Senate Official Hansard No

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

Senate Official Hansard No. 11, 2005 THURSDAY, 18 AUGUST 2005

FORTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—FOURTH PERIOD

BY AUTHORITY OF THE SENATE

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

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

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

SITTING DAYS—2005 Month Date February 8, 9, 10 March 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17 May 10, 11, 12 June 14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 22, 23 August 9, 10, 11, 16, 17, 18 September 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15 October 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13 November 7, 8, 9, 10, 28, 29, 30 December 1, 5, 6, 7, 8

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

CANBERRA 103.9 FM SYDNEY 630 AM NEWCASTLE 1458 AM GOSFORD 98.1 FM BRISBANE 936 AM GOLD COAST 95.7 FM MELBOURNE 1026 AM ADELAIDE 972 AM PERTH 585 AM HOBART 747 AM NORTHERN TASMANIA 92.5 FM DARWIN 102.5 FM

FORTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—FOURTH PERIOD

Governor-General

His Excellency Major-General Michael Jeffery, Companion in the Order of Australia, Com- mander of the Royal Victorian Order, Military Cross

Senate Officeholders

President—Senator the Hon. Paul Henry Calvert Deputy President and Chairman of Committees—Senator John Joseph Hogg Temporary Chairmen of Committees—Senators Guy Barnett, George Henry Brandis, Hedley Grant Pearson Chapman, Patricia Margaret Crossin, Alan Baird Ferguson, Michael George Forshaw, Stephen Patrick Hutchins, Linda Jean Kirk, Philip Ross Lightfoot, Gavin Mark Mar- shall, Claire Mary Moore, Andrew James Marshall Murray, Hon. Judith Mary Troeth and John Odin Wentworth Watson Leader of the Government in the Senate—Senator the Hon. Robert Murray Hill Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate—Senator the Hon. Nicholas Hugh Minchin Leader of the Opposition in the Senate—Senator Christopher Vaughan Evans Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate—Senator Stephen Michael Conroy Manager of Government Business in the Senate—Senator the Hon. Christopher Mar- tin Ellison Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate—Senator Joseph William Ludwig

Senate Party Leaders and Whips

Leader of the Liberal Party of Australia—Senator the Hon. Robert Murray Hill Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party of Australia—Senator the Hon. Nicholas Hugh Minchin Leader of The Nationals—Senator the Hon. Ronald Leslie Doyle Boswell Deputy Leader of The Nationals—Senator John Alexander Lindsay (Sandy) Macdonald Leader of the Australian Labor Party—Senator Christopher Vaughan Evans Deputy Leader of the Australian Labor Party—Senator Stephen Michael Conroy Leader of the Australian Democrats—Senator Lynette Fay Allison Liberal Party of Australia Whips—Senators Jeannie Margaret Ferris and Alan Eggleston Nationals Whip—Senator Julian John James McGauran Opposition Whips—Senators George Campbell, Linda Jean Kirk and Ruth Stephanie Webber Australian Democrats Whip—Senator Andrew John Julian Bartlett

Printed by authority of the Senate

Members of the Senate State or Terri- Senator tory Term expires Party Abetz, Hon. Eric TAS 30.6.2011 LP Adams, Judith WA 30.6.2011 LP Allison, Lynette Fay VIC 30.6.2008 AD Barnett, Guy TAS 30.6.2011 LP Bartlett, Andrew John Julian QLD 30.6.2008 AD Bishop, Thomas Mark WA 30.6.2008 ALP Boswell, Hon. Ronald Leslie Doyle QLD 30.6.2008 NATS Brandis, George Henry QLD 30.6.2011 LP Brown, Robert James TAS 30.6.2008 AG Calvert, Hon. Paul Henry TAS 30.6.2008 LP Campbell, George NSW 30.6.2008 ALP Campbell, Hon. Ian Gordon WA 30.6.2011 LP Carr, Kim John VIC 30.6.2011 ALP Chapman, Hedley Grant Pearson SA 30.6.2008 LP Colbeck, Hon. Richard Mansell TAS 30.6.2008 LP Conroy, Stephen Michael VIC 30.6.2011 ALP Coonan, Hon. Helen Lloyd NSW 30.6.2008 LP Crossin, Patricia Margaret (3) NT ALP Eggleston, Alan WA 30.6.2008 LP Ellison, Hon. Christopher Martin WA 30.6.2011 LP Evans, Christopher Vaughan WA 30.6.2011 ALP Faulkner, Hon. John Philip NSW 30.6.2011 ALP Ferguson, Alan Baird SA 30.6.2011 LP Ferris, Jeannie Margaret SA 30.6.2008 LP Fielding, Steve VIC 30.6.2011 FF Fierravanti-Wells, Concetta Anna NSW 30.6.2011 LP Fifield, Mitchell Peter(2) VIC 30.6.2008 LP Forshaw, Michael George NSW 30.6.2011 ALP Heffernan, Hon. William Daniel NSW 30.6.2011 LP Hill, Hon. Robert Murray SA 30.6.2008 LP Hogg, John Joseph QLD 30.6.2008 ALP Humphries, Gary John Joseph (3) ACT LP Hurley, Annette SA 30.6.2011 ALP Hutchins, Stephen Patrick NSW 30.6.2011 ALP Johnston, David Albert Lloyd WA 30.6.2008 LP Joyce, Barnaby QLD 30.6.2011 NATS Kemp, Hon. Charles Roderick VIC 30.6.2008 LP Kirk, Linda Jean SA 30.6.2008 ALP Lightfoot, Philip Ross WA 30.6.2008 LP Ludwig, Joseph William QLD 30.6.2011 ALP Lundy, Kate Alexandra (3) ACT ALP Macdonald, Hon. Ian Douglas QLD 30.6.2008 LP Macdonald, John Alexander Lindsay (Sandy) NSW 30.6.2008 NATS McEwen, Anne SA 30.6.2011 ALP McGauran, Julian John James VIC 30.6.2011 NATS McLucas, Jan Elizabeth QLD 30.6.2011 ALP Marshall, Gavin Mark VIC 30.6.2008 ALP Mason, Brett John QLD 30.6.2011 LP ii

State or Terri- Senator tory Term expires Party Milne, Christine TAS 30.6.2011 AG Minchin, Hon. Nicholas Hugh SA 30.6.2011 LP Moore, Claire Mary QLD 30.6.2008 ALP Murray, Andrew James Marshall WA 30.6.2008 AD Nash, Fiona NSW 30.6.2011 NATS Nettle, Kerry Michelle NSW 30.6.2008 AG O’Brien, Kerry Williams Kelso TAS 30.6.2011 ALP Parry, Stephen TAS 30.6.2011 LP Patterson, Hon. Kay Christine Lesley VIC 30.6.2008 LP Payne, Marise Ann NSW 30.6.2008 LP Polley, Helen TAS 30.6.2011 ALP Ray, Hon. Robert Francis VIC 30.6.2008 ALP Ronaldson, Hon. Michael VIC 30.6.2011 LP Santoro, Santo (1) QLD 30.6.2008 LP Scullion, Nigel Gregory (3) NT CLP Sherry, Hon. Nicholas John TAS 30.6.2008 ALP Siewert, Rachel WA 30.6.2011 AG Stephens, Ursula Mary NSW 30.6.2008 ALP Sterle, Glenn WA 30.6.2011 ALP Stott Despoja, Natasha Jessica SA 30.6.2008 AD Troeth, Hon. Judith Mary VIC 30.6.2011 LP Trood, Russell QLD 30.6.2011 LP Vanstone, Hon. Amanda Eloise SA 30.6.2011 LP Watson, John Odin Wentworth TAS 30.6.2008 LP Webber, Ruth Stephanie WA 30.6.2008 ALP Wong, Penelope Ying Yen SA 30.6.2008 ALP Wortley, Dana SA 30.6.2011 ALP (1) Chosen by the Parliament of Queensland to fill a casual vacancy vice Hon. John Joseph Herron, resigned. (2) Chosen by the Parliament of Victoria to fill a casual vacancy vice Hon. Richard Kenneth Robert Alston, resigned. (3) Term expires at close of day next preceding the polling day for the general election of members of the House of Representatives.

PARTY ABBREVIATIONS AD—Australian Democrats; AG—Australian Greens; ALP—Australian Labor Party; CLP—Country Labor Party; FF—Family First Party; LP—Liberal Party of Australia; NATS—The Nationals Heads of Parliamentary Departments Clerk of the Senate—H Evans Clerk of the House of Representatives—I C Harris Secretary, Department of Parliamentary Services—H R Penfold QC

iii

HOWARD MINISTRY

Prime Minister The Hon. John Winston Howard MP Minister for Trade and Deputy Prime Minister The Hon. Mark Anthony James Vaile MP Treasurer The Hon. Peter Howard Costello MP Minister for Transport and Regional Services The Hon. Warren Errol Truss MP Minister for Defence and Leader of the Senator the Hon. Robert Murray Hill Government in the Senate Minister for Foreign Affairs The Hon. Alexander John Gosse Downer MP Minister for Health and Ageing and Leader of the The Hon. Anthony John Abbott MP House Attorney-General The Hon. Philip Maxwell Ruddock MP Minister for Finance and Administration, Deputy Senator the Hon. Nicholas Hugh Minchin Leader of the Government in the Senate and Vice-President of the Executive Council Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry The Hon. Peter John McGauran MP and Deputy Leader of the House Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Senator the Hon. Amanda Eloise Vanstone Indigenous Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Indigenous Affairs Minister for Education, Science and Training The Hon. Dr Brendan John Nelson MP Minister for Family and Community Services and Senator the Hon. Kay Christine Lesley Patterson Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Women’s Issues Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources The Hon. Ian Elgin Macfarlane MP Minister for Employment and Workplace The Hon. Kevin James Andrews MP Relations and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service Minister for Communications, Information Senator the Hon. Helen Lloyd Coonan Technology and the Arts Minister for the Environment and Heritage Senator the Hon. Ian Gordon Campbell

(The above ministers constitute the cabinet)

HOWARD MINISTRY—continued Minister for Justice and Customs and Manager of Senator the Hon. Christopher Martin Ellison Government Business in the Senate Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation Senator the Hon. Ian Douglas Macdonald Minister for the Arts and Sport Senator the Hon. Charles Roderick Kemp Minister for Human Services The Hon. Joseph Benedict Hockey MP Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs The Hon. John Kenneth Cobb MP Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer The Hon. Malcolm Thomas Brough MP Special Minister of State Senator the Hon. Eric Abetz Minister for Vocational and Technical Education The Hon. Gary Douglas Hardgrave MP and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister Minister for Ageing The Hon. Julie Isabel Bishop MP Minister for Small Business and Tourism The Hon. Frances Esther Bailey MP Minister for Local Government, Territories and The Hon. James Eric Lloyd MP Roads Minister for Veterans’ Affairs and Minister The Hon. De-Anne Margaret Kelly MP Assisting the Minister for Defence Minister for Workforce Participation The Hon. Peter Craig Dutton MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for The Hon. Dr Sharman Nancy Stone MP Finance and Administration Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for The Hon. Warren George Entsch MP Industry, Tourism and Resources Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health The Hon. Christopher Maurice Pyne MP and Ageing Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for The Hon. Teresa Gambaro MP Defence Parliamentary Secretary (Trade) Senator the Hon. John Alexander Lindsay (Sandy) Macdonald Parliamentary Secretary (Foreign Affairs) and The Hon. Bruce Fredrick Billson MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister The Hon. Gary Roy Nairn MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer The Hon. Christopher John Pearce MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the The Hon. Gregory Andrew Hunt MP Environment and Heritage Parliamentary Secretary (Children and Youth The Hon. Sussan Penelope Ley MP Affairs) Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for The Hon. Patrick Francis Farmer MP Education, Science and Training Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Senator the Hon. Richard Mansell Colbeck Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

SHADOW MINISTRY

Leader of the Opposition The Hon. Kim Christian Beazley MP Deputy Leader of the Opposition and Shadow Jennifer Louise Macklin MP Minister for Education, Training, Science and Research Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, Shadow Senator Christopher Vaughan Evans Minister for Indigenous Affairs and Shadow Minister for Family and Community Services Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and Senator Stephen Michael Conroy Shadow Minister for Communications and Information Technology Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Julia Eileen Gillard MP Opposition Business in the House Shadow Treasurer Wayne Maxwell Swan MP Shadow Attorney-General Nicola Louise Roxon MP Shadow Minister for Industry, Infrastructure and Stephen Francis Smith MP Industrial Relations Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade Kevin Michael Rudd MP and Shadow Minister for International Security Shadow Minister for Defence Robert Bruce McClelland MP Shadow Minister for Regional Development The Hon. Simon Findlay Crean MP Shadow Minister for Primary Industries, Martin John Ferguson MP Resources, Forestry and Tourism Shadow Minister for Environment and Heritage, Anthony Norman Albanese MP Shadow Minister for Water and Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House Shadow Minister for Housing, Shadow Minister Senator Kim John Carr for Urban Development and Shadow Minister for Local Government and Territories Shadow Minister for Public Accountability and Kelvin John Thomson MP Shadow Minister for Human Services Shadow Minister for Finance Lindsay James Tanner MP Shadow Minister for Superannuation and Senator the Hon. Nicholas John Sherry Intergenerational Finance and Shadow Minister for Banking and Financial Services Shadow Minister for Child Care, Shadow Minister Tanya Joan Plibersek MP for Youth and Shadow Minister for Women Shadow Minister for Employment and Workforce Senator Penelope Ying Yen Wong Participation and Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility

(The above are shadow cabinet ministers)

SHADOW MINISTRY—continued Shadow Minister for Consumer Affairs and Laurie Donald Thomas Ferguson MP Shadow Minister for Population Health and Health Regulation Shadow Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries Gavan Michael O’Connor MP Shadow Assistant Treasurer, Shadow Minister for Joel Andrew Fitzgibbon MP Revenue and Shadow Minister for Small Business and Competition Shadow Minister for Transport Senator Kerry Williams Kelso O’Brien Shadow Minister for Sport and Recreation Senator Kate Alexandra Lundy Shadow Minister for Homeland Security and The Hon. Archibald Ronald Bevis MP Shadow Minister for Aviation and Transport Security Shadow Minister for Veterans’ Affairs and Alan Peter Griffin MP Shadow Special Minister of State Shadow Minister for Defence Industry, Senator Thomas Mark Bishop Procurement and Personnel Shadow Minister for Immigration Anthony Stephen Burke MP Shadow Minister for Aged Care, Disabilities and Senator Jan Elizabeth McLucas Carers Shadow Minister for Justice and Customs and Senator Joseph William Ludwig Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate Shadow Minister for Overseas Aid and Pacific Robert Charles Grant Sercombe MP Island Affairs Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Peter Robert Garrett MP Reconciliation and the Arts Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of John Paul Murphy MP the Opposition Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence and The Hon. Graham John Edwards MP Veterans’ Affairs Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education Kirsten Fiona Livermore MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Environment Jennie George MP and Heritage Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Industry, Bernard Fernando Ripoll MP Infrastructure and Industrial Relations Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Immigration Ann Kathleen Corcoran MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Treasury Catherine Fiona King MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Science and Senator Ursula Mary Stephens Water Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern The Hon. Warren Edward Snowdon MP Australia and Indigenous Affairs

vii CONTENTS

THURSDAY, 18 AUGUST

Chamber Absence of the President...... 1 Governor-General’s Speech— Address-in-Reply...... 1 Notices— Presentation ...... 1 Business— Rearrangement...... 2 Rearrangement...... 2 Notices— Postponement ...... 2 Committees— ASIO, ASIS and DSD Committee—Meeting...... 3 Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee—Extension of Time...... 3 World Breastfeeding Week ...... 3 Nuclear Waste Facility...... 3 Committees— Mental Health Committee—Extension of Time...... 4 Mv Tampa: Fourth Anniversary...... 4 Ms Vivian Solon ...... 4 Committees— Treaties Committee—Report...... 5 Public Works Committee—Reports ...... 7 Scrutiny of Bills Committee—Report ...... 10 Publications Committee—Report...... 10 Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee—Report ...... 10 National Residue Survey (Customs) Levy Amendment Bill 2005 and National Residue Survey (Excise) Levy Amendment Bill 2005— First Reading ...... 18 Second Reading...... 18 Australian Workplace Safety Standards Bill 2005, National Occupational Health and Safety Commission (Repeal, Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2005, Higher Education Legislation Amendment (2005 Budget Measures) Bill 2005, Health Insurance Amendment (Medical Specialists) Bill 2005 and Superannuation Legislation Amendment (Superannuation Safety and Other Measures) Bill 2005— First Reading ...... 19 Second Reading...... 19 Workplace Relations Amendment (Small Business Employment Protection) Bill 2005— First Reading ...... 24 Second Reading...... 24 Committees— Public Accounts and Audit Committee—Membership...... 26 Parliamentary Behaviour ...... 26 Migration Amendment Regulations 2005 (No. 6)— Motion for Disallowance...... 27

CONTENTS—continued

Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Amendment Bill 2005— Report of Employment, Workplace Relations and Education Legislation Committee...... 48 Australian Technical Colleges (Flexibility in Achieving Australia’s Skills Needs) Bill 2005— Report of Employment, Workplace Relations and Education Legislation Committee...... 48 Human Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2005— Second Reading...... 48 In Committee...... 50 National Residue Survey (Customs) Levy Amendment Bill 2005 and National Residue Survey (Excise) Levy Amendment Bill 2005— Second Reading...... 53 Third Reading...... 53 Business— Rearrangement...... 53 Building and Construction Industry Improvement Bill 2005 and Building and Construction Industry Improvement (Consequential and Transitional) Bill 2005— Second Reading...... 53 Questions Without Notice— Immigration Detention ...... 71 Afghanistan ...... 72 Immigration...... 73 Telecommunications: Services ...... 75 Palmer Inquiry...... 76 Workplace Relations...... 77 Film Classification ...... 78 Sex Trafficking...... 79 Telstra ...... 80 Telstra ...... 81 Palmer Report...... 82 AgQuip Field Days...... 84 Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs...... 85 Questions Without Notice: Take Note of Answers— Immigration...... 86 Matters of Public Importance— Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs...... 92 Business— Rearrangement...... 106 Documents— Responses to Senate Resolutions...... 106 Department of the Senate: Travelling Allowance...... 107 Auditor-General’s Reports— Report No. 6 of 2005-06...... 107 Committees— Membership...... 107 Ministerial Responsibility...... 107 First Speech ...... 114 First Speech ...... 119 First Speech ...... 124 Documents— Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs...... 129

CONTENTS—continued

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission ...... 133 Palmer Report...... 134 Consideration...... 139 Committees— National Capital and External Territories Committee—Report...... 140 Corporations and Financial Services Committee—Report...... 143 Community Affairs References Committee—Report...... 145 Public Accounts and Audit Committee—Report...... 146 Community Affairs References Committee—Report...... 148 Consideration...... 151 Auditor-General’s Reports— Report No. 44 of 2004-05...... 151 Adjournment— Sir Harry Gibbs ...... 153 Defence Recruitment...... 156 Workplace Relations...... 158 Documents— Tabling...... 160 Indexed Lists of Files ...... 161 Unproclaimed Legislation ...... 161 Questions on Notice Minister for Defence: Overseas Travel—(Question No. 714)...... 162 Prime Minister and Cabinet: Customer Service—(Question No. 833)...... 162 Eyre Peninsula Bushfire Recovery Assistance—(Question No. 919) ...... 166 Eyre Peninsula Bushfire Recovery Assistance—(Question No. 921) ...... 168 Family Relationship Centres—(Question No. 953)...... 169 Child Support Payments—(Question No. 978) ...... 171

Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 1

Thursday, 18 August 2005 NOTICES ————— Presentation The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Senator Bartlett to move on the next day Paul Calvert) took the chair at 9.30 am and of sitting: read prayers. That the Environment, Communications, In- ABSENCE OF THE PRESIDENT formation Technology and the Arts References The PRESIDENT—I inform the Senate Committee be authorised to hold a public meeting that I will be leading the Australian parlia- during the sitting of the Senate on Tuesday, 6 September 2005, from 6 pm, to take evidence mentary delegation to the 51st Common- for the committee’s inquiry into the economic wealth Parliamentary Conference in Fiji and impact of salinity in the Australian environment. I will be absent from the Senate from 5 Sep- Senator Brown to move on Wednesday, tember to 8 September 2005. I suggest that 7 September 2005: the Deputy President, Senator Hogg, be empowered to act as President during my ab- (1) That the Senate: sence, pursuant to standing order 13. (a) notes that the problem of petrol sniffing remains widespread and endemic in Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— remote Aboriginal communities; Manager of Government Business in the Senate) (9.31 am)—by leave—I move: (b) recognises the need for an inquiry into the feasibility of a comprehensive roll (1) That, during the absence of the President, the out of Opal fuel in the central desert Deputy President shall, on each sitting day, region of Australia; take the chair of the Senate and may, during (c) intends that such an inquiry would es- such absence, perform the duties and exer- tablish the basis for a staged process, of cise the authority of the President in relation which this inquiry would be the first to all proceedings of the Senate and proceed- stage, for the eventual comprehensive ings of committees to which the President is roll out of Opal fuel to all regions appointed. across Australia where petrol-sniffing (2) That the President be granted leave of ab- is an issue; and sence from 5 September to 8 September (d) requires the specific targeting of this 2005. inquiry to the central desert region of Question agreed to. Australia in the first instance, as a trial GOVERNOR-GENERAL’S SPEECH to establish a blueprint for developing in the future a comprehensive and Address-in-Reply multi-faceted approach to eliminating The PRESIDENT—I inform the Senate petrol sniffing throughout Australia. that yesterday, accompanied by honourable (2) That the following matters be referred to senators, I presented to the Governor- the Community Affairs References Com- General the address-in-reply to his speech, mittee for inquiry and report by 9 Novem- on the occasion of the opening of Parliament, ber 2005: which was agreed to on 10 February 2005. (a) the identification of the means of im- The Governor-General indicated that he plementing a comprehensive roll out of would be pleased to convey the address-in- Opal fuel throughout the central desert reply to Her Majesty the Queen. region of Australia (defined for these purposes as extending from Coober Pedy in South Australia to Tennant

CHAMBER 2 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

Creek in the Northern Territory and Senator Brown to move on the next day Laverton in Western Australia); and of sitting: (b) the recommendation of strategies to That the Senate— enable the comprehensive roll out of (a) notes the release of the report prepared by Opal fuel throughout the central desert the University of Sydney’s Centre for region of Australia, including: Peace and Conflict Studies, Genocide in (i) proposals for any legislative West Papua? The role of the Indonesian amendments which may be required, Security Services Apparatus; and and (b) calls on the Australian Government to (ii) the identification of and assignment investigate the claims in the report and re- of a clear delineation of Common- port back to the Senate. wealth and state responsibilities for the matter, to ensure the rapid and BUSINESS streamlined Commonwealth/state Rearrangement coordination of the roll out. Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— Senator Milne to move on the next day of Manager of Government Business in the sitting: Senate) (9.35 am)—I move: That the Senate— That the government business order of the day (a) notes that Gunns Pty Ltd’s proposed pulp relating to the National Residue Survey (Cus- mill in the Tamar Valley in Tasmania, by toms) Levy Amendment Bill 2005 and a related the admission of the proponent, will: bill be considered from 12.45 pm till not later than 2 pm today. (i) consume up to 4 million tonnes of woodchips per annum requiring at least Question agreed to. 30 years access to native forests, Rearrangement (ii) pollute the air shed of the Tamar Valley Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— with hydrogen sulphide emissions and Manager of Government Business in the other gaseous emissions generated by burning 500 000 tonnes of green wood Senate) (9.36 am)—I move: waste each year, That the order of general business for consid- (iii) potentially affect the habitat of 33 eration today be as follows: threatened species, including five na- (1) general business notice of motion No. 222 tionally-listed endangered and five na- standing in the name of Senator Ludwig re- tionally-listed vulnerable species, and lating to ministerial responsibility; and (iv) pump approximately 30 billion litres of (2) consideration of government documents. effluent containing organo-chlorines Question agreed to. into Bass Strait each year, thus impacting on Commonwealth waters; NOTICES (b) calls on the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) Postponement to withdraw the offer of $5 million in Items of business were postponed as fol- Commonwealth funding to Gunns Pty lows: Ltd; and Business of the Senate notice of motion no. 1 (c) calls on the Minister for the Environment standing in the name of Senator Bartlett for and Heritage (Senator Ian Campbell) to today, proposing the disallowance of the Aus- use his powers under the Environment tralian Meat and Live-stock Industry (Export Protection and Biodiversity Conservation of Live-stock to Saudi Arabia) Order 2005, Act 1999 to reject the new proposal. postponed till 5 September 2005.

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 3

General business notice of motion no. 221 (iii) breastfeeding is a natural and normal standing in the name of Senator Stott Despoja way of providing optimal nutrition, for today, relating to genetic testing and pri- immunological and emotional nurtur- vacy, postponed till 5 September 2005. ing for the growth and development of COMMITTEES infants, and ASIO, ASIS and DSD Committee (iv) every woman has the right to be supported and not discriminated against if Meeting they choose to breastfeed or not; and Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (9.36 (b) notes that breastfeeding women must be am)—by leave—I move: supported by allowing them to take breast- That the Parliamentary Joint Committee on feeding breaks and breaks to express milk, ASIO, ASIS and DSD be authorised to hold a encouraging workplaces to provide places private meeting otherwise than in accordance for mothers to breastfeed and express with standing order 33(1) during the sitting of the milk, and encouraging workplaces to pro- Senate today, from 11 am to noon, in relation to vide the necessary facilities for the storage its inquiry on Division 3 Part 3 of the ASIO Act. of breast milk. Question agreed to. Question agreed to. Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Refer- NUCLEAR WASTE FACILITY ences Committee Senator CROSSIN (Northern Territory) Extension of Time (9.38 am)—I move: Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL (New That the Senate— South Wales) (9.37 am)—by leave—At the (a) notes that: request of Senator Hutchins, the Chair of the (i) in 2004 the Northern Territory Parlia- Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Refer- ment passed the Nuclear Waste, Stor- ences Committee, I move: age and Disposal (Prohibition) Act That the time for the presentation of the report 2004 which bans the establishment and of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Refer- operation of a nuclear waste manage- ences Committee on matters specified in para- ment facility in the Northern Territory, graphs (a) and (b) of the terms of reference for the and inquiry into the Chen Yonglin and Vivian Solon (ii) during the 2004 Federal Election the cases, and any related matters, be extended to Minister for the Environment and Heri- 8 September 2005. tage (Senator Ian Campbell) gave an Question agreed to. ‘absolute categorical assurance’ to Ter- ritorians that the Commonwealth is not WORLD BREASTFEEDING WEEK pursuing any options anywhere on the Senator STOTT DESPOJA (South Aus- mainland, including the Northern Terri- tralia) (9.38 am)—I move: tory, for a national nuclear waste facility; and That the Senate— (b) calls on the Commonwealth Government (a) notes that: to honour its election promise not to locate (i) the week beginning 1 August 2005 was a nuclear waste facility in the Northern World Breastfeeding Week, Territory. (ii) the theme for the week was ‘Breast- Question agreed to. feeding and Family Foods (feeding beyond 6 months)’,

CHAMBER 4 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

COMMITTEES following the MV Tampa incident have Mental Health Committee undermined basic legal principles such as equality before the law, procedural fair- Extension of Time ness, transparent accountability of the ac- Senator ALLISON (Victoria—Leader of tions of Commonwealth officers and pro- the Australian Democrats) (9.39 am)—I tecting against refoulement; and move: (c) calls for review and reform of the Act, and That the time for the presentation of the report an end to the Pacific Solution, mandatory of the Select Committee on Mental Health be detention and temporary protection visas. extended to the Thursday of the second sitting (d) further notes that four years later, 32 asy- week in March 2006. lum seekers remain on Nauru as part of Question agreed to. the government’s cruel Pacific Solution, and MV TAMPA: FOURTH ANNIVERSARY (e) calls on the Government to bring the re- Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (9.40 maining asylum seekers still on Nauru to am)—by leave—I, and also on behalf of the Australian mainland. Senator Nettle, move the motion as Question negatived. amended: MS VIVIAN SOLON That the Senate— Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) (a) notes that: (9.40 am)—I move: (i) 26 August 2005 marks the 4th anniver- That the Senate— sary of the rescue of 433 asylum seekers by the MV Tampa, (a) notes that: (ii) this rescue was followed by the refusal (i) it has been 1 484 days since Ms Vivian of the Government to allow the ship to Solon’s unlawful deportation by the enter Australian waters, Department of Immigration and Multi- cultural and Indigenous Affairs and 94 (iii) the asylum seekers did not have access days since she was discovered in a to adequate medical care, legal advice hospice in the Philippines, or sanitary conditions, particularly for the pregnant women and children who (ii) evidence suggests that numerous offi- were on board, cers within the Department of Immi- gration and Multicultural and Indige- (iv) the MV Tampa was boarded by Austra- nous Affairs, the Department of For- lian Special Air Services troops and the eign Affairs and Trade and the Queen- asylum seekers taken to Nauru, sland Police, knew that Ms Solon had (v) the unnecessary and degrading cost of been deported unlawfully but failed to the resulting Pacific Solution is esti- correct the situation and bring her mated at close to a billion dollars home, and which does not take into consideration (iii) the Australian Government: the cost of human suffering, and (A) is refusing to guarantee that it will (vi) some of the refugees rescued by the provide more than 6 months care for MV Tampa are still on temporary pro- Ms Solon when she returns, and tection visas and have therefore not been able to reunite with their families (B) refuses to agree to arbitration should after more than 4 years apart; mediation not result in a compensation settlement; and (b) expresses the view that many of the changes made to the Migration Act 1958

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 5

(b) calls on the Government to allow Ms So- Joyce, B. Kemp, C.R. lon to come home to Australia and be with Macdonald, J.A.L. Mason, B.J. her children by: McGauran, J.J.J. Minchin, N.H. (i) extending the guarantee of care past 6 Nash, F. Parry, S. months, Patterson, K.C. Payne, M.A. Ronaldson, M. Santoro, S. (ii) offering her brother a visa which enti- Scullion, N.G. Troeth, J.M. tles him to work rights or a carers al- Trood, R. Vanstone, A.E. lowance and is not limited to 6 months, Watson, J.O.W. and PAIRS (iii) agreeing to arbitration of a compensation settlement if 6 months of media- Bishop, T.M. Hill, R.M. tion does not result in a settlement. Evans, C.V. Boswell, R.L.D. Faulkner, J.P. Lightfoot, P.R. Question put. * denotes teller The Senate divided. [9.45 am] Senator Ian Macdonald did not vote, to (The President—Senator the Hon. Paul compensate for the vacancy caused by the Calvert) resignation of Senator Mackay. Ayes………… 32 Question negatived. Noes………… 35 COMMITTEES Majority……… 3 Treaties Committee Report AYES Senator SANTORO (Queensland) (9.49 Allison, L.F. Bartlett, A.J.J. Brown, B.J. Campbell, G. * am)—On behalf of the Joint Standing Com- Carr, K.J. Conroy, S.M. mittee on Treaties, I present the 66th report Crossin, P.M. Forshaw, M.G. of the committee entitled Treaties tabled on Hogg, J.J. Hurley, A. 7 December 2004, 15 March and 11 May Hutchins, S.P. Kirk, L. 2005, together with the Hansard record of Ludwig, J.W. Lundy, K.A. proceedings and minutes of proceedings. I Marshall, G. McEwen, A. move: McLucas, J.E. Milne, C. Moore, C. Murray, A.J.M. That the Senate take note of the report. Nettle, K. O’Brien, K.W.K. I seek leave to have my tabling statement Polley, H. Ray, R.F. incorporated in Hansard. Sherry, N.J. Siewert, R. Stephens, U. Sterle, G. Leave granted. Stott Despoja, N. Webber, R. The statement read as follows— Wong, P. Wortley, D. Report 66: Treaties tabled on 7 December 2004 NOES (4), 15 March and 11 May 2005: Abetz, E. Adams, J. • United Nations Convention against Corrup- Barnett, G. Brandis, G.H. tion Calvert, P.H. Campbell, I.G. • Chapman, H.G.P. Colbeck, R. Treaty between Australia and New Zealand Coonan, H.L. Eggleston, A. Establishing Certain Exclusive Economic Ellison, C.M. Ferguson, A.B. Zone Boundaries and Continental Shelf Ferris, J.M. * Fierravanti-Wells, C. Boundaries Fifield, M.P. Heffernan, W. • Singapore-Australia Free Trade Agreement Humphries, G. Johnston, D. Amendments

CHAMBER 6 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

• Agreement between the Government of Aus- and state courts in the discharge of their functions tralia and the Government of the Republic of as state officials. Korea on Cooperation in the Fields of En- Even so, the Committee has made 2 recommenda- ergy and Mineral Resources tions asking the Attorney-General to advise the • Agreement concerning the Use of Shoalwa- Committee that there is no intention to use the ter Bay Training Area and Associated Facili- external affairs power and UNCAC to pass legis- ties in Australia lation not foreshadowed in the NIA. • Mutual Recognition Agreement on Confor- The Amendments to the Singapore Australia Free mity Assessment in Relation to Medicines Trade Agreement add a further 2 Universities— Good Manufacturing Practice Inspection and Murdoch and the University of Tasmania—to the Certification list of Australian universities which are recog- • Amendments to the Rotterdam Convention nised for admission as qualified lawyers in Sin- on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for gapore. On a parochial note, I am pleased to see Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides Flinders University on the list of 10 and look in International Trade forward to the University of Adelaide being added soon. • Final Protocol and Partial Revision of the 2001 Radio Regulations, as incorporated in Since 1995, Singapore Armed Forces have used the International Telecommunication Union the Shoalwater Bay Training Area. The Commit- Final Acts of the World Radiocommunication tee supports the Agreement between Australia and Conference Singapore which will allow the continued use of the Shoalwater Bay Training Area by the Singa- • Establishment of the Antarctic Treaty Secre- pore Armed Forces for five years from 31 De- tariat cember 2004. Report 66 contains the findings and recommenda- This report also recommends the Treaty between tions of the review conducted by the Joint Stand- Australian and New Zealand which defines mari- ing Committee on Treaties of nine treaty actions time boundaries enter into force. This treaty tabled in Parliament on 7 December 2004, serves as a model for calm bilateral cooperation 15 March and 11 May 2005. The treaty actions on maritime boundaries. relate to the matters identified in the title of the report. I will comment on a selection of the treaty Lastly the Committee has recommended that a actions considered. Treaty which establishes a permanent and independent secretariat to administer the Antarctic The United Nations Convention Against Corrup- Treaty Consultation Meeting enter into force. tion is a multilateral agreement designed to enhance international efforts to combat corruption. Australia has a large territorial claim and an extensive research program in Antarctica. The secre- Although no changes to Commonwealth legisla- tariat will be in Buenos Aires, Argentina. tion are required to implement Australia’s obligations under UNCAC, the Committee raised two In conclusion, the Committee believes it is in issues with this Treaty. The first issue was the Australia’s national interest for the treaties con- degree to which this treaty confers additional sidered in Report 66 to be ratified. jurisdiction on the Commonwealth through the I commend the report to the Senate. use of the external affairs power or Section 51 Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (9.49 (xxix) of the Constitution. am)—I will not speak for long on the report, Evidence to the Committee suggested that the use but I will take the opportunity as a member of the external affairs power is limited to some of the treaties committee to once again note extent by the Melbourne Corporation doctrine. the importance of the work that the commit- That is, it is unlikely the Commonwealth could tee does. There is a huge range of treaties enact legislation which relates to corrupt conduct of members of state parliaments, states executives contained and examined in this report, some of which I was able to participate in the pro-

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 7 ceedings on and some of which I was not well be an issue I do not agree with—does able to because of other priorities. It is im- believe it is appropriate to use the external portant to emphasise the benefit of parlia- affairs power to bring in legislation then it mentary scrutiny and the range of issues that clearly has a constitutional right to do so. It are developed and entered into in regard to should then be up to the parliament, and par- international treaties. I have a short addi- ticularly the Senate, operating independently tional comment of mild dissent from one of the government, to assess whether or not component of this report, and for that reason that is a desirable approach. It is not a major I thought it appropriate to put that on the differentiation but it is a sufficiently strong record in this chamber. expression by the committee that I felt it ap- The general thrust of the committee’s in- propriate to clarify my own position. But quiry in that aspect of the report regarded both I and the wider committee certainly Australia ratifying a convention which dealt recommend that that treaty, along with all the with corruption internationally and internally others in the report, be ratified. and developing and being part of interna- Question agreed to. tional standards for addressing and prevent- Public Works Committee ing corruption. The committee quite rightly Reports recommended that we sign up and ratify that. Senator TROETH (Victoria) (9.53 am)— There is a fairly strong comment in the report expressing apprehension about the use On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present five of the external affairs power by the Com- reports of the committee as listed at item 7 on monwealth unilaterally to implement further today’s Order of Business, and move: legislation based upon a treaty that has been ratified without doing it in consultation with That the Senate take note of the reports. the states. I agree that doing it in consultation I seek leave to incorporate tabling statements is desirable, but I think the committee report in Hansard. overstates the negative aspect of using the Leave granted. external affairs power. I think it is appropri- The statements read as follows— ate to use in some circumstances, including the circumstances detailed in the report. If it These reports examine works representing some is necessary and there is not sufficient coop- $336.28 million of Commonwealth expenditure. eration from the states, then it is an appropri- Working Accommodation for Special Opera- ate thing to do. It is appropriate for the par- tions Forces, Holsworthy Barracks, New South Wales liament to then decide whether or not the legislation is suitable. There is a continual The Committee’s eleventh report of 2005 ad- need to differentiate between government dresses the construction of working accommodation for Special Operations forces, and stage one proposing legislation and the parliament of the redevelopment of Holsworthy Barracks, agreeing to it. New South Wales. The proposed works will fa- The committee’s recommendation calls on cilitate the establishment of: the Attorney-General to categorically rule • Army’s Full Time Commando Capability, out that the government does not plan to do based upon the 4th Battalion, the Royal Aus- specific things with regard to passing legisla- tralian Regiment (Commando); tion. Firstly, the government does not pass • the Tactical Assault Group (East), to become legislation; the parliament does. Secondly, if an organic element of the 4th Battalion, the the government, on any issue—and it could Royal Australian Regiment (Commando);

CHAMBER 8 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

• the Incident Response Regiment; Noting that some of the redundant buildings con- • Special Operations Combat Services Support tain asbestos, the Committee recommends that the Company; and CSIRO take all necessary steps to identify and ensure the safe removal and disposal of hazardous • the first stage of the redevelopment of Hols- materials from the site. The Committee also rec- worthy Barracks. ommends that the CSIRO continue discussion Having investigated the proposal, the Committee with the National Capital Authority to resolve any is satisfied that the works will improve amenity outstanding design issues. Having considered the for, and operational efficiency of, the important proposal in detail, members are satisfied that the army units accommodated at Holsworthy and works should proceed at the estimated cost of therefore recommends that the works proceed at $12.7 million. the estimated cost of $207.7 million. ————— ————— Operational Upgrade of the Detention Facility, New Entomology Bioscience Laboratory at the Berrimah, Northern Territory Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Or- The Committee’s thirteenth report of 2005 deals ganisation’s (CSIRO’S) Black Mountain Cam- with a proposal by the Department of Immigra- pus in the ACT tion and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs The Committee’s twelfth report of 2005 examines (DIMIA) to carry out an operational upgrade of the proposed construction of a new entomology the detention facility at Berrimah, Northern Terri- bioscience laboratory at the Commonwealth Sci- tory, at an estimated cost of $8.21 million. entific and Industrial Organisation’s (CSIRO’S) The primary purpose of the proposed works is to Black Mountain Campus in the ACT. establish a safe and secure land-based detention The CSIRO reported that the Division of Ento- facility for illegal foreign fishers apprehended in mology currently conducts scientific research in Australia’s northern waters. The Department re- buildings that range in age from 32 to 76 years ported that illegal foreign fishing in Australia’s old. These buildings: northern waters has been increasing in recent • do not meet contemporary research stan- years and that current boat-based detention ar- dards; rangements have proven unmanageable. It is en- visaged that, in addition to illegal foreign fishers, • have, in some instances, structural con- the facility will accommodate Northern Territory straints which prevent them being refur- immigration compliance cases and unauthorised bished to a level commensurate with current air arrivals, some of whom are women and chil- and evolving laboratory standards; dren • do not meet current OH&S standards; and The Committee notes that the Department’s pro- • cannot accommodate anticipated Division posal contains a significant number of undeter- growth mined factors which may be expected to impact • To redress these deficiencies, the CSIRO upon the project cost. Whilst cognisant of the proposes to: difficulties associated with estimating project • construct a new two-storey, 2,313 square budgets under modern procurement arrange- metre Entomology Bioscience Laboratory; ments, the Committee requests that agencies supply the most robust and comprehensive costs • refurbish two existing buildings, available in order that the Committee can fulfil its • construct covered walkways to link the new statutory role as a scrutineer of public expendi- and existing buildings and ture. The Committee therefore recommends that • carry out associated site works and landscap- DIMIA supply regular updates on expenditure ing, including demolition of redundant build- throughout the course of the project. ings and sheds. Having viewed both the existing facilities at the Berrimah detention centre and the plans for the

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 9 upgrade, the Committee remains unconvinced also provide a new facility for the Darwin Port that the proposed family area represents the best Services Organisation. use of available space, or provides a reasonable The Committee notes Defence’s efforts to mini- level of amenity or security for detainees. Given mise the environmental impacts of the proposed the inadequacy and inappropriateness of the pro- works and, in respect of any future dredging ac- posed family area, the Committee recommends tivities, recommends that the Department main- that families including women and children are tain close consultation with the Northern Territory not detained at the facility. In the event that there Department of Lands, Planning and Environment is a demonstrated need for the short-term deten- to ensure minimisation of damage to the marine tion of families at the facility, the Committee rec- environment. ommends that, in order to ensure appropriate pro- In view of the importance of fire protection and vision of security, amenity and space for families, evacuation measures, the Committee recommends women and children, the Department better utilise that Defence supply it with details of the fire pro- the space available. The family area should be tection system proposed for the Standby Crew enlarged and should provide appropriate separa- and Port Services Organisation building, includ- tion of all facilities, adequate indoor recreation ing any departures from the requirements of the space and a secure outdoor area of a suitable size Building Code of Australia, when these have been to accommodate play equipment relocated from determined. The Committee is satisfied with the the existing large, grassed recreation area. evidence supplied by Defence and is happy for The Committee also wishes to ensure the reliabil- the works to proceed at the estimated cost of ity of DIMIA’s project delivery strategy and rec- $19.17 million. ommends that the Department supply the Com- mittee with an update on the chosen delivery ————— methodology and the application of Common- Proposed Redevelopment of Kokoda Barracks, wealth Procurement Guidelines to this process, Canungra, Queensland when this information becomes available. The fifteenth report of 2005 presents the Commit- Further, in the interest of transparency and good tee’s findings in relation to the proposed redevel- community relations, the Committee recommends opment of Kokoda Barracks at Canungra, Queen- that DIMIA consult with the local community and sland, for the Department of Defence. The pur- with relevant Northern Territory Government pose of the proposed work is to provide the work- agencies in respect of the proposed works. In ing and domestic accommodation, and engineer- particular, the Committee wishes DIMIA to con- ing services infrastructure required, for the ongo- sult with the office of the Northern Territory ing delivery of effective training at the Canungra Chief Minister to find an appropriate name for the Military Training Area. facility. The redevelopment entails: Having given careful consideration to the pro- • correction of working and training accom- posal, the Committee recommends that the works modation deficiencies; proceed at the estimated cost of $8.21 million. • rationalisation of messing facilities; ————— • improvements to living-in accommodation Upgrade of Patrol Boat Facilities at Hmas for trainees; Coonawarra, Darwin • upgrade of the engineering services infra- A further referral from the Department of De- structure; and fence, namely the upgrade of patrol boat facilities • disposal of redundant, high maintenance at HMAS Coonawarra, Darwin, forms the subject facilities. of the Committee’s fourteenth report of 2005. During the course of its inquiry, the Committee The upgraded facilities, estimated to cost $19.17 investigated a range of barracks services; the de- million, will facilitate the introduction into ser- sign of the proposed new facilities; the removal of vice of the Armidale Class Patrol Boat and will asbestos; heritage issues; and traffic management.

CHAMBER 10 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

The Committee recommends that the works pro- Ordered that the report be printed. ceed at the estimated cost of $86.7 million and Senator HOGG—I move: requests that Defence continue consultation with the Department of Environment and Heritage That the Senate take note of the report. regarding any heritage issues that may arise from I would like to thank the secretariat and the redevelopment project. those who appeared before the committee. I I would like to take the opportunity to thank my will leave the bulk of comments on the re- Committee colleagues and all those involved in port to Senator Faulkner. the five inquiries. I commend the reports to the Senator FAULKNER (New South Senate. Wales) (9.55 am)—Unfortunately too rarely Also, Mr President, this is my first opportu- in this parliament do we have an opportunity nity to congratulate you on your re-election to examine Australia’s role in the war in Iraq. as President, and I would like to do so. I am pleased that some important issues The PRESIDENT—Thank you. about Iraq are examined in this report. De- Question agreed to. spite the best efforts of the government to Scrutiny of Bills Committee deceive the Australian people about the Iraq war and cover up the truth, some things are Report crystal clear. The first is that Australia went Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL (New to war in Iraq on the basis of the need to South Wales) (9.54 am)—On behalf of the eliminate weapons of mass destruction. chair of the committee, I present the eighth Whatever fine-sounding claims Mr Howard report of 2005 of the Senate Standing Com- and Mr Downer make now, they told the mittee for the Scrutiny of Bills. I also lay on Australian people that the reason for war was the table Scrutiny of Bills Alert Digest No. 9 the danger of WMD. It is also clear that this of 2005, dated 17 August 2005. was a fraud on the Australian people. The Ordered that the report be printed. Howard government made fraudulent claims Publications Committee about the existence of WMD and used sexed- Report up intelligence reports, doctored intelligence reports, as the basis of those claims. Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (9.54 am)—On behalf of the chair of the commit- The facts are that the international com- tee, Senator Watson, I present the fifth report munity attempted to establish whether Iraq of the Publications Committee. really had WMD through the establishment of the Iraq Survey Group and, if they had Ordered that the report be adopted. them, would attempt to get rid of them. The Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade ISG’s main objectives after the 2003 war was References Committee to verify if Iraq had WMD, to find them, if Report that was the case, and to destroy them, if Senator HOGG (Queensland) (9.54 they existed. Eminent scientists and weapons am)—On behalf of the Chair of the Foreign experts were engaged to participate in the Affairs, Defence and Trade References work of the ISG. Mr Rod Barton and Dr John Committee, I present the report of the com- Gee were two such experts who worked for mittee entitled Duties of Australian person- the ISG, off and on, until their resignation. nel in Iraq, together with the Hansard record Rod Barton was so well regarded that he was of proceedings and documents presented to employed as the command leader of the Iraqi the committee. WMD elimination team of the ISG. Rod Bar-

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 11 ton had earlier been seconded from DIO to Ms Myra Rowling, First Assistant Secretary, work for Richard Butler in the UN special International Policy, and an Air Force group commission, UNSCOM, and for the UN’s captain on his concerns not just about the chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, from WMD issue but also about the fact that pris- 1991 after the first Gulf War. oners in Iraq were being mistreated during Barton’s experience of working with Blix interrogation. led him to the conclusion that Iraq did not That is where things get murky. It seems pose a WMD threat to the Western world. that at the time neither Barton’s nor Gee’s Blix, of course, had publicly declared that protests over the misuse of the ISG’s work, Iraq posed no WMD threat. Barton was con- nor Barton’s reporting of prisoner mistreat- vinced that Iraq had neither a delivery means ment, went one step further. That is hard to nor a WMD capability. We know that Rod believe, of course. It is the usual story from Barton advised the Howard government of the Howard government: the responsible this in January 2003 and we now know, minister’s claim that somehow, for some rea- without any contradiction, that Saddam Hus- son, they were never told. It is the ‘kids sein’s Iraq had neither the capacity nor capa- overboard’ defence that we hear time and bility to use WMD. It was not surprising that again. It is the usual excuse, but it does not the ISG never found any evidence of WMD. get any more plausible with time. There were not any. According to Mr Bar- It is very hard to believe that when two ton’s evidence in 2004, Dr John Gee had also senior WMD experts resigned in protest over reached the conclusion that Iraq did not pos- the distortion and politicisation of their work sess and had not possessed WMD. neither ONA nor DIO thought this worth What comes next in this sorry saga? Both noting in any of the ongoing WMD assess- Barton and Gee resign from the ISG, appar- ments that those agencies provided to the ently for the same reason. They made that Howard government from that time on. They reason clear in their letters of resignation. In had not kept their assessment of ‘no WMD’ a effect, both Barton and Gee resigned in pro- secret. They had both at separate times test over the politicisation and censorship of communicated their views to Australia’s rep- the ISG’s interim report which Charles Du- resentative in Iraq and on separate occasions elfer presented to the US congress. The re- briefed the Head of the Iraq Task Force, a port was a fix; the fixer was the CIA. When special working group that was set up in Barton and Gee returned separately into Aus- DFAT to coordinate Australia’s efforts in tralia, they briefed officials from DIO, ONA Iraq. Yet throughout this period the Howard and Defence. In the case of Gee, he addition- government continued to preach the line of ally briefed Mr Downer for some 20 min- justifiable war on the basis that Iraq had and utes. Mr Downer later described this discus- still could have WMD. sion as ‘personal’. In this personal discus- John Gee could have cleared some of this sion, surely John Gee mentioned his reasons up for the committee. He is a crucial figure for resigning. in this story. He failed to respond to two in- WMD was the hot political topic at the vitations of the committee to appear before time. It went to the major reason that our it, which is very disappointing indeed. I note Prime Minister committed Australian combat that Dr Gee is currently a contracted consult- units to Iraq. We know for certain that when ant to ONA, but there is in my view no ex- Rod Barton returned to Australia he briefed cuse for Dr Gee’s failure to attend before the

CHAMBER 12 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 committee and provide evidence. Dr Gee which talks about all of the matters surround- suggests that he has nothing of interest—no ing the context of the question of whether we interesting information and no new informa- were involved in interrogating any prisoners tion—to provide to the committee. That is a in Iraq. The Department of Defence became judgment that the committee should make, aware and concerned that there may have and I think it is very disappointing that Dr been some involvement. Accordingly, as Gee would not respond to the proper invita- would be good practice, they commissioned tions that were issued to him by the commit- a survey of every known person to have tee. served in Iraq at the time. That is set out in I want to say, because it is true, that Dr paragraph 3.30 of the report. The report Gee’s failure to appear before the committee states: stymied the work of the committee, stymied A list of 302 Australian personnel who might the inquiry and of course meant that it was have had some exposure to Iraqi prisoners was even more difficult to report on our terms of refined down to 60 and then to 15. The final 15 reference. That is very significant, because it were contacted by a small team of senior lawyers meant that we were simply unable to get who asked targeted questions relating to dealings with prisoners and visits to prisoners. closer to the truth of the Australian participation in the interrogation of Iraqi prisoners. To paraphrase: we surveyed the important people who could possibly shed any light Mr Acting Deputy President, you would upon this important issue. The report goes recall the government’s pathetic and trans- on: parent defence on this question of prisoner treatment. The government’s defence rests on A third country deployment questionnaire went to 106 third country deployment people, that is per- a dictionary definition. People look to all sonnel who were deployed with third countries, kinds of guides and reasons to judge right the US and the UK. Of those 106 personnel, 23 from wrong. Some people look to the law, were sent the survey. some look to religion, some look to philoso- We not only surveyed our own people in the phy, but the Howard government resorts to a ADF serving under the ADF; we surveyed dictionary—the dictionary definition of ‘in- anybody who might have been embedded in terrogation’ versus that of ‘interview’. And either the UK or the USA forces. Mr Barton what a grand defence it is! Decent people are filled out the questionnaire. We distilled it still laughing at Senator Hill’s efforts to down to just one person out of those 302 plus squirm away from Australia’s role in the in- the 106 personnel: Mr Barton. The report terrogation of Iraqi prisoners of war. There says: are still many unanswered questions in relation to this issue, including why Mr Downer On 25 May 2004, Mr Barton filled out the questionnaire. In answer to whether he had visited any has refused to confirm what was discussed coalition PW— between Dr Gee and himself. For my part and for the opposition’s part, we intend to that is, prisoner of war— pursue these issues relentlessly. or detainee detention centres, holding facilities, prisons or interrogation cells he wrote that he had Senator JOHNSTON (Western Australia) two visits only as part of his duties with the ISG: (10.05 am)—This report, as accurately as it • can, goes towards explaining and discover- 30 December 2003, to interview a former Iraqi senior government official … ing the actual facts surrounding this matter. If I may, I will go straight to the report, Let me underline the word ‘interview’—he did not say ‘interrogate’. He had the oppor-

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 13 tunity to tell the world, including his em- feather to fly with—in this allegation against ployer and his government, that he was in- ADF personnel or any Australians serving in volved in interrogation. He did not. He said, Iraq at the time of the realisation of what was ‘I interviewed an Iraqi government official.’ happening at Abu Ghraib. On 10 January, he conducted a familiarisa- I come back to the one witness who could tion inspection of Camp Cropper. As to ques- and did bring the facts to the committee: Mr tions about whether he had heard or observed Rod Barton. He said, ‘I did not observe any any mistreatment of Iraqi PWs or civilian mistreatment.’ His evidence in his transcripts detainees whilst he was in the Middle East, is clear. He was in no capacity an observer he responded: of, or a person who brings actual factual evi- I did not observe any mistreatment of detainees at dence of any tangible sort about, interroga- Camp Cropper. However I was concerned about tion or mistreatment of prisoners by Austra- the size of the cells many detainees were kept in lians in Iraq. This report gives the ADF a ... the amount of exercise permitted ... and the clean bill of health. solitary confinement of some detainees. I expressed these concerns to the officer in charge of As an aside to all this, I say that, when an the facility. Australian citizen, for whatever reason, de- Let me restate that the one person distilled cides not to attend and make himself avail- down in the inquiry by the Australian De- able for a Senate inquiry, he is—and thank fence Force’s due process of examining these goodness he is—absolutely entitled so to do. allegations said—and I requote this for the He is under no constraint, no compulsion benefit of senators: whatsoever, to come before a Senate inquiry. The Senate has the power to bring him, I did not observe any mistreatment at Camp Cropper. should it so resolve. No such application, no such motion, was directed from the commit- Further, at paragraph 232, in reply to ques- tee to the Senate. For Senator Faulkner to tions regarding what he did and who, if any- now want to heap the blame for his disap- one, he reported to, he stated: pointment at the feet of Dr Gee is outra- I expressed my concerns— geous. I have no doubt that Dr Gee is a per- and those were concerns about cell sizes son of outstanding and high reputation in the and— community, and I for one support him, about the possible abuse of detainees to Austra- knowing as I do the witch-hunt factors that lian government officials on my return to Austra- are involved in some of these inquiries put lia at the end of March 2004 and recommended on, by virtue of the former construction of that Australia should not be involved in the inter- the numbers of this place, by the opposition. view process. Dr Gee was right, and I stand to defend It was borne out that no Australian was in- him and his right not to appear before the volved in the interview process or the inter- Senate committee. If the committee had rogation process, other than as set out by me wanted him to appear and if he was consid- and by the report. It is absolutely clear from ered by any member of the committee to all the evidence and the facts. May I say that have knowledge and the capacity to provide the attack this morning on Dr Gee is under- evidence to assist in the terms of reference, standable. There is substantial disappoint- the committee should have passed a resolu- ment and frustration on the part of the oppo- tion that he be subpoenaed to attend. It did sition in this place because they have no not do so. I for one will never, ever condone smoking gun—no evidence, nothing, not a

CHAMBER 14 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 the condemning of an Australian citizen for about the concepts of operations. It is clear exercising his right not to appear before a that that may well have not been the case. Senate committee. I emphasise why this is so important. I commend this report to the Senate. It There is a tendency—and it was reflected a was an important reference. It absolves abso- bit in Senator Johnston’s comments—for lutely the minister and the Australian De- those of us who express great concern about fence Force. I am very proud of them at all the potential mistreatment of prisoners in times, as they well know. Iraq and the activities or actions of some of Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) the army personnel from the so-called coali- (10.14 am)—As the Democrats representation of the willing to be continually attacked tive on this committee and someone who for besmirching the integrity of Australian signed off on this report, I would like to af- troops or attacking the actions of Australians. firm the comments of both speakers. It is an That is a common tactic of trying to turn important report. One might not have picked around and play the patriotic card by saying, it up from the differing tenors of the com- ‘You’re just attacking our brave troops over ments from the Labor and Liberal speakers, there by raising these concerns.’ It is also but it is actually a unanimous report. I think clearly false. At no stage—certainly not in that is always desirable. It gives a report ex- this chamber—did anybody allege that Aus- tra weight when it can be unanimous. tralian troops or personnel were involved in committing acts of mistreatment or torture, It does contain one recommendation, but the clear issue is that there was a gross which is that the ADF review its procedures disparity between what the government was for instructing personnel about the ADF’s saying Australian personnel were involved in various codes of conduct and instructions or and what some of the personnel themselves concepts of operations governing the conduct were saying they were involved in. When of Australian personnel while they are en- you get that situation in which the govern- gaged in overseas operations, especially ment say, ‘Our people aren’t doing interroga- where Australian personnel are deployed in tions or such things,’ and you have people third-country operations. That recommenda- who were there on the ground—people with tion was made and supported by all on the immense experience, like Mr Barton— committee because it was quite clear from saying, ‘Yes, we are,’ then of course the Sen- the evidence, particularly from the key wit- ate and the Australian people are right to ness, Mr Barton, that that was not being question what the truth is and what is going done. There was an ADF perception that eve- on. That is why this inquiry was so valuable rybody was informed and fully briefed about and important. all aspects of the concepts of operations, but Mr Barton’s evidence indicated that he did I emphasise that, while the report did give not believe that he had been given full details a clean bill of health to the actions of Austra- of them and he suspected that others had not lian personnel and the ADF, it certainly did as well. Given the immense importance of not give a clean bill of health to the govern- ensuring that everything is above board and ment, as the report reflects, and, sadly, it did everybody is clearly aware of their responsi- not give a clean bill of health to the actions bilities and obligations, particularly under of some of the personnel from other coun- the Geneva convention, it is absolutely es- tries. The world knows about the actions in sential that absolutely everybody knows Abu Ghraib. Clearly, that is recognised and established. I have to say that the United

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 15

States should be congratulated for confront- actions to defend and promote liberal democ- ing that and punishing some of the people racy. However much we may disagree or involved. Whether they would have done so agree about the validity of the action that is if it had not become public knowledge, I do happening there—and we all have different not know, but they have clearly done so and views about that—you cannot be putting out not all countries do. The UK has done the a message saying we are doing this to pro- same with some of their personnel who had mote democracy and liberal democratic stan- been involved in clear abuses of international dards on the one hand and then have your law and the mistreatment of prisoners, and personnel involved in clear breaches of basic they should be congratulated when that hap- human rights and standards that have been pens because many countries do not do that. developed over a long period of time and The fact is that Mr Barton raised serious promoted most strongly by those liberal de- concerns about the treatment of prisoners in mocracies. the place where he was. He also raised con- Whilst the Australian personnel were cerns about one prisoner in particular and clearly not involved in any breaches, it is still whether mistreatment may have led to the a serious matter that we are working with death of that person. The details of that are in and aware of, and have people like Mr Bar- this report. That is a serious matter. Nobody ton raising concerns about, yet the govern- is saying Australians were involved in comment does nothing. That is what has hap- mitting those offences but, if we are working pened. There seemed to be no interest in with people who are doing that—if we are in knowing what is happening about these the same facility, working side by side with things and certainly no interest in telling it them—we are potentially complicit in those straight to the Australian people. offences. I draw the Senate’s attention to the That leads me to the final point I want to comments of the former chief of the ADF, make, which is that this report is valuable, as General Cosgrove, during his recent appear- Senator Johnston said, but the government ance on Andrew Denton’s show. He made it did not support this inquiry being set up. If clear that those sorts of abuses, such as those the Senate had proposed it today, there is a that became clear happened at Abu Ghraib, good possibility that it would not have been are completely unacceptable and that, once set up because the government did not sup- you stoop to that level, you have lost a core port it. A lot of the information here came part of what you are trying to defend. Those from Senate estimates as well. Senate esti- are the words of General Cosgrove, and I mates will still happen for a while but, if the support them entirely because he is right. government has its way, as Senator Hill has It is not acceptable to say, ‘These things been musing, the scope of Senate estimates happen in a war and it is to be expected.’ The will be narrowed so that it is solely expendi- Geneva convention was put in place as a ture under the appropriations bills, and they clear benchmark to send a strong signal could well have ruled out of order all of throughout the world that it is not acceptable. those questions about what Australian per- It is not just a nice, feel-good convention that sonnel were doing in Iraq. There is a very you aspire to when it is convenient; it is real danger that reports like this one, which when it is not convenient that these things government member Senator Johnston him- need to be tested and when we need to stand self has said is valuable, will not happen. I firm on them, particularly in the context congratulate Senator Johnston on his con- where we are talking about undertaking these structive approach in this and other inquiries.

CHAMBER 16 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

We need to make sure that we can continue sponsible government, in that it ordered the to do these things, and that is seriously at Department of Defence to take part in the risk. invasion and occupation of Iraq, but does not I will make a final comment about Dr want to share the responsibility for events Gee. I was also disappointed that he did not which have occurred there, including accept the committee’s invitations. I have breaches of international conventions includ- said in this place before that I respect Sena- ing those which protect prisoners who are tor Faulkner’s aversion to issuing subpoenas. taken in the course of a war. I have been on record as saying that if I be- What is clearly written into this report, lieve it is serious enough then I am willing to and what comes from the evidence of Mr issue a subpoena. Whether or not it was ap- Barton and others, is that there is indisput- propriate in this case, I do not know. Clearly, able evidence of mistreatment of prisoners Dr Gee does have the right not to attend. He by the US occupying forces: interrogation, was invited. If he did not want to attend for which includes what can only be described whatever reason, he had that right, and I as torture—beatings to soften people up for support him in that, but it was also very dis- interrogation and so on—that became known appointing and less than helpful that he did to the Australian command. In fact, at Abu not attend. Whether or not it would have Ghraib an Australian officer was very clearly been an idea for the committee to consider involved in misleading the Red Cross by subpoenaing him, I am not sure. I was not making sure that the Red Cross was not able able to be that fully involved in the day-to- to attend Abu Ghraib, unannounced, when it day activities of the committee in order to wanted to, so that things could be set up to make a judgment, but I do flag that I have a mislead the Red Cross about what was actu- different view from Senator Faulkner. I do ally going on there. think that, on occasions, it is appropriate for Mr Barton clearly was of the view that committees to subpoena people and, indeed, prisoners were being abused, against interna- I might say that it is sometimes helpful to the tional laws, and that was communicated. But witness to have that compulsion. The Scraf- when you get to the Minister for Defence, ton affair coming out of the children over- Senator Hill, and the Prime Minister, Mr board incident is one example that I point to Howard, there is this ‘no knowledge, no rein which it would clearly have been helpful sponsibility; we are not involved’ cover-up if he had had that subpoena a couple of years attitude. That is what this whole report reeks earlier, but I will not rehash all that. I think of, and the responsibility must lie with the this is a valuable report and I commend it to Prime Minister and the Minister for Defence. the Senate. It was not this parliament that voted to have Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (10.23 this nation involved in Iraq. It was not this am)—At 3.68, the committee reports that it parliament that set the conditions. That right, is: which should be a parliamentary right, was ... concerned that communication and the report- taken by the executive. The executive, yet ing processes within the Department of Defence again, is involved in this business of closing are falling short of that expected of a highly- its eyes to clear evidence of misbehaviour skilled and professional organisation. and then saying, ‘We are not involved.’ It is Let me put that in its context. This govern- duplicitous. It is falsifying responsibility. It ment has fallen short of the standard of re- is ducking responsibility when difficult matters are involved. It is failing to back up re-

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 17 sponsible people in the defence forces, in is not going to go into the public arena. This Australian employment, who are led to res- debate is not going to be challenging the ignation as a matter of conscience. Prime Minister or the Minister for Defence, Mr Barton made it clear that, in his view, the Leader of the Government in the Senate, interrogation was taking place with abuse of Senator Hill, who should be here leading the prisoners. But it has changed to ‘interviews’. response to this committee and its findings, There is a denial process going on here for but is absent. This is not accident; it is de- political purposes, and that is a failure of sign. It is designed obfuscation. At the end of responsibility at the top level of the Austra- the day, the Howard government is failing to lian government. That is what has been un- stand by its people, good and true—the best covered here and, of course, key witnesses of them, the most fearless, the most honest. failed to appear. They are the people who get chomped in this repeated process, which goes back to the Senator Johnston says he will always children overboard affair and beyond. Re- stand by anybody’s right not to appear before peatedly, when people come forward to put a Senate committee. I hope Senator Johnston the truth, to put the uncomfortable truth, the is here for a long time to come and that that Prime Minister, the Minister for Defence and will be sorely tested. I believe it is an obliga- others, have their hands to their ears because tion of anybody involved in the delivery of it is not convenient for them politically to any service in Australia at the direction of hear. That is a monumental failure of leader- government to appear before a Senate com- ship. The problem is, it is very often left to mittee when it is inquiring into a matter. If history to clarify the clouds, the diversion, there is no problem, there should be no prob- that can be thrown up by the current gov- lem in coming before a committee. And if ernment in power, against the analysis that there is a problem with coming before a should be brought to the matter. committee, one is right to assume that that is because the committee is being denied in- Let us hope that this does lead to the gov- formation that might change both its delib- ernment taking greater responsibility. How- erations and its findings. ever, one has to look at its form directly and be sensible about this. The fear must be that This committee has found that there has it will simply lead this government to be- been a failure of communication, but I would come cleverer in its covering up, to become weigh it differently. The failure of communi- sneakier in shedding responsibility, to be- cation is because, at prime ministerial level come more sophisticated at the prime minis- and at ministerial level, there is an attitude terial level in not knowing anything that is of: ‘Don’t tell us. We don’t want to know. uncomfortable and to not stand by decent You deal with it. We want to be squeaky people who come forward with uncomfort- clean by a denial of knowledge.’ In other able information which needs action at the words: ‘We won’t back you up. We will not highest level. That is not going to happen stand by you honest, fearless, decent people with this government. There has been a fail- who are employed by us if your information ure by this government and that has been is going to be an embarrassment to us.’ written into this report. I seek leave to con- That is a very, very poor level of leader- tinue my remarks later. ship in this country. In fact, it is a failure of Leave granted; debate adjourned. leadership. It is appalling. Yet the Prime Minister gets away with it. This debate today

CHAMBER 18 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

NATIONAL RESIDUE SURVEY The levy recovers the cost of the Apple and Pear (CUSTOMS) LEVY AMENDMENT BILL Industry’s residue monitoring program that is 2005 required for access to lucrative export markets. NATIONAL RESIDUE SURVEY The amendments are part of a package of strategies being put in place on behalf of the Apple and (EXCISE) LEVY AMENDMENT BILL Pear Industry and the increase in the maximum 2005 allowable levy rate will allow the Industry further First Reading scope to expand its operative rate of levy by sub- Bills received from the House of Repre- ordinate legislation where access to further fund- sentatives. ing for residue monitoring programs may be required at short notice. Senator MINCHIN (South Australia— The amendments will commence on or after the Minister for Finance and Administration) first day of the quarter following Royal Assent. If (10.31 am)—I move: the first quarter starts less than 30 days after That these bills may proceed without formali- Royal Assent the start date will be the second ties, may be taken together and be now read a quarter after Royal Assent. This will allow levy first time. payers to be given one month’s notice of the start Question agreed to. date of the new levy. ————— Bills read a first time. NATIONAL RESIDUE SURVEY (EXCISE) Second Reading LEVY AMENDMENT BILL 2005 Senator MINCHIN (South Australia— The purpose of this bill is to amend the National Minister for Finance and Administration) Residue Survey (Excise) Levy Act 1998. (10.32 am)—I move: The amendments to the National Residue Survey That these bills be now read a second time. (Excise) Levy Act 1998 (the Act) will raise the I seek leave to have the second reading maximum levy rate allowable to 0.10 of a cent speeches incorporated in Hansard. per kilogram and increase the operative levy rate for the purposes of residue monitoring on all ap- Leave granted. ples and pears, including fresh, juicing and proc- The speeches read as follows— essing fruit, produced in Australia that are sold or used in the production of other goods from the NATIONAL RESIDUE SURVEY (CUSTOMS) present rate of 0.060 of a cent per kilogram to LEVY AMENDMENT BILL 2005 0.075 of a cent per kilogram. The current opera- The purpose of this bill is to amend the National tive rate of the National Residue Survey levy is Residue Survey (Customs) Levy Act 1998. set in the regulations at the maximum allowable The amendments to the National Residue Survey rate of 0.060 of a cent per kilogram. (Customs) Levy Act 1998 (the Act) will raise the The levy recovers the cost of the Apple and Pear maximum levy rate allowable to 0.10 of a cent Industry’s domestic residue monitoring program. per kilogram and to increase the operative levy The amendments are part of a package of strate- rate for the purposes of residue monitoring on gies being put in place on behalf of the Apple and fresh apples and pears exported from Australia Pear Industry and the increase in the maximum from the present rate of 0.060 of a cent per kilo- allowable levy rate will allow the Industry further gram to 0.075 of a cent per kilogram. The current scope to expand its operative rate of levy by sub- operative rate of the National Residue Survey ordinate legislation where access to further fund- levy is set in the regulations at the maximum al- ing for residue monitoring programs may be re- lowable rate of 0.060 of a cent per kilogram. quired at short notice.

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 19

The amendments will commence on or after the Second Reading first day of the quarter following Royal Assent. If Senator MINCHIN (South Australia— the first quarter starts less than 30 days after Royal Assent the start date will be the second Minister for Finance and Administration) quarter after Royal Assent. This will allow levy (10.34 am)—I move: payers to be given one month’s notice of the start That these bills be now read a second time. date of the new levy. I seek leave to have the second reading Debate (on motion by Senator Minchin) speeches incorporated in Hansard. adjourned. Leave granted. Ordered that the resumption of the debate The speeches read as follows— be made an order of the day for a later hour. AUSTRALIAN WORKPLACE SAFETY AUSTRALIAN WORKPLACE SAFETY STANDARDS BILL 2005 STANDARDS BILL 2005 The Australian Safety and Compensation Council NATIONAL OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH is a new body to be established by the Govern- AND SAFETY COMMISSION ment to replace the National Occupational Health (REPEAL, CONSEQUENTIAL AND and Safety Commission. TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS) BILL The Council is an advisory body which, through a 2005 partnership of governments, employers and employees, will lead and coordinate national efforts HIGHER EDUCATION LEGISLATION to prevent workplace death, injury and disease AMENDMENT (2005 BUDGET and improve workers’ compensation arrange- MEASURES) BILL 2005 ments and the rehabilitation and return to work of HEALTH INSURANCE AMENDMENT injured employees. (MEDICAL SPECIALISTS) BILL 2005 The Council will establish a national approach to SUPERANNUATION LEGISLATION workplace safety and workers compensation AMENDMENT (SUPERANNUATION which currently does not exist in Australia. Most importantly the Council will provide the perfect SAFETY AND OTHER MEASURES) setting for the promotion of greater consistency BILL 2005 and uniformity amongst the various jurisdictions. First Reading Although the Council is to be established admin- Bills received from the House of Repre- istratively, however, as a result of representations sentatives. from stakeholders, and in particular from the Aus- tralian Chamber of Commerce and Industry and Senator MINCHIN (South Australia— the ACTU, the Government has agreed to provide Minister for Finance and Administration) the power to declare national standards or codes (10.33 am)—I indicate to the Senate that of practice in legislation. these bills are being introduced together. Af- This bill, therefore, enables the new Council to ter debate on the motion for the second read- continue this important task previously under- ing has been adjourned, I will be moving a taken by the National Occupational Health and motion to have the bills listed separately on Safety Commission. the Notice Paper. I move: Declaration of national standards and codes of That these bills may proceed without formali- practice is essential to ensuring workplace safety ties, may be taken together and be now read a in Australia. Standards and codes declared by the first time. Council provide nationally consistent frameworks Question agreed to. in which safety can be managed by employers and employees in certain industries or in relation Bills read a first time. to certain hazards. It also means that jurisdictions

CHAMBER 20 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 can adopt the standards in their legislation, provisions that will ensure continuity between the thereby ensuring that there are appropriate sanc- two standard setting bodies. tions and penalties for failing to comply with This bill provides for National Standards and certain workplace safety obligations. Codes of Practice that have been issued by The process of declaring standards which are NOHSC, to be read as if issued by the ASCC. It suitable for adoption in legislation by jurisdic- also preserves the effect of any public consultations assists in improving uniformity of occupa- tions that are underway and allows for these to be tional health and safety regulation in Australia. treated as if they had been undertaken by the We are often told by employers that they have to ASCC. operate within a myriad of different regulatory The National OHS Strategy 2002-2012 and the frameworks in Australia. Accordingly, the decla- Business Plan underpinning it, are also important ration of occupational health and safety standards components of the work of NOHSC that will be and codes, which can be adopted in state and ter- transferred to the ASCC. ritory legislation, is an important step in reducing The Government sees the Australian Safety and duplication and inconsistent regulation. Compensation Council as a way of revitalising The Australian Government is committed to en- the approaches to occupational health and safety suring that Australian workplaces are as safe as and workers compensation. possible, and that injured workers are assisted with their rehabilitation and return to work. This ————— bill will allow the new Council to continue to HIGHER EDUCATION LEGISLATION work in partnership with state and territory gov- AMENDMENT (2005 BUDGET MEASURES) ernments, employer groups and employee organi- BILL 2005 zations, to promote national consistency in occu- Australia’s higher education sector will benefit pational health and safety for workers in Austra- from a record $7.8 billion investment from the lia. Australian Government in this year’s 2005-06 ————— Budget. NATIONAL OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND The Government’s continuing commitment to the SAFETY COMMISSION (REPEAL, university sector will provide students with better CONSEQUENTIAL AND TRANSITIONAL facilities and more course options across a range PROVISIONS) BILL 2005 of campuses. This bill implements the Australian Government’s This bill now before the Senate is a clear expres- decision to abolish the National Occupational sion of that commitment to higher education, as it Health and Safety Commission. will honour two important election commitments for new places and capital funding. In its response to the Productivity Commission’s Report on National Workers Compensation and As part of a range of new initiatives and to reflect Occupational Health and Safety Frameworks, the Australia’s global expertise in many academic Government announced its intention to pursue the fields—such as tropical sciences—this bill con- goal of greater national consistency in these areas tains additional funding to ensure that our univer- through the establishment of a new body. sities remain at the forefront of new skills developments. The National Occupational Health and Safety Commission will be replaced by the Australian Recognising the importance of tropical sciences, Safety and Compensation Council. The Council’s the Australian Government is providing $26 mil- functions will include the declaration of national lion to James Cook University for veterinary sci- standards and/or codes of practice relating to oc- ence and tropical agriculture. cupational health and safety. Earlier this year the Government allocated infra- The bill provides for the transfer of the Commis- structure funding of $12 million over two years sion’s assets to the Commonwealth and contains towards a new veterinary science school at James Cook University’s Townsville campus with a link

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 21 to the Cairns campus. The new facility will fulfil the University will be enhanced through an addi- all of the normal functions of a veterinary school, tional $25 million over the next three years. but in addition will provide a unique focus on In 2006, $7 million will be provided for the de- tropical animal husbandry and diseases. The new velopment of a medical training facility at the school will play a role in developing preventative Campbelltown campus. The new medical training measures and early detection of diseases in live- facility will complement the existing wide range stock. of health science disciplines offered at the Camp- This bill now before us also provides funding for belltown campus, including occupational therapy, 50 new places to establish a new undergraduate and medical science. degree programme in veterinary science at the The facility will also complement the University’s school from 2006. These places will provide op- proposed new medical school to which the Gov- portunities to students, particularly in rural and ernment committed $18 million in the 2004-05 regional Australia, and ensure that Australia has Budget. This brings the Government’s total con- veterinarians with expertise in tropical animal tribution to the medical school to $25 million. diseases. The new medical school will enhance and im- Funding for 50 new places will also be allocated prove the teaching hospital capacity and the de- to create a new undergraduate degree programme livery of health and medical services in Western in tropical agriculture, giving graduates expertise and South Western Sydney. It will also provide in tropical plants and exposure to vital research in opportunities for local students to study medicine areas such as sugar cane production. in their own region. These 100 new places in veterinary science and In addition to the medical training facility, $2 tropical agriculture commence in 2006 and will million will be provided to the University of rise to 274 places by 2009, at a cost of $13.9 mil- Western Sydney for an upgrade of research and lion. training facilities at the Hawkesbury campus. The Expert understanding in tropical animal diseases Hawkesbury campus is a national leader in plant, and in tropical agriculture is vital to Australia’s agricultural and food systems research, and in the national prosperity. New diseases can have devas- teaching of courses related to these activities. The tating consequences across the nation. Equally, funds will assist the University to purchase a breakthroughs in the production of plants that state-of-the-art environmental electron micro- thrive in a tropical climate can boost crop produc- scope, which will be uniquely adapted for agricul- tion and the livelihoods of many Australians, par- tural and food systems research and which will ticularly those in rural and regional communities. significantly enhance the University’s capacity for performing high-level biological analysis. The It is essential that Australia continues to develop funds will also help to upgrade critical teaching expertise in these fields. The new veterinary sci- infrastructure with particular emphasis on horti- ence school and undergraduate courses will help culture, food science and agricultural sciences. position James Cook University as a leader in teaching and research in veterinary science and The Government will also provide $9 million tropical agriculture and will further enhance Aus- towards the establishment of a new building for tralia’s international reputation in these fields. teaching at the University’s Parramatta campus. The University also has a strong record in teach- These measures are a reflection of the Australian ing health and human service professionals, in- Government’s commitment to providing the cluding at the Parramatta campus. The new teach- communities of North Queensland with greater ing building will greatly expand the current ca- opportunities in education and research. pacity of the Parramatta campus. The other vital election commitment delivered A further investment of $7 million will assist with through this bill relates to new capital infrastruc- construction of a new library at the University’s ture funding for the University of Western Syd- Penrith campus. The funding will provide library ney. Teaching, research and student facilities at services for staff and students, and expand the library services available for the benefit of the

CHAMBER 22 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 broader Penrith community. A library will also The first is Fellowship of a specialist medical enable the University to use existing space to college. consolidate its visual and performing arts into a The second is application to my Delegate, who new creative arts precinct on the campus. refers applications to State or Territory Specialist Mr Speaker these initiatives reflect the Australian Recognition Advisory Committee (SRAC). Government’s ongoing commitment to building The third for medical practitioners not domiciled better communities and providing education op- in Australia at the time of application is applica- portunities in Western Sydney. tion to the Health Minister to make a determina- This bill will also amend the maximum funding tion to recognise a medical practitioner as a spe- amounts under the Higher Education Support Act cialist or consultant physician. 2003 and maximum amounts for transition fund- Referrals to SRACs may have been effective in ing under the Higher Education Funding Act the past by providing a structure for the assess- 1988, to reflect indexation increases. ment of specialists who were not eligible for This bill will enhance the quality of our higher automatic recognition. However, since these education system and the choices available to committees were established, specialist medical students. It reflects the Australian Government’s colleges and Medical Registration Boards have strong commitment to ensuring that Australia’s developed and implemented assessment processes higher education sector continues to play a vital which are now used by the SRACs in making role in our economic, cultural and social devel- their determinations. Because SRACs rely on the opment. assessment advice of specialist medical colleges Full details of the measures in the bill are con- and Medical Registration Boards in making their tained in the Explanatory Memorandum circu- decision, the Committees now add a redundant lated to honourable Senators. administrative layer to processing applications. This unnecessarily extends the period of time I commend the bill to the Senate. between the registration of specialists and when ————— they can provide services which attract Medicare HEALTH INSURANCE AMENDMENT rebates. (MEDICAL SPECIALISTS) BILL 2005 It is proposed to disband the SRACs. The The purpose of this bill is to reduce unnecessary amendment proposes to make provision for my red tape for medical practitioners seeking to pro- Delegate to act directly on my behalf, without vide specialist or consultant physician services referral to a SRAC. Under the new process, regis- under Medicare. tered medical practitioners will apply in writing This legislative amendment does not bestow spe- directly to me through my Delegate in the HIC cialist or consultant physician status on medical for recognition as specialists or consultant physi- practitioners. Medical practitioners are identified cians for the purposes of the Act. as specialists or consultant physicians by Medical Transitional arrangements have been provided to Boards when they are registered, on the advice of ensure the continued recognition of specialists specialist medical colleges. and consultant physicians previously recognised With Australia experiencing shortages in the by SRACs. Provision has also been made for the medical workforce, it is important that the admin- Delegate to immediately consider applications istrative processes are made more efficient and currently with SRACs at the time they are dis- timely, to ensure that appropriately qualified spe- banded. cialists and consultant physicians enter the work- Those sections of the Health Insurance Act 1973 force as quickly as possible. relating to the provision of Medicare provider Currently, a medical practitioner can be recog- numbers remain in effect. nised as a specialist for Medicare rebate purposes This Bill represents a minor procedural change. in three ways. The objective of the change is to reduce the complexity currently involved in the recognition of

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 23 medical specialists and consultant physicians proposed changes in Schedule 1 include amend- under the Medicare system. It is anticipated that ing existing provisions of the Superannuation Act this amendment will significantly reduce the time 1976; the Superannuation Act 1990; and the Su- between the receipt of an application from a perannuation Act 2005 to allow the CSS and PSS medical practitioner and recognition. Boards to delegate certain functions to their staff ————— which will improve the administrative efficiency of the Boards. SUPERANNUATION LEGISLATION AMEND- MENT (SUPERANNUATION SAFETY AND The bill also makes minor amendments to the OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2005 Superannuation Act 1976 and the Superannuation Act 1990 to broaden the type of information that The Superannuation Legislation Amendment (Su- can be provided to scheme members via their perannuation Safety and Other Measures) Bill employers, provided that this would not breach 2005 will amend the Superannuation Act 1976; the Corporations Act 2001 or any other Act. the Superannuation Act 1990; and the Superannu- ation Act 2005. Following the passage of legisla- The bill will also amend the Superannuation Act tion similar amendments will be made to the PSS 1976 to allow negative crediting rates (negative Trust Deed and Rules under the Superannuation earnings) to be applied to amounts held by mem- Act 1990. The bill makes amendment to the Su- bers in the CSS. This will ensure members bear perannuation Act 1976 to provide for the applica- the investment risk relating to their account bal- tion to the CSS Board of the new fitness and pro- ances in the CSS Fund and follows on from the priety operating standard under the Superannua- announcement by the CSS Board of the introduction Industry (Supervision) Act 1993, to provide tion of member investment choice. Similar for reduced reliance on acting members of the changes will be made to the Public Sector Super- CSS Board, and for the use of proxies at Board annuation Scheme through a PSS Amending Trust meetings. The bill also allows the CSS and PSS Deed. Boards to delegate certain functions to its staff, Under current arrangements it is difficult for the broadens the type of information that can be pro- CSS and PSS Boards to equitably distribute Fund vided to members via their employers, allows earnings between members who leave the scheme negative crediting rates to be applied to amounts and those who stay, especially when market con- held in the CSS and authorises certain payments ditions have led to negative fund reserves. made incorrectly to a small number of CSS mem- Allowing negative crediting rates brings the CSS bers. and PSS into line with usual arrangements for The bill amends the Superannuation Act 1976 to funded accumulation components of superannua- provide that persons appointed as substantive and tion benefits in that members will bear the risk of acting CSS Board members have to meet the new their investment choice. fit and proper standard under the Superannuation The bill will also amend the Superannuation Act Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 and that the Min- 1976 to authorize a small number of CSS benefit ister for Finance and Administration may termi- payments that were incorrectly paid. nate the appointment of any Board member who does not meet the standard. These amendments Debate (on motion by Senator Minchin) will place the same obligations on the CSS Board adjourned. as for other trustees of superannuation funds in Ordered that the Australian Workplace relation to having to comply with fitness and pro- Safety Standards Bill 2005 and the National prietary requirements. Occupational Health and Safety Commission The proposed amendments also provide for mem- (Repeal, Consequential and Transitional Pro- bers of the CSS Board to be able to participate in visions) Bill 2005 be listed on the Notice meetings when overseas to reduce the reliance on Paper as one order of the day, and the re- acting members, to instruct other members as maining bills be listed as separate orders of proxies for purposes of voting and for disclosing the day. conflicts of interest at Board meetings. Other

CHAMBER 24 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

WORKPLACE RELATIONS If this bill is not passed, the vast majority of small AMENDMENT (SMALL BUSINESS businesses covered by federal awards will even- EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION) BILL tually be subject to redundancy payments for their 2005 employees in accordance with the AIRC’s decision. If this bill is not passed, small businesses First Reading that are constitutional corporations and that are Bill received from the House of Represen- covered by State awards in States to which the tatives. AIRC’s decision flows, will become subject to redundancy payments. Senator MINCHIN (South Australia— Minister for Finance and Administration) The bill has four effects. First, it will preserve the exemption from redundancy pay obligations for (10.35 am)—I move: small businesses with fewer than 15 employees. That this bill may proceed without formalities Second, it will cancel the effect of any award and be now read a first time. variations made by the AIRC from 26 March Question agreed to. 2004, the date of its decision, until the legislation Bill read a first time. commences, that impose redundancy pay obligations on employers of fewer than 15 employees. It Second Reading will not, however, affect any redundancy pay Senator MINCHIN (South Australia— provisions that were in awards prior to the Minister for Finance and Administration) AIRC’s decision. It will also not affect any actual (10.35 am)—I table a revised explanatory entitlement that arises before the legislation memorandum relating to the bill and move: commences. The Government’s objective is not to take away something that employees already That this bill be now read a second time. have. I seek leave to have the second reading Third, the bill will prevent a small business re- speech incorporated in Hansard. dundancy pay obligation that was in a State law, Leave granted. State award or State authority order prior to the AIRC’s decision, and that would normally be The speech read as follows— suppressed by a federal award, ‘springing up’ to This bill proposes to amend the Workplace Rela- impose an obligation on a constitutional corporations Act 1996 to maintain the exemption for tion that employs fewer than 15 employees and small business from redundancy pay by overturn- that is bound by a federal award now or in the ing the decision made by the Australian Industrial future. Relations Commission (AIRC) on 26 March 2004 And fourth, the bill will also exclude constitu- to impose redundancy pay obligations on small tional corporations with fewer than 15 employees businesses. from redundancy pay obligations that may be This legislation is necessary because it is the only imposed by State laws, State awards or State au- option available to rectify a flawed decision of the thority orders that are made after the date of the AIRC. Under the current industrial relations sys- AIRC decision. The bill will also exclude all tem there is no review or appeal process to recon- businesses with fewer than 15 employees in the sider the merits of test case decisions made by a Territories from any redundancy pay obligations Full Bench of the AIRC. that may be imposed by a Territory law. The Government strongly believes it is Parlia- This bill is integral to the first tranche of the Gov- ment’s responsibility to use its legislative power ernment’s two-pronged approach to protect all and authority to shield small businesses from the small businesses from the AIRC’s decision. The AIRC’s decision. In fact, the Government sought second tranche involves the Government also and obtained a mandate for this legislative pro- working to protect small businesses that are not posal at last year’s election. constitutional corporations and that are covered

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 25 by State awards from any flow-on of the AIRC’s In the Government’s view, the AIRC’s decision decision. seriously underestimates the impact that redun- The Government intervened in test cases in the dancy pay would have on small businesses. For Western Australian and Queensland jurisdictions instance, a retail small business with seven em- to oppose the flow-on of the AIRC’s decision to ployees, each with four years’ continuous em- impose redundancy pay on small businesses; and ployment, would face a contingent liability for it will similarly seek to intervene in any other redundancy pay of nearly $30,000 once the re- relevant proceedings before State workplace rela- dundancy pay obligation established by the tions tribunals to oppose any flow-on. AIRC’s decision takes into account the full period of employment of the employees. Notably, both the Western Australian and Queen- sland governments agreed with the Government An obligation on small businesses to make re- and also opposed the flow-on of redundancy pay dundancy payments will result in a cost impost to small businesses in their States. Even more that is unaffordable for many small businesses. notable is the fact that both the Queensland and The end result will of course be a significant de- Western Australian Industrial Relations Commis- cline in job growth in the small business sector sions similarly agreed, rejecting union applica- and likely small business insolvencies. Clearly, tions to flow-on the AIRC’s decision to remove employees of small businesses will not gain any- the small business exemption. thing from the AIRC’s decision if they no longer have a job to go to. In addition, the Government has called on State governments to legislate to maintain the exemp- The undesirability of removing the small business tion of small businesses from redundancy pay. exemption is widely recognised. None of the four State governments that participated in the AIRC It is vital that opportunities for continued growth test case supported the removal of the exemp- and job creation for the 1.1 million non- tion—the Queensland and Western Australian agricultural small businesses in Australia be governments opposed the removal, while the maximised. It is even more essential for the 3.3 NSW and Victorian governments neither sup- million people employed by these businesses. ported nor opposed it. And as I’ve already noted, This is nearly half of private sector, non- the Western Australian and Queensland govern- agricultural employment. ments continued their opposition to the removal Small businesses are central to employment and of the small business exemption in recent test economic prosperity in Australia. The small busi- cases in their own jurisdictions. ness sector is often referred to, and rightly so, as Late last year the Queensland Industrial Relations the engine room of the economy. Commission reaffirmed its original decision of The small business sector is performing very August 2003 that small businesses are in a more well—and is very much the engine room of the financially constrained and precarious position continued growth and strength that our economy compared to larger business. The Queensland is enjoying. And without doubt many small busi- Commission unanimously decided that the ex- nesses are profitable. emption for small business from redundancy pay But we can’t afford to confuse this profitability obligations under the Queensland workplace rela- with an ability to afford redundancy payments. tions system ought to remain in place. The Small businesses tend to be chronically under- Queensland Commission concluded that many capitalised and in general don’t have the financial small businesses operate in marginal circum- resources to cope with large, unpredicted com- stances and that their lack of financial resilience mitments such as redundancy payments. Small had not changed since 1994 when the New South businesses are twice as likely as larger businesses Wales Industrial Commission also reaffirmed the to go out of business in the earlier years of opera- need for the small business exemption. tion. Even after 15 years of operation they are still The Queensland Commission also accepted that 1.7 times more likely to cease than larger busi- small businesses would generally have smaller nesses. cash reserves to meet redundancy pay require-

CHAMBER 26 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 ments and that redundancies occurring would COMMITTEES represent a greater proportion of the overall la- Public Accounts and Audit Committee bour costs of the business. Membership In short, the Queensland Commission found that to impose redundancy pay obligations on small Message received from the House of Rep- businesses had “the very real potential to result in resentatives notifying the Senate of the ap- the insolvency of a number of small businesses”. pointment of Mrs BK Bishop to the Joint In April this year, the Western Australian Com- Committee of Public Accounts and Audit in mission rejected an application by the Trades and place of Mr Somlyay. Labour Council of Western Australia to remove PARLIAMENTARY BEHAVIOUR the small business exemption, stating that they are “required to evaluate the evidence according to its Debate resumed from 16 August, on mo- weight and not merely adopt the conclusion of the tion by Senator Allison: AIRC”. The decision particularly relied on wit- That the ruling of the President (that the con- ness evidence that “small business as a whole is duct of Senator McGauran in making a gesture inherently riskier than larger business” and that following a division on 11 August 2005 was un- small businesses have more difficulty in obtaining seemly but not unparliamentary) be dissented finance when required. from. This Government agrees with the conclusions of Question put: the Queensland and Western Australian Commis- That the motion (Senator Allison’s) be agreed sions. We think it is imperative that the small to. business sector continue to be supported and encouraged to further grow and create new jobs for The Senate divided. [10.40 am] our economy and for all Australians. This legisla- (The President—Senator the Hon. Paul tion will lift from small businesses the additional Calvert) cost burden imposed by the AIRC’s decision. Ayes………… 8 Of course, we are not saying that by introducing this legislation small businesses can’t reach Noes………… 54 agreement with their employees to make redun- Majority……… 46 dancy payments where they can afford it and where it is a priority for employees. AYES The Government has a strong history of encour- Allison, L.F. Bartlett, A.J.J. aging employers and employees to reach agree- Brown, B.J. Fielding, S. ment on a wide range of issues at the workplace. Milne, C. Nettle, K. In our view, this is preferable to imposing an Siewert, R. * Stott Despoja, N. “across the board” obligation on small businesses NOES which cannot afford redundancy pay. Abetz, E. Adams, J. In introducing this bill the Government is demon- Barnett, G. Bishop, T.M. strating its ongoing commitment to the small Boswell, R.L.D. Brandis, G.H. business sector and its recognition of the vital and Calvert, P.H. Carr, K.J. essential role it plays in ensuring Australia has a Chapman, H.G.P. Colbeck, R. strong, thriving economy capable of employing Conroy, S.M. Coonan, H.L. all those who want jobs. Crossin, P.M. Eggleston, A. Ferguson, A.B. Ferris, J.M. * Debate (on motion by Senator Minchin) Fierravanti-Wells, C. Fifield, M.P. adjourned. Forshaw, M.G. Heffernan, W. Hogg, J.J. Humphries, G. Hurley, A. Hutchins, S.P. Johnston, D. Joyce, B.

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 27

Kemp, C.R. Kirk, L. the plight of asylum seekers generally. The Lightfoot, P.R. Ludwig, J.W. Palmer report, which we are all familiar Macdonald, J.A.L. Marshall, G. with, made it very clear that DIMIA is due Mason, B.J. McEwen, A. for a complete overhaul. Mr Palmer said that McGauran, J.J.J. McLucas, J.E. Minchin, N.H. Moore, C. ‘reform needs to come from the top’. These Nash, F. Parry, S. regulations that we are looking at today are Payne, M.A. Polley, H. an indication that the current Minister for Ronaldson, M. Santoro, S. Immigration and Multicultural and Indige- Scullion, N.G. Sherry, N.J. nous Affairs, Senator Vanstone, and the de- Stephens, U. Sterle, G. partment are in serious need of a shake-up. It Troeth, J.M. Trood, R. really is time now for the Prime Minister to Watson, J.O.W. Webber, R. Wong, P. Wortley, D. remove Minister Vanstone, ditch these regu- * denotes teller lations and implement a complete cultural Question negatived. change in the department—the cultural change that Mr Palmer advocates. MIGRATION AMENDMENT REGULATIONS 2005 (No. 6) Turning in detail to the regulations, they are designed to amend the Migration Regula- Motion for Disallowance tions 1994 and prescribe that certain islands Debate resumed from 11 August, on mo- that form part of Queensland, Western Aus- tion by Senator Bartlett: tralia and the Northern Territory, as well as That the Migration Amendment Regulations the Coral Sea Islands Territory, be made ex- 2005 (No. 6), as contained in Select Legislative cised offshore places as defined in para- Instrument 2005 No. 171 and made under the graphs (d) and (e) in section 5(1) of the act. Migration Act 1958, be disallowed. The government initially sought to excise Senator KIRK (South Australia) (10.44 over 3,000 islands from Australia’s migration am)—I rise to continue my remarks in rela- zone by way of regulations made on 7 June tion to the Migration Amendment Regula- 2002. Quite rightly, these regulations were tions 2005 (No. 6) and the motion moved by disallowed in the Senate at that time. The Senator Bartlett. As I was saying when I government then tried again, this time by spoke last week on this motion, the Labor way of a bill in 2002 and a further bill in opposition opposes this decision by the gov- 2003 but, again, on both occasions, these ernment to excise a large number of Austra- bills were defeated in the Senate. lia’s islands from its migration zone, this The regulations that we have before us to- time by way of regulation. The government day are similar to those contained in the pre- enacted these regulations on 21 July 2005— vious bills. As I said in my speech in 2003— in other words, shortly after assuming con- and I repeat it today—these regulations are trol of the Senate—in the knowledge that this self-defeating, will do much harm to Austra- time its regulations would be able to stay in lia’s international reputation and will show place and that it would be very difficult for the government’s defiance of international the Senate to disallow them. law, conventions and proper practice. These I, and many others, find it quite astound- regulations will do very little to achieve the ing that the government continues to dig in government’s stated aim of border protec- its heels on this issue, stubbornly refusing to tion. The regulations seek to extend the defi- let go of its unduly harsh, punitive and heart- nition of ‘excised offshore place’ under the less approach to immigration matters and to Migration Act so that any person arriving on

CHAMBER 28 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 these excised islands would be deemed an try will be that they will be required to bring offshore entry person. As a result, they could them closer to the Australian mainland. Not not make a valid application for a visa. only will these people smugglers bring their Some of these thousands of islands are so human cargo closer to the mainland if these close to the Australian mainland that they restrictions are in place but they will also put can be seen by the naked eye. In some cases, those people in greater danger than at pre- you can even walk to them. We have to ask sent. The International Commission of Jurists ourselves why asylum seekers, after a dan- argued before our committee: gerous journey, often in a leaky boat, would ... by forcing refugees fleeing persecution by sea land on an island with mainland Australia in to push on for the mainland in order to activate sight. In my view, this is beyond comprehen- their rights under the [Refugee] Convention, Aus- sion. The effect of the regulations will be to tralia is placing them in a more perilous situation establish mainland Australia as the goal for with further grave risk to their health and safety, particularly in areas with coral reefs. asylum seekers arriving by boat. They will not stop asylum seekers from coming to Aus- After hearing evidence given to the Senate tralia. Desperate people who are fleeing their inquiry into the 2003 bill, I was left wonder- countries will do whatever they can, and ing when the government would begin excis- there is no doubt that asylum seekers are ing parts of the Australian mainland from the desperate people. These ill-conceived regula- migration zone. The Prime Minister has tions in this form will not form any part of a claimed that excising parts of the Australian long-term solution to border security. mainland is an absolutely ludicrous proposition, and I agree. But does that mean that he What I have just said was the conclusion never, ever will seek to introduce either a bill that was reached by the Senate Legal and or regulations into this place that would have Constitutional References Committee, of that very effect? which I was a member at the time, and still am. The committee inquired into the bills The Senate committee that I referred to and reported to the Senate in October 2003. earlier heard a number of concerns during We received a number of submissions to that the course of its inquiry. Many witnesses Senate inquiry. In the submission made by warned that potential breaches of Australia’s the Australian Federal Police, it was ac- international obligations would be brought knowledged that the then bill would ‘draw about by the bills and the regulations that we people towards the mainland’. The depart- have before us today. The committee heard ment, DIMIA, told the committee that the of significant concerns in this regard from bill would require people smugglers to bring the United Nations High Commissioner for their vessels closer to mainland Australia. In Refugees, from international law experts, answer to a question on notice, DIMIA ac- and from legal and human rights groups—as knowledged this when they stated: well as from many other individuals and organisations. The Bill, by extending excised offshore places to islands off the northern coast of Australia, and It was made clear to us during the course therefore requiring people smugglers to bring of the committee’s hearings that the refugee their vessels closer to mainland Australia ... convention applies to all of sovereign Aus- In other words, they were recognising that tralia, and this is based on our signing of the the effect of the bills for the people smug- Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties glers who bring asylum seekers to our coun- 1969. Article 27 of the treaty provides:

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 29

… a party may not invoke the provisions of its the Constitution, this would be of little prac- internal law as justification for its failure to per- tical benefit to an asylum seeker. form a treaty. The committee also heard submissions Much of the evidence that the committee that article 31 of the refugee convention is received did concern Australia’s international another international obligation which is not obligations, particularly the obligation of complied with in the terms of the then bill. non-refoulement of refugees under the refu- Article 31 deals specifically with people gee convention. When Australia signed the coming directly from a country where their refugee convention, it committed this coun- freedom is threatened and states that no pen- try, through article 33(1), to the non- alties shall be placed upon them for their refoulement of refugees. This article prohib- illegal presence. its Australia from returning a refugee ‘in any As has been emphasised many times be- manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territo- fore in this chamber, these regulations and ries where his or her life or freedom would the bills which were before the Senate in be threatened’. This article also extends to 2002 and 2003 are simply a short-sighted chain refoulement, whereby Australia shall attempt at border protection. The minister, not send a refugee to a country where he or Senator Vanstone, has not taken on board the she will be returned to the place of persecu- recommendations of Mr Palmer, and she is tion. Similar obligations are imposed under continuing to pursue the same old stunts. the Convention Against Torture and other These regulations will do absolutely nothing Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or to address the need for reform in the area of Punishment, the International Covenant on immigration, and they will do absolutely Civil and Political Rights, and the Conven- nothing to address the complete cultural tion on the Rights of the Child, to which Australia is also a party. overhaul of immigration detention in this country which Mr Palmer recommended. I There were serious concerns expressed to urge senators to vote to disallow these regu- the committee that offshore entry persons lations. could remain on an excised island and be Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (10.57 left, in effect, in a legal limbo, having no am)—Senator Kirk is right. The Minister for recourse or responsibility to apply for a visa Immigration and Multicultural and Indige- and also no right to judicial review. Such nous Affairs brought these regulations for- persons may be unable to apply for a visa ward when the Senate was not sitting. Think while still in Australia, yet be barred from of the gall of it all: you have a department initiating any legal proceedings. As a conse- that is in complete disarray because of her quence, the individual would be left, as the mismanagement. You would imagine that, committee heard, in legal limbo—in no after 9½ long years, this government would man’s land, so to speak. have got the management of the migration Under section 494AA of the 2003 act, cer- area right. We have seen failure upon failure tain legal proceedings relating to offshore by the government in this area, and it still entry persons are barred. These include pro- does not stop. Here they are again, serving ceedings relating to an offshore entry, to the up another failed piece of legislation and status of an offshore entry person, and to the using regulations to do it. You would really taking of a person to a declared country. Al- start to wonder, but there is no longer time to though this provision recognises the jurisdic- wonder. tion of the High Court under section 75 of

CHAMBER 30 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

This minister should take responsibility way to do it. Border protection does not just and do the right thing. Rather than that, she involve people smuggling; it also requires serves this up as a way of saying, ‘Here is stopping firearms, drugs, plants, animals and another fiasco to add to all the other fiascos, diseases. failures and mismanagement.’ I am referring, What has the government done to address of course, to Migration Amendment Regula- the real problem of border protection? Mr tions 2005 (No. 6). These regulations pre- Philip Ruddock, in his capacity then as the scribe islands that form part of Queensland, minister for immigration, admitted that none Western Australia, the Northern Territory and of the government policies had any effect on the Coral Sea Islands Territory as excised the number of unauthorised arrivals in Aus- offshore places under the Migration Act tralia. The removal of even more islands 1958. This decision by the minister for im- from Australia’s migration zone is not a step migration is to excise a number of islands towards tougher border protection policy; it from Australia’s migration zone. It is again is a step back. indicative of a government that is not willing The Howard government initially excised to implement cultural change. It is a gov- or removed over 3,000 islands from Austra- ernment that fails to recognise what it needs lia’s migration zone by regulations made in to do. This minister simply will not take re- 2002. These regulations were rightly disal- sponsibility, will not manage her department, lowed in the Senate. The Howard govern- and uses this as a cloak to try to take her ment then introduced the Migration Legisla- other issues off the boil. They are not going tion Amendment (Further Border Protection to go off the boil, and this just adds one more Measures) Bill—to which I would add the to them. words ‘not true’—into the House. The Sen- This latest attempt to excise these islands ate rightly rejected that bill on 9 December raises alarm bells about whether the govern- 2002. On 26 March 2003 Mr Philip Rud- ment has any intention of changing the cul- dock, the then minister, tried again and in- ture of the immigration department at all. troduced the Migration Legislation Amend- The latest excision is an appalling example ment (Further Border Protection Measures) of the government’s surrendering the full Bill 2002 [No. 2] into the House of Repre- rights of territory as a stunt. It is another at- sentatives. Again, and appropriately, the Sen- tempt by the Liberal government to divert ate rejected that bill. attention away from the minister’s lazy mis- Here we are, a couple of days into the sit- management of the immigration portfolio ting of the new Senate, where the govern- instead of doing what needs to be done. Side- ment has a majority, and this bill has turned lining the minister for immigration would be up again—another stunt by this government. a good start. All the platitudes and assurances that it was The government is again attempting to ex- softening its hardline administration of im- cise a few thousand Australian islands from migration have been forgotten. The minister the migration zone. The Howard government seems to think we have moved on and it is seems to have abandoned the concept of bor- old news. It is not old news; it is still current. der protection and replaced it with border The minister has not addressed it. She has surrender. The excision does not strengthen done nothing to correct the record, to ensure Australia’s border protection; it weakens it. proper administration in the migration area How does writing off parts of Australia strengthen border protection? That is not the

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 31 and her department and to take responsibil- Let us not forget that four years on there ity. are still people left on Nauru. In 2001, 1,547 These regulations are similar to the previ- asylum seekers were taken to Nauru and ous bills. The regulations excise or remove PNG, with almost 1,000 being resettled. Just from the Australian migration zone the fol- fewer than 600 refugees have been granted lowing: all islands that are part of Queen- visas to settle in Australia, while New Zea- sland and are north of latitude 21 degrees land was quick to respond by resettling south, all islands that are part of Western around 360 refugees. The Nauru experience Australia and are north of latitude 23 degrees has been that Australia generally takes the south, all islands that are part of the Northern refugees and resettles them here, despite the Territory and are north of latitude 16 degrees government’s rhetoric time and time again south, and the Coral Islands territory. They leading the Australian people to believe that are seeking to make all of these islands not this would not happen. part of Australia. They are excising them for We remember the Prime Minister carrying the purposes of the migration legislation. on about the asylum seekers on the Tampa. Many of the islands in the proposed ex- He said that not one of them would set foot panded excision zone are small and uninhab- on Australian soil. Remember the Prime ited. It should be noted that in any event Minister saying that the asylum seekers in- many of them lie very close to the Australian volved in the ‘children overboard’ web of mainland. Many of the islands which are lies were not the sort of people he wanted in caught in the excision or removal are not in Australia? He was not being honest with the direct path of the likely border interdic- Australian people then—and he is still not tion or where the people smugglers and boat being honest today—about the ‘children people are going to come. This is an unnec- overboard’ affair or about what would hap- essary carte blanche excision of 3,000 is- pen to asylum seekers caught up in the so- lands, and it can only be a stunt. called Pacific solution. So much for the Prime Minister’s claim that not one refugee It is important to look at the legal effect of would be allowed to set foot in Australia. the excision as well. Let us assume that these regulations are passed. With the government The Senator Vanstone express is moving majority, I am sure they are going to crunch through, but it is not only about these regula- it through. What would happen if a boat tions that came before us in the break; it is reached the islands? Excision is not a stop about other things that happened in the break sign; it does not turn a boat around. It is a which should be being addressed and are not. different processing regime in a different If you were going to look at regulations that place. Presumably, the asylum seekers in- should be brought forward, why not look at volved would be taken to Nauru for process- regulations to deal with one of the other is- ing, which the government cites as being in sues that occurred that the minister still has line with the UNHCR standards. People not come into this parliament and provided a would get processed there and sorted into cogent ministerial statement about? refugees and non-refugees, but they would A couple of those issues are worth reiter- not have access to medical care, including ating. One is the GSL debacle. How could mental health care, which is so desperately you end up with the GSL operated van tour required by many people caught up in the of Australia? Those unfortunate travelling government’s policy of indefinite detention. detainees under the minister’s responsibility

CHAMBER 32 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 ended up in what can only be described as a been reasonable. But after 21 days plus how horror ride. Detainees were locked in the can she say it continued to be reasonable to back of a van for 10 hours, apparently with detain these people without explanation? no food and certainly not sufficient water We do not know the full story yet, because and without toilet breaks for an extraordinary the minister has not been able to provide the length of time. These issues should be ad- answer. I am hopeful that she will provide it dressed by the minister, but they are not. today. Certainly she has got the opportunity What we find is another stunt in terms of the before we rise today to come down and tell excision. In its management of migration us what went on and how long those people centres and of contracts in the migration field were there. She has the opportunity to inform this government can only be described as us so that we can then ask what she has done morally bankrupt. about it. It is not sustainable to argue that at Rather than punish GSL for their appall- the point of detention it may have been rea- ing record, it appears the government is sonable. After 21 days plus how can she say planning in fact to reward them. The Finan- it has continued to be reasonable to detain cial Review of 14 August 2005 said that the these people without explaining to them outcome of the Palmer report may deliver a what she is doing and how she is working ‘handsome financial windfall to the owners through the issue? of private detention centres’. If that is not These people were subsequently released right, then the minister should correct the as people who should not have been de- record. The minister should come down here tained, as far as I can tell from the record. At and say, ‘This is not going to happen. I am some point the minister has failed to recog- the responsible minister and I am going to nise that you have to ask the question not fix it.’ She should not leave it to the depart- once at the point of detention; you have to mental secretary to come out and say, ‘It is continue to ask the question every day at my job now to fix it.’ It is another sidelining every point to ascertain whether or not it of these issues by this minister. She is not continues to be reasonable to detain people. prepared to tackle them head-on and deal At 21 days plus the big question mark would with them. It is a clear case of government have to rise in the mind of bureaucracy and rewarding incompetence when it should be in the minister’s mind whether it was still punishing it. reasonable to continue detention. You cannot At the same time we heard the minister detain people just because you do not know argue that the fact that 56 people were de- who they are or because you are trying to tained was old news. Let me say that I think resolve their identity. You have to say that they would have had a different view about they are unlawful noncitizens or they are not. having been detained for 21 days plus. That That is the point of it all, and in these in- is how the answer to my question came stances the minister has not provided the back—21 days plus, not 21 days for X num- explanation about their detention—what ef- ber, or 30, 40 or 50. We do not know how forts were made to determine their identity long they were detained. We do not know and at what point she determined they were what nationalities they were, whether they not unlawfully detained and what happened were Australians or whether they have been to them after that. returned or whether they have been provided It is indicative of a government not com- with a clear explanation. It might be the case mitted to openness and accountability. That that at the point of detention it might have

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 33 is what it is about and that is what the minis- argue about that. She had to use the cover of ter needs to address. She has failed to ad- recess to sneak the regulation through. dress it by all accounts when you look at the Labor understands the concerns of Austra- record. Instead, we have a willingness to lians and shares their view that unauthorised deny, hide, obfuscate, misdirect, fudge, dis- boat arrivals are the worst of all possible tract, mislead and probably cover up and outcomes both from the Australian point of distort as well. Rather, the minister should view as a nation managing its borders and confront the truth in this. This culture of from the point of view of the asylum seekers concealment keeps coming up. But it does who risk, and all too often lose, their lives on not stop with the department. It seems to go the journey. Australians rightly all want a right up the chain and the minister must be managed and fair system. But are we going part of it. You ask whether the culture started to get that from this government? I think not in the department and crept upwards or when you look at the minister’s ability to run whether it started with the government and the immigration detention system. the minister and crept downwards. I suspect Labor would run a quick, fair and trans- it is a top-down outcome rather than a bot- parent processing regime on Christmas Is- tom-up one. land and on mainland Australia that would The so-called Pacific solution is nothing determine 90 per cent of refugee claims in 90 more than an expensive detour sign. It is not days. Genuine refugees would be quickly a stop sign. When you look at excision with identified and released, while failed claim- this regulation, it is not going to affect the ants would be quickly returned to their place outcome that the minister wants. It can only of origin. Labor would administer better be a way of taking the parliament and using a health and security checks. More impor- regulation to say, ‘What I would rather you tantly, Labor would initiate ASIO security argue about is excision over here,’ rather checks on the lodgment of a claim for asy- than the minister accounting for her depart- lum, rather than the steps this government ment, for the Palmer inquiry, for the GSL takes. contract, for the Wang children, for the 201 We have GSL as well. Labor would im- people who were—as far as we can make mediately end the contracts with Global So- out—detained, and for those 56 who were lutions and it would seek not to have a profit detained for more than 21 days. Those are motivated private company running Austra- the things that the minister needs to come lian detention centres. The operation and and account for. The minister also needs to management of these facilities would be account for the ANAO report and the con- immediately returned to public hands under a tracts which indicate some god-awful fail- Labor government. That is where they ings within the department. That is what the should sit. The minister still has not looked minister needs to come and account for. We at that other than, as I said earlier, coming have not heard her account for any of that. A back down to this parliament and saying: ministerial statement would be nice. We ‘We’ve had a look at the contracts. We might could at least take note of that and argue penalise them over that horror journey those about those issues. Instead, we have to argue detention persons were in. We might take a about the delegated legislation, this regula- bit of money off GSL for that but, in the tion. It is not even a bill. She is not even scheme of things, we are going to reward game to put a bill back in here so that we can GSL with a bigger slice of the pie.’ Not to

CHAMBER 34 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 pick on the particular company—they are from that sector of education billions of dol- motivated by profit—but what we really lars. So we are now dealing with a minister need is people who are going to look after a who has a track record of being totally detention system, care about a detention sys- hands-off and for not providing any direction tem, who have administration and are able to or assistance to the department, managing be publicly checked as to how things go on, the migration portfolio by regulation rather with clear lines of accountability back to the than substantive changes to the act. These minister. That is what is required. Instead, we regulations go to some 4,891 islands, which have the minister serving up another piece of range from places as large as Groote Eylandt, delegated legislation seeking to excise 3,000 Elcho Island or Bathurst and Melville islands islands. It is a shame that this minister will off the tip of Northern Australia to rather not take responsibility for her portfolio. large sandbars. Senator CROSSIN (Northern Territory) On those islands we have a total of about (11.16 am)—I rise to speak in this debate 20,629 people living. I know they were not about the Migration Amendment Regulations consulted about this. In fact, they were not 2005 (No. 6) which the Democrats have consulted about this the time before or the sought to disallow. I think this is another time before that. You may well remember case of, ‘Honey, I’ve shrunk the borders that in 2002 when this came before us as again.’ This is not the first time I have spo- legislation there was an attempt to quickly ken on this matter in this chamber. Of run around the islands and release some in- course, we have had this issue come before formation package about what this legisla- us a number of times now and it has been tion was to mean—before, of course, the disallowed by the Senate for a very good legislation was even introduced. We had a reason: the policy is illogical. The policy to situation where this government made an excise quite a number of islands from the announcement and then ran around to In- northern region of this country has no logic digenous communities trying to sell this behind it. The government has simply chosen proposition. A certain senator on the other to do this again because it can—because it side, who I will not name, involved in a Sen- has the numbers—without any explanation, ate inquiry at the time was known, and was discussion or consultation and without any seen on Elcho Island, to be encouraging In- clear plan about where the handling of mi- digenous people as to what to say to that in- gration policy in this country is going. So, in quiry. He now quotes back those words from the still of the night, towards the end of July, those Indigenous people in support of why we notice on DIMIA’s web site the regula- these regulations should be maintained. But tions are up and running again. This is our those Indigenous people were never given an attempt to bring some balance and a sense of opportunity to have the effect of these regu- cohesion and logic to the policy debate about lations, or the legislation at the time, clearly migration in this country, something that this explained to them. There was an information minister clearly does not have a handle on. kit and a CD produced and sent out to all This, of course, is not the first portfolio these communities, and then the legislation she has not had a handle on. I remember that did not get through the Senate. So when I go in 1998, when I first came into this chamber, out to Indigenous communities they now say the minister in charge of immigration matters to me: ‘What happened with that legislation? these days was the then minister for higher I thought we’d been excised for two years. education and totally responsible for gutting What’s going on? The government, on the

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 35 one hand, gets these information kits out is responsible for by regulations, not by leg- there and, on the other hand, you’re telling islation introduced into this parliament, so us the legislation did not go through the Sen- we cannot actually have another full and ate. And now we have regulations again.’ proper inquiry into this matter. When that I was on the Tiwi Islands just two weeks does happen, the minister wants to simply ago. People out there are totally confused walk away from the mess. That is exactly about what all this means. Why is that? Be- what Mick Palmer has highlighted in his re- cause we do not have a minister that is in port. control of the portfolio. We have a minister I know this is not a debate about the that wants to dump this mess on people in Palmer report, but this is a debate about the the immigration department and get them to mess that the immigration department is in— sort it out. What are Indigenous people actu- not because of the hardworking officials that ally saying? ‘Don’t you care about our is- I come across on a day-to-day basis, who lands? Does this mean that the federal gov- answer my many queries about sponsoring ernment can just strike them off the migra- people, visa applications and migration mat- tion map whenever they like?’ Yes, it does. ters and who are trying their darnedest to That is exactly what they have just done. make some sense of the act that they have to They have excised them for purposes of the work under, but because there is no direction migration area. ‘What does this mean?’ they from the top. The minister must take respon- say to me. ‘Does this mean that if we now sibility here and provide very clear and con- get a boat here anyway, no-one will come? cise opportunities for her officials in the Does it mean we should still get these people government to be able to put in place what on board if they need assistance? What ex- this government’s policy is—but I am not actly does it mean for these people and when really sure what this government’s policy is, is this government going to be very clear and in some respects. precise about where this policy direction is The Palmer report clearly showed that, af- going?’ ter nine long years of the Howard govern- Indigenous people say to me, ‘It doesn’t ment, the department of immigration is in a make sense to us,’ and I raised this in my total mess. It has developed a culture of as- speech in 2002. At Croker and Goulburn is- sumption and cover-up where departmental lands, Indigenous people do not actually see officers have minimal training and under- water as an obstacle. They are attached to the standing of the act they are supposedly ad- land. People at Goulburn and Croker islands ministering. If you read the Palmer report actually have connections with Oenpelli and you will see that Mick Palmer makes it very Maningrida. It is a huge triangle out there. clear that there need to be massive cultural The fact that the sea runs through the middle changes within the department. The answer of that land does not mean the same to In- to that, as far as I have seen, is that the min- digenous people that it does to you and me. ister has just thrown a couple of million dol- So they are totally confused by this. lars at it. We have not actually seen any cul- It has never been clearly explained to tural change emanate from the minister or these people. Even now, the implications the minister’s office. In his report, Mr have not been explained to these people. Palmer acknowledged that the speed of That is because we have a minister who change in the immigration and detention en- seeks to regulate the migration area that she vironment had put pressure on staff but he also said that it had led to policy procedures

CHAMBER 36 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 and enabling structures being developed on country. We have detention centres at the run. This is a very clear example of that, Maribyrnong, Villawood and Baxter. About isn’t it? four years ago we had an announcement that I note that Senator Scullion, in his speech, a detention centre at Christmas Island would said that this is an essential piece of legisla- be built at a cost, which is rising every tion to ensure that the environment is pro- month because the costs are escalating there, tected. I do not actually understand where of $220 million. The detention centre was you are coming from there, Senator Scullion. going to be built in one year. There was a If you are actually talking about the fact that huge flurry of activity. We had to have this the government assumes it will now be able centre built within a year. Four or five years to stop boats coming through the waters— on, it has still not been completed. So I sus- boats that may have all sorts of substances pect the cost of $220 million is rising. on them—this legislation does not guarantee At the same time in Darwin, we had this that. This legislation does not guarantee temporary processing centre built on the cor- those boats will not continue to come. I ner of the Stuart Highway and Amy Johnson might add it has been many years since a Avenue. That cost $7.4 million. It consists of boat has come through those waters. But it about 100 demountables and it is alleged it does not guarantee that even legal boats could house up to 450 people. In the time coming through those waters will not bring that I have been asking questions at estimates with them substances that will be harmful to about this temporary processing centre, we the environment. have had razor wire on the top of the fences What about the illegal fishermen we found moved to the bottom of the fence, at a cost of up the creek at Maningrida a couple of $48,000, and additional fencing and shrubs weeks ago? The silly thing about these regu- and palm trees put around it because we lations is that the Tiwi Islands are less than want to hide it as it is an eyesore, at a cost of 20 kilometres from Darwin and we have had $16,000 and $32,000. I now read that it is illegal fishermen up the rivers at Maningrida. costing around $118,000 a year to maintain. So is this a deterrent? I think not. If I were in But not one person has ever stayed in that a leaky boat and I got as far as Goulburn Is- processing centre. land, I am pretty sure I would not get off Then last year we saw it suddenly re- there. I would keep going until I saw the big named and become the Coonawarra deten- lights of Darwin city. The group of Vietnam- tion centre. We were told it is now going to ese people who arrived a couple of years ago be used for illegal fishing people. It is about made it to the Western Australian border. time illegal fishing people were taken off They were not silly enough to head for an their boats and put on land, but now we are island; they made it to the mainland. So there told the Coonawarra detention centre is actu- is no evidence that this will be a deterrent. ally going to become the Darwin detention What it is evidence of, though, is that this is centre and it will house illegal immigrants as a department that is having to cope with pol- well as illegal fishing people. icy on the run. Minister, where is the clear policy direc- Let me give you another example of that. I tion here? You have got Baxter, Villawood am amazed at the way in which this minister and Maribyrnong operating, you are trying to controls or tries to control where and when build a Taj Mahal on Christmas Island, but at detention centres are built and placed in this the same time you want to extend the

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 37

Coonawarra detention centre to become the centre? I noticed as I drove to the airport on Darwin detention centre and you say you Monday that the washing line of the very last will be putting illegal asylum seekers in there house on the Coonawarra base is probably as well. I would have thought it is a bit of only five steps from the fence of the deten- overkill here. We have not had these people tion centre. I would have thought the best coming to this country for many years. At the way to go would be to remove that facility very least, I would have thought that from there and relocate it or at least create Maribyrnong, Villawood and Baxter would another smaller facility just for illegal fish- cope with the numbers. I have never been erman. convinced that there was a need for a deten- Darwin does not want that detention cen- tion centre on Christmas Island. I am even tre. I suspect that Senator Hill has had quite a less convinced that there is a need to con- few headaches in trying to decide who is tinue with the one in Darwin. going to buy his base when Senator I notice that yesterday the Public Works Vanstone’s detention centre is right next door Committee presented a report revealing that, to it. But we have heard no comment from lo and behold, this government has now the minister about that. There has not been asked for a further $8.125 million for the any view expressed by Senator Vanstone Darwin detention centre. Yet we have been about this detention centre in Darwin: why it told for five years it was ready to house peo- is needed, why it has now been renamed ple at the drop of a hat. Obviously that was three times or why the boundaries of the de- not the case. So, Minister, what is really tention centre keep changing. It was for happening in your portfolio? Where are you emergency purposes; now it is for fishermen; really going with all of this? The representa- now it is for asylum seekers; now the Public tion from the Public Works Committee is Works Committee is saying, ‘Don’t put that women and children should not be women and children in there.’ Senator housed there. The Northern Territory gov- Vanstone, what is happening? What is your ernment and the Darwin City Council are clear policy direction in this instance? What very angry that there is a detention centre on is the direction for the people of Darwin, for the Stuart Highway as you drive into town the people in the immigration department that is now going to be called the Darwin who are trying to deal with this, or even for detention centre. At the very least, people are your colleague Senator Hill, who is trying to saying, ‘Don’t call it that.’ We try to promote sell off the land? This is just another example Darwin as the tourist destination of the Top of a minister who has no handle on what is End of Australia, and as you drive in along happening in her portfolio and seeks to en- the Stuart Highway you are confronted with sure that her poor departmental officials have an eyesore that has never been used. to carry the load for her ineptitude and in- The government has also announced that competence in trying to have a clear and it wants to sell the Coonawarra base on succinct policy. The Darwin detention centre which this detention centre sits. Well, there is is one example. The excision of these islands a little problem: I do not think anyone would is another example. want to buy the base. What would they use it When I was overseas in Vietnam this year for: an industrial estate, a housing estate? at the invitation of the World Bank, I spent Why would you want to buy an estate that the time with about 12 other people from sits right next door—and I am talking about around the world—politicians from Korea, less than 10 feet next door—to a detention India, Pakistan, Sweden, Germany, France

CHAMBER 38 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 and Italy. All of them—even the politician and refugees. It does nothing to improve our from Sweden and the politician from France, relationship with Indigenous people, who are who were elected under conservative gov- even more confused about what they would ernments—said to me: ‘Australia ought to be say is ‘white man’s law’. It does absolutely ashamed of the way it is treating its people nothing to ensure that officials working in over there, you know—ashamed of the way Immigration, Customs and Quarantine are it treats refugees and asylum seekers.’ They assisted by the policies of this government cannot understand why it is, given our vast and particularly by the policies this minister resources, our land, our opportunity and purports to have control over. what they believed was a country of some The immigration department is in a mess. social justice, that we do not take these peo- We are about to start an inquiry into the ad- ple in and try to solve the problems for them ministration of the Migration Act, which will and then, if they are not refugees, send them almost become a Mick Palmer report II, I home—no-one is resiling from that. would say. This is a minister who clearly Instead we act like bully boys in the needs to get some control over her portfolio. South-East Asia region. Without a proper She needs to provide that portfolio with dialogue with South-East Asian countries strong and clear directions and policy guide- and without any discussion with Indigenous lines so that not only her department knows people as to why we are doing this, in the what they are doing but the rest of this coun- still of the night we just excise the islands. try can clearly get a handle on where this And we somehow pretend that this is going government is going, and so the government to further fix up the flow of refugees around does not continue to make policy on the run. the world who want to come to this country. (Time expired) I do not believe it will do that. I do not be- Senator MARSHALL (Victoria) (11.36 lieve that that is at all what will happen. I am)—I too rise to join the debate on the mo- think that, if there are people out there who tion for disallowance of the Migration want to trade in human misery and encour- Amendment Regulations 2005 (No. 6). In age people to come to this country on a leaky doing so, I think my contribution to the de- boat, the asylum seekers will now simply bate needs to be in context of the compe- attempt to get to the mainland, as the Viet- tence of the department that administers the namese people have done. Mind you, all of regulations that we are moving to disallow those Vietnamese people have now been seen today. Nothing does this better than the to be genuine asylum seekers. So what are Palmer report itself, so I want to spend some we actually proving here? I also note that of the early part of my contribution going nearly 90 per cent of those people who were through some of the key points identified by taken to Nauru have now been assessed as the Palmer report. genuine asylum seekers. We may have quite Having read the Palmer report, what I can a number of people trying to get to this coun- say is that it is explosive—an utter indict- try, but at the end of the day they turn out to ment of the highest order of this government, be people who have genuine cases and are its immigration ministers and their malad- accepted by this country. ministration. It is a sad report on an immigra- This is another example, I believe, of an tion detention regime that is completely out illogical policy—a policy that does nothing of control. It highlights a department of im- to assist our status and image internationally migration in a shambles and totally incapable as a nation that cares about asylum seekers

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 39 of delivering correct and just outcomes: it is sure that similar indictments, illegal and beset by incompetence, poor training and, it wrongful detention and/or deportations do would seem, many hopeless personnel. The not occur again in the future then we must report paints a picture where totally inade- get to the bottom of all the problems that quate health care is afforded to people whose exist and find solutions for them. I submit liberties have been taken away from them that only a royal commission can do this. and who are in the care and responsibility of Mr Acting Deputy President, so that you the state. It is a depiction of an awful incar- understand the gravity of the situation I ceration environment dressed up as an ad- speak of, let me inform you of a number of ministrative process. It really is a terrible the issues raised by Mr Mick Palmer in his read all over. report. In terms of the training and skills of The circumstances surrounding Cornelia DIMIA officers in relation to detention mat- Rau’s illegal and wrongful 10-month-long ters, Palmer found that many DIMIA officers immigration detention are a national disgrace who use the detention powers under section and can easily be put into the context of this 189(1) of the Migration Act 1958 had little debate. So too are the circumstances sur- understanding of what, in legal terms, consti- rounding the deportation of Australian citi- tutes ‘reasonable suspicion’ when applying it zen Vivian Alvarez Solon. While we knew to factual situations. He noted: these facts before the inquiry and examina- In particular, there appeared to be a general lack tion took place, the Palmer report vindicates of understanding on the part of officers of their them. While it does vindicate them and shed legislative responsibilities under the Act. light on a number of problems within the He went on: immigration department, the inquiry and ex- ... the level of knowledge and training of many amination leading to it simply could not, officers is inadequate. with the terms of reference and powers given What is obvious, and Mr Palmer noted it, is to it, get to the bottom of every problem that that operational experience in these circum- exists in this department. What the Palmer stances may exacerbate problems rather than report does is skim the surface. On any read- add value. With regard to Compliance, this is ing of the report, that is clearly obvious. what he had to say in the report: While it is an excellent report, and I con- Many current compliance officers have had very gratulate Mick Palmer and those involved little or no formal training for their role. As a with it, it simply did not have the teeth or consequence, they have only a limited under- resources necessary to assess all of the prob- standing of the legislation they are required to lems with the immigration detention regime enforce, the powers they are authorised to exer- and inside DIMIA or to pose recommenda- cise, and the implications of those powers. tions for change in this regard. What the He went on: Palmer report does is prove beyond doubt the In a recent formal interview a senior DIMIA ex- need for a royal commission into the entire ecutive asserted that the power to remove from department and all of its actions. The report Australia a person reasonably suspected of being proves to anyone who cares about the rights an unlawful non-citizen ‘does not require a deci- and plight of people caught up in immigra- sion’ because it is required by the Act. Even when tion detention or those who may have mental questioned about the importance of review and health problems that there are some very supervision to ensuring the propriety of any ac- serious problems within the department that tion to remove a person, the interviewee seemed date back a very long time. If we are to en- reluctant to accept that supervision and review of

CHAMBER 40 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 decisions to detain and remove are crucial to good Had Anna’s case management linked her general governance and operational integrity. and medical health records, contacts and observa- Such an attitude is very worrying. tions (as recorded in daily incident sheets and other records) and had this collected information It is also interesting to note, as Mr Palmer been objectively assessed and reviewed as part of did himself, that his concerns were ‘over- developing a comprehensive and evolving per- whelmingly based on the statements of field sonal profile, Anna would have received more and operational staff’ themselves. The appropriate care and been transferred much Palmer report, notwithstanding its inadequate sooner to an immigration detention facility. It is powers, still manages to bring to light, on the also possible that, had wider avenues of inquiry evidence it obtained, total and utter incompe- been pursued within the first few weeks of her tence within DIMIA. detention, Anna might have been identified as Cornelia Rau and been released. The report also highlights the poor de- The fact that these avenues were denied to Anna tainee identification investigation processes is an indictment of the system. employed by DIMIA. Mr Palmer found that inquiries about detainees’ identifications Indeed, it was. were assumption based, narrowly focused, Cornelia Rau’s six-month long detention unplanned and not subject to any review, and in Brisbane Women’s Correctional Centre, he noted in the report: where she was treated like any other pris- These are fundamental flaws in the inquiry proc- oner, was also examined in some depth. Mr ess—not only as they affected Cornelia Rau but Palmer noted: also, in their wider application, as they relate to The basis on which Anna was detained and man- detainee identification more generally. aged in BWCC was flawed. DIMIA has ultimate Case management was also revealed as being responsibility for the health and welfare of immi- ‘disjointed, fragmented and poorly coordi- gration detainees, but the current processes for nated’. The report notes that, each time Cor- monitoring and managing immigration detainees in BWCC are ineffective and do not enable nelia Rau was moved, a new case manager DIMIA to properly discharge its responsibility. was appointed to her case and started with Competent management and oversight of Anna, very limited knowledge of her history. It also conducted in accordance with DIMIA’s own in- noted that she had two case managers while structions, would have resulted in her being re- at Baxter. According to the report, it is ap- moved from BWCC much sooner than she was. parently normal DIMIA practice not to send It was also noted that no concerns were ex- a detainee’s file with them to Baxter when pressed about the appropriateness of Anna’s they are transferred from interstate. Instead, detention in prison and, despite a require- the file is forwarded to the removals policy ment to visit her monthly, a DIMIA officer and operations section in Canberra. As such, visited her on only three occasions during Ms Rau’s file did not accompany her to Bax- her six months detention there. ter. Mr Palmer noted: The report noted: This is not only bad practice: it defies common- During interviews with the Inquiry, a DIMIA sense. Good decisions can only be made on the officer with direct responsibility for this area ex- basis of accurate and complete information. pressed the view that DIMIA paid Queensland It was also revealed that detainees’ health Corrective Services $95 a day for each detainee and general records are not kept together. Mr and therefore Queensland Corrective Services had Palmer noted: total responsibility for the care and management of detainees in its custody. The executive did not see DIMIA as having any day-to-day responsibil-

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 41 ity in this area. Such a lack of understanding— changes to the behaviour of executive manage- and, indeed, the attitude that would underpin it— ment in the immigration compliance and deten- is of serious concern to the Inquiry and it is in- tion areas will be necessary. If the required attitu- dicative of the level of operational oversight that dinal improvements are to be achieved at the op- occurred during the time Anna was in prison in erational level, change will need to be embraced Brisbane Women’s Correctional Centre. at the executive level and be led by the executive. This is simply unbelievable. The precondition to effectiveness is fundamental cultural change. Moreover, the entire agreement between DIMIA and the Queensland government over They are not my words; they are a direct immigration detention was found to be to- quote from the report. And similar comments tally inadequate. The inquiry found that ar- depicting an appalling and totally unacceptable culture within DIMIA pervade the entire rangements made under the 1992 agreement report. are still in place despite no official agreement having been signed between the de- Here are a few other examples. Page 166 partments since 1995. Mr Palmer noted: of the report states: Even at the executive level, there is an inadequate Despite the best efforts of what is generally a understanding of the separate and joint responsi- highly committed workforce, DIMIA has strug- bilities and accountabilities of the parties to these gled to do justice to the onerous responsibilities it arrangements. has to government, immigration detainees and the Australian people. The Inquiry formed the view These are examples of the incredible malad- that many of the weaknesses and deficiencies it ministration that the Palmer report uncovers. identified are the consequence of poor structure I understand that a new or renewed formal and a culture preoccupied with process and quan- agreement has now been signed by the two titative, rule-driven operational practice. governments and I welcome that. However, Page 168 of the report states: the agreement does not address a number of Within the DIMIA immigration detention func- the more problematic aspects of detaining tion there is clear evidence of an ‘assumption immigration detainees in jails. Let me go to culture’—sometimes bordering on denial—that the underpinning culture of DIMIA. The re- generally allows matters to go unquestioned port states: when, on any examination, a number of the assumptions are flawed. For example, the following ... although the Inquiry became aware of a number of inappropriate or defective agreements, ar- is assumed: rangements and instructions, it is the strength of • Section 189 of the Migration Act is a manda- the immigration detention culture that is of great- tory detention section and there is conse- est concern. The deficiencies in practices and quently no capacity and—perhaps more dis- procedures can be remedied, and many instruc- turbingly—no requirement to review the va- tions are being amended. But the attitudes of the lidity of the exercise of ‘reasonable suspi- people who have responsibility for managing cion’ where it is formed or the basis on these instructions will take much longer to which the detention is made. change. Old values and attitudes must be re- • Depression is simply a normal part of deten- moved, and a new, enabling culture must be fos- tion life, which consequently normalises ab- tered. normal behaviour in the assessment of medi- … … … cal and mental health. The present culture seems to have operated to • Organisational practice and levels of service stifle original thought, inhibit individual action, are ‘about as good as could be expected’, and and discourage wider consultation or referral. any deficiencies are essentially a reflection This must be changed. In particular, dramatic of the difficulty of the task.

CHAMBER 42 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

• Criticism of the processes or systems is gen- management and senior executive management erally voiced by people who do not under- levels to accept responsibility and acknowledge stand the complexity of the business or have fault. their own agendas and therefore do not need Put quite simply, as Mr Palmer does on page to be considered seriously. 160: Such perspectives reflect a culture of denial and The Inquiry’s investigations and its discussions self justification that the Inquiry found to be at with independent expert bodies, detention facility the heart of the problem. operators, medical services providers, Baxter All those previous assumptions cannot on immigration detainees, advocates, visitors and any logical reading be assumptions that other interested parties led it to conclude that should not have been challenged throughout there are serious problems with the handling of the department. immigration cases. These stem from a deep- seated culture and attitudes and a failure of execu- Page 169 of the report states: tive leadership in the compliance and detention The Inquiry found that these attitudes and per- areas. spectives were not, as some believed, confined to What an indictment indeed Mr Palmer has operational levels but were pervasive at senior executive management level. Executive manag- made on this department. ers, including Assistant Secretaries, should be in The report identified many more problems the vanguard of corporate leadership and should with the health services and mental health not be shackled by process-driven thinking and services afforded to immigration detainees, unable or unwilling to question existing struc- including Cornelia Rau. While I do not in- tures, processes and procedures. tend to go through every detail of the mis- … … … management of Cornelia Rau’s personal There is a management attitude that does not health issues while she was in DIMIA’s care, question the instructions and processes and seems I do wish to address the wider issues that to attach little value to explaining to staff the op- became apparent because of it. erating context and the purpose of the instructions In terms of DIMIA delivering poor health and processes. The attitude emphasises process and is silent on outcomes. This is dangerous in a care to detainees in its care, the report notes volatile portfolio. that: On pages 171-172, the report notes that the At issue are the prevailing culture, lack of asser- combination of the pressures just discussed tive leadership, uncertainty about roles and responsibilities, lack of appropriate training, lack of ‘has given rise to a culture that is overly self- arrangements for effective communication, poor protective and defensive’ and which presents coordination and consultation, and a failure of itself as ‘largely unwilling to challenge or- management responsibility and oversight. ganisational norms or to engage in genuine At Baxter, the report notes: self-criticism or analysis.’ The adequacy of health care falls short because From page 193, we see that: the ‘standards’ set in the contract [between In the Inquiry’s view, change seems to be crisis DIMIA and the private contractor managing Bax- generated and not initiated by self-criticism of ter] through the Immigration Detention Standards departmental actions, processes and outcomes. are neither measurable nor clear statements of At page 194 the report says: requirement. The performance measures are exception based and not supported by any quality Throughout all aspects of both the Inquiry and assurance mechanisms. the Examination there was, with few exceptions, ... consistent evidence of reluctance at middle

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 43

Terms used in the standards include ‘timely there. Obviously there must have been, or and effective’ with regard to access to pri- else someone would have raised a point of mary health care, and for that to be con- order. The relevance is that Senator Marshall ducted in a ‘culturally responsive frame- outlined details of the Palmer report and the work’, whatever that means. There is no ef- debacle in the immigration department fective quantifiable way to assess the per- around the Cornelia Rau issue but, much formance of these requirements. They are wider than that, the intrinsic failures and completely and totally inadequate. And, as massive flaws in the way the immigration the report notes, ‘the Standards do not take department currently operates and has been account of the quality of care or how that operating for a long period of time under this should be measured.’ government and this minister under the Mi- It was also noted that a health advisory gration Act. panel, made mention throughout the so- These regulations allow the immigration called standards, was not even yet estab- department to operate totally outside that act lished. The report noted with reference to altogether for people who are not in the mi- Rau, and I quote: gration zone. Senator Marshall has outlined a With a performance management regime that damning indictment of how badly this gov- does not manage performance or service quality ernment and this department fail in treating or risks in any meaningful way, it is not surprising people with even basic decency and duty of DIMIA was caught unaware. The system did not care, let alone legal rights. While they are ‘fail’: it was ill-conceived and could never deliver operating under the law as it stands with all to the Commonwealth the information on per- its flaws, what this regulation will allow if it formance, service quality and risk management is not disallowed is for them to just disregard that DIMIA was confident it would. that law altogether for anybody who arrives Having noted that: here in those areas that are excised from the ... repeated studies of national prison and refugee migration zone. populations have found that incarcerated people While the government and the minister have a much higher incidence of psychological and psychiatric morbidity than the general com- say, ‘Yes, we have got a real problem in the munity—anything up to 50 per cent higher— immigration department, there is a real culture problem, a management problem, all of the report found that there are totally inade- those things; we are going to change the cul- quate psychiatric services available at Bax- ture; we’re going to make it more respon- ter. The report noted that in the four months sive, more accountable, less mistakes,’ at the that Cornelia Rau was detained at Baxter, the same time they bring in a regulation that re- consultant psychiatrist from New South moves any sort of accountability—that re- Wales who attended Baxter on a fly-in, fly- moves the whole law. How can you possibly out basis had visited the centre only once. It say that the government is genuine about noted that, and I quote— (Time expired) changing the culture of the department and Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) the people in it and how they operate when (11.57 am)—in reply—this debate is actually the minister is saying, ‘Here you go, if you about the Democrat motion to disallow regu- can catch people in this part of Australia, you lations that excise thousands of Australians have got free rein; no law at all; nothing to from Australia’s migration zone. Senator worry about’? It is farcical and it puts Marshall’s contribution perhaps went a bit squarely, front and centre, that any sugges- wider than that, but there is some relevance tion that there is a genuine culture change

CHAMBER 44 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 being driven by this minister and this gov- So whilst Labor’s position is clearly an ernment is a joke. improvement on the government’s—and I That is why this disallowance motion is so always welcome and am keen to encourage important: it sends a clear signal that we are improvements, not just expect all or nothing not going to go back to the bad old days of overnight—it does need to be pointed out these farcical, ridiculous, quasi-legal fictions that until the policy shifts to remove this that have led to the sorry situation that we whole concept of some parts of Australia now have with our immigration department. being allowed to operate outside the law then Let me emphasise that, when our immigra- we will still have this significant problem tion department is as dysfunctional as it is and that principle will still be there. There is now, it is not just a problem for a few thou- nothing special about islands; they do not sand refugees and asylum seekers. Our im- have any special legal status that means that migration department directly deals with they have a different application of the law millions of applications and people each from anywhere else and we should not be year. It directly affects the lives of huge running any suggestion that there is. Once numbers of Australians in all sorts of ways we allow such a precedent to stand—that in into the future. For that department, in such a parts of Australia the law does not matter— key public policy area, to be so dysfunctional then obviously it can be expanded to other is a serious problem for all of us. Yet at the areas. The government can point to it and same time we are putting in place something say: ‘We’ve been doing it here. Let’s do it that says, ‘We’re still going to allow you to with something else.’ operate in this legal shadow land where there I see Senator Scullion is in the chamber, are no rules at all.’ fleetingly; it looks like he is going out the Let me take this opportunity to remind the door again. He has been the only member of Senate and the public that there are still 32 the government to come in and defend these people suffering enormously on Nauru. I last regulations. The minister has not come in to saw them earlier this year and they were suf- put the government’s case. These are regula- fering hugely then. Some of them were in a tions gazetted through the minister, who put terrible state. It is now many months later; them forward. It is delegated legislation, so it the fourth anniversary of the Tampa rescue is is equivalent to the minister bringing legisla- coming up in a week’s time. A small number tion into this Senate. Where is the minister? of those people were on Nauru from the very No disrespect to Senator Scullion, but why is start—they were not on the Tampa but on the he the only one who has come in to defend Manoora, the Navy vessel that dropped them the case? Why can’t the minister come in and off. It needs to be said that, while it is pleas- put the case? ing that Labor is supporting this disallow- The minister has not responded to the ance motion and has supported previous dis- Palmer report. The minister has not re- allowance motions, the regulation itself is sponded to so many of these other crucial only possible because the Labor Party sup- issues in migration. One thing I will say for ported the government’s legislation in 2001 the previous minister, Minister Ruddock, is in response to the Tampa incident, and it is that at least he would be on the front foot and my understanding that it is still Labor policy very strongly defend the rationale and the to support Christmas Island being excised legality of various things. I strongly dis- from the migration zone. agreed with him, obviously, many times, but at least he would take up the fight, not have a

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 45 bit of bluster and a press conference and then rightly said, it is very dangerous. They are disappear. Having said that, given that Sena- dealing with criminals, they are putting their tor Scullion’s contribution was the only one lives at risk and they are the subject of extor- putting the case opposing the motion for dis- tion. But the fact is that if people have no allowance I need to respond to some of the other option when they are fleeing persecu- points that he put forward. tion—as we have seen and as history shows Senator Scullion said that border protec- going back to 1945, which led to the refugee tion is a very sophisticated challenge and convention—then people will take whatever needs very sophisticated answers. I agree: it options are available to them. is a sophisticated issue. It is far wider than This government has done some good just asylum seekers; in fact, I really do not things. For example, getting people assessed see asylum seekers as a border protection by the UNHCR and overseen and assisted by issue at all because they are always detected, the International Organisation for Migration they always were detected and they always in Indonesia is a positive thing, as long as the want to be detected. There are no people people who are assessed as refugees can find coming into this country who are more con- a place where they have viable protection. sistently detected and more thoroughly as- That has not always happened. They can be sessed and examined. So I do not see asylum found to be a refugee by the UNHCR but seekers as a border protection issue. But how then be stuck. Some of the people who we deal with unauthorised arrivals is a so- drowned on the SIEVX had actually been phisticated and difficult issue. It is a hard assessed as being refugees by UNHCR in issue. It does need sophisticated answers. Indonesia, but no other country could be That is why this regulation is a joke: it is found for them in the foreseeable future so not a sophisticated answer; it is a farce. The they made the tragic choice to go on that principle behind it subverts the rule of law. boat. There is no legal logic behind why different To suggest that the only people who are law is applied in some parts of Australia and impacted are people smugglers is simply not others. It tries to reinforce a subcon- wrong. Firstly, the vast majority of people scious message—that we need a barrier of smugglers get away with it scot-free. It was islands around the top of Australia to protect only due to enormous public and political us from this so-called threat. However, his- pressure that a couple of the people involved tory shows that the vast number of those is- in the SIEVX tragedy bore some legal re- lands are not ones that will attract asylum sponsibility, one of whom was sentenced in seekers first; the mainland is much closer Brisbane last month to, I think, nine years than most of those excised islands. It is basi- jail. Only a very small number of people cally a stunt to send a political message to smugglers have been impacted. The people the Australian people. who have been impacted in a very severe Senator Scullion said that these regula- way have been refugees. I mention again, as tions very clearly impact on only one group one example, the 32 who have been impris- of people: people smugglers. I have spoken oned on Nauru for four years now—almost out, as have many others, against people as long a sentence as the person seen as the smugglers. All of us in this chamber, I be- mastermind behind the whole SIEVX trag- lieve, want to discourage people from arriv- edy got in Egypt. ing here on boats. As Senator Scullion

CHAMBER 46 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

It is simply not true to say this only im- inquiring into some of those issues. I invite pacts on the people smugglers; it is impact- senators and others to read the book Follow- ing on refugees. Immense suffering, harm ing them home that was recently released—I and misery were caused to those refugees cannot remember the name of the author off because of the measure passed by the Senate the top of my head, I am sorry. The book in 2001 and, if we expand it now, we clearly follows some of the people sent back from run the risk of it impacting on other people. Australia. Again, I think we need to question They are the ones who will be hurt. To sug- this blanket statement that we have never gest it is only going to harm people smug- sent anybody back to danger. glers is a furphy. We had the final furphy when the gov- Senator Scullion drew a very long bow ernment said: ‘If we disallow these regula- when he said it was a necessary quarantine tions then it will send the message back that measure because terrible invasive species we are open for business. It will open the can be on board these boats. That is true. But floodgates. There will be an open door pol- these boats, more than any others, are de- icy. People will pour in if we disallow this.’ tected whenever they arrive because they The obvious counter to that is: the Senate has want to be detected. We can actually check disallowed these regulations, I think, four them for quarantine purposes. The risk is times before and no floodgates opened and with the boats that come here and we do not no people poured in. I think it is quite clear get to see what is on them. It is drawing an that it did not happen then and it will con- extremely long bow to say that we need this tinue to not happen. as a quarantine measure. That would be the We then had the unfortunate but, nonethe- case anyway, even without examining how less, instinctive response from the govern- poor this government’s commitment is to ment that the people who support this disal- quarantine. Senator Heffernan from the gov- lowance motion support people smugglers; ernment has done a good job during a Senate you are either with us or against us. Anybody committee by putting a spotlight on the con- who disagrees with this appalling undermin- tinuing decline in the strength of the gov- ing of the rule of law, this massive infliction ernment’s commitment to genuine quarantine of enormous suffering on refugees, actually provisions. It is even the case that plants that supports people smugglers. So much for a are on the quarantine alert list are allowed to sophisticated argument and a sophisticated be sold in nurseries to gardeners throughout position from the government! I do not think Australia. So much for commitment to quar- it helps the debate to descend into that sort of antine! thing. The government representative stated that If we are going to be talking about attack- we have never refouled a refugee in the his- ing people who traffic in human misery— tory of this government. To be polite, I think and of course people smugglers traffic in that is very much in dispute. The Edmund human misery—frankly, this government has Rice Centre has done a lot of work in this generated a lot of human misery, and the regard, because nobody else from the gov- Senate has assisted the government by pass- ernment could be bothered to do it. The Ed- ing some legislation that allows it to do it, I mund Rice Centre has explored statements might say. But the human misery is out there; like the one made by the government, and I it is out there in the Australian community think it would strongly question such state- now with thousands of refugees. The human ments. At the moment, a Senate committee is

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 47 misery is there on Nauru, with 32 totally and legally tenuous aspects that are still en- traumatised and massively damaged peo- trenched within the Migration Act and its ple—probably, irreparably damaged. There is regulations. Voting for this Democrat motion human misery. The cost has been met by the for disallowance is one opportunity to do Australian taxpayer—hundreds and hundreds that. of millions of dollars—and more is needed. I Question put: think it will cost $330 million to build an- That the motion (Senator Bartlett’s) be other 800-capacity facility on Christmas Is- agreed to. land. It is an extraordinary waste of money. The Senate divided. [12.19 pm] There is the human misery and there is the cost to the taxpayer. (The President—Senator the Hon. Paul Calvert) I call on all government senators to consider this issue. I know there are some within Ayes………… 32 the government who are not comfortable Noes………… 36 with the continuing direction of this govern- Majority……… 4 ment and the continuing state of our Migra- tion Act and how it impacts on many people. AYES I do not want to play politics and criticise Allison, L.F. Bartlett, A.J.J. them if none will vote with the Democrats Bishop, T.M. Brown, B.J. and the opposition parties on this motion. I Campbell, G. Carr, K.J. recognise you have to choose your moment Conroy, S.M. Crossin, P.M. Faulkner, J.P. Forshaw, M.G. as to when you take that walk across the Hogg, J.J. Hurley, A. floor. You cannot be doing it every day of the Hutchins, S.P. Ludwig, J.W. week. I do signal that there are occasions Marshall, G. McEwen, A. when there are important matters of principle McLucas, J.E. Milne, C. and important signals to send in a range of Moore, C. Murray, A.J.M. different ways. I urge them to think about it Nettle, K. O’Brien, K.W.K. on this occasion. If they cannot on this occa- Polley, H. Ray, R.F. Sherry, N.J. Siewert, R. sion, I urge them to recognise that this area is Stephens, U. Sterle, G. one that still needs ongoing action. Stott Despoja, N. Webber, R. * The fact is that the government has pro- Wong, P. Wortley, D. ceeded with these regulations after the deba- NOES cle of the Palmer report, after all the pledges Abetz, E. Adams, J. about a change of culture and after the Barnett, G. Boswell, R.L.D. agreements that were reached between the Brandis, G.H. Calvert, P.H. Prime Minister and those Liberal Party Campbell, I.G. Chapman, H.G.P. MPs—Mr Georgiou and others—who stood Colbeck, R. Coonan, H.L. Eggleston, A. Ellison, C.M. up to make a point on these matters. They do Ferguson, A.B. Ferris, J.M. * need to recognise that more needs to be Fielding, S. Fierravanti-Wells, C. done. Whether this is the right time for them Fifield, M.P. Heffernan, W. to take that stand is for them to say. This is- Johnston, D. Joyce, B. sue will undoubtedly continue to result in Kemp, C.R. Lightfoot, P.R. other votes being taken in the Senate into the Macdonald, I. Macdonald, J.A.L. future. At some stage, we do need to start McGauran, J.J.J. Minchin, N.H. Nash, F. Parry, S. winding back some of the incredibly unjust

CHAMBER 48 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

Patterson, K.C. Payne, M.A. Colleges (Flexibility in Achieving Australia’s Ronaldson, M. Santoro, S. Skills Needs) Bill 2005 together with the Scullion, N.G. Troeth, J.M. Hansard record of proceedings and docu- Trood, R. Watson, J.O.W. ments presented to the committee. PAIRS Ordered that the report be printed. Evans, C.V. Humphries, G. Kirk, L. Hill, R.M. HUMAN SERVICES LEGISLATION Lundy, K.A. Mason, B.J. AMENDMENT BILL 2005 * denotes teller Second Reading Senator Vanstone did not vote, to compen- Debate resumed from 10 August, on mo- sate for the vacancy caused by the resignation by Senator Coonan: tion of Senator Mackay. That this bill be now read a second time. Question negatived. Senator STEPHENS (New South Wales) INDIGENOUS EDUCATION (12.26 pm)—The Human Services Legisla- (TARGETED ASSISTANCE) tion Amendment Bill 2005 is in response to AMENDMENT BILL 2005 the Uhrig report and review of statutory au- Report of Employment, Workplace thorities and organisations. Those which Relations and Education Legislation concern us in this legislation are Centrelink Committee and the Health Insurance Commission. The Auditor-General has reported several times Senator SCULLION (Northern Territory) on Centrelink’s shortcomings. In Audit Re- (12.24 pm)—On behalf of the Chair of the port No. 34 of 2001, it was found that 49.1 Employment, Workplace Relations and Edu- per cent of claim forms were not fully com- cation Legislation Committee, Senator Tro- pleted in accordance with the legislative re- eth, I present the report of the committee on quirements. It seems to me that it is the job the provisions of the Indigenous Education of Centrelink to make sure that its legislation (Targeted Assistance) Amendment Bill 2005 is implemented. So how can we not be sur- together with the Hansard record of proceed- prised that there are so many mistakes in ings and documents presented to the commit- payments if the information collected at the tee. first interview or application is incomplete? Ordered that the report be printed. In light of the new debate on a possible AUSTRALIAN TECHNICAL Australian identity card, proof of identity is a COLLEGES (FLEXIBILITY IN critical issue, just as it was in Audit Report ACHIEVING AUSTRALIA’S SKILLS No. 26 of 2001-02. That report identified that NEEDS) BILL 2005 22 per cent of Centrelink applications for Report of Employment, Workplace payments contained errors in the proof of Relations and Education Legislation identity process. Nothing much has changed. Committee This year the Audit Office found that, under Senator SCULLION (Northern Territory) the watch of the Health Insurance Commis- (12.25 pm)—On behalf of the Chair of the sion, up to 500,000 Medicare cards were Employment, Workplace Relations and Edu- probably held by dead people. A subsequent cation Legislation Committee, Senator Tro- report, Audit Report No. 54, was critical of eth, I present the report of the committee on the commission for the poor administration the provisions of the Australian Technical of health cards. This is not exactly a show-

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 49 case model for a national identity card. It mortgages to pay and families to provide for does not engender public confidence that are preparing to be dumped. Is this an exam- such a card could even be administered apple of the famous Howard government man- propriately or that this government is on top agement style? Rumours have overrun the of its responsibility to protect the integrity of agency concerning how many and just who fundamental systems of government. will be going, because they cannot get a The Health Insurance Commission is di- straight answer from anyone. In this respect, rectly affected by this legislation, and serious on this side of the chamber we know exactly questions about the future of the HIC were how they feel. asked by Mr Kelvin Thomson, the shadow This bill is the precursor for the govern- minister for human services, in the House of ment’s rebadging of the Health Insurance Representatives on Tuesday last week. I Commission as Medicare Australia. Is this might add that those questions have not been yet another opportunity for the government answered, nine days later, despite assurances to spend millions of unnecessary dollars on by the minister’s parliamentary secretary, Dr advertising? It was revealed last week that an Stone, that: ‘We will make sure that you have old friend of the Liberal Party, Mr Ted Hor- those responses quite urgently.’ Yesterday, ton, a man who has been working on Liberal Labor once again requested that Minister Party election campaigns for 10 years, has Hockey’s office respond urgently to those the lucrative contract to complete the current questions, and still there has been nothing. industrial relations advertising campaign that There may be a very good reason why the government is running—a campaign these questions have not been answered. This about which respected Sydney Morning Her- government is attempting to hide, very ald economics editor, Ross Gittins, said, ‘Far poorly, some devastating news; that is, ru- from admitting the truth, it is seeking to con- mours are running rampant in the agency and ceal it.’ That campaign will be under scrutiny around Canberra that hundreds of Health in the Senate inquiry into government adver- Insurance Commission jobs are about to be tising. cut. People are living with the stress of un- It is obvious that the government’s 1997 certainty and yet nothing is forthcoming changes have been a failure for Centrelink, from this government about their circum- and they now have to be rolled back. Labor stances. So I ask again: can the government supports the legislation as a means of im- confirm or deny that hundreds of jobs in the proving the governance of Centrelink and the Health Insurance Commission are going to Health Insurance Commission-cum- be cut? And is this part of the restructure Medicare Australia, and improving the ac- currently in process? What is apparent is that countability of the Howard government in these cuts are not confined to the current important service delivery agencies. The freeze on recruitment in the national office or governance boards of Centrelink and the to the review of all employment arrange- Health Insurance Commission have not been ments and natural attrition of staff, or to the able to provide solutions to the real failures finalisation of the implementation of the new in management systems and service delivery. computer system—all explanations of the But, having provided a buffer in accountabil- minister. ity for the minister in the past, their abolition People who trusted that they had perma- and the new institutional arrangements out- nent jobs and very likely have HECS and lined in the bill will ensure that the minister can no longer shuffle or shift the blame, be-

CHAMBER 50 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 cause his ministerial control equates to min- (5) The Minister must by writing deter- isterial accountability. mine a code of practice for selecting and appointing the Chief Executive Of- I acknowledge that Senator Siewert’s ob- ficer and any acting Chief Executive servation yesterday about diminishing com- Officer which sets out general princi- munity consultations is an important one. It ples on which selection and appoint- is clearly a decision of a government that is ment is to be made, including but not out of touch and out of step and that does not limited to: want to know about or acknowledge the im- (a) merit; portance of public participation in the politi- (b) independent scrutiny of appoint- cal process and policy development. If the ments; bill being debated today delivers significant (c) probity; improvements to the services provided to (d) openness and transparency. Australian citizens by the Health Insurance Commission and Centrelink, that will cer- (6) After determining a code of practice tainly be a positive step. The minister will be under subsection (5), the Minister must publish the code in the Gazette. beholden to ensure that such improvements are delivered and resourced appropriately. He (7) Not later than every fifth anniversary could begin by coming clean to HIC em- after a code of practice has been determined, the Minister must review the ployees about their future. code. Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special (8) In reviewing a code of practice, the Minister of State) (12.32 pm)—I thank hon- Minister must invite the public to ourable senators for their contributions to comment on the code. this debate and for the cross-party support (9) A code of practice determined under that I understand this legislation is going to subsection (5) is a legislative instru- receive. ment. Question agreed to. As senators will realise, these are standard Bill read a second time. amendments that the Democrats have put up to many such bills. They require that ap- In Committee pointment be on the basis of merit. I note Bill—by leave—taken as a whole. that the Human Services Legislation Senator ALLISON (Victoria—Leader of Amendment Bill 2005 is supposed to be the Australian Democrats) (12.33 pm)—by about improvement of corporate governance. leave—I move the Democrats amendments The second reading speech says so and it on sheet 4638: also talks about increasing accountability and (1) Schedule 1, page 9 (after line 24), after item ensuring high levels of performance of gov- 30, insert: ernment agencies. Those agencies, as has 30A Subsection 29(2) been said already, are Centrelink, Medicare After “Minister”, insert “and in accor- Australia and the HIC. I understand that this dance with the merit selection process is a result of the Uhrig model, which has required by subsections (5) to (9)” been taken up by government, and that there (2) Schedule 1, page 9 (after line 28), after item will not be boards but instead government 31, insert: appointed CEOs. This is very relevant to the 31A At the end of section 29 amendments that I am putting. Add:

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 51

We have spoken out on many occasions Before moving to further discussion about about the need for an end to the system of these amendments, I wonder if I could raise a jobs for the boys that has been so apparent in question for the minister, if he is intending to recent years and for a long time—well before respond. I understand that yesterday a ques- even your government, Senator Abetz. tion was asked about whether a family im- Wherever appointments are made to the gov- pact statement had been made on this legisla- erning organs of public authorities, whether tion. I think that the minister undertook to they are institutions set up by legislation, find out whether that was the case. I am not independent statutory authorities or quasi- sure whether an offer was made to provide it government agencies, the processes by to the Senate, but I ask whether this could be which these appointments are made should the case. be transparent, accountable, open and honest. Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special That applies to appointments of CEOs just as Minister of State) (12.37 pm)—I understand it does to board members. there are no other speakers on this amend- One of the main failings of the present ment, so, to quickly sum up on behalf of the system is that there is no empirical evidence government, as I understand it, there was no to determine whether the public perception family impact statement in relation to this of jobs for the boys is correct, as these ap- piece of legislation and therefore no state- pointments are not open to sufficient public ment as a result can be provided. Senator scrutiny or analysis. Again we have govern- Allison was quite honest with the Senate ment putting in place processes for appoint- when she said that this is the 25th time, or ments to statutory authorities which will be whatever it is. I think that the arguments left to the discretion of the minister. There is about this have been dealt with on numerous no umbrella legislation that sets out a stan- occasions in the Senate previously. The De- dard procedure regulating the making of ap- mocrats do seem to have a tendency to want pointments. Perhaps most importantly, there to legislate on absolutely everything. We is no external scrutiny of the procedure and think that is a bit bureaucratic, and it would merits of appointments by an independent be a bit unkind of me to remind the Democ- body. rats that their name suggests they are democ- In the past we have put up amendments in rats, not bureaucrats. I would think that the this parliament designed to compel ministers sort of extra legislation that the Democrats to make appointment on merit. This must be always come up with and the extra work that about the 25th occasion we have done so. it would entail is just extra bureaucracy Every single time, both major parties have which will possibly be of benefit one day to opposed it for some reason which has never a lawyer or somebody else but not really of quite been explained. I ask the government great benefit to the administration of the de- to seriously consider moving down this path. partment. I think it would be to the benefit of the ob- I think that in general terms people would jectives of this bill, which is supposedly, as I accept that the vast number of appointments said, to improve the corporate governance of that this government have made have been these agencies and to increase accountability. on merit and, whilst Senator Allison makes This is one very important measure that comments about jobs for boys, I would re- might go some way to achieving that. mind the Senate that this government in fact have the proud record of having the most women as heads of departments and, might I

CHAMBER 52 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 say, not on any quota or system other than whether a family impact statement is neces- merit. We as a government are very much sary or not. As I asked yesterday on another merit-based and any appointments will of piece of legislation, it would be useful to course be made on merit, because as a gov- know what the process is for this. The an- ernment we want to ensure that the govern- swer given by a minister was that this was a ment departments we run are for the benefit cabinet document and not something which of the Australian community, and therefore could be made available to senators outside we will be appointing on merit. the cabinet room. So if the minister is able to Senator ALLISON (Victoria—Leader of indicate what the process is—who the recipi- the Australian Democrats) (12.40 pm)—It is ents are of this impact statement and, if not good to know that we have women heading everybody in this place, why that is the up those departments and if the minister is case—that would be useful. correct in saying that those appointments are Senator MOORE (Queensland) (12.42 based on merit then why not support this pm)—Whilst we are giving support to this amendment? If it is already happening, there piece of legislation, we have a number of is nothing to lose on the part of government. questions and we would like to seek some I suggest to you that it would protect gov- answers to clarify some positions. Most of ernment from those inevitable accusations them were raised in the speeches made on that here is yet another job for the boys. the legislation. I would like to start by saying However, my question is about the family that we share the concern about the family impact statements. Could you indicate to the impact statements, Senator Allison, and we Senate what it is that determines when a also seek to know the process and how that family impact statement will be made and will be done. when it will not? Minister, one of the things that has been Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special mentioned is that this particular piece of leg- Minister of State) (12.40 pm)—Undoubtedly, islation is cost neutral, that there is no real it will be when the government determines cost in the process. We are interested in the that such a statement is necessary. I am not issue of the advertising around the changes sure that I necessarily have responsibility for to the name HIC, which is now going to be the area; somebody somewhat higher in the Medicare Australia. We would like to have food chain in government ultimately deter- some information about what the expected mines that question. I do not think that we cost would be of any advertising campaign have set out a blueprint—or I am not aware and also those all-too-often and necessary of one—or a document which says that in changes to the whole rebadging aspect of a these particular circumstances we will have a significant change with a rename in an or- family impact statement. I think that it is a ganisation. It is a significant cost in terms of situation that is judged on the basis of need stationery, process, advertising—even the on each occasion. If I am wrong as to that, I signage that goes up outside offices. We will make sure that appropriate information know that there are far too few current of- is provided to Senator Allison’s office. fices—we hope that there could even be Senator ALLISON (Victoria—Leader of some more offices out of this process. What the Australian Democrats) (12.41 pm)—It indication is there of the budgetary impact of would be useful if the Senate were provided those changes? with a set of the criteria used in assessing

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 53

Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) (12.46 Minister of State) (12.43 pm)—I am advised pm)—I thank the Senate for its support and that the cost of the name change for HIC is commend the bills to the Senate. to be absorbed by HIC as part of their operat- Question agreed to. ing costs—and that is about $2 million. HIC Bills read a second time. are absorbing the administrative costs and adopting an incremental and progressive roll- Third Reading out of materials relating to the name change Bills passed through their remaining in order to minimise costs. Was there any- stages without amendment or debate. thing else on that? BUSINESS Senator MOORE (Queensland) (12.44 Rearrangement pm)—We will gratefully take that answer, Senator COLBECK (Tasmania— Minister, and have a closer look at it, be- Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for cause there are a number of cost impacts in Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) (12.46 terms of the process. You said it was $2 mil- pm)—I move: lion and that it would be absorbed by normal operating costs, so as we question through That consideration of government business or- the estimates process we will find out which der of the day No. 2 (Building and Construction Industry Improvement Bill 2005 and a related particular groups that would go through. bill) be called on to enable second reading Another series of questions that came out speeches to be made till not later than 2 pm. in the discussion was about staffing and Question agreed to. budget changes under the guise of govern- BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION ance in terms of the board. We are going to INDUSTRY IMPROVEMENT BILL 2005 concentrate on HIC in this particular range of questions. I think Senator Stephens item- BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION ised— INDUSTRY IMPROVEMENT (CONSEQUENTIAL AND Senator Abetz—Just before we run out of TRANSITIONAL) BILL 2005 time, if you have a list of questions and pass them over, we can try and get answers. Second Reading Senator MOORE—Minister, I will take Debate resumed from 16 August, on mo- advice on this. It seems to be a sensible ap- tion by Senator Abetz: proach. That these bills be now read a second time. Progress reported. Senator WONG (South Australia) (12.47 NATIONAL RESIDUE SURVEY pm)—The Building and Construction Indus- (CUSTOMS) LEVY AMENDMENT BILL try Improvement Bill 2005 and the Building 2005 and Construction Industry Improvement (Consequential and Transitional) Bill 2005 NATIONAL RESIDUE SURVEY reintroduce in part the Building and Con- (EXCISE) LEVY AMENDMENT BILL struction Industry Improvement Bill 2003, 2005 which was the subject of some lengthy de- Second Reading bate in this chamber. It reintroduces that leg- Debate resumed. islation with some significant modifications, Senator COLBECK (Tasmania— which I will speak about later. Labor op- Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for posed the substantively similar legislation in

CHAMBER 54 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

2003 and will also oppose this legislation. As I said at the outset, this legislation has This is fundamentally flawed legislation. It a somewhat torrid past. The then minister for will not assist in the satisfactory resolution of workplace relations introduced the bills industrial issues in the building and construc- which are currently before us into the House tion industry. In fact, it will have the oppo- in March 2005 and announced that they site effect. would operate retrospectively from this date. As a general proposition, Labor are op- The Building and Construction Industry Im- posed to creating specific jurisdictions for provement Bill 2005 reintroduces in large specific industries. It is far better to have a part the government’s 2003 legislation. That sensible regulatory system across a number bill was developed as part of the govern- of industries. But the government’s blind ment’s legislative response to the Cole royal zealotry in targeting the construction indus- commission. The 2003 bill lapsed when the try unions requires them to introduce this parliament was prorogued for the 2004 fed- legislation, which specifically targets this eral election. In essence, senators in this union and these workers. More specifically, chamber will recall there was substantial this bill also changes the rules retrospec- debate in relation to the 2003 building and tively and provides substantial new penalties. construction industry legislation, which also As a matter of general principle, Labor are sought to establish an Australian building opposed to retrospective legislation unless and construction commission. On that occa- there are very good grounds for demanding sion, the Senate refused to pass that legisla- retrospectivity, and in our view those tion and the government got around the will grounds are not the government’s political of the Senate by essentially introducing a desire to target particular trade unions and similar body by administrative and executive particular workers in the building and con- means. It bypassed the Senate and set up the struction industry. We are particularly op- Building Industry Taskforce. However, it had posed to the retrospective penalties which the issue of what powers it would provide to exist in this legislation. the task force. That obviously was an issue that had to come before this chamber. We The Building and Construction Industry therefore saw what was then called the codi- Improvement Bill 2005 defines ‘construction fying contempt act, in which powers associ- industry’ so broadly that employers and em- ated with the work of the Building Industry ployees never previously considered as part Taskforce were put in place. That was a of this industry will now, should the bill be fairly lengthy debate in this chamber. passed, be covered by the provisions of the legislation. It will expose both employers Those powers were substantially amelio- and employees in this industry to prosecution rated and mitigated by Labor and the De- and penalties for participating in what is cur- mocrats in the Senate. They were very sub- rently legal bargaining activity under the stantial coercive powers—powers that Labor government’s Workplace Relations Act. The still says are inappropriate. They certainly bill places further restrictions upon employ- give very substantial rights to the task force, ees and their unions from exercising their arguably rights far greater than police have, right to strike, which brings Australia into so you have the bizarre situation where further breach of the relevant International building union officials and employees in the Labour Organisation convention. These are construction industry actually have fewer the reasons that Labor is opposed to this bill. rights in relation to investigation by the task force than a criminal might have in relation

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 55 to investigation by police. However, there posed retrospectively to fines of up to were ameliorating provisions put in place by $110,000 and uncapped damages. Individu- this chamber by Labor and the Democrats. als may face fines of up to $22,000. This is What we have before us is a bill which sim- intended to severely limit the ability to nego- ply does not include any of those ameliora- tiate bargaining outcomes. Finally, the bill tive mechanisms or any of the protections also shifts the onus onto employees to prove that were put in place and insisted on by the that a reasonable concern exists where action Senate in relation to the previous legislation. is taken based on an imminent occupational The Building and Construction Industry health and safety risk. This is a significant Improvement (Consequential and Transi- safety issue, given the particularly hazardous tional) Bill 2005 provides for machinery nature of building and construction work. amendments relating to the Building and Over the last 10 years, there have been an Construction Industry Improvement Bill average of 50 workplace fatalities each year. 2005. On 8 August this year, government This bill potentially puts the health and amendments in the other place reintroduced safety of employees in this industry at risk additional provisions from the 2003 bill. by imposing financial penalties upon em- These amendments create the Australian ployees who cease to work in what they re- Building and Construction Commissioner, gard as an unsafe environment. the ABCC, and provide this body with coer- I turn now to the coercive powers which cive powers to gather information and prose- the government is proposing to provide to cute people associated with a very broadly the ABCC. Provisions introduced into the defined building industry. House in August of this year provide this As I said at the outset, there are a number body with coercive powers to gather infor- of measures which are to be applied, should mation and prosecute people associated with this legislation be passed retrospectively, the building industry. As I said at the outset, from 9 March 2005. Firstly, there will be an the role of the proposed commissioner is increase in the maximum penalties, to currently undertaken by the Building Indus- $110,000 for a body corporate and $22,000 try Taskforce, with powers provided under for an individual, where unlawful industrial the Workplace Relations Amendment (Codi- action is taken. Secondly, the bill makes cer- fying Contempt Offences) Act 2004. Once tain forms of industrial action unlawful and this bill has been passed, the task force will provides access to sanctions against unlawful convert to the ABCC and the provisions of industrial action in the form of injunctions, the codifying contempt act referring to the pecuniary penalties and compensation for Building Industry Taskforce will no longer loss. Thirdly, in particular the bill makes in- be effective. dustrial action taken by unions prior to the As I said previously, Labor, with the mi- nominal expiry date of certified agreements nor parties, amended the codifying contempt unprotected and unlawful. That is an ex- act to mitigate the worst elements of the co- traordinary shift in terms of the provisions ercive powers provided to the Building In- which apply to other unions and workers in dustry Taskforce. It is interesting to note that other industries under the government’s own all of these amendments have not been in- Workplace Relations Act. cluded in the government’s bill. Essentially, Fourthly, if a union takes industrial action the government is proposing to provide the in support of its negotiations, it may be ex- new building commission with all the coercive powers proposed and not previously

CHAMBER 56 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 passed under the codifying contempt bill and almost unlimited range of industrial relations without any of the associated checks and matters. balances that Labor and the Democrats in- Previously, Labor also moved an amend- serted into that legislation. ment that required the approval of a Federal In essence, the bill empowers the commis- Court judge to use coercive powers. This sion to demand answers to such questions as: inserted a truly independent element into this ‘Are you or have you at any time been a process. Federal Court judges routinely deal member of a trade union or a political party?’ with industrial relations matters and are well To be subjected to such questioning, a build- placed to determine whether coercive powers ing industry employee need have done noth- are appropriate or necessary in any particular ing wrong nor have been suspected of doing case. Requiring a warrant from the Federal anything wrong. The investigator can also Court also went a long way to ensuring that demand the production of phone records, building workers do not have lesser civil bank account records and any other docu- liberties than those people being questioned ment. An employee who fails to cooperate by ASIO about terrorism. Senators will recall fully will have committed a criminal offence, the ASIO legislation that was previously de- and the punishment will automatically be a bated in this chamber. There was much dis- prison term. Our amendments to the previous cussion about the importance of ensuring legislation ensured that there was an alterna- that there was some judicial oversight of the tive financial penalty available to the courts additional powers to be granted to our secu- rather than a mandatory prison sentence for rity organisations to question persons who employees in this situation. Whilst we may have some knowledge of terrorist activi- clearly deplore any criminal behaviour, ties. Labor’s amendment to the previous whether it is in the building industry or else- building and construction industry legisla- where, we do not support the denial of civil tion, which is not reflected in the current liberties to innocent Australians simply be- legislation, was to ensure that there was cause they work in the building industry and some independent oversight of the coercive simply because this government wants to powers to be initiated and utilised by the target these workers. ABCC. This bill will enable the ABCC to use co- A third amendment that Labor moved to ercive powers in investigating any breach of the codifying contempt bill was to amend the the Workplace Relations Act, award or mandatory jail term in order to give the court agreement, including investigating ordinary the capacity to either fine or imprison an in- industrial activities of unions, such as meet- dividual who does not comply with a war- ings with members, not just investigating rant. Clearly, it makes sense to give a court alleged criminal activity. Labor are commit- the capacity to impose a monetary penalty ted to removing any criminality that may instead of jail time if a judge thinks this is exist in any workplace, including in the appropriate in the circumstances. In fact, building industry, but we do not believe that imprisonment has the potential to make a the task force or the ABCC is the right body martyr of the person who defies a warrant. It to investigate such matters. Criminal matters may be that in some cases a high financial ought to be investigated by the police. We penalty is more of a burden on an individual are also substantially concerned about giving than simply a short term of imprisonment. this body coercive powers in respect of an

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 57

A fourth amendment that Labor previ- offences and inserted some semblance of fair ously moved to that similar legislation, and process by requiring the approval of Federal which indicates our position on this legisla- Court judges. As I said, these amendments tion, deleted the requirement that a person are not included in the government’s bill. provide information when this might be con- Finally, as part of the amendments to the trary to another law or might incriminate that codifying contempt act, guidelines in the person. In our system of justice, the protec- form of a disallowable instrument were en- tion against self-incrimination is one of the acted about the use of the Building Industry most fundamental principles of natural jus- Taskforce’s coercive powers. This bill pro- tice—a point highlighted in a number of vides greater powers to the ABCC than those High Court cases, most notably by Justice previously granted by the government and Lionel Murphy in the case of Pyneboard Pty the parliament to the Building Industry Task- Ltd v Trade Practices Commission. force and unfortunately contains no guide- It is also worth noting that the Democrats lines to constrain their use. amended the previous legislation to place a I turn now to the issue of the Building limit on investigations so as to ensure they Code. The bill provides some legislative ba- were not minor or petty. Notwithstanding our sis for the current Building Code which re- concerns that the definition of that might be quires employers to comply or else fail to in the eye of the beholder, we note that this win Commonwealth construction contracts, provision has not been retained in the bill but otherwise the bill provides little detail. that is currently before this chamber. Accord- This effectively provides a blank cheque to ingly, the concern correctly identified by the the minister to impose conditions upon con- Democrats that these coercive powers could struction employers without requiring an be utilised for minor or petty offences and appropriate level of transparency and exac- therefore would not be appropriate has not erbates the current high level of uncertainty been picked up in this legislation. Coercive among employers about their compliance powers would be able to be used under this with the Commonwealth’s Building Code. act, if passed, to investigate trivial offences. The legislation was referred to the rele- Had the Labor and Democrats amend- vant Senate legislative committee, which ments been retained, Labor would still be reported in May 2005. The Australian Indus- extremely concerned about giving the ABCC try Group made a submission supporting the coercive powers to gather information. bill but called for amendments to narrow the Frankly, the Building Industry Taskforce, definition of ‘building work’ and thus the which is the predecessor of the ABCC, has application of the bill. The New South Wales had an entirely anti-union focus since it was government opposed the bill because: it is established in 2002. It has shown minimal industry specific; it adds unnecessary com- interest in important issues in the industry, plexity; its provisions are punitive, heavy such as non-payment of employee entitle- handed and unbalanced; and it promotes a ments, sham corporate structures and health litigious, adversarial and costly approach to and safety concerns. In light of this track industrial relations which would hinder record, Labor do not believe that the task rather than assist good faith bargaining. The force’s successor, the ABCC, should receive New South Wales government also raised additional coercive powers. Our amendments concerns about the retrospectivity of the leg- to the codifying contempt act restricted the scope of these coercive powers to criminal

CHAMBER 58 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 islation, which had no demonstrated justifi- ciation that are embodied in the relevant ILO cation. conventions. The Australian Democrats have also ar- This is a poorly drafted, excessively puni- gued against the need for specific industry tive and unfair bill. It is divisive in its appli- legislation and noted with concern the con- cation and will not assist in the satisfactory fusing nature of the definition of ‘building resolution of industrial issues in the building and construction industry’ in the bill. I note and construction industry. Labor do not sup- that Senator Murray has circulated some port unreasonable and unlawful conduct, but amendments to deal with that issue. The we also do not support the creation of laws Democrats also opposed the retrospectivity which will effectively prohibit the taking of of the bill. While I will wait until the com- industrial action. This is a contravention of mittee stage to indicate more clearly Labor’s the fundamental rights to which I have review about the Democrats’ amendments, in ferred. general we are supportive of them as they do The retrospectivity of this bill potentially address some of our concerns. But they do and substantially penalises employees, un- not ameliorate the bill sufficiently for Labor ions and employers currently participating in to support the legislation. making enterprise bargains in a legal and The minister argues that the bill aims to reasonable way. The bill also adds complex- promote respect for the rule of law in the ity to resolving occupational health and building and construction industry, yet this safety issues in the industry and thus poten- bill, if enacted, will compound Australia’s tially endangers employees. The definition of ongoing disrespect for international labour ‘the construction industry’ in this bill is so law. Australia has repeatedly reaffirmed its broad that employers and employees who obligations as a member of the International have never considered themselves part of the Labour Organisation and its commitment to industry are encompassed by the legislation. ensure that its domestic laws provide for la- Consequently, they will be exposed to prose- bour standards consistent with internation- cution and penalties for participating in what ally recognised labour principles. The ILO is currently legal bargaining activity, and Committee of Experts has repeatedly found substantial litigation will be necessary to that the government’s Workplace Relations accurately understand exactly what is en- Act 1996 contravenes fundamental Interna- compassed by the definition. tional Labour Organisation conventions on In the remaining minutes I have, I want to freedom of association and the right to col- make a brief point about some of the activi- lectively bargain. ties of the Building Industry Taskforce to This bill selectively and unfairly targets date, a body which the government essen- building industry workers and excludes them tially wants to reconstitute and give more from basic and universally applicable labour powers to. This week a decision was handed standards. All employees should have the down by the Australian Industrial Relations rights and protections afforded by interna- Commission in which the Building Industry tional labour law, irrespective of the industry Taskforce sought to revoke a right of entry of in which they work. The building and con- a particular organiser in the CFMEU. The struction industry should not be exempt from task force request to revoke was not granted compliance with the fundamental rights to by the commission. The commission found collective bargaining and freedom of asso- that legitimate safety concerns were involved

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 59 in the inspection that was the matter of dis- hauling out Germany and New Zealand as pute. The Deputy Industrial Registrar stated: examples: the former as an example of over- ‘I am satisfied that this particular official has regulation and no reform in workplace law had a genuine and longstanding concern for and the latter given coalition praise for and interest in maintaining appropriate occu- greater inequality, resulting from a lowering pational health and safety standards. He con- of workplace standards. Why do they not ducted himself with the consent of manage- look at the Scandinavian countries instead? ment and I am not satisfied that his conduct Those countries are wealthier on average was unreasonable.’ That is what the prede- measures than we are, with greater regulation cessor to the ABCC has been doing to date. than we have and with lower long-term un- (Time expired) employment. Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) Our present industrial relations system is (1.07 pm)—Today marks the legislative be- not broken. It makes a very positive contri- ginning of the coalition’s ideological triumph bution to Australia’s economy and society. on workplace relations, possible because Australia now has lower unemployment, they now have the Senate numbers. If you lower interest rates, higher productivity, are a Queenslander who did not give your higher real wages and very significantly first or second preference to John Cherry, lower levels of industrial disputation than it this is the effect. I use the word ‘ideology’ did in the past. No economic case has been deliberately, in the sense that it represents a made for changing this system radically— belief system, a manner of thinking of the and it is going to be very difficult to con- conservative class. In responding to ideology struct one—but the social case for the dam- or belief driven legislation, a legislator has to age is extremely possible. ask basic questions: does the proposed law I have spent the past nine years—or nine- improve society and improve the economy? plus years now—working hard to find a bal- Is it fair and just? Does it advance the rule of ance between the ideologies and allegiances law? of the Liberal and Labor parties. The Democ- Workplace law in Australia is born of pas- rats are not beholden to the unions or to sion and belief. It has been forged on the business, but we do respect both. I was the anvil of the Australian demand for a fair go. Democrat portfolio holder responsible for To date, Australian workplace law has con- negotiating on the coalition’s extensive 1996 sciously responded to the social demand that amendments to Labor’s Industrial Relations the mark of a civilised First World country is Act 1993, creating the Workplace Relations the advancement of our living standards, that Act 1996. I always refer to Labor’s brave wealth creation is not incompatible with 1993 act as the first wave—brave because it good working conditions. I have been aston- broke with a tradition and introduced far bet- ished that some conservatives have been ter productivity and flexibility measures. I condemning the fact that our minimum wage always refer to the coalition’s 1996 act as the is 58 per cent relative to the average wage, in second wave in that process. The Democrats contrast to the United Kingdom and the put 176 amendments to that coalition 1996 United States, for instance, where it is about bill before passing it. Those amendments one-third. We should be proud of the fact that kept that bill economically effective but our poor are less poor than the poor in the made it socially acceptable, and the reason United Kingdom and the United States. I the sky did not fall in at that time was that have been equally amazed at the coalition we did that. Most importantly, we made that

CHAMBER 60 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 bill fairer and much more balanced. The re- exposes the rhetoric and propaganda for sult of our moderation of coalition proposals what it was. is that Australia has been performing very We Democrats have rejected bad legisla- well. tion, such as the coalition’s attempt to allow Many hundreds of pages—perhaps over employers to dismiss workers unfairly. I re- 1,000—of workplace relations law have been mind you that, out of 10 million employees passed, in 18 separate workplace relations in Australia, the total number of unfair dis- bills, since the Howard government first missal applications, both state and federal, is came to office. You will find that, of the 18 15,000-plus and that unfair dismissal appli- workplace relations bills passed since the cations under federal law have dropped by Howard government came into power, the 60 per cent, whilst employment has risen by Democrats have negotiated the passage of 12 1.6 million. So the facts stand in the way of of them—two-thirds—after amendment. Of the argument that they have been putting. those 18 bills, one bill was passed by the However, in the spirit of continuous im- coalition and Labor and opposed by the De- provement, the Democrats have supported mocrats; five bills were passed by all parties; workplace bills with amendments and many and 12 bills were passed by the coalition and coalition initiatives and in the process have the Democrats after amendment and opposed consulted with unions, industry, governments by Labor. and experts along the way. The coalition have poured out the propa- Today that ends, and instead we will see ganda of Senate obstruction, dutifully re- the government pass the first of what we peated by the media. Two years ago, as far think are ideologically driven bills. They will back as 8 October 2003, I asked the Manager be untroubled by the Democrats, who no of Government Business in the Senate, in a longer hold the balance of power. The value question on notice, whether he was aware of of us holding the balance of power is that we the following statement made by the Minis- have never been tied to a particular set of ter for Small Business and Tourism, Mr people in the community. We have never had Hockey, in a Meet the Press interview aired a ‘just say no’ or oppositionist attitude, and on 14 September 2003: that has been the value of our balanced and What I do know is the Labor Party and the De- moderate approach. The Building and Con- mocrats are holding up a vast amount of legisla- struction Industry Improvement Bill 2005 tion that the Government has put in place in the and the Building and Construction Industry Senate. Improvement (Consequential and Transi- I asked: ‘Does the minister accept the Aus- tional) Bill 2005 were originally short bills tralian Concise Oxford Dictionary’s defini- that replicated the enforcement and penalty tion of ‘vast’ as ‘immense, huge, very provisions, and some of the provisions mak- great’?’ I also asked: ‘Can the minister: (a) ing certain forms of industrial action unlaw- provide a list for the Senate of any bill that ful, of the very detailed Building and Con- could conceivably be regarded as being held struction Industry Improvement Bill 2003. up, as described by Mr Hockey; and (b) give The government last week added to these his reasons for making that judgment?’ They bills by moving a very large number of have not answered the question. They cannot amendments, which will establish the Aus- answer the question because it requires fact, tralian Building and Construction Commis- not assertion. Two years later their non-reply sion and the attendant powers that it will

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 61 have. As the parliament knows, the Democ- be salvaged or amended. The problems in the rats made a comprehensive contribution to industry and in other industries would be far bet- the Senate Employment, Workplace Rela- ter addressed by enforcement of existing law and tions and Education References Committee the creation of a well-resourced independent Na- report, Beyond Cole—The future of the con- tional Workplace Relations Regulator. struction industry: confrontation or co- So the Democrats opposed the 2003 legisla- operation?, which amongst other things ex- tion outright. Our belief was that those bills amined the 2003 bills. In that report the De- could not be salvaged or amended. For this mocrats made the following supplementary we were applauded by some unions but were remarks: damned by some industry groups. Australia With the exception of targeted action needed in as a whole probably never even noticed. areas such as occupational health and safety and However, we could not ignore our obliga- possibly in the area of agreement making with tions to address problems identified in the respect to project/site agreements, there was no Senate inquiry. Through the Workplace Rela- evidence that convinced us that industry specific tions Amendment (Codifying Contempt) Bill legislation was necessary. We did however iden- 2003, passed in 2004, we supported a three- tify some areas of the law that could be amended, fold increase of key penalty provisions but we saw no reasons why this should not and could not occur across and benefit all industries. across all industries. The government had sought a tenfold increase. We also supported … … … a limited increase in the powers of the Build- The Democrats strongly support the need for ing Industry Taskforce as an interim measure greater compliance with the law and more effec- until a national industrial relations regulator tive law enforcement. The Royal Commission could be developed. Note that we support a identified weaknesses in the current mechanisms of enforcing laws of general application, includ- national industrial relations regulator; we do ing criminal law, industrial relations law, civil not support an industry specific regulator. law, tax law and state law. Therefore another Those interested can refer to my speech on question we considered during this inquiry was 22 June 2005 to the disallowance motion on that if one of the key findings of the Commission building industry guidelines for more infor- was a weakness in current enforcement mecha- mation on our position. It is notable that in nisms, then how will creating new workplace that debate we and the coalition were op- relations laws solve a problem that has been iden- posed by Labor and the Greens. For our posi- tified as failure of the market regulators across tion on that bill we were damned by the these fields of law? CFMEU and the ACTU for supporting in- … … … creased powers, and again damned by some The Democrats support one central proposition industry groups for not going far enough. behind the Bills, that greater regulation and en- Once again, Australia as a whole probably forcement of workplace relations law is neces- never even noticed. sary. We do not support the second central proposition behind the Bills, that industry specific leg- And here we are today—the Democrats, islation and sweeping new WRA provisions are Labor and the Greens—all powerless to op- necessary to achieve this aim. pose the very provisions we all previously … … … publicly opposed. Despite the new laws, the circumstances in the building and construc- [Because of fundamental philosophical and tion industry have not changed much since policy issues] the Building and Construction In- dustry Improvement Bills will be opposed out- the previous Senate inquiry. They have not right by the Australian Democrats. They cannot changed much because the regulators, the

CHAMBER 62 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 enforcers, are not on the case. If they were It is also in complete contrast to other sec- on the case and the law were applied we tors, where the national interest is paralleled would not have the problems that the gov- by national laws with a national regulator, ernment think need to be addressed by legis- such as finance, where there is APRA and the lative change. The weakness in our system is Reserve Bank; Corporations Law, where not law; it is enforcement and regulation. there is ASIC; competition law, where there The government need to address those but is the ACCC; and tax, where there is the they will not. If anything, except for Western ATO. The evidence we get is that by and Australia, where a peculiar sickness is appar- large the Workplace Relations Act is sound. I ent, there appears to have been less disputa- could easily take another 20 minutes to argue tion. By the way, when I say the government the case against the government’s proposed should address those matters but they will IR changes to the current act, but that would not, do not think this bill will cure them. be sidetracking and I should probably save it Remember what the Royal Commission said: for another day. The problem in key indus- the problems are in criminal law, tax law and tries, as we see it, is that good IR law is often state law as well as in workplace relations poorly enforced. law. I will, however, repeat arguments I have The Democrats position on disputation is made before that are apposite. What we cur- that it is part of the bargaining process. But rently have are fragmented, dispersed and we do not support breaches of the law and therefore ineffective federal and state de- we do not support the sort of behaviour that partmental inspectorates, including the Em- we have seen in Western Australia, where a ployment Advocate, task forces and other peculiar sickness is apparent in the way in bodies. They need to be swept up into a sin- which health and safety issues are being used gle independent statutory authority—and as an excuse for workplace confrontation. note the word ‘independent’. Competition But overall we should remember—and this is law, tax law, finance law and Corporations the point that was made by Senator Wong— Law each have their own national regulator, that mostly unions address workplace health and employment law should too. The unions and safety measures on a practical and nec- need help in making sure that entitlements essary basis. Overall in Australia there is not are paid, that wages and conditions are ob- that much disputation, although as I have served, and that health and safety are looked said it is a bit higher in Western Australia at after. Unions and employers need help to present. The Democrats position on the ap- ensure that people do not defy court and propriateness of reforms to BCI practices commission orders and other principles. The remains. We continue to argue that the prob- employers need help with regulators on call lems in this and other industries would be far when faced with unreasonable or thuggish better addressed by the enforcement of exist- people perverting the law’s intent. ing law and the creation of a well-resourced The Industrial Relations Commission has independent national workplace relations limitations as to what it can do. It is primar- regulator. The establishment of the industry ily a conciliator and arbitrator. It cannot be specific regulator proposed in this bill has present in workplaces. The police are the major weaknesses, not least that it sets up wrong agents to use for what are essentially different rights and obligations for citizens civil matters. The police do not like to get who work in one part of one industry. involved. They also lack knowledge and training in industrial relations law, which is

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 63 often complicated further because both a As noted in my minority report to these bills, state and federal system operates in the same there are four main types of retrospectivity, workplace. As everyone knows, the Democ- the first being practical and necessary, the rats support a unitary system, subject of next two being positive and the last being course to state agreement. The OEA is under- negative. It is often practical or necessary for resourced and has limited powers and scope. some new tax law to take effect from the What a national regulator would look like date of announcement, subsequently con- would obviously require wide consultation firmed by legislation. Remedial retrospectiv- and examination. Importantly, the regulator ity that corrects mistakes or that is technical would have to be independent, act as an is usually beneficial. Retrospectivity that is even-handed enforcer on both the employer benign or beneficial to individuals or entities and the union sides and have the ability to should be supported. Retrospectivity which investigate and work side by side with other is adverse to those affected should generally national regulators like ASIC, the ATO and be opposed. There are two elements of retro- the ACCC. In our view, the establishment of spectivity that the Democrats have concerns an industry specific regulator is flawed and a about. The first is that retrospective legisla- waste of resources, and we will not be sup- tion offends against the principles of natural porting those provisions. justice and trespasses upon the basic tenet of There are several elements of these bills our legal system that those subject to the law that we believe the government have a re- are entitled to be treated according to what sponsibility to amend. The first is the defini- the law says and means at the relevant time, tion of ‘building and construction industry’. subject to the court’s interpretation. The sec- If the government are going to impose dra- ond area is that retrospective legislation conian legislation on an industry because brings uncertainty to the environment in they claim that that industry has problems, which the community and business operate. they should at the very least get the defini- As a general principle, the Democrats do tion right so as to not draw in others. Con- not support the use of retrospective legisla- cerns were raised both by unions, such as the tion that acts to overturn existing contractual CEPU and the TWU, and industry groups, arrangements, makes previously lawful ac- such as AiG, that the definition was too broad tivity unlawful or acts to the detriment of and would capture large segments of the individuals or organisations. This is not a manufacturing and services industries within party but a cross-party principle. It has long the coverage of the bills. AiG argue that the been a Senate and a parliamentary principle bills’ very broad definition of building work not to approve retrospectivity except in in- could lead to construction industry terms and stances of fraud, illegality or exceptional conditions flowing into other industry sec- circumstances. So we are disappointed that tors, such as the fabrication and supply of the government insists on pursuing this pro- building materials and products, which in vision, and we will be moving an amend- turn would drive up the cost of construction ment to remove it. We are particularly disap- through higher input costs. The Democrats pointed that the party that bears ‘liberal’ in will be moving an amendment to narrow the its name should pursue such a course of ac- definition of ‘building and construction in- tion. It is contrary to the Liberal Party tradi- dustry’. tion and it is contrary to the small L liberal The other element that should be amended philosophy which is well established in the relates to the retrospective nature of the bills.

CHAMBER 64 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

Anglo-Celtic circles from which our law is the amendments previously agreed to by the largely driven. Senate—sensible safeguards which ad- Senator SIEWERT (Western Australia) dressed significant flaws in the legislation. (1.27 pm)—If you were to ask someone to This is yet another indication of the contempt guess which country you were talking about in which this government holds this chamber. when you described a place where the right Where is the respect for the critical analysis to silence was being removed and workers and healthy debate applied to the original could be thrown in jail for failing to incrimi- legislation? It has been tossed out in the nate themselves or dob in a mate, where un- ideological drive. These bills are yet another ions were being locked out of workplaces part of the government’s antiworker agenda, and could only inspect conditions and safety and its audacity is breathtaking. at the boss’s discretion, where workers could At the black heart of this bill is the inten- be told to sign up to unfair contracts or not tion to remove the basic civil rights of work- get a job and could be dismissed with no ers in the building and construction industry. comeback because somebody was having a This bill provides that witnesses cannot bad day, what kind of country would you avoid answering questions or producing think we were talking about? A proud nation documents on the basis that they will in- with a long tradition of workplace organisa- criminate themselves or breach other laws, tion, a supposed commitment to a fair go, a denying them the right to silence, one of the commitment to site safety and an atmosphere fundamental tenets of natural justice on relatively free of industrial turmoil? No, you which our system of law is based. Not only would think of some despotic dictatorship is that right removed but the penalty for non- where workers worked for next to nothing in compliance in this amended legislation is six sweatshops or on building sites and were months jail—that is, six months jail for do- treated as mere commodities and where the ing what should be your fundamental right. real cost could be measured not in wages but This heavy-handed penalty is a clear demon- in human lives. And this could be Australia. stration of the government’s use of its major- This is the brave new world of workplace ity in the Senate to bring about draconian relations under the Howard government. legislation, knowing that the Senate cannot I find it unbelievable that we are being or will not make amendments to safeguard asked to consider legislation such as the workers’ rights. Building and Construction Industry Im- At the same time that we are being told provement Bill 2005 and the Building and that a worker could get six months jail for Construction Industry Improvement (Conse- refusing to say which of his mates attended a quential and Transitional) Bill 2005. We are stop-work meeting, we are seeing a high- a well-off country and we have a way of life profile personality exercising his right to that is the envy of many in the world, yet our refuse to incriminate himself in relation to government thinks that it needs to attack tax fraud charges. Clearly we are developing workers, remove their rights, break unions one law for workers and another law for the and lower working wages. Why? So that rich. corporate Australia can make more money Taking away the right to silence sends a and pay its executives even more ridiculous sad message to this nation; that is, that the salaries at a cost to workers. This is the sec- Senate is prepared to stand by and watch ond time the Senate has debated such legisla- basic human rights and civil liberties being tion. These bills have been recycled without

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 65 taken away. Those rights and conditions are minister the power to issue a construction the result of the struggle of ordinary working industry code of practice, as opposed to the Australians over many years. They are the current situation where the code is enforced soul of the nation that our great-grandparents only by regulation. We should be very wary and grandparents fought so hard to create of moves to grant ministers carte blanche to and defend—the foundation of our democ- determine industry codes and standards. racy. I believe that as senators we are en- Yesterday, it was reported that the Office trusted with a serious responsibility as the of Workplace Services will be given an ex- custodians of our democratic traditions. We panded role in protecting workers against need to keep this firmly in mind in all that ‘inappropriate conduct by employers’. Will we do and be vigilant and rigorous in de- this watchdog be given the ability to compel fending the fundamental civil rights and lib- bosses to give evidence? Will employers erties that underpin our democracy. What- have their right to silence removed? Will the ever gains in productivity and economic office be able to send recalcitrant employers growth we may imagine will arise from these to jail for not complying with its directions? changes, I do not believe that they can be Will it be able to fine them up to $110,000? I worth selling out the core values of our na- think that we can make an educated guess on tion. the answers. On the basis of what we have This bill singles out a group of people— seen so far we can expect that the same pro- one class of citizens; in this case, our build- visions will not apply to bosses as apply to ing and construction workers—and then sys- their workers; we can expect that this watch- tematically undermines and removes their dog will be toothless. rights. Their right to silence, their freedom of The next issue of concern to me is work- speech, their right to privacy, their right to place safety. Yet again we are seeing work- take considered industrial action and their place safety being compromised in this un- right to be treated as innocent until proven ion-bashing exercise. It will be the workers guilty are all undermined or removed by this that suffer. Just as we have heard that the IR bill. changes affecting independent contractors This amended legislation establishes the are undermining safety in the trucking indus- Australian Building and Construction Com- try, so too will these changes in the bill un- mission, the ABCC, which has already been dermine the safety of our work sites. Let me provided with $23 million in its first year of remind you that safety is a big issue on our operation to roll out the government’s union- work sites. While the situation has improved, busting program—taking over the role of the this industry accounts for an average of 50 Building Industry Taskforce. The legislation deaths per year—that is, almost one death a outlines the watchdog role of the Australian week on our building sites. And these are Building and Construction Commissioner good numbers by world standards. How and gives this watchdog teeth through what many lives are an extra percentage point of are clearly coercive powers. The way in growth worth? Are you really prepared to which the governance of the ABCC and the trade away workers’ lives on the chance, on commissioner are set out in this legislation is unproven speculation, that these ideologi- of real concern, as there is a very clear con- cally driven changes will make our economy centration of executive power, with the min- a little stronger? ister able to direct the ABCC at his or her discretion. The legislation also hands the

CHAMBER 66 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

The rates of death and serious injury used ment and resorts proposed for environmen- to be much higher. This reduction is some- tally sensitive areas. Now green bans could thing that our workers have fought hard for. be outlawed, in a move that breaches Austra- When they believe that unsafe equipment or lia’s commitment to workers’ rights en- work practices are putting their lives and shrined in International Labour Organisation limbs at risk it is important that they have the conventions to which Australia is a signatory. right to do something about it to protect their Workers will no longer be able to take indus- lives and those of their workmates. Now the trial action in support of environmental, so- right to safety stoppages is being under- cial or safety concerns. mined. The onus is on each worker to prove Why is the government singling out and that they believe that their safety is at risk; it demonising one particular group of workers? is not on the employer to prove that it is not. Why is one set of citizens having its rights The bill proposes the setting up of the new removed? We all know the government’s Federal Safety Commissioner. This will be agenda—it is embarking on a concerted at- yet another mechanism by which the gov- tack on unions. It has begun this attack by ernment will be able to coercively control the singling out one of the strongest unions. In building and construction industry, by ensur- this case, it is attacking a union that has a ing that only organisations that are accredited history of showing solidarity with other by it for occupational health and safety pur- workers and ensuring that support for safety poses will be able to obtain federal construc- and collective bargaining in their workplace tion contracts. This issue will remove work- is strong. It is designed to slow down, frus- ers’ involvement in the safety of their work- trate and disempower a group of workers that places. Those in the best place to spot safety it knows will oppose its wider antiworker problems, those most directly affected by the agenda. consequences of unsafe practices, will no Just like the government’s previous attack longer have a voice in the process. on the waterfront workers, this action is de- Another issue of concern to the nation and signed to break the back of a strong and vo- one that is particularly close to my heart is cal union. It is part of a strategy to divide and green bans. Green bans have been extremely conquer, dismantle the unions one by one important in the past in helping the nation to and take away the rights of working families protect its heritage, and they have saved piece by piece. The Cole royal commission hundreds of important sites. If it were not for has been used as a justification for this dra- green bans by New South Wales unions we conian legislation. Millions of dollars were would have lost Kelly’s bush, the Rocks dis- spent on it. Yet none of the allegations of trict and Centennial Park. Green bans have standover tactics, corruption and violence also played a crucial role in making compa- have been upheld in a court of law. In fact, I nies accountable for the environmental and would assert that the reason that none of public health consequences of their actions— these allegations have been prosecuted, de- like the recent bans on James Hardie prod- spite the government’s clear desire to un- ucts in relation to mesothelioma and asbesto- dermine construction workers, is that the sis. government are well aware that they would Green bans are extremely important to my lose because they have no hard evidence to constituents in the west, who are concerned back these assertions. about regional bushland, coastal develop-

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 67

The Greens believe that workplace laws in terms of the building and construction should be fair, protect all workers from un- industry reforms, they are part of a package just treatment, promote industrial harmony to force cultural change. They will encourage and enable us to organise collectively to ne- fair play and create a far more efficient and gotiate fair pay and conditions. This bill will decent building and construction industry in increase the coercive powers of the govern- this country. ment’s industrial police force, the ABCC—a The Australian Labor Party have ac- task force that will ruthlessly pursue the gov- knowledged to some extent the problems of ernment’s agenda of destroying building un- the building and construction industry, but ions across the country. To add insult to in- their challenge now is what they will do jury, this legislation does not come into force about it. Are they prepared to separate them- at the time that this bill is passed. The gov- selves from the lawlessness of this industry ernment has made the legislation retrospec- or will they bow to the thuggery of the well- tive from 9 March this year. This is another known and vocal elements in the industry? I attack on fundamental civil rights and an refer specifically to some elements of the attempt to intimidate unions across the coun- union movement. I refer to the CFMEU. I try. note upfront in this debate that, since 1996, This bill is an attack on the basic civil the CFMEU has contributed a shade under rights of building workers in this country. It $5 million to the Australian Labor Party. I is part of the government’s campaign to un- note for public attention that the ACTU and dermine the wages and conditions of ordi- the unions generally in this country have nary workers, destroy trade unionism and contributed $47 million since 1996 to the stop them from having a say in their future Australian Labor Party. That is not a small and the future of this nation. The measures amount of money; that is a large amount of proposed in this bill have no proper place in money. As the saying goes, ‘He who pays the a fair and equitable system of industrial rela- piper calls the tune.’ I believe it is payback tions or in a civilised democracy and they time for the Labor Party. I believe it is pay- should not be allowed. The proposed bill and back time in terms of their opposition, which the wider industrial relations ‘deform’ they have announced. They are opposing this agenda, as I call it, are not in the interest of legislation, our building and construction working Australians, families or small busi- industry reforms and our workplace relations nesses. reforms. I believe their opposition is consis- Senator BARNETT (Tasmania) (1.39 tent with the fact that it is payback time. pm)—I stand in support of the Building and It is also consistent with the fact that they Construction Industry Improvement Bill support the ACTU’s consistently misleading 2005, the Building and Construction Industry and deceptive campaign that is being waged Improvement (Consequential and Transi- and foisted on the Australian people, particu- tional) Bill 2005 and the government’s larly the vulnerable working men and workplace relations reforms. I congratulate women of Australia. They have a campaign the Prime Minister and Mr Kevin Andrews, of fear being foisted on them at the moment. the minister who has been leading the fight I can give you no better example than one and the reforms to the building and construc- from a transcript I have. I did not actually tion industry and workplace relations more see the program. It is from Lateline of generally. I will speak on both of those is- 10 August. This is a demonstration of the sues, but I do want to say right upfront that, campaign of fear, the extent to which they

CHAMBER 68 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 will go and how low they will go. Sharan industry was beset with corruption and Burrow, the ACTU president, said: unlawful practices. The government has I need a mum or a dad of someone who’s been acted on the recommendations of that com- seriously injured or killed. That would be fantas- mission. There were 210 recommendations, tic. and already 170 have been implemented. She was answering a question from Maxine This industry is worth $50 billion to the McKew on Lateline, the ABC program, and Australian economy. There are 700,000 peo- that is what she said. She will go to any ex- ple employed in the building and construc- tent whatsoever to feed on the vulnerable and tion industry across the country. It comprises on the fears of Australian men and women. seven per cent of our gross domestic product. Do you know that, since that statement that It is a very important part of the Australian she made on Lateline just a few days ago, economy today. Independent, objective eco- she has not apologised to the Australian peo- nomic research undertaken by Econtech in ple and she has not withdrawn that state- their report, Economic analysis of the build- ment! This is consistent with the ACTU’s ing and construction sector, concluded that, campaign, which is misleading and decep- if productivity in the construction sector tive. There are no bounds in terms of the ex- matched that in the more efficient residential tent of that campaign. This is consistent with building sector, the level of gross domestic the Labor Party’s opposition to our bills, product would rise by 1.1 per cent, the CPI which try to fix the building and construction would fall by one per cent and consumers industry and make it better, fairer, right and would benefit by $2.3 billion. This is a huge honest. industry, and the implications of further re- The Labor Party has a choice of acting for form are incredible, as are the benefits that the benefit of all Australians, especially those can flow through. workers and their families, or protecting be- The Cole royal commission found that the haviour, particularly in the building and con- commercial construction industry was char- struction industry, which is unlawful, harm- acterised by illegal and improper payments, ful and costly to us all. The government has chronic failure to honour legally-binding made its choice. It has said, ‘Yes, there will agreements, regular flouting of court and be reform of the building and construction industrial tribunal orders, and a culture of industry,’—and this is what the legislation is coercion and intimidation. Volume 1, page 6 on about. Let us make it clear that the Leader of the commission report says: of the Opposition, Kim Beazley, has said: At the heart of the findings is lawlessness. It is ‘The lemon has been squeezed dry,’ in terms exhibited in many ways. There are breaches of the of workplace relations and industrial rela- criminal law. There are breaches of laws of gen- tions reform. He does not want any further eral application to all Australians where the sanc- reforms. We will ensure that this legislation tion is a penalty rather than possible imprison- dealing with the building and construction ment. There are breaches of many provisions of industry will be successful, because this is the Workplace Relations Act 1996. very important legislation. Frankly, the community and the economy I will go back to some of the reasons for cannot continue to bear the costs of such this legislation. It emanates from the Cole conduct. The laws of this country must apply Royal Commission into the Building and equally, across the board, to all citizens, Construction Industry, which found that the whether they are union officials, employers

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 69 or employees. The commission also noted in tion industry. The amendments will enhance volume 1, page 6, paragraph 16: our response to the Cole royal commission. These findings demonstrate an industry which This legislation is of course part of a package departs from the standards of commercial and of reform. The bill will establish the Austra- industrial conduct exhibited in the rest of the Aus- lian Building and Construction Commission tralian economy. and the Federal Safety Commission. The bill They are saying that it is a special one-off. will improve the bargaining framework by The commission continued: prohibiting certain coercive and discrimina- They mark the industry as singular. They indicate tory conduct and will improve the compli- an urgent need for structural and cultural reform. ance regime by increasing penalties—and I It is that clear. That is what the royal com- notice that there has been discussion today mission said—and that is what we are doing. on the fact that those penalties are so high. I We are acting on the recommendations of the have no hesitation in supporting these in- commission. creased penalties. The bill will also enhance access to damages for unlawful conduct. The Building and Construction Industry Improvement Bill 2003 was the Australian The Australian Building and Construction government’s response to the recommenda- Commission will be a new statutory agency tions of that commission. As indicated earlier responsible for enforcing federal workplace today, that bill lapsed prior to the 2004 elec- relations laws on building sites. It will oper- tion and then the Building and Construction ate as a one-stop shop for the building and Industry Improvement Bill 2005 was intro- construction industry by dealing with matters duced to the House on 9 March 2005. There itself or referring them to relevant agencies have been references to retrospectivity, but for action. The commission will improve let us make it clear that this bill was intro- current arrangements by being able to act duced and made public on that day. It was promptly on unlawful industrial action and made clear at that time, in a media release by strategically intervene on behalf of parties to the honourable minister, Kevin Andrews, provide cost-effective relief when federal that the provisions of that legislation would workplace relations laws have been apply from that day. Union officials, em- breached. ployers and employees became aware of it The bill provides specific statutory powers on that day. The bill was introduced in re- for the commissioner, such as appropriate sponse to the intense industrial pressure be- investigatory, compliance and enforcement ing applied by the building industry unions powers, including the appointment of Austra- to force contractors to sign up to union- lian building and construction industry in- friendly agreements. That was the motivation spectors. In terms of our financial commit- for the bill. ment, proper and adequate funding has been The government now seeks to introduce made available to establish and perform the amendments to establish the Australian functions, as I have indicated, of the office of Building and Construction Commission and the Federal Safety Commissioner. The initial other key parts of the bill. I will outline some establishment funding allocated was $2.63 of the reasons for and elements of the bill. As million in the 2004-05 financial year. The I said, the commission provided a compel- allocation to the Building Industry and Con- ling and unassailable case for the need to struction Commission is $123.93 million to reform the $50 billion building and construc- cover the establishment and operating costs until June 2009. We make no apologies about

CHAMBER 70 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 that very significant commitment to the pling dispute.’ These are the threats that are commission. It is a large amount of money being made. This comment was punctuated and we are proud of that investment. by language of the kind which deliberately I was a member of the Senate Employ- scorns the decency of civilised discourse. ment, Workplace Relations and Education Government party senators note this lan- Legislation Committee looking into these guage of class warfare and the proclamation bills. We reported in May 2005. It was made of an image of thuggery and contempt. It clear in that report that the immediate spur to highlights the need for cultural change in this the legislation was the actions of unions, par- industry. ticularly in Victoria, in threatening industrial Senator Kemp—Good point. action aimed at coercing employers to sign Senator BARNETT—Thank you very enterprise agreements before the current much, Senator Kemp, for that interjection. It round of enterprise agreements expired. The is appreciated. The report also made it clear committee received 11 submissions. We had that the Master Builders submission was a public hearing on 4 May with the AIG, the supportive of the reforms and their submis- Master Builders, CFMEU, Transport Work- sion to the committee included a large ers Union, CEPU and the ACTU, and we amount of evidence of union intimidation, heard all of their submissions. The AiG gave particularly in Western Australia, Victoria unequivocal support for the government’s and Queensland, and there has been no dimi- legislation and its endeavours to legislate for nution in the level of industrial action. Un- peace and stability in the industry. Senator ions in the building and construction industry Murray referred to the definition of the are responsible for about 30 per cent of the building industry and there is a clear answer total work days lost around the country, even to that in the merit of the legislation. Yes, though the industry employs only about 8 per there is a broad definition of the building cent of the total work force. Our report pro- work so it can effectively bring about the vides statistics to support the view that this is structural and cultural change the industry a one-off that needs attention. The Australian requires. The definition is intended to ensure Industry Group was very supportive of the that the problems endemic in the industry are government’s reforms and, more broadly, of not shifted further down the contractual the workplace relations reforms of our gov- chain. An important fact that has not been ernment. Heather Ridout and the Australian referred to in the debate today is that the Industry Group made that clear only a couple definition of building work is able to be of days ago in this Parliament House when modified by regulation. That has not been they met for their national annual general noted today. It will ensure that any minor meeting, and those comments have been well adjustments that can be made, will be made. noted. The report is worth a read, but I want What else did the committee resolve, or to make it clear that the behaviour of the conclude? I can assure you that the commit- Western Australian and Victorian branches of tee noted the CFMEU Victorian branch sec- the CFMEU, in particular, have been noted, retary—from the report in the Age on 13 Oc- targeted and they have been characterised by tober 2004 that promised employers that they a confrontational culture which sees indus- had a choice—saying they could ‘negotiate trial relations as a theatre of class warfare. industry wide pattern bargaining agreements Senator George Campbell interjecting— in 2005 in a peaceful climate or, following the government urgings, in a climate of crip-

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 71

Senator BARNETT—I see Senator QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Campbell is interjecting and I can understand Immigration Detention his reasons for interjecting. But I note that Senator O’BRIEN (2.00 pm)—My ques- the committee said that, as a consequence, tion is to Senator Vanstone, the Minister for the building costs in Perth and Melbourne Immigration and Multicultural and Indige- are significantly higher than in other cities. nous Affairs. I refer the minister to the damn- The economic and social benefits likely to ing report by Mr Keith Hamburger which flow from the reform of the building industry found there were ‘serious violations of the will be quickly apparent and will result in a immigration detention standards’ by the de- benefit not only for those cities but also for tention centre contractor Global Solutions the whole nation—the whole of Australia. Ltd. Has the immigration department evalu- This is why we so strongly support the bill. ated the report and reported to the minister? We want to note that the Labor Party’s oppo- Why wasn’t the minister’s department ade- sition is in response to the CFMEU dona- quately supervising the contract with GSL? tions of $5 million to that party since 1996 If the department was adequately supervising and $47 million from the ACTU. Let me say the contract with GSL, how did it allow five that there are examples of inappropriate and detainees to be locked up in the back of a unlawful conduct in the building industry. van for a 10-hour drive with no toilet breaks, There is a litany, in fact, and I could go food or water? through all of those but I will just mention a couple. Recently 200 CFMEU members of Senator VANSTONE—I thank Senator the Perth to Mandurah railway all took O’Brien for the question. I recognise that it is sickies on the same day—it was the so-called Senator O’Brien and not Senator Evans—I ‘blue flu’. This is a common tactic on West- am a bit more with the program today, Sena- ern Australian construction sites. tor. Neither I, the department, the government nor anybody condones mistreatment of Opposition senators interjecting— human beings, whether they are detainees or Senator BARNETT—The Labor Party is otherwise. That has been made clear. I can defending this type of action—listen to them confirm for you that the independent investi- crow! That is taxpayers money down the gation requested by me into aspects of the tubes, as Senator Johnston has indicated. The transfer of five detainees from Maribyrnong response of the Western Australian IR minis- has now been finalised. I can confirm the ter was to say that they would talk to the investigator has established that most of the CFMEU and hopefully they would have a allegations made by the detainees were cor- change of heart. The Cole Royal Commis- rect or have been substantiated—I think that sion heard evidence of numerous small con- is a better way to put it. I can confirm what I tractors being coerced into union pattern said before, when the report became avail- agreements by representatives of the able, that it is an extremely regrettable inci- CFMEU. This often involved violence, or the dent. I feel extreme sympathy for the people threat of violence. This is not on in Australia. involved. This is why we have this legislation—to fix I accept one aspect of what has been put the problem. (Time expired) to me, and that is that there may be inadequate training. But I will make this crystal clear: it is not my view that any human being should need to be trained to let another hu-

CHAMBER 72 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 man being go to the bathroom or have a cally rule out any renegotiation of the con- drink of water. These seem to me to be basic tract with GSL that will result in the com- civil courtesies in how we should each treat pany being rewarded with a more lucrative each other in whatever circumstance we are contract? Does the minister concede that su- in. pervision of the contract is more than just I can confirm for you, Senator O’Brien, responding to complaints of events after they that both HREOC and the Commonwealth have occurred and has a lot to do with look- Ombudsman have been provided with a full ing at the culture of the contractor? copy of the report. The detention services Senator VANSTONE—Senator O’Brien, provider has accepted that some of the offi- you ask what you may not have intended to cers did not follow the operational proce- be a tricky question. I will not attribute bad dures, which resulted in these violations of faith to you in this respect. But you know, if the contractual requirements. You say: ‘Why you are interested in this area, and I know wasn’t it being monitored?’ The only way that if a contract is to be renegotiated—if, for you could make sure that did not happen example, as a consequence of the Palmer would be if you had someone travelling with inquiry more services are required—then we every person to make sure. The monitoring is may contract out for more services to whom- such that, when the allegations are received, soever any additional contract goes. It does a proper independent person is given the task not mean that it will be more lucrative as in of coming up with an explanation of what more profitable, but it may mean a larger actually happened. contract. I will just draw that distinction. Yet again you can see in this report that Palmer made it very clear about a number of there has been no attempt to cover up what changes that have to be made. Thank you for have been serious violations of the contrac- your question pointing out what the Palmer tual requirements. The department has noti- report made clear, and that is that the con- fied GSL of substantial sanctions valued at tract does need to be reviewed. We have in- over—and I stress the word ‘over’—half a dicated that it is going to be. million dollars. I leave it at that point be- Afghanistan cause the contractor is entitled to dispute the Senator JOHNSTON (2.05 pm)—My assessment of what the penalty should be. question is to the Minister for Defence and That is an assessment of what it may well Leader of the Government in the Senate, come out at, which is over half a million dol- Senator Robert Hill. Will the minister update lars. The matter has been referred to the Vic- the Senate on the visit to Australia of His toria Police for investigation into whether Excellency Dr Abdullah Abdullah, Minister any criminal offences were committed by the for Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic officers. I can confirm that the department of Afghanistan? Will the minister also advise will be implementing all of the recommenda- the Senate of progress in the forthcoming tions. deployment of Australian troops to Afghani- Senator O’BRIEN—Mr President, I ask stan? a supplementary question. I note that the Senator HILL—I thank Senator Johnston minister has referred to substantial breaches for his question. The government is pleased of GSL’s contract and a penalty regime to welcome to Australia His Excellency Dr which may involve penalties exceeding Abdullah Abdullah, Minister for Foreign Af- $500,000. Will the minister now categori- fairs of Afghanistan. His visit anticipates the

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 73 critical national assembly elections which propriate mobility, force protection and ade- will take place in his country on 18 Septem- quate logistics support. This represents some ber. His visit also reflects the growing sig- increase over our initial planning assessment nificance of our relationship with Afghani- but the challenge of logistically sustaining a stan’s growing democracy. The Australian small force so far from home required the government is proud of the role Australia has commitment of additional support personnel. played in helping remove the Taliban from The challenge in Afghanistan remains power in Afghanistan and in denying a sanc- twofold. Whilst contributing to a national tuary to al-Qaeda. reconstruction is a major focus, there is nev- Although many security challenges re- ertheless an ongoing combat challenge. It is main, Afghanistan has made remarkable pro- essential that the international community gress since its liberation. Some 26,000 Af- assist Afghan forces to defeat those who, ghan security personnel have been trained through force of arms, remain determined to and are engaged in combating terrorism in defeat the progress of democracy and return their country. Registrations for the upcoming Afghanistan to the appalling theological dic- elections are particularly strong. It is notable tatorship under which it had for so long la- that large numbers of women will vote for boured. It is this dangerous but vital role in the first time. Afghanistan is now a signifi- which our troops will be engaged. cant recipient of Australian foreign aid. We The government is planning a farewell have committed more than $110 million in function before the Senate returns, at which aid to Afghanistan since September 2001. we expect the Prime Minister and the Leader This commitment supports the heroic part of the Opposition will address the troops. I that the Afghan people are playing in resist- am sure that all honourable senators will join ing fundamentalist terrorism and reflects the me in thanking our forces for their service, in geostrategic significance of Afghanistan in wishing them well in their deployment and this global conflict. obviously in wishing them a safe return. Afghanistan has long been one of those Immigration countries that, by the accident of geography, Senator CHRIS EVANS (2.10 pm)—My has been blighted by invasion, civil war and question is directed to Senator Vanstone, the fundamentalist ideology. We have a strong Minister for Immigration and Multicultural shared interest in defeating al-Qaeda and in and Indigenous Affairs. Apart from Mr promoting a healthy and stable democracy in Farmer and his two deputy secretaries, can Afghanistan. The Senate will recall that, on the minister detail what other immigration 13 July, the Prime Minister announced that officers have been dismissed or shifted side- in the next month Australia would be com- ways or have moved departments as a result mitting a special forces task group to Af- of Mr Palmer’s scathing report and the asso- ghanistan and that the government would ciated problems in the immigration depart- also explore the possibility of making a con- ment? Aside from the cost of Mr Farmer’s tribution to a provincial reconstruction team. sinecure to Indonesia, what are the additional I can advise the Senate that planning and costs as a result of the massive changes to preparation for the first of those deployments the departmental executive as a result of the is well advanced. The advice that the gov- Palmer report? Were any of the officers that ernment has received from Defence is that have stepped aside, been shifted or been the special forces contingent will need to be approximately 190 personnel to provide ap-

CHAMBER 74 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 dismissed the beneficiaries of performance senators opposite may not be aware that the pay in the last 18 months? Immigration officers were in fact at the front Senator VANSTONE—Thank you for of the embassy at the time and took the the question, Senator. Let me put on record greatest brunt of that, which Mr Farmer was my disdain for your reference to Mr responsible for dealing with. He understood Farmer’s acceptance of the job of being our very clearly the consequence of that bomb as ambassador in Indonesia as being a sinecure. it affected the Immigration people more than Given the incident of the bombing at the em- others. bassy a few years ago, when the current am- The question that I was asked related to bassador was sitting at his word processor changes that might have been made in addi- only to find a paling from the fence come tion to those of the movement of Mr Farmer clean through the window about a foot above and two dep secs. I have been asked about his head, for you to refer to someone taking the cost of that. I have not seen any figures in up that position as a sinecure says more relation to the cost. We will make such about you than it does about Mr Farmer. changes as need to be made, both in person- Government senators—Shame! nel if that is required and in policy and practice. The Prime Minister and I have given a The PRESIDENT—Order! Senators on clear indication that we accept in full the my right, your colleague is trying to answer a thrust of the Palmer report. We are already in question. the business of implementing that. I am satis- Senator VANSTONE—I notice Senator fied that what the public will see and what Carr chuckling at the back. parliament will see when we report back is Senator Carr interjecting— not in any way a begrudging implementation Senator VANSTONE—I am not sure of the Palmer report—quite the opposite. In whether he is chuckling at his own joke. He fact, you might be looking at ‘Palmer-plus’ is a bit prepossessed with himself. because we are determined to do whatever needs to be done. Senator Chris Evans—Mr President, I rise on a point of order regarding relevance. As to changes under that level, I know of This is a very serious issue. It is a direct a couple of changes where there have been question going to the minister’s responsibil- some rearrangements of place. For good rea- ity. She has showed total disdain for critics, son, I am not prepared to go into why that addressed Senator Carr across the chamber, has been done at this point. I think that when sought to criticise him and sought to criticise the Solon inquiry reports there will be a me. Could you please bring her to order and greater opportunity to indicate some changes ask her to answer the question for which she that have been made. They have not been is responsible to this chamber. made at this point because of an assumption of guilt on anybody’s part but for other rea- The PRESIDENT—I am not going to re- sons. I will explain that to the Senate at an peat other rulings that I have made, but I will appropriate time. But this is not the appro- say this: Senator Vanstone, ignore the inter- priate time. When the Solon inquiry reports, jections, address your remarks through the I believe we will be able to look in particular chair and return to the question. at the Brisbane office in full, and I will be Senator VANSTONE—I take the oppor- able to report back to you then. tunity to reinforce the point that, with respect to the security of the post in Indonesia, the

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 75

Senator CHRIS EVANS—Mr President, Telecommunications: Services I ask a supplementary question. I note that Senator MASON (2.16 pm)—My ques- the minister did not provide any detail about tion is to the Minister for Communications, what moves have been taken. I would appre- Information Technology and the Arts, Sena- ciate it if she took that part of the question on tor Coonan. Will the minister advise the Sen- notice because, while a promise of a report ate how the Howard government is ensuring back sometime in the future is helpful, we adequate safeguards are in place to protect have no information. As part of my supple- telecommunications consumers? Is the min- mentary question, I ask whether or not the ister aware of any alternative policies? minister is confident that, given Mr Palmer’s Senator COONAN—I thank Senator Ma- concern about the culture and his doubts son for his important and timely question. As about the capacity of existing personnel to the Senate would be aware, yesterday I an- lead the change, the new secretary of the nounced a comprehensive plan to future- department, who has spent more than 15 proof telecommunications in Australia. The years in the department and inside that cul- coalition are committed to improving the ture, will have the capacity to fix the culture range of services and choices available to that he was part of for such a long period of consumers and to giving people access to time. these services at the lowest possible sustain- Senator VANSTONE—As I said yester- able prices. Competition is the best way to day, I thought it was me that had the hearing deliver innovation, cheaper prices and problem. For Senator Evans’ benefit, I did greater choice, but the government go further indicate in my answer to him that I would than simply relying on competition; we sup- report back to the Senate when appropriate plement that competition with tough regula- changes had been made and also indicated tory consumer safeguards, including price why I am not giving you the very limited controls, the customer service guarantee and detail that I have at this point anyway. I did the universal service obligation. indicate that. If it is a requirement because Despite some of the uninformed commen- Senator Evans is not capable of understand- tary, my package includes very strict price ing that simple English, I will give a shorter controls to protect consumers. Untimed local version of it, which is that I will take your calls will be capped at 22c, and we are ensur- question on notice. As to the culture and the ing parity in the local pool prices offered to suggestion that Mr Metcalfe cannot do this regional and metropolitan consumers. Any job, I completely disagree. I think it needs increase in the charge for connecting phones someone with some experience and under- will be capped at the inflation rate, and the standing—not completely new hands—but price controls will ensure that, on average, with a fresh outlook. Mr Metcalfe brings there will be no price increase across a bas- that. I have used the example before to say ket of services that includes line rentals, STD that Mr Abbott was my parliamentary secre- and fixed to mobile calls. I have required tary once. It is well known that he and I do Telstra to maintain a package of services to not always agree on a whole range of things, look after low-income earners. and it is does not mean that simply because he worked for me that he thinks the same Senator Lundy interjecting— way I do. The PRESIDENT—Senator Lundy, I ask you desist.

CHAMBER 76 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

Senator COONAN—The government’s problems in the Department of Immigration package also strengthens the customer ser- and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, as vice guarantee and includes measures to en- identified by Mr Palmer and, indeed, the sure consumers are aware of their rights un- minister, emerge only after Senator Vanstone der the guarantee. The regulator’s powers to took charge of the portfolio, or did she in- do with breaches of regulatory obligations herit them from her predecessor? When did have been increased. In short, the Connect the current minister conclude that there was a Australia package of targeted funding and problem in the culture of the immigration future-proofing income from the communi- department? Was it only when she sought to cations fund will combine with the guaran- shift blame for failures from herself to her teed safeguards and a competitive environ- public servants? In retrospect, wouldn’t it ment to meet the needs of consumers now have been better to take a hands-on approach and into the future. to the administration of your department I was asked about alternative policies. De- rather than just bask in the dividend of spite a search, in 8½ years in opposition, grubby wedge politics? Labor has not demonstrated that it has a plan Senator VANSTONE—I have to tell you for telecommunications and protecting con- that I am not at all sure what Senator Faulk- sumers, so where does Labor’s spokesperson ner means by ‘bask in the dividend of grubby on communications, Senator Conroy, actu- wedge politics’. But I do accept that Senator ally stand on these issues? First he says there Faulkner would understand very well about is a massive conflict of interest in the gov- grubby politics, and probably understands ernment owning Telstra and then he says very clearly what he means. there is a massive conflict of interest in the Nonetheless, I am asked a question about government selling Telstra. So you cannot the culture within DIMIA. I am quite confi- own it and you cannot sell it. Where does dent that it is not possible with any degree of that leave the Labor Party? We are criticised precise particularity to nominate a point at for committing to a roll out of regional infra- which a culture changes. That takes time in structure at the same time as Labor says ser- an organisation, whether you are changing vices to the bush should improve. We hear for the better or for the worse. So I cannot Labor’s only policy. Its fundamental plank is give you a date on which the culture of to own Telstra. Then Senator Conroy says a DIMIA became a problem. I can tell you that couple of days ago on the Jon Faine show I raised with the secretary, sometime last that most Australians do not care about Tel- year, a cultural problem with DIMIA, which stra’s ownership structure; they care about I outlined I think at estimates. I think this has services. At last Senator Conroy agrees with been covered there; it has certainly been the government. Labor should now come covered in some doorstops and press confer- clean and support the sale of Telstra to de- ences which related particularly to a cus- liver better services for all Australians, irre- tomer-friendly approach. I have taken the spective of where they live. opportunity when asked about that to de- Palmer Inquiry scribe what I mean, and what I mean by that Senator FAULKNER (2.20 pm)—My is that it is appropriate that officers make question is directed to Senator Vanstone, the decisions within the law, obviously; in fact I Minister for Immigration and Multicultural have said that in here before. But it is not and Indigenous Affairs. Did the cultural appropriate that they only consider the law and do not also look at whether, within the

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 77 law, they can find a suitable, fair and appro- that matter, without pointing out that, while priate immigration outcome. there are, in my view, some cultural issues An example would be the following. within the immigration department, I make Someone puts in with their form a credit card the point that I made in the estimates com- to pay the application fee, and by the time it mittee, in an opening statement which Sena- comes to be considered the credit card has tor Faulkner may have been there to hear: expired. So the officer decides that it is not a immigration is very much a can-do depart- valid application because it does not have a ment. This is the department which, when suitable application fee payment with it, Kosovars arrived, found accommodation for when it is perfectly possible to ring up and thousands of them in a very short period of say, ‘Your credit card has expired; can you time— give us a new number?’ Senator Patterson—And East Timorese I have never suggested that things should on top. be done outside the law. But, within the law, Senator VANSTONE—and East Immigration should be looking not just to Timorese on top, as Senator Patterson re- whether they can justify their decision at law minds me. This is the department which, but to whether it is a good immigration out- when faced with thousands of unauthorised come. That was identified last year. I cannot boat arrivals, managed to set up accommoda- give you a precise date. I think an awareness tion arrangements and processing arrange- of a culture that needs changing is not some- ments to deal with that when it was a most thing of which you can say that it occurred unexpected workload that was put on them. on a particular date. If you kept a diary you So, while there might be, and there are, cul- could, I suppose, but I do not do that. I do tural problems, as to the things that have al- not have discussions with people on the basis ready been done, Senator, I will refer you to that I am going to take down what they have some of the things that have been indicated said and write some grubby little book later. very clearly in the estimates committees that All I can tell you is that it was last year and I you have been at, including— (Time expired) think you would find that Mr Farmer would Workplace Relations confirm that for you. Senator BRANDIS (2.26 pm)—My ques- Senator FAULKNER—Mr President, I tion is directed to the Special Minister of ask a supplementary question. Whilst we State, Senator Abetz, representing the Minis- have a plethora of inquiries into the past fail- ter for Employment and Workplace Rela- ures of the immigration department, what tions. Is the minister aware of new data con- processes has the minister now put in place firming the continued increases in both to monitor the performance of the depart- wages and employment in Australia? What ment in order to satisfy herself that they have actions is the government taking to ensure not reverted to their past cultural practices? this wage and employment growth continues In other words, Minister, what are you doing for the benefit of all Australian workers? Is to ensure that your department’s ongoing the minister aware of any alternative poli- performance and activities meet the highest cies? standard required of the department? Senator ABETZ—Can I thank Senator Senator VANSTONE—It would not be Brandis for his important question and for appropriate for me to leave the substantive drawing our attention to figures which reveal question, or the supplementary question for the great news of continued real wage in-

CHAMBER 78 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 creases for Australian workers. Figures re- for workers. I do not know why those oppo- leased yesterday revealed that wages for site are going to the rallies, because all they Australian workers have risen by an average have got to do is send along a tape recording of four per cent over the past year—well of their speeches from all the previous ral- above the inflation rate and the largest yearly lies: all the same empty rhetoric, all the same increase since the ABS started its price index empty doom and gloom, all the same propa- on wages. ganda which has been shown to be false. That is not all. Today those figures were Indeed, I do not know why they are issuing backed up by the latest ABS full-time adult new press releases. All they have got to do is ordinary time earnings figures, which show change the names and the dates to protect the an increase in wages of 6.5 per cent this year. guilty—except Mr Beazley, of course; he All this has occurred on the back of Labor only has to change the date on his. I say to falsely asserting job losses and wage cuts in those opposite: our pay packets are speaking the face of our surplus budgets, our tax re- so much louder than Labor’s pointless pick- form, our waterfront reform and our indus- ets. trial relations reform. Film Classification How many of those opposite, either as Senator FIELDING (2.30 pm)—My Labor senators or as trade union officials— question is to Senator Ellison, the Minister and I am not sure if there is a difference— representing the Attorney-General. Follow- addressed rallies condemning our surplus ing reports that cinemas are ignoring new budget, saying it would cut jobs and wages? film classification laws and that the chief How many of those opposite addressed GST censor has little interest in pursuing prosecu- rallies, saying it would drive down wages tion, what is the government going to do to and cost jobs? And, I ask rhetorically, how require the Office of Film and Literature many of those opposite have since apolo- Classification to protect children by enforc- gised to the Australian work force for mis- ing guidelines and ensuring that operators leading them? Of course, the answer is none. who breach them are prosecuted? Could I invite those senators opposite, Senator ELLISON—The government when they are addressing these anti- takes a very strong line in relation to the pro- industrial relations reforms rallies during the tection of children from material that could coming fortnight break from parliament, to be harmful to them, be it in the print media tell them that it is a national disgrace that or in the electronic media. Firstly, I might they have all kept their jobs and, what is say that in relation to television there are more, been paid more for their jobs, with the provisions of the Broadcasting Services Act lowest level of industrial disputation ever. in which there are standards. In fact, pro- That is the sort of thing that people can ex- gramming on commercial free-to-air net- pect from the anti-worker Howard govern- works must be in line with the Commercial ment. Television Industry Code of Practice. I un- Unemployment has come down to five per derstand that there have been recent com- cent. Real wages have increased. There is the plaints about a particular program which lowest rate of industrial disputation ever, went to air on Channel 10. Of course, that is despite a nine-year campaign from those op- television. In relation to films, we have the posite, standing in the way of every reform Classification (Publications, Films and Com- that has delivered these wonderful outcomes puter Games) Act 1995. That is a regime

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 79 which does set a standard and we will see as want those classifications to be observed and a government that that standard is enforced. we will take action to see that they are. I understand that there have been a num- Sex Trafficking ber of recent film classifications—and I am Senator HUMPHRIES (2.34 pm)—My not sure if Senator Fielding’s reference is to question is also to the Minister for Justice those—and I can provide him with the detail and Customs, Senator Ellison. Will the min- on those. But if he has any information on ister update the Senate on the Howard gov- someone who contravenes those classifica- ernment’s efforts to combat the abhorrent tion rules then I would very much like to crime of sex trafficking? know about it so that we can enforce them. Senator ELLISON—This is indeed a We do not have these classifications merely very important question and one of increas- to pay lip-service. I understand that there ing concern, I think, across Australia. It is have been strict classifications imposed on timely, because on 3 August this year we some recent films, such as Mysterious Skin. implemented our Criminal Code Amendment Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, I think, was (Trafficking in Persons Offences) Bill. At a game that was included in one, and there that time there was an article—indeed, head- are some others. Certainly, I would say to lines—in the Australian which dealt with anyone who is concerned about this area that reports of young girls being sent overseas the government is deadly serious about en- from Australia for forced marriages. At the forcing these classification rules, and if there time I issued a press release urging anyone is any evidence of those being breached then who had information on this practice to bring certainly we would want them to be en- it to the attention of the Australian Federal forced. Police and it would be prosecuted. Senator FIELDING—Mr President, I The relevance is that in our amendment have a supplementary question. There were which came into effect on 3 August we in- recent reports in the papers about this issue. cluded trafficking of people both into Austra- What confidence can parents have in the sin- lia and out of Australia. Previously, we had cerity of government statements about pro- laws dealing with the trafficking of persons tecting children from the impact of such ma- into Australia, but we expanded the legisla- terial when its own agency, the Office of tion to include the trafficking of persons, Film and Literature Classification, turns a particularly women and children, out of Aus- blind eye to what really is happening? tralia. This practice of taking young girls out Senator ELLISON—I understand the Of- of Australia for the purposes of a forced mar- fice of Film and Literature Classification has riage will not be tolerated. In relation to the indeed been monitoring the situation and I do trafficking of a child you could face a pen- not necessarily accept that it has turned a alty of up to 25 years in gaol. As well as that, blind eye to the situation. But of course, if it we expanded the definition of debt bondage deliberately did that, that would be wrong offences and we also expanded the deceptive and the government would certainly investi- recruiting offences. We found this as a result gate that. So again I would say: if Senator of prosecutions which are pending; we have Fielding has some information where he can some 15 people facing the courts for sex traf- point to a deliberate ignoring of those classi- ficking offences and I think it is very impor- fications, we would very much like to know tant to keep our legislation up to date. about it. But, certainly, as a government we

CHAMBER 80 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

We have put in place very strong measures Telstra to fight this despicable trade. We have a task Senator CONROY (2.38 pm)—My ques- force in the Australian Federal Police. We tion is to Senator Coonan, the Minister for have work being done in the region. Indeed, Communications, Information Technology the Australian Crime Commission recently and the Arts. Can the minister confirm that pointed to a reduction in the number of Thai appropriations from the communications women being trafficked, and I would put that fund announced by the government yester- down to the very good cooperation we are day will be made on the basis of recommen- getting from the Thai authorities and the fact dations of independent reviews of service that we have an official from the Department levels in rural and regional Australia? Can of Immigration and Multicultural and In- the minister also confirm that similar ar- digenous Affairs posted in Bangkok. But an rangements are in place to ensure that the alarming feature of that intelligence from the funding being provided under the Connect Australian Crime Commission was that there Australia program will be allocated based on has been an increase in the number of Ko- need and as such will provide no guaranteed rean women being trafficked. The Howard money for any specific regions or particular government will not tolerate this in any states? If this is the case, can the minister shape or form. Recently there were reports explain to the chamber whether these ar- that up to 1,000 women have been trafficked rangements are consistent with Senator into Australia. I have said publicly that we do Joyce’s statements that he is ‘happy’ for the not have any intelligence or forensic evi- government’s plan to be described as a ‘slush dence which would back that up. fund’? Can I say to the Senate that just one Senator COONAN—The communica- woman being trafficked is one woman too tions fund arrangements will depend on the many. That is our approach to this subject, regular reviews and will be in response to and it requires a whole-of-government ap- those regular reviews and, yes, the Connect proach. I have raised this at the Australian Australia $1.1 billion fund will be allocated Police Ministers Council and I am pleased to based on need. say that we are getting cooperation from the Senator CONROY—Mr President, I ask states and territories. But we need that coop- a supplementary question. Is the minister eration across the board, including from local aware of Senator Joyce’s claims last night government, because prostitution in some that he had ‘extracted’ more money for jurisdictions is regulated on a local basis. Queensland in exchange for his support of That is why we need the local authorities to the Telstra sale than Senator Harradine got work with us. This is not just a problem that for his support of the first two sales? Can the can be dealt with by the Australian govern- minister confirm that Senator Harradine ex- ment. We will continue our fight against this tracted more than $333 million in direct despicable trade. We urge all the other gov- guaranteed funding from the government for ernments in Australia to join with us in the spending exclusively in Tasmania? Can the fight against people trafficking, particularly minister inform the chamber of the guaran- the sex trafficking of women and children teed value of the funding to be received by where it applies. I think our law enforcement Queensland under the package released yes- authorities across the board have been doing terday by the government? an excellent job, and we will continue to fight this evil trade.

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 81

Senator COONAN—As I said, the fund- Senator Allison would be aware that there ing from the communications fund will be have been calls from time to time for Telstra allocated in response to regular reviews, and in particular, as the dominant telecommuni- the money for Connect Australia will be al- cations provider, to be operationally sepa- located based on need. rated. Telstra has been accused by some of Telstra being too big to regulate and by others of needing some better regulatory framework. Senator ALLISON (2.41 pm)—My ques- We have gone down the path of looking at tion is to the Minister for Communications, whether there should be operational separa- Information Technology and the Arts. The tion of Telstra. That has been developed in Competition Principles Agreement at sub- consultation with Telstra to respond to Tel- clause 4(3) says that, before a government stra’s particular business model and that will, introduces competition to a market tradition- in fact, provide greater transparency, effi- ally supplied by a public monopoly or priva- ciency and enforceability regarding the prin- tises a monopoly, it will review amongst ciple that Telstra’s operations need to be other things: more transparent and not unfairly favour its (b) the merits of separating any natural monopoly retail customers over its wholesale custom- elements from potentially competitive elements ers. of the public monopoly; In response to Senator Allison’s question, Can the minister explain why the govern- I am confident that these arrangements will ment did not do this before heading down the continue to deliver competitive outcomes. path of privatising Telstra? Why hasn’t the Indeed, I understand that they have been government explored the option of keeping warmly welcomed by Telstra’s competitors. core telecommunications infrastructure in In fact, Telstra has squealed a bit and that public hands? surely means that the balance is probably Senator COONAN—I thank Senator Al- right. When you look at getting the balance lison for the question. The government’s ap- right, you clearly have to balance the legiti- proach to the sale of Telstra was to look at mate needs of Telstra as it moves to a com- what was needed to provide a good competi- petitive model with pressure on its traditional tive environment under the telecommunica- network and ensure the rights and needs of tions specific rules, as Senator Allison would consumers are being met in a more competi- be aware, that operate under the Trade Prac- tive environment. I am very confident that in tices Act, in particular parts 11B and 11C. It the arrangements taken by the government looked at whether the competitive environ- we have looked very critically at what will ment needed any reforms prior to Telstra deliver a competitive model. We have cer- being privatised and, even if it was not priva- tainly considered the drawbacks to the con- tised, whether it was time, because of the sumer more broadly as well as to the tele- operation of competition—which has been communications industry, in particular, of very successful in the telecommunications continuing to retain a monopoly telecommu- sector, as Senator Allison would be aware— nications provider largely in government to see whether any adjustments were needed hands. to encourage new investment, new entrants The prospect of the government continu- and new players given the state of maturity of the market. ing to be the majority shareholder in the largest company in Australia simply defies logic. This government has had a consistent

CHAMBER 82 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 policy that, when it is proper and when the ate there has been a full inquiry when half conditions are met, it will proceed with the the players in the drama have not been inves- sale of Telstra. I recommend that Senator tigated? Allison has a look at the package. The condi- Senator VANSTONE—I thank the sena- tions are there to ensure that no Australian tor for the question. I do not have appendix will be left behind in telecommunications. B with me. Senator, you make the suggestion Senator ALLISON—Mr President, I ask that Mr Palmer has interviewed a few people a supplementary question. Isn’t it true, Min- and not others. I have yet to hear someone ister, that the government could have sepa- put forward the suggestion that Mr Palmer rated Telstra structurally as opposed to op- did not do a thorough job and that the rec- erationally—in other words, kept the core ommendations in the Palmer report do not infrastructure 100 per cent in public hands, very, very clearly highlight what the difficul- sold off the retail businesses and used the ties are and what needs to be done about funds to roll out fibre and wireless to the them. I am not aware of any request by Mr many Australians who do not currently have Palmer to interview my chief of staff but I it? Wouldn’t this solve what the government will have something to say about this at a calls its ‘half pregnant dilemma’? Wouldn’t later date. My chief of staff has been on sick this solve access to broadband issues and leave for four weeks and is not expected public anxiety about that vital, nationally back for another two. I may leave it until he important infrastructure being entirely in returns to clear the air. It has been cleared in private hands, and provide an ongoing reve- estimates—I thought very clearly—for Sena- nue stream that would fund investment in tor Faulkner’s benefit. new infrastructure technology? Why wasn’t To make a small point with respect to that, structural separation considered? one of Ms Alvarez’s partners rang my office Senator COONAN—Senator Allison, it to make inquiries about what had happened was considered and it has been rejected. and indicated that what he wanted to do was Palmer Report find out where she was and that he did not want the media involved. I have said before Senator LUDWIG (2.46 pm)—My ques- in this place that there was a specific reason tion is to Senator Vanstone, the Minister for for that—not that the media or anyone else Immigration and Multicultural and Indige- cared. That information was passed on to the nous Affairs. I refer specifically to appendix department. I will have more to say about B of the Palmer report, and ask the minister that, because the proposition you put now— whether Mr Palmer has forgotten to inter- and it has been put by Senator Faulkner in view a few people. How is it that Cornelia this place—has already been answered in the Rau wrote to the minister while in detention, Hansard. It is just another example of Labor yet the minister and her office were not ques- seeking to traduce the good character of peo- tioned about the handling of that application? ple who work with ministers or public ser- How is it that the minister’s chief of staff, Dr vants, and I will come back to that. Nation, acted as the contact between Immi- gration and Ms Vivian Solon’s ex-husband, As to people who were not interviewed, I yet was not questioned by Mr Palmer about have had occasion to reflect on whether I why he decided to hide the fact that Ms So- have got the time to go through appendix B lon had been deported from the public? How and see who put submissions forward. It has can the minister stand here and tell the Sen- occurred to me that I would be very inter-

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 83 ested to see whether Mr John Harley, who is have been interviewed by the Palmer inquiry. the Public Advocate in South Australia, did. The minister can answer that. Senators on this side will know that Mr Senator Hill—Mr President, I rise on a Harley appeared on The 7.30 Report. It was point of order. This is not the occasion for through Mr Harley’s comments that the na- the honourable senator to be reminding the tion was led to believe that Ms Rau was kept minister of anything. This is his opportunity under lights, badly mistreated and a whole to ask a supplementary question arising out range of things that, for the benefit of Ms of her answer, and he has not even attempted Rau and her family, I will not repeat. But to do so as yet. they were salaciously repeated around Aus- Senator Chris Evans—On the point of tralia by the media. order: what Senator Ludwig was attempting The proposition put by Mr Harley was to do was remind the minister of the original that he had been arguing for two months to question. get Immigration to listen to the plight of this Honourable senators interjecting— woman. Mr Harley privately admitted to me the next day, by way of a faxed letter, that he Senator Chris Evans—That is right. In never raised the matter with my office. I the form of the supplementary question he wrote to him and asked him: given that he is has been forced to ask it again, because again the Public Advocate in South Australia, did the minister was allowed to meander, tell her he raise it with South Australian mental little anecdotes, reflect on the culture that has health authorities, because the Palmer report so concerned Australians and not answer the indicates there were some problems there? I key questions that were put to her. Senator received no reply on that issue. I did receive Ludwig, in his supplementary question, has a reply but not on that issue. I was interested been forced to re-ask the question that the to read in the paper the other day that Mr minister refused to answer. Harley now says that he did raise it with The PRESIDENT—I ask Senator South Australian mental health authorities Ludwig to ask his supplementary question. and that he was happy with their response. Senator LUDWIG—Can the minister tell So I would have welcomed Mr Harley detail- the Senate whether she has been interviewed, ing his role and the exercise of his responsi- whether her staff have been interviewed, and bility in South Australia or otherwise. But whether she is aware of whether Mr Rud- what Mr Harley did or did not do is not ma- dock has been interviewed? If she cannot do terial regarding what Immigration did or did that, how can anyone have any confidence in not do, and matters, frankly, very little. But I the government’s secretive inquiry proc- would personally be very interested. esses? Can the minister now explain to Aus- Senator LUDWIG—Mr President, I ask tralians the full facts about the dimensions of a supplementary question. I would appreciate the public administration fiasco in the immi- it if the minister would come back to the gration department overseen by both her and question and answer it or, if not, take it on Mr Ruddock? notice. I remind Senator Vanstone that the Senator VANSTONE—The short answer question goes to whether any of her staff as to who was interviewed is: have a look at have been interviewed, whether she has been the report. There is an appendix that indi- interviewed, whether Mr Ruddock has been cates who was interviewed. interviewed or whether Mr Ruddock’s staff Senator Ludwig—You haven’t read it!

CHAMBER 84 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator nue and employs more than one-third of the Ludwig, you asked a question. Have the nation’s work force. Exporters generate manners to listen to the answer. skills, infrastructure and social capital that Senator VANSTONE—I have in fact build and strengthen local communities. The read the report, and I have read the appendix. free trade agreement that Senator Joyce men- But it is apparent that either Senator Ludwig tioned is certainly crucial for Australian ex- has not or he has some trumped-up question porters, and I want to congratulate Deputy about whether someone was interviewed Prime Minister Mark Vaile for the work that when the information is clearly available for he did as trade minister on the AUSFTA, and him. As to the administration of the immigra- also the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Alex- tion department, at present and in the past, I ander Downer. Under that free trade agree- might have something more to say about that ment, 66 per cent of agricultural tariff lines during the next sittings. have been eliminated, and a further nine per cent will be reduced over the next four years. AgQuip Field Days Joining our colleagues from this side at Senator JOYCE (2.53 pm)—My ques- the AgQuip field days in Gunnedah will be tion is to Senator Ian Macdonald, the Minis- more than 10 trade commissioners and busi- ter representing the Minister for Agriculture, ness development managers visiting from Fisheries and Forestry. Will the minister in- Austrade offices right around the world. form the Senate how visitors next week to They will be talking to businesses about ex- AgQuip—which are the largest field days in port opportunities. This is, as I understand it, Australia, attracting over 100,000 visitors the first time Austrade staff have attended an and in excess of 2,500 businesses—can learn agricultural field day. about the benefits flowing from Australia’s free trade agreement with the US? Whilst the coalition is, through these sorts of initiatives, working on free trade agree- Senator IAN MACDONALD—I thank ments to bring jobs to rural Australia, Labor Senator Joyce for what I think might be his are working hard on losing jobs from rural first question. I acknowledge Senator Joyce’s Australia. I know that Senator Joyce shares very keen interest in rural matters, particu- my concern about jobs in rural Queensland. larly in opportunities for Australian agricul- It is very difficult for me, for Senator Joyce tural exporters. The AgQuip field days in and for my other Senate colleagues from Gunnedah next week are a classic opportu- Queensland to understand Labor Premier nity for Australian agricultural exporters to Peter Beattie’s decision to slash 400 jobs learn more about opportunities overseas. I from the western hardwoods industry in acknowledge that they are very large field Queensland. This is particularly embarrass- days, with over 100,000 visitors and some ing in Queensland, because Queensland for- 2½ thousand businesses exhibiting there. I ests have just been granted an AFS certifica- understand that the Parliamentary Secretary tion by the new minister recognising their for Trade, Senator Sandy Macdonald, new sustainability. Whilst one arm of the Queen- Senator Fiona Nash, and not-so-new Senator sland government is saying they are well- Bill Heffernan will all be at the field days. managed forests, Mr Beattie, who seems to Rural and regional communities are a ma- run everything in Queensland, is slashing jor source of our export strength and eco- 400 jobs from the western hardwoods indus- nomic wealth. Indeed, country Australia gen- try. I cannot understand why Senator erates about half of Australia’s export reve- Ludwig, whose father is a very significant

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 85 person in the workers union in Queensland, those. The short answer to that is no. You is not continually asking about this and then go on to ask, according to your version hammering Labor Premier Beattie about of Westminster responsibility, whether I am those sorts of things. Four hundred jobs are more interested in good governance than in being lost and we do not hear a squeak from my job. Frankly, I am interested in both. I Senator Ludwig or any of his colleagues love my job and I am also interested in good from Queensland. governance. That is why, having been con- The Howard government are determined fronted with the Cornelia Rau case, the obvi- to save jobs in country Australia. We did it in ous problems associated with that and the Tasmania. Had we followed the Labor plan, difficulties of dealing with someone with a 10,000 jobs in the timber industry would mental illness of the sort that Ms Rau appar- have gone in Tasmania. The Howard gov- ently has, I asked for an inquiry to be made ernment saved those jobs. We want to save and for the department to go back and find jobs for the timber industry in Queensland, every other problem that could have possibly and we need a bit of support from the Labor fitted into that category. senators to pull Mr Beattie into line. I do not know of a previous occasion Minister for Immigration and when a minister has not only dealt with the Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs problems at hand—and had them dealt with swiftly, unlike, as I indicated, the Midford Senator CARR (2.58 pm)—My question Paramount case, which took three years to is to Senator Vanstone, the Minister for Im- get to the bottom of—but has also said: ‘Go migration and Multicultural and Indigenous back and look for more problems. Find them Affairs. Was Senator Vanstone the responsi- so that we can be accountable to the public ble minister when an Australian resident was for what we have done.’ I have not seen that wrongfully detained for 10 months; when an happen before. I happen to think that it is a Australian citizen was wrongfully deported; minister’s responsibility when there is a when two children were removed from the problem to see if there are any more and set Stanmore primary school and wrongfully about fixing them. detained in the Villawood Detention Centre; when five detainees were locked in the back Senator CARR—Mr President, I ask a of a van for a 10-hour road trip without toilet supplementary question. Given that long list breaks, food or water; and when a judicial of items I read out for which the minister decision was handed down saying that the said she was not responsible, does she take immigration department was responsible for the view that as minister she is responsible culpable neglect and for breaching the duty for the actions of her own department? If she of care in relation to the refusal of psychiat- does not, what does she actually do within ric treatment for two detainees at Baxter de- the immigration department? tention centre? Under the Westminster sys- Senator VANSTONE—I answered the tem of government, isn’t the minister respon- senator’s question by saying he had asked sible for these repeated failures? What is me whether I was the responsible minister more important to the minister: good gov- when all of these happened, and the proper ernance or keeping her job? answer to that is no. Senator VANSTONE—Senator, you list Senator Chris Evans—You were, for a a number of matters and ask whether I was number of them. the responsible minister in relation to each of

CHAMBER 86 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

Senator VANSTONE—Apparently Sena- minister. We have seen no ministerial state- tor Evans knows more. He is welcome to ment on these matters. We have seen no ex- have a go at getting elected at the next elec- planation to this chamber by this minister as tion if he wants to. But, given that he voted to why these administrative bungles have for the current leader, it is not looking that occurred. We have seen nothing but a litany good. of blame-shifting exercises designed to shift Senator Chris Evans—I didn’t have an attention away from her failures and onto ice pack on my head worrying, though. other people. Of course, it is not the first time such a proposition has occurred, and I Senator VANSTONE—You ought to will come back to that in a moment. have now. I see senators behind Senator Ev- ans who do not only blame Mr Beazley for We have a situation where, as a result of the poor state of the opposition’s standing; the Palmer report, we now have some 201 they look at the whole leadership group. My cases of people who have had to be released view is that ministers are responsible for get- from detention as a result of being unlaw- ting their departments on track when they get fully detained. Fifty-six of those cases were off track and for fixing problems that come for periods greater than three months. The about. As to direct responsibility for matters, minister’s response? To remove the execu- I think that is a question better referred to the tive of the department and to try to suggest Prime Minister. I refer the questioner to the that this is the culture created by her prede- Prime Minister’s remarks on that matter. cessor. At no point does she say, ‘I am responsible under the Westminster tradition, or Senator Hill—Mr President, I ask that under the Prime Minister’s code of conduct.’ further questions be placed on the Notice At no point does she come forward and say, Paper. ‘I will take responsibility for what’s oc- QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: curred.’ TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS This is not the first time events like these Immigration have occurred. I can recall back in 1997, at Senator CARR (Victoria) (3.03 pm)—I the beginning of her ministerial career, a move: similar pattern occurring. I can recall a Sen- That the Senate take note of the answers given ate estimates committee where she brought by the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural forward the bogus case of the Wright family. and Indigenous Affairs and Minister Assisting the She said, in order to justify the policy posi- Prime Minister for Indigenous Affairs (Senator tion she had taken, the culture of the depart- Vanstone) to questions without notice asked to- ment at the time was to bring forward a bo- day. gus millionaire family and claim that they Today we have heard the minister seek to were on welfare and that they had two homes blame as many people as possible other than of $1.6 million in value, they had flash cars, herself. She has sought to blame public ser- they sent their kids to private schools and vants and she has sought to blame her prede- they had a declared income, according to the cessors. She has sought to essentially sheet minister, of only $12,000. These things were home to anyone else responsibility for the all completely false. The ministerial code of long list of cultural failures and administra- conduct at the time said that ministers should tive bungles in the department of immigra- be honest in their public dealings and should tion, many of which have been identified as not intentionally mislead the parliament or occurring while she was directly there as the the public, and that any misconception inad-

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 87 vertently caused should be corrected at the Senator SANTORO (Queensland) (3.07 earliest opportunity. The pattern was estab- pm)—Again we have today a cynical motion lished in 1997. trying to shoot somebody who, together with Who got the blame for that? I remind the the government—in fact, representing the minister of Ms Mary Lovett, who was the government—has acted with total propriety First Assistant Secretary of the Youth, Stu- in relation to the issues that are being cov- dents and Social Policy Division of the de- ered by this cynical motion to take note. It is partment at that time. That officer was re- instructive just to remind the Senate why this moved. Just as we see today, the minister government and the minister have acted with seeks to blame her public servants for the great propriety. The government established political climate which is created by this the Palmer inquiry. It acknowledged that government seeking to use the dog whistle of there was a prima facie case for procedures politics to press the hot-button issue of ra- to be reviewed. Subsequently the govern- cism and xenophobia—a policy position ment referred the Vivian Alvarez Solon mat- which starts at the very top in this govern- ter to the Palmer inquiry. The government, ment. also entirely of its own volition and without any particular pressure from senators oppo- This minister ought to take responsibility site, ordered the Department of Immigration for her actions. But back in 1997 she did not and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs to do that. I can recall another occasion, the so- review all cases of people being released called ship of fools case, where very large from detention because they were found to sums of money were paid to the South Pa- be, or later became, lawful. As a conse- cific Cruise Line, which collapsed. The gov- quence, 200 cases were referred to the ernment public policy was once again Palmer inquiry and are now being examined brought into disrepute. Two thousand ap- by the Ombudsman. prentices, if I recall rightly, were very badly treated. Hundreds of new apprentices were As the minister clearly explained in the badly abused. Again, what was the minister’s Senate yesterday, they are not necessarily response? Blame the Public Service, blame cases of wrongful detention. They cover a anybody else and blame the situation that she broad range of circumstances, including is good at directing to other people. When it people detained for very short periods while comes to her own actions, she is a bit like their identity was being established. They Bronwyn Bishop without the charm. will also include people who are detained and are subsequently released because they The minister ought to resign. She ought to have been granted a visa. It does not mean take responsibility for the actions of her de- that their detention was wrongful or indeed partment, she ought to take responsibility unlawful. It is not a technical point and there under the Westminster traditions of this par- is no presumption involved. Labor, during liament and she ought to take responsibility question time today in this place and in the in regard to the Prime Minister’s code of other place and through this motion, are de- conduct. She ought to resign. But what we liberately misleading the public and the par- have is a litany of her blame-shifting and liament on this point. attempts to redirect attention to other people. We have seen a pattern emerge where this The ‘released not unlawful’ scenario is the minister has failed in her public duty. She natural and indeed inevitable consequence of has failed—(Time expired) detention provisions in the Migration Act. I have not heard the Labor Party seek to move

CHAMBER 88 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 a motion or to amend any law to change that. side pretends to represent. We established the In the way that the act is supposed to oper- inquiry and referred serious matters to it be- ate, people may be detained on the basis of cause that was the correct thing to do. reasonable suspicion of being unlawful non- I have participated in many taking-note citizens and, after further inquiry, released if debates on the same issue in this place be- they are found to have lawful status or fur- cause, day after day, opposition senators ther detained if their unlawful status is con- come in here and cynically seek to denigrate firmed. Furthermore, it is not a case of pre- and besmirch the reputation of a minister and suming that a person is an unlawful nonciti- that of the government. I am very proud to zen. What is required under section 189 of rise in the defence of a minister and a gov- the act is a reasonable suspicion, which ernment who have done the right thing—a means a suspicion grounded in objective government that recognise that when prob- facts. The suspicion that a person is an lems arise the source of the problem needs to unlawful noncitizen must be justifiable upon be identified and fixes made. That is pre- an objective examination of relevant mate- cisely what the government are doing in this rial. But because, by its very nature, a suspi- case. Trying to bring down officers of the cion involves a degree of uncertainty, it is department, as opposition senators constantly inevitable—and those opposite simply can- try to do, trying to bring down a minister and not deny it—that in some cases of detention trying to besmirch the reputation of a gov- under section 189 the suspicion, albeit rea- ernment in relation to these matters simply sonably held at the time, will turn out to be do not wash with the public. Clearly, that is incorrect upon further inquiry. That simply reflected in the opinion polls that all opposi- does not make the detention unlawful. tion senators take particularly close notice of. Senator O’Brien interjecting— They are just not getting the message across. Senator SANTORO—Senator O’Brien (Time expired) understands that, but again cynical politics Senator FAULKNER (New South are at play here. We have the playing out of Wales) (3.12 pm)—In no other government cynical political point-scoring that seeks to in the Western world would a minister with besmirch, belittle and bring down a minister. the record of Senator Vanstone survive. Not That is not going to work because right is on just the Westminster conventions of ministe- the side of the minister. The opposition par- rial responsibility but also sheer, plain com- ties know that but they constantly try to im- monsense dictate that this level of incompe- ply otherwise. tence means that Senator Vanstone should The referral of all these matters to the resign. Senator Vanstone has presided over Palmer inquiry and subsequently to the Om- the greatest public administration debacle in budsman for independent examination is the the history of the Commonwealth of Austra- action of a government who accept their re- lia. We know that from the government’s sponsibilities. We did not need to be own report. If the government’s own report prompted by senators opposite. We did not is so critical, just imagine what the real, un- need to be encouraged to do the right thing, varnished truth must be like. which is what we did when we established Neither Philip Ruddock nor Amanda the Palmer inquiry and referred matters to it. Vanstone did one single thing to address the We did not need a lecture in morality. We did pervasive cultural problems, even the cul- not need any moral compass that the other tural crisis, in the department until all the

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 89 publicity surrounding the wrongful detention those kids behind barbed wire in a detention of Cornelia Rau prodded Senator Vanstone centre is not enough, what does it take to into some very belated action. Of course it is sack a minister in the Howard government? no wonder that neither Minister Ruddock nor Where are we left with the Westminster con- Minister Vanstone acted to address the cul- ventions of ministerial responsibility? There ture of the Department of Immigration and is an open and shut case that the minister for Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. They immigration in the Australian government are both part of the cultural problem. The should resign. She should have resigned a Howard government’s posturing on border long time ago. She should go and she should protection and asylum seekers has seeped go now. right through the immigration department, Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS (New which now acts as though its job is to detain South Wales) (3.17 pm)—It is somewhat and deport as many people as possible. hypocritical of Senator Faulkner to stand The department, in its approach, took its there and talk about the decisions of this lead from the government. The department, government. I was a government lawyer for in its approach, took its lead from the minis- 20 years and I oversaw some decisions and ters, Mr Ruddock and Senator Vanstone. The acted for DIMIA in certain circumstances, department believed it knew what the gov- and perhaps Senator Faulkner ought to go ernment wanted and it tried to deliver it. Of back and look at his own government’s recourse, when it got too hot, it was the de- cord in the past. But I would like to focus on partment and the officials of the department the Palmer report. The government has ac- who copped all the blame; and it was Mr cepted the thrust and findings of the Palmer Ruddock and Senator Vanstone who ac- report. The Prime Minister announced on 14 cepted none of it. The Cornelia Rau case, the July that the government accepts, on the ba- Vivian Alvarez Solon case and the scores of sis of the Palmer report, that mistakes were other cases of Australian citizens and resi- made in relation to Cornelia Rau and Vivian dents wrongly detained by the immigration Alvarez Solon. Both women have been department highlight an obsession with de- apologised to by the government and tention and deportation in the department, an changes have already been made within obsession that grew and was fostered under DIMIA as a result of the report. And more the ministerial responsibility of Mr Ruddock changes are on the way. and Senator Vanstone. Something is rotten in The government is demanding, and the the state of DIMIA, but no-one has stepped new leadership of the department is deliver- up to the plate to take responsibility. ing, real change that will make a difference We have senior executives of the depart- in the future. This should not overshadow the ment being shifted sideways. We have some fact that Mr Palmer also found considerable duckshoved into other departments. We have evidence of highly committed DIMIA staff. some promoted. One has ever become the Even before Mr Palmer presented his report, ambassador to Indonesia. And the minister— the minister acted to change policy and pro- what has happened with the minister? She cedures to improve the impact of detention just sails on with no care and no responsibil- on individuals. These measures included the ity. You have to wonder what it would actu- establishment of the national verification and ally take for the Prime Minister, Mr Howard, advice unit, the creation of the detention re- to sack a minister these days. If stealing kids view manager positions within the depart- out of a schoolyard and wrongfully tossing ment to ensure constant revisiting of individ-

CHAMBER 90 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 ual cases and improvement to mental health ment; and releasing a new draft client service services at the Baxter immigration detention charter and strategy for public comment. facility. This significant change agenda is occurring I remind the Senate that the Prime Minis- against a backdrop of strong public support ter also announced changes, including an in general terms for the government’s ap- additional non-compellable power for the proach to immigrating. It is worth noting that minister to specify alternative arrangements it has been possible for the government to for persons’ detention, the result being that significantly increase the migration intake there are now no children in immigration over the past years and that this is a positive detention centres, and an additional non- reflection on the administration of the pro- compellable power for the minister acting gram. personally to grant a visa to a person in de- In summary, these are the actions of a tention. He also announced the revision of government that recognises its responsibili- the ‘removal pending’ bridging visa to ties. But what would the Labor Party have broaden its application and allow more de- done? What would be their approach? Would tainees to be released and six-monthly re- Labor have willingly sought someone of the porting to the Ombudsman on persons in calibre of Mick Palmer, former Australian detention for two years or more. Further, he Federal Police Commissioner—and, later, announced a legislative requirement time Neil Comrie, former chief commissioner of frame of three months for the processing of Victorian police and the Ombudsman—to refugee claims at primary stage and three independently and thoroughly examine these months at review, and a requirement on the issues? Would Labor have ordered the de- department to complete all primary assess- partment to go back and check all cases of ments of applications for permanent protec- people released from detention? Labor have tion visas from the existing case load of tem- a history of ducking and weaving. In stark porary protection visa holders by 31 October. contrast, the coalition government is willing The minister herself also announced fur- to recognise where problems are and do ther changes, including steps to bring down something about them. razor wire from immigration detention cen- Senator O’BRIEN (Tasmania) (3.22 tres, beginning with Villawood in Sydney. pm)—We have just heard the defence of the This was not a recommendation of the indefensible but one has to expect that from Palmer report, but it reflects the govern- coalition senators when they stand up here ment’s recognition that appropriate meas- and try to defend a minister whose admini- ures, even beyond those recommended by stration has been so demonstrably abjectly Mr Palmer, can and will be put into place. appalling. The fact of the matter is that, nine Right now there is a new team at the top of long years ago, the Prime Minister promised DIMIA that has already begun implementing Australia that he would raise the standards of changes recommended by Palmer. These parliament and he would raise the standards changes include: releasing a framework for of parliamentary accountability. Initially the way forward for the department, focusing when offences were discovered, he required on it becoming a more open and accountable those ministers or parliamentary secretaries organisation ensuring fair and reasonable to resign. If you look at what happened to dealings with clients and with greater em- Senator Gibson in this place and his resigna- phasis on well-trained and supported staff; tion, compared with the actions, or inactions, recruiting people from outside the depart- and the dereliction of duty of this minister,

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 91 one has to feel terribly sorry for Senator Gib- had been held for more than three weeks, but son. The Prime Minister and this government there was nothing wrongful, according to have completely abandoned the promise to Senator Santoro, about those 201 people be- Australia that they would observe new stan- ing detained. That is a typical defence of the dards for parliamentary and ministerial ac- minister’s inaction. This was, in a typically countability. Those standards are clearly Orwellian phrase, ‘released not unlawful’. gone. Say anything and do anything but do not ac- Yesterday we saw Minister Vanstone, cept responsibility. That is the standard that when answering questions, try to shift the this government now accepts for all of its blame to someone else, because that is the ministers. modus operandi. It is always someone else’s For this government, after nine long years, fault, not the minister’s fault. She tried to to be talking about standards and about being shift the blame. We talked about the prob- fit for government, is laughable. This gov- lems but it was the public servants who were ernment is no longer fit for government. This at fault. It was someone in the department government is showing that it is totally arro- who was at fault. It was the contractor who gant. It is out of touch with the people of was at fault. It was never the minister, not Australia and the standards they expect. If according to Senator Vanstone. this government were in touch, the minister Yesterday in question time the minister would have resigned or the Prime Minister ducked and weaved. She was asked whether would have sacked her because the litany of or not the Hwang children were part of the wrongful events that have been conducted by 201 cases referred to the Palmer inquiry. She her department—including deporting an did not answer that. The minister was asked Australian citizen and locking up an Austra- if there had been any other cases of wrongful lian citizen for months and denying her detention since April 2005. She did not an- proper psychiatric attention—and all of the swer that. The minister was asked how many events that have been referred to in the of the 201 were citizens or residents and Palmer inquiry and all of the events that the about the longest period of detention. She Ombudsman has referred to indicate that this did not answer that. The minister refuses to department is out of control. answer these questions because, frankly, But what do we see? We saw some people there is something to hide and because, if the promoted out of the department and other minister answers those questions and puts people moved sideways out of the depart- the facts on the table, her lack of perform- ment. But the person responsible, the person ance and the decline in her credibility will be who occupies a place at which the buck highlighted. stops, says, ‘Not me. It’s somebody else. What are we seeing today? We talk about We’ve got the inquiries going’—inquiries Orwellian politics; we are now seeing termi- which were commissioned because of public nology change. What did we hear defended pressure, not because of the conscience of by Senator Santoro today? The use of the the government— (Time expired) term ‘released not unlawful’ instead of Question agreed to. ‘wrongful detention’. We have been talking about the 201 people who have been held by the immigration department. According to an article in the Courier-Mail today, 56 of those

CHAMBER 92 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE quiry, court decisions, the Hamburger report Immigration and Multicultural and and a whole range of evidence about the Indigenous Affairs complete failure of administration and about the abuse and mistreatment of people under The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—The that administration, and yet the government President has received a letter from the have not had the courage or have not treated Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, the matter seriously enough to come into this Senator Evans, proposing that a definite mat- parliament to table a ministerial statement in ter of public importance be submitted to the reply. All we have had is an apology in the Senate for discussion, namely: face of an estimates inquiry. We have had no Dear Mr President attempt by the government to come in and Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the explain their position. following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion: When asking questions of the minister we have had further evidence that she maintains “The need for Senator Vanstone to accept ministe- the culture of denial, the culture of denigrat- rial responsibility for the serious and systemic failures of administration at the Department of ing critics, the culture that Mr Palmer so Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous strongly criticised that had permeated the Affairs that has caused such injustice and mis- immigration department. The minister, Sena- ery.” tor Vanstone, is living proof that that culture Yours sincerely persists. She refuses to answer questions. Chris Evans She refuses to take responsibility. She is in denial about essential facts. She seeks to use I call upon those senators who approve of the legal language to hide the misery that has proposed discussion to rise in their places. been imposed on people who have been More than the number of senators re- taken into custody inside her department. quired by the standing orders having risen in She had the brazenness to say yesterday: their places— ‘Oh, it’s old news.’ The government’s posi- The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I under- tion is: ‘It’s old news. Australians will forget. stand that informal arrangements have been We’ll move on. We’ll brazen this out.’ The made to allocate specific times to each of the minister knows the Prime Minister has no speakers in today’s debate. With the concur- standards. His only standard is when the rence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to stench gets bad enough he might have to set the clocks accordingly. drop a minister, but until then there are no Senator CHRIS EVANS (Western Aus- standards. tralia—Leader of the Opposition in the Sen- This debate is important because I think ate) (3.28 pm)—I have sought to bring on Australians do care. They are seriously con- this debate today, partly because there has cerned by the Palmer report. Despite the lim- been no attempt from the government to ta- ited terms of reference and despite the lim- ble and speak to the Palmer inquiry. Since ited powers, Mr Palmer did a good job as far the parliament last sat, we have had a range as he could in revealing the departmental of reports and inquiries which have pointed culture and the abuse that occurred under to the complete breakdown of proper process that culture of Australian citizens and those inside Senator Vanstone’s Department of who have sought to come to this country. Immigration and Multicultural and Indige- nous Affairs. We have had the Palmer in-

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 93

It is important that we take a step back. country’s own citizens had been picked up in We all follow the newspapers, we all follow an injured, confused state and deported—her the debate, and it allows the minister to say it child left at a child-care centre waiting for is old news. But I invite senators to think her mother to return—and taken into custody about it in another way. Think about it in in an injured and confused state and eventu- terms of how people outside Australia might ally deported because she looked foreign, she see what is going on in Australia today. In did not look as the rest of the citizens of that 1988 when I was in London studying, there country did? was a protest march down the Strand. Thou- What would we make of that if that report sands of people were protesting. They were came in about a foreign country? We would protesting about the treatment of Aboriginal be shocked. We would be appalled. We people in Australia. I was shocked to my would be writing letters. We would be in core, because I had never had that perspec- outrage that a country could treat its citizens tive that people in Britain had about the Aus- like that. But, no, in Australia the govern- tralians’ treatment of their Indigenous peo- ment say: ‘There were a few mistakes made. ple. These were people motivated to protest Don’t worry about it.’ They figure they can about our treatment of Indigenous Austra- brazen it out, that the person who has run lians. There I was organising the beers and this system can stay in place without penalty pies for the Australia Day celebration, and because Australians will move on, the new there were these thousands of people march- cycle will move on, and it is all okay. No-one ing. It shook me very seriously, because it has to take responsibility. We would be out- said: ‘This is how other people view us.’ raged if that sort of action took place in an- I invite senators and others listening today other country, but the Prime Minister expects to look at the report from outside. Pretend it Australians to see that happen in Australia was a report from another country. Pretend and to say: ‘It doesn’t really matter. We that you read a report in which a government shouldn’t be concerned about it.’ That is not department in a foreign country threw people the sort of Australia I want to live in. I do not into vans and trucked them across the coun- want to see that happen. I want to see people try for hours without food or water, sitting in accept that it is wrong and demand change. their own urine—people who had to sit for People must demand responsibility be taken. seven hours amid the stench of urine and We cannot just move on. We cannot see Aus- fear. What about hearing reports about a de- tralian citizens and people who come to this partment that sends government officials out country treated like that and just move on. It to primary schools to march in, drag children is not good enough. There has to be some out of their classrooms, take them to a deten- accountability. tion centre and lock them behind razor Mr Palmer was tasked not as I would have wire—in front of their own school friends, tasked him, but he did a commendable job. drag them out of the class and incarcerate He got a lot of the truth out. I have some them? What about reports of a department quibbles about witnesses who were not in- where a sad, vulnerable young woman was terviewed et cetera, but he revealed the deep- left eating dirt and left to be humiliated at seated departmental culture, and for that he every turn as she was incarcerated—her ought to be congratulated. And yet this sting- medical care was neglected and she was left ing indictment of our immigration system is scarred, anguished and alone? What about not even the subject of a ministerial state- reports of a department where one of that ment to the parliament. No-one has come

CHAMBER 94 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 into this place to say anything about that. It said, ‘I’m not responsible.’ Who is responsi- is quietly tabled and left on the documents ble under the Howard government? Nobody. list: ‘It’s all over. We’ll move on. They’ll No-one is accountable. A few senior public forget about it.’ It is not good enough. servants have been shifted sideways to create We waited for Senator Vanstone to come. a sense of reform and we have had a senior Unfortunately she was ill last week—I ac- former Immigration official brought back as cept that. She came this week. We have secretary, but no-one has taken responsibility sought to ask her questions. We have not got for what has occurred. answers. We have had the culture of denial I think the government stands condemned again as she has been brazenly trying to because it has failed to take responsibility. blame the critics and everybody else but take We all know the Prime Minister walked no responsibility herself. And that is the key away from his code of conduct for ministers issue here: who is going to take responsibil- years ago. After losing five or six because ity? What we now know is that under the they were so clumsy that they could not meet Howard government a damning indictment the most basic of parliamentary standards, he of a department—a report which says that said, ‘We’ll have to change the rules; we’ll Australians have been treated appallingly, have to abandon that.’ But any quick look at that people taken into custody have been that code of conduct would show that treated appallingly and that children have Amanda Vanstone should have gone. She been locked up, snatched from schools and had to go. Under the most limited interpreta- treated in an inhumane way—is acceptable tion of the Westminster system of ministerial because no-one is responsible. accountability, under the slimmest definition The two senior persons responsible for of that concept, Amanda Vanstone should that state of affairs in that department are have taken responsibility. But no: no-one whom? The minister and the secretary of the takes responsibility in this government. department. Well, what has happened there? Australians are deported because they The secretary of the department has been look foreign. People are locked up. Children promoted to the position of Ambassador to are snatched from school. But no-one takes Indonesia. That is his accountability; that is responsibility. It is all okay. The media focus the responsibility he has taken—the Prime will move on. It is ‘old news’. Well, it is not Minister has promoted him and sent him old news as far as I am concerned. The min- overseas. The Prime Minister has said that ister has to be held accountable by the cham- the minister, Amanda Vanstone, is doing a ber. She knows we do not have the numbers great job: ‘I’m going to leave her where she to force her out. Even in the previous Senate is because she’s now starting to fix up the we could not do that. But the brazen disre- problems that she’s been responsible for for gard for taking any responsibility is breath- the last two or three years.’ And that is it. taking and, quite frankly, it is highly hypo- That is the arrogance. That is the concern. critical. That is the government’s attitude to respon- I ask senators to think of two of the other sibility. issues that are currently being espoused by Today the minister was in here again say- the government. Think about shared respon- ing, ‘It’s old news,’ and ‘I’m not responsi- sibility. Think about how the Prime Minister ble.’ She was asked directly about incidents and the minister go out to Aboriginal com- that occurred in the last few months. She munities, to people living in some of the

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 95 worst Third-World conditions, inside our government are just going to try to brazen it country. The minister lectures them about the out. They will not take responsibility. need for them to take responsibility—for It is not just the Palmer report. Since the them to take responsibility for their condi- Senate rose in June, there have been a whole tion, for their children, for their health care— series of developments that reinforce the and not to rely on the government and not to point that Mr Palmer made about the deep rely on others but to take personal responsi- malaise inside Immigration, about the cul- bility. She lectures people living in poverty ture. Culture comes from the top. Leadership about personal responsibility, and she comes sets the culture. The culture of this govern- in here and says, ‘Nothing to do with me. I ment is to take no responsibility. The culture take no responsibility for my actions.’ What of DIMIA was driven by the political deci- abject hypocrisy! She has to take personal sions of the Howard government. They knew responsibility, and she has taken none. She they were doing the government’s bidding. lectures poor, unemployed Aboriginals living They knew, when they acted in the way that in terrible conditions about responsibilities they did, that they were in tune with gov- but takes no responsibility herself. ernment policy. But now, no. The govern- And there is the other big issue of the day: ment seeks to take no responsibility for the unfair dismissal laws. The government says, actions of its public servants. It seeks to shift ‘We don’t want people to have rights to pro- the blame, to deny and to have an esoteric tect themselves from unfair dismissal.’ I can legal discussion about whether someone has understand why. The minister wants to talk been unlawfully detained or not. This is ac- to us about how terrible it is that people tually talking about someone locked up in a might have a right to protect to themselves jail, even though they are an Australian citi- against unfair dismissal. What hypocrisy! If zen, because the immigration department ever a minister deserved dismissal, it is decided that they looked a bit foreign. But Senator Amanda Vanstone. What else would we have an esoteric debate, with people say- you have to be responsible for that was more ing that legally they have the right to do that. serious than what she has overseen—and yet That is the defence. There is some sort of the Prime Minister will not sack her. legal argument that says, ‘Under the immi- When the government want to talk hypo- gration law we have the capacity and the critically about shared responsibility, mutual ability to do that, so what’s your problem?’ obligation or industrial relations laws, I will I am morally outraged about it. I actually be reminding them of their failure to take think it is frightening. A Greek friend sent responsibility. They have no moral authority me an email. He gave me his Medicare num- any longer. As long as Amanda Vanstone is ber and his passport number because he said allowed to stay minister, the stench that sur- that after a couple of beers he has been rounds her and the government will continue. known to talk Greek, and he is a bit worried The government may think that, with their about getting picked up! He wanted me to be Senate numbers and their total control, that able to vouch for him in the case of him be- sort of arrogant disregard for the processes ing picked up by DIMIA. that have served Australia and our democ- This is a really serious matter that has not racy so well is okay. I do not think it is. I do been treated seriously by the government. not think Australians will think it is either. They have not taken their responsibilities They know she should go. They know she seriously. I think it is the height of hypocrisy has failed in her job and they know that the

CHAMBER 96 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 that the government continue to defend a boss there and say, ‘We’ve changed.’ It does minister who has so appalling failed in her not happen in a private organisation. In the duty to Australian citizens and her duty to end, in our system of government, the minis- this parliament. It is just not acceptable that ter is responsible, not for every action inside that be allowed to occur. This is a test for the the department but for the culture and for the government. It is a test about whether they general systems. have any moral fibre at all, whether they The problems inside DIMIA are systemic. have any ability to respond to the serious Palmer found that. The minister has to take concern. responsibility. There is just no sign at all of I know you have the numbers. I know you this government taking any responsibility for have the capacity to try to ride it out but, if those problems. The stench, the moral failure we are to initiate change and reform in of this government will continue to haunt DIMIA, you cannot do that by leaving the Senator Vanstone. She will be a dead woman minister in charge. It is a typical response walking, because she has no moral authority. when these things occur to just sack a few She will have no moral authority with any- juniors. I am sure we will find that a couple one so, when she goes to lecture people of low-level public servants will be tossed about responsibility, they will laugh in her out on their ear in months to come. The min- face. ister will sit up there saying, ‘It is not my Senator Brandis—You have already said responsibility; it has nothing to do with me.’ that. It will be another blustering performance that Senator CHRIS EVANS—I am sorry, we have seen time and time again from her Senator Brandis. I know you do not like Sen- which seeks to blame the critics, to argue the ate process, inquiries and things like that. minor technical points, to say, ‘You don’t Your colours have been shown. I am looking understand,’ to try to degrade and attack forward to your legal defence of Senator anyone who says: ‘Surely this is morally Vanstone. It will not be a moral defence. corrupt. Surely this is not right. Surely someone ought to take responsibility.’ But, Senator Vanstone sits at the head of a rot- no; this minister will seek to argue that she is ten system. She sits at the head of a system fixing the problems, that she is not responsi- which needs radical and urgent change at the ble for the problems and that all the things most profound level. The catalogue of mis- that occurred under her watch—as recently management and inhumane treatment carried as in the last couple of months—are not her out by her department is a terrible reflection problem. on this government and it shames our country. Senator Vanstone absolutely refuses to We have had the Hamberger report, we take responsibility for any of it. She has have had the Palmer report and we have pleaded ignorance, she has passed the buck, Federal Court judges concerned about a and she has sat on her hands. That is just not Bangladeshi student who had his visa good enough. Her performance has been a wrongly cancelled and had been restrained disgrace and an embarrassment, and Austra- while in his home and searched without a lia and Australian democracy is poorer for warrant. We have a whole range of cases still allowing it to occur. If we as a community do occurring. The culture has not changed and, not hold her to account, what moral authority until the minister goes, there will be no sig- will we have? What ability will we have to nal to the Australian community that the cul- argue proper behaviour? What lessons will ture is going to change. You cannot leave the

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 97 we teach our children if we say, ‘You can Senator Evans bases his whole case against behave like this; you can preside over a sys- the government—what did the minister do? tem that treats other human beings in this She said: ‘We accept these recommenda- way, but you do not pay a penalty or take tions. We publish the report and we will act responsibility’? How are we to speak to our upon them.’ That is accepting responsibility children to try to teach them proper values in the most practical way—that is, by getting when this is the signal that the government to the bottom of the problem and moving of the day sends to children? The signal it swiftly to fix it. sends to public servants is that they will be What did Senator Evans, Senator the ones to carry the can for the govern- O’Brien—and it was all a bit beyond Senator ment’s failures. Senator Vanstone must re- O’Brien—and Senator Faulkner not say? sign. If she will not resign, Mr Howard must Nobody alleges that these mistakes, with sack her. Anything less is a disgrace. (Time terrible consequences for Mrs Solon and Ms expired) Rau, and this misconduct which has come to Senator BRANDIS (Queensland) (3.48 light were personally the mistakes of Senator pm)—Far from refusing to take responsibil- Vanstone, the minister. ity for what happened in DIMIA, Senator Senator Wong—That is not the principle Vanstone has assumed responsibility in the of ministerial accountability. most obvious and practical way. On 8 Febru- Senator BRANDIS—I will come to that, ary, she commissioned former Commissioner Senator Wong. Nor do they say that Senator Palmer to undertake a searching inquiry into Vanstone knew of those mistakes at the time DIMIA to find out where the problems were, they were made or that she ought to have to rip the covers off the department’s proc- done so. These were mistakes. Nobody has esses and to come up with recommendations denied that grave mistakes with serious con- to fix them. That report was published, and sequences for the individuals involved were here it is. What an absurd argument from made. Nobody says that the minister was Senator Evans and what a humiliating, de- personally responsible for those mistakes or meaning performance from Senator Faulkner aware of them. What they say is that some- earlier on in the afternoon who, as a former how ministerial responsibility means that a cabinet minister, one would expect more minister should assume a personal culpabil- from. What a humiliating performance, ity for the mistakes made at the most junior Senator Evans, because every argument you levels of the department by officers making raise and every charge you make against decisions of which she was unaware. That is Senator Vanstone comes from the very re- a bizarre notion of what ministerial responsi- port—the Palmer report—which she herself bility means and it is unsupported by anyone commissioned. who could speak with authority on what min- The government and Senator Vanstone did isterial responsibility means. not have to commission the Palmer inquiry, There are two Australian academics who but they did. They did not have to give have written at great length about what min- Commissioner Palmer the broadest imagin- isterial responsibility means in our system. able terms of reference, but they did. They One is Professor Hugh Emy and the other is did not have to extend the Palmer inquiry’s Professor Patrick Weller, the latter of whom terms of reference not once but twice, yet has devoted a long and distinguished career they did. When they received the recommen- to studying ministerial conduct and ministe- dations—critical recommendations on which

CHAMBER 98 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 rial responsibility. This is what Professor ‘Undertake to correct them’—and that is Emy says: precisely what Senator Vanstone did, in a Is it reasonable to hold the minister personally situation where nobody can honestly assert responsible for administrative errors occurring at that the minister was personally responsible organizational levels far beneath him? Ministerial for the errors and nobody can honestly assert responsibility assumes that the minister has that the minister knew that the errors had enough contact and familiarity with routine ad- been made at the time they were made. ministration for it to be feasible to hold him personally responsible for the actions of his public Senator Vanstone, with all the authority of servants. This is no longer true. In large depart- the Prime Minister and the rest of the gov- ments, the chains of command and communica- ernment, commissioned the Palmer report to tion are usually too long to insist on holding the get to the bottom of it. Unlike opposition man at the top personally responsible for the sins senators who have spoken in this debate I of his subordinates. have actually been through the Palmer re- There are common-sense reasons therefore for port, and I cannot immediately think of a qualifying the minister’s overall or blanket re- precedent of a minister, made aware of a sponsibility for administrative error. Today, in the grave mistake made by junior officers of majority of cases where error occurs, ministerial their department, of which not only did they responsibility means ministerial answerability: not know, but in the routine of administration the minister is constitutionally responsible for could not possibly be expected to know, informing parliament of the matter and assuring MPs that the error will be corrected. He is commissioning such a searching inquiry into unlikely to be held personally liable for the error. their department. It is even less likely that, when the officials are It certainly did not happen during the recognizably at fault themselves, he will be ex- Keating government. If it did, if I am mis- pected to resign. taken about that, Senator Wong, when you And Professor Emy writes that there has speak in the debate perhaps you would be been no precedent in the whole of Australian good enough to inform us of the occasions constitutional history of a minister being ex- during the term of the Keating government pected to resign on the basis of mistakes when a minister, made aware of problems made by officials within his department of within their department, commissioned such which he was neither aware nor ought rea- a searching inquiry into the department’s sonably to have been aware. processes, routines and procedures as did The leading study of the responsibility of Senator Vanstone when she commissioned ministers, though, was written by Professor the Palmer inquiry. And, Senator Wong, Patrick Weller in 1980, and co-authored by a when you speak, perhaps you would be good journalist known to all of us in this cham- enough to tell us—because I am not aware of ber—a very distinguished journalist— it—of any precedent of the Hawke govern- Michelle Grattan. What Patrick Weller and ment doing it, or of the Whitlam government Michelle Grattan had to say about ministerial doing it or, indeed, of any non-Labor gov- responsibility was this: ernments doing it. To my knowledge, it is Acknowledging that the minister can no longer unprecedented in Australian constitutional know everything that his officials are doing, it is history for a minister, made aware of serious now asserted that ministerial responsibility means administrative errors at a low level of deci- simply that a minister must explain how mistakes sion-making within their department, com- were made by his officials and undertake to cor- missioning an inquiry as searching as this. rect them.

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 99

Why is Senator Vanstone being chastised released. So the first thing Senator Vanstone by the Labor Party today? The reason is that did was to release the report. Senator Vanstone set in place a process, on 8 Let the point be made, lest it be missed in February this year when she announced the the fog of rhetoric from the opposition, who Palmer inquiry, whereby she knew or could do not want to condescend to the facts—or, reasonably have expected that Mr Palmer as Senator Evans rather preciously said, let would come back to her with a report that us not have the legalities here; and I can un- would expose nakedly, rawly, candidly, derstand, Senator Evans, why you are not bluntly, the errors being made in the depart- interested in the legalities—that there is not ment. How in God’s name is that a minister one word in the Palmer report that is a criti- running away from responsibility? How is cism of Senator Vanstone. That is not be- that a minister refusing to be answerable cause the terms of reference are too narrow. when she herself commissions an investiga- It is acknowledged that they are very wide. It tion and then puts it in the public arena, is not because Mr Palmer was not a tena- knowing that, by the very fact of doing so, cious and thorough investigator—because by she is making bullets for the opposition to common acclaim and reputation he is. It is shoot at her, as they have done in an unwor- not for any reason other than there was no thy and intellectually dishonest fashion this personal criticism of the minister to be of- afternoon? fered, because Senator Vanstone neither In a case where the impugned decisions knew nor could reasonably have been aware happened so low down the ministerial chain of the decisions made by junior officials in of command that the minister is not aware, the department. and could not reasonably be aware, of them, So this report was published, containing the first step in ministerial responsibility is to not a breath of criticism of Senator Vanstone. identify what the problem is. And, as I have The second thing Senator Vanstone did after said, by commissioning as searching an in- authorising its publication—and I acknowl- quiry as this country has ever seen into de- edge that it is a report critical of the culture partmental processes, and thereby opening of the department; we all know that—was to herself up to political criticism by those who apologise, along with the Prime Minister, to do not descend below the level of rhetoric, the people concerned, as they ought and as Senator Vanstone has certainly fulfilled the they did without any hesitancy. The third first of those requirements. thing Senator Vanstone did—and I think in But the second thing that ministerial re- terms of taking responsibility it was the most sponsibility means is that, when made aware important thing she could have done—was to by the report set in train by the minister of take responsibility for fixing the problems. what the problems are, you fix them. When She took responsibility for identifying them, Senator Vanstone received the Palmer report, she took responsibility for exhaustively and she did three things. First of all she released thoroughly investigating them, and she took it. That might seem to senators something responsibility for fixing them. that she ought to have done, but more com- The measures that the Palmer report rec- monly than not, as you know Mr Deputy ommended, which Senator Vanstone has President, in governments of both political moved swiftly to implement, include: the persuasions, when inquiries into departmen- establishment of a national verification and tal processes are made, they are not publicly advice unit within the department to improve

CHAMBER 100 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 the process of identifying individuals who Labor Party, that all that happened because cannot be positively identified; the creation Senator Vanstone, having been made aware of detention review manager positions in the of these mistakes, rolled up her sleeves and department to ensure constant revisiting of said, ‘Even though this might embarrass the individual cases; improvements to the mental government and it might make bullets for the health services at Baxter immigration deten- opposition to fire at us, let’s get to the bot- tion facility; additional non-compellable tom of these problems and let us fix them.’ power for the minister to specify alternative (Time expired) arrangements for a person’s detention, with Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (4.03 the result that there are now no children in pm)—The Senate is debating the need for immigration detention centres—a measure Senator Vanstone, as minister for immigra- that arose not merely from Palmer but from a tion, to accept ministerial responsibility for debate driven within the government parties; the serious and systemic failures of admini- the addition of non-compellable powers for stration at the department of immigration the minister acting personally to grant a visa that have caused such injustice and misery. It to a person in detention; revision of the re- has to be said that a lot so far has focused on moval pending bridging visas to broaden the Palmer report and the fact is that it did their application and allow more detainees to not have the broadest imaginable terms of be released; six-monthly reporting to the reference, as Senator Brandis might suggest. Ombudsman on persons in detention for two The terms of reference were actually ex- years or more; a legislative requirement time tremely narrow and the inquiry had limited frame of three months for the processing of powers. It is quite clear that people across refugee claims at primary stage and of three- the spectrum had been calling for a much monthly review intervals; and a requirement stronger and broader inquiry and are still on the department to complete all primary calling for it. To suggest that it was the most assessments of applications for permanent comprehensive investigation in history into protection visas from the existing caseload of the administration of a department is absurd. temporary protection visa holders by 31 Oc- Perhaps it is also a bit over the top to say that tober 2005. The minister has also announced this is the most incompetent and horrendous more detailed changes in the detention cen- display of ministerial and departmental fail- tres, particularly at Baxter and Villawood. ure since Federation, as I think one of the Mr Deputy President, you could have Labor speakers said at some stage this after- heard the cheap rhetoric from Senator Faulk- noon. ner, Senator O’Brien and Senator Evans— To pull it back to somewhere in the mid- the demeaning, humiliating, rhetorical flour- dle ground of reality, an extremely serious ishes we have heard from the opposition— failure has occurred in the immigration de- and been unaware that all of those decisions partment—not just in one case, two cases or were made as a result of the Palmer report. 200 cases. The failure is widespread, sys- You would have been unaware that the temic and comprehensive, and that is a seri- Palmer report contained not a breath of criti- ous problem for all of us, because this is a cism of Senator Vanstone. You would have key area of public policy. Despite the fact been unaware that this is as exhaustive a re- that I and the Democrats have been very view of departmental processes as exists in critical of this minister, the previous minister, Australia’s constitutional history. And you this government’s immigration policies and would have been unaware, listening to the the administration of the department, I do

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 101 accept that it is a very difficult area of public sonably know, I would say that, in some policy, but unless you have a minister who is cases, I accept that but I do not accept that it willing to front up and go on the front foot is true in all cases and I do not accept that it about these things—and to his credit, at least is true in a holistic sense. The immigration Minister Ruddock did that to some extent— department has quite deliberately put in then I think you do not even have a hope of place so many structures that people do not getting to first base. know and do not want to know—and the We have all this talk about a change of minister does not want to know. You cannot culture. I will not revisit the debate we had say that the minister should be absolved of earlier about disallowance, but the fact is, as responsibility for not knowing, when she Senator Evans said, that the system needs does not want to know. radical and urgent change. We cannot do that I have seen massive injustice. I categori- by shuffling a few people around and chang- cally guarantee to this Senate massive injus- ing the secretary—and, frankly, much as I tice and incompetence in decision making think the minister must bear more responsi- with regard to some people on Nauru. The bility, you cannot do that just by changing minister has not even gone to Nauru since the minister, because it is government policy she has been minister and says that it is not and the Migration Act that is driving this. I our problem, even though we put that system have to say that the Migration Act, in most of in place. There are a clear number of cases its problematic aspects, has been supported where the issues have been brought to the by the Labor Party. It has been the bipartisan attention of officials in the minister’s office policy of the two major parties to support and they have just flicked them back to the most of these things that have given public department. You cannot keep doing that time servants and ministers extraordinary powers, after time when there is such widespread as Mr Palmer described them. evidence of major problems and then beg to It is my view that while ever you have be excused by saying, ‘I didn’t know, so you public servants or a politician who has indi- can’t blame me.’ vidual, unappealable power to lock people up Once things get to this stage, you have to at their discretion, indefinitely, you will get be willing to take responsibility and you injustices. We have all of these systems of have to look at reforming the laws and the checks and balances that have developed policies that will inevitably lead to this injus- over a very long period of time—going back tice. That is a challenge for all of us, not just into our British legal heritage—to try to pro- the minister or the government. I hope that, tect against these sorts of injustices and even through the Senate inquiry that is under way, they fail from time to time. So what can we we can, in a constructive way across all par- do but expect that people will inevitably be ties, try to make the legislative and policy wrongfully detained or wrongfully deported, changes that are needed. (Time expired) when there is such power concentrated in Senator WONG (South Australia) (4.09 unaccountable public servants and in the pm)—The story of Senator Vanstone’s period minister, who has total discretion in a whole as Minister for Immigration and Multicul- range of areas? tural and Indigenous Affairs is a story of in- If you are looking at this issue from the competence. It is a story of incompetence point of view that the minister cannot be with sad and tragic consequences for people blamed because the minister could not rea- such as Vivian Solon, an Australian citizen

CHAMBER 102 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 wrongfully deported by the Department of questions about the serious failings in her Immigration and Multicultural and Indige- department? Have we seen her willing to nous Affairs; the five detainees who were answer questions competently and clearly? locked in the back of a van for a 10-hour No, we have not. We have seen a minister road trip without toilet breaks, food or water; who comes into question time, often late, and the children who were removed from the blustering and blundering her way through Stanmore Primary School and then wrong- question time—ducking and weaving, not fully detained. wanting to give the information and not But this is more than a story of an incom- wanting to answer the question. Instead of petent minister; it is also the story of a minis- answering the question, what do we get from ter who refuses to take responsibility for the the minister? We get a lot of vitriol, attacking incompetence that has occurred on her senators on this side, and we get sarcastic watch. Today we have had Senator Brandis jokes such as, ‘I’m hard of hearing today. I picking up some academic text and talking thought it was me, but I think it is you who is about the legal reason that all these mistakes hard of hearing because you haven’t heard are not the minister’s fault and she does not my answer.’ How many times did we hear have to take responsibility. That shows just that in the last two question times? We see how out of touch this government is. The her personally attacking senators on this side Australian people understand what responsi- so that she does not have to answer that bility means and they understand what they question and we see her, over and over again, want—that is, a minister who actually takes blaming everybody else instead of taking responsibility for the mistakes her depart- responsibility. Even today she had the gall to ment makes, including things such as deport- attack the Public Advocate in South Austra- ing an Australian citizen and not returning lia. her to Australia after they realised that she It appears that it is always someone else’s was an Australian citizen. It shows how out fault when it comes to Minister Vanstone and of touch this government is. it is never her responsibility, despite the fact What have we seen from Senator that she is the responsible minister. Unlike Vanstone? From the defence on the other Senator Brandis and those on the other side, side, you would think that she has been a we on this side think there is a principle of pillar of moral virtue in this process. Have ministerial accountability—accountability to we seen her come in here and make a minis- the parliament and accountability to the Aus- terial statement on the Palmer report? Have tralian people through the parliament. Unfor- we seen her come into this chamber, to tunately, we do not see that from Senator which she is responsible and through Vanstone. We do not see her come in here which—through this parliament—she is re- and demonstrate her accountability by being sponsible to the Australian people, and have able to clearly answer questions that are put the courage to debate the Palmer report, on serious issues by the opposition. make a ministerial statement and debate the What we see is a range of technical, facile, opposition and the minor parties in this legal defences. Amongst the most extraordi- chamber on the contents of that report? No nary is the one that appeared today in various we have not. papers, including the Courier-Mail, where it Have we seen the minister come in here in was reported that 201 people had been held question time willing to give answers to by the immigration department but then were found to be in Australia lawfully and 56 had

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 103 been held for more than three weeks. And partment level was needed. Of our own voli- now we find that the minister and her de- tion, not only did we call upon Mr Palmer— partment do not like the phrase ‘wrongful one the most credible individuals in Austra- detention’ and are now using the phrase ‘re- lia—to go and have a look at these processes leased not unlawful’—a bit more Orwellian and asked that the Palmer inquiry be released speak, a bit more language change, a bit on 8 August and but also the minister de- more ducking and weaving so that she does cided to extend that—Palmer plus. We are not have to take responsibility for wrongfully actually going to review all cases of people detaining 56 persons. ‘Wrongful detention’ is that have been released because they were out and ‘released not unlawful’ is in. In the found to be lawful or later became lawful. same article, Minister Vanstone is quoted as That is an extension—quite an honest, trans- saying that she and the department have been parent and accountable process from a leader practising open, transparent and good gov- who is determined to make sure that any of ernment. What a joke! (Time expired) these things that happened within the de- Senator SCULLION (Northern Territory) partment would not happen again. That is (4.14 pm)—I rise to speak on this matter of ministerial responsibility: responsible for the public importance and I have to touch on department, taking on board the issues and another matter of public importance. I al- challenges and making sure that they fix ways thought that this place had the very them. This is a government that is all about important role in informing Australians of fixing things. We are a government about the facts. I have to say that I have not heard reform and this matter is no different. too many facts from the other side. I think it After looking at over 200 cases, and these is a preposterous, personal attack on a leader are not cases of wrongful or unlawful deten- and minister who is credible, has transparent tion that some people on the other side have leadership and has always being accountable. suggested, this is a carefully crafted, highly I have watched very carefully through this confusing legal case. Perhaps I can just sim- whole process and I think the minister has plify it. When a policeman sees a young chap acted in the most appropriate manner and she walking down an alleyway with a television should be the envy of other governments. when a television has recently been stolen, Instead of criticising this side, Senator he is quite within his rights to say, ‘Excuse Ludwig, and laughing at that suggestion, let me, sir, I would like to question you about me remind you that the Australian people where you got the television.’ That is not judged you and you came a resounding sec- being unlawful; it is quite lawful. In the same ond. I think the Australian people have way, when someone has a reasonable suspi- judged and they continually have confidence cion that a person may be an unlawful citizen in this government and particularly this min- he may hold them until such time as he can ister. sort the facts out and make sure that that is Quite seriously, it is very clear that these the case or otherwise. It happens throughout are the facts before us: we have a set of what the globe, let alone throughout Australia. It is I would say are reasonably alarming circum- an ordinary process to establish whether or stances surrounding the Cornelia Rau matter; not someone has the bona fides to stand up to when they came to the attention of the gov- the supposition that they are putting. This is ernment and the minister, the government no mystery of law. Even a simple fisherman acknowledged that clearly a review of the like me can understand that. processes that led to the failure at that de-

CHAMBER 104 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

As to whether or not we are a government The minister recognises that she has a that is characterised by a minister who is not ministerial responsibility to bring in changes accountable, I cannot think of anything more on these issues. She has acted on them, she ridiculous. I know that Senator Brandis has acted very well and she has represented spoke about a number of issues under which the best interests of Australians, which is we would improve the circumstances. The what this government is about. She went on minister herself had decided, even before Mr to say, ‘We’ve obviously got to have some Palmer presented his report, to act to change changes.’ There is now a new team at the top a number of policies in a whole range of of DIMIA to implement the changes that ways to improve the impact of detention on have been recommended by the Palmer in- individuals. We made that decision even be- quiry. We have made sure that we not only fore the Palmer inquiry report came out, behave the facts and the bits and pieces of con- cause this is a minister who listened and tent but we also have the process right. We looked carefully at what was happening and put in a framework to ensure that all of these decided immediately not only to depend on recommendations can actually be imple- the very significant Palmer inquiry but also mented. We have the release of the frame- to go out, on her own cognisance, and do work for the way forward for the department, something about this. That is leadership, focusing on becoming more open and ac- transparency and credibility. countable. Remember those words—more There are initiatives like the establishment open and accountable—because that is what of the National Identity Verification and Ad- this government is about. The significant vice Unit, which of course deals with identi- change of this agenda is occurring against fying of individuals and issues—we have to the backdrop of very strong public support. make sure we get that right—and the crea- The public understand that there have been tion of detention review manager positions to some mistakes made. Quite genuinely this make sure that the department constantly government has said, ‘Look, this has been a revisits individual cases. We knew that was a mistake; this has been an error.’ On 14 Feb- bit of an issue so we immediately put some- ruary Prime Minister John Howard person- thing into place that would make sure that ally and publicly apologised to those two that was ameliorated. There have been im- individuals. provements to the mental health services at It is worth noting that it has been possible Baxter, and the Prime Minister announced for the government to significantly increase some changes that included additional non- the migrant intake over the past few years compelling power over the ministers. I have and it is a positive reflection of the admini- to say that it does not end there. There is stration of this entire program. I have to say such a comprehensive range of changes that that those on the other side should take note this minister brought to bear even before the of how it is done. What has been done here Palmer inquiry had been completed. Senator has been a government acting responsibly Brandis reminded us that the minister had and accountably in a transparent and credible announced changes including steps to bring manner. We should be lauding the efforts of down the razor wire from the detention cen- this wonderful minister who has brought tres, beginning with Villawood in Sydney. wonderful administration and great outcomes That was not even a part of the Palmer in- to so many new Australians. quiry. Senator Lundy—I can’t believe you said that with a straight face!

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 105

Senator SCULLION—We have some in- ernment will respect our institutions of de- terjections from the other side, Mr Acting mocracy or be arrogant with its increased Deputy President. What would their ap- numbers. One of the most important aspects proach have been? Do you think their ap- of our system of democracy is the concept of proach would have been completely trans- ministerial responsibility. An encyclopedia I parent in this manner? Do you think they consulted gave the following definition of would have immediately gone out and com- ministerial responsibility: missioned a report by one of the most credi- Ministerial responsibility or Individual minis- ble individuals in this country? Do you think terial responsibility is a constitutional convention they would have gone out and extended that in governments using the Westminster System report on their own volition? Do you think that a cabinet minister bears the ultimate respon- that would have happened? Sadly, I think sibility for the actions of their ministry. not. … … … Would they have said to the department, This responsibility means that if waste, corrup- ‘Go back and check all the other cases; we tion, or any other misbehaviour is found to have want you to make extra special effort to go occurred within a ministry, the minister is respon- back beyond what we had first thought and sible even if the minister had no knowledge of the checked every single case out there to make actions. sure that there is nothing else wrong’? Do … … … you think that is what would be happening If misdeeds are found to have occurred in a min- on the other side? I think not. They have a istry the minister is expected to resign. history of ducking and weaving on this issue. … … … I have to say I am offended—as I know The principle is considered essential as it is Senator Vanstone very well personally—by seen to guarantee that an elected official is an- the personal attacks on her about her appar- swerable for every single government decision. It ent lack of caring. I have been with her to is also important to motivate ministers to closely Indigenous communities; I have been with scrutinize the activities within their departments. her with to see migrants. She is someone The Prime Minister has turned the meaning who has a deep and passionate understanding of ministerial responsibility on its head. At a of the issues she is responsible for and, every press conference on 14 July, the Prime Min- day, really demonstrates what ministerial ister said: responsibility is all about. The Labor Party’s I indicated last weekend that Ministers should go ducking and weaving is in stark contrast. Our if they are directly responsible for significant coalition government, of course, is willing to failings, or mistakes or if their continued presence recognise where there are problems and de- in the Government is damaging to the Govern- cide what to do about that. It simply recog- ment. nises those problems, goes and fixes them: A journalist then asked the Prime Minister: transparent, accountable, credible govern- Didn’t Ministerial responsibility used to mean ment. that if something went seriously wrong on a Min- Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) ister’s watch it was the Minister’s responsibility? (4.23 pm)—The Australian Greens welcome To which the Prime Minister replied: this debate about ministerial responsibility Well different people have asserted different because it is a critical issue for this new Sen- things. I’ve given you my view of it and the view ate. The Australian people are watching this that has I think, been more consistently adopted new Senate very closely to see if this gov- over time.

CHAMBER 106 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

It certainly has been consistently adopted by massive failings and negligence of her de- this Prime Minister. Now that the govern- partment in the case of Vivian Solon. The ment has the numbers in the Senate it is quite minister should be doing everything she can willing to trash what the encyclopedia tells to ensure that Ms Solon is returned home as us is a longstanding and important conven- soon as possible and that all her needs are tion of our democracy. Mr Howard’s crite- provided for. The Minister’s arrogance and rion for ministerial responsibility is that min- failure affect real people. Right now, Vivian isters do not have to take responsibility for Solon is languishing in the Philippines, away their departments. The new criterion is that a from her two children. What the minister and minister will only be removed if they are the government could and should be doing is damaging the government. No longer do we giving clear instructions to the government have ministers serving the people of Austra- lawyers to agree to the reasonable terms put lia; they serve the government and the politi- forward by Ms Solon’s lawyers: guaranteed cal purposes of the Liberal Party of Austra- long-term care and arbitration for her case if lia. mediation fails. The minister has failed and The prioritising of the Liberal Party’s po- the minister should resign or be sacked. litical purposes extends beyond government The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ministers. The politicisation of the Public (Senator Chapman)—Order! The time for Service is such that public servants are now the discussion has expired. rewarded for failing the public and being BUSINESS scapegoats for this government. Bill Farmer, Rearrangement the former Secretary of the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indige- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT nous Affairs, was not punished or repri- (Senator Chapman)—I remind the Senate manded for his department’s failings—no, he that the standing orders provide for general was rewarded with an Order of Australia and business to be called on at this time. Before I a prestigious diplomatic post as the Ambas- call on general business, is leave granted for sador to Indonesia. documents to be tabled in accordance with items 15(a) and 15(d) on today’s order of Scapegoating and shirking responsibility business, except for the tabling of the presid- are the orders of the day under Minister ing officer’s and clerk’s conference report Vanstone and the Prime Minister. Minister and for a motion to be moved with respect to Vanstone has set up a system where it is hard committee memberships? to pin responsibility and it is easy to pass the buck. The minister blames her department. Leave granted. The secretaries blame junior officers. The DOCUMENTS department blames the private company that Responses to Senate Resolutions runs the detention centres. The detention The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT centre provider blames the subcontractors— (Senator Chapman)—I present a response and they all blame the contracts, the detain- from the Premier of Victoria (Mr Bracks) to ees, the advocates, the media and the voices a resolution of the Senate of 21 June 2005 of opposition. No-one is prepared to stand up concerning the Earth Charter. and take responsibility. The minister has the opportunity to take some responsibility and make up for the

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 107

Department of the Senate: Travelling Employment, Workplace Relations and Allowance Education References Committee–– The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT Appointed, as a participating member: (Senator Chapman)—I table documents Senator Brandis providing details of travelling allowance Environment, Communications, Informa- payments made by the Department of the tion Technology and the Arts References Senate to senators and members during the Committee–– period 1 July 2004 to 30 June 2005, and Appointed, as a participating member: travel expenditure for the Department of the Senator Siewert Senate during the period 1 July 2004 to Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport 30 June 2005. Legislation Committee–– AUDITOR-GENERAL’S REPORTS Appointed, as a participating member: Senator Brandis Report No. 6 of 2005-06 Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT References Committee–– (Senator Chapman)—In accordance with Appointed, as participating members: the provisions of the Auditor-General Act Senators Brandis, Milne and Siewert. 1997, I present the following report of the Question agreed to. Auditor-General: Report No. 6 of 2005-06— Performance Audit—Implementation of Job MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITY Network Employment Services Contract 3. Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (4.30 COMMITTEES pm)—I move: Membership That the Senate expresses its deep concern that the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT and Indigenous Affairs (Senator Vanstone) has (Senator Chapman)—The President has failed to take responsibility for the Department of received letters from party leaders seeking Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous variations to the membership of certain com- Affairs despite the ongoing revelations and rising mittees. financial and human cost of the portfolio mismanagement. Senator COONAN (New South Wales— Minister for Communications, Information What we have had up to now is a minister Technology and the Arts) (4.30 pm)—by who has been incapable of accepting respon- leave—I move: sibility, let alone taking responsibility for her actions in the immigration area. It is more That senators be discharged from and ap- than a case of simply saying, ‘I’m not re- pointed to committees as follows: sponsible.’ This is about accepting responsi- Employment, Workplace Relations and bility. We have to consider the litany of fail- Education Legislation Committee–– ures by the department. We can go through Appointed: Senator Crossin as a substitute the litany of the department’s failures and member to replace Senator George Camp- itemise cases like those of Cornelia Rau, bell for the committee’s inquiry into the provisions of the Higher Education Legis- Vivian Solon, GSL, the Hwang children and lation Amendment (Workplace Relations all the others. But we also have to add to Requirements) Bill 2005 them the range of committee reports about Appointed, as a participating member: the department that date back to the first Senator Brandis committee that I joined when I came to the Senate, the Legal and Constitutional Refer-

CHAMBER 108 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 ences Committee, and its report A sanctuary until we saw the gem from the current minis- under review. Then there was the Senate Se- ter when she described it as ‘old news’. I am lect Committee on Ministerial Discretion. certain that it was not old news to those peo- During that inquiry the department decided ple who were locked up in detention for 21- not to provide any information to the com- plus days. This is not old news, Minister, mittee. It just said, ‘We’re not going to assist because it is the first time that it has come you at all.’ out. Then there was the attempt by the Human This is another example of the extremist Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission cultural attitude of the minister and the Lib- to penetrate the department by saying, ‘Chil- eral Party. They think they can just detain dren should not be in detention,’ and the anyone off the street for more than 21 days government’s response at the time was to and not bat an eyelid. The Liberal Party is ignore it completely. We can then go to the out of touch with the rule of law and with Australian National Audit Office and ask community standards. That is who is out of what they have said about the department. touch. Senator Vanstone says the news that They had made a number of statements about the Liberal Party locked up 56 people for at the department, including in relation to con- least three weeks for no good reason is ‘old tracts part B, which dealt with the failings of news’. It may be old news, as I have said to GSL and how the department has been un- the minister; it may be old news to the minis- able to ensure close scrutiny of the contracts. ter’s staff or it may be old news to the de- You then come to the latest round of in- partment, but it is not old news to the Prime quiries and you still find the minister incapa- Minister or his office. It is not old news to ble of accepting responsibility and taking the us. course that she should take. Instead, we find We have been to estimates and getting the the minister hanging on by her nails, saying: information out of DIMIA and the minister is ‘I’m not going; I’m not going to leave this like pulling teeth slowly, painfully and usu- place. I’m not going to let myself slide to the ally only one at a time. What was missing chair behind me. I want to stay on the front was the department and the minister saying bench. I want to stay in charge of the de- up front, ‘Not only did the Cornelia Rau case partment. I’ll let my undersecretary and happen but so did Vivian Solon and, by the some of the other departmental officials go. way, we’ll provide a chronology of how it By the way, how many more do I have to let happened, what our responsibility was and go to keep me hanging on here?’ what we did about it.’ We had to use esti- It is unacceptable that the minister can mates to flush it out, and it was like pulling preside over this fiasco that she has inherited teeth. from Mr Ruddock and not take the blame Getting the facts out of this minister has and responsibility that goes with it. The min- been a hard row to hoe. It is clear now that ister described the latest outrage herself. She the Palmer inquiry that she set up was totally described how the government locked up 56 inadequate and unable to get to the bottom of people. Of course the phrase was used: the whole deal. What we find is that it did ‘They were released; not unlawful’. It not interview Minister Ruddock, his staff, the seemed impossible for the department, with current minister or her staff. It was not a full the minister’s concurrence, to come up with inquiry. What the minister was offered and more ways to describe fiascos and outrages what she could have bit the bullet on was a

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 109 royal commission. She could have taken that erence of the inquiry were structured by the path, which would have been the responsible minister, not by an independent royal com- thing for a minister thing to do. It has been mission which could then expand on them done before by this government and by us and look into other areas if need be. We find when we were in government. She should that Mr Palmer reported only on those terms have bitten the bullet and taken the right that were enumerated by the minister—to course. examine and make findings. But none of the Today we have seen the Commonwealth additional means afforded to royal commis- Ombudsman come out and claim he has all sions was afforded to Palmer. the powers of a royal commission. With due What have we now? We have another 201 respect to Professor McMillan, he is wrong. cases with the Ombudsman, and that report Section 5(2)(a) of the Ombudsman Act 1976 has yet to come. The way forward for the says that the Ombudsman is not authorised to minister is to accept responsibility and re- investigate action by a minister. It makes it sign. That is what the minister should do. clear that the Ombudsman is powerless to She should take it on the chin and say, ‘I investigate the minister and her office. need to step aside and let a clean broom into By contrast, the powers of a royal com- this place and into the department,’ to ensure mission are detailed in the Royal Commis- that not only the culture in the department sions Act 1902. Among those powers, penal- changes but also the culture at the top ties and consequences enumerated are: the changes. power to summon witnesses and take evi- What we have, unfortunately, is a case dence on oath—something Palmer never where the minister refuses to accept respon- had; a $1,000 fine or six months imprison- sibility. We have had Senator Brandis tell us ment for witnesses who fail to attend or pro- that ministerial responsibility does not in- duce documents—a power Palmer never had; clude taking responsibility for the fiasco that power to apply for search warrants, including has occurred. That is a neat way of describ- power to apply by telephone in urgent ing it. We have heard Senator Scullion also cases—a power Palmer never had; the ability attach himself to that argument. However, to ensure evidence given by a witness may the government also have the difficulty not be used against the witness in civil or wherein the department is administered by criminal proceedings; in other words, the the minister. The minister has to take respon- ability to provide protection—a power that sibility for the way the department has been Palmer never had; and a power to retain for administered and the way the ministerial se- as long as necessary or to copy documents or ries of instructions have been issued. If the other things produced in evidence—a power minister does not do that, who is to take re- that Palmer never had. And the list of the sponsibility? Perhaps you would like the powers that royal commissions have that the cleaner or the domestic—anyone other than Palmer inquiry never had goes on. The Om- the minister—to accept responsibility for the budsman does not have all of those powers, position she has put the department in. (Time either. That is clear from the case. expired) Since the Palmer inquiry was set up by an Senator SCULLION (Northern Territory) administrative action rather than under the (4.41 pm)—It is probably rare in this place Royal Commissions Act, it had, as I have that within the same hour you give pretty said, none of those powers. The terms of ref- much the same speech. But in view of this

CHAMBER 110 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 personal attack on a very fine minister— parent, the most credible and the most ac- which is using much of this Senate’s time, countable office in this place. not only during the discussion on matters of Senator Ludwig—Then why didn’t you public importance but now, with pretty much refer it there first? exactly the same issue being put forward—I Senator SCULLION—Let me go on. It is hope the Senate forgives me if I have to re- not just that we selected the Palmer inquiry; peat some of the issues in defence of not we have deliberately selected a suite of op- only this minister but also the government’s tions. The Palmer inquiry had different pow- absolutely excellent record on this matter. ers from those of the Ombudsman. There We need to deal with some facts about this was no suggestion that we could only go this matter. We have had all sorts of ridiculous far and that we had run out of power in this allegations from the other side. The govern- inquiry. It was quite a simple process. People ment and the minister did what I thought was looked into the facts. We looked into the cir- the most transparent, reasonable and credible cumstances surrounding the Cornelia Rau thing. She instantly demonstrated leadership case and we decided there needed to be an by saying: ‘I’m responsible for this depart- inquiry and we acknowledged that a review ment. That’s a bit out of line. So what I’m into these processes needed to be made—not going to do is have a transparent inquiry, in the sense of a criminal investigation but an headed by someone with the credibility of investigation by Mr Palmer, who would Mr Palmer.’ make positive recommendations that would Senator Ludwig—It was not transparent. assist good governance. That is what this I do not know what the witness list was. government is about, and that is why we Senator SCULLION—Senator Ludwig, couched the inquiry in that way. The inquiry you can interject as much as you like but you has come back with an excellent report by will not change the facts of the matter: this Mr Palmer. was a tremendously credible way to deal Of course, we did not stop there, Senator with it. It has a great deal of public support. Ludwig. Any sort of assertion that you are You may not accept Mr Palmer’s credibility, making that we are not credible or transpar- Senator Ludwig, but I can tell you that the ent is absolute and arrant nonsense. It flies in public of Australia do. the face of the facts of the matter—that we I must say, Senator Ludwig, that there was said, ‘Look, we’re going to go beyond that.’ some confusion in your previous comments. We mentioned the other 210 cases. We said: I know that you believe that the Ombudsman ‘For any case at all, if there is any suggestion is somehow confused about this matter. The of any unlawful detention, we want that Ombudsman, when he makes the statement looked into. We want them added to the list.’ that he has powers that are similar to those of That is the sort of leadership, accountability a royal commission, has obviously got it and ministerial responsibility that I am very completely wrong! What would an Om- proud of in this minister. I think she has done budsman know about an inquiry? You are an outstanding job. It is very difficult to sit really drawing a long bow here, and we need on this side and have people decide it is so to show a little bit more respect to people. depressing on that side that they need to find The office of the Ombudsman does not only something to focus on. They say: ‘What are inquire when the government wants it to; the we going to do on Thursday afternoon? office of the Ombudsman is the most trans- We’ve got absolutely nothing else going for

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 111 us; we’ll pick on the minister.’ I can tell you she is working with the Western Australian, today that you have got the wrong minister. Northern Territory and South Australian In fact, you could pick on any one of them governments to ensure that we have a coor- and you are not going to get there, because dinated response to that issue. She is on the they are excellent performers and they have front foot, showing leadership, showing ac- done an excellent job. If you read the Palmer countability and showing credibility. That is inquiry, Senator Ludwig, you will understand what this minister is about and that is what that that has been the case. this government is about. Much has been made of this issue of law- We have referred the detention matter to ful entanglement and that it is all very diffi- the Ombudsman, and that is the action of a cult. As I explained a little earlier in this government that accepts responsibility and is place, the issue concerning the 200 or so going to fix this. When the Prime Minister, people who we want to ensure have been on 14 July, recognised that there had been treated appropriately—and we will take ac- mischief done—and they were terrible cir- tion when we get that part of the report—is cumstances that Cornelia Rau and Vivian whether they have apparently been detained Solon found themselves in—the Prime Min- unlawfully, and we have gone to great ister apologised. He said, ‘We’re going to lengths to ensure that the Australian public make changes’—and we made changes. We are not misled on this matter. As I have said already have made changes, and there are previously in this place, it is quite reasonable more on the way. Change is part of a reform to expect a police officer or any other person government, and this government is abso- with powers to detain someone until such lutely committed to ensuring that we do ex- time as their bona fides have been estab- pedite our ministerial responsibilities in a lished. It is just a basic principle about com- proper, correct and transparent way. pliance and enforcement. We have it in Fish- This debate today has been another exam- eries, we have it in Family and Community ple of how those on the other side are so Services, we have it in the Australian Federal blinded by their internal rhetoric and depres- Police and we have it in the state and terri- sion that they cannot see that this is an ex- tory police. It is just an ordinary, average emplary government and an exemplary min- thing, and so any scaremongering about a ister who has done a fantastic job. We should very sophisticated and well-educated Austra- not be sitting here, along with those people lian public is not going to cut it—not here who are listening to the proceedings today, and not with the public. That is why there is and hearing the sort of rhetoric we have had so much support from the public for this from the other side—the bitching and the government. carping—about somebody who has done an We talk about the review and what is hap- absolutely outstanding job, not only for peo- pening. We do not need people to say: ple in detention but also for all Australians. ‘You’ve done the review. What’s going to We continue to look at a considerable happen next?’ We have already started the amount of evidence that we are making process of reform. That process has of course changes—reasonable and responsible been instigated by a minister that is keen to changes. We have established a national veri- be on the front foot on these issues. She has fication advice system within the depart- been on the front foot about petrol sniffing. I ment, we have created the detention review was delighted the other day—and we have manager positions and we have improved had the debate in the chamber—to hear that

CHAMBER 112 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 mental health services in the Baxter deten- really is in stark contrast to the actions of this tion facility. The Prime Minister also an- coalition government, which is willing to nounced some changes, including an addi- recognise where the problems are and to do tional non-compellable power for the minis- something about them. ter to specify alternative arrangements. That Senator KIRK (South Australia) (4.51 is why we do not have any children in deten- pm)—I rise to speak in relation to the motion tion. It does not happen at the flick of a fin- moved by Senator Ludwig, to focus attention ger; it needs good administration, good lead- on what we have been discussing here this ership and exercising correctly your ministe- afternoon in the Senate; namely, the failures rial responsibility. by Senator Vanstone to take responsibility We have also established an additional for what has gone on in her department—the non-compellable power for the minister to incompetence that we have all witnessed act personally to grant a visa to someone over the last few months. Today, I wish to who is already in detention, we have revised focus my words on the findings of the and removed the removal pending bridging Palmer report, which has been mentioned by visas to broaden the application to allow a number of speakers this afternoon. We more detainees to be released, we have six- know that Mr Palmer was given terms of monthly reporting to the Ombudsman on reference to report on the circumstances of persons in detention for two years or more— the detention of the Australian citizen Corne- and the list goes on. It is a list that I am parlia Rau. I have spoken about this on numer- ticularly proud of—and to be a member of a ous occasions. Then of course his terms of government that is a reformist government reference were extended so as to include re- and that can respond not only swiftly and porting on the deportation to the Philippines transparently, both through the Palmer in- of another Australian citizen, Vivian Alvarez quiry and the Ombudsman, but in a way that Solon. makes some real changes. Mr Palmer’s report was given to Senator In his dissertation earlier, Senator Ludwig Vanstone on 6 July, and it was released pub- asked: ‘What are we going to do about the licly on 14 July. Those of us who have con- culture?’ I can tell you what we are doing sidered the report know that it was highly about the culture. We have a new team at the critical of the Department of Immigration top of DIMIA. They are implementing and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, changes that have been recommended by Mr highlighting systemic departmental and ad- Palmer. They are on the job now, Senator ministrative failures and the need for a com- Ludwig. The new team are already working plete cultural overhaul. Mr Palmer’s report to implement those changes as we sit here slams the culture of cover-up and denial that today. There is no pontificating on this: the is so prevalent in DIMIA and also criticises job is getting done. Ministerial responsibil- the department for, to use his words, ‘devel- ity—out there, getting things done. Action— oping policy, procedures and enabling struc- that is what this government is about. It is tures on the run’. about reform and action. We have released a How has this government reacted to this framework and a way forward for the de- damning report? Predictably, Senator partment. There are people on the other side Vanstone, the minister, has been largely si- who criticise those changes. The ducking and lent. Her big fix was simply to shift a few weaving that happened in previous Labor deckchairs, transferring former departmental governments, I have to say, Senator Ludwig,

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 113 head, Bill Farmer, to an ambassadorship to are also worried that the Palmer report will Indonesia and some of the deputies in the simply allow DIMIA to make cosmetic department to other Public Service jobs out- changes and avoid the complete overhaul side of DIMIA. As we know, Mr Farmer was that is required. Looking a bit more closely the secretary of the department during the at Mr Palmer’s report, I will start with find- Tampa incident. Despite this, despite what ing No. 10 on page 14, which says: can only be described as his appalling record During Ms Rau’s detention— over many years, he was given a promotion bearing in mind, of course, that she was an and made Ambassador to Indonesia. Australian citizen— What has the Prime Minister done in rela- the DIMIA management approach to the com- tion to this? He has refused to criticise Sena- plexities of implementing immigration detention tor Vanstone, and also he has refused to lay policy appeared to be ‘process rich’ and ‘out- any blame at the feet of the former minister, comes poor’, with the predominant, and often Mr Ruddock, who, of course, was the immi- sole, emphasis being on the achievement of quan- gration minister at the time that Vivian Alva- titative yardsticks rather than qualitative perform- rez was deported. Mr Ruddock, too, must ance. The organisational structure and arrange- come forward and accept some responsibil- ments fail to deliver the outcomes required by the ity. Not surprisingly, Ministers Vanstone and Government in a way that is firm but fair and Ruddock have not accepted any of the respects human dignity. blame, and the Prime Minister continues to Pretty damning, I would say. In the report, claim that he has full confidence in the min- Mr Palmer also says: ister and also in Global Solutions Ltd, which There is a serious cultural problem within are also criticised significantly by Mr Palmer DIMIA’s compliance and detention areas: urgent in his report. Yet, despite this, they are still reform is necessary. managing a DIMIA contract worth $90 mil- This is the reason for the things that I am lion a year. calling on the government to do today. Mr Today I am calling on the government to Palmer describes DIMIA as operating in a do four things: firstly, to set up a royal com- culture that is ‘overly self-protective and mission into immigration failures in this defensive, a culture largely unwilling to chal- country; secondly, for Senator Vanstone to lenge organisational norms or to engage in accept responsibility for the failures of her genuine self-criticism or analysis’. own department and to step down as minis- I could go on about the findings of Mr ter; thirdly, for Mr Ruddock to make a public Palmer, but I will read just a few more statement apologising and accepting respon- words. He says: sibility for the many debacles that happened Within the DIMIA immigration detention func- on his watch; and, fourthly, for a complete tion there is clear evidence of an ‘assumption overhaul of the culture, policies and admini- culture’—sometimes bordering on denial—that stration of DIMIA, including the sacking of generally allows matters to go unquestioned all top level managers in the immigration when, on any examination, a number of the as- compliance and detention areas. sumptions are flawed. Labor’s concern is that the government What does the minister say about this? Today has not given any guarantees that there will in question time she said that it is a ‘can-do be an end to the mistreatment of asylum department’. This is clearly not the finding of seekers in Australia’s detention centres. We Mr Palmer. Mr Palmer goes on to say:

CHAMBER 114 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

Such perspectives reflect a culture of denial and ommendations, and we very much look for- self-justification that the Inquiry found to be at ward to seeing them implemented. the heart of the problem. Rigid, narrow thinking We know that there are more than simply stymies initiative and limits the ability to deal successfully with new and complex situations. A two cases that have been investigated by Mr wider, questioning and enabling culture is re- Palmer. We know that there are many more. quired. These have been mentioned here in the The Palmer report makes a large number of chamber today. On many occasions, we— detailed recommendations, but time does not and I in particular—have spoken out about permit me to touch on all of them. However, keeping children in detention. Fortunately, one of his key findings is on page 172, and it now that policy has changed, and not before states: ‘Reform must come from the top’. Mr time. But there are still outrageous examples Palmer does not spell out that the minister of immigration policy being used in an in- and top level management must go, but this humane and uncaring manner. Today we is what Labor believe must happen. heard about the two children who were taken from their primary school classrooms and Mr Palmer’s recommendations also in- wrongly detained in Villawood for four clude the need for adequate staff training and months. I call on the government to set up a better recruitment processes, including giv- royal commission. I call on Mr Ruddock, ing more emphasis to recruiting staff with Senator Vanstone and Prime Minister How- health and welfare skills rather than simply ard to accept responsibility for the many security backgrounds. I want to make it very DIMIA stuff-ups and make a public apology. clear here that neither I nor the Labor oppo- It is not nearly enough to shunt Bill Farmer sition have any criticisms of Mr Palmer him- off to Indonesia and reshuffle a few deputies. self. We believe that his inquiry was as ex- It is time for a complete overhaul of DIMIA, tensive as it could possibly have been, given starting from the top. Senator Vanstone, it is the limited terms of reference that he was time to go. given by the government. Debate interrupted. What we have highlighted here today is that DIMIA really is a shambles. It needs a FIRST SPEECH major overhaul. I congratulate Mr Palmer on The PRESIDENT—Before I call Senator his thorough report, but this very limited in- Nash, I remind honourable senators that this quiry does not give us or the Australian peo- is her first speech. I therefore ask that the ple any assurances that there will be an end usual courtesies be extended to her. to mistakes and mistreatment of asylum Senator NASH (New South Wales) (5.01 seekers and Australian citizens by this gov- pm)—Thank you, Mr President. I am in- ernment. We know that at least another 200 credibly humbled and honoured to take up cases are being investigated, but how many my position as a Nationals senator for New more are there that have not yet come to South Wales. The role of a senator is one of light? As I said, some of Mr Palmer’s rec- great responsibility. To serve the people of ommendations were directly aimed at creat- this great country is a privilege, and I am ing a more humane detention environment, determined to fulfil the role to the best of my including that detainees be able to make ability. We are incredibly fortunate to live in regular trips outside to engage with the Australia—a land of peace; a land of democ- community. We welcome all of these rec- racy; a land of beauty; a land of opportunity; and a land where hope, determination and

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 115 hard work mean that we can shape our future the philosophical history of many other na- and build the paths on which we want to tions—nations that were home to the likes of walk, both as individuals and as a people. Aristotle, Plato and Descartes. Australia is a Australia is a nation that recognises its place that has the excitement and opportunity place in the world. As Australians, we recog- that being a young and fledgling society nise our responsibility to contribute to im- brings. A young society, I believe, should proving circumstances in the world. We do encourage the development of ideas, phi- not shrink from that responsibility. It often losophy and vision from everyone in the takes great courage to stand up as individu- community. als, as it takes great courage for us to stand My role as a senator for The Nationals is up as a nation for the things in which we be- as a champion of the bush. While I represent lieve—democracy; the freedom of the indi- the people of New South Wales, my focus vidual; the right to free speech; the right to will be on those who live outside our major live without fear; the opportunity to pursue cities—those people in our rural and regional those ideals in which we believe without fear communities, whose set of circumstances or favour; and the right to live together in and lifestyle are often markedly different happiness, harmony and safety. We should from those who live in our urban areas. My never forget how fortunate we are to live in role is to be an advocate for them and to en- this wonderful country of ours and how for- sure that we bridge the divide that we so of- tunate we are that we call ourselves Austra- ten see between city and country. Make no lians. mistake: I am not one who sees the negatives Australia is a nation of great economic in our rural and regional communities. I fo- strength and stability. I applaud the coalition cus on the positives—the many great and government for delivering a strong and dy- abiding things that combine to make those namic economy for all Australians. But for communities such wonderful places to live. this nation to reach its full potential, I believe But we need to recognise the potential social we must ensure we are a nation that encour- dislocation that may occur if we allow the ages intellectual growth and rigour. We ap- divide between city and country to become a plaud economic success in this nation, but chasm. we also need to mature in our capacity to We are fortunate to be blessed with a na- applaud intellectual achievement. Without tion of stability. Our society is multicultural intellectual contribution and respect for that in nature. Although that sometimes brings contribution, I do not believe we can reach complex challenges, I believe that we are a our real potential. Economic prosperity is the people who in the main are imbued with the core of Australia’s growth. Ensuring intellec- essence of what it is to be Australian. We tual prosperity will allow our country to must appreciate the stability of this country grow and develop even further. as we compare ourselves with those coun- Australia is a young nation. In many ways tries around the world that are less fortunate. we are a blank page on which we can write We cannot allow the peace and stability of our own future. When creating that future, let our nation to be eroded by the tearing of the us all be optimistic, ambitious and prepared fabric of our society. to take risks. I believe we must ensure that In 1999 the former Nationals leader and those who have vision for this nation are al- Deputy Prime Minister, John Anderson, lowed to prosper and grow. We do not have

CHAMBER 116 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 talked about the possibility of Australia be- export about $25½ billion a year worth of coming two nations. He said: farm products that contribute significantly to The sense of alienation, of being left behind, of our strong economic growth. The farm sector no longer being recognised and respected for the itself accounts for 3.2 per cent of Australia’s contribution to the nation being made, is deep and GDP but its true importance becomes clear palpable in much of rural and regional Australia when you include the industries that support today. agriculture and the industries that depend on While there are areas and industries that are doing it. The farm sector supports 1.6 million jobs, very well, there are many that are not. or 17 per cent of the labour force. And, Mr This issue must be addressed by all of us who President, 781,000 of those jobs are in our collectively make up Australia, if we are to be a major cities. Many of the men and women whole nation, because we can and must do every- who work in cafes and restaurants, the thing we can to draw alongside those facing great truckies and the waterside workers and the challenge. hospitality workers in the bars, clubs and Although those comments were made six pubs across Australia owe their jobs to the years ago, they still hold true today. As a agricultural sector—a sector that produces wife, mother and farmer from a rural area many of the things that people in the city and as a senator for The Nationals, I am con- take for granted. cerned about the divide between city and John Anderson was right to raise his con- country. cerns about the divide between city and Over the past decades, rural Australia has country. We need to ensure that the imbal- been affected by a revolution in technology, ance is recognised and addressed, and gov- in much the same way, it must be said, that ernment has a role to play in ensuring that the Industrial Revolution affected British that happens. This is not to advocate a hand- society. The shift we have seen away from out mentality for rural and regional commu- dependence on manual labour, with advances nities—far from it. I am advocating policies in technology, has resulted in a significant that ensure that there is fair and equitable demographic change in our regions. The opportunity for all Australians regardless of population drift away from our smaller where we live. As legislators, we must al- towns has impacted greatly on our rural ways be aware of the consequences of our communities, while our coastal communities actions, of how the decisions we make affect feel the pressure of booming populations. the 20 million people who live in this nation. That population decline has changed the bal- As Atticus says in To Kill a Mockingbird: ance in our rural communities, and the criti- If you can learn a simple trick Scout, you’ll get cal mass needed for the sustainable delivery along a lot better with all kinds of folks. You of services and infrastructure has ceased to never really understand a person until you con- exist in many areas. I believe the challenge sider things from his point of view—until you for our communities and government is to climb into his skin and walk around in it. work together and find opportunity in We must be able to ‘put ourselves in another change. man’s skin’ to ensure we make decisions in Mr President, we should never underesti- the best interests of those we represent. mate the importance of rural society to the The constituency that The Nationals stability of Australia. Primary production represents has changed dramatically over the creates real wealth for this nation. We feed years. We represent those seven million peo- the nation. We clothe the nation. And we ple outside our capital cities: people from the

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 117 coast, regional towns, and rural and remote not have the wonderful support of my chil- parts of this great nation—small business dren’s grandparents, Joy Morton and Rob people, workers, battlers and achievers who and Dorothy Nash. are all under the wing of The Nationals be- Mr President, there is no doubt that the is- cause we deliver them a strong voice in this sue of health is a priority for people in our building. We are the only party in the federal rural and regional communities, indeed for parliament that exists solely to champion the people right across Australia. Ensuring we cause of rural and regional people. have enough health professionals in our re- It is important to note that it is The Na- gions is an ongoing challenge and one we tionals who represent the poorest electorates must continue to address. Encouraging rural in the country. It is often those communities students to attend university to study not who need the greatest support, and The Na- only medicine but also other health vocations tionals make no apology for fighting as hard is something we must continue to do. And it as we possibly can for them and making de- is important that we recognise that general cisions accordingly. I will never be distracted practitioners in rural areas are actually per- by city interests, and I will be completely forming a specialised form of medicine in focused on having the best interests of our itself, and we need to make policy reflecting rural and regional communities at heart. that. Mr President, there are many issues that I would like to take this opportunity to affect the lives of those in our rural and re- raise the issue of Indigenous health and the gional communities. As a wife and mother in health related problems that we see in those a regional community who has spent time in communities. The life expectancy for In- the work force, I am keenly aware of how digenous people is reported as 56 years for difficult it can be to strike a balance when males and 63 years for females, compared to you are a working family. We see, in many 76 years and 82 years for Australian males instances these days, families where both and females generally. To say that another parents are working and trying to juggle the way, an Aboriginal boy born today has only a competing demands of work and family. 45 per cent chance of living to age 65 and an That juggle can be particularly difficult in Aboriginal girl a 54 per cent chance. Despite the regions, where families are often affected the enormous gains in medical expertise of by the tyranny of distance and a lack of ser- the last 20 years, their health remains at an vices. We need to address issues like child unacceptable level. Regardless of our back- care availability, in-home care for children, ground, we are all entitled in this nation to the provision of adequate medical services the best health outcomes possible. and education facilities, flexible workplaces Mr President, I am acutely aware of the and a recognition of the changing nature of lack of support services provided for those society—all of which will contribute to get- who suffer mental illness and also the diffi- ting the balance right between work and fam- culties faced by their families and carers. ily. There is not enough support in country areas I would also like to take the opportunity to for people suffering from social and eco- acknowledge the increasing role that grand- nomic stresses, and this can in turn lead to parents play in the lives of their grandchil- mental health illness and problems. There are dren, and certainly I would have found my fewer mental health services being provided role in politics much more difficult if I did in the regions as compared to the cities, and

CHAMBER 118 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 we need to address this. There needs to be it but actively embrace it. In the United greater acknowledgement of the problems States alone, last year 13 billion litres of being faced in this area and the effects on ethanol was used. The list of countries using people and families and indeed whole com- ethanol is ever growing, including the US, munities. The high level of unresolved men- Brazil, Thailand, the Philippines, India, tal health issues is unacceptable and we need China, Japan, Colombia and the EU. Gov- to accept that there are significant problems ernments in all of those nations have recog- and look to find some solutions. nised the importance of this industry. Austra- As a champion of the bush I will always lia is lagging behind, and it is not good seek to find ways to improve the viability of enough. our rural communities. One such way is the I would like to acknowledge the support development of a sustainable domestic bio- that The Nationals leader, Mark Vaile, has fuels industry. For many years I have been, shown for this innovative industry for many and I will continue to be, a passionate advo- years and congratulate him for his vision cate for a domestic ethanol industry. There is with regard to the development of the biofuel no doubt that the development of an ethanol industry. To date, the four major oil compa- industry would create jobs and opportunities nies have done very little to embrace the use in our regions. I will do all I can to support of ethanol, to the detriment of this nation. I industries that will deliver real benefits to believe the time has come, for the benefit of rural and regional Australia. An ethanol in- all Australians, for a mandatory target to be dustry would provide significant environ- put in place to ensure that the 2010 biofuels mental and health benefits and would reduce target is met. our reliance on fossil fuel. It would give There is no doubt that the issue of tele- grain and sugar farmers another market, and communications is a vital one not only for it would develop business opportunities in our rural and regional communities but for our regions. all Australians. Earlier this year I chaired The The government currently has in place a Nationals Page Research Centre’s inquiry policy target of 350 million litres of biofuel into regional telecommunications. I would production by 2010. The effect of vehicle like to acknowledge Troy Whitford, the cen- emissions, particularly in our cities, cannot tre’s executive director, for the comprehen- be ignored. Given that the introduction of sive work he did in preparing the report. I ethanol into our fuel mix would lower vehi- believe the telecommunications package put cle emission pollutants, it stands to reason forward yesterday by the government ad- that it is simply commonsense that, for the dresses those issues of competition, service improved health of Australians, we as legis- delivery and infrastructure funding that the lators support the development of an ethanol Page Research Centre identified earlier this industry in this nation. Indeed, the AMA re- year. One of the most important aspects of cently put forward their view to the Prime the package is the requirement for opera- Minister’s Biofuels Taskforce that they tional separation of Telstra, which will allow strongly support the use of ethanol in our greater transparency and competition and fuel mix as part of the solution to improving will ultimately deliver better services to the the health outcomes of Australians. bush. Many countries around the world pursue In spite of what some might say, just say- the use of ethanol—indeed, they not only use ing, ‘Don’t sell Telstra,’ or ‘Do sell Telstra,’

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 119 will not fix services in the bush. What will who are not just wonderful children; they are fix services is ensuring competition, ensuring my great mates. Finally, to my husband, that business can invest in telecommunica- David, whose unfailing support and belief in tions in the regions and ensuring that there is me has made it possible for me to walk the ongoing government funding to assist in the path of political life: thank you so very, very event of market failure. We need to ensure much. that a solid platform is in place to deliver the Australia’s economic strength not only technology that will take us into the future. enables us to take our place on the world The Copper Age was 5,300 years ago, and stage as a strong and viable nation; it is what that is where copper belongs. We need to enables government to deliver for those who embrace optic fibre, wireless and satellite so need support. Without a strong productive that we have the right mix of infrastructure sector in this nation, there is no capacity for to take us into the future. government to deliver the necessary health, The Nationals led the debate on the need education and social requirements of our for comparable levels of telecommunications society. It is quite a moment to stand here services, pricing and infrastructure to be pro- and deliver my first speech. I am incredibly vided across the country. Through the hard proud to be in this place, and I am committed work of The Nationals, especially Mark to doing all I can in my role as a senator to Vaile, and John Anderson before him, we ensure a strong and prosperous future for our have again delivered for rural and regional rural and regional communities—indeed, a communities through the $3.1 billion re- strong and prosperous future for all Austra- gional telecommunications plan announced lians. yesterday. FIRST SPEECH There are so many people I would like to The PRESIDENT—Before I call Senator thank, but there just is not time to thank them Wortley, I remind honourable senators that all. They know who they are, those people this is her first speech. I therefore ask that who are so special and who have helped me the usual courtesies be extended to her. so much on my political journey. There are a Senator WORTLEY (South Australia) few people, though, I would especially like (5.25 pm)—Growing up in Adelaide’s north- to thank. Kay Martin, Kel Harpley, Ian ern suburbs in the 1960s and 1970s, I could McColl and Owen Parker, I thank you all so not have imagined that one day I would much for your belief in me and your unwav- stand in this chamber as a representative of ering support. Ian Armstrong, thank you for the Australian Labor Party, elected by the your wise and very honest advice and your people of South Australia to the Australian friendship for many years now. I cannot let Senate. It is an honour, and one that I will the moment pass without acknowledging the treat with the greatest respect. role you are playing in making the road over the Blue Mountains in New South Wales a South Australia was the first state to give reality. You have my total support for that. women the right to vote in state parliament, To two people I would not be here without, in 1895, and, along with Western Australia in Michael Priebe and Kris Henderson: what a 1901, the right to vote in a federal election. road we have travelled. Thank you both so Today I stand with my Labor colleagues much. I would also like to thank my mother, South Australian senators Annette Hurley, Joy, who is an inspiration, my sisters, Sara Penny Wong, Linda Kirk and Anne McEwen and Trudy, and my boys, Will and Henry, as, together with Democrat Senator Natasha

CHAMBER 120 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

Stott Despoja and Liberal senators Jeannie government, our society or our own commu- Ferris and Amanda Vanstone, South Australia nity. It was not long before I learnt about the becomes the first state to have a majority of injustices in our world: people starving in women in one parliament in the Senate. In famine stricken countries; people persecuted this, the 41st Parliament of Australia, eight of for their beliefs and the colour of their skin; the 12 South Australian senators are women. people in despair suffering from the tragedies We have indeed come a long way since the of wars that should never have been fought; passing of the Commonwealth Franchise Act people having returned from wars, all but in 1902, when Australia became the first forgotten; people, including young children, country in the world to give women the right detained behind barbed wire fences; people to vote and to stand for federal parliament. discriminated against because of cultural However, it was another 41 years before the differences, gender differences, sexual pref- first woman was to be elected. erences and physical differences; and people Unfortunately, it was not until 1962 that in our community battling to have their cul- Australia bestowed the same rights on all of ture recognised and valued, make ends meet, our Indigenous men and women. Today I pay the bills, put food on the table and keep a acknowledge the traditional owners of this roof over their head. How the innocence of land where we stand, the Ngunnawal people, childhood quietly fades away. and I pay tribute to all Indigenous people of Along with my sisters and brothers I at- Australia. For the tragedy suffered by them tended the local state primary school, where and their ancestors I am truly sorry, as are there was a diversity of cultural back- the 55,000 people with whom I marched in grounds. From here, we went on to the local Adelaide on that long weekend in June 2000. state high school, at the completion of which More than 240,000 people around Australia I benefited from the Whitlam government’s walked for reconciliation with our Aboriginal policy to broaden access to the tertiary edu- and Torres Strait Islander people. It is a cation system. The Whitlam Labor govern- shame that reconciliation has not progressed ment’s abolition of tuition fees and the intro- as it could have, and we now know that as a duction of the means-tested tertiary educa- nation it will not reflect kindly on us in the tion scheme enabled many in our community history books. The problems facing our In- to access higher education. The reduction of digenous people are generational, and the the financial disincentives on students recog- sorrow immense. nised the importance of education for all for As a young girl living in the working- the future growth of Australia as an economy class northern suburbs of Adelaide, I was not and as a society, and it was a system by aware of the suffering of our own Indigenous which many in this chamber benefited. It is a people. I thought life was pretty good. I can- long way from today’s full-fee cost of up to not remember ever thinking that some had $65,000 for an education degree, $114,000 more rights than others or that the colour of for a law degree and $208,000 for a degree your skin could determine your value in so- in medicine. Access to education should be ciety, because I was living in a community for all, not just the wealthy. Without the ini- where everyone was born equal. After all, we tiatives of the Whitlam Labor government, had these feelings expressed when our parish tertiary education would have been beyond priest came to dinner every second Friday my reach as, coming from a family of six night. We had no reason to doubt that his children, we just would not have been able to words were not reflected in the actions of our afford it.

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 121

Education really is a window to the world. I had long believed in the importance of Through education comes knowledge and literacy levels being a barrier to opportunity opportunity, and all people should have the for many, particularly for those in disadvan- opportunity to access good quality education taged groups. With this as catalyst, I applied at all levels—as children, as youth and as for, and was successful in being granted, a adults—to enable them to develop and fully special secondment by the education depart- realise their potential throughout their life- ment to the Advertiser, the new Murdoch time. It is for these reasons I chose a career acquired South Australia daily newspaper. as a teacher, where I thought I could make a Newspapers were concerned that with new difference, where I could impact in a positive technology children would stop reading and way on the lives of others. So, at the age of rely only on visual and audio news presenta- 20, I began my teaching career and became a tions. They wanted to secure newspaper member of the South Australian Institute of readers for the future. The education depart- Teachers, now known as the Australian Edu- ment was concerned about literacy levels in cation Union. I soon learnt that teachers our schools, particularly through the high commit to their students in providing the best school years, and saw newspapers as an adult education possible, often against an adverse means of getting our young people in schools background of social, physical and time ob- to read as well as keeping them informed stacles. It was my view that, in facing the about what was going on in the world and reality of where and who we are, our place in up-to-date with media education. the world and what we believe in, we are With the support of newspaper editors and able to gather round us those people who the department, I developed a number of share our ideals and together work towards a education initiatives targeting those in pri- common goal. For me, that was to work to- mary school through to university years. In wards achieving a society where there is jus- the evenings I attended the University of tice, fairness and equity; a just and tolerant South Australia, where I completed a Bache- society which protects the rights and free- lor of Education majoring in communication doms of all. studies. As my role in the media developed, I For these reasons, at the age of 21 I joined resigned from the education department, was the Australian Labor Party. I was elected a employed by the Advertiser and joined the sub-branch delegate to the ALP state conven- Australian Journalists Association, which tion, enrolled in the newly credited labour now forms part of the Media, Entertainment studies course at Adelaide College of Ad- and Arts Alliance. As a member of the house vanced Education, became the teachers un- committee I became involved in issues af- ion delegate at my school and was elected to fecting our daily working lives, including the the teachers delegation of the United Trades fight against News Ltd’s introduction of the and Labour Council. Seven years on, sitting controversial non-union contracts. With en- in the staff room of an Adelaide north- couragement from my journalist colleagues eastern suburbs school, I opened my letter of and the leadership of the union, I filled the transfer from the state education department journalist industrial officer vacancy in the only to be notified that my new appointment South Australian and Northern Territory would be at the very same state primary branch of the alliance. Within a couple of school I had attended as child. I had gone years I was elected as the branch assistant full circle; maybe it was time for a career secretary and then branch secretary of the change. union, where I worked representing the pro-

CHAMBER 122 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 fessional and industrial interests of my of the funding adequacy and efficiency of the members until I was elected last year as a ABC must not be a wasted opportunity to Labor senator for South Australia. This is make things right. With the exception of Fri- just a glimpse of the experiences that I bring day nights, weeknight locally produced and with me to this chamber. presented current affairs programs have dis- Now, in my new position, I continue to appeared. In some regional areas, locally acknowledge the important role of a diverse produced radio bulletins have been dropped. media in a healthy democracy. The media, as In some major cities, locally produced week- the fourth estate, has many responsibilities— end radio news after 1 pm has been dropped the responsibility to report, to question, to and replaced by a national bulletin. The end scrutinise and to investigate. Quality journal- result is reduced local coverage and content. ism is vital to preserve and enhance the val- The Australian content obligations cur- ues of democracy. In a parliament where the rently in place for commercial television sta- government holds the majority in both tions is 55 per cent Australian content be- houses, where the usual practices of scrutiny tween 6 am and midnight. This includes and investigation are under threat, the media, drama, news and current affairs. ABC televi- as the defender of public interest, must be sion is currently broadcasting only 29 per vigilant. The media plays a crucial role by cent of Australian content across all genres. ensuring that many voices and opinions can For the commercial stations, the obligation to be heard by the Australian community. Ex- broadcast new Australian drama is close to perience suggests that diversity of opinion, 200 hours per year. Last year, ABC televi- comment and news sources is better deliv- sion broadcast only 43 hours and is this year ered through diversity of media ownership. tracking somewhere between 14 and 20 In Australia, the rules currently in place, al- hours of new Australian adult drama for the though not perfect, serve their purpose of year. preventing further concentration of what Adequate funding would go some way to many already consider to be a highly concen- addressing this issue. It would enable the trated media industry. For these reasons, any Australian Broadcasting Corporation to de- future changes to government policy should liver sufficient first release Australian televi- protect and promote diversity of media own- sion drama, documentaries and children’s ership in Australia. programs. It would enable it to deliver en- This brings me to another issue of great hanced levels of local television and radio importance to many Australians—that of our news, current affairs and sports coverage for national broadcaster. For close to two-thirds people living in metropolitan, rural and re- of the budget of the average Australian mote areas. In its charter, the ABC is re- commercial television station, the ABC man- quired to broadcast ‘programs that contribute ages and produces content for two television to a sense of national identity and inform and stations, four national radio networks, 60 entertain, and reflect the cultural diversity of, local radio stations, three digital internet ra- the Australian community’. For the ABC to dio services, Radio Australia and ABC continue to produce high-quality programs Online. In recent years, the people’s ABC and increase its local content and production, has seen a significant reduction in the deliv- it must have a stable and adequate funding ery of locally produced news and current base. Of 17 countries surveyed by the OECD affairs programs in both radio and television about levels of public broadcasting funding, in city and regional areas. The current review Australia came in 16th.

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 123

Our continent is important to us all, and as theatrical technicians and members of our a nation we have a responsibility to future symphony orchestras to cinema workers, generations—to our children and their chil- events ticket sellers, workshop stage trades dren and beyond. A recent government report people and front-of-house workers. Whether on climate change risk and vulnerability es- they come through university, TAFE, a timates that Australia could be two degrees cadetship or on-the-job training, there is Celsius warmer by 2030 and six degrees Cel- something they all have in common—a need sius warmer by 2070. According to the re- to be valued for their contribution in the port, a further two degrees Celsius increase workplace, rewarded by a fair day’s pay for a would be devastating for Australia, with fair day’s work, and fair and equitable work- more heatwaves and bushfires, extended ing conditions. They want a workplace free droughts, reduced rainfall in southern Aus- of bullying, intimidation and discrimination, tralia and extensive damage to the Great Bar- where employment is secure and on-going rier Reef. Like many South Australians and where family friendly conditions, includ- growing up in the 1960s and 1970s, a camp- ing paid holidays and sick leave are guaran- ing holiday on the banks of the River Murray teed; a workplace where employees are ade- was part of my childhood. We have since quately compensated for overtime and shift recognised the significance, both environ- work, and where they have reasonable notice mentally and economically, of the mighty of their rostered hours; a workplace where Murray River. We are aware of the costs sa- employees have the right to bargain collec- linity has on infrastructure, agriculture and tively for decent wages and conditions; a our environment. These are the just some of workplace where any agreement will have the reasons that Australia needs to meet our the no disadvantage test applied; and a national and international environmental re- workplace where employees cannot be un- sponsibilities. fairly dismissed. There is no doubt that those who know me The reality, even today, under the current will expect that in this my first speech in Workplace Relations Act, is that the bargain- federal parliament I will speak against this ing power of the employer is greatly superior government’s widely publicised agenda for to that of the employee. We must view any changes to our industrial relations system— changes to the industrial legislation with this and I do not intend to disappoint them. My in mind. There will be no equality of bar- 10 years as a union official, and more than gaining power between an employer and an 16 years of work before this, stand me in individual employee when it comes to Aus- good stead to make a statement on workplace tralian workplace agreements, because it ap- issues. The proposed changes to the indus- pears likely that both protective institutions, trial relations legislation flagged by this gov- the Australian Industrial Relations Commis- ernment are not in the best interests of Aus- sion and the unions, may be removed from tralian workers or their families. While pro- the process. The extreme changes expected ductivity is an issue that must be addressed, to be pushed through the Senate by this gov- it should not be at the expense of the quality ernment mean that, for Australian workers of our family lives and values. and their families, the future is uncertain. The many workers I have represented in There is however certainty in this fact: Labor the past 10 years come from different and will take up the fight on behalf of Australian diverse walks of life—from journalists, pho- workers and their families. tographers, artists, camera operators, actors,

CHAMBER 124 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

There are many other areas I would like to is his first speech. I therefore ask that the have addressed in this my first speech but usual courtesies be extended to him. they will have to be addressed as future op- Senator PARRY (Tasmania) (5.47 pm)— portunities arise. One does not arrive at the This is the final first speech of all the 15 ‘House on the Hill’ without the support of senators who were elected in October 2004. I many, and today I thank the people of South can see relief in some senators’ faces. Whilst Australia and the South Australian branch of not agreeing entirely with the content of the Australian Labor Party. My special some speeches that have taken place before thanks go to friends Robyn Geraghty, the me, may I commend my colleagues for the state member for Torrens, and her husband passion and delivery of their first speeches in Bob; Terry Roberts, state Minister for Abo- this chamber. riginal Affairs and Correctional Services; the I am a Tasmanian by birth and come from South Australian branches of the Communi- a line of many generations of Tasmanians. In cations Electrical and Plumbing Union and fact, I am a descendant of the First Fleet the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union convicts who arrived on 26 January 1788 as well as the other South Australian unions onboard the ships the Scarborough and the who gave me their support; and Christopher Prince of Wales. I left home at the age of Warren, the Alliance Federal Secretary; and 16—much to the joy of my mother, I think— South Australian and Northern Territory Sec- joining the Tasmanian police force as one of retary, Shauna Black. their youngest ever recruits. After 10 years as I place on record my thanks to Walkley a police officer I became a funeral director, Award winning journalist and journalism eventually buying the longstanding family educator, the late Julie Duncan, who was a business with my wife, Allison. great inspiration in my journalistic develop- As a result of my vocations I am conver- ment. Thank you to Debra Mewett, who has sant with many sides of life. Like all good so competently set up my offices in Adelaide senators I bring to the Senate an additional and Canberra, and to my other staff, Rachel range of experiences. I have been to gov- and James. ernment and non-government schools, I have I thank my parents, Janice and Johnny, my been an employee and an employer, I have sisters and brothers, Russell’s parents, Pam- been a public servant and I have been in the ela and Kevin, my colleagues, union mem- private sector. I know people. I have dealt bers and friends for their advice and support constantly with people: people under pres- over the years. To Russell, my closest friend, sure, people who are suffering, the wealthy, my partner from high school days: I thank the poor, our youth, people with disabilities, you for your dedication to our young son, criminals, the mentally challenged, sexual your encouragement, your support, your love assault victims, drug users, the bereaved, the and your humour. To you and Che, I trust traumatised, prostitutes, beggars, the home- that time will judge the sacrifices as a family less and the dying. I have become adept at that we make, by me taking my place in this handling people and I feel the plight of parliament, as being worthy. Thank you. many. I know about the harsh and ugly side FIRST SPEECH of life. I have been there with the victims and The PRESIDENT—Before I call Senator the offenders. I have seen and experienced Parry, I remind honourable senators that this things in my life that I would never want others to have to experience—from horrific

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 125 fatalities and injuries to the inhumane treat- believe that the team is bigger and more im- ment of one human being by another. portant than the individual. I have seen and I also understand what it is like to go experienced the benefits of a team, of the without and what it is like to have plenty. I esprit de corps that is generated through peo- struggled, alongside others, in the early years ple coming together and working towards the of married life with a mortgage and the pros- same goals. I know the advantage of working pect of raising children. I know what it is as a unit and the achievements that can flow like to be faced with spiralling interest rates from such a team perspective. I have worked and to sometimes deprive your family and in partnerships and teams that have required yourself of essentials in order to retain the loyalty in order to not just achieve but sur- family home. I have known times in business vive. My life has been in the hands of others, when money was tight and loans were enor- and their lives in mine—never more evident mous but I have also known success, and the than during my time as a detective. spoils that success from dedication, long Conversely, my role as a funeral director hours and honest labour brings. Throughout allowed me to take the emotional lives of all these times as a child, as an adult and as a others into my care. Funeral directors have a business proprietor, I have never lost my unique role in society, where each of us be- sense of purpose, of reality, of obligation to comes a part of a family’s life during a very those around me, of patience and of strong special and very private time. I make men- commitment. I have remained focused on the tion that a number of my funeral industry important aspects of family, of loyalty to colleagues have journeyed here today, and I both friend and client, the need for hard work thank them for taking time out of their busy and the importance of not losing sight of the schedules to be in this house today. Equally, I objectives. I also know of the good side of trust it is not of concern to you, Mr Presi- life. I am in my 24th year of a vibrant and dent, or to honourable senators, that this is happy marriage to a beautiful and loving the largest gathering of embalmers and prac- woman. Together we have raised our chil- tising funeral directors ever to witness live dren into adulthood. I value and subscribe the proceedings of the Senate. I also wish to wholeheartedly to the liberal philosophy of assure all gathered here that no professional the protection of the family unit. Like Sena- interest from the gallery is apparent. tor Nash, I also value the extended family While speaking of occupational paths, I with the importance of the role of grandpar- mention in passing that I will one of the few ents, siblings’ families and beyond. Often senators—if not the only senator—to have great stories, great experiences and great covered, vocationally speaking, both of life’s love can come from those who are fortunate certainties: previously, death; and now, taxes. enough to have the closeness of extended I am confident that the diverse backgrounds family relationships. and experiences contained within the ranks I respect and am passionate about the law. of all new senators will complement the ar- As a police officer I have applied the law ray of prior occupational backgrounds of that legislators have enacted. Effective legis- senators already ensconced in this place. lation comes from good policy. I am keen to If one looks at the makeup of the Senate pursue the continuance of good Liberal pol- by way of past vocations, then the people of icy so that this country can continue to move Australia should be satisfied that this body of forward with the values and the lifestyle that 76 elected individuals contains enough skill, all Australians deserve. I am a team player. I

CHAMBER 126 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 expertise and life experience to effectively tion the coalition now has by way of a major- deliberate on all legislation and issues that ity on the floor of this chamber. I want to are placed before it. This current Senate is make three observations about this. Firstly, made up of people that have a wide range of the makeup of this chamber is determined occupational classifications and come from solely, and without recourse, by the electors areas such as nursing, practising medicine, of our nation voting in all states and territo- farming of all varieties, journalism, policing, ries. This is not an electoral aberration, this is lecturing, wholesaling, labouring, skilled not an engineered outcome and this is not, in trades of all kinds, fishing, horticulture, any way, shape or form, a mistake. On 9 Oc- teaching, accounting, the legal profession tober last year, this nation voted and this is and many more. the legitimate result. Importantly, coupled with occupational Secondly, commentators—both from the definition, many have actually owned and parliamentary wings of some political parties operated medium and small sized businesses, and from the media—treat the result of the giving that added advantage of having more last federal election as though it was unique than just a passing knowledge of what issues in our time and something of problem, and as face the small business owner. Rather many though an entirely new landscape has pre- in this place know exactly what the 1.26 mil- sented itself in Australian democratic history. lion small business owners in this country This is not true. There are two other jurisdic- face on a daily basis. I note the greater diver- tions in this country that are operating under sity of occupational background and small similar majorities. The Victorian parliament business experience comes from this side of has a majority of government members in the the chamber. upper house: 23 Labor members occupy I have just spoken about the makeup of seats, with 15 Liberal and four National. the vocational attributes of this place. Now I Similarly, the single-house system in Queen- want to speak about the political makeup of sland, which has less scrutiny than the bi- this chamber. In doing so, it is appropriate to cameral houses across this nation, has a ma- consider the last half-Senate election. Fifteen jority without upper-house scrutiny or hostil- senators left the Senate on 30 June this year, ity. One could confidently argue that the sky replaced by 15 senators elected on 9 October has certainly not fallen in in either of those last year. This represents the largest change states. of the Senate since 1950, equating to The third comment that I make in regard 19.74—or 20—per cent of the Senate. Much to the configuration of the Senate is to do has been said, and said by people with far with control. I am on the public record from more knowledge than I, about the contribu- a very early stage after the October election tion of the senators that are no longer in this result objecting to this word, ‘control’. The place. I will not add to that except to publicly government does not control the Senate. It acknowledge the longstanding contribution never has and it never will. The Senate is of Senator Brian Harradine, a fellow Tasma- comprised of individuals who have an oppor- nian, and I wish him well in retirement. tunity to exercise their vote as their hearts As I reflect upon the change to the and minds and the will of the constituency makeup of the Senate, I note that the media guides them. The only control that is exer- has focused—often negatively—on the con- cised is that of the Australian people at the figuration of the Senate and the strong posi- ballot box. This, however, does not prevent a collective of like-minded senators voting in a

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 127 similar pattern on legislation presented to than being reactive to problems after they this chamber. In fact, the people of Australia, arise. I have been proactive in my commu- in deciding whom to elect, chose individuals nity regarding medical research both at a by their alignment to political groups or par- fundraising and an awareness level through ties. Our constituents have expectations that to administration. Being a funeral director, we will fight for their causes in the party whilst also being proactive in medical re- rooms of our respective organisations and search, certainly raised some eyebrows. then, after the exhaustion of battle there, vote When giving addresses to service clubs and as a collective. The only way to effectively similar groups about medical research, I govern this nation and provide for our states would often be taken to task by fines masters is to have a common, aligned, working ma- and the like for trying to reduce funeral in- jority. dustry based clientele. I would graciously I believe that we and the Australian people accept the humour, but then deliver my seri- need reminding of the difficult nature of our ous message. roles in two respects. Each senator in this As a funeral director, I have stood beside place wears the burden of having two mas- the bodies of hundreds of people who have ters, the first being the constituents of the died from what will one day be a preventable state or territory from where each senator disease. Sadly, on many occasions the bodies resides, and secondly the master that goes by of those people were younger than me or the the name of national interest or the common same age as my children or were people in good for the people of Australia as a whole. their fifties and sixties, all far too young to If each senator were to consider only the die. I have also experienced, with the fami- welfare and benefit of their respective states lies that I have served, the emotion and and territories, then the overall wellbeing of heartache that befalls us when someone close this country would be sadly, and recklessly, to us dies. abandoned. The ability to place national in- Whilst dealing with traumatic and other terest ahead of state interest when a conflict sudden deaths through accident or injury is of opinion is apparent is indeed what tests devastating to families and funeral directors the courage, intelligence and integrity of alike, the death of Australians from cancer each and every one of us. and other medical illnesses appears to har- Mr Abraham Lincoln, the 16th President bour a cruel aspect because of the thought of the United States of America, in his 1860 that it just might have been preventable. So it Cooper Union address, captured the essence is my vocational journey that has created a of what I have just said rather well—not that passionate desire to see medical research he heard what I said. Mr Lincoln said: funding continue to increase. I commend this Neither let us be slandered from our duty by government on its record so far. Following false accusations against us, nor frightened from the Wills review in 1999, this government it by menaces of destruction to the Government made a commitment to double the research nor of dungeons to ourselves. Let us have faith funding to the National Health and Medical that right makes might, and in that faith, let us, to Research Council. This increase has taken the end, dare to do our duty as we understand it. place over a six-year period and will reach a Many members of parliament have taken a peak of $445 million dollars this financial keen interest in the health and wellbeing of year, up from $176 million in 1999. I am every person in this nation. I have a strong very keen to work towards further support view that preventative medicine is better for medical research funding.

CHAMBER 128 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

On matters concerning health, I place on Mr President, we are privileged to have record my view that further examination of a you as President and part of our team. On single national approach to health is war- that note, as this is my first speech since your ranted. The blame shifting from one agency re-election to office, I congratulate you on to another; from one government tier to an- your re-election. I also note that in our team other misses totally the point of health care. we have a minister of the Crown in Senator There are people throughout Australia that Abetz, a parliamentary secretary in Senator want service delivery in relation to issues Colbeck and the longest serving senator in that affect them personally. They do not care this parliament—now father of the Senate— who is responsible; they—and rightly so— Senator Watson. Together with Senator Bar- just want treatment. It is our duty to see that nett and myself, we can truly have direct happen. influence on working for the betterment of We need to be delivering the best out- our country, state and regions. I am pleased comes in this critical area of public service. to have joined my colleagues to continue our A duplicative administration and convoluted team approach. funding arrangements complicate and create Time does not permit me to indulge in bureaucratic jungles rather than medical ser- other areas of interest that fall within the vice solutions. If the public interest is best purview of the federal government and the served by a single national health entity then federal parliament. I make it known that over I want to start working towards that. The my time in this place I will be keen to ex- states will need to agree to this, and I would plore and assist in areas that relate to the en- encourage state governments to explore this vironment, our quarantine and federal polic- option with a view to a better health service ing efforts, electoral matters, migration, for our nation. small business compliance issues, taxation I want to turn my attention to the Tasma- simplification—just to name a few. I will nian Liberal Senate team. As a group, we certainly welcome the opportunity to involve regularly caucus and utilise the skills and myself in these and other areas as time pro- interest areas of each senator to pursue issues gresses. for individual constituents and groups alike. I do need to publicly thank some impor- Whilst we do not always agree and whilst we tant people in my life. To my wife, Allison, I may have healthy debate, the team attitude thank her so much for supporting me not removes duplication of effort and provides only as a fantastic wife but as a business for a higher degree of representation by now partner, as my No. 1 constituent and, to my having six senators supporting any single annoyance at times, my best critic. I cannot issue and by drawing on the expertise and thank her enough for her support. To my two experience of each team member in advanc- adult sons, Joshua and James, my thanks to ing issues. As the newest member of the them for not only being good mates and team, I place on the public record my respect great fun but for being ambassadors for my for this cooperative and unified method. Not cause, especially in a university environment only does a single unit of senators auger well where support for a Liberal Senate team was for the people of our state and nation, but it not necessarily the most popular role on is worth noting that we have a highly creden- campus. I also take this opportunity to pub- tialed team. licly express my congratulations to my eldest son, Joshua, on announcing his engagement

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 129 to his now fiance, Amber, here in this house for your loyalty thus far and look forward to yesterday. Congratulations to you both. counting each milestone with you. I owe so much to so many others for con- Prior to concluding, I wish to quote, once tributing over short and long periods again, President Lincoln. This is from March throughout my life’s journey, which has led 1832, well before he became President. I to me standing here today. I do need, and thought this statement of Lincoln’s to be indeed want, to acknowledge some important poignant for two reasons: firstly, it talks people. To my parents, Bill and Patricia, who about ambition in a way I subscribe to, par- have moulded, nurtured and shaped me, led ticularly in his reference to worthiness; and by example, especially the installation of a secondly, like me today with a first speech, strong work ethic in me and the sense of this was reportedly—while not his first needing to support one’s community; thanks, speech—his first political announcement. I Mum and Dad. quote: To my three brothers, Dean, Vincent and Every man is said to have his peculiar ambition. Andrew, I thank them for all our adventures Whether it be true or not, I can say for one that I together, for the comradeship of brothers and have no other so great as that of being truly es- for the continued support and spirit of fam- teemed of my fellow men, by rendering myself ily. My parents-in-law, John and Anne Vin- worthy of their esteem. How far I shall succeed in gratifying this ambition, is yet to be developed. cent, I thank you, as you have also been an integral part of my life. To my extended fam- Mr President, I am new; I am keen; I am here ily, friends and past colleagues, thank you for to serve. I thank the Senate. attending today. I cannot and will not name Honourable senators—Hear, hear! you, but it is fair to say that virtually all of DOCUMENTS my best friends, confidants, mates and debat- Immigration and Multicultural and ing partners are all present today. I thank Indigenous Affairs each of you most sincerely for your encouragement, your support and, most impor- Debate resumed from 11 August, on mo- tantly, your honest friendship. I also thank tion by Senator Kirk: you for giving up your day. With some pride, That the Senate take note of the document. I acknowledge that each state of Australia is Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL (New represented in the gallery. South Wales) (6.11 pm)—The Department of I also thank the members of the Tasma- Immigration and Multicultural and Indige- nian division of the Liberal Party of Australia nous Affairs report for 2003-04 provides yet for having the confidence to preselect me more evidence that this government has lost and to the voters of Tasmania for placing control of its own migration and detention their trust in the Liberal Senate team and policy. We are now at crisis point and things indeed their faith in me. I hope to serve you do not look like getting any better. In nine well. To the gathering of friends and state long years of government, we have had some colleagues in my electorate office at Burnie pretty poor performances from immigration watching these proceedings on the web ministers. But our current minister, Senator broadcast, thank you for your support. Fi- Vanstone, is by far the worst yet. Thanks to nally, to my three new staff members, her lazy and arrogant approach to her portfo- Leanne, Michelle and James, all four of us lio duties, we have a system that is in chaos. set out on this journey on 1 July. I thank you

CHAMBER 130 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

I want to draw attention to page 92 of the cases and some more crises whipped up by report, where it states this objective: the department. To provide lawful, appropriate and economic Maybe we should not be surprised that detention of unlawful non-citizens. this was the response of the minister, because It continues with: this was the minister who oversaw the deten- To detain unlawful non-citizens as required under tion of Ian and Janie Hwang, who were taken Commonwealth legislation. from their school, Stanmore Public School, The reality is that the department, in enforc- in March this year and locked up—kids were ing immigration law in this area, has in fact taken out of their classroom and put behind been detaining lawful Australian citizens. razor wire. This is from a minister who says One has to ask how that fits in with the de- that she is compassionate—that she has partment’s objectives or how much effort it compassion for people in detention. In my actually puts into delivering on its objectives. view that sort of action does not demonstrate The department, under the inept leadership much compassion. This is also the minister of Minister Vanstone, has completely failed on whose watch a 12-year-old boy attempted to meet one of its most important core re- to commit suicide three times while he was quirements. We have a department that, in- locked up in Villawood detention centre and stead of doing its job effectively, runs a sys- a minister who has already cost taxpayers $1 tem in which the mentally ill are treated as million in compensation payouts for wrong- criminals and locked up without thought for ful detention—and with so many more cases their care or wellbeing—as we have seen in coming to light, the bill is likely to be much the now infamous case of Cornelia Rau, who larger. was detained for an agonising 10 months. We Quite frankly, it was a disgrace to watch have a system in which people who are law- the way in which this minister handled the fully in Australia fall victim to an inept bu- series of serious questions that were raised reaucracy ruled over by an uninterested and with her in question time today. She treated arrogant minister. the questioners with contempt and she Just days ago, the nation found out that treated the substance of the questions with over 200 innocent people had been unlaw- contempt, because she really did not have fully detained over the last five years. Fifty- any answers to the serious issues that were six of these people were detained for periods posed to her in those questions. The Prime of more than three weeks. Most Australians Minister has responsibilities to this country, are rightfully outraged by these revelations and his first responsibility is to ensure that and, what is more, they are disgusted by the the ministers he puts in charge of depart- minister’s arrogant and uncaring response. ments are competent and capable of doing How did the minister describe these cases the job. This minister has clearly demon- this morning on Radio National, when ques- strated that she is incompetent and not capa- tioned about them? As ‘old news’—that is ble of doing the job, and the best action the what the minister called these tragic cases. Prime Minister could take to represent the They were just ‘old news’—not serious mis- interests of this country would be to remove takes by an incompetent department, man- the minister—(Time expired) aged by an incompetent minister, but ‘old Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (6.18 news’—something to be discarded and for- pm)—I also want to speak about the De- gotten about so as to move on to a set of new partment of Immigration and Multicultural

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 131 and Indigenous Affairs annual report. We business visitors and there were 10,000 have had a bit of a focus on DIMIA this af- sponsored family visitors. In addition to that ternoon, both in the discussion on the matter 3½ million, we had nearly 100,000 working of public importance and in the debate on the holidaymakers—and I believe that that will general business motion moved by Senator go over 100,000 in the next financial year. Ludwig, and it is appropriate that that is the That is a huge number of people and it shows case. We have also had a debate on the ex- just how much this issue is interconnected cise of Australian territory from the migra- with the Australian community. When we are tion zone. There have been a number of talking about 3½ million visitor visas each times in those debates and many others when year, that makes debates about whether our I have spoken about the wider importance of permanent intake should be 90,000, 100,000 the migration area in terms of public policy or 110,000 pretty minor in comparison. and why Australians need to make them- If you look at the permanent entry area in selves aware that this is not just an issue of a the so-called economic program, there were small number of unfortunate people who over 71,000 in 2003-04. As is well known, have fallen through the cracks and not just an that is going to increase to close to 100,000 issue of asylum seekers; it is an issue of huge in the next financial year in the economic significance to the future direction of Austra- area. If you contrast that with the family lia. area, which was down to only 42,000 in the Given the other opportunities I have had previous financial year, you can see how this afternoon to specifically criticise the much the migration program has been dis- department and the actions of the Minister torted by looking for people who will bring for Immigration and Multicultural and In- in quick money and by dealing with short- digenous Affairs, I want to draw on the de- term employment and skills shortage issues partmental report to point to the significant but not recognising the broader value of the number of people who are affected or family in our program. I particularly point to touched in one way or another by the actions the increase—the nearly 866 per cent in- of the immigration department each year. crease—in parent visas from the year before. This is, firstly, to demonstrate why it is so That went up from 510 to nearly 5,000 and significant that we do much better in terms was a direct result, I might say, of Democrat of getting things right and, secondly, to em- negotiations in trying to deal with the total phasise just how significant this is, in a so- mismanagement of the parents category— cial, economic and environmental context, to this government’s obsession with trying to the future directions of our country. I will reduce and limit the number of people who make a few comments along the way. come here, purely on the basis that they It is worth noting, if you look at the fig- might cost us something in dollars and cents. ures in this report, the number of visas issued It is driven by a clear discrimination on in the visitors area and to working holiday- the basis of age. It is a clear discrimination makers each year. In the last financial year, saying, ‘We don’t want people coming here at the end of 2004, the total number of visitor who will cost our health system.’ It also im- visas issued was nearly 3½ million—that is a pacts on people who have children or huge number of people. Of those, 2¾ million spouses with disabilities. They are clearly were electronic travel authority visitor visas, discriminated against purely on that basis another 400,000 were tourist visas for people because we look at the dollars and cents of from non-ETA countries, there were 150,000 what they might cost our health system; we

CHAMBER 132 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 do not look at the broader social benefits. I there are two sections in the legislation. Up note that Senator Nash, in her fine first until now, it seems that the minister has been speech, talked about the role of grandparents. ignoring the latter section at her conven- That is a clear example of the wider benefits ience. Senator Vanstone’s interpretation of that the family unit can play. It is a real con- the act is that you can detain indefinitely, for cern that we are decreasing parent and family as long as you want, while you determine visas in favour of short-term economic bene- identity. The most recent attempt to argue fits. There are student visas as well—another this absurdity was in question time yesterday. 171,000; the numbers are enormous. It is a The minister and this government still cling clear reminder of how important migration to the idea that you can detain indefinitely is. (Time expired) while you determine identity—but you can- Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (6.22 not. It ignores the legislation; it ignores sec- pm)—I rise to take note of the annual report tion 196. of the Department of Immigration and Mul- Mr Mick Palmer, who looked into ticultural and Indigenous Affairs. What is DIMIA, also, in essence, said the same thing, clear from the annual report is that the de- but the minister still blithely ignores the ad- partment fail, through their minister, to un- vice given. If Senator Vanstone is confused derstand how to detain people lawfully and about the operation of these sections, she can in a humane way. It seems to be—and it is easily turn to the assistance of the Federal becoming more abundantly clear, especially Court. Three times they have made a ruling after question time today—that the minister on the correct interpretation of the law in this still does not understand the basic operation regard and, as far as anyone can tell, three of the Migration Act’s detention powers. It is times the minister and her department have a matter we have tried to explain to her on a ignored the ruling. In fact, they still continue number of occasions, but it is one of those to pursue their own view of how these sec- things that you have to try and try again. tions should be interpreted. It is reckless be- The detention powers comprise two sec- haviour of an administration that believes tions: sections 189 and 196. Section 189 itself to be beyond the rule of law. In the end, provides the power of initial detention, and it is a product and a final destination of the the minister seems to understand that and so extremist Liberal Party ideology peddled by does her department. Where a person is rea- this government. sonably suspected to be unlawful, they can I also want to deal with another matter be detained. However—and this is the part where the government, through the minister, that the minister and the department fail to seems to be unable to face up to the truth. It grasp—section 196 determines the duration is demonstrated by the following. On 10 of detention. You cannot—and let me repeat May 2005 Senator Vanstone said in parlia- this for the minister’s benefit, even if she is ment: not here—continue to detain indefinitely, The short answer is that I think the department unless you are certain that the person is do an excellent job. We are talking about 0.2 per unlawful. cent of the cases. The point that cannot seem to get through In other words, there are 0.2 per cent of cases to the minister—and it seems that the de- involving detention where errors have been partment either does not want to acknowl- made. And the PM, Mr Howard, on 26 May edge this or fails to appreciate it—is that 2005 said:

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 133

And I’m told that of these 88,000, 201 individual prospect of ensuring a decent deal for the cases fell into the category where a person was consumer. released after it was determined they were not This report is from the financial year here unlawfully and that was 0.2 per cent of the number of people who were located. 2003-04, so in some respects things have moved a fair way in regard to some of the If there is any doubt about where the source things that have happened since. But it does of the problem culture lies, Mr Palmer has signal the extent of some of the problems nailed the Prime Minister and Senator that are currently faced with the regulator, in Vanstone in the Palmer report. He said: the form of the Australian Competition and It was suggested to the Inquiry that, of the thou- Consumer Commission—a regulator with sands of removals and cases DIMIA deals with legal authority to oversee, under the Trade each year, the case of Cornelia Rau represents Practices Act, Telstra’s compliance with the less than 0.001 per cent. The Inquiry considers price control arrangements that apply to it. that this statement, more than most, demonstrates the culture and mindset that have brought about If you look at this report, which is quite a the failures in policy implementation and prac- small and short report, you will see that the tices. ACCC has said that, subject to the qualifica- The Prime Minister and Minister Vanstone tions listed in this report, Telstra has ade- have failed again and again to see it. There it quately complied with the price control ar- is in black and white. Mr Palmer knows rangements. That sounds fine until you actu- where the culture comes from. It comes from ally look at the qualifications. There are quite this extremist Liberal Party government. a lot of them and some of them are quite se- Palmer could not investigate beyond what rious. The qualifications can be characterised Senator Vanstone and the PM ordered him to. as involving matters of interpretation of the Despite the extensive involvement of the price control arrangements and matters re- minister’s office in these cases, this govern- flecting data limitations. These include the ment seems to have no ability to look at it- late supply of reconciliations of data reported self. (Time expired) for the price control purposes and of Telstra’s Question agreed to. publicly reported data. Telstra’s belated supply of data to the ACCC meant that the Australian Competition and Consumer ACCC was unable to scrutinise the recon- Commission ciliations that had been made in regard to the Debate resumed from 11 August, on mo- price control data. tion by Senator Bartlett: They also had a qualification about the That the Senate take note of the document. disputed three percentage point line rental Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (6.29 claim. I do not have time to go into the fine pm)—The Australian Competition and Con- print now, but it details how Telstra added a sumer Commission’s report on Telstra’s footnote in regard to the three percentage compliance with price control arrangements points. The report says that, although Telstra is a particularly appropriate document to ex- did not state why it believed the course in the amine given the current public debate sur- footnote was open to it, the ACCC consid- rounding the potential sale of Telstra. It is ered that any such use of the three percent- one aspect amongst a whole lot that do need age points as foreshadowed by Telstra would to be examined if there is going to be any be contrary to the price control arrangements

CHAMBER 134 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 that apply to Telstra and contrary to the Leave granted; debate adjourned. agreement previously reached on the issue. Palmer Report Another qualification is the treatment of Debate resumed from 11 August, on mo- pensioner rebates—an area where the De- tion by Senator Ludwig: mocrats were able to win benefits, I might That the Senate take note of the document. say, for pensioners in the previous Senate, when we had the opportunity to use the bal- Senator HOGG (Queensland) (6.35 ance of power for people’s benefit. In this pm)—I rise to speak on the report by Mr area, the ACCC considered that the way Tel- Mick Palmer on the detention of Cornelia stra treated the revenue regarding phone bills Rau. I do so having listened to the debate in for fixed lines for pensioners failed to give this chamber this afternoon. One would not an accurate measure of the prices faced by be too far from the mark if one thought that pensioner customers for Telstra call services there were two different reports by Mr Mick and line rental services and was inconsistent Palmer for consideration—one that had been with the policy objectives of the price control given to government members and one that arrangements. had been given to the rest of us. I am sure that is not the case. I am sure that we are all Another qualification involves errors in working from the same report. I listened to previously reported basic access SIO data. government members trying to shift the Another qualification is the sampling of bill blame down and away from the minister, data to assess metropolitan and non- who should fairly and squarely accept the metropolitan local call relativities. In this blame for what is clearly the mismanage- case, Telstra altered its record-keeping sys- ment of her portfolio—in particular, the op- tems so that records that were previously erations of the DIMIA compliance and im- used for the Telstra Country Wide business migration detention areas of that portfolio. If unit could no longer be used. The sampling one takes a look at the report, one will find that was used, according to the ACCC, is that Mr Palmer indeed has done a marvellous contrary to the regulatory premise on which job given that it was not an open inquiry, the price control arrangements were based. witnesses who appeared were not subject to Another qualification is the non-supply of cross-examination in a public forum and not volume data in respect of discounted line all of the witnesses who should have been rentals offered to schools. heard were heard, according to evidence that For such a small report around what seems to be well and truly on the public re- should be a simple area of price control, to cord. have six different, separate and in some cases It was as though government senators to- serious qualifications by the ACCC, com- day adopted the condescending attitude that pounded with what appears to be a dubious ‘well, the government took a look at the con- degree of cooperation from Telstra, should ditions operating as a result of the Cornelia set big alarm bells ringing for anybody who Rau case’, but of course they tried to push seriously thinks that the regulatory regime is the blame to lower levels of the Public Ser- adequate to ensure that Telstra provides a vice, never ever accepting that the minister decent service for individual consumers of or the upper echelons of the department were Australia, let alone plays it fair in relation to responsible for what happened in this and competitors. I seek leave to continue my re- other matters. If one looks at the language marks later. that was used by Mr Palmer one sees just in

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 135 the initial part of his report under the heading ship in the immigration compliance and detention ‘Main Findings’ where the blame clearly and areas. squarely lies. Mr Palmer, for example at There is a failure of leadership, a failure to point 6, says: supervise. So what do we see in the end? We Initiatives are now being introduced, but the In- see people such as Cornelia Rau suffering quiry found inadequate evidence of the required internment in prison when that is not the cor- systems and processes in the compliance and rect place for her to be. The department and immigration detention areas of DIMIA during the the minister failed to recognise how to han- period of Ms Rau’s detention. dle such a case because over a period of time So there were clearly deficiencies. Some they had been very blase about these issues. government members, to give them their (Time expired) due, did own up and admit that there were Senator MARSHALL (Victoria) (6.40 deficiencies but would not lay the blame pm)—Having read the Palmer report, I can where it should be sheeted home: to the min- say that it is an explosive and utter indict- ister. The report goes on to state: ment of the highest order of this government, That they should be permitted and expected to do its immigration ministers and their malad- so without adequate training— ministration. I had an opportunity to talk at that is, DIMIA officers— some length on this report earlier today in without proper management and oversight— the context of that maladministration when and it was not at a low level, one can only we were debating the disallowance motion assume; management comes from the top, for the excise regulations. Consequent to that and the top is the minister— there has been some further discussion today about the report and the responsibility that with poor information systems, and with no genu- the Minister for Immigration and Multicul- ine quality assurance and constraints on the exercise of these powers is of concern. The fact that tural and Indigenous Affairs should take in this situation has been allowed to continue un- accepting some of the responsibility for the checked and unreviewed for several years is diffi- enormous failures of the department for cult to understand. which she is responsible. Today we saw And who has been at the helm? It is the min- Senator Brandis come into the chamber and ister. The minister has to face up to the re- defend the guilty, as we so often see— sponsibility at some stage. The minister is Senator Forshaw—He defended the in- where the buck stops. I heard all sorts of rea- defensible. sons from the other side today as to why the Senator MARSHALL—He defended the blame should be shifted elsewhere. This is indefensible, and I support Senator Brandis becoming too common a practice within having the right to do that. We saw him do it various departments under this government. in the ‘children overboard’ affair. He is chief The blame is shifted away from the minister counsel for the defence for this government. and onto the lower echelons within the Pub- I accept that even the guilty deserve to have lic Service—quite wrongly, in my considera- a defence counsel try to mount some argu- tion. Point 17 of the report states: ment for them. We saw him do that admira- There are serious problems with the handling of bly again today. During his presentation I immigration detention cases. They stem from wondered whether he had read the report but deep-seated cultural and attitudinal problems he went on to clarify that he had. I know that within DIMIA and a failure of executive leader- if Senator Brandis says that he has read the

CHAMBER 136 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 report, he has indeed read the report. But the problem here. The minister ought to do there must be a problem with comprehen- the right thing and accept that responsibility sion. Senator Brandis would have us believe and resign. that all that the report indicated was that The other interesting thing which Senator there were some problems at the most junior Brandis, the counsel for the defence, wanted levels of the public sector for which the min- to argue was that, because the minister initi- ister could not possibly take any responsibil- ated the Palmer report in the first place, that ity or have any knowledge of. That is not showed that she was accepting the responsi- what I read through the Palmer report. bility. Senator Brandis is from Queensland, The Palmer report indicated that there was and what he has said is really like saying that a culture of denial and self-justification. The Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen accepted the respon- inquiry found that that was the heart of the sibility of all the corruption and failure in problem. I have only to take Senator Brandis that state because he initiated the Fitzgerald and other senators who might be interested to inquiry. It is like saying that because he initi- page 169 of the report, which states: ated that inquiry he had accepted full respon- The Inquiry found that these attitudes and per- sibility for that and really needed to take no spectives were not, as some believed, confined to further responsibility for what was happen- operational levels but were pervasive at senior ing in that state. It is a nonsense argument. It executive management level. Executive manag- was a good try by a lawyer who came in to ers, including Assistant Secretaries, should be in be the counsel for the defence, but it really the vanguard of corporate leadership and should does not wash. It does not pass the test of not be shackled by process-driven thinking and logic. It does not pass the laugh test. This unable or unwilling to question existing struc- minister should own up to her ministerial tures, processes and procedures. responsibilities. If she does not, the Prime That clearly identifies the highest levels of Minister should do the right thing and re- management—the highest levels of man- move her from office. agement that would report directly to the minister, and the minister has the audacity to Senator MOORE (Queensland) (6.45 say that she ought to take no responsibility pm)—I rise to speak on the same document. for any of those problems which are inherent We have heard many comments this evening throughout the process. Again, for the inter- on the Palmer report and I think we will con- est of the Senate, I refer to page 194 of the tinue to do so, now that the report is public. report, which states: There is considerable interest in it. In my office I have received numerous phone calls Throughout all aspects of both the Inquiry and the and emails from people in the community Examination there was, with few exceptions, been consistent evidence of reluctance at middle man- wanting to see what is in the report. It has agement and senior executive management levels been a bit difficult to respond because in to accept responsibility and acknowledge fault. many cases there are no printed copies of the What a surprise. It does not stop at senior report. You have to recommend to people executive management; it goes all the way to that they download it. I always have some the ministry, because the minister fails to do reluctance when I ask community groups to the same thing which Palmer accuses senior use their printers to download government executive management of doing. Let us be reports. clear: they refuse to accept any responsibility For me, reading this report was a very or acknowledge fault. That is at the core of damaging experience on a whole range of

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 137 levels. There are the horrid and deeply per- responsive, independent Public Service. sonal experiences of Australian citizens and There have been justifiable allegations of would-be Australian citizens being actively misconduct, lack of training and poor deci- harmed by the system that should be support- sion making. Throughout that service, which ing them and giving them solace. I am at a we build up through a very strong audit loss to understand how, in the great culture in process, there is a clear structure which indi- which we operate, we can be anything but cates that there should be review, identifica- shamed by reading about the litany of hor- tion of an issue, discussion of an issue with rors that occurred when people turned to the relevant area and then a decision about their government and their Public Service, what should happen to fix it. seeking help and support. Of course, no sys- What we have now is an entrenched situa- tem is ever perfect. We do not expect them to tion in this department where people seem to be perfect, but what we should be able to have no understanding of what it means to be expect in our community is a strong, respon- truly open and responsive. This is in a de- sive public sector. For any of us who hold partment that has been set up over many those values dear, the Palmer report is not years to be at the forefront of our democratic just of concern; it is actually frightening. The system. This is the department that is respon- report says about people working in the pub- sible for citizenship. This is the department lic sector: which is responsible for those people from Such perspectives reflect a culture of denial and across the world who seek to live and work self-justification that the Inquiry found to be at and make their lives in Australia. How, then, the heart of the problem. Rigid, narrow thinking can we feel confident in our Public Service if stymies initiative and limits the ability to deal we can see, after so many years of hiding, successfully with new and complex situations. such a culture? The report points out that it If it were possible to put together a document has become a culture which ‘generally al- that reflected the absolute horror of a public lows matters to go unquestioned when, on sector that is not truly responsive and is not any examination, a number of the assump- being adequately supported by the govern- tions are flawed’. ment to which it reports, you would have to This report not only reflects on decisions point to the Palmer report. I talk with people about immigration matters. I hope that will who work in this department—it is a depart- be the subject of a lot more discussion in this ment that has a long history—and they have place. This report once again raises the issue been damaged by reading this report and of an effective public sector in our country. seeing the media comments about their That is something that we all value. I think workplace. They are shocked by the fact that the Palmer report will go on record as being people have now seen public condemnation one of the most damaging attacks on the of them and the work they do. That must public sector in Australia. We should be sup- reflect directly back on the minister. porting our people who work in the Public We understand that there are different Service, not leaving them open to this kind conventions on what constitutes ministerial of attack. (Time expired) responsibility, but a key element of the way Senator FORSHAW (New South Wales) that we operate is that the minister is the key (6.50 pm)—I rise to speak on the report from point of their Public Service department. Mick Palmer. In the years that I have been in There has been considerable discussion over this chamber I have read a number of damn- the years about what constitutes a strong,

CHAMBER 138 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 ing reports highlighting gross failures of with Ms Alvarez Solon we saw the same management and administration in certain thing happen. The decision was made in ef- government departments and instrumentali- fect almost at the outset that this woman ties. I can recall a report on AQIS and one should be deported. That it was exposed only with regard to Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease is- came about because the department and this sues. But I have to say that this report is one minister finally acted to go back and have a which really defies imagination. It defies look at how that actually came to pass. That imagination that the sorts of things that have is endemic to the culture in this department: been identified in Mick Palmer’s report constant failures to pursue investigations to could have actually occurred. I refer particu- reach the truth. There are so many instances larly to the systemic failure, the continued of it in the findings of this report. It states: failure, built layer upon layer, of manage- There is a serious cultural problem within ment—the failure to act appropriately to try DIMIA’s immigration compliance and detention to get to the truth of the tragic circumstances areas ... of Ms Cornelia Rau. It says that this has: As we know from the main findings of the ... given rise to a culture that is overly self- report, Ms Rau was detained and clearly at protective and defensive, a culture largely unwill- the time, though one has to acknowledge that ing to challenge organisational norms or to en- it was not necessarily evident to the officers, gage in genuine self-criticism or analysis. she was suffering a mental illness. She had And it concludes: given a different name and claimed that she The fact that this situation has been allowed to was a German citizen. But it is clear from the continue unchecked and unreviewed for several findings of the report that officers of the de- years is difficult to understand. partment failed to pursue the case suffi- As my colleagues have pointed out, the fail- ciently to get to the truth. As it says at para- ures are at the top—with the top manage- graph 2 of the main findings: ment and with this minister. It is an absolute Nevertheless, officers should not only have con- disgrace that people who were in positions tinued inquiries aimed at identifying Anna— responsible for this end up getting Australian that was the name that she had given— honours awards and got promoted to senior they should also have continued to question ambassadorial positions around the world. whether they were still able to demonstrate that As the report says, ‘nobody was in charge’— the suspicion on which the detention was origi- (Time expired) nally based persisted and that it was still reasona- Senator BRANDIS (Queensland) (6.55 bly held. pm)—Flattered as I am by Senator Mar- DIMIA’s inquiries concerning Ms Rau focused on shall’s observations about me a few minutes establishing her identity for the purpose of ena- ago, I have to say that the burden of Senator bling her removal from Australia. There was no Marshall’s argument was nonsense. The corporate policy for or instruction to review the continued validity of the ‘reasonable suspicion’ highest, most immediate form of responsibil- that Ms Rau was an unlawful non-citizen. ity that any minister or administrator can take is to move swiftly upon the identifica- The point that Mick Palmer is making is that tion of a problem, to set the processes in mo- they had reached a conclusion that Ms Rau tion, to ensure that the problems are got to was a noncitizen and they continued to pur- the bottom of, and to expose themself, as sue an activity which had as its purpose to Senator Vanstone did in this case, to search- have her deported. Of course, in the situation

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 139 ing public scrutiny and the kind of party po- Let me say two other things quickly. First, litical cheap criticism we have heard from I saw Mr Bill Farmer first during the ‘chil- the other side of the chamber as a result of dren overboard’ inquiry. I do not know him having done so, and then to move swiftly and particularly well, but may I say I was im- immediately to fix the problem. pressed by Mr Farmer’s forthrightness on As I said earlier in the day, I have that occasion. I thought that he was one of searched my memory for a single occasion the most impressive Public Service officers I on which any minister of an Australian gov- have ever seen. His reputation in the Austra- ernment, be they Labor or coalition, have lian Public Service, and particularly in the exposed themselves to so much transparent Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, scrutiny in order to get to the bottom of a from where he comes, is exemplary, and his systemic problem in their department which appointment as Ambassador to Indonesia I nobody says they were personally responsi- think is a great thing for this country. ble for. But that is what Senator Amanda Finally, may I chide my friend Senator Vanstone did. The fusillade of rhetoric we Marshall for his lamentable ignorance of have heard from opposition senators, both in Queensland political history, because as you, the earlier debate this afternoon and now this Madam Acting Deputy President Moore, evening in parliamentary prime time, is noth- certainly know, it surely was not Joh Bjelke- ing other than an intellectually dishonest, Petersen who set up the Fitzgerald inquiry. disingenuous stunt. Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (7.00 Senator Amanda Vanstone, by taking a pm)—I seek leave to continue my remarks step which no minister of an Australian gov- later. ernment has taken before and so setting her- Leave granted; debate adjourned. self up for the sorts of cheap shots we have Consideration heard from Senator Forshaw and Senator Gavin Marshall, has shown her real charac- The following orders of the day relating to ter. And those of us who know her in this government documents were considered: place, as we all do, are not surprised, because National Oceans Office—Report for Senator Vanstone is a person who is a blunt, 2003-04. Motion to take note of document plain-speaking, can-do and purposeful per- called on. Debate adjourned till Thursday son. She is a person who is willing to roll up at general business, Senator Bartlett in con- her sleeves and when there is a problem not tinuation. sweep it under the carpet, as generations of Sydney Harbour Federation Trust—Report Labor Party ministers have done, but expose for 2003-04. Motion to take note of document called on. Debate adjourned till it to the unstinting, harsh glare of public Thursday at general business, Senator scrutiny, even at the cost to herself of being Bartlett in continuation. the victim of the sorts of cheap shots we Refugee Review Tribunal—Report for have heard from the opposition, which could 2003-04. Motion of Senator Bartlett to take have no resonance with anyone who either note of document called on. Debate ad- had studied the report or was informed of the journed till Thursday at general business, facts that Commissioner Palmer disclosed in Senator Bartlett in continuation. his report. As I said a moment ago, she not Aboriginals Benefit Account—Report for only did that but moved swiftly to correct the 2003-04. Motion of Senator Bartlett to take problems. note of document debated. Debate ad-

CHAMBER 140 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

journed till Thursday at general business, concerning their detention at the Curtin Senator Bartlett in continuation. Immigration Reception and Processing Cape York Land Council Aboriginal Cor- Centre. Motion of Senator Bartlett to take poration—Report for 2003-04. Motion of note of document called on. On the motion Senator Bartlett to take note of document of Senator Moore debate was adjourned till called on. Debate adjourned till Thursday Thursday at general business.. at general business, Senator Bartlett in con- Natural Heritage Trust—Report for tinuation. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Bartlett to take National Environment Protection Measures note of document called on. Debate ad- (Implementation) Act 1998—Independent journed till Thursday at general business, review by Baker and McKenzie. Motion of Senator Bartlett in continuation. Senator Bartlett to take note of document Gene Technology Regulator—Quarterly called on. Debate adjourned till Thursday report for the period 1 January to 31 March at general business, Senator Bartlett in con- 2005. Motion of Senator Bartlett to take tinuation. note of document called on. On the motion Productivity Commission—Report for of Senator Moore debate was adjourned till 2003-04. Motion of Senator Bartlett to take Thursday at general business. note of document called on. Debate ad- COMMITTEES journed till Thursday at general business, National Capital and External Territories Senator Bartlett in continuation. Committee National Environment Protection Council Report and NEPC Service Corporation—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Bartlett to Debate resumed from 11 August, on mo- take note of document called on. Debate tion by Senator Lightfoot: adjourned till Thursday at general business, That the Senate take note of the report. Senator Bartlett in continuation. Senator HOGG (Queensland) (7.00 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social pm)—I rise to speak on this report by the Justice Commissioner—Social justice— Report for 2004. Motion of Senator Carr to Joint Standing Committee on National Capi- take note of document called on. Debate tal and External Territories as a member of adjourned till Thursday at general business, that committee and a person who partici- Senator Bartlett in continuation. pated in the conduct of the inquiry. I thought Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social that it was a very important inquiry indeed. Justice Commissioner—Native title— The focus of the inquiry turned out to be the Report for 2004. Motion of Senator Carr to issue of funding for the Antarctic Division. It take note of document called on. On the became clear to me—and it was a concern of motion of Senator Moore debate was ad- mine that was expressed repeatedly through- journed till Thursday at general business. out the inquiry—that the funding that has Productivity Commission—Report—No. been available to the Antarctic Division over 33—Review of national competition policy a long period of time, but particularly in the reforms, 28 February 2005. Motion of last nine long years of the Howard govern- Senator Bartlett to take note of document ment, has not moved at all. The funding has called on. On the motion of Senator Moore been static, and the only way in which the debate was adjourned till Thursday at general business.. Antarctic Division has been able to operate efficiently has been to make economies and Human Rights and Equal Opportunity efficiencies within its operations. It is like Commission—Report—No. 28—Inquiry into complaints by immigration detainees the old question: how much juice can one

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 141 squeeze out of the orange or lemon? There is address the financial requirements of the just so much, and I believe that at the end of Australian Antarctic Division. the day the Antarctic Division is very fast I will look briefly at the recommenda- reaching that time in its history. tions. The first looks at operations and logis- The Antarctic Division is not one of the tical support. The committee recommends more prominent issues in the forefront of that the government make funding available Australian minds, but it should be, because it in this financial year for a scoping study for a performs a great service in terms of the re- new, dedicated marine research vessel. I search that is done at our sites in Antarctica think that it came across that, while the and managed by the headquarters of the Ant- Aurora Australis is doing a magnificent task arctic Division in Kingston, in the outer sub- indeed, there is a need for a dedicated re- urbs of Hobart in Tasmania. The thing that search vessel. The committee put into its repeatedly came to the attention of inquiry report the need for funding to do a scoping was the strength of the organisation, built on study to determine just how that new, dedi- the diminishing resources that were being cated research vessel could be used to advan- supplied. The report acknowledges that in tage us in pursuing research on the fishing the last budget the government determined grounds there and looking at changes in wa- that they would put in an air link, which is a ter temperature and how that will affect the welcome improvement for our scientists and food chain, not just in our immediate area which, from the evidence that we heard but over a long distance around and off our given to the committee, may well improve shores. the standard of research that is performed by The second recommendation looks at Aus- Australian scientists in the area. That is wel- tralia’s obligations under the Antarctic Treaty come indeed. System. We urge the government to put: One of the concerns that I formed during ... an appreciable investment commensurate with the inquiry was that our research was starting Australia’s significant involvement in polar ac- to lag and we were not attracting the quality tivities to support Australian programs planned or quantity of scientists to Antarctica to do for the International Polar Year 2007-2008 ... the research that is necessary, particularly in We had to put in that recommendation be- an area such as climate change. We had some cause it seems at this stage that the govern- excellent presentations from the Antarctic ment has been remiss in investing substantial Division during the inquiry which clearly resources to show Australia’s interest in this showed that the research that is carried out in very important conference which will take Antarctica has a real, practical implication place in 2007-08. We also urged that, be- for us on the mainland in terms of our sea- cause of our significant role in the Antarctic sons, the diminishing rainfall that we are area, Australia should play a significant role seeing in some areas and the climate change, in the International Polar Year activities. as was mentioned by Senator Wortley in her The third recommendation of the commit- first speech, that we may see into the future. tee went to an important area that should not I thought that, importantly, the committee be overlooked, and that is conservation and did establish that there were some niche protection of the Antarctic environment. The needs in that area, and for a report that has committee urged the Australian government not a great number of pages there are a num- to allocate an additional $50 million to the ber of recommendations that all basically budget over a 10-year period. The committee

CHAMBER 142 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 made this recommendation on the basis that in the pack of ice that currently invades the there are some significant remediation pro- site itself. grams that need to be carried on with respect Last but not least, the committee made to past worksites in the Australian Antarctic recommendations in respect of our science Territory. program. In the report, we recommend to the Senator Ian Macdonald—They’ve been government a doubling of funds from the doing that for a long time. current level of approximately $700,000 per Senator HOGG—The minister on duty, annum for scientific research. We felt that Senator Ian Macdonald, interjects and says the government have missed the mark. that they have been doing it for a long time. Whilst there is funding there, it is inade- That is acknowledged, Minister, but the quate. It is insufficient. committee recognised from the evidence that The report clearly targets the need for bet- had been presented to it that the need was ter funding for the Australian Antarctic Divi- beyond what the allocation currently is. I sion to support the magnificent work that has believe that that was a fair and reasonable been done there by our scientists over a long conclusion for the committee to come to in period of time so that we can maintain the this particular instance. Whether the gov- reputation that we have gained out of this ernment act on that will be their prerogative research. I seek leave to continue my rein the longer term, but the committee saw the marks. need and made the recommendation that the Leave granted. government need to invest more heavily than Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- they currently do in the remediation of cer- sland—Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and tain sites in the Antarctic region. I do not Conservation) (7.11 pm)—I do not want to think that was unreasonable in any way and I hold the Senate up from the adjournment think that the government need to show that, debate, which I know is nigh, but I would in this particular pristine area, we are pre- say in response to the committee’s report and pared to invest the dollars that are required to the issues that Senator Hogg has very— remediate these sites to a satisfactory standard. Senator Hogg—Is this the government’s response? The fourth recommendation of the committee went to the need to better fund the Senator IAN MACDONALD—Do I restoration and cultural heritage management close the debate, do I? of Mawson’s huts. Whilst there has been a The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT program that has recognised that there is a (Senator Moore)—No. dual role for the broader commercial com- Senator IAN MACDONALD—I can munity to sponsor restoration works in those close the debate—and it would probably be areas, the significance of these sites should appropriate. I want to indicate how very keen not be lost because there are insignificant Senator Ian Campbell, the Minister for the funds being put in by the government at this Environment and Heritage, is about the is- stage. We are urging the government to boost sues that Senator Hogg has been talking the funding so that the proper restoration can about. I followed Senator Campbell as par- be done before it becomes too late—before liamentary secretary in charge of the Antarc- the iconic status of Mawson’s Hut gets lost tic Division. Senator Campbell, as my predecessor, was vitally involved and interested in

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 143

Antarctica. In fact, when he became the sen- Hut Foundation. He personally raised a lot of ior minister in the portfolio, as environment money for work that needed to be done. minister, rather than leaving it with the par- I thank senators for their contributions on liamentary secretary, he has taken it to him- the report. As I said, I will make sure that self. Senator Campbell reflects the govern- Senator Campbell’s attention is drawn to the ment’s keenness and enthusiasm for Antarc- comments in the report. I seek leave to con- tica. I am not sure that Senator Campbell tinue my remarks later. would have been listening to this debate, but Leave granted; debate adjourned. I will make sure that he— Corporations and Financial Services The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— Committee I am sure he would have been, Minister. Report Senator IAN MACDONALD—He is Debate resumed from 11 August, on mo- probably at some other important meeting tion by Senator Chapman: for the government at the moment, but I will make sure that his attention is drawn to the That the Senate take note of the report. issues that Senator Hogg has raised, because Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (7.15 they are important issues. pm)—I would like to speak briefly on the Mawson’s Hut was something that Sena- Joint Corporations and Financial Services tor Campbell was involved in, as was I in the Committee report on property investment time that I was parliamentary secretary. A advice with the appropriately questioning great job done was done by a large number title of Safe as houses? I just want to touch of people in a commercial sense. The gov- on this because it does link into issues that I ernment in those days contributed quite a lot have raised a number of times in this cham- of money to the Mawson’s Hut Foundation, ber about housing affordability, the wider which did a lot of good work. I was surprised property market and the tax regime. to hear Senator Hogg’s comment—and he The tax regime—particularly, in my view, was commenting on what the committee has the completely unjustified huge windfall for reported. My impression was that the foun- higher income earners that was allowed dation had done all of the work that was nec- through this chamber by the Labor Party in essary. I take it from what Senator Hogg supporting the government’s reduction in said—obviously quoting the report—that capital gains tax back in 2000, along with the there is still more to be done. refusal of either of the major parties to look There is certainly a recognition that it is a at how that interacts with the current nega- particularly important part of Australia’s tive gearing regime—has led to a huge num- heritage—one that I suspect few Australians ber of people looking towards property will ever have the opportunity of seeing. speculation and property investment. I do not Those who do get the opportunity say that it criticise property investment per se, but I do is a very emotional experience to see Maw- think the impact it has on housing afforda- son’s Hut and the work that has been done. I bility needs to be recognised. When housing mention in passing how grateful we have affordability was last a major issue—it is a been to have had the sponsorship, one might major issue now, but when it was briefly a say, of Sir Edmund Hillary, who was a great media controversy—I remember Mr Howard supporter and benefactor of the Mawson’s saying, ‘I have never heard anybody com- plaining about the value of their house going

CHAMBER 144 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 up.’ I have. A lot of people are far broader more of a problem for us in the artificial way thinkers than just thinking, ‘My house is now that impacts on our economy. worth more, so I am worth more.’ As Ross This report deals with one dangerous as- Gittins rightly pointed out, either yesterday pect of that, which is the so-called property or the day before, a lot of that so-called in- investment advice and some of the property crease in wealth can be very illusory. The investment schemes that are around to try to fact is that if my house is worth more now tempt people into the property investment than it was five years ago—as it undoubtedly market. The fact is that the tax regime, and is, and indeed the Brisbane property market the investment incentives around now, dis- is continuing to rise compared to most other torts the investment incentives to make peo- parts of the country—that might mean I can ple believe, in some cases quite rightly, that borrow more, which is not necessarily a it is more lucrative to invest in property. But good thing for our overall private debt ratio accompanying that are some risks and the in this country, but it also means that it is of fact is that some people who are new at this no value to me unless I want to then borrow and do not know what they are doing are against it to invest in something. This is what able to be led astray by some of the sharks this report goes into. It is certainly no good and spivs that are undoubtedly around the for anybody coming through, such as my place. In this case I have to reluctantly point own daughter. If she wants to buy a house in to my own state of Queensland for the exis- the future, that is going to be far more diffi- tence of some of those. They can really put cult if the price of property has gone up. The people in the terrible situation of not only not broader issue of the inability of anybody who making money from their investment but is not already a homeowner, those older Aus- actually losing their own home in the proc- tralians, to get on the property merry-go- ess. round has been made a lot more difficult by There are good recommendations in this the increase in the price of housing. So, unanimous report. As far as I am aware the frankly, there are a lot of people who are government has yet to respond to it, but I concerned if the so-called value of their believe it is one that needs to be responded to house goes up. as a matter of urgency. Whilst there are areas A lot of that is driven by ill informed in Australia now where the bubble has burst property speculation. That is not the only in the property market—I think that is a very reason, but part of what drives that is the tax good thing, personally—the fact is that in regime. The problem is that the longer it some parts, including south-east Queensland, goes on the more difficult it is and the more it is still reasonably vibrant in some respects unwilling the major parties are to tackle the and there certainly can be a return to that in hard choices. All we get is fairly facile com- the future. There is still no doubt that a lot of mentary about the issue instead. The more people are looking to invest in property. As I people have their equity and debt tied up in said, that is not something I criticise as a artificially inflated housing prices, the more concept, but there is no doubt that, as the difficult it is to do anything about negative final chapter in the report says, it does need gearing and the interaction with the capital to be a matter of buyer beware. gains tax regime. It is not a matter of abol- There also need to be better protections. ishing negative gearing overnight, or any- We need to ensure that there are some better thing like that, but I do believe that we need protections for the naive, the vulnerable and to bite that bullet before it becomes even

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 145 those who are basically led astray by crooks. forming choice, on the inquiry into services We can do better with that. That is partly a and treatment options for persons with can- matter for state governments but there are cer. I note that former WA senator, the hon- things that can be done at federal level too. ourable Peter Cook, was very strongly push- Some of the recommendations in the report ing for this report. I wish him well. I am a are: that loans for investment in property cancer sufferer and have been involved with which is secured by home equity should be a number of organisations. I think there have subject to a waivable 14-day cooling-off pe- been 33 recommendations, and the ones I riod; that ASIC conduct targeted advertising would like to speak to tonight are recom- and educational campaigns to alert consum- mendation 20, which is about the patient as- ers to the risks associated with property insisted travel services; recommendation 6, vestment in general and particularly with the about multidisciplinary teams and cancer get-rich-quick spruikers that do some of care; and recommendation 30, which is the these so-called education seminars; and also target age groups for BreastScreen. For those that in implementing the recommendations who heard my first speech, these were some of the Consumer and Financial Literacy Task of the things I identified and I do feel very Force, the government include a stronger strongly about. As far as the patient assisted focus on property investment in particular. travel scheme is concerned, this committee They are just a few of the recommenda- has made recommendation 20: tions and I think they are important. Apart The Committee recommends States and Terri- from anything else, they will protect, or pro- tories adopt and implement the consistent ap- vide a better chance of protecting, individu- proach to the benefits for travel and accommoda- als who in some cases put their own house at tion recommended by the Radiation Oncology risk. Anything that stops ill-informed or du- Jurisdictional Implementation Group to ensure that benefits are standardised across Australia. bious property investment that is basically These benefits should be indexed or reviewed just speculative the better, because at least it annually for increases in travel and accommoda- takes one less pressure off some of the things tion costs. that unnecessarily push up the price of hous- I was actually on that committee as well, and ing. It might be great if you get on the right I will just quickly go through some of the side of property as an investment, but if it things we recommended: pushes up the price of housing in an artificial • way it makes it more difficult and more ex- eligibility, accommodation, transport and mileage benefits—including assistance con- pensive for everyday Australians to do that tinuing to be based on distance rather than basic thing of buying their own home. time taken to travel to a specialist treatment Question agreed to. centre; Community Affairs References Committee • patient contributions—with a focus on tar- Report geting maximum financial assistance towards those most in need; Debate resumed from 11 August, on mo- • tion by Senator Cook: escort/carer eligibility and benefits—aiming to reduce financial barriers to the participa- That the Senate take note of the report. tion of an escort/carer in supporting eligible Senator ADAMS (Western Australia) patients; (7.23 pm)—I would congratulate all those • research—building on the evidence base for involved with the Senate Community Affairs parameters of patient travel assistance committee report, The cancer journey: In- schemes;

CHAMBER 146 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

• awareness raising—both at facility level and women outside the age limits are made aware of through collaborative Federal, State and Ter- their cancer risk. ritory strategies; This is also very important. Just to conclude, • availability of subsidised accommodation I will read something from the Breast Cancer facilities for radiotherapy patients—to be Network Australia by Lyn Swinburne, a col- considered in the service development league of mine. I think this sums it all up: framework for radiation oncology; and Patient Assistance Transport Scheme (PATS) • community involvement—including enhanc- reflects more than just the problem with the travel ing patient navigation of the local care sys- scheme, it reflects a bigger problem concerning tem through greater involvement of the the states and the Commonwealth and the rela- community and non-government sector. tionship between them. An example is women The Senate committee recommended that the who live near borders. A women who lives in states and territories adopt the recommenda- Byron Bay has to travel to a treatment centre in tions by ROJIG in relation to travel and ac- NSW to be able to get PATS, even though Bris- commodation assistance. This need is evi- bane or the Gold Coast are much closer and her dent in people who have to go for radiother- family and support could be there. There are a lot of things that are not sensible as part of the apy services mainly because of the length of scheme. There are a lot of bureaucratic difficulties time that that takes. In most states, including and challenges for women my own state of WA, the only access to ra- I think that really does sum it up. I seek leave diotherapy service, of course, is in Perth. to continue my remarks later. That means if someone is in the north of the state or right down south, they still have to Leave granted; debate adjourned. travel to Perth. It is a long time to be away Public Accounts and Audit Committee from family, without support. Report I feel very strongly about the second rec- Debate resumed from 11 August, on mo- ommendation, on the multidisciplinary teams tion by Senator Watson: and cancer care, because I believe that every That the Senate take note of the report. person suffering from cancer needs the sup- Senator HOGG (Queensland) (7.29 port of a whole allied health team. If it is pm)—I will speak on the Joint Committee of possible to get to a major teaching hospital, Public Accounts and Audit report No.403, those teams are there but, with the patient Access of Indigenous Australians to law and assisted travel schemes, you have to go to justice services. I serve on this committee in your nearest specialist. That might be in a this parliament, and I must say that it has regional centre, where this support is not been one of the more difficult inquiries in available. I am very strongly supportive of which I have participated. the multidisciplinary teams. It is just so important. It became very clear throughout the conduct of this inquiry that the resources avail- The third recommendation was the target able to Indigenous people are far below those age group for BreastScreen Australia: that are necessary to service the needs of the The Committee recommends that the target people. I also felt that throughout the inquiry age groups for BreastScreen Australia and the and post the inquiry that there was a frustra- National Cervical Screening Program should be reviewed regularly, given the increasing trends in tion in the sense that some of the people who life expectancy for Australian women. In addi- appeared before us and some who have tion, a review should be conducted of how communicated with us since the inquiry were

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 147 sick and tired of being inquired into. The Of course, as I said, that prioritisation then clear solution to the Indigenous community takes representation away from other areas, receiving proper legal representation is to particularly representation of women who give them adequate funding. It is not a matter are facing domestic violence, and that is just of how deep one’s pockets are or how deep clearly one of the most important areas that the well is; it is primarily and essentially a is missing out at this stage. The report states: system that is currently underfunded. That The prioritisation of criminal law services is at fact was recognised unanimously in that the expense of providing family and civil law unanimous report. services. By way of outline, the report states: It further states: Indigenous Australians receive legal services The arrangements under which ATSILSs receive through an array of publicly funded mainstream funding present significant impediments to them (Legal Aid Commissions (LACs) and Community introducing or increasing family and civil law Legal Centres (CLCs)) and Indigenous specific services. organisations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Is- So there is this act of tension in the Indige- lander Legal Services (ATSILSs) and Family nous community between sufficient funding Violence Prevention Legal Services (FVPLSs)). for criminal matters and sufficient funding It went on to look at where the first need is for civil and family law matters. Those areas, within the Indigenous community, and it which many of us take for granted, are being clearly concerns those who find themselves ignored purely and simply because of a lack in criminal circumstances. So they are priori- of funding. One understands the frustration tised and they receive the first bite of the that comes out in the Indigenous community cherry, if you like, of the funding that is when they see a committee of the parliament available under these various legal service yet again inquiring into their needs for legal groups. The report notes that ATSILSs oper- representation. And legal representation is a ate in a climate of effectively static funding fundamental basic right, I believe, in our and increasing demand. That is a major prob- society today. Whilst one cannot attribute lem because there is increasing demand for blame to the people who are the victims in the service but there is effectively static this case, many of them are victims because funding. Whilst the tender process was going of circumstances that we have imposed upon on in respect of the ATSILSs during the in- them over a long period. quiry, there was no evidence to convince me From information provided to us by the at least—and I presume a number of other New South Wales Legal Aid Commission, members of the committee—that that was the cost of incarceration is in the order of going to be the panacea and that would re- $66,000 per person per year. That cost is solve the problem of funding. Let us face it, borne by the community at large. The argu- the government have had a long time to cor- ment was put to us that there needs to be a rect this problem and to address an issue that great deal of prevention in some of these goes to the very heart and soul of many re- Indigenous communities to ensure that this mote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cost is not being borne unnecessarily by the communities. The report goes on: rest of the community—in other words, that Evidence suggested that ATSILSs have prioritised a dose of prevention is infinitely better than cases where a person is in danger of incarceration the cure. The Western Australian legal aid because the needs of criminal clients are immediate. commission put a very succinct statement to

CHAMBER 148 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 us regarding the cost of incarceration. They not access proper legal representation in civil said: and family matters. Indigenous women, who … if we were able to provide proper representa- are playing a leading role in trying to reform tion for a lot of … people currently being found some of the excesses that might occur in guilty and being sent to prison, I am sure that we some communities, do not have access to would either reduce the numbers or contribute to proper representation. I seek leave to con- a lowering of the sentences that people are being tinue my remarks later. saddled with. Leave granted; debate adjourned. Further on, they said that there were two types of costs associated with the increased Community Affairs References Committee incarceration rates in the system. First was Report the cost of the criminal justice system and Debate resumed from 11 August, on mo- second was the financial cost of incarceration by Senator Marshall: tion. That is where the cost which was given That the Senate take note of the report. to us by the New South Wales Legal Aid Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (7.39 Commission comes in. I will quote directly pm)—I want to speak to the Community Af- from the report: fairs References Committee report Protect- It currently costs $66,000 to keep an adult in ing vulnerable children: a national chal- prison for twelve months. The costs jump expo- lenge. The Democrats representative on this nentially when costs for their children are fac- committee is my colleague Senator Andrew tored in. Children whose parents are in prison run Murray from Western Australia. Occasion- a high risk of being taken into State care or juvenile detention centres. ally, we get confused with each other because of our common first name and our So there is a spin-off from the incarceration: common philosophical predisposition to the exposing of young children to risk of many issues. In this case, Senator Murray being put into state care or juvenile detention has to be congratulated on playing such a centres. This was clearly evidenced to the driving role not just in this report but in other committee in its inquiry. Quoting again from Senate committee reports into the way chil- the New South Wales Legal Aid Commission dren, particularly children in institutions, submission to the inquiry: have been mistreated in the past. It does not Out of home care can cost as much as $260,000 a just look backwards; it looks at the present year, while it costs $216,499 to keep a child in and the future. juvenile detention for 12 months. I want to draw attention to the report and Clearly, there is a cost associated with the the need for a prompt government response problems caused by the lack of access to to it. The report was brought down in March proper legal representation by Indigenous of this year. That is already closing on six people in Australia. Surely the government months ago. That probably does not seem can find a way to make more funding avail- very long ago in government time but it is able to target areas which are currently not quite a long time when you are dealing with even being addressed in either civil or family important and crucial issues that are affecting law. children and others across the country as we It really is a blight on our society that a speak. report such as this has to be delivered in this I would particularly like to emphasise that parliament. Furthermore, it is equally a frus- there is a need for action here at state level as tration for those Indigenous people who can-

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 149 well. That is detailed in the recommenda- carers, particularly those caring for children, tions of the report. State governments have disabled children or children with particular failed children in many ways in the past and special needs, do not get caught up inadver- continue to do so. But it is broader than that: tently—or deliberately, for that matter—in it is society as a whole. Firstly, there is a lack the welfare changes that are coming forward. of seriousness about many issues dealing These are people who are already struggling with the abuse and neglect of children and a enormously and it is widely accepted—as it lack of appropriate laws, appropriate proc- is in this report—that they could do with esses and appropriate resourcing. both more financial support and wider social However, it really comes down to a lack support. of attention to understanding. Some of the The last thing we want is to put at risk recommendations in this report calling for some of their already inadequate income courses of study that focus on child protec- support or to put another extra burden, ex- tion and related issues and increasing aware- pectation and responsibility on them of an- ness about child protection issues really need other obligation they are meant to meet. urgent consideration. There is still a lack of There is no doubt—and I have said this be- knowledge, even after a reasonable degree of fore—that if there is one group in the com- attention in recent years to the problems and munity that I believe we really should be failings of the past. There is still a lack of making sure do get extra assistance, it is car- knowledge and expertise in some of the areas ers. That includes those who are caring for to do with this. children, parents, spouses and others in the This is a unanimous report. That gives it home and those who are caring for others in greater weight. I would like to particularly the community. point to recommendation 9, which talks It also includes foster carers, who, frankly, about the national plan for foster care, young save the taxpayer a fortune. If people just people and their carers, and the need for that gave up on that task and said: ‘I’ve had to be extended to include training, uniform enough; I can’t do it anymore. It is up to the data collection and support—and ways of community,’ then we would really know how improving carer support in particular. That expensive it is. I acknowledge that providing includes national standards for reimburse- more financial support to carers does cost ment of costs to cover the real costs of caring more money and there are limits in that area; and an examination of ways of improving nonetheless, the cost would be tenfold—and foster carer retention. that is probably a conservative estimate—if One issue that was raised by Senator all of those carers just stepped away and left Murray—or it might have been another sena- it to the broader community and the taxpayer tor—in Senate question time was the need to to manage that issue. make absolutely sure that, whatever the other There is also a recommendation here— pros and cons of the proposed changes in the and I again remind the government and the welfare area that the government has Senate that it was a unanimous recommenda- planned—and I must say I have serious con- tion—that the Commonwealth establish a cerns about them—carers in particular do not national commissioner for children and get caught up in those changes. There is a young people to drive a national reform real risk there. Data released by ACOSS in agenda for child protection. This is very im- recent times shows that we must ensure that portant. One of the reasons why I think we

CHAMBER 150 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 have failed as a community and at the state age of 18, and I think there have been some level—and this is not blaming any particular clear benefits from that. I should take the government, party, ministry or whatever—is opportunity, though, to note that there is an that this has not had that national drive be- anomaly in this area in Queensland. Follow- hind it. We are seeing Mr Howard, somewhat ing recent legislation in Victoria, Queensland controversially, taking greater control na- is now the only state in Australia that places tionally of some key areas. Philosophically, I 17-year-old children in adult prisons. So 17- do not necessarily disagree with that— year-old juveniles who cannot legally drink depending on what is actually being done alcohol, sign contracts, get married without with that control—but what we need is lead- their parents’ permission or vote, should they ership as well. It is not just a matter of grab- be found guilty of a crime and subsequently bing legislative power and legislative con- sentenced to incarceration, for the purposes trol; it is a matter of providing that national of the Queensland criminal justice system drive behind something. It does not mean are treated as adults and sent to adult prisons. coming in with a predetermined view and That is completely at odds with the child saying, ‘Here’s what we’re doing; everybody protection system, and this report points to has got to wear it.’ In fact, it means the oppo- the sort of damage that can be done to chil- site of that almost. It is just setting up the dren in institutional or out-of-home care. I mechanisms and the priority at a national am not sure that you would call being in level to really pull things along to ensure the prison a form of institutional care, but these solutions, the expertise and the experiences developments show that, while many people that are there at the community level are might not think of 17-year-olds as children, tapped into in a cohesive and coordinated there are clearly recognitions of that within way. our system. As I say, in terms of their crimi- One of the reasons reports like this are so nal justice system, all states except Queen- valuable and informative is not that the sena- sland recognise that 17-year-olds are juve- tors who have been involved with them are niles and should not be put in adult prisons. particularly brilliant, although I am sure they There is a review under way of this in are all highly capable; it is that the mecha- Queensland but it has yet to produce results. nism draws on the expertise, knowledge and It should be emphasised that this is actually experiences of professionals in the field and contrary to the Convention on the Rights of often, more importantly, the expertise of in- the Child, which defines ‘children’ as those dividuals who have experienced things first- aged under 18 and says that children should hand and who know, to their own cost, what not be imprisoned with adults. The Queen- can go wrong. They often have a much better sland government has yet to act on that, de- idea than anyone else about what needs to be spite it being a commitment from quite some done to fix things. We need to do better in time ago. It can be done quite quickly. It terms of tapping into those experiences. does not even need a legislative change, as I My own state of Queensland was the first understand it; it only needs a regulatory state in Australia to establish a commissioner change. With our current compliance with for children and young people, and it is one the Convention on the Rights of the Child of the most empowered children’s commis- being examined—it is under its regular re- sions in the world. It has a wide range of view at the moment—this is the perfect op- powers and functions to promote and protect portunity for Queensland to address that the rights of young Queenslanders under the anomaly and to ensure that we join with the

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 151 rest of the country in not locking up children Employment, Workplace Relations and with adults. That is just one example of the Education References Committee—Interim sorts of things that can be done. I urge the report—Indigenous education funding. government to address this report. (Time ex- Motion of the chair of the committee pired) (Senator Crossin) to take note of report agreed to. Question agreed to. AUDITOR-GENERAL’S REPORTS Consideration Report No. 44 of 2004-05 The following orders of the day relating to Debate resumed from 11 August, on mo- committee reports and government responses tion by Senator Mark Bishop: were considered: That the Senate take note of the document. Environment, Communications, Informa- tion Technology and the Arts References Senator MARK BISHOP (Western Aus- Committee—Report—The performance of tralia) (7.50 pm)—I rise to take note of Audi- the Australian telecommunications regulator-General’s report No. 44 of 2004-05, Per- tory regime. Motion of the chair of the formance audit: Defence management of committee (Senator Bartlett) to take note long-term property leases, and to make a few of report called on. On the motion of Sena- comments. The report was tabled in the par- tor Stephens debate was adjourned till the liament some six or eight weeks ago. At the next day of sitting. outset, I should say that this report demon- Regulations and Ordinances—Standing strates that the government has sacrificed Committee—112th report—40th Parlia- sound financial management for short-term ment report. Motion to take note of report gains. The report concerns the government’s called on. Debate adjourned till the next day of sitting, Senator Bartlett in continua- decision to sell and lease back six Defence tion. owned properties. That decision, made and implemented between 2001 and 2004, re- Community Affairs References Commit- tee—Report—Quality and equity in aged sulted in a significant additional net cost to care. Motion of the chair of the committee government, arising from the sale and lease- (Senator Marshall) to take note of report back of the same properties for a period of called on. On the motion of Senator up to 12 years. This was contrary to recom- Stephens debate was adjourned till the next mendations. day of sitting. Indeed, if the government had retained the Employment, Workplace Relations and properties in public ownership, there would Education References Committee— have been a considerable saving of public Report—Indigenous education funding. moneys. The excess spend, over 12 years, Motion of the chair of the committee (Senator Crossin) to take note of report from the sale and lease-back was a remark- agreed to. able figure of some $1.2 billion—that was in extra outlays over the period. That decision Migration—Joint Standing Committee— Report—Inspections of Baxter Immigra- demonstrates how short-term budgetary tion Detention Facility and Port Augusta cash-flow gain was considered a higher pri- Residential Housing Project, April 2005. ority of the government than other matters. It Motion of Senator Kirk to take note of re- shows ideology clearly overriding what port called on. Debate adjourned till the would be regarded as normal commercial next day of sitting, Senator Bartlett in con- decision making. tinuation.

CHAMBER 152 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

The facts of the ANAO report bear out the The additional budgetary outlay for the conclusion that I have just asserted. The properties was not approved until much later. background is this: the Department of Fi- It is fair to say that it was both a poor and a nance and Administration and the Depart- remarkable decision. Defence, of course, in ment of Defence concluded a joint review of inhabiting the properties—and some of them the Defence estate on 6 March 2000. That are of fairly recent construction—is more review by the two departments examined a than likely to exercise options, at the expiry lease-back option and made a recommenda- of the first lease period, to extend the leases. tion to government that the six properties in In such a case, ANAO calculates that the question should be retained in public owner- gross rental paid for the period of the con- ship—that is, the rent paid in any lease-back tract and option in each of the leases will scheme would exceed the opportunity cost of exceed some $1.2 billion, recalling that the the sale proceeds. Contrary to that recom- sale proceeds netted $472 million. It is fair to mendation, the Howard government pro- say that, in those circumstances and with ceeded with the sale over a period of years. those figures on the table, as identified by The six properties that we are talking ANAO, this is the result of short-term think- about are: the Defence Plaza in Sydney, ing, an inconsistent approach and a clearly which sold for some $85 million in 2001; the reckless disregard for future liability. Defence Plaza in Melbourne, which sold for Worse still—there is worse to come— $40 million in 2001; the Hydrographic Of- these are not normal commercial leases. At fice in Wollongong, which sold for $7 mil- Campbell Park, Moorebank and Weston lion in 2001; Campbell Park offices in the Creek, the Auditor-General found that there ACT, which sold for $99 million in 2002; the were greater lease obligations imposed upon Defence National Storage and Distribution the Commonwealth than is the case with Centre in Moorebank, which sold for $209 normal Defence contractual leasing ar- million in 2003; and the Australian Defence rangements. In fact, there is an additional College in Weston Creek, which sold for cost as well. Almost $2½ million was paid to some $32 million in 2003. The total net gain a property services contractor in 2003-04 to to government from the sale of these proper- meet the requirements of the lease agree- ties was some $472 million. ments. These decisions to sell and to lease Defence paid back $46.4 million in rent were taken after the outcome of the joint re- for these six properties in the first year. For view of the Defence estate was known. The the first full year of rental in 2003-04, this government based its business case analysis amounted to 60 per cent of Defence’s prop- on outdated figures. The government, in its erty rental payments. Over the six-year life decision making, deliberately chose to ignore of the lease agreement, Defence will pay a actual market values. Instead, it relied upon rental of some $604 million for the proper- hypothetical lease terms. In fact, the ANAO ties they once owned. I repeat: the sale pro- finds that the Department of Finance and ceeds from the six properties were some Administration breached the provisions of $472 million and the rental return—that is, the Financial Management and Accountabil- the rent that has to be paid out after the sale ity Act—an act that the department is proceeds of $472 million are realised—is charged to oversee in terms of its administra- $604 million. The difference is an additional tion. So, desperate to achieve the sale for cost of some $132 million to the Defence particular budget reasons in 2002, 2003 and budget over a period of six years. 2004, the government chose to deliberately

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 153 breach its own act and incur significant fu- likewise, with a number of other refits and ture liabilities for many out years into the upgrades such as the frigate project, which I future. It ignored normal commercial prac- will speak to on another occasion. The real tice and created new standards of conduct. worry is that we seem to accept such mis- But there is more. The ANAO made find- management of huge sums of money by the ings in respect of the two big value proper- Department of Defence as normal or even ties in the CBDs of Sydney and Melbourne. permissible. The reaction of most people is The ANAO found that the rental increases simply to roll their eyes and think, ‘It’s al- were 23 per cent and 43 per cent respectively ways been thus.’ After nine long years the after two years. At the time of the sales, both evidence is clear. It is simply not good Sydney and Melbourne had buoyant com- enough that bad decisions, poor decisions, of mercial property markets. It is pretty obvious this magnitude are allowed to continue. I perhaps, but it was not taken into account in conclude by saying that this is clearly an- the costings or the sales figures that were other example of a government struggling eventually negotiated by the sale agents on with the concept of sound financial man- behalf of the Commonwealth. Even if De- agement. fence invested the proceeds from the sale of Question agreed to. these properties, the ANAO report found that ADJOURNMENT the rental commitments would exhaust funds The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT during year 10 of a 12-year lease in the case (Senator Moore)—Order! It being 8.00 pm, of the Sydney property and during year eight I propose the question: of a 12-year lease for the Melbourne CBD property. That the Senate do now adjourn. As I said, to comment objectively, this Sir Harry Gibbs was a remarkable and poor decision. And Senator BRANDIS (Queensland) (8.00 this from a government which continually pm)—Since the Senate rose for the winter boasts of its own competence with respect to recess Australia has suffered the loss of one financial management and from a govern- of its most distinguished citizens—the for- ment which chooses to stand upon and argue mer Chief Justice of Australia Sir Harry on the basis of its own credible economic Gibbs, who died on 25 June. I had the hon- record. Here is a clear example of a govern- our of representing the Senate at the state ment proceeding with a plan that from the memorial service for Sir Harry in Sydney on outset was doomed to create losses in defi- 11 July, when his life and achievements were ance of its own structures but, more particu- commemorated in moving eulogies by his larly, in breach of an act of parliament that it daughter, Margaret Gibbs; his close friend brought in and, at one time, heralded. and fellow member of the High Court bench, Last week I spoke of other examples of Sir Ninian Stephen; and his first two associ- the Howard government’s mismanagement ates, the Hon. Justice Glen Williams, now a of Defence funding or Defence moneys. In member of the Queensland Court of Appeal, particular, I referred to a report by the ANAO and Mr David Jackson QC, the leader of the of the M113 armoured personnel carrier up- High Court bar. All spoke in their different grade project. The ANAO found that there ways of a man of rare intellectual distinction was a litany of problems resulting in massive and the highest integrity who was pre- cost blow-outs in that particular project and, eminent among the judicial lawyers of his day. Yet, despite his eminence in the public

CHAMBER 154 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005 life of our nation, Sir Harry Gibbs remained Gibbs’ fledgling practice was interrupted in the private sphere an exemplar of the qui- by the Second World War. He served eter virtues of modesty, humanity, decency throughout the whole of the war, particularly and good humour. in New Guinea, rose to the rank of major and Harry Talbot Gibbs was born in Sydney was mentioned in despatches. After the war on 7 February 1917, but he grew up in the he resumed his practice and quickly became Queensland city of Ipswich. He was edu- the busiest and most respected junior at the cated at the Ipswich Grammar School and bar, specialising in commercial, property, tax the University of Queensland, from which he and constitutional matters. He was renowned graduated with degrees in arts and law in as an appellate advocate. He did not have a 1937 and 1939 respectively. He achieved particularly polished or suave manner of first class honours in English literature and speech—in fact, his voice was high and first class honours in law—the first arts/law slightly grating. But those who remember graduate of that university to have achieved him as a barrister speak of the intellectual the distinction of a double first. It would be force of his arguments, which persuaded by several decades before that achievement was their sheer intelligence. While still a rela- repeated. He was also the president of the tively young man he won the respect of the university law students association. most eminent judges of his day, including the great Sir Owen Dixon. In fact, Gibbs won Gibbs was called to the Queensland bar in flattering remarks from Dixon for his argu- 1939 and immediately demonstrated the ment in the last High Court case in which he fighting spirit appropriate to a barrister when appeared—Dennis Hotels v Victoria—the he and his friend Tom Matthews, who had rarest of all compliments from that com- also graduated that year with first class hon- manding and austere man. ours in law, brought proceedings against the Barristers Admission Board. The board had Having taken silk in 1957, Gibbs was ap- refused to give them the benefit of a rule pointed to the Supreme Court of Queensland which remitted the admission fees of barris- in 1961 at the age of only 44. He was the ters who had achieved that academic distinc- young star of the court and there were many tion, contending, rather parsimoniously, that who expected Gibbs to be promoted rapidly it had a discretion not to do so. Gibbs and to the chief justiceship when Sir Alan Mans- Matthews argued that their entitlement to field retired in 1966. But that did not happen. waiver of the fee could not on the proper Instead, he was appointed to the Federal construction of the rules be denied—and Court of Bankruptcy, having been earmarked they won. It was the first appearance in the to be the first chief justice of a proposed law reports of the name ‘HT Gibbs’, a name Commonwealth superior court. But the new which would come to dominate the Queen- court was not created as expected—it was sland Reports during the 1950s as Gibbs be- not until 1976 that the Federal Court of Aus- came the pre-eminent barrister at the Queen- tralia came into being—and for a few years sland bar. It would appear with increasing Gibbs’ career languished. frequency in the Commonwealth Law Re- It was revived when, in 1970, the Gorton ports as well, as Gibbs developed the leading government appointed him to succeed Sir High Court practice among Queensland bar- Frank Kitto when he retired from the High risters. Court. He served as a justice of the court for 17 years—for the last seven of them as Chief Justice—until his retirement in 1987. He

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 155 served the court and the Australian people critics claim that it is quite unreal to say that judi- with exemplary distinction. He was never cial decisions are guided by strict and complete controversial—not a small virtue in a judge, legalism. although one which is less appreciated The words of that expression of Sir Owen nowadays than it should be. His judgments Dixon have perhaps acquired an unfortunate con- across the whole gamut of the law were al- notation. No one seriously suggests that there ways closely argued and convincing. He should be a rigid adherence to the very words of previous judgments or that statutes should be never engaged in judicial rhetoric and, al- construed with unthinking literalism and every- though in his private life he had a great love one recognizes that the law must and does de- of English literature—in particular, poetry— velop to meet the needs of the changing times but one will scour his extensive judgments in in that development principle and logic and vain for a single purple passage. Yet his precedent have their proper place and a judge judgments are models of clarity and lucid would fail to perform a judicial function if he or expression in which he arrived at his conclu- she deserted all three and gave a decision based sions through rigorous, exhaustive and intel- simply on individual notions of right and wrong. lectually honest reasoning. Stability and certainty in the law are virtues, particularly in unsettled times. His style of judicial reasoning was some- His approach was, very much, the Dixonian times criticised during the 1980s and 1990s one of reasoning, carefully and rigorously, as unfashionably narrow. That was a time from stated, transparent premises to ultimate when the fashion developed among some of conclusions, having regard to all relevant his judicial colleagues for judgments which facts, legal doctrines and principles and— were all too often monuments of social, eco- just as importantly—conscientiously disre- nomic and political relevance, paeans to phi- garding any irrelevant ones. It is an approach losophic doubt, tracts of the times, effusions which David Jackson QC, at Sir Harry’s of social consciousness and even gratuitous memorial service, described as ‘quintessen- expressions of outrage more suitable to par- tially judicial’. And, I am happy to add, it is liamentary speeches or the columns of news- an approach which is once again asserting papers than to the spare and difficult task of itself, as the legal faddism of much of the judicial decision making. But that criticism 1980s and 1990s is being critically reap- bothered Sir Harry Gibbs not at all. Evoking praised. the memory of the great Sir Owen Dixon, he reflected on the proper function of the judici- Yet it should not be thought that Sir Harry ary in his retirement speech on 5 February Gibbs was a narrow lawyer. Rather, he un- 1987. He said: derstood that legal principles are embedded It no doubt makes it easier for some to explain in a firm foundation of rights and freedoms. the decisions of the Court if the Justices are re- But, as he said in his retirement speech: garded as stereotypes and if one is described as a History shows that rights and freedoms are best conservative or upholder of State rights and an- protected, indeed can only be fully protected, other as a liberal or centralist. Implicit in this when the law is administered openly by impartial approach is the assumption that judges make de- courts and the parties are represented by lawyers cisions on the basis of their own preconceived who are competent and independent. The rule of opinions regarding social, economic or political law is a precious inheritance and it can be pre- matters. In truth, the difficulties of decision are served only if the legal profession in Australia sometimes such that two judges may be led to retains its strength and integrity. opposite conclusions, although each rigorously applies legal methods and legal principles. Some

CHAMBER 156 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

The death of Sir Harry Gibbs marks the pass- ments in the system. Some commentators ing of the greatest lawyer the state of Queen- have referred to the current term of service sland has produced since Sir Samuel Griffith. as a problem. Some say that the younger Both occupied the office of Chief Justice of generation these days has a different para- Australia with conspicuous distinction. Both digm of employment life. It is said that there brought to it the very highest intellectual is significantly less concern for single career capacities and profound knowledge of the paths of only one employer for life. That is, law, enhanced and broadened by deep learn- income security holds less fear than it did for ing in the humanities. Appropriately, in his earlier generations. I must say, though, that I retirement, Sir Harry accepted the presidency have seen no research on this matter, so it of the society named in Sir Samuel Griffith’s remains fairly speculative. But I note in pass- honour. ing that both generations associated with the At the peak of Sir Harry Gibbs’s career Great Depression and World War II held em- there was no greater judicial lawyer in Aus- ployment security paramount over all, hence tralia. His reputation, always outstanding, the attachment in those days to careers in the will, I believe, grow in lustre with the pas- Public Service and various government sage of time. agencies. Defence Recruitment I understand, however, that turnover within the Australian defence forces, at vari- Senator MARK BISHOP (Western Aus- ous levels, is not always considered to be a tralia) (8.10 pm)—Tonight I want to resume bad or retrograde thing. In fact, my informa- where I left off in an adjournment debate tion is that for other ranks, ORs, the average earlier this week and address the matter of period of employment might be only four or falling and failing recruitment to Australia’s five years. In terms of constant force re- defence forces. It might be recalled that I freshment, that is considered both desirable referred to data provided in the ASPI report and healthy. That is particularly so, given the on the 2005-06 defence budget. Those fig- limited career paths for persons in those ures showed a picture of failed targets over ranks. For officers it might be different but the last nine years. They also showed reten- again there are critical career points when tion rates over the same period averaging choices have to be made. Equally, turnover about 11 per cent. I also spoke on the pro- as the hierarchy narrows is also desirable. It posal to attract and retain more women in the facilitates careers and prevents the creation Australian defence forces. A key feature of of bottlenecks. So perhaps any consideration this is training which is offered by all of the of career paths as part of the recruitment and services, much of which is transferable into retention problem might be marginal. Per- industry after discharge. I identified the con- haps wastage rates are simply the nature of cern at family disruption, the needs of part- the beast. ners for employment and the changing nature of society which put it at greater odds with However, there are two other rigidities in the extant culture of the defence services. the system which are worthy of comment. There is, however, much more to this matter. The first is the new policy introduced in recent years which set very high standards for The government and the defence forces fitness but again with the deficiency that need to urgently review their entire approach there is no apparent safety net. Fitness for to this subject. This includes looking at ri- duty in the services is, of course, essential. gidities which might be structural impedi- But whether the standards are too absolute

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 157 and too rigorous is a question. Put simply, services to civilian and clerical jobs. This not all services require one to be fit for bat- effectively makes discharge earlier, easier tle. and more frequent. This in turn affects the It has been put to me that wastage could retention rate. The whole debate about reten- be reduced by having more flexibility for tion, training and discharge is, as one would those less able to perform at such a high expect, complex. physical standard. That, though, will vary Some say the current controversy over between the services. We know, for example, military justice crystallised an unfavourable that the Navy cannot fill its shore comple- attitude towards a defence career. If so, it is a ment and hence denies rotations from sea most unfortunate downside, but the remedy duty. Unfortunately, fitness standards have is obvious, if the government is serious. The another downside. My own experience of government simply needs to acknowledge military compensation is that medical dis- the veracity of the findings of the Senate in- charge due to unfitness facilitates wastage. quiry into military justice. The diminution of For defence as an employer, it is not a prob- the reputation of, and lack of respect for, our lem because there is no requirement for it to military personnel which have flowed from manage its own compensation liability. The this inquiry are most unfortunate. The repu- compensation bill is always funded out of tation of those personnel needs to be restored general revenue. Therefore, it is very easy to as a matter of priority, and that is entirely in diagnose personnel as being unfit and then the hands of the government and more senior discharge them without consequences. The personnel within the Australian defence recent military justice inquiry has revealed forces. some of those cases. It also needs saying that modern percep- The result of this is that, in some cases, tions of risk are changing. Defence service middle-aged personnel, and younger, return, can entail risk—and sometimes significant unexpectedly and without anticipating it, to a risk—to life and limb. In making a choice in labour market for which they are unprepared. a wider and more sophisticated labour mar- The disability for which they were dis- ket, that risk is logically and properly a con- charged might restrict opportunities for fu- sideration for those seeking to enter into a ture employment. And, being discharged career in the defence forces. Public contro- early, they have not gained marketable skills versy about the merit of various deployments which would enable them to take up a useful may, one suggests, be part of that. It is inter- place in the civilian labour market. The im- esting to consider the debate about the depression gained is that, despite efforts to im- ployment to East Timor, under the flag of the prove transition management, training for United Nations, and the debate that has fol- work force re-entry is at best inadequate. lowed the location of troops in Iraq. We If skills are obtained, military personnel know that in the United States, for example, can benefit enormously from a service ca- the increasing body count from Iraq shown reer. If not, then at discharge they are cer- on the evening news is making recruitment tainly in limbo. It is perhaps unfortunate that into the services there quite difficult. Putting the latter impression is so strong. Recruit- one’s life on the line in a national emergency ment, therefore, might also depend on this is one thing; doing the same for another impression. Added to this is a second policy country’s emergency, outside the authority of tenet which prevents deployment within the the United Nations, is clearly a different matter.

CHAMBER 158 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

We note that there has been other specula- to come from that advertisement was appre- tion, including the potential for recruitment hension. She felt pressured that she could be overseas. This idea is not unique to the ADF; called into work at any time on any day, de- it is something many in industry are actively spite her family circumstances, and appre- pursuing. It is also suggested that there is a hensive about what the future might hold for need to pay greater attention to the ethnic her and her job unless she complied with the communities. These communities are gener- implied unreasonable demand being made on ally considered to be underrepresented in the her. The truth is that that ad was designed to defence forces. It is said, for example, that scare people into believing that the proposed the ADF is predominantly a white, Anglo- workplace relations reforms will damage and Saxon community. That is another issue wor- undermine existing workers’ rights. Even thy of consideration. Recruitment to the ADF putting to one side that we have not yet seen is a matter of continuing importance. This is the legislation, the claims in that advertise- particularly the case at this time of higher ment are already highly misleading and can levels of readiness. We will watch this de- be easily refuted. bate, as it unfolds, with continuing interest. For example, myth 1: vulnerability. This Workplace Relations myth is that workers’ rights might in some Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (8.19 way be diminished. In fact, workers’ rights pm)—Some of us in this chamber would will continue to be protected under the gov- have seen the recent advertisement by the ernment’s proposed workplace relations re- ACTU against the government’s foreshad- forms. It will continue to be unlawful to dis- owed workplace relations reforms. The ad criminate against or sack an employee on the which appeared on television that I want to basis of family responsibilities. That is the refer to tonight showed a young mother who case now, and the Workplace Relations Act is, it is implied, threatened with the sack for will continue to provide protection against refusing to comply with her boss’s demand unlawful dismissal. that she come to work unexpectedly. This Myth 2: inflexibility. This is the second advertisement, in my view, creates a range of emotion. The proposed reforms are about emotions among very vulnerable members of giving workers genuine choice and flexibil- the work force, including, firstly, a sense of ity. Employees and employers will be able to vulnerability. In the television footage a negotiate employment arrangements which mother is at home looking after her two suit both parties, with or without a union young children, without a man. She is called representative as they choose. Flexibility is in to work with no ability to provide for her the most important issue for working parents family in her absence, leaving her and her with young children. children feeling very vulnerable. Myth 3: insecurity. Workers’ rights will be The second emotion seemed to me to be protected under the new workplace relations inflexibility. The woman was being forced to reforms. These reforms are about genuine come to work at short notice by a demanding choice. Workers need not feel insecure. They and unscrupulous boss. The third emotion will have choices and they will not be able to appeared to me to be insecurity. The woman be unlawfully pressured into making agree- appeared scared stiff at the possibility that ments. she would lose her job if she said no. The Myth 4 is the fourth of the emotional fourth and final emotion that seemed to me myths in the advertisement that to me ap-

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 159 peared to come through from that woman— of their lives. Australia’s workplace relations that is, apprehension. These reforms are de- reforms must ensure that employees and em- signed to assist employees and employers in ployers have genuine choice. tailoring working arrangements that are best Standing still on this issue, as with so suited to them. This misleading television many others, is not an option. Our labour advertisement is designed to frighten the productivity has slipped recently, and if we vulnerable in this society, women in particu- stand still in an environment of increasing lar, who feel threatened by change. To me, global competition we go backwards. We the offensive implication is that employers must undertake sensible and sensitive work- will be able to sack women because they are place reforms to stay productive and ahead pregnant, are of different racial backgrounds, of our competitors and to provide the best will not come in when they get a phone call, working environment for our children. The have different religions, have union member- fact is that the current workplace relations ship or because of their sexuality, and that system, at both a state and federal level, is they will in fact have no redress. That is a process driven rather than outcome based. It cruel fabrication to the women in the work creates disputes in order to solve them. It has force. become the domain of third parties and so- Contrary to that advertisement, unlawful called experts rather than actual employers dismissals will still be unlawful under any or employees. The complex procedures changes to the workplace relations system. It which have developed over the past century will still be unlawful to discriminate against include absolutely ridiculous logs of claims. or sack an employee on the grounds of a per- The ambit in some of those logs is laughable. son’s religion, gender, union membership, And at a federal level, the roping-in of em- pregnancy or any family responsibilities. It is ployers that become bound by awards is lu- unlawful now and it will continue to be so. dicrous. Businesses prosper with a stable and In all jurisdictions other than Victoria and happy work force—not one where people the territories private sector workplaces have can be dismissed because one phone call to establish whether they are bound by the results in some question about their avail- Commonwealth laws or the state laws. This ability. They will not be able to be dismissed is no easy task, and there is no logic to it. on a whim. It will continue to be unlawful to Businesses in the same industry, sometimes do so. We do not want a work force and they competing with each other in the same street do not want a work force where there is a or shopping centre, may be under different revolving door employment policy: in one industrial relations laws. It is crazy. In some day and out the next. That does not make for cases, employees in the one business are un- a good work force. der different Commonwealth laws, but other Today’s families come in all shapes and employees doing other tasks, even in the sizes. They are no longer necessarily a hus- same shop, are under state laws. This is just band, a wife and 2.4 children. Fertility rates crazy. I ask you: is this a system that is work- are dropping and Australia has an ageing ing well? If it is, I would hate to see one that population—we have discussed that in this was in need of change and reform. There is a place many times. Everybody has different need for industrial relations reform and this aspirations as to when and how they want to government plans to deliver it. work and how they want to structure the rest

CHAMBER 160 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

I had a very constructive meeting this Financial Management and Account- morning in my office with the President of ability Determinations— the ACTU, Sharan Burrow. We plan to meet 2005/21—Other Trust Moneys— again, and as a member of the Prime Minis- Insolvency and Trustee Service Aus- ter’s task force on industrial relations reform tralia Special Account Establishment I am very keen to maintain that dialogue 2005 [F2005L02306]*. with Sharan Burrow. I felt that we had a very 2005/22—Other Trust Moneys— constructive first conversation and I look National Blood Authority Special forward to more of them. And I give an un- Account Establishment 2005 dertaking to the working women of this [F2005L02307]*. country: I will not let you down. In the proc- 2005/23—Other Trust Moneys— ess of constructive and sensible workplace Australian Communications and Me- reform I will be in there arguing for you. dia Authority Special Account Estab- lishment 2005 [F2005L02309]*. Senate adjourned at 8.28 pm Net Appropriation Agreements for— DOCUMENTS Department of Finance and Admini- Tabling stration [F2005L02254]*. The following documents were tabled by Department of Transport and Re- the Clerk: gional Services [F2005L02297]*. [Legislative instruments are identified by a Insolvency and Trustee Service Aus- Federal Register of Legislative Instruments tralia [F2005L02267]*. (FRLI) number] National Capital Authority Civil Aviation Act—Civil Aviation Safety [F2005L02257]*. Regulations—Airworthiness Directives— Financial Sector (Collection of Data) Part 105—AD/A330/52—Electronic In- Act—Financial Sector (Collection of Data) strument System Display Units Determinations Nos— [F2005L02293]*. 57 of 2005—Reporting Standard SRS Customs Act—Tariff Concession Revoca- 240.0 (2005) [F2005L02223]*. tion Instrument 16/2005 [F2005L02289]*. 58 of 2005—Reporting Standard SRS Environment Protection and Biodiversity 300.0 (2005) [F2005L02225]*. Conservation Act—Threat Abatement 60 of 2005—Reporting Standard SRS Plans for— 310.1 (2005) [F2005L02231]*. Predation, Habitat Degradation, Compe- 61 of 2005—Reporting Standard SRS tition and Disease Transmission by Fe- 310.2 (2005) [F2005L02233]*. ral Pigs [F2005L02259]*. 62 of 2005—Reporting Standard SRS Psittacine Beak and Feather Disease Af- 320.0 (2005) [F2005L02234]*. fecting Endangered Psittacine Species [F2005L02255]*. 64 of 2005—Revocation of reporting standards applying to superannuation Financial Management and Accountability entities [F2005L02238]*. Act— Migration Act—Migration Regulations— Adjustments of Appropriations on Specification of a class of persons for the Change of Agency Functions— purposes of subparagraph 1222(1)(a)(ii), Direction No. 5 of 2005-2006 dated 10 August 2005 [F2005L02294]*. [F2005L02283]*. * Explanatory statement tabled with legislative instrument.

CHAMBER Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 161

Indexed Lists of Files The following documents were tabled pursuant to the order of the Senate of 20 June 2001, as amended: Departmental and agency contracts for 2004-05—Letters of advice— Communications, Information Technol- ogy and the Arts portfolio agencies. Foreign Affairs and Trade portfolio agencies. Unproclaimed Legislation The following document was tabled pursuant to standing order 139(2): Unproclaimed legislation—Document providing details of all provisions of Acts which come into effect on proclamation and which have not been proclaimed, including statements of reasons for their non- proclamation and information relating to the timetable for their operation, as at 31 July 2005, dated August 2005.

CHAMBER 162 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE The following answers to questions were circulated:

Minister for Defence: Overseas Travel (Question No. 714) Senator Chris Evans asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 4 May 2005: For each financial year since 2000-01 to 2004-05 to date: (1) (a) What overseas travel was undertaken by the Minister; (b) what was the purpose of the Minis- ter’s visit; (c) when did the Minister depart Australia; (d) who travelled with the Minister; and (e) when did the Minister return to Australia. (2) (a) Who did the Minister meet during the visit; and (b) what were the times and dates of each meeting. (3) (a) On how many of these trips was the Minister accompanied by a business delegation; and (b) can details be provided of any delegation accompanying the Minister. (4) Who met the cost of travel and other expenses associated with the trip. (5) What total travel and associated expenses, if any, were met by the department in relation to: (a) the Minister; (b) the Minister’s family; (c) the Minister’s staff; and (d) departmental and/or agency staff. (6) What were the costs per expenditure item for: (a) the Minister; (b) the Minister’s family; and (c) the Minister’s staff, including but not necessarily limited to: (i) fares, (ii) allowances, (iii) accommodation, (iv) hospitality, (v) insurance, and (vi) other costs. (7) What were the costs per expenditure item for each departmental and/or agency officer, including but not necessarily limited to: (a) fares; (b) allowances; (c) accommodation; (d) hospitality; (e) insurance; and (f) other costs. (8) (a) What was the total cost of air charters used by the Minister or his/her office or department; and (b) how many occasions did the Minister or his/her office or department and/or agency charter air- craft, and in each case, what was the name of the charter company that provided the service and the respective costs. Senator Hill—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) (4), (6), (7) and (8) The Special Minister of State will respond on behalf of all ministers to these parts. (2) (3) and (5) (d) The information sought in the honourable senator’s question is not readily available. To collect and assemble such information would be a major task requiring considerable time and resources. In the interest of efficient utilisation of departmental resources, I am not prepared to authorise the time and effort that would be required. (5) (a), (b) and (c) See my response to Senate Question on Notice 682 part (1). Prime Minister and Cabinet: Customer Service (Question No. 833) Senator Chris Evans asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 4 May 2005: With reference to the department and/or its agencies:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 163

(1) For each of the financial years 2000-01 to 2004-05 to date, can a list be provided of customer service telephone lines, including: (a) the telephone number of each customer service line; (b) whether the number is toll free and open 24 hours; (c) which output area is responsible for the customer service line; and (d) where this call centre is located. (2) For each of the financial years 2000-01 to 2004-05 to date, what was the cost of maintaining the customer service lines. (3) For each of the financial years 2000-01 to 2004-05 to date, can a breakdown be provided of all direct and indirect costs, including: (a) staff costs; (b) infrastructure costs (including maintenance); (c) telephone costs; (d) departmental costs; and (e) any other costs. (4) How many calls have been received, by year, in each year of the customer service line’s operation. Senator Hill—The Prime Minister has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: I am advised by my department as at Attachment A.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 164 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

Attachment A Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet Customer Service Telephone Lines

1(a) 1(b) 1(c) 1(d) 2 3(a) 3(b) 3(c) 3(d) 3(e) 4 Customer Service Toll Fre Open 24 hrs Output Area Call Centre Cost of Staf Costs Infrastructure Telephone Depart- Any Other Number Number Located At Maintaining Costs (including Costs Mental Costs of Calls the Customer mainenance) Costs Service Lines 2000/2001 Annual Total $166 1800 190 101 Y N ANS ACT $166 NA NA $166 NA - 6 1300 362 072 Y N OCO National - NA NA NA NA - NA

2001/2002 Annual Total $18,832 1800 190 101 Y N ANS ACT $329 NA NA $329 NA - 1,383 1300 362 072 Y N OCO National $18,503 NA NA $18,503 NA - 13,837

2002/2003 Annual Total $38,343 1800 190 101 Y N ANS ACT $6,019 NA NA $6,019 NA - 8,270 1300 362 072 Y N OCO National $32,324 NA NA $32,324 NA - 31,089

2003/2004 Annual Total $25,451 1800 190 101 Y N ANS ACT $150 NA NA $150 NA - 13 1300 362 072 Y N OCO National $25,300 NA NA $25,300 NA - 32,389

2004/2005 Annual Total $18,948 1300 362 072 Y N OCO National $18,948 NA NA $18,948 NA - 36,572 NOTES: 1 The Department does not have dedicated call centres. Customer service lines are answered by general staff as part of their normal administrative duties.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 165

2 The toll free number is open during business hours and a recorded message after hours. Local call cost only. 3 Answers provided to question l d indicate - "National" - general staff located in capital cities around Australia "ACT" - general staff located in Can- berra. 4 Information only available from January 2002 for OCO in 2001/2002. 5 NA denotes information is not available. KEY: PM&C OUTPUT AREA ANS Awards and National Symbols Branch PORTFOLIO AGENCIES OCO Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 166 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

Eyre Peninsula Bushfire Recovery Assistance (Question No. 919) Senator O’Brien asked the Minister representing the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, upon notice, on 31 May 2005: With reference to the joint media release by the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and the Minister for the Environment and Heritage of 25 February 2005 (reference DAFF05/040WTJ), announcing the provision of $2.68 million in bushfire recovery assistance for Eyre Peninsula farmers: (1) What is: (a) by each financial year of this program, the projected expenditure profile; (b) the expenditure by the Commonwealth to date; (c) the starting date of the program; and (d) the projected completion date. (2) By financial year, what amount of funding is projected to be made available from: (a) the Natural Heritage Trust; and (b) the National Landcare program. (3) When and who in the South Australian Government did the Minister approach to: (a) negotiate the South Australian Government’s contribution to this program; (b) invite the South Australian Gov- ernment to jointly announce this program; and (c) negotiate the South Australian community’s contribution of an estimated $2.74 million to this program. (4) (a) Who made the estimate that the community’s in kind support for this program would be equivalent to $2.74 million; (b) how was this estimate made; and (c) can a copy of the modelling used to make this estimate be provided; if not, why not. (5) When and in what form did the Member for Grey make representations to the Minister in relation to this program. (6) For each financial year, what is the total projected number of grants of up to $4 000 to be made available to assist landholders to develop property management plans. (7) As at 30 May 2005, how many grants of up to $4 000 have been made to assist landholders to develop property management plans. (8) For each financial year, what is the total projected number of grants of up to $10 000 to be made available to assist landholders to implement property management plans. (9) As at 30 May 2005, how many grants of up to $10 000 have been made to assist landholders to develop property management plans. (10) Can a copy of the guidelines and application form be provided; if not, why not. (11) How many requests for information about grants for property management plans and on-ground works have been received by Landcare and the Sustainable Industries section of the department on the telephone number 02 6272 5196. (12) Has a freecall number or some other low cost facility been installed to deal with long distance inquiries from South Australia; if so, when; if not, why not. (13) How many requests for information about this package have been received by the Rural Financial Counselling Service at Tumby Bay on 08 8688 2922. (14) (a) What extra resources were provided by the Commonwealth to the Rural Financial Counselling Service at Tumby Bay to assist the service to cope with the number of inquiries generated by this package; and (b) over what period of time were these resources made available. Senator Ian Macdonald—The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 167

(1) What is: (a) by each financial year of this program, the projected expenditure profile; (b) the expenditure by the Commonwealth to date; (c) the starting date of this program; and (d) the projected completion date of this program. (a) Projected Expenditure (Combined State and Australian Government contributions) 2004-05 (program commenced 2005-06 2006-07 (program ends 15 June 2005) 30 June 2007) $2,050,000 $1,270,000 $2,040,000 (b) $1.64 million. (c) 15 June 2005. (d) 30 June 2007. (2) By financial year, what amount of funding is projected to be made available from: (a) the Natural Heritage Trust; and (b) the National Landcare program. 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 a) Natural Heritage Trust $1,490,000 $0 $1,040,000 b) National Landcare Program $150,000 $0 $0 (3) When and who in the South Australian Government did the Minister approach to: (a) negotiate the South Australian Government’s contribution to this program; (b) invite the South Australian Gov- ernment to jointly announce this program; and (c) negotiate the South Australian community’s contribution of an estimated $2.74 million to this program. (a) Australian Government officials on behalf of the Minister commenced discussions with the State on receiving their first draft of the proposal on 4 February 2005. (b) The South Australian Government, through the office of the Hon John Hill, MP, Minister for Environment and Conservation was consulted on the development of a joint draft announcement prior to Minister Truss’ visit to the Eyre Peninsula on Thursday 24 and Friday 25 February 2005. (c) A joint announcement did not take place as the State were not able to confirm their funding commitment to the program at that time. The South Australian community’s contribution of an estimated $2.74 million to this program was based on information provided by the South Australian Government. (4) (a) Who made the estimate that the community’s in kind support for this program would be equivalent to $2.74 million; (b) how was this estimate made; and (c) can a copy of the modelling used to make this estimate be provided; if not, why not. (a) South Australian Government. (b) No. The estimate was made by the South Australian Government. (c) No. (5) When and in what form did the Member for Grey make representations to the Minister in relation to this program. The Member for Grey and his office held numerous discussions with the office of the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry commencing directly following the fires on the Eyre Peninsula. (6) For each financial year, what is the total projected number of grants of up to $4 000 to be made available to assist landholders to develop property management plans. 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 0 60 32

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 168 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

(7) As at 30 May 2005, how many grants of up to $4 000 have been made to assist landholders to develop property management plans. Nil. (8) For each financial year, what is the total projected number of grants of up to $10 000 to be made available to assist landholders to implement property management plans. 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 0 80 104 (9) As at 30 May 2005, how many grants of up to $10 000 have been made to assist landholders to develop property management plans. Nil. (10) No. Guidelines are currently being finalised by the State in consultation with Australian Govern- ment officials. (11) Nil. (12) The State Government had a freecall number operational by 13 January 2005. (13) As at 10 June 2005, there had been 452 fire-related enquiries received by the Rural Financial Counselling Service at Tumby Bay. The Service estimated that 25-35% of these enquiries sought information on the package. (14) (a) Through the South Australian Association of Rural Counselling Services additional counsellors were deployed to the impacted area on a rotation basis. The rural counsellor from Kangaroo Is- land – 3 days, a rural counsellor from the South East – 11 working days, Wudinna – 1 day and a retired counsellor for four months supported the existing services. (b) This additional support was made available directly following the fires. Eyre Peninsula Bushfire Recovery Assistance (Question No. 921) Senator O’Brien asked the Minister representing the Minister for Human Services, upon notice, on 31 May 2005: With reference to the joint media release by the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and the Minister for the Environment and Heritage of 25 February 2005 (reference DAFF05/040WTJ), announcing the provision of $2.68 million in bushfire recovery assistance for Eyre Peninsula farmers: (1) (a) When was the Minister briefed on the operation of this program and the requirement for Centre- link and the department to administer the program; and (b) on each occasion, who briefed the Min- ister. (2) What changes were required to Centrelink’s normal operating procedures for the Farm Help Pro- gram in relation to the package announced in the media release. (3) When were Centrelink staff briefed regarding the package announced in the media release. (4) (a) How many applications have been received to date for grants of up to $4 000 to assist landholders to develop property management plans; (b) how many applications have been approved; (c) how many applications have been received to date for grants of up to $10 000 to assist landholders to implement property management plans; and (d) how many applications have been approved. Senator Patterson—The Minister for Human Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 169

(1) The grants referred to in the media release of 25 February 2005 are the responsibility of the De- partment of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, the Department of the Environment and Heritage and the South Australian State Government. As a consequence, the Minister of Human Services was not briefed by Centrelink on this component of the bushfire package. (2) In relation to the Farm Help program mentioned in the media release, Centrelink Financial Infor- mation Service Officers actively promoted the Farm Help program to relevant customers and liaised with Rural Financial Counsellors in the Lower Eyre Peninsula. (3) As the Farm Help program was an existing service, no additional briefing was required. Centrelink was not involved in administering any financial elements of the grants announced in the joint media release by the Departments of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and Environment and Heri- tage on 25 February 2005, therefore it was not necessary to brief Centrelink staff. (4) This grants package is the responsibility of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, the Department of the Environment and Heritage and the South Australian State Government. Family Relationship Centres (Question No. 953) Senator O’Brien asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 9 June 2005: With reference to the Prime Minister’s media statement of 29 July 2004 headlined: ‘Reforms to the Family Law System’: (1) Can information be provided on: (a) the proposed location of the 65 community-based Family Re- lationship Centres by: (i) state or territory, (ii) city/town/suburb, and (iii) federal electorate; and (b) the scheduled opening date of each centre. (2) What modelling is being conducted, or has been conducted, to determine the needs of particular communities and thereby the location of each Family Relationship Centre. (3) (a) When will the modelling begin and when will it conclude; (b) who will conduct the modelling; (c) how were they selected; (d) who made the final decision; and (e) can the modelling be made available; if not, why not. (4) For each financial year of the program’s projected existence, can information be provided on the profile of total projected Commonwealth expenditure to: (a) establish; and (b) provide running costs for the community-based Family Relationship Centres. Senator Ellison—The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) (a) Information about the location of the first 15 centres is at Attachment A. The Government has not yet announced the locations of the other 50 centres. (b) The first 15 centres are expected to open from the middle of 2006. (2) The Attorney-General’s Department analysed demographic information obtained through the Aus- tralian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) along with the results of a needs analysis undertaken by the De- partment of Family and Community Services, which showed, by ABS statistical sub-division: • population • proportion of divorced or separated people with children • proportion with oldest child under 5 yrs old • the number of blended families • separations in the last 6 months and the last 3 years

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 170 SENATE Thursday, 18 August 2005

• Child Support Agency clients • people receiving parenting payment, and • Domestic Violence Hotline referrals. Other factors taken into account in the Department’s analysis were: • the accessibility of the proposed Family Relationship Centre to people elsewhere in the region, and • the location of the courts and Government funded services such as those under the Family Re- lationship Service Program, Indigenous services and community legal services and the distribution of other Government agencies such as Centrelink and the Job Network. • the need for the first 15 centres to be in discrete geographical areas such as outer metropolitan/regional areas to avoid them being overrun while the next 50 centres are being established. (3) The analysis of the data was conducted by the Attorney-General’s Department and the Department of Family and Community Services. The analysis is not available as it was prepared for internal decision making purposes, specifically for the Ministers’ consideration of the location of the centres and other services. (4) Total projected Commonwealth expenditure on the Family Relationship Centres over the next four years is: 2005-06 $2.064m 2006-07 $29.253m 2007-08 $59.131m 2008-09 $87.996m This expenditure includes costs associated with the national advice line, research, training and other support for the centres. The establishment and running costs vary from centre to centre. Funding for each centre will be announced at the commencement of the selection process. Attachment A Locations of the first 15 Family Relationship Centres New South Wales Location Electorate Lismore Page Sutherland Hughes Penrith Lindsay Wollongong Cunningham Victoria Location Electorate Sunshine Maribyrnong and Gorton Frankston Dunkley Ringwood Casey, Deakin and Menzies Mildura Mallee Queensland Location Electorate Strathpine Dickson Townsville Herbert

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Thursday, 18 August 2005 SENATE 171

South Australia Location Electorate Salisbury Wakefield, Port Adelaide and Makin Western Australia Location Electorate Joondalup Moore Tasmania Location Electorate Hobart Denison Northern Territory Location Electorate Darwin Solomon Australian Capital Territory Location Electorate Canberra Fraser

Child Support Payments (Question No. 978) Senator Kirk asked the Minister representing the Minister for Human Services, upon notice, on 23 June 2005: (1) How many resident families ceased receiving payments through the Child Support Agency because the non-resident father has died. (2) How many resident families ceased receiving payments through the Child Support Agency because the non-resident father has committed suicide. Senator Patterson—The Minister for Human Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) In 2002-2003 there were a total of 1 527 male payers recorded on the child support computer system as having died. This is the latest data available. (2) CSA does not collect data on client suicides or other reasons for death.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE