senator Murray’s revenue raising measures have been chal- amendments in this regard. It is not actually lenged in the courts and found not to apply a precedent, in as much as it is not the first and restitution has been made. If you look time the Senate would have agreed to some- back at those situations—and I have not got thing which, in purely legal terms, may have them all in front of me, so do not ask me to been seen to be retrospective but in fact itemise them—it is very seldom possible, created the intention of government, rather when restitution of revenue is made, for that than whether or not they had written it cor- revenue to go all the way back to the consum- rectly in the letter of the law. It has happened ers, because the consumers of products are so on several occasions. varied and so many that it is impossible for So in that sense, it is not a precedent. On a the company concerned to restore them. number of occasions, the arguments that were For those who say that that results in a given in relation to the difficulties and the $12.6 million windfall gain to the companies expectations that people had about tax liabili- concerned, I say, ‘Yes, that is true, but it was ty have been taken into account when that money that never did belong to the govern- decision was made. Therefore, I am unable to ment in the first place. Anyway, when the support these amendments on this occasion. companies get it paid back to them, it will go Senator SHERRY (Tasmania—Deputy straight on to their bottom line and the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5775

(12.06 p.m.)—I will conclude this issue on I did indicate in the second reading debate this point. Senator Murray, I still see a par- that the industry had not campaigned for these ticular problem with your approach, given the moneys to be refunded. The Democrats’ recent High Court decision—yes, it was the approach this issue as a matter of principle—a High Court—in respect of state licensing fees matter of Senate principle, not a matter of and charges. industry equity. Effectively, the Senate will be asked to rule I think one of the best ways to respond to on the gains that have now been ruled unlaw- your probing rather than your questioning is ful by the High Court in respect of a tobacco to indicate the New South Wales Labor distributor, I think it was, who took the case government’s approach on this matter. With to the High Court ultimately. We will be regard to refunds due to the liquor retail presented with legislation that effectively industry, at first they refused to refund the prevents the states from benefiting from what money, as you know. Senator Sherry, I has turned out to be illegal charges by states understood that the refusal by the New South for a very, very significant number of years. Wales Labor government was based on legal That legislation—via a fairly circuitous route, and financial advice. but the only route legally—will ensure the Commonwealth imposes a regime of excises That they eventually decided to refund the on those businesses in the states retrospective- money was a political decision because of the ly. I cannot see any difference in principle community pressure for equity to be estab- between that problem we are going to be lished. They are going to refund that money confronted with—and which Labor has given throughout the country to proprietors of retail in principle support to—and the issue we are and wholesale establishments, who will be dealing with here. incapable of passing that money on to all the individual consumers who buy from them. That is one of the reasons why we will be supporting what could be—and what you So we are into a bit of a messy discussion have argued is—retrospective. We see these here as to what you can and cannot do and as as exceptional circumstances. I am certainly to how it operates. That is why I have tried to not happy and comfortable about allowing stick very firmly to the principle we should be exceptional circumstances to blow out beyond following. I do not think we need to say reason but, having considered this and dis- much more. I think what has been said needs cussed it with some of the industry people, I to be said, and that is it. Let us go to the am not even sure the industry were seeking vote. that. As I recall my discussions, or it might Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— have been one of the submissions, I do not Minister for Customs and Consumer Affairs think the industry were expecting a refund of and Minister Assisting the Attorney-General) the money—certainly some elements of the (12.11 p.m.)—For its part, the government industry were not expecting a refund of the will not be supporting the Democrats’ amend- money. It is not as though we have a situation ment. The government takes on board the here where significant elements of the indus- comments made by Senator Margetts and try are saying, ‘Whoopee, we won a court Senator Sherry and has some sympathy with case. We can grab all this money.’ So I think those senators on the sentiments they express- in those circumstances Labor has taken the ed. I would also add to that the comments I correct position, and we will certainly still made in my response to the second reading support the government on this aspect of the debate. legislation. Amendments negatived. Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) (12.09 p.m.)—Senator Sherry, I sympathise Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) with you struggling with this a bit as we do, (12.12 p.m.)—by leave—I move: because that High Court judgment is so recent (1) Clause 2, page 2 (after line 4), at the end of that all the ramifications are difficult to grasp. the clause, add: 5776 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

(5) Items 1A, 4A and 4B of Schedule 1 com- Standard P5 means Food Standard P5 in the mence on the day on which this Act re- Australian Food Standards Code, 1992. ceives the Royal Assent. (3) Schedule 1, page 6 (before line 1), after item (2) Schedule 1, page 3 (after line 5), after item 1, 4, insert: insert: 4A Item 2 of the Schedule 1A Schedule Repeal the item, substitute: Insert: 2. Spirits; Beverages containing distilled alcohol

(A) Brandy $31.59 per litre of distilled alcohol (C) Fruit Brandy $36.99 per litre of distilled alcohol (D) Whisky $36.99 per litre of distilled alcohol (F) Rum $36.99 per litre of distilled alcohol (G) Liqueurs $36.99 per litre of distilled alcohol (H) Beverages (other than beverages comprised solely of To the extent that the distilled fortified wine and other than beverages which are co- alcohol in the beverage is at- vered by Standard P5) containing distilled alcohol, n.e.i. tributable to the presence of brandy—$31.59 per litre of that distilled alcohol.

To the extent that the distilled alcohol in the beverage is at- tributable to the presence of anything other than bran- dy—$36.99 per litre of that dis- tilled alcohol (J) Spirits for fortifying Australian wine or for fortifying Free Australian grape must, subject to regulations (M) Spirits for industrial and scientific purposes, n.e.i., Free subject to regulations (N) Methylated spirits, subject to regulations Free (O) Non-potable spirits, n.e.i. $37.97 per litre of distilled alcohol (P) Spirits for scientific or educational purposes, subject to regulations: (1) For use in universities Free (2) For use in approved technological colleges or other Free educational institutions prescribed by by-law (Q) Spirits for use in public hospitals, or for use in the Free manufacture of medicinal preparations for use in public hospitals and universities, subject to regulations (R) Denatured ethanol for use as a fuel in internal combus- Free tion engines, as prescribed by by-law Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5777

4B After item 2 of the Schedule Insert: 2A. Beverages covered by Standard P5

(A) Beverages which are covered by Standard P5 and which $15.89 per litre of that alcohol do not contain more than 5% by volume of alcohol. (B) Beverages which are covered by Standard P5 and which To the extent that the beverage contain more than 5% by volume of alcohol contains distilled alcohol which is attributable to the presence of brandy—$31.59 per litre of that distilled alcohol.

To the extent that the beverage contains any alcohol which is attributable to the presence of anything other than bran- dy—$36.99 per litre of that alcohol.

Amendment 1 sets a commencement date for I have suggested, I can imagine that it would my amendments from the date of royal assent. be too difficult for the government then to Therefore, they are not retrospective. Amend- adopt the approach we have presented to try ment 2 states that standard P5 is the same as to be helpful now. the Australian food standards code. So, if you are serious about programming Before I speak about these amendments, time, it is hard to understand how you are though, I want to say—despite what the actually suggesting drawing out a process government representatives have said here simply on the vague idea of not being seen to today, Minister—why it does not make any be creating new taxes when, quite clearly, we sense to wait until another time. My under- have argued that people are not suggesting standing from the committee was that there that there is a new tax being created, simply was not a great deal of angst being shown. a more sensible approach to the same tax. There was not any indication that there was going to be a whole lot of new information Amendment 2 states that standard P5 is the being provided which would change what same as that in the Australian food standards could otherwise be a very sensible solution to code. The P standard is for alcoholic bever- the problem. ages, and the P5 standard is for alcoholic beverages not elsewhere standardised. This The government is often telling the Greens excludes beer and beer products, cider wine and making statements in the press about and wine products, sparkling wine, fruit wine, what we do with time in the Senate. We have vegetable wine, fortified wine, reduced alco- actually spent several hours on this issue in hol wine, meads, spirits and liquors. All of the Senate which, quite clearly, could have these are classified in other food standards. been avoided by a sensible approach by the None is covered by P5, so the use of P5 government. Not only have we spent several should not affect them or change the tax hours trying to sort out the government’s treatment of any of these products. problem, but the government is suggesting that we go through the process again, not only But P5 will cover the new designer drinks, in a committee stage in another review— however made, unless they are actually which the industry do not seem to be calling redesigned to become beer or cider or spirits. for, and it is not necessarily from the com- In that case they will still be taxed according munity—but in the Senate. If we have to to their appropriate classification. The use of come back again to try to sort out the prob- the P5 food standards assures that all alcohol- lem in the future, that means more hours. As ic drinks will be subject to excise under one 5778 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 classification or another. Amendment 3 levels may vary dramatically. Traditional basically deletes whatever P5 drinks might alcoholic drinks, however, have a nature otherwise fall into the spirit classification. I where the alcohol content does not generally think there is a compelling argument that all vary markedly. Spirits are taxed at a high rate P5 drinks should be taxed at the same rate, because spirits are by their nature high alco- regardless of the source of their alcohol. They hol drinks. The tax treatment of other tradi- are all sold in a similar way, to a similar tional drinks reflects both alcohol content and market, and made in a similar way, and I industry or use variations. I believe this is think there is no advantage or rationale to appropriate. It is inappropriate to simply tax pushing manufacturers to use fermented rather all drinks at the alcohol level. I commend my than distilled alcohol. The product will remain amendments to the Senate. essentially the same in either case. Senator SHERRY (Tasmania—Deputy Amendment 3 asserts the new P5 category. Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) The rates of excise change from the beer rate (12.18 p.m.)—I was going to ask the for drinks of five per cent or less alcohol minister—assuming that your legislation is content, and at the spirits rate where there is passed—about the government ensuring that more than five per cent alcohol. This puts the excisability of beverages which contain higher alcohol designer drinks on par with the distilled alcohol continues. What do you do tax applied to mixed spirit drinks like ‘Bundy in the event of producers switching from a and Cola’, all of which would be taxed at the distilled alcohol base to a fermented alcohol spirits rate since they have around six per cent base, where there is absolutely no apparent alcohol while the lower alcohol drinks would difference in the product? be taxed at the beer rate, seeing as they Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— mainly compete with the beer market and are Minister for Customs and Consumer Affairs about the same alcohol content. and Minister Assisting the Attorney-General) It leaves open an option to the manufactur- (12.19 p.m.)—I am advised, Senator Sherry, ers of premixed spirits to make low alcohol that producers have that option now of variations with a level of alcohol lower than switching from distilled alcohol to fermented any currently available. I do not see this as an alcohol and that this bill would not prevent undesirable option, nor do I see their treat- that happening. ment as inconsistent with the rest of the act. Senator SHERRY (Tasmania—Deputy I note that the Alcohol and Other Drugs Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Council of Australia, in their evidence to the (12.19 p.m.)—That is precisely why we committee on this bill, supported our tiered indicated we are supporting the Green amend- approach to alcohol content on these drinks. ment. As I understand it, now that the govern- I also note that the committee recognised that ment has confirmed that it will be taxing the bill will do nothing to rectify the current distilled alcohol and reversing the Federal problem with regard to designer drinks. That Court decision, we are going to see producers is what I mentioned, with regard to Senate switch away from a distilled alcohol base to time, at the beginning of my presentation. I a fermented alcohol base. There is an obvious will remember this next time someone is financial incentive because the tax collected ranting and raving about waste of Senate will be less. time. At least both minority reports suggested My follow-up questions to you, Senator, that something be done and my amendment are: firstly, is the government concerned or was considered, and seen generally, to be on not at the potential loss of revenue by people the right track. producing, or producers producing, either the I further note that, while it seems appropri- current RTDs or some new brand of RTDs ate to take a tiered approach in this case based on a fermented alcohol base, and the based on alcohol content, our position largely subsequent revenue loss that will result as a reflects the fact that these are relatively flow-on of the switching in the production synthetic manufactured products and alcohol base from distilled alcohol to fermented Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5779 alcohol? Secondly, do you have any estimated the same name on the outside of the bottle—I revenue loss, or estimates of revenue loss, as put it to you that there is an obvious incentive a consequence of the switching effect, which for a producer to switch from a distilled we know is already occurring? alcohol to a fermented alcohol base, because Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— the taxation of fermented alcohol under what Minister for Customs and Consumer Affairs you are proposing will be less. As a conse- and Minister Assisting the Attorney-General) quence, the government must lose revenue. (12.21 p.m.)—In answer to Senator Sherry’s This is not just a matter of the Greens amend- question: the government is unable to predict ment for social equity and tax; it is about exactly how this will develop. One has to protection of the existing tax base. I think any look at the market penetration of the ferment- logical producer listening to this who can ed alcohol and how successful that will be. quite easily move from distilled to fermented That is really getting into the crystal ball alcohol base would do that, because they gain stage. The government, therefore, cannot financially, since they would be paying less predict what sorts of revenue implications tax. As a consequence you must collect less there would be in this and it is hard to esti- tax. mate that. I am unable to answer that question Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— because of that aspect: how do we know how Minister for Customs and Consumer Affairs the particular product will fare in the market- and Minister Assisting the Attorney-General) place? (12.24 p.m.)—I do not take issue with what But the government is of the view that, if you say, Senator Sherry. However, if we were it were to change the regime here in relation to support the Greens amendment we would to fermented alcohol, it would be placing be treating fermented alcohol differently from itself in a position where it would be breach- the way it has been treated to the present day. ing its undertaking to the people of Australia That would be the introduction of a new that it would not bring in any new taxes, and tax—something we promised the people of that is an overriding principle in this case. Australia we would not do. I do not think I Senator SHERRY (Tasmania—Deputy can put it any more simply than that. Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) (12.22 p.m.)—It is not a new tax. This excise (12.25 p.m.)—I would also like the minister has been there until the Federal Court deci- to comment on this. There will be changes to sion. I will deal with your overriding princi- the tax regime to sort out the difficulties ples a little later. associated with the recent High Court deci- Minister, your legislation reimposes the tax sion in relation to state and federal revenue on distilled alcohol. We have bottles of collection. Will it not make that transition product made from distilled alcohol, and we easier if we have sorted out some of these have bottles of product that is not identifiably problems in advance rather than add yet different in terms of taste or colour—the only another change onto a problematic decision thing that is different is the fancy name on the which then has to be changed again later? If outside of the bottle—that is made from we have helped to sort out some of these fermented alcohol, with the same alcoholic anomalies now, will it not make it easier in content. And yet what you are suggesting is the transition when those other changes need that there should be a different tax treatment to take place? of those essentially the same products—only Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— the base from which they manufactured being Minister for Customs and Consumer Affairs different. and Minister Assisting the Attorney-General) Minister, surely you would have to accept (12.25 p.m.)—The essential aspect to this that if producers can produce the same alco- involves a question of tax reform. Recently hol, the same colour, the same taste, and just the Prime Minister announced that the vary the name on the outside of the bottle— government would lead the debate in a com- they can even produce the same alcohol with prehensive way in relation to the question of 5780 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 tax reform in Australia. If we tinker with one anomalous, as we all agree. This bill presents aspect of excise on alcohol, which in turn is an opportunity to correct this. As Senator a subset of another aspect of taxation across Margetts said, the bill is tinkering, if you like, the whole spectrum of taxes, customs duties with the current situation. If we are going to and excises, then I would think, Senator tinker, we might as well deal with the anoma- Margetts, that we could well be revisiting this lies. in the debate that we are going to have on tax Unless we do that, as Senator Sherry has reform generally. said, the producers will simply substitute It is like having a giant canvas before you fermented alcohol for distilled alcohol, thus and you are just dabbing the oil on a corner eroding the collection of excise by the of that canvas whilst the rest of it remains Commonwealth—unless we believe, and it is untouched. That is why the government took hard to do so, that distillers are so public the view in relation to the suggestion of an spirited that they will not take the opportunity inquiry by the Senate committee that we leave of minimising their taxes. that until the comprehensive debate on tax Unless we amend this legislation in the way reform. The Senate committee suggestions that Senator Margetts has proposed, high will no doubt stand the test of time and will alcohol content drinks based on fermented be looked at in that debate. To tinker with it alcohol would continue to be non-excisable on this basis the government considers to be and, therefore, more appealing to young unwise. people. That is my feeling about the matter, Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) from what I have heard young people say. (12.27 p.m.)—I am going to have to state the Senator Margetts’s amendment simply seeks obvious here. This bill is tinkering with a tax. to base excisability on the level of the alcohol You are asking us to fix up a problem. You content, rather than on its derivation, whether are actually changing the definition, so we are it be manufactured by fermentation or distilla- already doing that tinkering. You are saying tion. It seems entirely sensible and logical to that you would like us to tinker in one way me, and I propose to vote for the amendment. and not another. We are trying to say, ‘Let’s I would like to thank and acknowledge— tinker in a way that actually helps to solve a often we do not do this—the work done by problem.’ I do not really want to delay the our committees and the people who made Senate any further, but I think we are getting submissions to the committees. I see Senator down to semantics. Murray nodding. He was at the Senate Eco- Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— nomics Legislation Committee to which this Minister for Customs and Consumer Affairs bill was referred. That committee, as usual, and Minister Assisting the Attorney-General) which was chaired by Senator Ferguson, (12.27 p.m.)—I can briefly reply to that. This received quite important submissions which bill is rectifying an anomaly brought about by I found very interesting. As a matter of fact, a decision handed down by the Federal Court. I found the material from United Distillers That is not tinkering; it is remedying a situa- very useful in getting a grasp of what it was tion which has come about by legal interpre- all about. I notice that Senator Jacinta Collins tation. That is something quite different, with wrote a minority report on behalf of the respect. opposition. I am extremely grateful to those Senator HARRADINE (Tasmania) (12.28 who work on these committees—I am on p.m.)—One can only congratulate the minister some of them myself. It does help independ- on his valiant attempt to support this legisla- ents and minor parties particularly. No doubt tion as a whole and to argue against the the major parties and the Senate as a whole amendment that is now before us. As I see it, benefit from the work of our Senate commit- as a government bill it simply ensures that the tees. proportion of a beverage that is distilled Senator SHERRY (Tasmania—Deputy alcohol will be subject to excise. The taxation Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) of beverages in the P5 food standard is (12.33 p.m.)—I would like to thank again my Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5781 colleague Senator Hogg for the work he put changed without parliamentary scrutiny, you into this committee report. Also, like Senator could have a negative effect on revenue. Who Harradine, I thank the various organisations knows? That is an aspect that the government and individuals who presented submissions to finds to be of concern in relation to this the committee. Minister, as I understand it, amendment and it is another reason why the your election commitment said that there government cannot support the amendment. would be no increase in existing taxes and no Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) introduction of new taxes. Is that correct? (12.37 p.m.)—On that point, I understand that Senator Ellison—That is how I recall it. the food standards code would need to be approved by some person responsible for Senator SHERRY—In view of consisten- those standards—potentially a health minister cy, how do you rate the government’s new or a minister involved with consumer affairs, half a billion dollar superannuation tax on and so on. In the end, one would have to higher income earners in the context of that think that minister would take a responsible promise? approach—unless it is totally independent, Senator Ellison—I don’t think that is and you could give me some advice on that. relevant to this debate. Unless I am totally wrong, if there is Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) ministerial approval of some sort required for (12.35 p.m.)—If I may spur you on, Senator the changing of the standard code, then that Sherry, it is the understanding of the Senate minister would take into consideration the Economics Legislation Committee, and it is implications of revenue. Even if it is not our understanding, that far from introducing coming to the parliament, then I would think a new tax, what Senator Margetts’s amend- there would be some responsibility taken at a ment does is protect the revenue base by at departmental or ministerial level which would least $30 million. I would think that is just take into consideration the revenue implica- good housekeeping, good management and tions of such changes. good husbandry, to use the old-fashioned Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— term. I would like to know whether your Minister for Customs and Consumer Affairs promise not to introduce new taxes should and Minister Assisting the Attorney-General) also include preserving your old tax base and (12.37 p.m.)—My initial advice is that the your revenue base. food standards code is adopted by the Austral- Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— ia New Zealand Food Authority, ANZFA. Minister for Customs and Consumer Affairs That, I am advised, is not reviewable. and Minister Assisting the Attorney-General) The criteria in consideration in setting that (12.35 p.m.)—Might I add a point. The food standards code would not entail any opposition has not raised this point but I think question of revenue, as I understand it. So that there is a problem with the Green amend- that the person, albeit a very responsible ment in relation to clause 2, which states: person, making that decision would not be Standard P5 means Food Standard P5 in the having regard to how it might affect revenue. Australian Food Standards Code, 1992. That would be beyond their purview. I think that highlights the flaw. This is another aspect of the amendment which the government has trouble with. It Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) links the P5 into the food standards code, (12.38 p.m.)—I think this is a fairly spurious which is subject to change from time to time. argument. The P5 standard means other These changes could well occur with no drinks. If it does not fall under the ‘other consideration of the effect it might have on drinks’ classification and if there is a change the Excise Tariff Act, which is designed to in that classification, it will fall under one or tax various products. This has some relevance other of the classifications. to the point which Senator Murray just raised It is actually clearer now. It is less likely to in protecting revenue. It could well be, if the cause a revenue implication now that drinks food standards code were changed and will fall under one or the other classification. 5782 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

So the change from ‘other drinks’ to some- Senator Ellison—As well. thing else will simply mean that it gets taxed Senator SHERRY—No, not ‘as well’— at another rate instead of this rate. So the now. My reading of it is that it has replaced reality is that it is unlikely to fall between the it. Whether it is both or one, the fact is that cracks as it used to before. It actually creates it is consistent with the Greens’ approach. greater certainty not less certainty in relation to standards. I indicate that we are, obviously, supporting the Green amendments. We do not see this as Senator SHERRY (Tasmania—Deputy a new tax. It is an existing excise tax whose Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) base is being eroded due to new develop- (12.39 p.m.)—Minister, you have criticised ments in industry and which we believe from the Green amendments for linking the rate of all the evidence presented to us will result in tax excise to the Australian food standards a substantial loss of revenue to the govern- code. I draw your attention to page 4 of the ment. We see that as being totally consistent explanatory memorandum, which says: with the principles that your government took New sub-item 2(G) to the election to ensure that these sorts of This sub-item presently imposes excise duty on anomalies and loopholes would be closed. liqueurs. In order to be eligible for the concessional rate of excise duty, a liqueur is required to be Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) prescribed by by-law. This requirement existed (12.42 p.m.)—The Australian Democrats mainly for health reasons and for classification indicate that they will be supporting the WA purposes. Greens’ amendments. However, since the term "Liqueurs", which is Amendments agreed to. defined in the Schedule to the Tariff Act, is now controlled by the Australian Food Standards Code Bill, as amended, agreed to. 1992, the need for liqueurs to be prescribed by by- law no longer exists. Bill reported with amendments; report adopted. So we have a situation where already liqueurs are now controlled by the Australian food Third Reading standards code. What we have at the moment Bill (on motion by Senator Ellison) read a in respect to liqueurs is no different to the third time. approach the Greens are taking in their amendments and are linking in a broader but MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST consistent way the level of excise to the Australian food standards code. United Nations: Contracts Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— Senator PATTERSON (Victoria) (12.44 Minister for Customs and Consumer Affairs p.m)—I rise to speak today in the matters of and Minister Assisting the Attorney-General) public interest debate about a $30 billion (12.41 p.m.)—I understand the point you are market. Each year the United Nations and making there, Senator Sherry, but I think the multilateral development banks outlay $30 point of distinction here is that liqueurs are billion, creating new total investments of also defined in the schedule to the tariff act. around $65 billion in recipient countries. What we have here in clause 2 is a situation Australian companies are getting some of this, where standard P5 relies solely on that defini- but there is no reason why we should not be tion as stated in the clause. It would appear getting a lot more of it. there are two aspects which govern liqueurs: During my upcoming visit to the United the definition in the schedule and the food Nations General Assembly as a parliamentary standards code. adviser, one of the things I will be looking at Senator SHERRY (Tasmania—Deputy is how Australia and Australian businesses Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) can more effectively tap into this market. (12.42 p.m.)—It says—and I just read it out— Senator Schacht—Are you on a junket, are that it is now the food standards code that you? Three months—three months, Senator. regulates— How did you get it? Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5783

Senator PATTERSON—The politics of contracts funded by Asian development banks greed, Senator Schacht. The activities of the totalling $US142.5 million in 1995. That UN and its associate organisations represent compared with $US42 million in 1994. very significant opportunities for internation- Figures do fluctuate from year to year, how- ally competitive firms. Each year, UN agen- ever they show the magnitude and the great cies contract out activities worth about $3.7 potential for Australian businesses. billion. I was amazed at the extent of this When one analyses these multicultural business when I started reading, researching procurement results, it highlights the world- and preparing for the trip. In the back of my wide spread of Australian companies. Austral- mind I kept thinking of the potential oppor- ian firms are looking beyond the immediate tunities for businesses in my own state of Asia-Pacific region or traditional markets for Victoria and for Australian businesses in procurement opportunities. This is of specific general. significance in regions such as Africa, Latin When one reads through the general busi- America, Eastern Europe, Central Asia and ness guide for potential suppliers of goods the Middle East. While these results are and services to the United Nations it is stag- encouraging for Australia and Australian gering to read the vast and varied opportuni- firms, we need to work hard to maintain and ties that are available for supplying UN improve them. agencies. They purchase such things as food, While I have been concentrating on the drugs, medical equipment, vaccines, vehicles, positive figures and aspects, I cannot stress communication and industrial equipment, enough the importance of improving tents, Tilley lamps, hoists, computer, software Australia’s involvement. Close analysis of the and sea and air fright. If you think of a figures contained in the trade and outcomes peacekeeping force, there are many things that objective statement, tabled in parliament would be required from enamel plates and earlier this year, indicates—for example, in cups and saucers to a mass of other items. All relation to multicultural development banks of these are areas in which Australian com- such as the World Bank and the Asian Devel- panies already work and produce and areas in opment Bank—that a large proportion of the which we compete well. procurement business reflected only a few In 1995, Australian companies won $33.7 large commodity contracts. So even though million worth of business in UN contracts. the figures were higher it was due to a couple This was a big increase compared to the of large commodity contracts. $18.9 million secured in 1994. This increase While we are doing better and doing well really demonstrates the potential market that we must maintain these figures and do better. is waiting to be seized upon by Australian In relation to procurement businesses, the companies. It is also a testament to the in- figures in the outcomes and objectives state- creasing competitiveness of Australian com- ment show that Australia’s share of procure- panies. While I say this, there is of course ment contracts falls behind many other count- scope for an improvement in these results. ries. In 1995, Australia’s share of procurement There is still room for many more Australian while an improvement at $US33.7 million companies to become involved. was still around 0.8 per cent of total UN In 1995, the value of procurement business procurement contracts worth $US3.7 billion. won by Australian firms overall also increased This means that we were 20th behind other significantly, although it must be noted that countries such as the Ukraine, Panama and fluctuations occur from year to year. Not only the Netherlands. The top six are the US with was there an increase in UN contracts award- 17.83 per cent, Italy, Croatia, the UK, France ed to Australian firms, there was also an and Germany. increase in World Bank disbursements to As Australia contributes nearly 1.5 per cent Australian companies totalling $US242 of the UN’s regular budget on time, the million in 1994-95 compared with $US139 government would like to see Australia’s million in 1993-94. Australian companies won percentage of UN business continue to im- 5784 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 prove significantly. Based on these figures, In March last year the government estab- when we compared them to other countries, lished the Multilateral Procurement Unit it seems very clear that there is plenty of within the Department of Foreign Affairs and room to raise Australia’s profile amongst UN Trade. This unit reinforces the government’s agencies as a supplier of quality goods and efforts to develop and implement its multi- services. lateral procurement strategy. The unit has engaged relevant state business bodies and In light of the results I have just mentioned, produced a number of publications outlining the government is working hard to improve how to go about taking advantage of multi- these figures and develop its trade and multi- lateral procurement opportunities. The second lateral procurement strategy designed to help strategy involves overseas staff from both Australian companies do just that. The trade agencies assisting in the essential task of outcomes and objectives statement, which I collecting early information about project mentioned, outlines the government’s strategy. opportunities. These staff in our various This statement for the first time sets out Foreign Affairs and Trade missions around benchmarks of our performance on trade the world also work to establish close links policy. It met a pre-election commitment and with procurement officials in UN agencies is an important part of the coalition and with executing agencies in borrower government’s strategy to strengthen trade and countries for bank financed projects. foreign investment performance and to bring While I am attending the United Nations benefits to businesses and to the Australian General Assembly I will be meeting with the community. Australian staff involved in this strategy to Our capacity to create new jobs and our see what is being done and to learn more ability to raise the living standards of all about how Australian companies can get a Australians depends on increasing our nation- bigger slice of the UN market, so that I can al wealth through trade. For example, between be of as much assistance as possible to Aus- the September quarter 1995 and the Septem- tralian firms when I return to Australia. ber quarter 1996, Australia’s GDP rose by 3.8 I have already had extensive contact with per cent in real terms. About one-quarter of the Committee for Melbourne. I think this is this increase was provided by the growth in a good news story that ought to be told. The net exports of goods and services. Increased Committee for Melbourne, which was estab- trade is necessary to help sustain GDP and, lished to promote business and business very importantly, as it is an issue which opportunities in Victoria, identified the fact concerns all Australians, jobs growth. that Australia is not as involved in UN pro- curement as it possibly could be. It identified As part of the government’s trade strategy, the firms in Victoria which sell products— detailed in the outcomes and objectives Senator Schacht—Don’t forget that you statement, the minister set out the high priori- represent all of Australia while you are there, ty which the government places on our efforts Kay. You’re also representing Australia over to assist Australian companies in winning there. contracts let by UN agencies. The strategy comprises two main elements. The first, Senator PATTERSON—I am also a Austrade and the Department of Foreign Victorian senator, Senator Schacht. I do not Affairs and Trade are active domestically in need your gratuitous advice. I am sure I will encouraging Australian companies to take up do it much better than you ever could. multilateral procurement opportunities. Because the Committee for Melbourne is Austrade’s export hotline is a valuable source committed—as are we on this side of the of information. If you are making wheelbar- chamber—to jobs growth, it decided that we rows in Ballarat or hoists in Bendigo, how do should be getting more of that action. The you know that the UN buys those sorts of committee identified a number of firms—I things. That is the sort of information we think it is over 200—that sell the sorts of have got to get across. things the United Nations buys. The commit- Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5785 tee invited the businesses and procurement known as a conduit and a liaison point so that officers from the United Nations to a seminar when they come to the conference in 1999 so that the procurement officers could tell there will be somebody that they know. those businesses how they could get into the There is a growing awareness among firms loop: how they could put in tenders, how they of the extent of the business and activities of should put in their tenders and when the UN the United Nations. It is vital that Australian advertises. That was incredibly creative. businesses maximise future opportunities in Do you know what we found out after 13 the UN system. It is obvious that UN agen- years of Labor? The Committee for Mel- cies are keen to diversify their sources of bourne asked the UN procurement officers, supply. Australian products and services are ‘Do you have a conference every year?’ They of world-class standard. It is important that said, ‘Yes, we do: the World Health Organisa- we show the UN this. It is also important that tion, UNICEF.’ ‘Where do you have them?’ Australian companies increasingly develop ‘All around the world—wherever we’re links with the UN and its agencies. To do this invited.’ ‘Have you ever been invited to and win contracts, our companies will have to Australia?’ ‘No, we’ve never been invited to be well informed and pro-active. Australia.’ So the Committee for Melbourne UN officers have indicated that there does invited the UN procurement officers to come not appear to be a high level of awareness to Australia to give Australian firms the among Australian firms of the procurement opportunity to find out about the sorts of procedures followed by UN agencies. Also, things that the United Nations buys. many companies are not responding to invita- That is the sort of pro-active creative tions to bid. By doing so they run the risk project which will make sure that we increase of not being asked to bid again. Companies employment opportunities in Australia. It will also need to ensure that they complete their give small businesses which might not other- tender documents thoroughly and meet tender wise get into the loop—the company that is deadlines so that they are not disqualified at making wheelbarrows in Victoria, the com- an early stage. These might sound simple pany that is making freeze dried food in matters, but they are matters that businesses Tasmania—an opportunity to find out how must get right if Australian firms are to they can get into the system and become part successfully compete for business. of this worldwide procurement process. While I am at the UN I will endeavour to The Committee for Melbourne and other find out all I can about this process so that I Australian corporations, with the support of can pass the information on to businesses in the Minister for Trade (Mr Tim Fischer) and my state and in other states—as I have al- his department, were successful in securing ready done, Senator Schacht, by alerting for Melbourne the United Nations Inter- former Senator Bronwyn Bishop to the issues Agency Procurement Group Meeting. This that might be able to be addressed through meeting will be held in Melbourne in 1999. her portfolio. I cannot stress enough to busi- It will be the first time this meeting has been nesses in Australia that I will do the same held in Australia. I congratulate Minister thing for them; I will not just promote busi- Fischer and his officers and also the Commit- nesses in Victoria. Although involvement in tee for Melbourne for this achievement. multilateral procurement can mean long lead Holding the meeting in Australia will be times and substantial financial commitments invaluable in promoting Australia and Aus- for Australian businesses, the rewards are tralian businesses. It will build on the momen- potentially great. tum which has already been generated The UN and the multilateral development through promoting Australia’s involvement in banks are some of the world’s biggest cus- UN business. tomers. Australian companies cannot ignore I hope while I am at the UN to meet with this fact. With the involvement and strategy procurement officers from both Washington of the Australian federal government and the and New York in order to make myself support of Australian businesses and organisa- 5786 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 tions like the Committee for Melbourne, I am to be the legal firm which provides advice on sure that our share of UN contracts in multi- this matter to Mr Olsen, the Premier of South lateral procurement can be increased, and that Australia. When I raised that matter with the it can also contribute to jobs growth. people at the Adelaide Advertiser, they said that they were aware that the firm acted for South Australia: Leader of the both of them. They were concerned about the Opposition conflict of interest but they had spoken to the Senator SCHACHT (South Australia) firm and the firm assured them that the (12.59 p.m.)—I rise to speak in the matters of lawyer dealing with advice to the Adelaide public interest debate concerning an issue Advertiser had absolutely no connection with relating to South Australia in particular— and was completely separated and walled off politics in South Australia—which has broad from the lawyer handling advice to Mr Olsen. ramifications for all Australia. The issue is the Therefore, they said that they did not believe fact that in South Australia the Leader of the that there was any conflict of interest. I Opposition of South Australia took out a appreciate that the Adelaide Advertiser was so defamation case against the Premier when the forthcoming in explaining that position to me Premier called him a liar. during our recent telephone conversation. As a result of the case being lodged in the I said to the people at the Adelaide Adver- court, as of Friday last week a number of tiser, ‘If it is a matter that you are concerned documents relating the court case are avail- about on the legal advice that you have, the able. I went to the Supreme Court registry, one thing I could do is to table all of these paid my $70—I think it was $70—and got documents in the Australian Senate. As they four documents. The documents are available are freely available to any member of the to any member of the public in South Austral- public in South Australia, I will table them in ia or Australia who wishes to pay the money the Senate so that there can be no doubt about to get those documents as part of normal it, and therefore you can publish what you procedure. like and the public of South Australia can The reason I did that was that, at the end of make a judgment.’ last week, in South Australia a number of Mr Acting Deputy President, I wish to table media outlets—television stations and the five documents. The first is dated 30 June national paper, the Australian—published 1997 and is from Mr Rann. It is a court detailed extracts from those documents which document giving his side of the case. The were available from the court about this case, second is dated 29 July and is from Mr Olsen, a case which has quite significant political in reply. The third document is from Mr implications for both Mr Rann and Mr Olsen. Rann, dated 20 August, further explaining his case. The fourth is a reply from Mr Olsen of The newspaper that did not publish them 21 August. The fifth document, also from Mr was the Adelaide Advertiser. I was astonished Olsen, explains his position and denies Mr that that paper did not cover something so Rann’s allegations. I seek leave of the Senate significant to the politics of South Australia. to table these documents. The chief of staff of the paper informed me that the paper had taken legal advice that Senator Ian Macdonald—No. these documents may not have full privilege The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT and that, therefore, the Adelaide Advertiser (Senator Childs)—Leave is refused. could be sued at a later date. No other media Senator SCHACHT—Mr Acting Deputy organisation in Australia had had similar President, I am astonished. These documents advice, and they were more than happy to are publicly available to anyone in Australia report in detail and accurately from the who goes to the Supreme Court registry. The documents available. government whip has very stupidly denied my I have discussed this with the Adelaide tabling even a public press release that Mr Advertiser. Its legal advice came from the Olsen issued—not in the court but separate- legal firm Minter Ellison, which just happens ly—in reply. He will not even let me table Mr Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5787

Olsen’s public press release which he did not the Liberal Party, Catch Tim Limited. On the go to the court with. This is how stupid the same occasion the defendant agreed to talk government’s position is in refusing to allow further with the plaintiff on the issue. me to table these documents. 2.2. Shortly after the events referred to in 2.1 hereof the plaintiff telephoned the defendant It also shows that clearly the government in his Parliamentary office at night. A conver- Senate whip has taken advice from some- sation ensued in which the defendant advised where that Mr Olsen has a weak case and has the plaintiff that Brown had misled the House to be protected, so the case that is available and must, as the Treasurer of the Liberal Party in the court documents cannot be made at the relevant time and a member of the available to the people of South Australia. Liberal Party’s fund raising committee, have The importance of this case is that, for the known the identity of Catch Tim and all other donors. During the course of the conversation first time in my memory and maybe in Aus- the defendant referred to one Vicki Chapman tralian political history, one political leader ("Chapman") and indicated that Chapman has taken a defamation case against another would be asked by Brown to "take the rap" for political leader and the court will decide who the Catch Tim donation. The defendant urged is telling the truth. the plaintiff to pursue the matter in the House as the plaintiff was "getting close". The If the court decides in favour of one or the defendant also advised the plaintiff that "You other—and I do not know which one it will should pursue the Rob Gerard connection". be—the loser will have his political credibility Rob Gerard ("Gerard") is the Managing absolutely shredded. This is not a slight argy- Director of Gerard Industries Pty Ltd. The bargy argument across the chamber in the defendant also said "You might want to talk to Dale Baker in respect of this". Dale Baker Senate. That is why this is a matter of such MP ("Baker") is and was the Member for public importance in South Australia. As the MacKillop and a Government Member in case unfolds, the people of South Australia, Parliament at all material times. Baker was at even today, should have access to this infor- the relevant time the Minister for Primary mation. I am disappointed that the Adelaide Industries. Baker was at all material times a Advertiser took legal advice that said it could known supporter of the defendant. not publish any of the material, when three 2.3 Following the telephone conversation referred television stations in Adelaide and the Aus- to in 2.2 above and, in or about the first week tralian openly published details of these of March 1995, the plaintiff telephoned Baker. documents at the end of last week and in Senator Ian Macdonald—I raise a point of Saturday’s press. order. I hesitate to raise a point of order at Nevertheless, I now have no option other this time as, by convention, it is intended for than to read extracts from these documents discussion of matters of a non-controversial into the Hansard, and I will continue to do so nature. Mr Acting Deputy President, with that for as long it takes to put these in—including apology, I seek your ruling. I understand that in adjournment speeches, et cetera. In particu- Senator Schacht is reading from court docu- lar, I will read extracts from Mr Rann’s ments from a court case that is currently in document that he lodged with the court on 20 train. I seek your advice—and, through you, August 1997. The extract from the document the clerk’s advice—on whether this is sub reads: judice and whether it is appropriate for this PARTICULARS OF MATTER UPON WHICH matter to be canvassed in parliament. BELIEF BASED The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT 2.1 On or about the 21st February 1995 the (Senator Childs)—In this instance I refer to defendant advised the plaintiff in the corridor Odgers’s Senate Practice: outside the Chamber— the defendant is Mr Olsen and the plaintiff is It would be an undue restriction on the freedom of the Senate to debate matters of public interest if Mr Rann— debate were to be restrained simply on the basis that the then Premier of South Australia, the that matters may come before a court in the future. Honourable Dean Brown ("Brown") had misled Thus the fact that writs have been issued, which the House concerning that identity of a donor to does not necessarily mean that proceedings will 5788 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 ensue, does not give cause for the sub judice preparedness to answer questions concerning convention to be invoked. Catch Tim Ltd and also said that the plaintiff was at liberty to run proposed questions to That was a ruling by President Sibraa. In Brown past him. Baker thereafter regularly view of the fact that Senator Schacht has, in provided information to the plaintiff on the addition, referred to documents being public issue of Catch Tim and political donations documents, I can see no reason why he generally. The plaintiff by telephone submitted should not continue. proposed questions to be put to Brown in the House to Baker for vetting and Baker suggest- Senator Ian Macdonald—Thank you for ed changes to those questions to improve that. In your ruling you indicated that, where them. Baker invited the plaintiff to focus upon a court case may be involved in the future, the original source of the donation made to the the issue of a writ therefore does not prevent Liberal Party through Catch Tim Limited. discussion in the Senate. As I understand it, Baker advised the plaintiff to pursue the issue of the identity of Moriki Products in the same from having listened to Senator Schacht, this context as the plaintiff had pursued Brown in is more than a writ. As I understand it from respect of the identity of Catch Tim Limited. Senator Schacht, there has been a writ filed, The plaintiff formed the belief that in so a statement of claim, and a defence, and I assisting him Baker was acting as the agent of understood Senator Schacht to say that he was the defendant in order to embarrass Brown. actually reading from a reply to the defence. 2.4 In or about mid-March 1995 two sheets of If that is the case, it is not a court case of the paper containing questions regarding Political future; it is very much a court case of the Donation issues were received at the plaintiff’s present. The pleadings are quite detailed and office in Parliament House. The questions it is part of the court process that these details were in the nature of proposed questions to be put to Brown in the House. The plaintiff that are pleadings do proceed. formed the belief that the sheets of paper had Senator SCHACHT—So much for free been forwarded by either the defendant or speech from you lot! Baker on the defendant’s behalf. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— 2.5 In or about the third week of March 1995 the Order! plaintiff telephoned the defendant in his Parliamentary office in the evening of a Senator Ian Macdonald—I am only Parliamentary sitting day. The defendant told interested in the rules of the Senate. the plaintiff words to the effect that Brown had had a meeting with Gerard prior to the The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— previous election during which Gerard prom- Senator, stick to the point of order. ised to bankroll the Brown campaign by Senator Ian Macdonald—I am seeking arranging donations from friendly overseas companies with links to Gerard Industries Pty your ruling. On the basis of the ruling you Ltd. have just made, I would have thought it was self-evident that Senator Schacht should not 2.6 Kevin Foley MP ("Foley") is and was the proceed. Member for Hart and a Senior Opposition Shadow Minister at all material times. Foley The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— is and was at all material times in a position That was illustrative only. The principle of trust in respect of the plaintiff. The plaintiff behind the paragraph I have read is that the was entitled to and did place reliance upon information provided to him by Foley. In or matter is not before a judge and jury. I do not about later 1995 and during 1996 Foley uphold your point of order. advised the plaintiff that the defendant as the Senator SCHACHT—Thank you, Mr then Minister for Infrastructure was providing Acting Deputy President. The document information to Foley in respect of a major outsourcing contract with Brown was negotiat- continues: ing and signed with a company known as 2.3 Following the telephone conversation referred Electronic Data Systems (EDS). Foley advised to in 2.2 above and, in or about the first week the plaintiff that the defendant had told Foley of March 1995, the plaintiff telephoned Baker. that Brown had signed the EDS deal, had been Baker said words to the effect that he had a weak negotiator, and had not secured the heard that the plaintiff "had spoken to John best possible deal for South Australia. During (meaning the defendant)". Baker expressed a 1976 Foley did in Opposition strategy and Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5789

policy meetings attended by the plaintiff and embarrassing to Brown. The letter suggested others provide information described by him that Brown had misled Parliament on 15 as coming from a senior Government source. October 1996 when answering questions put Outside of such meetings Foley advised the to him by Foley. The document was provid- plaintiff that the defendant was the senior ed by Foley to the plaintiff. The plaintiff Government source referred to. formed the view that the defendant was 2.7 On or about 14 October 1996 the defendant seeking to undermined Brown’s leadership. spoke with Foley by telephone. During the The plaintiff formed the view that the course of the conversation the defendant said defendant was the source of the document. to Foley "Have you checked your mail late- 2.11 On or about 6 November 1996 Foley re- ly?". Shortly thereafter Foley inspected his ceived an unmarked envelope containing cut mailbox in Parliament House. In the mailbox, up sections of what appeared to be a Cabi- in an unmarked envelope, was part of a docu- net submission relating to the EDS North ment believed to be from the Cabinet Sub- Terrace building. The document disclosed committee for Information Technology. The inconsistencies in answers given by Brown document was partially cut up to remove to questions in the House on the issue. marginal and source notes. Foley advised the Foley provided the subject document to the plaintiff of the circumstances of the receipt of plaintiff advising that the document was this document. from the defendant. 2.8 On or about 15 October 1996 in the early 2.12 The defendant spoke with the plaintiff again morning the defendant telephoned Foley. The on the topic of the Adelaide City Council on defendant gave information to Foley of and 10 November 1996 following an event at concerning the issue of the location of EDS’s the Power House Findon associated with the head office in Adelaide. Such information Greek Orthodox Church. The defendant formed the basis for questioning of Brown in spoke with the plaintiff as the two left the the House that day and related to location of stadium. The defendant advised the plaintiff EDS headquarters in the old News building on that in respect of the Adelaide City Council North Terrace, co-location of the Department issue Brown had no game plan and had of Information Industries in the same building backed himself into a corner by attacking and the proposed Delphin Lend Lease develop- the Labor Party but needing its support. He ment planned for Technology Park. Foley repeated that Brown had made this a leader- advised the plaintiff of the circumstances of ship test for himself. He advised the plain- the receipt of this information. tiff to hold out against Brown’s plans for 2.9 On or about 22 October 1996 the plaintiff the Adelaide City Council. telephoned the defendant. The plaintiff 2.13 On the same occasion as is referred to in enquired of the defendant as to what Brown 2.12 hereof the plaintiff commented to the was doing with the Adelaide City Council. defendant upon an article in the Sunday The defendant confirmed an expressed belief Mail of that day which article noted the of the plaintiff that Brown had made the possibility of a leadership challenge to Adelaide City Council a leadership test for Brown following a poor showing in an himself. The defendant advised the plaintiff Advertiser poll. The plaintiff asked the that Brown had told members of his Party that defendant whether he had the numbers. The he would put the Labor Party under pressure defendant responded "I need another bad on the issue and that the Labor Party would poll". give way. He further advised that he believed I will continue my remarks later. (Time that Brown had no idea as to what a proposed triumvirate to take over the Adelaide City expired) Council would do but that Brown wanted to look strong "like Jeff Kennett". Global Electronic Commerce 2.10 On 4 November 1996 the defendant (by his Senator COONAN (New South Wales) office) telephoned Foley at Foley’s elector- (1.18 p.m.)—I wish to raise as a matter of ate office. Foley was not present and the public interest the implications for tax and defendant left a message. Shortly thereafter industry policy of global electronic commerce. the defendant did speak with Foley and the Few Australians would argue with the need topic of the EDS contract was discussed. On for fundamental tax reform in this country. or about 5 November 1996 Foley received an anonymous mail item. The document was While the emphasis may vary and the pre- a letter dated 14 October 1996 from Brown ferred tax mix may differ, the potential for to Hansen & Yuncken. The letter was emerging technologies to erode existing tax 5790 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 revenue is truly breathtaking—so much so The most rapid growth in electronic com- that no debate on tax and industry policy can merce has been in business to business trans- fail to address the challenges of cyberspace. actions, currently estimated at about $US1 Put simply, if we do not find solutions to million. According to industry sources, by the the economic imperatives of the Internet, any year 2000 around 20 per cent of all software tax reform might well be out- of-date before will be delivered on-line as well as 20 per it is implemented. These problems are not cent of travel bookings in Australia and confined to Australia alone. upwards of 50 per cent in the United States. All countries are under the threat of border- The release of the Goldsworthy report is less electronic commerce undermining the timely in promoting an understanding of what foundations of sales tax, capital gains tax and is required to facilitate Australia’s transition intellectual property as the basis for imposing to an on-line economy. The research under- withholding tax. The implications of informa- taken by Professor Goldsworthy should not, tion technology for the broader economy are however, be read in isolation. Its implications profound, and the sense of urgency conveyed and subject matter reach far beyond the rel- in the information industries task force report evance of the PC market—incorporating The global information economy: the way business, taxation, privacy laws, industry ahead should not be ignored. policy and training. In today’s terms, harnessing the growth The matter of most significance to business engines of the IT world is about competitive- and the community is the implications of the ness—getting the policy settings right to build superhighway for job creation and employ- infrastructure and to encourage investment. In ment. The 1996 OECD report Technology, tomorrow’s terms, maximising the capacity of productivity and job creation identifies know- information technology will be about survival. ledge, especially technological knowledge, in The exponential growth of electronic com- industries such as telecommunications, merce points to the reality that there is an- pharmaceuticals, new materials, environmental other tiger economy on our doorstep. technologies, computers, education and software as the main sources of economic No longer a vision of what was merely growth and job creation in member countries. imaginable beyond 2000, the information superhighway is rapidly transforming the way Whilst armed with the knowledge that the we do things such as banking, purchasing and IT field represents the source of new jobs in communicating. Doing business over the Australia and the best chance we have of Internet was virtually unheard of just a year reducing unemployment, industry sources or two ago. Since the World Wide Web was suggest that United States companies are, on invented in 1989, electronic commerce has average, about two years ahead of Australian grown exponentially. Based on the 1995 companies in adapting to Net based electronic Internet retail sales, worldwide electronic commerce. Further, the Goldsworthy report retailing is currently valued at $US300 typecasts Australia as a declining player in million. Web commerce increased by 500 per the global IT field, representing two per cent cent in 1996 and is expected to grow at 400 of IT users and only 0.3 per cent of produc- per cent in 1997. Industry analysts expect Net ers. trade to reach $100 billion to $150 billion by Hopping on board the IT superhighway is the year 2000. not just about keeping up with the Joneses, The four factors driving growth in electron- however. It is about putting Australia forward ic commerce are the increase in the number as an active participant that has the means to of users, the high disposable incomes of participate and influence the shape of the typical Net users, the growing confidence in emerging global economy as opposed to being the Net as a medium for trade as the privacy a passive spectator alongside the global IT and security of on-line transactions are se- giants. cured and the growing convergence of elec- With a collaborative review of the research tronic commerce technologies around the Net. undertaken by the Mortimer report, the Golds- Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5791 worthy report, the soon to be released Cutler and traced in the absence of intermediaries report and the Australian Taxation Office and on-site tax collectors? What audit tech- Internet and electronic commerce project, we niques, for example, would need to be imple- will soon be in a position to map out the way mented to avoid perhaps rampant tax evasion? ahead for Australia’s on-line economy. The Even if there is evidence of a transaction, treatment of electronic commerce as merely how will authorities determine the nature of a modern day means of doing business, the transaction, which is, in effect, sent in the however, raises some serious questions. digitised form of binary numbers, without Fundamental to these questions are the infringing individual privacy? implications of electronic commerce for Fourthly, within a global marketplace with Australia’s taxation system. Firstly, the full no traditional legal structure, will copyright impact of borderless electronic banking has and intellectual property rights still apply? not yet been felt. Currently, Australia’s claim How will these rights be monitored and to taxable income is based on the residence of enforced? To what degree will these concepts the taxpayer and the source of the income or be relevant when the content has been altered, gains. However, as electronic commerce manipulated or even adapted? How will a further erodes national borders, creating a company’s identity be verified? What forms virtual global marketplace in cyberspace, how of protection will be afforded to protect is a government able to identify and trace individual brand names from being passed off who, what and where taxable activities are as the real thing? Assuming that these issues occurring? Unfortunately, a Net address does can be resolved, the Net presents unlimited not identify the user or users with the same opportunities for Australian business and geographical proximity as does a postal consumers. address. How realistic is it that authorities In the wake of the contributions from will be able to track down cyber tax evaders? Mortimer, Goldsworthy and Cutler, I look Further, the Australian tax system enshrines forward to investigating the implications of the principle that the source of income is the expected growth in electronic commerce located where the economic activities creating as a member of the Joint Committee of Public the income occur. Given the global nature of Accounts inquiry. The committee will inquire the Net, how is the source or sources of and report on the impact of Internet com- income to be determined when taxable activi- merce on many areas of potential effect. The ties have taken place in a number of different committee will consider amongst its terms of jurisdictions across cyberspace? What evi- references the expected growth in Internet dence would be required to establish a perma- commerce and the findings and solutions nent connection within a particular jurisdic- proposed by the task force on electronic tion? If a permanent establishment is found to commerce, which are being prepared by the exist in a particular jurisdiction, how much of Australian tax office. the income and expenses arising from global The quantity, value and types of goods trading activities could be attributed to this entering Australia under duty and sales tax jurisdiction? free limits and the commercial entry thres- Secondly, given President Clinton’s recent holds will be another area that will be con- commitment to a tax free trade zone on the sidered. As well, it will look at the opportuni- Net, what technical and policy limitations will ties for Commonwealth agencies to improve inhibit Australia from collecting taxable services to the business sector and to the revenue from electronic commerce if, indeed, general public arising from growth in Internet it were thought desirable to do so? Can the commerce. tax system of a solitary government be effec- Two issues which I am eager to develop tive and enforceable amidst the tax shelters during the public accounts inquiry are the and hideaways of cyberspace? benefits of electronic commerce to small to Thirdly, if electronic cash is analogous to medium enterprises and ways in which the paper cash, how will transactions be sourced new technology can increase labour flexibili- 5792 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 ty. The Net is a cheap and effective means of industry policy has changed fundamentally reaching suppliers and markets that would since the last election. There is a realisation otherwise be closed to small business. that there has been a significant shift in the One of the greatest advantages of the Net focus to provide sustainable growth. Of for Australian small business is its ability to concern to Australians is that, as a nation, we erode the tyranny of distance, enabling the are not meeting the new challenges in a establishment of overseas market presence global environment. without the capital costs of a physical office. The social contract between the government The opportunities available are such that and its citizens is lacking vision and a coher- businesses and consumers are rushing to ent strategy. The result has been a failure on connect to the Net. In January 1997, there the government’s behalf to create the desired were 57 million Net users worldwide, of increase in living standards, job security and whom 1.5 million were Australian. By the an engaging future for our children. Funda- year 2000, the number of users is estimated mentally, government has tended to be caught to triple to about 150 million. up in an industry policy debate that was I have to inform the Senate that, if recent relevant during the 1980s but is not so now. reports are to be believed, generation T has Significant macro-economic and micro- now been born. These are the techno tots and economic reforms during the 1980s have the cyber kids who have embraced the infor- meant that much of the focus of industry mation superhighway and envisage that the policy debate today is irrelevant. Net will be used for such diverse purposes as It is fair to argue that Australia has pro- to e-mail Santa, to elect the US President and gressed from a nation that survived on the to become mandatory for good living. price of its commodities to one that realised Research by US futurist Thom Blischock its manufacturing base and, today, its services indicates that 98 per cent of people born after industry are critical to future success. This has 1983 have used a computer. Generation T been as a result of significant policy changes spends an average 4.4 hours per week on the throughout the 1980s and early 1990s. How- computer, 18 hours watching television and ever, realising the changing nature of the seven hours on the telephone. The enthusiasm Australian economy is only half of the chal- for the new technology is not dependent, lenge facing government. The implementation however, on age. A recent trial of PC and Net of appropriate industry policy is essential to training for people over 55 was met with ensuring that future success and security. unprecedented demand. Perhaps there is hope Policy implementation has been a major for all of us. concern in this sector. I mean two things by The Net makes home based work an attrac- this. Firstly, Australia has continued to focus tive option for people with disabilities and predominantly on an approach of utilising and parents who prefer to work from home. The promoting current comparative advantage as possibilities of electronic commerce are a way of attempting to improve Australia’s virtually unlimited. It is clear that those trading position, our economic outlook and countries that can quickly overcome the our long-term future. Secondly, Australia, and difficulties of ensuring security, privacy, in particular this government, has relied and intellectual property and revenue collection is relying on an economic policy rather than will lead the rest in terms of wealth and jobs. an industry policy to improve our world It is a challenge, I believe, that we all must be trading position. These two approaches have prepared to meet. done and will do little to rectify the current problem with which Australia finds itself Industry Policy confronted. Senator BISHOP (Western Australia) (1.31 Firstly, I will address the ills of focusing p.m.)—I wish to discuss in this matter of Australia’s industry and economic policy on public interest the emerging debate on indus- the notion of comparative advantage. Com- try policy and observe at the outset that parative advantage is premised on the notion Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5793 that a country’s engagement and success in a To provide a participatory environment in market should be determined by its natural which industry is engaged, industry policy is resources and skills. These resources and based and should rely upon a number of skills create an immediate advantage in the re- factors. Firstly, it must be strategic. This spective market for the nation. Unfortunately means that government and industry leaders for Australia, however, our natural resources in partnership must devise a plan for identify- and skills lie predominantly in the area of ing and entering high growth and high return commodities, which has for some time now industry sectors. There must be clear criteria been producing a diminishing return for in order to identify those industries that Australia. This means that we are leading the Australia wishes to be engaged in. This world in areas of trade that are of declining requires a fundamental rethink of the nature value. of participation in the economy. It requires The impact is twofold. Firstly, our return government to view its citizens not solely as for investment is declining and, secondly, our consumers but also as producers. This means imports increase as we outsource and buy that the community has an interest in forgoing products and skills that have been produced short-term cost reduction based upon current and provided offshore. Generally, these areas of advantage. Instead, our community imports are in high growth areas, thus im- relies on the creation of comparative advan- proving our trading partners’ position at our tage in long-term, high growth and return own cost. The real success in comparative industries that provide employment and advantage will stem from creating an environ- security. ment that identifies and facilities comparative As producers are reliant on growth for advantage in long-term, high growth industry employment, it must be seen as a priority by sectors, rather than immediate comparative the community to forgo short-term consumer advantage but with little future prospects. gain for long-term advantage. In doing this, Secondly, I will address the failure of government is setting itself up to take advan- government to formulate a strategic and tage of a range of industries that will be long- integrated industry policy. After significant term producers, with increasing value. There macro-economic and micro-economic reform are a range of criteria that are required for change in the 1980s, government has con- success in this selection process. These will tinued to focus on these issues of economic be industries that will have a significant policy. However, with much of that work lifespan that will benefit Australia and Aus- completed successfully over the last 10 years, tralians in the acquisition of technology, government now needs to address new areas knowledge, research and development and of policy reform. Economic policy can no public and private research. longer be a substitute for industry policy. Equally, these industries will exist where Government is relying on fiscal control, there is a high elasticity of demand. The budget surpluses, low inflation and moderate desired industries should be export orientated, wages growth to attract investment and to possibly with the government prepared to provide a level of growth that will both fund entry into the world market through increase employment levels and living stand- national savings as an investment mechanism ards. in Australia’s future. The desired industries Industry policy does not rely solely on should also be value adding. This would macro-economic settings or micro-economic increase the value of the export and decrease reform. It actively participates in creating an the cost of the final import where there is a environment in which industry and investment direct correlation. will prosper on an industry by industry basis. Finally, the industry should have a high Economic policy can assist in creating an level of return. This would be true to both appropriate environment in which to conduct investors and employees who see their living industry policy, but this cannot be confused standards increase as the result of success and with industry policy itself. return levels of production. Thus, the com- 5794 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 munity reaps the reward as producers via job bounty by the government and then the security and increased wages, rather than as backflip due to electoral pressure highlight consumers via product cost reduction. this reactive approach. It must be understood that a strategic policy There have been two significant recent is compatible with an integrated policy. I contributions to the focus government should mentioned earlier that economic policy can take with regard to industry policy. The first assist with creating a helpful environment for of these was the Goldsworthy report that industry policy. Australia cannot afford to looked into the information economy. It made continue past policy trends of concentrating a number of recommendations regarding the on one aspect of a problem or providing a one role of government in this newly developing dimensional solution. To this effect, industry industry. Those recommendations were sum- policy is in partnership with a range of other marised in the following way: appointment of government policies. For example, part of this a cabinet minister for information industries; integrated approach may address issues such establishment of an industries council; a 200 as import replacement. per cent R&D concession; feasibility studies Australia has focused on this remedy funded by an information economy develop- heavily in the past. However, it did so in a ment fund; coordination between three tiers of vacuum. The international market is much government; outsourcing to maximise devel- more complex in this approach as indicated. opment benefits; establishment of a purpose A multifaceted approach is required. designed attraction agency for the industry; and some taxation reform. As part of an integrated and strategic policy, import replacement can be an import- Essentially, this was a report that encour- ant tool in the formulation of a successful aged government involvement and assistance industry policy. A failure to address all in industry. Tom Burton explained in the relevant issues that impact industry can, Financial Review, and I quote: however, result in overall failure. The message from yesterday’s report was clear: if Once having identified these criteria and the Government wants to snare a greater share of the global information industry it is going to have desired industries, the government must turn to pay for it. its attention to how best to implement and administer this. As previously mentioned, The Mortimer report was of a similar opinion. there are a number of immediate policy areas This recommended: the support of successful that can be used to assist industry growth. industries; appointment of a high level invest- Tax policy, predominantly in the area of ment advocate with $1 billion to sell Australia research development, stands out as an obvi- internationally; annual assessment of business ous choice. Such a policy allows industry to assistance by parliament; and a focus on invest in areas that are identified as future exports, investment, innovation, competi- long-term growth industries. If government tiveness and sustainable development. desires the identification of those industries, Generally, these reports are on the right it must provide the incentive for industry track. They seek to involve government in involvement. industry policy as a supporter of Australian Bounties such as the ships bounty, which industry. There are two concerns from these were vigorously supported by the ALP, is an reports, however. Firstly, there may be an obvious example. This policy, which in the over reliance on the information economy end was supported by the government, al- which, at best, will include about 15 per cent lowed a current Australian industry leader of employment opportunities. In this sense, it with long-term growth prospects to remain may be a false hope to the government. competitive, rather than putting it to the torch Secondly, there is an emphasis on assistance of neutral economic policy. These are, how- of industry and government intervention, but ever, fundamentally areas of policy that are no real strategic plan on how to go about this reactive rather than part of a strategic plan to or to give effect to particular outcomes. The assist industry. The initial approach to the long-term focus required in planning industry Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5795 policy can come from one main initiative: that policy thinking has allowed for. The policy is through the creation of an independent approach must focus much less on immediate investment agency. This is not a new idea. It cost advantage and much more on growth has been used successfully around the world, sectors of the future and government’s role in predominantly in South-East Asia. facilitating that growth. The success of that agency will depend on X-rated Videos a number of criteria. They are: the agency must receive high levels of guaranteed Senator HARRADINE (Tasmania) (1.45 government funding for a specific period of p.m.)—We are discussing matters of public time, yet be allowed to remain independent; interest and I believe that one of the most the agency must be wide reaching, based both important matters of public interest would be on an industry and a sectorial approach; its the credibility or otherwise of ministerial performance must be tied to objective meas- statements. I want to deal again with the very urements; the primary objective must be to serious question of whether or not the Attor- assist government and industry in identifying ney-General (Mr Williams), who is the first long-term, high growth industries and to law officer of the Crown, in a statement on 8 identify possible barriers of entry to the April of this year, relating to x-rated videos market; and it must be linked to growth and the NVE classification, delivered himself targets. of a statement which is demonstrably false. The establishment of the agency, however, I raised this matter with the leader of the is not all that is required. A great deal of trust government in this chamber (Senator Hill) by or faith must be placed in that agency. There way of a question. I refer to that question, will be a requirement for it to fully consider which is in the Hansard of 25 August 1997. the agency’s recommendations based upon I quoted from the Attorney-General’s state- that agency’s expertise. The proposal for such ment which stated: an agency is contrary to the traditional, The Federal Government has decided to ban X- neutral economic and industry theory sub- rated videos and create a new category for non- scribed to by most governments of the past. violent sexually explicit videos which will contain However, if Australia’s position at the mo- tighter guidelines in order to exclude demeaning material. ment teaches us anything, it is that the classi- cal theory subscribed to is not working. One I asked Senator Hill whether he was aware only has to look at the tiger economies of that such material should already be excluded Asia to identify the structure and system by law under the national classification code. required to facilitate this long-term growth. Certainly the Attorney-General should have Clearly, then, our industry policy requires a known that. I asked him: radical rethink of the role of government, both . . . Does this not mean that the responsible in the role it directly plays and the way in minister, namely the first law officer of the Crown, which it facilitates involvement from other has failed to ensure that current X-rated material quarters. conforms to the demeaning provisions of the national classification code and that, by this It is encouraging to read reports that the statement, the Attorney-General has misled the government is considering a further change in public since the establishment of an NVE category industry policy. However, the government is clearly not necessary, as he says, ‘in order to needs to understand that the debate is more exclude demeaning material’?... than the level playing field versus government Senator Hill responded yesterday—I will not intervention. The policy required is that of a deal with his response on Monday, because it different paradigm. The producer versus con- was a question without notice—after referring sumer approach is required in order to be the matter to the Attorney-General. He said: prepared to make the decisions that will bring . . . The Attorney-General has noted that the joint success in the future. The creation of advan- press release referred to must be viewed in its tage for the future requires a much more entirety as not only reflecting the government’s strategic approach than current day industry decision but also providing information to the 5796 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 community about what the proposed new NVE misled the community. He has not misled the category is likely to contain... parliament as yet but, obviously, if one were If that is not a non-answer, then I don’t know to believe the statement, it would mislead the what is. Clearly, it is a virtual admission that parliament. No doubt his colleagues have also the Attorney-General did deliver himself of a been misled. public statement which is demonstrably false. It is a matter of great concern, because we Let us go to the second paragraph of the are on the verge of this material going into statement if the government is not prepared to the homes of Australians via the Internet. The admit openly—although, inferentially, it has— technology is available, of course, and will be that he was wrong. The second paragraph of quite readily available in the next two years the Attorney-General’s statement said: for real time videos to be shown through the The decision fulfils the Government’s commitment Internet. This is something that should be to ban X-rated films and address community considered very seriously by the parliament concerns about the availability of any sexually and the government. violent and demeaning sexually explicit material. Apart from the question of those issues in Officers of the Attorney-General’s Department particular, I wish to reiterate my concern that admitted before a hearing of the Legal and the government has not focused on the clear Constitutional Legislation Committee that fact that the Attorney-General, the first law such material should not now be in the X officer of the Crown, on an important social category. Yet the Attorney-General says that and public issue, has delivered himself of a not only is the NVE to be established in order statement which is provably false. I ask the to do something which the minister or his government to take that matter on board in officers should have done in respect of the X- order to restore the credibility of statements rated category, but also it is done to address that emanate from ministers. community concerns about the availability of sexually violent and demeaning sexually Sitting suspended from 1.54 to 2.00 p.m. explicit material—material that should already be excluded from the X category. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE One wonders why the government has, on Superannuation: Fringe Benefits the recommendation of the Attorney-General, proceeded in this way—on the basis of Senator SHERRY—My question is to misinformation; on the basis of statements Senator Hill, the Leader of the Government in that are patently and provably incorrect. the Senate representing the Prime Minister. Because of the odium attached to the X Minister, are you aware that the Department category, Canberra’s porn merchants have of the Prime Minister and Cabinet have put long sought the switch to the NVE label. In together a list of fringe benefits that senior fact they welcomed the decision of the federal public servants can access in order to repack- Attorney-General to establish an NVE catego- age their salaries and thereby avoid your ry and were able get around a clear election government’s new 15 per cent superannuation promise by this government to ban X-rated tax? Such fringe benefits would include a videos. motor vehicle up to the value of $55,000, laptop computers and mobile phones. Does The joint select committee on video materi- the government support salary repackaging by als received evidence that the pornography in senior Prime Minister and Cabinet officers to the X category engenders in the minds of the avoid the new 15 per cent superannuation habitual viewer a callous and manipulative tax? If not, what action will the government orientation towards women, and a perception take to ensure that their new 15 per cent of women in general as highly promiscuous superannuation tax is not avoided by their and available. This is the sort of material that own employees? we are dealing with. One would have thought that the Attorney-General of this Common- Senator HILL—I must have missed that wealth should state the facts. Instead, he has one. I will find out— Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5797

Senator Schacht—You miss a lot these exploration will give considerable insight as days, Hilly. to the position of the ALP. Mr Evans, the Senator HILL—I do not think I miss much shadow Treasurer, now deputy leader, said at all but I apparently missed that one. I will last year, Australia is ‘so undertaxed—’ so find out the detail of that and come back with undertaxed—‘by any relevant international a considered response. standard, there is a case for having some overall revenue increases. Senator SHERRY—Madam President, I ask a supplementary question. Senator, surely Madam President, you will recall that the you should be able to rule out on the one Sunday before last he decided to add to that. hand the government introducing a new Consistent with his recognition of last year superannuation tax and on the other hand that we were undertaxed and deserved tax employees of the Prime Minister seeking to increases, on the Sunday television program avoid the government’s new superannuation he called on the states to address their diffi- tax. Does the list of fringe benefits that can culties by increasing death duties, property be used to avoid your government’s new 15 taxes, state income tax surcharges and in- per cent superannuation tax have the approval creased payroll taxes as well. This is the of both the Secretary to the Department of the shadow Treasurer calling for increased taxes Prime Minister and Cabinet, Mr Max Moore- in this country—payroll taxes, income taxes, Wilton, and the Prime Minister? death duties and property taxes. There it lies. Senator HILL—I will not accept the Is that also the view of others in the ALP? premise of the question until I have ascer- What about Mr Tanner, one of the rising tained the facts. I have said I will check on stars, the shadow minister for transport? What that and come back and give you a considered did he say? He said: answer. We should have an inheritance tax or some tax of that nature. Taxation Reform So Mr Tanner believes in inheritance taxes for Senator KNOWLES—I direct my question Australians as well. He continued: to the Leader of the Government in the Senate, Senator Hill, and it relates to the issue Deemed capital gains tax on death is another option of tax reform. in that regard . . . there should be a return to the 60c in the dollar tax rate for people earning over Opposition senators interjecting— $75,000. Senator KNOWLES—I thought you’d be Senator Faulkner, he is one of yours, the interested, but you’ll be even more interested rising star in the Labor Party. He went on to with the question because my question relates say: to the issue of tax reform. No doubt the I think our overall tax take at the moment has minister’s attention has been drawn to recent become too low. I am quite happy to state that I proposals by certain people about the intro- think the total tax is too low. duction of death duties, the introduction of property taxes and claims that Australia is So it goes on. We have Mr Carr implement- actually an undertaxed country. I therefore ask ing bed taxes in New South Wales. What did the minister: would he care to explain the Mr Goss, who is another aspiring Labor different approach of a coalition government leader coming down here to Canberra, he to that of the people advocating such new hopes, say? He said: taxes? We need to be looking at taxes. We need to be Senator HILL—I certainly have not missed looking at the black economy. this information. It is very important that the Mr Tanner went on to say that he wants to Australian public understand exactly where extend sales tax on services—‘A restructuring the Australian Labor Party stands in the tax of sales tax, extending it to certain services debate. I know there is a little hesitancy to and rationalising its existing incidence would come forward at the moment but a little be logical.’ 5798 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

The hypocrisy. Firstly, they want taxes to sively in that estimates hearing. I would urge rise—property taxes, inheritance taxes, in- you to closely read the very cogent arguments come taxes and payroll taxes. Secondly, when that were put as to why the government was you look at what Mr Carr said, when you proceeding in this particular direction—a look at what Mr Beazley has said in the past, direction which we believe is in the best and when you look at what Mr Tanner says interests of the Australian taxpayer. now, they say you should be looking at broad While I am my feet I can report to Senator based indirect taxes as well. So why won’t Mackay that the government’s strategy for the the Labor Party leadership in Mr Beazley sale of Commonwealth properties has seen come clean and say that, in fact, the policy of excellent results. Of the 11 commercial the Labor Party, if it ever gets back into properties identified for sale in the 1996/97 office, will be increased taxes and a new budget, nine properties have been sold, broad based indirect tax? returning over $80 million to the Common- DISTINGUISHED VISITORS wealth. The remaining two properties will be marketed for sale in the near future. The sales The PRESIDENT—I have pleasure in showed the strong interest of investors in acknowledging the presence in the gallery of Commonwealth properties and to date I am Mrs Molly Missen, widow of the late distin- advised that the total sales figures have been guished senator from Victoria Alan Missen above valuation. who died in office on 30 March, 1986. Molly has just attended the Alan Missen memorial Senator, when your government was in lecture delivered by former Senator the Hon. office—of course, you were not here at that Fred Chaney and sponsored by the parlia- time—your government was able to initiate, mentary group of Amnesty International. On as Senator Carr always reminds me, the sale behalf of all senators, I extend her a warm of many government assets. That is what your welcome. government did, Senator Mackay. It is okay for you to stand up here and say we forget the Honourable senators—Hear, hear! past, we rule off the past. Your policy was QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE clear—I thought your policy was clear, maybe it is not—that where it is in the interests of Sale of Commonwealth Buildings the taxpayer the government will make the Senator MACKAY—My question is appropriate decisions. directed to the Minister representing the Senator MACKAY—Madam President, I Minister for Administrative Services. Minister, ask a supplementary question. I did not get an I refer to the figures prepared by the domestic answer to my question. I understand that what property task force which indicate that within happened at estimates was that the govern- 10 years the government’s fire sale of 57 ment ran the argument that the ownership of Commonwealth buildings will result in a net buildings is not a core government business. loss of $350 million to the Commonwealth Isn’t it core business of government to gain government and continuing losses thereafter. maximum value for taxpayers? Isn’t your Given this analysis, what was the basis for the justification for outsourcing every possible government’s decision to sell the buildings? government function based on this? Why have Won’t the short-term gain from this policy you then embarked on a measure which is come at long-term financial cost to the tax- clearly going to cost the taxpayer dearly in payer? the medium to long term? Senator KEMP—Senator Mackay, I am Senator KEMP—Senator, again, I hate to not sure if you were there at the Senate draw on old history but it was your govern- estimates hearing; I think you probably were ment which started outsourcing. Don’t stand not there when this issue was canvassed up here and try to lecture us and say, ‘Isn’t it extensively. The issue of whether it is better awful a government is outsourcing?’ Senator to keep the property in government hands or Mackay, read the history of your own party. to rent out I thought was covered very exten- I know your own party has great difficulty in Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5799 deciding where it stands on any issue. Senator When Labor were in office they increased Mackay, it was your party that started wholesale sales taxes, they increased petrol outsourcing. excises, they increased the Medicare levy, Senator Mackay—Answer the question! they increased the wholesale sales tax on cars, they increased company tax. There is great Senator KEMP—I am answering the amusement in the Labor Party at this because question. I am absolutely answering the the one thing you really like and really love question. Senator, if you wish to forget your is to increase taxes. That, I might say, is the history, we do not. We will remind you of one thing the Labor Party is good at— your history all the time. increasing taxes. Taxation Reform There are some real problems with the Senator WATSON—My question is current tax system. The current tax system has directed to the Assistant Treasurer. I refer the real problems in relation to the high levels of minister to the outdated taxation system marginal tax on personal income. There are which the coalition government inherited problems with the wholesale sales tax system, when it came to office. Minister, what prob- as anyone who has been close to this system lems exist with the current system and how clearly knows. What is most peculiar is that important is it that Australia pursues taxation the Labor Party refuses to join in this tax reform and less tax? debate. What we have is a scattergun ap- proach day after day with various members of Senator KEMP—Thank you, Senator the Labor Party moving in and moving out of Watson, for the question. There are two the tax debate as they are corrected by their questions which the Labor Party seeks to leader, Kim Beazley. avoid and really hates. The first question is: what does the Labor Party stand for? No-one The coalition is very clear on its principles knows the answer to that question. I certainly in relation to tax reform. We want a system do not. The second really hard question for which will encourage people to work, to save, the Labor party is: where does the Labor to invest. We believe there is widespread Party stand on tax reform? support in the Australian community for tax reform; there is no question about that. As I Senator Hill—I know where Gareth Evans said, we support a constructive debate on tax stands. reform. Senator KEMP—I do not know where the Senator Sherry—You said that about the Labor Party stands on tax reform. We know surcharge—it is a tax on super. where Wayne Goss stands on tax reform and, as my colleague Senator Hill said, we know Senator KEMP—I will come back to you where Gareth Evans stands on tax reform. We on that one in a minute. It is a great tragedy know that Gareth Evans supports death duties that the Labor Party refuses to join in. One of but we think Kim Beazley does not support the Young Turks said that we want to tax the death duties. It all goes on and on. Even the wealthy. Young Turks want tax reform. John Faulkner Senator Robert Ray—Who are the Young is not a Young Turk so he probably does not Turks? want tax reform. Senator Sherry is getting close to that margin and we do not think Senator Kemp—One of the Young Turks Senator Sherry wants tax reform. said that, Robert Ray. In relation to my answer to Senator Senator Sherry—You taxed their super. Mackay, we can judge from history what is Senator KEMP—But what did Senator the Labor Party’s attitude to tax. The Labor Sherry want with the 15 per cent surcharge? Party’s attitude to tax can be summed up in Senator Sherry did not want a surcharge to be two words—more tax. That is what the Labor placed on higher income earners and he Party stands for. That is exactly the point that convinced the Labor Party of that. Thank you Senator Hill made about Gary Evans. for the interjections. 5800 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

The PRESIDENT—Senator Kemp, your tion of the words used. So I am afraid I time has expired. You ought not to refer to cannot really take it much beyond that. Mr Evans in the fashion you did during your Senator ALLISON—Minister, by not answer to the question. disowning Dr Kemp’s figures, are you saying Firearms Buyback that one teacher in a private school does the work of four in a government school? Are Senator HOGG—My question is directed you saying that one nurse in a private hospital to the Minister representing the Attorney- does the work of four in a government hospi- General, Senator Ellison. Minister, what does tal? Are you also saying that one worker in a the government anticipate the spending for the private child-care centre cares for four times final month of the firearms buyback to be? as many children as a worker in a community Does the government anticipate a surplus based child-care centre? If so, what is your from the Medicare levy? What will the size evidence and, if not, will you apologise of the surplus be? Is the $63 million spent on before further long-term damage is caused to administration too high? When the govern- our Public Service by Dr Kemp? ment conducts an audit of the scheme, will it include an audit of the administration expens- Senator ALSTON—All I can say is that it es incurred by state and territory govern- is not a very good attempt. It is really a ments? classic example of having a blind ideological commitment to a position. You are deter- Senator ELLISON—I thank the honour- mined to put it on the record, irrespective. able senator for his question. As was recently Even if I trotted out everything you ever stated in the press and by the Attorney-Gener- wanted to hear, you would be wanting me to al, just under half a million firearms have re-endorse it, underline it and generally put it been handed back and the program is going up in lights. very successfully. That program has been advertised across the country. A recent I cannot take the matter much further. I am Newspoll revealed that a high percentage of sure that whatever proposition Dr Kemp firearms have been returned. Three-quarters of espoused was a very carefully thought-out the illegal arms have now been returned. With one. I am sure we will be able to provide you regard to details as to funding, I do not have with further elaboration. It might be a lot those available to me. I will refer the matter easier next time if you contacted his office, if to the Attorney-General and get those details you want to know what motivated a particular to you. statement, rather than asking me to somehow second guess. Beyond that, I am afraid I Australian Public Service cannot help you. Senator ALLISON—My question is Privacy Scheme directed to the Minister Assisting the Prime Senator BOLKUS—My question is direct- Minister for the Public Service. Is the minister ed to the Minister representing the Attorney- aware that this morning on the radio Dr Kemp General, Senator Ellison. Minister, are you said that it takes four people in the Public aware of comments made by the New South Service to provide the same service as one Wales Privacy Commissioner, Mr Chris person in the private sector? What was the Puplick, that the proposed national privacy source of these figures? Which departments scheme recently released by the Common- or agencies was he referring to? Do you agree wealth Privacy Commissioner would ‘become with Dr Kemp’s statement? an embarrassment’? Are you aware that Mr Senator ALSTON—The short answer, Puplick stated that the Commonwealth’s firstly, is no, I did not hear it. Secondly, I proposal would lead to each state developing have not heard of the proposition. Thirdly, I their own inconsistent privacy laws? Are you could not give you any indication of my also aware that 15 consumer, privacy and attitude until I did. Fourthly, I would need to legal organisations have resolved to boycott see the transcript and get a precise formula- consultations with the federal Privacy Com- Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5801 missioner because of these voluntary privacy realised from recent estimates, HREOC is proposals? Finally, has your attention been functioning. It is business as usual. drawn to Mr Puplick’s comments that the federal Privacy Commissioner has been forced Senate: Press Photographs to develop her proposal on the basis of what Senator BROWN—My question is directed she thinks is saleable to the Howard cabinet? to you, Madam President. I refer to the Why is it, Minister, that a weak voluntary restrictions on press photographers taking privacy scheme is the only proposal that is pictures in the Senate—for example, during acceptable to the Howard cabinet? the second half of question time—although Senator ELLISON—I thank Senator live television coverage is permitted. I ask: Bolkus for that question. A weak privacy will the Senate be following the House of regime is not acceptable to the Howard Representatives in allowing, with prudent government. I am not aware of the comments restrictions, pictures to be taken by press by the New South Wales Privacy Commis- photographers at any time in this chamber? sioner that you mentioned. There is no influ- The PRESIDENT—I recently wrote to ence by the Commonwealth government of parties and independent groups in the Senate the Commonwealth Privacy Commissioner sending a copy of the arrangements that the and there have been no instructions that any House of Representatives has come to with weak regime, as you put it, should be en- the press gallery on this matter and asking for gaged in or embarked upon. I reject those any comments. I have had responses, which comments. were totally different views, from two sena- Senator BOLKUS—Madam President, I tors, and I expect to hear from others in due ask a supplementary question. Minister, given course. I will proceed to look at the matter your rejection of those comments, wasn’t Mr when I have had the benefit of that advice. Puplick correct when he observed: Senator BROWN—Madam President, I ask Having seen the public humiliation of the Attorney- a supplementary question. Could you outline General in this matter, in a situation where the what the process might be and if there is Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission some time line towards making a decision on itself is being gutted and filleted by the Coalition, the matter? with 43 per cent budget cuts, commissioners not being appointed, a new president not being appoint- The PRESIDENT—I intend to wait a ed, a sex discrimination commissioner not being reasonable time for responses to the letters I appointed, the last thing you would want to do if sent out. Parties must be given an opportunity you are one of the remaining commissioners within to discuss it in their party rooms. I would not the HREOC framework is to put something up to expect there to be any undue delay. This Government that will enable them to say "they’re matter will receive attention, as it has for at off on another one of these anti-business frolics". least the last 12 months, and I think consider- Minister, wasn’t Mr Puplick right? ably before that. Senator ELLISON—No, he certainly was Australia on CD Program not. In relation to the Sex Discrimination Senator FAULKNER—My question is Commissioner, Senator Bolkus is well aware directed to Senator Alston, the Minister for that the Privacy Commissioner, Moira Communications and the Arts. Minister, could Scollay, was appointed to act in the position I ask you what was the cost of production of of Sex Discrimination Commissioner on 2 your department’s latest CD-ROM in the June this year for a period of three months. Australia on CD series entitled Tales from the That acting appointment was then extended to kangaroo’s crypt? Could I ask you if the final 1 March 1998. So I reject outright that there product came to you for approval, or did you is no-one acting in the position of Sex Discri- just approve the emblazoning of your photo- mination Commissioner. graph on the back cover? Are you aware, There is no attempt by the federal govern- Minister, that the CD-ROM has been de- ment to gut HREOC and, as Senator Bolkus scribed by the CD reviewer in the Australian 5802 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 as ‘ham-fisted’, ‘unimaginative’, displaying you were still pretending there was a huge ‘bleak ineptitude’ in its use of CD-ROM budget surplus. We have had to wear the technology, and ‘a stinker’? consequences of that. Unfortunately, the Senator ALSTON—The Australia on CD money is locked in, and we are proceeding program I think emanated from the Creative with the process. Nation era of the Labor Party, going back to Undoubtedly there will be variations be- about 1994. I cannot remember now, but they tween the CD programs. That is only to be threw a couple of million dollars at it and we expected. Some are better than others. As have been generally following through on that long as we do not get one about the ALP then because it was already very much in place. I am sure we will not turn in a real shocker. I launched the first in the series a couple of Senator FAULKNER—Madam President, months ago at the National Gallery—and it I ask a supplementary question of Senator got rave reviews, I might say. Certainly I Alston who says he knows nothing about this think it was a glowing example of the cre- CD-ROM, although his photograph appears ativity of Australians. The program itself was on the back cover. Perhaps he could explain very well patronised. There were lots of to us why, if he knows nothing, he issued a applications for grant funding, and generally press release which said: I think it has been very well received. Indeed, ‘With creatures such as flesh-eating kangaroos, that is one of the reasons we continued with tree-climbing crocodiles and the world’s largest the process. I imagine, although I was not known dinosaurs, Tales from the Kangaroo’s Crypt involved in Tales from the kangaroo’s makes Australia’s amazing prehistory more acces- crypt— sible not only to young people, but to Australians everywhere,’— Senator Robert Ray—Why is your photo on the back of it? It just goes to show that you should read your own press releases, doesn’t it? You also said Senator ALSTON—My photo was? I do it is ‘an invaluable educational tool’. All I not know. Look, I was not there to cheer— want to know is how much it cost, why you Senator Robert Ray—It got an M rating! stuck your photo on the back cover when you Senator ALSTON—I resent being called knew nothing about it, and are you confident mature in that context. Certainly I do not that the production of this CD-ROM has been remember even authorising my photo to be an effective use of taxpayers’ dollars? used for it. Senator ALSTON—Let us be clear about Opposition senators interjecting— this; my press release made it very clear that this was about some very interesting aspects Senator ALSTON—It may have been a of prehistory which very many people in the horrible mistake. Maybe that is why the population take very seriously. I am sure they reviewer took the position that Senator will be appalled at your general response to Faulkner has indicated. He may have just it. I will find out what the cost is but, un- looked at the photo and thought, ‘Well if that doubtedly— is as good as they have got, then maybe the contents of this aren’t much better.’ I simply Senator Schacht—You said you knew do not know. I did not attend the opening; I nothing about it. was not involved in the launch; I have not Senator ALSTON—I know about the seen the photograph. I am sure if it is a pretty series of them; I simply said to you that I did ordinary one we can improve on it, and I am not know about the photograph. That was the happy to address the issue. question Senator Faulkner asked. If you want Beyond that, I will find out for Senator to ask a wider question, you ask it. You Faulkner what the cost of the program was. cannot get up and ask about a photograph one Essentially I think it is old money that was minute and a press release the next and allocated by you, and we are very grateful for pretend that somehow they are the same when that. No doubt it was provided at a time when they are not. Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5803

You may not know the difference between Senator NEWMAN—Those opposite do text and graphic, but we are more than happy not like to hear. They think they have a to explain it to you. If you cannot tell the monopoly on the interests of women. Our difference between a photograph and a press commitment is not only demonstrated by the release, come over and have a word to me way we have got so many women into parlia- later. But for heaven’s sake, do not ask ment; it is also reflected in the consultative Senator Schacht; you will get no enlighten- processes that we have got in place. ment at all. As far as costs are concerned, we Today I had the pleasure of opening the will get back to you shortly. national women’s round table which has brought nearly 50 national women’s organisa- Women tions to Canberra for consultations. Never Senator COONAN—My question is to the before have they had a two-day round table. Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the This enables them great opportunities for Status of Women. Minister, what is the networking between the women’s organisa- government doing about listening to the tions and also for meeting with ministers, concerns of Australian women? How widely ministerial advisers and departmental officials. is the government consulting with women It also includes a delegation to meet with the from different backgrounds and ensuring their Prime Minister tomorrow. views are heard and considered by the Previous round tables have been held twice government? a year for one day. Labor ministers, if they Senator NEWMAN—I thank Senator appeared at all, appeared for a very brief Coonan for her question. She is one of the moment and disappeared. Women’s organisa- very many female members of the govern- tions are not accustomed to having the federal ment who is making an important and very Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the valued contribution to the policy making Status of Women actually stay and listen to process of this government. them. That in itself is a big plus. There is a more focused effort from the round table, This government is certainly listening to because of the longer time that we have. Australian women and consulting with them. Things can be canvassed at length and in There are more coalition women listening and more detail with a longer round table. It does consulting to constituents now than at any provide, as I said before, for greater interac- time in Australia’s history. Madam President, tion or networking between the round table I am sure you will be personally interested to participants and also between members of know that, as a percentage of all the women parliament. in the federal parliament, the coalition women Earlier this year, I wrote to all women’s make up something like 58 per cent. So there organisations around Australia and asked are a lot of coalition women listening to the them to identify, in consultation with their concerns of Australians. membership, issues which they regarded as We as a government take very seriously our important to women so that the agenda would responsibility to consult with Australian reflect this and form the basis of the round women, who after all make up 51 per cent of table. It is an excellent opportunity for the population. Our commitment to women is women’s organisations to present their views reflected in the record number of women MPs to government and to the heart of the decision on the government benches. They did not get making process here in Parliament House. here by accident. They did not get here by Relevant ministers have been invited to attend quota. sessions relating to their portfolios, and the delegates will be meeting with ministers Opposition senators interjecting— personally. The PRESIDENT—Order! There is far too The discussions are wide ranging and they much talk in the chamber for people to hear are interesting. Already we have spent a very clearly what is being said. interesting morning. In addition, there will be 5804 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 workshops on women and reconciliation and which we have just launched today, called on how to access government to influence Australian women working together: An policy and access funding. overview of the activities of Australian Yesterday, we held a summit in Parliament women’s non-government organisations. That House where women from the Australian is useful for other organisations. Council of Business Women met the Prime Senator Patterson—What about access to Minister. They discussed issues with him women members of parliament? relating to the impact of Hilmer reforms— Senator NEWMAN—Access to women especially in rural and regional Australia— members of parliament is as well very import- and to the potential skills deficit among ant. Those are the things this government is young people, because in some instances, doing for communication with women. (Time given state awards, it is more expensive to expired) employ an apprentice over the weekend than a fully qualified staff member. What does that Long Range Cruise Missiles do for youth unemployment? They also were Senator SCHACHT—My question is to very keen to see the government undertake the Minister representing the Minister for taxation reform, unlike the position that we Defence. Minister, I refer you to recent have seen from the opposition. Australia’s reports that senior military planners are women are urging massive tax reform. I pushing for Australia to acquire long range would like to go on if I had the opportunity. tomahawk cruise missiles. Is it a fact that the (Time expired) government has already allocated $1.5 million Senator COONAN—Madam President, I for the conduct of a study on fitting the ask a supplementary question. Minister, could conventionally armed missiles to the navy’s you inform the Senate of any other issues that submarine fleet? Why have the funds been are of concern and that are being discussed at allocated? Why was there no public an- the round table today? nouncement of this decision, given the pro- found strategic and regional implications of Opposition senators interjecting— such an acquisition? In the absence of such a Senator NEWMAN—The opposition is public announcement, how has the potential obviously not interested in what the members acquisition and the allocation of funds for the of the round table are interested in. study become publicly known? They are discussing and canvassing issues Senator NEWMAN—I gather that the of women and work and the related issues of opposition is relying on media stories in this. family friendly workplaces and work related I am advised by the Minister for Defence that costs for women and families. They are a long-range stand-off capability is one option interested in women and leadership. They are which has been suggested for enhancing our interested in appointments to boards and the strike force in the future. But let me emphas- development of mentoring programs in high ise that no decision has been made by the profile business organisations. They are government on the acquisition of such a interested in domestic violence, which after capability at all. We already have a potent all is the scourge of our society. They are strike force of F111 aircraft and submarines. interested in the national summit that will be We are increasing the effectiveness of the convened by the Prime Minister later this F111 fleet by acquiring shorter range stand- year. They are interested in economic security off weapons. for older women. It is not clear whether cruise missiles in They are interested in getting the message Collins submarines or aircraft would be a through to parliamentarians and to parlia- cost-effective solution for Australia in the mentary committees. We have helped them longer term. So studies on this issue are with the production of this little book, called continuing. Long-range stand-off weapons are Getting the message through. We have also just one of the many competing priorities for helped them by putting together a booklet, defence funding. Let me emphasise that no Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5805 decision has been made; studies are continu- often people are only starting to get interested ing. themselves at the last minute. Senator SCHACHT—Madam President, I We are very committed to looking after the ask a supplementary question. Minister, you customers in Social Security. The new say ‘studies are continuing’. Is that the study Commonwealth Services Delivery Agency is that is costing $1.5 million? totally customer focused. I would be con- Senator NEWMAN—I do not have any cerned if older people are not getting the information here about the cost of any study. information that they need. If you have any If it is available, I will see if I can get it for specific examples, I would be very happy to the senator. take them up. Social Security Income and Assets Test Senator WOODLEY—Madam President, I ask a supplementary question. I refer to a Senator WOODLEY—My question is to letter dated 18 August of this year in which the Minister for Social Security. It relates to the department at Mount Gravatt told a person the inclusion of superannuation assets in the that, in fact, the department had not identified social security income and assets test. which investments will actually be exempted. Minister, are you aware that, despite this Minister, I would like to ask you, in respect policy coming into effect in less than four of your answer, whether or not the exemp- weeks, the Department of Social Security is tions apply only to the income test and do not still not able to tell people which investments apply to the assets test. Could you give the will and will not be counted? Do you think it Senate some indication of that, please? is fair that these people, some elderly and disabled, will have less than three weeks to Senator NEWMAN—Senator, surely the make investment decisions which will affect exemptions you are referring to are where them for the rest of their lives? When will people have superannuation which is genuine- specific details of exemptions from this policy ly inaccessible. It is in those circumstances be made available to DSS staff and custom- that I have the discretion on a one-by-one ers? basis to determine if an exemption is appro- priate. So it is not something that I think the Senator NEWMAN—I think Senator department would be able to advise people on Woodley has got the wrong end of the stick. ahead of time. People would need to make I am afraid it is not quite as he would portray. application. I emphasise that it is only in the The FIS officers in the Department of Social cases where—for one reason or another; that Security, coupled with the other officers in is, legal requirements of their fund or what- the department, have been advising people for ever—they simply cannot get access at all. So some months now after all this was an- I think it would be better if you brought the nounced last year. case to me, and we will have a look at it. There has been a growing interest amongst some people in the last few weeks as they Copyright realise that the start-up date is coming, and Senator LUNDY—My question is directed there has been a great deal of opportunity for to the Minister for Communications and the older people to understand these issues. I Arts, Senator Alston. Is the minister aware might point out that in many parts of Austral- that growing numbers of international screen- ia the department has been running seminars writers are agreeing with the Australian to provide information for older people, at Writers Guild that writers must be counted as which they can ask questions and have mat- authors of films for the purposes of copy- ters followed up for them. I believe that the right? Is the minister also aware that the department has been pretty thorough in trying International Affiliation of Writers Guilds— to get information to people, in trying to which represents over 15,000 professional answer their questions, and in holding semi- writers in the United States, Canada, Great nars and general discussion. As is the way Britain and New Zealand—has also objected with a lot of changes in legislation, however, to the exclusion of writers from the definition 5806 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 of ‘author’? What action has the minister decision made by a producer, it might offend taken to ensure that the entitlements of writers the sensitivities of the originator. In those of films are protected? circumstances the judgment that we made was Senator ALSTON—This issue is currently that the regime that we have included in the being addressed by the Senate Legal and bill should be the one that should prevail. Constitutional Legislation Committee, chaired But, at the end of the day, we do not have a by Senator Abetz. I know that they have had closed mind on the subject. We want to quite a number of representations and discus- seriously address the implications of those sions on the issue. Quite clearly, there will changes and undoubtedly we will take notice always be concerns on behalf of those who of the arguments that are put up by interna- would like to have a place in the sun. The tional guilds and anyone else with an interest government is anxious to address all of those in the subject. concerns as much as we can, consistent with ABC Weekend Regional Weather having an effective copyright regime. Reports We made it clear prior to the last election Senator HEFFERNAN—My question is to that moral rights are very important. We do the Minister for Communications and the want to protect the right of attribution, the Arts, Senator Alston. Minister, is the govern- right of integrity and the right to ensure that ment aware of the recent ABC decision to your work is not passed off as someone have weekend regional weather forecasts in else’s. In that context it is important, there- New South Wales, the Australian Capital fore, to ensure that you not only recognise Territory and the Northern Territory read, in those rights but that you do not, at the same future, by the relevant news presenter? Was time, put in place mechanisms which would this a decision of government and has there effectively allow projects—quite often very been any community or other misunder- expensive ones, particularly in the film indus- standing about this decision? try—to come to a halt at short notice. Senator ALSTON—The fact is that the So they are matters that are being seriously ABC itself—in other words, unilaterally, addressed by the government. You asked me without any involvement from government— when we will be in a position to act. I imag- ine the first thing we will do is await the Government senators interjecting— report from the Senate committee. Then we Senator ALSTON—The ABC took an will take that into account before making a executive decision, uninspired and unrelated final decision. to anything that might have been said by Senator LUNDY—Madam President, I ask government—in other words, we were not a supplementary question. Minister, on what consulted in any shape or form—to require basis has the government reached the view weekend weather reports to be presented by expressed in the discussion paper ‘Proposed the news presenter rather than a dedicated moral rights for copyright creators’ that the weather reporter. That was made perfectly director is the sole author of a film? clear in a letter from the head of news of the ABC to the editor, dated yesterday, which Senator ALSTON—As I have indicated, said: there have been some concerns that the ABC News will continue to provide a weather provisions in the legislation should be strong- report covering metropolitan and country New er. There is obviously a lively debate about South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory and whether scriptwriters should have rights in the Northern Territory. It will be delivered by the finished films rather than only in the scripts news presenter, as it has been in every other state which form the basis of those films. I think for some years. the concern arises out of the ability to effec- It follows from that, of course, that quite tively obtain an injunction at the last moment clearly the weather reports will continue to be if you claim that, for example, a piece of available. All those who are interested in the writing has been excised from the film. issue will continue to get the same quality of Whilst that might be a sensible executive information that they had previously. Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5807

In those circumstances, how can one pos- talk about ‘bordering on the insane’ simply sibly explain how the shadow minister for raises the question of where the marbles are, communications can put out a press release my friend. I can tell you, in terms of Crowded today saying that ‘the minister’s decision to House, it is not too crowded in your top axe the ABC weather forecast was bordering packet. It simply makes Dan Quayle’s spell- on the insane’. This really is a very serious ing of ‘potatoe’ look pretty good, I would problem because the minister did not make have thought. If you wanted a bit of a brief- any decision and the ABC weather forecast ing, why didn’t you talk to the ABC? That is has not been axed. In other words, it is all you had to do. You don’t have to ask me comprehensively wrong. The press release about it. (Time expired) continues: Senator HEFFERNAN—Madam President, Senator Alston now goes down in history as the I ask a supplementary question. Minister, only minister to have banned the weather. what would be the consequences of any He asks me whether I know some Crowded misunderstanding that has arisen out of the House song. This is ludicrous. I simply ask confusion in the state of mind of the shadow whether this was Senator Schacht’s own minister? work. Were you out for a long lunch? Did you start thinking it was 1 April? Did you Senator ALSTON—I have to say very consult with the ABC? Of course you didn’t. serious consequences, Madam President. It is all your own work, isn’t it, because you Senator Faulkner—I raise a point of order, are desperately trying to get a run. Madam President. We have had many points The tragedy is, of course, that you put out of order taken in this chamber in relation to a release in that form and what happens? The the appropriateness of supplementary ques- jury is not out Senator Schacht. The jury has tions. I ask you, Madam President, given that come right back in and what they have said you have made consistent rulings in relation is, ‘Comprehensively guilty of total ignorance to supplementary questions, to rule that one and utter irrelevance.’ The gallery comprehen- out of order. It is clearly in breach of both the sively ignored this press release because they standing orders and rulings that you have saw it for what it was—a very poor attempt made consistently about the nature of supple- at some sort of combination of humour and mentary questions. desperation to try and get back into the game. It does not do any justice to those who might Senator ALSTON—Madam President, on be even tangentially interested in the issue. the point of order: all you had then, apart from a desperate attempt to try and bury one’s I do not recall the last time Senator Schacht head in the sand, was a series of assertions. asked a question on communications, so it is You had no reasons advanced to you why a not surprising that he does not want to take supplementary question that asks about the any interest in proceedings now. The only consequences of a matter dealt with in the tragedy from the ALP’s point of view is that question is somehow out of order. The best he is still there. They have five ministers over Senator Faulkner could say was that it was there—they have 10 on the frontbench alto- inappropriate. He did not tell you why it was gether. Seven of them have got trade union inappropriate. I do not recall any standing backgrounds. order— I congratulate the recent meeting of the Senator Faulkner—It was about the state ACTU executive in deciding to promote of mind of Chris Schacht; that’s not in order Senators Mackay and Lundy, but all I can and you know it. suggest is that if you want to be taken seri- ously, you ought to get Senator Schacht’s Senator ALSTON—Senator Faulkner position put before a full meeting of the seems to be anticipating what the answer ACTU congress. They will not stand for this. might be. He might be right, but that is not They simply will not cop it because you are the issue. The issue is whether or not you can doing irreparable damage. To go out there and ask a follow-up supplementary question that 5808 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 asks about the consequences of issues arising department had been contracted more recently from the question. to pay even more money to this company? Senator Cook—You are a deceitful cheat. Senator VANSTONE—Senator, I do not The PRESIDENT—Senator Cook, I ask have advice about ‘even more money’ being you to withdraw that. paid to this company. You rightly draw my attention to the raising of this matter in the Senator Cook—I withdraw it, Madam estimates committee and to the assurance that President. I gave you that I certainly want to know more The PRESIDENT—On the point of order, about this matter. I will not go over all the the press release was certainly referred to by detail—I do not think it is the purpose of the Senator Alston, and that can be commented Senate time to rehash estimates committees— upon. Senator Schacht’s state of mind or what but it is important for people to understand he might have been thinking cannot be com- that the department, up until a period very mented upon by the minister. close to the signing of the contract, was in fact dealing with a training provider with Senator ALSTON—Madam President, I which the department has had extensive fully accept your ruling. I do not think anyone experience, William Angliss. would be game to speculate on what Senator Schacht’s state of mind would have been, but Senator Chris Evans—So what? unfortunately, having committed himself to Senator VANSTONE—You say,‘So what?’ paper, he has to be judged by what is there. If the opposition want to be the government, The consequences are very serious politically, they will have to win more public support and because this is going to be a document we get elected. Then they can stand here and give will be trotting around the countryside as an the answers. example of the sort of level to which opposi- tion senators have risen—or descended. Senator O’Brien, as was indicated to you at the estimates, there was a substitution—I For example, Senator Schacht says in this won’t say at the last minute, because that that ‘the sad aspect of the minister’s banning implies on the last day—and it is that matter the weather is the loss of a familiar face in particular that I want to get to the bottom reading the weather report’. He is not interest- of. I indicated to you that I would come back ed in the quality of what is said, not interest- to you with a chronology of events. If there ed in the accuracy of what is being said to the have been subsequent events to that that I do farmers and everyone else who relies on the not now know about, I will certainly add that weather reports—whether the pitch is going to the explanation I give you. to be under water, whether the game is going to be washed out; all he is interested in is Senator O’BRIEN—Madam President, I whether there is a familiar face. (Time ex- ask a supplementary question. Minister, pired) reminding you that the original contract was for training to expire on 28 August, I am now South Pacific Cruise Lines Ltd reliably informed that your department has Senator O’BRIEN—My question is to extended that contract for three weeks to 13 Senator Vanstone, the Minister for Employ- September, with payment accordingly, and ment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs. will fly students to Jakarta—paying for their Minister, I refer to the contract entered into flights and a number of other things. I remind by your department with South Pacific Cruise you that this is a contract with a company Lines Ltd for $2.8 million in funding under about which you said you had had concerns the training for employment program. I accept over the original contract. I ask you, if you your assurance last week that we will have are taking it on notice, to explain the handing your full and considered views on this within over of this money to this company twice two weeks. But I ask: why, when the $2.8 without appropriate checks. million was raised last week, didn’t you or Senator VANSTONE—Senator, I have not your officers advise the committee that your got much to add to what I have already told Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5809 you, other than to say that if the department capita basis to assist schools to improve believes that training—and that is an ‘if’, it is outcomes for indigenous students. in a sense a hypothetical answer—can be Under the new apprenticeships and completed and enhanced and would otherwise traineeships which we are about to overhaul, be lost without a further investment, that may we want to shape a non-bureaucratic, acces- be the case. But as I have indicated to you, to sible, relevant training system for employers the best of my knowledge I have not seen a and of course for people wanting training. piece of paper in relation to any further Within the last 12 months we have made investment. I will get that and come back to some very significant progress in moving you with it. towards this. Education: Indigenous Students Indigenous employment programs have Senator PATTERSON—My question is to been maintained. Over 4,700 indigenous Senator Vanstone, Minister for Employment, people commenced traineeships in 1996-97— Education, Training and Youth Affairs. compared to 800 in 1994-95. There is one of Minister, this government is committed to the key differences in performance: 4,700 meeting the challenge of the diverse educa- indigenous people on traineeships under us; tional needs of our community, which require 800 in 1994-95 under the previous Labor gov- innovative and effective programs to meet ernment. A further six projects are planned to students’ needs, particularly those of the start this financial year and are expected to indigenous community. Will the minister provide positions for up to 165 apprentices advise what assistance is available to indigen- and trainees. ous children who present at school without In higher education nationally, for 1997 we previous exposure to English and what further have allocated $21.6 million to higher educa- initiatives this government is taking to im- tion institutions across Australia to support prove the standard of services and outcomes Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander educa- for these students? tion. In addition to that, I announced last year Senator VANSTONE—Thank you, Senator a further $8.8 million for the establishment of Patterson, for a very astute question. This five indigenous higher education centres. government is committed—as, I believe, the These centres will encourage the development previous government was—to improving of research skills and academic excellence education, training and employment outcomes within the indigenous community and help to for indigenous Australians. The difference is nurture and promote Australian indigenous that I think we are doing more about it. cultural heritage. The coalition government Earlier this week I attended the Aboriginal has increased funding for indigenous educa- and Torres Strait Islander people’s Training tion across the spectrum from preschool to Advisory Council Network Group Conference higher education, but we are not satisfied with and commended the VET sector for the role that. There is still more to be done. that it is playing in some very successful and While most Australians take literacy and innovative approaches that the Common- numeracy skills for granted, a significant wealth has adopted to meet the needs of in- number of indigenous students encounter very digenous students. real difficulties. The government is aware that These include a number of things. Under the Labor government failed to provide the indigenous education strategic initiatives assistance to children from indigenous com- project, I was very pleased to secure in the munities entering school who required addi- last budget an additional $80 million for fund- tional assistance in English in order to func- ing for preschool to TAFE, spread over four tion effectively in the classroom. I am very years to 1999. That is a lot of money to pleased to tell the Senate that I have an- secure as additional funds in a very difficult nounced today that a new program of support budgetary climate. In 1997 that program will for these students is to be introduced next provide some $110 million to education year. The Commonwealth will provide an providers and state education systems on a per estimated $6.2 million per annum for this 5810 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 purpose under the indigenous education schools in Australia, as well as to public strategic initiatives program. It will provide to libraries, members and senators and Austral- indigenous students from non-English speak- ian overseas missions. ing backgrounds and communities intensive Not all of the comments on the Tales from courses in standard Australian English similar the kangaroo’s crypt have been negative. I to courses provided to newly arrived migrants. draw the Senate’s attention to an e-mail It will enable students commencing their received by my department on 16 August schooling to do so on the same footing as from a primary school teacher at Holgate other Australian students by providing primary school who has responsibility for government and non-government education computer. In reference to the Tales from the authorities a once-only payment of just over kangaroo’s crypt CD, he states— $3,000 for each eligible student. (Time ex- pired) Senator Chris Evans—Was his name Peter Alston? Senator Hill—Madam President, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Senator ALSTON—No, that is not the Paper. name. He states: It’s entertaining, makes one think laterally, makes ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS WITHOUT one think period. . . . It’s informative and challen- NOTICE ges us. . . . I would have no hesitation recommend- ing it to others. Congratulations. Australia on CD Program Senator ALSTON—Madam President, Fitzroy River: Proposed Dam during question time Senator Faulkner asked Senator HILL—Further to my response to me a question and I am now in a position to a question from Senator Murray on Monday provide further information. The CD-ROM in relation to possible triggers for federal Tales from the kangaroo’s crypt cost involvement in Western Australia’s Fitzroy $650,000 to produce. It is the second in a River development proposal, I can confirm series of 10 CDs being produced under the that there are no known decisions of circum- Australia on CD program which was initially stances at this stage which would trigger the funded under Labor’s Creative Nation state- Commonwealth Environment Protection ment. Funding for the program has been (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974. There was retained by the coalition government. The early advice that there was one Ramsar site Australia on CD program is an important within the catchment. Later advice was to the means of providing opportunities to private effect that this was not so and that the site is and community sector multimedia content unlikely to be affected by the proposal. developers. It is also an effective means of As I said earlier, the Western Australian using multimedia technologies to inform government has provided assurance that any Australians and the rest of the world about irrigation development in the west Kimberley Australia’s sport, culture, history and the will be subject to normal legislative require- environment. The first CD in the series, ments for such projects in relation to environ- Under a southern sun, received rave reviews mental impact assessments associated with the from the critiques. Tales from the kangaroo’s ecological requirements of the river system. crypt was launched by Senator Hill on 11 The Commonwealth would seek to be in- August at Parliament House. volved in any state environmental impact In his critique of Tales from the kangaroo’s assessment process to ensure that the crypt, Mark Butler makes a number of subjec- Commonwealth environmental interests are tive judgments about which there can be fully taken into account. legitimate differences of opinion. The article even suggests that the CD costs $29.95 for Long Range Cruise Missiles schools to purchase. I can assure the Senate Senator NEWMAN—Madam President, that the first copy of the CD will be provided earlier today I was asked a question relating free of charge to all primary and secondary to the defence portfolio and some additional Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5811 information has been provided to me by the we get to expose the fact that he wants to minister. There is no study, as such, in de- blame ABC management for the changes in fence that meets the description of the study programming, when those changes are mentioned in the Canberra Times article. brought about by the cuts to the ABC that However, defence studies continue to monitor this government, in opposition, promised not missile developments and purchases around to make. On election night, after they had the world, as well as appropriate capabilities won the election, when Senator Alston was for the ADF. asked, ‘Will you maintain funding for the triennium in real terms?’ he said, ‘Absolute- ACCESS TO HOUSE OF ly.’ Four months later, $55 million a year was REPRESENTATIVES BY SENATORS taken off the ABC budget. The PRESIDENT—I wish to inform The issue of the cut to the weather report- senators of the outcome of matters I have ing is on the front page of yesterday’s Sydney been discussing with the Speaker of the Morning Herald. I think most people would House of Representatives conveyed as follows rather trust the remarks of Allan Humphries in a letter from him dated today’s date: and David Ellyard than your long track record I am very pleased to advise that I have given my of broken promises regarding the ABC. The approval to arrangements for distinguished visitors and Senators to be positioned in an appropriate area article states: on the floor of the House of Representatives But Humphries, 49, departed with both guns Chamber for the viewing of the House’s proceed- blazing. Yesterday he accused the ABC of "blatant ings. This arrangement recognises the dual role of urban bias". Members and Senators in the legislative process "Ultra violet readings, Sydney’s dam heights, a and reciprocates the access provided by the Senate beach watch on bluebottle stings on Bondi Beach, to Members. The first floor gallery, of course, and pollution levels now clutter the weather slot," remains available to Senators under the existing he said. arrangements. As it will take a few days to establish the ground He is going because this minister cut the ABC floor gallery area, I would expect the new gallery budget. This change to the programming of area to be introduced from 1 September 1997. the ABC weather service is because this minister and this government have broken ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS WITHOUT their promise to maintain ABC funding. NOTICE As I have said before, 1,000 jobs have ABC Weekend Regional Weather gone. There has been amalgamation of pro- Reports grams, whether it is in radio or on television. Senator SCHACHT (South Australia) The ABC still has not yet completed all its (3.06 p.m.)—I move: cuts to meet the target set by the government. That the Senate take note of the answer given by We certainly know that Radio Australia has the Minister for Communications and the Arts been destroyed to achieve the cuts of this (Senator Alston), to a question without notice asked government. We have already had plenty of by Senator Heffernan today, relating to the Austral- evidence that this has reduced Australia’s ian Broadcasting Corporation. standing in the Asia-Pacific region. In recent I am delighted to have this opportunity to times there has been evidence given that, even speak to this issue, which Senator Alston in South-East Asia, in such places as Cambo- raised, commenting about my press release. dia, our expatriates have been put more at What he fundamentally failed to acknowledge risk, as they said publicly to me and the again, as he has now done for 12 months, is ambassador in Cambodia— that it is his policy and his government’s policy which has cut $55 million a year off Senator Ferguson—What’s this got to do the ABC budget. If that budget had not been with weather programs? cut, they would not have had to restructure so Senator SCHACHT—Because they can no many of their programs and sack nearly 1,000 longer get Radio Australia when relevant people. That is Senator Alston’s policy. It is information should be made available. This is what we will consistently say, every chance a result of the cuts that this government has 5812 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 made. We will consistently raise this and Senator ALSTON—No, but you see it is expose this minister for what he has done. He not the weather forecast that has been cut by has comprehensively broken his own promise. me or the ABC. All that they have done is to This is not the only area in which he has say that, instead of having dedicated weather broken his promise on the ABC—this is only presenters, they will have it read by the news one area. presenter. He promised before the election to have an Senator Schacht—You are playing seman- independent inquiry into media ownership in tics now—a slick lawyer from Melbourne’s Australia. Now he is down to having deals defence. done behind the scenes. That is typical of this Senator ALSTON—There is nothing slick minister. But the fundamental broken promise lawyer about this, my friend. The fact is that is $55 million a year off the ABC. Minister, you are absolutely and comprehensively do not blame the ABC management; blame wrong. yourself, Mr Costello and Mr Howard. You were the ones who posed the cuts. You were You overplay your hand. No wonder you the ones who got the result that we saw in cannot get a run. You do not get a run be- yesterday’s Sydney Morning Herald where cause you say, ‘The minister banned the well-respected staff of the ABC are saying weather.’ That is investing me with supernatu- publicly their program has gone because of ral powers. Gough Whitlam would be furious your cuts that the management has to impose. to think that I had the ability to ban the weather. If I could ban the weather, I would It is an absolute hypocrisy for you to stand be banning a lot of other things as well and up and say, ‘It’s the ABC’s fault, not mine.’ I would be trying to save you from yourself. If you had not put the cuts on them, they But, unfortunately, I cannot. I do not have would not be having to do this to their pro- any control over your ability to put out press gram. We certainly will expose this at every releases that are totally and absolutely wrong. chance we get and draw it to the attention of the public through press releases, through Play the politics as much as you like. Get public statements and through statements here. up and say, ‘The poor old ABC had no choice Minister, we hope that in the next budget you because the nasty, wicked government chop- can revisit the draconian cuts you have put on ped $55 million off them.’ You ignore the the ABC so that they can restore the program- fact, of course, that all they have done is ming that certainly regional Australia wants. bring it in line with the weather broadcasting around Australia. As the head of news said, Senator ALSTON (Victoria—Minister for it will be delivered by the news presenter as Communications and the Arts) (3.11 p.m.)— it has been in every other state for some All of what Senator Schacht just said is years. wrong— Again, if only you just made it a bit clear Senator Schacht—What? A $55 million that you understood the issue. If you say, cut? ‘The minister axed the weather report,’ and Senator ALSTON—Hang on! But he is then say, ‘The minister banned the weather,’ entitled to run a political line. You are per- it is no wonder they do not take you serious- fectly entitled to get up and say, ‘The ABC ly. They think, ‘This bloke is out of his had to do this because of the government’s depth.’ They probably think, ‘This bloke has cuts.’ The only problem is that you did not been out in the rain too long.’ You are say that. This is where you kicked the biggest drowning in it. own goal in history because you said, ‘The Senator Schacht—You break your promis- minister’s decision to axe the weather fore- es all the time, Richard. cast— Senator ALSTON—Unfortunately, you do Senator Schacht—Yes—this weather not run that line here. You do not say, ‘This forecast. is because of the government’s breach of Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5813 promise.’ You do not say that; you say, ‘The media will say, ‘Well, at least he understands minister has banned the weather report.’ the issue.’ If you go and put out something The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Minister, bordering on the insane, it shows that the only maybe if you address the chair, it will dis- issue of insanity arises over there. That is the courage him. problem. Senator ALSTON—I have no objection at Senator BOURNE (New South Wales) all to Senator Schacht on a personal explan- (3.15 p.m.)—The Minister for Communica- ation apologising for just getting it so funda- tions and the Arts (Senator Alston) can say, mentally wrong. Think about it for a moment. ‘You can make it political if you want,’ but The only reason you put out a press release this was made political when this government is to try to make a political point, isn’t it? first of all chopped $11 million from the ABC You are not making a political point if no-one budget last year, and will chop $55 million takes you seriously, and they do not take you from the ABC budget over the next three seriously because you do not understand the years. The reason it was made political— issues. Senator Alston—The press release doesn’t They do not think it is very clever. They do say that. not think it is particularly funny. Maybe the staff thought it was funny. Maybe they had Senator BOURNE—Is the minister inter- had a long lunch and thought, ‘Chris will not jecting when he is not in his seat. I am mind. We will just run this out and see if it outraged if that is the case. gets a bit of a giggle.’ It did not. All that The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Minister, happens is that it comes right back in your you know the correct behaviour. own face. Senator BOURNE—Fancy ministers I know there is not much talent over there, exhibiting incorrect behaviour. I am very but you have to be under pressure after this shocked. The political point was made by the effort. If I were you, I would go back, think cabinet of this government when last year about the issue, make your political point and they chopped $11 million from the budget of blame them. I have not blamed the ABC. the ABC and this year chopped $55 million Senator Schacht—Yes, you did. from the budget. Perhaps the weather fore- Senator ALSTON—I have just simply casters would have been the people to go recited the fact that the ABC itself took the anyway, as the minister said. There are a lot decision and, as it says, it brought it in line of things that have to go from the ABC that with the practice in every other state. should not have to go. There were innovative programs being developed that have just been Senator Schacht—You are telling lies chopped. We will never see them. We will again, Richard. You could not lie straight in never know what they were. bed. You are a slick, lying lawyer from Melbourne. I understand that Frontline is now not able The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order! to be bought by the ABC because somebody Senator Schacht you might like to withdraw has outbid them for it. Where did the people the last comments you made. who developed Frontline come from? What did they say on the television when they were Senator Schacht—I withdraw. interviewed? They said, ‘If we had not been Senator ALSTON—The ABC may well trained in the ABC, we would not have been have taken this decision irrespective of the able do this.’ They thought that in-house level of funding they got from government production in the ABC was one of the most because it is simply a sensible decision to valuable things that the ABC does. This take. It brings this service into line with the government is trying to make the ABC stop service in every other state. Get the facts all in-house production except for news and right. Give it a bit of a political barb. We do current affairs. That is an absolutely outra- not mind that. Good cut and thrust and the geous and totally ridiculous situation. 5814 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

One other issue that I will mention before sense it would. It could start with the $1.6 I sit down is one that Senator Schacht men- million. I would also like to hear the opposi- tioned and that is Radio Australia. Radio tion say that when they get back into govern- Australia currently broadcasts in many lan- ment they will put back that money as well. guages. I will give them that. I think we are Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queens- up to plan C. Plan A was to get rid of Radio land—Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister Australia. This of course came from the for the Environment) (3.19 p.m.)—I am government and not the ABC. Plan B from absolutely dumbfounded that Senator Schacht the government was, ‘We will not get rid of should compound his embarrassment by it, but we will put it out just on satellite. So moving to take note of this answer, but I if you are poor and do not know what is thank him for doing that. I do not want to going on in your country you will not be able miss the opportunity—and I know a lot of my to hear it anyway. It will only be in English, colleagues do not want to miss the opportuni- by the way, so if you do not speak English ty—of helping Senator Schacht understand the too bad. But we want to be really close to issue. Asia.’ As Senator Alston has quite clearly and Plan C is what we are up to now. The explicitly mentioned, the whole issue is a Cantonese service was chopped on 1 July— complete beat-up. There has been no cutback spectacular timing; the day that Hong Kong in weather reports, forecasts and warnings on was handed over to the Chinese again. The the ABC. The ABC in Sydney is doing French service was chopped that day too. exactly what the ABC in every other state There are a lot of French speakers in the does and that is have its news presenters Pacific region because it is an old colonial deliver the Bureau of Meteorology forecasts. region. Cantonese has gone and French has Senator Schacht’s media release is so ludi- gone. crous that I find it quite unbelievable. It is very good that we still have the other In his press release, Senator Schacht sug- languages, but, unfortunately, if you live in gests that ‘the decision to axe weather reports Cambodia, where they speak Khmer and will clearly disadvantage people living outside where we are trying to broadcast Khmer to, metropolitan Australia’. That is absolutely you cannot hear it because the Cox Peninsula wrong. It will make no difference whatsoever transmitters have been turned off. The reason to the weather reports that people living they have been turned off—they are still outside the metropolitan areas of Australia being maintained, I am very thankful to say— will receive. What could have had an impact is to save $1.6 million a year. In order to save on the weather reports given to people right $1.6 million a year we are making sure that around Australia, including Sydney, was the we do not get Australia’s voice out to Asia on atrocious mess the Labor government left the short wave, which, by the way, is not a dying Bureau of Meteorology in when they left technology. Its use is increasing, particularly office. Upon coming to office this government around this region. received a report from Professor Slatyer entitled Review of the operations of the To save $1.6 million a year we have cut off Bureau Meteorology. Australia’s voice to that part of the world. We have cut off Australia’s voice into Asia. Even Senator Campbell—The Deputy President though we are saying that we want to have knows about that. more of an impact in Asia and that we want Senator IAN MACDONALD—The Depu- to demonstrate to Asia that we are their ty President would know about that. Professor friends, we have made sure that the people in Slatyer, an eminent scientist, was roundly Asia cannot hear us. It is an absolutely outra- critical of the run-down in the Bureau of geous and ridiculous situation. The situation Meteorology resources since 1991. One of the the ABC finds itself in overall is outrageous paragraphs in his report states: and ridiculous. I would really like to see the In particular, the review found that the effective- government put back that money. If it has any ness of the Bureau’s basic national observation and Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5815 climate monitoring networks had deteriorated The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Would you significantly since 1991 compared with accepted like to withdraw your comments about stu- benchmark standards. pidity, please? Unconditionally. Just with- One of the recommendations that Professor draw, thank you. Slatyer made in the first report was that the Senator IAN MACDONALD—I do not basic network should be restored to accepted know— 1991-92 levels. Senator Campbell—Madam Deputy Presi- Senator Bourne and Senator Schacht might dent, on a point of order: I do not think like to comment on the fact that the Labor Senator Ian Macdonald should have to with- government ran down the effectiveness of the draw the word ‘stupidity’ in relation to the Bureau of Meteorology—the people who previous government’s actions on cutting the really do give the weather reports to rural and resources of the Bureau of Meteorology. regional as well as metropolitan Australia. There is no doubt that Professor Slatyer has They just simply let it run down. They did said in that report that it was dangerous and not provide it with the proper staffing, with that it put lives at risk. It is clearly an act of the proper equipment, to provide the neces- stupidity. He may have to withdraw in rela- sary service. Rather than Senator Schacht tion to Senator Schacht, but not in relation to complaining about what the ABC might like the stupidity of the previous government. It to do—that is, the ABC in Sydney doing has been proven in a report that— simply what the ABC everywhere else does— he should get his facts in order. He should Senator Neal—Sit down. You are abusing address the real problem: the Labor Party’s the system. criminal neglect of the Bureau of Meteorol- Senator Campbell—I am not abusing it. I ogy during their term in office. am making it quite clear that he should not Senator Alston has quite comprehensively have to withdraw the word ‘stupidity’ in destroyed any credibility Senator Schacht relation to the actions of the previous govern- might have had in relation to the ABC and ment. When you slashed the resources of the this particular issue. I call upon Senator Bureau of Meteorology and put people’s lives Schacht to address the real problems of at risk—as you know, Madam Deputy Presi- getting weather forecasts out. Rather than dent, because I have heard you speak on it— suggesting that the minister had banned the The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order! weather, he should look at the effects of his Senator Campbell—particularly in Western government—a government in which he was, New South Wales—you stood up, Madam for a short time, a minister—and the way that Deputy President, and made a very important his government impeded the Bureau of Me- speech on this matter—you should not require teorology in their tasks and duties of provid- Senator Ian Macdonald to withdraw that. It ing good and accurate weather forecasts and was a stupid government and a stupid act of services to all Australia. Senator Schacht’s that government. stupidity in this press release perhaps equals the stupidity of his government—the govern- The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order! ment of which he was a member—in running Senator Campbell, would you please resume down the excellent work that the Bureau of your seat? Senator Ian Macdonald, you were Meteorology did. reflecting upon an individual and that is why I am asking you to withdraw the word, please. Senator Neal—On a point of order, Madam Deputy President: referring to the stupidity of Senator IAN MACDONALD—Madam Senator Schacht is really quite out of order. Deputy President, it is not worth making an I ask that it be withdrawn. The DEPUTY issue over. If you want me to withdraw, I PRESIDENT—I did not hear the comment, will. but I am advised of it. Would you like to Senator Neal—Withdraw it! withdraw the comment, please? Senator IAN MACDONALD—His ap- Senator IAN MACDONALD—I am sorry? proach to it was quite stupid. 5816 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

Senator LUNDY (Australian Capital we are talking about how Australia communi- Territory) (3.26 p.m.)—I rise also to speak to cates with the rest of the world. this motion. I have noted with interest through We have here a systematic deflection from the course of this taking note the elaborate the substance of this issue. Yes, Minister lengths to which the government representa- Alston, let us talk about the politics of it. Let tives have gone to try to deflect the substance us talk about the restrictions on drama pro- of the issue—the cuts to the ABC and the ductions by the ABC. Let us talk about the resultant decisions of the ABC to deal with forced consolidation of services, not only in those cuts in the most sensible way that they regional Australia but in metropolitan Austral- see fit. ia as well. Let us talk about the cuts to Radio Senator Campbell—Madam Deputy Presi- Australia and the closing down of the relay dent, on a point of order: this is a taking note points in other places in the world. Let us talk of a question asked by Senator Heffernan in about the programs that would have been, had relation to cutting the weather and axing the that funding to the ABC been maintained. weather. That is what Senator Alston’s re- What we see here is the end result of cuts. sponse was about. We are talking about cuts I want to take up the point about funding of to the weather. Senator Ian Macdonald has the ABC and where the ABC would have actually approached the issue because he gone if real funding had been maintained—as talked about the cuts to the weather expendi- this government promised not only in the ture by the previous government and the election but prior to previous budgets as well. increases in spending on weather prediction They stood up in this place and the other under this government. I ask you to draw place and gave a 100 per cent commitment to Senator Lundy’s attention to the relevance of maintain ABC funding. this debate. You must address the matter of cuts to the weather. It has got nothing to do That has all gone out the window. What we with the ABC. have today is quite a pitiful attempt, Senator Campbell, at ridiculing a political statement Senator Carr—Madam Deputy President, that focused on the result of the cuts to the on a point of order: the point of order is ABC and how that has equated to limiting obviously spurious. This is an argument that services to regional Australia. That is what we senators have put around the chamber on the are here to talk about today. That is the question of who is responsible for the actions politics of the issue. taken by ABC management. The minister has claimed it is entirely their fault; the Labor Senator Campbell interjecting— Party maintains that this is a direct result of The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order! government actions. Senator Campbell. Senator Lundy, you might The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order! like to address your remarks through the There is no point of order. This is a wide- chair. ranging debate and it did include discussions Senator LUNDY—Perhaps Senator Camp- about the ABC by the minister. bell would like to stop contributing to the Senator LUNDY—That just vindicates the ridiculous and petty attempt by government position I earlier stated. What we are talking senators to try to stop us making our point about here are the cuts to the ABC and how about the result of the cuts to the ABC. they are being effected on the Australian Senator Ian Macdonald interjecting— community. There is no doubt in the minds of Australians what this government has done to Senator LUNDY—Perhaps Senator Mac- the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. The donald needs to understand that he is contri- manifestation of that $55 million cut this year buting to our argument by making the point and the cuts previously has been a significant continuously that, in this case, we are talking reduction in the services that reach Australia. about the impact upon weather services. The cuts do not only affect Australia. We In closing, I would like to make a point have already heard from Senator Bourne that about ministerial accountability. How come it Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5817 suits this government to stand up and say, and trade union official defence, I can tell ‘It’s not our fault that the cuts are in this area. you. We just cut the funding. It’s the ABC man- Senator Schacht drew the short straw. I agement that have made the cut in this area,’ happen to live outside the metropolitan area and Senator Alston stood up here and said and weather reports are very important. If that himself? We have had other examples of weather reports were going to be cut, the first this government doing exactly the same place you would get a response from would thing—cutting significant chunks of funding be those people in the bush who rely entirely out of public institutions and then standing up on the weather reports for planning ahead for in this place and saying, ‘Oh, it wasn’t our what they need to know and what they need fault they’ve had to cut that end of the ser- to do in their day-to-day work. I do not care vice. It’s the fault of the management of that who gives the weather report. I could not care particular institution.’ less whether it is a special weather presenter We have a very fine example of this in the or whether it is the principal newsreader. ACT itself. The closure of the High Court on The only thing that really matters to people weekends is a classic example of the govern- outside the metropolitan area who listen on a ment cutting the overall budget of an institu- daily basis to weather reports—and the only tion and the institution having to make some reason they listen to them—is finding out very hard decisions about how it was going with some reasonable accuracy what the to survive and cope with the magnitude of weather will be. Under this government, they those cuts. We are also talking about are going to find out with even more accuracy ministerial accountability and the responsibili- what the weather is going to be because a ty that Senator Alston has to stand up here new $40 million computer has just been and take the wrap for the cuts that have installed in Melbourne which gives much occurred in all of the services—not just the more accurate five day forecasts. This money ABC but everywhere else. has been spent, so they will get more accurate Senator FERGUSON (South Australia) weather reports. (3.32 p.m.)—One of the first things that I am amazed by the press release of Senator Senator Lundy will learn following her eleva- Schacht’s. I am amazed, Senator Lundy, that tion to the frontbench is that the last person you would stand up to try to defend Senator you would want to come in here and try to Schacht. In his press release, Senator Schacht defend is Senator Schacht. I would have to said: say that Senator Schacht must have drawn the The other sad aspect of the Minister banning the short straw in having to get up and take note weather is the loss of the familiar face reading the of the answer that was given during question weather reports. time today by Senator Alston. Senator The really sad aspect is that you are not going Schacht was absolutely slaughtered by Sena- to see a familiar face reading the weather tor Alston’s response in which the minister reports. Who would care who was reading it referred to Senator Schacht’s media release. as long as you get the results? The press The one thing that Senator Schacht, Senator release continues: Lundy and Senator Bourne would not refer to The ABC localises all of its weather reports, often is the media release of Senator Schacht in showing photographs sent in by people from around which he talks about ‘everywhere you go, you the state and creating a sense of community. will have to take the weather with you’. I think the next sentence of this media release The cutting of the weather is yet another really tops it all off. Senator Schacht says: chapter in the sad story of ABC cuts. How Senator Alston now goes down in history as the wrong can you get it? All Senator Schacht only Minister to have banned the weather. does is sit there and talk about a slick Mel- I reckon that is a feat in itself—to ban the bourne lawyer defence. I can tell you, I would weather. From now on there will be no rather have a slick Melbourne lawyer defence. weather, Minister, because you have banned It is far better than a failed Labor minister it. I am so sorry to hear it. 5818 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

The real truth of the matter is that Senator forests, wilderness, rainforests and critical Schacht drew the short straw. It was his turn habitats of endangered species; to take note of answers and no other answers facilitate rapid transition of the timber industry were thought worthy of taking note of. Sena- from harvesting high conservation value native tor Schacht, having just been slaughtered by forests, to establishing mixed-species farm forestry on existing cleared and degraded lands, Senator Alston, got up to try to restate his using non-toxic methods to protect ecological case. In doing so he talked about cuts to the sustainability; ABC and not his press release, and his press maximise use of readily-available plantation release was the very issue that Senator Alston timber for industry needs, using appropriate raised in his answer. forestry techniques and progressive minimal- All I can say is that, if Senator Schacht’s waste processing methods, such as radial sawing, and wherever possible, reuse and recycle wood effort in taking note of answers is the best and paper products; that you can come up with in trying to be support incentives for nationwide composting, critical of answers that are given by this soil remineralisation, and planting programs of government, I would suggest that in future trees and annual fibre crops, inter-grown with you have a little round table meeting prior to appropriate fruit and nut trees and medicinal question time. Senator Lundy, you want to be plants; ready to move up a seat or two because encourage sensitively-managed, environmental Senator Schacht is surely skating on very thin education tourism in appropriate forest areas, ice, although, if that is a weather prediction, with full respect for natural ecosystems, Aborigi- we do not know if there is going to be any nal cultural heritage, sacred sites and other sites ice. But if we do have some ice, Senator of significance; and Lundy, you will be next. progressively utilise technological expertise and resources transferred from the military Question resolved in the affirmative. sector, to help implement these tree planting solutions; and to motivate the international PETITIONS community to follow this example. The Clerk—A petition has been lodged for And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever presentation as follows: pray. Logging and Woodchipping by Senator Murray (from 498 citizens). To the Honourable the President and Members of Petition received. the Senate in Parliament assembled. NOTICES OF MOTION For permanent protection of old-growth forests and all other areas of high conservation value, and Textile, Clothing and Footwear Industries for the implementation of tree plantation strategies. Senator CARR (Victoria)—On behalf of This petition from the undersigned respectfully Senator Cook, I give notice that, on the next points out that: there is an increasing and urgent day of sitting, he will move: demand from the people, to protect all remaining high conservation value forests which support flora That the Senate recognises that: and fauna unique to Australia, thus complying with (a) the future of the 100 000 Australian textile, the United Nations Biodiversity Convention to clothing and footwear (TCF) workers must which Australia is a signatory. We have a responsi- be secured, together with future exports and bility to future and present generations, and the investment growth; necessary reasons, knowledge and technology to act (b) Australia is well ahead of its international now on the following achievable solutions. competitors in the reduction of tariffs in this Your petitioners therefore request that the Senate industry; legislate to: (c) if the Industry Commission’s recommenda- Immediately stop all logging and wood- tions are implemented, at least 50 000 chipping activities in high conservation value Australian jobs will go off-shore and the native forests; remaining 50 000 workers will be forced ensure intergenerational equity by planning for into low-paid backyard operations; the rights of future generations, and protecting in (d) there should be a freeze on TCF tariffs from perpetuity all biologically diverse old-growth the year 2000 to, at least, the year 2005, Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5819

consistent with Australia’s international September 1995 when Mick won his second obligations; championship does refer to specifically the (e) the Import Credit Scheme must not be great benefits of national importance of removed without putting in place a program increasing levels of participation in sport by of equivalent value, consistent with Aust- Australians, particularly amongst the young, ralia’s international obligations; and and the significant contribution that Mick (f) a review of future assistance arrangements Doohan’s win makes to inspiring young should be undertaken in the year 2004, in consultation with the industry’s partners, Australians to participate in sport. That is why taking into account: I referred to that motion because I think it was designed, as I recall at the time, to ensure (i) progress on TCF trade liberalisation among Australia’s trading partners and that it did have a national significance in competitors, terms of broader policy issues. But if I do (ii) the industry’s progress in meeting its need to reword the motion and restate— commitments on employment, investment The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—It will be and exports, and looked at closely. (iii) the effect of changes in the TCF industry on regional Australia. Legal and Constitutional References Mr Michael Doohan Committee Senator CAMPBELL (Western Australia— Senator KERNOT (Queensland—Leader Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer)—I of the Australian Democrats)—I give notice give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: shall move: That the following matters be referred to the That the Senate— Legal and Constitutional References Committee for (a) notes the resolution no. 1815 agreed to on inquiry and report: 28 September 1995 in relation to the achievement of Mr Michael Doohan in (1) The desirability of Australia becoming a winning back-to-back 500cc world motor- republic with an Australian as Head of State cycle championships; and the process by which that might best occur, including: (b) congratulates Mr Doohan on achieving another world championship victory; and (a) the circumstances and the timeframe in (c) wishes Mr Doohan well for the remaining which the move to a republic might races of the 1997 season and for his prepa- occur; and rations for the 1998 World Championships. (b) the most appropriate republican model to Senator Chris Evans—Madam Deputy be put to the Australian people at a refer- President, on a point of order: I thought endum. previous occupants of the chair had ruled on (2) That the committee seek submissions and sporting notices of motion and that they were present an interim report to the Senate by now no longer allowed. I do not want to be 23 October 1997, recommending a list of rude to Senator Campbell. It is not a ruling I witnesses who represent a broad range of support, but I do ask how do you rule in such views and who may be invited to express those views in a forum to be determined, a case? which may include appearance before the The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I will have Senate. the Clerk and the President look at it closely. (3) After completion of the process outlined in Senator CAMPBELL (Western Australia— (2) above, the committee hold public hear- Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer)— ings throughout Australia canvassing as Madam Deputy President, I seek leave to broad a range of views as possible. make a short statement on this matter. (4) That the committee present a final report to Leave granted. the Senate by the last sitting day in March 1998 recommending questions which should Senator CAMPBELL—The motion that be put to the Australian people at a referen- the Senate in its great wisdom agreed to in dum. 5820 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

Mr Geoff Nicholas Aboriginal Delegation to the United Senator FORSHAW (New South Wales)— Nations I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, Senator MARGETTS (Western Austral- I shall move: ia)—I give notice that, on the next day of That the Senate— sitting, I shall move: That the Senate— (a) notes: (a) notes: (i) that Mr Geoff Nicholas, a member of the Lakes Golf Club in Sydney, recently won (i) the attendance of the Aboriginal deleg- his 8th consecutive British Open Amputee ation to the United Nations Working and United States Open Amputee titles, Group on Indigenous Peoples in Geneva in late July 1997, (ii) the great benefits and national importance (ii) the report of the Special Assistant on of increasing levels of participation in Indigenous Peoples, Ms Erica Daez, sport by Australians thereby improving which stated that the Federal the health and fitness of the community, Government’s native title amendments and would extinguish native title and that (iii) the significant contribution that Geoff indigenous people around the world face Nicholas’ success makes to inspiring similar threats of having their land rights other Australians to participate in sport; extinguished, and (iii) the statement of the Special Assistant that (b) congratulates Mr Nicholas on his outstand- the survival of indigenous peoples is ing achievements. dependent on title to their land, Notice amended by Madam President pursuant to (iv) that the Australian Government is 4 years standing order 76. overdue in providing a report to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Madam Deputy President, in light of the Discrimination to show Australia is abid- earlier issue that was raised, I appreciate that ing by the Convention on the Elimination this may also need to be looked at but I of Racial Discrimination, and would hope that the Senate could find a way (v) that the Australian Government is 6 years to congratulate such an outstanding perform- overdue in providing a report to the ance by one of Australia’s internationally Human Rights Committee which monitors the implementation of the International recognised disabled athletes. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Senator O’Chee—Madam Deputy Presi- and ensures that Australia is abiding by dent, on a point of order: maybe I can be the Covenant; and helpful to Senator Forshaw and suggest that (b) calls on the Government to: he make reference in his notice of motion to (i) restore native title to Aboriginal people in the role of the AIS in its programs for dis- the spirit of the Mabo and Wik decisions abled athletes and therefore bring it within the and not move down the path of legislative purview of notices of motion which would be extinguishment of native title, and acceptable under standing orders. (ii) immediately report to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Senator FORSHAW—On the point of and the Human Rights Committee on the order: I take note of the point of order raised human rights conventions to which the by Senator O’Chee. Whilst I accept that the Australian Government is bound. issue has to be addressed in terms of the Community Affairs References standing orders of the Senate, I would have Committee thought that we would not need to have to go to those lengths to recognise what I think is Senator CHRIS EVANS (Western Austral- an incredible achievement. I do not think we ia)—At the request of Senator Bishop, I give need to state the obvious, but if we do then notice that, on the next day of sitting, he will so be it. move: That the time for the presentation of the report The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—There is no of the Community Affairs References Committee point of order but it will be observed. on the fairness of the recent settlement offered to Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5821 human pituitary hormones recipients by the currently at risk due to the Government’s Commonwealth Government and whether public indecision over TCF tariffs; safety has been protected in relation to the Austral- (b) the future of this industry is linked to the ian Human Pituitary Hormone Program be extended need for tariffs to be frozen, and to the to 1 October 1997. development of a viable industry plan which Jabiluka Uranium Mine includes: (i) comprehensive recognition and accredita- Senator MARGETTS (Western Austral- tion of the existing skills of workers, ia)—I give notice that, on the next day of (ii) the capacity for current and future work- sitting, I shall move: ers to receive certification under the That the Senate— Australian Qualifications Framework, and (a) notes: (iii) investment in new technology and innova- tion in design and work organisation (i) the recommendation of the Minister for linked to industry training programs the Environment (Senator Hill) to the which deliver training throughout all Minister for Primary Industries and Ener- levels of the work force; and gy (Mr Anderson) whether or not to allow uranium mining at Jabiluka in the region (c) courses at the Technical and Further Educa- of Kakadu National Park, which has not tion colleges, such as the Melbourne Col- been released publicly, lege of Textiles, should be revamped after close consultation with the TCF industry, (ii) the expectation of the environmental unions, and the National TCF Industry movement that the Jabiluka mine will be Training Advisory Body. approved with token environmental condi- tions attached, ORDER OF BUSINESS (iii) the recommendation of the judge hearing the Gundjehmi court challenge to the Migration Regulations legality of the Jabiluka lease that the Motion (by Senator Margetts) agreed to: Minister should await the outcome of the That business of the Senate notices of motion court case before making a decision to Nos 1 and 2 standing in the name of Senator approve the Jabiluka mine, and Margetts for today, relating to the disallowance of (iv) the fact that Gundjehmi Aboriginal Cor- regulations, made under the Migration Act 1958, be poration, Australian Conservation Founda- postponed till the next day of sitting. tion and a number of environmental organisations have written to the World COMMITTEES Heritage Committee asking that Kakadu National Park be placed in the category Finance and Public Administration of World Heritage in Danger, due to the Legislation Committee prospects of increased uranium mining in Extension of Time the region of Kakadu National Park; and Motion (by Senator O’Chee, at the request (b) calls on the Government to: of Senator Gibson) agreed to: (i) delay its final decision on uranium That the time for the presentation of the report mining in Kakadu National Park until of the Finance and Public Administration Legisla- legal challenges are resolved, and tion Committee on the provisions of the Snowy (ii) refuse to allow uranium mining to go Hydro Corporatisation Bill 1997 and the Snowy ahead on environmental, social, health, Hydro Corporatisation (Consequential Amend- indigenous and security grounds and to ments) Bill 1997 be extended to 2 October 1997. refuse the granting of export licenses to Energy Resources of Australia Ltd for the Information Technologies Committee purpose of uranium mining at Jabiluka. Appointment Textile, Clothing and Footwear Industries Motion (by Senator Tierney) agreed to: Senator CARR (Victoria)—I give notice (1) That a select committee to be known as the that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: Senate Select Committee on Information Technologies be appointed to: That the Senate recognises that: (a) receive and consider the outstanding (a) the significant skills of 100 000 textile, government responses to the reports of clothing and footwear (TCF) workers are the Select Committee on Community 5822 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

Standards Relevant to the Supply of Ser- (The President—Senator the Hon. Margaret vices Utilising Telecommunications Tech- Reid) nologies; Ayes ...... 33 (b) evaluate the development of self-regula- Noes ...... 33 tory codes in the information industries; —— and Majority ...... 0 (c) monitor the personal, social and economic —— impact of continuing technological change AYES created by industries and services utilising Allison, L. Bishop, M. information technologies. Bourne, V. Brown, B. Carr, K. Childs, B. K. (2) That the committee report to the Senate Collins, J. M. A. Conroy, S. before the end of the 38th Parliament. Cook, P. F. S. Cooney, B. (3) That the membership, powers and proced- Crowley, R. A. Denman, K. J. ures of the committee be those set out in Evans, C. V. * Foreman, D. J. paragraphs (2) to (8) of the resolution of Forshaw, M. G. Gibbs, B. appointment of 21 June 1991 establishing Hogg, J. Kernot, C. the Select Committee on Community Stand- Lees, M. H. Lundy, K. ards. Mackay, S. Margetts, D. McKiernan, J. P. Murray, A. Neal, B. J. O’Brien, K. W. K. Superannuation Committee Ray, R. F. Reynolds, M. Extension of Time Schacht, C. C. Sherry, N. Stott Despoja, N. West, S. M. Motion (by Senator O’Chee, at the request Woodley, J. of Senator Watson) agreed to: NOES That the time for the presentation of the report Abetz, E. Alston, R. K. R. of the Select Committee on Superannuation on the Boswell, R. L. D. Brownhill, D. G. C. principles relating to provisions governing the early Calvert, P. H. Campbell, I. G. release of superannuation benefits as contained in Chapman, H. G. P. Coonan, H. the Small Superannuation Accounts Amendment Crane, W. Eggleston, A. Bill 1997 be extended to 11 September 1997. Ellison, C. Ferguson, A. B. Ferris, J Gibson, B. F. Heffernan, W. Herron, J. HIGHER EDUCATION: Hill, R. M. Kemp, R. UNDERGRADUATE FEES AND Knowles, S. C. Lightfoot, P. R. ABSTUDY Macdonald, I. MacGibbon, D. J. McGauran, J. J. J. Minchin, N. H. Motion (by Senator Brown) proposed: Newman, J. M. O’Chee, W. G. * Patterson, K. C. L. Payne, M. A. That the Senate— Reid, M. E. Tierney, J. (a) supports the student occupation of the Royal Troeth, J. Vanstone, A. E. Melbourne Institute of Technology’s finance Watson, J. O. W. and strategic planning department as part of PAIRS a continuing campaign to prevent the impo- Bolkus, N. Tambling, G. E. J. sition of up-front fee payments for domestic Collins, R. L. Parer, W. R. undergraduate students at Australian univer- Faulkner, J. P. Synon, K. M. sities; and Murphy, S. M. Macdonald, S. (b) calls on the Government to demonstrate its * denotes teller commitment to Aboriginal health and educa- Question so resolved in the negative. tion by withdrawing its planned changes to ABSTUDY. MATTERS OF URGENCY Question put: Privacy Legislation That the motion (Senator Brown’s) be agreed to. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I inform the Senate that the President has received the The Senate divided. [3.54 p.m.] following letter from Senator Stott Despoja: Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5823

Dear Madam President schemes being adopted in other parts of the Pursuant to standing order number 75, I give world. I can name the European Union, Hong notice that today I propose to move: Kong and New Zealand among those count- That in the opinion of the Senate, the following ries which have similar principles and is a matter of urgency: schemes. The failure of the government to introduce But on 21 March this year, the Prime legislation amending the Privacy Act 1988 to extend the operation of the Privacy Act 1988 to Minister (Mr Howard) announced that the all sectors of the Australian community. Privacy Act 1988 would not be extended to the private sector. The Prime Minister essen- Yours sincerely tially ended Australia’s chance at an interna- Natasha Stott Despoja tional best practice privacy scheme. This was Is the proposal supported? another election promise broken. It was an More than the number of senators required absolute backflip from this government, and by the Standing Orders having risen in their one that we have had little justification for, or places— explanation of, to date. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I understand Senator Neal—What do you mean ‘little’? that informal arrangements have been made There’s been none. to allocate specific times to each of the Senator STOTT DESPOJA—I take on speakers in today’s debate. With the concur- board that interjection. We have had some rence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to reference and some excuses, and I will go on set the clock accordingly. to explain those. The reasons for this decision Senator STOTT DESPOJA (South Aus- and the relevant information that the Prime tralia) (3.59 p.m.)—I move: Minister used or relied on to make this deci- That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following sion have not been made available. That is is a matter of urgency: very true. What Senator Neal said is correct. The failure of the Government to introduce We have had little information—indeed, no legislation amending the Privacy Act 1988 to information—as to why the Prime Minister extend the operation of the Privacy Act 1988 to made this particular decision. all sectors of the Australian community. Senator Woodley—Rolled by his mates, he I brought the matter of the extension of was. privacy laws to the privacy sector before the chamber today because the Australian Demo- Senator STOTT DESPOJA—Rolled by crats are on the record as expressing our his mates, suggests Senator Woodley. As concern—indeed our condemnation of this Senator Woodley would note, I am sure, a government—that the government has failed decision of this importance should not be to deliver what was an election promise. That passed off without some level of explanation. is, their promise to extend those very laws to It is a matter of urgency, I believe, and it is the private sector. one that the parliament cannot ignore. A discussion paper was released by the Failure to legislate for a national and a Attorney-General (Mr Williams) on 12 Sep- consistent privacy scheme applying to all tember 1996 which set out a scheme based on sectors of the Australian community is a the existing information privacy principles short-sighted disaster for all Australians. By that are in the Privacy Act 1988 and added to that, I include not only businesses and indus- this codes of practice and a range of addition- tries but individual consumers. Our access to al provisions which address the particular new technology and the data flows in our concerns of the private sector. In essence, this region and across the world will be severely was a proposal for industry codes of practice limited by a failure to have adequate privacy that were to be supported by the Privacy regulation. This is quite clearly a matter of Commissioner and subjected to statutory Australian jobs and lifestyles. backing—essentially, a co-regulatory ap- The G7 industrialised countries and the proach. This scheme was consistent with APEC ministers have identified privacy as an 5824 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 issue which is vital for commercial reasons. munications ombudsman and the South So everyone else is identifying this as an Australian privacy committees. I have a important issue; it is just us who are lagging number of examples as to privacy intrusion miserably behind. New Zealand, the European that are not covered but should be covered by Union and a number of other countries in our legislation. I note these examples, which have region have adopted legally enforceable been provided by the Privacy Commissioner. privacy laws. This is serious—the fact that One example provided was of a woman they are doing it and we are not—and it who gave birth in a hospital and the baby should be reviewed. To date, we have had no died within a few days. For weeks afterwards, willingness from this government to undertake the woman received at her home congratula- such a review. tory notes from a range of baby product Among businesses and their customers, companies which had bought details of new privacy is a particular. It is a primary concern. mothers from the hospital. Outrageous! In fact, Price Waterhouse surveyed 130 large A second example provided by the commis- businesses earlier this year and found that 70 sioner was of a man who found he was per cent favoured, 10 per cent were neutral having difficulty getting insurance. He eventu- and 20 per cent opposed the introduction of ally found out that he had been mistakenly comprehensive national privacy laws. The confused with someone else with the same survey concluded: name who had a record of insurance fraud. It Australian business has identified privacy as a took him a significant period of time to have major business risk and they are looking to the this confusion sorted out and corrected. No Australian government for guidance on how to wonder state and territory governments are manage it. considering and examining privacy legislation So they have looked to this government for options. guidance, but certainly none has been forth- If state and territory governments do intro- coming. duce privacy schemes, businesses will be This survey confirmed an earlier survey required to satisfy requirements which may be conducted by the Faculty of Business and different for each state and each territory. A Economics at Monash University, which fragmented approach to privacy regulation found that businesses recognised the import- and protection is likely to increase compliance ance of personal information to their clients costs—the very thing the Prime Minister and employees. So I asked the government wanted to avoid—and the regulatory burden where they got their conclusive evidence that for many businesses. This is an approach that introducing privacy laws would increase has been adopted in Canada, where there is a compliance costs and regulatory burdens, centralised scheme for public agencies and a when this data clearly shows that businesses whole hotchpotch of province laws with want privacy regulation. That is the only varying requirements. excuse I have had from this government—that Businesses and consumers have to look to somehow it would lead to increased compli- a range of different and sometimes incon- ance costs. It is a somewhat dubious argu- sistent regulations. This is exactly what ment, and we have yet to see any data that Australian consumers do not deserve. It is backs it up. something that we want to avoid, and certain- The Privacy Commissioner states that there ly Australian consumers and businesses do not is significant evidence of unfair information need that kind of fragmented approach. on privacy practices, which creates a real These measures alone should be enough to problem for real people in Australia. She encourage the government to reconsider its receives something like 15,000 complaints per privacy backflip. The International Covenant year and a significant number of these are on Civil and Political Rights and the Univer- about privacy intrusions in the private sec- sal Declaration of Human Rights include tor—that one area that is relatively uncovered. privacy measures. It is a fundamental princi- Similar responses came from the telecom- ple, a fundamental right, that a person has a Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5825 right to know what information is held about tional, which has sent an open letter to the them and, if that information is lawfully held, Prime Minister outlining their international that the information is correct. So privacy is concerns. a human rights issue, and the government should deal with this issue appropriately by The need for privacy is also being driven introducing a suitable legislative scheme to by technological development. Storing and comply with Australia’s international obliga- exchanging information on electronic devices tions. is much easier, and the applications are dependent on that personal information. So, So on Monday in this place, I tabled an to embrace the new technologies and the new exposure draft that looked to some possible commercial possibilities, consumers and options for extending privacy laws to the businesses need to be sure that personal private sector in Australia. Essentially, it was information is safe. So technology is one for the purpose of community consultation reason that these laws, more so than ever, are and, given that privacy is such a complex imperative. matter, we would benefit as a parliament from a range of different viewpoints and a range of I believe our community wants this legisla- community input into various beliefs and tion: consumers, individuals, businesses. I am ideas of different consumer and representative glad of the opportunity to bring this matter organisations. I suggest that a Senate commit- before the Senate today. I only hope the tee might be an appropriate way of canvassing government acts on it. the broader perspectives in this debate and Senator ABETZ (Tasmania) (4.09 p.m.)— also a way of seeking a good basis for legisla- The motion before us is not so much a pro- tive reform. So I hope the government will duct of the alleged urgency of the matter, perhaps consider taking up this option as a rather a product of what some of us on this way of addressing the privacy backflip that it side and in the media have been observing as was responsible for earlier this year. the divisive machinations within the Austral- Last week, the Privacy Commissioner ian Democrats. We all know how Senator released a document that sought the views of Stott Despoja was sacked from the employ- the Australian community for a privacy ment portfolio—by fax by her leader—and scheme based on voluntary participation and she has been frozen out from being able to self-regulation. This is a commendable re- ask questions. Now it would appear that, as sponse to what the Privacy Commissioner a sop to her, they have allowed her to move herself has described as a broad consensus an urgency motion. that there is an urgent need for a national Senator Murray—Madam Acting Deputy consistent framework for the protection of President, I raise a point of order. Apart from information privacy. Her framework is a best the offensive and patronising nature of the attempt to cover up the privacy vacuum that remarks, my point of order goes to relevance. has been left by this government, but it does fall very short of the kinds of schemes Aus- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT tralians were promised—promised by the (Senator Crowley)—It is straining the inter- current government—at the last election. This pretation of a point of order, Senator Murray. is supported by a range of consumer and other I have to say that there is no point of order. groups which have boycotted this consultation Senator Abetz, could you please direct your- because of its self-regulation and its voluntary self to the urgency motion. nature. Senator ABETZ—Absolutely, Madam So I recognise these concerns, particularly Acting Deputy President. It was a matter of among those consumer groups, and reiterate urgency for the Australian Democrats to give that a voluntary and self-regulatory scheme is something to Senator Stott Despoja to do in insufficient. If I have time today, I will refer this chamber that is the result of this motion to some of the information I have had from being before us. It is not the result of the consumer groups, including Privacy Interna- community having some degree of urgent 5826 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 feeling about this matter—important though chamber as the champions of the individual it be. and their individual privacy. One would have thought that, if Senator The principles of privacy are set out in Stott Despoja had the right to choose the section 14 of the Privacy Act, and they are topic for today, she may have chosen one of good and important principles. The legislation those really urgent matters that are facing the that is currently on the statute book in this community today—those matters that this country was developed over a considerable government is addressing to fix up after 13 period of time. Sure, we can look at amend- years of Labor failure. How about employ- ments; we can look at refining it; we can see ment? How about the national debt? How about making amendments and changes to it, about some of the real issues confronting this but to trot into this parliament today and nation? Instead, we have a motion dealing somehow say that this is a matter of urgen- with the Privacy Act 1988. It has been around cy—when there are so many people unem- for nine years, and all of a sudden it is urgent ployed in this country and when we are facing that it be amended. a huge debt—really defies belief. Madam Acting Deputy President, if we are talking about straining the standing orders, I One wonders what Senator Stott Despoja think we should look at standing order 75. I and the Democrats did during the break we have to say to you that it really does seem to had in this parliament. I have to say that, strain the credibility of the standing orders when I went door knocking and when I went and the processes of this parliament for to community groups, not a single person Senator Stott Despoja to get up and say that raised with me the issue of privacy—let alone somehow this is a matter of urgency. The that somehow it was a matter of such national matter of privacy is an important issue within urgency and importance that it ought be this community, and we in the Liberal and debated within the first three days of us National parties have a great record on that resuming. issue. The government has not been quiet on this Senator Neal—You had a good record. It very important issue of privacy. Indeed, the is falling apart at the moment. Attorney-General’s Department released a Senator ABETZ—Which parties were the discussion paper in September. Responses to ones that stood up against your Australia that discussion paper provided the government Card, Senator Neal? We on this side blocked with very clear guidance as to the real con- that, and we did so unreservedly and un- cerns of business and industry and individuals ashamedly because we believe in fundamental on possible government approaches to privacy privacy principles. So I am very interested, protection. What you have to understand is Senator Neal, that you are on the speakers list that, if you put another web of red tape over to make a contribution. You might like to the top of business and industry, it will cost explain to the Australian people about your jobs; it will make them less competitive. We fundamental commitment to privacy and how as a government also went to the election that somehow marries in and dovetails with promising to reduce the red tape. So we had the Australia card proposal of the Australian two competing principles. It is not so very Labor Party. simple. The Australia Card was an outrageous That is what I find so very frustrating about proposal, but it was indicative of the fact that the Australian Democrats—they always come you somehow believe that every individual in into this place with a simplistic answer. One the community ought to submit themselves to day they will talk to you about cutting red Big Brother. We on this side do not believe tape for small business as a matter or urgen- in that. That is why we, as a matter of privacy cy; the next day they will say, ‘You have got for the individual, fought so hard against the to bring in privacy legislation.’ The fact that Australia Card. The community recognises those two concepts might conflict and require that, and we are seen on this side of the some sound judgment absolutely defies the Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5827

Democrats. They can never grasp that some has agreed now that after the first three years of the problems and difficulties that we as a of the Liberal government there will be a government have to deal with are multi- surplus in the budget. The Australian people pronged. As a result we as a government are out there will say, ‘Good on you, you have looking through the privacy issue in a mature got your priorities right, you have looked at and considered manner—concepts which are the big issues and you are going to ensure completely foreign and not understandable by that the economy is going to grow, so that the Australian Democrats and the Labor Party. many of our fellow Australians can be taken On 15 August, the Privacy Commissioner off the unemployment list.’ That is what is so released a consultation paper proposing the important. development of national standards. To the They will say to us, ‘Congratulations that listeners out there: that was only 12 days ago. you have now fixed up the budget situation This issue is currently under consideration and have not allowed yourself to be distracted and being developed by the Attorney- to the extent of overlooking those important General’s Department and the Privacy Com- issues, by those other issues such as privacy.’ missioner. We are looking and working Important though they may be, you can hardly through those issues. The issue, therefore, assert with any credibility that there is some- really is for the Democrats to come before us thing urgent about this matter when Australia and say that the privacy issue is of such has been able to operate since 1901—for the fundamental importance that somehow it past 96 years—without the sort of legislation ought to take top rung on the ladder of that Senator Stott-Despoja is talking about. priorities facing this nation. I have to say to Senator Stott Despoja—Changes happen. you, it is an important issue; it is a concept Senator ABETZ—I know changes happen, that all of us grapple with. All of us have our Senator Stott-Despoja, and I remember the own particular ideas and views. But you can one that happened in March 1996, in particu- hardly come into this chamber and pretend, lar, when we won government. That was one with any degree of credibility, that it is a of the most important changes that occurred matter of urgency that is above some of the in this country’s history and I welcomed it. other issues that I have mentioned in this We are committed to privacy, and we will debate. deal with it, but we will deal with it in due There are many issues and concerns within course and not be distracted from the main the community about privacy. That is clear. issues. (Time expired) They are issues that need to be addressed. Senator NEAL (New South Wales) (4.19 But, after 13 years of Labor, this government p.m.)—I must say it is always difficult, in the has had to set certain priorities in relation to light of Senator Abetz’s provocative state- turning the ship of state around to a proper ments, to stay focused on the issue at hand. course. It is a question of what we as a But I have to say that I was a bit disappoint- government consider to be the vital issues. I ed, bearing in mind Senator Abetz’s usual have got to say to you—and I am not sure way of dealing with matters, that he feels that the Australian Democrats really agree unable to deal with the substantive issue at with our approach to balancing the budget, of hand today, which is the Privacy Act and its trying to reduce the national debt— extension to the private sector. Senator Neal—You are going to have a It is true that the issue of privacy is not a surplus. Don’t you read the newspapers? new issue. It has probably been on the agenda Senator ABETZ—Senator Neal, are you since the early 1980s. In fact, when the Labor suggesting that you had a surplus? government was elected in 1983, less than one year later, Lionel Bowen, who was to Senator Neal—You are going to have a become the Deputy Prime Minister, made a surplus within two years, as we predicted. statement that a privacy act would be enacted. Senator ABETZ—Senator Neal, thank you Privacy legislation was enacted in 1986, with very much. Put it on the public record. She subsequent legislation being carried in 1988. 5828 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

There seems to be a view that what has alternative to having a legislative base for an been done at the moment is adequate and extension to the private sector. there is not an urgent situation. I have to say That is not only my view. The community that I disagree with that proposition because at large was very much of the view that it circumstances have changed very markedly in was not an adequate response. It is not some the short period since the election of this consumer groups that have refused to discuss government. The Prime Minister, John How- the report with the Privacy Commissioner: a ard, at the time he was seeking election, made total of 15 consumer groups have said that a very clear statement to the Australian people they do not intend to liaise further with the that he intended to put in place privacy Privacy Commissioner to progress this discus- legislation that extended to the private sector. sion paper. But that, as we know, is not what took Mr Puplick, an ex-coalition senator, said— place. What happened was that Daryl Wil- and I will quote some of the key portions of liams, the Attorney-General, was asked to his statements: produce a discussion paper. This discussion The scheme outlined in Miss Scollay’s consultation paper, released in September 1996, was very paper was a minimal proposition that would not be well received. Probably most of you have had regarded by anybody as sufficient and would an opportunity to have a look at it. Not only encourage the states to go further. was it very well received by consumers and I will quote further, as he obviously felt quite individuals, but contrary to the Prime passionate about this issue: Minister’s view, or his apparent view, it was extraordinarily well received by the business The sort of knee-jerk reaction that says, ‘We can’t have privacy legislation because it is an imposition community as well. on business’ in fact is going to end up costing I was optimistic that, after the discussion Australian business and causing a great deal of paper’s release and its reception, this govern- confusion about data exchange with the European ment would go ahead and introduce that Union. legislation. Of course, that is not what occur- The control of private information and priva- red. In a blatant breach of his promise, the cy protections is a major part of setting in Prime Minister in March 1997 said: place a framework for the expansion of the The Commonwealth opposes such proposals which information technology and data processing will further increase compliance costs for all economy in Australia. Australian businesses, large and small. Certain things have happened internationally His response, in fact, was to ask the Privacy over the last two years that mean that, if Commissioner at HREOC, with its reduced Australia does not legislate to protect our financial resources, to prepare a consultation privacy, we will be falling behind in interna- paper on information practices in the private tional trade and international economy. Both sector in lieu of legislative extension of the Hong Kong and the European Parliament have Privacy Act to the private sector. passed legislation that data, and particularly At the time that discussion paper was being personal information, should not be provided proposed, the Labor Party held its peace, to those countries that do not have sufficient because we were wanting to see the pro- protections in place . tections in place and thought that we would It is my view that the proposals set out here give it a go; that we would see what the in the discussion paper by HREOC at the discussion paper proposed before we made a behest of the Prime Minister are not adequate judgment. One should always be optimistic in to meet those guidelines. This government’s this situation. failure to take action in terms of privacy Despite a lot of fine work done by the ensures that Australia is excluded from the Privacy Commissioner—a lot of the informa- fastest growing industry in the world. That is tion contained in that discussion paper is not an overstatement of the circumstances. extraordinarily useful—it is our view that it Contained in the Attorney-General’s discus- is not an adequate response or adequate sion paper are some comparisons and exam- Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5829 ples of other jurisdictions that have put these know whether existing departments can sorts of protections in place. I was interested actually do a job more cheaply and with to see that in the Canadian example many better reliability. It wants to outsource to big businesses that had initially thought that there business. would be great impositions had found at the Ask the Australian information technology end that the costs were minimal and that they industry about the tenders. They are designed had made substantial gains in consumer so that only a couple of major transnational confidence by putting in place those companies—like IBM—will effectively fit the protections of personal information. tendering profile, if reports from the IT There is an urgency at the moment. The industry are to be believed. But there are no private sector must be included within the effective provisions that require private sector bounds of the Privacy Act. That is imperative IT operators to maintain privacy, and there is because of the increasing and rapid change in no regime in place to monitor whether or not information technology and the transfer of they are doing this. personal information. It is urgent because, if In government bureaucracies there have we do not take the steps in Australia to put been cases where examination of personal these protections in place, then we will be information for private purposes has been excluded from a major industry that will picked up and prosecuted. With the private provide jobs to Australians. Having these sector, however, we are potentially talking protections in place will mean that in the about people who set themselves up as effi- future Australia will be a better place and cient because they are information-processing have an industry that it would otherwise not experts. They will be very possibly working have had. for several public and private clients, they Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) will be minimising cost and this will probably (4.28 p.m.)—Privacy is a major issue in our include having minimal supervision regarding society. The Privacy Act was put in place as privacy, unless it is required. Remember, this part of a recognition of the international is a competitive world; if it is not required, it standards in relation to preservation of priva- will be cheaper not to provide it. cy. Privacy has become an urgent issue with More of a worry: one of the cheapest and the decision to outsource various aspects of most common means of dealing with informa- government activity. A major area of tion input is to send it to India for input. outsourcing is collection, analysis, organisa- Indian computer subcontractors work for huge tion, storage, retrieval and maintenance of numbers of public and private organisations. information. It is something people can do So in a competitive situation like that without outside of government departments, and regulatory legislation, where is the guarantee information technology is a major target of of privacy? It is time to look at the social government outsourcing. impacts of competition policy before it is too In part, this issue has arisen through appli- late. I also urge senators to support a Senate cation of the principles of competition policy. inquiry into the social impacts of competition This policy demands that services provided by policy. government be open to competition or at least Senator CHAPMAN (South Australia) to bidding by the private sector. But the real (4.31 p.m.)—For weeks and weeks now, agenda of this government is to divest government senators have been urging the government of all the functions it can, on an Democrats—Senator Kernot in particular—to ideological assumption that the private sector give the kid a go, to let Senator Stott Despoja can do it better, more cheaply and make a make a contribution in this chamber. Today profit. she has been given full rein in proposing this Outsourcing information technology has urgency motion. We can all now well see been done through opening bidding, generally why Senator Kernot has been keeping her on without really allowing or considering in- a tight leash. It is not, as some might suggest, house bidding. Government does not want to because Senator Kernot sees Senator Stott 5830 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

Despoja as a threat to her leadership of the all of those problems for which we were Democrats. On the contrary, what we have elected. It shows that the Howard government seen today in this contribution from Senator is doing a successful job with regard to all Stott Despoja is that the Democrats and those issues. As a result of that, the Demo- Senator Kernot quite justifiably feared that crats have to resort to desperately attempting she would make a fool of herself and, indeed, to beat up a non-issue into an issue. a fool of the Democrats. Senator Stott Senator O’Chee—An urgency motion! Despoja has indeed made a fool of herself and of the Democrats by proposing as a matter of Senator CHAPMAN—It should be de- urgency— scribed as ‘a non-urgency motion’, Senator O’Chee. Secondly, this motion also clearly Senator Stott Despoja—On a point of shows just how bereft the Democrats are of order, Madam Acting Deputy President, if the worthwhile ideas. There is no urgency in this senator is not out of bounds on the basis of matter. The government has made a well-con- relevance, could you at least suggest that he sidered decision that an extension of the refrains from the patronising and insulting Privacy Act to the private sector is not neces- language that he is directing my way? sary. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT Senator Stott Despoja interjecting— (Senator Crowley)—Senator Stott Despoja, in this case I think Senator Chapman’s lan- Senator CHAPMAN—While Senator Stott guage is out of order. To describe you in the Despoja and her Democrat colleagues might way that he has, I believe, is outside the disagree with that decision, it is an abuse of standing orders. Senator Chapman, I ask you process and a waste of the Senate’s time to to withdraw those comments and proceed raise an issue of this sort for debate today. according to the debate under question. This issue, as raised by the Democrats, Senator CHAPMAN—Which particular makes a complete fool of them by proposing comments are you referring to, Madam Acting quite unnecessary extensions of privacy Deputy President? I was referring to this legislation, which quite appropriately currently particular issue which is before us today. applies to the public sector, to the private sector. For years we have seen the Democrats The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— parading themselves around the community as To describe Senator Stott Despoja as making the friends of small business. This motion a fool of herself is what I am referring to, if today clearly shows that that is nothing more you would care to withdraw those words. than a camouflage. When the Democrats Senator CHAPMAN—I withdraw those perceive a problem, whether real or imagi- particular words, but I will say that proposing nary, they inevitably resort to legislation as this particular matter as a matter of urgency the solution. They completely ignore the clearly makes a fool of the Democrats. I regulatory and compliance cost burdens that quote the matter of urgency, as it is claimed such legislation imposes on business, includ- to be: ing small business. The failure of the government to introduce legisla- This Democrat failing is demonstrated par tion amending the Privacy Act 1988 to extend the excellence in this so-called urgency motion. operation of the Privacy Act 1988 to all sectors of the Australian community. Unlike the Democrats, the Howard govern- ment is genuinely committed to assisting Very clearly, this is not a matter of urgency small business. It is quite inappropriate, as and it is quite ridiculous to suggest that it is. Senator Stott Despoja proposes, to be adding Bringing on this matter by the Democrats yet another layer of regulation with associated shows two things. Firstly, it in fact shows compliance costs on business. what a terrifically good job the Howard government is doing in dealing with major Senator Cook—What do you want a GST issues of concern to the Australian people, for? issues like inflation, interest rates and creating Senator CHAPMAN—Listen to Senator a sound climate for business activity, solving Cook, ‘Why do we want a GST?’ That is a Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5831 matter yet to be determined Senator Cook. will see a significant reduction in the regula- Can I remind you of the compliance costs we tory burden on small business. currently have with the wholesale sales tax The government’s response to privacy burden? Just get your little mind around that issues is quite consistent with that objective. for a few minutes and talk about compliance. It demonstrates that the government is com- Senator Cook—You want a GST—admit mitted to assisting and encouraging the it; be honest. private sector in developing and abiding by Senator CHAPMAN—Enough of your fundamental privacy principles. The govern- nonsense, Senator Cook. As I said, we are ment has decided that the Privacy Commis- genuinely committed to assisting small busi- sioner will be available to assist business in ness and we do not want further layers of its endeavours to meet privacy standards and regulation. As a government we certainly will be available to assist business with the recognise the importance of personal development of voluntary codes of conduct. freedoms, which include an individual’s right As a result of that determination by the to privacy. That is why this issue—an exten- government, the Privacy Commissioner has sion of the Privacy Act to the private sector— initiated a range of meetings with industry has been fully explored by the government. and consumer groups as a starting point for developing codes of conduct. Senator Stott Despoja—It hasn’t. As well, as recently as 15 August, the Senator CHAPMAN—It has, Senator Stott commissioner released a consultation paper Despoja. You should just examine and under- proposing the development of national stand- stand the facts. Again, it shows why you have ards for handling personal information by the been kept on the tight leash by Senator private sector. This continues the process Kernot for so long. which the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) There is absolutely no evidence of the need commissioned in March. We believe that the for an extension of the Privacy Act to the Privacy Commissioner’s consultations with private sector at this time. Nevertheless, the the private sector will develop an appropriate government does want to ensure that there is framework for privacy protection without an appropriate Australia-wide privacy regime. unnecessarily increasing compliance and That is why last September a discussion paper regulatory costs for Australian business. was released by the Attorney-General (Mr I conclude by mentioning in response to Williams) outlining the possible approach to what Senator Margetts put before this cham- privacy protection in the private sector. ber that she has quite clearly confused the Responses to that discussion paper have issue of the private sector generally with the provided the government with very clear process of contracting out of previous govern- guidance as to the genuine and real concerns ment services. The government has announced of business and industry on the possible that the privacy legislation will be extended government approaches to privacy protection. to cover the contracting out of government Those responses clearly indicated that there is services, but that is a quite different issue to no need at this time for a legislative response generally extending a legislative response to to those privacy issues. the private sector on the whole. The government is committed to reducing The government is adequately dealing with the regulatory burden on small business. We this issue. I come back to the point that there demonstrated that very clearly when, not long has been no demonstrated need and no evi- after being elected to government, we estab- dence adduced for an extension of the legisla- lished a task force to achieve this very goal. tion to the private sector. (Time expired) The result of that task force was the so-called Senator COONEY (Victoria) (4.40 p.m.)— Bell report, because that task force was, I think this is a very good motion. I do think indeed, chaired by Mr Bell. The recommenda- it is a matter of urgency that Senator Stott tions of that report have largely been adopted Despoja has brought forward. If you look at by the government. As a result of that, we what privacy is about, then you can see the 5832 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 force of this motion. Everyone has an inherent should be the law for everyone. If it is good right to keep control of information about enough for information to be made available them. The access to that information is rightly about private individuals, why isn’t it good theirs to determine. That means that there is enough for information to be made available information that is yours alone. There is about banks, about taxation offices or about information about you that you, as a citizen the police force, if you like? of this community, should be able to retain If we are going to say, ‘It doesn’t matter control of and which should not be taken out how far the contravention of privacy is of your possession without your permission. spread, we don’t need laws to protect priva- If it is taken out of your control, then you cy,’ then what about those laws that—in my should know about it and have access to it. view, properly—protect the information that There are issues of privacy, even for small law enforcement authorities hold? If it is good business. A small business can be sent bank- enough to have laws to protect that, why isn’t rupt by a bank failing to give credit on the it good enough to have laws that protect basis of information which that small business people who are going to be injured by infor- does not know about. One of the rules of mation that is made available about them? privacy is this: not only should people have Another issue to raise in this regard is what the right to maintain information about them information people should be able to obtain which is rightly theirs but, if you are going to from you. I think this is also a matter of have laws which say that people or institu- urgency because there are calls at the moment tions are allowed to have information about to get rid of the right to silence. People are others—or even if you have not got a law and saying that people should not be able to the situation is that people have information withhold information about themselves if law about other people—then that should be enforcement authorities, for example, should available to the people about whom that be able to obtain information from people if information is held. they want to ask them questions. If you are in A lot of institutions, such as banks, insur- court and you maintain the right to silence, or ance companies and even government itself, if you are being questioned by the appropriate say, ‘Yes, it is all right for us to hold infor- authorities and you maintain the right to mation about you. We can know all that we silence, then that should be used. That is a want to know about you, but you can’t get very interesting concept. One of the great information about us.’ The great test of that, figures, one of the great humanising figures of course, is the estimates committees. We go in history who maintained the right to silence along on behalf of the people of Australia to was— get information about government and they Senator O’Chee—St Thomas More. say, ‘No, you can’t have information about Senator COONEY—And before him what we are doing. You can’t have our legal Senator O’Chee was Jesus Christ. When Jesus opinion. You can’t have information about Christ was before Pilate he maintained the why we made this particular decision. But we right to silence. can hold information about you.’ The Health Insurance Commission, the Department of Senator McGauran interjecting— Social Security and the income tax office can Senator COONEY—It is a great worry that hold information about you, but you cannot Senator McGauran, for whose piety I have look at the information that those bodies hold. great honour, seems not to know that that was This whole motion is talking about those one of the central themes of the trial of Jesus two issues. The first issue is what information Christ. You should have a look at that. I refer should people be able to have about others you, Senator McGauran, to the gospel of and what information should people be able Mark 15:1-6. If you read that you will see the to keep control of. The second: if information importance of the right to silence. about a person or people generally is to be As Senator McGauran is one of the most made available to all and sundry, then that eminent backbenchers in the government Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5833 parties his reaction worries me because I think urgent that we get on to them. I congratulate it indicates an attitude within the government. Senator Stott Despoja for bringing this matter I think Senator Stott Despoja’s case has been before us today. made out because they are ignorant of one of Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (4.50 the great issues in history and ignorant of one p.m.)—The difficulty in following Barney of the great issues of the moment which is the Cooney in a debate— ability to keep private and keep to yourself what is properly yours. That apparently does The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT not resonate on the benches of the govern- (Senator Crowley)—With the greatest re- ment because they laugh at, in my view, the spect, Senator McGauran, it is Senator greatest figure in history. Senator McGauran Cooney. obviously does not consider that to be so. I Senator McGAURAN—Senator Cooney is digress. ever so eminent and ever so lofty in present- ing his points. An old tactic that only Senator The issue of privacy is fundamental and one Cooney, given his credibility, can get away that needs to have the force of law behind it with is speaking about the issue of privacy as to make it effective. The government talks if the other side of the chamber—the govern- about the right to privacy, but there is a ment side of the chamber—does not hold up refusal to bring in laws to back that up in the the principles of privacy, has not enshrined private sector. It says that the private sector the principles of privacy or fought and de- does not want that. I would be very surprised fended the principles of privacy. I point out if that were the case. I would have thought our opposition to the Australia Card which that the private sector would be interested to Senator Cooney was around for and voted for. know what those big financial institutions do Senator Cooney simply concentrated on the with the information they have about those lofty matters of privacy and free speech going small businesses, but, in any event, the back some 2,000 years. I am always happy government says it is not. for Senator Cooney to refer me to passages in I put the proposition to the Senate that there the Bible. I can always do with that sort of are laws giving people enforceable rights to advice. life and limb. If a person attempts to kill you To dress up this whole issue brought to us or attempts to maim you there are laws to by Senator Stott Despoja in nothing more protect you. There are laws to protect your than the principle of privacy, free speech, the securities and shares in companies. There are right to silence is to really distort the facts. laws to protect your land and chattels. There Those opposite make out that this government are laws to protect your intellectual property is doing nothing about it. It is moving on the and your reputation. The government does not matter. It is moving, but not the way Senator say anything about the cost or the terrible Stott Despoja wants us to. We are the govern- burden it places on the community having law ment. Do you think we are going to move the enforcement authorities, courts and procedures way the Democrats suggest? I cannot think of whereby people can manifest these rights. one time that we ever moved with the Demo- Why is it that privacy, this inherent right to crats. They have quite often moved with us. maintain information about yourself or if I cannot think of a time when we would say, information about you is going to be made ‘Yes, Senator Stott Despoja you are right.’ available that it should be made available The whole bench across there has never come about everybody else, should be separated out up with a bright or right idea. from other rights? It is all right for the com- Senator Cooney, I am going to go back to munity to bear the expense of protecting other the Bible and refer to those passages. But do rights but not the right to privacy. I think this not try to tell this government that we do not is a very important matter. It is a matter that enshrine the principle of privacy. Quite has been delayed too long. Economic rights frankly, I think both sides of the parliament are important but civil rights are very import- do—they just have a different way of going ant too. We have neglected them. I think it is about it. A good try, nevertheless. 5834 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

A lot was made of the discussion paper that Stott Despoja say some of those consumer was brought out by the Attorney-General’s groups are black-banning these meetings. Department on 12 September 1996—as if it They may well black-ban them, but the more were government policy. That is like saying significant ones are turning up. By the way, the Industry Commission report brought down you never named the ones that were black- on the car industry was government policy. In banning them. I would find that an interesting that report they recommended no further tariff list indeed. cuts. The government did not take up that On 15 March, the Privacy Commissioner recommendation by the Industry Commission. released a consultation paper proposing It was just one source fed into cabinet’s national standards for the handling of personal decision making process. So, too, was this information by the private sector. This con- discussion paper by the Attorney-General’s tinues the process commissioned by the gov- Department. Cabinet made a decision on 17 ernment in March. The government is very March. I will read it out for you, Senator Stott confident that the Privacy Commissioner’s Despoja. Cabinet agreed: consultations with the private sector, which (a) no Commonwealth legislation would be are well under way, will develop an appropri- developed at this stage; ate regulatory framework for privacy protec- (b) the Privacy Commissioner would be available tion in the private sector without unnecessari- to assist business in its endeavours to meet ly increasing the compliance cost to Austral- privacy standards, including assistance in the ian business. Isn’t that important? This gov- development of voluntary codes of conduct; and ernment is committed to reducing the regula- tory burden on business. It is against this (c) the Prime Minister propose to Premiers and Chief Ministers that, in recognition of the backdrop that our response to privacy con- added costs to business that would result from cerns has been developed. piecemeal State and Territory legislation, the I would have thought that, after 18 months States and Territories not enact their own of seeing this government operate, that would privacy legislation as it affects the private sector. be a pretty clearly understood principle for the Australian Democrats. It was mentioned So we too are looking for a national code of by Senator Neal and Senator Stott Despoja in conduct, contrary to what some of the previ- regard to outsourcing. With only a minute to ous speakers said. I endorse what the previous go I will simply say on that matter that the speakers on this side said when they talked government has acted legislatively in regard about this being a waste of time. to government departments outsourcing. It is Senator Stott Despoja—And the insults? an important matter, it is a serious concern— Senator McGAURAN—I will not deliver and we have picked up that serious public the insults—you can refer to the Hansard. concern. This is far from an urgency motion. Quite In the context of considering the whole frankly, before I got up it had pretty well run government information technology infrastruc- out of puff. You can be very thankful Senator ture, the government recently decided that the Cooney put some spice into the whole debate. Privacy Act will be extended to all contractors I really think that, as far as urgency motions who hold personal information on behalf of go, this is one that has really run out of puff. the government. So those privacy concerns, It does not warrant the title of urgency mo- Senator Stott Despoja—if you care to listen— tion. Nevertheless, in the brief time we are are being taken up in regard to outsourcing. given I will attempt to address the matters When Labor was in government they promot- before us. ed outsourcing in the Public Service for five It is worthy of note that, following that years, but they never once introduced—(Time cabinet decision, the Privacy Commissioner expired) initiated a range of meetings with industry Senator STOTT DESPOJA (South Aus- and consumer groups as a starting point for tralia) (4.57 p.m.)—I should note that, even developing a code of conduct. I heard Senator without Senator the Rev. John Woodley in Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5835 this debate, we certainly still seem to have The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT reference to religious and historical matters of (Senator Crowley)—It is time to put the significance. I congratulate Senator Cooney motion. The question for the Senate is that the on his contribution to this debate. But I urgency motion brought by Senator Stott cannot go without mentioning the fact that Despoja be agreed to. what is most insulting and offensive to me Senator Murray—Madam Acting Deputy about this debate is not the government’s President, I raise a point of order. I am not unwillingness to recognise that the matter of sure of the standing orders, but in the interests extending privacy laws to the private sector of good order I would like to refer to the is an urgent matter, but the way that three appropriate authority or chair my belief that backroom boys were sent in to be insulting to the insulting and personal attacks on Senator me and my party. I want to note for the Stott Despoja should not be allowed to pass students who may be left in the gallery that unchecked. I would like to see a better stan- dismissing me as a fool or a kid is really dard of debate and behaviour on the govern- quite petty in this debate. I want on the record ment side in that regard. that I took offence at Senator Chapman’s and Senator Abetz’s contributions to this debate. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— There is no point of order. I was also a bit disturbed that they knew nothing about the issue. But, rather than go Question put: through a privacy 101 course for the benefit That the motion (Senator Stott Despoja’s)be of Senators Abetz, Chapman and McGauran, agreed to. I will simply state a couple of things that they need to know. Compliance costs is the only argument that has been put forward by these The Senate divided. [5.04 p.m.] senators to date. Where is their evidence? (The President—Senator the Hon. Margaret Where is the data that suggests that compli- Reid) ance costs will increase? In fact, all the Ayes ...... 32 evidence we have suggests that the only Noes ...... 32 reason the regulatory burden would increase —— and compliance costs go up would be if there Majority ...... 0 were a hotchpotch of fragmented regulations —— among the states and territories as opposed to AYES a nationally consistent enforceable privacy Allison, L. Bishop, M. Bourne, V. Brown, B. legislation scheme. Senator McGauran, I look Carr, K. Childs, B. K. forward to seeing some statistics from you on Conroy, S. Cook, P. F. S. that. Cooney, B. Crowley, R. A. Denman, K. J. Evans, C. V. As for the urgency in this debate, in Sep- Foreman, D. J. * Forshaw, M. G. tember last year the Attorney-General recog- Gibbs, B. Hogg, J. nised this as an urgency debate. It is why, I Kernot, C. Lees, M. H. presume, the government went to the election Lundy, K. Mackay, S. promising to introduce privacy laws for the Margetts, D. McKiernan, J. P. private sector. What has changed? We have Murray, A. Neal, B. J. O’Brien, K. W. K. Ray, R. F. seen no evidence, no rationale, for the Reynolds, M. Schacht, C. C. government’s backflip, except that the Prime Sherry, N. Stott Despoja, N. Minister essentially vetoed the idea of intro- West, S. M. Woodley, J. ducing legislation. I quote the Attorney- NOES General: Abetz, E. Alston, R. K. R. I intend to be in a position to develop legislation Boswell, R. L. D. Brownhill, D. G. C. for introduction next year. Calvert, P. H. * Campbell, I. G. Chapman, H. G. P. Coonan, H. This matter is urgent. I urge senators to vote Crane, W. Eggleston, A. for the motion. (Time expired) Ellison, C. Ferguson, A. B. 5836 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

NOES One of the principal messages of my visit was that Ferris, J Gibson, B. F. my government intended to build on this shared Heffernan, W. Herron, J. history and shared values in looking ahead and Hill, R. M. Kemp, R. creating modern and dynamic partnerships which Knowles, S. C. Lightfoot, P. R. meet Australia’s contemporary needs and interests. Macdonald, I. MacGibbon, D. J. The United States is the largest investor in Austral- McGauran, J. J. J. Minchin, N. H. ia, and the United Kingdom the second largest. The Patterson, K. C. L. Payne, M. A. United Kingdom invests more in manufacturing in Reid, M. E. Synon, K. M. Australia than any other foreign investor and so is Tierney, J. Troeth, J. a very important source of employment in this Vanstone, A. E. Watson, J. O. W. country. PAIRS It is not a one-way street either. Australia is Bolkus, N. Tambling, G. E. J. rivalling France and Germany for third place Collins, J. M. A. Newman, J. M. amongst foreign investors in Britain. Australian Collins, R. L. Parer, W. R. investment in the United States is 40 per cent of Faulkner, J. P. O’Chee, W. G. the United States’ investment in Australia—a very Murphy, S. M. Macdonald, S. large figure when you consider the difference in the * denotes teller size of our economies. Question so resolved in the negative. We have substantial trading relationships with both COMMITTEES countries. Our alliance with the United States is vital to Australia’s stability and the security of our Scrutiny of Bills Committee region. We have close and valuable defence ties with the United Kingdom. Report United Kingdom Senator COONEY (Victoria)—I present It was therefore timely to visit the United Kingdom the 11th report of 1997 of the Standing early in the life of the new government led by Mr Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills. I also lay Blair. Mr Blair of course is no stranger to Austral- on the table Scrutiny of Bills Alert Digest No. ia. I invited him to visit us again in his new 10 dated 27 August 1997. capacity. I was also pleased to have the opportunity to call Ordered that the report be printed. on the Queen. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS I had a very valuable round of discussions with Mr Blair and leading members of his government, Visit by the Prime Minister to the United including the deputy prime minister, Chancellor of Kingdom and the United States of the Exchequer, defence secretary, foreign secretary and home secretary. I was pleased to find that they America share my conviction of the growing strength and Senator MINCHIN (South Australia— relevance of the relationship between Australia and Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) the United Kingdom. (5.08 p.m.)—On behalf of the Prime Minister I was struck by how much there is in common (Mr Howard), I seek leave to incorporate in between my government and Mr Blair’s on the challenges faced by our societies—especially the Hansard a statement on his overseas visit to issues of unemployment and the role of welfare— the United Kingdom and the United States, and the need to address those challenges, not with and to move a motion in relation to the ideological prescriptions but by looking for practi- statement. cal ways to achieve results. I was particularly interested to hear about the welfare to work propo- Leave granted. sals of the new government and Mr Blair’s views The statement read as follows— on changing attitudes in modern societies towards welfare and how they married with much of our The United Kingdom and the United States are two thinking. of Australia’s strongest and most important political and economic partners. Both with the UK government and in my meetings with leaders of the UK business community, I was Our relationships with both countries are founded able to set out first hand the strength of the Aus- in our shared histories and traditions, our common tralian economy. The reality is that our economy values and aspirations and the strong personal links over 1997 and 1998 is predicted to grow more between our societies. strongly than any of the G7 economies. Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5837

During a visit to the Hawk aircraft assembly line region was an important focus of my discussions in Warton, I announced the then imminent signa- in Washington and New York. The other was my ture of the contract for the lead-in fighter for the message that under my government’s reform RAAF—a significant boost for the Newcastle area programme the Australian economy was creating both in terms of the jobs and the leading edge new opportunities for US business to use Australia technology it will bring. as a base for operations in Asia. I pointed out in my meetings that Australia’s I emphasised the vital importance of continued US integration into the Asia Pacific region and the engagement in the region. The interests of Austral- United Kingdom’s with Europe were making our ia, the United States and the region are all served bilateral links more relevant and valuable—rather by the United States continuing to make a strong than the reverse as some might think. No two contribution to the stability and economic growth countries in their respective regions have closer of the region. relationships or a better understanding of each other than Australia and the United Kingdom. I was reassured by my discussions with President Clinton and others in his administration of the The benefits are becoming more evident in the continuing commitment of the United States to number of British companies locating their regional exercising its leadership, economic power and headquarters in Australia and using Australians strategic influence to help ensure the region’s skills and expertise to expand their business in the stability and prosperity into the next century. Asia Pacific region. Australia and the United Kingdom hold different It is a tribute to the role Australia plays in the positions on climate change, which is not surprising region that President Clinton and members of his given the differences in the structures of our administration and Congress want to know what economies. I made clear to Mr Blair and his Australia thinks of developments in the region and government that Australia is prepared to play her to discuss ways in which we can extend our part in tackling greenhouse gas emissions. But we cooperation there. will not be party to a legally binding uniform target While sharing fundamental objectives, Australia’s which no-one honestly expects will be achieved, specific geography and interests means that she has which is discriminatory in its economic conse- a different perspective on the region from the quences and which does not make an effective United States—and that makes our views useful. contribution to improving the world’s environment. In a major speech to the Foreign Policy Association A continuing irritant in our bilateral relations is the annual dinner, I set out Australia’s views on the UK government’s refusal to index pensions for UK important changes taking place in the region and residents in Australia. Mr Blair and I agreed that as how we should respond to them. The opening up a first step officials would reach an understanding and modernising of economies and societies in the on the actual costs involved—lack of agreement on region are bringing immense benefits for the this has so far obstructed sensible discussion of the countries of the region and their peoples. It is in issue. our interests to reinforce these trends and to I also took the opportunity of being in London to encourage the integration of regional economies maintain my contact with former prime ministers, into the world economy rather than lecture them John Major and Baroness Thatcher, and to meet the about their shortcomings. new leader of the Conservative Party, William For example, it is in the interests of Australia, the Hague. United States and the region that we maintain broad During my visit, I was pleased to be able to help and balanced relationships with Indonesia within facilitate requests for the return of Yagan’s skull to which differences for example on human rights can Australia and I hope that outstanding issues can be be handled productively. resolved soon. The government and the Clinton administration United States agree on the importance of integrating China into My visit to the United States was an opportunity to the region. We agree also on the importance of build on the success of President Clinton’s visit to APEC’s role in sustaining the growth of regional Australia last year. I met a very wide range of key economies by freeing up trade and investment. We figures in President Clinton’s administration, are keen to see APEC’s momentum maintained Congress and the business community in New under the Canadian chairmanship at Vancouver. York. My meetings left me in doubt about the An active and credible ANZUS alliance is an strength of the US alliance with Australia and the important part of the contribution we both make to value the United States places on it. the region. I was pleased to highlight that with an Our shared strategic and economic interests in the invitation to the Seventh Fleet to visit Australia in Asia Pacific region meant that the future of our the year 2000. 5838 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

The Australian and US positions on climate change heads of state, including the President of the are not the same—but we share a desire for a United States, the Prime Minister of the realistic and equitable outcome of the Kyoto United Kingdom, heads of states from Japan, meeting. President Clinton acknowledged the need for flexibility in order to achieve that and we France, Germany, Russia and right around the agreed on the need to find a way of involving the world. What happened was that our Prime developing countries effectively in the process. Minister was sipping tea with Baroness I was pleased to hear Dr Greenspan comment on Thatcher and twiddling his fingers in London, the strong position of the Australian economy. as the Lord’s cricket match was not on be- New York is where perhaps the toughest bottom cause it rained, while a world conference on lines are drawn about economic performances. So the environment and sustainable development I was pleased to see when I visited Salomon was attended by heads of state from almost Brothers a graph which plotted the differential everywhere else on the planet. between Australian and United States Treasury bonds. When my government came to office the You would have to ask why John Howard margin was about 250 points against Australia. On did not represent Australia. Why didn’t he do the day I visited, the margin had dropped to only us proud at this prestigious international 60 points. Recently it has dropped to 25 points. gathering? The reason is that he is downright This is a measure of the extent to which in the past ashamed of his government’s environmental 17 months we have been able to repair the funda- mentals of the economy. record. I note the Minister for the Environ- ment (Senator Hill) is absent, but he would be I was interested to hear from the US administration able to endorse the fact that since John and business their views on how the US economy’s impressive rate of job creation has been achieved. Howard came to office the already destructive While I heard a range of ideas, there was consensus process of woodchipping in our native and on the importance of labour market flexibility. I wild forests in this country has been acceler- came away convinced that sensible reform of the ated. It has been accelerated by the Prime kinds we have undertaken—to achieve greater Minister who referred to the last Prime labour market flexibility, to remove the obstacles Minister, Mr Keating, with some good reason, to job creation and to address welfare and taxation disincentives against work—is critical if we are to as the Prime Minister for woodchipping. What improve employment. John Howard has done is leapfrog the record Dr Greenspan also stressed the role that the integra- of the Keating government and accelerate the tion of new information technology into the econ- destruction of native forests and wildlife in omy has played in creating jobs in the United this country at a time when that industry is States. The government will be announcing steps job shedding. in this area in the near future. The Prime Minister is about expanding Finally, I would like to extend my deep appreci- uranium exports out of this country into the ation to my hosts in both the United Kingdom and the United States for the warmth of their reception unsafe nuclear industry, which countries like and their generous hospitality. France, Sweden and Great Britain are getting I believe my visit has helped focus the leadership out of, because there are dollars in it. This of both countries on the benefits that our partner- government would sell off anything and let ship can bring to all of us if firmly oriented the devil look after the next generations. Not towards the future. Together, our partnerships with least amongst some 15 uranium mines on the the United States and the United Kingdom will play slate is Jabiluka, where the traditional owners an important part in Australia’s growth and securi- do not want that mine in the heart of this ty. magnificent valley in Kakadu. This govern- Senator MINCHIN—I move: ment is about to ride across the top of social That the Senate take note of the statement. justice and environmental parameters. Any Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (5.09 p.m.)— sane, responsible and caring government In agreeing to take note of this statement, I would stand against that. cannot allow the opportunity to pass to Of course, amongst the other multitude of condemn the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) for sins of this government as far as the environ- having failed to attend the Earth Summit in ment is concerned, and what should be a New York, which was attended by some 100 matter of great shame for John Howard—and Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5839 ample reason as to why he stayed away from the next century and the next millennium, is New York—is the abhorrent record his going to be tax reform. As important as that government has in its responsibility for is, it shows the degree of failure of imagina- tackling, along with the rest of the world, the tion of this Prime Minister—imagination greenhouse gas and global warming problem: which, if it were firing and if it were up to Australians, per capita, are the worst default- the representation Australians expect, would ers on the face of the planet. have us as a middle order nation taking a lead This Prime Minister’s policies are dictated amongst the community of nations in a planet by the coal industry, by dollars, not the rights that, for goodness sake, needs leadership. We of future generations, certainly not the rights did not get it in New York and we are not of our neighbours living on islands and going to get it during this period in office of certainly not the rights of people who right the Prime Minister—in office not at the around the world are going to have to grapple Lodge, but in his residence in Sydney. with the awesome downside of the neglect by I suppose these things creep up on people this Prime Minister of his national and global slowly, but Australians have to recognise that responsibilities. there is a vacancy where we need leadership, So what happened? He had tea with Baron- that there is a vacancy where we need vision ess Thatcher and then he flew to Washington, for the next generation coming after us, that bypassing New York. When he got to there is a failure where we need success as a Washington he found that President Clinton country that has everything going for it, if we was not there because President Clinton was want to take a lead in innovations, bright spending four days in New York, three hours ideas and solutions as we move into the next train ride up the line, with the rest of the century. The Prime Minister cannot even world in what turned out to be an unsatisfac- come to grips with that when it comes to such tory conference but at least an effort to get a simple thing as alternative power, solar together to try to tackle the world’s environ- power. The world is crying out for power mental and therefore social problems. John alternatives which are going to help fix the Howard sat in Washington having coffee with global warming problem. Newt Gingrich, the extreme right representa- Instead of that, he is subsidising diesel fuel tive of the Republicans, because he felt more use—greenhouse gas production—to the tune at home with that than he did representing of $800 million a year for the mining corpora- this nation at the biggest gathering of heads tions alone and cutting $20 million to $25 of government that he is likely to see in this million out of energy research assistance for period of office. solar power. It just shows how wonky his It was a failure of responsibility; it was a priorities are, how far off-beam he is, how failure of national leadership; it was a demon- narrow minded and, I think, self-centred he is, strable failure to represent this nation, to give and how limited his field of view is, when Australia top level representation at a global this great nation of ours needs statesperson- conference which mattered. And if John ship, vision, imagination and get-up- and-go Howard cannot do better than that he ought of the wider sense that goes beyond tax not to be in that office. If he has not got the reform to the other values that we have to vision beyond that narrowness which says hold high in life if we are going to give ‘Baroness Thatcher before the world’, he does fulfilment not only to this generation, but to not deserve to be in the prime office of this the people who follow us. nation. He is selling out Australians, he is Senator COOK (Western Australia) (5.18 selling out this nation’s interests and he is p.m.)—I, too, wish to speak to the motion to selling out future generations. He is not up to take note of this ministerial statement by the it, and we are seeing this more and more as Prime Minister (Mr Howard) on his trip to the we go down the line. United States and the United Kingdom. When This is the Prime Minister who says that the one reads the document that the Prime great adventure for Australia, as we go into Minister has used to report on this trip, I 5840 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 think one would have to say that this is a day he went. If that is a signal of prime very thin justification for going. There are no ministerial responsibility and priority setting, matters of great moment contained in this one has to say he has got it miserably wrong. document. It is a travelogue of meeting major Indeed, the Prime Minister’s trip provided Tory celebrities and hobnobbing with them in a huge source of levity for the cartoon draw- Britain. The list was: Baroness Thatcher, Mr ers of Australia: at the Lord’s test when it Hague and John Major. In the United States rained, and later when the Prime Minister the stand-out personality was Newt Gingrich. opened the Ashes exhibition at Lord’s and This was a Tory celebration and a tour by the described it as one of the greatest events of Australian Prime Minister to get, no doubt, his prime ministership—‘the greatest occasion the approbation of his political kin in the of my prime ministership’. The opening of the United States and the United Kingdom. It did Ashes museum in London was hardly a nothing for Australia. significant event for Australia. It was sym- When he was away, major issues occurred bolically important for those interested in here that he did not attend to. The Newcastle cricket and sport, but it was not something steelworks was closed down and the protests which changed the national destiny of this about the jobs for people in that city reached country. And then, in New York, Shirley a crescendo. The carcass of the then minister MacLaine fell asleep while the Prime Minister for small business, Mr Prosser, was turning in was making his speech. She later apologised the wind awaiting finally being put to rest as for that, but it was an indication of how he was a political neuter, given the clash of vibrant and exciting things were on the Prime his personal interests and his public responsi- Minister’s international trip. bilities. And that remained unresolved. I want to deal in some detail with two The handover of Hong Kong occurred. Our things which the Prime Minister has included Prime Minister did not appear at that. Of in the report of his international trip and course, as Senator Brown has just alluded to, which I think should be explained to this the greenhouse gas conference was being held parliament. Firstly, he argued in his report— in New York at the United Nations. Major and he argued in the media at the time—that, countries were represented by their heads of on meeting Tony Blair, the Labour Prime state, by their prime ministers or presidents. Minister of Great Britain, their exchange had Australia was not. Australia was remarkable been useful because he and Blair had a for that fact; Australia was represented by its common view about policies on unemploy- Minister for the Environment (Senator Hill) ment and welfare. and therefore was not able to mix it with the The Prime Minister used this point to argue big boys in terms of the argument that it that that meant that Labor in Australia was wanted to put. The level of representation sent out of date or out of touch. Let me put a few was seen as an indication of the strength of of the facts on the record. The leader of the the arguments Australia wanted to present. Labor Party in this national parliament, Mr I am not saying, in that sense, that I justify Beazley, put these facts on the record directly the arguments that the government was to the Prime Minister in the debate in the wanting to put at that conference, but it other place earlier today. downgraded its own ability to be respected by Essentially, from the day-long discussions the level of representation it presented when that Kim Beazley had with Tony Blair—as most other nations were represented by their opposed to the short hour or so that the Prime heads of state. The Chancellor of Germany Minister had with him—what was shown to was there, the President of France was there, be true was that Tony Blair is a friend of the President of the United States was there, Australia. He is a friend of the Australian the Prime Minister of Britain was there; our Labor Party. He gained inspiration to conduct environment minister was there. Our Prime his campaign in the United Kingdom from Minister was at Lord’s watching the cricket— what he found in Labor in government in or, rather, he wasn’t because it rained on the Australia. He is a personal friend of Kim Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5841

Beazley. The policies that John Howard was ment at all in this country, to bring unemploy- referring to were policies drawn by the British ment down, this nation has to have its econ- Labour Party from our Working Nation omy grow at 4½ per cent, he made a positive statement, and then presented in British style. choice to keep unemployment high and, in What the Prime Minister is praising when fact, for unemployment to grow. That is the he praises those policies is Working Nation— inescapable conclusion from the budget a statement that he condemns in Australia, settings of budget No. 1 and budget No. 2 of and a policy which he has dismantled here, this government. The government chose a thus preventing the opportunity for unem- level of economic growth in this country ployed people in this nation to gain access to which would keep unemployment levels high, training and jobs, and preventing the improve- and growing. ment of the lot of the long-term unemployed. Despite all the words the government It is one thing to praise what the British members might say about their concern for Labour Party is proposing to do. Its model unemployment, it is actions that decide was Working Nation. That was the model we sincerity, not words, and the actions were had in place in Australia, and that is the budget settings which will cause unemploy- model that this government has shown respect ment to remain high or to grow. When the for by scrapping. That is hardly sincere praise Prime Minister talks, as he did in London, in those circumstances. about concern for the unemployed and about The other point I wish to comment on is what he might learn about how to keep them that the Prime Minister came away from his off welfare and get them back into the work discussions with President Clinton having force, one has to remember that this is the suddenly discovered the information industry. man who presided over a Treasurer who set He had left Australia several weeks before budget growth levels below the level at which that, in the closing week of the Senate during you can make a dent in unemployment levels. which, to the ignominy of information tech- They were the targets. The actual perform- nology, the Senate voted, with a government ance in the budget of last year, as I said, was majority, to scrap the computer bounty. not 3¾per cent but 2.4 per cent, so the actual The computer bounty was one of the things outcome of the budget settings undershot the that underpinned the existence of an informa- target that the government had set—you tion technology industry in Australia. But, would have thought it would have done having scrapped it, the Prime Minister discov- something to correct that in the second budg- ered, after having chatted with President et, but it did not—and any words we therefore Clinton, how important information technol- hear from the Prime Minister about how he ogy is for the world, and how Australia must might tweak the system to make it marginally catch up—after his having demolished the better, based on what he learnt from new basis on which information technology devel- Labour in London, are about moving the opment was founded in Australia. deckchairs on the Titanic. Both these examples show a Prime Minister You must first fix the problem by growing who in this way confesses that he knew not this economy at the levels that it is capable of what he did: he had no policy vision; he was and within the speed limits that it is capable a policy-free zone when it came to planning of achieving, at around five per cent or six the industry, welfare and employment needs per cent, and bring down the total level of of this country in his first and second budgets. unemployment. In that way, the issue of what In both those budgets the Prime Minister you then do about the long-term unemployed chose to opt for a level of growth for the is the secondary question, because you are economy—a GDP growth level—of 3¾per reducing the total number of unemployed. In cent. In the first year it was not realised—we facing that secondary question, the blueprint got 2.4 not 3¾per cent. In choosing to set the is the Working Nation statement. budget at a growth level of 3¾per cent know- Let me now turn for a minute to the indus- ing that, to make any impact on unemploy- tries of the future. The biggest industry in the 5842 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 world and the fastest growing industry in the group—cut that bounty out and then discov- world is the information and telecommunica- ered, ‘God, we’ve got to do something to tions sector. Australia imports something like create an information technology sector in $6 billion worth of information technology a Australia.’ year. That is the net trade balance. We export We now have the Goldsworthy report, but some; we import some. The net deficit is we do not know what the government is about $6 billion. going to do about that. Of the Goldsworthy By the end of this century, the net deficit report, let me say that it is a worthwhile try will be $20 billion, unless we husband this but it is nowhere near the answer to putting industry in Australia so that we build here the Australia on the map as a world power—as it type of technology that we now import and could be—in the growth sector of the future. we replace those foreign imports with home- That is where the jobs will come from in the grown products. That would change the trade next century. So we have a Prime Minister balance and create challenging, intellectually who confesses his sins on both those fronts stimulating, highly skilled, technical jobs for while away. Australia. I have heard what Senator Brown has said That is the program Labor was embarked with respect to the earth summit in New on and, to help Australian industry achieve York. Indeed, it is true that the Prime that, we had a bounty for computer produc- Minister should have been there, he should tion. That is, we paid a small amount to have represented Australia and he should have encourage this industry to re-establish itself put Australia’s views. The fact that he chose here and make that equipment in Australia. not to is a massive slight to the rest of the Well, it is a matter of record that, just before world and a lack of faith in or commitment to the Prime Minister left for his overseas the case Australia has been making interna- junket, he scrapped that bounty. He cut the tionally. ground from under this industry, pushing a There is no excuse for the Prime Minister number of these companies out of Australia to be at the cricket or sipping tea with Baron- and into new markets. They then had to ess Thatcher when the world was gathered in export into Australia, and that pushed the earnest consideration of the effect of green- level of trade deficit up even further. house emissions on the ozone layer and was The Prime Minister cut it out from under trying to cobble together an agreement about this industry without studying the impact and that. The fact that Australia was not represent- in the face of an Industry Commission report ed is an enduring slight to the rest of the which found in favour of continuing the world. bounty. I might say that, over the last few I want to conclude my remarks about this weeks, we have heard of workers in the car trip with another point that stands out. We do industry attacking the Industry Commission know this. Prior to the Prime Minister pack- for removing protection, and we have heard ing his bags for London, his office systemati- of workers just this week—and we will be cally leaked to Australian reporters, to tease moving a motion tomorrow on this subject— them about how important his mission would in the textiles, clothing and footwear industry be, that he would make a speech in London, attacking the Industry Commission for remov- the Menzies memorial lecture, and that in that ing tariff protection from them, and with speech he would link the member for Oxley, justifiable reason in my view. Pauline Hanson—rightly, I might say, in my In this particular case, the Industry Com- view—with the association of the Ku Klux mission had found that the bounty should Klan in the United States. He was to make a remain. This ultra dry agency had found that comparison of her policies and their policies, the bounty should remain because that was note the striking similarity between both and the only way in which it could leave a growth note the interdependence that seems to be in this industry sector. But the government— growing between the Hanson group and those against the advice of the most dry economic extreme right wing elements in the United Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5843

States. That was leaked out of the Prime The fact that he said he would perform and Minister’s office to the Australian media, and did not is taken to be further confirmation the Australian media reported it. that perhaps there is a sneaking regard for So it was that, when the Prime Minister Hanson policies in the government. I think the rose to the lectern to deliver the Menzies truth is that there is not, but the truth is that memorial lecture, we waited to see exactly there appears to be, at least with the Prime how he would present this view. The truth is Minister. That is a shocking view to have that he did not. He squibbed it. It dropped out abroad. But that is the view abroad, and it is of his speech. He did not actually do it. one that he has created by his failure to perform on this matter. One wonders what mental processes were Let me conclude as I began. His report to in his mind that caused him to make that this parliament about what he did in the UK shift. He had told the world that he was going and the United States is a thin travelogue and to do it, and the world was expecting to hear a Tory tour of the world. It carries with it no from him about it. He was going to at last lasting statesmanlike effort to place Australia provide some leadership on what is, I think, better in the world than it was before he left. one of the biggest international issues facing It recounts what the investment flows are Australia now—that is, the fact that we are between Australia and the United Kingdom being characterised as a white racist nation by and how important US and UK investment is people who are not friendly to us. They are to Australia, but that is citing the facts—the using the Hanson factor to justify it and, as facts that were achieved by Labor when it they often do, are pointing to the Prime was in government. What this report fails to Minister of Australia as encouraging the do is show how the government intends to Hanson forces because of his refusal to enhance that or take it further. I think the condemn her out of hand at the very begin- failing is in this report. ning. The Prime Minister then says he is going to do it, and then he does not do it. The trip overseas by the Prime Minister has been a damp squib and has not advanced our What sort of message is that sending to the national interests. It has not advanced our rest of the world? That is a disgraceful national interests because he was preoccupied message for the rest of the world. It gives rise with cricket and he failed to perform in the again to the belief that this Prime Minister is Menzies lecture. He put Shirley MacLaine to soft on this sort of view being put in Austral- sleep in New York. Then there was the ia, that he is quite happy to sit back and allow unfortunate trip on the way to the rose garden the Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Fischer) and in Washington. These incidents have caught the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr Downer) the tone of this venture. (Time expired) to do the hard yards, to make the condemna- tions that are appropriate and proper—and I Question resolved in the affirmative. support them in what they say—to express the CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION tolerant and multicultural face of Australia to (ELECTION) BILL 1997 the world and to argue for its importance. But when the time comes for the Prime Minister Consideration of House of to stand up and be counted on this issue, Representatives Message despite the fact that he leaks his intention to Consideration resumed from 26 August of do so, he does not deliver. House of Representatives message. During the recess I visited a number of House of Representatives message— Asian nations as shadow minister for trade. I Schedule of the amendments made by the might say that the character of a nation is Senate to which the House of Representatives often judged by what the leaders of the nation has disagreed. say, and what the Prime Minister says or does (1) Page 1 (after line 11), after the title, insert: not say on this subject is being treated as Preamble indicative of the views of the government and This Act provides the necessary framework for sometimes the views of the nation. the election of delegates to a Constitutional 5844 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

Convention to represent the views of all 41A Nomination fee to be forfeited in certain Australians about possible changes to the cases Constitution. (1) The nomination fee paid by or on behalf of The Convention will provide a forum for a candidate is to be retained pending the debate about: ballot, and after the ballot must be returned . whether the present Constitution should be in accordance with subsection (2) or (3), if changed so that Australia might become a the candidate is elected, or: republic with its own Head of State; and (a) if the total number of votes polled in the . what republican models should be put to the candidate’s favour as first preferences is voters of Australia as elements of the choice at least 4% of the total number of votes between the present system and a new polled in favour of the candidates in the system; and election as first preferences; or . the timeframe and the appropriate circum- (b) in a case where the name of the candidate stances for considering change. is included in a group—if the sum of the votes polled in favour of each of the If it is to be successful, it is vital that the candidates included in the group as first Constitutional Convention reflects the diverse preferences is at least 4% of the total experiences, backgrounds, views, beliefs and number of votes polled in favour of the aspirations of the Australian people. To that candidates in the election as first prefer- end, the appointment of non-parliamentary ences; delegates to the Convention should reflect the diversity of our nation. Furthermore, it is to be otherwise it is forfeited to the Commonwealth. hoped that all groups standing for election to (2) If the nomination fee was paid by a person the Convention will draw upon our diversity other than the candidate, the nomination fee when nominating candidates. In particular, and must be returned to the person who paid it, in light of the fact that the Constitutional or to a person authorised in writing by the Conventions of the 1890s which led to Feder- person who paid it. ation were composed entirely of male deleg- ates, it is to be hoped that all groupings will (3) In all other cases, the nomination fee must provide for the fair and equal representation of be returned to the candidate, or to a person women. authorised in writing by the candidate. (2) Clause 11, page 6 (lines 3 and 4), omit the (11) Clause 52, page 26 (lines 13 to 21), omit clause. paragraphs (c), (d) and (e), substitute: (3) Clause 13, page 7 (line 8), omit paragraph (c), (c) on Part A, the names of groups notified substitute: under section 29 (unless the request has been refused by the AEO) arranged in the (c) the day of the poll;(4) Page 7 (after line order determined under section 58; and 13), after clause 13, insert: (d) on Part B, the full names of candidates 13A Enrolment to be encouraged etc. arranged in the order determined under As soon as practicable after the commencement section 58; and of this Act, the Electoral Commissioner must (e) the material that would be required by take all reasonable steps to ensure that the Rolls subsections 55(1) and (2) to be printed on to be used for the purposes of the Act are the ballot-paper if the ballot-paper were reviewed and that eligible persons who are not being printed. enrolled are encouraged to enrol. (5) Clause 14, page 7 (line 17), omit "*closing". (12) Clause 54, page 27 (lines 6 to 9), omit paragraph (c), substitute: (6) Clause 16, page 8 (line 9), omit "*closing". (c) the names of each of the candidates are (7) Clause 29, page 14 (line 19), omit "*first to be printed opposite the name of the candidate", substitute "candidates". candidate’s group requested under section (8) Clause 34, page 17 (lines 4 to 6), omit sub- 29 if that request has not been refused clause (1), substitute: under section 31; and (1) A group, or an *ungrouped candidate, may (13) Clause 55, page 28 (lines 1 to 30), omit submit a statement under this Division for paragraphs (a) to (i), substitute: inclusion in the material to be made avail- the names of groups notified under section 29 able to electors. (unless the request has been refused by the (10) Page 22 (after line 5), after clause 41, AEO) arranged in the order determined under insert: section 58 are to be printed. Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5845

(14) Clause 55, page 28 (line 32) to page 29 (c) every public library in Australia; and (line 6), omit paragraphs (a), (b) and (c), (d) every post office in Australia. substitute: (2) The Electoral Commissioner must cause (a) the names of all candidates are to be such numbers of copies of the pamphlet of printed, with the names of candidates by candidate statements as the Electoral Com- whom requests have been made under missioner considers appropriate to be sent section 28 being printed in groups on the to any person or organisation who asks the ballot-paper in accordance with those AEO or a DRO for a copy or copies of the requests (unless the request has been pamphlet. refused by the AEO); and (21) Clause 66, page 37 (lines 1 to 12), omit the (b) the names of grouped candidates are to be clause. printed before the names of ungrouped (22) Clause 67, page 37 (lines 13 to 15), omit candidates; and the clause. (c) subject to paragraph (b), the order in (23) Clause 68, page 38 (line 3) to page 39 (line which the names of grouped and 3), omit the clause, substitute: ungrouped candidates are to be printed is the same as the order determined under 68 Certain provisions of CEA to apply section 58 for the purposes of section 54; In so far as is practicable, the following and provisions of the CEA shall be applied to the (d) the names of each of the ungrouped conduct of elections under this Act: candidates are to be printed opposite the (a) sections 182 to 184, 184A, 184B, 185, name the candidate requested under 185B, 185C, 186 to 195, 195A and 196 section 30 (if that request has not been to 200 (postal voting); refused under section 31); and (b) sections 200A to 200K, 201 and 202 (pre- (e) where similarity in the names of 2 or poll voting); more candidates is likely to cause confu- (c) section 203 (arrangements for polling); sion those names are to be arranged in (d) section 204 (substitute presiding officer); the same way, and with the same descrip- (e) section 205 (use of licensed premises as tion or addition, as they are arranged, polling booth); described or added to under paragraph 54(h); and (f) section 206 (separate voting compart- ments); (f) except as otherwise provided by the Electoral Commissioner, a square must be (g) section 207 (ballot-boxes); printed opposite the name of each candi- (h) section 211 (group voting tickets); date. (i) section 215 (ballot-papers to be initial- (15) Clause 57, page 29 (lines 16 to 20), omit led); the clause. (j) section 216 (group voting tickets to be (16) Clause 60, page 33 (lines 5 to 27), omit the displayed); clause. (k) section 217 (scrutineers at the polling); (17) Heading to Division 1, page 35 (lines 3 and (l) section 218 (provisions relating to scruti- 4), omit the heading, substitute: neers); Division 1—Distribution of candidate statements (m) section 220 (the polling); (18) Clause 62, page 35 (lines 5 to 12), omit the (n) section 222 (where electors may vote); clause. (o) section 223 (interpretation); (19) Clause 64, page 35 (line 16) to page 36 (p) sections 224 to 226, 226A and 227 (mo- (line 19), omit the clause. bile booths); (20) Clause 65, page 36 (lines 20 to 25), omit (q) section 228 (declaration votes); the clause, substitute: (r) section 229 (questions to be put to voter); 65 Issue of candidate statements (s) section 231 (right of elector to receive (1) The Electoral Commissioner must cause ballot-paper); copies of the pamphlet of candidate state- ments to be sent, by post or other means to: (t) section 232 (voters to be recorded); (a) the office of each DRO; and (u) section 233 (votes to be marked in pri- vate); (b) each office, whether in a parliamentary building or otherwise, of every Member (v) section 234 (assistance to certain voters); of the Commonwealth, a State or a Terri- (w) section 235 (provisional votes); tory Parliament; and (x) section 238 (spoilt ballot-papers); 5846 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

(y) sections 241 to 243 (adjournment of (a) produce all the ballot-papers received by polling); the DRO; and (z) section 245 (compulsory voting); (40) Clause 99, page 58 (lines 17 to 20), omit (za) sections 246 to 262 (polling in Antarcti- paragraph (e), substitute: ca). (e) arrange the unrejected ballot-papers so (24) Clause 69, page 39 (lines 7 to 18), omit scrutinised under the names of the respec- subclauses (2) and (3), substitute: tive groups or candidates (depending on whether the voter has completed Part A or (2) If the person chooses to vote on Part A of Part B of the ballot-paper), by placing in the ballot-paper, he or she must mark his or parcels: her vote on the ballot-paper by writing the number 1 in the square opposite the name (i) under the name of each group all the of one group and only one group. ballot-papers on which a vote is indicated for that group; and (3) If the person chooses to vote on Part B of the ballot-paper, he or she: (ii) under the name of each candidate all the ballot-papers on which a first preference (a) must mark his or her vote on the ballot- is indicated for that candidate; and paper by writing the number 1 in the (41) Clause 99, page 58 (lines 21 to 27), omit square opposite the name of the candidate paragraph (f), substitute: for whom the person votes as his or her first preference; and (f) count the votes given for each group and the first preference votes given for each candi- (b) must mark his or her vote on the ballot- date on such ballot-papers and *transmit the paper by writing the numbers 2, 3, 4 (and following information in an expeditious so on as the case requires) in the squares manner to the AEO: opposite the names of all the remaining candidates so as to indicate the order of (i) the number of votes given for each group; the person’s preference for them. and (25) Clause 70, page 39 (lines 22 to 24), omit (ii) the number of first preference votes given the clause. for each candidate; and (26) Clause 72, page 40 (line 23) to page 41 (iii) the total number of ballot-papers rejected (line 11), omit the clause. as informal; and (27) Clause 73, page 41 (line 12) to page 42 (42) Clause 99, page 59 (lines 16 and 17), omit (line 16), omit the clause. "determine the quota, transfer value or order, or identify the candidate", substitute (28) Part 6, page 43 (line 2) to page 51 (line 4), "or determine the quota, transfer value or omit the Part. order". (29) Clause 90, page 52 (lines 6 to 8), omit (43) Clause 100, page 69 (line 9), omit "candi- subclause (2). date", substitute "group". (30) Heading to Division 2, page 54 (line 2), (44) Clause 100, page 69 (line 10), omit "a first omit the heading, substitute: preference is indicated for that candidate", Division 2—The scrutiny processes substitute "a vote is indicated for that (31) Clause 94, page 54 (lines 3 to 11), omit the group". clause. (45) Clause 100, page 69 (lines 24 and 25), omit (32) Clause 95, page 54 (line 12) to page 57 subparagraph (g)(i), substitute: (line 14), omit the clause. (i) the number of votes given for each group on (33) Clause 96, page 57 (lines 15 to 17), omit ballot-papers referred to in paragraph (b); the clause. and (46) Clause 101, page 71 (lines 16 to 22), omit (34) Clause 97, page 57 (lines 18 to 21), omit the clause. the clause. (47) Clause 103, page 73 (lines 12 to 20), omit (35) Heading to Division 3, page 58 (line 2), subclause (5). omit the heading. (48) Clause 103, page 73 (line 25) to page 74 (36) Clause 98, page 58 (lines 3 to 5), omit the (line 13), omit paragraphs (6)(b) and (c), clause. substitute: (37) Clause 99, page 58 (line 6), omit "further". (b) a ballot-paper is taken to be Part B invalid (38) Clause 99, page 58 (line 7), omit "further". unless: (39) Clause 99, page 58 (lines 11 to 13), omit (i) it has a vote indicated on it for at least paragraphs (2)(a) and (b), substitute: one candidate; and Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5847

(ii) the same mark is not indicated for any Antarctic elector, and Antarctic Returning other candidate; and Officer. (c) for the purposes of paragraph (b) any mark- (60) Schedule 1, clause 1, page 126 (lines 1 to ing on a ballot-paper of a vote for a de- 5), omit the definition of Assistant Antarctic ceased candidate is to be ignored. Returning Officer. (49) Clause 105, page 75 (line 4), omit (61) Schedule 1, clause 1, page 126 (lines 15 and "*grouped candidate", substitute "group". 16), omit the definition of candidate num- (50) Clause 105, page 75 (line 6), omit ber. "candidate’s". (62) Schedule 1, clause 1, page 126 (lines 20 to (51) Clause 105, page 75 (lines 7 to 23), omit 22), omit the definition of certificate enve- subclauses (2) and (3). lope. (52) Clause 106, page 75 (line 24) to page 76 (63) Schedule 1, clause 1, page 126 (line 23), (line 26), omit the clause, substitute: definition of close of the poll, omit "clos- 106 Ballot-papers marked on Part B ing". (1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), if a (64) Schedule 1, clause 1, page 126 (lines 24 and ballot-paper has been marked on Part B, the 25), omit the definition of closing day. voter is, for the purposes of sections 99 and (65) Schedule 1, clause 1, page 128 (lines 26 and 100, taken to have expressed preferences for 27), omit the definition of preference the candidates as follows: square. (a) a first preference is taken to have been (66) Schedule 1, clause 1, page 129 (line 9), indicated for the candidate beside whose definition of scrutiny, omit "subsection name the number 1 has been written; 90(2)", substitute "Part 7". (b) a second preference is taken to have been (67) Schedule 1, clause 1, page 129 (lines 18 and indicated for the candidate beside whose 19), omit the definition of vote certificate. name the number 2 has been written; (68) Schedule 1, clause 1, page 129 (line 20), and so on. omit the definition of voting material (2) If the same number has been written beside the names of 2 or more candidates, no House of Representatives reasons for preference is taken to have been indicated disagreeing to Senate amendments 1 to 8 and for either or any of those candidates, nor for 10 to 68— any candidates against whose names higher Senate Amendment Number 1 numbers have been written. The Amendment proposes a preamble be included (3) For the purposes of this section, any mark- which specifies the role of the Convention and the ing on a ballot-paper of a preference for a appointment and election of delegates to the deceased candidate referred to in section Convention. The House of Representatives does not 108 is to be ignored. accept the Amendment, as it does not reflect the (53) Clause 108, page 77 (lines 9 to 13), omit purpose and scope of the Bill. paragraphs (a), (b) and (c), substitute: Senate Amendments Numbers 2-8 and 11-68 (a) of the inclusion on the ballot-paper or the *list of candidates of the name of the These Amendments focus on the method of voting deceased candidate; or for half of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention which will meet for 10 days in Decem- (b) of the marking of a preference opposite ber 1997 to consider the question of whether or not that name. Australia should become a republic. The Amend- (54) Clause 122, page 86 (line 19), omit ", being ments require that voting in the election be by a an officer other than an Antarctic officer,". compulsory attendance ballot, which will make (55) Clause 122, page 86 (line 23) to page 87 Australians who choose not to vote in the election (line 6), omit subclauses (2) and (3). for delegates liable to prosecution and add up to (56) Clause 131, page 95 (lines 17 to 21), omit $20 million to the cost. the clause. The Amendments also propose that the election be (57) Clause 132, page 96 (lines 1 to 6), omit the conducted along the lines of a Senate election. In clause. light of the large number of candidates which could contest this election (possibly exceeding 200-300 (58) Clause 134, page 96 (lines 11 to 17), omit candidates in New South Wales) a pure Senate the clause. "style" election would make it difficult for electors (59) Schedule 1, clause 1, page 125 (lines 13 to to vote for someone other than a group, and would 26), omit the definitions of Antarctica, extend the time needed to count the vote. 5848 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

Accordingly, the House of Representatives opposes but we have put forward a process to move these Amendments (Numbers 2-8 and 11-68). this debate along. We made that quite clear in Senate Amendment Number 10 1994—this is a policy we have had for three This Amendment provides that candidates’ $500 years—and we are attempting yet again to nomination fee should be returned if the candidate implement the policy that we went to the is elected or the candidate/candidate group receives people with in 1996. at least 4% of the total number of votes. Given the Government will be providing a tax deduction for Of course, the irony in this is that all the election expenses up to a limit of $1,000 to candi- opposition parties who run around the country dates, whether successful or not, the House of desperate to have Australia become a republic Representatives does not accept Amendment are the ones who have refused to allow this Number 10. debate to proceed by killing off the process The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Before put forward by the government. If the opposi- calling the parliamentary secretary to speak tion parties are serious about progressing this on this bill, I would draw the Senate’s atten- debate, then they should obviously allow this tion to the fact that, in order to consider the bill to pass on this third occasion. amendments disagreed to by the House of Representatives, senators will need to look at It does seem quite extraordinary to us that the statement I made on 24 June 1997, copies the opposition parties are deliberately sacrific- of which have been circulated in the chamber. ing the process to advance the debate on a republic which they so want on the altar, Senator MINCHIN (South Australia— frankly, of their obsession with compulsory Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) voting. There can be no other interpretation (5.41 p.m.)—I move: of what has occurred to date. I have to say That the committee does not insist upon its that, from the government’s point of view, we amendments to which the House of Representatives do regard the opposition parties as behaving has insisted on disagreeing. in a most extraordinary fashion on this matter. The government is presenting the Constitu- From the government’s point of view, it has tional Convention (Election) Bill 1997 to the been a history of backflips and double stand- Senate for what amounts to effectively the ards and hypocrisy. third time by way of this motion to the committee. In doing so, I think we are dem- We announced this electoral system back in onstrating our genuine sincerity in wanting to February. We said then in the Prime hold a constitutional convention. If we did not Minister’s statement the process by which we want to hold a constitutional convention, we proposed that delegates to the convention be would not have bothered to go through this elected. The Labor Party and the Democrats process today. We would simply have said, said at that stage that, while they did not like ‘The Senate has voted against it twice. Clear- the voting system, it was not their intention ly the Senate is not going to allow us to hold to block it and prevent the process occurring. a constitutional convention. We will abandon Senator Margetts interjecting— the idea.’ Nevertheless, we will give the Senator MINCHIN—You said that you Senate another opportunity to allow a consti- would not prevent the government’s an- tutional convention to proceed by effectively nounced proposals for a voluntary postal re-presenting it to the Senate for a third time ballot from proceeding. Mr Beazley made that today. quite clear and, I believe, the Leader of the We are committed to advancing the debate Democrats (Senator Kernot) made that quite on the republic, despite the squeals from those clear at the time. Of course, what appears to opposite. The way in which we proposed this have happened is that the Left of the Labor to the Australian people, which they endorsed, Party, sitting together in the chamber at the was to hold a constitutional convention. It is moment, rolled the Labor leader, Mr Beazley, perfectly true that the coalition government is on this. They forced a complete backflip by not committed, like the other parties, to demanding of the Labor Party outright oppo- Australia becoming a republic. On that basis, sition to this proposal. It is something that we we need not have bothered with the process, do not really understand, given their passion Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5849 for the Australian republic. It does appear that back in 1989 brought into this parliament a it is absolutely founded upon a refusal to proposal to establish the Aboriginal and allow the government to have a voluntary Torres Strait Islander Commission, and postal ballot to elect delegates. That is the specifically provided in that bill that voting fundamental objection. for the elections within ATSIC would be by I would like to draw the Senate’s attention a voluntary vote. I was not here at the time to the editorial of the Adelaide Advertiser but I presume, in the event that it passed, that today—a paper out of the News Ltd stable, it was supported by the Democrats. This which is completely committed to an Austral- chamber and this parliament have, when it ian republic. What we are talking about here was run by the Labor Party, voted for, sup- is the opposition parties refusing to allow this ported, introduced and authorised voluntary whole process to go forward because of this voting in national elections: to wit, elections fundamental principle—they say—of not to ATSIC. allowing a voluntary postal ballot. As the You had seven years to change that. You Advertiser said, it is not the government did not make any move to change away from which is going to thwart the event but a voluntary voting for ATSIC elections. If combined opposition vote. It went on to say: voluntary voting is all right for the body that The general election was not a referendum on a you set up to represent Aboriginal Austral- republic or even a convention, though Mr Howard ians, and which controls a budget of nearly $1 did have a policy for one. It was the bestowal of a billion, why is it not all right for Australians, mandate for a limited period on the coalition in voting to elect delegates to a national parties. Surely if an elected government wants to convention which will meet for 10 days, to call a meeting it has the right to set the rules? have voluntary voting? It is an utterly ridicu- Whether people go is then their own concern. But lous position that you are putting forward. to seek to change the rules is plain arrogant. As I have said many times, the Labor Party I concur with the Adelaide Advertiser that the itself, through its industrial wing, presides Senate is displaying the most extraordinary over voluntary postal voting for trade union arrogance in saying to the government of the elections. Many of the Labor Party members day, which wishes to hold a convention, that in this parliament are, of course, the products the Senate, in its petulant manner, will not of trade union officialdom, to which they tolerate the rules which the government have came through voluntary postal voting. set which are perfectly reasonable. As my colleague Senator Abetz has remind- Those rules have been endorsed by the only ed the nation, the Leader of the Democrats in independent electoral commentators that we this parliament, Senator Cheryl Kernot, is have. The Electoral Reform Society and the elected by a voluntary postal ballot, to cap off Proportional Representation Society have both the hypocrisy. The leader of the party that has endorsed the rules that we have established— the swing vote in this chamber, which can not these partisan, biased opposition senators. decide whether propositions become law or A journalist, of course, that I think even you not, is elected by a voluntary postal ballot. might respect, the Australian Financial But delegates to attend a convention to Review’s, Michelle Grattan, said in her col- discuss the question of whether Australia umn on 19 June about this whole issue: should become a republic cannot be elected But Labor’s (and the minor parties) argument that by a voluntary postal ballot. voting for the republic convention should be compulsory? This, surely, is nonsense. Your opposition to this bill is so disingenu- ous that it is clear to us that you are simply I agree entirely with Michelle Grattan about determined to use whatever means you can— the opposition’s position on this thing. no matter how ridiculous and no matter how I have repeatedly stated, and I think it is ill-founded—to shatter our proposal for a fair to say this, that the position of the Labor constitutional convention. You are prepared Party and the Democrats on this question is to use any means at your disposal to prevent entirely hypocritical. The Labor government a constitutional convention proceeding. The 5850 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

Senate is insisting to the government that this million to $20 million more. Of course that ballot can only proceed if it is a compulsory figure will fluctuate because it will depend on attendance ballot. As we have repeatedly said, how many people choose not to vote. that is not acceptable to the government. Senator Bolkus—They’re bodgie figures. We are not prepared to allow the Senate to You are a disgrace—an incompetent, devious set absolutely unreasonable rules for the disgrace. You put up bodgie figures all the election of delegates to this convention. We time. are not prepared, as a coalition government, Senator MINCHIN—Therefore, the costs to compel Australians to vote in this election of prosecuting Australians who do not vote is of delegates to attend a convention. That is unlimited, Senator Bolkus, so you do not simply not consistent with our view of the know what it is going to cost. It could cost world and we are not prepared to accept that more than $20 million if Australians exercise proposition. As I have repeated many times, the right not to vote. We have committed $35 the proposition put forward by the Senate for million to this process. a compulsory attendance ballot has been estimated by the AEC to add to the cost of Senator Heffernan—I raise a point of the whole process an amount of somewhere order, Mr Temporary Chairman. I think the around $15 million, up to possibly $20 description by Senator Bolkus of the parlia- million—more than the government’s propo- mentary secretary as devious is unparliamen- sal. tary and should be withdrawn. Senator Bolkus—That is rubbish and you The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN—I ask know it. Senator Bolkus to withdraw that statement. Senator MINCHIN—It is not rubbish, Senator Bolkus—I used three adjectives: Senator Bolkus. There is approximately $13 incompetent, devious and a disgrace. If to $14 million more for the attendance ballot, Senator Heffernan is only concerned about and up to $4 million extra for it to be com- one of them, I withdraw it. pulsory. You have had those figures. You Senator MINCHIN—Again I will ignore know they are true. the ridiculous comments coming from the Senator Bolkus—You have the figures too opposition. The government has committed and you know better than that. You are lying $35 million to the process of election. We to the public. think that is a reasonable commitment to the process of advancing the debate. We have got The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Sena- a lot of very important projects that we want tor Chapman)—Order! Senator Bolkus, to spend money on, but we are laying our withdraw that comment. money on the line. We are saying, ‘Yes, we Senator Bolkus—I made the assertion that are prepared to spend $35 million to allow he is lying because he knows full well what Australians to elect delegates to this conven- the figures are. He may not be lying, but he tion. We have budgeted up to $5 million to is not telling the truth. hold the convention itself and yet you, the opposition parties, are not prepared to accept The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN—You that. You are insisting on us spending a whole should withdraw unconditionally, Senator lot more money for your compulsory attend- Bolkus. I ask you to do so. ance ballot, something that is just unaccept- Senator Bolkus—I withdraw the claim that able to the government.’ We do not think we he is lying, but I say he is not telling the are being unreasonable; the Senate is being truth. I can do that. utterly unreasonable in refusing to allow it to Senator MINCHIN—I have little regard proceed on the sensible basis which we have for the comments or views of Senator Bolkus proposed. at any time, so I will ignore that comment. We do want this convention to proceed. The costs have been determined by the AEC, That is why we have reintroduced the bill. As not by us, and they amount to some $15 I said at the start, we could have simply said, Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5851

‘You’ve voted against it twice’ and have supported by both sides of politics—when the forgotten the whole process. We want a politics are in fact inclusive. convention. It is before you again. We ask It is the government which has sought to you to support it. deliberately divide on this issue. They have The Democrats have floated a proposal for asked the Labor Party and all other parties a Senate committee to look into this question. and Independents in this place to make what My initial reaction to that is that it really is a they know is for them an unacceptable choice. pretty pathetic alternative to what the govern- They want us to choose between progressing ment has put before the people. We are a republic and support for compulsory proposing a national election of delegates voting. We do not want to choose between which will involve every Australian. They those two issues; we do not need to choose will receive material from the government between them. We are not prepared to play setting out the pros and cons of change. your silly, divisive game, Senator Minchin. Material supplied by both sides of this debate An increasing number of your backbench are will go to every household. They will have getting tired of your silly, divisive game. their chance to vote for delegates representing Accordingly, we will continue to support a both sides of this debate. We will have 152 compulsory ballot for the election of delegates people elected from across Australia. All the to the People’s Convention. If the government state governments and oppositions will be is not prepared to support a voting system represented. that has served this nation well since 1924, it The convention is a magnificent opportunity can explain that decision to the Australian for a national debate of this issue. Instead, people. you just want a Senate committee to run Senator Minchin quotes from the Adelaide around the country. The public will laugh at Advertiser News Ltd newspaper. I will quote that—another committee of politicians just to you from the national News Ltd news- running around the country. That is not an paper, Senator Minchin, what they said about alternative to what we are presenting. It is a your devious little games: joke. I therefore ask you to support this bill . . . the government is beginning to look as if it and not insist on your amendments. fears the march of history. Senator BOLKUS (South Australia) (5.54 They went on to say: p.m.)—The government has said that the Mr Howard did not campaign on the proposition reason the Constitutional Convention (Elec- that the selection of delegates to the people’s tion) Bill 1997is back is that it wants to give convention should be used as a pilot for voluntary Labor, minor parties and Independents in this postal ballots. place one last opportunity to support the They said a lot actually. I have only four Constitutional Convention. In doing so, short grabs here. They said: Senator Minchin has said again today that if Equally, the Government has made no case for the we fail to support this bill the convention will use of voluntary postal ballots for testing the waters not proceed. Let us put aside for one moment on matters of ant importance. the sheer arrogance of Senator Minchin’s That is News Ltd’s points 1, 2 and 3. The statement—a statement which shows very fourth point was in the editorial yesterday: clearly that the government is not serious . . . the suspicion must be that the government is about a republic, it is not serious about not so much interested in curbing the cost of the engaging in a constructive and bipartisan convention vote but in limiting the scope for a approach to constitutional reform, and it is not majority of electors overall to endorse a republic. serious about approaching this issue in the We know that that has been your motivation way that it should be. right from the start. The issue of the republic The history of our constitution has shown will not go away, Senator Minchin. Shortly, time and time again that proposals for reform with the Democrats and others in this place, succeed only when those proposals and the we will be initiating resolutions to establish processes by which they are implemented are either a joint select committee or Senate 5852 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 committee to examine various models for an ian Democrats would do a backflip and Australian republic. Of course that committee support the convention bill. In that context, will draw on a considerable body of expertise Senator Abetz said that the passage of the bill and thought on issues surrounding the Aus- would be: tralian republic. . . . a major boost to trialling voluntary voting on The republic issue is one that should be a national basis. handed over to the Australian people. In order Senator Kernot—Exposed. to do so, the committee we propose will, Senator BOLKUS—Exposed all right, well through a series of hearings, forums and and truly exposed. Not surprisingly, Senator public meetings, take the issue of the republic Minchin quickly carpeted Senator Abetz and to the Australian people across Australia. said that Senator Abetz was not speaking for In advancing these proposals it is fair to put the government. You can look at Senator on record and to appreciate the work that has Abetz’s comments in one of two ways. One been done by Senators Kernot, Harradine, is that Senator Abetz was a fool for admitting Margetts and Brown. We have had discus- what the government had repeatedly sought to sions and will continue to have discussions, deny in this debate—namely, that this bill was and we will make sure that the overwhelming a Trojan horse for voluntary voting. If that is majority of Australians will be able to have the true interpretation of Senator Abetz’s a fair say in a fair process for a fair outcome. comments, then he has only confirmed our The 70 per cent of Australians who support worst fears about the bill. He has shown that a republic will not be subverted by your the government is not serious about this bill devious little games. or the republic and that it is more interested Senator Minchin—It is 49 per cent in your in some ideological pursuit of voluntary own Australian. voting—an idea which 70 per cent of Austral- ians oppose. Senator BOLKUS—It is much more than that, and you know it. So the choice will not The alternative view is that Senator Abetz, be ours; it will be the government’s. With most likely in collusion with Senator Minchin, these resolutions it will be up to the govern- knew exactly what he was doing. He knew ment to decide whether to participate in the that his comments would force any non- committee process and help to advance the government senators who were considering discussion on a republic. We hope you do. changing their minds to oppose the bill. If that was his intent, then he and the govern- A very early decision you will have to ment have, once again, shown their lack of make will be whether to support the establish- commitment to the republic and to the con- ment of a joint select committee or to let the vention. Senate proceed with a Senate committee. If you are serious about debating the republic, Senator Minchin—What commitment to a you will support the establishment of a joint republic? select committee. If you are not, we will have Senator BOLKUS—Either way, you have to proceed with a motion of which notice has shown what we have said all along, Senator already been given by Senator Kernot to Minchin, that this charade has been nothing establish a Senate committee to ensure that more than an attempt to bury the republic and the people do have an input. to introduce voluntary voting. On either There are other matters that I would like to ground, you, Senator Abetz and the govern- discuss at this stage—all of which surround ment stand condemned. Of course, Senator what I must call the government’s incompe- Abetz may come in here and explain his tence in the handling of this bill. The first and actions, but I suspect he will not do that and, most important is the remarkable contribution if he does, we will not know his motive. made by Senator Abetz to this debate. Sena- The second matter I want to discuss is why tors may recall that on Monday there was we are debating this bill this week. What the some unfounded speculation that the Austral- government has refused to admit is that the Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5853 reason why the House voted on the bill on have contrived a bill which you hoped would Monday night and why we are voting on it end our republican dream, not bring it closer, today is that the government’s so-called a vehicle for burial, rather than to progress master technician, the man who has all the the issue. Senator Minchin, it is not going to high-profile jobs, Senator Minchin, made a happen. You have claimed you have a man- mistake. He forgot to return the Senate’s date to elect the delegates to the convention message on this bill to the House at the end in any way that you want, but you do not of last sitting. The effect of that mistake was have a mandate to do so contrary to the will that the time period required by section 57 of of some 70 per cent of the Australian public the constitution between the first and second who have made a decision as to whether or rejections of a bill by the Senate only started not they support voluntary voting. You con- to run two days ago when the House insisted tinue to grossly overstate the cost of holding on its amendments. But worse than making a compulsory ballot. Your figures have been that mistake, Senator Minchin, your pathetic dodgy from the start but, like Goebbels, you attempt to cover it up compounded the felony. continue the big lie. And with that big lie, we In your press release issued last Friday you saw the Prime Minister on the weekend said: running the same line—$20 million differ- While there is no indication that the Senate is ence. likely to change its position on the Bill, it is the Government’s view that the issue should be finally The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Sena- resolved early in this session. tor Chapman)—Order! Senator Bolkus, ...... please withdraw that reflection. If the Senate again insists on its amendments to the Senator BOLKUS—Which one? Bill, then the Constitutional Convention cannot be held in this term of Government. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN—You Despite your comments, it is interesting to know which one, Senator Bolkus. note that the three-month gap required by Senator BOLKUS—I am sure mention of section 57 of the constitution for a double Goebbels has been acceptable conduct in this dissolution trigger will now be completed in chamber. It is on the record. I do not know the last sitting week of the current session. In why you are asking me to withdraw it now, other words, the government still has the but I withdraw it. opportunity to use this bill as a double disso- lution trigger, as they have repeatedly threat- The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN— ened to do, before the end of the year. Of Senator Bolkus, the particular issue which I course, Senator Minchin says, ‘We were never raise is your assertion that Senator Minchin is going to use it as a double dissolution trig- continuing the big lie. ger.’ But what did the Treasurer say on the Senator BOLKUS—I withdraw that as Sunday program? He clearly left open the well, if you really want to be tetchy. What we issue as to whether this bill could be used for have here, though, is a lie on the discrepancy a double dissolution. He said: between the two alternatives. You have The only way a double dissolution trigger can come promised to give Australians a heavy dose of about is if Labor rejects legislation. democracy and to entrench division you have Forget about the other parties in the Senate; sought the most devious way to produce and it is just Labor as far as he is concerned. He conduct a process for the election of a con- continued: vention and a republic. This is not the last Now, we have a policy which we took to the chance for the Senate, for anyone who does Australian people last year for a constitutional not agree with the government or for the convention this year. The legislation’s in the republic. It is the last chance to elect fairly a Senate. We want the convention. people’s convention. If the government Either you are not being honest or the Treas- supports our amendments to the bill, then the urer is not being honest. It is up to the public people’s convention can go ahead this year in to work that out in a very hard field. You December, as promised. Just keep that in 5854 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 mind. It does not take more than six or seven Senator KERNOT (Queensland—Leader weeks to run a ballot. of the Australian Democrats) (6.07 p.m.)— Well we might laugh—and there is an awful You could still have this convention this lot of irony about that debate, that is so year if you wanted to. In doing so, you could true—but the government’s choice in bringing keep faith with your election promise and the Constitutional Convention (Election) Bill with the Australian people. Alternatively, you back to the Senate for the second time, in my will be given the opportunity soon to support view and in the Democrats’ view, has abso- our model for a joint parliamentary commit- lutely nothing to do with their passionately tee, but if you refuse both of these, then wanting to have a constitutional convention; through a Senate committee at least this issue it has everything to do with the beginning of will be kept alive. another deliberate government campaign to The republic issue is bigger than today’s beat up the mythology of Senate obstruc- vote, it is bigger than the government’s tionism. That is what it is about. legislation, it is bigger than any party in this This has nothing to do with the government place. It will continue and either the govern- wanting to have a convention; it has every- ment can confront the republic in a fair and thing to do with the very immature advice the reasonable way or it can take its tricky and Prime Minister (Mr Howard) has been given devious approach and proceed down that road. over the break to rescue his failing leadership. I think the Australian did get it right yes- This was summed up by an article by Hugh terday when they said what we are seeing Mackay in the Weekend Australian of 19 and here is ‘the government beginning to look as 20 July, which says: if it fears the march of history’. This week’s Newspoll findings suggest that the Senator Minchin—Ha! Prime Minister has suffered an alarming slump in public esteem. Why? Senator BOLKUS—Senator Minchin, you That is what this is about. This is about the can laugh. I am sure that when you went to advice that the Prime Minister has been given the meeting of the uglies two weeks ago and to rescue his leadership by being seen to take told them what a great job you are doing on the Senate. I recall reading that advice in burying native title you also told them that the break. Paul Kelly, writing in the Weekend you were in charge of burying the republic. Australian, said: They were all very proud of you. They stood up and cheered and saluted you—I’ll bet they Howard should keep calling the Senate’s bluff and force either a series of Senate retreats (which did. The reality is you are a minority in your depict his own strength) or, if the Senate holds, own party. State leader after state leader secure his reforms at a post-election joint sitting, wants to see some constructive progressive inevitably a grand event. leadership on this. But it is you, Mr Howard Laurie Oakes in the Bulletin of 29 July under and Mr Morris, all the Prime Minister’s men, the heading ‘Political circus in search of a sitting in the bunker of The Lodge, whenever strongman’ again quotes the same story he gets there—at Kirribilli, most likely—or in around the gallery. It says: the bottom of this Parliament House, not looking at the tide of history— Advisers . . . will be telling him . . . that from now on, he should be uncompromising with the Senate; Senator Minchin—The tide of history that he should bowl everything up to them, and not swept you right out. budge an inch. He needs to call the Senate’s bluff ....Iftheopposition parties in the Senate do not Senator BOLKUS—It took 13 years to do back down, Howard will at least have been seen to so. It may not take more than two or three take them on. years to knock you off, particularly, as has That is what this is about. The campaign is increasingly been the case, the Australian beginning. Biffo No. 1 is the convention, public are seeing your government as a biffo No. 2 is the unfair dismissal law debate government that cannot constructively run any coming up and biffo No. 3 is native title. It is issue at all. You will be hung on this. so transparent, Senator Minchin. Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5855

The only problem is Australians do not New Zealand election campaigns. You have actually believe that this self-imposed virility been very quick to leap into print to point out test and your criterion of macho aggression the merits of voluntary voting in all of those and taking on the Senate are the most import- and, in some cases, I suppose, to misrepresent ant measure of leadership in this country. voter turnout. They do not agree with you. They will see You said this morning on ABC radio that through this transparent little campaign. the Senate would need to vote on changes to Senator Bolkus quoted from the Australian the electoral act: ‘Just let it through this once editorial of 26 August. Of course, Senator and, really, the wider electoral act is protected Minchin only quoted selectively from the because it has to get through the Senate.’ I Adelaide Advertiser, his home-town paper. am afraid that one of the problems with We all know what campaigns it prefers to attempting to persuade us to that view is that, run. A June Australian editorial said: to put it delicately, the state of play in rela- The government is clearly wrong to use the con- tion to the Senate numbers at this moment, in vention to experiment with voluntary voting. The the Democrats’ view, means that the merits of Parliamentary Secretary responsible for the republi- arguments for or against the proposition are can convention, Nick Minchin, an ardent espouser not the only determinant of the outcome of of voluntary voting, stresses it is a one-off proposi- how the Senate might vote. So do not ask us tion. to be reassured by your saying, ‘Don’t worry, The obvious question is: why do it at all? it has to go to a vote of the Senate.’ Good question. That was June, but yesterday I noticed that you came in swinging with the Australian editorial said: the same old Senate obstructionism lines this Mr Howard did not campaign on the proposition morning. I heard you on both ABC interviews that the selection of delegates to the people’s and I counted the number of times and said convention should be used as a pilot for voluntary to myself, ‘The campaign’s beginning; this is postal ballots. biffo No. 1 back on the agenda today.’ When- Equally, the government has made no case for ever things start to look a little bit shaky for the use of voluntary postal ballots for testing you lot, whenever the failure of your econom- the waters on matters of national importance. ic policies are exposed or whenever we have That is the significance. This is a very import- another debate on unemployment where ant matter, despite all the other nonsense we everybody says, ‘We don’t want more labour hear in here about public interest and national market deregulation,’ what do you fall back interest. The shape of our government for the on? Senate obstructionism. next century is quite clearly one of the most It was very disappointing that you ruled out important issues facing this country. Senator Bob Brown’s plebiscite offer. You Senator Minchin, you are determined to put said that it was an unreasonable demand for this little poisoned pill of voluntary voting in a plebiscite to be held at the next election. there because you do not want the shape of You said, ‘My goodness, this will be three the government in this next century to be national votes in the space of 12 months!’ anything like a republic. That is what this is Obviously, you are inferring that Australians all about. We do not believe you want a are not capable of doing that, let alone the convention. We do not believe you want a fact that Americans can cope with 15 or 16 republic. What is more, we do not believe votes simultaneously. your disingenuous little assertion on the radio There has been a tremendous amount of this morning that ‘this is no Trojan Horse’. goodwill in here and in our meetings on this Goodness me, this bill is no Trojan Horse for matter in recent days. We have been trying to voluntary voting! Senator Abetz has already provide an alternative forum so that the blown your cover on that one. impetus for national debate on our nation’s From the record, we also know of the future is not lost. I expected you to disparage passionate endorsements for voluntary voting our proposal as it stands at the moment—as you have given during past American and a notice of motion today. 5856 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

It is not just another Senate committee— can in the way of such a move. Then it will and let us not say that about Senate commit- be the job of this committee to recommend to tees anyway. We know that there are some the Senate, based on the evidence they have that have had a fantastic impact on the legis- received, a form of question or questions to lative history of this country. It is not, as you be put to the Australian people at a referen- say, just another Senate committee. This is a dum on this issue. committee which has the express responsibili- That is what we want, is it not? Is that not ty of facilitating the staging of a national what we really want to come out of the debate, utilising the existing mechanisms of debate, even out of your convention? But you the Senate. are requiring some kind of consensus to be As Senator Bolkus explained, individuals reached and then you are going to give us the considered to have some expertise on this wonderfully grand gesture of a vote before the issue, irrespective of whether they are for or end of the century. Thank you very much for against the status quo, are invited to express that. their views at a forum to be determined by When I think about being offered a vote this committee. We think one of the options before the end of the century, I say to myself for consideration ought to be, as has been that I hope to goodness it is before the Olym- done in other parliaments, particularly in the pics Games because I do not relish the state parliament of New South Wales, that thought of the Queen or the Prime Minister, people address the Senate from a lectern at John Howard, being the face of Australia for the front. They can actually say, ‘These are the rest of world in opening the Olympic my views,’ and not necessarily be subject to Games. I think that is a fantastic reason for cross-examination. I think the important thing not putting obstacles in the way of the repub- is that their ideas for a possible model for an lican debate. Australian republic can then form the frame- Senator Boswell—The only obstacle is the work within which a series of public hearings one you are putting in the way, as far as I can can be staged. see. We can take this debate, as Senator Bolkus Senator KERNOT—Senator Boswell, you said, to every corner of the continent—that is, speak again. The important issue to come into the cities and the regional centres—and back to is the timing. Why has the govern- we can ask as many Australians as possible, ment brought this back today? Why have they not just a select few, what they really think brought it back at all? Senator Minchin, about the issues. I think the public hearings wearing his other hat, is expecting the native process could be informative for those indi- title debate to happen in the Senate in Decem- viduals confused about the alternatives avail- ber. That is at a time when we were not able. It could spell out the implications of meant to be sitting. those alternatives. I think it could result in a The question is: why have you brought it much better indication of the Australian mood back at a time when it is not a trigger. I think than any small sample from a Newspoll that is wise enough for you. It is not the could. motive. It is not a reason that you have given I think there is one fundamental difference all of us. It is not because you want a conven- between the proposal that we in the non- tion. Nobody believes you. You say the issue government parties are trying to work up to of voluntary voting is not important. I say a put to the Australian people and through the convention should not be held hostage. You Senate and the government’s talkfest. We do should have been willing to consider a com- not have questionable motives on this. We are promise instead of saying the Senate is block- not trying to stick a poisoned pill in the ing your legislation. That is not true. The middle of it. This is a very simple proposi- Senate has amended your legislation. It is tion. We want to facilitate the move to a your government that has been unwilling to referendum. We are not seeking dishonestly walk away and say, ‘Is it not possible that we to put obstacles whenever and wherever we could break the nexus, that we could break Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5857 the hostage relationship between the method One of the other issues was what republican of voting and the outcome—the convention?’ models should be put to the voter. That could You were not willing to do that. Your govern- be a range of things; I guess that issue is as ment has not been willing to do that and that wide as it is long. It is not for the cabinet to is what needs to be injected into consideration decide what the Constitutional Convention in this debate. interprets that as. I suggest that the Constitu- I regret that we may not have a convention, tional Convention might look at the various that we may not be able to go forward and elements of constitutional change that might take the republican debate forward via that be appropriate to go with any discussion mechanism. But I agree with Senator Bolkus about whether or not Australia progresses to that you should not be forcing the Senate to a republic. choose between the principle of compulsory At that time Senator Minchin also said, voting, which has underpinned our democracy ‘Well, no, that’s not the role of the Constitu- for so long in this country, and the opportuni- tional Convention.’ So, no, the government ty to have a discussion on the nature of a does not expect the Constitutional Convention republic in this country. I say shame on your to look at the models that should be put to the government for behaving so immaturely. I voters of Australia; that is, the government also come to my starting point: this is not does not expect it to look at what kinds of about your wanting to have a convention; this constitutional changes should attend any is the first phase of your next campaign to proposed changes. They said that the govern- build up the mythology of Senate obstruction- ment will make decisions on the time frame ism. and that the Constitutional Convention would Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) not be empowered or somehow the govern- (6.20 p.m.)—During the debate that we had ment would not be paying attention to them the last time we were debating this legislation if they looked at any alternative models; that some points became very clear. Those points is, if they looked at any wider constitutional were that the preamble, which stated the changes. That, as far as I can see, would fit framework for the constitution convention, into what would be the model for a change. was not actually what the government had in Let us face it: it is called a constitutional mind for the constitutional convention to convention, not a ‘Would you like to be a debate and have an influence over. republic convention?’ It is called a constitu- I asked questions in relation to the time tional convention. What is left? What is left frame. What if the Constitutional Convention is whether the present constitution should be were to say, ‘We would like to have an changed. Guess what? The Prime Minister indicative plebiscite earlier?’ The response said, ‘If there is a consensus.’ It has been set from the government—and Senator Minchin up so there cannot possibly be a consensus. might respond to this—was, ‘We will decide A consensus is a bringing together in one when and if that plebiscite takes place.’ mind. It is a process that means working Basically, the Constitutional Convention was together to a common end, and that those given no power to actually make that deci- people who have a different view are prepared sion. One of the three points in the preamble, to step back. It is not designed to do that. and a very important one, to the Constitution- That is three out of three—you have batted al Convention—that is, the time frame and out. appropriate circumstances for considering It is not as if what the Senate is being change—the government clearly stated it had asked to do is vote on a partially flawed not considered doing. They were going to model of a constitutional convention. What make the decisions when they were good and came out in the debate is that the model is ready. One out of three points the government almost totally flawed. Added to that is the had no intention at all of honouring. So the very real risk that, in supporting the convention was not expected to do what it government’s poor offer to the people of was listed to do. Australia, the Senate would potentially be 5858 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 used as a vehicle for pushing other changes government, perhaps, and for other groups to to the voting system. It is not just about the have meetings and workshops to talk about voting system; it is also about whether or not the issue of what kind of Australia they would women will be fairly represented. It is about like in the next century, what kind of consti- a whole lot of issues within the Constitutional tutional basis they think is appropriate for Convention which certainly make it highly Australia in the next century and how they flawed. want to relate to their head of state. When it comes to money, if this convention To me, the minimalist approach of simply were to take place you would have to say that changing the head of state and then hoping that amount of money should be spent care- that the rest will all turn out okay is a flawed fully. You would not put a constitutional process. I believe if we have got the chance convention together and then maybe at some to do it, we should do it right. It is extremely stage if another government came through—or tempting not to vote on this issue at all, even the same government rethought the because then the government would be left situation and realised that it was acting with a constitutional convention which clearly against the interests of the community—think, they do not want. That would mean that they ‘We’d better do it better this time.’ What then would have to deal with the public’s response could we use to say, ‘Let’s do it properly this when, inevitably, they could not totally time’? You would say, ‘Oh, we spent $35 control the process. But to lead such an plus million on it before; therefore we can important issue into such a flawed process is only do it the once.’ still a problem that I have difficulty dealing There are many people I know within the with. I would have to say that the ends that wider community who have varying views on the government has presented do not justify this issue. I know within the Greens network the shoddy means that they are presenting to there are people who believe that the conven- the Senate in order to achieve an end which tion should be progressed. But I also know is uncertain. Quite clearly—Senator Brown there are many more people within the net- knows this—the government has no real work that I speak to who, on the issue of how intention of advancing the process. we are going to advance the constitution of So all three proposals for the forum have Australia—that is, our democratic process— turned out to be flawed. The government has believe that if there is one issue where the no intention of acting on any outcomes on means is at least as important as the end, it is any one of those three proposals. Therefore, how you come to the decisions about your at this stage it may well be better for us to go constitution. How can you say, ‘Let’s just be back to the community. The community can undemocratic,’ and hope that the process will kick the proverbial rear end of the govern- turn out to be representative of people’s ment so that they get it right and join with the views? rest of the community in taking this issue I can understand those in the republican further and debating it further. movement who might like to progress this The Senate committee by itself, obviously, further or who believe that this is the way to is no exchange for a full and properly funded progress it. I have a difficulty with those process of consultation, but it would open the people in the republican movement who process up to more of the community than believe that part of this process is to control would currently be the situation with both the the debate to stop it from widening out. I also election and the selection process that is believe, however, that this is an opportunity; under way. It is my opinion it is not enough. instead of being rushed into a flawed mickey In order to work, it will also have to be mouse process which is, by its process, associated with a lot more involvement within undemocratic, now is the opportunity for the the community of sharing ideas, empowering community to claim back the process. other people through information and provid- It is possible for people across Australia to ing the way forward. I really hope that that have meetings, to have workshops; for local will happen. Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5859

I also hope that the republican movement only in the Australian community but also will open that process to bring in the excite- throughout the world. We have in Australia ment of those people who really do think that the best electoral system in the world. The we have to not only change the head of state cornerstone of it is compulsory attendance in Australia but also that we should look at ballots. what kind of Australia is appropriate in terms We see belligerent posturings from Senator of such things as human rights, ecological Minchin on this bill—that is when he takes sustainability as a right of citizenship and the time out from organising the extreme right rights of indigenous people in Australia. wing Liberal Party faction in the New South We have this immense opportunity to talk Wales— about those kinds of issues. We have this Senator Minchin—Mainstream! immense opportunity to talk about the roles of states, including the revenue powers of Senator FAULKNER—It is called the states and local and federal government. We mainstream, is it, Senator Minchin? No should not waste this opportunity. Therefore, wonder you laugh because you do not believe we should all open out the process to make it and no-one else does. It is only you and sure that it is inclusive and that the maximum Lyenko Urbanchich who cop that. participation means that the outcome is Senator Minchin—Never met him. worthy of Australia and Australia’s future. Senator FAULKNER—Never met him? Senator FAULKNER (New South Wales— Well, he was at the meeting. Of course, it was Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (6.31 not really a meeting, was it? It was just a p.m.)—I begin my contribution on the Consti- family gathering. That is right—it was a tutional Convention (Election) Bill 1997 by family gathering. I forgot. There you were up reaffirming the fundamental position of the in New South Wales not organising a new Labor Party. We are absolutely committed to extreme right wing faction but involved in a the system of compulsory voting that has family gathering. The only problem is that no- served this country so well. Any move away one’s family was there, including Senator from the system will be absolutely opposed Minchin’s. It is only his political family, the by us, despite whatever threats the Prime broad church of the extreme right wing of the Minister (Mr Howard) and his cronies might New South Wales division of the Liberal wish to hold over us. Party. The opposition is fervently committed to a When you take time off from your family republic and an Australian head of state. We gatherings, what you are saying is you will also strongly believe that the best way to can the constitutional convention if we, the achieve a republic is via a sustained and Labor Party, do not back down on our amend- rational debate by all Australians leading to ments. We will not, because our amendments an indicative plebiscite and, ultimately, a are designed to preserve the democratic referendum. We have said all along that the traditions of this nation. It is the best electoral government’s proposal for a constitutional system in the world. convention is a political exercise—an un- The last time we were here debating this necessary and ill-conceived political exercise. legislation I acknowledged, generously, that The way the government has managed and the holding of the constitutional convention handled this legislation really demonstrates was a Howard pre-election pledge. I did say what a paltry political exercise it really is. that it was an unusual pledge because it was It is the tried and true Liberal Party tech- one of the few that Mr Howard had made that nique of the sugar coated poison pill. They he intended to honour. But, of course, like so have tried yet again to blackmail the Senate many of Mr Howard’s promises, it is one that into supporting the backdoor introduction of he was really ready to ditch once the going a voluntary system of voting—a perversion of got tough. He is now backing away from the the democratic process; a perversion of the constitutional convention with a simple threat: electoral system that has found support not he will not hold it unless the Senate backs 5860 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 down on its position of principle and compro- to say, Mr Howard and Senator Minchin’s mises on the issue of a voluntary postal real agenda is clear: they do not want a ballot. convention. They do not want a republic. The proposals in this bill include a massive They have tried to spike this convention with change from compulsory to voluntary voting, their electoral experiments in the knowledge holding a postal ballot, not an attendance that the Senate would not be likely to support ballot, and a change to optional and preferen- them. Of course, the underhand way that they tial voting, all of which I believe are of great have manipulated this legislative process is significance to the Australian electorate. But proof of their commitment to changing not one of them was ever canvassed by the Australia’s electoral system. coalition parties before the election. They I would like to refer to a matter raised by were certainly not part of Mr Howard’s Senator Minchin in his contribution. I was promise to the Australian people at the last most interested to see the true Liberal agenda election. It was the secret agenda of Mr come out via the press release from Senator Howard, Senator Minchin and the mainstream Abetz. For the information of anyone who faction of the Liberal Party. might be listening to this broadcast day in the I think we need to be very clear on this. Senate, let me explain who Senator Abetz is. Our amendments do not prevent the Constitu- He would not be well known. It is Senator tional Convention from proceeding. We have Eric Abetz from the state of Tasmania. I hope always said that we at least respect the fact that explains who he is. Senator Boswell did that the convention is the preferred vehicle for not know either, but there are a lot of listen- the government to progress the debate on the ers who would not have heard of him, I can republic. However, what we have done and assure you, Senator Boswell. what we will not back down on is our com- Senator Eric Abetz put out a press release mitment to ensure that the ballot is a compul- demonstrating for the first time on his part not sory attendance secret ballot to ensure that the only some real political insight but also the system of voting is simplified so it is as true Liberal Party agenda. Fancy him being straightforward, as accessible, as democratic, honest enough to actually confirm what Mr as well understood and as simple as is pos- Howard and Senator Minchin were really on sible. about before this debate was about to occur Both Mr Howard and Senator Minchin are in the Senate! This is what he actually said. on the record in the Sydney Morning Herald Let me quote Senator Eric Abetz, Liberal, of 5 May stating that they ‘won’t be budged’ Tasmania. He said: from the proposed voluntary ballot and that it The reported Democrat backflip on the constitution- was ‘non-negotiable’. Likewise, the Labor al convention is a major boost to trialling voluntary Party, the opposition, will not be budged on voting on a national basis. these issues. Likewise, these issues are non- Thank you, Senator Abetz. Then he went on negotiable as far as Labor is concerned. The to say: real agenda of the Liberals has always been If the Democrats do support the constitutional very transparent. They have always been convention they will allow a significant voluntary committed to undermining our democratic voting project to be undertaken and I look forward process by abolishing compulsory voting in to that prospect. favour of a voluntary system. Thank you again, Senator Abetz. It is a set- We say that a voluntary system would up. The Liberals are using this election of further alienate the disadvantaged and the delegates to the Constitutional Convention to disaffected from the political process. I will attack the integrity of Australia’s electoral not go through the arguments that I outlined system. But we will not back away from the at length when this matter was previously Australian way of voting. We will not back debated in the Senate. I believe I went away from the Australian ballot, which has through them very thoroughly before and traditionally been a compulsory attendance those views are firmly on the record. Suffice secret ballot. We will never accept the perver- Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5861 sion of our electoral system, which is an in terms of the government’s lack of commit- electoral system that I think the vast majority ment to a republic, lack of commitment to of Australians are proud of and rightly regard their own Constitutional Convention and as the best in the world. desire to fundamentally change our electoral It is shameful to see people like Senator system for their own political advantage. I Boswell and his colleagues from the National urge the chamber to press these amendments, Party conned by this. The National Party do to progress this matter and to reject this not support voluntary voting, do you, Senator barefaced, transparent rort from Mr Howard Boswell? No. You do not support postal and his henchman, Senator Minchin. ballots for elections, do you, Senator Senator BOSWELL (Queensland—Leader Boswell? No. of the National Party of Australia in the Senator Boswell—I support this bill. Senate) (6.46 p.m.)—On behalf of the Nation- al Party, I give the Constitutional Convention Senator FAULKNER—Yes, but you (Election) Bill my full support. It is true, as support this because you have been conned, Senator Faulkner said, that the National Party Senator Boswell. You have been conned is against voluntary voting, and it always has again. The National Party is rolling over on been. But we are not voting on an election; what hitherto has been a fundamental princi- we are voting to select a number of delegates. ple that that party has signed up to. It is The government has been totally honest to its weakness on the part of the National Party, constituency and has kept its electoral prom- and it is pathetic on behalf of the constituency ise. Not only has it been totally honest, but it they claim to represent. We will do every- has been totally honest three times. We have thing to ensure that the convention just does given you three chances and you have not become a device for Mr Howard and dropped the ball every time. Now, three Senator Minchin to smother a republic and to strikes and you’re out. That is what you have rort our electoral system. We have taken the got to make up your mind about tonight. You first step along the way by amending this have been given three chances. Turnbull says legislation to make the ballot for delegates to that you are a bunch of dopes because you the convention a ballot in the tried and true will not take the opportunity. No-one would Australian tradition, which is a compulsory disagree with Mr Turnbull on that observa- attendance ballot. We are not going to back tion. This government has a clear program on away from that now. the republic, and it had it before the last I would also like to make some reference to election. the feeble defence that the government has Senator Robert Ray—Why didn’t you put to the parliament that the voluntary postal mention it before the last election? ballot is a more cost-effective way of electing delegates to the convention. Our response to Senator BOSWELL—We did; we went to that weak and pathetic excuse is simple: the the election with a commitment that we would cost of democracy has never before been an have a convention. That was on our program. issue in this country. It should not be one It was announced before the last election, it now. You cannot compromise the democratic was taken to the people and they voted for us process on the basis of cost. What price does overwhelmingly—not on that, mind you; it the Liberal Party put on democracy? In this was the 13 years of tyranny under your mob context it is a measly $13 million at the most. that forced them to come across. We say to the government: whatever the The coalition government showed good will difference is between the cost of a compul- and good faith by having a comprehensive sory attendance ballot and a voluntary postal program that it took to the people. We have ballot, whether it is $13 million or it is less, shown good faith three times, by giving you the integrity of our electoral system is worth three chances—and you have rejected the the money. There is no defence, budgetary or three chances every time. That contrasts with otherwise, for the government’s proposed the hypocrisy that you have come up with. voluntary postal ballot. It can be justified only Opposition senators interjecting— 5862 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

Senator BOSWELL—The big man in the tee of the State Parliament of senior Government back row doesn’t want to get into the fight bureaucrats. The questions asked and the answers any more. It has all become too hard for him; given had the effect of embarrassing Brown. Material used by Foley included information he wants to sit there and have a bit of a go. provided by the defendant over a long period of When Labor was in power, they went in on time. On the same day Foley told the plaintiff a technical promise of a minimalist republic. that the defendant was the source of much of his When they got there, they did not have the information. guts to go through with it. You are denying For those reading the Hansard, I note that the the Australian people a say in the process. defendant is Mr Olsen and the plaintiff is Mr That is what you are doing. You are denying, Rann. The document continues: by the rejection of this bill, the Australian 2.15 On the evening of 27 November 1996 people a say in the process; you are denying Brown lost the leadership of the Liberal the opportunity for democracy to work. The Party to the defendant. A short time later government is providing a true election the defendant gave a news conference on through this bill, by providing the means to the front steps of Parliament House. elect 50 per cent of the delegates to meet for Shortly thereafter the plaintiff spoke with a 10-day session. For a 10-day session, you the defendant and congratulated him on his election. The plaintiff said to the want virtually the same election process that defendant words to the following effect: happens for a total election. The points for "Don’t forget who put you there". The discussion are whether Australia becomes a defendant responded to the plaintiff with republic. a smile. Consideration interrupted; progress reported. 3. As to paragraphs 17 to 19 inclusive the plain- tiff denies that the occasion was an occasion DOCUMENTS of qualified privilege. The plaintiff further says as follows: The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—It being 3.1 as to paragraph 17 the plaintiff denies that 6.50 p.m., I now call on consideration of any answer given by him to questioning by government documents. There being no con- the Joint Committee can constitute an attack sideration required, we will proceed to the upon the defendant which would enable any adjournment. response by the defendant to have the benefit of qualified privilege; ADJOURNMENT 3.2 as to paragraph 18 it is admitted that the The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I propose publications complained of occurred in the the question: course of political discussion but it is denied that such publications were reasonable so as That the Senate do now adjourn. to afford the publications qualified privilege; South Australia: Leader of the 3.3 as to paragraph 19 it is denied that the Opposition publications constitute comment; the plain- tiff admits sub-paragraphs 19.1 to 19.3 Senator SCHACHT (South Australia) inclusive but denies sub-paragraph 19.4. (6.51 p.m.)—During the matter of public 4. The plaintiff further says in the alternative that interest debate today, I was reading from the defendant cannot have the benefit of the court documents in the case Rann v. Olsen. I defences of qualified privilege or fair comment had to do so because the government refused for the following reasons: to allow me to table these publicly available 4.1 the defendant knew for the reasons particu- court documents. Therefore, I said I would larised in paragraph 2 hereof that he, the read the relevant parts of these documents defendant, had given confidential informa- into the Hansard record. Therefore, I will tion to both the plaintiff and Foley and had continue. I believe I had finished paragraph given Cabinet documents to Foley; 2.13 of a document tabled on behalf of Mr 4.2 the defendant was reckless to the possibility Rann dated 20 August 1997. I now continue that a supporter of himself had given Cabi- net documents to a Parliamentary member at paragraph 2.14: of the Opposition in circumstances (being On 27 November 1996 Foley asked a number of the circumstances asserted in sub-paragraphs questions in the Economic and Finance Commit- 2.1, 2.2, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 2.12, 2.13, Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5863

2.14 and 2.15 hereof) which may have led basis for forming a belief that the sheets of the plaintiff to a reasonable belief that he, paper had been forwarded by the defendant or the defendant, had provided such documen- by Baker on the defendant’s behalf. tation. 5.1 As to paragraph 2.5 of the Reply, the defend- In the event the words were spoken with actual ant denies that a conversation as alleged took malice. place. That completes the document submitted to the 5.2 Further, the defendant would not have known court on 20 August by Mike Rann. In the if Brown had met with Gerard as allegedly latter part of that statement, a number of the stated in the conversation. references are to paragraphs of other docu- 6.1 As to paragraph 2.6 of the Reply, the defend- ments which I have not yet had a chance to ant admits that Foley is and was the member for Hart and an Opposition Shadow Minister read into the record. I now want to read into at all material times. the record a statement from John Wayne Olsen. It is a rejoinder to the document from 6.2 The defendant does not know and cannot admit that Foley is or was at all material times Michael Rann which I have just read. The in a position of trust in respect of the plaintiff. rejoinder reads: 6.3 The defendant does not know and cannot 1. As to paragraph 2.1 of the Reply, the defend- admit the plaintiff was entitled to and did ant says that no such discussion as alleged place reliance upon information provided to took place. him by Foley. 2.1 As to paragraph 2.2 of the Reply, the defend- 6.4 The defendant does not know and cannot ant says that no such discussions as alleged admit the content of conversations between took place. Foley and the plaintiff. 2.2 Further, the defendant says Brown was not 6.5 The defendant denies that he told Foley that Treasurer of the Liberal party at the relevant Brown had signed the EDS deal, had been a time and, to the best of the defendant’s infor- weak negotiator or had not secured the best mation and belief, would not have had know- possible deal for South Australia. ledge of the identity of Catch Tim or donors. 6.6 In 1996 the defendant was not privy to the 2.3 Further, information relating to Catch Tim detail of negotiations regarding the EDS deal. Limited was provided to the Opposition, to the The defendant did not attend the Information knowledge of the plaintiff, by Alex Kennedy Technology Cabinet Sub-Committee after 15 whilst she was a journalist working for December 1995. As such, he was not in a Messenger Newspapers Ltd. Such information position to form or express an opinion on was supplied by Kennedy with the knowledge Brown’s negotiations. and approval of her editor, Des Ryan, so that the Parliamentary question time could be used 6.7 The defendant denies having provided any to extract further information from the Govern- information to Foley which was improper or ment. It was not provided by the defendant, in breach of confidence. nor did the defendant have any knowledge as 7.1 As to paragraph 2.7 of the Reply, the defend- to its provision. ant says that no such conversation as alleged 3.1 As to paragraph 2.3 of the Reply, the defend- took place. ant does not know and cannot admit that any 7.2 The defendant denies having provided or conversation as alleged took place. acquiesced in the provision of a document 3.2 The defendant says that at no time was Baker referred to in paragraph 2.7. acting as an agent of the defendant in order to 7.3 The defendant does not know and cannot embarrass Brown, nor did the defendant do admit the content of any discussion between anything which entitled the plaintiff to have the plaintiff and Foley. any proper basis for forming such a belief. 8.1 As to paragraph 2.8 of the Reply, the defend- 4.1 As to paragraph 2.4 of the Reply, the defend- ant says that no such conversation took place ant does not know which sheets of paper the as alleged. plaintiff is referring to, nor does the defendant 8.2 The defendant does not know and cannot have any knowledge of their contents. admit what Foley may have advised the 4.2 The defendant says that he did not provide or plaintiff, but says that he did nothing which acquiesce in the provision of the sheets of was improper or could have formed any proper paper, nor did the defendant do anything basis for the plaintiff having a belief that the which entitled the plaintiff to have a proper defendant had provided confidential informa- 5864 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

tion to Foley or acquiesced in the provision of Nevertheless, in view of what she wrote about such information. Mr Brown, for the Premier now to re-employ 9. As to paragraph 2.9 of the Reply, the defend- her as a senior adviser means that he is quite ant says that no such conversation took place happy with the work she did in attacking Mr as alleged. Brown. (Time expired) Madam Deputy President, I have not finished reading all of this material, but I will continue South Australia: Leader of the at a later stage in an adjournment speech to Opposition put all of Mr Olsen’s reply on the record. I Senator FERGUSON (South Australia) am not going to be selective in my quoting. (7.01 p.m.)—Senator Schacht’s desperate and However, before my time expires, I want to grubby little political exercise cannot go comment on what was contained in Mr without some response but, because I have a Olsen’s rejoinder at paragraph 2.3. He has put number of things I want to read onto the it on the record, in a court document, that record, I do not propose to respond to what Alex Kennedy, who is now his speech writer Senator Schacht has said. Instead, I will read and senior adviser, was the person who, while an account of a media release from the Premi- she was a journalist with Messenger News- er of South Australia, Mr John Olsen, fol- papers, provided information to the leader of lowed by a statement. This is a media release the opposition on the issues relating to Catch from Thursday, 21 August 1997 and it says: Tim. Premier John Olsen today released details of his I find it extraordinary that this is the best defamation response. defence the Premier can make. He employed His rebuttal of the Opposition Leader’s claims Alex Kennedy as a research officer while he includes: was a senator in this place and she went back . A detailed legal statement from Premier and with him to Adelaide, expecting him to Cabinet Chief Executive Officer, Ian Kowalick, that become the Leader of the Opposition in 1992. the Government papers concerning the EDS When that failed— Contract/North Terrace Development released by the Opposition were not cabinet documents but Senator Ferguson—She did not go back. departmental documents which Premier Olsen had She stayed and worked for me for three no access to, could not have had access to and had weeks. not seen. Senator SCHACHT—Even further, she And I will be reading a copy of that statement worked for Alan Ferguson. When Mr Olsen into the record. failed to win the leadership because he was beaten by Mr Brown, shortly thereafter, as I Senator Schacht—Madam Deputy Presi- understand it, Alex Kennedy went to work for dent, I have a point of order. My point of Messenger Press. During the period she order is that Senator Ferguson is raising issues worked for Messenger Press, she published and accusing me of not quoting correctly. He weekly in the Sydney Messenger some of the is quoting from documents which I attempted most attacking articles against the then Premi- to table today. Senator Ferguson and other er, Mr Brown. She attacked his performance Liberals refused to give me leave to table consistently in the most colourful of language. those documents—the same documents he is I draw those articles to the attention of all now reading from. It is extraordinary! senators and invite them to look at them to The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—There is no see what she said about Dean Brown and his point of order. I call Senator Ferguson. government. Senator FERGUSON—The press release Then, after Brown was sacked as Premier continues: and Mr Olsen became Premier, she was re- . A statement that it was a local media organisation employed by Olsen. Does anyone believe that which provided the Catch Tim information directly she would be doing any of this work as a to the Opposition Leader so that parliamentary journalist without any contact with Mr Olsen? question time could be used to extract further I think that would be a strange credulity. information from the Government. Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5865

. Confirmation that Premier Olsen had not been In this instance, I believe that standard process was part of the IT cabinet sub-committee since 1995 followed. and therefore had no access to the commercial in It involved the preparation of a draft Cabinet confidence details of the EDS development which Submission in the Premier’s Office or the Depart- it is claimed he supplied to the Opposition. ment. I now want to read the following statement of That was then distributed to a number of agencies 24 July 1997 made by Ian Kowalick, Chief for comment. Executive of the Department of the Premier In this particular instance, I am able to say that the and Cabinet. It reads: agencies to whom the draft was distributed were: I have been Chief Executive for approximately two . Treasury and a half years. . Services SA My department is responsible for the circulation of Cabinet papers. Cabinet papers are prepared by . Crown Law Ministers or their departments. . Department of the Premier and Cabinet I am aware that the Leader of the Opposition, the . Department of Information Industries. Honourable Mike Rann, has alleged that material I am able to say that from information maintained relating to EDS was provided to him by Premier in our departmental computer system, which I have John Olsen. accessed. In this instance, in relation to the EDS material, it That information is perfectly standard. was prepared in the Department of the Premier and Cabinet. Generally, such submissions are sent out for comment. That evidence was given on 10 June 1997. Any comment or criticism is returned to our office, On Tuesday 27 June 1997, I looked at material from which my department prepares a "Cabinet provided to me by the Premier’s Chief of Staff, Liz blue". Blieschke. This is an attachment to the Cabinet Submission I looked at it at Parliament House. containing our summary of any critique, comments On that day, Mike Rann handed material out to or modifications proposed in relation to the Sub- members of the media, identifying it as material mission. provided to him by John Olsen. After the blue is prepared, it will be distributed to As far as I am aware, he did not issue any press Cabinet with Cabinet Submissions, ie the Submis- release. sion and the blue will often be distributed together. I was not present when he actually handed it out. Distribution of Cabinet papers to Ministers occurs He did not do it in the course of Parliamentary late on Wednesdays and Fridays, for the following proceedings. Monday’s Cabinet meeting; or, as on this occasion, for the next morning’s special Cabinet meeting Liz Blieschke told me, when I was at Parliament prior to Executive Council. House that certain documents she was holding were copies of material provided by Mr Rann to the Our departmental computer system shows that the media. submission was received at 10.30 am on Wednes- day 23 October 1996. She indicated that the copy she held had been provided to her by an Advertiser journalist, who I do not know for sure if a blue was prepared in had received the material from Mr Rann. this case. Vicki Thompson was the member of the Premier’s It does not always occur. office who received them, and she would know the Here, having regard to the short time frame, I identity of the journalist. I do not. suspect one was not. The documents which I saw were copies of docu- However, I can say, from information contained in ments relating to a proposed building for EDS. The our departmental computer system, that the submis- material consisted of typed extracts from a Cabinet sions were distributed to Ministers at approximately Submission in the standard font for the Department 4.00 pm on 23 October 1996. of the Premier and Cabinet and a copy of a letter from the former Premier, the Honourable Dean That is, prior to that time, John Olsen did not have Brown, to Mr J Bowyer of Hansen Yuncken Pty access to a copy. Ltd that was an attachment to the Submission. It had gone to the five agencies only. I am familiar with the process for preparation and No minutes or attendance records are kept for distribution of Cabinet papers. Cabinet meetings. 5866 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

However, Executive Council follows on Thursdays That is, I came back to the State Administration after any special Cabinet meeting. Centre 14th floor photocopier, which I am able to Records are kept of who attends Executive Council. say is the machine used for distribution of Cabinet papers. Those who attended were: I receive copies of all Cabinet submissions pro- . Premier Dean Brown duced in the same run as Ministers’ photocopies. . Deputy Premier Stephen Baker I was overseas at the time this particular matter . Attorney-General Trevor Griffin went before Cabinet, ie on 23-24 October 1996. . Minister for Tourism, Graham Ingerson In order to check my findings, I examined a photocopy of another submission produced by the . Minister for Transport, Diana Laidlaw Cabinet Office in late September 1996. . Minister for Housing & Urban Development, Again, it did not have the defects of the Rann Scott Ashenden photocopy. John Olsen did not attend the Cabinet meeting that My department and I are very security conscious. day. When I saw the Rann document, I knew straight I was not at that Cabinet meeting, but have made away which floor of the State Administration enquiries. Centre and which machine it had been produced on. My enquiries of John Olsen’s office indicate (from I recognised the characteristic defect as emanating memory) that he was somewhere down South doing from a photocopier on the 13th floor. an opening ceremony. It was then used by the Project Co-ordination I have looked at the material which, as I understand Division of the Department of the Premier and it, Mike Rann has identified as being provided to Cabinet. him by John Olsen. Staff working in that area at the time were working I have compared it to the first generation copy on the EDS proposal. provided to agencies for consultation. There are other functions of this department and I noted a number of matters. Treasury on the 13th floor. The Leader of the Opposition’s copy carried defects I cannot say how many people may have had which I am able to say are "fingerprint" character- access to the photocopier. istics of the drum of the photocopier used to make previous generations of the copy. Also, the photo- I am unable to say who made the photocopies. copied staple marks on the copy of the letter appear I am however, from my knowledge of Cabinet in a different position to that on the Cabinet file procedures, able to say that John Olsen could not master copy. have made that copy. That is, the Rann document was not derived from So far as l am aware, he has never accessed a the same master as the documents that went out to photocopier on the 13th floor himself, and it would Ministers. be most unusual and memorable if a Minister did so. On 27 June I examined a copy of the submission in the departmental working file. That file was the Indeed, for security reasons he would not have been basis for consultation with other departments and able to access the 13th floor. the Prudential Management Group and later recon- I am able to say that other photocopies within the sideration of the proposal for the EDS building by Department of the Premier and Cabinet files have Treasury and myself, ie it was the document which the same "fingerprint" characteristics as the materi- went out to the agencies. al provided to the media by Mr Rann, ie other The copy in the departmental working file bore the copies in the files which were made on the 13th same characteristics as the copy provided to the floor machine have the same defect. media by the Leader of the Opposition. The probability that a copier in a Minister’s Office From that, I infer that the Rann document comes would have the same random defect on its drum is from someone who has copied an agency consulta- infinitesimal. tion copy—being a copy which would not have It is not even remotely possible. been able to be accessed by John Olsen. Further, in any case the staple holes in the copy of I made a copy of the master copy which is the the letter would have been in a different position. source of Ministers’ copies on the Cabinet Office Accordingly, I have no doubt that the Rann photo- photocopier. copy and the attached letter was derived from a I was not able to reproduce the characteristic copy made in the Department of the Premier and defects. Cabinet. It was not made from a first generation Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5867 copy made by the Cabinet Office for distribution literacy but it also has the potential to do to Ministers. more harm than good. I am able to say that at least five departments had The harm that I refer to is that the govern- copies for consultation purposes. Accordingly, the ment will use the results of that data in its likelihood is that the material received and distri- buted by Mr Rann was provided by a government ongoing campaign to shift students from officer, not a Minister. government to private schools or, as the minister says, she ‘wants to focus a spotlight There are two more pages of my speech, but on areas where they’—that is, government I will leave those for my colleague Senator schools—‘can do better’. I would like to Ferris to read into the record when she speaks contrast the government’s ‘bleed them dry later in the adjournment debate. then test how they cope’ mentality with what the educators are saying tonight. Schools and Literacy Almost 12 months ago, the Australian Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (7.11 p.m.)— Literacy Educators Association produced what I rise to expand on the remarks I made yester- was titled ‘A strategy plan for successful day in the urgency debate regarding schools literacy learning’. This organisation is made and literacy. As all senators will now be up of members of all levels of education and aware, our two ministers for education— from different education systems. The plan echoing complaints made from time to time outlines 10 key recommendations. Of course, by disgruntled employer groups—are back on it may come as a surprise to the government the bandwagon of literacy or, should I say, that none of these is about testing and none the lack of it in government schools. of them is about competition between schools This began with Dr Kemp’s pronouncement and any of the other nonsense that we hear late last year that one-third of year 9 students about from our education ministers when they could not read—something which has now discuss the matter of literacy. In the preface been said by him so often that it has become of the strategy plan, the association says: the truth for many people. He took for his While there is no evidence to support the com- evidence the results of a test for something monly expressed view that there has been a decline quite different; that is, a very small section of in literacy standards in Australia, literacy educators a longitudinal 20-year study of the transition must not be complacent for the highly technological society in which we live demands or requires more from school to work, in which a complex sophisticated skills. question of comprehension was put to stu- dents. Senators may recall that the journalist The association goes on to say: who wrote the piece on which the test was We believe that high standards of literacy are based failed the test according to the necessary for today’s students to meet the literacy examiner’s interpretation of the meaning. I requirements for our present society as well as for keep raising this matter because the minister the future. Changes in technology and society have altered and will continue to alter the ways in which continues to mislead parents by repeating his we use language to communicate and to think. remarks over and over again. Students must be prepared to meet these demands. Now Senator Vanstone has joined in the However the act of setting high standards, by itself, fray, and she too proclaims that literacy is of cannot erase the impact of poverty, ethnic or great concern to this government. Literacy cultural discrimination, low levels of family literacy, and social and political disenfranchise- ought to be of concern to the government. ment. We must ensure that all students have equal Every effort should be made to see that all opportunities to learn that inequities in school students have the most basic skills in literacy resources are addressed, that schools have an by their very early primary years. Unfortu- adequate number of knowledgeable teachers, and nately, concern is not enough. A nine per cent that we provide safe and supportive environments reduction in real terms in spending on literacy for learning. is not enough. A nationwide campaign to test students is also not enough. In fact, wholesale ...... testing is not only ineffective in improving 5868 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

Literacy involves the construction and interpretation language education units. They suggest that of meaning for a range of purposes. Meaning has on-going professional development in literacy to be at the centre of any literacy program. education should be compulsory for all The association’s first recommendation is teachers so they remain informed about that a major literacy promotion campaign literacy research and practices and can trans- through commercial television targets parents late these into classroom practice. The asso- and carers of pre-school students, highlighting ciation points out that many teachers have the importance of their role in supporting been in the service for a long time and there early and on-going literacy development. It is a need for them to keep abreast of current should be understood that literacy learning research, theory and current practices, and the begins a long time before formal schooling. significant changes which have taken place Studies have shown that if families can share over the last 10 years in literacy education. books with babies as young as six to nine months of age, then these children will show Their recommendation No. 8 relates to positive literacy outcomes. support for programs. There should be a network of locally based language and liter- The second recommendation is the develop- acy specialists to support teachers in improv- ment of a home education literacy program. ing their classroom teaching, as well as This would target new parents and would curriculum support guidelines and materials focus on talking with and to children, singing, that reflect current research and practices in chanting rhymes and jingles, sharing reading teaching and learning. Of course, funding and enjoying books with children. The pro- should be made available to assure small class gram, they say, could be run through maternal sizes at least in the early years. Funds are also and child health centres, libraries and commu- needed to ensure that classrooms and school nities centres. libraries can continue to provide children with The association suggests the appointment of contemporary Australian books. pre-school literacy officers attached to com- munity service centres to assist in the admin- Their recommendation No. 9 is that schools istration and development of the program. should be supported and encouraged to Very high on the list of priorities for the develop agreed school policies and programs association is a well resourced local library. which prioritise literacy, and develop plans to Most communities already have a good local have experienced teachers with specialist library, but many do not. Of course, remote qualifications in literacy; to maintain well rural areas are the places where we find very stocked school and classroom libraries; to low retention rates. A number of inquiries and provide access to classroom based computers reports, and their recommendations, have and materials for classroom reading, writing already been made. Now, says the association, and spelling activities; and, finally, to ensure is the time for a firm policy to be articulated that curriculum evaluation procedures match to ensure that there is increased provision for individual school policies. literacy education in all pre-service education The reason that I raise this strategy plan programs. tonight and give it to the Senate in some The association points out that over the last detail is because I want to point out that the four years there have been dramatic reduc- government has put in place none of these tions in the time allocations for pre-service recommendations. I did not notice anywhere education courses in the areas of language in that strategy document the requirement that and literacy education. It says that early all students be tested and the results made childhood, primary and secondary teacher public. I detected no sense of blame because education should include compulsory lan- schools and teachers have not tried hard guage education units. Their recommendation enough, or have not been competitive enough, No. 6 is that all primary teacher education or efficient enough. This is a plan of action— programs should include compulsory units on a positive contribution towards improving early literacy learning, in addition to other literacy in our schools. The government has Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5869 had this plan for almost a year and has man- What I can say is that the Cabinet Submission copy aged to ignore it totally. sent to John Olsen’s Office is not the document identified to me as having been released by Mike The Senate Employment, Education and Rann. Training References Committee will com- I can also say from my experience in working in mence its inquiry into the status of teachers government that there can be many and multiple this Friday and I want to tell senators that it sources of leaks. is my earnest hope that, although the govern- Leaks from government are not uncommon. ment has not listened to this advice and the advice, no doubt, that it has been given from I have no reason to believe that John Olsen leaked the material at all, and every reason to believe that other sources since it came to office, the he did not. evidence which might come before that In relation to the water contract material that Mike committee perhaps will lend weight to that Rann claims to have received, the only material I advice. It is my hope that our two education am aware of is that tabled by John Olsen in ministers will put aside their rhetoric and their Parliament, being material which came from a attacks on schools, and on teachers and learn filing cabinet of Richard Yeeles. to take better care of the education of children That cabinet was located in the Premier’s Office on in this country. the 15th floor of the State Administration Centre. South Australia: Leader of the Only the Premier’s personal staff, myself and my Opposition deputy have access to the Premier’s suite. Again, John Olsen would not have had access to Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (7.20 that filing cabinet. p.m.)—I rise to complete the statement being read into Hansard by my colleague Senator Richard Yeeles left the Premier’s office before the change of Premiers. Dean Brown kept the filing Ferguson and I take up where he left off: cabinet after he ceased to be Premier. He took it The copies of Cabinet Submissions which are with him to his new office at 45 Pirie Street. That distributed to Ministers each have characteristics is, John Olsen never had access to that filing which make them identifiable as Ministers’ copies. cabinet, although he of course had access to the That does not apply to those draft submissions documents themselves, as he was the Minister which are distributed to agencies for comment. In responsible for overseeing the contract. I would the case of the Rann photocopy, I am able to say find it extremely surprising that John Olsen would that it was not a Ministerial copy. want to leak material about his own contract. I also add that the Rann photocopy had in the top Of course, most interestingly, the fact that left hand corner a dark patch, ie when the docu- Mike Rann has named Mr Kevin Foley, a ment was photocopied, someone had turned over a political colleague, means that Mr Foley page. himself will be called before the court to give That does not appear on Ministerial copies of evidence in this matter. That means that he Cabinet Submissions, because they are prepared on will be subject to cross-examination. What an an automatic collating machine which photocopies interesting twist! Machiavelli would be proud the single sheets. of Mr Rann doing all that he can to make In relation to Cabinet meeting procedure, the sure that Mr Foley does not succeed Mr Rann Cabinet Submissions are distributed to Ministers in when the inevitable election is held very soon a locked case, to which the Minister has a key. now. Mr Foley’s clean skin image as Mr At Cabinet, all Submissions are placed in the centre Clean, ready to take over the leadership, will of the table after discussion, ie handed back. be substantially dented. If a Minister did not attend a meeting, the likeli- hood is they would not even have read the docu- There are two reasons for Mike Rann ments or unlocked the case. setting up his colleague, Mr Foley. The first, In any event, the Cabinet Submissions would as I have just said, is to make sure that he normally be returned, ie John Olsen would have shores up his own position following the returned the papers in the Cabinet bag and placed election, and the second is to clear the path them on the table for disposal. for his old friend, John Hill. So the damaged I cannot guarantee that occurred, but that is ordi- Mr Foley will have no chance of taking on nary practice. the leadership, clearing a path for John Hill. 5870 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

Alternatively, of course, he can make way the region. I would like to place on record in for his other close and dear friend, Trish the Senate that this statement is totally untrue White. Kevin Foley has been running around and unfounded. bragging about a Kirribilli agreement, a pact, Following a widely advertised invitation for that he has the numbers to put Rann out two expressions of interest, the state government years after the election. Ralph Clark, the of Western Australia on 29 July 1997 an- current Deputy Leader, does not even have a nounced the appointment of Western Agricul- vote on the floor of their convention, which tural Industries Pty Ltd—I will refer to them highlights the division within that party. as WAI in the rest of this speech—as the So stand by for Trish White. Trish White preferred proponent to carry out an environ- has taken the seat of the former South Aus- mental impact statement and feasibility study tralian Premier, Lyn Arnold. Everybody on into the West Kimberley land and water our side has watched her progress with great resource development proposal. interest, and I have no doubt that she, along WAI is an Australian company comprising with John Hill, waits patiently in the wings. Queensland Cotton Holdings and Kimberley Agricultural lndustries—both proprietary Fitzroy River: Proposed Dam limited companies—and they will start their Senator EGGLESTON (Western Australia) feasibility study into the damming of the (7.25 p.m.)—Tonight I wish to reply to Fitzroy in approximately two months time. Senator Murray’s recent adjournment debate That study is expected to take two years for speech on the proposal to dam the Fitzroy completion. WAI will study all aspects of the River in the Kimberley region of Western planned project, including flora, fauna, hy- Australia. I would like to provide evidence to drology, environment, heritage, culture and the Senate and place on record that the social impact. damming of the Fitzroy River could well WAI has recently completed a six-year pre- deliver strong economic growth to the region. feasibility study of the Fitzroy River and the Contrary to what Senator Murray stated in his West Kimberley area. It is WAI’s plan to adjournment debate speech, the damming of harvest 25 per cent of the annual flow of the the Fitzroy means that significant net benefits Fitzroy River and leave 75 per cent for most certainly could be achieved. The West environmental use. Kimberley has the prospect of becoming an Australian food and fibre powerhouse. WAI states that broad community participa- tion will be sought in the problem solving and Firstly, I would like to provide the Senate decision making process with regard to the with some background information on the damming of the Fitzroy, and this will be Fitzroy River. The catchment area of the brought about by one-to-one meetings, discus- Fitzroy is bigger than Victoria and, in flood, sion groups, workshops, speaking engage- the volume of water from the Fitzroy is ments and telephone surveys as required. second only to the Amazon. In fact, it would WAI studies will provide evidence that fill Sydney Harbour in three and a half hours. economic growth will be generated from the However, at present the water resource of the damming of the Fitzroy River and that signifi- Fitzroy is neither harvested nor utilised and, cant net benefits will be delivered. if used, this area would become a diverse Trials of cotton and other crops, in conjunc- agricultural production zone that would tion with CSIRO and Agriculture WA will provide solid opportunities for food and fibre continue to assess the environmental and crops and generate at least $900 million in economic sustainability of fibre and food exports per year. This of course means jobs crops using bore water for irrigation. An and new small business opportunities for aquifer south of Broome will be investigated Australians. to define annual sustainable water yield Senator Murray asserted that no appraisal is levels, and this will form the basis of a pilot being undertaken into the environmental, project to prove the economic viability of the social and long-term economic wellbeing of next possible stage of the project, which Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5871 would involve construction of a water storage The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—The prob- dam. A very important point to make is that lem is, the time expired before you sought to no decision can be made on the likely site of have it incorporated. any dam or dams until the feasibility study Senate adjourned at 7.30 p.m. has been completed. DOCUMENTS The full development of this project is Tabling estimated to take 10 to 15 years and will involve an area estimated to be 225,000 The following government documents were hectares. The initial crop will be cotton, tabled: which has existing market opportunities in Employment, Education and Training Act— which Australia holds an internationally National Board of Employment, Education and competitive position as the fourth largest Training—Australian Research Council— Evaluation program—Reviews of grants out- cotton exporting country. comes—Plant physiology 1989-1993 (No. 21). Senator O’Chee—A mighty crop. Higher Education Funding Act 1988— Determinations made under the Act—Report for Senator EGGLESTON—A mighty crop 1996. indeed. The following documents were tabled by the Clerk: The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order! Copyright Act—Declaration under section 10A, Senator Eggleston, the time has expired. dated 20 May 1997. Senator EGGLESTON—I seek leave to Corporations Act—Accounting Standard—AASB incorporate the remainder of my speech. 1035. Radiocommunications Act— The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—The debate Radiocommunications (Spectrum Licence Lim- finished when our time expired, I am sorry. its—800 MHz and 1.8 GHz Bands) Direction 1997. Senator EGGLESTON—I did have a pre- Spectrum Re-allocation Declarations Nos 2 to 4 arranged agreement to have it incorporated. of 1997. 5872 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

The following answers to questions were circulated:

British Commonwealth Occupational Senator Newman—In accordance with Forces advice to the Minister for Defence Industry, (Question No. 625) Science and Personnel the following informa- tion is provided in response to the honourable Senator Woodley asked the Minister senator’s question: representing the Minister for Defence Indus- (1) Service in Japan with BCOF does not fulfil try, Science and Personnel, upon notice, on 11 the requirements for qualifying service. Occurring June 1997: after the formal surrender of Japan and facing no (1) Why are members of the Australian contin- opposition to their presence in the country, the gent to the British Commonwealth Occupational occupation forces did not incur danger from hostile Forces (BCOF) not qualified for a service pension. forces of the enemy. The operations undertaken by the occupation forces in Japan were not warlike in (2) (a) What process was undertaken in the nature and can be better equated to the current recent review conducted by the department in concept of non-warlike service. association with the Department of Veterans’ Affairs of the overseas service given by members (2) (a) The internal review conducted by Defence of the BCOF in Japan; (b) did this review take in conjunction with the Department of Veterans’ evidence from any external groups; if so, which Affairs, uniformly applied elements and concepts groups; and (c) what other sources of information inherent in repatriation legislation, and the current were accessed. eligibility criteria for conditions of service, to fifteen periods of past overseas service. BCOF was (3) (a) Was there any conflicting evidence given one of the fifteen periods of overseas service to the review as to the nature of service by BCOF reviewed. members; and (b) in particular, was there any evidence provided which suggested that BCOF (b) No. members did incur danger from hostile enemy (c) Official documents and files held by Austral- forces; if so, what is the Minister’s response to that ian Archives and the Australian War Memorial; evidence. books and published accounts. (4) During the period of service in Japan, was (3) (a) No. there any loss of life amongst the Australian (b) No. contingent of BCOF which related to war service; (4) No, there was no loss of life as a result of if so: (a) how many lost their lives; and (b) in each ‘war service’. Deaths recorded for the Australian case, what was the cause. contingent of BCOF during the period 13 February (5) Does the Government now consider that the 1946 to 30 June 1951 are listed below. It should be issue of service pension eligibility for Australian noted that this list includes deaths which occurred members of BCOF has been finalised. off duty as well as on duty.

BCOF DEATH STATISTICS 13 Feb 1946—30 June 1951(includes both on duty and off duty)

Natural Cause of Death Illness Suicide Causes Killed Accidentally Total Navy 1 - - 2 3 Army 11 4 3 43 61 Air Force - - - 13 13 Total 12 4 3 58 77 Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5873

BCOF DEATHS (Cause of Death: Killed Accidentally)

Number Type of Accident 26 motor vehicle accident 7 aircraft accident 4 struck by train 4 accidentally drowned 2 accidental gun shot wound 1 shot dead by fellow soldier 4 fall from building 1 fall from fence 1 fall (type unstated) 2 electrocution 1 explosion on ammunition barge 2 mine explosion 1 fire in unit lines 2 not stated

(5) Yes. (2) Under the Export Control (Unprocessed Wood) Regulations 4. (1), the following are Logging and Woodchipping declared to be prescribed goods: (Question No. 634) " (a) wood chips (except wood chips declared to be prescribed goods by the Export Control (Hard- Senator Murray asked the Minister repre- wood Wood Chips) (1996) Regulations); senting the Minister for Primary Industries (b) wood in the round which is intended to and Energy, upon notice on, 17 June 1997: undergo further processing following export; (1) Is it a fact that some or all of the karri trees (c) wood with a cross sectional area of 225 to be taken from the National Estate interim-listed square centimetres or greater which is intended to old-growth karri forests of Giblett block near undergo further processing following export. [Note: Pemberton in Western Australia are destined for Special provisions apply to the export of certain export to South Africa to be used as mine support kinds of hardwood wood chips—see the Export stays; if so: (a) how much karri from Giblett will Control (Hardwood Wood Chips) (1996) Regula- be used for this purpose; (b) what will be the total tions. ]" value and volume of Giblett karri for this particular Timber falling outside this definition, may be export market; (c) which company or companies exported without a licence. hold the contract for this export; and (d) which South African companies or government agencies (3) This is a commercial transaction, to which are purchasing the karri timber. the Commonwealth Government is not a party. As such, the Commonwealth Government does not (2) Has the Minister or the Commonwealth have access to, and in any event would be reluctant approved the export of this timber; if so: (a) when to release, details of commercial transactions was approval given; (b) can full details be provid- between other parties. ed; and (c) why was approval given for this inappropriate use of these world famous, unique Defence Force: Entitlements and disappearing old-growth forests. (Question No. 645) (3) Is this karri timber being supplied at below Senator Bourne asked the Minister repre- economic returns to Australia. senting the Minister for Defence Industry, Senator Parer—The Minister for Primary Science and Personnel, upon notice, on 20 Industries and Energy has provided the June 1997: following answer to the honourable senator’s (1) (a) What are the spousal and defacto entitle- question: ments for members of the Australian Defence Forces (ADF); and (b) can a copy of the guidelines, (1) I have received no applications to approve regulations, directives or orders regulating the exports of native hardwood for mine stays in South benefits and conditions of spouses in the defence Africa. forces be provided. 5874 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

(2) (a) What are the entitlements for members of . Volume 3—Accommodation, Leave, Compen- the ADF who have same sex partners; and (b) can sation and Other Provisions; and a copy of the guidelines, regulations, directives or . Volume 4—Conditions Relating to Overseas orders regulating the benefits and conditions of Service. same sex couples in the defence forces be provided. Because of the size and number of volumes (3) (a) What are the entitlements for members of involved I have not produced a copy of the Manu- the ADF who have defacto partners; and (b) can a als. A copy is held in the Parliamentary Library, copy of the guidelines, regulation, directives or however, if this does not meet the Senator’s needs orders regulating the benefits and conditions of de I could arrange for a copy to be provided. facto couples in the defence forces be provided. Should the Senator require a synopsis of the (4) What, if any, regulations exist to recognise ADF’s Conditions of Service, a Parliamentary spouses, defacto partners and same sex partners in Research paper entitled ‘Conditions of Service in the ADF: (a) how is this done; and (b) what the Regular Defence Force’ is also available from evidence is required to prove defacto or same sex the Parliamentary Library. This document is couple status. presently being updated by library staff. (5) Who decides whether a spouse, defacto or (4) Instruction 1001 of Volume 1 of the Manual same sex partner is entitled to ‘partner’ benefits in for members of the Permanent Forces (copy the defence forces. provided) provides details on the procedure for (6) What are the entitlements for members of the recognition of a de facto marriage and the evidence ADF: (a) with a family; (b) without a family; and a member may provide as proof that a relationship (c) can a copy be provided of the guidelines, exists. regulations, directives or orders regulating the (a) De jure marriages are recognised on produc- benefits and conditions of: (i) members with a tion of a marriage certificate by members. Recogni- family, and (ii) members without a family; in the tion of de facto marriages is subject to the member defence forces. providing suitable evidence of the relationship. (7) What, if any, regulations exist to recognise (b) Evidence may be provided under the follow- spouses, defacto partners and same sex partners as ing criteria: mutual support and interdependence; dependants of members of the ADF: (a) how is this common household; elements of permanence or done; and (b) what evidence is required to prove exclusivity in the relationship; recognition of dependency status for defacto couples and same sex marital status in public and private; mutual society couples. and protection; and nurture and support of children. Senator Newman—In accordance with (5) Applications for recognition of de facto advice to the Minister for Defence Industry, marriages are generally approved at the unit level, Science and Personnel the following informa- however, where special circumstances exist or tion is provided in response to the honourable applications contain minimal evidence these are senator’s question: considered by the member’s Service Office. (6) (a) (b) and (c) The Manual of Salaries and (l) to (3) The Manual of Salaries and Conditions Conditions of Service for the Permanent Forces and of Service for the Permanent Forces and the the Manual of Pay and Conditions of Service for Manual of Pay and Conditions of Service for the the Reserve Forces contain details of all financial Reserve Forces contains details of all financial conditions of service for members of the ADF. conditions of service for members of the ADF. The Each instruction in these manuals clearly indicates entitlements of members with family are applicable whether it is applicable to members with family to members in de jure marriages and ADF recog- and/or members without family, but does not nised de facto marriages. categorise conditions of service provisions under The ADF does not recognise same sex partners, these headings. The entitlements of members with consequently, there are no regulations covering the family are applicable to members in de jure recognition of same sex partners. Members with marriages and ADF recognised de facto marriages. same sex partners do not have access to additional (7) (a) and (b) Determination Number 45 of 1991 entitlements other than to those available to mem- made under section 58B of the Defence Act 1903 bers without family. provides for the recognition of dependants. In The Manual for the members of the Permanent accordance with this determination a dependant in Forces consists of four volumes relation to a member is defined as the spouse of the member or a child. A spouse includes a de jure . Volume 1—Salary, Allowances, Bounties and spouse or an ADF recognised de facto spouse. A Gratuities; child includes an adopted child, an ex-nuptial child, . Volume 2—Travel and Removal Entitlements; a foster child, a step-child or a ward who is a child Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5875 of the member or spouse, is dependent on the charged following the incident and are currently in member and is under 21 years of age or an invalid detention awaiting trial. The case is likely to be or infirm. A dependant is approved on provision of heard by the beginning of August 1997. All the appropriate evidence (for example, marriage defendants are being represented by the Yayasan certificate, birth certificate or adoption papers) by Lembaga Bantuan Hukum (an Indonesian legal aid the member. As the ADF does not recognise same foundation) which Australia has funded from the sex partners, there are no regulations to recognise Human Rights Fund. same sex partners as dependants of ADF members. (3) (a) The Government has and continues to East Timor urge the Indonesian authorities to ensure that those detained be given their full rights and due process (Question No. 649) under the law and be treated in accordance with Senator Bourne asked the Minister repre- international human rights standards. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Downer, raised the human senting the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon rights situation in East Timor at his latest meeting notice, on 20 June 1997: with Indonesian Foreign Minister Alatas in Hong (1) Did the Indonesian military open fire on 200 Kong on 30 June. He also discussed the East Timor people who gathered outside the Mahkota Hotel in situation, in light of the incident at the Mahkota Dili in an attempt to see Mr Jamsheed Marker, the Hotel, with East Timor Governor Abilio Soares United Nations General Secretary’s Special Repre- when he met him in Ambon on 24 April. sentative on East Timor, in order to pass him (b) In addition to the Minister’s raising of these documentation on human rights violations in East issues with the Indonesians the Government has Timor. asked our Embassy in Jakarta to take up this (2) (a) Is it a fact that as many as three youths matter. Officers from the Embassy subsequently were killed and 45 were wounded, seven seriously; raised the issue with various officials and independ- and (b) were 48 people detained and are 24 still ent human rights observers in East Timor, during being held in custody. a visit in April 1997. The Embassy officers specifi- (3) (a) Can details be provided of the Gov- cally raised Australian Government concerns ernment’s reaction to the Indonesian military’s regarding violence against demonstrators and attack; and (b) is the Government going to raise the suspects in the Mahkota Hotel incident. They also issue in its dialogue with the Indonesian Foreign raised general human rights concerns in East Affairs ministry. Timor. These concerns were raised with a number of officials including the military command in Dili, Senator Hill—The Minister for Foreign the Police Chief, the Chief Prosecutor, the Komnas Affairs has provided the following answer to Ham (Indonesian National Commission on Human Senator Bourne’s questions: Rights) and the local leadership (civil and military) in Aileu, Baucau and Viqueque Kabupatens. (1) There are unconfirmed reports that police fired some shots from handguns during a demon- Department of Employment, Education, stration outside the Mahkota Hotel in Dili on 23 Training and Youth Affairs: Mr Dean March 1997. The International Committee of the Red Cross has informed officers from the Austral- McCarthy ian Embassy in Jakarta that it was very likely that (Question No. 655) shots—probably fewer than 10—had been fired from handguns. The East Timor Roman Catholic Senator Denman asked the Minister for Church’s Commission on Justice and Peace said Employment, Education, Training and Youth that they believed the police had used "simulated Affairs, upon notice, on 24 June 1997: bullets". (2) (a) Neither the ICRC nor the Commission on (1) Has the national office of the department re- Justice and Peace have confirmed any deaths ceived a grievance by Mr Dean McCarthy, an resulting from the incident. Information supplied to employee formally requesting an investigation by officers from our Embassy in Jakarta during a visit the Secretary of the department. to East Timor from 6-12 April suggests that (2) Has the department formally acknowledged approximately 29 people were treated for various receipt of the request for investigation. injuries at the Motael Church clinic. (3) What point in the investigation process has (b) An Amnesty International report of 26 March the department reached with regard to the request 1997 stated that 45 people were arrested following by Mr McCarthy. the incident, of which 24 remained in custody at the time of the report. The Australian Embassy in (4) When is it likely that the investigation by the Jakarta has been advised that 33 persons have been department will be concluded. 5876 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

Senator Vanstone—The answer to the was a primary concern. The Secretariat will be honourable senator’s question is as follows: working closely with States to streamline adminis- trative efforts. (1) The grievance was received in national office of the Department of Employment, Education, (3) There has been one specific application for Training and Youth Affairs on 13 June 1997. RTIF funding considered by the Board. On 11 July, (2) Formal acknowledgment was sent to Mr the RTIF Board considered an application for McCarthy on 27 June 1997. funding from the Tasmanian Government in conjunction with the University of Tasmania and (3) The grievance has been referred to the the Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce and Industry DEETYA District Office in Townsville for investi- for the establishment of a Tasmanian Electronic gation. Commerce Centre. (4) The Department completed the investigation The RTIF Board has agreed to the provision of on 18 July 1997 and the relevant parties advised of funding for the establishment and operation of the the outcome on 24 July 1997. Centre of $1.5 million per annum for three years Tasmania: Regional Telecommunications from 1997-98 to 1999-2000. The RTIF Board has authorised the Secretariat to negotiate a funding Infrastructure Fund agreement involving an initial payment and the (Question No. 659) meeting of identified milestones relating to the Centre’s strategic direction, operations and ac- Senator Brown asked the Minister of countability arrangements before the balance of the Communications and the Arts, upon notice, funds will be payable. on 24 June 1997: (1) How much of Tasmania’s $58 million Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Regional Telecommunications Infrastructure Fund Commission will be retained by the Government for administra- tion or other costs. (Question No. 661) (2) To what use will the funds be put. Senator Kernot asked the Minister repre- (3) What schemes have been considered in any senting the Attorney-General, upon notice, an way for fund allocation. 24 June 1997: Senator Alston—The answer to the honour- (1) How many inquiries into complaints referred able senator’s question is as follows: to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) by the Sex Discrimination (1) Of the $58 million Regional Telecommunica- Commissioner have been held since 1984. tions Infrastructure Fund (launched as Networking the Nation on 20 June 1997), allocated to Tasmania (2) How many inquiries have been held into: (a) over the five year life of the program, a total of complaints of indirect sex discrimination, (b) $2.229 million will be retained by the Common- complaints of direct sex discrimination, (c) com- wealth Government for administrative costs. plaints of direct discrimination because of a (2) The objective of Networking the Nation is to characteristic imputed to or pertaining to the sex of assist the economic and social development of the aggrieved person, (d) complaints of non- regional, rural and remote Australia by funding intentional direct sex discrimination that was sub- projects which: conscious or systemic in nature; and (e) complaints of sexual harassment. . enhance telecommunications infrastructure and services in regional, rural and remote areas; (3) What is the overall success rate for com- plaints, other than those who settle or withdraw . increase access to, and promote use of, ser- from an inquiry, and what are the statistics for vices available through telecommunications success or dismissal of the complaints in each of networks in regional, rural and remote areas; the categories in (2). . reduce disparities in access to such services and facilities between Australians in regional, (4) How many inquires into complaints referred rural and remote areas and those in urban to the HREOC by the Race Discrimination Com- areas. missioner have been held. The $2.229 million administrative funds will (5) What is the rate of success or dismissal of contribute to paying for the running costs for the complaints of race discrimination in relation to: (a) Board and the RTIF Secretariat. employment; (b) accommodation; and (c) services. In determining running costs, the importance of (6) What is the record of individual hearing minimising the call on program funds by adminis- commissioners in dismissing complaints and finding tering the RTIF in the most cost effective manner complaints substantiated. Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5877

Senator Ellison—The Attorney-General has discrimination on the grounds of sex, potential provided the following answers to the honour- pregnancy, pregnancy or marital status but not to able senator’s questions: sexual harassment as this is the subject of a separate question in paragraph (e). I am advised that these answers were provided by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity It follows that the statistics provided below do Commission (HREOC) and that the statistics are as not incorporate complaints of sexual harassment at 8 July 1997. I am further advised that, unless the into the answers to questions (a) to (d) even though contrary intention appears, for the purpose of all sexual harassment is itself a form of sex discrimi- answers concerning complaints/inquiries under the nation. The only category in which sexual harass- Federal Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (SDA), ment complaints are counted is in response to ques- "inquiry" has been interpreted to mean the public tion (e). However, where an inquiry considered a inquiry that is held after a notice referred to in complaint of sexual harassment as well as a section 63 of the SDA is issued. Similarly, for the separate complaint of sex discrimination (for purpose of all answers concerning complaints/ example that the complainant was unlawfully inquiries under the Federal Racial Discrimination dismissed) the separate complaint of sex discrimi- Act 1975 (the RDA), "inquiry" has been interpreted nation has been included in the statistics given in to mean the public inquiry that is held after a relation to questions (a) to (d) as well as the sexual notice referred to in section 25E of the RDA is is- harassment complaint being included in the statist- sued. ics in response to question (e). (1) How many inquiries into complaints referred Furthermore, it should be noted that one inquiry to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity can be held into multiple complaints by the com- Commission (HREOC) by the Sex Discrimination plainant(s) against the respondent(s) in relation to Commissioner have been held since 1984. a particular fact situation. For example, where an inquiry was held into complaints of direct and indi- (a) There have been 141 inquiries into 223 rect sex discrimination as well as a complaint of complaints where the inquiry has been completed sexual harassment then the inquiry is counted as and a decision handed down. being one inquiry under each of the relevant com- (b) There are 2 inquiries that are part-heard and plaint categories in (a) to (e). 10 inquiries that have been completed but are Finally, in answering the questions, it is assumed awaiting decision. that the reference to "direct sex discrimination" is (c) There are 8 inquiries that have been ad- a reference to complaints made under subsections journed sine die (usually for want of prosecution): 5(1),6(1) and 7(1) and that the reference to "indi- [statistics only available from 1994 to present]. rect discrimination" refers to complaints made (d) 19 inquiries have settled after the first day of under subsections 5(2), 6(2) and 7(2) of the SDA. hearing [statistics only available from 1994 to (a) Complaints of indirect sex discrimination; 17 present]. inquiries have been completed into complaints of (2) How many inquiries have been held into: indirect discrimination. [4 inquiries were com- menced but not completed] (a) complaints of indirect sex discrimination, (b) complaints of direct sex discrimination, (c) com- (b) Complaints of direct sex discrimination; 94 plaints of direct discrimination because of a inquiries have been completed into complaints of characteristic imputed to or pertaining to the sex of direct discrimination. [43 inquiries were com- the aggrieved person, (d) complaints of non- menced but not completed] intentional direct sex discrimination that was (c) Complaints of direct discrimination because subconscious or systemic in nature; and (e) com- of a characteristic imputed to or pertaining to the plaints of sexual harassment. sex of the aggrieved person. 43 inquiries have been For the purpose of this answer, "inquiries" is de- completed into complaints of direct discrimination fined as public inquiries that have been held and because of a characteristic imputed to or pertaining completed and includes those where a decision has to the sex of the aggrieved person (including preg- been handed down and those that are awaiting deci- nancy or marital status). [41 inquiries were com- sion. Below each set of statistics are figures from menced but not completed] 1994 onwards for those inquiries that were com- (d) Complaints of non-intentional direct sex menced in relation to each category but not com- discrimination that was subconscious or systemic pleted (that is, the complaint settled or was with- in nature. drawn sometime after the first day of public in- The SDA does not refer to "systemic discrimina- quiry). tion". The term is generally used to refer to situa- It has also been assumed from the manner in tions in which a complex of directly and/or indi- which questions (a) to (d) are worded above that rectly discriminatory practices operate to produce the term "sex discrimination" is used to refer to general disadvantage to persons in the same 5878 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 category as the individual. It is unclear what is (b) Complaints of direct sex discrimination meant by the reference to "subconscious" or "non- Out of 83 complaints that have been the subject intentional" direct discrimination. Because the of inquiry and where the inquiry has been com- question is unclear, the answer is given under 2 pleted and decisions handed down, 37 complaints categories. were upheld (45%) and 46 complaints were dis- (i) Direct systemic discrimination missed (55%). This term refers to those complaints where the (c) Complaints of direct discrimination because particular complainant experiences direct discrimi- of a characteristic imputed to or pertaining to the nation (for example, they are denied a particular sex of the aggrieved person benefit because of a characteristic imputed to Out of 43 complaints that have been the subject people of a particular marital status) and this policy of inquiry and where the inquiry has been com- applies across the board to all persons in the same pleted and decisions handed down, 22 complaints category as the complainant. were upheld (51%) and 21 complaints were dis- There are 14 inquiries that have been completed missed (49%). in relation to direct systemic discrimination. (d) (i) Complaints of direct systemic discrimi- (ii) Indirect systemic discrimination nation This term refers to those complaints where the Out of 9 complaints that have been the subject particular complainant alleges that he or she is ag- of inquiry and where the inquiry has been com- grieved because he or she is a member of a par- pleted and decisions handed down, 4 complaints ticular group which is unable to comply with a were upheld (44%) and 5 complaints were dis- facially neutral requirement or condition that is missed (56%). unreasonable. The discrimination is systemic in that (ii) Complaints of indirect systemic discrimina- all persons who share the relevant characteristic of tion the complainant are unable to comply with the fa- cially neutral requirement or condition (for exam- Out of 7 complaints that have been the subject ple, it is a requirement or condition of eligibility to of inquiry and where the inquiry has been com- apply for a particular job that a person must first pleted and decisions handed down, 3 complaints have completed a period of employment in another were upheld (43%) and 4 complaints were dis- related job, but the latter has in the past been limit- missed (57%). ed to people of a particular sex or marital status (e) Complaints of sexual harassment. and the imposition of this limitation is not reason- able). Out of 65 complaints that have been the subject of inquiry and where the inquiry has been com- There have been 9 inquiries completed in relation pleted and decision handed down, 48 complaints to indirect systemic discrimination. were upheld (74%) and 17 complaints were dis- [1 inquiry was commenced but not completed] missed (26%). (e) Complaints of sexual harassment. (4) How many inquiries into complaints referred There have been 69 inquiries completed in to the HREOC by the Race Discrimination Com- relation to complaints of sexual harassment. missioner have been held. [118 inquiries were commenced but not com- For the purpose of this answer, "inquiry" has pleted] been interpreted to mean the public inquiry that is held after a notice referred to in section 25E of the (3) What is the overall success rate for com- Federal Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (RDA) is plaints, other than those who settle or withdraw issued. from an inquiry, and what are the statistics for suc- cess or dismissal of the complaints in each of the There have been 78 inquiries completed and categories in (2). decisions handed down. Overall out of 223 complaints that were the [1 complaint is part-heard and 5 complaints have subject of inquiries and where the inquiry was been heard and are awaiting decisions completed and a decision handed down, 120 (5) What is the rate of success or dismissal of complaints have been upheld (54%) and 103 com- complaints of race discrimination in relation to: plaints were dismissed(46%). (a) employment, (b) accommodation; and (c) (a) Complaints of indirect sex discrimination services. Out of 16 complaints that have been the subject It should be noted that one inquiry can be held of inquiry and where the inquiry has been com- into multiple complaints by the complainant(s) pleted and decision handed down, 6 complaints against the respondent(s) in relation to a particular were upheld (38%) and 10 complaints were dis- fact situation. For example, where one inquiry has missed (63%). been held into complaints in relation to employ- Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5879 ment, accommodation and services, the one inquiry (h) Commissioner William Carter may appear as concerning three complaints. Out of 14 inquiries that have been completed and (a) What is the rate of success or dismissal of decisions handed down, 4 complaints were upheld complaints of race discrimination in relation to (27%) and 10 were dismissed (73%). (Note: in one employment decision, 6 complainants were successful in having Out of the 42 complaints that have been the their complaints upheld and 2 complainants had subject of inquiry and where the inquiry has been their complaints dismissed). completed and decisions handed down, 10 com- (i) Commissioner Irene Moss plaints were upheld (24%) and 32 complaints were Out of 2 inquiries that have been completed and dismissed (76%)3. decisions handed down, 1 complaint was upheld (b) What is the rate of success or dismissal of (50%) and 1 was dismissed (50%). complaints of race discrimination in relation to (j) Commissioner Ron Merkel accommodation. Out of the 2 complaints that have been the Out of 3 inquiries that have been completed and subject of inquiry and where the inquiry has been decisions handed down, 1 complaint was upheld completed and the decision handed down, 2 (33%) and 2 were dismissed (67%). complaints were upheld (100%). (k) Commissioner Aaron Castan (c) What is the rate of success or dismissal of Out of 6 inquiries that have been completed and complaints of race discrimination in relation to decisions handed down, 2 complaints were upheld services. (33%) and 4 were dismissed (67%). Out of 23 complaints that have been the subject (l) Commissioner Susan Crennan of inquiry and where the inquiry has been com- Out of 3 inquiries that have been completed and pleted and the decision handed down, 9 complaints decisions handed down, 3 complaints were upheld were upheld (39%) and 14 were dismissed (61%). (100%). (6) What is the record of individual hearing (m) Commissioner Patricia Wolfe commissioners in dismissing complaints and finding complaints substantiated. Out of 9 inquiries that have been completed and decisions handed down, 3 complaints were upheld (a) President Marcus Einfield (33%) and 6 were dismissed (67%). Out of 13 inquiries that have been completed and (n) Commissioner Terrence Worthington decisions handed down, 6 complaints were upheld (46%) and 7 were dismissed (54%). Out of 5 inquiries that have been completed and decisions handed down, 2 complaints were upheld (b) President Ronald Wilson (40%) and 3 were dismissed (60%). Out of 62 inquiries that have been completed and decisions handed down, 22 complaints were upheld (o) Commissioner Stan Jones (36%) and 40 were dismissed (64%). Out of 2 inquiries that have been completed and (c) Commissioner Kevin O’Connor decisions handed down, 2 complaints were upheld (100%). Out of 18 inquiries that have been completed and decisions handed down, 12 complaints were upheld (p) Commissioner Hanifa Dean (67%) and 6 were dismissed (33%). Out of 1 inquiry that has been completed and (d) Commissioner Robert Nettlefold decisions handed down, 1 complaint was upheld (100%). Out of 21 inquiries that have been completed and decisions handed down 10 complaints were upheld (q) Commissioner Elizabeth Hastings (48%) and 11 were dismissed (52%). Out of 1 inquiry that has been completed and (e) Commissioner Roma Mitchell decisions handed down, 1 complaint was upheld (100%). Out of 2 inquiries that have been completed and decisions handed down, 1 complaint was upheld (r) Commissioner Christopher Webster (50%) and 1 was dismissed (50%). Out of 9 inquiries that have been completed and (f) Commissioner Kiefel decisions handed down, 2 complaints were upheld Out of 8 inquiries that have been completed and (22%) and 7 were dismissed (78%). decisions handed down, 7 complaints were upheld (s) Commissioner Graeme Innes (87.5%) and 1 dismissed (12.5%). Out of 8 inquiries that have been completed and (g) Commissioner Quentin Bryce decisions handed down, 5 complaints were upheld Out of 3 inquiries that have been completed and (62.5%) and 3 were dismissed (37.5%). decisions handed down, 3 were dismissed (100%). (t) Commissioner John Nader 5880 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

Out of 9 inquiries that have been completed and Out of 1 inquiry that has been completed and a decisions handed down, 4 complaints were upheld decision handed down, 1 complaint was upheld (44%) and 5 were dismissed (56%). (100%). (u) Commissioner Stephen Keim Out of 2 inquiries that have been completed and decisions handed down, 1 complaint was upheld 1 One inquiry can consider more than one (50%) and 1 was dismissed (50%). complaint: This is why there have been 141 (v) Commissioner John Basten inquiries but 223 complaints have been in- quired into (see answer to question 3). Out of 3 inquiries that have been completed and 2 decisions handed down, 2 complaints were upheld The sum total of the complaints in answer to (67%) and 1 was dismissed (33%). S (a) to (c) is less than the 78 inquiries in answer to question 4 as question 4 includes all (w) Commissioner Suzan Cox RDA inquiries not just the categories referred Out of 1 inquiry that has been completed and a to in question 5. decision handed down, 1 complaint was upheld 3 In one of these decisions, the complaints of 6 (100%). complainants were upheld and the complaints (x) Commissioner Regina Greycar of 2 complainants were dismissed so it appears Out of 2 inquiries that have been completed and as both a dismissed and upheld complaint. decisions handed down, 1 complaint was upheld Turkish Incursion into Northern Iraq (50%) and 1 was dismissed (50%). (y) Commissioner Chris Sidoti (Question No. 666) Out of 1 inquiry that has been completed and a Senator Carr asked the Minister represent- decision handed down, 1 complaint was dismissed ing the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon (100%). notice, on 25 June 1997: (z) Commissioner Roslyn Atkinson (1) What actions has the Australian Government Out of 7 inquiries that have been completed and taken to date in responding to the Turkish military decisions handed down, 6 complaints were upheld invasion of northern Iraq on 13 May 1997. (86%) and 1 was dismissed (14%). (2) What is the attitude of the Australian Govern- (aa) Commissioner Antonia Kohl ment to the invasion of up to 50,000 Turkish troops into northern Iraq. Out of 5 inquiries that have been completed and decisions handed down, 4 complaints were upheld (3) Has the Minister been advised by the depart- (80%) and 1 was dismissed (20%). ment of the widespread and systemic abuse, by invading Turkish troops, of the human rights of the (bb) Commissioner Kathleen McEvoy Kurdish population of northern Iraq. Out of 4 inquiries that have been completed and (4) Is the Minister aware that hostile acts perpe- decisions handed down, 1 complaint was upheld trated by Turkish troops in northern Iraq include (25%) and 3 were dismissed (75%). repeated shelling of Iraqi towns and villages, the (cc) Commissioner Moira Raynex death of civilians and the forced displacement of Out of 1 inquiry that has been completed and a civilian Kurds living in the area. decision handed down, 1 complaint was upheld (5) When will the Australian Government join (100%). the United Nations, the European Union and many (dd) Commission Hilary Charlesworth other nations in condemning this act of aggression by Turkish military forces. Out of 1 inquiry that has been completed and a decision handed down, 1 complaint was dismissed Senator Hill—The Minister for Foreign (100%). Affairs has provided the following answer to (ee) Commissioner Marion Brown the honourable senator’s question: Out of 1 inquiry that has been completed and a (1) The Australian Government is aware of the decision handed down, 1 complaint was upheld Turkish military incursion into northern Iraq. Our (100%). relevant Missions including those in Ankara and at (ff) Commissioner Rosemary Kalantzis the United Nations, New York, have kept the Government informed of developments. Turkey has Out of 1 inquiry that has been completed and a acknowledged that as many as 50,000 troops decision handed down, 1 complaint was upheld crossed the border in an operation directed against (100%). guerrillas of the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) (gg) Commissioner Jenny Morgan which has been waging an insurgency in support of Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5881 a separate Kurdish State since 1984. Turkish At the same time, while Australia deplores any authorities have indicated that most of the forces actions of the Turkish Government which fall short have been recalled but the operation seems likely of internationally accepted standards of human to continue for several more weeks at least. The rights and behaviour, it also condemns the actions media has not been allowed into operational areas of organisations, such as the PKK, which have and objective and independent reporting has not resorted to terrorism and violence to achieve an been possible. The Turkish operation is being independent Kurdistan. conducted jointly with one of the main Kurdish factions established in northern Iraq—the Kurdistan Indian Port Facility Democatic Party (KDP). (Question No. 670) (2) Australia has taken a consistent position regarding Turkish incursions into northern Iraq, the Senator Lees asked the Minister represent- previous major intervention against the PKK having ing the Minister for Trade, upon notice, on 26 taken place in March 1995. Because the PKK is a June, 1997: terrorist organisation which is a threat to Turkey’s (1) Is the Minister aware that P&O Ports, security and has been responsible for the deaths of Australia, has signed an agreement which is likely thousands of people, its actions cannot be con- to lead to the construction of a major port facility doned. At the same time Australia respects the at Vadhavan, India, in an area of great environ- sovereignty of Iraq and has noted Turkey’s claims mental significance. that it respects the sovereignty of Iraq’s territory. Australia has consistently urged Turkey to limit any (2) Is the Minister aware that such a port would such operations against the PKK only to what is contravene laws protecting what is a designated required to guarantee its security and with respect protected area, and would also be in contravention for human rights and the well-being of the civilian to nine separate orders from the Indian Supreme population. The Australian Government expects Court. Turkey to withdraw as quickly as possible. (3) Is the Minister aware that many local people (3) The Government is aware of the claims, have been arrested opposing the development of the principally by supporters of the PKK, of wide- proposed port. spread and systemic abuse. The situation on the (4) Will the Minister examine the matter and ground is not clear, but the Government is not raise the concerns of both Australian environmental aware of any substantiated evidence to support such organisations and their Indian counterparts with claims. P&O, particularly in the context of an Australian (4) The Turkish ground forces have been backed registered company acting in a manner which by artillery, heavy armour and air support. The would be unacceptable in Australia. Turkish General Staff said that it had targeted and (5) Is there any current involvement by any successfully attacked a number of identified PKK Australian Government or semi-Government agency bases and strongholds, and that as many as three in the proposed construction of the port; if so, what thousand guerillas and PKK supporters had been is that involvement. killed or captured and that others have fled across the border into Iran and Syria. (6) If there is any Government involvement, will the Minister seek to cease that involvement, in (5) A number of countries, including Iraq, Iran, order to protect the environment in India and Syria, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates have respect its laws. criticised the intervention. Iraq lodged a formal protest claiming that Turkey had violated Iraqi (7) Does an Australian Coal trading company, sovereignty and called for an immediate withdraw- Glencore Australia, have contracts to ship coal to al. Other countries, including the United Kingdom Bombay Suburban Electricity Supply Company, and France, have urged Turkey to keep its actions despite Supreme Court orders in India ordering the to within acceptable limits and to respect human power company to switch the relevant power rights. The United States has acknowledged station to gas firing. Turkey’s right to defend itself against a vicious Senator Hill—The Minister for Trade has terrorist organisation and accepted Turkish assuran- provided the following answer to the honour- ces that the operation had a limited scope and that Turkey would withdraw once it had achieved its able senator’s question: objectives. UN Secretary General Annan has urged (1) I was aware that P&O Ports, Australia had Turkey to withdraw as soon as possible. We signed an agreement to construct a major port understand that most of the Turkish objectives have facility at Vadhavan, India. been achieved and only a small contingent remains in northern Iraq in support of the KDP. Australia (2) No. supports an early withdrawal by Turkey from Iraq. (3) No. 5882 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

(4) As far as I am aware, P&O Australia has not (6) Will the Minister make these reports publicly acted in a manner which would be unacceptable in available; if not, why not. Australia. No environmental organisations have Senator Hill—The answer to the honour- raised concerns with my Department either here or in India about the proposed project. If there are able senator’s question is as follows: concerns, these would be more appropriately taken (1) Yes, I understand that the former Minister for up with the Indian authorities. the Environment, Senator Faulkner, recommended (5) In the lead-up to P&O Australia’s bid for the 15 conditions to the Action Minister in relation to Vadhavan Port contract, the Australian Government the risk insurance proposed to be provided by Ex- assisted by promoting P&O’s capabilities, as it does port Finance and Insurance Corporation (EFIC). I for many other services exporters. However, there understand that the Action Minister’s decision to is no Australian Government involvement in the approve the provision of sovereign risk insurance project beyond that. took into account the recommendations and the undertakings given by the company. (6) Not applicable. (2) I understand that EFIC has received a number (7) An Australian Coal trading company, of reports on aspects of the environmental manage- Glencore Australia, does have contracts to ship coal ment regime and performance of Lihir Gold oper- to Bombay Suburban Electricity Supply Company ations on Lihir Island. (BSES). However, there are no Supreme Court (3) The recommendations made by the Minister orders in India requiring the BSES to switch to gas for the Environment, and undertakings subsequently firing. Nor are there any court orders preventing the entered into by Lihir Gold, did not specify that use of imported coal by the BSES plants. reports be provided to the Environment Protection Papua New Guinea: Export Finance and Group. Insurance Corporation It is the responsibility of the Action Minister to take into account the recommendations arising from (Question No. 672) the assessment process. In this case the Action Senator Lees asked the Minister for the Minister directed EFIC to negotiate with Lihir Gold. I understand that EFIC did obtain undertak- Environment, upon notice, on 26 June 1997: ings required by the Action Minister and continues (1) Is the Minister aware that during the approval to monitor the project. process for the Export Finance and Insurance (4) Administration of the EPIP Act by my Corporation (EFIC) loan to Lihir Gold the then department has not been hampered in relation to Minister for the Environment recommended that a Lihir. The recommendations by the former Minister number of conditions be imposed on the loan and for the Environment were taken into account prior that this recommendation was accepted. to a final decision by EFIC. (2) Is the Minister aware that as a result of this (5) See 3 above. recommendation EFIC has received from Lihir Gold a number of reports including one report (6) The undertaking given by the company was commissioned from Dames and Moore and one to publish the findings on the environmental from a Papua New Guinean consultant, which performance of the company in its annual report. examine a range of issues relevant to the recom- Separation of Aboriginal and Torres mendations of the Minister for the Environment. Strait Islander Children from their (3) Is the Minister aware that the Environment Families Protection Group (EPG) which provided the recommendations to the Minister for the Environ- (Question No. 683) ment has been unable to obtain a copy of these Senator Bob Collins asked the Minister reports from EFIC and therefore is unable to representing the Attorney-General, upon ascertain whether the recommendations made by notice, on 4 July 1997: the EPG, then Commonwealth Environment Protection Agency, and the Minister have been (1) How many copies of the Human Rights and implemented. Equal Opportunity Commission report entitled Bringing them home, have been published to date. (4) Will immediate steps be taken to ensure that, in future, the work of the department is not ham- (2) How many have been sold. pered by its apparent lack of a mechanism to (3) Are there any plans for additional print runs. ensure that the recommendations of the Minister (4) With reference to a statement to the Senate and the department are properly implemented. on 28 May 1997, in which the Minister for Abo- (5) Will the Minister immediately seek copies of riginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs said the the report from the EFIC; if not, why not. department had advised the report ‘is flawed in its Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5883 analysis of many of the key legal issues’: can the reason it is not proposed to provide any further Minister confirm this, if so, when did the depart- information. ment provide this advice. (6) (a) I am advised that it is not proposed to dis- (5) Was the advice written; if so, can a copy of close the nature of the advice as the advice relates that advice be provided; if not, can an explanation to legal proceedings which are currently before the be provided to support Senator Herron’s statement courts. in the quotation in (4). (b) I am advised that the request came from the (6) With reference to Senate estimates hearings Office of the Attorney-General. for the department on 10 June 1997, during which (c) For the reasons given above, it is not pro- Mr Burmester advised the committee he had posed to provide any further information. recently provided advice to the Government on the (7) (a) I am advised that the Minister for Abo- effect of a Government apology on possible riginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs has written compensation claims arising from the report: given to relevant Commonwealth Ministers asking them that Mr Burmester told the committee he received to examine the Report, and to his State and Terri- an oral request on 28 May 1997 for the advice tory counterparts urging them and their relevant which was provided ‘urgently and at short notice’, Ministerial colleagues to give careful consideration the same day: can information be provided as to: to those recommendations relating to State and (a) the nature of the request which triggered that Territory responsibilities. The Report will be dis- advice; (b) who made the request; and (c) why. cussed at the next Ministerial Council of Aboriginal (7) (a) How is the Government’s response to this and Torres Strait Islander Affairs on 15 August report being handled; and (b) has inter-departmental 1997. committee been established; if so: (i) when; and (ii) (b) I am advised that an interdepartmental how is it comprised; if not; what mechanisms have committee (IDC) has been established to coordinate been put in place to prepare the Government’s the preparation of a response to the Report by the response. Commonwealth (8) What timetable, if any, has been adopted by (b) (i) The first meeting of the IDC took place the Government to officially respond to the report. on 22 July 1997 Senator Ellison—The Attorney-General has (b) (ii) The following agencies are represented on provided the following answer to the honour- the IDC: Prime Minister and Cabinet (Chair); able senator’s question: Attorney-General’s; Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Communication and the Arts; Health and (1) I am advised by the Human Rights and Equal Family Services; Employment, Education; Training Opportunity Commission that 8,000 copies of the and Youth Affairs; Finance; and the Aboriginal and Report have been printed to date. This includes Torres Strait Islander Commission. those copies approximately 650—required under the Tabling regulations (8) The government’s detailed response to the Report’s recommendations will be developed in the (2) I am advised by the Human Rights and Equal coming months in accordance with the processes Opportunity Commission that the Australian outlined above. Government Publishing Service report that, of the 6,500 copies available for sale, approximately Department of Veterans’ Affairs: Appeal S,500 have been sold to date. Mechanisms (3) I am advised by the Human Rights and Equal (Question No. 692) Opportunity Commission that additional print runs are to be negotiated between the Human Rights and Senator Woodley asked the Minister for Equal Opportunity Commission and the Australian Veterans’ Affairs, upon notice, on 9 July Government Publishing Service: If demand requires 1997: an additional print run, then the numbers of such (1) What appeal mechanisms are currently a print run will be discussed at the appropriate available for those people who apply for payments time. from the department. (4) I am advised that advice was given to that (2) What is the normal process through which effect by the Attorney-General’s Department on 2 appeals would be conducted, for example, depart- May 1997. mental review officer first, followed by an external (5) I am advised that the advice was in writing. body. I am further advised, however, that a copy of the (3) For the past 5 years, if figures are available: advice cannot be provided. The advice is the (a) how many appeals have been made against subject of legal professional privilege and relates decisions of the department; (b) how many were to matters currently before the courts. For the same resolved in the department’s favour; (c) how many 5884 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997 were resolved in the clients’ favour; (d) is there he or she can appeal to the Administrative Appeals some breakdown as to the nature of the appeals; Tribunal (AAT). and (e) at what level in the review process were the Where a claimant for income support (service appeals finalised. pension, partner service pension or widow(er)s’ (4) Does a representative of the department pension) is dissatisfied with a decision of the physically appear before review bodies or does the delegate, he or she can request a review of the department simply submit written submissions. decision by a senior delegate. If the claimant is still dissatisfied, he or she can appeal to the AAT. The (5) Does the Repatriation Commission have any VRB has no jurisdiction in these cases. involvement in the appeals process. A further right of appeal on a question of law (6) Has any research been undertaken as to lies to the Federal Court and then to the High Court whether people view the appeals process as ad- in both compensation and income support matters. equate; if so, what were the findings of that research. The Repatriation Commission has the power to review its own decisions on compensation under (7) Are there any imminent changes to the s.31 of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986, while process. under s.57 of the legislation a person can request Senator Newman—The Minister for the Commission to review its decision on an Veterans’ Affairs has provided the following income support matter. The powers under s.31 and s.57 are delegated to certain officers of the Depart- answer to the honourable senator’s question: ment. The aim of these reviews is to get decisions (1) & (2) Claims for pensions, allowances and right at the primary level and to reduce appeals to benefits are determined by delegates of the Repatri- the next tier of determination; that is, to the VRB ation Commission. on compensation matters and to the AAT on income support matters. Where a claimant for compensation (disability pension or war widow(er)s’ pension) is dissatisfied From 1995/96, the Repatriation Commission with a decision of the delegate, he or she can commenced reviews by delegates of all appeals on appeal to the Veterans’ Review Board (VRB). If compensation matters lodged with the VRB. the person is dissatisfied with the VRB’s decision, (3) (a), (b) and (c)

Table 1—VRB Appeals

1992/93 1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 1996/97 (a) Appeals lodged against 7,615 8,044 8,162 10,048 7,937 Repatriation Commission de- cisions (b) Decisions resolved in 5,426 4,691 4,848 4,509 5,757 Repatriation Commission’s favour (c) Decisions resolved in 2,503 2,825 2,918 2,017 2,100 client’s favour Table 2—AAT Appeals

1992/93 1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 1996/97 Appeals lodged against Repatri- 1,678 1,663 1,850 1,721 1,824 ation Commission/ VRB deci- sions* (b) Decisions resolved in Repatri- 594 411 394 592 637 ation Commission’s favour (c) Decisions resolved in client’s 1,327 1,267 1,429 1,114 995 favour * Repatriation Commission decisions refer to income support matters and VRB decisions to compensation matters. Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5885

Table 3—Federal Court Appeals **

1992/93 1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 1996/97 (a) Appeals lodged against 37 28 31 38 35 AAT decision (b) Decisions resolved in 6 13121423 Repatriation Commission’s favour (c) Decisions resolved in 13 12 7 11 9 client’s favour ** In a number of the cases in which clients were successful the courts remitted the matter for re- hearing by the AAT on narrow points, yet, in effect, maintained the Parliamentary intent as submitted by the Repatriation Commission. Upon re-hearing in the AAT, the clients have not necessarily succeeded. Note: In the above tables, statistics for appeals lodged and withdrawn before decision are not shown.

3 (d) Statistics by nature of appeal are not Telstra: 1996 Atlanta Olympic Games recorded. (Question No. 698) (3) (e) Appeals can be finalised at each level of the reviews process. For example, if an appeal is Senator Allison asked the Minister for accepted by the VRB then the appeal is finalised Communications and the Arts, upon notice, at the VRB level. However, if the appeal is rejected on 17 July 1997: by the VRB, the claimant can appeal to the AAT. If the appellant is dissatisfied with the AAT’s With reference to the answer to question on decision, he or she can appeal to the Federal Court, notice No. 495 (Official Senate Hansard, 7 May but only on a question of law. 1997, pp.2999-3000) who were: (a) the ‘key (4) A representative of the Department does not customers’ in the public sector who were ‘can- usually appear before the VRB. The Department vassed seeking expressions of interest to attend the provides written submissions on behalf of the Atlanta [Olympic] Games’; (b) the ‘key customers’ Repatriation Commission. in the public sector who expressed an interest; and (c) the ‘key customers’ who were offered a free trip The Department appears or is represented by to the Atlanta Games. legal counsel, on behalf of the Repatriation Com- mission, before other appeal bodies. Senator Alston—The answer, based on (5) The Department acts on behalf of the Repat- advice from Telstra, to the honourable riation Commission. senator’s question is as follows: (6) The Department is not aware of any such (a) Telstra has advised that representatives from research. However, the Repatriation Commission State Governments and Territories who were and the Department receive regular feedback from intending to bid for the 2006 Commonwealth the ex-service community on the determining Games were canvassed seeking expressions of system through various forums with ex-service interest to attend the Atlanta Olympic Games as organisation representatives and communication observers so as to enhance their bids. with individual veterans and dependants on their cases. While the Department does receive some (b) Telstra advises that the offer to attend the criticism of the system from time to time from Games was taken up by the Victorian and Northern individual veterans, the veteran community as a Territory Governments. whole is generally happy with the system. (c) Telstra has advised that in addition to the (7) The Attorney-General has announced that the public sector guests, customers from ten global and Government has agreed in principle to amalgamate domestic private sector companies accepted invita- several merit review tribunals. The present Admin- tions to attend the Games as guests of Telstra. istrative Appeals Tribunal, Social Security Appeals Telstra further advises that it considers these to be Tribunal, Veterans’ Review Board, Immigration sensitive customer commercial relationships. Review Tribunal and Refugee Review Tribunal are Consequently, Telstra does not feel it is able to to be merged to create a single tribunal to be called disclose the personal details of representatives who the Administrative Review Tribunal. accepted the invitation. 5886 SENATE Wednesday, 27 August 1997

Minister for Resources and Energy: Under the Higher Education Funding Act 1988, Media Monitoring Services HECS liable and non-fee paying HECS exempt students must be able to complete their chosen (Question No. 727) award without facing course related charges imposed by their higher education institution. Senator Robert Ray asked the Minister for Universities may not, therefore, charge fees for Resources and Energy, upon notice, on 28 units which are compulsory parts of HECS liable July 1997: courses. (1) What was the total cost of media monitoring Under some circumstances, however, a student services, including press clippings, electronic media may be charged fees for units which would give transcripts etcetera provided to the Minister’s office credit towards a course, as long as the student can in the 1996-97 financial year. choose to complete the course without undertaking those units. This is the basis on which institutions (2) Which agency or agencies provided these are able to charge fees for the costs associated with services. obtaining a pilot’s license and the undertaking of practical flying training. My Department is in the Senator Parer—The Minister for Re- process of formally writing to the universities sources and Energy has provided the follow- involved in the provision of aviation courses to ing answer to the honourable senator’s ques- confirm that these courses comply with these tion: provisions of the Higher Education Funding Act 1988. (1) The total cost for media monitoring services to my office in the financial year of 1996-97 was Under the Actual Means Test (AMT) all ex- $9,438. penditure and savings are included in a family’s actual means except those related to the main (2) Media Monitors ACT Pty Ltd provided these business activity of the family. As the AMT services. measures expenditure and savings, and borrowings are a spending resource, any expenses which are paid from borrowings must be included as part of Austudy the actual means available to a family. Senator Crowley asked the Minister for The changes to the administration of Austudy Employment, Education, Training and Youth that I announced on 20 February, clarify the Affairs, without notice, on 19 March 1997 treatment of loans in the Actual Means Test for (Official Hansard page 1818): Austudy. Loans are treated in two ways. Firstly the outlay or purchase price funded by (1) Are you aware that some universities help loans for the principal family home, other real arrange repayment deferred bank loans for students estate expenditure and motor vehicles should not be undertaking HECS-liable courses which include a reported as estimated expenditure in the year of substantial fee component eg aviation. Can you applying for Austudy. However, repayments of confirm that these loans are deemed as actual principal and interest in the year of study for these means under the revised Austudy Means test and items are to be included as expenditure. may make some students with self employed parents ineligible for Austudy. Secondly, the outlay or purchase price funded by loans for all other items including education should Senator Vanstone—The response to the be included as estimated expenditure The estimated honourable senator’s question is as follows: repayments of principal and interest for these items are not to be reported as expenditure. I am aware of instances where universities arrange deferred repayment back loans for the costs Austudy associated with the flying training component of aviation courses. Senator Crowley asked the Minister for Employment, Education, Training and Youth These arrangements have been created because Affairs, without notice, on 19 March 1997 the Commonwealth does not (nor has it ever) (Official Hansard page 1818): provided funding to higher education institutions to cover the cost of pilot training. The Commonwealth Is it not the case that the Actual Means Test in has taken this view on the basis that the costs interpreting debt as expenditure severely disadvan- associated with obtaining a pilot’s license and the taging rural families whose incomes fluctuate from undertaking of practical flying training should be year to year and who need to make up that differ- born by individuals, not taxpayers. ence through debt. Wednesday, 27 August 1997 SENATE 5887

Senator Vanstone—The response to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: Rural families receive special consideration under the Actual Means test. For example, Sole Trader Primary Producers and families in receipt of Drought Relief Payment or Farm Household Support payments are exempted from the AUSTUDY Actual Means Test. Isolated families also receive a discount off their actual means when in receipt of the isolated boarders’ concession. For the purposes of the Actual Means Test, loans fall into two categories. For loans for the principal family home, other real estate expenditure and motor vehicles, the purchase price should not be included in estimated expenditure in the current year. Repayments of principal and interest in the current year should be included in expenditure estimates. For loans for other items, the outlay only should be reported as estimated expenditure in the current year. Repayment of principal and interest should not be reported as expenditure. Neither business expenditure, including business loans, or business assets are counted in the Actual Means Test. The Actual Means Test is an estimate of ex- penditure for the year of study and therefore it is sensitive to fluctuations in a family’s current financial situation. The Actual Means Test like the AUSTUDY Income Test allows the family whose circumstances change within the year of study to have their eligibility and level of entitlement re- assessed at any time throughout the year of study.