SENATE Official Hansard

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

THURSDAY, 23 OCTOBER 1997

THIRTY-EIGHTH PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—FIFTH PERIOD

BY AUTHORITY OF THE SENATE CANBERRA CONTENTS

THURSDAY, 23 OCTOBER

Privilege ...... 7901 Notices of Motion— Privileges Committee ...... 7902 Petitions— Australian Broadcasting Corporation ...... 7902 Logging and Woodchipping ...... 7902 Notices of Motion— Amnesty International ...... 7903 Koongarra Uranium Mine ...... 7903 Road Transport Reform (Dangerous Goods) Regulations ...... 7903 Community Affairs References Committee ...... 7903 Racism ...... 7904 Committees— Selection of Bills Committee—Report ...... 7904 Order of Business— Government Business ...... 7908 Introduction of Legislation ...... 7908 General Business ...... 7908 Importation of Cooked Chicken Meat ...... 7908 Whale Meat ...... 7908 Oakajee Port and Industrial Estate ...... 7909 Committees— Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee— Extension of Time ...... 7909 Order of Business— Australian Workplace Agreements ...... 7909 East Timor ...... 7909 Notices of Motion ...... 7909 Committees— Corporations and Securities Committee—Meeting ...... 7909 Constitutional Convention ...... 7909 Human Rights ...... 7910 ACIL Economics ...... 7911 Parliamentary Service Bill 1997— Report of Appropriations and Staffing Committee ...... 7915 Farm Household Support Amendment (Restart and Exceptional Circumstances) Bill 1997— First Reading ...... 7915 Second Reading ...... 7915 Workplace Relations and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1997— In Committee ...... 7917 National Road Transport Commission Amendment Bill 1997— Second Reading ...... 7943 Ministerial Arrangements ...... 7944 Questions Without Notice— Nursing Homes ...... 7944 Greenhouse Gases ...... 7945 Nursing Homes ...... 7946 Privatisation ...... 7947 Nursing Homes ...... 7949 Greenhouse Gases ...... 7949 Nursing Homes ...... 7950 Greenhouse Gases ...... 7952 Nursing Homes ...... 7953 Violence ...... 7955 Nursing Homes ...... 7956 Oakajee Port and Industrial Development ...... 7956 CONTENTS—continued

Answers to Questions Without Notice— Clerk of the Senate ...... 7957 Importation of Cooked Chicken Meat ...... 7958 Nursing Homes ...... 7959 Personal Explanations ...... 7965 Notices of Motion— Superannuation Committee ...... 7966 Documents— Parliamentary Zone: Administrative Building ...... 7966 Committees— Membership ...... 7966 Matters of Urgency— Unemployment ...... 7966 Suspension of Standing Orders ...... 7971 Industry Policy ...... 7977 Documents— Commonwealth Ombudsman ...... 7994 Nuclear Safety Bureau—38th and 39th Reports ...... 7996 Judge Advocate General ...... 7997 Veterans’ Review Board ...... 7998 Civil Aviation Safety Authority ...... 7999 National Health and Medical Research Council ...... 8000 Horticultural Research and Development Corporation ...... 8001 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner . . . 8002 Consideration ...... 8004 Committees— Economics References Committee—Report ...... 8005 Foreign Affairs and Trade Committee: Joint—Report ...... 8006 Consideration ...... 8007 Adjournment— Orphans of the Empire ...... 8007 In the Shadow of the Cross ...... 8007 Industry Policy ...... 8009 Parliamentary Privilege ...... 8011 Parliamentary Privilege ...... 8013 Documents— Tabling ...... 8014 Questions on Notice— Minister for Industrial Relations: Media Monitoring Services— (Question No. 711) ...... 8015 Taxation: Motor Vehicle Claims—(Question No. 738) ...... 8015 Department of Environment, Sport and Territories: Grants and Programs—(Question No. 792) ...... 8016 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission: Grants and Programs—(Question No. 801) ...... 8023 Government Contracts—(Question No. 818) ...... 8027 Government Contracts—(Question No. 820) ...... 8029 Government Contracts—(Question No. 825) ...... 8031 Department of Social Security: Salary Packaging—(Question No. 841) 8031 Australian Ethnic Radio Training Project—(Question No. 861) ..... 8032 Australian Taxation Office: Lamesa Holdings BV—(Question No. 867) 8033 Child Care—(Question No. 888) ...... 8036 Nursing Home Accommodation—(Question No. 889) ...... 8036 SENATE 7901

Thursday, 23 October 1997 ised disclosure have been regarded as meeting the criteria for giving precedence to a motion. There is a difficulty with the matter raised The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. by Senator Bolkus, however. One of the Margaret Reid) took the chair at 9.30 a.m., persons named in Senator Bolkus’s letter, Mr and read prayers. Entsch, is a member of the House of Repre- sentatives, and past presidential rulings have PRIVILEGE made it clear that the Senate cannot inquire The PRESIDENT—Senator Bolkus, by into the conduct of a member of the House of letter dated 21 October 1997, has raised a Representatives, other than a minister acting matter of privilege under standing order 81 in the capacity of a minister. Only the House and asked that precedence be given under that of Representatives can inquire into the con- standing order to a motion relating to the duct of its members other than ministers matter. acting in that capacity. Rulings to this effect The question he raises is whether two were given by President Sibraa on 17 May documents of the Joint Committee on Native 1988 and by President Beahan on 19 Septem- Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait ber 1994. Islander Land Fund have been dealt with by Although Mr Williams is a minister and the Attorney-General, Mr Daryl Williams MP, may be taken to have been acting in that the Special Minister of State, Senator capacity in dealing with the documents in Minchin, or Mr Warren Entsch MP, in a question, the evidence of his dealing with the manner not authorised by the joint committee. documents is his disclosure of them in the I am required by the standing order to course of proceedings in the House of Repre- determine whether a motion to refer the sentatives. The Senate cannot inquire into matter to the Privileges Committee should proceedings in the House of Representatives. have precedence, having regard to the follow- I therefore determine that precedence may ing criteria: be given to a motion relating to the matter raised by Senator Bolkus only in so far as it (a) the principle that the Senate’s power to relates to unauthorised dealings with commit- adjudge and deal with contempts should be tee documents other than by members of the used only where it is necessary to provide House of Representatives who are not reasonable protection for the Senate and its ministers and other than in the course of committees and for senators against improper proceedings in the House of Representatives. acts tending substantially to obstruct them in the performance of their functions, and should On 20 June 1996 the Senate adopted a not be used in respect of matters which recommendation of the Privileges Committee appear to be of a trivial nature or unworthy of that, in cases of unauthorised disclosure of the attention of the Senate; and committee documents, the committee concerned should in the first instance inquire into (b) the existence of any remedy other than the disclosure and determine whether it had that power for any act which may be held to a tendency substantially to interfere with the be a contempt. work of the committee or of the Senate. The Past presidential rulings have explained that resolution adopting this procedure, however, a matter is given precedence if it is capable explicitly does not prevent a Senator raising of being held by the Senate to meet criterion a matter of privilege under standing order 81 (a) and if there is no other readily available in the absence of such an inquiry and determi- remedy. nation by the committee concerned. Unauthorised disclosure of committee If Senator Bolkus decides to exercise his documents is declared by the Senate’s privi- right to give a notice of motion, the notice lege resolutions to be a matter which may must be framed so as to make it clear that any constitute a contempt of the Senate, and, in inquiry by the Privileges Committee does not past precedents, allegations of such unauthor- extend to the conduct of members of the 7902 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

House of Representatives other than ministers by Senator Sandy Macdonald (from 274 acting in the capacity of ministers or to citizens). proceedings in the House of Representatives. I table Senator Bolkus’s letter and attach- Logging and Woodchipping ments. To the Honourable the President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled. NOTICES OF MOTION For permanent protection of old-growth forests and all other areas of high conservation value, and Privileges Committee for the implementation of tree plantation strategies. Senator BOLKUS (South Australia)—I This petition from the undersigned respectfully give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I points out that: there is an increasing and urgent shall move: demand from the people, to protect all remaining That the following matter be referred to the high conservation value forests which support flora Committee of Privileges: and fauna unique to Australia, thus complying with the United Nations Biodiversity Convention to Whether any person, other than a member of the which Australia is a signatory. We have a responsi- House of Representatives who is not a minister, bility to future and present generations, and the and other than in the course of proceedings in necessary reasons, knowledge and technology to act the House of Representatives, dealt with two now on the following achievable solutions. documents of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Your petitioners therefore request that the Senate Strait Islander Land Fund, namely: legislate to: (a) a copy of a facsimile transmission from Mr immediately stop all logging and wood- Steve Curran, Research Officer of the chipping activities in high conservation value Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native native forests; Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait ensure intergenerational equity by planning for Islander Land Fund, to Mr David Kinley of the rights of future generations, and protecting in the Australian Law Reform Commission, perpetuity all biologically diverse old-growth dated 12 September 1997; and forests, wilderness, rainforests and critical (b) a copy of a letter from Mr Peter Grundy, habitats of endangered species; Committee Secretary of the Parliamentary facilitate rapid transition of the timber industry Joint Committee on Native Title and the from harvesting high conservation value native Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land forests, to establishing mixed-species farm Fund, to Mr Warren Entsch, MP, dated 1 forestry on existing cleared and degraded lands, October 1997; using non-toxic methods to protect ecological in a manner that had not been authorised by the sustainability; Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title maximise use of readily-available plantation and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander timber for industry needs, using appropriate Land Fund. forestry techniques and progressive minimal- waste processing methods, such as radial sawing, PETITIONS and wherever possible, reuse and recycle wood The Clerk—Petitions have been lodged for and paper products; presentation as follows: support incentives for nationwide employment in composting, soil remineralisation programs, Australian Broadcasting Corporation and the planting programs of trees and annual fibre crops, inter-grown with appropriate fruit To the Honourable the President and Members of and nut trees and medicinal plants; the Senate in the Parliament assembled. encourage sensitively-managed, environmental The petition of the undersigned recognises the education tourism in appropriate forest areas, vital role of a strong and comprehensive Australian with full respect for natural ecosystems, Aborigi- Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) and asks that: nal cultural heritage, sacred sites and other sites 1. The Senate votes its will to maintain the of significance; and existing role of the ABC as a fully independ- progressively utilise technological expertise ent, publicly funded and publicly owned and resources transferred from the military organisation. sector, to help implement these tree planting 2. The Senate oppose any weakening of the solutions; and to motivate the international Charter of the ABC. community to follow this example. Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7903

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever (iii) the site is adjacent to the highly signifi- pray. cant and spectacular rock art site, Nourlangie; and by Senator Brown (from 216 citizens). (b) calls on the Government to now state clear- Petitions received. ly that it will not proclaim the Koongarra Project Area Act 1981. NOTICES OF MOTION Road Transport Reform (Dangerous Amnesty International Goods) Regulations Senator BOURNE (New South Wales— Senator O’CHEE (Queensland) (9.38 Deputy Leader of the Australian Demo- a.m.)—On behalf of the Standing Committee crats)—I give notice that, on the next day of on Regulations and Ordinances, I give notice sitting, I shall move: that 15 sitting days after today I shall move: That the Senate notes that: That regulation 1.13 of the Road Transport (a) 24 October 1997 marks Amnesty Internat- Reform (Dangerous Goods) Regulations, as con- ional’s Candle Day, commemorating tained in Statutory Rules 1997 No. 241 and made Amnesty’s work to free all prisoners of under the Road Transport Reform (Dangerous conscience, people who are imprisoned Goods) Act 1995, be disallowed. because of their beliefs or because of their colour, gender, ethnic origin, language or I seek leave to make a short statement about religion, provided they have neither used the committee’s concerns with the regulation. nor advocated violence; Leave granted. (b) Amnesty International also campaigns: Senator O’CHEE—The regulations pro- (i) to ensure fair and prompt trials for politi- vide the substantive regulatory provisions for cal prisoners, the national scheme, which include the code (ii) to end torture, disappearances, political for the transport of dangerous goods by road killings and executions, and and rail. The committee notes that regulation (iii) to promote the protection of human rights 1.13 provides for 68 strict liability offences generally; and which may breach personal rights. The expla- (c) the Amnesty International Parliamentary natory statement, however, does not explain Group (AIPG) is the largest of the parlia- why these offences are needed. mentary groups worldwide whose work seeks to ensure human rights are not re- The committee has previously received an moved from our political agenda and proves undertaking that a related instrument, statutory that a commitment to human rights trans- rules 1995 No. 55, would be amended in the cends politics and is truly representative of light of our concerns about strict liability and a multi-partisan approach. administrative review. The committee was Koongarra Uranium Mine also assured that the instrument would not commence before suitable arrangements were Senator LEES (South Australia—Acting made. Given this previously helpful cooper- Leader of the Australian Democrats)—I give ation, the committee has written to the notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall minister seeking reasons for the inclusion of move: these strict liability offences. That the Senate— Community Affairs References (a) notes that: Committee (i) the Minister for the Environment (Senator Senator LEES (South Australia—Acting Hill) has refused to rule out the proclama- tion of the Koongarra Project Area Act Leader of the Australian Democrats)—I give 1981 to enable the Koongarra uranium notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall mine to proceed, move: (ii) the proposed mine would be in one of the That the following matter be referred to the most environmentally sensitive and fre- Community Affairs References Committee for quently visited areas in Kakadu, and inquiry and report by 31 March 1998: 7904 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Current arrangements for the provision of public (c) endorses the comments made by former dental services in Australia, with particular Prime Minister, Mr Malcolm Fraser, at an reference to: Australian Broadcasting Corporation televi- (a) the current and future dental care needs of sion function on 22 October 1997, particu- low income earners and other disadvantaged larly relating to Australia’s ‘need to re- groups of Australians and the capacity of emphasise that those who express racist both private and public dental services to views, that those who would base policies meet those needs; on the grounds of race, religion, or ethnic origin are unacceptable in civilised society’; (b) the effect of the abolition of the Common- wealth Dental Health Program; (d) notes Mr Fraser’s comments relating to (c) the nature of the Commonwealth’s responsi- Australia’s relations with Asia and the need bility to make laws for the provision of to accept these relations, ‘not grudgingly, dental services pursuant to section but openly and fulsomely’; and 51(xxiiiA) of the Australian Constitution and (e) urges the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) to the extent to which the Commonwealth is make a public statement supporting these currently fulfilling that responsibility; sentiments. (d) the Commonwealth’s role and responsibility in setting and monitoring national goals for COMMITTEES oral health in Australia; and Selection of Bills Committee (e) options for reform in the delivery of public dental services, including an exploration of Report the efficiency and effectiveness of a range of options for delivering dental services to Senator O’CHEE—At the request of low income earners. Senator Heffernan I present the 16th report of 1997 of the Selection of Bills Committee. Racism Senator BOURNE (New South Wales— Ordered that the report be printed. Deputy Leader of the Australian Demo- Senator O’CHEE—I also seek leave to crats)—I give notice that, on the next day of have the report incorporated in Hansard. sitting, I shall move: Leave granted. That the Senate— (a) endorses the comments made by the Mem- The report read as follows— ber for Aston (Mr Nugent) on 21 October SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE 1997, when speaking to the Native Title Amendment Bill; REPORT NO. 16 OF 1997 (b) notes Mr Nugent’s rebuttal in that speech of 1. The Committee met on 22 October 1997. the assertions made by the Member for Oxley (Ms Hanson) in relation to multicul- 2. The committee resolved-That the provisions of turalism and native title; the following bills be referred to committees:

Stage at which Committee Bill title referred (legislation/select) Reporting date Family Trust Distribution Tax immediately Economics 20 November 1997 (Primary Liability) Bill 1997 (see Appendix 1 for a statement of reasons for referral) Family Trust Distribution Tax immediately Economics 20 November 1997 (Secondary Liability) Bill 1997 (see Appendix 1 for a statement of reasons for referral) Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7905

Stage at which Committee Bill title referred (legislation/select) Reporting date Medicare Levy Consequential immediately Economics 20 November 1997 Amendment (Trust Loss) Bill 1997 (see Appendix 1 for a statement of reasons for referral) Taxation Laws Amendment (Trust immediately Economics 20 November 1997 Loss and Other Deductions) Bill 1997 (see Appendix 1 for a statement of reasons for referral) Farm Household Support immediately Rural and Regional 10 November 1997 Amendment (Restart and Excep- Affairs and Trans- tional Circumstances) Bill 1997 port (see Appendix 2 for a statement of reasons for referral) Live-stock Transactions Levy Bill immediately Rural and Regional 17 November 1997 1997 (see Appendix 3 for a state- Affairs and Trans- ment of reasons for referral) port Migration Legislation Amendment immediately Legal and Constitu- 17 November 1997 (Migration Agents) Bill 1997 (see tional Appendix 4 for a statement of reasons for referral) Migration Agents Registration Ap- immediately Legal and Constitu- 17 November 1997 plication Charge Bill 1997 (see tional Appendix 4 for a statement of reasons for referral) Migration Agents Registration Re- immediately Legal and Constitu- 17 November 1997 newal Charge Bill 1997 (see Ap- tional pendix 4 for a statement of reasons for referral) Social Security Legislation immediately Community Affairs 10 November 1997 Amendment (Youth Allowance) Bill 1997 (see Appendix 5 for a statement of reasons for referral) Superannuation Contributions Tax immediately Select Committee 17 November 1997 (Members of Constitutionally Pro- on Superannuation tected Superannuation Funds) As- sessment and Collection Bill 1997 (see Appendix 6 for a statement of reasons for referral) Superannuation Contributions Tax immediately Select Committee 17 November 1997 Imposition Amendment Bill 1997 on Superannuation (see Appendix 6 for a statement of reasons for referral) Superannuation Contributions Tax immediately Select Committee 17 November 1997 (Members of Constitutionally Pro- on Superannuation tected Superannuation Funds) Imposition Bill 1997 (see Appen- dix 6 for a statement of reasons for referral) 7906 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Stage at which Committee Bill title referred (legislation/select) Reporting date Superannuation Contributions and immediately Select Committee 17 November 1997 Termination Payments Taxes on Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 1997 (see Appendix 6 for a statement of reasons for referral) Superannuation Legislation immediately Select Committee 17 November 1997 Amendment (Superannuation Con- on Superannuation tributions Tax) Bill 1997 (see Appendix 6 for a statement of reasons for referral) Termination Payments Tax Impo- immediately Select Committee 17 November 1997 sition Amendment Bill 1997 (see on Superannuation Appendix 6 for a statement of reasons for referral)

3. The Committee resolved to recommend—That . Trade Practices Amendment (Fair Trading) Bill the following bills not be referred to commit- 1997. tees: The Committee recommends accordingly. . Airports Legislation Amendment Bill 1997 4. The Committee deferred consideration of the . Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Bill following bills to the next meeting: 1997 (deferred from meeting of 1 October 1997) . Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry (Repeals . Ballast Water Research and Development Fund- and Consequential Provisions) Bill 1997 ing Levy Bill 1997 . Beef Production Levy Amendment Bill 1997 . Ballast Water Research and Development Fund- ing Levy Collection Bill 1997 . Buffalo Export Charge Bill 1997 (deferred from meeting of 22 October 1997) . Buffalo Slaughter Levy Bill 1997 . Health Legislation Amendment Bill 1997 . Cattle (Exporters) Export Charge Bill 1997 . Social Security Legislation Amendment (Parent- . Cattle (Producers) Export Charges Bill 1997 ing and Other Measures) Bill 1997. . Cattle Transactions Levy Bill 1997 (Bill Heffernan) . Charter of Budget Honesty Bill 1996 Acting Chair . Live-stock (Exporters) Export Charge Bill 1997 23 October 1997 . Live-stock (Producers) Export Charges Bill 1997 . Live-stock Slaughter (Processors) Levy Bill 1997 Appendix 1 . National Residue Survey (Buffalo Slaughter) Proposal to refer a bill to a committee Levy Bill 1997 . National Residue Survey (Cattle Export) Levy Name of bill: Bill 1997 Taxation Laws Amendment (Trust Loss and Other . National Residue Survey (Cattle Transactions) Deductions) Bill 1997. Levy Bill 1997 Family Trust Distribution Tax (Primary Liability) . National Residue Survey (Sheep, Lambs and Bill 1997. Goats Export) Levy Bill 1997 Family Trust Distribution Tax (Secondary Liability) . National Residue Survey (Sheep, Lambs and Bill 1997. Goats Transactions) Levy Bill 1997 Medicare Levy Consequential Amendment (Trust . Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Amend- Loss) Bill 1997. ment Bill 1997 Reasons for referral/principal issues for con- . Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No. 4) 1997 sideration: . Telecommunications Legislation Amendment Bill Significant industry interest in inquiry into these 1997 bills. Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7907

Possible submissions or evidence from: United Graziers (Qld) Taxation Institute, Institute of Chartered Account- Merino Stud Breeders of Australia ants, Australian Society of CPAs, etc. Committee to which bill is to be referred: Committee to which bill is to be referred: Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Commit- Senate Economics Legislation Committee. tee Possible hearing date(s): Possible hearing date(s): November 14, 1997. Possible reporting date: Possible reporting date: (signed) November 20, 1997. S. Conroy (signed) Whip/Selection of Bills Committee member S. Conroy, Whip/Selection of Bills Committee Member Appendix 4 Proposal to refer a bill to a committee Appendix 2 Name of bill: Proposal to refer a bill to a committee Migration Legislation Amendment (Migration Name of bill: Agents) Bill 1997. Farm Household Support Amendment (Restart and Migration Agents Registration Application Charge Exceptional Circumstances) Bill 1997 Bill 1977. Reasons for referral/principal issues for con- Migration Agents Registration Renewal Charge Bill sideration: 1997. Provisions of the bill relating to controversial Reasons for referral/principal issues for con- drought assistance, welfare and farm transfer sideration: changes in the rural sector, with particular regard Oppose the Bill. to the lack of detail in many areas of the bill, its The new Application Charge Bill does away with complexity, and the inequities and hardships which the exemption for voluntary organisations for could result from the eligibility conditions of the registration of fees. schemes. The Bill clauses (32), (35) time for raising an Possible submissions or evidence from: objection is reduced to 10 days. Extend time to 6 Julie Austin, National Farmers’ Federation weeks—current provision. Financial/rural counsellors Accountability—the government is delegating State and federal rural industry associations regulation responsibility—no specific accountability Committee to which bill is to be referred: requirements. Mediation—no provision for arbitration or for powers to grant clients compensation. Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legisla- tion Committee. Possible submissions or evidence from: Possible hearing date(s): Community organisations response Possible reporting date: Victorian Immigration Advice and Right Centre As soon as practicable. Immigration Advice and Rights Centre NSW (signed) Committee to which bill is to be referred: Vicki Bourne Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Whip/Selection of Bills Committee member Affairs. Possible hearing date(s): Possible reporting date: Appendix 3 17th Proposal to refer a bill to a committee (signed) Name of bill: S. Conroy Livestock Transactions Levy Bill 1997. Whip/Selection of Bills Committee member Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration: Appendix 5 Lack of consultation with industry. The effect of creating a tax on an unrelated sector (i.e. wool) Proposal to refer a bill to a committee which already has a tax on its product. Name of bill: Possible submissions or evidence from: Social Security Legislation Amendment (Youth Pastoralists and Graziers (WA) Allowance) Bill 1997 7908 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Reasons for referral of Social Security Legisla- Possible submissions or evidence from: tion Amendment (Youth Allowance) Bill 1997 ASFA, APCPA, Institute of Actuaries, IFA, Jacques To examine the provisions of the Social Security Martin, IFS, Coopers & Lybrand, CPSU, Armed Legislation Amendment (Youth Allowance) Bill Forces Federation, Bruce Harris, Noel Davis. 1997 and, in particular, to examine how the Bill Committee to which bill is to be referred: addresses inadequacies in the current system of income support for young people, including: Senate Slect Committee on Superannuation. (a) structural disincentives to continue in educa- Possible hearing date(s): tion; Week commencing 3.11.97 (b) the complexity of five different payments at Possible reporting date: 13 different rates; 20.11.97 (c) whether young people needing to leave (signed) home for work or study receive adequate S. Conroy, Whip/Selection of Bills Committee support; and Member (d) the appropriate balance between parental support and Commonwealth income support ORDER OF BUSINESS Possible submissions or evidence from: Government Business Community groups in the welfare, youth, student Motion (by Senator Ian Campbell) agreed and education sectors. to: Committee to which bill is to be referred: That the following government business order of Community Affairs Legislation Committee the day No. 4 (National Road Transport Commis- Possible hearing date(s): sion Amendment Bill 1997) be considered from 31 October 1997 12.45 p.m. till not later than 2 p.m. today. Possible reporting date: Introduction of Legislation 10 November 1997 Motion (by Senator Neal) agreed to: (signed) That general business notice of motion No. 828 Whip/Selection of Bills Committee member standing in the name of Senator Neal for today, relating to the introduction of the Quarantine Amendment (Ministerial Approval) Bill 1997, be Appendix 6 postponed till 28 October 1997. Proposal to refer a bill to a committee General Business Name of bill: Motion (by Senator Ian Campbell) agreed Superannuation Contributions Tax (Members of to: Constitutionally Protected Superannuation Funds) Assessment and Collection Bill 1997. That the order of general business for consideration today be as follows: Superannuation Contributions Tax Imposition Amendment Bill 1997. (a) general business notice of motion No. 826 standing in the name of Senator Cook, relating Superannuation Contributions Tax (Members of to industry policy; and Constitutionally Protected Superannuation Funds) Imposition Bill 1997. (b) consideration of government documents. Superannuation Contributions and Termination Importation of Cooked Chicken Meat Payments Taxes Legislation Amendment Bill 1997 Motion (by Senator Bourne, at the request Superannuation Legislation Amendment (Superan- of Senator Woodley) agreed to: nuation Contributions Tax) Bill 1997. That general business notice of motion No. 811 Termination Payments Tax Imposition Amendment standing in the name of Senator Woodley for today, Bill 1997. proposing an order for the production of documents Reasons for referral/principal issues for con- relating to the importation of cooked chicken meat, sideration: be postponed till the next day of sitting. * Examination by Senate Select Committee on Superannuation about impact of Bills on fund Whale Meat members to which superannuation tax applies. Motion (by Senator Allison) agreed to: * Investigation of impact of Bills on superannuation That general business notice of motion No. 824 industry and fund members. standing in the name of Senator Allison for today, Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7909 relating to the international trade in whale meat, be and the Democrats, it inevitably comes to my postponed till the next day of sitting. vote. Oakajee Port and Industrial Estate I feel that I am the only senator who has to Motion (by Senator Margetts) agreed to: spend such an inordinate amount of time physically present in this chamber listening to That general business notice of motion No. 809 standing in the name of Senator Margetts for today, other persons’ motions. I am not complaining relating to the construction of a port and industrial about that; that is my job. There are other estate at Oakajee, Western Australia, be postponed matters which require substantial amounts of till 28 October 1997. my time. Unfortunately, as I understand the divisions which are taking place, the Wik COMMITTEES matter is one of those matters. Hopefully that Rural and Regional Affairs and time will not be broken by other activities. I Transport Legislation Committee am raising this point so that honourable Extension of Time senators might give some thought to whether contentious issues could be dealt with in one Motion (by Senator O’Chee at the request group at a particular time on a particular day of Senator Crane)—by leave—agreed to: of the week. That would certainly assist me. That the time for the presentation of the report of the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport I do apologise for that. I understand the Legislation Committee on the provisions of the situation and I ask honourable senators to Wheat Marketing Amendment Bill 1997 be extend- understand that everybody else seems to be ed to 28 October 1997. able to either get a pair or have somebody ORDER OF BUSINESS else cover for them in this chamber. That might change, of course, after the next elec- Australian Workplace Agreements tion. Really, this is an appeal to honourable Motion (by Senator Chris Evans at the senators to give consideration to perhaps request of Senator Mackay) agreed to: having one day—say a Thursday—when we That general business notice of motion No. 641 can have a look at these matters. I have not standing in the name of Senator Mackay for today, done it before, but I appeal on this occasion proposing an order for the production of documents because in the next few weeks I will have to by the Minister representing the Minister for spend a considerable amount of time on the Workplace Relations and Small Business (Senator Wik measures. Alston), be postponed till 27 October 1997. The PRESIDENT—Senator, it is a matter East Timor which I will draw to the attention of the Motion (by Senator Brown) agreed to: Chairman of the Procedures Committee where That general business notice of motion No. 814 it can be discussed. Thank you for proposing standing in the name of Senator Brown for today, it. relating to the deaths of six Australian-based COMMITTEES journalists in East Timor in 1975, be postponed till 28 October 1997. Corporations and Securities Committee NOTICES OF MOTION Meeting Senator HARRADINE (Tasmania) (9.45 Motion (by Senator Chapman) agreed to: a.m.)—by leave—At the moment in the That the Joint Committee on Corporations and chamber, one-sixth or perhaps even one- Securities be authorised to hold a public meeting during the sitting of the Senate on 27 October seventh of senators are present. When we deal 1997, from 3.30 pm, to take evidence for the with notices of motion—essentially they are committee’s statutory monitoring of the Australian notices of motion from the opposition, the Securities Commission. Democrats or the Greens—quite frequently we get a situation where the government opposes CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION the notices of motion. The numbers in the Motion (by Senator Allison) agreed to: Senate being as they are, if notices of motion That the Senate— are supported by the opposition, the Greens (a) notes that: 7910 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

(i) among the 36 non-parliamentary delegates (i) conveying the Australian Senate’s deep to the Constitutional Convention, only concern at the ongoing pattern of human two will represent local government, rights abuses in Nigeria and Kenya, and (ii) these two delegates were not included in urging the Nigerian and Kenyan Govern- the Australian Local Government ments and the Commonwealth to do Association’s list of proposed delegates to everything in their power to ensure that the convention, and the basic human rights of all their citizens (iii) the Government has consistently broken are respected, and its promises on local government and has (ii) asking the Nigerian and Kenyan Govern- failed to offer local government proper ments to meet representatives of Amnesty input into the democratic process; International. (b) acknowledges the vital role that local government plays in the life of Australian Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western communities; and Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the (c) calls on the Government to reconsider its Treasurer) (9.50 a.m.)—by leave—This matter list of delegates to better reflect the con- is being considered at the Commonwealth cerns of local governments. Heads of Government Meeting which is HUMAN RIGHTS taking place at the moment. We are also aware that the Commonwealth Ministerial Motion (by Senator Brown) proposed: Action Group will be meeting today, Scotland That the Senate— time, to discuss these issues. Australia will (a) notes: continue to work with the international com- (i) the Commonwealth Heads of Government munity to support efforts to improve human Meeting (CHOGM) in Edinburgh, Scot- rights in Nigeria and Kenya. This we will do land, from 24 October to 27 October 1997, in a constructive and positive way. As you (ii) that the Nigerian Government, despite will be aware, Commonwealth heads of promises to improve, continues to abuse government are meeting this week and will human rights, including by imprisoning give these issues serious consideration. Other 20 Ogoni activists and presidential elec- international measures are also being taken. tion winner Mr Moshood Abiola, detain- ing democracy activists, torturing and ill- We continue to be concerned by the human treating prisoners and killing and attack- rights situation in Nigeria. We wish to play a ing political opponents and human rights positive role in conjunction with other count- groups, and ries in urging Nigeria to observe internation- (iii) human rights abuses in Kenya, including ally recognised human rights standards. At the torture and ill-treatment of prisoners and Commonwealth Heads of Government Meet- refugees, the high number of police killings, restrictions on freedom of ex- ing we will be working with other heads of pression and association and the lack of government to consider Nigerian participation independence of the judiciary; in the Commonwealth. If CHOGM considers (b) calls on the Australian Government at that Nigeria has not made enough progress CHOGM to move for or support: towards compliance with the Harare declara- (i) the expulsion of Nigeria from the tion to warrant lifting its suspension, Australia Commonwealth until its human rights would support Nigeria’s continued suspension record reaches an acceptable standard, from the Commonwealth. It will be important (ii) the setting of specific goals to safeguard to monitor closely progress with Nigeria’s human rights in Kenya, and transition program. If the Nigerian timetable (iii) the sending of election monitors to for return to democracy stalls, we would Kenya, with a strong human rights brief- support consideration of a sanctions package ing, to monitor, document and report on the elections due in January 1998, as well by heads of governments. The Commonwealth as to provide protection to local human looks to the Commonwealth Ministerial rights election monitors; and Action Group for recommendations. Decisions (c) requests the President of the Senate to write on these recommendations are matters for to the Nigerian and Kenyan Ambassadors determination by Commonwealth heads of and to the Commonwealth Secretariat: government. Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7911

The international community is watching contracts let to it on or about 15 May 1996 political developments in Kenya closely in the and 20 June 1997. lead-up to the Kenyan national elections. The I ask that this motion be taken as formal. international community attaches considerable The PRESIDENT—Is there any objection importance to free and fair elections in Kenya to the motion, as amended, being taken as as a prime indicator of political stability. formal? Western donor countries, including Australia, have made several group demarches to the Senator ALSTON (Victoria - Minister for Kenyan government in recent months advo- Communications, the Information Economy cating free and fair elections. Representatives and the Arts) (9.54 a.m.)—Madam President, from the Australian High Commission in I seek leave to make a statement on the Nairobi will participate as part of an interna- matter in anticipation of it being taken as tional election monitoring group. formal. Leave granted. In summary, the Australian government is being actively and constructively involved Senator ALSTON—The government is through the Commonwealth heads of govern- committed to improving waterfront reliability ment process and the Commonwealth and productivity to enhance job prospects, Ministerial Action Group, and we believe that exports and economic growth for the benefit is the appropriate action to take. of all Australians. Question resolved in the affirmative. In May last year, just a few months after the election, expressions of interest were ACIL ECONOMICS invited from a number of relevant consultants Senator O’BRIEN (Tasmania) (9.53 to provide advice ‘regarding an industrial a.m.)—Madam President, I seek leave to relations strategy for the implementation of amend general business notice of motion No. waterfront reform’. 752 standing in my name for today before ACIL Economics and Policy Pty Ltd was asking that it be taken as a formal motion. selected because of their extensive experience Leave granted. in waterfront reform, including having conducted two reviews in New Zealand, and their Senator O’BRIEN—I amend the motion to involvement with a range of export industries. read as follows: ACIL had also subcontracted with First IR That there be laid on the table by the Minister Pty Ltd, a firm with an intimate knowledge of representing the Ministers for Transport and the new industrial relations landscape encom- Regional Development and for Workplace Relations and Small Business (Senator Alston), no later than passed in the Workplace Relations Bill that 5 pm on the next day of sitting: was introduced into parliament late last year. (a) all documents relating to the tender and The consultants submitted a report finalising awarding of the consultancy contract to the consultancy on 18 September 1996. The ACIL Economics on or about 15 May 1996 report was commissioned to assist the relating to waterfront reform; government’s consideration of waterfront (b) the report arising from the contract awarded reform. The awarding of this contract was to ACIL Economics on or about 15 May listed in the government Gazette in 1996, and 1996; in supplementary information to the 1995-96 (c) the terms of reference for the contract annual report of the Department of Transport awarded to ACIL Economics on or about 20 and Regional Development, also published in June 1997 relating to the waterfront reform 1996. and all related documents; (d) a list of all organisations contacted by ACIL ACIL have also recently been engaged to Economics pursuant to the contracts let to provide advice on options to improve the it on or about 15 May 1996 and 20 June reliability and productivity of the services 1997; and provided by the waterfront industries. ACIL (e) a list of all sites visited and travel undertak- were engaged for this project at the direction en by ACIL Economics pursuant to the of the former Minister for Transport and Reg- 7912 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 ional Development, based on official advice report is classified commercial-in-confidence that a tendering process can be forgone where and cabinet-in-confidence and contains advice there is a need for a particular consultant to to assist the government’s contribution to further develop or enhance a task previously waterfront reform. The report is part of the carried out by that consultant and which deliberative processes involved in the func- requires special knowledge and familiarity tions of the government, and disclosure would with the previous task. This advice was drawn be contrary to the public interest. from that department’s supply manual, which The cabinet has discussed the development was issued on 11 July 1995 under the previ- of the government’s policy on waterfront ous Labor government when Mr Brereton was reform. The development of policies relating the minister for transport. to waterfront and shipping reform is of na- The contract with ACIL provides for ex- tional economic importance. Disclosure of the penditures of up to $600,000, which allows report could damage relations with the states, for the potential use of subcontractors. Again, as some information contained in the report the consultancy was listed in the government was provided in confidence by state govern- Gazette and the information was provided to ments. There is also the potential that disclos- Senator O’Brien in a response to a question ure could endanger the physical safety of a on notice. The opposition has already asked person or persons. Accordingly, the govern- questions about these consultancies in the ment will be claiming public interest immuni- estimates committee hearings in August 1997 ty in relation to the disclosure of this docu- and has been provided with relevant informa- ment. tion. Part (c) of the motion seeks the terms of There are five categories of documents reference for the contract awarded to ACIL included in Senator O’Brien’s motion. Part (a) Economics on or about 20 June 1997 relating seeks all documents relating to the tender and to the waterfront reform and all related docu- awarding of the consultancy contract to ACIL ments. The minister is prepared to table the economics on or about 15 May 1996 relating terms of reference for the contract, and I table to waterfront reform. These tender documents that document now. were provided to the Senate Rural and Re- Part (d) of the motion seeks a list of all gional Affairs and Transport Committee in organisations contacted by ACIL Economics response to a question taken on notice at its pursuant to the contracts let to it on or about hearings on 20 August 1997. A further copy 15 May 1996 and 20 June 1997. The list of of these documents will be provided if re- organisations contacted for the 1996 ACIL quired. project is part of the ACIL report. Knowledge Other documents relating to the awarding of of specific persons or entities visited could the consultancy contract involve a compara- adversely affect the commercial interests of tive assessment of bidders as well as the those named, and may also endanger the tender proposals of the bidders. These were physical safety of persons. Full details of provided in confidence. If these are to be contacts under the 1997 ACIL project will released, either publicly or on a restricted form part of the report that has not yet been basis, to Senator O’Brien, privacy consider- received. However, when the report is re- ations would require prior contact with the ceived, it can be expected to be treated in the affected organisations to obtain approval. The same manner as the 1996 report. Accordingly, Minister for Workplace Relations and Small the government will claim public interest Business (Mr Reith) is prepared to contact the immunity in relation to these documents. relevant parties to seek their permission to The final part of the motion seeks a list of release all or part of the documents relating all sites visited and travel undertaken by to them. ACIL Economics pursuant to the contracts let Part (b) of the motion seeks the report to it on or about 15 May 1996 and 20 June arising from the contract awarded to ACIL 1997. The list of sites visited for the 1996 Economics on or about 15 May 1996. This project is part of the ACIL report. Knowledge Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7913 of specific persons or entities visited could been outstanding for some time, and those adversely affect the commercial interests of matters were not drawn to our attention before those named and may also endanger the this morning’s revelation. physical safety of persons. In relation to the other comments that the The full extent of visits under the 1997 Minister representing the Minister for Work- project will be part of the report, which has place Relations and Small Business made, it not been received as yet. However, when the is important that it be on the record, prior to report is received, it can be expected to be a determination of this motion, that until the treated in the same manner as the 1996 report. demise of the former Minister for Transport Accordingly, the government will claim and Regional Development, Mr Sharp, there public interest immunity in relation to these was within the department a well-resourced documents. Information on interstate travel division—the Maritime Division. undertaken is provided for the purposes of This reform program has been under way reimbursement of costs and is recorded only for some time, so it has to be said that there at the level of the city visited. It would not be is not only expertise within that division but an effective use of departmental resources to also experience. Despite this, the government collate this information and, to the extent that chose to pay a consultant nearly $700,000 it has any relevance, it could identify specific over the last year and this year to develop a persons or entities visited and adversely affect strategy for reform on the waterfront—or that their privacy or commercial interests. is what we are told. The ACIL projects are part of the advice to Information on that matter has properly government on maritime issues. The former been sought at the Senate estimates process, Minister for Transport and Regional Develop- but the government has, to date, denied the ment, Mr Sharp, commissioned a number of information available and, only this morning, consultancies to provide research and advice has advised the availability of certain of that on maritime matters. In addition to ACIL he, information. But the government continues to through the department, engaged Dr Stephen indicate it does not wish to produce all the Webster to prepare a report with the assist- information. ance of six other contractors. Five of these contracts were notified in the Gazette on 19 The Maritime Division—this properly September 1997, and one will be notified in resourced division; a part of the Department the normal course of events later this month. of Transport and Regional Development—has now been moved from its natural home into Dr Webster’s report was presented on 3 the Department of Industrial Relations. It is, October 1997. The Minister for Workplace in the opposition’s view, a bizarre process Relations and Small Business (Mr Reith), as which, as I said yesterday, indicates that the the minister now responsible for maritime only transport policy this government has is matters, is currently considering the report. As to attack the Maritime Union. But, rather than with the ACIL documents, this report will be get into that process, what we in the Esti- a valuable input into the government’s devel- mates process are entitled to observe is the opment of policies in the maritime sector and relevance of the advice sought, given the will likewise be subject to public interest resourcing of this government, of a division immunity. which has, as I understand it, an annual Reform on the waterfront must be realised budget of $62 million to conduct the neces- for the benefit of all Australians. We will not sary process of advising government. Yet we allow this objective to be placed in jeopardy are advised that a further $700,000 in consul- by the premature release of documents which tancy fees are being or have been paid to are inputs to our deliberative processes. ACIL Economics to assist the government to Senator O’BRIEN (Tasmania) (10.02 prepare policy. a.m.)—by leave—I thank Senator Alston for It is the opposition’s view that we are his comments and the material that he has entitled to scrutinise the expenditure of this tabled today. Unfortunately, this matter has $700,000 and to judge its worth, as are the 7914 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 people of Australia. We indicate that we are a whole range of issues. Nevertheless, a opposing the government’s view on retaining serious question has been raised. the secrecy of these documents. The waterfront is a key area, but it is important that the As Senator O’Brien said, it was the first Senate not be refused information to which it time that he had heard these matters and these is legitimately entitled. questions raised against the provision of information. It is certainly the first time that Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) I have heard of that. It concerns me that the (10.05 a.m.)—by leave—I listened carefully government says that supply of this informa- to the statements of the minister. I have made tion to the Senate may endanger presumably statements on frequent occasions in this the life and safety of certain individuals. That chamber in relation to the actual reasons for is a matter which we must all be interested in commercial in confidence retention of docu- and concerned about. ments and information. Listening to the minister, I thought that many of his arguments However, I think that ought to be tested in were, to say the least, tenuous. This govern- some way. I am not sure that we ought not ment said that every element of the previous look at whether the matters raised in the government ought to be available for scrutiny, minister’s statement are of such a nature as and we have been assured that we ought to be should prevent us from proceeding with a totally confident in the outsourcing and demand that these be tabled. That could be privatisation of functions of government. done in the upcoming estimates committee Here we have the government digging even meetings and in the consideration of the further into a trench. Those elements of matter afterwards or, alternatively, it could be government expenditure which end up going referred to another committee, whereby the out to private resources will be used as an chair and deputy chair of that committee excuse for not providing full and frank dis- would be able to assess whether or not the closure of what is going on. It is not good statements that have been made by the enough. This government has only been in minister were of such importance that the power since last year. It is a dreadful sign for information and, in particular, the report future government accountability, because we should not be provided to the Senate. are going more and more into privatisation and competition policy in this country. I do not think we should let go of the request that has been made. I note that Sena- Senator HARRADINE (Tasmania) (10.06 tor O’Brien indicated that it was the first time a.m.)—by leave—It is important, as has been he had heard of those sorts of protections, and said, that the Senate does protect its rights to I presume it is the first time anybody around information from the executive government. here has heard of them as well. At present, I The current government, when in opposition, suggest that perhaps we should defer the frequently used the forms of the parliament to motion to another day, and then perhaps obtain documentation from the previous senators can consider a way of dealing with government. It has always been my view that, this matter so that we are not prevented by no matter which government is in power, executive government action from obtaining when the Senate or a senator makes a legiti- information and documentation from the mate request of the executive government for executive government, as we have done time legitimate information, that should be support- and time again over the many years that this ed, irrespective of what the issue is. demand for presentation of documents has been made in the Senate—and that has been A very serious situation is facing us. The for the 21 or 22 years that I have been here. statement that has been read by Senator Alston, and which was presumably prepared Motion (by Senator O’Brien) agreed to: by the industrial relations minister, could be developing a line of argument which could be That notice of motion No.752, as amended, be used against the provision of information on postponed till the next day of sitting. Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7915

PARLIAMENTARY SERVICE BILL Economics show the sector as a whole has endured 1997 a long period of negative profitability. Severe drought, low commodity prices and cost pressures, Report of Appropriations and Staffing particularly in the farm finance market, have Committee created a very difficult operating environment for farm businesses. The PRESIDENT—I present the 28th Madam President, my intention is not to talk down report of the Senate Standing Committee on the sector and paint too gloomy a picture; it is Appropriations and Staffing entitled Consider- simply to acknowledge the circumstances our ation of the Parliamentary Service Bill 1997. farmers have and in many cases continue to endure. Ordered that the report be printed. Their resilience in the face of adversity is indeed admirable. FARM HOUSEHOLD SUPPORT There is, however, another side to the coin, for AMENDMENT (RESTART AND while there are challenges to be overcome, there is EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES) no poverty of opportunity for our farmers. They are efficient, competitive producers of high quality, BILL 1997 clean food and fibre. They are ideally positioned to First Reading capture the significant opportunities presented by the rapid growth of Asian food markets and Bill received from the House of Representa- international trade reform. tives. Much has already been done by the government to Motion (by Senator Ian Campbell) agreed position rural Australia to succeed in the years to: ahead. Our preparedness to reign in government expenditure and put the Commonwealth budget on That this bill may proceed without formalities track for surplus, together with broader micro- and be now read a first time. economic reforms in areas such as the labour Bill read a first time. market, are good news for agriculture. The maintenance of low inflation and continuing reductions in Second Reading real interest rates have allowed real progress to be Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western made in reducing business input costs and provided a boost to Australia’s international competitiveness Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the through the resulting devaluation of the Australian Treasurer) (10.14 a.m.)—I move: dollar. That this bill be now read a second time. While much has been done to get the big picture I seek leave to have the second reading right, there is more still this government can do to speech incorporated in Hansard help secure the foundations of Australian agriculture. This bill is about investing substantial re- Leave granted. sources where it matters, just as the government The speech read as follows— has done through the Natural Heritage Trust and in areas such as quarantine and meat inspection This bill establishes the new Farm Family Restart reform. Agriculture—Advancing Australia is a Scheme and the exceptional circumstances relief comprehensive package with four key objectives; payment for farm families. firstly, to help farm businesses profit from change; This bill introduces an important element of the secondly, to provide positive incentives for ongoing government’s integrated rural policy, "Agricul- farm adjustment; thirdly, to encourage social and ture—Advancing Australia" which will help to economic development in rural areas and fourthly, build a competitive, sustainable and profitable rural and very importantly, to ensure the farm sector has sector. The measures introduced in this bill will access to an adequate welfare safety net. ensure farm families experiencing financial hard- "Agriculture—Advancing Australia" is the direct ship have equitable access to welfare support. The result of many government initiated reviews of rural sector accounts for a major share of rural policy which have been conducted over the Australia’s exports and provides the basis for much past 18 months. These reviews have drawn on the of the nation’s value adding food and fibre process- expertise and experiences of many involved in the ing industries. Its economic health and profitability rural industry. Extensive consultation with state and is vital to the future prosperity of this nation. territory governments, farmer groups and the public The rural sector has faced unprecedented challenges has contributed significantly in shaping the meas- in recent years. While the top 20 per cent of farm ures introduced today. The initiatives in this bill the businesses are performing well, data collated by the farm family restart scheme and the exceptional Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource circumstances relief payment, have received 7916 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 widespread endorsement from key farming bodies appropriate. Very importantly, it does not require such as the National Farmers’ Federation. the farm family to put the farm on the market or In the past, the interrelationship between rural undergo an activity test as would be the case if welfare and business policy objectives has not been they were seeking support through the social fully appreciated. In a sense, the integration of security system. This support will be available to family life and welfare with the management of the eligible farmers for up to one year; farm business has been taken for granted. This Recipients will face an obligation to obtain profes- interrelationship needs to be recognised in address- sional advice on the future viability of the farm ing the welfare needs of farming families. It is business, as well as ongoing professional advice to imperative that we do if we are to ensure the assist the family focus on either re-building the current transition in outlook from the family farm business where this is possible, or leaving the to the family farm business runs to a successful industry. The government will provide financial conclusion. This means also that welfare measures support to the farm family to access this profession- need to be distinct from measures targeted at al advice, which may include career counselling. improving the profitability of farming businesses. A re-establishment grant of up to $45,000 will be This bill has been carefully designed to meet the available to eligible farmers. This grant will coalition’s long standing commitment to address provide positive incentives for farmers to leave these important welfare issues, while, at the same farming before their assets are severely depleted. time, taking account of the uniqueness of family I emphasise that eligible farmers will be able to farm business structures, and the vulnerability of apply for the re-establishment grant only during the farming families to natural events. first two years of the operation of the Farm Family Just as importantly, the measures contained in this Restart Scheme. To receive the grant, those who bill offer carefully targeted assistance to those who apply and meet the eligibility criteria will need to wish to adjust out of farming. Additionally, it sell their farm within twelve months of ceasing provides income support for those farm families income support, or from the date of their applica- who find themselves suffering financial hardship as tion if income support is not sought. a result exceptional circumstances which are The re-establishment grant will be subject to a beyond their capacity to manage. more generous assets test than past re-establishment Madam President, the new Farm Family Restart grants, but any income support provided under the Scheme is the government’s key program for Farm Family Restart Scheme will be deducted from delivering income support to the farm sector. It also the grant. The new assets test will allow farmers to provides adjustment assistance to farmers who wish have up to $90,000 in assets to qualify for the to leave the industry. maximum grant. The grant will phase down by $2 The proposed amendments offer an innovative for every $3 in assets above this threshold. approach to assisting farm families. This legislation Farmers who have accessed the scheme for less provides farmers with the opportunity to give than six months and withdraw will be eligible to serious consideration to the future of the farm and apply to rejoin the scheme, to complete the twelve family without having to rush decisions. It recog- months. Farmers who withdraw from the scheme nises that it takes time to come to grips with the after six months will not be able to rejoin. Support possibility of a future that does not entail farm paid under this scheme will be provided as a ownership. It allows them to keep working the farm grant—not as a loan scheme, which was proven while they review their situation. It relieves the ineffective under the former government’s farm tremendous pressure than can arise from literally household support scheme. It resulted in low not being able to put food on the table. income farmers incurring debts to the government The Farm Family Restart Scheme will provide a which they simply did not have the capacity to decision support system for farmers considering repay. This government has, of course, decided to exiting the industry as well as those who need the wipe the slate clean in this regard and write off breathing space to re-focus their farm enterprise. these debts. This scheme provides access to professional advice Madam President, the Farm Household Support Act to farmers to help them assess the future viability 1992 is also being amended to introduce the of their business. exceptional circumstances relief payment. The Farm Family Restart Scheme will begin on 1 The exceptional circumstances relief payment will December 1997. I will now provide the house with be an income support payment available to farmers details of the features of the new scheme. in areas declared to be in exceptional circum- Income support will be provided to low income stances. Its rate of payment will also be equivalent farmers who cannot borrow further against their to the newstart allowance, plus partner allowance assets. This support will be equivalent to the where appropriate. It will be subject to the same Newstart Allowance, plus Partner Allowance where income and off-farm assets tests that apply to Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7917 drought relief payment to ensure it is targeted to WORKPLACE RELATIONS AND farm families who are experiencing financial OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT hardship as a result of the exceptional circumstance. The exceptional circumstances relief BILL 1997 payment will be equivalent to and replace the In Committee current drought relief payment. Consideration resumed from 22 October. The exceptional circumstances relief payment gives The bill. recognition to the fact that there are exceptional circumstances which are beyond the scope of Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western normal farm risk management strategies. It will be Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the available to farmers suffering financial hardship as Treasurer) (10.15 a.m.)—I table a supple- a result of rare and severe events including, but not mentary explanatory memorandum relating to restricted to, extreme drought. It will allow farming the government amendments to be moved to families to focus on the task of managing their businesses in circumstances which are challenging this bill. This memorandum was circulated in enough without the added burden of worrying about the chamber on 23 October 1997. how they will meet their day to day living costs. Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) (10.16 a.m.)—I move: The duration of this payment will be determined on a case by case basis according to the nature of the (1) Schedule 1, page 3 (after line 4), before item declared exceptional circumstance. A 12 months 1, insert: recovery period will continue to apply for excep- 1 After subsection 111(1E) tional drought. Insert: (1F) Where, as a result of a notification of a Farmers currently in drought exceptional circum- dispute, an organisation or an associated stances areas, and receiving the drought relief body is affected by action under a State law payment, will progressively move to the exception- which results in the loss of: al circumstances relief payment. As their drought exceptional circumstances certificates expire, they (a) respondency to existing State awards or will be issued with exceptional circumstances agreements to which the organisation certificates. Farmers completing their recovery or an associated body was a party; period for the drought relief payment or reaching and/or the end of exceptional circumstances relief payment (b) the right to cover members under the support will be eligible to apply for the Farm eligibility rules of that organisation or Family Restart Scheme if they wish to do so. an associated body; then notwithstanding section 111AAA, the The government will honour its commitments under Commission must proceed to deal with the the rural adjustment scheme. Farmers will still be application as quickly as it can, and if the able to apply for re-establishment assistance under Commission considers it appropriate, make the rural adjustment scheme, until 30 November an interim award for an interim period. 1997. This will provide a smooth transition to the new Farm Family Restart Scheme when it com- (1G) For the purposes of this section, associated mences on 1 December 1997. body has the same meaning as in Schedule 4. Madam President, this bill is an essential element The amendments we will have before us in the government’s rural policy platform. It is throughout this debate are primarily technical. closely linked to other measures in the Agricul- As I outlined in my speech on the second ture—Advancing Australia package which will help reading, I have adopted the approach of to maximise the sector’s contribution to the economic, social and environmental well-being of the accepting, by and large, a technical approach, nation, especially rural and regional communities. unless issues have emerged subsequent to the passage of the act which attempt to put the I commend the bill to honourable senators. act into some difficulty in any area or unless issues are fundamental to the nature of indus- Ordered that further consideration of the trial relations as it is at present. My view, as second reading of this bill be adjourned until the Senate well knows, is that we should seek the first sitting day in 1998, in accordance to ensure that the new act has time to be with standing order 111. bedded down and not succumb to the drive, 7918 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 particularly from the right, to advance the The Senate and those who are experienced cause of major reduction in the provisions in the issues of union operations would be available to both workers and employers aware that it can take many years to move through the act. from a state to a federal jurisdiction. I have However, my amendment No. 1 refers to a been told that it can take as long as four situation which has arisen in Western Austral- years. So you hardly want to have no ability ia which goes against the fundamental princi- to care for your workers under the state ples and purpose of the act. The act says that system in the meantime. This amendment workers and employers and their respective seeks to fast-track the ability of the Industrial organisations should be free to choose the Relations Commission to consider an applica- jurisdiction under which they seek to operate tion to move from the state to the federal either at the state or the federal level. It also system where respondency to existing state implies that anyone doing so should be free awards or agreements has been impaired as a to do so; in other words, they should not be result of state law. To do that the commission constrained by pursuing their legal and legiti- would have to evade somewhat the restrictive mate activities. nature of section 111AAA. Minister Graham Kierath, a Liberal member We would never dream of proposing that of the coalition government in Western except in circumstances where people’s rights Australia, introduced a law in Western Aus- have been unfairly and unnecessarily con- tralia which was known as the second wave strained, as they have in the Western Austral- of reforms. He shovelled it through the upper ian situation. Of course, that disease could house—and that is probably a polite term— spread to other governments and therefore we before the members of that upper house have not particularised this amendment to changed on 22 May this year consequent to Western Australia. But we do think it is the Western Australian election on 16 Decem- appropriate. We do not think it is an ideologi- ber 1996. The change in the upper house cal issue or a philosophical issue. We think it would have meant that he would have been is an issue of fairness and morality. In fact it unable to get through some of the more hairy- is an attempt to make sure that the provisions chested and draconian measures he put for- we have within the bill about freedom of ward. choice are respected by state governments. One of the measures Minister Kierath put Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (10.23 forward which has in fact passed into law in a.m.)—I indicate that the opposition agrees Western Australia is that, in the event of a with the amendment proposed by Senator workers’ or an employers’ organisation Murray and we will not be opposing it. making an application to move into the Senator BISHOP (Western Australia) federal system through a process—and the (10.23 a.m.)—I rise to pass a few comments process has a number of steps—that ends with in respect of this amendment proposed by the minister, it is possible for that organi- Senator Murray and to indicate my thoughts sation’s ability to operate under the state that it is a most worthwhile amendment on his system to be ended whilst the application is part. In a former life I was involved with a being considered; in other words, the organi- major trade union in Western Australia which sation cannot continue to maintain its state was in the process of engaging in a range of awards or respond to the nature of the agree- negotiations on behalf of its members with a ment or negotiate improvements to the state range of firms, some national, some medium awards. Frankly, we think that is wrong. We sized and some local. A range of those firms, think that goes against the morality of the act for reasons relating to business practice, and against freedom of choice and the ability indicated that they wished to switch their to go about ones business in industrial rela- method of operation from regulation under the tions, which should be the right of every Western Australian state system and the worker, every employer and every organisa- Western Australian common rule awards that tion that relates to them. applied in that state, to the federal system, Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7919 either under federal awards or, as it was in and other members under the state system. To those days, federal certified agreements. We the extent that Senator Murray’s amendment did not have a particular concern whether an seeks to overcome that evil, it is a most award agreement or enterprise bargain was worthwhile endeavour as far as I am con- regulated either in the federal system or the cerned and, as far as the opposition is con- state system. cerned, it is worthy of support. The more recent amendments passed by the Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western Court government in Western Australia have Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the had the effect that, where trade unions negoti- Treasurer) (10.27 a.m.)—The coalition is ate enterprise bargaining agreements or opposed to this amendment. We are quite certified agreements, whatever they are sure, and I am sure Senator Murray would not currently called, with employers and seek to deny this, that it is designed purely to punish have them regulated under the law in the one state and to discriminate against one federal system, the union that does that, and state’s industrial laws, and that is the state of that shifts its members by consent or through Western Australia where Senator Murray, the arbitral process out of the state system to Senator Bishop and I come from. We believe, the federal system, can be penalised for doing firstly, it is inappropriate to include this sort so. of amendment in a technical bill. In any Senator Murray indicated he thought it was event, the Workplace Relations Act already an issue of correctness or right or wrong, and requires the commission to deal with matters not so much an ideological or philosophical as quickly as practicable, and provision is issue. I would disagree with him on that made for the commission to make interim point. The effect was that trade unions and awards. employers who negotiated agreements that I think Senator Bishop said that it was suited their mutual and joint interests to indeed a philosophical issue. I think Senator change the system of regulation from either Murray tried to say it was not philosophically federal to state or from state to federal, as was or ideologically driven but just a technical the case from time to time, were punished, thing. If that is the case, Senator Murray, well notwithstanding the fact that they operated technically, the commission is required to deal within their rules with the interests of their with matters as quickly as possible anyway. members as a priority and consistent with the I think Senator Bishop is being more frank interests of the particular firm or firms in- about this. It is an ideological and philosophi- volved in that process. cal attack on the Western Australian govern- Then, having achieved that purpose by ment’s industrial laws. agreement, the state system was changed to I am sure that Senator Bishop and Senator deny that union coverage of a former group Murray share an ideological opposition to of workers when they had consented to go those industrial laws, but they are a matter for into the federal system for their own pur- the state parliament of Western Australia. To poses. This strikes me as being an ideological seek to interfere, in what is, I think, a fairly pursuit carried to the extreme. On occasion, obvious if not blatant attack on that state that shift from federal to state or state to parliament’s decision to pass those laws with federal was pursued via arbitral process before what is clearly, as is even agreed by the an independent tribunal. All of the evidence ACTU, a technically amending bill—a tidying was placed before the tribunal and it made a up bill; a bit of housekeeping—is entirely decision on merit, having regard to the sense inappropriate. or otherwise of the argument put forward by Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) the respective organisations. (10.29 a.m.)—For the record, I am attempting Again in that case, when that arbitral to draw the attention of the chamber to the process was pursued, the government in that moral issue here. For me, the moral issue is state passed laws that restricted the rights of you should not punish someone for attempting that organisation to protect those members to operate in one jurisdiction rather than 7920 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 another, and that is what the Western Austral- PAIRS ian government has done. Let us assume it Bolkus, N. Vanstone, A. E. was not an issue of industrial relations; let us Faulkner, J. P. Heffernan, W. Lundy, K. Watson, J. O. W. assume you are punished for going to the Reynolds, M. Patterson, K. C. L. Federal Court instead of the state Supreme Sherry, N. Calvert, P. H. Court, or you are punished for abiding by * denotes teller federal copyright laws instead of state busi- (Senator Ellison did not vote, to compen- ness names laws. It is just wrong in principle; sate for the vacancy caused by the resignation it is wrong morally. It is for that reason that of Senator Kernot.) I regard it as an issue of morality and not an issue of ideology. Question so resolved in the affirmative. Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) Question put: (10.38 a.m.)—I move: That the amendment (Senator Murray’s)be (2) Schedule 2, page 4 (after line 4), before item agreed to. 1, insert: The committee divided. [10.34 a.m.] 1A At the end of section 170LA (The Chairman—Senator S. M. West) Add: Ayes ...... 32 (4) Notwithstanding any other section in this Noes ...... 31 Act, other than section 170ML, the Com- —— mission may make any orders it deems Majority ...... 1 necessary to further the object of this Part. —— (5) A person or organisation to whom an order AYES under subsection (4) is expressed to apply Allison, L. Bishop, M. must comply with the order. Bourne, V. Brown, B. This is a technical amendment. It has arisen Campbell, G. Carr, K. as a result of a problem of interpretation and Collins, J. M. A. Collins, R. L. understanding which has emerged within the Conroy, S. Cook, P. F. S. Industrial Relations Commission between the Cooney, B. Crowley, R. A. Denman, K. J. Evans, C. V. * Department of Industrial Relations and the Forshaw, M. G. Gibbs, B. Minister for Workplace Relations and Small Harradine, B. Hogg, J. Business. I say it is technical but, of course, Lees, M. H. Mackay, S. I am aware of how important it is. It goes to Margetts, D. McKiernan, J. P. an issue which is fairly fundamental. Accord- Murphy, S. M. Murray, A. ingly, I will need to return to the message Neal, B. J. O’Brien, K. W. K. Quirke, J. A. Ray, R. F. which I put across in my speech in the second Schacht, C. C. Stott Despoja, N. reading debate which concerns this amend- West, S. M. Woodley, J. ment. I referred to it as a material technical amendment, which is probably the best way NOES Abetz, E. Alston, R. K. R. I could describe it. It deals with the issue of Boswell, R. L. D. Brownhill, D. G. C. collective bargaining. Campbell, I. G. Chapman, H. G. P. We have always said that collective bar- Coonan, H. Crane, W. gaining protects the weak and vulnerable in Eggleston, A. Ferguson, A. B. Ferris, J. Gibson, B. F. our society from those with strength. A key Herron, J. Hill, R. M. issue has always been the protection afforded Kemp, R. Knowles, S. C. to Australian workers and, I happen to be- Lightfoot, P. R. Macdonald, I. lieve, Australian employers as a result of Macdonald, S. MacGibbon, D. J. Australia’s long commitment and adherence McGauran, J. J. J. Minchin, N. H. to its international obligations under ILO Newman, J. M. O’Chee, W. G. * conventions. Those ILO conventions—as Parer, W. R. Payne, M. A. Reid, M. E. Synon, K. M. Labor senators would know better than any- Tambling, G. E. J. Tierney, J. one—prefer collective bargaining over indi- Troeth, J. vidual bargaining in areas where those who Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7921 do the individual bargaining are in an inferior is the best course. I am not supportive of a or a weakened bargaining situation. We all situation where workers in an inferior bargain- fought very hard over that last year and we ing position who wish to bargain collectively did get as much of our international obliga- would be obliged or forced to take up individ- tions back into that act as we felt we could. ual agreements. It is plainly their right to be We had several meetings with the Minister able to negotiate collectively, and it is a right for Workplace Relations and Small Business that has been recognised throughout the on this particular issue last year. We were civilised world. That is how we understood persuaded by the minister and his staff that the bill would operate. We understood that the bill did indeed prefer collective bargaining workers could not be forced—and I use the over individual bargaining. In particular, the word ‘forced’ so you understand my mean- minister’s office pointed to the fact that under ing—by their employers to bargain individual- section 170LA the Industrial Relations Com- ly. mission has a positive duty to facilitate the What happened in the Hunter region is that making of collective certified agreements. the Industrial Relations Commission essential- I received advice that it is important to ly said to us all, ‘We know that you have appreciate that the Australian Industrial 170LA. We think we know what that says, Relations Commission will have extensive but we are uncertain as to the intention of conciliation powers to facilitate the negation government.’ The government took, in our of certified agreements which may include, view, a harder line than that which we had for example, ordering the parties to attend understood to be the case. compulsory conferences. Indeed, under sec- It is our intention, through this material tion 170LA, the AIRC is required, as far as technical amendment, to make it clear that practicable, to perform its function in such a where a third party is required—throughout way as to facilitate the making of certified our law it is consistent that a third party is agreements. frequently required; we take it as axiomatic In dealing with a situation where employers that if there is a problem you can refer to an want to bargain individually and workers arbitrator, a court or a conciliator and that is want to bargain collectively—in other words, throughout the basis of our contractual deal- where there is a difference in opinion as to ings—it should be axiomatic that the Indus- how they want to be dealt with—I was further trial Relations Commission, with the constitu- advised that such employees would have a tional imperative that it enjoys, feel obliged number of options open to them. In particular, and able, in terms of the act and particularly they could initiate a bargaining period for a in terms of 170LA, to enter a dispute where certified agreement and they could also the issue is incapable of resolution in any appoint their union as their bargaining agent. other way. The government may not agree If the employer still wished to negotiate an with that interpretation, but it was certainly agreement he would have to deal with the the interpretation that we believed, and I have union. The union and the employer would been at pains to be very particular with the then have to negotiate whether any agreement wording that I have used. was to be in the form of a collective AWA or We propose a technical amendment to give a certified agreement. The employees would the commission the power to make any orders be able to act collectively and would be able that it deems necessary to fulfil its statutory to take protective action. They would also obligations to facilitate the making of certified seek the assistance of the Industrial Relations agreements and collective bargaining where Commission to facilitate a certified agreement the workers or the employers need that device if they wished. activated. Such orders would not extend to I would have thought that we in the Senate stopping protected action, as the act clearly were absolutely in support of employees and intended such action to be protected, but such employers pursuing individual agreements orders could extend to prevent the predatory where both are willing and both feel that this offering or approval of AWAs, for example, 7922 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 or other punitive action by employers against unless the Commission determines a lesser unions and workers wanting and needing to period; and bargain collectively. That is the nub of our (2) Schedule 2, item 2, page 4, (lines 21 to 23), case. I hope the Senate will recognise that it omit paragraph (b), substitute: is a material technical amendment designed to (b) 7 days’ notice, in writing, of intention to give a message to the AIRC that, when other make the agreement is given to every means are not before it, it does have the person first employed after the first notice powers it should. is given under paragraph (a), unless the Commission determines a lesser period; and Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (10.46 (3) Schedule 2, item 3, page 4, (lines 31 to 33), a.m.)—Whilst the opposition will not be omit paragraph (aa), substitute: supporting the amendment, we do appreciate (aa) any person first employed less than 14 days the logic behind the Democrats’ position and before approval is given either has, or has also the motivation behind the amendment. ready access to, the agreement, in writing, The difficulty from our perspective is that, in at least 7 days before the approval is given, attempting to attend to one particular problem unless the Commission determines a lesser with an amendment of such breadth, other period; and areas of concern might be opened up uninten- We believe the government’s amendment will tionally. For example, we are concerned that affect the rights of new employees in the there may be some unforseen ramifications workplace who are considering whether or not and difficulties with it. To use Senator they will sign up to a certified agreement. We Murray’s example with regard to Rio Tinto, believe the government’s amendment will this could actually be used by Rio Tinto to effectively reduce the period for those em- gain damage orders against workers’ agents ployees who commence work after the 14 and their representatives. However, I did days begins. It is aimed at ensuring that the indicate that we are sympathetic to it, and we 14-day time period does not have to recom- do understand the types of difficulties that mence if a new employee begins work during Senator Murray has addressed. that time. As I said, our concern is that the amend- Our concern with regard to this first amendment is too broad, and we are dealing with a ment is that a lesser period should occur as a specific example that Senator Murray has right; for example, at least seven days, unless alluded to. The difficulty there is that, if the the commission determines otherwise. We government had agreed to the AIRC moving believe that a new employee coming on does to compulsory arbitration with regard to that need to have a reasonable amount of time to example, this problem would never have consider a certified agreement, which has the arisen in the first place. So we believe the potential to affect them for years with regard difficulty in that situation is a lack of political to their working environment and the wages will on the part of the government. To sum and conditions that they work under. How- up, whilst we will not be supporting the ever, we are sympathetic to the position that amendment, we are sympathetic to what the we do not want the timeline pushed out too Democrats are attempting to do here and we far, but there is the capacity for the commis- appreciate their concerns, as articulated by sion to approve a lesser period with regard to Senator Murray. this. Amendment not agreed to. To sum up, whilst we do have some sympa- Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (10.48 thy with the government’s position, we do see a.m.)—by leave—I move: that in extreme circumstances workers may, (1) Schedule 2, item 1, page 4 (lines 10 to 12), in fact, have very short periods to determine omit paragraph (aa), substitute: whether or not they are prepared to sign up to a certified agreement. We think seven days is (aa) any person first employed less than 14 days before approval is given either has, or has reasonable. As I said, if there is any sugges- ready access to, the agreement, in writing, tion of vexatious or frivolous activity, then at least 7 days before the approval is given, the AIRC does have the capacity to come in Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7923 and say, ‘No, this is not appropriate.’ How- ing in protected industrial action. The orders ever, we do not believe that the government’s that can be made are more limited than those amendment is fair in terms of new workers that the court can make when employees are coming on during that period. So, again, it is terminated for any other unlawful reasons and an attempt on our part to ensure that people these are provided by section 170CR. are given adequate time to determine the Our concern is that the current situation is effect of a certified agreement on them and to unfair. It is anomalous in that we have differ- give their concurrence or otherwise to it. ent provisions for workers engaged in action Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) which is protected and for workers engaged (10.52 a.m.)—I indicate that the Greens (WA) in other more general circumstances. So there will be supporting opposition amendments is an inherent anomaly with regard to this. Nos1to3. This amendment attempts to address that Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) inherent anomaly and ensures that the avail- (10.52 a.m.)—I indicate that the Democrats able remedies apply equally in both cases. In will not be supporting opposition amendments particular, this amendment will provide that, Nos1to3. in the case of an employee terminated for engaging in protected industrial action, the Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western court will be able to make any other order it Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the thinks appropriate and any other consequential Treasurer) (10.52 a.m.)—The government will order. not be supporting opposition amendments Nos 1 to 3. We believe that this seven-day require- So we believe that situation is anomalous. ment will create unnecessary procedural We do not believe workers engaged in pro- burden for employers, for the unions and for tected industrial action should be treated any employees seeking to finalise the approval differently. This amendment goes to address- process. We believe the government’s amending that anomaly. ment is more sensible and more practical. It Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) will ensure that new starters will to have the (10.55 a.m.)—I advise the chamber that we effect of an agreement explained to them and accept opposition amendment No. 4 as a be provided with a copy of the agreement. technical amendment. We think these dismiss- Our amendment will avoid the delay and als are in the nature of unlawful, rather than unnecessary expense which will result from unfair, dismissals. We believe the relief the effect of these opposition amendments. should be accordingly afforded. Therefore, we Amendments not agreed to. will be supporting the Labor Party on this amendment. Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (10.53 a.m.)—I move: Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) (10.56 a.m.)—I rise to indicate that the (4) Page 5 (after line 19), at the end of Schedule 2, add: Greens (WA) will be supporting opposition amendment No. 4. 5 Subsection 170NH(1) Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western Omit "order the employer", substitute "make the following orders". Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) (10.56 a.m.)—The government will 6 At the end of subsection 170NH(1) be opposing opposition amendment No. 4. We Add: think the proposed amendment further compli- ; and (c) any other order that the Court thinks cates the legislation and, more importantly, is necessary to remedy the effect of the entirely unnecessary. We say that section contravention; and 170NH provides for the Federal Court to (d) any other consequential orders. order reinstatement and compensation where This amendment deals with the matter of an employee is dismissed or injured in his or protected industrial action. Section 170NH her employment for taking protected industrial provides the orders a court can make when an action. We, therefore, say that there is no employer terminates an employee for engag- need for any other remedies to be provided 7924 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 for. The court already has inherent powers to which we have maintained consistently, that make orders to give effect to its decisions. we do not believe the appropriate method of It is also the case, the government submits, industrial policy is manifest in the Employ- that section 170NH specifically provides that ment Advocate’s office or that Office of the the rights conferred by that section do not Employment Advocate should even exist. Our limit any other rights a person might have. concerns with the operation of the office and That is why the government will be opposing the power that the act gives to the office this amendment. remain the same. On that basis, whilst understanding what Senator Murray is attempting Amendment agreed to. to do here, we will be opposing both these Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western amendments. Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western Treasurer)—by leave—I wish to record that Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the the coalition voted against this amendment. Treasurer) (11.00 a.m.)—We are both sympa- Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) thetic and understanding, and we will be (10.58 a.m.)—by leave—I move: voting for the amendments. (3) Schedule 3, item 8, page 7 (after line 20), after Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) "requirements", insert "in paragraphs 170VO (11.00 a.m.)—I guess this comes to the nub (1)(a) and (c)". of the second reading amendment that the (4) Schedule 3, item 8, page 7 (line 21), omit "the opposition moved—that is, whether or not this filing", substitute "those filing". chamber agrees that more power and responsi- I referred to these two amendments in my bility should be given to the Employment remarks during the second reading debate. Advocate rather than less. That is an area in The Democrats were originally inclined to which I can clearly say that there was dis- oppose the government’s proposed amend- agreement between the Greens and the Demo- ment to correct technical defects in this area. crats. There have been concerns all along the However, it was pointed out to us that the way with a body which clearly is trying to capacity of the Employment Advocate to represent two sides of debate simultaneously ignore technical defects is limited already by and which, quite clearly, has been set up to the additional approval requirements in be more sympathetic to the employers rather section 170VPA. than employees. So on this issue I would be The only filing requirement mentioned in prepared to vote with the opposition. section 170VO not covered in section Amendments agreed to. 170VPA is the requirement to declare that the information statement required by the Em- Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) ployment Advocate has been given to em- (11.01 a.m.)—I move: ployees. The amendment we are moving, (5) Schedule 3, item 14, page 8 (line 6), omit therefore, excludes this one requirement in "considers it appropriate", substitute "so paragraph 170VO(1)(b) from the ability to requests". ignore technical defects. It means that all My understanding of the ACTU’s concern substantial requirements in section 170VO on with the government’s amendments in this filing must be complied with and the scope provision is that they would allow the em- for correcting technical defects is narrowed ployers to bring in hard experts to snow the extremely. It now makes the power equivalent advocate in analysing Australian workplace to that of the Industrial Relations Commis- agreements. The advocate has assured us that sion, which can correct technical defects in that was not his intention in seeking this subsection 111(1Q). provision. All this provision is supposed to be Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (10.59 about is allowing the advocate to seek infor- a.m.)—I indicate that, whilst we are sympa- mation to help them make their decision. thetic to the intent of Democrat amendments For that reason, the Democrats proposed an Nos 3 and 4, we have an in principle position, amendment to make a request from the Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7925 advocate the starting point for any informa- transparency to every area we can, and this tion being provided under the section. So if includes the Industrial Registrar. the advocate simply needs to confirm a date Essentially, we are enshrining in our or a place or a name with a clerk or whoever amendments an in-principle position which it is, for instance, he may in fact have that we will be pursuing in these areas. Given the discretion to ring up somebody other than the behaviour of the Employment Advocate’s actual nominated person who is available to office so far, we are not confident that only him. Our amendment takes it from a passive minor filing requirements, filing irregularities, consideration of appropriateness to an active will be waived. They are not defined in the ‘he must so request’. legislation. Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (11.03 I understand that Senator Campbell indicat- a.m.)—Our position remains the same as ed yesterday during the second reading debate indicated previously. that they would be minor. However, they are Amendment agreed to. not defined as being minor. We do not know what they are. In the estimates process the Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (11.03 Employment Advocate indicated that one of a.m.)—I have a number of amendments to the concerns he has with what he regarded as this bill in the following terms: excessive bureaucracy on this is the fact that (5) Schedule 3, items 1 to 5, page 6 (lines 6 to a number of employees had not in fact signed. 29), TO BE OPPOSED. We do not regard that as minor and we are (6) Schedule 3, item 7, page 7 (lines 6 to 12), TO not intending to pursue that principle with BE OPPOSED. regard to the Industrial Registrar. (7) Schedule 3, item 8, page 7 (lines 13 to 23), Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) TO BE OPPOSED. (11.07 a.m.)—Madam Temporary Chair, (8) Schedule 3, item 14, page 8 (lines 4 to 12), before we go to a vote on this issue, I might TO BE OPPOSED. say that I recall, during the 1996 debate on These amendments have the effect of oppos- the legislation—and particularly in relation to ing all proposals as printed and inserting a the Employment Advocate—that we knew provision, which is amendment (9), whereby very little about how the office was going to the Industrial Registrar must publish the work, where the resources would be allocated, reasons for approving or refusing an AWA or what staff there would be and how they a variation agreement or for terminating an would be allocated, and whether or not they AWA. Determinations published must still would be, as the government indicated, truly ensure that the identity of a party to an AWA able to look after the interests of all workers. is not disclosed. If I could go on from the argument Senator This goes back to comments made with Mackay put, there is an indication there might regard to previous Democrat amendments. As be some reluctance on the part of the Employ- I indicated before, we have concerns with ment Advocate to take the time to check that regard to the Employment Advocate in the all of those assurances have been fulfilled— areas of secrecy, the lack of accountability, that is, that people in the workplace have the excessive secrecy, the lack of scrutiny. freely and fairly entered into agreements and For these reasons we regard any extensions of that they are happy with the agreements they the powers of the Office of the Employment have signed. We should remember that the Advocate as unacceptable. government is always saying, ‘We are giving We have had somewhat illuminating discus- people more choices’, but we have to ascer- sions in the estimates hearings with regard to tain whether there have been choices in fact this in terms of the opposition continually or whether the agreements have been forced attempting to get access to information as to on people. what the Office of the Employment Advocate In relation to the Employment Advocate, I is doing. We have had enormous difficulty wonder whether the Parliamentary Secretary there. We wish to extend the principle of to the Treasurer (Senator Ian Campbell) can 7926 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 update me regarding resources and where they tion. The advisers have said that yes, that have been allocated, and can he assure us that information can be made available, but I do the employees of Australia are getting fair not have it here. If you want to play some representation from the Employment Advo- elevator music and wait until we get it, we cate? will do that. If that is the reason you will vote Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western against the amendment, it is obviously a Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the highly principled, ideological and sensible Treasurer) (11.09 a.m.)—In response to stance. Senator Margetts, let me say that I think it is I said I will get you the information; I did an important question. I do not have that not fob you off. If you genuinely wanted it, information to hand, but I imagine that, at the knowing the committee stage was coming up estimates committee, that sort of information today and knowing that it was a matter of will be available. I will certainly seek, either concern, you could have called me, Peter through that process or some other process, to Reith or anybody else, and said, ‘Senator provide the information you have sought, Campbell, by the way, could you get us this Senator. I guess it is just impractical to do it information?’ I could have had it for you. We right now on this sort of notice. just do not walk around with briefcases full Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) of answers for the Greens’ questions. As I (11.09 a.m.)—With all due respect, in 1996 said, it is an important question. I will get when we asked those questions the response you the information. I cannot do it right now was, ‘It is too early; we can’t tell you.’ I unless we put everything on hold and listen would like to think we could have more than to some sort of interlude music. two advisers to tell us about things such as Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (11.12 the kind of staffing in the Office of the a.m.)—I was not going to speak again but I Employment Advocate and where staff are will following that load of gratuitous non- located. sense. I do not know if you are aware of it, With this legislation we are being asked to Senator Campbell, but the reality is that we accept further changes to the Office of Em- have been attempting to get the type of ployment Advocate. In 1996 we were never information that has been alluded to for many given assurances because it had not happened. months. In fact, there is a notice on the Notice Now that it is supposedly happening and we Paper which is a return to order with regard are dealing with further legislation, we think to AWAs. The opposition has deferred that it is unreasonable that we be fobbed off to the for months whilst awaiting responses to estimates process to get some idea of what is commitments that were given at estimates. happening. If you are unable to give this kind Senator Ian Campbell—That wasn’t the of an answer, it gives me even more intent to question. That wasn’t Senator Margetts’s support the concerns of the opposition and to question. It was about resources for the Office vote with them to oppose these items. of the Employment Advocate. Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western Senator MACKAY—Yes, I understand Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the that, but the reality is we have a return to Treasurer) (11.10 a.m.)—Might I just say I order regarding AWAs. We are also awaiting did not fob you off, Senator Margetts. I said information regarding the sorts of questions I do not have that information to hand. If you Senator Margetts has alluded to, and we still would like us all to sit here quietly or perhaps have not got them. So in my view Senator to go and get a cup of tea, I will send the Margetts has a perfect right, in the committee staff off to get it for you. We will wait until stage, to get up and ask why the government then, if you like. has not provided that information following I said I will get you the information. Firstly, detailed questioning in three rounds of esti- I said you might be able to ask questions at mates. Through you, Madam Temporary the estimates committee in a few days’ time. Chair, I think we could proceed far more Secondly, I said I would get you the informa- smoothly if Senator Campbell could lower the Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7927 temperature a bit and provide Senator to each of the various functions of the Em- Margetts with that information. We would be ployment Advocate so that we have some idea very grateful to have it as well. how far he is going about his facilitating Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) function, his regulatory function and his filing (11.13 a.m.)—I find Senator Campbell’s and record keeping function. It is a fairly response extraordinary. This is not something bureaucratic process that he goes on about. It the Greens decided to pluck out of thin air. seems there is a danger—this side does not This is actually something that is put down agree with it—that the philosophy now here as an amendment to the bill. For many adopted of an employer and an employee people, the preparation of this bill has been coming to an agreement may well be being seen as hasty. This has not come out of the interfered with by the Employment Advocate, blue. Detailed questions were asked during a non-elected person. the course of the Workplace Relations Bill Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) 1996. Any reasonable reading of the requests (11.17 a.m.)—There have been some useful for information on this bill would indicate it contributions on this section. I would like to was likely the Senate would be asking ques- suggest that we not delay the process any tions about how the Office of the Employ- further. To give the government time to ment Advocate is actually operating, consider- provide that information to the committee so ing that you as a government are endeavour- that we can debate amendments 5 to 8 ad- ing to make further changes to the area. equately, I suggest that we defer it until the This is not something I as the Greens (WA) government comes back to us with that am doing out of the blue. This was something information. that was flagged in 1996, and there have been Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) questions from then on. I am not asking for (11.17 a.m.)—I rise to indicate two things. anything odd or unusual. I am not asking for Firstly, Senator Margetts’s questions are elevator music—and I think it is extremely reasonable, and the minister has indicated that rude to suggest that the Senate is doing he will give us the information. I did think something outrageous when it is suggested your reaction was a little over the top, but that that kind of information should come in these things happen. Secondly, I do not think with the advisers who are provided on this it is appropriate to defer the debate simply kind of bill. because we have decided not to support you Senator COONEY (Victoria) (11.14 on this, Senator Mackay. We are all aware a.m.)—One of the problems we face is that that we have a philosophical difference over people are not quite sure of the full functions the Employment Advocate. Our view, as you of the Employment Advocate and what know, is that the government should be given emphasis he gives to those functions. Obvi- the opportunity to try out a new institution. It ously, the Employment Advocate is a has only really been alive since April. It was facilitator of the proper drawing of contracts not alive for four months after the new act between employers and employees. He has a passed, so we are talking about six months. function of filing and keeping records and of We think we should let them have a go and making sure that the contracts are agreed see how it develops and progresses as it goes with. What is uncertain is how he is going along. about each of those functions. In the meantime, Senator Margetts’s and Up until now, there has been a feeling that Senator Mackay’s questioning in estimates there ought to be a widening of the range of and other fora are right to the point and need people who can do the jobs which are put a response. We understand your opposition. upon the advocate. That is done in this par- We too are watching the whole thing closely ticular amendment. When the government is to see how it will develop, but we will not be getting the information, I wonder whether you supporting your amendments. could get information about the particular Senator COONEY (Victoria) (11.19 resources and the amount of resources given a.m.)—I have heard what Senator Murray 7928 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 says and I take it on board. The problem with publication does not disclose the identity of the proposition put by Senator Murray is that either party to the AWA. this whole issue, as Senator Margetts and This is the same principle we talked about in Senator Mackay have said, has been brought the previous debate in terms of our concerns on not by us but by the amendments—they about secrecy with regard to the Employment are called technical amendments. Neverthe- Advocate. As I indicated before, we do not less, there have been amendments made to the want the same level of secrecy being extended functions of the Employment Advocate. The to the AIRC and the Industrial Registrar; we second reading speech says: are having enough trouble with the Employ- The scope for our reforms to continue to bring ment Advocate. The principles are very clear: about the productivity improvements which are we remain committed to transparency and necessary to underpin sustained economic growth accountability for the Employment Advocate, will be further enhanced by the technical amend- the AIRC and the Industrial Registrar. ments proposed in this bill. Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) The second reading speech says that an (11.22 a.m.)—I indicate that the Greens (WA) increase in productivity is expected through will be supporting opposition amendment No. these technical amendments. Even though 9. they may be technical, their impact is going to be of great significance to the economy of Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) this country. We have been asked to vote on (11.23 a.m.)—The Australian Democrats the basis that we do not quite know how the regret that they cannot support opposition Employment Advocate’s function is going, amendment No. 9. although we do know that it is going in such Senator COONEY (Victoria) (11.23 a way as to call for technical amendments a.m.)—The issue of transparency is a very which will improve—if you read the second important one. This is a function that the reading speech—the productivity of this Employment Advocate performs. He is a country. person who is not elected as a person may be elected to a business organisation, or as a It is significant, when we are making person may be elected to a union by those changes to a function, that we ought to be that they purport to represent. This is a informed beforehand of the import on the function that is imposed—and I do not say economy, the workplace and the social fabric this with intent to give any sinister connota- of society, rather than letting it go on and tion to the word—upon an industrial relations perhaps taking up this matter in estimates situation. In other words, it is a regulatory where it would tend to get lost, where the function. In a free economy, this is somebody amendments are made in any event, and it is from the outside who is imposed on employ- all too late. ers and employees. It is a person and function Items 1 to 5, 7, 8 and 14, as amended, paid for by the taxpayers’ money. agreed to. Given that, it seems to me that there ought Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (11.22 to be an ability to scrutinise how this person a.m.)—I move: and their office go about their functions. You say, clearly, that we do not want the world to (9) Schedule 3, item 15, page 8 (lines 15 to 22), omit section 170WHC, substitute: know what is in fact the result of a private negotiation which ends up with a contract— 170WHA Industrial Registrar to publish AWA the privity of contract. But it is not quite like determinations that, because it is not as if we are buying and The Industrial Registrar is obliged under selling at the Victorian market, or buying and section 143 to publish any determination of the selling on the world markets. This is regulat- Commission that approves or refuses to approve an AWA or a variation agreement, or ing a workplace that has been subject to that terminates an AWA. When the Industrial legislation in this country since federation, Registrar publishes such a determination under and that process has been subject to public section 143, he or she must ensure that the scrutiny—arbitration takes place in the open Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7929 and so on. It seems to me that the degree of with regard to wage differentials, and we are openness in this case and the degree with concerned that that not be exacerbated by which people, as a community, are able to bringing another variable into the equation— examine how this whole system is operating, that is, state awards. is not as great as it should be. As I have said, there is a large variation Amendment not agreed to. across the states in relation to state awards Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (11.25 and we believe that it is important that the a.m.)—The opposition oppose a number of same benchmark be applied, which is the items in the following terms: relevant federal award. Obviously, where that does not exist, there are umpteen federal (10) Schedule 4, item 1, page 9 (lines 5 to 6), awards which, in those rare circumstances TO BE OPPOSED. where there is not one, can be applied and the (11) Schedule 4, item 2, page 9 (lines 7 to 22), equity principle maintained. TO BE OPPOSED. Senator COONEY (Victoria) (11.29 (12) Schedule 4, item 4, page 9 (line 25) to page 10 (line 10), TO BE OPPOSED. a.m.)—Senator Mackay has made a very lucid point. We are supposed to be running a We regard this attempt by the government federal system. If you go back to the founding particularly seriously. From our perspective, fathers—there being no founding mothers in it is very important that a federal award those days— system be used. Firstly, there are very few circumstances, if any, where a federal award Senator Margetts—They didn’t make the does not apply. Secondly, in the very few history books anyway. instances where there are no federal awards, Senator COONEY—No, they did not make there are similar awards which could apply. the history books as they would have done these days. That shows, at least, that we have We believe that this is not a technical come a long way in 100 years. But I am not amendment in that it may allow a serious too sure that we have come a long way on diminution of effect with regard to the no this particular point, because the idea was that disadvantage test in the scrutiny of AWAs by the federal system would work just as the allowing a state award to be used which may words suggest—as a federal system. Here, be lower with regard to wages and conditions where we have state awards forming the than a federal award. standard, we really are going back by using We have serious difficulties and differences a federal constitution to entrench, as it were, across the various states in relation to state the state system, because the states individual- awards. We believe it is appropriate to pro- ly are now able to set the standards for how vide the federal benchmark. At this point, I a person in that particular state will operate. indicate that the opposition believes there is As Senator Mackay says, different rates of already a situation where the no disadvantage remuneration and different conditions will test breaches the government’s pre-election apply. That certainly is against the idea of commitment that no worker would be worse there having to be an interstate dispute to off. That situation is occurring where the found an arbitration system. Of course, we Employment Advocate is ignoring, in terms rely on international conventions, corporations of the application of the no disadvantage test, powers and things like that—I understand areas where there are agreements, and areas that. But the general spirit of how industrial where workers are operating under minimum relations was conducted in the founding awards rather than paid rates awards. fathers’ era has passed. Is that a good thing? From our perspective, there is already a I do not think it is a good thing because states serious divide with regard to what workers can bid against each other to reduce wages were getting under the old industrial relations and conditions in an attempt to attract busi- system and the way that the no disadvantage nesses to them. I think there is a real danger test is being applied by the Employment in this, and I think Senator Mackay is abso- Advocate. There is already a gap emerging lutely right in her approach to this. 7930 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) such as severance pay or redundancy . We (11.31 a.m.)—I indicate that the Greens (WA) oppose the time limit imposition of 21 days will be supporting opposition amendments on a union applying to the AIRC on behalf of Nos 10 to 12. an employee over an employer’s decision to Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) sack a worker. (11.31 a.m.)—I rise to indicate that we think While accepting government items 4 and 5, the government’s technical amendments do we are opposing the rest for the following not pose great dangers. We therefore do not reasons. Firstly, from our perspective, the support opposition amendments Nos 10 to 12. government is keeping workers’ rights as Items 1, 2 and 4 agreed to. confined as possible. The government is Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) concerned that workers may be able to access (11.32 a.m.)—I move: beneficial state legislation awards on termination, and obviously that is something that the (6) Schedule 5, item 3, page 11 (line 17), after government would not support. We believe it "after", insert "the employee is given notice of". is important that workers have access to either jurisdiction, and that their access not be This is just a minor amendment to the restricted. government’s amendment to count the number of days from when the employee is given Secondly, with regard to the time limit notice of a decision by management to mass imposed on a union, we believe, as I indicat- retrench workers. We have added the words ed before, that the amendment’s effect is too ‘the employee is given notice of’. In other restrictive. Currently, there is no time limit words, we want to prevent managers keeping imposed on unions. I would like to indicate the decision secret from workers for three that there are a number of reasons why we weeks to prevent relief under the act. They believe that 21 days is too restrictive. You must be given notice; that is obviously the may have a situation where a large number of need. Accordingly, it is a technical amend- employees are terminated at once, which is ment, but it is important. quite possible; it has happened many times in Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (11.33 Australia’s current industrial climate. In fact, a.m.)—I indicate that, whilst we understand quite recently 1,000 workers were terminated. what the Democrats are attempting to do here, Twenty-one days is simply not adequate for we support this particular amendment but we the preparation of a case as to whether the will be opposing the provision as a whole. termination was unjust, harsh and unlawful. Also, you may have a situation wherein a Amendment agreed to. worker who is a member of a union is sacked, Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (11.34 but may not be aware of his or her rights in a.m.)—We oppose the bill in the following that respect. It may take some time for that terms: person to say, ‘Well, look, I believe in retro- (13) Schedule 5, item 1, page 11 (lines 5 to 11), spect, having thought about this, that I was TO BE OPPOSED. terminated unjustly. I’d better get down to the (14) Schedule 5, items 2 and 3, page 11 (lines 12 union to see whether I’ve got a case.’ This to 18), TO BE OPPOSED. can often take in excess of 21 days. I think (15) Schedule 5, item 6, page 12 (lines 5 to 12), Arco is probably the best recent example of TO BE OPPOSED. the situation with mass sackings. Given the (16) Schedule 5, item 7, page 12 (lines 13 and industrial relations climate, we are likely to 14), TO BE OPPOSED. see more en masse sackings occurring. (17) Schedule 5, item 8, page 12 (lines 15 to 21), Each unfair dismissal has to be filed indi- TO BE OPPOSED. vidually, and there is currently no capacity for The effect of the government amendments is what could be termed ‘class actions’. Here that employees under federal awards, certified again, we believe that 21 days is too limiting agreements and AWAs will not be able to because of the procedural aspects surrounding access state provisions in laws or awards, applications. Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7931

I reiterate the difficulties that arise when government has a different philosophy from workers are sacked en masse, quite often for ours. We understand that, but this does not different reasons—it may not be for reasons seem to fit in with the philosophy that the such as inadequate productivity or a dimin- government has adopted that an agreement ution in the bottom line in terms of profit, but ought to be reached between employer and it could be for different reasons. Quite of- employee, that they should be able to arrange ten—as Senator Cooney would be aware— their own terms, and that it should be done these are very complex cases in terms of according to common law. On this issue, there establishing whether it is harsh, unjust and is a complete setting aside of what would unlawful. We believe that the current provi- normally operate as a statute of limitations. sions should apply with regard to no time Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) limit. (11.41 a.m.)—I rise to indicate that the Senator COONEY (Victoria) (11.38 Greens (WA) will be supporting the opposi- a.m.)—Senator Mackay has convinced me yet tion on these amendments. again. In a sense, this is not an issue of Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) industrial law but an issue of common law. (11.41 a.m.)—Mr Temporary Chairman, I The basis for employment is contracts be- have vacillated a little on these amendments, tween the employer and the employee— I am afraid, because I wanted to hear the workplace contracts. Normally, the time limit arguments of the opposition. I have struggled that applies to a breach of contract is six with it a bit because I thought the original years. Why 21 days has been chosen in what government technical amendments were in really is a common law action is a very order. However, I have listened to the debate. interesting question. I do not know where the I still have some real nagging doubts that you 21 days comes from. have identified, but because I cannot put my This provision is aimed, I think, at getting finger on a particular clause or phrase, I think more summonses or writs issued. If you are I will stay with the government on this one. a lawyer, what you ought to do as soon as Senator COONEY (Victoria) (11.42 anybody is sacked is simply issue a writ to a.m.)—Having listened to Senator Mackay, I make sure that you are not sued for negli- cannot understand why the bill says: gence. Why there would be a provision like An application under subsection (2) or (4) must be this seems extraordinary, as Senator Mackay lodged within 21 days after the decision to termi- said. nate the employee’s employment is made. If you are a worker, you would have firstly As a matter of reality—if not as a matter of to recover from the shock, and then get philosophy—that is a very harsh provision. A proper advice and proceedings taken. You person who has had his position terminated would probably be better off if you were in will at times be in a state of shock. It is a a union because you would go straight to the terrible thing to lose your job and be put in a union and it would get in touch with its position where you have to go home to your solicitors. Even though workers in a union family and say, ‘Look, no income is going to would be disadvantaged, they would not be as be coming in for a while. We have to apply disadvantaged as workers who did not have for social security and all that that amounts a union to look to and who were trying to to.’ recover from the very nasty shock of being sacked. Anybody who has lost preselection or Within the 21 days, when you are going lost an election would certainly know that that through that shock, for a person to be expect- does not do much for the morale. ed to act rationally is absolutely incredible. When you are put at a disadvantage, when Senator Forshaw—Sometimes you don’t you are put onto the street, in effect, you are get 21 days. not in any condition to think about things. Senator COONEY—True! I have no doubt Yet, in that condition, you are expected to that the government is determined to do this make an informed decision to see a solicitor and, as Senator Campbell has often said, the and put in an application. 7932 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Why is it that, if there is a breach of con- Senator COONEY (Victoria) (11.46 tract between a bank and a big business a.m.)—I understand what Senator Campbell house, that breach of contract is alive, in is saying and it has force in the context in terms of taking action upon it, for six years? which he is saying it. When you go on to say People who have legal advice and accounting that there are provisions right throughout this advice—all the expert advice they need—have act that do that sort of thing I think that is still got six years within which to make a absolutely right. It is only when you start decision on whether or not to take proceed- arguing and listening to somebody like Sena- ings. However, a worker, usually someone on tor Mackay that you suddenly realise how reasonably low wages, who has no legal flawed all these provisions in the legislation advice, no accountant and no experience must are that will confine working people in that get that application in within 21 days, and if way. the person does not, that is the end of him. Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) This measure seems to me to be quite (11.47 a.m.)—Just to put what we have been extraordinary. It is against the very common talking about into context, the minister indi- law that we are supposed to be operating cates that this is a narrow category but the under and against this new business of bar- average person does not know what category gaining where the marketplace decides. If the they are in. They have no idea, and generally marketplace decides, why shouldn’t the time they have no access to legal advice. People limitations that generally operate in the are telling us on a day-to-day basis that marketplace—that is, six years—operate for people have to voluntarily provide advice to the worker? The biggest business house in people in these situations because they are left Australia has six years to vindicate what it without knowing where to go. That is more thinks is a breach of contract but a person and more the case with what the government who is vulnerable, like a sacked worker, will is doing, trying to isolate people in the work- be confined to 21 days. place. Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western What Senator Cooney has been indicating Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the as a principle is quite right. We have to put Treasurer) (11.45 a.m.)—I think Senator it in the context of people knowing or not Cooney’s arguments would be fine if they knowing what category they are in or who on actually applied to what is a very narrow set earth they can go to. As Senator Cooney of matters to which this amendment applies indicated, if you asked the average person in relation to the 21-day time limit. It is a when they are in that situation and in a state technical amendment that seeks to bring the of shock, they would not know. If they are in provisions in line with all the other provisions a work force that is hostile to unions—that is, on the termination of employment. The the employer does not much like unions— provision is also made for an extension of there will not be much access to a support time to be granted in appropriate cases. base. For the protection of workers you have I reiterate that the technical amendment we to think of potential medium or worst case have moved in relation to the 21-day time scenarios. Believe me, in Western Australia limit goes to a very narrow set of matters. For there are quite a few of those. example, it relates to section 170CL in rela- Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (11.49 tion an employer notifying the Common- a.m.)—I want to indicate that we seek to have wealth Employment Service of terminations. items 2 and 3 put separately and indicate that The matters that Senator Cooney raised are we will be calling for a division with regard not even addressed by this amendment or by to those. Senator Mackay’s opposition to the amendment. To achieve what Senator Cooney wants Item 1 agreed to. to achieve you would have to go back and The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Sena- basically amend all of the provisions which tor Chapman)—The question is that schedule relate to termination of employment. 5, items 2 and 3, as amended, be agreed to. Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7933

Question put: Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) The committee divided. [11.53 a.m.] (11.57 a.m.)—I proposed amendment No. 7 on sheet 711 because I had previously asked (The Chairman—Senator S. M. West) the Department of Workplace Relations and Ayes ...... 37 Small Business for this information and they Noes ...... 24 had declined on the basis that they neither —— had the resource nor the ability to do it. Majority ...... 13 —— However, ministers have much more power than departments, and the minister has indi- AYES cated, very kindly, that he will provide such Abetz, E. Allison, L. Boswell, R. L. D. Bourne, V. information. I regret that I have lost my copy Brownhill, D. G. C. Campbell, I. G. of his letter, but I seek leave to have his letter Chapman, H. G. P. Coonan, H. tabled. Crane, W. Eggleston, A. Leave granted. Ferguson, A. B. Ferris, J. Gibson, B. F. Herron, J. Senator MURRAY—As a result of the Hill, R. M. Kemp, R. tabling of that letter I withdraw my amend- Knowles, S. C. Lees, M. H. ment No. 7. Lightfoot, P. R. Macdonald, I. Macdonald, S. MacGibbon, D. J. Amendments (by Senator Ian Campbell)— McGauran, J. J. J. Minchin, N. H. by leave—proposed: Murray, A. Newman, J. M. (1) Schedule 6, page 13 (after line 4), before item O’Chee, W. G. * Parer, W. R. 1, insert: Payne, M. A. Reid, M. E. Stott Despoja, N. Synon, K. M. 1A Subsection 4(1A) Tambling, G. E. J. Tierney, J. After "in this Act", insert "(except in Part XA)". Troeth, J. Vanstone, A. E. Woodley, J. (2) Schedule 6, page 14 (after line 19), after item 5, insert: NOES 5A At the end of section 298B Bishop, M. Brown, B. Campbell, G. Carr, K. Add: Collins, J. M. A. Collins, R. L. (5) It is declared that a reference in this Part, or Conroy, S. Cook, P. F. S. in regulations made for the purposes of this Cooney, B. Crowley, R. A. Part, to an independent contractor is not Denman, K. J. * Faulkner, J. P. confined to a natural person. Forshaw, M. G. Harradine, B. 5B Application of items 1A and 5A Hogg, J. Lundy, K. Mackay, S. Margetts, D. For the purposes of the application of Part XA McKiernan, J. P. Murphy, S. M. of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 in respect Neal, B. J. O’Brien, K. W. K. of any conduct occurring after the commence- Schacht, C. C. West, S. M. ment of this item, the amendments made by items 1A and 5A are taken to have been in force PAIRS at all times since the commencement of that Part. Alston, R. K. R. Quirke, J. A. Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (11.59 Calvert, P. H. Sherry, N. Ellison, C. Evans, C. V. a.m.)—I indicate that the opposition will not Heffernan, W. Ray, R. F. be opposing these amendments. Patterson, K. C. L. Reynolds, M. Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) Watson, J. O. W. Gibbs, B. (11.59 a.m.)—Could we have on record a * denotes teller little bit of information about what the (Senator Bolkus did not vote, to compen- government is moving? sate for the vacancy caused by the resignation Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western of Senator Kernot.) Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the Question so resolved in the affirmative. Treasurer) (11.59 a.m.)—Senator Margetts, of course; we are always pleased to help. Items 6 to 8 agreed to. Government amendments Nos 1 and 2 will 7934 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 ensure that the freedom of association provi- clauses from existing agreements and awards. sions are not limited in their application to We oppose the whole section. non-corporate independent contractors. This In speaking to that, I indicate that the would give effect to the government’s clear Senate may wish to have regard to a recent policy intention that the freedom of associa- CEPU application to the Industrial Commis- tion provisions apply to all contractors. The sion on this matter, whereby the commission amendments will ensure that, in future, corpo- itself determined that there was no need for rate contractors are covered by the freedom of these clauses to be removed. We believe that association provisions irrespective of whether removal of each preference clause would they are engaged before or after the new require a separate application. We believe provisions come into force. that, given that they do not have any effect This is designed to ensure that action taken anyway, there is no reason to pretend that after the new provisions come into force will they never existed. We believe—to use some not be outside the scope of the freedom of of Senator Campbell’s own justification on association requirements of the act merely other matters—that it is an unnecessary waste because the contractor in question was not an of time, money and effort. I would again say independent contractor as defined—that is, a that the independent umpire itself determined natural person at the time they were engaged. that there was no need for these clauses to be However, the proposed legislation makes clear removed in that they have no effect. that acts done before the amendments come Items 1 to 7 agreed to. into force will not become retrospectively subject to sanction. I commend these amend- Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western ments to all senators, particularly Senator Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the Margetts. Treasurer) (12.03 p.m.)—I seek leave to move amendments Nos 3 and 6 together. Amendments agreed to. Senator Mackay—No. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Sena- tor Chapman)—The question is that items Senator IAN CAMPBELL—I move: Nos 1 to 7 of schedule 6 stand as printed. (3) Schedule 7, page 17 (after line 29), after item Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (midday)— 3, insert: The opposition opposes items Nos 1 to 7 in 3A After section 253ZJ the following terms: Insert: (18) Schedule 6, items 1 and 2, page 13 (lines 5 253ZJA Outline of proposed withdrawal to 31), TO BE OPPOSED. (1) The application must be accompanied by a (19) Schedule 6, item 3, page 13 (line 32) to written outline of the proposal for the page 14 (line 10), TO BE OPPOSED. constituent part to withdraw from the amal- (20) Schedule 6, item 4, page 14, (lines 11 to gamated organisation. Subject to subsection 15), TO BE OPPOSED. (2), the outline must: (21) Schedule 6, item 5, page 14, (lines 16 to (a) provide, in no more than 3,000 words, 19), TO BE OPPOSED. sufficient information on the proposal to enable the constituent members to make (22) Schedule 6, item 6, page 14 (line 20) to informed decisions in relation to the page 15 (line 16), TO BE OPPOSED. proposed withdrawal; and (23) Schedule 6, item 7, page 15 (line 17) to (b) address such matters as are prescribed. page 16 (line 2), TO BE OPPOSED. (2) The outline may, if the Court allows, consist The effect of the government amendments, as of more than 3,000 words. we see it, is that an agreement may not be (3) The outline must be a fair and accurate certified if it has a preference clause in it representation of the proposed withdrawal contrary to the freedom of association provi- and must address any matters prescribed for sions in the act. If it is certified, then an the purposes of paragraph (1)(b) in a fair appeal against a decision can be made to the and accurate manner. full bench of the AIRC. It also provides a (4) If the Court is not satisfied that the outline mechanism for removing void preference complies with subsection (3), the Court Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7935

must order the making of such amendments (i) is a fair and accurate representation of to the outline as it considers are needed for the proposal for withdrawal from the the outline to comply with that subsection. organisation; and 253ZJB Filing the "yes" case (ii) addresses any matters prescribed for (1) The constituent members, or committee of the purposes of paragraph 253ZJA(1) management, making the application may (b) in a fair and accurate manner; and file with the Court a written statement of no 3C Subsection 253ZL(2) more than 2,000 words in support of the proposal for the constituent part to withdraw Repeal the subsection, substitute: from the amalgamated organisation. (2) In considering whether to order that a ballot (2) The statement must either: be held, the Court may hear from: (a) accompany the application; or (a) an applicant for the ballot; and (b) be filed within such later time as the (b) the amalgamated organisation; and Court allows. (c) a creditor of the amalgamated organisa- (3) The Court may order that the statement be tion; and amended, in accordance with the order, to (d) any other person who would be affected correct factual errors or otherwise to ensure by the withdrawal of the constituent part that it complies with this Act. from the amalgamated organisation. 253ZJC Filing the "no" case 3D At the end of section 253ZM (1) The amalgamated organisation may file with Add: the Court a written statement of no more than 2,000 words in opposition to the propo- (2) The ballot paper sent to the constituent sal for the constituent part to withdraw from members of a constituent part of an amalga- the organisation. mated organisation in connection with a proposal for the constituent part to withdraw (2) The statement must be filed either: from the amalgamated organisation must be (a) not later than 7 days before the day set accompanied by: down for the hearing of the application in (a) a copy of the outline under section question by the Court; or 253ZJA relating to the proposed with- (b) within such later time as the Court al- drawal; and lows. (b) if there is a statement under section (3) The Court may order that the statement be 253ZJB in support of the proposed with- amended, in accordance with the order, to drawal—a copy of that statement; and correct factual errors or otherwise to ensure (c) if there is a statement under section that it complies with this Act. 253ZJC in opposition to the proposed 253ZJD Provisions relating to outlines and withdrawal—a copy of that statement. statements of "yes" and "no" cases 3E At the end of Subdivision D of Division 7A (1) An outline under section 253ZJA or a Add: statement under section 253ZJB or 253ZJC may, if the Court allows, include matter that 253ZW Certain actions etc. not to constitute is not in the form of words, including, for breach of rules of amalgamated organisation example, diagrams, drawings, illustrations, (1) Neither of the following constitutes a breach photographs and symbols. of the rules of an amalgamated organisation: (2) The Court may allow an outline under (a) an act done, or omitted to be done, under section 253ZJA, or a statement under sec- or for the purposes of this Division, or tion 253ZJB or 253ZJC, to be amended by regulations made for the purposes of this whoever filed the outline or statement with Division; the Court. (b) an act done, or omitted to be done, in 3B After paragraph 253ZL(1)(a) connection with the proposal of, or prepa- Insert: ration for, an act or omission of a kind referred to in paragraph (a). (aa) the outline under section 253ZJA accom- panying the application, or (if applicable) (2) The following are examples of acts and that outline as amended: omissions to which subsection (1) applies: 7936 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

(a) making an application under section (c) injunctions (including interim injunc- 253ZJ; tions), and any other orders, that the (b) supporting, or supporting the making of, Court considers necessary to stop the an application under section 253ZJ; conduct or remedy its effects; (c) participating in, or encouraging a person (d) any other consequential orders. to participate in, a ballot under Subdivi- (3) An application for an order under subsection sion B; (2) may be made by: (d) not participating in a ballot under Subdi- (a) a person against whom the conduct is vision B; being, has been, or is threatened to be, taken; or (e) encouraging a person not to participate in a ballot under Subdivision B; (b) any other person prescribed by the regulations. (f) casting a vote in a particular way in a ballot under Subdivision B; (4) For the purposes of this section, action done by one of the following bodies or persons is (g) encouraging a person to cast a vote in a taken to have been done by an amalgamated particular way in a ballot under Subdivi- organisation: sion B; (a) the committee of management of the (h) complying with an order or requirement amalgamated organisation; made under this Division or regulations (b) an officer or agent of the amalgamated made for the purposes of this Division; or organisation acting in that capacity; (i) encouraging a person to resign his or her (c) a member or group of members of the membership of the amalgamated organisa- amalgamated organisation acting under tion from which the constituent part the rules of the organisation; withdrew to form the newly registered organisation so that the person can be- (d) a member of the amalgamated organisa- come a member of the newly registered tion, who performs the function of deal- organisation. ing with an employer on behalf of other members of the organisation, acting in 253ZX Amalgamated organisation not to that capacity. penalise members etc. (5) Paragraphs (4)(c) and (d) do not apply if: (1) The amalgamated organisation, or an officer or member of the organisation, must not (a) a committee of management of the amal- impose, or threaten to impose, a penalty, gamated organisation; or forfeiture or disability of any kind on: (b) a person authorised by the committee; or (a) a member or officer of the organisation; (c) an officer of the amalgamated organisa- or tion; (b) a branch, or other part, of the organisa- has taken reasonable steps to prevent the action. tion; (6) In this section: because the member, officer, branch or part amalgamated organisation includes a branch concerned does, or proposes to do, an act or of an amalgamated organisation. omission to which section 253ZW applies. officer, in relation to an amalgamated organi- (2) The Court may, if the Court considers it sation, includes: appropriate in all the circumstances, make (a) a delegate or other representative of the one or more of the following orders in organisation; and respect of conduct that contravenes subsection (1): (b) an employee of the organisation. (a) an order imposing on a person whose Senator Margetts—A little information conduct contravenes that subsection a about what the government is moving would penalty of not more than: be nice. (i) in the case of a body corporate— Senator Mackay—While Senator Campbell $10,000; or is collecting his thoughts, I would just like to (ii) in any other case—$2,000; back up what Senator Margetts is saying. A (b) an order requiring the person not to carry lot of the difficulty is that we got these very out a threat made by the person, or not to late. We had some indication previously of make any further threat; the Democrats’ amendments, but we did only Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7937 get the government ones very late. For other 5 Commenced ballots for withdrawals from senators who are probably a bit mystified, it amalgamations probably would be quite helpful. The amendments made by items 3A, 3B and 3D do not apply in relation to any proposal for Senator IAN CAMPBELL—We do plead a constituent part of an amalgamated organisa- guilty to their being late arrivals, and I am tion to withdraw from the organisation if the happy to provide information. Amendment ballot to decide whether the constituent part No. 3 seeks to ensure that members have should withdraw has commenced under section 253ZM of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 sufficient information when deciding whether before the commencement of this Schedule. or not to support a proposal for disamalga- 6 Applications for withdrawals from amalgamation by providing for the lodgment of yes mations and no cases—that is, cases in support of and against disamalgamation—and an outline of (1) If: the proposed withdrawal from amalgamation (a) an application was made, before the and its effects. Also, to provide for the yes commencement of this Schedule, under section 253ZJ of the Workplace Relations and no cases, there is an outline to be distri- Act 1996, for a ballot to be held to decide buted to voters by the Australian Electoral whether a constituent part of an amalga- Commission with their ballot papers. These mated organisation should withdraw from relate to proposed new sections 253ZJA, the organisation; and 253ZJB, 253ZJC and 253ZJD to be inserted (b) a ballot to decide whether the constituent by new item 3A and other amendments to part should withdraw has not commenced items 3B and 3D respectively. under section 253ZM of that Act before the commencement of this Schedule; They are also to provide protection for the amendments made by items 3A, 3B and members invoking the withdrawal from 3D apply in relation to the proposal for with- amalgamation—also known as disamalga- drawal, subject to the modifications specified mation provisions—and for a constituent part in subitem (2). affected by the application. Also, they alter (2) The modifications that apply in relation to the provision about who may be heard by the the proposal for withdrawal are as follows: court in proceedings on an application for a (a) the requirement under subsection ballot for disamalgamation from a registered 253ZJA(1) of the Workplace Relations organisation. Act 1996 that the application referred to in that subsection must be accompanied In relation to amendment No. 6, the new by the outline referred to in that subsec- requirements relating to outlines of disamal- tion is taken to be a requirement that the gamation proposals and yes and no cases are outline must be filed with the Court within such time as the Court allows; to apply to applications lodged before schedule 7 comes into effect only if a ballot on the (b) the requirement under subsection 253ZJB(2) of that Act is taken to be a question of withdrawal from amalgamation requirement that the statement referred to has not commenced. In such cases, the outline in that subsection must be filed with the and the yes case, if any, must be lodged Court within such time as the Court within such time as the court allows. The allows. filing of the no case would be subject to 7 Application of section 253ZW to acts etc. section 253ZJC. In other words, a no case before commencement would need to be filed at least seven days Section 253ZW of the Workplace Relations Act prior to the date set for hearing of the applica- 1996 applies to acts or omissions that took place tion or such later time as the court allows. before the commencement of this Schedule but after the commencement of Division 7A of Part Amendment agreed to. IX of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 in the same way that it applies to acts or omissions that Amendment (by Senator Ian Campbell) took place after the commencement of this proposed: Schedule. (6) Schedule 7, page 18 (after line 4), at the end Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (12.06 of the Schedule, add: p.m.)—I indicate that we will be opposing 7938 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 this amendment because of the retrospectivity Senator COONEY (Victoria) (12.12 aspect. p.m.)—With regard to the question of the Amendment agreed to. right of entry, I think that one of the problems is the concept that is behind it—that is, that Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (12.08 the union and the union official is going into p.m.)—I move: the workplace to cause trouble or at least to (24) Schedule 7, page 17 (after line 29), after provide a focus for friction. I think that the item 3, insert: issue that Senator Mackay has raised is a 3A Paragraph 285C(1)(a) central one. Senator Murray says that it is not a technical issue, which is true, and therefore Repeal the paragraph. it should not be discussed—that is probably This ALP amendment goes to the question of putting it too strongly—and allowed to go right of entry. Section 285C provides the through. Senator Mackay has raised an issue requirements that must be met before a union which needs to be looked at by this parlia- can exercise its right of entry to have discus- ment at this stage. The nature of the union sions with an employee. The requirements and its relationship with employees ought to include: be looked at. (a) work is being carried on to which an award The conduct of the union and its officials applies... is underpinned by the Workplace Relations (b) employees who are members, or eligible to Act 1996 and the various acts which came become members... before it. The union is an organisation elected Our amendment removes the first requirement by its members. Its officials are subject to the and ensures that a union can gain right of ballot box every four years. I think that has entry to see any union member or potential to be taken into account when you look at union member. Our concerns there are obvi- this particular problem. ous. We believe that the right of entry should It would seem to me that—where the idea prevail in those circumstances. We believe is for the work force and management to that this is an appropriate place to make that bring flexibility and choice into the work- point. We seek support for this amendment. place—an organisation which is freely and Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western democratically elected every four years by a Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the group of workers ought to be taken into Treasurer) (12.10 p.m.)—I thank Senator account. It is only right and proper that any Mackay for her clarification. The government organisation which goes about its functions in does not regard this as a technical amend- a lawful, reasonable and measured way ought ment. It really goes to one of the core issues to be able to recruit and to see how work- of the Workplace Relations Act. It tries to replaces are operating. If they try to cause open that issue. It seeks to expand a union’s disturbances or break the law then, certainly, right of entry to workplaces where they have they should not be allowed into the work- no award coverage. The government will place. oppose this amendment. In the great British traditions that underpin Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) this nation—and the concept of the union, the (12.11 p.m.)—I am advised that under the concept of the free association of people who Labor Party’s Industrial Relations Act right of work, is a very English concept—why entry was regulated by awards. In other shouldn’t a freely elected body be able to take words, the right was based on award cover- its proper place in society and go in at an age. I think the parliamentary secretary is appropriate time and in an appropriate way right. This is like our very first amendment. and speak to people who are in the work- This is not technical. This amendment would place? The unions can put forward to workers extend the intention beyond the scope that the proposition that they might find it useful Labor’s law originally provided. Accordingly, to be part of an organisation that tries to get we will not be supporting the amendment. fairness in wages and conditions—not only in Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7939 wages and conditions but in the way the to information about what their entitlements system operates. I think more and more the are, what unions there are and how easily position is clear that the union movement they can join a union. They are actually wants to see a productive and a forward creating that situation by not allowing union thinking industry in Australia. It is a matter representatives into the workplace without a of cooperation. Their function is also to see very difficult process. We have already heard that those people are properly protected by a that, in Western Australia at least, there are a system that they elect. lot of issues about workers’ health and safety. I think it is a real tragedy that the percep- That lack of access to information puts work- tion in industrial relations is that the union is ers at risk. It puts their lives at risk. People there to simply aggravate the situation. I think have died in Western Australia because of the it is the same sort of false concept we would inability of unions to have guaranteed access have if we thought that employer organisa- to the workplace. tions were simply there to grind down work- So it is not a situation where the opposition ers and to make difficulties. We would not are asking for something over and above what have that concept at all. We would be saying was in the Labor government legislation. that these organisations are there to see that They are trying to provide that right for industry is not only run profitably and that workers to have access to that information production is at its highest level but also that that they otherwise would not get. Remember, the workplace is a socially just, culturally we just heard the opposition say, in relation enriching place. That deserves cooperation. I to withdrawals from amalgamated organisa- have great respect for Senator Murray, but tions, that they believe workers have a right this provision that Senator Mackay wants to to information. Yes, they do. On issues to do remove is one that really poisons the climate with their workplace, one of the best ways to in which industrial relations should be proper- make sure they have access to their rights is ly carried out. if the unions are able to go into the workplace Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) and tell them what they are. (12.17 p.m.)—I wanted to follow up on a Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (12.20 matter that was mentioned by Senator Murray p.m.)—I would like to acknowledge the in relation to this amendment moved by the contributions by Senator Cooney and Senator opposition. Senator Murray indicated that he Margetts because I think they are absolutely thought it was an extension of what the relevant. Perhaps I could put it in this way to previous Labor government industrial rela- the government and to the Democrats: if you tions legislation allowed. He mentioned that join a union, surely you have the right for that it used to be in awards. It is not in the 20 union to provide a service to you. That is allowable matters, so there is no right of entry really what we are on about. To use an under awards, and there will be no right of example that the government may be able to entry under awards with what got pushed relate to, it is a bit like subscribing to a through under the workplace relations bill. So, magazine and the government coming in and no, it is not something in addition to what saying, ‘You can’t have that magazine.’ In existed before; it is basically saying it is fair fact, it is a type of market intervention, dare enough to say that somehow or other this I say it, by the government in terms of the right ought to exist. capacity of those workers who choose to Time and time again we have heard the belong to a union. Workers should be able to government come in and use membership access that service and have a union represen- levels of unions to bash workers over the tative come in when they wish—to put it in head. For instance, they say, ‘Look, if there parlance that the government may be able to are fewer people joining unions, there is understand. something wrong with the union movement.’ It is very important to say to Senator The government are actually helping to create Murray that I endorse the comments made by the situation where people do not have access Senator Cooney and Senator Margetts but, if 7940 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 somebody chooses to belong to a union, why NOES shouldn’t they have the right to have that Hill, R. M. Kemp, R. union come and see them to provide the sort Knowles, S. C. Lees, M. H. of service that they require? Senator Margetts, Lightfoot, P. R. Macdonald, I. quite correctly, gave examples in terms of Macdonald, S. MacGibbon, D. J. occupational health and safety. Under this McGauran, J. J. J. Minchin, N. H. government’s provision, if a union member Murray, A. Newman, J. M. O’Chee, W. G. * Parer, W. R. has difficulty with an occupational health and Payne, M. A. Reid, M. E. safety matter at work, unless the appropriate Stott Despoja, N. Synon, K. M. award coverage is there, that union would not Tambling, G. E. J. Tierney, J. be able to come in, see that union member, Troeth, J. Vanstone, A. E. examine the site and determine whether or not Woodley, J. there was an occupational health and safety PAIRS difficulty there. Reynolds, M. Patterson, K. C. L. As I said, to use parlance that the govern- Sherry, N. Calvert, P. H. Evans, C. V. Ellison, C. ment can relate to, we do not believe this Campbell, G. Heffernan, W. government should be seeking to intervene in Lundy, K. Alston, R. K. R. the union market. We believe there should be Bolkus, N. Watson, J. O. W. free access between a union and the people * denotes teller who wish to join that union. We encourage (Senator Cook did not vote, to compen- the Democrats to rethink their position. As sate for the vacancy caused by the resignation indicated, we will be dividing on this matter. of Senator Kernot.) Question put: Question so resolved in the negative. That the amendment (Senator Mackay’s) be Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western agreed to. Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the The committee divided. [12.26 p.m.] Treasurer) (12.30 p.m.)—by leave—I move: (The Chairman—Senator S. M. West) (4) Schedule 7, item 4, page 17, (line 30), omit Ayes ...... 24 "Schedule", substitute "items 1, 2 and 3". Noes ...... 37 (5) Schedule 7, item 4, page 18, (line 1), omit —— "this Schedule", substitute "items 1, 2 and 3". Majority ...... 13 —— Because Senator Margetts may ask me, I AYES point out that amendments Nos (4) and (5) are Bishop, M. Brown, B. consequential upon the amendments made by Carr, K. Collins, J. M. A. item 3 of schedule 7. They were the items we Collins, R. L. Conroy, S. dealt with a little earlier in relation to the Cooney, B. Crowley, R. A. printing of yes and no cases et cetera. Denman, K. J. * Faulkner, J. P. Forshaw, M. G. Gibbs, B. They ensure that the provisions in the bill Harradine, B. Hogg, J. relating to the validity of applications for Mackay, S. Margetts, D. disamalgamation ballots already made—in McKiernan, J. P. Murphy, S. M. Neal, B. J. O’Brien, K. W. K. other words, items 1, 2 and 3—continue to Quirke, J. A. Ray, R. F. apply as intended, that is, the new provisions Schacht, C. C. West, S. M. will operate to ensure that applications for NOES disamalgamation made before the new provi- Abetz, E. Allison, L. sions come into effect can proceed without Boswell, R. L. D. Bourne, V. the need to reapply to the Federal Court. If Brownhill, D. G. C. Campbell, I. G. these existing applications were not preserved, Chapman, H. G. P. Coonan, H. Crane, W. Eggleston, A. the parties concerned would be unreasonably Ferguson, A. B. Ferris, J. inconvenienced by the need to make a new Gibson, B. F. Herron, J. application to the court. Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7941

Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (12.31 agreements would be compared with the p.m.)—We will not be opposing these amend- relevant award. If workers were operating ments. under a federal award, the agreement would Amendments agreed to. not rule out using the federal award as a benchmark. I think that what the government Item 4, as amended, agreed to. is proposing stretches ‘technical’ a little Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (12.32 further than we expect, so we will support the p.m.)—The opposition will oppose item 1 of opposition at this stage. schedule 9 in the following terms: Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) (26) Schedule 9, item 1, page 23 (lines 5 and 6), (12.35 p.m.)—I have to say that this whole TO BE OPPOSED. bill is wide ranging, although the government We are concerned about this from the per- has pushed it as a series of technical amend- spective of a state enterprise agreement being ments. Their arguments that they are just little able to override a federal award only if the weeny technical amendments in the bill itself agreement does not disadvantage the worker do not necessarily hold water. I am prepared relevant to the award. to support the opposition in relation to this The other matters are tidying up of the act. issue. Certainly, as a senator from Western Our position is that the status quo should Australia I believe that the workers, the remain. Our principal position is similar to ordinary people, in Western Australia do need arguments we have advanced in other amend- this support from the Senate. ments—that is, we are concerned about the Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western diminution of the no disadvantage test in Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the terms of state awards, particularly in states Treasurer) (12.36 p.m.)—We have not said like Western Australia, which has an appal- that these are teensy weensy sort of minor ling IR track record which Senator Murray technical amendments. They really are techni- and Senator Bishop spoke about earlier. cal in nature but they do have an important We are already concerned about the dimin- effect. I think Senator Cooney quoted earlier ution of the application of the no disadvan- from the second reading speech saying that tage test in that, as I articulated previously, they will obviously add to the Workplace we have a situation whereby the Employment Relations Act and the new industrial relations Advocate, in terms of applying the no disad- culture that this government is trying to create vantage test on AWAs, is taking minimum through this legislation and particularly the rates awards and not recognising pre-existing amendments we are debating today. enterprise agreements or pre-existing agree- So although they are ostensibly technical ments on the work site. Obviously with paid amendments, they do seek to make a work- rates awards there is a bit of a difference, place relations scheme work more effectively although that will decrease over time in terms and therefore deliver the policy benefits that of the government’s action on paid rates flow from that. You can have a debate about awards. Western Australia if you want, but one of the We are already concerned that the no things that are indisputable about Western disadvantage test is being compromised. We Australia is that it has one of the best employ- do not want it further compromised by going ment generation records of any of the states to the lowest industrial relations common of Australia. denominator like the Western Australian Senator Murray—No thanks to Graham industrial jurisdiction, which we believe is Kierath. appalling. Senator IAN CAMPBELL—Maybe thanks Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) to Richard Court and a few other people, (12.34 p.m.)—The Democrats will join the Senator Murray. I acknowledge that you are Labor Party in opposing this amendment. In nodding there. I am sure the Premier will be our agreement with the government last year, happy to have your support in that regard— the wording agreed was that state employment and surprised. 7942 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

The amendment is indeed, though, a techni- believe that they did not mean that employers cal amendment. It is designed to clarify the would be forced to dock the pay of workers existing provision. The omission of the for any possible sort of action, including government’s amendment, which now seems work-to-rule. likely with the support for the Labor Party by Sometimes, if something is dangerous, the Democrats, will simply make the existing employees try to indicate there is a problem. provision more confusing for the parties Sometimes something additional to employ- concerned. ees’ paid duties may be required to be under- Under the provision as it now stands, the taken—for instance, teachers may choose not reference to ‘relevant award’ can only mean to agree to take on excursions which are in a relevant state award. The provision is about effect in their own time. Ironically, those the criteria applied by state tribunals in instances can be regarded as industrial action. relation to the approval of state agreements. And there are all sorts of other issues. For the approval of state agreements by state tribunals, the relevant award benchmark will Pretty soon the government found that they necessarily be a state award. So, in summary, had a monstrous, unenforceable situation. the government regards this as an important Most of us have received letters saying, ‘If provision and believes that the opposition your staff ever attend meetings you must tell amendment will make a significantly negative us so that we can dock their pay.’ What a impact on the scheme which the government monstrous assertion! What a dreadful thing to supports. happen in 1997! Senator HARRADINE (Tasmania) (12.38 At the time of that debate I pointed out this p.m.)—For the information of the committee, consequence to the Senate, and in particular I will be supporting the opposition’s amend- I pointed it out to Senator Murray who repre- ment which in effect removes schedule 9. sented the Australian Democrats, as he is here today in this debate. Like most people in the Item 1 not agreed to. Senate, he did not realise that that was what Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) the government had in mind. As I said, (12.38 p.m.)—I move: initially I gave the government the benefit of (1) Schedule 9, page 23 (after line 12), after item the doubt. I thought that maybe it was an 2, insert: unintended consequence, but, during the 2A At the end of section 187AA course of the debate, it became clear that it was an intended consequence on the part of Add: the government—they meant any form of (4) For the purposes of this section, an em- industrial action. ployee is not deemed to be engaged in industrial action where the employee is During the debate it was explained that the fully engaged during his or her ordinary reason for that very broad definition of indus- hours of work in performing work direct- trial action being put into industrial relations ed by the employer, notwithstanding that the employee may refuse to perform some legislation in the first place was not to try to other aspect of work required by the beat workers over the head, that it was actual- employer. ly there to make sure that there could be early There are two amendments that honourable and relevant intervention so that issues could senators will see that deal with aspects of the be taken to a tribunal before they became full- issue dealt with in my amendment (1) on page scale industrial action. That was said to be 719. This revisits an area which was debated the reason for the broad definition. But the in the consideration of the 1996 industrial government took that broad definition and relations legislation, when I pointed out to the used it as a means of beating workers over Senate that ‘industrial action’, as written in the head, and I believe that was a very draco- the bill, may mean almost anything. At the nian step. time, initially, we were prepared to give the The government—as have we—have found government the benefit of the doubt and this to be an unworkable situation. At one Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7943 stage we know that the entire public sector lous to suggest that they will. So I argue that was stopping for one or two minutes at a time work-to-rule situations and those kinds of to see how on earth the government could non-strike actions should not be included in enforce this situation. I guess Senator Murray the section regarding the compulsory docking has tried to redeem himself with his amend- of pay because, in the end, I think it will ment (10), but I do not believe it goes far become unworkable. Perhaps we will end up enough. Basically, it says: with more industrial action rather than less. For the purpose of this Part, industrial action does The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Sena- not include action by employees that is authorised, tor McKiernan)—Order! It being almost agreed to or accepted by the employer of the 12.45 p.m., I will report progress. employees. That is a good point inasmuch as it was noted Progress reported. in the debate that there could be a ridiculous NATIONAL ROAD TRANSPORT situation where an employer could be quite COMMISSION AMENDMENT BILL happy with the industrial action that was 1997 being taken, or quite at ease with the industrial action that was being taken for various Second Reading reasons, therefore they should not be forced Debate resumed from 2 October, on motion to dock the pay of their workers for action by Senator Ian Campbell: with which they either agreed or did not That this bill be now read a second time. object to. Senator SCHACHT (South Australia) However, according to basic human rights (12.45 p.m.)—The opposition supports the principles, if you start defining industrial National Road Transport Commission Amend- action according to whether or not an employment Bill 1997 and commends it to the er likes it, you have a very silly situation. So, Senate. whilst I will certainly agree to support Senator Murray’s amendment, I will also add those Senator MARGETTS (Western Australia) aspects which in effect are included in work- (12.45 p.m.)—The National Road Transport to-rule—that is to say: Commission Amendment Bill 1997 basically brings about an extension of the National . . . an employee is not deemed to be engaged in industrial action where the employee is fully Road Transport Commission, or NRTC, for engaged during his or her ordinary hours of work another year to allow a new agreement be- in performing work directed by the employer, tween the states and the Commonwealth to be notwithstanding that the employee may refuse to finalised. The Greens (WA) have no objection perform some other aspect of work required by the to this bill, but I wish to speak about the employer. shape of the final agreement. This will cover minor work-to-rule disputes Road transport is an issue which has major involving people such as nurses and teachers implications for greenhouse gas emissions. and people who believe they have a social Roughly one-third of our anthropogenic or responsibility to the people they serve. They person-made CO2 emissions come from road are often people who work under very strait- transport. The approach to transport policy in ened conditions, who have had their pay and this country will have major implications for conditions kept down in many instances, but our ability to effectively address the green- who want to make sure that their message is house problem, without imposing other getting across without creating a problem for unnecessary costs. The failure to have ad- the people to whom they are dedicated. To equately addressed this issue in the last start requiring that people’s pay be docked in decade will already impose substantial costs. those kinds of situations I think is a very The NRTC has the job of road transport dangerous thing. reform. It seeks to provide a coordinated It is very unlikely that, say, the Western national approach to road transport. It is the Australian education department will authorise natural organisation to address the reform of a work-to-rule situation—in fact, it is ridicu- road transport to take account of the environ- 7944 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 mental implications of such transport. I would relating to the portfolio of employment, think the world would be looking to Australia education and youth affairs, and the Public to address some of these situations, as road Service. transport is such a major issue. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Fuel supply is also an important question in the context of road transport planning. We Nursing Homes have an acknowledged decline in oil sup- Senator McKIERNAN—My question plies—even acknowledged by the Minister for without notice is directed to the Senator Resources and Energy (Senator Parer). We are Herron, the Minister representing the Minister reaching the halfway point of known world for Family Services. Minister, can you con- oil supplies. We are already at the point firm that, on the ruling IT261, a medical where production exceeds the rate of discov- expense rebate can be claimed for fees paid ery. We know that from here on in we are to nursing homes? Can you also confirm that, reaching the more expensive range of oil under ruling TR93/14, a medical expense sources. That means that within the next 10 rebate can be claimed for fees paid to hostels years the price of oil will increase exceeding- where a personal care subsidy is paid for the ly. Even for purely selfish economic reasons person? Will older Australians be able to we should be planning to deal with these claim the medical expenses rebate for the issues. accommodation bonds and income tested We will see an increase in the marginal cost daily fees they now have to pay in order to of oil and need to start planning for the get the care they need? reality now. That marginal cost of producing Senator HERRON—One thing is certain— the next barrel of oil is going to increase that the care that they will get from the quite substantially. I trust the National Road medical profession in nursing homes will Transport Commission will consider these two improve under us, as it did not, as it ran important issues in the context of their current down, under the Labor Party. It is fairly review. obvious that we have had to change and bring Senator NEWMAN (Tasmania—Minister in the bonds for the nursing homes because for Social Security) (12.48 p.m.)—I thank the quality of the nursing homes has deterio- senators for their contribution and commend rated. I showed a graph the other day where the National Road Transport Commission the amount of money that went into nursing Amendment Bill to the Senate. homes went down 70 per cent over that Question resolved in the affirmative. period of time. The opposition should be ashamed, as I said the other day. I repeat it Bill read a second time and passed through because it does not get through. I would have its remaining stages without amendment or thought that it would get through to my Irish debate. confrere there, that it would get through even Sitting suspended from 12.50 p.m. to to an Irishman, that the— 2.00 p.m. Opposition senators interjecting— MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS Senator McKiernan—Madam President, on Senator HILL (South Australia—Minister a point of order: I would ask the minister to for the Environment) (2.00 p.m.)—by leave— withdraw that slur not only on me personally I inform the Senate that Senator Chris Ellison, but on the race of people that I happily Minister for Schools, Vocational Education belonged to prior to my becoming an Austral- and Training, will be absent from the Senate ian citizen and, unfortunately, relinquishing chamber, including question time today and my Irish citizenship. on Monday, 27 October. Senator Ellison is in Senator HERRON—Madam President, I Paris attending the UNESCO general confer- withdraw any imputation, because I am of ence where he will deliver Australia’s profile Irish descent myself—my father was Irish. I speech. In his absence, I will take questions am a member of the Irish association of this Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7945 parliament. I am a very proud Irishman. Greenhouse Gases Irishmen always understand a joke. Senator FERGUSON—My question is The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator Herron, directed to the Minister for the Environment, I would remind you of the question that was Senator Hill. Minister, what is the govern- asked of you. I would remind you of the ment’s reaction to President Clinton’s an- content of the question that you were asked. nouncement of the United States greenhouse gas emission target? Does Australia support Senator HERRON—Madam President, I the United States announcement, and does take your admonition. I respect you greatly. Australia share the United States view of the role of the developing countries in the climate Senator Schacht—Did you withdraw? change negotiations? The PRESIDENT—Yes, he withdrew. Senator HILL—The United States has added a further position to the negotiating Senator HERRON—Yes, I did withdraw, table overnight. I think that is a helpful Senator Schacht. contribution to the debate in the lead-up to The PRESIDENT—You were making too Kyoto. What the United States has done is to much noise to hear it. suggest an appropriate target for the United States. It is interesting that what it has done Senator HERRON—That was a very is to select a target that reflects the particular technical question, obviously. I am quite national circumstances of the United States. confident that Senator McKiernan, seeing he In other words, it has nominated a figure that asked that question, would know all the it believes can be achieved, consistent with sections of that particular act and the implica- what might be described as adopting sensible tions of that question, otherwise he would not domestic practices providing a certain amount have asked it. of incentive, providing a certain opportunity for domestic reform and providing a certain I will get back to Senator McKiernan with amount of encouragement for domestic indus- a factual answer to that question, because I try in particular. am not familiar with all the details of the sections that he referred to in that act; nor, I That is very much along the same lines as would expect, would anybody else in this the Australian approach to this debate. Aus- chamber—apart from Senator McKiernan, as tralia has always said that we as a country he asked the question. I will get back to should make a reasonable contribution, one Senator McKiernan with an answer to the that can contribute to a better global outcome, question that he asked. but that it also should be consistent with our national circumstances. Senator McKIERNAN—Madam President, It is interesting that we now have from the I ask a supplementary question. I thank the majors three different positions on the table: minister for taking the earlier part of that the position of Europe, the position of Japan, question on notice. I am disappointed that he and now that of the United States. They all is not in a position to answer now what I substantially differ, but they all in some ways thought was a relatively simple question about reflect what can be achieved by the econo- claims on the medical expenses rebate. How- mies that they represent. Australia’s position, ever, I will follow it up with a supplementary. of course, will be different again, and we I ask: do your savings estimates for the hope to be able to release that figure as soon introduction of accommodation bonds and as possible. income tested daily fees take the increased taxation expenditure on the medical expenses There is no doubt that, if we were to apply rebate into account? the United States’ suggested figure to our country, the consequence would be very Senator HERRON—As I understand it, significant economic sacrifice and the loss of they do not. But, again, I will check that with a large number of jobs. That is why that the minister. figure would not be a sensible figure for 7946 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Australia to accept. Obviously, this govern- are direct from hospitals, how can you claim ment has made it clear from the start that we that such persons are able to properly and want to be part of a good global outcome, we equitably negotiate the level and conditions of want Australia to accept its fair share of the the nursing home bond? burden, but we are not going to sacrifice Australian jobs to achieve that outcome. Minister, are you really going to stand up here in the Senate and argue that, firstly, these There were a lot of things in the Clinton elderly frail people should be required to pay speech which were helpful to the debate and an up-front bond; and, secondly, that they were certainly not inconsistent with the points should have to negotiate quite complex that we have been making. The issues of the issues—namely, the amount of the bond and science, the importance of the issue, the need the conditions attached to it? Isn’t it really the for a global response are all things that we case that it will be the nursing homes that have been saying. The need for flexibility in determine the amount of the bond and it will implementation is something that we agree be the residents, those seeking a bed in a with. The need to engage developing count- nursing home, that just have to cop it? ries within the solution is obviously essential if you are going to achieve an effective global Senator HERRON—Now we are going outcome. The language of President Clinton beyond the pale. This whole disinformation was that it required ‘meaningful participation campaign that has been going on in the Labor by developing countries’, which is very much Party for some time now has reached the in accordance with our own views. stage where they are scraping the bottom of His preference for market solutions over the barrel. Obviously, with that question the regulatory solutions to maximise the potential senator is not aware that there is a legal friend outcome is along the lines of our position. He attached to everybody in every state, a legal said that this was a challenge for the whole of friend who represents a person who goes into the community and not just for governments. a nursing home. It shows the obvious ignor- In fact, he adopted something, Senator Parer, ance of those on the other side who have had very close to our own greenhouse challenge no dealings whatsoever with nursing homes program in relation to domestic industry in or hostels. the United States, and it is good to see that Of all people, Senator Forshaw should have that is being taken up. been aware of this because he maintains that President Clinton called for reform of the he has had some connection with a medical electricity market in the United States; and we fund of some kind. In every state there is a are well advanced on that in our own country. legal friend. Perhaps I could take the Labor He called for more effective energy usage by Party through this so that they will understand the US government; and we are going down it. They might understand it if I take them the same lines in that regard. Madam Presi- through it step by step. dent, when you look at the speech as a whole, Before a person goes into a nursing home, there is a lot in there that is very similar to they are assessed on need and not on means, the direction that we have taken, and I think and that is the basic principle of this legisla- it is a helpful contribution to what is a very tion, and it was the basic principle of their complex but vitally important negotiation. legislation—it is no different. An aged care Nursing Homes assessment team—comprising the local doctor, a general practitioner in most cases, and Senator FORSHAW—Madam President, a nurse, and sometimes two nurses because my question is directed to Senator Herron, the the regulations vary from state to state be- Minister representing the Minister for Family tween a state-appointed nurse and a federal- Services. Minister, given that persons who appointed person—assesses that aged person. enter nursing homes do so because they are You should know that, Senator Forshaw. assessed as being no longer able to care for themselves and that 60 per cent of referrals Senator Forshaw—I do know that. Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7947

Senator HERRON—He has just said that of order and you then asked me to continue he does know that, Madam President. Then he my remarks, and I am continuing my remarks. got up and— The point I was making is that if a person Senator Forshaw—Madam President, I rise is incapable, and that is the implication of the on a point of order. The minister is actually question—and dare I say that Senator giving us an explanation of the first part of Forshaw is obviously incapable—but if they my question, which I told him; that is, that are mentally incapable, and I wouldn’t cast patients are assessed for entry into nursing any aspersions on the mental capacity of the homes based upon their state of health and person asking the question, but— their care needs. The question that was direct- Senator Parer—It speaks for itself. ed to Senator Herron is related to the government’s claims that the patient entering Senator HERRON—Yes, as my colleague a nursing home has to negotiate with the says, it speaks for itself, because if he under- nursing home on the level of the bond. That stood, he wouldn’t ask such a fatuous ques- is what the question is about, that is what I tion. If a person is incapable of conducting asked him about, and that is what he should anything for themselves, there is a legal friend be directed to answer. in each state who does it for them. There is negotiation between the legal friend and the The PRESIDENT—There is no point of person who suffers from that incapacity on order. their admission, which is assessed by the aged Senator HERRON—Madam President, I care assessment team. was going to speak to the point of order, and If, as Senator Forshaw says, I am not Hansard will show what question was asked. answering the question, I think my answer That question related to the government’s needed that preamble so that even he might approach to how elderly people go into understand that there is a legal friend, and an nursing homes, and I was explaining to aged care assessment team makes the decision Senator Forshaw— to approach the nursing home so that that Senator Forshaw—What’s the answer, you person may be admitted. Any negotiation fool? from then on goes between the nursing home proprietor and the legal friend or the relatives. Senator HERRON—The answer should be If the person designated somebody to be their obvious to even you, Senator Forshaw. agent before they became incapacitated, then The PRESIDENT—Minister, direct your that agent negotiates. I think even Senator remarks through the chair. Forshaw should have been aware of that Senator HERRON—My apologies, Madam before he asked that fatuous question. Other- President, I get provoked. It should be obvi- wise, he is wasting the time of the Senate ous, even to Senator Forshaw— during question time. Senator Forshaw—Is he still speaking to Privatisation the point of order? Senator CHAPMAN—My question is The PRESIDENT—He is answering the directed to the Minister for Communications, question. the Information Economy and the Arts. Is there substantial public support for the Senator Carr—Is it a point of order? government’s one-third privatisation of The PRESIDENT—I said there was no Telstra? Is this level of support in line with point of order and invited him to answer the worldwide trends in relation to privatisation? question. Are there any groups or individuals who Senator HERRON—Madam President, this remain out of step with these trends? is an example of how, if they stopped talking Senator ALSTON—Senator Chapman is to each other and listened to what was being absolutely right. In fact, the response has been said, they might learn something. Madam overwhelming. Something like 2.3 million President, you ruled that there was no point Australians have already voted on this issue 7948 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 by registering an interest in the prospectus. If former Senator Kernot stand? She was out you look around the world you will find the there dying in a ditch on these issues. She same awareness on the part of governments hated the privatisation of Qantas. She bagged that privatisation makes sense in all sorts of Labor on the Commonwealth Bank. She ways. would not have a bar of Telstra. What is she I want to draw particular attention to what going to do now? has been happening in the UK where son of Now that Labor has decided to take the Thatcher has once again shown the way for money, is she going to simply roll over, junk the Labor Party in Australia, if they are inter- her principles, sign on to this long overdue ested. They are interested only in the style, ideological sell-out or is she going to tell not the substance. If you look at the substance Labor that that is not what she had in mind in you will see that the Deputy Prime Minister switching over? She wanted to keep them in the UK, who just happens to be in the left honest, so called—honest right in the pockets wing faction, has announced his confidence of your preselectors, of course your clients in a partial privatisation of the London Under- who will not have a bar of it, who do not ground, which was announced by the tories believe in privatisation at any cost because it during the election campaign. He said, ‘The will affect the public sector ownership and public would expect us to look at a wide therefore the union membership. range of public-private partnerships.’ Let us face up to the issue. Senator Schacht, If you surfed the Times net today you did you or did you not draft this provision would have found the words ‘Blair to an- that an ALP government would maintain nounce Labour’s first sell off. The Prime majority public ownership of Telstra? If you Minister is to announce that the government did, I congratulate you on seeing the light. If is to sell its majority holding in the $1.5 you do not know anything about it, which is billion Commonwealth Development Cor- much more likely, then you had better scurry poration’. He is also reported as saying that, out there and find out who is putting this although it is a change of approach for La- forward without your knowledge. Let us see bour, he is more interested in whether somewhere your customers stand. Let us see if thing works than in whether it is private or they have really rolled over, whether Mrs public. I can tell you that if he keeps this up Kernot is going to come on board or whether we will be inviting him out here for the next this is simply a kite that you are flying. election because he will be in a perfect position to tell you lot what privatisation is all Saying that it is only a majority does not about. mean anything anyway because that is what you said about the Commonwealth Bank. The biggest policy challenge of all faces the Remember, Ralph Willis even put out the want to be member for Dickson, who has prospectus saying that they would not go been swanning around, tripping over televi- beyond selling off a majority interest in the sion cables, not facing up to the policy issues. Commonwealth Bank. Of course, once Labor Here is a very good one for her to face up to. was re-elected in 1993 it did precisely the The agreed draft policy for the Labor Party’s opposite. So do not believe for a moment, 1998 national conference contains the follow- because we do not and the public does not, ing words—and, Senator Schacht, I would be that a form of words like that will get you off interested if you would pay attention because the hook. I want to know whether you drafted it: An ALP government would maintain majority The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator, the public ownership of Telstra. time for answering the question has terminat- There you are. This lot who are out there ed. kicking us to death are all of a sudden pre- Senator ALSTON—That is an acknow- pared to countenance the sale of another 16½ ledgment that we have been right all along, per cent; in other words, they no longer have and I would like you and Mrs Kernot to face this ideological prejudice. But where does up to it straightaway. Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7949

Senator Robert Ray—Madam President, predicted that, if you did not change course, on a point of order: this is about the 20th Australia risked becoming an international time this year that Senator Alston has defied pariah on this issue. Since then we have seen you and continued talking when you called nation after nation decry Australia’s bloody- him to order. He is the only minister over mindedness, and today you lost your last there who does it. At least once this week you major card when President Bill Clinton made have had to stand to get him to finish his it clear that the US will not endorse your answer. If he cannot time his little prepared position and, in fact, wants binding targets. diatribes within four minutes, you have to sit Firstly, will you reconsider now that we are him down, Madam President. an international pariah? Secondly, will you The PRESIDENT—Thank you, Senator. throw out the useless ABARE report and encourage the new jobs that are there waiting Nursing Homes to be done? Finally, do you agree that we Senator BOB COLLINS—My question is must quickly recognise the potential for directed to the Minister representing the renewable technologies and that international Minister for Family Services. Minister, you market opportunities will flow on if we told us very aggressively yesterday of your develop a strong domestic market? personal familiarity with the policy area of Senator HILL—That was a strange ques- nursing homes. You would then be aware of tion but I will have a go at answering it. In the 47-page model agreement that has just fact, I would suggest, Senator, that the princi- been drawn up for elderly Australians entering ples that underlie our position are being more nursing homes. Given the obvious trouble that widely recognised and respected by our you have reading and comprehending a one- negotiating partners each day. On that basis, page question time brief, don’t you agree that you will understand why I think your question frail elderly people, indeed anyone, will have is oddly out of order with the direction of a great deal of difficulty in understanding that these negotiations. 47 pages of legal gobbledygook? The point that I made in answer to an Senator HERRON—Yes. earlier question was that President Clinton has Senator BOB COLLINS—Thank you, put down a formula today that suits the Minister. I agree that they will. Minister, national circumstances of the United States. yesterday you spoke about all the options that It does not call for no action. In fact, he puts people have in regard to not having to sell forward a number of domestic changes in their houses—being able to do things like terms of incentives and other ways that would making periodic payments. Under the area of encourage a better domestic greenhouse periodic payments, the agreement prescribes performance, but basically it fits their national that the provider of the service—that is, Mr circumstance. It is what he believes can be Moran and others—will be able to apply achieved by the United States without eco- security to periodic payments and the provider nomic loss. That is basically the position that will determine what that security has to be. Australia is advocating. We have argued that Minister, don’t you agree that, considering the Australia should make a worthwhile contribu- number of people who will own only their tion but it should be one that does not under- own homes, the obvious security that will be mine our economy, does not sacrifice Austral- demanded for these other options you talked ian jobs and does not provide an extra burden about yesterday will be the homes they own? to the regions of Australia that would suffer Senator HERRON—No. under a uniform proposal. What I said earlier was that, in fact, we Greenhouse Gases now have a number of different formulas and Senator LEES—My question is to Senator targets on the table. Japan put down its a Hill, Minister for the Environment. Minister, couple of weeks ago. It talked about 1990 when I began this series of questions last year levels less five per cent plus an allowance for on the government’s greenhouse policy I various elements of differentiation. One of 7950 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 those areas of differentiation was within our targets. We are the only nation now left in the formula. It added another two that suited its OECD that is going to be at Kyoto that does national circumstances. It called for some pain not support binding international targets. Min- for Japan. For example, it called, in their ister, do you agree that, as far as differenti- interpretation, for them to build another 20 ation is concerned, if we keep pushing this nuclear power stations, which might be some- line we could end up having to do more than thing that Senator Lees is suggesting for the rest of the world because of our current Australia as an alternative. I do not know. position, and that we have the flexibility with- The Europeans have done likewise. They in Australia to differentiate between indus- have allowed differentiation within the Euro- tries, depending on where they are now at? pean community. They have allowed Portugal Did you note that most of Europe, specifically to go 40 per cent above 1990 levels. As I the English Guardian today, believes that we recall, they allowed Spain to go 30 per cent are totally out of step and that ‘Oz is up a above 1990 levels. Out of that differentiated gum tree and out on a limb’? Minister, you model, they have an overall picture that they seem to be the only one who is convinced believe they can deliver as a community, a that we are not out of step with the rest of the community target that will not cost them world. We have to acknowledge that there are unduly in terms of jobs. many new jobs there waiting to be done, to get in step with it and, if we can develop All Australia wants is to be put in the same those industries here, then export that technol- boat. By the time you give differentiation for ogy, particularly to Asia. (Time expired) the European states, differentiation for the east European states and differentiation for the Senator HILL—What we have said on developing world, as was acknowledged by binding targets is that, until we know the President Clinton today, so I presume you obligation that is going to be sought of us, it endorse that, there are only eight countries would be inappropriate, foolish and bad left in the world that you are not giving the public policy for us to agree to sign on. In right to differentiate. Why should we be one other words, what you are suggesting we of those eight countries and sacrifice thou- should do is sign a blank cheque on Austral- sands of jobs just to please the Europeans? ian jobs, and we are not going to do that. We Why should we do that? This government is believe we have a responsibility to contribute not going to do it. to a better global greenhouse outcome, but we have also got a responsibility to grow the As I said, this government is prepared to Australian economy and provide jobs. We take tough domestic decisions, and the Prime want to achieve both, and we believe you can Minister will be making further announce- achieve both. ments in due course. This government is pre- Senator Lees is just starting to understand pared to further encourage industry, as we differentiation. An industry, for example, that have been doing through the greenhouse has already made the sacrifice and spent the challenge program. I commend industry that money to put in new energy efficiency plant has come on board and done a good job in may be able to do less than one that has not that regard. This government is prepared to done it. But that is what differentiation is all ensure Australia does its fair share and does about. It is about putting enough pressure on its bit to achieve a better global outcome, but each industry and each state to contribute we are not going to take an unfair burden and what they can consistent with preserving jobs we are not going to throw Australian jobs on and economic opportunity. So, Senator Lees, the trash heap. you are starting to get on track, but if you Senator LEES—Madam President, I ask a take that example one step further you will supplementary question. I thank the minister better understand the debate. (Time expired) for his interesting answer. Minister, you must have read a different version of what Presi- Nursing Homes dent Clinton said to what I did because he Senator SCHACHT—My question is made it very clear that he supported binding directed to Senator Herron, the Minister Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7951 representing the Minister for Family Services. damage. I would not know who Mr Moran Is it true that Mr Doug Moran of the Moran had dinner with nor who Mr Costello had Health Group heavily lobbied coalition front- dinner with. Who else was it Senator Schacht benchers to introduce a user pays system for spoke about? Somebody else—I am sure they nursing homes? Is it true that Mr Moran had are quite decent people— Mr Costello and Mr Ruddock to dinner for Senator Schacht—So you didn’t get a free this purpose just before the 1996 election? Is lunch? it true that he increased his nursing investments in the expectation that your Liberal Senator HERRON—Senator Schacht asked government would introduce a user pays me whether I got a free lunch. I did not get system and that he had a lot to do with the a free lunch. I did not get a free dinner. I did nursing home legislation you subsequently not get anything. But I did go to Mr Moran’s introduced? art prize, which is the best art prize in Aus- tralia—a portrait prize. He donates that every Senator HERRON—I am sure that many year. He is a philanthropist, I know. If his people from many parts of the industry philanthropy includes the Liberal Party, good approached us because they would have on him. I think that is great. We on our side known that we were going to win the last never have any strings attached to donations, election. Blind Freddy would have known that not like the— we were going to win the last election. It would have been very prudent for the whole Opposition senators interjecting— of the nursing industry as the health care The PRESIDENT—Order! The level of industry to approach our party and the coali- noise is far too high. A reasonable level of tion because Captain Whacky was leading intervention can be tolerated, but not the level them down the plughole, as those nursing which is going on at the present time. home people and the hospital industry, the Senator HERRON—There is one thing I whole lot, would have been aware. The only am certain about, that there are no strings people who were not aware of it were Senator attached to donations to the Liberal Party. Faulkner and his cohorts over there. You cannot say that about the other side. You have only to read that book about what Opposition senators interjecting— happened during that campaign to know that many people consulted with us. It was abso- Senator HERRON—They laugh and scoff, lutely marvellous. The last time I can remem- but what do the unions expect of them? ber that happening was in 1975. I am sure Nothing? Mr Moran spoke about bludgers the that Mr Moran probably approached people. other day. The only people who bludge off I would not know whether he had dinner. I the unions are those who are here in the am sure he had dinner every night, just as all Senate. That is what they are doing. They are of us did. Who he had as his companions, I not working for their unions. This is where have not the faintest idea. But, if he was they come when they are superannuated out prudent, just as Francis Sullivan, the Director from the unions. of the Australian Catholic Health Care Asso- There are no strings attached to donations ciation, he would have also seen our people— that are given to the coalition. They are all Senator Forshaw—Did you read what he declared. There is nothing under the covers. said in the paper? So to imply that anything has occurred is the pot calling the kettle black. That is what they Senator HERRON—No, you do not want are doing. They are implying that there is to blame Francis Sullivan because he comes undue motive, that there was lobbying. Of and meets with you daily, just as he does with course there is lobbying. Everybody lobbies us. In fact, I met with him last night. politicians. If they are not lobbying, they are Senator Forshaw interjecting— not doing their job. Senator HERRON—You go back into Senator Alston—They don’t go near that your box over there. You have done enough lot. 7952 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Senator HERRON—Senator Alston inter- vehicle fuel efficiency? Will these standards jects that they do not go near that lot. Why be at least as stringent as those in other would they? They even have to clutch at the nations such as the US and Germany? On leader of another party to be their acolyte, to what basis will national standards be devel- join the rest of them, to come in. I am sure oped? Just how much of this reported $150 that will come back and bite them one day million package will consist of a subsidy to too. petroleum companies to reduce lead in petrol, Senator SCHACHT—Madam President, I a worthy aim but nothing whatsoever to do ask a supplementary question. Minister, do with greenhouse gas reductions? you see a potential conflict of interest in Senator HILL—I do not remember seeing nursing home proprietors such as the Moran that last idea, even in the Financial Review, group also operating a real estate agency? Is I have to say. That is presumably an invention your government comfortable with a situation of the Greens. I would dismiss that, Senator whereby a company collects bonds of up to Margetts. Obviously, I can neither deny nor $250,000 from new entrants to nursing homes confirm other aspects of that article. and, at the same time, sells their homes or What I can say to you is that there are rents them out? opportunities for us across all sectors to do Senator HERRON—As I understand it, better in relation to greenhouse gas emissions. those huge bonds are exempt. Senator Schacht We think that it is reasonable that best inter- is probably not aware of that, but there is an national standard is expected of Australia. If exemption over a certain area. For example, we look at the domestic sector, for example, the accommodation bonds of up to $250,000 there is the potential for better insulation that Senator Schacht referred to apply to Mr standards and the like that would help make Moran’s Rose Bay Gardens nursing home. a positive contribution. If we look at the This home operates under the exempt home transport sector, there is the potential for arrangements, introduced by the previous better emission standards. Labor government. I should mention to Senator Lees that the They introduced the exemption. He does second area of domestic reform that Japan is not even know his own policy when he was looking at after building 20 new nuclear in government. The Labor government intro- power stations is even more stringent emis- duced those exemptions to enable those who sion requirements for motor vehicles. There can afford to and wish to do so to pay for is that potential for Australia. Similarly, in more luxury level accommodation and hotel relation to the fixed production of energy, type services. If they wish to pay that, they industry use of energy and, dare I say it, land are exempt from the bond, Senator Schacht, use policy there is the opportunity in this and less than three per cent of nursing homes country for better performance and therefore are in this category. (Time expired) a greater contribution to reducing global greenhouse gases. Greenhouse Gases The government is working its way through Senator MARGETTS—My question is all of those sectors. We will be putting to the directed to Senator Hill as the Minister for the people a program that calls for a stronger Environment, as the Minister representing the domestic response than that which we now Prime Minister and as the Leader of the have. It is interesting that, under the current Government in the Senate. I refer to the front domestic response, our performance has been page report in the Financial Review yesterday better than that of many of the countries that that the government will roll out a strategy criticise us. document on greenhouse in an effort to Our increase, as Senator Margetts will counter increasing internal and global criti- know, from 1990 to 1995 was about six per cism of their approach. I ask: will the govern- cent. That was a considerably better result ment be introducing enforceable standards in than many other countries within annex 1. It areas such as building insulation and motor demonstrates that the voluntary no regrets Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7953 approach that the government has adopted is in a few weeks time, further announcements making a useful contribution. Nevertheless, can be expected. I think the honourable we accept that Australia can do more, can do senator is also somewhat confused in that this better and it is our intention to ask that of government does invest very large sums of Australians. public money in greenhouse science and in I have made the point that it is not just a renewable energy. I draw Senator Margetts’ challenge for governments; it is also a chal- attention to the CRC on renewable energy lenge for industry. It is a challenge for the which is based in her home state. community at large. If we as a nation are Senator Margetts—You just cut it. going to produce a better greenhouse outcome Senator HILL—You have probably never then we all have to make a contribution. It been there. I invite you to visit and to talk to cannot all be under federal legislation be- the academics and to look at the very worth- cause, as you are no doubt aware Senator while work that they are doing with public Margetts, some of these matters are within the support. This government is investing in the constitutional province of the states. universities. It is investing in the CRC. It is I believe it can be argued, in any event, that investing in renewable technologies. It is your approach, the regulatory approach—and investing in sustainable energy. (Time ex- it is interesting to see the way that President pired) Clinton developed his argument today—is not as effective as a non-regulatory regime, a Nursing Homes market orientated regime, which will encour- Senator ROBERT RAY—I direct my age a better outcome than a regulatory out- question to the Minister representing the come which tends to become a lowest com- Minister for Family Services, Senator Herron. mon denominator outcome. There is room for Can you confirm that, in order to appease the us to do better. We want to do better because coalition backbench, the government is con- it is important that Australia does play its full templating allocating $4 million for an adver- role within the international greenhouse tising campaign to sell its introduction of challenge. That is the way in which we are entry bonds and daily charges for nursing approaching this vitally important issue. homes? Will the Department of Health and Senator MARGETTS—Madam President, Family Services consult the Office of Govern- I ask a supplementary question. I am glad that ment Information and Advertising in relation the minister mentioned the United States. It to that decision? Will you guarantee that that appears that US President Bill Clinton has contract for the campaign will be decided proposed more than $6 billion in tax incen- through a competitive tendering process tives for industry to encourage research and without any political interference—novel energy efficient practices. Will the govern- though this concept may be to some of your ment be reversing its decision to withdraw government colleagues? money from energy conservation research Senator HERRON—No, I cannot confirm through the ERDC, the Energy Research and any of that because I am unaware of that. Development Corporation, and the cooperative Holding Senator Ray in high regard, I will put research centres? Given that the United States that question to the minister and get back to has quite a lot of enforceable standards, will him with an answer. As I have high regard for the government be working with the states to Senator Ray’s abilities and as he has advocat- actually bring about the first enforceable ed all those things, I will take that on board. environmental standards on energy efficiency I am sure that suggestion from you, Senator that Australian has had? Ray, will be very useful to us. I would have Senator HILL—We have started the thought, considering the level of ignorance on process of putting propositions to the states. the other side, the amount of disinformation We obviously would like to see them endorse that is around and the scare campaign that has our proposals. When those negotiations are been mounted against this issue by the oppo- concluded and the COAG meeting comes up sition, that $4 million would not be enough. 7954 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Senator Faulkner—What scare campaign. There may be some item that I have not Senator HERRON—There has been covered. I apologise to Senator Ray for that. enormous publicity about this disinformation Senator Ray could raise by way of supple- campaign—the scaring and the frightening of mentary question anything that I have not elderly people. All this week we have been covered in my answer. I would be happy to trying to spell out to the opposition what is follow it through. If he has a supplementary occurring. I thank Senator Ray for his sugges- question in that regard, I will complete that tion. I think it is a marvellous idea that that part of the answer I have not given him. It should occur. The only thing I would differ will be necessary to refer this to the minister with is the amount of funding that should be so that I can get a full answer for him. spent on this campaign, because there has Senator ROBERT RAY—Madam Presi- been an enormous amount of publicity and dent, I ask a supplementary question. Firstly, media generated by this disinformation cam- isn’t Senator Herron aware that government paign. One should consider, Senator Faulkner, advertising does not go to open tender, which that the actual principle was introduced by the he has committed the government to, but a Labor Party in the first place in relation to restricted tender run by OGIA? Secondly, if hostels. he is not satisfied with the $4 million as So I do not think that amount of funding being sufficient, will he, in fact, nominate a will be enough, because it will take a mon- figure? Thirdly, will he tell us how many strous campaign to overcome the disinforma- nursing home entries per million dollars the tion and the mistruths that have been devel- government could have effected without oped in the media. I think the media actually wasting it on advertising? Finally, will he has a responsibility now to clarify all the make sure that some of this money is spent in points in this particular policy. resolving disinformation that Mr Smith has just put down in the other place, which totally I also agree with Senator Ray that any contradicts him today? Obviously ignorance contracts put out should be all above board, starts over there. as they are under us. There should be open tendering. I think it was Senator Ray’s sug- Senator HERRON—I have to inform the gestion that there should be open tendering. Senate that I was asked a question earlier I would agree that, if any contract is let for an today by Senator Bob Collins. The same advertising campaign, there should be open question about the inability to cover a brief in tendering and it should be all above board so one page was asked in the other chamber, that there can be no outside influences. I am word for word, about 10 minutes later. Sena- sure that a particular agency favoured by the tor Ray, I would hope that you will follow the opposition will not be the one that will be— same format in relation to the supplementary Senator Faulkner—You cannot go the four question that you have just asked so that you minutes. will get a similar sort of answer on the other side to the one that— The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator Faulkner! Senator Robert Ray—You are not allowed supplementaries over here. Senator HERRON—The tenders will be open. If that should be Senator Ray’s sugges- Senator HERRON—Senator Ray interject- tion, I think it is a very good suggestion. ed that they are not allowed supplementaries. There are other points that Senator Ray has You certainly are allowed supplementaries on suggested with regard to detail. As I said, I the other side, Senator Ray. You are totally am not aware of those points in relation to ignorant of the procedure on the other side, those details, but certainly they fit in with the just as former Senator Gareth Evans is. parameters that I would think would be Wasn’t he the one who called for a quorum reasonable by any government. We will during question time, or was that Senator follow those through, as has been suggested Faulkner? I think it was former Senator by Senator Ray. Evans. So I would suggest that Senator Ray Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7955 check the procedure on the other side—(Time there were over 100 entries from across expired) Australia. The projects have to have been up and running for a year. They are assessed on Violence a range of criteria, including whether the Senator SANDY MACDONALD—My project can be copied elsewhere, whether it question is to Senator Vanstone, the Minister will be useful to other communities to follow for Justice. Minister, the issue of violence and the example, whether it actually does reduce personal safety is an increasing concern to or prevent violence, and the degree to which many Australians, especially to women and to it is innovative and raises community aware- older Australians. Will you inform the Senate ness. of the government’s initiatives to prevent The winners of the violence prevention violence in our community, including the awards this year cover a range of interesting Australian Violence Prevention Awards? aspects. The lead winner of the $20,000 prize Senator VANSTONE—I thank Senator is the positive parenting program, or the triple Macdonald for the question. He rightly identi- P program, from Queensland. In this program, fies that fear of violence in the community, parents are taught strategies for building especially in the rural community and positive relationships with their children and amongst the elderly, is a problem. Today I to develop appropriate discipline strategies. had the opportunity to announce the four There has been significant publicity given to national winners in the Australian Violence this program—most recently by the 60 Prevention Awards. These are jointly spon- Minutes program. It is a most effective pro- sored by the heads of Australian governments; gram and one that can be transmitted around that is, Commonwealth, state and territory. It Australia. is a combined initiative and includes a total Three other programs received awards of prize pool of some $100,000. The whole $10,000 each. In Queensland, the family care system is designed to reward the most out- program received $10,000. That program standing projects for the prevention or the involves a trial of home based nursing ser- reduction of violence. Projects can focus on vices which are provided to families that are specific groups, such as women or children or identified as being vulnerable—that is, instead youth or the family, or they may take the of waiting until a problem occurs, vulnerable other tack and focus on specific problems, families are identified and assistance is pro- such as excessive alcohol consumption, vided so that the problem does not occur. violence in the media or violence in sport. Preventing workplace violence in Victoria, a Recent figures on the cost of crime suggest scheme initiated by Jobwatch, helps employ- that for every man, woman and child in ees who experience violence at work, giving Australia, the cost of crime is some $100,000 them a capacity for reporting and redress. a year, and that gives us a $20 billion a year Opposition senators interjecting— cost across Australia. It is clear, therefore, The PRESIDENT—Order! Interjections that in tackling the causes of violence in that relate to the answer are one thing; sledg- crime we cannot rely on the justice system ing is another, and it is totally disorderly. alone, which picks up the crime after it has Senator VANSTONE—Feelsafe in Western been committed. We absolutely have to give Australia is a very useful program for adults a much greater focus to crime prevention and older adolescents who have impaired strategies which will reduce the opportunities cognitive abilities. It helps them develop the and the motivation for criminal activity. skills to deal with situations that are unsafe, The Prime Minister recently announced potentially abusive or dangerous. Forty other some $13 million in a national campaign projects around Australia on a state basis were against violence in crime, which will support awarded either prizes or certificates of merit. a very wide range of crime prevention initia- Each of these projects in their way contributes tives. The awards play a very important role across Australia, whether they involve in the fight against violent crime. This year Commonwealth, state or local government or 7956 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 community groups, into making Australia a supports the common law. I think even safer place. Senator Faulkner could understand that. Nursing Homes Oakajee Port and Industrial Development Senator FAULKNER—My question is Senator MURRAY—My question is to the directed to the Minister representing the Minister representing the Minister for Indus- Minister for Family Services. Minister, given try, Science and Tourism. It was reported in that you avoided addressing the issue of the West Australian of 2 October that the WA conflict of interest in Senator Schacht’s Minister for Resource Development, Mr Colin supplementary question just a moment ago, I Barnett, had held talks with Treasurer Peter would like to ask you very clearly again: do Costello and industry minister John Moore on you see a potential conflict of interest in the subject of Commonwealth financial nursing home proprietors, such as the Moran assistance for the controversial proposed group, also operating a real estate agency? Oakajee port and industrial development near Minister, doesn’t this place such a company Geraldton. Firstly, is the minister aware of the in a position where it can take unfair advan- widespread community concern about the tage of elderly people who have no other economic and environmental risks and costs option than to sell or rent their house in order of the proposed new industrial site and port to get into a nursing home? Does the govern- at Oakajee? Secondly, what sum of money ment accept this situation or will the govern- was the WA government seeking from the ment take some action to change it? Commonwealth? Thirdly, was any commit- Senator HERRON—The common law ment given at that meeting or subsequently by covers this situation and Senator Faulkner the Commonwealth for funding assistance for should be aware of that. this project? Senator FAULKNER—Madam President, Senator PARER—I would like to thank I ask a supplementary question. I asked the Senator Murray for the opportunity to com- minister to explain to the Senate and explain ment on what is a very important resources himself whether the government accepts this development. It is not often recognised that situation. We have had clear evidence at the out of resources development and downstream Senate Community Affairs References Com- processing comes enormous infrastructure mittee—for example, from Mr Robinson from development and the spin-off effects from the Office of the Protective Commissioner in those additional infrastructure developments. New South Wales—of where a conflict of I am informed that the government of interest exists. For example, he says in answer Western Australia is close to completing to a question from the chair, ‘Yes, that would assessments and approvals for the proposed be an obvious conflict of interest. We’d want Oakajee deepwater port and associated indus- to see that principal remove himself or herself trial estate near Geraldton. I understand the from one of those functions.’ What we want Western Australian government has spent to know is whether the Howard government some $2½ million on external consultancy accepts this situation or whether you, fees, including on environmental and econom- Minister, and your government are going to ic issues. I also understand that the Western do something about changing it. Australian government is confident that the Senator HERRON—It is obvious that port can be constructed within reasonable Senator Faulkner has not the wit to under- financial parameters and is negotiating to stand what I said in my answer. The point is bring the proposal to fruition. I also under- that the common law covers these situations. stand that financial details remain to be Of course the government supports the com- settled. mon law. That is what it is. The government The port is crucial to the development of certainly supports the common law. If there important resources proposals in the mid-west is a complaint, then the complaint is made region of Western Australia, including the through the legal system. The government $1.2 billion An Feng Kingstream iron and Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7957 steel project, a project, I might say, that I Senator MURRAY—Madam President, I discussed when I was recently in Taipei with ask a supplementary question. Minister, I the An Feng people. There is also the $900 appreciate your taking that question on notice million Mt Gibson integrated iron project as in terms of the finance matter. You would be well as $1 billion in associated infrastructure. aware that the proposed steel mill, which These projects, provided they proceed, will could be sited at a number of sites, is much result in the creation of 1,500 permanent jobs less controversial than the associated port and 5,000 indirect jobs, with 2,400 jobs project, which is just a few miles up from the during the construction phase. The port would existing port at Geraldton. There is strong give a significant boost to regional develop- National and Liberal concern, some disagree- ment and resources and energy exploration as ment, over this project. There is strong com- well as, of course, the downstream processing munity concern. We seek your assurance that that most of us in this country have sought for if Commonwealth money is to be considered so many years. The proposal is strongly in this matter you would undertake to consult supported by the local community. the wider community, which—I agree with Senator Margetts—is concerned about the port Senator Margetts—No it is not. project, not as much about the steel mill Senator PARER—There is the lone voice. project. Would you give us the assurance that Any development in this country you can you would consult with that community? guarantee the Greens will oppose. To hell Senator PARER—Senator Murray will be with the jobs. aware that this is predominantly a state issue. I know that you did make the point that if It will be the only major port between Perth there was any federal government funding and the Pilbara, a distance of some 1,200 involved somehow we would get involved in kilometres. The port project is commercially the process. You also indicated that there was driven and is being strongly supported by the no particular concern about the steel mill but private sector. I understand that consideration there was about the port. Senator, I do not of the financial studies that will be the basis think I have to remind you of this, but there of a Western Australian government contribu- might be others in this place that I do have to tion to the project remains to be finalised. remind: it is no good having the steel mill I am advised that the Western Australian without the port. I would suggest to you—and government’s preferred approach is to proceed I would not say that you, Senator Murray, to tender for a finance-build-own-operate and would be one of these—that I could almost transfer process facility—in other words, guarantee that wherever it was decided to build, own, operate, transfer across back to build that port you can be sure that Senator the state; it is an old trick—that will cost Margetts and her group would oppose it. significantly less than reported in the press. Senator Hill—Madam President, I ask that A substantial amount of funding for the port further questions be placed on the Notice will come from the private sector. There has Paper. been considerable interest in participating in ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS WITHOUT the port development from credible private NOTICE consortia. As regards the other part of the question Clerk of the Senate asked by Senator Murray as to whether there The PRESIDENT—During question time had been some approach made to the federal yesterday, Senator Allison asked me a ques- government, no approach has been made to tion concerning the government’s intention to me personally or to my department. Prior to set as a maximum a non-renewable term of 10 coming into question time I heard that some years for the office of the Clerk of the Senate. approach had been made to, I think, the Senator Allison also asked how long previous Treasurer. But I will find out for you and let Senate incumbents had been in office. I you know. should point out that the Parliamentary Ser- 7958 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 vice Bill, which will parallel, in most aspects, and Staffing Committee yesterday and that the the Public Service Bill, was drafted at the bill will be introduced into the House of request of the Presiding Officers—not the Representatives today—I think in fact it has government. been. In the Parliamentary Service Bill, the Speaker and I have suggested that the clerks I seek leave to incorporate in Hansard a list in both houses be appointed for a period of of the people who, since 1901, have served as 10 years and that the person so appointed is Clerk of the Senate together with their term not eligible for reappointment. Senator Allison of office. will note from the material which I tabled this Leave granted. morning that the Parliamentary Service Bill was examined by the Senate Appropriations The list read as follows—

The Department of the Senate

Clerk of the Senate Term of office Blackmore, Edwin Gordon, CMG 1.4.01-30.6.08 Boydell, Charles Broughton 1.7.08-31.12.16 Duffy, Charles Gavan, CMG, LLB 1.2.17-27.8.20 Monahan, George Henry, CMG 28.8.20-31.12.38 Broinowski, Robert Arthur 1.1.39-30.11.42 Edwards, John Ernest 1.12.42-20.7.55 Loof, Rupert Harry Colin, CBE, BComm 21.7.55-14.8.65 Odgers, James Rowland, CBE 16.8.65-8.8.79 Bullock, Roy Edwards, OBE 9.8.79-15.7.81 Bradshaw, Keith Oscar 29.10.80-15.7.82 Cumming Thom, Alan Ritchie, BA, LLB 16.7.82-15.2.88 Evans, Harry, BA, DipLib 17.2.88-

Importation of Cooked Chicken Meat The answer read as follows— Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— (1) I am informed that no record has been able to Minister for Justice)(3.05 p.m.)—On 2 Octo- be found in the Attorney-General’s Department that any officer of his Department has checked ber 1997 Senator Woodley asked Senator AQIS reports on testing of cooked chicken Chris Ellison, the then Minister Assisting the imports to ensure that they are accurate; Attorney-General, a question without notice. (2) Generally, such a task would not be done The question asked by Senator Woodley was within the Attorney-General’ s Department in relation to the accuracy of testing by AQIS unless the Commonwealth agency concerned of cooked chicken meat imports for Newcastle asked the AttorneyGeneral’s Department disease and other bird viruses and the role of (including the Australian Government Solici- the Attorney-General and his department in tor) to give legal advice on issues to which the assessing the risk of legal liability arising question of the accuracy of such tests was rel- from that test. evant; Senator Ellison took that question on notice (3) While the Attorney-General is concerned to and undertook to provide the information at minimise any exposure of the Commonwealth and its agencies to any legal liability sounding a later date. Since then, of course, I have been in damages or other relief, it is not part of the appointed as Minister for Justice. The normal functions of his Department to check, Attorney-General has provided me with the without request, processes and procedures for following information in answer to Senator which other Departments and agencies are res- Woodley’s question. I seek leave to incorpo- ponsible, in an endeavour to minimise legal rate the answer in Hansard. liability. It needs to be borne in mind, in that connection, that since 1 July 1992 the provi- Leave granted. sion of legal services by the Attorney-Gener- Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7959

al’s Department Legal Practice has operated mentioning the Titanic as it reflects his own on a user pays basis and, accordingly, it is performance. properly a matter for the responsible agency to determine whether legal services are required; Again today, when Senator Faulkner and I (4) Should there be a request from the responsible asked questions about conflict of interest, his Minister or agency, the Australian Government response ultimately was, ‘The common law Solicitor is available to provide advice con- covers it.’ That is utter gibberish. We did not cerning potential liability that may be related ask about the common law; we asked, ‘Does to the testing of chicken meat imports. the government have a policy about the I trust that this answers Senator Woodley’s question conflict of interest between the Moran group and I thank him for his question. running a several hundred million dollar Nursing Homes nursing home empire and also apparently having a number of real estate agencies Senator SCHACHT (South Australia) operating in the same building?’ It was a (3.06 p.m.)—I move: simple question. His answer was, ‘The com- That the Senate take note of the answers given mon law covers that.’ by the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs (Senator Herron), to questions How does the common law cover the without notice asked today, relating to nursing conflict of interest? He could have said, home bonds. ‘There is no conflict of interest’, or ‘There is Yesterday and today the minister has given a conflict of interest’, or ‘I will investigate; I the worst performance I can remember in my will come back.’ The reasonable thing for the 10 years in the Senate in the gibberish he has minister to do if he was not sure was to take used to try to explain the government’s policy it on notice. This minister gets up and babbles regarding the bonds being charged for nursing away and says the first thing that comes into homes. his mind. In this case, common law was the I want to compliment Senator Herron on defence. two things he did in my 10 years here that Senator Bob Collins—Gibberish! ought to be noted. Firstly, he has always opposed the tobacco industry and has moved Senator SCHACHT—As Senator Collins to restrict smoking in Australia, when it is quite rightly said, this is gibberish. He seemed against his party’s policy. Secondly, he very to have the view, this hopeless minister, this courageously took leave from this Senate to hapless minister, that the best way to defend work in Rwanda as a doctor, when that the government’s policy was to fill up the tragedy occurred some years ago. four minutes allocated to answer the question, Since then, his performance as a minister even when it was contradictory, even when it has been abysmal. In his answers today and could not be understood by any sensible yesterday on the issue of nursing homes, to person. The one time he did say yes or no defend himself he has referred to senators as was in answer to a question by my colleague altar boys and acolytes; he has accused Senator Collins who will deal with how the Senator Mackay of being a better blonde than minister got himself into even deeper prob- Senator Kernot; he has attacked trade union- lems by attempting to give a brief answer. ists as being lazy, even though he is a mem- But, on the remaining matters, this minister ber of the strongest trade union in Australia, could not explain the government’s policy. I the AMA. asked him about the connections with Mr Today the minister had to withdraw remarks Moran and the Moran group. Yesterday the about the Irish. He also attacked Senator minister said, ‘I don’t agree with Mr Moran’s Crowley, implying that she is no longer a comments, but I admire what he has done in doctor, just because she is a senator. He also establishing his empire.’ He would not com- defended himself with phrases about the ment on the fact that Mr Moran’s own words Marie Celeste and the Titanic. I think it very were that he has run Liberal Party policy on appropriate that he made the Freudian slip of nursing homes. It is dominated— 7960 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Senator Cook—And made a profit out of that money will become available for capital it. improvements. Senator SCHACHT—And he has made— We have to remember that Australia faces as Senator Cook said—an enormous profit. an ever-increasing proportion of its population The Financial Review reported: falling into the aged group. In fact, something like a 48 per cent increase will occur in the Doug Moran admits his nursing home business is virtually underwritten by $2 billion in government number of people aged over 65 in the next 20 subsidies. years. We have to do something to prepare to meet their needs. That is why the government What other business gets paid every third working day of the month in advance? has introduced this very sensible policy to enable nursing homes to have access to The government policy is a basic way of capital to improve facilities. shovelling money out of the public purse into I know it has been said many times before, Doug Moran’s private empire. But they but this policy which the government is cannot understand the conflict of interest. If introducing is just an extension of a policy Senator Herron can come back and explain and a program to charge accommodation how common law covers this issue, I will be bonds for hostels which the Labor government staggered and surprised. introduced in 1988. That policy worked very Mr Moran is on the public record skiting well. In fact, people in hostels today have about how he has got the Liberal Party to benefited greatly from that policy because the adopt policy that suits him—and overwhelm- standards of the facilities in which they are ingly him. He has been making hundreds of living have greatly improved. millions of dollars of profit over many years, I think it is very curious that the opposition and then he has been donating it back to the is so critical of this policy when in fact it is Liberal Party. (Time expired) really, I suppose, a credit to them that the Senator EGGLESTON (Western Australia) government has been so impressed with the (3.11 p.m.)—I must say that Senator success of the policy they introduced that they Schacht’s little speech exemplifies the ap- have extended it to nursing homes. Very proach the Labor Party has taken to this largely, what has been said has been whole issue. It completely ignores the real scaremongering; they have been trying to issue, the state of Australia’s nursing homes. frighten people about accommodation bonds. We have heard nothing about the real issue, The fact of the matter is that the accommo- the appalling state of Australia’s nursing dation bond system in hostels has meant that homes, or the fact that the policy of the people have had to pay a fairly modest bond government is designed to improve conditions of around $26,000. There is no reason at all in those nursing homes. to believe that accommodation bonds in I know it has already been said to the nursing homes will be any different. They Senate at least four times in taking note of will not be anything like the horrendous answers over the last couple of months, but amounts which the opposition is claiming the fact is that nursing homes around Austral- they will be. ia on the whole are of very poor quality. For I was a member of the Senate Community example, 40 per cent of nursing home resi- Affairs Reference Committee inquiry which dents share their bedrooms with four or more looked into the question of nursing homes. people; 13 per cent of nursing homes do not One of the witness was a Dr Norman meet fire regulations, and another 11 per cent Marinovic, who is the head of the geriatric do not meet health regulations. These are service at Fremantle Hospital. He said in pretty appalling statistics. There has been a evidence to the committee that he did not see real need to improve the standard of nursing any problem with accommodation bonds for homes, and that is what the government has nursing homes and that he believed the set out do to with this policy to introduce a system would work just as well as it had in bond system. The idea of the bond system is the case of hostels. In other words, he be- Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7961 lieved that the standard of nursing homes Northern Territory and the Northern Territory would be improved under the government’s Council on the Ageing but, as reported today, policy, just as the standard of hostels has by the conservative political colleagues of the improved under the government’s policies. minister in the Northern Territory government Also, I would like to quote an endorsement led by Shane Stone QC MP— which came from Maureen Lister of Aged ‘queer customer’ that stands for, with defer- Care Australia, which represents the church ence to Rumpole. and charity community group sector and provides most of the hostels and about 45 per I draw your attention to a report in today’s cent of all nursing homes in Australia. On the Northern Territory News headlined ‘Elderly World Today on ABC Radio on 11 February Fear Cost of Nursing Homes’. The report Ms Lister said: contains a number of statements made by speakers at a Royal College of Nursing We’ve had entry contributions to the hostel system seminar in Darwin yesterday on discrimina- for some 10 years and I don’t believe that residents of hostels would ever say that that system has not tion against elderly people. A keynote speaker worked. was the Northern Territory’s conservative Minister for Health, Denis Burke. According (Time expired) to the Northern Territory News, he used the Senator BOB COLLINS (Northern Terri- occasion to launch ‘a stinging attack on the tory) (3.16 p.m.)—I rise to take note of the Howard government’s reforms to nursing responses by the Minister for Aboriginal and home policy’. He said that most Territorians Torres Strait Islander Affairs (Senator Herron) in aged care could not afford the accommoda- during question time today on the nursing tion bonds proposed by this government. Mr homes issue because I am sick and tired of Burke said that about 90 per cent of aged the minister’s non-stop response to every Territorians in residential care were financial- concern raised with him in this chamber that ly disadvantaged. He went on to say: it is some sort of Labor plot. If honourable There are no limits. The individuals who are senators would take the trouble to look back financially disadvantaged will have limited access over the minister’s responses in question time in the future. Those who have assets will have to through the whole of this week, they will see compete with others in some sort of lottery, which that this has been the constant theme running I think is to their detriment at the time of their life through every response from Minister Herron when they are most vulnerable. to questions on the nursing home issue. It is This is not the Labor Party talking, Senator a pattern that he has developed in his area of Eggleston, in respect of the fact that you also prime responsibility—Aboriginal affairs—to talk about scaremongering. This is your hide the fact that he is simply not on top of conservative colleague the Northern Territory the detail of his responsibilities, no matter Minister for Health. In the same address, Mr what portfolio they reside in. Burke went on to say that the federal govern- On this issue, he would have us all believe ment was hell-bent on driving itself over a that there is no concern in the community political cliff. He warned that, if the federal about this government’s policy on nursing government did not rethink its position, it homes. According to the minister, those on would face, ‘a massive fight from state and this side of the chamber are indulging in ‘a territory governments’. Where does this leave scare campaign designed to terrify older the erstwhile minister and his claims of a people and their relatives’. So there we have Labor Party scare campaign? In my view, it it. Everyone can rest easy. There is no actual leaves him exactly where I expected him to problem, there is no concern; it is simply a be when he started out this week retailing Labor Party plot to scare the most vulnerable these stupid conspiracy theories. That leaves in the community. him with egg all over his face—a very famili- The Labor Party’s concerns in the Northern ar position for this minister to be in. Territory over this matter are publicly shared His political stupidity is not confined to now, not by many in the community in the Labor Party conspiracy theories. While his 7962 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 ministerial colleagues, Ministers Wooldridge have just heard Senator Bob Collins’s com- and Smith, were back-pedalling at a million ments with regard to the financially disadvan- miles an hour to distance themselves from the taged. I want to put on the record the fact that outrageous statements by the self-proclaimed financial disadvantage will not affect a architect of this policy, Mr Moran, we had the person’s ability to get the care they need. relevant minister in this place, Minister That is a very important point. Every facility Herron, yesterday clutching Mr Moran to his will be required to set aside a minimum philosophical bosom saying that he is an number of places for those who cannot pay an Australian hero and that we should all admire accommodation bond. In the hostel sector and respect him because he is a self-made now, the average national target for places for man. financially disadvantaged persons is 23 per I do not know what other good aspects Mr cent. The concessional resident target under Moran may or may not have, but anyone who the new scheme will be 27 per cent of places claims with a broad brush that the elderly nationally—in each region, according to local people of Australia who object to selling their need. homes to pay him a bond to enter one of his This will ensure that all older people, nursing homes are ‘bludgers, silvertails and whether concessional residents or not, have an hoarders’ is, in my view, beneath contempt. equal chance of getting a place. I want to Senator CRANE (Western Australia) (3.21 emphasise that point: they will have an equal p.m.)—I would like to speak on this particular chance of getting a place. It is a very import- issue to bring some balance to the debate. I ant point in the context of this debate and the accept there is fear out in the community but necessity to get the facts on the table. that fear has been generated by the campaign Also, concessional residents will not wait run from the other side, particularly in the any longer to get a place. There will be equal House of Representatives. There is so much access. Experience with hostels shows that misrepresentation around in terms of what is people who are financially disadvantaged wait occurring that it really is quite a sad day for no longer for a place. Let us remember that Australia, I believe, that we should see this the hostel policy is almost identical to the happening. policy adopted by the previous government. I wish to place on record a couple of points. Providers will receive an extra subsidy of In a lot of ways, the need to deal with the $7 a day for each concessional resident and issue of aged people and the necessity for $12 if their number of concessional residents nursing homes and what they require in their totals more than 40 per cent. This is a big later years is not dissimilar, in a sense, to improvement on Labor’s $3.50 a day extra for what we were confronted with when we had financially disadvantaged residents. In fact, to deal with the $10 billion deficit when we according to my sums, it is double. We are came into government. It was the Labor confident that, with higher government subsi- government which left nursing homes in such dies and better protections, the new arrange- a mess. We should never forget that when ments will provide greater assurance that dealing with this issue. older people will have access to the care they We have heard many quotes but one worth need. commenting on is that of Maureen Lister of I would like to deal with one other aspect Aged Care Australia, who said, ‘We’ll be able in the time remaining to me—that is, the sale to see quite significant improvements in the of a resident’s home. Under these arrange- building of nursing homes, and everyone ments, residents do not have to sell their knows that is gravely needed.’ As I under- home to pay for a bond. From everything we stand it, she is involved with 45 per cent of heard during the campaign that was run a nursing homes in this country. week or 10 days ago, we would have believed I will endeavour to put to bed a few of the that that was the case. Let me assure every- furphies that we have heard. With regard to body that it is a concern that is shared not better access for concessional residents, we only by elderly people but by people who Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7963 accept responsibility for their mothers, fathers ter for Family Services, Senator Herron. I feel or members of their families—in some instan- very sad about the minister’s performance ces it could be their aunts and uncles or their today and, indeed, his performance during the friends. People need to understand that they week—particularly yesterday—on this issue. do not have to sell their home to pay for a I like Senator Herron but I feel sorry for him bond. They may prefer to pay from other because he is just not capable of adequately assets or income, from borrowing against the representing the Minister for Family Services. home or other assets, or from rental income. Today, when I asked a very legitimate One of the big furphies is this scare- question that any senator or any member of mongering campaign—I cannot describe it as parliament should ask, instead of directing his anything else—that aged people will have to remarks to the content of the question, he sell their home. You can understand why they sought to vilify me personally and the race of would get upset about that. (Time expired) people that I come from. That is not the first Senator McKIERNAN (Western Australia) time this week that the minister has engaged (3.26 p.m.)—I agree with a couple of the in those tactics. As Senator Bob Collins said comments made by Senator Crane, who in his contribution, with regard to practically preceded me in this debate. He acknowledged every question that was asked of the minister, that there was a great deal of fear in the he came back with the retort that it was a community. Indeed, that is the case. I am Labor plot. He sought to reinforce that view pleased it now appears that that fear is getting by presenting some graphs to the chamber— through to members on the government side, unfortunately, he held them upside down, at least in the Senate. I am aware that a which shows his competence—to show that couple of members of the government parties it was a Labor plot. in the other place have also listened to community concerns and fears, and have coura- Senator Ian Macdonald—That is an geously expressed those fears in their respec- outright lie, and you know it. tive party forums. Senator McKIERNAN—They were upside I hope more of them do it. I hope more of down. them will encourage the Minister for Family Senator Ian Macdonald—They were not. Services (Mr Warwick Smith) to echo the words Senator Crane has just used—that Senator McKIERNAN—You could not see individuals will not have to sell their homes them from where you were, Senator Macdon- to get into a nursing home. Let the minister ald. say that to individual elderly Australians who do not have any asset other than their family The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order! home and who want to get into a nursing Senator McKiernan, would you like to address home. Let the minister assure those individu- your remarks through the chair. als that they will not have to sell their homes. Senator McKIERNAN—I will indeed. The fact is that the minister will not do that because the government’s proposed changes Senator Cook—Madam President, on a in this area mean that individuals will have to point of order: the interjection which has just do that. I dearly hope that other members of been acknowledged, and which therefore will the government parties—perhaps Senator appear in Hansard, is that Senator McKiernan McGauran, who will follow me in this de- told an outright lie—that is what Senator Ian bate—will echo those words. I hope that Macdonald said. That is, of course, unparlia- Senator McGauran has listened to his con- mentary; Senator Ian Macdonald knows it is. stituency in Victoria and will, in turn, express He knows also that he should not say it. It is their fears in this debate. not true on this occasion, and he should withdraw. What we are doing this afternoon is taking note of the answers during question time The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Please, today of the Minister representing the Minis- Senator Ian Macdonald. 7964 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Senator Ian Macdonald—I notice it really to do so here in this chamber. I have allayed cut Senator McKiernan to the quick— the fears of that particular sector. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Withdraw, Before I explain in detail the safety net that thank you. the government has in place, I would like to bring the debate back to the issue and away Senator Ian Macdonald—but I do with- from the minister. Do not pretend you did not draw it. personally attack the minister yourself. You Senator McKIERNAN—Thank you, used the word ‘slagging’. I was present during Senator Cook. I actually had not heard it. The the fray in question time. I heard you con- other tactic that the minister has engaged in stantly slag, along with your other frontbench- is personal vilification of individuals who ers. Let us get back to the— sought to address questions to him on the Senator McKiernan—Madam Deputy portfolio matter. One senator from this side of President, I raise a point of order. That is a the chamber was referred to as an altar boy. complete and utter untruth. I have not during I have never known that to be an insult in the today or at any time during the week inter- past. Certainly when I was growing up it was jected across the chamber. thought by some to be a privilege. Senator Ian Macdonald—That’s not a The next individual I refer to is one of our point of order. female senators who was slagged off—you probably picked it up, as well—because of the Senator McKiernan—He is telling a lie. colour of her hair. Really, somebody in the He is not allowed to do that. I did not inter- oval office or somewhere else has got to look ject across the chamber, either during question at the performance of the minister. time today or at any other time during this week. In actual fact, I very rarely interject I like Senator Herron as an individual, as a across the chamber at all. human being, as a member of parliament. But, quite honestly, what he has been engaging in Senator O’Chee—Madam Deputy resident, in the last few days in this place brings no I think you are going to rule that there is no credit to the office that he holds or the point of order. But, during the course of ministerial position he purports to represent in Senator McKiernan’s little statement, he did this place. I hope that when this debate accuse an honourable senator on this side of continues next week—indeed, it will, because telling a lie. That is quite clearly unparliamen- there are huge concerns in the community— tary. I would suggest that Senator McKiernan the minister will stick to the portfolio matters, be asked to withdraw. stick to the facts. (Time expired) The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I did not hear you say it, Senator McKiernan. But, if Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (3.32 you did— p.m.)—I listened to all the previous speakers and I listened to them closely. What is the Senator McKiernan—I did, and I with- opposition’s policy? We did not once hear draw. what they would do to adjust what they The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Thank you. consider to be a problem. Senator McKiernan The level of language in debate could im- did throw a question across the chamber to prove, and a bit less interjecting would be me: had I listened to the concerns of the aged greatly appreciated—especially from my right, care community in Victoria? I said to Senator Senator Ian Macdonald. McKiernan, ‘I have.’ I have allayed their fears about the safety net that this government has Senator McGAURAN—My case rests. He put in place in regard to its new policy. Of called me a liar and had to withdraw. He course, the most criticised area by the other stood up, feigning indignation, to say he has side is the bond system that we have put in never slagged anyone across the chamber. He place. I have explained the policy to the aged did it in his point of order. Senator community, and I also taken the opportunity McKiernan, honestly! You have been here Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7965 long enough to show your experience and to Closely linked to this is the state of the control your tongue a bit more than that. nursing homes. The previous government was The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Would you warned as far back as 1993, in the Gregory care to address the chair, please, Senator report, that the nursing home industry needed McGauran? That might get you out of a bit of a capital injection of some $130 million per trouble, as well. Thank you. year over at least the next decade. This government found that nursing homes across Senator McGAURAN—He has decided to Australia needed capital upgrading. They did come back—to slag across the chamber, not meet the fire regulations or the health perhaps, if he is provoked. regulations. There were narrow corridors, The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Just address there was dingy lighting and there were the chair. unhygienic kitchens. More than 40 per cent of Senator McGAURAN—I will not provoke nursing home residents were forced to share Senator McKiernan any more, so if he does a bedroom with four or more people. That is wish to leave the chamber he can quite safely the foundation stone on which we have built do so. I want to bring this right back to the our policy. core issue: why the government has had the In the short time I have left, I would like to courage to make these major structural chan- allay the concerns of my Victorian residents— ges. It is for two reasons. Firstly, importantly, as Senator McKiernan invited me to do—in a reason not lost on anyone in society— regard to the safety net. Those who cannot Senator McKiernan, you can go. financially meet the bond will be catered for The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Senator and will have direct access to nursing homes. McGauran, address the chair and the issue. If people do not meet the financial criteria, if people are under the threshold, we will put Senator McGAURAN—Or perhaps, Sena- aside 27 per cent for nursing homes for what tor McKiernan, you do want to hear the are called ‘concessional rates’. (Time expired) government’s policy. He really does want to hear it. He is genuine after all. Senator Question resolved in the affirmative. McKiernan, there are three reasons that we PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS have introduced this policy. Firstly, because of the estimated sheer growth in the number Senator McKIERNAN (Western Australia) of older Australians in the next 20 years; (3.38 p.m.)—I seek leave to make a short secondly, because of how run down nursing personal explanation under standing order homes have become over the past decade; 190. and, thirdly, because of how ill-prepared we The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Do you are for the estimated future growth in the claim to have been misrepresented? number of older Australians. Senator McKIERNAN—I do. With regard to the future growth in the Leave granted. numbers entering nursing homes, it is no exaggeration to say that one of the great tasks Senator McKIERNAN—During Senator facing the coalition when it achieved govern- McGauran’s contribution just now, on a ment was to plan for this future wave. The number of occasions, but certainly on two statistics are compelling. The number of aged separate occasions, he made references to the Australians over 65 will grow to some 48 per fact that I slagged people across the chamber. cent over the next 20 years. To put that in As I said by way of a point of order—which number terms, in 1991 the number of Austral- was, indeed, not a point of order, and you ians over the age of 65 was two million. correctly ruled on that—it is not my habit to Within the next 20 or so years there will be interject across the chamber, not even to slag as many as five million. This government, across the chamber. because of these compelling statistics, is I do not do it. I have had the experience of planning for the future. In fact, this planning sitting in the chair that you are now sitting in should have been done some 10 years ago. and so I know how difficult it is for the chair 7966 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 to seek to control the debate. I do not seek to for the committee’s inquiry into the provisions of add to the disorder in the chamber when I am the Superannuation Contributions Tax (Members of sitting in my place here. The assertion and Constitutionally Protected Superannuation Funds Assessment and Collection) Bill 1997 and five allegation that Senator McGauran made is not related bills. founded on truth. Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (3.39 DOCUMENTS p.m.)—I would like to make a personal Parliamentary Zone: Administrative explanation in response to Senator Building McKiernan. Senator VANSTONE—I present a letter The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Do you from the Australian Heritage Commission claim to have been misrepresented? relating to a proposal by the National Capital Senator McGAURAN—Yes, most definite- Authority on behalf of the Domestic Property ly. Group for works within the parliamentary Leave granted. zone to lower the parapets on the administra- Senator McGAURAN—I make my claim tive building. This document was accidentally directly following the so-called personal omitted from the documents that were tabled explanation by Senator McKiernan. I believe on 21 October 1997. that he has discredited my name by saying COMMITTEES that I have misrepresented him. If someone calls you a liar, which Senator McKiernan Membership did—and he was forced to withdraw that The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—The Presi- statement by you—that is an abuse across the dent has received letters from party leaders chamber. seeking variations to the membership of I used the term ‘slagged across the cham- committees. ber’ because I took it directly from comments Motion (by Senator Vanstone)—by by Senator McKiernan—he talked about other leave—agreed to: people slagging each other. So I am using that That senators be discharged from and appointed word. In itself, it may be unparliamentary, but to committees as follows: I have picked it up from Senator McKiernan’s comments. He called me a liar. I asked for a Community Affairs Legislation Committee withdrawal. I got a withdrawal, but if that is Participating member: Senator Stott Despoja for not abuse across the chamber and a the consideration of the provisions of the Social Security Legislation Amendment (Youth Allow- misrepresentation, then I do not know what is. ance) Bill 1997. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I asked Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee earlier that people improve their language and actually address the chair. If you address the Substitute member: Senator McGauran to replace chair you will find that you will get into a lot Senator O’Chee on 24 October 1997. less trouble because you are actually talking MATTERS OF URGENCY to the chair and not to the other people. Unemployment NOTICES OF MOTION The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I inform the Superannuation Committee Senate that the President has received the Senator O’CHEE ( Queensland)—by following letter, dated 23 October, from leave—On behalf of Senator Watson I give Senator Lees: notice that, on the next day of sitting, he will Dear Madam President, move: That the Select Committee on Superannuation be Pursuant to Standing Order 75, I give notice that today I propose to move: authorised to hold a public hearing during the sitting of the Senate on Tuesday, 28 October 1997 "That in the opinion of the Senate the following from 3.30 p.m., for the purpose of taking evidence is a matter of urgency: Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7967

The absolute contempt shown by the Hawke, In fact the minister’s own department has Keating and Howard Governments for the stressed over and over, in the context of the 800,000 unemployed persons in Australia, and merits of the work for the dole bill, that job for the loss of 3.3 million jobs over the last decade by their failure to fully explore creative outcomes and training do not even factor in but practical solutions to the unemployment the formal objectives of this scheme. As we crisis currently gripping this nation. have seen, it has never been enough to simply Yours sincerely refer to economic growth as a solution. It was not good enough under the previous govern- Meg Lees ments, and it certainly is not good enough Is the proposal supported? now. It does not automatically bring down unemployment levels. More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their Despite years of economic growth, growth places— which was supposed to generate jobs, hundreds of thousands of Australians remain The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I understand unemployed and many others who want full- that informal arrangements have been made time work are stuck in part-time and casual to allocate specific times to each of the positions barely able to make ends meet. At speakers in today’s debate. With the concur- the same time as working conditions are rence of the Senate, I ask the clerks to set the declining stress levels are increasing. Those clock accordingly. in full-time work are being expected, as we Senator LEES (South Australia—Acting have seen from the latest statistics, to work Leader of the Australian Democrats) (3.43 longer and longer hours. p.m.)—I move: If this pattern continues the result will be a "That in the opinion of the Senate the following divided and unequal society, a society where is a matter of urgency: a privileged minority have access to well-paid and very satisfying work with probably some The absolute contempt shown by the Hawke, Keating and Howard Governments for the promotional opportunities, but the vast majori- 800,000 unemployed persons in Australia, and ty of Australian workers will be left to fight for the loss of 3.3 million jobs over the last for fewer and fewer jobs—jobs which will be decade by their failure to fully explore creative of poor quality, jobs which will have little, if but practical solutions to the unemployment any, security and satisfaction, jobs which will crisis currently gripping this nation. be highly stressed, jobs which will have no I begin by looking at the answer given to a prospects for advancement, few fringe ben- question of mine by the Minister for Schools, efits and low wages. Vocational Education and Training, Senator So who is responsible for this pattern? Ellison, earlier this week. Unfortunately, he Senator Ellison would have us believe that is not able to be with us for this debate today, this government is nothing like the former but in his answer he fell immediately into the government but, frankly, in my view, looking inevitable government rhetoric that the answer at the evidence they are as bad as each other. to the jobs crisis lies, first and foremost, in Australians have endured more than a decade the work for the dole scheme and, failing that, of both federal and state governments seeing in economic growth. themselves solely as economic managers, While I am certain that Senator Ellison has pulling out of providing services, selling off been very carefully and eagerly studying the public assets and consistently refusing to obligatory rhetoric on jobs since assuming his place social and environmental goals on at present role, he obviously has a lot of work least an equal footing with economic ones. to do, because none of his colleagues—not When the economic bottom line becomes one minister, not even Dr Kemp—has at any the only criterion governments really care stage dared to go so far as to suggest that the about, other important national objectives tend work for the dole scheme will have any to go out the window. But what about the impact whatsoever on unemployment levels. important national and economic objective of 7968 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 ensuring business and consumer confidence question of how they think unemployment by concentrating on securing Australian jobs? should be addressed. In March of this year we How can you justify attempts to explain away commenced a public consultation project in the loss of 3.3 million full-time jobs to redun- search of viable solutions to the jobs crisis. dancies over the past 12 years? How do you We approached forward looking and creative even begin to explain the loss on average, business and community leaders and academ- year in and year out since 1986, of 275,000 ics to contribute to a discussion on the full-time jobs? Internet on jobs. We asked them to put up a The fact is that neither the Labor Party nor challenge to the existing paradigms and we the Howard-led coalition have any policies in are pleased and, in some instances, quite place to reverse this loss of full-time posi- surprised at the results. We have shown, and tions. Let us just go through this govern- Senator Stott Despoja will demonstrate, that ment’s list. These are jobs directly lost thanks there are a range of alternatives to the eco- to the actions of this government. This nomic rationalist approach so readily em- government is responsible for the shedding of braced by the two mainstream parties. 180,000 jobs since March 1996—27,000 are This book is a testament to Australians in directly from the Public Service due to the all walks of life who care deeply about the government’s cuts; 22,000 are from Telstra as employment crisis—those who we approached part of the preparations for privatisation; for essays, those in the general public who 20,000 are from state and local governments public contributed via the Internet and the as a result of grant cuts to those bodies; Australian Democrats staff and members who 25,000 are from public works due to a $1 have contributed endless ideas and innova- billion cut in spending; 39,000 are from the tions. High unemployment is not an inevitable manufacturing sector due largely to a collapse by-product of technological advancement as in confidence; and 46,000 are due to a cut in the essays in this publication show. (Time labour market program places. expired) So there is little doubt that if the rampant Senator ABETZ (Tasmania) (3.50 p.m.)— job shedding encouraged under the policy Unemployment really is, I suppose, the worst settings of both the Labor Party and the problem that is facing this country, and we all coalition had been reduced by just one-quarter know that its social consequences are quite many of today’s unemployed would probably horrendous. have jobs right now. The simple fact is that Senator Cook—Why don’t you do some- Labor and the coalition have not only failed thing about it? We all know that your budget to create new jobs—and I particularly em- was aimed at increasing unemployment. phasise new jobs for young Australians—but Senator ABETZ—Senator Cook, who is also failed to protect existing jobs. interjecting, was a senior cabinet minister There have certainly been some distractions when unemployment topped the one million in the last couple of weeks. But the Demo- mark and there are one million Australians crats refuse to allow the furore over travel who will never forgive Labor for that. rorts and the actions of former Senator Kernot The motion before us is both pejorative and to distract us from the main game. There unbecoming. Even if one trawls over the needs to be a new approach, some creative Labor Party’s poor performance in this area solutions, to the jobs dilemma in this country, I do not think you could argue that it was on and we should be investigating those right the basis of absolute contempt for the unem- now. My colleague Senator Stott Despoja, the ployed. I have to say that with the unem- Democrats employment spokesperson, will ployment problem facing the Howard govern- rise in a few minutes to introduce to the ment there is nobody I know on the Liberal Senate the Australian Democrats most recent side or indeed the Labor side of politics who initiatives on jobs. says, ‘Ha, ha! There are 800,000 people We have been getting down to the job on unemployed.’ We genuinely try to seek jobs—consulting the Australian public on the solutions and the argument between the two Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7969 sides of this place and the nation is about What has happened is that a lot of people how you overcome the problem. have lost their jobs but they do not tell you The fact that we have arguments as to how the other side of the equation, that a lot of to overcome the problem indicates that we those people that have lost their jobs have in acknowledge it is a problem, Senator Lees, fact gained new jobs, and that is where this and we are trying to do something about it. motion is so very deceptive and very mislead- But to suggest that they are treated with ing. absolute contempt is unbecoming, Senator One wonders: have Senator Lees and the Lees, and I have to say to you that it does Democrats given some thought to these nothing for your prospects for leadership of figures? Where would they have trawled these the Australian Democrats and your standing figures up from? It is quite obvious. They are and your party’s standing within the com- from the Sydney Morning Herald headline. A munity. cheap journalistic headline becomes the Sure, let us have a fight, a debate and an substance of the Australian Democrats policy argument about our policy thrusts and direc- on unemployment. That is how devoid they tions where you think ours may be wrong and are of policy consideration. That is how yours may be right. But I would never de- devoid they are of actually thinking about the scend to the suggestion that the Democrats issues that are confronting this nation. treat the unemployed with absolute contempt, although I might be forgiven for saying so The motion goes on to tell us that the when one reads today’s Daily Telegraph Howard government and others have failed ‘to where we are told: fully explore creative but practical solutions to the unemployment crisis currently gripping Hairdresser Vicki McFarlane was ready to take on this nation.’ I would have thought that if the two new staff members at her Parramatta Salon in time for Christmas. Australian Democrats were fair dinkum they would have said ‘explore creative but practi- But when opposition MPs— cal solutions to the unemployment crisis such including the Democrats— as—’ and then given us definite examples. in Canberra scuppered changes to unfair dismissal There is not a single example in the motion. laws on Tuesday, Ms McFarlane decided it just was Why? Because they do not have any solu- not worth the risk. tions. "We feel betrayed by what the Senate has done," she said yesterday. What makes me so wild in this debate is Do you know what? There are two people in that there are people who seek to portray Parramatta that also feel betrayed. Because of themselves as the champions of the oppressed the policies of the Democrats and the Labor who come in here accusing this government Party, there are going to be two people in of having absolute contempt for the unem- Parramatta that face Christmas 1997 without ployed, but you yourselves cannot come up a job—a direct result of the way the Demo- with one single policy statement on the issue, crats and the Labor Party cast their vote in other than if we go surfing on the net. What this place only a few days ago. do we find about the Australian Democrats issues sheet on unemployment? It states: The motion that has been put before us suggests that there are 800,000 unemployed Redefining Work. With dramatic changes in our persons in Australia. Unfortunately, that is society and our economy, a goal of every Austral- correct, and the government is dealing with ian having work is an impossibility. that issue. If time permits, I will go through That is the Democrat policy. If you believe some of our initiatives in that regard. But we that every Australian cannot have a job, you are then told ‘and for the loss of 3.3 million tell us, Senator Lees, what is the acceptable jobs over the last decade’. If there were 3.3 rate of unemployment for this nation? I tell million jobs actually lost out of the economy, the Senate that the only acceptable rate for wouldn’t it stand to reason that you might unemployment is zero, and that is what we have an unemployment rate of 3.3 million? are working towards. 7970 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

We may not achieve that goal, and I accept be kind to everybody and I am trying not stop that, but we will work day and night to get your flow either, Senator Abetz. the unemployment level right down. We will Senator ABETZ—Madam Deputy Presi- not accept that soft cop-out of saying, ‘It’s dent, if I become somewhat passionate about impossible to give every Australian a job, so this issue, I am sure that at least the unem- let’s forget about it. Let’s just condemn Labor ployed in this country will forgive me, even and Liberal but not come up with any policy if you don’t. We were told by the former solutions.’ If you had definite policy solu- leader of the Australian Democrats in the tions, you would have got up in your intro- Australian on Thursday, 10 October 1996 that ductory speech, Senator Lees, and told the the Democrats are developing a niche role as Senate what the acceptable rate of unemploy- the nation’s intellectual opposition whose ment was, how your policies would in fact solution for unemployment is that you cannot reduce the numbers and what the numbers have a job for everybody in Australia, so why would be at the end of the implementation of bother. your policies. But we know what your policy is. Unlike the Australian Democrats, we are trying and we do have some very good The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Senator policies in place. One of the important strat- Abetz, can I just ask for a bit less bashing on egies, of course, is deficit reduction, and we the desk please. have handled that very well and very success- Senator ABETZ—Oh, excuse me, Madam fully. You know it. You are embarrassed Deputy President. about it, but the Australian people are thank- ing us for it. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I think you might be causing some problems for the ears The government is working to create real of the people who are trying to monitor this, jobs, and this strategy has already contributed and if it were broadcast—it is not broadcast to strong economic growth in Australia. An today but it is— aggressive deficit reduction program has significantly contributed to the lowest interest Senator ABETZ—It is not broadcast, rate and inflation rate environment seen in Madam Deputy President. If you wish to Australia for many years. Indeed, I think it interrupt my speeches on the basis of how I was only yesterday that other figures came conduct myself when I am not outside stand- out which were excellent in that regard. We ing orders, I might give you some kind are getting the policies in place. reminders as well. The new workplace relations framework has The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Your speech given employers greater operational flexibility is very good, Senator, but— and is improving productivity in the workplace. This will encourage employers to Senator ABETZ—Oh, I don’t need that recruit as the economy grows. We are ex- school teacher sort of comment. panding vocational education and training The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I am con- programs in schools. This will provide senior cerned about the thumping on the desk and secondary students with structured on- and the effect that that can have on people’s ears off-the-job training which is recognised by in the monitoring booth. industry. But, when we work in concert with Senator Cook—Madam Deputy President, McDonald’s, you belittle our activities and I raise a point of order. My point of order is you belittle the activities of McDonald’s. that Senator Abetz has made a reflection on Further assistance to enter the work force is the chair which he should withdraw. available through the jobs pathway program with the assistance of employment brokers. Senator ABETZ—What is the reflection? New apprenticeships will provide expanded The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I did not training opportunities, including for those hear that, Senator Cook. I am quite happy for disadvantaged in their access to vocational Senator Abetz to continue. I am just trying to education and training. The government is Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7971 spending $550 million over the next two ed. We in the government will disagree with years to support more than 220,000 new the Democrats on the original motion, but apprenticeships and traineeships. what we in this government will not do is The list goes on of the initiatives that we as give the opposition leave to amend this a government have taken over the past 18 urgency motion so that they can just delete months. We reject the Democrat proposition any reference to their own culpability. that we cannot get a job for every Australian. This is a stunning indictment of the attitude We are determined to achieve that task. We of the Labor Party—a stunning indictment will work tirelessly to achieve it. I reject the which saw the people opposite thrown off the Democrat motion. (Time expired) treasury bench at the last election. Why, I ask Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (4.02 honourable senators, were the Labor Party p.m.)—I seek leave to move an amendment thrown out of office at the last election? to the urgency motion as circulated. Because they were arrogant. Why at the last election did the people of Australia throw the Leave not granted. Labor Party out of government? Because the Suspension of Standing Orders Labor Party refused to accept the fact that they were responsible for the economic Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (4.02 malaise in this country. p.m.)—Pursuant to contingent notice and at the request of the Leader of the Opposition in The Labor Party refused to accept the fact the Senate (Senator Faulkner), I move: that they were responsible for unemployment. That so much of the standing orders be suspend- The Labor Party refused to accept the fact ed as would prevent Senator Faulkner moving an that they were responsible for high interest amendment to the motion. rates. The Labor Party refused to accept the Senator O’CHEE (Queensland)(4.03 fact that they were responsible for record p.m.)—The government does not accept this bankruptcies. Now what do we see? We see suggestion that the urgency motion be amend- an urgency motion brought by the Democrats, ed. The provisions are, of course, that this has and the Labor Party seeks to continue their to be done by leave. There is a very good old ways. This is not the new Labor Party. reason why the provisions are that it has to be This is not even the reconstructed Labor done by leave—for the very simple reason Party. This is the old, unreconstructable Labor that this is a matter of urgency. Party. The Democrats are of the belief that this is No matter whom they get to defect to them, a matter of urgency. They have brought the they are still the same old ‘head in the sand, motion to the chamber today, and the Labor we’re not responsible for the economic ma- Party had ample opportunity to bring their laise in this country, even though we were in own urgency motion should they have so government for 13 years’ Labor Party. That wished. They chose not to do so. is why the Australian people, with a stunning blow, threw the Labor Party off the treasury Senator Cook—We circulated an amend- benches at the last election. This debate today ment. is proof to the Australian electorate that the Senator O’CHEE—The Labor Party seeks Labor Party do not wish to be a responsible to amend this motion to delete any reference political party in this country. They are a to its own culpability. We have had 13 years party of political opportunists. of Labor government in this country and 13 I understand that the Democrats do not wish years of high unemployment—higher unem- to have this motion amended. I think I have ployment than exists now. In fact, the unem- made the point for the government. Senator ployment rate at the last election was higher Lees may wish to speak to the suspension of than it is now. This government is trying to standing orders, but it will be very clear that do something about rectifying the situation. the government will be voting against the It is my understanding that even the Demo- suspension of standing orders. We are here. crats agree this motion should not be amend- We are happy to debate this motion that 7972 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Senator Lees has brought on. This govern- unemployment. There is no doubt that it is the ment has some very positive things it wants most important question in Australia today. I to do. This government has very positive am somewhat surprised that in raising the plans. This government, as Senator Abetz has issue of unemployment—the most important shown, will not accept anything other than debate we could have—they are intolerant of our best efforts to reduce unemployment. any proposed change to the motion. They then We can have a sensible debate here about put that proposed change as a question to this what is the best way to reduce unemployment, chamber to ascertain the support for the and I think that is what Senator Lees wants to change but simply want to cleave to their own do, but we will not allow the ALP to run motion. If we are going to have a serious away. In the words of former President debate about unemployment then all points of Reagan, ‘You can run, but you can’t hide.’ view should be heard. There is no hiding place for the Labor Party All Senator Mackay wants to do is put a in this chamber today. Senator Cook may point of view which varies a little from the want to smirk. He is smirking because he is view which the Democrats wish to put. It feeling embarrassed. Senator Cook has been would be reasonable for that motion to be caught out. accepted and for the chamber to have the Senator Quirke—Hiding his own Easter opportunity to hear the argument on it and eggs. then vote accordingly. Anything less than allowing that procedure to unfold would be to Senator O’CHEE—Senator Quirke, we inhibit the ability to properly discuss this may actually excuse you because you were issue. If we truly believe that unemployment not part of the Labor government that got is the most serious question—and I do and thrown out of office. my party does—and if other people in this Senator Vanstone—He was part of the one chamber believe this to be the case then they that wrecked a bank! will be prepared to listen to points of view Senator O’CHEE—He was part of the other than their own. Labor Party that wrecked the State Bank of We have had the pyrotechnics of the South Australia. We know what the Labor schoolboy debating champion from the other Party are up to. They do not want to face up side and it is a desperation call if ever I have to the facts and, until the Labor Party face up heard one. All Senator O’Chee has to do is to the fact that they are responsible for the look at the polls to understand why people economic destruction of this nation, the have drifted away from the government—and people will never trust the Labor Party. It its response to unemployment—and are in does not matter whom they get to defect to increasing numbers favouring Labor and our them, the people will never trust them, will attitude to managing what is a serious and never vote for them and they will never sit on concerning problem for this nation. the treasury benches. I am not going to engage in the same Senator COOK (Western Australia) (4.07 histrionics as Senator O’Chee. The fire, p.m.)—I will speak briefly to the motion that brimstone and bluster which he employed has been moved by Senator Mackay. Senator were necessary to cover his embarrassment. Mackay wants to amend the motion that is You are embarrassed, Senator O’Chee, be- before the chamber. The two speakers we cause you know that people do not believe have heard thus far in the debate on the you and in the most recent polling have been urgency motion are the proponents of the prepared to indicate that by indicating support motion—the Democrats—and the government. for the Australian Labor Party or the minor Senator Mackay, in my view rightly, believes parties in this chamber. So bluster away but that the motion is deficient and ought to be do not think that there is anything credible in changed to reflect the reality of the situation. what you have to say. The Democrats are to be congratulated for I want to conclude before my time is up in bringing on a debate in this chamber about order to enable this debate to roll on, as I Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7973 think that it is a serious debate. I implore the I cannot say that I feel that warmly about government and the minor parties here to the wording of the motion proposed by the allow what ordinary Australians would regard Democrats. It seems to me to be a motion that as a fundamental democratic opportunity— seeks to apportion blame rather than find that is, allow Senator Mackay to put an solutions. It is purely political on that basis. amendment which is at variance to the princi- In that sense, I have some contempt for the pal motion so that this chamber can vote on motion itself. If you are going to apportion it. Let us do that and get on with the sub- blame then it is platitudinous rubbish for stance of this debate. Senator Cook to come in here and suggest Senator LEES (South Australia—Acting that somehow Labor ought to be taken out of Leader of the Australian Democrats) (4.11 that debate. He would have done better to p.m.)—I will be brief because I do want to offer some sensible contribution. get on with the substance of this debate. I Senator QUIRKE (South Australia) (4.13 take issue with Senator Cook’s idea that to p.m.)—I think quite often a lot of debates that have a serious debate we need to effectively go on in this place and a few other places gut the motion. The motion is written as it is around Australia could be described as a because we are concerned about the 3.3 waste of time. I do not think this one is really million jobs that have been lost over the last a waste of time, but we could say that time 10 years. We cannot just look in isolation at could probably be better spent on other the last 18 months. We are looking at the things. As I understand it, this refusal by the bigger picture, the longer term reasons for the government to accept what is a reasonable steady loss of jobs in this country. amendment to the motion will mean that the debate will be cut short. I find it most interesting that this side of the chamber seem to believe that to have a real I am not going to respond to Senator Abetz. debate they have to be left out of it—that we I am not going to respond to Senator O’Chee. should only debate the current government’s I am not going to respond to the advice given policies. I suggest to Senator Cook that, if it by the junior minister in the chamber, the is his wish to just look at the policies of this Minister for Justice (Senator Vanstone), who government, we move another motion next started to give some gratuitous advice about week dealing with just that. This motion is events in South Australia. Instead, I say that written as it is because we believe we have to this motion is, in my view, fundamentally go back in time and look right through the flawed. growth of this idea that the economic One of the reasons I am making some rationalist ideal will somehow solve the jobs remarks now is that I think this will be one of and unemployment problem. Obviously, I will the few opportunities I will have here today be voting against this motion. If that is unsuc- to make a few of these remarks. In the first cessful, we will not be supporting any chan- place, I do agree with one thing that the ges to the motion that we have already minister said. The minister said a moment ago moved. that this is full of negative stuff about two Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— governments who, in their own way—albeit, Minister for Justice) (4.12 p.m.)—I do not I suspect, this government’s incompetent want to speak for very long. I support Senator way—dealt with a very important issue in O’Chee in refusing Senator Mackay leave to Australia. At the end of the day, I can under- move her amendment. In relation to Senator stand why the Democrats want to get some Cook’s contribution, I indicate that I have not product differentiation at work in respect of heard such platitudinous self-serving rubbish this question. I can understand that because, in this place for a long time. His comments after the South Australian election, they were about wanting to talk about employment having a pretty good time until Wednesday really amounted simply to removing from the last week. In fact, I think the Democrats— motion Labor’s culpability for the unemploy- Senator Conroy—Where’s that—South ment problem that we have. Australia? What happened? 7974 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Senator QUIRKE—For four days in South have it. There are a number of examples of Australia the sun was shining on them but, that. I well remember the 1990 federal elec- unfortunately, on Wednesday afternoon last tion campaign in South Australia. week, if you had not been watching TV or The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— listening to the radio, you would have seen a Order! Senator Quirke, I would ask you to strange thing happening on every electric pole draw your remarks to the motion before the in South Australia. All of the Democrat chair, which is the suspension of standing election signs came down in unison very orders. quickly because they actually had someone on it who they wanted to make sure was not Senator Ian Campbell—Mr Acting Deputy going to get any more publicity. President, I rise on a point of order. I think that, if Senator Quirke is going to explain Senator McGauran—Mr Acting Deputy why the Labor Party promised not to sell the President, I rise on a point of order. What we Commonwealth Bank in the 1990 election, are meant to be discussing today is why we deceived the voters and then went ahead and should suspend standing orders. Senator sold it, then he should be allowed to—in fact, Quirke is not mounting any case when he I am canvassing your ruling, Mr Acting discusses the South Australian election. I Deputy President. I should perhaps resume would ask you to bring the speaker to order. my seat. Senator QUIRKE—Mr Acting Deputy The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— President, on the point of order: I think, had Senator Quirke, you still have time to speak the good senator over there been listening, he to the suspension of standing orders, but I would have heard that I was making out a would remind you to draw your remarks to case as to why this particular proposal needs that. amending. That is the case that we are making on this side, and we do not come in and Senator QUIRKE—Mr Acting Deputy out— President, on the point of order, I really must The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT say that it is very hard to make a case on this (Senator Ferguson)—Order! Senator Quirke, when the people I am not attacking in here on the point of order: we are debating the keep attacking me. It is really at the end of motion to suspend standing orders. I would the day. What happened in the 1990 federal ask you to relate your remarks to the suspen- election campaign was that the Democrats’ sion of standing orders. I know you can policy was widely circulated in Kingston. Let traverse somewhat widely in some areas, but me tell you that that is why they lost the seat you must relate the remarks that you make to there. On the urgency motion and the suspen- the question before the chair, and that ques- sion— tion is the suspension of standing orders. Senator O’Chee—Mr Acting Deputy Senator QUIRKE—Mr Acting Deputy President, I rise on a point of order. Senator President, thank you for your advice on that. Quirke is now so irrelevant that his attack on At the end of the day, the Democrats have put the Democrats does not even support the a proposal before the chamber today that we argument for his own amendment. Senator condemn both sides of politics but that they Quirke has obviously not read the amendment escape totally unscathed. We believe that proposed by Senator Mackay because there is, needs amending, and we believe it needs in fact, no reference to the Democrats at all. amending for a couple of reasons. I think the I think we have given him a lot of latitude. arrogant bunch over there that will not allow What Senator Quirke should be doing is not any debate on this question need to be put in seeking to amend the motion but seeking to their place. More importantly, what I want to make amends. say about the original Democrats’ proposal The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— and why it needs to be amended is that, in Order! Senator O’Chee, I have already re- fact, the only thing over the years they have minded Senator Quirke to address the motion told us about employment is where we cannot before the chair. I do believe that he was Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7975 addressing the motion before the chair at that ployed for 13 years. How can you sleep at time. night, Senator Mackay? Senator QUIRKE—The amendment that Senator Mackay—On a point of order, Mr we are seeking to get up to this motion today Acting Deputy President: on many occasions is quite clearly putting the blame for unem- when I have been on my feet in this chamber ployment where it belongs. We believe that you have pulled me up and I have accepted is the issue that is before the chair. What we your ruling with regard to referring to people think is that the Democrats’ motion just does by their proper titles. I now ask you to apply not conform with reality out there. The reality that ruling equitably. is that you people are in charge of the treas- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— ury bench now. It is your industry policy that Senator Mackay, I must apologise. My ruling is failing. You are picking on the unemployed was in error because Mr Keating and Mr out there through all of the various measures Hawke are no longer members of the House that are going on. You are responsible for the of Representatives and Senator Synon is 8.6 per cent unemployment figure and, in entitled to refer to them without title. I was some regional parts of Australia, it is very going to let it pass, but Senator Abetz brought much more than that. it to my attention. I must allow Senator Synon Indeed, this motion that is before the Senate to continue. now is seeking to bring some reality into this Senator Mackay—All right. Fair enough. debate. I notice that government senators are intent on ensuring that we do not get the right Senator SYNON—I also draw the Senate’s of debate here. Very well. We will use other attention to the fact that the motion talks forums for it. about Hawke, Keating and Howard. So as I was saying— Senator Ian Campbell interjecting— Senator Mackay—It doesn’t make any Senator QUIRKE—Yes. We did seek difference in terms of his previous ruling. leave, and it was denied. (Time expired) Senator SYNON—It may interest you to Senator SYNON (Victoria) (4.21 p.m.)—I know, Senator Mackay, if I had had an rise with a feeling of sickness in my stomach opportunity to speak on this most important because I am disgusted at the hypocrisy of issue this afternoon, one of the most critical those sitting on the benches opposite. I had issues facing this country, that I had elected hoped and suspected that there may have been to speak on the positives, not on the nega- some changes. I notice that you have been tives. trying to distance yourself from the 13 years Senator Quirke—On a point of order, Mr of malpractice that happened in this country. Acting Deputy President: I think quite clearly But no, you are seeking, in terms of this the good senator has indicated that she is suspension of standing orders, to wipe all about to digress from the issue. I seek your blame away from Keating and Hawke. ruling on it. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT Senator Abetz interjecting— (Senator Ferguson)—Order! You must The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— address people by their proper titles, Senator Order! Senator Abetz, I think I can rule on Synon. this. Senator Quirke, you are anticipating that Senator Abetz—On a point of order, Mr the senator is about to digress. She has not Acting Deputy President: I draw your atten- digressed yet. I will wait and see whether she tion to the wording of the motion. I under- does digress. If she does, I will call her to stand that that is what the honourable senator order. was, in fact, referring to. Senator SYNON—I am sorry that Senator Senator SYNON—It does say ‘Hawke and Quirke thinks this is such a laughing matter Keating’. You have deceived the unemployed because I happen to think unemployment is a for 13 years. You have cheated the unem- very serious problem facing this country. 7976 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Unlike anybody else in this chamber, I have Senator SYNON—How many unemployed worked for a dozen years directly with unem- people have you worked with, Senator ployed people both in the western suburbs of Mackay? Would you know? Have you met an Melbourne and right throughout Victoria. One unemployed person? of my primary motivations for wanting to join The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— the Howard government was my genuine Order! Senator Synon, you must address your despair at what the ALP policies— remarks through the chair. Senator Quirke—On a point of order, Mr Senator SYNON—The Keating and Hawke Acting Deputy President: given that on one governments were a disgrace. The people on occasion I was gaveled by you in less than 30 the other side of this chamber are a disgrace. seconds, this senator has certainly had long You do not want the Australian people and us enough to make the case out now. She has in this chamber this afternoon to critically not addressed the central issue here of the examine the policies that plunged one million suspension of standing orders once. I ask you people into unemployment in this country, do to apply your rulings fairly to the other side. you? Are you ashamed of the fact that you The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— had one million people unemployed? I sug- Senator Synon had been addressing the gest they are because they do not want to us matter. Perhaps she is straying at present. So to look at this issue. They are still deceiving I ask you, Senator Synon, to restrict your the unemployed people of this country. It is remarks to addressing the matter before the a national disgrace and they should be asham- chair, which is the suspension of standing ed. orders. Senator CARR (Victoria) (4.27 p.m.)—I Senator SYNON—I oppose the suspension rise to support the suspension of standing of standing orders because the record of the orders. I think it ought to be explained to the ALP government is a disgrace. Who will ever Senate what actually is going on here, be- forget that Paul Keating told students to go cause I would have thought senators may be and get a job at a time when youth unemploy- somewhat confused. What is happening here ment in this country was 26.6 per cent and is that the government is determined to when more than a quarter of our young prevent a proper discussion of the ways in people could not find a job. Unemployment which unemployment solutions can be found. under Labor did not fall below nine per cent This government is about trying to divert from March 1991 to November 1994—for attention away from the abysmal performance nearly three years. We all remember when the that it is responsible for. unemployment rate reached 11.2 per cent Since this government has come to office under Labor in December 1992—the highest we have seen unemployment getting worse in level of unemployment in the postwar era. this country. It is getting worse because this Congratulations! government’s own policies have directly led Over one million people were unemployed to the smashing of demand and confidence in and the Labor Party did nothing. Sure Labor this economy and to undermining the security governments spent money on the problem. and the safeguard of the social wellbeing of They are good at spending money, aren’t this country as a result of its ideological they? But they did not fix the problem. It was obsessions with what is essentially an indus- all window-dressing. I oppose the suspension trial relations reform agenda. That agenda is of standing orders because clearly the Hawke about destroying organised labour and it is and Keating governments are culpable—they about destroying the wages and conditions of are culpable of deceit and they are culpable working people in this country. of duping our unemployed people. The Work- The government has a deliberate policy of ing Nation program was an absolute disgrace keeping unemployment high. It is a device to because of the way it raised people’s hopes beat the unions around the head so it can just to have them crushed. pursue its fight inflation first strategies, its Senator Mackay—Like work for the dole. strategies of downsizing and reducing services Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7977 in the areas of health, education and a whole NOES range of public sector activity. Some $10 Synon, K. M. Troeth, J. billion has been taken out of this economy by West, S. M. this government. We have seen the conse- * denotes teller quences in towns like Canberra, Ballarat and Question so resolved in the negative. Bendigo. Right across this country we have seen the direct consequences of this INDUSTRY POLICY government’s policies in terms of undermin- Senator COOK (Western Australia— ing the social fabric of this country. Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the We have a government that is dedicated to Senate) (4.37 p.m.)—I move: increasing unemployment, not fighting unem- That the Senate— ployment. That is the real issue at stake here today. The government is avoiding its respon- (a) notes, with concern, the continuing failure of the Australian Government to develop a sibilities and avoiding being held accountable comprehensive industry policy, as demon- for its own actions. (Time expired) strated by: The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (i) its failure to respond effectively to key (Senator Ferguson)—It being 4.30 p.m., I reports, such as the Mortimer report, the must in accordance with standing orders 57 Goldsworthy report and the Metal Trades and 75 put the question on the urgency Industry Association report, Make or motion. Break, The question is that the motion moved by (ii) its failure to come up with any initiatives on industry policy apart from those ele- Senator Lees be agreed to. ments of the Australian Labor Party’s Question put: policy which it has been forced to accept, including the responses on the automotive That the motion (Senator Lees’s) be agreed to. and textile, clothing and footwear indus- The Senate divided. [4.34 p.m.] tries and on ship and book bounties, (The President—Senator the Hon. Margaret (iii) its inability to respond decisively to the Reid) BHP announcement on Newcastle in Ayes ...... 9 order to ensure that Australia continues to Noes ...... 31 have a viable steelmaking capacity, —— (iv) its gross mishandling of the anti-dumping Majority ...... 22 issue and its failure to keep its election —— promise to cut the maximum time for an AYES anti-dumping case to 155 days, Allison, L. Bourne, V. * Brown, B. Harradine, B. (v) its mishandling of the pharmaceutical Lees, M. H. Margetts, D. industry issue, which has put at risk Murray, A. Stott Despoja, N. millions of dollars of investment and Woodley, J. hundreds of new jobs, and NOES (vi) its failure to act upon the recommenda- Abetz, E. Brownhill, D. G. C. tions relating to strategies to develop an Campbell, I. G. Carr, K. Australian information industry contained Chapman, H. G. P. Conroy, S. * in the Information Industries Taskforce Cook, P. F. S. Coonan, H. (Goldsworthy) and the Industrial Property Cooney, B. Denman, K. J. Advisory Committee (Cutler) reports, Eggleston, A. Ferguson, A. B. including its failure to recognise the Ferris, J. Gibbs, B. critical role government procurement Gibson, B. F. Hogg, J. plays in this sector in terms of estab- Knowles, S. C. Lightfoot, P. R. lishing export credentials amongst small- Lundy, K. Macdonald, I. to medium-sized enterprises; Macdonald, S. Mackay, S. McKiernan, J. P. Minchin, N. H. (b) condemns the Government’s $4 billion cuts O’Chee, W. G. Payne, M. A. to industry programs, noting that overall Quirke, J. A. Reid, M. E. budget cuts have: 7978 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

(i) taken approximately half a percentage The motion then goes through the effect on point off gross domestic product, economic growth, the slash to industrial (ii) slashed industrial research and develop- research and development funding and the ment from $820 million in the 1995-96 reduction in Australia’s attractiveness as a financial year to a projected $286 million destination for investment. It also states that in the 1997-98 financial year, and the Senate: (iii) reduced the attractiveness of Australia as deplores the Government’s failure to respond to a destination for major new industrial growing job insecurity, particularly amongst investment; workers in the manufacturing sector, and its failure (c) deplores the Government’s failure to re- to take any steps to deliver on its election commit- spond to growing job insecurity, particularly ment to create 200 000 new manufacturing jobs by amongst workers in the manufacturing the year 2000— sector, and its failure to take any steps to That is something that, in office, the govern- deliver on its election commitment to create ment has not been prepared to re-endorse. The 200 000 new manufacturing jobs by the year 2000; and motion then sets out a program of at least three steps the government can take in order (d) calls on the Government, as a matter of urgency, to: to do something about this important front of national policy development. I will be joined (i) respond positively and comprehensively in this debate by my colleagues Senators to the Mortimer blueprint on industry policy, including the approach to growth Lundy, Bishop, Murphy and Campbell. They targets, strategic action plans for key will certainly add to the entire argument I put. industries, and the 5-year funding model, Senator Ian Campbell—Thanks, Peter. (ii) reverse its cuts to industry programs, and Senator COOK—I am sorry? (iii) recommit to the 200 000 manufacturing Senator Ian Campbell—You said Senator jobs target. Campbell is going to add to the argument. This is a very important notice of motion. It Senator COOK—Yes, he is. Senator deals with the essential question that Austral- George Campbell is a fine acquisition to the ians want an answer to—where will the jobs Labor Party on this side of the parliament and come from to provide employment for the has a very deep knowledge of industry policy unemployed and for those who will be leav- as a practitioner from the coalface. He is ing school in about six weeks and facing the someone who worked with Australia’s major jobs market? What can be done to allay the corporations trying to develop a bipartisan concerns of those parents who are worried approach to industry policy and job creation about the employment future of their chil- in this country. dren? The first thing that should be defined when This is a motion that deals with industry confronting this issue is the role of govern- policy—an unfashionable area of economic ment. The role of government is to give long, debate in this country but one absolutely strong and dependable signals to the private essential to get the engines of industry grind- sector in Australia as to what the framework ing into growth so that employment oppor- for economic growth for this country is. In tunities open up. The motion states: other words, the government has to have a That the Senate— vision. It has to know where it is going. It has (a) notes, with concern, the continuing failure to be able to then put in place a series of of the Australian Government to develop a steps that are credible and that command comprehensive industry policy— community support in order to get to its It then goes to a number of subpoints, which destination. I will address in my remarks later. It also What is the single, strongest criticism that states that the Senate: comes from the private sector in Australia condemns the Government’s $4 billion cuts to about this government? The single, strongest industry programs, noting that overall budget cuts criticism that comes from the private sector is have— that the government lacks vision. It makes Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7979 day-to-day, short-term decisions. It does not other job developments?’ The government did have an overview of the direction of the not take that approach to the budget. It took development of the Australian economy, and a narrow, accountancy approach. some of its decisions are contradictory. In As a consequence of that, two major things other words, the private sector of Australia— have happened. The Australian economy has the sector that the government acknowledges been flat and the budget predictions for in many of its press releases is the engine of growth last year have been undershot. The economic growth for this country—is con- prediction for growth was 3¾ per cent. The fused, does not understand what is happening growth that was actually obtained was 2.4 per and is at odds often with the government cent. This year, the target for growth is 3¾ about the direction of economic growth for per cent. The growth that will be obtained this country and what it believes and depends will be around three per cent. That is not my on as being the directions the government view. That is the view of any sample of should take. forecasting economists in both the private and Why is that so important? If industry lacks the public sector. the confidence to make investments because So what we have is a government that has it is uncertain of the climate into which they stunned the economy and made it somnolent. have been plunged by the government, they Despite any number of interest rate cuts we will act cautiously and not make those invest- might have, the economy has failed to re- ments. Jobs that could be created will not be spond. Why is the Australian private sector up created. Opportunities that could be taken will in arms against this government? Because the be taken on cautiously and not to their full economy is so flat, aggregate demand—that potential. That means, in short, that many is, the market which buys the goods and more Australians will be out of work and services produced by the private sector—is many more opportunities for Australian flat and people are not consuming. Therefore, industry to grow will be stunted and will not production runs have to be slowed down and be able to develop. stopped or stockpiled because there is no-one Why is there this confusion? Let us go back out there with confidence in the future to buy to the 1996-97 budget. Whatever is said about the goods and services produced. Without that that budget and the rationale for it, let us look market, no profits are able to be made, no at the immediate effect of it. The government report to shareholders is able to be given made across-the-board cuts to government ex- about a return on investment and there is a penditure in that budget. It did not differenti- general lack of confidence and leadership. ate between the types of cuts it made. There- That is exactly the situation in the Australian fore, it cut government expenditure that aided economy at the first level, the macro level. and fuelled economic growth, as well as At the micro level, what has happened is government expenditure on the outlay side that $4 billion dollars worth of industry that did not directly contribute to economic support has been removed from Australian growth. industry and, at a time when they needed that In other words, the government cut out or boost of confidence in order to win markets, reduced the amount of funding that went to they have lost support from the very govern- industry in order for it to grow. It took a ment they believed would support them. So narrow, accountant’s view of the budget—that we find that massive cuts have been made, for is, cut outlays and get a balance on your example, in research and development. bottom line. It did not take a creative view of Australia is one of the most creative count- the budget. It did not say, ‘What expenditure ries in the world. We create new knowledge returns growth to the economy, takes people in science and technology well ahead of our off the unemployment queue, puts them in population or our GDP. The trick for Austral- jobs, causes them not to be beneficiaries of ia is to convert that new knowledge into new unemployment benefits but contributors to the products and new services. By cutting down budget through the paying of tax and fuels incentives for research and development, we 7980 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 remove an essential building block to creating while they wait to find out what the govern- products or services which the market of the ment wants to do to lead the economy. The future will consume. That means that Austral- trouble is, these reports, which took time and ian manufacturers and exporters are unable to are impressive, have been delivered and we produce products which can hold their place have been waiting four months for a response in the market and we then decline as an from the government. Not just members of economic power in the region. You cut this parliament but Australian industry leaders research and development and creativity and want to know what the government response the ability to be competitive with new ideas is to these reports so that they can plan their and new products in the marketplace are growth targets for next year, how they can affected. take advantage of any government programs to create new investment and what will be Did the Australian government take any their strategy for getting into international view about research and development, about markets. how we build on our science excellence to create products for the new age in the next When they do that, they will know how millennium? Yes, they did; they took a many jobs they can take on next year. But the negative view and cut the funding. We now government cannot make up its mind what to see that rather than $800 million-odd being do. We have continual leaking from the spent on R&D—and it would have been spent public service in Canberra about one govern- had our government policies remained in ment department fighting a turf battle with place—it is now reduced to over $250 another government department over who million, a reduction of $550 million in re- shall take over what type of program and search and development, which means a with- whether or not one department will win that drawal of investment in Australia’s future. battle—arm wrestling between bureaucrats— while industry growth in Australia stagnates So when I say on the micro-economic front, and jobs are put on the backburner. That is ‘What has the government done?’, what it has exactly the scenario we face right now. That done is choke off creativity in the Australian is why bodies like the Business Council, like industry sector and put us behind in the race the government’s favourite business mates, with other powers to capture the markets of the ACCI, and others are very critical of this this world with our products and processes. It government. has sat waving goodbye as Australian brands have gone overseas. That is what the Howard This is not a presentation of an opposition government has done. view; this is the opposition putting a view which is representative of Australian industry We have this absolute need for direction which now feels disenchanted and unled by and vision for Australian industry. After the the direction of this government, industry that wreckage of these cuts was beginning to make was so moved by the concern that it commis- itself felt in the economy, there was a wake- sioned, at considerable expense to itself, the up call. ‘We have to have an industry policy,’ MTIA report, the Make or break report, a became the rallying slogan in government report in which Australian metal manufactur- ranks. So they commissioned the Mortimer ers ask the question, ‘How will this economy report and the Goldsworthy report. They did be made or how will this economy be bro- that out of recognition that they did not have ken?’ They have put down a series of recom- an industry policy and did not understand the mendations which they too expect the Aus- needs of industry. While keeping some rem- tralian government to respond to. What has nants of our policy, they decided to create one been the response? A deafening silence has of their one. been the response because the government While this is happening, industry awaits cannot make up its mind. direction. Opportunities that could have We cannot have a situation where the existed are forgone and there is an interrup- economy drifts, where jobs are not created tion in industry strategic planning for growth and where the circumstances that face Aus- Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7981 tralian industry, unable to plan for its future, he doing in Washington to open up these remain. That is why this motion ought to be markets? He has not been there recently, and carried in the Senate today. he is not doing anything. The other thing I want to say about the The European economy is the other major 1996-97 budget and, indeed, the budget economy in the world that is not going all brought down this year—the 1997-98 budg- that well. Again, we have a trade deficit with et—is that both budgets have a common Europe: they buy less from us than we buy thread: massive cuts to public expenditure from them. The European economies are across-the-board. When one looks at the jogging along at about 2½ per cent growth reasonings behind these cuts, one comes to and they have high levels of unemployment. this conclusion—and it is said in black print They themselves are searching for an answer in the budget documents—that that may mean in the present circumstances. a temporary slow-down in domestic economic Then we turn to Asia. The first thing one growth because of a reduction in demand in must say about Asia is that, currently, South- the Australian economy. But the international East Asia has been plunged into a currency economy is still strong and, because Australia crisis. The bubble in property in Thailand has is a trading nation, international economic burst. The Thai baht is in free fall against the growth will pull us through and the impact US dollar, and there is a massive devaluation, will not be as great. in excess of 30 per cent, going on in Thai- That is not a perfect quote, but is a fair land. That contagion has been caught in summary of what those documents say. Indonesia which, like Thailand, has now put Because we have knocked flat the Australian itself in the hands of the International Mon- economy we will, nonetheless, hitch our etary Fund. That is to say, if you were a wagon to the stronger international economies private company, you have put yourself in the and be pulled along by them, and that is hands of the receivers. That is what Thailand where the growth will come from. and Indonesia have done. They have put Let us look at the international scene for a themselves in the hands of the IMF. moment, because the budget strategy that The same contagion affects Malaysia and, underpins what has occurred here has now to a lesser extent, the Philippines. We have been knocked into a cocked hat. The Ameri- seen devaluations in their currencies of over can economy is the strongest in the world at 30 per cent. What does that mean to Austral- the moment. It is a healthy economy, and it ia? Our currency is sound and I have great is the locomotive of world economic growth. confidence in it. But what does that mean to It is going well and it is an important trading Australia? It means that the products manu- partner for Australia. But bear in mind that factured in those countries are cheaper than the Americans are beating up on Japan and they were yesterday, they can come into China because the trade deficits between the Australia at cheaper prices, thereby undercut- US and Japan, and the US and China are too ting Australian products in our markets. That great. is the first effect. The trade deficit between Australia and the The second effect is that imports cost more United States is greater in percentage of GDP money in the domestic economies of the terms than the trade deficit between the US countries affected by massive currency de- and the other two countries. Do we hear the valuation. In ASEAN countries, where you Australian government taking the initiative to have tariff barriers of around 30 per cent, Washington in order to open up the markets with a currency devaluation of 30 per cent, in the United States for Australian products in you now effectively have a tariff barrier of 60 the way that Washington is to Tokyo and per cent. Australian products trying to be sold Beijing for US products? Where is the into those markets have a higher barrier to Minister for Trade, Tim Fischer? He is in the leap over. The higher price of imports into Vatican getting his hat blessed; he is down in those countries means high inflation for them Madrid talking to the King of Spain. What is as well as a depression of living standards. 7982 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

They are facing very difficult times. Because and Coonan. Senator Cook, how wrong can these are key markets for Australia, and they you be? Let me start with a quote from will buy less goods from Australia, the reli- Graham Richardson which appeared in the ance on international economic strengths to Bulletin this year. He said: overcome the cuts to the Australian domestic The greatest failure of successive Labor govern- economy is not there to the extent that Treas- ments from 1983 to 1996 was the failure to develop ury thought it was when it wrote the budgets a coherent industry policy. in 1996 and 1997. Senator Cook, you have criticised the govern- Let me demonstrate the proposition that ment for its budget measures of last year. But domestic economic demand is down, but what have the industry reports been saying? international economic demand will pull He was critical of the government for not Australia through. That was a theory. Domes- responding urgently to those reports, but the tic economic demand remains down but world government is doing so. Let me start with the economic demand, while strong in the United summary of the recommendations from the States, is slack in Europe and down in Asia. MTIA report entitled Make or break. It says: So we are not being pulled through, and the 1. Continue to deliver good macro-economic expectations for stronger growth in the latter results. part of this year and early next year have to 2. Fundamental tax reform. be seen against the impact of the currency What was this government’s first priority crisis in Asia. At the same time as we are when it came to power? It was getting the pushing along at a very slow level, imports macro-economic settings right. As the report from that region of the world will be cheaper says, it is the highest priority. The Mortimer in our markets thereby displacing jobs in report says the same thing, that we should get Australia. the fundamentals right. That is what we have Ask yourself: what is the government’s done; that is what we have delivered. Those reaction to that? Again, there is a silence. Is reports were demanding that we should have there a comprehensive plan on behalf of the a stable economic environment for business government to deal with that? No, there is investment, for encouraging jobs. That means not. Where is Tim Fischer? What is he doing low inflation, and that has led to low interest about opening up those economies, working rates. Why did we do it? We did it because of with the International Monetary Fund that is the mess left behind by the Labor govern- helping to rescue those economies, lowering ment. They were the big spenders. They are the level of tariff barriers so that they can the big taxers. Pity the poor taxpayers. overcome the problem of the lack of confidence in their currencies and creating a more Let me again quote some figures, and level playing field in this region with lower remind the Senate and the community of the tariffs, and opening up those economies to the last four years of the Labor government when world, in the way in which the IMF wants to tax revenue was up 30 per cent. Which take them? What are we doing about arguing business had a 30 per cent increase in revenue that? Have we been out there? No, we have over that four-year period? The then Com- not. monwealth government. It sold off the sil- ver—$9 billion worth of assets: Qantas and Senator Ian Campbell—Oh, what a load half the Commonwealth Bank—and then it of rubbish! went out and borrowed another $70 billion, Senator COOK—We have not been out and spent the lot. there, Senator Campbell. You just do not At the same time the then government had know. That is where we should be and we are the hide to tell the community that the not there.(Time expired) government was running in surplus. The then Senator GIBSON (Tasmania) (4.58 p.m.)— government confused the community. Basi- On behalf of the government, I rise to oppose cally, it would not come clean as to the exact the motion by Senator Cook. I will be ably state of the accounts. When we came into supported by Senators Lightfoot, McGauran power we found out that, instead of being in Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7983 surplus, as they claimed, we were actually government done? We have made commit- $10 billion in deficit. What did that mean? It ments to change the financial reporting meant that the then Labor government had system so that that can never happen again. spent $10 billion more than it got in. That is The community will never be misled. We what was going on. have made a commitment. We are in the Every household knows that you cannot go process of adopting accrual accounting, whole on spending more than you get in. You just of government reporting; in other words, a cannot do that. You cannot rely on selling the balance sheet for government. The charter of house or selling the furniture to pay for the budget honesty, which sets the scene, will groceries. It does not work. So we in the new produce openness and transparency for all in government had to cut programs across the the long-term future. As I said before, the board to meet the $10 billion deficit. The cuts macro-economic settings are the government’s virtually had to be across most programs to first priority. We have fixed inflation and we reduce the cost of the administration of have fixed interest rates. That is what this government. Of course, some of the industry government demanded, and that is what this programs were cut. Everyone had to take government has delivered. some pain in order to get the macro-economic What else has this government done for the variables right. As Make or break says, we business community in the short time of 18 have got to get the macro settings right. That months? It has delivered reform in industrial is the first priority. We have done that. relations. We needed a change in industrial What constraints were there on economic relations in order to get away from the ‘us’ growth in Australia in the past? The con- and ‘them’ attitude of the past; to encourage straints were inflation and the current account managers and workers to come to agreement deficit. Those constraints were stopping within the workplace and work cooperatively Australia’s future growth. Inflation is now together. That is what we have to achieve. We well and truly under control, and the current have changed the legislation to encourage that account deficit is coming under control. The situation, but perhaps not as far as we would very low inflation is a great encouragement have liked to go. It is absolutely criminal that for investment. A stable, low inflation envi- the Labor Party and the Democrats have ronment really does encourage wise invest- stopped the government’s unfair dismissal ment. It certainly discourages speculative legislation going through the Senate, because investment, which happens in periods of high it offered further incentives to free up the inflation. labour market for small business. Interest rates, as a consequence, have come Another positive thing that we have done is down from the very high rates that we had in signal a change to the Corporations Law. We the Labor era to the lowest in about 30 years. also recently signalled that we will change the Since we have been in government, which is fundraising regime—particularly as it applies only 18 months, official interest rates have to the small end of business—for raising come down 2½ per cent. Housing rates have equity. come down four per cent. Ten-year bonds are Tax is the next big business issue. Major currently at the extraordinarily low level of reports have emphasised that we have got to 6.3 per cent. The risk premium on 10-year fix the tax regime. What is Labor’s policy on bonds—US 10-year bonds versus Australian tax? They are running away from it. They do 10-year bonds—is now close to zero. It was not want to have anything to do with tax 2.2 per cent higher when Mr Keating was in reform. We have already made a substantial power. In other words, the world now judges change in tax for the small business arena. us to be a safe place to invest money, relative We have given capital gains tax relief to to the USA. small business. We are allowing rollovers for The Labor Party was dishonest and said we small business of up to $5 million from one were in surplus. It turned out that we were business into another. As an incentive we will actually running at a loss. What has this allow people selling their business to use up 7984 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 to half a million dollars from the sale, free of Senator GIBSON—That is right, not much. capital gains tax, for retirement purposes. Senator Bishop, you were present yesterday The Prime Minister (Mr Howard) an- when Alan Oxley gave a speech in the li- nounced two months ago that tax is the next brary. As he said, the manufacturing industry major business issue that this government will is doing well in Australia. Let me quote the address. We are looking forward, not back- statistics. Manufacturing exports are currently wards like the Labor Party. The tax system in greater than agricultural exports. Elaborately Australia is in a mess—there is no doubt transformed manufacturing exports have been about that. It discourages investment, it growing at 15 per cent a year for the last 10 discourages jobs, it discourages exports and years, and they continue to grow. If things are it is basically unfair. The government has growing, why does it need to be changed? All signalled that we want to change that system exports are growing at half that rate—eight and we will do so. The system is basically per cent—and, as Mr Oxley said yesterday, unfair. about half of the elaborately transformed exports have zero help from the government. I might add that the wholesale sales tax that we currently have is basically a tax on manu- Many particular industries are claiming that facturers because services are not touched at they want government help, but who is going all. It is manufacturers who are hardest hit by to pay? Who are you going to suggest pays the wholesale sales tax. We basically need a the bill for additional support? Who are you broad based indirect tax, and that is being going to tax? Are the battlers going to pay addressed by the government. The govern- more to pay a particular industry? We are ment is committed to tax reform, which is the suggesting that the emphasis has to be on No. 2 issue for business, to encourage invest- education and services. ment, growth and jobs for our children and The fact is, as the Cutler report points out, our grandchildren. The government is also that the thing that we are really competitive committed to no increase in the overall tax in in a world sense is the excellence of our burden. people, particularly in the technical arena, in information technology and engineering. We Today, the Treasurer (Mr Costello) again are world class and very economical by world emphasised the Consultative Task Force on standards. They are the things we have to be Taxation, of which I am proud to be the chair. encouraging, and that is where we need I propose to seek leave to table a copy of the encouragement, and I am sure the government press release by the Treasurer, which sets out will do something about encouraging that. that we are seeking submissions from the community on, firstly, what is wrong with the A few people from both sides were in tax system and, secondly, any proposals for Ireland recently. There has been huge invest- change. I seek leave to table the document. ment in Ireland. Whilst the world believes that this has been largely tax driven, I do not Leave granted. believe that that is so. The government’s IDA Senator GIBSON—Turning to the various reported that it believed that a lot of the industry reports to government—Mortimer, investment is because a lot of the investors, Goldsworthy and Cutler, of which I have especially from North America, regard Ireland copies—the government has said that it is as an easy entry into Europe. considering same. They are substantive issues The people in Ireland are well educated. and the government is giving them due con- There is emphasis on the three R’s in educa- sideration. Again, I emphasise that these tion and, what is more, they even teach reports place first priority on getting the grammar in schools in Ireland. The tax breaks macro-economic setting correct. That has been that are available in Ireland were seen as a the government’s first priority and we have bonus beyond that, but they were not the done that. What else is needed? The short fundamentals driving the investment. They are answer is: not much. the messages for Australia. We cannot match Senator Bishop—Not much? those tax breaks because the Labor Party has Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7985 committed us and we do not have any spare sighted policy which has affected jobs, invest- taxes, unless you can suggest who we should ment and growth. tax. We cannot do that. This view, which is known as the Treasury With regard to the information technology view, that the best thing government can do industry, the government has accepted the for industry is absolutely nothing, in line with recommendations and has appointed a an extreme view of how the market works, is minister for the information economy. The simply out of step with international best National Office of Information Economy is in industry policy practice. It is out of step with the process of being set up. With regard to the policies and experiences of those countries R&D, Senator Cook claims that the govern- with successful industry policy and impressive ment has slashed industrial R&D from $820 economic and jobs growth. million in 1995-96 to $286 million this The Democrats and the Senate have had current year. some successes in minimising the damage the This reduced figure is only a reflection of coalition has sought to inflict. For example, the estimated cost to revenue of the tax the Senate—and I draw your attention to concession for R&D which reflects the particularly me, Senator Cook and Senator government’s decision to abolish the Labor Harradine—did succeed in extending the Party’s syndication scheme, which was basi- shipbuilding bounty and preventing the cally being rorted. It is not an accurate reflec- abolition of book, machine tools and robotics tion of expenditure on R&D because it com- bounties ahead of schedule. We did succeed pletely ignores the government’s new R&D in retaining eligibility of trusts and airfares start program and the innovation investment under the EMDG scheme. We are currently fund, both of which will provide about $520 pressuring the government to tighten and million over the next four years. improve Australia’s anti-dumping legislation, In summary, the government has stuck to and I expect we will be successful in that the fundamentals. It has fixed the macro- area. Anti-dumping is an area in which economic settings for business. It is about to hopefully the government is moving in the tackle taxation, which is the highest priority right direction. for business, to encourage investment, to get We have welcomed the outcomes focused investment going, and to provide jobs for our approach adopted by Mortimer and the MTIA children and our grandchildren. reports and their endorsement of the view that Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) governments can and should be involved in (5.13 p.m.)—The last 18 months have been a pro-business, investment enhancing, jobs low point for industry policy and particularly friendly policies. We look forward to the for businesses involved in manufacturing moist or the damp group of the coalition industry. The Democrats have stood shoulder actually triumphing over the hard and dry to shoulder with industry groups to oppose people who predominated in the first 18 very damaging short-sighted cuts to vital months. industry policy programs such as the R&D tax I hope for the sake of the 800,000 unem- concessions, bounties, the export market ployed, the long-term unemployed and the development grant scheme, the DIFF scheme 500,000 underemployed Australians that the and the imposition of a three per cent duty on government does listen to Mortimer and other imported business inputs that previously hands-on campaigners and reverses its hands- entered duty free. off policy directions of the last 18 months, I have described these sorts of policies as especially in the areas of innovation, invest- not about avoiding picking winners but rather ment and job creation. as picking on winners. The coalition In the short time available I will do a quick government’s view, certainly in the first 18 stocktake of some of the key developments months, has been that if a program worked it that we think are important. One of the most would cut it back because expenditure was no deplorable actions undertaken by the coalition longer needed. That is a singularly short- has been the savage cuts to business R&D 7986 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 assistance. Time and time again I, Senator remains still too close to its spell in govern- Cook and other senators have asked: have you ment to admit this. Labor often remains done a cost-benefit analysis? What does the unable to accept that the new government, the ledger tell you will be the effects on jobs, coalition government, not only has a right but investment and growth of these actions? has a duty to constantly review industry Regrettably, the coalition persisted with the assistance programs and to improve, replace view that business R&D assistance should be and even abolish programs which are not cut. effective or not sufficiently effective. That is Given that less than two per cent of Aus- not our problem. The problem is that the tralian based firms invest in R&D, given that government cut; it did not create. our regional neighbours are achieving sub- The government did not simply abolish the stantially higher annual average growth rates syndication scheme. At least this time the in business R&D expenditure, given that government cut something and did replace it. Australian business investment in R&D has It replaced it with the Start program, and for peaked at only 0.7 cent of GDP, which is far this we supported the government, as did less than developed countries such as Japan, Labor, I seem to recall. However, I am not the USA and Switzerland, to name three, each convinced that the Start program is adequate, of which invests around two per cent—nearly and I believe our whole package of R&D three times that of Australia—of GDP per assistance schemes needs to be reviewed, year in business research and development, overhauled and boosted. The Democrats do the short-sighted nature of the government’s not want a mere return to the programs that R&D decisions cannot be overestimated— Labor had in place. short-term budget revenue gains for long-term Not all those programs still need to be alive jobs, investment and growth damage. today, although some, such as the EMDG Investing in R&D is crucial to ensuring scheme, were outstanding and need to be sustainable growth, improving our export given the approbation they deserve. If Labor performance, improving our intellectual at times appears guilty of blindly supporting capital and reversing the brain drain of some its old programs, even if they are suspect, it of our best and brightest in the academic, must recognise that it can bring disrepute to scientific and business world. Few disagree the argument that industry assistance pro- now but the decision to wind back R&D grams and active interventionist methods are assistance was one of the coalition’s worst necessary. That can be seen to be support for decisions. Even the Industry Commission, a partisan view, not for a policy measure which we all know the Democrats believe is which has integrity in its own right. a dry and hardline economic rationalist think There are many instances when government tank, did support the 150 per cent tax conces- intervention is warranted, when market forces sion for R&D. left to themselves will not deliver outcomes Labor rightly sought to prevent the cuts to most beneficial to the community. I mean the 150 per cent tax concession scheme, but ‘community’ in the broader sense—the busi- it wrongly sought to defend the R&D syndica- ness, social and national community. But if tion scheme. The R&D syndication scheme parties such as Labor—a party which is the did boost R&D investment levels but there alternative government—can actually publicly were serious doubts about its cost-effective- defend inefficient and potentially manipulated ness. There were also clear suggestions that programs, then the public and the key opinion the scheme was being manipulated by some makers will lack confidence in government of the major financial institutions. Allegations intervention. of creative accounting were widespread. Another appalling decision was the govern- The Labor Party needed to acknowledge ment’s move to abolish tariff concessions on that a scheme that it had developed and business imports. The tariff concession system implemented was not cost-effective and was allowed products to be imported duty free if possibly being manipulated. Labor was and there was no equivalent Australian manufac- Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7987 tured product. The rationale was that tariffs Let us now turn to the issue of tariffs. Both existed to protect Australian industries and Labor and the coalition are running around as should not apply to goods where there was no the Latter-day Saints of tariff reductions. local industry to protect. The decision to Regrettably, they get more media exposure abolish it caused understandable fury within than we do so we are not getting the contrary industry. To his credit, the Minister for view across. All of a sudden, both appeared Industry, Science and Technology, John to have discovered that unilateral tariff reduc- Moore, recognised how stupid this decision tions means job losses. Yet, for a decade and was and described it as ‘dreadful policy’. a half of Labor governments who were fully supported in this by the coalition, it was the Where did the idea come from? Regrettably, Democrats alone who strongly opposed the it came from the Labor Party. The motion unilateral—and I emphasise unilateral—cuts before us today says that the government has in tariffs, quotas and bounties pursued and failed to come up with any initiatives on implemented by Labor. The coalition simply industry policy apart from those it took from cheered them on. In other words, Labor and the ALP. Well that is one you should not the coalition stood together as the conserva- have given them. After intense lobbying from tive group supporting unilateral cuts in tariffs, industry, which was supported by the Demo- quotas and bounties. crats in their lobbying, the government eventually adopted the inept compromise of The media have been vigorous in promoting effectively imposing a three per cent tariff on the view that the government and Labor have previously exempt business imports. had an about-face on tariffs. That they ignored the Industry Commission reports into The industry minister described this as the both the car and textile, clothing and footwear best outcome under difficult circumstances. industries was commendable, but this was not What he did not mention was the difficult an about-face; it was simply a slowing down. circumstances were the dry as dust hard boys The economic cheer squad—those favouring in the cabinet. It was a pathetic outcome and tariff reductions—have been scathingly the difficult circumstances refer to the com- critical of the government for slowing tariff plete ineptitude of a cabinet full of lawyers cuts while other media commentators catering and of the Labor opposition’s inability to for Howard’s battlers came out cheering that accept that that recommendation had been John Howard froze tariffs and saved jobs. wrong. Labor then completely ignored the But did the government and Labor really impact on business. They wanted to impose ignore the Industry Commission? Have they a five per cent tariff. When the three per cent really done an about-face on tariffs? We do tariff came in, the Labor industry spokes- not think so. With the aid of the media, the person, Simon Crean, then launched a cam- government has been able to perpetrate a paign against the impact that these changes major hoax on the Australian public because would have for consumer goods, but there tariffs have not been frozen. It has not given was not a mention about the impact on up the goal of unilateral tariff reductions. business imports that I can find or recall. Tariffs in the car industry are currently falling Business warned that the changes were like- at a rate of 2½ per cent a year and at a rate ly to render the scheme ineffective because of three per cent a year for the TCF indus- claiming back the two per cent value on tries, and they will continue to do so. By the goods would not be worthwhile. No-one but year 2000, they will have fallen to a maxi- the Democrats in the Senate took this serious- mum rate of 15 per cent for the car industry ly. Regrettably, it has since been revealed that and 25 per cent for the TCF industries. applications for tariff concessions have fallen These reductions are set to take place by more than two-thirds from 3,273 in 1995- irrespective of what our trading partners do 96 to 1,029 in 1996-97. This has borne out and irrespective of their impact on employ- the fact that a good proportion of industry ment and investment in Australia, and that is complaints were not just rhetoric but justified. our complaint. To adopt the Democrats’ 7988 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 policy you would have to adopt the policy of time the battlers are cheering. The battlers reciprocity, and you have not. You have have been deceived into believing that there maintained the policy of unilateral reductions. has been a reversal on tariff policy. But still, We think it is dangerous policy considering every month, every year, the industries and the car industry directly employs 22,000 the factories close down and the jobs are lost. people and TCF industries directly employ up For example, 275,000 full-time jobs have to 100,000 people and a further equivalent been lost every year for the last decade. number, it is understood, of outworkers. When are you going to accept that econom- Hundreds of thousands of employees and ic rationalism does not deliver the goods? families are indirectly affected. You have the evidence before you. All that Unfortunately, the Liberal, Labor and has occurred is that the tariff reductions have National parties are still fundamentally op- been packaged slightly differently, a tempo- posed to reviewing these decisions. The recent rary pause slotted in and that is all. Do not decisions in both the car and TCF industries get me wrong—we at least welcome that, but only deal with tariffs after the year 2000. So it is not far enough. what we have in the tariff decisions is a Labor are claiming victory. They are saying change in timing, not a change in direction. that the government have adopted their policy. Do they stop tariff reductions? No. On the The coalition are claiming victory. They are contrary, the government has decided to saying, ‘Look at what we have done for jobs.’ unilaterally—and, once again, I emphasise the But there is no difference really between the word ‘unilaterally’—reduce both car tariffs Labor Party and the coalition on this because and TCF tariffs by the year 2005. We say it they both accept the same dry economic should be a reciprocal view we take relative dogma. Both the government and Labor have to our competitors. remained committed to the Industry Commis- By 2005, the maximum tariff rate within sion view. Both Labor and the coalition have TCF industries will be 17½ per cent, and this been like minded on tariffs for the past two will apply to clothing and finished textiles. decades. The Democrats have stood apart. Other TCF products will have a maximum Only the Democrats have consistently re- rate between five per cent and 10 per cent, mained opposed to unilateral disarmament. regardless of what our competitors have or The coalition have faltered badly. They do. Isn’t that the most astonishing thing— have failed to respond to growing job inse- regardless of what our competitors have or curity, especially for those workers in manu- do? facturing. They have failed on their election In the car industry tariffs will fall to 10 per promise to create 200,000 new manufacturing cent in 2005—again, regardless of what our jobs. They have failed to adopt both economic competitors have or do. Whether this occurs and job growth targets. They have failed to in one step as the government proposes or as adopt an industry policy which is comprehen- a series of steps as the Industry Commission sible. What they have adopted is an intention proposes is largely irrelevant. The end result to pursue macro and micro policy and macro is much the same. The end result is that and micro reform. That has a place. Without tariffs are eroded unilaterally. The end result doubt, some of it will be good. Some of it is that our tariffs will continue falling unilat- will be bad, from our point of view. But we erally while no regard is given to what our need an industry vision and direction. trading partners do. The Democrats—along with the Labor Party Unilateral tariff reductions are to continue when they have voted with us—have been through to the year 2000 and on to the year able to minimise some of the damage that the 2005. They will occur in one step rather than coalition has sought to inflict. I assure the in yearly steps as recommended by the com- Senate that the Democrats will continue mission. If anything, the supporters of unilat- pressuring the government to deliver an eral tariff reduction should be elated. They are activist, interventionist, strategic industry getting their tariff reductions but at the same policy. We will continue to pressure the Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7989

Labor Party to start to move away from the Senator Abetz—What about the $1 billion economic rationalist dogma they have so investment base? wrongly pursued over the last decade. I advise Senator LUNDY—Let me draw on a point the Labor Party that we will support their that I would like to make specifically. This motion if they omit subparagraph (a)(ii). If goes to the contribution of the Treasurer (Mr they do not, we will be unable to support Costello) to the MTIA conference earlier this their motion. week. Post the articulation of macro-economic Senator LUNDY (Australian Capital policy as being the be-all and end-all of Territory) (5.32 p.m.)—The significance of industry development for this government, we this motion should not be underestimated as get onto tax reform. So there is another layer it represents, I believe, the false base upon of what this government are doing for indus- which this government sold itself to the try policy. Australian people. Its alleged commitment to Senator Gibson—Of course there is. small business as the jobs growth engine of our economy was a phrase plastered right Senator LUNDY—They are looking at tax across its election campaign and, surprisingly, reform. Congratulations to Senator Gibson it has had the audacity to continue with it 18 and others who have taken the time to spend months into government. their whole contribution on this critical debate about industry policy and cuts to all of the This motion is significant because it steps elements that support industry in this country out at each point the damage that this govern- to talk about macro-economic policy and tax ment has done to industry and business. The reform. significance of this, in turn, goes to the very If you look at this motion, we go far be- heart of what should be the priority of this yond those two points and start looking at the government—that is, jobs, employment, job substance of what is going wrong. What is the creation and what a government can do to malaise in the Australian economy? The improve the opportunity of Australians in malaise lies in the heart of this government’s seeking and finding secure employment. inability to provide direction, focus, support It is interesting that the response from the and strategically applied incentives in a government to date on this issue does not consistent manner to allow business to have really get past the macro-economic issues. confidence to grow. They continue to hold up, as their one creden- We find ourselves in a situation where we tial for industry policy, macro-economic have five reports on industry policy. Why do policy mechanisms, low inflation— we have five reports that have come down all Senator Gibson—The highest priority. at once? You do not need to look too far beyond those reports to see why. Just about Senator LUNDY—Senator Gibson points every one of them articulates the lack of out that it is the highest priority of the leadership in this country as a prime reason government. You would think that managing why industry policy is floundering. the economy would end up on the high priority list for any government. What I think The issue of leadership, of vision, is some- is significant is how this government have thing that was largely avoided in the election managed to position the economy, macro- campaign. Whilst we had all the rhetoric economic policy and monetary policy at the about business being the jobs growth engine forefront of their solution to industry develop- of our economy, there was no substance, and ment in this country. It is a pretty long bow we have 18 months of government to prove to draw but not an unreasonable one. Unfortu- that there is no substance and a proliferation nately for this government, they have nothing of reports to try to put the substance where beyond that point to demonstrate that they are leadership is lacking. providing anything in terms of support, The government’s inability to acknowledge direction or focus for the growth of business the important and successful structures and in Australia. schemes that were put in place under Labor 7990 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 is an indication of the way that it is prepared I would now like to turn to a specific area to play petty politics with this critical issue. which I have great interest in. It goes to the So many times we have seen areas of govern- heart of two significant industry reports that ment support—be it in regional economic have been presented in the area of information development, research and development technology and services. Both the Golds- incentives or anything else—cut back or worthy’s report entitled The global informa- ditched altogether and then re-emerge in a tion economy: the way ahead and the IPAC repackaged, liberalised version of a support report entitled A national policy framework mechanism. for structural adjustment within the new We are starting to see hints of that now. We Commonwealth of information really start to are starting to see backdowns. We are starting articulate what was a glaring deficiency in the to see Goldsworthy, in his report entitled The make-up of the government’s frontbench. global information economy: the way ahead, I would like to look at the development of talk about reinstating a R&D incentive for the recognition of information technology as business in a slightly different way. We are a policy issue of substance by this govern- going through a process of repackaging. ment. It has taken quite some time for them to realise that the fastest growing global Is this responsible government? Is it respon- industry is of some importance to Australia. sible to take away what had been developed It has taken them quite some time to realise over a long period and had evolved to support that what we have, or what we had, is a industries—whether it be partnerships for critical opportunity to position Australia to development or the EMDG programs—and ensure that we have claim to at least a propor- reshape and repackage them? What you have tion of what is currently the second largest done is squander 18 months of growth. You industry on the globe. have denied our economy who knows how many percentage points of growth through The Minister for Communications, the your cutbacks in this area. Ostensibly you Information Economy and the Arts, Senator have done all of this for the purpose of the Alston, was probably the first one to pick it macro-economic measures to which Senator up. It took about six or eight months for him Gibson alluded but more covertly you have to learn the language and the IT lingo and to done all this to repackage it in a way which start building it into responses to dorothy is based on pure political opportunism. You dixers in the chamber. He has since had a have denied this country 18 months of what couple of briefings which have upgraded at should have been a pathway of expansion—a least the perception of his knowledge of this pathway of growth of R&D investment as a sector. He has also had some pretty compre- proportion of GDP. hensive advice to back that up. I have spoken in this chamber before about I would like to focus on the Prime Minister, the relationship between R&D investment in Mr Howard. It was not until Mr Howard got business and economic growth and jobs. We a second dose of what was going on in the know that there are a number of scenarios. US and President Clinton’s next generation We know that there is a path on which Aus- Internet and other IT initiatives that it finally tralia was travelling under Labor. It was a dawned on Mr Howard that maybe there is path of growth and improvement. We know some substance to this issue and maybe he that there was an enhanced scenario which had better pay lip-service to it back home. meant that if the government put more focus When President Clinton visited Australia on that area of policy it would result in even last year and addressed both houses of parlia- greater growth. But what we saw this government in the other place the issue of IT was ment do is ignore all of that information—it specifically raised as being critical for West- is all there on the public record—and cut ern developed nations in terms of how they those very programs, knowingly denying that approach industry policy. It did not register. growth and restricting the opportunities for He missed it completely. The Prime Minister Australian businesses and hence jobs. went over to the US and when he came back Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7991 he said, ‘IT is important.’ Ding. It took a long ment. In Australia it is reasonable to say that time and we suffered as a consequence. government procurement has a far greater I do not think the Treasurer, Mr Costello, level of importance in terms of a Western is anywhere near realising the importance of economy because of the nature of our indus- this particular policy issue. In his articulation try. We do not have a critical mass of large of these macro-economic issues Mr Costello industry in Australia. We are predominantly is devoid of any substance and any critical small to medium enterprises in terms of our achievement in putting in place an industry profile. policy to back what should be a competitive So how do our companies export? How do and growing business environment. He is not they grow and innovate and look outwards going to click to the issues. While he holds globally? One of the key mechanisms for sway in cabinet this government is going to these companies to build an export base is to be unable to develop industry policy in any build up some credential, and the biggest successful and meaningful way. Even if he contracts available are in the government were overridden in cabinet, I do not believe sector. When we talk about outsourcing there is the vision, talent or skill amongst the Commonwealth information technologies, we frontbench of this government to actually are talking about giving away the ability for progress sensible, practical industry policy these companies to create credentials for and to do what is required to be done in this themselves so that they can enter into the country to resolve some of these issues. So global market. we had this rude awakening to the importance The whole way that this IT outsourcing of IT. process has been managed—and I have Research and development is a backdrop to spoken about this issue many times in this the information technologies, the information chamber—is doing great damage to local services sector. Why? Because it is high-tech. SMEs. The government are ignoring that It is the top end. It is a new technology and clamouring, and the small movement that they it requires a significant research and develop- have tried to implement—there was a particu- ment base to develop at an innovative level. lar industry development section inserted into We know Australia will never be at the the cluster 3 request for tender—shows that, forefront of hardware manufacturing. We even when the industry knocks on their door know that, because of the lack of action of and tells them what the problems are, the this government with respect to software government cannot get it right. They have a development, opportunities are slipping by. singular focus on outsourcing, and it is to save money. Forget the impact on local Do we see any positive action by this business, forget the impact on innovation, government to promote the remaining oppor- forget the impact of taking away the platform tunities in this area? Do we see increased or the opportunities upon which Australian investment in research and development? Do companies base their credentials for exports; we see support of cooperative research cen- that is, how they sell themselves. tres? Have a look at what this government is Senator Gibson—Yes. doing in this area and you start to see a Senator LUNDY—No, we do not. We see comprehensive package of undermining the $10 million worth of cuts. Do we see the innovative end, the interesting end, the end recommendations from these reports into the that could position Australia in a very signifi- development of our IT sector being imple- cant and useful way with leading edge tech- mented? No, we do not, because this govern- nologies. This issue is not over yet; it is still ment has not clicked yet. How long is it going. going to take? Meanwhile, these opportunities I just want to take the time to make refer- are flying by. ence to what the member for Mackellar, Mrs The other issue I would like to mention Bishop, said in the other place today in about IT is the role of government procure- response to a question from the member for 7992 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Lindsay (Miss Kelly). It is worth raising in ad hoc policy-on-the-run approach to industry this context because, on the issue of IT development in this critical sector by this outsourcing, we have heard some very specif- government. My only hope is that they are ic comments from the Minister for Finance limited in the extent to which they can inflict and Administration (Mr Fahey) about what damage by virtue of our democratic processes. they are trying to achieve. They are trying to Let us have a look. We have a government save money; they are trying to position scratching around for leadership. We have a multinationals in Australia and grow our proliferation of reports, articulating that very industry off that. point and providing some solutions, being So let us have a look at what Mrs Bishop ignored. We are seeing R&D cuts. We are said in the other place about IT outsourcing. seeing cuts to education that undermine We should remember, too, that the contracts industry potential in every way. The links are which she is referring to relate to Defence, there—we know they are there—and the which happened because of their decision to studies have been done. Consistently, this provide for an in-house option bid in their IT government is undermining the infrastructure outsourcing. Surprise, surprise! The in-house that will build those foundations of a sound, bid was the successful one. So, here we go. solid industry that has strong growth potential. Mrs Bishop states: If the best the government have to offer is The recently announced tender is that relating to focusing on the macro-economic policy CRISP, which is part of the Russell redevelopment settings—and I am not even convinced that program. It is concerning the overall computing infrastructure desktop hardware and standard office they have a grip on that—then they are operating products for Russell. closing their ears to small business. They are The importance of this contract is that, firstly, it closing their ears to what they have described is a $27 million contract of which $8.8 million—or as the jobs growth engine of the future. Are about 30 per cent of the contract for systems their doors open to only those who are well integration—will go directly to Australian small resourced enough to be able to bend the ear and medium enterprises. of the relevant ministers? It is a sad day for Well, well, well. She goes on to say: Australian industry to see that, even with this Secondly, there is another $6 million which will go information around on providing advice and to IPEX, which will provide desktop devices from even with the scope and possibilities that are its Melbourne manufacturing facility, and its available to them, they are squandering associated printer production of Lexmark will be opportunities every day that they are in manufactured in Sydney. government. Mrs Bishop goes on to say: Senator LIGHTFOOT (Western Australia) This contract is also of importance in that it is in (5.52 p.m.)—I am pleased to have the oppor- accordance with that important principle this tunity this afternoon to respond to Senator government supports that I brought in which says Cook, Senator Murray and Senator Lundy, that we require large foreign firms doing business here in Australia not to exclude SMEs by using who just spoke, and to support my colleague vertically integrated companies in their tenders but on this side of the House Senator Gibson. I to nurture and look after small and medium enter- continue to be amazed during my short time prises which are Australian, so that Australian here that, all of a sudden, after 13 years of individuals get the opportunity to work in these rule by the Labor Party, they now have all the important areas. solutions. They say we should have had all Well, well, well. I wonder if Mrs Bishop has the solutions and rectified the malpractices of been speaking to Mr Fahey lately. I suspect the previous administrations in 18 months. not because this flies directly in the face of They say that we should have cleaned up the everything we have heard from the minister mess in 18 months. I am afraid the mess was for finance on this issue from day one, when just too high and just too big for us—or for that submission was first put forward to any administration coming in that is expected cabinet and supported for the 1997-98 budget. to rectify problems and fiscal problems of that We will continue to observe the mismatched magnitude—to do that. Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7993

There were no notable reforms that the small business so desperately needed with people opposite speak of during that period of unfair dismissal laws. 13 years. Now they have all the answers. Senator Forshaw—They needed to despe- Apart from pandering to the unions, to which rately sack people. Is that your answer to members of that administration had to tug unemployment? You are a twit. their forelocks regularly—at least in the run up to preselection time—they pandered to the Senator LIGHTFOOT—Senator Forshaw people who ultimately brought them down. has not even learnt yet that the reform was to The eyes of ordinary decent Australians employ people, not to sack people. The ultimately brought down the administrations reform was needed to employ. of Hawke and Keating. Senator Abetz—He was even against wide combs, this bloke. What the Labor Party did produce in Aus- tralia during its tenure on this hill were Senator LIGHTFOOT—The only thing premiers like John Cain, Joan Kirner, Carmen Senator Forshaw knows about combs relates Lawrence, Brian Burke, John Bannon and to the one he runs through his hair on odd Peter Dowding, who in aggregate lost billions occasions. I do not think he knows too much of dollars for the Australian people. How about combs in a shearing shed. That is true, disgraceful it is to say today that we are not Senator Forshaw; isn’t it? You have never doing the right thing when we have to rectify bent your back in a shearing shed like I have, those things, to try to bring back those sorts Senator Forshaw. I can tell you I have. of losses and to recompense the people of They were experts with high interest rates. Australia for the corruption at the state and We had the highest interest rates that this federal levels and for the moral corruption at nation has ever seen. Under your administra- the state and federal levels. We have to do tion we had one of the great recessions that that in the short period of 18 months. this nation has ever seen, apart from the Great Did Labor, for instance, unjam the logs at Depression of the 1930s. And you have the the waterfront? No. Did they rectify the hide and the temerity to tell this government problems there with the bludgers and the it should have got it all right and rectified crooks on the waterfront who hold Australia your damage in 18 months. to ransom and make us a laughing stock in Senator McGauran—Disgraceful. the international world of commerce? Senator LIGHTFOOT—Yes, an absolute Senator Forshaw—You are a grub. disgrace. We also had the unfettered deregula- tion of the banks. You went in with the Senator LIGHTFOOT—If I can continue, plump boys at the top end of the streets in the Senator Forshaw. I worked on the wharves shady suburbs of Perth, Sydney and Mel- and I know what they are like. In fact, I was bourne, to whom you attached yourselves a member of the Waterside Workers Feder- with some alacrity, and deregulated the banks. ation for some short time. What the previous You caused that industry, which once enjoyed administration did excel at was high interest respect, to be reviled by average Australians rates. I remember those very well and so do because of what it is doing with its charges. a lot of other businessmen in Australia. They I understand that, when we came into are not likely to forget that in the short term, office, Australia had about 0.9 per cent annual if ever. growth—not even one per cent annual growth. Those businessmen will also remember the Of course, the growth is now expected to be fact that you denied small business this week at the end of this fiscal year about 3.7 per the opportunity not only of increasing their cent. Senator Forshaw, I appreciate the fact own security but of employing young people. that you have stayed in here. You obviously By knocking back the workplace reforms that did not have much else better to do. Senator this government put up, you, in collusion with Forshaw, those figures alone will tell you that, the Democrats—all of whom are left of you, whatever this government may have in terms I might say—knocked back those reforms that of faults, at least it is working. We do not 7994 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 pander to the plump boys in the leafy suburbs There have been serious consequences, in particu- of Sydney and Melbourne. lar: You left it to us to look after Mr and Mrs . the office is being forced to turn away an in- Average Australia. That is what you did and creasing number of people; that is what we are doing. That is why we are . important functions have been diminished; and going to get back in next time. You are going . there are signs that confidence in the office is to sit over that side for a couple more terms being eroded. yet because you have not learnt your lesson. You have not learnt your lesson. Do not This is all because of cuts that this govern- criticise us because we are fixing the mess— ment has made to the Ombudsman’s Office. the stinking pile of economic filth—you left This government obviously does not care to behind. While it is going to take longer than see that there is any scrutiny or any independ- 18 months, we are going to rectify it. ent body or organisation for individual people with complaints and problems caused by The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT government programs and changes, and for (Senator Jacinta Collins)—Order! The time people to seek redress for poor treatment they allocated for the consideration of general are getting. business notices of motion has now expired. The efficacy and the ability of the Ombuds- DOCUMENTS man to do work on this issue are being eroded. For that the government must stand Commonwealth Ombudsman condemned. As much as we might like to say Debate resumed from 2 October, on motion that the public servants do a wonderful job— by Senator Carr: and they do on the whole—there are the difficult cases, the cases that slip through, the That the Senate take note of the document. cases that are put in the too-hard basket, and Senator WEST (New South Wales) (6.00 people are given a hard time. Whilst we as p.m.)—I wish to speak on document No. 5, members of parliament are often able to assist the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s report. I people to resolve their problems, referral to start by complimenting the Ombudsman and the Ombudsman still occurs for an independ- her office for the hard work that has been ent, non-judgmental assessment of the case, undertaken this year in what have to be for a judgment to be made and some force to increasingly trying circumstances. I quote be applied to the errant department. from chapter 10 of the report: It was also interesting to note within the Adequate resources are essential if the Ombuds- report the significant increase in the number man’s Office is to be effective and fulfil its statutory role. of complaints and problems being experienced by the Department of Social Security. One 1996-97 has been the busiest year ever for the wonders, with these cuts to personnel, just Ombudsman’s Office with over 50,000 approaches to the office—complaints have increased by 19 per how they are going to cope with that. cent over 1995-96, and by 61 per cent over the last We also note that the Deputy Ombudsman three years. As the Government implements further Defence position was vacated in 1996 and has changes in administrative practices, it is likely that there will be further increases in the number of not been re-filled. The Ombudsman Act complaints to the Ombudsman’s Office placing provides for up to three deputy ombudsman additional pressure on limited resources. positions. However, to reduce overheads these positions have been reduced to one, which has She continues: eroded specialisation. Of course, with the The Ombudsman’s Office has always operated on erosion of specialisation, one then begins to a shoestring. By international standards the Austral- see maybe a diminution in the standard of the ian Ombudsman is probably the busiest and most cost effective. The situation is reaching a breaking decisions being made and the advice being point, with a dramatic increase in both the demand given. It also reduces the strength and the for the Ombudsman’s assistance, and the office’s amount of time the Ombudsman’s Office has throughput of cases. to assist people to rectify problems. Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7995

I also turn to the Defence Force Ombuds- addressing this to the matter of how it seems man report, because this is an area that I have to have been remedied, it is cause of grave a great deal of interest in over a number of concern that that crops up in a report at all. years. This is often the place of last review, When referring to alternative ways of particularly for women who have had sexual resolving issues, the report said: harassment cases. The Department of Defence One problem we identified was a tendency to is saying that it has done a lot of things to invoke an investigation under the Defence (Inquiry) overcome these problems but, from media Regulations, whether or not this was the most reports recently, it would appear that that is appropriate course for dealing with a complaint. not the case. The Ombudsman’s report on That is what Senator West said earlier. The page 239 also raises some serious issues report continued: regarding the handling of incidents, which included: This is an intensive and expensive option— a tendency to investigate complaints (and par- One would have thought an organisation such ticularly complaints regarding harassment and as the Defence Force would have been very discrimination) whether or not an investigation meticulous in the way it handled these cases. was the most appropriate response; The report goes on to say: It also talks about: In some cases, an investigation will either not solve . the alternative dispute resolution strategies the problem or will not be the best solution. needed to be better integrated into the processes Although there has been an increased emphasis in of deciding how to deal with these sorts of recent years on alternative resolution strategies for complaints; harassment complaints, the employment of such strategies is still a relatively new concept— . the widespread use of "informal inquiries" with little guidance on the conduct of such inquiries, In view of that comment in the report, one and few accountability mechanisms in place to would hope we see a changed manner within protect the parties involved. the defence forces, particularly in respect of When you go through this report, you have to the handling of harassment cases. find that it is an issue of grave concern. (Time Further in the report on page 245, there is expired) a very concerning comment about procedural Senator HOGG (Queensland) (6.05 fairness. The report states: p.m.)—It is pertinent that I follow Senator One of the matters of most concern to our office West on this issue of the Ombudsman. I am was the lack of adherence by some Defence addressing the issue of the Defence Force investigators to the principles of procedural fair- Ombudsman, because I think the points that ness. Senator West has raised are very important. One would think that, if we are going to have Whilst Senator West obviously did not have a fair and just system, we must have pro- sufficient time to canvass that section of the cedural fairness. Whilst this comment should report, there are some significant issues in the not be tagged to all investigators within the defence area because of the current turmoil defence forces, the report did refer to some that is there, I would imagine, as a result of investigators failing to follow the principles the Defence Efficiency Review. I am sure the of procedural fairness. The report says: role of the Ombudsman will come into play . . . there is a need to ensure that the principles of more often. procedural fairness are spelt out in the relevant Senator West referred to a number of Defence instructions and adhered to— factors that had been identified as issues One would hope beyond all hope that that is relating to the Australian Defence Force’s the case. People who are subjected to investi- handling of serious incidents. While she gation—whether they be in the Defence Force mentioned some, she did not move to the fact or citizens outside of the Defence Force—are that there were no procedures for monitoring entitled to fair play. Fairness is one of the and quality control of investigations, leading hallmarks of our society, and people are to some going off the rails. That is quite entitled to fairness and justice evenhandedly unsatisfactory. Whilst I will refer later on in distributed, not with some cooked-up investi- 7996 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 gation techniques used by some Rambo in the If you object to or put in a notice of dis- Defence Force. allowance of a regulation, departments are not The report finishes the Defence Force likely to take that kindly. They understand the Ombudsman section by addressing the fact general proposition that power ought to be that: exercised responsibly and that arbitrary power ought to be restrained. They understand that Despite the difficulties the Australian Defence general proposition and no doubt accept it, Force has faced with investigations in the past, the but it is the actual example that brings for- Chief of the Defence Force is to be commended for recognising those deficiencies and for taking steps ward all sorts of concerns. The person who is to remedy the Australian Defence Force’s policy faced with resistance to the power that he or and procedures. she exercises tends to say, ‘I’m doing this in a very reasonable fashion. I shouldn’t be Because this is mentioned in this report, one criticised.’ It is the person who stands up for would certainly hope to see it reflected in that citizen and pursues that topic in a proper what we see in reality. If we do not see it in and right way who suffers. reality, one would wonder why these reports are printed and used in the first place. I would like to pay tribute to Philippa Smith, who has acted fairly over the time but, Senator COONEY (Victoria) (6.10 p.m.)— nevertheless, has come up with the resistance I would like to address the Commonwealth that anybody who stands up for the rights of Ombudsman’s report, which has been signed others will come across. I think that is a by the Commonwealth Ombudsman, Philippa matter of reality. People who undertake that Smith. She has done mighty work—and I use task are at times unpopular, but that is the that adjective advisedly—in the area of way it is played. Even though we recognise human rights and in trying to establish a that, I think it is proper to say that we should situation where people treat each other in a pay people like Philippa Smith due deference decent fashion. Under the heading ‘Ombuds- when they do what is proper and right. man’s role’, the report states: It is interesting to look at the index of this This year represents the 20th anniversary of the report and the sorts of matters she dealt with: Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Office. Australia Post, the Australian Defence Back when the Office was created, the Prime Force—and that issue has already been ad- Minister of the day, Malcolm Fraser said, ". . . the dressed by Senator Hogg and Senator West— establishment of the office is directed towards the Australian Federal Police, Austudy, the ensuring that departments and authorities are Child Support Agency and so on. They are all responsive, adaptive and sensitive to the needs of citizens." bodies that no doubt try to do the best they can to carry out their duties, but at times they The creation of the position of the Common- perhaps act in a way that could be labelled as wealth Ombudsman was just one mechanism an arbitrary exercise of power. It is proper to enable people who live in the community that we have somebody like Philippa Smith to to move about as well-respected citizens— restrain them, to bring them back to reality so respected not only by their fellow citizens but they can get back to properly serving us as respected by the government departments that citizens and can do what they no doubt intend gave them service. to do. Senator O’Chee—Respected by the people Question resolved in the affirmative. who exercise the law. Nuclear Safety Bureau Senator COONEY—Yes, respected by the 38th and 39th Reports people who exercise the law, if I can take that interjection from Senator O’Chee. One of the Debate resumed from 2 October, on motion great difficulties, as Senator O’Chee will by Senator Margetts: understand, is that the theory is all very good That the Senate take note of the documents. but, when you come to apply it, that is when Senator FORSHAW (New South Wales) the difficulty arises. (6.15 p.m.)—I rise to take note of the reports Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7997 of the Nuclear Safety Bureau covering the ANSTO, and you really have to dig deep to period 1 January to 31 March 1997 and the find it—I will come to the way these reports next period of 1 April to 30 June 1997. As I are produced in a minute—saying that rain think honourable senators know, I live in the water had seeped into the containers contain- electorate of Hughes which contains ing the fuel rods. It defies one’s imagination, Australia’s only nuclear reactor, namely the to the normal person in the community, how Lucas Heights establishment. It is not widely rainwater could have got in, given that these known that two reactors are located there. containers are encased in quite thick concrete. The Moata reactor has been decommis- I want to quote from page 2 of the first report sioned but is still on the site in its decommis- because what really concerns people is that sioning phase, and issues continue with these reports are couched in such scientific respect to safety and the decommissioning language that the average person really cannot process. The major reactor is the Hifar reactor understand them. They have a right to under- which is scheduled for shutdown and decom- stand these reports. The report says: missioning in 2003. As a consequence of that, Twelve Abnormal Occurrences were reported to the this government announced recently that it NSB for the period 1 January to 31 March 1997. proposes to locate a new replacement reactor The Abnormal Occurrences were reviewed by the NSB and it was concluded that none had adverse for the Hifar reactor at Lucas Heights. We safety implications. Ten Abnormal Occurrences will come to deal with that issue next year were due to equipment fault, one was human when the Senate committee looks at that factors related and one was not classified as to decision, because there is strong community cause. Two of the occurrences involved unavoid- opposition to that government proposal, and able non-compliance with Operational Limits and that opposition relates to the question of Conditions, and the NSB agreed to temporary exemptions in these cases. The NSB continued to nuclear safety. assign levels on the International Nuclear Event I have never been one to come down on the Scale (INES)2 to HIFAR Abnormal Occurrences on side of total opposition to the mining of a trial basis. uranium in this country. As you know, Mr How can the public possibly understand what Acting Deputy President, the union which I that gobbledegook is supposed to mean? I used to work for, the Australian Workers seek leave to continue my remarks later. Union, covers most of the workers at the uranium mine in Roxby Downs or Olympic Leave granted; debate adjourned. Dam in South Australia, your home state. Judge Advocate General Also, living in the area I recognise that the reactor was there at Lucas Heights long Debate resumed from 2 October, on motion before I built a home not far away, as many by Senator MacGibbon: other residents of that area have done. That the Senate take note of the document. What is of major concern is, firstly, the fact Senator HOGG (Queensland) (6.21 that we are going to get another reactor to p.m.)—Whilst this report is not wildly excit- replace it and, more importantly, the attitude ing, the reason for raising it is that it men- that is adopted, particularly by ANSTO, tions a study going on under the auspices of which is reflected in this report; that is, the the Judge Advocate General. That report was question of safety. There is genuine concern due out in June 1997. To date, I have not in the community about safety issues at Lucas seen the report—I would be interested in Heights. It ranges from those who are moder- reading it. ately concerned to those who are passionately According to the report, the office of the concerned. Judge Advocate General was created to police Very recently there was an incident at and enforce the Defence Force Discipline Act Lucas Heights where it has been acknow- 1982. The functions under that act include: ledged that water was found to have entered . . . making procedural rules for Service tribunals, the containers containing some of the fuel providing final legal review of proceedings within rods stored there. The report came out from the Australian Defence Force . . . and reporting 7998 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 upon the operation of laws relating to the discipline impact it has on the legal system as it applies of the ADF. within our military forces. Point 5 of the preamble to the report says: Another interesting point is that the report The JAG’s duty is also perceived as including the concluded that ‘the state of discipline within promotion of the jurisprudential welfare and the Australian Defence Force continues to be education of the ADF together with the exercise of good’. One would hope that there will be no a beneficial influence upon the legal structures rebellions in the near future. One must say, within it. though, that one would have to be concerned That is terribly important. It is one thing to at the impact the Defence Efficiency Review say that we can have discipline—and it gets is having on morale. Let us hope that does back to the issue that I raised before: it is the not impact on the whole state of discipline fact that it has to be applied fairly and equi- within the Australian Defence Force. tably; otherwise the application of any disci- Question resolved in the affirmative. pline is seen to be harsh and oppressive. At point 6 it says: Veterans’ Review Board The JAG should not,— Debate resumed from 21 October, on in the opinion of this report— motion by Senator West: act as a general legal adviser to the ADF as that That the Senate take note of the document. would be inconsistent with judicial office. Senator WEST (New South Wales) (6.26 In reading the report, it was also interesting p.m.)—The Veterans’ Review Board is a very to find out that legal training and military important organisation. This is one of the legal education are now being given to civil- organisations that the government has been ian lawyers who act for the Judge Advocate planning to merge, along with the Administra- General. Obviously, this can only be a plus tive Appeals Tribunal, the Social Security for the defence forces. In particular, they are Appeals Tribunal, the Immigration Review grounded in matters peculiar to military Tribunal and the Refugee Review Tribunal, service, including military discipline law, into a single tribunal called the Administrative international law and operations law. Review Tribunal. This led to a study being commissioned. This is something that the opposition has The Chief of the Defence Force tasked the grave concerns about, and we have expressed Deputy Judge Advocate to conduct a study them on previous occasions. We see a need into the arrangements for the conduct of for the independence of these tribunals, that military trials, with a view to determining they be kept away from departments, so that whether these arrangements satisfy current they can review, as they are supposed to do, tests of judicial independence and impartiality. in an objective, non-judgmental and arms- This is a very laudable and praiseworthy thing length manner. that we are seeing take place; that we can be When we read the overview of this report, assured that the legal processes within the we find that the government—as with so military stand up to any test against what many other things—has not been able to happens out in the real civilian world. The make up its mind about appointments. It Deputy Judge Advocate was also to recom- would appear that the Veterans’ Review mend any changes if necessary. Board is no different, because we have had a The study was also to look at the military change of Principal Member. The appointment justice systems in the United States, the of Mr John Gallagher, who had been the United Kingdom and Canada and to compare Principal Member, ended on 5 February 1997 those systems with that of Australia. As I said and, by that stage, the process for a Principal earlier, the report was expected in June this Member had not been concluded. year. To date, to my knowledge, no such This is a bit unusual, because it has not report has been forthcoming. When this report been the practice to have a significant number appears, it will be interesting to see the of principal members. In fact, there have only Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 7999 been two since 1985. It would have been presume that the government, with its usual fairly apparent to the government when they sloppiness, will not be ready to take any came to power nearly 12 months earlier that action on the material when it receives the this appointment was going to be up for report at the end of 1997. review. However, that did not seem to bother We also looked at the workload they have the government. Again, they had to put in undertaken. I congratulate them on the fact place interim measures, and Mr Bill Cook that they heard a greater number of applica- from New South Wales acted until 7 April, tions than last year, and that there has been a when Brigadier Rolfe, retired, was appointed reduction in waiting time for hearings from on 8 April for two years. I am sure that those 9.5 weeks to 7 weeks. That is something on gentlemen will do a very good job. which the board is to be congratulated. Also, It needs to be brought home to this govern- a total of 7,937 applications were lodged, ment that they are continually late in making compared with approximately 10,000 the significant appointments to boards—to lots of previous year. But it needs to be noted that things—and for that they have to be criticised. we are not comparing apples with apples here, This is not the way to promote harmony and because these figures, as the department says, efficacy in the administration and working of are misleading. Under the department’s newly boards. We saw the same thing happen when introduced section 31 review procedures, the terms of appointment for the other mem- applications for review by the board are not bers of the board were due to expire on 31 counted as lodged with the VRB until the December 1996. In the case of senior mem- section 31 review is complete. (Time expired) bers and members, the appointments had to be Question resolved in the affirmative. extended for six months, and for 12 months for service members. This is just sloppy work Civil Aviation Safety Authority on the part of the government. Debate resumed from 2 October, on motion by Senator Bob Collins: The advertisements for the senior members and members went out in March 1997. Their That the Senate take note of the document. term was due to expire in December 1996. It Senator FORSHAW (New South Wales) is taking the government a couple of months (6.32 p.m.)—The Civil Aviation Safety here and a couple of months there to get their Authority of Australia, as I think all senators act into gear. I think it is an indication of are aware, was established in 1995 following some sloppy administration. Certainly, the a restructuring of the authorities that are advertisements were well received, and there involved in the regulation of air safety in were a lot of applications. The outcome of the Australia. Prior to that time, air safety had selection process will be a subject of the been exclusively in the control of the Civil report at the end of 1997-98. It is not good Aviation Authority. There was also, of course, enough for the government to have this the Bureau of Air Safety Investigation, whose sloppy administration attitude, where they charter was specifically to investigate air cannot get their things ready and up to date; safety incidents. and it is of grave concern. Senators will recall the tragedy of the The plan to merge the appeal bodies ap- Seaview disaster and also the Monarch in- pears to have led the Veterans Review Board quiry. Notwithstanding the fact that, over all into undertaking an internal review of systems the years of aviation in this country, we have and methods of operation in order to ensure had a marvellous record in air safety, it was that it is armed with current information when clearly recognised that there were issues that eventually it is called upon to assess or apply needed to be addressed and that those unfor- particular proposals. One has to wonder how tunate circumstances that I have referred to much time, effort and energy that is taking should not have occurred and may have been up. An IDC has been set up to devise an avoided. implementation strategy and it will report to As a consequence, the previous govern- the government by late 1997. One has to ment’s minister, the member for Kingsford- 8000 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Smith (Mr Brereton), quickly ensured that the National Health and Medical Research regulatory authorities were restructured, and Council the old CAA had its responsibilities re- Debate resumed from 21 October, on arranged. Two bodies were established. motion by Senator West: Airservices Australia was established to look at airport management and such issues as That the Senate take note of the document. flight path management, and the Civil Avia- Senator WEST (New South Wales) (6.37 tion Safety Authority of Australia was given p.m.)—I would love to talk about the grants, the specific task of ensuring a continuation of but I do not think I will because I will start the high standard of air safety. to feel old if I look at how the grants have gone to the people that I knew as residents In the corporate plan, which was released and registrars at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital in August 1997 under the hand of the then 25 or so years ago, people who are now chairman, Justice Fisher, CASA stated its associate professors and professors. This is vision as being: where I get out of that one real fast—but I With the aviation community, create an air safety wish them well in their research! environment which engenders public trust and The topic I want to deal with tonight—and confidence. I started to deal with it the other day, and That is important. In its operations CASA, warned that I would do so again—is immuni- until recent times—up until the time that the sation. I feel extremely strongly about the recently departed minister, the member for essential need for children and people in this Hume (Mr Sharp) took over—was re-estab- community to be immunised. I am old enough lishing that enviable reputation of the highest to remember the poliomyelitis outbreak of standards of air safety in this country. On 1954-55. I am old enough to have lined up as page 2 of the corporate plan, the previous— a schoolchild and put out my arm to get the and only recently resigned—director of Salk vaccine, which was effective against two CASA, Mr Leroy Keith said: of the three strains of polio. I am old enough to have also been lined up The core business of CASA is to regulate the safety as a schoolchild to be given the Sabin vac- of civil aviation for the benefit of the Australian public. This represents a fundamental shift from the cine, which immunised against the third strain concept of ‘the aviation industry’ as our ‘customer’, of polio. I am concerned because, reading to a primary emphasis on public safety. through the report, I read a profile by Associ- ate Professor Margaret Burgess, who talked Again, I emphasise the words ‘public safety’. about recalling seeing 5,000 people lined up in a street in Melbourne years ago just to get It is well known that in recent months this their vaccine. She says that not long ago, in government, under the then minister, Mr the Soviet Union, there were more than Sharp, prior to his forced removal for other 40,000 cases of diphtheria and nearly 2,000 reasons, had turned air safety regulation in deaths. this country on its head. In his blind manic pursuit to get a CASA board that would do I have nursed children who have died from his and the government’s bidding rather than diphtheria, and there was absolutely no need focus upon the issue of public safety, he for it. I have nursed a tiny baby that had essentially set out to destroy that board. He whooping cough, and there was absolutely no sought to have the chairman, Justice Fisher, need for it. The child was too young to be who quite rightly stood up to him, resign. He fully immunised—it was old enough to have then set about trying to stack the board by had only one injection but not the full appointing Dick Smith, the friend of the course—but, because other people had not Liberal Party. I seek leave to continue my had their children immunised, this child remarks later. developed whooping cough. Fortunately, it suffered no side effects. The mother knew Leave granted; debate adjourned. very quickly that there was something wrong Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8001 with her child and took it to hospital, but it ness, it was 4.5 per cent for Infanrix and 29 spent many days there. per cent for triple antigen. I seek leave to That brings me to the decision last week by continue my remarks later. the government to not allow the use of Leave granted; debate adjourned. Infanrix—which is the DTPA vaccine for the diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough Horticultural Research and Development viruses—in the primary immunisation sched- Corporation ule for babies at two, four and six months of Debate resumed from 21 October, on age. It is approved for use in booster doses at motion by Senator West: 18 months and four and five years of age. It That the Senate take note of the document. is approved for those doses because triple antigen—the old one that we all know—was Senator O’CHEE (Queensland) (6.43 not able to be given to children at that age p.m.)—I want to make a number of observa- because they had reactions. tions on horticultural research and development in this country. As honourable senators It is quite widely known that children have know, if we are to be one of the world’s a number of reactions to triple antigen. These finest food exporting nations, we have to be can mostly be settled quite simply with some at the cutting edge of research into the pro- liquid or paediatric panadol. However, it is of ducts which we produce. concern to parents. They do not like to see their children with sore arms and upset. It is The sort of research I am talking about is imperative that the government do everything not just research in terms of improved resist- it can to make available to every baby and ance to disease or pests, nor is it just things every child in this country an injection for like improved research into markets. A whole these three diseases in a form which is going range of things that we do are important to to cause less discomfort. If you have less research: from improving genetic varieties, discomfort, you have a less unsettled child resistance to disease, management practices and you will get greater compliance on the on farms, and the handling of goods after they part of parents. But it does not seem to work leave the farm, to researching the market to like that. ensure that what we are producing is what the market wants. Obviously, a number of the states thought that Infanrix—or whatever they want to call Mr Acting Deputy President Ferguson, as it—was the superior form of immunisation a farmer, you will understand that. You and a superior vaccine. Places like Western cannot just send any product to market—or Australia had already gone ahead with the you can, but you are not going to get the best distribution of it and they have now had to let price. You get the best price by meeting the their doctors know that it is no longer avail- demand of the market for a particular type of able, except where there have been severe product. That is what we have to be doing as side effects and for the older child. If parents a nation in terms of exporting, particularly wish to immunise their child with Infanrix, when we talk about exporting high-value they can certainly do so, but the cost will agricultural products to some of the countries vary between $38 and $65 per dose, to be of South-East Asia. I will give you an exam- obtained by prescription. That is three times ple of the sort of thing I am referring to. $38 to $65, because they have to have three About six or seven years ago, as some of of these immunisations. my colleagues well know, we exported abso- From the information given by the Western lutely nothing by air from far North Queens- Australian department of health, it is apparent land. Last season we exported 3,400 tonnes of that the adverse events within two days of mangoes by air from Cairns alone. Senator immunisation between the two drugs are Hogg is doing some quick arithmetic. He will different. For Infanrix, for local swelling it be aware that that means we exported over was only about 8.9 per cent, while for triple 170,000 trays of mangoes. antigen it was 25 per cent. For local tender- Senator West—How many aircraft? 8002 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Senator O’CHEE—That is an interesting because I was adding up the total of the grant question, Senator West. We realised about six money which flowed to our good state of years ago in far North Queensland that there Queensland. Senator Hogg, you will agree, as was an excess freight capacity in the tourist I do, that Queensland is the finest state in flights that were coming in. So we had fre- Australia and because of our frequency of air quency of flights as well as low cost of flights we have much better opportunities to operation. One of the reasons why it is very export our product by air to neighbouring difficult to succeed in exporting with charter countries of South East Asia than people in planes is the cost. Let me explain, Senator some of the other states. I got as far as West, because I know you have an interest in getting up to the new and value added horti- these matters. We are exporting out of North cultural products— Queensland, out of Cairns, at a cost of 90c to Senator Carr—Do you want another $1 per kilo but generally about 90c in the government grant? This is a pitch for another peak season. grant. Senator West—And the back load? Senator O’CHEE—Senator Carr, if you Senator O’CHEE—There is no back understand anything about exporting, these load—and this is the point—because it is a exports have to stand up on their own or they tourist plane. What happens is: if you use the do not stand up at all. Senator Hogg, I had hold of a 767, it will carry 11 tonnes of added up to $2.454 million of grants to freight. The people who come into North Queensland but I noted that there were some Queensland come for about five days, so 12 more pages of grants, so I am sure the instead of bringing two suitcases they bring figure is substantially higher. (Time expired) one. There leaves about five tonnes in the Question resolved in the affirmative. hold. If you were to do it by charter flight— and I know there are people who say, ‘We Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander want to bring charter planes into wherever’— Social Justice Commissioner you have to understand that the cost will vary Debate resumed from 21 October, on between $2 and $3 because there is no cost motion by Senator Cooney: on the other side. But we succeeded in find- That the Senate take note of the document. ing a way to get into the market and we also Senator CARR (Victoria) (6.49 p.m.)—The found a way of ensuring that the product we Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social were producing was the best possible product Justice Commissioner report for 1996-97 on so that we picked up the premium. We also the operation and the effect of the Native made sure we were producing at the right Title Act is a report under the hand of time of the year. Michael Dodson, who is the Aboriginal and The work of the Horticultural Research and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commis- Development Corporation is very significant, sioner. This is the final report that Mr Dodson and I want to say with a great degree of pride will put to this parliament under section 209 that this government has been instrumental in of the Native Title Act 1993. I think it is improving the level of funding. For example, appropriate that the Senate take note of this the revenue from government this year is report and, hopefully, take the opportunity to $11.867 million. That is up from $10.292 debate its contents. million last year. That is more than a 14 per It is an extremely well-presented, well- cent increase in government grants to the researched and well-argued report. This report Horticultural Research and Development highlights some of the grave concerns that are Corporation. As a result of that, the total being expressed across this country in regard grants they have given out has increased from to the government’s response to the High $18.801 million to $21.364 million. Court’s Wik decision. This report highlights I was rather hoping that Senator Hogg, my the view that nothing is more important to the friend on the other side, might have been kind shaping of our national character than the way enough to speak for about five more minutes in which our elected representatives respond Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8003 to the High Court’s decision in the Wik case. sought not to educate but to inflame and to The report states: highlight racial tension in this country. As Our Parliament’s response to this Bill will provide highlighted in this report: a measure of the values by which we live and work Wik was a "conservative" judgment, "carefully together as a nation. securing the Crown guarantee’s status quo." These are very strong sentiments. This report The report also highlights: reflects the very deep concerns and sentiments that are being expressed across the country. There is nothing to suggest: . . . that this regime of co-existence is somehow a This report highlights, as Mr Noel Pearson striking innovation in property law. Every law has indicated, that the Wik peoples put a student knows that more than one person may have simple argument to the High Court in June an interest in the same land. There is nothing this year—that is, the rights of pastoralists to revolutionary in the High Court’s finding that the their pastoral leases were in no way under rights of the Aboriginal people can co-exist with challenge and the native title rights of tradi- rights of pastoral lease holders. tional owners could coexist with the pastoral- When it comes to the issue of coexistence, the ists’ rights. They did not challenge the rights fact remains that there are far greater levels of the pastoralists; indeed they urged the court of uncertainty for Aboriginal people than to confirm pastoral rights. The Aboriginal there are for pastoralists. I think that this is a people said that all they were seeking was point that is often overlooked. recognition of coexisting rights. What we are seeing across this country is That is essentially the way in which the that the Aboriginal people’s response to this pastoral industry in this country has devel- judgment has been, as characterised in the oped throughout its history. What this report words of the report, ‘rational, responsible, does, and I think it is unusual in a govern- constructive and firm’. There has been a ment report, is provide a very good historical constant theme in the responses of the will- essay on the way in which the pastoral indus- ingness of indigenous people to accommodate try has existed and was founded upon the the legitimate rights and needs of the pastoral premise of coexistence. An article by Ms Ann industry, government and miners. There has McGrath is included in this report. It draws been no rush to lodge claims over pastoral upon the work of prominent Australian histor- lands. In fact, on the contrary, there have ians and demonstrates conclusively that been suggestions by prominent Aboriginal fundamental premise, that the basis of our spokespeople in this country that there ought pastoral industry in this country has rested to be a moratorium to allow for a negotiated upon the foundation stone of coexistence and reasonable settlement based on real between black and white Australians. That has certainty. (Time expired) been the case throughout much of our history. Senator O’CHEE (Queensland) (6.54 Of course, there have been other instances p.m.)—I cannot let Senator Carr’s comments of responses to white settlement, particularly go without remark. If you listen to Senator in the north and west of Australia. That is Carr, he would have you believe that, and I also the situation in my own state. But the think he just concluded by saying, there has fundamental premise has been that, despite been no rush to make native title claims in the massacres, despite the wars, despite the this country. I do not know what the situation appalling treatment, the pastoral industry has is in Victoria, but let me say very clearly that coexisted with the rights of Aboriginal people. the situation in Queensland is that there has This report highlights that the High Court’s been a massive rush of native title claims. Let decision was a confirmation of the rights of me make my position very clear on those pastoralists. There is great irony in the way in native title claims. If an area is genuinely which this matter has been debated in the vacant crown land and has not been set aside public arena, the way in which this govern- for a particular purpose, then it is perfectly ment has sought to stir up racial intolerance, reasonable to say that, if the Aboriginal and the way in which this government has people succeed, they should in fact be given 8004 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 title to it. But, better than native title, I said that native title cannot be owned by a believe they should be given freehold title to private individual; it must be owned by a that land. corporation. What the previous government My point of view from a Queensland did in its Native Title Act was to destroy the perspective is very simple. Queensland has opportunity for Aboriginal and islander people been a state since 1859. If the government of who in fact achieve native title to own it in Queensland in almost 140 years has done their own right. It has to be owned by a nothing with a bit of vacant crown land—has corporation. It is yet again a perpetuation of not even set it aside for a purpose—it is a bit this sort of feudal serfdom that holds back the churlish to say that, if Aboriginal or islander economic aspirations of Aboriginal and people can prove that they have native title to islander people. it, they should not be given unfettered access I well recall the debate in this chamber on to utilise that land. In fact, that is the point I that particular night when I argued long and made to the Central Queensland Land Council loud that this provision of the bill should be earlier this year. They said, ‘Nobody has ever taken out and that Aboriginal and islander suggested to us that we should have freehold people should be allowed to own land them- title to the land. Would you support our selves if they get native title to it, and they having freehold title where we can prove a should be allowed to own it as freehold title. claim?’ I said, ‘Absolutely. I would support That is not possible and the land is effectively your having freehold title, because I think it alienated. It cannot be transferred. I believe is the only way to achieve real economic that the Labor government in the Native Title impoundment of Aboriginal people.’ Act did a gross disservice to people who are One of the great problems we have is that, crown leaseholders in this country and also in many places, Aborigines are allowed to did a gross disservice to Aboriginal and live on land, particularly in reserves, but they islander people. That, I believe, is one the are never allowed to own it. The great tragedy great tragedies—that all of this carry-on does is if you do not have a sense of ownership, not actually advance the interests of either you do not have a sense that there is some- group of people as it sits at the moment. thing you can pass on to your children. I It is my longstanding view that we should believe it is tragic that Aboriginal people may end the paternalism as it applies to Aboriginal be allowed to occupy land on Aboriginal people and give them a chance to own the reserves but in many cases can never own it. land. But Senator Carr cannot deny the fact What we really have in many of these that we have seen in the state of Queensland Aboriginal communities is just a perpetuation wholesale native title claims over large of medieval feudalism. These Aboriginal chunks of Queensland, and that is reprehen- people are in no better a position than feudal sible. serfs in the Middle Ages. That is a tragedy. Debate (on motion by Senator West) What is also a tragedy is that, under the adjourned. existing Native Title Act, it is impossible for a private individual to acquire native title Consideration rights. For all the noise that we have heard Question resolved in the affirmative on the from the other side of the chamber, the one following orders of the day without further thing which is undeniable is this: in Mabo debate during consideration of government and Others and the state of Queensland, the documents: High Court created private property rights in favour of those islander people. Army and Air Force Canteen Service Board of Management—Report for period 30 January 1996 It recognised the fact that they had had, to 31 January 1997. (Senator Forshaw) prior to white settlement, a system of private Treaties—Text, together with national interest property rights over land. When the Native analysis—Bilateral—Project Arrangement Title Act was introduced, a provision was between the Government of Australia and the inserted into that act when it was a bill that Government of the United States of America on Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8005

Data Fusion for Over-The-Horizon Radar. these people. The problems listed in the report (Senator Carr) include low piece rates, which translate to low Industry Research and Development Board— hourly rates; impossible deadlines for the Report for 1996-97. (Senator Murray) completion of work; late payment, underpay- Fisheries Research and Development Corpora- ment or non-payment for completed work; tion—Report for 1996-97. (Senator O’Brien) rejection of work; unreimbursed expenses; Australian Fisheries Management Authority— physical and verbal harassment from inter- Report for 1996-97. (Senator West) mediaries; blackmail, threats, coercion and Land and Water Resources Research and Devel- bribes; substandard working environments; opment Corporation—Report for 1996-97. and worries associated with combining work (Senator Margetts) with family responsibilities. A motion to take note of the following One would hardly think that this was going document was moved and debate adjourned. on in this day and age, but these are the Australia New Zealand Food Authority—Report findings of this committee and, from my for 1996-97. (Senator Margetts) experience of what goes on out there in the COMMITTEES real world, I have no doubt that their findings are, in effect, very much correct. The recom- Economics References Committee mendations that the committee brought down Report were seeking to redress those problems that Debate resumed from 2 October 1997, on are being confronted by those people out motion by Senator Hogg: there—people who invariably are isolated and have no-one to turn to for assistance. So the That the Senate take note of the report. report, indeed, was welcome. Senator HOGG (Queensland) (7.01 p.m.)—I want to take a few moments on this There are a number of case studies in the particular report. Whilst I had an opportunity report. One sees the case of the Nguyen to comment on the response that the govern- family, and it describes the conditions under ment had tendered, the irony was that I did which the Nguyen family had been outwork- not have a chance to speak to the report that ers. They had been outworkers for seven was put forward by the committee itself—and years. The report states: a very fine report it was too. Over the last five years they have never received rates equivalent to the award have had to rely on Senator West—It had a very good chair. their daughters to assist them with work over the Senator HOGG—Yes. It clearly focused last five years. on the difficulties that were being experienced They say in the report that the average work- by people who were outworkers in our soci- ing day was 12 to 14 hours a day seven days ety. These people are almost outcasts and a week. This is the problem being confronted lepers in terms of any industrial rights and by people who have little or no knowledge of industrial justice. the system. The highlight of the report, as far as I am What the government has set about doing concerned, is a case study which I will come with its industrial relations reform has been to to in a few moments. It is interesting to note dismantle the system which may in some way that the report identified that most of the protect these people. It is almost incredible to outworkers were migrant women and were say that this is going on in Australia. It is not aged between 25 and 35. The report identified going on in some Third World nation. It is that very few had English language skills and not going on overseas somewhere which we very few were able to find work elsewhere. have never heard of; it is happening here in This really goes to highlight how low on the Australia. To that extent, it is of real concern. food chain in respect of dignity these people It goes on to say: are. The Nguyens have four children aged between 18 The inquiry itself was seeking to address and three years old. The children work at the the problems that are being confronted by machines sowing from the age of 13. Before this 8006 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 age, they help with ancillary tasks—turning gar- people in this way in this day and age. Whilst ments out, folding, sorting, bundling and cutting I spoke to the government response to this threads. The children assist for an average of three report before actually speaking to the report, hours at night and up to 10 hours a day on the weekend. On average, the children work 35 hours I thought that the government response was per week. feeble at best and failed to take up the cudgel to protect the people who are least able to This is supposed to be an enlightened society. protect themselves. That is what we should be This report should be made compulsory about in this nation. We should not worry reading for many people to see the exploit- about the high-fliers and those who are ation that went on out there in the market- making exorbitant profits and living in the lap place, and still does go on. It is a real indict- of luxury. ment on the morality that exists in our society that we let this thing persist, and the response I would commend this report to anyone as that was offered by the government was it gives a view of what we should not have in feeble to say the least. The only response to our society. I would recommend to people the problem of the likes of the Nguyen family that they be wary of the exploitation of came from the agreement that was worked out people in our society for the sake of the between a number of retailers and people exorbitant profits which are made by those working in the industry and the ACTU. That usuries out there who seek nothing other than particular agreement was there to assist these to feather their own nests. people who were otherwise badly treated. Senator CARR (Victoria)—I seek leave to That, to me, is what this place is really continue my remarks later. about—exposing these people, exposing the Leave granted; debate adjourned. problems that they are confronted with, exposing those who would exploit them and Foreign Affairs and Trade Committee: seeing that those problems are addressed. This Joint place is not about just relying on some mysti- Report cal power that will take these people out of Debate resumed from 2 October, on motion their problem, out of their difficulties; it is by Senator Calvert: about helping them in a positive and sensible way. It goes on to say: That the Senate take note of the report. It is not uncommon for the Nguyens to be given Senator SANDY MACDONALD (New work to be completed within five days but the South Wales) (7.11 p.m.)—I rise to speak on following day they receive calls from the intermedi- the report of the Joint Committee on Foreign ary to finish the work earlier. They have often been Affairs, Defence and Trade entitled ANZUS pressured to finish the order in 3-4 days and have after 45 years: Seminar proceedings, 11-12 had to go without sleep for at least one day to August 1997. This was an important seminar complete the order. because it looked at the ANZUS alliance If we can stamp out this sort of practice then which is 45 years old. ANZUS is a security it is a positive for our society. When you read treaty and alliance that was signed by Austral- the ages of the children in the Nguyen family ia, New Zealand and the US on 1 September it makes it all the more shameful that we are 1951 and ratified on 29 April 1952. It came still resorting to the exploitation of child out of the relationship that Australia had with labour in this nation to provide cheap goods the United States in World War II and with to the retailer, who then puts on an exorbitant New Zealand a long time before. mark-up. We as unsuspecting consumers go This treaty has been a central pillar of our out and pay for these goods, having no idea national security policy for 45 years. Our of the pain, suffering and inconvenience bilateral relationship with the United States which has been put into those goods by the has progressed remarkably well because of it. people who make them. I think that fundamentally Australia’s view of The case of the Nguyen family highlights the world has been seen substantially through just how sick our society is if we still treat the close relationship that we have had with Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8007 the United States. I think that is true of Question resolved in the affirmative without governments of all political persuasions further debate on the following orders of the during the last 45 years. It is an expectation day during consideration of committee reports of the Australian population that we have a and government responses. strong relationship with the United States Treaties—Joint Standing Committee—10th even though we may have differences of report—Treaties tabled in Parliament on 17 June opinion with them and may seek to open up and 26 August 1997 (Senator Heffernan) some of the joint facilities for accountability Regulations and Ordinances Committee— and management reasons. Certainly our Paper—A breach of the committee’s principles relationship with the United States has been (Senator O’Chee) substantially based on that strong ANZUS Community Affairs References Committee— relationship. Report—CJD settlement offer (Senator Bishop) It is as important now as ever—and as the ADJOURNMENT tiger economies in south and east Asia devel- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT op and the strategic balance in our region (Senator Jacinta Collins)—Order! Consider- changes and has changed—that the ANZUS ation of committee reports and government alliance and treaty continues. The biggest responses has now concluded, and I propose structural change to ANZUS was New the question: Zealand’s prohibition of nuclear powered ships visiting New Zealand which happened That the Senate do now adjourn. in the mid-1980s. The joint standing commit- Orphans of the Empire tee believes that for Australia and the region there remain important advantages in main- In the Shadow of the Cross taining ANZUS in good repair. Senator McKIERNAN (Western Australia) (7.15 p.m.)—On 2 October, in the adjourn- Although the trilateral activities no longer ment debate in this chamber, I made reference take place because of New Zealand’s exclu- to a book that was about to be launched on sion by the US—they view New Zealand’s the following Monday, 6 October. The book membership as merely suspended—the US was called Orphans of the Empire, and it was fully understands and welcomes Australia’s to be launched by David Hill. Unfortunately, continuing relationship with our very near and I was not able to be present at the launch, dear neighbour. That is occurring all the time. even though I had been invited and, indeed, New Zealand have agreed to buy two Anzac get a couple of mentions within the book. class vessels from Australia and have indicated that they would buy another one. I hope One thing I did forget to make mention of they reconsider a recent decision not to add was the author of the book. I seek now to to the two Anzac class vessels they have correct that mistake. Now that I have had the agreed to buy. It is important at this time to opportunity to read parts of the book—I have take stock of the relationship that has served not completed it all—I want to make some Australia well, has served the region well and remarks on the content of the book itself. will hopefully continue. Alan Gill is the author of the book Orphans of the Empire. He is a journalist of some 35 Question resolved in the affirmative. years standing, and he was a religious writer for the Sydney Morning Herald for 17 years. Consideration In 1985, he was awarded the Walkley award. Consideration of motion to take note of the In 1995, he was made a member of the Order following committee report was adjourned: of Australia for services to the media. The book is not for those who wear their Electoral Matters—Joint Standing Committee— Report—industrial elections: Report of the emotions on their shirt sleeves. It is a stark inquiry into the role of the Australian Electoral reminder of the treatment this country deliv- Commission (AEC) in conducting industrial ered to many young children who were elections (Senator Hogg) brought here—some without their parents’ 8008 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 consent. Some parents were not even told have reflected poorly on the Catholic Church they had been brought out here. It is a book in Australia. that can leave somebody with low control An article that appeared on page 5 of the over their emotions close to tears, because it Australian on 26 September 1997 is headlined is very graphically written. The reason it is so ‘Public bash, abuse Catholic priests’. Part of graphically written is that Alan Gill spoke to the article states: many of the individuals themselves. The book Catholic priests had been bashed, publicly abused is not light reading. It is not a book that you and their homes subject to graffiti attacks in would want to take to bed with you and read unprecedented displays of hostility, a senior Bishop before you go to sleep. It is very disturbing, said yesterday. recounting what those children went through. Bishop of Sydney Geoffrey Robinson said the In an excerpt on the back of the book, incidents could be linked to public anger directed Geraldine Doogue says: at priests over child abuse allegations. Orphans of the Empire is unusually affecting, hard Bishop Robinson is the co-chairman of the to put down but very painful to read too, at times. church’s national committee for professional For the extra light it casts upon the Australian-Irish standards which is drafting a code of conduct to Catholic culture that helped form me, with its warts counter sex abuse scandals. and its well-meaning, I am especially grateful. It is very regrettable that articles such as that Geraldine Doogue is obviously well known to appear in our media. Now that a number of everybody in this chamber. I commend Alan things have happened in our community, I Gill for putting down this part of Australian hope we will not be seeing reports of priests history. I certainly look forward to reading the or anybody else being bashed or abused in rest of it. Perhaps at some later time I might public or, indeed, even in private. come in and recount some of the stories that There have been a number of developments are in the book. occur in this record of history—it is not a Another book dealing with much the same particularly proud record of Australian his- subject has arrived on my desk in the last tory—and this book by Bruce Blyth records week or so. This one is called In the Shadow some of them. Justice is close for some of the Cross: The Story of VOICES: How the people, but it is not there for each and every Christian Brothers’ Victims Fought for Jus- one of the victims and probably never will be. tice, and the author is Bruce Blyth. On the But at least now there is public recognition by back cover, Bruce talks about this book being the church authorities, at least in Western a crusade for truth and justice. To a certain Australia, that some things were not all that extent, In the Shadow of the Cross is a record they should be. In doing that, they have of at least a part achievement in that crusade accepted some of the blame, indeed, are for truth and justice. moving towards reconciliation and also I was reminded in glancing through the paying some small measures of compensation. book—again, I have not had the opportunity Bruce Blyth and the membership of VOIC- to read each and every part of it because of ES have to be commended and congratulated pressures of parliament and of the committees for their efforts. Their struggle over the years of parliament—of some comments that I made was not easy. It was very difficult, particular- in the Senate some four years ago, in 1993, ly in the early stages, to get acceptance that when I said that the possibility of a cover-up the allegations that the individuals were on allegations of child abuse within the four making were indeed true. I came into the institutions in Western Australia was reflect- issue only because certain individuals—some ing on the Catholic Church as a whole. That of whom speak with an accent similar to was not something I had wished to happen. mine—approached my office seeking my My former colleague and former senator John assistance for them to get their identity back, Panizza joined with me in the hope that that to get their name back and to get themselves was not going to happen to the church, but it a passport or an identity document in order does appear that perhaps the events in West- for them to travel to where they had been ern Australia and in other places in Australia brought from—in some cases it was Northern Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8009

Ireland and in some it was the northern parts of taxation for all businesses, not just those of the Republic of Ireland. We were able to privileged enough to get a government hand- assist some of them in getting those docu- out; and to effectively deregulate industrial ments, but we could not in every case heal relations if Labor and the minor parties in this the hurt that was deep in their hearts. chamber will permit it. Of course a couple of I think that justice is getting close for the nights ago we saw the extraordinary resolu- victims. I commend Bruce Blyth and the tion of this chamber against the exemption of membership of VOICES. I also commend the small businesses from unfair dismissal laws— Catholic Church and those in authority within a job destroying decision if ever there were the church for the achievements they have one. We also need to fix the waterfront, to made to date. I do not think the war—if that continue competition policy development, and descriptive term can be put to it—is over, but to identify and remove distortions that protect certainly it has gone a long way towards some sectors at the expense of others. addressing the wrongs that occurred in the The government’s scorecard on macro- past. economic reform so far is impressive. I will come back to that if time permits. But the Industry Policy government does recognise that there is a role Senator COONAN (New South Wales) to play in providing incentives to industry for (7.25 p.m.)—Earlier today Senator Cook growth and development. Arguments about moved general business motion No. 826 incentive schemes tend to downplay the relating to the government’s industry policy. fundamental fact that, under Labor, all too I was, in fact, on the speakers’ list and did often such incentives were little more than not get reached before the time for the debate business welfare involving a transfer from had expired. I was so astounded by some of Australian taxpayers—and, in effect, from the claims made during the debate that I wish other efficient businesses—to those industries to take up some of those matters in the that succeeded in a bit of special pleading to adjournment debate tonight. government to justify handouts. Not only does this result in sectoral distortions but it is The very terms in which that motion was based on dubious and untested assumptions couched indicate Labor’s fundamental confu- that the trickle-down effect actually results in sion as to what actually underpins good net economic gains for Australia. industry policy. There has never been any shortage of advice given to governments of While there can be no doubt that Australia either persuasion about what will assist needs to encourage export competitiveness industry. Currently, the government is con- and exploit our position in the region, the templating the Mortimer report, the Golds- recent destabilisation in the South-East Asian worthy report, the Cutler report and the Metal economy must lead us to question the as- Trades Industry Association report on the sumption that what works in Asian economies need for proactive investment. Whilst shortly automatically works in Australia—it does not. the government will be announcing its re- Unfortunately, Labor had 13 years to develop sponse to this plethora of recommendations a good industry policy and to get the funda- and encouraging investment and growth in mentals right. It failed pretty dismally. Under Australian business, there cannot be any Labor, the manufacturing sector was forced to reasonable doubt that the most effective shed over 200,000 jobs and showed no net industry policy for Australia is, and will growth in employment for 12 years. So it was remain, fixing the economic fundamentals so more than a little ironic that Senator Cook’s that growth can be directed through the motion actually sought to reinstate a job market. target of 200,000 in the manufacturing sector. To be able to do this we need to get a fairer Business investment declined to its lowest and more efficient tax system that allows us level on record. Australia’s average produc- to compete internationally; to get a well- tivity improvement was just 0.9 per cent, half designed tax system that delivers a lower rate the world’s average for this century; foreign 8010 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 debt increased by 800 per cent; real house- investment are major factors driving growth hold incomes decreased by nine per cent; a and likely to produce new job opportunities. million people were left unemployed; and— But proposals for R&D incentives posed in here is the clincher—Australia slipped from the Mortimer report require careful and 18th to 24th in terms of business expenditure considered evaluation before they are adopted. on research and development among OECD Unlike Labor, this government had the nations. Despite the promises of the Labor courage to get rid of the inefficiencies of government to make Australia the clever syndication. Even Senator Cook has said the country, in 1995 we imported $20 billion previous syndication system was ‘an escalat- worth of technology developed by other ing and unsustainable cost to the taxpayer’. countries. So what can he possibly have meant when he What is more alarming for business invest- called today for a reverse to cuts in industry ment however is that Senator Cook seems programs? Does the opposition know whether unrepentant. He is still intent on picking it is coming or going on industry policy? winners rather than improving the conditions The R&D start program, which replaces for all businesses to flourish. He was reported syndication, provides $520 million over four in the Australian Financial Review on 17 years for genuine R&D. It is better targeted October this year as misty eyed about the towards larger grants in areas of high-risk virtues of the now discredited development research and development. R&D funding import finance facility, the DIFF scheme. The under the previous government—where I headline was: ‘Another DIFF needed, says think Senator Cook held the portfolio, al- Cook.’ though memories fade quickly—encouraged Senator Cook is advocating that the com- a focus on financial returns for wealthy pany Transfield should again be given a promoters and investors, rather than generat- mixed credit taxpayer funded loan to help it ing an interest in genuine R&D. win a contract for $178 million to build four The government’s R&D start program patrol boats for the Philippines. It prompted announced the establishment of the Innovation Janet Hunt, the Executive Director of the Investment Fund, which will provide $130 Australia Council for Overseas Aid, to write million in government funding on a two-for- to the Financial Review on 22 October. Her one basis giving access to venture capital for letter begins: small technology based enterprises. It will Senator Peter Cook’s call for a "son of DIFF" to make available a total of about $200 million assist Transfield export patrol boats is a worrying for commercialisation of R&D and fills a sign. longstanding gap in the marketplace. Indeed it is. In case it has escaped Senator The need for access to early stage venture Cook’s attention, the Simons review of the capital was simply ignored by the Labor DIFF scheme recommended against any tied government. The Innovation Investment Fund mixed credit scheme and warned against the is based on successful venture capital models use of aid to promote trade agendas. established in the United States and Israel, Another example of Labor’s backward and will help to ensure a much greater return looking attitude to industry policy was on R&D expenditure. Australia needs such Labor’s call for intervention in the recent investment in R&D in order to be competitive BHP rationalisation of its steel division in and to meet the challenges of the next centu- Newcastle. The call for intervention would ry. have simply deferred the hard decisions, long Senator Cook’s motion then called for a overdue, that BHP needed to take to modern- recommitment to a manufacturing jobs target ise to make itself internationally competitive. of $200,000. As I said a little earlier, it is a I doubt that there would be anyone in this bit rich, as it was the manufacturing sector chamber who fails to recognise the import- that was forced to shed over 200,000 jobs and ance of incentives for a national research now Labor wants this government to put these development effort and that innovation and jobs back. Of course, now manufacturing is Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8011 globally cost competitive and is growing at the NCA committee and the conduct of twice the rate of all exports, mostly without Messrs Richter and Walker. Professor Davis government assistance. said: Whatever response the government does At the Committee hearing on 12 June 1997, Mr make to the various industry recommenda- Richter submitted that at least those transcripts tions before it, such initiatives will simply be were confidential. He said, to quote from the proof Hansard Report of that meeting, at p 882: ‘Senator ineffective unless the artificial impediments to Conroy is purporting to read from a transcript of business success are removed. Reform of the evidence which was given in confidence. That tax system, restrictions on industrial relations confidentiality was never lifted. His Honour Mr and removal of those, will have a far greater Justice Vincent ruled that it was illegally obtained impact on the success of our economy than and excluded the evidence.’ any amount of business handouts. This Professor Davis went on to say: government has got its priorities right. The first thing to be said about this submission is that it appears to confuse, on the one hand, the Parliamentary Privilege propriety of the way in which the evidence was Senator CONROY (Victoria) (7.34 p.m.)— obtained and its admissibility in criminal proceed- I would like to start by acknowledging some ings with, on the other hand, the status of the visiting members of my family in the gallery: documents as confidential. Those two issues must be kept completely separate. Whether a document my uncle, Ed Walker, and cousin, David. has been obtained legally or illegally has no How are you? bearing on whether it should be regarded as I am glad Senator Coonan is here and I confidential. hope she has got time to stay for a moment, ...... because I am speaking on an issue that Sena- Furthermore, the mere fact that evidence is ruled tor Coonan raised in the parliament on 24 inadmissible in a criminal trial is irrelevant to the September. question of whether the evidence is confidential. Another recent controversial use of parliamentary ...... privilege has involved Senator Conroy reading into The law relating to confidentiality is still in a state Hansard a transcript of interviews said to be by of development, but one thing which would appear National Crime Authority investigators with Mr to be relatively clear is that a claim that a particular John Elliott and others—evidence that had been document is confidential must be based on some ruled inadmissible in the Supreme Court of Vic- legal principle. Merely to assert confidentiality, toria. without some legal backing for that claim, is not She goes on to say: enough. Such a claim may be based, say, on a . . . aspects of the matter concerning whether the contract between two parties, or on principles of protection of parliamentary privilege extends to equity or as an aspect of the property rights which matters covered by the secrecy provisions of the a person has in information, or in a document. NCA have been referred to the Senate Committee ...... of Privileges... The only provision of the Act which appears to be And further on: even remotely relevant is section 51, dealing with It raises the spectre of individuals being persecuted secrecy. But that section merely prohibits a member or being accused in a public forum with little or no of the Authority, or a member of its staff, from effective redress. If the legal system has failed to revealing information obtained by the Authority, achieve a fair balance between the interests of the otherwise than in connection with the performance person or persons accused of criminal or civil of his or her duties under the Act. wrongdoing and the public interest in having that This will come as no surprise to anybody in person brought to justice, it is, in my view, for the this chamber, but I am not actually an em- legal system to address. ployee of the National Crime Authority. I inform the Senate that a number of legal Therefore, I am not bound by the secrecy opinions have been sought recently. I have provisions of the NCA Act. It is quite clear one from Professor Davis, Professor of Law that that is the case. Further: at ANU, who regularly works for a number of In particular, subsection 51(3) permits, but does not the parliamentary committees. We have the require, a member of the Authority to provide, in benefit of his view on what transpired before Court, information which has been obtained in the 8012 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 course of an inquiry, where the divulging of that With all respect to counsel, I find it information is "necessary . . . for the purposes of very hard to support this contention. a prosecution instituted as a result of an investigation carried out by the Authority in the performance That is about as close as lawyers get to of its functions" (see paragraph 51(3)(b)). saying, ‘What a crock. What an absolute That is absolutely clear. If you collect infor- furphy.’ mation, it is allowed to be tendered in court. What you had here was a deliberate attempt That is perfectly clear. If NCA staff give by counsel representing Elliott and Scanlon to material to the courts as part of legal pro- impugn me for my actions in my duties as a ceedings against individuals, that material is senator. They suggested that I was doing part of the public documents. They are not illegal things and that I had in my possession private, not secret or not illegally obtained, illegally obtained documents. It was purely a but public documents. Professor Davis went stunt because they did not want to answer any on to say: questions about the evidence that their own Although some of the documentary evidence people gave before the NCA. That is all that tendered by the NCA was found to be inadmissible happened at that committee. for a variety of reasons, much of it was accepted without objection by the defence. As the transcript Then, when I read into Hansard the docu- of the committal hearing shows (at p 199), the ments that are publicly available on request, contents of all of the documentary evidence which I am accused of being similar to Franca Arena Mr Richter now claims is confidential was made for abusing parliamentary privilege. It is a sad available to the press, subject only to the members day when qualified legal people mislead the of the press checking with counsel that any part parliament. Senator Coonan—an eminent which they proposed to use was not inadmissible for one reason or another, or was not hearsay. lawyer in New South Wales, I am told—runs this furphy out that I am tainted in the same At the trial before Justice Vincent, the evidence which the NCA proposed to lead was initially way as Franca Arena in New South Wales. embargoed and not permitted to be released to the I am sorry that Senator Coonan has left the media. The reason for that was that anyone who chamber. I advised her beforehand, as proto- was to be a member of the jury should not be col, that I would be speaking about what she allowed to discover the nature of the evidence to be led, otherwise than in court. But when his had to say. For her to suggest on the basis of Honour ruled that most of the evidence was my actions—which she has not investigated inadmissible, and the prosecution declined to lead and has not sought to clarify with the NCA any evidence against the accused, the embargo on committee—that the Senate’s parliamentary release of the material held by the NCA was lifted. privilege needs to be changed is an absolute Lifted—no embargo, no secrecy provisions. misleading— It was lifted; they were public documents. Senator O’Chee—On a point of order, Professor Davis went on to state: Madam Deputy President: Senator Conroy has There was hence no judicial ruling that the material been given a lot of latitude here tonight, but be kept confidential, or not released to the public. it is not parliamentary for him to suggest that All you have to do to get these transcripts is Senator Coonan was somehow attempting to go down to Justice Vincent’s court and mislead the Senate. That is quite contrary to request them. It is that simple. Or, if you standing order 193. I suggest, Madam Deputy happen to know somebody who was given a President, that you instruct Senator Conroy to copy during the trial, you can ask them for a confine his remarks to those which are parlia- copy. That is not illegally obtained. What has mentary. been said is an absolute furphy. Further: The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—What However, as a result of further discussion before Senator Conroy said was not unparliamentary. the Committee, especially by Mr Walker QC, the There was no accusation of deliberate Prosecution Case Statement was described by that counsel as "a purely confidential, private docu- misleading. I will listen to what Senator ment" . . . and therefore one which ought not to be Conroy says very carefully. tabled before the Committee. Senator CONROY—In conclusion, I repeat Professor Davis said: that Elliott’s lawyers and Scanlon’s lawyers Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8013 have been running around this country trying that view, but I ask honourable senators: is to suggest that I have been acting illegally. that the best purpose to which this parliament They have made that statement many times. can be put? I would say no. It is not true. They have misled the commit- There are many things that this parliament tee, they have misled this parliament, and can be used for. There are many things which they were trashed by the full bench on appeal are appropriate for debate in this place, but I in Victoria where even Judge Brooking would have thought that if Senator Conroy suggested, in the harshest possible legal wanted to use his undoubted talents he could terms, that Richter QC was not telling the have used them in a much more constructive truth in evidence before Justice Brooking. and creative fashion. Moreover, I am disap- Parliamentary Privilege pointed that Senator Conroy persists in using this to justify his unjustifiable conduct in that Senator O’CHEE (Queensland) (7.45 Senate committee. p.m.)—I had not intended to rise, but I must make a number of observations having heard Quite frankly, I would not conduct myself Senator Conroy. in that way. I know that most senators would not conduct themselves in that way because Senator Conroy—You were listed. they see that conduct as unbefitting a senator. Senator O’CHEE—I was not going to It is for Senator Conroy and his conscience to make a speech tonight because I had intended wrestle with whether he considers this satis- to speak about another matter which has not factory, but I will have Senator Conroy know transpired. I want to make a number of that there are many people in this chamber observations following Senator Conroy’s who were disappointed, not in a political contribution to the adjournment debate. The sense, but disappointed in a sense of propri- first of those is this. With the greatest respect ety, with the way in which Senator Conroy to my friend Professor Davis, in every legal conducted himself at that hearing for the case there are two sets of lawyers; and one set simple reason that everybody knew that wins and one set loses. What Senator Conroy Senator Conroy was willing to recklessly must understand about legal opinions is that impugn people, be they guilty or innocent, to half of the time they tend to be wrong. I am obtain a political motive. not casting aspersions upon Professor Davis— I can understand why Senator Coonan he is a very fine man and a very fine academ- would compare Senator Conroy’s actions with ic—but, just because Senator Conroy can find those of Mrs Arena in the New South Wales one lawyer who will write an opinion which parliament. If I were forced to make a deci- supports Senator Conroy’s action, it does not sion, I would have to say, leaving my party mean that Senator Conroy’s conduct was hat off, that I would be forced to align myself legal, nor does it mean that Senator Conroy’s with Senator Coonan’s comments rather than conduct was the sort of conduct which should with Senator Conroy’s comments because I be welcomed in this Senate or in the commit- can see very little difference between Mrs tees of this parliament. I want to make that Arena going out and accusing people of being comment very clear. paedophiles—she may have seven boxes of There is a place and I understand that there documents, she may have four, she may have is a role for parliamentarians to use parlia- four folders, she may have absolutely noth- mentary privilege to raise matters of signifi- ing—and Senator Conroy accusing people in cance. I understand that, but there is also a this country of being somehow involved in limit. The limit is decency and respect for the criminal conspiracies just because it suits him freedoms of individuals. What Senator Conroy and his political ambitions. has done has been to utilise the proceedings In this Senate, we begin every day with an of this parliament to conduct a witch-hunt, a invocation that this parliament should serve vendetta, for purely political motives because and prosper the good of the nation. I do not he sees that as advancing the cause of the think that Senator Conroy is doing that and Labor Party in Victoria. It is his right to form that is why I urge Senator Conroy, in the 8014 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 weekend that he has available to him, to give Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage some serious consideration to the moral Protection Act—Declaration under section 9, consequences and the moral guidance of his dated 1 October 1997. actions because I believe it is unfortunately Corporations Act—Accounting Standard— AASB 1002—Events occurring after reporting lacking. date. Senate adjourned at 7.50 p.m. AASB 1026—Statement of cash flows. Life Insurance Act—Actuarial Standard— 4.01—Minimum surrender values and paid-up DOCUMENTS values. Tabling 5.01—Cost of investment performance guarantees. The following documents were tabled by Privacy Act—Public Interest Determination No. the Clerk: 7. Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8015

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

The following answers to questions were circulated:

Minister for Industrial Relations: Media Were the rates per business kilometre for motor vehicle claims in income tax returns for the 1996- Monitoring Services 97 financial year lower than the rates which applied (Question No. 711) for the 1995-96 financial year, if so: (a) how are these rates determined; and (b) what were the rates Senator Robert Ray asked the Minister in:(i) the 1995/96 financial year, and (ii) the representing the Minister for Workplace 1996/97 financial year. Relations and Small Business, upon notice, on Senator Kemp—The answer to the honour- 28 July 1997: able senator’s question is as follows: (1) What was the total cost of media monitoring services, including press clippings, electronic media The rates per business kilometre for motor transcripts etcetera, provided to the Minister’s vehicle expenses for travel of less than 5,000 office in the 1996-97 financial year. business kilometres for the 1996-97 financial year were lower than the rates which applied for the (2) Which agency or agencies provided these 1995-96 financial year. services. However in March 1996 when announcing the (3) What was the total cost of media monitoring rates applicable for 1995-96, the Assistant Treasur- services, including press clippings, electronic media er outlined the 1995 Department of Industrial transcripts etcetera, provided to the department and Relations (DIR) rates and foreshadowed that they its agencies in the 1996-97 financial year. would apply in 1996-97 unless the rates subse- (4) Which agency or agencies provided these quently rose. services. The DIR rates for 1996-97 subsequently fell with the exception of the rate applicable to vehicles with Senator Alston—The Minister for Work- non-rotary engines exceeding 2600 cubic centi- place Relations and Small Business has metres. The foreshadowing of the rate applicable in provided the following answer to the honour- the following financial year was designed to ensure able senator’s question: taxpayers would not face any unexpected income tax liabilities which could occur if they received (1) During the 1996-97 financial year, media allowances based on the 1995-96 rates. monitoring activities for the Minister’s office and the department were costed together on the basis (a) Rates per business kilometre for motor vehicle claims are specified in the Income Tax that the subjects covered were the same for both Regulations. Since the 1986-87 income year, the the Minister’s office and the department. A separate rates have followed the private motor vehicle rates figure, therefore, is not available for the Minister’s for the Commonwealth Public Service set by the office for the 1996-97 financial year. DIR. The DIR rates are set by a subcommittee in (2) Media Monitors. accordance with a Joint Council methodology that (3) The total cost of media monitoring services is prescribed in the Continuous Improvement in the for the department and "the agencies" for the 1996- APS Enterprise Agreement: 1995—1996. The methodology requires a triennial review of the 97 financial year was $87,745.27. This figure rates, with an annual adjustment based on the includes the services provided to the Minister’s Private Motoring Component of the Consumer office. The total cost for the 1995/96 financial year Price Index (CPI) in the intervening years. was $134,136.13. The subcommittee comprises representatives (4) Media Monitors, Rehame, Marketrak. from the Department of Work Place Relations and Small Business (formerly known as the Department Taxation: Motor Vehicle Claims of Industrial Relations), Telstra and the Community (Question No. 738) Public Sector Union (CPSU). Senator Colston asked the Minister repre- The triennial review is carried out to ensure rates senting the Treasurer, upon notice, on 4 continue to reflect the approximate cost of running a private vehicle. The review takes into account the August 1997: 8016 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 following vehicle running costs; depreciation, The triennial review further observed that motor interest, comprehensive insurance, third party vehicle sales and production had moved away from insurance, registration, drivers licence costs, vehicles in the small medium range and decided motoring organisation fees, tyres, petrol, repair and that the previous four categories (small, small maintenance intervals. medium, upper medium and large) should be A triennial review was held in 1996 and resulted reduced to three (small, medium and large). The in rates being reduced compared to those rates findings of the triennial review were endorsed which applied for the 1995-96 financial year, due by_the sub committee. to: Following the triennial review for 1996-97, the . significant reductions in interest rates available Assistant Treasure’s Office announced on 3 April from financial institutions; 1997, new rates which would apply for the 1996-97 . improved fuel economy of current vehicles; financial year and foreshadowed rates which may and apply for the 1997-98 financial year. . reduced maintenance costs due to longer (b)(i) the rates for 1995/96 are displayed in the service intervals. following table:

Table 1

Engine capacity of car not pow- Engine capacity of car powered ered by a rotary engine (cubic by a rotary engine (cubic centi- centimetres) metres) Rate per kilometre(cents) Not exceeding 1600 cc Not exceeding 800 cc 48.1 Exceeding 1600 cc but not ex- Exceeding 800 cc but not ex- 54.5 ceeding 2000 cc ceeding 1000 cc Exceeding 2000 cc but not ex- Exceeding 1000 cc but not ex- 56.2 ceeding 3000 cc ceeding 1500 cc Exceeding 3000 cc Exceeding 1500 cc 58.8 (b)(ii) the rates for 1996/97 are displayed in the following table:

Table 2

Department of Environment, Sport and the following federal electorates: Bass, Denison, Territories: Grants and Programs Franklin, Lyons and Braddon; and (b) what was the level of funding provided through the programs (Question No. 792) or grants to each electorate for each of the 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97 financial years; and (c) what Senator O’Brien asked the Minister for the level of funding was budgeted for in each program Environment, upon notice, on 2 September or grant for the 1997-98 financial year. 1997: Senator Hill—The answer to the honour- (a) What programs and/or grants administered by able senator’s question is as follows: the portfolio provide assistance to people living in (a-c) Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8017

Program: Environment Forests

Amount Amount Amount Amount Budgeted Electorate Program/Grant 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 Bass Construction, Forestry Mining and 0 $3,750 0 0 Energy Union (CFMEU)—Forestry Division for Deferred Forest Agree- ment (DFA) participation. Bass CFMEU—Forestry Division for Re- 0 0 $15,000 0 gional Forest Agreement (RFA) participation. Bass Tasmanian Country Sawmillers Feder- 0 0 $5,000 0 ation Ltd—for RFA participation. Bass Australian Forest Growers for RFA 0 0 $2,000 0 participation. Denison Tasmanian Conservation Trust for $25,900 0 0 0 High Conservation Value exercise. Denison Tasmanian Conservation Trust for 0 $3,750 0 0 DFA participation. Denison Tasmanian Conservation Trust for 0 0 $5,000 0 RFA participation. Lyons Forest Protection Society for DFA 0 $3,750 0 0 participation. Lyons Forest Protection Society for RFA 0 0 $5,000 0 participation. Lyons Tarkine National Coalition for RFA 0 0 $5,000 0 participation. Lyons Native Forest Network for RFA par- 0 0 $5,000 0 ticipation. Lyons Forest Collective Friends of the Earth 0 0 $5,000 0 for RFA participation. Lyons St Helens History Room for RFA par- 0 0 $1,000 0 ticipation. Franklin Southern Forests Conservation Group 0 0 $5,000 0 Inc. for RFA participation. Franklin Tasmanian Traditional & Recreational 0 0 $5,000 0 Land Users Federation Inc.—for RFA participation. NB: No grants will be paid to Tasmania in 1997-98 in view of expected completion of the Tasmanian Regional Forest Assessment process. Grants to Voluntary Conservation Organisations (GVCO) Bass GVCO—Launceston Environment $16,205 $16,205 $15,000 Not yet Centre. determined Denison GVCO—The Wilderness Society. $58,151 $58,151 $58,200 Not yet determined Denison GVCO—Tasmanian Conservation $34,096 $34,096 $47,100 Not yet Trust. determined Denison GVCO—Tasmanian Environment $52,587 $52,587 $53,000 Not yet de- Centre. termined Environment Resource Officer Scheme Denison Environment Resource Officer 0 0 $37,000 $55,000 Scheme—Local Government Associa- tion of Tasmania. 8018 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Amount Amount Amount Amount Budgeted Electorate Program/Grant 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 Environment Protection Bass Pilot Study on Microbiological Haz- 0 $7,000 0 0 ards due to Effluent Reuse on River- side Golf Course, Launceston Tas- mania—Ad hoc grant for Masters De- gree student to investigate health risks to users of Riverside Golf Course, Launceston Tasmania that has been irrigated with treated sewage effluent. Bass Tasmanian Regional Environmental 0 0 $300,000 $1,200,000 Remediation Program (TREP)—a 3 year program to improve water quality and amenity of Tasmania’s key rivers by reducing sources of pollu- tion. Five Tamar based projects were funded in the first year. Bass Bass Media—Radio advertising for 0 0 $1,960 0 Tasmania Woodsmoke Campaign. Denison Municipal Association of Tasmania— $50,000 0 0 0 Employment of Environment Re- source officer in Local Government Association. Denison University of Tasmania—Glochant $20,000 0 0 0 Secretariat at the Antarctic Coooperative Research Centre (CRC). Denison University of Tasmania—2nd Year $9,180 0 0 0 Funding Dedicated Greenhouse Re- search. Denison Antarctic CRC University of Tasman- $112,200 0 0 0 ia—1st Year Funding Dedicated Greenhouse Research. Denison CSIRO Division of Oceanography— $72,000 0 0 0 Sea Level Rise Report. Denison University of Tasmania—Attendance $2,000 0 0 0 at Greenhouse ‘94. Denison CSIRO Division of Fisheries—Ocean $16,000 0 0 0 Outlook Conference Denison CSIRO Marine Laboratories— $93,000 0 0 0 Technical Consortium Project on Bioregionalisation Component 3. Denison Tasmanian Conservation Trust $9,440 0 0 0 Hobart—Smogbusters. Denison Tasmanian Conservation Trust 0 $14,429 0 0 Hobart—Smogbusters. Denison CSIRO Division of Oceanography— 0 $9,440 0 0 Assessment of Enhanced Photosynethic uptake of greenhouse gases technology. Denison Greg McGrossen—Attendance at 0 $640 0 0 National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Committee Meeting. Denison Antarctic CRC—3rd Year Dedicated 0 $103,530 0 0 Grants Program. Denison CSIRO Division of Oceanography— 0 $4,500 0 0 1996 review of the National Green- house Response Strategy. Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8019

Amount Amount Amount Amount Budgeted Electorate Program/Grant 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 Denison CSIRO Division of Oceanography— 0 $6,700 0 0 Update of the National Greenhouse Advisory Committee report. "Founda- tions for the Future". Denison University of Tasmania—Glochant 0 $20,000 0 0 Secretariat at the Antarctic CRC. Denison University of Tasmania—Department 0 0 $1,200 $300 of Geography and Environmental Studies—provision of scientific information and related expertise for the National Woodsmoke Education Pro- gram. Denison CR Attwater & VJ Thorp—Tasmania 0 0 $12,500 $2,500 Woodsmoke Campaign Evaluation. Denison CR Attwater & VJ Thorp—Tasmania 0 0 $10,000 $5,000 Woodsmoke Campaign Evaluation Western Australia. Denison WIN TV—TV Air time Tasmania 0 0 $8,000 0 Woodsmoke Campaign. Denison Meadow Mews Shopping Centre— 0 0 $160 0 Casual leasing in mall for Tasmania Woodsmoke Campaign. Denison Tasmanian Senior—Advertising for 0 0 $495 0 Tasmania Woodsmoke Campaign. Denison Commercial Broadcasters Pty Ltd— 0 0 $2,000 0 Radio advertising for Tasmania Woodsmoke Campaign. Denison Printing Authority of Tasmania— 0 0 $16,248 0 50,000 copies of postcard booklets. Denison Salmat—Distribution of "Breathe the 0 0 $2,024 0 Benefits" Campaign. Franklin Tasmanian Regional Environmental 0 0 $595,000 $1,105,000 Remediation Program (TRERP)—a 3 year program to improve water quality and amenity of Tasmania’s key rivers by reducing sources of pollu- tion. Three Derwent based projects were funded in the first year. Franklin Orielton Lagoon remediation pro- 0 0 0 $725,000 ject—a single project to reuse treated sewage for irrigation which otherwise has been discharged into Orielton Lagoon, resulting in degraded water quality and nuisance algal growths. Biodiversity Denison National Wetlands Program 0 0 $15,000 Not yet determined Statewide* Waterwatch $72,200 $75,800 $55,100 Not yet determined Lyons One Billion Trees $35,715 $60,783 $89,140 Not yet determined Braddon One Billion Trees $1,370 $24,200 $7,440 Not yet determined Denison One Billion Trees 0 $1,733 $1,040 Not yet determined Franklin One Billion Trees $12,300 $1,733 $1,040 Not yet determined 8020 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Amount Amount Amount Amount Budgeted Electorate Program/Grant 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 Bass One Billion Trees $12,000 N/A $8,640 Not yet determined Lyons Save the Bush $109,187 $218,934 $207,284 Not yet determined Braddon Save the Bush $15,642 $65,550 $51,600 Not yet determined Denison Save the Bush $11,487 $33,834 $32,634 Not yet determined Franklin Save the Bush $30,826 $45,434 $52,634 Not yet determined Bass Save the Bush $7,782 $23,400 $12,900 Not yet determined Lyons Urban Forest 0 0 $30,000 Not yet determined Lyons National Corridors of Green 0 0 $136,256 Not yet determined Bass Endangered Species Program 0 $25,828 $6,250 Not yet determined Lyons Endangered Species Program $73,974 $44,782 $80,451 Not yet determined Denison/ Endangered Species Program $2,086 $26,453 $58,612 Not yet de- Lyons termined Denison/ Endangered Species Program 0 0 79,300 Not yet set- Lyons/Franklin tled. Lyons/Braddon Endangered Species Program 0 0 $54,000 Not yet settled. * Statewide grants. Some of the funds may have been directed to the electorates of Bass, Denison, Franklin, Lyons and Braddon. Australian and World Heritage Details of the Australian and World Heritage related grants have been provided to the honourable senator and additional copies are available from the Senate Table Office. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority Tasmania* Tasmanian Department of Environ- $6,750 0 $2,250 0 ment and Land Management—Ocean Rescue 2000 Program: Rocky Cape Marine Environment Public Educa- tion. * Statewide grant. Some of the funds may have been directed to the electorates of Bass, Denison, Franklin, Lyons and Braddon. Portfolio Marine Group Bass/Lyons Integrated Coastal Zone Manage- $60,000 0 0 0 ment—Break O’Day, Dorest, and Glamorgan through to Spring Bay local councils for integrated Marine and Coastal Management Strategy Braddon/ Coastal and Marine Planning Program 0 0 0 $85,000 Lyons (CMPP)—West North West Tasman- ian Regional Grouping of Councils for Tasmanian Coastal and Marine Strategic Management Plan Coastcare Grants Bass Marine Board of Flinders 0 0 $7,300 0 Bass Flinders Island Council 0 0 $4,310 0 Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8021

Amount Amount Amount Amount Budgeted Electorate Program/Grant 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 Bass Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre 0 0 $5,300 0 Franklin Clifton Beach Coastcare Group and 0 0 $7,500 0 Parks and Wildlife Service Franklin Goat’s Coastcare Group 0 0 $8,700 0 Franklin Verona Sands Coastcare Group Inc 0 0 $10,000 0 Franklin Clarence Landcare and Coastcare 0 0 $7,800 0 Groups Association Franklin Taroona Community Association 0 0 $6,100 0 Lyons East Coastcare Group Swansea 0 0 $2,800 0 Lyons Eastcoast Regional Development 0 0 $15,000 0 Organisation Lyons Orford Primary School 0 0 $5,440 0 Lyons Sorell DHS, Dodges Ferry/Carlton 0 0 $7,500 0 Landcare Lyons White Beach Landcare Group 0 0 $3,000 0 Lyons Roaring Beach Coastcare Group 0 0 $5,200 0 Lyons Tasmanian Conservation Trust Inc 0 0 $4,950 0 Lyons Bay of Fires Landcare Group 0 0 $5,850 0 Lyons Moulting Lagoon Game Reserve 0 0 $6,600 0 Advisory Committee Braddon Coastcare Grants—Sisters Beach Pro- 0 0 $3,000 0 gress Association Braddon Smithton Apex Club Inc 0 0 $3,500 0 Braddon Tasmanian Aboriginal Land Council 0 0 $16,750 0 Aboriginal Corporation Braddon King Island Enterprise Development 0 0 $2,300 0 Inc Braddon Central Coast Council 0 0 $7,900 0 Braddon Stanley Peninsula Landcare Group 0 0 $5,450 0 Statewide* Tasmanian Marine Life Education 0 0 $7,900 0 Program for Schools—Tasmanian Conservation Trust Inc. Statewide* Benefits of Retaining Coastal 0 0 $4,850 0 Vegetations (educative pamphlet)— Save Our Coast Inc. * Statewide grants. Some of the funds may have been directed to the electorates of Bass, Denison, Franklin, Lyons and Braddon. NOTE: $244,000 Commonwealth funding has been budgeted for Coastcare grants for each financial year from 1997/98 to 2000/01 inclusive for Tasmania (electorates of Bass, Denison, Franklin, Lyons and Braddon). Projects for 1997/98 funding will not be assessed until later this year. Program: Antartic Denison Antarctic Science Advisory Commit- $184,811 $219,099 $181,420 $168,511 tee Grants Scheme—University of Tasmania

Denison Antarctic Science Advisory Commit- $14,302 $18,940 $16,000 $16,720 tee Grants Scheme—Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service (Division of the Tasmanian Department of Environ- ment and Land Management) Program: Corporate Services Denison Environmental Education and Infor- 0 $9,620 0 0 mation Grants Program—Nel Smit for production of the ‘My Patch’ publication 8022 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Amount Amount Amount Amount Budgeted Electorate Program/Grant 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 Program: Sport and Recreation Australian Sports Commission Details of Australian Sports Commission grants have been provided to the honourable senator and additional copies are available from the Senate Table Office. Program: Territories and Local Government National Office of Local Government The Commonwealth provides united financial assistance grants to all statutory local government councils—for details refer to the 1996 Local Government National Report provided to all Senators and Members. Following are grants to councils in each of the electorates: Bass Financial Assistance Grants to Local $9,409,974 $9,693,035 $9,803,726 $9,721,453 Government Councils. Denison Financial Assistance Grants to Local $4,541,182 $4,661,668 $4,747,570 $4,691,221 Government Councils. Franklin Financial Assistance Grants to Local $7,292,527 $7,500,840 $7,682,461 $7,643,012 Government Councils. Lyons Financial Assistance Grants to Local $19,681,42 $20,612,95 $21,253,10 $21,348,580 Government Councils. 6 7 6 Braddon Financial Assistance Grants to Local $8,228,435 $8,739,383 $9,082,786 $9,189,101 Government Councils. Lyons Local Government Development 0 $45,000 $15,000 0 Program Statewide* Local Government Development 0 $176,000 $248,000 0 Program * Statewide grants. Some of the funds may have been directed to the electorates of Bass, Denison, Franklin, Lyons and Braddon. NB: Because councils and electorate boundaries do not necessarily coincide, grants to some individual councils are included in the totals for more than one electorate. NB: Funding from the Local Government Development Program is made on the basis of proposals submitted by councils, local government associations and state departments to the Minister. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ed the following information in response to Commission: Grants and Programs the honourable senator’s question: (Question No. 801) All Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Com- Senator O’Brien asked the Minister for mission (ATSIC) programs are available to Indigen- Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs, ous Australians residing in the Tasmanian Federal upon notice, on 2 September 1997: Electorates. Information on the programs is contained in the ATSIC Annual Report. (a) What programs and/or grants administrated by the portfolio assistance to people living in the The funding information relating to these elector- following federal electorates: Bass, Denison, ates for the 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997- Franklin, Lyons and Braddon; and (b) What was 98 financial years is in Attachment A. the level of funding provided through the programs or grants to each electorate for each of the 1994-95, The information provided for 1997-98 is an 1995-96, 1996-97 financial years; and (c) what estimate only as the total distribution of funding level of funding was budgeted for in each program has yet to be determined. or grant to each electorate for the 1997-98 financial year. In some instances, where funding may cross Senator Herron—The Aboriginal and several electorates, the grantee address has been Torres Strait Islander Commission has provid- used to determine the electorate. Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8023

Program $

1994-95

Bass Electorate Business Funding 35,291 Community Housing 84,316 Community Infrastructure 278,970 Community Training 189,626 Enterprise Employment Assistance 10,868 Health 98,514 Public Affairs 18,600 Total Bass 716,185 Braddon Electorate Community Infrastructure 5,500 Community & Youth Support 35,000 Public Affairs 2,800 Total Braddon 43,300 Denison Electorate Business Funding 55,000 Broadcasting 41,240 Community Housing 1,108,367 Community Infrastructure 36,510 Community Training 693,832 Community & Youth Support 239,304 Enterprise Employment Assistance 10,868 Health 693,989 Heritage Protection 39,300 Indigenous Womens Initiatives 42,349 Land Acquisition 652,552 Land Rights 308,000 Language Maintenance 217,000 Law & Justice 831,260 Link-Up 66,500 Public Affairs 11,305 Sport & Recreation 341,581 Substance Abuse 547,364 Total Denison 5,936,321 Franklin Electorate Community & Youth Support 107,500 Public Affairs 2,000 Total Franklin 109,500 Lyons Electorate Business Funding 260,500 Community & Youth Support 147,339 Public Affairs 3,800 Total Lyons 411,639 Total 1994-95 Grant Funding 7,216,945 8024 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Program $

1995-96

Bass Electorate Art and Culture 6,000 Community Economic Initiatives 29,976 Community Training 12,650 Community & Youth Support 47,676 Housing Recurrent 390,180 Infrastructure Recurrent 1,012,475 Land Acquisition & Management 64,260 Public Affairs 10,375 Total Bass 1,573,592

Braddon Electorate Community Economic Initiatives 50,000 Community & Youth Support 75,000 Public Affairs 2,650 Sport & Recreation 6,470 Total Braddon 134,120

Denison Electorate Law & Justice 787,260 Art & Culture 20,000 Business Funding 54,545 Community Economic Initiatives 53,294 Community Training 631,431 Community & Youth Support 311,898 Housing Capital 1,200,972 Heritage Protection 6,000 Infrastructure Capital 136,190 Industrial Relations 78,250 Land Acquisition & Maintenance 911,437 Law & Justice 153,811 Language Maintenance 217,000 Land Rights 250,000 Native Title 50,000 Public Affairs 16,825 Sport & Recreation 309,776 Total Denison 5,188,689

Franklin Electorate Community & Youth Support 86,561 Public Affairs 1,360 Total Franklin 87,921

Lyons Electorate Community Economic Initiatives 135,966 Community Training 25,000 Community & Youth Support 157,071 Land Acquisition & Maintenance 65,000 Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8025

Program $

Public Affairs 4,200 Total Lyons 387,237

Total 1995-96 Grant Funding 7,371,559

1996-97 Bass Electorate Art & Culture 8,902 Community & Youth Support 40,005 Community Housing 272,282 Infrastructure 483,200 Land Acquisition & Maintenance 30,000 Municipal Services 168,426 National Aboriginal Health Strategy 320,000 Public Affairs 10,674 Total Bass 1,333,489 Braddon Electorate Community Training 21,589 Community & Youth Support 66,324 Land Acquisition & Maintenance 307,855 Public Affairs 3,224 Total Braddon 398,992 Denison Electorate Art & Culture 45,340 Community Training 158,140 Community & Youth Support 130,590 Community Housing 860,000 Indigenous Womens Issues 81,000 Land Acquisition & Maintenance 292,096 Law & Justice 950,219 Language Maintenance 225,000 Land Rights 257,750 Public Affairs 17,834 Sport & Recreation 238,425 Total Denison 3,256,394 Franklin Electorate Art & Culture 10,600 Community & Youth Support 65,057 Public Affairs 1,777 Total Franklin 77,434 Lyons Electorate Community Economic Initiatives 58,000 Community Training 3,769 Community & Youth Support 118,902 Land Management 40,430 Public Affairs 2,833 8026 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Program $

Total Lyons 223,934 Total 1996-97 Grant Funding 5,290,243

1997-98 (Estimate) Bass Electorate Art & Culture 31,771 Community Housing 538,499 Community Infrastructure 219,027 Municipal Services 235,396 Total Bass 1,024,693 Braddon Electorate Art & Culture 41,298 Total Braddon 41,298 Denison Electorate Community Housing 927,800 Community Training 32,351 Economic Program Support 20,000 Heritage Protection 21,470 Indigenous Womens Initiatives 84,276 Land Rights Operating 226,000 Language Maintenance 175,000 Law & Justice 956,192 Link-Up 57,360 Social & Cultural Program Support 6,160 Sport & Recreation 205,746 Total Denison 2,712,355 Franklin Electorate Broadcasting 41,068 Total Franklin 41,068 Lyons Electorate Arts & Culture 66,298 Business Funding Scheme 25,000 Total Lyons 91,298 Total 1997-98 (Est) Grant Funding 3,910,712

Government Contracts (2) What was the value of each contract. (Question No. 818) (3) Did the value of any contract vary from the Senator Faulkner asked the Minister for original cost; if so, what was the reason for the price variation. the Environment, upon notice, on 3 Septem- ber 1997: (4) How many of the contracts in (1) were awarded following an open tender process. (1) What contracts for public relations services has the department, or its agencies, signed since 3 (5) Where there was no tender process, what March 1996. assessment criteria were followed in selecting the Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8027 contractor and why was the normal practice of (8) How many journalists are currently employed calling tenders not followed. by the department. (6) Did the department seek guidance from the Office of Government Information and Advertising Senator Hill—The answer to the honour- before signing the above contracts; if not, why not. able senator’s question is as follows: (7) How many journalists were employed by the department as at 3 March 1996. (1)—(6)

Environment Priorities and Coordination Group

(6) OGIA Guidance (1) Contract (2) Value (3) Price Variation (4) & (5) Tender Process sought

Environment Priorities and Coordination Group

Production of a Non English Speaking Brochure $20,200 Yes. $18,240; paid out less Selective tender process No. The contract did not and Speakers Kit—‘Communications Overload’, due to reduced delivery of which involved inviting fall within the role of May 1996. Aim: to produce a NESB Kit to promote expected outcomes three service providers to OGIA. the 1996 SoE Report to ethnic and indigenous sec- submit quotes for the pro- tors of the community; to produce a speakers kit ject. with speakers notes and associated overheads to use in oral presentations for promoting the 1996 SoE Report.

Australian and World Heritage Group

Ms Louisa Eastmead—consultancy to research and $19,530 The original contract was for As is usual practice for No. It has not been promote the National Estate to electronic media pro- $24,530 but was terminated this type of consultancy usual practice to seek grams, signed 25 June 1996. prior to the completion of the requiring assistance on advice from OGIA for consultancy as Ms Eastmead specific projects from a individual public affairs was offered a permanent posi- single public affairs offic- officer contracts at this tion in the Australian Public er, the contract was award- level. Service. ed after seeking requests for proposals from individuals listed with the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance Freelance Register, and to other freelance public affairs officers with proven ability. Propo- sals were based on a brief provided to contractors outlining requirements of the consultancy. Briefs were sent to three or more people. Ms Eleanor Dean—consultancy to promote National $18,745 The original contract was for As above. As above. Estate publicity signed 13 May 1997. $19,256 followed by a variation for an additional $10,696. This was due to increased work load on various projects. The contract was terminated prior to completion of the consultancy as Ms Dean was offered a permanent position in the Australian Public Service.

Environment Protection Group

Organochlorine pesticides—Logistical support for $15,045 No. Limited tender. A previous No. Contract did not fall public involvement program in organochlorine pesti- (used competitive tender on the within the role of OGIA. cides. Contract with Public Relations Partners, Syd- ANZECC subject had identified the ney. The program organised by the Waste Manage- Trust company as the most suit- ment Secretariat was to arrange public meetings to Fund able and cost effective for ensure public input into a management plan in sup- money) the task. The company was port of an ANZECC program. invited to tender for the work from a detailed brief as their expertise was proven and urgent timelines were operating. All normal clearance procedures through the department’s tender board were followed. 8028 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

(6) OGIA Guidance (1) Contract (2) Value (3) Price Variation (4) & (5) Tender Process sought

Biodiversity Group

Acme Consulting Pty Ltd. Communications strategy $17,750 Yes, due to a variation on re- Selective tender process. No. The contract did not development and implementation for Sustainable quirements. The original con- fall within the role of Landscapes Branch. tract was $19,250. OGIA. Elizabeth Bilney. Contracted on ad hoc basis to $7,145 No. Initial selective tender pro- No. The contract did not write articles for publications promoting sustainable cess, then ad hoc commis- fall within the role of agriculture. sioning based on competi- OGIA. tive quote. The amount involved was not substantial enough to warrant tender process. Allen Mawer. Contracted on ad hoc basis to write $893 No. No. Ad hoc commission- No. Does not fall within articles for Sustainable Agriculture, a supplement to ing based on competitive the role of OGIA. the Australian Farming Journal subsidised in part by quote. The amount in- Sustainable Landscapes Branch. volved was not substantial enough to warrant tender process.

Portfolio Marine Group

Landcare Australia Limited (LAL)—to conduct $300,000 No. No. LAL was selected Yes, in the first year of Coastcare Sponsorships and Awareness Marketing. without calling for tenders the contract but not in because of its link with the the following years as National Landcare Pro- the project was ongoing. gram and the requirement to link public awareness of Landcare with oastcare. The Big Picture Marketing Communications— $1,596 No. No. On contract with the No, as the contract was consultant expenses associated with Coasts and Department of Primary In- for a small amount. Clean Seas launch. dustries and Energy.

Corporate Management

Australian Public Strategies Pty Ltd, for $75,000 Contract still in progress. A selective tender process No. The contract did not speechwriting services. was used given the spe- fall within the role of cialised nature of the con- OGIA. sultancy and a number of quotes were sought. The Department’s Procurement Review Board approved this process.

Sport, Territories and Local Government

Grey O’Keefe and Associates—Identification of $10,000 No. Selective tender process. Yes. potential sponsors for the National Awards for Inno- vation in Local Government.

Australian Sports Drug Agency

The Australian Sports Drug Agency is developing $15,000 No. Open tender process. No. The Agency was its strategic plan for the period 1998-2001. As part not seeking to deal with of this activity, the Agency has commissioned a sensitive issue and the Ingrid Roepers Public Relations to assist in devel- contract was not con- oping its public relations strategy to fit within the sidered substantial. strategic plan framework.

(7) As at 3 March 1996 the following journalists Government Contracts were employed: Department: 13 Public Affairs Officers; Austral- (Question No. 820) ian Heritage Commission: six journalists; Bureau Senator Faulkner asked the Minister of Meteorology: one journalist; Australian Sports representing the Minister for Workplace Commission: three journalists. Relations and Small Business, upon notice, on (8) The following journalists are currently 4 September 1997: employed: (1) What contracts for public relations services Department: 12 Public Affairs Officers; Austral- has the department, or its agencies, signed since 3 ian Heritage Commission: six journalists; Bureau March 1996. of Meteorology: one journalist; Australian Sports Commission: four journalists. (2) What was the value of each contract. Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8029

(3) Did the value of any contract vary from the ments. The consultancy also involved the provision original cost; if so, what was the reason for the of finished artwork for each of these items and price variation. printing of stationery and business cards. (4) How many of the contracts in (1) were Newspaper advertising awarded following an open tender process. In March 1997, an advertising campaign was (5) Where there was no tender process, what undertaken to promote the availability of Australian assessment criteria were followed in selecting the Workplace Agreements (AWAs) as a new option contractor and why was the normal practice of under the Workplace Relations Act 1996. The calling tenders not followed. campaign involved advertisements in national, state, (6) Did the department seek guidance from the metropolitan, rural and ethnic newspapers. Office of Government Information and Advertising Ad hoc advertising before signing the above contracts; if not, why not. The Office of the Employment Advocate (OEA) (7) How many journalists were employed by the has also placed ad hoc advertisements in a number department as at 3 March 1996. of journals, magazines and newspapers promoting (8) How many journalists are currently employed the roles and responsibilities of the OEA. by the department. (2) The total cost incurred by the Department of Senator Alston—The Minister for Work- Workplace Relations and Small Business for placement and design of advertising to notify the place Relations and Small Business has commencement of the new workplace relations provided the following answer to the honour- legislation was $50,439.44. able senator’s question: The total cost incurred by the Department of (1) Contracts were entered into by the Depart- Workplace Relations and Small Business for ment of Workplace Relations and Small Business placement and design of advertising to promote the and the Office of the Employment Advocate. new industrial relations arrangements for Victoria Advertising was undertaken by the Department was $4,329.12. of Workplace Relations and Small Business to The total cost incurred by the Department of notify the commencement of the new workplace Workplace Relations and Small Business for relations legislation. Grey advertising was used to placement and design of advertising to promote the design the copy and layout of the advertisement. Victorian "Workplace Relations Weeks" was Neville-Jeffress (now TMP Worldwide) was used $2,552.98. to book and place the one-off advertising, under the Government’s Central Advertising System contract. The total cost incurred by the Office of the Employment Advocate for the corporate identity Advertising was undertaken by the Department work undertaken by Communication Partners was of Workplace Relations and Small Business to $21,801.00. promote the handover of the new industrial relations arrangements for Victoria. Neville-Jeffress The total cost of newspaper advertising campaign (now TMP Worldwide) was used to book and place regarding AWAs paid by the Office of the Employ- the one-off advertising, under the Government’s ment Advocate was $180,756.13. Central Advertising System contract. The total cost of ad hoc advertising incurred by Advertising was undertaken by the Department the Office of the Employment Advocate to date is of Workplace Relations and Small Business to $6,915.30 promote the Victorian "Workplace Relations (3) There were no significant price variations. Weeks". Neville-Jeffress (now TMP Worldwide) (4) None of the Department’s contracts was was used to book and place the advertisements, awarded through an open tender process because under the Government’s Central Advertising the Department used the Government’s Central System contract. Advertising System, TMP Worldwide. The Office of the Employment Advocate entered The contract for corporate identity work for the into contracts relating to the following public Office of the Employment Advocate was awarded relations services: through an open tender process. Corporate Identity (5) All advertising was booked through the Communication Partners were engaged during Government’s Central Advertising System, TMP 1996-97 to undertake corporate identity work on Worldwide. behalf of the Office of the Employment Advocate. (6) The Office of Government Information and This involved the design of the Office of the advertising was advised of the proposed advertis- Employment Advocate and Employment Advocate ing. As the advertising was classified as non- logos, stationery items, signage and press advertise- campaign it was booked through the Government’s 8030 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Central Advertising System, TMP Worldwide, seeks relevant guidance from OGIA in making its recommended by the Office of Government Infor- contractual arrangements with suppliers and consul- mation and Advertising. tants which fall under OGIA’s purview. (7) As at 3 March 1996 the Department of (7) & (8) The department employs public affairs Workplace Relations and Small Business employed officers with a mix of skills, including in some seven Public Affairs officers. cases, journalistic skills. The skills requirements for (8) As at 19 September 1997 the Department of public affairs officers also include expertise in Workplace Relations and Small Business employed graphic design, editing, publishing, campaign seven public affairs officers. management and public relations. The Department’s personnel records indicate that Government Contracts as at 3 March 1996 the Department employed 19 (Question No. 825) public affairs officers directly engaged in public affairs work. At 4 September 1997 it employed 17 Senator Faulkner asked the Minister for public affairs officers on this basis. Health and Family Services, upon notice, on 4 September 1997: Department of Social Security: Salary (1) What contracts for public relations services Packaging has the department, or its agencies, signed since 3 (Question No. 841) March 1996. (2) What was the value of each contract. Senator Chris Evans asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 4 Septem- (3) Did the contract vary from the original cost; if so, what was the reason for the price variation. ber 1997: (4) How many contracts in (1) were awarded (1) Has the department negotiated or indicated a following an open tender process. willingness to negotiate salary packaging for its employees. (5) Where there was no tender process, what assessment criteria were followed in selecting the (2) Has the department informed any staff of its contractor and why was the normal practice of intention to offer salary packaging schemes to its calling tenders not followed. employees. (6) Did the department seek guidance from the (3) Can a copy be provided of the communica- Office of Government Information and Advertising tion in (2), as well as information regarding: (a) before signing the above contracts; if not, why not. when it took place; and (b) what developments have occurred regarding implementation of salary (7) How many journalists were employed by the packaging. department as at 3 March 1996. (8) How many journalists are currently employed (4) Can details be provided of any salary packag- by the department. ing arrangements which have been made available to employees of the department. Senator Herron—The answer to the (5) Can details be provided of the number of honourable senator’s question is as follows: salary packaging arrangements which have been (1)—(5) The Department provides information entered into by employees. about consultancies, as it is required to do, in its (6) (a) Are salary packaging arrangements being Annual Report. Consultancy information for the offered to all employees or only selected employ- period 1 April 1996—30 June 1996 is available in ees; (b) if selected employees, what class of the Department’s 1995-96 Annual Report and its employee is being offered salary packaging; and (c) detailed Supplementary Papers. Similarly, informa- what are the salary ranges applicable to these tion on consultancies commissioned from 1 July employees. 1996—30 June 1997 will appear in the Department’s 1996-97 Report due to be tabled in (7) What percentage of an employee’s total late October 1997. Information for the period since salary is allowed to be taken as non-salary benefits. 30 June 1997 will be provided in the 1997-98 (8) Please list the options or items that are annual report of the Department. allowed to be salary packaged under any depart- (6) The Department maintains a close working mental arrangement. relationship with the Office of Government Infor- (9) Do any of the arrangements offered benefit mation and Advertising (OGIA). It participates from an employer exemption from fringe benefits fully in the Central Advertising System run by that tax. body and in the Ministerial Committee for Govern- ment Communications process for which OGIA Senator Newman—The answer to the provides administrative support. The Department honourable senator’s question is as follows: Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8031

(1) Yes. owners to guarantee access to transmission for (2) DSS informed meetings of staff that the national and community broadcasters, so that Government’s policy parameters for agreement transmission costs for these broadcasters, and small making in the Australian Public Service call for community broadcasters in particular, are not cost- agency agreements to provide for flexible remu- prohibitive. neration packaging on a salary sacrifice basis. (3) (a) When will the Minister make public his (3) No. Information was conveyed orally to DSS decision on the allocation of the sixth television staff meetings. licence; and (b) will the licence be offered to the (a) DSS staff meetings were held about a range community sector, as suggested in the Coalition’s of agency agreement issues on 6, 7, 8, 11, 12 and Better Communications policy document. 14 August 1997. (b) There have been no developments regarding Senator Alston—The answer to the honour- the implementation of salary packaging in DSS. able senator’s question is as follows: (4) DSS undertook to provide staff with detailed (1) The AERTP was one of three initiatives information about salary packaging. This informa- funded in 1990 as part of the Ethnic Radio Current tion has not yet been gathered. Affairs Service (ERCAS). The other two ERCAS (5) No salary packaging arrangements have been components, involving provision of satellite recep- entered into by DSS. tion equipment to community broadcasters, and (6) (a) Subject to staff endorsement of the DSS production of a weekly ABC radio series, have Agency Agreement, salary packaging arrangements been completed. will be offered to all employees. Funding for the three year ERCAS program (b) Not applicable. totalled $3.4m. From this total, funding of $1.65m (c) Not applicable. was allocated to establish the AERTP in 1992-93. The funds were provided to the Community (7) DSS has not yet considered what percentage Broadcasting Foundation (CBF) together with an of salary may be taken as non-salary benefits. undertaking that the CBF would establish a fund (8) DSS has not yet considered options or items which would allow training in the ethnic communi- to be packaged under any departmental arrange- ty sector to continue over a number of years. On ments. current estimates, the Project will operate on existing funds for the next six years. (9) Not applicable, as benefits have not yet been defined. (2) In agreeing to the sale of the network, the Government noted that appropriate competitive Australian Ethnic Radio Training Project safeguards would be developed to balance a future (Question No. 861) purchaser’s market power. Legislation in relation to the sale is expected to be introduced shortly, Senator Bourne asked the Minister for which will address access provisions for national Communications and the Arts, upon notice, and community broadcasters. on 8 September 1997: (3) (a) The future use of the sixth channel is (1) With reference to the Australian Ethnic Radio currently the subject of Government examination. Training Project (AERTP), which has been funded It is being considered in the context of the section on a triennial basis since 1992, and the Govern- 215 review of the television broadcasting industry ment’s allocation of a one-off grant to the AERTP: as required by the Broadcasting Service Act 1992. Given that the current term expires in the 1998-99 financial year, will the Minister guarantee that (b) The ABA has conducted an inquiry, at my funding for this important project will not expire direction, and has recommended that if the channel with that term. is to be used at all, it should be for community (2) With reference to the concern of the National access television. It also recommended that if Ethnic and Community Broadcaster’s Council that adequate funding for community access television the sale of the National Transmission Agency was not available, the channel should be left vacant (NTA) will negatively affect their ability to provide in the short term. important language programs to the ethnic communities of Australia: I have indicated to the ABA that the current community television trial period should be extend- Can the Minister provide any assurances or ed for twelve months from 1 July 1997 to provide guarantees that, when the sale of the NTA is a transition period, until a decision on the sixth finalised, the Government will require the new channel is made. 8032 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Australian Taxation Office: Lamesa of Australian Resources Ltd (ARL) should be held Holdings BV to be the assets held by Arimco Mining Pty Ltd. The latter company held interests in three mines (Question No. 867) and was controlled by ARL through a 100% Senator Sherry asked the Minister repre- shareholding in Australian Resources Mining Pty senting the Treasurer, upon notice, on 17 Ltd which in turn held 100% of the shares in Australian Resources and Mining Company NL September 1997: with that company holding 100% of the shares in (1) On what grounds did the Australian Taxation Arimco Mining Pty Ltd. A flow chart setting out Office (ATO) fail in its Federal Court action to tax the company structure is attached. Lamesa Holdings BV for the sale of shares in Article 13 of the Australia/Netherlands Double Australian Resources Ltd. Tax Agreement (DTA) provides for income from (2) How much tax did the ATO fail to get. the alienation of real property to be taxed in the (3) On what grounds did the ATO initiate action State in which the real property is situated. Real in order to tax Lamesa Holdings BV. property is defined by the Article to be: (4) Was the ATO’s failure due to deficiencies in (i) a lease of land or any other direct interest in (a) the current legislation; or (b) the current double or over land; tax treaty between Australia and the Netherlands. (ii) rights to exploit, or to explore for, natural re- (5) In light of the ATO loss, does the Govern- sources; and ment plan to review either the treaty or the legisla- (iii) shares or comparable interests in a company, tion with a view to making any changes. the assets of which consist wholly or principally of (6) Is the manner in which Lamesa Holdings BV direct interests in or over land in one of the States structured its sale of shares in Australian Resources or of rights to exploit, or to explore for, natural Ltd a cause for concern for the ATO. resources in one of the States. (7) What is the threat to revenue from similar The Commissioner’s argument was that the structured transactions. income arising from the sale by Lamesa of its (8) What has been the cost to date regarding shares in ARL fell into category (iii) and should, ATO’s action for both its legal representation and accordingly, be taxable in Australia where the any costs awarded against the ATO. rights to exploit or to explore were situated. The argument was based on the Court taking a "sub- (9) Will the ATO be seeking to appeal the stance over form" approach which would have Federal Court decision to the High Court; if so, recognised that as the DTA provides in sub-subpa- how confident is the ATO of succeeding in any ragraph (iii) for real property to be held indirectly High Court action. through a company that Australia’s rights to tax (10) Did Lamesa Holdings BV enter into any should not be defeated merely because the rights discussions with the ATO at any time from the were held indirectly through a chain of wholly launch of the ATO litigation with a view to settling owned group companies. the dispute. The Commissioner’s argument was based on the (11) If any offer to settle the action was made, principle that international treaties are to be con- what was the ATO’s response. strued more liberally than domestic law provisions (12) If an offer to settle was made, what were given that they allocate taxing rights between the the terms and any amount offered by Lamesa parties to them rather than impose tax as is the case Holdings BV to settle the litigation. with the domestic law i.e. the right to tax exists under Australian domestic taxation law and the (13) If a High Court action is proceeded with, treaty merely determines whether that taxing right what would the approximate cost of such an action can be exercised by Australia in relation to Nether- be. lands residents deriving income in Australia. (14) Did the ATO take any outside legal advice The Commissioner was unsuccessful in this on the merits of proceeding with the litigation in argument before the Full Federal Court. the Federal Court; if so: (a) from whom was this advice taken; (b) how much did it cost; (c) what (2) The profits on which Lamesa was assessed was the nature of the advice; and (d) can a copy of resulted in a primary tax liability of $74,199,875 that advice be provided. this consisted of tax on profits derived in the year ended 30 June 1994 of $28,111,646 and in the year Senator Kemp—The answer to the honour- ended 30 June 1996 of $46,088,229. able senator’s question is as follows: (3) The Commissioner initiated action to assess (1) The Commissioner of Taxation’s primary Lamesa under the provisions of the Income Tax argument in the Lamesa case was that the "assets" Assessment Act 1936 (ITAA) dealing with capital Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8033 gains (section 160ZO). These assessments were (8) Barristers costs for the ATO are in the subsequently amended to assess Lamesa on the vicinity of $140,000, the costs of the Australian profits from the sale of the ARL shares under Government Solicitor will be approximately section 25(1)(b) of the ITAA (i.e. as ordinary $60,000 while costs awarded against the ATO have income amounts rather than on the capital gain). been advised by the taxpayer’s representatives to (4) The Commissioner was not successful be around $1.2 million because of deficiencies in the current DTA between (9) The Commissioner has decided not to seek Australia and the Netherlands.. special leave to appeal to the High Court. The (5) The Government is currently considering the Commissioner’s decision is based on the fact that options open to it in relation to the decision. the decision of the Full Federal Court is one open (6) Yes. However, it should be noted that in the to it on the wording of the DTA albeit the Com- Lamesa case the real property was held indirectly missioner would contend not within the spirit of by Australian Resources and Mining Company NL what was intended to be the situation under the (at that time Arimco NL) prior to the purchase of DTA. that company by ARL and its subsidiary Australian Resources Mining Pty Ltd (ARM). Accordingly, (10) Three settlement offers were received by the based on the Courts finding that Article 13(2)(a)(iii) Commissioner through the Commissioner’s legal only applies to real property held by one company advisers. tier, interposition of ARL and ARM could not be (11) As the profit was either assessable or not, said to have occurred purely to derive a tax benefit the Commissioner did not see any basis for settle- under the Australia/Netherlands DTA as Article ment of the case.. 13(2)(a)(iii) would not have applied even if Lamesa had purchased the shares of Arimco NL directly. (12) The secrecy provisions of the tax law The Commissioner will, however, be scrutinising preclude the Commissioner of Taxation from similar structures to that used in the Lamesa case providing this information. very closely and will not hesitate to use Part IVA (13) Question is no longer relevant. of the ITAA in circumstances where the interposition of companies between the real property and a (14) The Commissioner took verbal legal advice non-resident that has control over that real property from Mr David Bloom QC and Mr Tony Pagone results from a scheme to defeat the operation of prior to the hearing in the Federal Court. Written Article 13(2)(a)(iii). opinions in relation to appeal applications to the (7) It is not possible to gauge how many similar- Full Federal Court and also the High Court were ly structured transactions may be in existence or the obtained from Mr David Bloom QC, Mr Tony potential revenue loss that might be involved. The Pagone and Mr Tony Payne. The advice was effectiveness of similarly structured transactions is provided on a confidential basis and is covered by subject to the comment on the potential application legal professional privilege. of Part IVA of the ITAA as referred to in the previous question. The chart reads as follows— 8034 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997 Thursday, 23 October 1997 SENATE 8035

Child Care Smithton Outside School Hours Care Program, Smithton Primary School, Grant Street, Smithton (Question No. 888) TAS 7330; Senator Denman asked the Minister repre- Ulverstone OSHC Program, Ulverstone Com- senting the Minister for Family Services, upon munity House, 8 Lugana Crescent, Ulverstone TAS notice, on 29 September 1997: 7315; (1) How many child care places are there in the Upper Burnie Primary OSHC Program, 4 electoral division of Braddon, Tasmania. Johnston Street, Burnie TAS 7320; (2) (a) What categories of child care places exist Wynyard Outside School Hours Care; Communi- in Braddon; and (b) where are the centres located. ty Centre, 46A Hogg Street, Wynyard TAS 7325; Senator Herron—The Minister for Family Mersey Leven YRC Vacation Care, 32-36 Valley Services has provided the following answer to Road, Devonport TAS 7310; the honourable senator’s question: Penguin Fun Club, Vacation Care, Ironcliffe Road, Penguin TAS 7316; (1) There are a total of 1056 places made up of Waratah-Wynyard Council YRC Vacation Care, the following: Community Centre, 46A Hogg Street, Wynyard Community Based Long Day Care 296 TAS 7325. Family Day Care 325 Occasional Care: Outside School Hours Care 313 Devonport Occasional Child Care, Centre, Occasional Care 48 Malangenna Child Care Complex, 32-36 Valley Private Long Day Care 74 Road, Devonport TAS 7310; (2) (a)—(b) Burnie Occasional Care Child Care Centre, 11 Queen Street, Burnie TAS 7320. Community Based Long Day Care: Private Long Day Care: Circular Head Child Care Centre, 109 Emmett Footprints Children’s Centre, 52 Westpark Street, Smithton TAS 7330; Grove, Burnie TAS 7320; Burnie Child Care Centre, 34 Alexander Street, Stepping Stones Children’s Centre, 11 Moore Burnie TAS 7320; Street, Ulverstone TAS 7315. Devonport Child Care Centre, 62 North Street, Devonport TAS 7310; Nursing Home Accommodation Devonport Child Care Centre, Malangenna Child (Question No. 889) Care Complex, 32-36 Valley Road, Devonport TAS Senator Denman asked the Minister repre- 7310; senting the Minister for Family Services, upon East Devonport Child Care and Community notice, on 29 September 1997: Centre, 1-3 North Caroline Street, Devonport TAS (1) How many nursing home beds are in the 7310; electoral division of Braddon, Tasmania. Ulverstone Child Care Centre, Cnr Alexandra (2) How many beds in Braddon are owned and Road and James Street, Ulverstone TAS 7315; operated by: (a) private operators or companies; Wynyard Child Care Centre, Saunders Street, and (b) community or religious organisations. Wynyard TAS 7325. (3) (a) What is the name and address of each Family Day Care: centre operating hostel or nursing home beds in Braddon; and (b) how many beds are provided in Coastal Family Day Care Scheme, 55A Mount each centre. Street, Burnie TAS 7320; Senator Herron—The Minister for Family Mersey Level Family Day Care, 32-36 Valley Road, Devonport TAS 7310. Services has provided the following answer to Outside School Hours Care: the honourable senator’s question: (1) There are 405 nursing home beds in the Devonport Community House After School electoral division of Braddon, Tasmania. Program, 10 Morris Avenue, Devonport TAS 7310; (2) (a) 84 beds in Braddon are owned and Mersey Level Year Round Care After School operated by private operators or companies. Care, 32-36 Valley Road, Devonport TAS 7310; (b) 702 beds in Braddon are owned and operated Nixon Street After School Hours, Nixon Street by community or religious organisations. Primary School, Nixon Street, Devonport TAS (3) (a—b) The names and addresses of each 7310; centre operating hostel or nursing home beds in Penguin Fun Club After School Care, Ironcliffe Braddon and the number of beds in each centre are Road, Penguin TAS 7316; as follows: 8036 SENATE Thursday, 23 October 1997

Centres operating hostel beds Name Address Beds Coroneagh Park Hostel Ulverstone 30 Eliza Purton Home for the Aged Elliot St, Ulverstone 53 Emmerton Park Hostel Smith St, Smithton 33 Emmerton Park Units Smith St, Smithton 6 Karingal Home for the Aged Lovett St, Devonport 53 King Island Multipurpose Centre South Rd, Currie 6 Meercroft Hostel Bluff Rd, Devonport 59 Salvation Army Levenbank Senior Citizens Grove St, Ulverstone 34 Village Yarandoo Hostel Cardigan St, Somerset 60 Umima Park Hostel Mooreville Rd, Burnie 47 Total Hostel Beds 381

Centres operating nursing home beds Name Address Beds Adaihi Nursing Home Elizabeth St, Ulverstone 24 Eliza Purton Home for the Aged Elliot St, Ulverstone 51 Karingal Home for the Aged Lovett St, Devonport 30 King Island Multipurpose Centre South Rd, Currie 8 Meercroft Home for the Aged Bluff Rd, Devonport 50 Melaleuca Home for the Aged Mary St, East Devonport 35 Mt St Vincent Nursing Home South Rd, Ulverstone 44 Smithton Nursing Home Bass Highway, Smithton 22 Spencer Nursing Home Cnr Moore and Quiggan Sts, Wynyard 60 Umina Park Home for the Aged Mooreville Rd, Burnie 81 Total Nursing Home Beds 405