VICTORIA

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD)

FIFTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT

AUTUMN SESSION 1990

Legislative Council

VOL. 397

[From 6 March 1990 to 3 May 1990}

MELBOURNE: L. V. NORTH, GOVERNMENT PRINTER

The Governor His Excellency the Reverend DR JOHN DAVIS McCAUGHEY, AC The Lieutenant-Governor The Honourable SIR JOHN McINTOSH YOUNG, AC, KCMG The Ministry [As AT 6 MARCH 1990] Premier The Hon. John Cain, MP Deputy Premier, and Minister for The Hon. J. E. Kirner, AM, MP Education Minister for the Arts, Minister for Major The Hon. E. H. Walker, MLC Projects, and Minister responsible for Post-Secondary Education Minister for Industry, Technolo$y and The Hon. D. R. White, MLC Resources, and Minister Assistmg the Treasurer in Budget Expenditure Minister for Police and Emellency Ser- The Hon. S. M. Crabb, MP vices, and Minister for Tounsm Minister for Health The Hon. C. J. Hogg, MLC Treasurer The Hon. R. A. Jolly, MP Minister for Transport The Hon. J. H. Kennan, QC, MP Minister for Local Government .. The Hon. M. A. Lyster, MLC Att

Leader of the Government: THE HON. E. H. WALKER (until 2 April 1990) THE HON. D. R. WHITE (from 2 April 1990) Deputy Leader of the Government: THE HON. D. R. WHITE (until 2 April 1990) THE HON. C. J. HOGG (from 2 April 1990) Leader of the Opposition: THE HON. M. A. BIRRELL Deputy Leader of the Opposition: THE HON. HADDON STOREY, QC Leader of the National Party: THE HON. W. R. BAXTER Deputy Leader of the National Party: THE HON. R. M. HALLAM

Heads of Parliamentary Departments

Assembly-Clerk of the Parliaments and Clerk of the Legislative Assembly: Mr R. K. Boyes

Council-Clerk ofthe Legislative Council: Mr A. V. Bray

Hansard-ChiefReponer: Mr L. C. lohns

Library"":'-'Librarian: Mr B. 1. Davidson

House-Acting Secretary: Mr W. F. McKelvie

Members of the Legislative Council FIFTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT-FIRST SESSION

Member Province Party Member Province Party Ashman, Hon. Gerald Barry Boronia LP Landeryou, Hon. William Doutta Galla ALP Baxter, Hon. William Robert North Eastern NP Albert Best, Hon. Ronald Alexander North Western NP Lawson, Hon. Robert Higinbotham LP Birrell, Hon. Mark Alexander East Yarra LP Long, Hon. Richard John Gippsland LP Chamberlain, Hon. Bruce Western . LP Lyster, Hon. Maureen Anne Chelsea ALP Anthony McLean, Hon. Jean Boronia ALP Connard, Hon. Geoffrey Higinbotham LP Macey, Hon. Reg Monash LP Phillip Mackenzie, Hon. Roderick Geelong Ind. Cox, Hon. George Henry Nunawading LP Alexander Cox sedge, Hon. Joan Melbourne West ALP Mier, Hon. Brian William Waverley ALP Craige, Hon. Geoffrey Central LP Miles, Hon. John Gould Templestowe LP Ronald Highlands Pullen, Hon. Barry Thomas Melbourne ALP Crawford, Hon. George Jika Jika ALP Sgro, Hon. Giovanni Melbourne North ALP Robert Antonio Davidson, Hon. Burwyn Eric Chelsea ALP Skeggs, Hon. Bruce Albert Templestowe LP de Fegely, Hon. Richard Ballarat LP Edward Strachan Smith, Hon. Kenneth South Eastern LP Evans, Hon. David Mylor North Eastern NP Maurice Guest, Hon. James Vincent Monash LP Storey, Hon. Haddon, QC East Yarra LP Chester Tehan, Hon. Marie Therese Central LP Hall, Hon. Peter Ronald Gippsland NP Highlands Hallam, Hon. Roger Murray Western NP Theophanous, Hon. Theo JikaJika ALP Henshaw, Hon. David Geelong ALP Charles Ernest, MBE Van Buren, Hon. Charles Eumemmerring ALP Hogg, Hon. Caroline Jennifer Melbourne North ALP Fredrick Hunt, Hon. Alan John South Eastern LP Varty, Hon. Rosemary Nunawading LP Ives, Hon. Robert Stuart Eumemmerring ALP Walker, Hon. Evan Herbert Melbourne ALP Kennedy, Hon. Cyril James Waverley ALP White, Hon. David Ronald DouttaGalla ALP Knowles, Hon. Robert lan BaHarat LP Wright, Hon. Kenneth Irving North Western NP Kokocinski, Hon. Licia Melbourne West ALP Mackenzie

Death ofHon. Sir Henry Edward Bolte, GCMG 6 March 1990 COUNCIL

Tuesday, 6 March 1990

The PRESIDENT (the Hon. A. J. Hunt) took the chair at 3.3 p.m. and read the prayer.

DEATH OF THE HONOURABLE SIR HENRY EDWARD BOLTE, GCMG The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts)-I move: That this House expresses its sincere sorrow at the death, on 4 January 1990, of the Honourable Sir Henry Edward Bolte, GCMG, and places on record its acknowledgment of the valuable services rendered by him to the Parliament and the people of Victoria as member of the Legislative Assembly for the electoral district of Hampden from 1947 to 1972, and as Premier and Treasurer from 1955 to 1972, Minister of Water Supply and Minister of Mines from 1948 to 1950, Minister of Conservation from 1949 to 1950 and from 1955 to 1961, Commissioner of Crown Lands and Survey and Minister of Soldier Settlement in 1955, Minister of Mines and Minister of Water Supply in 1964, and Minister of State Development in 1964. Shortly after Sir Henry's death, the Premier was accurate when he said that Sir Henry Bolte had placed an indelible stamp on Victorian politics-no-one would disagree with that. The enduring nature of Sir Henry's contribution was evident at his death in January by the sad sense of loss experienced by so many Victorians. Despite his having been retired from public life for approximately eighteen years, there was a real sense that Victorians knew and respected Sir Henry. Such a response is understandable as all Victorians-supporters and opponents alike, and he would not have had it otherwise-recognise the commitment that Sir Henry had to the development of Victoria. He took over as Premier in a period of great political instability. I have no doubt that other honourable members-particularly those opposite-will detail their memories of that turbulent era in the mid-1950s. Despite the benefits to some from the wool boom early in that decade, most Victorians were still experiencing rather tough times. Sir Henry turned those problems into opportunities. Through his own leadership and political nous he ushered in a period of significant political stability. Sir Henry recognised the need to develop Victoria, and as Premier and Treasurer he proceeded in a single-minded way to do just that. He was tireless in his efforts to promote Melbourne and Victoria to the rest of Australia; indeed, he was one of the first Premiers to begin strongly selling Victoria to the rest of the world. His period as Premier was marked by significant development in Victoria's resources. His enthusiasm for development had its genesis in his success in developing his own property at Meredith, which I had the pleasure of visiting when I was Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs. Sir Henry was a good farmer. I was fascinated when he gave me a lecture on the fact that one ought not bale hay, and that it was a wasted effort. That was new to me since I do not have a significant farming background. We went into the details of his theory and, in the end, he convinced me that farmers tended to bale hay to give themselves something to do. Many commentators have made much of Sir Henry's contribution to the economic development of Victoria; but other contributions should be acknowledged. As the Minister for the Arts and Minister responsible for Post-Secondary Education I particularly say that because, during his time as Premier, Sir Henry saw the establishment of two new universities-Monash and La Trobe; not a bad record for a Session 1990-1 2 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Henry Edward Bolte, GCMG man considered to be anti-intellectual! Victoria also saw the establishment of the Victorian Arts Centre; not a bad record for a man considered to be anti-culture! Some review is in order because, during Sir Henry's time as Premier, significant developments of that kind did occur. They were major contributions to the life of Victoria, and Victorians now are the beneficiaries. It is often said that Sir Henry was a man for his time; I go further and say that he was a man for his time who knew his times very well. Sir Henry also knew how to pick partners well. In terms of life generally his wife, Jill, was a great comfort to him and a source of much of his inspiration and strength. Sir Henry sorely missed her in his last years. His great political partner was Sir Arthur Rylah. That was noticed from my side of politics; my party was dealing with a very strong partnership. Sir Henry Bolte was the first to admit that it was the backup of Sir Arthur Rylah that gave his Premiership strength and longevity. As Victoria moved into the difficult world of the 1970s, Sir Henry decided it was time for him to move aside-it was his own choice. He did so with a minimum of fuss, and in time to enable him to make a significant contribution in other fields. It is of interest that it was to this House that Sir Henry turned for his successors-I do not draw any moral from that. Sir Henry continued as a trustee of the Melbourne Cricket Ground, a role in which I had dealings with him on a number of occasions. He served as a director on the boards ofa number of prominent companies and was actively involved in his beloved racing industry. I last saw him last year at a lunch when a few people gathered to celebrate the end of what was once known as Bolte's follies-a famous development in the Western District of a daring kind; it was a soldier settlement development which turned out to be a most successful venture, and Sir Henry was pleased to claim it as such. Sir Henry had a real, rich and productive life. I, my party and my colleagues did not always agree with him-and I suspect that many of his own side did not agree with him-but he once said to me that he always slept well. He did not worry too much about what we thought. Sir Henry put an indelible stamp on Victorian politics and will be remembered fondly by the people of Victoria. He is sadly missed. I offer my government's condolences to his remaining family and friends. The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL (East Yarra Province)-I am proud to express the strong support of the Liberal Party for the motion of condolence on the death of Sir Henry Bolte. Sir Henry Bolte was born on 20 May 1908 and died on 4 January this year at the age of 81 years. The statements he made to his relatives not long before his death made it clear that he thought he had a full and enjoyable life. For a man at that stage of his life to be able to reflect with a sense of satisfaction on his career, his life, his friends and his colleagues is an example from which we can draw some strength and at which we feel admiration. This motion is like no other condolence motion in the history of the Victorian Parliament because it deals with a man who is a legend and whose term of office as Premier will never be beaten. He was a political giant in Victoria and will always be remembered for how he influenced the destiny of the State, not just for the way he dealt with day-to-day issues. Sir Henry was one of the most revered political leaders of our time and we will probably never see a politician like him again. He was one of those rare men who do not need a monument to record his achievements; the diverse and booming Victoria Death ofHon. Sir Henry Edward Bolle, GCMG 6 March 1990 COUNCIL 3 that he created during his term in government is his monument. He built it for us; and remembering his contribution is as simple as that. The enigma of Sir Henry has been summed up by one commentator, who said: How is it a shy little fat boy-as he once described himself-developed, almost without trying, into the living epitome of what most of the electorate felt and wanted? The vote that he achieved at election after election was a clear indication of his popular support; he did become the epitome of what most of the electorate wanted. Young Henry Bolte was not quite the typical carefree, conformist country lad that he would have had us believe. He did not just get through school: he won a scholarship on merit and showed his ability in gaining entrance to Ballarat Grammar School. It was typical of his modesty that he considered he had no great scholastic ability. Just the same, he did exceptionally well at maths, both at school and in government. Throughout the Bolte era Victoria paid its way. He was toughened by the spartan life as a boarder at school and hardened by the struggle farming under marginal conditions in the depressed 1930s, and any article about or biography of him reflects the fact that in that period his attitudes to life were formed. During his teenage years and until he was in his mid-twenties Henry Bolte worked in the family drapery store at Skipton and as a shed hand. Sir Henry served in the Australian Military Forces between 1940 and 1944 in the 2nd Field Training Regiment. His success with farming, combined with his gregarious nature, quick wit and earthy charm, made him a natural leader in the small local community, and it was that earthy charm, quick wit and gregarious nature that are perhaps the most memorable aspects of Sir Henry as Premier, as Leader and as a Victorian. We have heard many of his comments on issues that came up during his term in government. Two such comments sum up the cleverness of the way he could deal with problems, the light-hearted way he could deal with difficulties and the incisive way he would get on with the next job. At a race meeting he was heard to offer the following comment, "I like that horse Divide and Rule. I've done that for nearly twenty years, you know". After a precarious by-election he said, "I feel we did take some risks in that by-election by leaving the results to the electors". Sir Henry had a way of disarming debate through his command of language. If there is any quality that is important to a great politician it is command over the language, and Sir Henry had that command in a very earthy way. Mr President, Henry Bolte's entry into politics was little different from most, and perhaps this type ofeackground of his own explains why. After his discharge from the Army he was having a beer at the local golf club with two friends who had been looking for a candidate for the then Assembly seat of Hampden. They discussed their unsuccessful recruiting efforts and how they were unable to find any candidate to stand for the Liberal Party. After Sir Henry was fairly relaxed, they turned to him and said, "What· about you?" Sir Henry later said, "I thought it was a joke when I was invited to stand for Parliament". But he stood anyway and that was in 1945, a by­ election he lost. In 1947 he realised that a political career was a career that he wanted to pursue, and blooded by the experience two years earlier he stood for the 1947 election and won, and he was not to lose another election through to the time of his retirement. His ability to tackle matters head-on and to be always forthright, combined with his natural ability to establish rapport with people from all walks of life, established him quickly as a contender for leadership of the Liberal Party. Through an extraordinary 4 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Henry Edward Bolte, GCMG series of events the Liberal Party had to pick four successive Leaders in less than eighteen months. He was No. 4 on that list and became party Leader in 1953. The Leader of the Government in this place is correct in saying that it was a time of turmoil for the Labor Party just as it was a time of turmoil for the Liberal Party. Sir Henry became Leader of the Liberal Party, but at that time it had only eleven members. Sir Henry became Premier following the Labor split of 1955-with only eleven members and being the fourth elected Leader in eighteen months he became Premier and held that position for 6288 days until 1972; a record that is unlikely to be matched, if only for endurance reasons. Sir Henry held the following portfolios: Premier, of course, from 1955 to 1972; Treasurer for that entire period; Minister of Water Supply from 1945 to 1950 and for a year in 1964; Minister of Mines from 1948 to 1950 and for a year in 1964. Other executive and leadership positions held by him were: Commissioner of Crown Lands and Survey in 1955; President of the Board of Land and Works in 1955; and, of course, Leader of the Liberal Party from 1953 through to 1972. Sir Henry's appeal stemmed, in part, from his warm, outgoing nature. He had a straightforward manner that was seen by many as just being refreshing and normal. Sir Robert Menzies attributed Sir Henry's success to the fact that he was an average man with an uncommon facility for communicating with other average men and women, not from a lofty position but from one of equality with them. He would walk right up to strangers and introduce himself, establishing immediate rapport from the first moment. It is not something that comes as commonly to many others. Central to Sir Henry Bolte's success, I believe, was the fact that he continually immersed himself in the mainstream issues of the day. Some called him a conservative, but it would be far more accurate to call him the essential pragmatist. This ensured that his natural instincts and actions were remarkably in tune with the electorate year after year-indeed, from decade to decade. As Premier, he was initially called a stopgap Leader and was regarded as someone who would not last long at all; but this so-called stopgap Leader went ahead and governed for seventeen consecutive years. Sir Henry, of course, became known during those seventeen years as a straightshooter with a compelling honesty that earned him great respect. He had a populist instinct, yet he had no pretension. He dealt with a problem by admitting that something had gone wrong, and that ensured that the problem passed. He was also devastatingly realistic about political life. On becoming Premier he said, "It's the one job where, after you become experienced, people want you to get out". He was never forced out; he disregarded the intrigue, or overcame it, and got on with the job. The image of strength that Sir Henry conveyed came partly from the fact that he always knew his own mind; he had no doubts about what he believed in and he was not afraid to express his view regardless of the consequences. That strength made him a father figure; he was seen as more than a political leader and more than the Premier­ he became part of the Victoria of the time. Sir Henry had all the qualities of a great Australian leader: he was tough, shrewd, determined and direct and spoke a language that people understood. Ironically, he was a man offew words. He usually got straight to the point and did not labour it with debate. His words were often colourful. When Sir Henry retired from office his Cabinet colleagues presented him with a set of silver spurs, symbolic of his approach to leading his team during the remarkable Death ofHon. Sir Henry Edward BO/le, GCMG 6 March 1990 COUNCIL 5 expansion that took place in Victoria during his stewardship. However, it must be said that the silver spurs were not only an indication of the pressure put on his Cabinet colleagues but were also symbolic of the fact that he always drove himself extremely hard. Sir Henry said publicly that consensus was foreign to him. He had an autocratic style yet he gathered around him an administrative team of flair and drive capable of great outpourings of energy all for the good of Victoria. He could also be bad-teIllf)ered, but his quick wit and charm meant that many people saw him simply as being urbane and friendly. He was lucky because he had the good fortune of having an exceptional Deputy Premier in Arthur Rylah. The bond between those two men allowed Henry to stay as Premier with his deputy happy to support him to the hilt on all occasions during the length of his term. It cannot be understated that it became a team that was a two-man act. Horseracing, of course, held a special place in Henry's priorities, particularly after his retirement. The journalist whose telephone call interrupted his viewing of a special race still vividly recalls the tongue-lashing. Henry went on to be knighted: KCMG in the Queen's New Year's honours list in 1966 and GCMG in 1972. In 1986, sadly, he lost his greatest supporter and confidante, his gracious wife, Edith. The absence of her unselfish support and wonderful sense of humour after a lifetime together sharing the duties and difficulties of high public office must have made his final years more difficult. Sir Henry once stated: My wife has far greater influence on me than many of my party colleagues. Sir Henry Bolte was Victoria's longest serving Premier. He harnessed the economic circumstances of that time and made Victoria the most progressive, most expansionist and, on a per capita basis, the wealthiest part of the postwar Commonwealth of Australia. He was committed to developing the State and it was a legacy in which he rightfully took considerable pride. On some of the issues of the time Sir Henry was described as reactionary while on other issues, such as drinking and gambling, he took a liberal, even radical, view. He introduced liquor reforms and put an end to the 6 o'clock closing. He laid the basis for a huge growth in the State's manufacturing centre and gave Victoria its arts centre, two more universities and a vast network of colleges of advanced education. As the Leader of the House has indicated, perhaps that side of Sir Henry's history needs to be dwelt upon. On 5 January this year the Age paid tribute to Sir Henry Bolte: The Bolte era was a remarkable one and the man who led it was a politician of singular character and great accomplishment. He governed Victoria well, and all of us who live in the State remain in his debt. Sir Henry guided Victoria to its premier position on the national scene; every indicator of economic activity and living standards grew rapidly during his period in government. In the last years of his premiership he was able to note that Victoria enjoyed the lowest unemployment rate in Australia, the highest bank savings, the highest job opportunities and the highest level of home ownership. He also left the Liberal Party in a much stronger position than he had found it. Members of the Opposition can reflect on that with recognition and pride. Some of the tributes paid by Victorians, particularly former colleagues, referring to Sir Henry Bolte were that he was a "team man", a "loyal leader", "one of the truly 6 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Death o/Hon. Sir Henry Edward Bolle, GCMG great members of Parliament", "the last of a special breed", "an immensely friendly man", and "a man with a clarity of vision and a surety of purpose". It is also clear that Sir Henry's quotable quotes made him a journalist's dream. The fact that he enjoyed the occasional late-night drink or a game of snooker with the odd journalist must have added to that relationship! Even in retirement Sir Henry was a busy man; he never ceased working and, consequently, he retained his alertness throughout. Many honourable members would have attended the last function over which he presided-the launching of Lindsay Thompson's memoirs. He had the clarity of thought and the presence of mind for which we all knew him. In retirement Sir Henry pursued his continued involvement with the Victoria Racing Club and the Melbourne Cricket Ground. Shortly before his final illness he was a committee member of the VRC and Chairman of the MCG Board of Trustees. It is gratifying to note that a firm link between this Parliament and Sir Henry Bolte continues today and into the future with the presence in the other place of his great­ nephew, the honourable member for Ballarat North, Mr Stephen Elder. Mr Elder's parents, Billie and Toby Elder, looked after Sir Henry after he lost Dame Edith and they took care of him during his final illness. So far as the history of this Parliament and the people of Victoria are concerned, the passing of Sir Henry Bolte indeed marks the end of a special era. The cartoonists are not the only ones who will miss him. I shall quote a review of one biography: Whether you loved him or loathed him, you had to admit he possessed a touch of magic which made him a legend in his own lifetime. He certainly wove a spell over the Victorian electorate for decades and, unlike many politicians, Sir Henry Bolte chose the time of his own departure from office, perhaps his greatest show of strength. He again exhibited the hallmark of a great leader; he got out while he was on top even though the Liberal Party would have fully supported him continuing in office for years to come. . Sir Henry Bolte was revered by all members of the Liberal Party and we will never forget him. We are all the poorer now that Sir Henry Bolte has gone. Memories of him and his achievement-his monument-will, however, continue to enrich our lives. On behalf of the Opposition, I extend sincere sympathy to Sir Henry's remaining relatives. The Hon. W. R. BAXTER (North Eastern Province)-On behalf of my colleagues in the National Party I endorse the remarks made by the Leader of the House and the Leader of the Opposition on this motion of condolence to mark the passing of Sir Henry Bolte. The descriptions and adjectives used by the two Leaders to describe Sir Henry's character, personality and hIS achievements-indeed, the superlatives they have used-are well justified. All members of Parliament-those who had the honour of serving Victoria when Sir Henry was a member and those who have come since, like each of my colleagues in the National Party-know of his tremendous achievements even if we did not have the opportunity of meeting him in person. Honourable members have been given today some outline of those tremendous achievements, and they were extraordinary. For Sir Henry to have the leadership of this State for a record term-as has already been noted quite correctly, a term that will never be exceeded in the future-and to bring the State from an agnculture-based society, which was perhaps fairly inward looking, to the standard that it was when he retired in 1972, with a manufacturing base, with its reputation known and enhanced overseas, and with it being the premier State in Australia in a whole range of respects Death ofHon. Sir Henry Edward BO/le, GCMG 6 March 1990 COUNCIL 7 was indeed an achievement which, although not entirely of his own making, was largely the result of his initiative and drive. All of us are now enjoying the fruits 'of his labours. I thought I would not recapitulate many of the things that have been said by the Leader of the House and Mr Birrell in outlining Sir Henry's life but, rather, would reflect on my own association with Sir Henry. Although I never served with him in Parliament, I had the honour of meeting him on several occasions. My first memory of Sir Henry in this Parliament is when I came quite regularly and sat in the public gallery in another place when I was in boarding school in Melbourne. The picture I have of him relates to two things. The first is Sir Henry hovering in the doorway to the right of the Speaker's chair with a cigarette either in hand or in mouth, listening intently to what was happening in the Chamber and keeping an eye on things, but not being able to resist that urge to have a smoke. On other occasions, I remember him engaging in some fairly vitriolic debate with the then Country Party Leader, Mr George Moss. I believe it may well be recorded that my predecessors in this party and the former Country Party had a fairly turbulent association with Sir Henry, and that in no way demeans or reduces the respect that I or, I am sure, my predecessors had for him, despite the disagreements they had with him over the years. I first met Sir Henry at a function at Government House in 1967 when Their Royal Highnesses Prince Charles and Princess Anne were attending a dinner dance on the occasion of a Royal visit. I was representing the Young Country Party at the time. It was a fairly hot evening and the side doors of the ballroom were open. Later Sir Henry arrived in company with Major-General Sir Rohan Delacombe, the then Governor. I do not believe it is telling tales out of school to record that their demeanour suggested that they had had a fairly convivial evening elsewhere prior to arrivin~ at Government House. I had a conversation with Sir Henry and Sir Rohan. It was Just prior to the State election, and we entered into a certain arrangement as to its outcome. It goes without saying that I lost. I sent off my cheque to Sir Henry in accordance with the arrangement we had made and, in due course, I received a reply from his private secretary thanking me for the enclosure. I noticed subsequently that it appeared on my bank statement as well! When I consider that now and think about a brash twenty­ year-old from the bush engaging the Premier of the State and the Governor of Victoria in that sort of transaction I sometimes wonder about my boldness. Nevertheless, I treasure that memory of my first meeting with Sir Henry Bolte. Of course, I saw Sir Henry on a number of occasions after his retirement, and particularly at race meetings at Flemington. Something has been said of Sir Henry's achievements, and honourable members have heard about universities, industry and the like. I should like to mention particularly a couple of others. One achievement was the freeway building program. This city owes a debt to Sir Henry, who initiated the building of freeways. Freeways have come under considerable criticism from some people since then, but I could not imagine this city operating efficiently if Sir Henry had not put that program in place. The other achievement I wish to record, which may be seen by some as a negative one, is the protection of the Eildon weir waters for the irrigators of this State rather than allowing the water to be siphoned off into metropolitan Melbourne, when other avenues of supply were available for Melbourne. As this State relies so heavily on agricultural production, that was a very wise decision by Sir Henry. There was no doubt that Sir Henry Bolte lived life to the fullest. Dame Edith was a great backstop and support to him, and it was a tragedy when her untimely death occurred so suddenly in Queensland in 1986. I attended the memorial service for Sir 8 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Henry Edward Bolte, GCMG

Henry at St Paul's Cathedral. The tribute paid to him by another former Premier of Victoria, the Honourable Lindsay Thompson-who spoke for 20 minutes without notes and without a pause, using very appropriate words-was one of the highlights of the occasions that I have had the opportunity of attending and participating in. I pay sincere tribute to Mr Thompson for the way he summed up Sir Henry's life. On behalf of my colleagues, I place on record the National Party's sympathy for Sir Henry's remaining family. Not only their lives but also the lives of all Victorians have been enriched by his work. Not only this generation but also subsequent generations have certainly been enriched by his achievements. The Hon. HADDON STOREY (East Yarra Province)-I am very honoured to be able to join with other speakers in supporting the motion moved by the Leader of the House. As each of the previous speakers has said, Sir Henry Bolte was a great Victorian and Australian. Others have outlined his history adequately and fully, and I echo each of the sentiments that has been expressed. Like Mr Baxter, perhaps I can reflect on a few of my experiences with Sir Henry Bolte. I first had occasion to meet him just a few months after he was elected Premier of Victoria. At the time I was the Vice-President of the Young Liberal Movement, and Sir Henry came to address a rally that we held. I did not really know him at all in those days, and he was not the public figure that he later became, even though he was then the Premier of Victoria. I was given the job of meeting Mr Bolte, as he was known then, and taking him onto the stage and introducing him. I could not find him. I walked around the hallways looking for him and eventually I found a short, diminutive fellow with a cigarette In his mouth, looking quite lost. I went up to him and saw that it was the Premier of Victoria. It just shows how people chanse over the years as they become accustomed to their position and their public reputatIons STow. At that time Sir Henry seemed to me to be a very meek, mild and extremely fnendly person who, as he said to me, was still finding out what his job was all about. On that occasion, Sir Henry got up on the platform and delivered an inspirational speech to the Young Liberal Movement. Later I was president of the Constitutional Club, which no longer exists. It used to have speakers at lunchtime, and Sir Henry came along as a speaker. He had been Premier for a few years then, but he was still prepared to go along to a club like that, which just consisted of people from the city who got together at lunchtime to listen to speakers. The most vivid memory I have of that occasion is of Sir Henry arriving and saying, "Where's the Scotch?", and after he had the Scotch, he entertained us with his speech. Sir Henry grew in stature in this State and became a person whom I greatly admired. I was therefore very pleased when I first became a member of this House that he was still the Premier, although he retired just a few months after that. I was most fascinated to see what this legendary person-he was already then a legend-would be like in the party room. I imagined that he would simply tell members what would happen and that would be that. However, I was fascinated to note that he encouraged discussion and encouraged people to put forward their points of view. He sum~ed up what the "mood of the party seemed to be, and he appeared to be very acceptIng of whatever emerged from the party discussions, except occasionally when he had his own point of view. On those occasions discussion did not usually last for long, and he made it quite clear what the decision would be. One side of his character was prepared to listen to and take note of what people had to say. The other thin~ I remember most about Sir Henry Bolte when I first came into Parliament was hIm walking along the corridors and stopping me, saying, "What do Death ofHon. Sir Henry Edward Boite, GCMG 6 March 1990 COUNCIL 9 you think of this?", and he would utter a phrase. Suddenly one day the Premier would make a spontaneous public statement using one of those one-liners that captured the hearts of the people and received coverage on the front pages of the newspapers. From my short experience of Sir Henry I can say that he spent much time perfecting those one-liners, rounding them off and getting them exactly right. There is a message in that for all of us. The final point I make is that Sir Henry Bolte chose to retire of his own volition. I thought his retirement set the stage on a great career. Not many people who are at the top of what they are doing, still active, with plenty of energy and ability and fully supported by everyone can decide that it is time to get out and make room for someone else. It was the achievement of a great person to make that decision, and I admire him all the more for it. On a number of occasions I have been fortunate enough to meet Sir Henry and can say that, from my experience, he was a great person who was also friendly at a personal level. He conveyed the impression that he was in charge of what he was doing, knew what he was doing and had confidence in his ability to do it with his team and, what is more, he actually carried it out. It was a great achievement, and I am delighted to have the opportunity of paying tribute to him and supporting the condolence motion. The Hon. K. I. M. WRIGHT (North Western Province)-I support the motion that has been moved by the Leader of the Government and supported by the Leader of the Opposition and Leader of the National Party in this House. I did not serve in Parliament during the time Sir Henry Bolte was Premier. I was elected one and a half years after he retired, which was a pity, because Sir Gilbert Chandler, a former Leader of this House and a great friend and trusted colleague of Sir Henry, was the cousin of my uncle, and he had said that ifhe had still been in Parliament when I was elected he would have given me a hand. It is true that Sir Henry was a great Victorian. Many of us have had ideas about who are the four greatest Victorians. I suggest they are Sir Alfred Deakin, Sir John Monash, Sir Robert Menzies and Sir Henry Bolte. Regardless of what other honeurable members think of the four men I have mentioned, I am sure they would all agree that Sir Henry should be listed among the top four. Although I did not serve with Sir Henry in Parliament, I had numerous contacts with him while I was in local government and earlier. In 1948 the First Mildura Irrigation Trust, which was an autonomous body without any government support, faced difficult circumstances. The channels were leaking and going to rack and ruin and the pumping stations were having difficulty operating without the expenditure of the tremendous amount of money required to replace or renovate them. At the time Henry Bolte was the Minister of Water Supply and, in a momentous decision for the Mildura district, he persuaded the government to put the First Mildura Irrigation Trust on the same basis as other irrigation districts in Victoria. The trust was then able to draw annual maintenance grants and, most importantly, the State of Victoria, through Henry Bolte, provided sufficient funds to build two new pumping stations; one to pump water out of the Murray River into Kings billabong, and another to draw water another 60 feet out of Kings billabong to gravitate to the rest of the fruit growing district. The next contact I had with Sir Henry was when I was part ofa deputation-I think I may have led it-to him to protest about the water right to be given to a group of people for the Piambie farm. This was a controversial matter, and I thought we presented a good case. Perhaps the decision was not entirely in the hands of the Premier but, nevertheless, the decision was made to grant the water right to Piambie 10 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Henry Edward Bolte, GCMG farm. The farm is still operating, perhaps not as successfully as those who commenced it hoped would be the case. In 1961 I was elected to the Mildura City Council. At the first meeting I attended it was revealed that the Premier had offered a grant of 30 000 pounds for the City of Mildura, at the request of the Honourable Arthur Mansell, to purchase the Gem paddle steamer. In its wisdom, the City of Mildura decided that that kind of development was not for it. The people of Swan Hill were alert and purchased the Gem. They were able to negotiate for the transfer of the grant that had originally been offered by Sir Henry Bolte to the City ofMildura. I notice to this day that a number of people claim they were responsible for the grant going to Swan Hill. I was elected Mayor of the City of Mildura in 1965, and one of my early duties was to pick up Sir Henry Bolte from the aerodrome when he visited the municipality. On the trip from the aerodrome into the City of Mildura I was most impressed with Sir Henry's vision for Victoria. He talked about development, and certainly much development was taking place at that time. I vividly remember that the municipality hosted a luncheon while I was mayor and, in his wisdom, the town clerk seated Sir Henry and Lady Bolte next to my wife and me at a smaller table. We had a pleasant discussion during the luncheon, and I shall never forget him asking me whether I was interested in going into politics. I said I did not think so, and he said, "Ah, that means you will". I do not know whether he ever recalled that conversation later on. The Mildura district must also be grateful to Sir Henry for his interest in fostering the arts, although it appeared somewhat out of character for him. He made a substantial grant available to the City of Mildura for the Rio Vista arts centre project, including the home of the Chaffey brothers, that has been renovated, and also new buildings on the side of an art gallery and a theatre. That development would never have become a reality without Sir Henry's interest and the grant he made available on behalf of the State of Victoria towards that centre. Sir Henry Bohe was truly a great Victorian. He will be much revered and long remembered. The Hon. W. A. LANDERYOU (Doutta Galla Province)-It gives me much pleasure to be associated with this condolence motion and to inform the House of some personal recollections I have of the late former Premier. I did not serve in Parliament with Sir Henry Bolte, but I had a number of associations with him as a member of the Trades Hall Council disputes committee. I suppose it goes without saying that most of the things Henry Bolte stood for in terms of political philosophy I did not share, but there is one thing that is certain-which others, including the Leaders of all parties, have referred to-and that is that without doubt Sir Henry Bolte put the interests of the people he served in Victoria ahead of all other matters. He had a dedication to the private sector development of this State which, as Mr Birrell said, will be his monument. I should like to share some personal experiences of a political nature with the Chamber. In the days when public opinion polling was not as sophisticated and as frequent an occurrence as it is today, Cyril Wyndham, the then Secretary of the Victorian Branch of the Australian Labor Party, conducted a poll on the eve ofa State election. He told the press that, according to the very scientific survey that he had conducted, the Labor Party would win the State election to be held in a couple of weeks time. I do not know whether Sir Henry Bolte honed his response over some days, but his comment on Cyril Wyndam's claim was that he supposed he had conducted the survey in the heart of the Trades Hall Council. As it turned out, Cyril Wyndham's survey was as inaccurate Death a/Hon. Sir Henry Edward Ba/te, GCMG 6 March 1990 COUNCIL 11 as many of the other things the ALP did in those days, because the Liberal Party was returned. At a Liberal Party dinner that I was honoured to attend Sir Henry referred in a speech to what he called the Liberal Party's secret weapon in those days: of course, he was referring to none other than W. Hartley, whom Sir Henry trotted out and used against us from time to time. Although in his own way Bill did his best to help the ALP, Sir Henry saw it otherwise and used Bill's sincere attempts to help the party to great effect. I recall one occasion when, as the Leader of the Opposition in this place, I was forced to borrow a car from the car pool because either my driver was missing or the car was-I do not know which! Although I did not realise it at that time the only spare driver who was available was the man who drove the car provided for Premiers who had retired. To show I appreciated Sir Henry's release of the car for my use I bought a couple of packets of Turf cigarettes, put them in the glove box, and told the driver to give Sir Henry the cigarettes the next time he picked him up and to tell him that they were a token of my appreciation for the use of the vehicle. On the many occasions afterwards that I met Sir Henry-usually at the race track-without exception he would either mention the cigarettes to me or introduce me as the bloke who had given him the Turf cigarettes. Most of the people who borrowed Sir Henry's publicly provided vehicle never acknowledged their appreciation as I had done, so it was as though I had bought him a couple of pounds of gold. Although I cannot claim, as Mr Wright has done, that Sir Henry was a source of inspiration, he influenced me in other ways. As a youn$ Broadmeadows city councillor I remember attending the opening of a local biSCUIt factory, which was my first experience of American public relations; the opening of the Nabisco factory was conducted in a show business style unique to Americans. I do not know whether Sir Henry had been to see the Governor or had been to a ball the night before, but it was clear that he had enjoyed himselfl The Hon. Robert Lawson-A bit emotional, was he? The Hon. W. A. LANDERYOU-He was not emotional or overtired; he was simply Henry Bolte! The biscuit factory was opened on the eve of a Premiers Conference. Sir Henry's speech was very succinct. He said, "Mr Mayor, ladies and gentlemen, I am delighted to be here. It is very appropriate that I have been asked to open this biscuit factory because tomorrow I am off to Canberra for a Loan Council meetin$ to see whether there are any bickies in the tin!" I remember thinking that if that httle, fat, rotund bloke could make such a short speech, then perhaps I could do the same one day. So perhaps Sir Henry was a source of inspiration-although not to the same degree as he was for Mr Wright and others. Nevertheless, I always enjoyed my association with Sir Henry. Sir Henry is not survived by immediate dependants; but those of us who knew him, worked with him or associated with him will always remember him as a good man who was always direct and who made certain everyone knew which side he was on and where he stood-at least that was certainly the case in his dealings with the Trades Hall Council: he did not dither at all! Although I did not share his political philosophy I always enjoyed his company. The Hon. R. I. KNOWLES (Ballarat Province)-My family lived close to Sir Henry Bolte's farm. My father acted as the returning officer at the polling booth at which Sir Henry always voted. As other honourable members have said, in 1945 the seat of Hampden was considered to be a poor prospect for the Liberal Party; indeed, the 12 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Henry Edward Bo/te, GCMG

Liberal Party had difficulty in finding a candidate. Along with a number of others, my father attended a public meeting held in the Buninyong Shire Hall to listen to the bright new Liberal Party candidate address his first meeting. From all accounts it was an unmitigated disaster. Sir Henry could not put two words together, and those who had encouraged him to stand for Parliament were embarrassed by his performance. The Liberal Party did not win the seat at the 1945 election. In 1947, after a redistribution, Hampden became a winnable seat for the Liberal Party. Many of those who encouraged Sir Henry to stand in 1945 were determined to find a better candidate for the 1947 election, but Sir Henry had gained a feel for politics; he took on those who opposed him and, after winning preselection, won the seat for the Liberal Party at the election. Before the 1952 election the press talked about ala to 15 per cent swing to the Labor Party. At that time Sir Henry occupied the most marginal seat in the State, which could have changed hands with a swing of less than 2 per cent against him. Although there was a swing against the Liberal Party during the campaign Sir Henry held his seat because his electors recognised that he epitomised their aspirations. Those of us who grew up in the era when Sir Henry was a State institution and who now enjoy the facilities available to present-day members will recall the lectures Sir Henry gave us. He claimed that we did not know what politics was about, because in his day honourable members did not have electorate secretaries; every letter had to be written by hand, and every letter that was received caused three replies to be written by hand. Sir Henry's hard work stood him in good stead when the tide swung against the Liberal Party in 1952. As other honourable members have said, Henry Bolte was selected as a stopgap Leader in 1953 but held the position of Premier with distinction for seventeen years. I shall not reiterate what other honourable members have said about the contributions Sir Henry made to Victoria, but his most important contributions were the stability he gave to the government of Victoria; the opportunities he gave to many Victorian families to own their homes and the breaking down of religious intolerance. Sir Henry believed the introdu~tion of State aid to non-government schools reduced religious intolerance, a significant achievement. Sir Henry always had a strong affection for Ballarat. He supported the establishment of Sovereign Hill, one of the State's premier tourist attractions. After talking to a group of local residents about their plans for the development of Sovereign Hill he made a grant of$100 000 to get the project under way. Their response was, "No, Mr Premier; we would prefer it if you would give us a $1-for-$1 grant up to a quarter of a million dollars". Sir Henry believed that was an offer too good to refuse-that there was no hope of this local group of people raising $250 000 and that he thought he could well appear to be supportive and save the State $100000. It was not long before they were back to say they had raised $250 000. Sir Henry met his side of the bargain and went on to be a great supporter of the Sovereign Hill project, and I am pleased to say that every subsequent Premier has continued that strong level of support. Sovereign Hill is a project for which Sir Henry had a special affection, and it will remain as a lasting memorial to his work. Sir Henry's passing will cause a great loss to the Victorian community. As other speakers have said, he will long be remembered for his leadership of the State and for his contribution to its development. I wish to publicly convey my sympathy to Sir Henry's brother, Bill, and the other members of his family on his passing. Death aJHan. Sir Henry Edward Balte, GCMG 6 March 1990 COUNCIL 13

The Hon. R. S. de FEGELY (Ballarat Province)-I support this motion as a friend and one-time constituent during Sir Henry's period as Premier, and subsequently as his local member of Parliament. It is probably reasonable to say that if it were not for Sir Henry I may not be here. I know his tacit support of my bid to get into Parliament was of some consequence in my move into this House. I suppose a measure of Sir Henry's popularity, which has already been mentioned, was the fact that when Ararat became part of the Hampden electorate after the electorate of Ripon was abolished in 1955, Sir Henry produced election results in that area that have never been surpassed, and for those honourable members who do not know, I point out that Ararat is recognised as a Labor town, although the vote is now about 48 to 52 per cent, 49 to 51 per cent or thereabouts. The present holder of the seat of Ripon, Mr Tom Austin in another place, was defeated by Sir Henry when they both made a bid for preselection to become the member for Hampden in the 1940s. Tom, for all his popularity in Ararat, has never surpassed Sir Henry's vote, although he has on occasions got close. It just shows how popular Sir Henry was over those years when he represented the seat of Hampden. I first met Sir Henry Bolte on the golf course. Sport is entering into politics quite a deal these days and our Prime Minister has turned it into an art form, but here was Sir Henry doing his electioneering in the sporting field back in the 1950s, and highly successful it was. I first met him at one of the tournaments he elected to play in. We always played tournaments in pretty cold weather in those days, and I remember well that Sir Henry always came armed with some form of fortification. It was probably just as well that we did not have the ·05 blood alcohol content legislation in those days and the police were not quite as strict as they are today because, having played a round of golf with Sir Henry and his flask and having visited the nineteenth hole after that to introduce him to all the members of the club and so on, one tended to weave a course home at a much later hour. Sir Henry's feats in Victoria have been well covered. I wish to say that the door to his house was always open, and one was always welcome there. On a number of occasions since I have been a member of this place when I had the opportunity I would call at his home at Bamganie to discuss the current situation over a quick drink before going on to some meeting. His wisdom was something I very much appreciated, and his thoughts on politics today are worth reflecting upon. I remember asking him what he thOUght about current events and how he would handle politics and the media as they are today and he said, "Yes, it is different. It would be tougher, but I think if you are frank about what you are doing, if you are direct and you make decisions, you would still be able to handle it". He also said, "One of the things I cannot abide is this business of policies. I never had policies. Policies only get you into trouble; you never want policies". There is probably a great deal of wisdom in all that. One day as I was leaving Sir Henry's house, I noticed a magnificent bed of cannas flowering profusely. I commented on them to Sir Henry and he said, "Yes, they came from Parliament House". I said, "How did you get those?" He said, "You had better ask George Oliver; he rounded them up for me." I rather wish that George Oliver was a member of this House because he could probably regale us with a great many stories about Sir Henry which would keep us entertained for some time, although I am not sure whether he would be able to put them all across in this House. It has been a privilege to have known Sir Henry Bolte. He served this State for all those years with great ability and commonsense, with wisdom, with openness and frankness and without pretence, which probably was one of his greatest virtues. We have been fortunate to have known him and he will be remembered for many years 14 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Death of Hon. Sir Henry Edward Bolte, GCMG for the things he has done, particularly in my electorate. There are many monuments there to him. Mr Knowles mentioned Sovereign Hill and I add the Ararat Technical School, and Sir Henry did many things right across the spectrum for the benefit of society. As somebody said earlier, he governed this State for all people, and I guess that is what Parliament is all about. I join this condolence motion and extend my sympathy to his brother Bill, his niece Billie and her husband Toby and their family. The Hon. B. A. E. SKEGGS (Templestowe Province)-I join in this motion of condolence and particularly relate my remarks as a participant in the racing industry which Sir Henry Bolte loved so well. I am sure his many friends in the racing industry would wish to be remembered in this tribute to him. He probably did more than many of his contemporaries to further the growth of the racing industry in this State. I also recall Sir Henry for a number of characteristics: sparkling blue eyes and an open-eyed look of convincing candour that invariably disarmed most of his critics in a single instant. He had a gruff chuckle and an impish grin, yet for all that he was a man of strength and determination and he had extraordinary political perception. Without doubt, of all politicians he was the ultimate cartoonist's dream. The earthy Liberal Leader from the bush was depicted in many cartoons, but the battles that he had with successive Prime Ministers caused him to be known for his tough negotiating skills. Yet for all of this, there was a nervous side to Sir Henry Bolte. Before any political occasion he was not sure that he would take the situation by storm, but when he walked out on the stage that is what occurred because of his sheer strength of character and drive. I remember him attending a political rally in the electorate of Ivanhoe when he was to be chairman for the night. In order to get ready for the evening he wanted to be in a quiet room without people worrying him, in order to have a cigarette and get himself ready to go on stage. When he walked onto the stage his magnetism took over. He could completely capture an audience by the sheer force of his personality. I served with Sir Henry for many years on the State executive of the Liberal Party before I came into Parliament. He showed tremendous political knowledge and his perception was overwhelming. He was able to dominate those who were setting policy within the organisation of the party. He was clear minded on political matters and he was a natural leader. He may not have started out that way but he quickly developed the skills of leadership. Another side of his character was his love of sport. He will be remembered for his tremendous interest in racing and cricket. I am sure many honourable members will recall the famous cricket pitch at the rear of Parliament House where Sir Henry led his team out on so many occasions as well as at other venues. He loved cricket and he will be remembered also for this outstanding chairmanship of the board of trustees of the Melbourne Cricket Ground. Horseracing was a clear love of Sir Henry's. He was an owner and he had many successes. He was closely associated in this with the late Jim MacDonald, who was a former member for Burwood. Locharn was his all-time favourite horse. Sir Henry was always prepared to have a strong wager; he loved his betting. Despite the fact that he is known as the father of the Totalizator Agency Board he always preferred to bet in the bookmaker's ring at any racecourse. He set up the TAB not only to build racing in this State but also to help our hospitals and to wipe out illegal betting operations, which were extensive in Victoria. It was his drive and determination that saw the TAB set up first in Victoria. It has now become a great national institution. Sir Henry served with distinction on the committee of the Victoria Racing Club. Death o/Hon. Sir Henry Edward Bo/te, GCMG 6 March 1990 COUNCIL 15

Sir Henry was also a keen churchman. In the outstanding tribute delivered by the Honourable Lindsay Thompson at Sir Henry's memorial service we were told that at one stage Sir Henry thOUght of taking up the ministry. He had been a member of the vestry of his Anglican Church for a number of years. That showed a different side to Sir Henry; he was a deeply committed Christian and also a lifelong member of the Masonic lodge. He had that dimension that many people did not see; he had great depth to his character. Of course Sir Henry was greatly sustained in all that he did by the late Dame Edith Bolte, who was affectionately known as Jill. She was a wonderful partner to him in all things. Honourable members will remember his last great public occasion when he launched the Honourable Lindsay Thompson's book. He was magnificent on that occasion. Indeed, he was the longest serving Premier and he will probably be the longest remembered of all of us. The Hon. G. P. CONNARD (Higinbotham Province)-I join with my colleagues to add my tribute to the condolence motion for the late Sir Henry Bolte. I shall bring some of my memories of Sir Henry to the House. The first occasion I met Henry Bolte was prior to the 1955 election when he visited the Mentone-Aspendale area in which I lived. I was chairman of the Mentone electorate committee in an area that had been securely held by the Australian Labor Party for many years, except for a brief period when Mr Harold Drew had held the seat. It was rare for the area to get a visit from the Premier or the Leader of the Opposition. We had asked Mr Bolte, as he then was, to assist our campaign prior to the 1955 election. He was invited to attend a meeting at the Aspendale Life Saving Club which approximately 150 people attended. I met Mr and Mrs Bolte at the door. I believe as the Leader of the Opposition he was entitled to a car, but he certainly drove up in his own car because he said he had had difficulty finding a place to park and asked for his car to be parked. It was my duty as chairman to take Mr Bolte and his wife to the platform. As he passed through the door he said to his wife that she should go one way and he would go the other and that they would meet on the other side of the hall and we could then conduct the meeting. It took one and a quarter hours for him to get to the other side of the hall. He had spoken to everybody and so had Mrs Bolte. When I took him to the platform he spoke briefly; I do not remember the details, but he spoke for no more than 6 or 7 minutes. He welcomed those attending and said that, as he had spoken to everybody on all the important issues as he had moved through the hall, there was no purpose in speaking at length except to say that people should not vote for John Cain's government but they should vote for the proposed Bolte government and he would fix up all the local problems. He then said that a cup of tea was being served. He won that election in Mentone handsomely. He was a person who, on the one hand, could identify with the ordinary people and their ordinary problems but, on the other hand, he could be tough indeed. Mr President, you will recollect that following the death of the Honourable Phil Mair there was a by­ election in the South Eastern Province, which included Mentone, Aspendale and Cheltenham. As treasurer, I was part of that campaign committee. As I am not sure of the date I am sure you, Mr President, will refresh my memory at a later time. The Liberal Country Party had amalgamated at the time. The Hon. W. R. Baxter-I do not think it was a formal amalgamation, though! The Hon. G. P. CONNARD-We represented the interests of both country and metropolitan areas. Prior to the by-election, Sir Henry had raised the suburban railway 16 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Henry Edward Bo/te, GCMG

fares substantially. He was about to increase other costs, including power costs, to the community. The committee arranging Liberal Party affairs at the time took the view that this issue would dramatically affect the results in what was a non-Labor seat. We took the matter to the Premier and forcefully expressed the view that the charges would affect the result of the by-election because, at that stage, we had the majority in this House. Sir Henry forcefully told us that his decision in raising those charges was something that had to be done. He firmly expressed his position by saying that he would not bow to the political forces of the day as a result of decisions his government had made. He was firm about that and accordingly dismissed our concerns. I regret to say that we lost that by-election. Subsequently I received a letter of apology from Sir Henry Bolte for not respecting our views. In response, Sir Henry said that he knew his decision in increasing those charges was correct for the State and he was not willing to resile from that decision for whatever appreciable pressures. From those anecdotes one can see that he was a man of compassion, a man of the people, yet a man who, knowing he was right, had significant resolve. I was advised that in the last weeks of Sir Henry's life he sought an interview with Lindsay Thompson, a former Liberal Premier, and made a simple statement to Lindsay that he had received his marching orders. Lindsay did not understand because Sir Henry looked comparatively fit and well. It took Lindsay a few minutes to understand that what Sir Henry was saying was that it had been reported to Sir Henry that he had a limited life expectancy. Sir Henry adopted a brave approach towards the end of his life by advising Lindsay of the necessity for the preparation of his funeral and perhaps the appropriate acknowledgments of society. It was a very brave approach: "I have received my marching orders and I am prepared to go". I join with my colleagues in expressing my regret at the passing of Sir Henry, a great person. My party and the community mourn the loss. The PRESIDENT-As a young solicitor, I once received from my client the very briefest of instructions on a complex transaction that entailed a number of complicated interacting legal documents. When the client came to me I said, "Now, it will take some time to explain the detail to you". My client said, "That's a matter for you, but if it's not right I will sue you". Henry Bolte was just like that client. He was able to concentrate on essentials and leave the detail to others. He trusted them to do it and to do it well; he dealt with principles and not with detail. It was his proud boast, when he left this Parliament, that he had never read a Bill in his life. That was a matter for Parliamentary Counsel and for the Bill committees looking after the Bills. At times it was a matter for his great lieutenant Arthur Rylah. Henry Bolte did not bother himself with that detail. I discovered that his Cabinet meetings lasted only from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. Every meeting was finished within that time span. Every Minister was required to present his case succinctly and well, to master the facts and to be able to answer the questions. If there were no questions, the Minister's recommendation was approved. The only time Henry Bolte entered into any issues of detail was when he believed they had a greater political significance than the Minister concerned had recognised. That ability to see the principles and to concentrate on the essentials was what I believe was the secret of Sir Henry Bolte's success. He applied it in every field. Once he understood the principles and made up his mind, he stuck with it. He was a decisive man. He was decisive in every field, whether it was politics, sport or at the racecourse. He prepared his strategy, made his decisions, and got on with the job. Death ofHon. Sir Henry Edward Bolle, GCMG 6 March 1990 COUNCIL 17

That was also the way in which he approached the public. He was not afraid to confront every issue directly and to say honestly what he believed. He had nothing but contempt for politicians who would seek to avoid or obfuscate issues rather than meeting them head-on. For this he was called by Melbourne newspapers early in his period of office-and he was delighted to be called this-an amateur in politics. That is what I believe the public loved and identified with. He was a man who looked at the real issues, who met them face to face and who did not try to hide from them or run away from them in any way. I might add that Sir Henry did not tolerate a lot of nonsense in the party room either. Party meetings also lasted from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. except for special occasions when there were elections for such things as overseas trips for Ministers, when the time taken was much longer. In the party room everyone was expected to put his case succinctly and raise nothing that had been raised before-only new material-so that the party room could proceed to dispatch its business effectively and efficiently with a minimal waste of time. Henry Bolte was a tough but a loyal man. He expected loyalty and, having expected it, always gave it in return. He knew that loyalty cannot be a one-sided coin-that it had to be given as well as taken. Much has been said about the quips of Sir Henry. I recall another finely honed one about the teachers. When there was a teachers strike, they were intending to march up and down Bourke Street. Henry said, "They can march up and down until they are n bloody-well footsore • The Hon. B. W. Mier-It was not the teachers, because I was one of them. The PRESIDENT-The plumbers, was it? Nevertheless, the fact is that that quip was finely honed before it was used. On another occasion I recall a major complaint being made about the quality of the Board of Works water. The Minister at the time n said, "This is terrible , and the press accused the Minister of sounding like an outraged amateur. To dampen down the furore in the newspapers, Henry invited the press down to his farm where, on their arrival, they found him swimming in his dam, and they took photographs of that. The photograph on the front page of the Herald was of this impish fellow Mr Skeggs mentioned, with just his head above the water. It was of Henry Bolte smiling away. When he came out of the water he said, "I will even give you the title of this photograph: 'Germs! Phew!' ". Believe it or not, Henry had worked out, successfully as it transpired, that that would defuse the debate about Melbourne's water supply, which everyone recognised was far better than the water in his own dam. It has been suggested that Henry was sometimes inflexible, and that was true. On the other hand, he could be moved by sound argument. On one occasion he was aghast when the Treasury committee of his party held him up on one of his Budget Bills. The committee explained that the Bill happened to go a very difficult way about raising a certain amount of money and it would cost just as much for the public to comply with it as the amount that would be raised by it. After arguing for a short time that it was outrageous for a committee to interfere with a Budget Bill, Henry suddenly saw the logic and that the person at fault was his draftsman. They were able to show him how he could raise exactly the same amount of money in a different way with less cost by having the public comply with the legislation. He changed the Bill and the one who was kicked was the draftsman. He was a wonderful man to work with. Everyone has talked about his earthiness and his simplicity. He thought in simple terms; he did not complicate issues; by getting 18 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson to the crux of them, he kept them simple. He did that, too, in his public life. His genius was in making things simple for the public of this State. Everybody has agreed he was a great man and that it is unlikely we shall see his like again. It was a pleasure to work with him as a backbencher and as a Minister and, with others, I deeply regret his passing. The motion was agreed to in silence, honourable members showing their unanimous agreement by standing in their places.

DEATH OF MRS ELIZABETH SUSAN GLEESON The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts)-I move: That this House expresses its sincere sorrow at the death, on 16 December 1989, ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson, and places on record its acknowledgment of the valuable service rendered by her to the Parliament and the people of Victoria as member ofthe Legislative Assembly for the electoral district ofThomastown from 1985 to 1989. Over the past year, as Minister responsible for Post-Secondary Education, I have had the good fortune of working closely with Beth Gleeson on a number of training and property and development issues in her electorate. Beth had a passionate commitment to improving the life of the people she represented. It was palpable, and she would never stop short of seeing to it that she went the full distance in having the government do what it could for her people. She saw improving training and education opportunities as critical to the needs of the people of her electorate, and she was right. Beth was the Deputy President of the College Council of the Northern Metropolitan College of T AFE. She was a tireless worker for the establishment of that college at Epping and was successful in that work. Late last year, I had the honour of sharing the platform with Beth as we turned the first sod of the new Epping campus. As it happened, it was just before her untimely death. I am pleased that the council of the college will recognise her contribution to its establishment by naming the main building of the new Epping campus in her memory. Beth's involvement in training was, of course, one aspect of her work. As a local member she was involved in all that was happening, but her involvement in the establishment of the college exemplified her philosophy of achieving social justice by helping the people of her electorate-particularly disadvantaged people-to develop as much as they could. Beth made a significant contribution also to advancing the interests of women in her electorate and across the State. She worked particularly to help ethnic women because she recognised that many of them were isolated by language and cultural barriers. She did her best to build the necessary bridges. I understand that at her funeral her work for women, particularly ethnic women, was recognised. I was sad to miss her funeral, but I was out of the country. As I said, I gather the expressions of sympathy by her friends and those she had helped were remarkable. As well as achieving change in areas of concern in the electorate, she worked in other fields. Beth had a good grasp of economics and issues associated with industry development, as members of caucus learned. She chaired the Economic and Bud~et Review Committee, which is a significant task in Parliament. She made a major contribution in the ALP industry and technology caucus committee. As well as attending to her electorate and to Parliamentary duties, Beth found a lot of time to devote to her much loved family, about whom she spoke to me openly and lovingly from time to time. She pursued also her own artistic and cultural interests. I understand she was a fine pianist and a talented green thumb, or gardener. Death ofM rs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson 6 March 1990 COU'lCIL 19

In the relatively short time that she was in Parliament, from 1985, Beth made a significant contribution in her achievements for the people in her electorate and throughout the State. Above all, she was a determined fighter for the less privileged in our society. She recognised the problems in our society and worked long and hard to overcome them. Beth Gleeson is sadly missed. On behalf of the government members in this place, I offer sincere condolences to the family and friends ofBeth Gleeson. The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL (East Yarra Province)-On behalf of the Liberal Party, I join with the Leader of the House in expressing my sympathy to the family of the late Beth Gleeson. Beth was born on 7 March 1943 in Warrnambool and died on 16 December 1989 at the age of 46 years. There is nothing more tragic to Parliamentarians than the death of a sitting member. Honourable members have previously discussed with respect the service of Sir Henry Bolte, but, as Sir Henry said only weeks before his death, he had had a very full and satisfying life. It is tragic to hear that someone who had the energy and the commitment of Beth Gleeson has died when she had so many years ahead of her in Parliament and in public life. Beth Gleeson was highly respected by members of the Parliamentary Liberal Party who had the good fortune to work with her on Parliamentary committees and to have participated with and watched her in her general work as a local member of Parliament. Not many honourable members of this House know of her work. One of the problems is that we usually see members of the Legislative Council but rarely come into contact with newer members of the Legislative Assembly. However, we all recognise that she really cared about the problems of her constituents, especially the problems of women and families. Her concerns were very much reflected in her work on several Parliamentary committees. Beth Gleeson was first elected to the Legislative Assembly as the member for Thomastown in March 1985, having spent her early years in the Western District and completed a Bachelor of Arts degree in social science at La Trobe University. In Parliament she was probably best known for her role as a member and chairperson of the Economic and Budget Review Committee, a position which she assumed on her re-election in 1988. Members of that committee and others knew her as a warm, caring and active member of Parliament, and this impression is very much borne out when one examines the work she did on the committee and the depth and breadth of her commitment to local community services within her electorate and, it must be said, within the region she worked in. To mention but a few of her achievements, she was closely associated with Melbourne's new Northern Metropolitan College of TAFE, as the Leader of the Government said. She was involved in the establishment of a neighbourhood house and a community health centre in her electorate. I understand that the establishment of these facilities in Thomastown was regarded by Beth as being her greatest achievement as the local member. Community groups with which she was involved and had worked on numerous occasions include the Bundoora Progress Association, the Bundoora/East Preston Tramline Action Group, the Whittlesea Community Action Group, the Whittlesea Welfare Review Group, the Region 14 Regional Consultative Committee, "The Plenty" Employment Support Committee and Unemployed Rights Centre and the Migrant Women Factory Workers Information Services. She was also co-author of Services for the Unemployed, which has since been translated into five languages. 20 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson

Beth showed compassion and energy in her Parliamentary career, as well as the courage that comes to the fore for anyone who has to battle with cancer, as she did for a period of months. For this Parliament to have now lost two fine, well-liked sitting members in the past twelve months to cancer is something which many honourable members have difficulty facing emotionally. I believe there is something to be gained from the fact that fine members of Parliament such as Pauline Toner and Beth Gleeson have not only left an indelible impression in the minds of their families, friends, colleagues and the wider community, but also left lasting benefits to their respective communities. Beth Gleeson was like that; her work has made Victoria a better place and she represented her constituents extremely well. Mr President, her death came as a shock to all members of Parliament and, on behalf of the Opposition, I extend to her husband and her daughters our sincere sympathy. The Hon. W. R. BAXTER (North Eastern Province)-I wish to associate the National Party with the condolence motion. As Mr Birrell said, it came as a shock to us all to hear ofMrs Gleeson's sudden death. For my colleagues and me it was totally unexpected. I am not sure whether members of her own party were aware of her serious state of health but certainly we were not, and it came as a tremendous shock. It is a great tragedy when a sitting member, regardless of party, dies. It is almost as though one of our own has passed on; we all feel it very deeply. Beth Gleeson's career was cut short prematurely, she having been a member of Parliament for a little more than five years. Her full potential was certainly not realised. I had the honour of serving with Beth on a couple of committees, the Economic and Budget Review Committee and, in particular, the subcommittee that toured the State on an inquiry into the future role of bush nursing hospitals. I valued Beth's input on that occasion. She also served on the Joint House Committee, of which I was a member for a simultaneous time, so I am aware of the contributions she made directly to Parliament through the committee system and I have been able to observe at somewhat greater distance her other contribution to Parliament. It is clear that Beth was a solid representative of Thomastown. That became obvious during the recent by-election campaign when it was acknowledged frequently, not only by the Labor candidate in seeking support but also by opposing candidates, that she had been a dedicated and active local member. I am sure the people of Thomastown regret the passing of a truly local member. I pass on to her husband and her daughters the sincere sympathy of members of the National Party. The Hon. C. J. HOGG (Minister for Health)-Beth Gleeson's representation of the seat ofThomastown had an enormous impact on the community and on her colleagues, the people who knew her and who were her friends in the Labor Party room. As everybody who has spoken in this debate has mentioned, she had a tremendous mission in her advocacy of work for women, especially women from non-English speaking backgrounds, and for the multicultural and multilayered nature of her electorate. She really was a fantastic local member. She was tireless and she expected all of us to be tireless, too. She expected colleagues in adjacent seats and Ministers to be tireless. She certainly did not spare herself. In fact, on 25 November, a short time before her death and when already she knew she was extremely ill, she organised an occasion for the Minister for Community Services, various people from surrounding municipalities and me to go to a small function that she had organised in a sporting pavilion where the elderly Italian population of part of her electorate meets. It was probably the first hot day of spring. It was an extraordinarily small hall and Beth had organised it very Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson 6 March 1990 COC"NCIL 21 well. There were probably between 250 and 300 people there. The point was made that this was an inadequate facility; a point we were asked to take note of. She fought for the schools in her electorate and for the neighbourhood houses of which' she was so proud and towards the foundation of which she had done so much. She fought for a community health centre, for the expansion of public dentistry and for all the services she believed the northern suburbs had perhaps not had in abundance. Perhaps more than anybody else it was Beth who directed my attention and probably the attention of some of my colleagues to the fact that the Mill Park area was a growth area and something would have to be done about training needs, further educational needs for women, infant welfare, kindergartens and primary and secondary schools. Sometimes after conversations with Beth my head would ~ spinning at the vision she had of where that part of her electorate was heading-and she was right, of course. She set the scene and she made us think and where we could we delivered what she outlined for us because she was right in what she asked for. As other speakers have mentioned, Beth was a strong member of her Parliamentary committee. She was energetic in caucus committees on which she served and she was a real presence around Parliament House. She was certainly a good friend to all women on our side of politics and to all women in Parliament. We are part of a fairly small group and try to know each other across party lines. Beth had a strong sense of fellowship with women in Parliament and was always frank when she spoke publicly about her pride and happiness at being in public life. She also spoke frankly of some of the difficulties and the occasional down side of it. All the time she represented the electorate ofThomastown she was sustained by her family who, whenever they could, joined her at the very many social, fundraising and community functions that she organised. To Michael, Megan and Lisa we all extend very sincere condolences and sympathy. The Hon. M. T. TEHAN (Central Highlands Province)-I join with other honourable members who have expressed sympathy and condolences at the untimely death of Beth Gleeson. Unfortunately, I did not have an opportunity of knowing her well for two reasons: firstly, her presence in the Lower House meant that our contacts were not as frequent as with members with whom one serves in this place, and, secondly, her untimely death stopped me from getting to know her better. However, I did know her through her constituency work and as a member of an all-party Parliamentary committee on which we both served. The Minister for Health said that there is a bond between women from all parties in this institution. Women are still a minority in Parliament and it is not an easy situation for women; that bond is tangible, is across party lines and is something I appreciate. Beth Gleeson felt the same bond and there was an immediate sense of what we shared together rather than what separated us in our Parliamentary and constituency work. I commented earlier about the untimeliness of her death. There is a real poignancy, a sadness and a sense of unfulfilled promise when someone as young as Beth Gleeson dies. It should not occur; it is something we cannot explain. Having suffered the death of a sister and knowing how close we were in age, I feel some empathy with Beth's family in her untimely death. I used to meet Beth at citizens meetings of what is now the City of Whittlesea. There was a natural bond between us because the group on the stage who were there to make short contributions were predominantly male. Beth was always at these meetings and I understand only too well what the Minister for Health meant when she referred to Beth's interest in ethnic women, because that was a situation where we were welcoming 22 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson new members from distant countries into the Australian nation. Beth always spoke appropriately on those occasions. I similarly knew her, albeit briefly, when I served on the Estimates Committee. She always had a contribution to make, usually along social lines. She queried the effectiveness of programs and whether they fulfilled the social need for which they were designed. I found her quiet and gentle, but certainly committed to the party she represented and there was no doubt she was a member of the committee representing the Labor Party and carried that role proudly. I was privileged to see Beth Gleeson work in the electorate she represented and in Parliament. I have no dopbt she would have continued to play a major role in both those spheres and that the bond I felt and expressed would have grown because she was totally committed to what she was doing. Nothing more could be asked of a person than that commitment, and she certainly had that. Beth Gleeson's passing was untimely; the loss her family must feel is real and deep, and I extend my personal sympathy and that of my party on her sad demise. The Hon. M. A. LYSTER (Minister for Local Govemment)-I have always believed the greatest tribute that can be made to a member of Parliament is that his or her time in this place and as a representative of his or her electorate has actually made a difference; that can certainly be said of Beth Gleeson. She worked in capacities within Parliament that have already been described by other speakers and she did those tasks extremely well. I worked with her, as did Mrs Tehan, on the Estimates Committee, on the industry and technology caucus committee of the Labor Party, on the education caucus committee and on the status of women caucus committee. It was on that last committee that she taught me the most about the sorts of needs in her electorate which were quite different from the needs of the women in my own electorate. She saw a desperate need to empower many people in her area ofThomastown who she felt were being denied access to the institutions of our society. They were having difficulty in getting educational and training opportunities. Child-care was very difficult fot: them to obtain. Certainly understanding the political processes was completely beyond them. Beth made it one of many of her missionary tasks, one of her particular interests, to inform people about how they could break down those barriers that were stopping their full participation in life in their community. She would have regular meetings with small groups of women, often women who did not speak English as their first language, in her electorate office. They would not be large groups because she knew that could be frightening and intimidating for them. She would explain to them what a school council was, how they could be part of it and how they could approach a teacher to find out about their child's progress. Things that so many of us take for granted are things that are a real barrier to full participation in the life of a community if those things are foreign to you. Beth knew that you did not effect change by doing things to people, but if you did them with people and gave them the power and the facilities to do things for themselves, you were making a difference that would last a long time. She applied that philosophy to many areas of interest. Beth had what was often described as Irish values or qualities-it depends which way one likes to take it. She was determined or dogged, single-minded or pig-headed. She was all of those things. She was also caring and sensitive and most compassionate. That compassion led to the passion to which the Leader of the House referred. Beth could get very angry and she got angry with many of us at some times when we could not understand the great needs that she was describing in her own electorate. Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson 6 March 1990 COUNCIL 23

Beth would get angry about indignities, about inequities and about intolerance. Although she so often appeared confident, like most of us, she was not always as confident as she seemed. She knew that her role as a Parliamentary representative for the Legislative Assembly seat of Thomastown was extremely important; important also was the way she was seen to carry out that role. She did it extremely well. She was a leader in that electorate. She was a teacher to many of us and, as the Minister for Health said, she alerted many of us to the needs of the growth corridor and made sure she did all in her power to be sensitive to the needs of such a diverse and growing area. The comment was made at her funeral about a quotation of a member of her electorate who said, "Who will look after us now?" I do not believe that comment is valid. Beth gave people skills and she showed people the way to look after themselves. The work she did in Thomastown will continue and it will be an everlasting memorial to Beth Gleeson. I am fortunate to have known her. Thomastown has lost an excellent representative in Beth Gleeson. The Australian Labor Party has lost an excellent member who contributed to many parts of our organisation, and Parliament has lost a valuable representative. I know her family will mourn her passing for a long time. I too share in that mourning, for I have lost a friend. The Hon. ROSEMARY V ARTY (Nunawading Province)-My colleagues on both sides of the House have had many things to say about the late honourable member for Thomastown in the other place, Beth Gleeson. I had known Beth only since 1988 when I became a member of the Economic and Budget Review Committee, under her chairmanship. It was her great pride and joy that not only did that committee have a woman as chairperson but also that it had me as its deputy chairperson. Beth Gleeson had a great belief in the Parliamentary committee system and she set about ensuring that the committees on which she served operated properly. On many occasions we sat down to work out how we might weave our way through the maze of the bureaucracy that seemed determined at all times to hinder the tasks that had been set for the committee. She found that fact very annoying and I can understand how my colleagues on the other side say that she could become very angry. Beth used to become angry about the bureaucracy which seemed determined to hinder. Certainly in the committee scene, Beth was determined in a very quiet way. She was able to achieve what she aimed for by going about it in a very positive, determined, but quiet way. As has been said, she worked very hard in her electorate. She treated her first illness as a problem to be overcome and was very determined to overcome that first bout of cancer. As an extension, she provided much support to the late honourable member for Greensborough in the other place, Pauline Toner, and her family, when Pauline was so ill. I know that Beth shared Pauline's experiences and supported her family in their tragedy. It was mutual support that the two families were able to share; I know that it gave them the strength to get through those very difficult times. As has been articulated in other ways, Beth was a very caring person. I am sure that my female colleagues will agree that it is not easy being a woman member of Parliament. Beth Gleeson had the support not only of Michael but also of the rest of her family and of her friends; she was able to cope with all of that and pursue her own interests as well. All honourable members will miss her as a Parliamentarian; we will miss her as a colleague and as a friend. It is a great shame that she was not able to continue the good work that she commenced. 24 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson

The Hon. G. A. SGRO (Melbourne North Province)-All honourable members knew Beth Gleeson after she was elected in 1985. However, for many years before she became a member of Parliament she had worked for the people of Thomastown. She had worked in the area for a former Federal member of Parliament, Dr Harry Jenkins. Before she came to the other place she helped and worked with the people of Thomastown. Before the word "multicultural" became fashionable Beth Gleeson and I-but especially Beth-worked in the Thomastown area where half the population are migrants. For many years before the trend of multiculturalism, Beth Gleeson took their fight for schools, for languages in the classrooms and in factories and followed it through; Thomastown is an industrial area and many people in the area were looked upon as second-class citizens. Beth in particular used to initiate discussions with unions and management to establish a respect for those people so that they would be treated with dignity. She did much good work for many years before she became a member of Parliament. I do not use the expression "godfather," but she was a "godmother" for many in Thomastown. Since her death and the consequent by-election, the press has talked about the Labor Party receiving 72 per cent of the vote but, without delving into the politics, we should not kid ourselves. At least 15 or 20 per cent of the 72 per cent vote was a personal Beth Gleeson vote. That was not because she was special but because she worked very hard for the people. As the priest said at her funeral, Beth Gleeson helped to establish accommodation for young mothers, and was involved in improvements to transport and roads. She spent much time in Mill Park, and established two or three organisations there, as well as housing for young mothers, at which they could convene and discuss their problems, and where baby sitters would enable the young mothers to have a few hours. Many people were crying at her funeral; they were not politicians but ordinary people and their concern was, "Who will look after us now that Beth is not here any more?" Beth Gleeson became a friend of the people in the area. Beth Gleeson and I worked together since I became the elected representative of the Melbourne North Province in 1985. At times I argued with Beth but not because of policy-only because she worked too hard! She would not allow me to have one free weekend. She always had a school council meeting, a migrants meeting, or a mothers club meeting to attend. In the weeks before Christmas I told her: "Enough is enough". But only a few weeks before she died she said to me "Giovanni, come with me to a luncheon"; I said that I could not attend-then we had an argument, but not because of policy, simply because she was overworked. Beth knew she was sick; I knew she had a problem but I did not know how sick she was. She worked hard until her last days because she believed in the people she represented-not only since 1985 but also for the many years before that. A large part of the 73 per cent vote in Thomastown was for Beth Gleeson as a person, and for her hard work. I miss her very much and I am certain people in the area will miss her. Since Beth's death I have attended meetings in the Thomastown area, even in her own office; people there continue to talk about Beth Gleeson as though she were present. Beth will be there with them for many years to come. The Hon. JOAN COXSEDGE (Melbourne West Province)-I pay tribute to Beth Gleeson who died a little more than one week before Christmas 1989. Her death at such a young age was a profound shock for everyone in her electorate, in Parliament, and in the Labor Party, but especially to the women members of Parliament, losing two of our colleagues in the one year-Pauline Toner and Beth Gleeson-and both Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson 6 March 1990 COUNCIL 25 from cancer, was a great blow. It has made us all pause and take stock of our own lives and perhaps place a higher value on the things that really count. Beth was very courageous in her fight against cancer. She just got on with her work and seemed to completely ignore her illness-not an easy thing to do, I would think, when putting up with the side effects of chemotherapy. Like many others, I used to talk regularly with her and ask her how she was getting on and she was invariably positive and uncomplaining. She had a special interest in economics and many other matters that have been mentioned today as well as issues of civil liberties because for some time Beth was the secretary of the Labor Party civil rights and law reform policy committee, of which I have been a member for many years. It was during that period, perhaps ten or more years ago, that I first came to know Beth. One could describe her as a quietly determined and courageous fighter. She was a very hardworking person and dedicated to improving the lot of ordinary people, partiCularly in her own region, and she was interested particularly in migrant women because she wanted them to have a fair go. That is why she was held in such high esteem by the labour movement. It is bad enough when loved ones die, no matter how old they are, but it is particularly cruel when young people die, and Beth was very young. There is a feeling of incompleteness and perhaps an even sharper sense of loss. The latter years must have been particularly difficult for Beth trying to juggle her own needs, when ill health overtook her, with the needs of her family, who were very close to her, as well as the needs of the electors and the Parliament. But she was a battler right to the end and did not give up for a second, and that is how she will be remembered by all her colleagues­ for her courage and for her dedication. I extend my sincere condolences to her husband, Mike, and to her daughters, Megan and Lisa, who must be missing her very deeply. The Hon. JEAN McLEAN (Boronia Province)-I also met Beth Gleeson before she became a member of Parliament~ first through the party and through the role she played in Thomastown working with the migrant communities and in her counselling role when difficult problems and arguments arose not only at the community level but also within the Labor Party-the problems that all members of political parties face. When Beth Gleeson ran for Parliament it was clear that she had overwhelming support from the various migrant communities in her area. As has been said, she played an important role on all the committees with which she was involved. She identified with the women's role and took that into account in the decisions that she made in the various areas in her own community and in her work on Parliamentary committees. Beth was sick for a long time but she never complained. She identified closely with all her Parliamentary colleagues. In this House we do not have the same amount of late nights they have in the other place. On many occasions I spoke with Beth on a Thursday when she had been up for all hours of the night before and had to return to the Parliament early the next morning to carry out her work although she was obviously very tired. I agree with the comments that have been made about the tragedy of two young women colleagues dying in the service of this Parliament, and it has not been that long since women have been able to take their rightful place in the Parliament. The dual roles that all women have to play place great pressures on women Parliamentarians, and Beth never looked like giving up any of her commitments on the various 26 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson committees of which she was a member even though at times the strain was very great. I feel very sad and depressed at having lost a great colleague in Beth Gleeson. I pass on my condolences to her husband, Mike, and family and say that the whole of the Parliament-certainly the Parliamentary women-have lost a wonderful person on this sad occasion. The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS (Jika Jika Province)-I should like to associate myself with this condolence motion. When one enters Parliament some honourable members give a great deal of assistance over the course of time and are willing to help new members in a variety of ways. Beth Gleeson was one such person. She and I went on a number of committees together; we were on the Economic and Budget Review Committee, the public accounts subcommittee of that committee, the Treasury committee and the Department of Industry, Technology and Resources committee, and we were together on the northern suburbs MPs group. I shall briefly say a few words about three areas of the work of Beth Gleeson. The first concerns the Economic and Budget Review Committee and its public accounts subcommittee. It is fair to say that for Beth there were two important issues to which she was committed in relation to those committees: one was that she was dedicated to the idea of the Parliamentary committee system as such. She had a passionate and strong commitment to that system and dealt with committees in a bipartisan way. She believed, where it was possible to get agreement across the parties on the way to handle particular issues, that that was the best way to proceed and the method that would yield the best results in the interests of Victoria. Her second major commitment was in the area of accountability. She had a strong commitment to the notion that government should be accountable, and that was shown on a number of occasions by the fearless way in which she approached public account funding in the Economic and Budget Review Committee subcommittee. The other broad area that has been talked about, of which I know something, was what could be and has been described as her passionate commitment to her local area and the way that she operated locally. She represented an outer suburban electorate that has a high migrant content, with more than 40 per cent of the population being born overseas. There were significant gaps in the infrastructure component and, in particular, in the economic and social infrastructure of her area. To my knowledge she worked tirelessly in trying to improve that infrastructure. As to economic issues, Beth was always talking about the transport needs of her area, of how to create employment opportunities and of better traffic flow across the area she represented. On many occasions she spoke with the relevant Ministers about those concerns. In the social infrastructure component Beth Gleeson was passionate about education, training and kindergarten and migrant services. Her strong commitment to ethnic women has been mentioned and Beth had the respect of many people from her local area because of that commitment. During the course of the last State election campaign I went to her electorate and spoke to the Ethnic Communities Council which was to announce a joint initiative with the Victorian Ethnic Affairs Commission and the Shire of Whittlesea. The initiative was an attempt to improve services to the ethnic communities and arose from reports that Beth Gleeson had initiated. The people from the council who spoke to me all had positive things to say about the role and work of Beth Gleeson. Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson 6 March 1990 COUNCIL 27

The third area about which I shall speak is Beth's commitment to education, employment opportunities and the economic development generally of the northern suburbs. Some time ago Beth introduced me to the NIETL group-the Northern Industry Education and Training Link. She took me to a meeting at the Howe leather factory in Preston and ensured that I was introduced to various people from the educational institutions and industry groups in the region. We went through the factory and NIETL then held a meeting. I have since been asked by the group to continue to provide government representation and I hope that I can do the job somewhere near as well as Beth did it. She understood the crucial link between educational training, economic development and industrial development. She helped to form the NIETL group and on 5 November 1987 chaired the planning committee meeting with Norm Shearer. That meeting formulated the terms of reference and the plan for the group. NIETL operated throughout 1988 and 1989 and Beth was able to attend as regularly as Parliament allowed. Certainly every time I went to a meeting she was in attendance. Indeed, only two weeks before her death she chaired a meeting at which the Leader of the House was present, and that showed a great deal of courage. As she left she turned to me and made a remark about some leaks that had appeared in the paper the week before and asked whether I knew about them. I told her that, of course, I had no idea. I shall briefly mention some aspects of Beth's commitment to education. She was a member of the planning committee for the formation of the Northern Metropolitan College of Technical and Further Education and a member of the planning committee for the Epping campus of that T AFE college. She was also a member of the planning committee for the Northern Applied Science Technology and Engineering Centre­ NASTEC-at Bundoora and was Deputy President of the College Council of the Northern Metropolitan College ofTAFE. Beth's commitment was extensive and I understand that appropriate memorials at the sites of NASTEC and the Epping campus are under way. At the last meeting of NIETL it was proposed that the group initiate a Beth Gleeson memorial scholarship. A subcommittee, of which I am a member, was formed to look into that. Beth Gleeson's vision was of a vigorous, sustained northern region economy supported by an up-to-date and relevant education and training infrastructure. I am delighted to support the motion, and I extend my sympathy to her family. The PRESIDENT-The contributions this afternoon have given me a much greater appreciation of the breadth of the late Beth Gleeson's interests and the depth of her service to the local community. I did not know her well; I had met her mainly through her chairmanship of the Economic and Budget Review Committee at meetings held with Presiding Officers. I knew her to be one who was always properly briefed and who had done her homework before meetings, which, I regret to say, is not always the case with everyone who attends such meetings. I also met her through the House Committee, of which she was a member. Similarly, she always knew what she was talking about and frequently raised specific issues that affected women. One could not but be impressed by the fact that she prepared extremely well. However, tonight I have learned that her interests were very much wider and deeper. My sympathy goes to the members of her family. It is a tragedy indeed when one so young, with so much promise and so much to give, is taken from us prematurely. The motion was agreed to in silence, honourable members showing their unanimous agreement by standing in their places. 28 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Rutherford Guthrie, CMG

DEATH OF THE HONOURABLE SIR RUTHERFORD CAMPBELL GUTHRIE, CMG The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts)-I move: That this House expresses its sincere sorrow at the death, on 20 February 1990, of the Honourable Sir Rutherford Campbell Guthrie, CMG, and places on record its acknowledgment of the valuable services rendered by him to the Parliament and the people of Victoria as member of the Legislative Assembly for the electoral district of Ripon from 1947 to 1950 and as Commissioner of Crown Lands and Survey and Minister of Soldier Settlement from 1948 to 1950. Sir Rutherford Campbell Guthrie, or Ford Guthrie, as he was better known, passed away some two weeks ago. He was the honourable member for Ripon from 1947 to 1950. He was born in Donald on 28 November 1899, a few days after my father was born. He was born at the very end of the last century and, had he lived for one more decade, he would have seen three different centuries. His family owned a property in Donald and grazed sheep and cattle and, no doubt, harvested grains. He was educated at Melbourne Grammar School and later at Cambridge University, where he graduated in 1921 with a degree of Bachelor of Arts. That was a remarkable feat because during the first world war he also spent more than a year in the armed forces. Therefore, he was very young to achieve what he achieved at Cambridge University in 1921 when he was only twenty years old. Sir Rutherford had a distinguished war record. He served in both world wars. He married Rhona McKellar in 1927 and they had two sons. Continuing in the tradition of his family upbringing he returned to the land. He had a cattle stud at Warrawidgee, Linton, and he bred sheep on the property as well. At the outbreak of the second world war he re-enlisted and that marked the recommencement of Sir Rutherford's military career. He achieved the rank of major. He was wounded at El Alamein and was mentioned in dispatches. He had a long career as a councillor in the Shire of Ripon from 1946 to 1974, and was three times president of that shire council. After the election in 1947, Sir Rutherford became a Minister in the Hollway government in 1948. He was Commissioner of Crown Lands and Survey and Minister of Soldier Settlement, which were suitable portfolios for a man of his background. His term was short. As has been said earlier today, it was an unstable environment, and he lost the seat in 1950. Sir Rutherford was an active member of numerous local committees such as the Central Highlands Regional Development Committee, Ballarat Legacy, the Ballarat Agricultural Society and the Corriedale Breeders Association. More importantly, after his career as a Parliamentarian he became State President of the Liberal Party from 1956 to 1960 and Treasurer of the Liberal Party from 1960 to 1963. Sir Rutherford was a director of a number of companies and an office-bearer in the Returned Services League. During the course of his life, through his political and military service, Sir Rutherford demonstrated his commitment to the community, the State and the country. I have no doubt that other honourable members would like to speak at more length about that contribution. It was only fitting, therefore, that he should be recognised for his services. In 1960 Sir Rutherford was awarded the Companion of the Order ofSt Michael and St George, and in 1968 he was honoured with a knighthood. On behalf of the government I offer my sincere condolences to the family and friends of Sir Rutherford Guthrie. Death a/Ban. Sir Ruther/ordGuthrie, CMG 6 March 1990 COUNCIL 29

The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL (East Yarra Province )-On behalf of the Liberal Party I join with the Leader of the House in expressing my sympathy and that of my colleagues to the family of the late Sir Rutherford Guthrie. He was born on 28 November 1899 at Donald and died on 20 February 1990 at the age of 90 years. Sir Rutherford-or, as he was better known, Ford Guthrie-was prominent in a number of significant areas of Victorian public life from the 1940s through to the 1970s. Ford was prominent in local government, being a member of the Ripon Shire Council from 1946 to 1974-a very long innings-and having served three separate terms as shire president. Sir Rutherford was also prominent in the Liberal Country Party, as it was then known, being the President of the Victorian Division from 1956 to 1960 and Treasurer from 1960 to 1963-the Liberal Country Party not being a merged entity but an entity that had in its mind being the government in power and also the party that took over the Country Party. The "Hon. E. H. Walker interjected. The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL-In answer to the Minister's interjection, the other Country Party. The Hon. W. R. Baxter-Perhaps you might explain that to Mr Connard later. The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL-I will, ifhe has not altered his Bansardproofs! Sir Rutherford was the honourable member for Ripon from 1947 to 1950. He was particularly well known to Victorians between the years of 1948 and 1950 when he was Commissioner of Crown Lands and Survey and Minister of Soldier Settlement in the Hollway government. Having been a member of Parliament for only about one year before he was appointed a Minister, there is a story that he was a little bemused when he moved into his new Ministerial office. On finding five telephones on his Ministerial desk he picked up each phone in turn and asked each person who answered to drop in to see him and have a chat. People came from all parts of the building to brief him and tell him what he should do in his capacity as Minister, which I understand bemused him even more. Sir Rutherford had a distinguished war record-as has been outlined by the Leader of the Government-serving in both world wars. He was a major with the 9th Division, Cavalry Regiment of the Australian Imperial Forces. He was mentioned in dispatches, and was wounded at El Alamein. I understand from those who knew him well that Ford Guthrie would wish to be remembered for his love of cricket-he was particularly active in the Western Plains District, having been a batsman of some repute-and also for his magnificent herd of Poll Hereford cattle. His services to the community and particularly his work on behalf of primary industry were acknowledged in 1960 when Sir Rutherford was awarded the CMG­ Companion of the Order ofSt Michael and St George-and later in 1968 when he was knighted in the New Year's honours List. Other major public offices held by Sir Rutherford were that of President of the Board of Land and Works and Commissioner of Crown Lands and Survey. He was a member of: the Central Highlands Development Committee; Ballarat Legacy; the Ballarat Agricultural Society; and the Corriedale Breeders Association. In 1973 Sir Rutherford retired to Gisborne. I am told that he was invariably a well-mannered and kindly gentleman. He had a natural flair for getting along with everyone he met and he was extremely well liked. 30 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Rutherford Guthrie, CMG

It is therefore with pleasure that, on behalf of the Opposition, I extend condolences to Peter, Sir Rutherford's surviving son, and his family. The Hon. W. R. BAXTER (North Eastern Province)-Sir Rutherford passed away recently at a very great age. As has been outlined to the House this evening, he achieved much in his lifetime. In particular, he served his country in the two world wars. I first learned of his death when entering the Naval and Military Club a day or two after he had died. I noted on the board which is customarily in the foyer of the club and contains information about the deaths of members that heading the list that day was the Honourable Major Sir Rutherford Guthrie. Honourable members need to take due note of the tremendous service given by people who served this country in both world wars. Sir Rutherford was clearly a very young man in the first world war, yet he took up the cudgels again some years later when the second world war occurred. He was a Minister for a short while in what have already been noted today as very turbulent times. I understand that for some time he has headed the list, which I understand is made up in chronological order, of dates when Ministers were first appointed. In fact, he has been at the head of that list for some time, having been appointed in 1947, shortly before the late Sir Henry Bolte was also appointed. I believe that tradition now passes on to a predecessor of mine, two or three times removed, in this place as Leader of the National Party, the Honourable Ivan Swinburne, of Myrtleford. It should be noted that Sir Rutherford and his family suffered a dreadful tragedy only some twelve months ago, when his wife, Lady Rhona Guthrie, was killed in a tragic accident near Romsey when her car collided with another vehicle that was driven by a daughter ofa prominent constituent of mine from Echuca. I expect it must have been very detrimental to Sir Rutherford's health to lose his wife at a great age and in those very sad circumstances. However, Sir Rutherford's family can be ve~ proud of his good, long and very productive life and the service he gave both to thIS Parliament-albeit for a relatively short time-and, more particularly, to the community at large. The Hon. HADDON STOREY (East Yarra Province)-I am pleased to join in this motion of condolence to the family of the late Sir Rutherford Guthrie. As earlier speakers have mentioned, he had a long and honourable record of service to the public both in the Army and in public affairs, as well as in local councils and in this Parliament. It was certainly a magnificent record. I knew Sir Rutherford very briefly back in the days when I was a Young Liberal, and on the occasion to which I refer particularly, I happened to be the President of the Young Liberals and he was president of the party. I do not want to let out too many secrets about the Young Liberal Movement or the Liberal Party, but it had gone through some turbulent times leading up to my term as president, and my overwhelming impression of Sir Rutherford Guthrie was that he was a kindly and tolerant man who took a considerable interest in the Young Liberal Movement and went to great pains to try to ensure that earlier rougher times were overcome and that everybody was working together in harmony. It happened to be at the time when the State government was going great guns under Sir Henry Bolte and the Liberals were governing at the Federal level. He was a curbing influence on some of the turbulent elements within the party at that time. I remember him as a friendly person and, although there was a difference in our ages, I found that I could get along well with him. He was always prepared to talk to me and listen to ideas that Young Liberals had in those days, which is an attribute that I commend to all political parties. I have fond memories of Sir Rutherford at that Death ofHon. Sir Rutherford Guthrie, CMG 6 March 1990 COUNCIL 31 time. I express my condolences to his family. He had a wonderful life of public service, and obviously a satisfying life. If we could all live to the age of 90 years and look back on a life like that, we would be well satisfied. The Hon. R. S. de FEGELY (Ballarat Province)-I support the condolence motion. It is probably somewhat unusual that a member should address two condolence motions in one day for two members who have represented his particular area. Sir Rutherford Guthrie, or Ford as he was known, served only a short term in this Parliament, which was to Victoria's detriment. The Guthrie family and my family' have been great friends for many years although I did not meet Ford Guthrie untIl 1946. He was the son of Thomas Oliver Guthrie, who married twice. I was associated with the second family, Ford's half-brother, Oliver, his brother Tim, and their parents, and I did not meet Ford Guthrie until 1946. When I went away to boarding school I spent four years in the same boarding house as Ford Guthrie's son, Peter, and we became friends. As a consequence, on a number of occasions I stayed at Warrawidgee with the Guthries, and I have treasured their kindness to me over the years. The fact that Sir Rutherford represented Ripon in those early days is interesting because he represented part of the area that was later represented by Sir Henry Bolte. Ford Guthrie won the seat from Ernie Morton, a former Secretary of the Shire of Ararat, who held it from 1945 to 1947 for the Labor Party, and to whom he lost the seat again in 1950. He was unable to regain it because the seat was abolished in 1955. As happens to many members of Parliament who find that they have no constituency following a redistribution, Ford found himself unable to return to the politics that I know he loved. It is interesting to digress for a moment to say that Ernie Morton is still living in Maryborough and will be one of the first world war veterans making the trip to Gallipoli this year on the historic tour for Anzac Day. I am not sure what my colleagues have said about Ford Guthrie, so I do not want to go over ground already covered, but the fact that he was not able to get back into politics did not deter him from the political field. As I am sure has been spelt out, when unable to get back into politics he decided to put his efforts into the political party itself. He served with distinction as President and Treasurer of the Victorian branch of the Liberal Party. At the Warrawidgee property he loved at Linton, near Skipton, he had a fine herd of stud cattle and Corriedale sheep which, in the Guthrie tradition, he bred with distinction. He was involved in the Corriedale Breeders Association and was involved in other areas relating to agriculture as Chairman of the Phosphate Co-operative Co. Ltd and the Federal Woollen Mills Ltd. He served Victoria in all sorts of ways, as well as being on the Ripon Shire Council for almost 30 years. Between 1946 and 1974 he was president of the shire three times. The greatest attribute of Ford Guthrie was that he was a man of great stature-an upright man in all senses of the word. He was a person of total integrity who played life with a straight bat. He stuck to his word on every occasion. He led a long and active life, dying at 90 years of age, but over the last fifteen years or so he had a number of bypass operations. He was, however, still able to enjoy life and thanks to the care that was given to him by his wife, Rhona, he was able to live his life to the full. After Ford's retirement from the property near Skipton he and Rhona lived at Mount Macedon, where they were constituents of mine. I was then able to see them on odd occasions when I visited that part of the world. Sir Rutherford's life was not without sadness. He and his wife lost their youngest son, David, who died in England in his early twenties, which was an incident that set Ford back considerably. However, being the sort of person he was, he carried on with life and did not let it get to him too much. 32 COUNCIL 6 March 1990 Adjournment

He was a keen sportsman and was a rower of some note in his early days, representing Cambridge University. He played cricket in the Western District for many years, and for his activities in public life he was knighted in 1968. His son Peter survives him. His wife was tragically killed in a car accident less than twelve months ago, when he was in hospital with further problems. The accident obviously shattered him, although his condition improved, enabling him to be released from hospital and return home, where he died six weeks later. I am glad to have the opportunity of addressing this motion and extending my sympathy to Sir Rutherford's son, Peter, his brothers, Oliver and Tim, and to their families. The PRESIDENT-The late Sir Rutherford Guthrie-Ford Guthrie-was a courteous, imposing, dignified and kindly man. I first met him almost 40 years ago at a Liberal Party State Council meeting. At such meetings Ford Guthrie had an enormous reputation: his words were treated with awe, because he had plain, simple commonsense. He was an elder statesman of the party; and I am told he brought those same qualities to every organisation he joined and every walk of life he moved in. He was a respected stud breeder, a leader in the field of primary industry, a serviceman of high repute and a clubman of the city; he contributed to sport and to local government and was briefly a Minister in a Liberal Country Party government. After his defeat in the election of 1950 he continued to serve his party, becoming its State president. One of the most remarkable things about his career is that he is the only person since the second world war to have served as a Minister and a shire councillor at the same time, something quite impossible today, and never likely to recur. The range of his activities and interests was very wide. In each field of endeavour he contributed effectively and engendered the respect of all who knew him. No-one can ask for more than that. To those who survive him lextend condolences. The motion was agreed to in silence, honourable members showing their unanimous agreement by standing in their places.

ADJOURNMENT The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts)-I move: That, as a further mark of respect to the memory of the late Honourables Sir Henry Edward Bolte, GCMG and Sir Rutherford Campbell Guthrie, CMG, and Mrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson, the House do now adjourn. The motion was agreed to. The House adjourned at 5.54 p.m. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 33

Wednesday,7 March 1990

The PRESIDENT (the Hon. A. J. Hunt) took the chair at 2.2 p.m. and read the prayer.

TREASURER'S FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL (East Yarra Province)-I move: That Standing Orders be suspended in so far as necessary on the ground of urgency to enable me to move the following motion forthwith: "That this House calls on the Premier to dismiss the Treasurer immediately because of the Treasurer's history of gross financial mismanagement and his failure to honour the principles of Ministerial responsibility" . I provide some brief reasons for wishing to have the Standing Orders suspended. This is the first opportunity this House has had to meet and discuss the issue of State Bank Victoria and the report that was released by the government a few weeks ago. The normal opportunity for the Opposition to move a motion on a Wednesday is not readily available, given that yesterday the House adjourned to show respect following the deaths of former members and notice of motion could not be given. I therefore ask that Standing Orders be suspended to allow the motion to proceed forthwith. The motion was agreed to. The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL (East Yarra Province)-I move: That this House calls on the Premier to dismiss the Treasurer immediately because of the Treasurer's history of gross financial mismanagement and his failure to honour the principles of Ministerial responsibility. If justice is to be done; if the finances of the State are to be protected; and if the tradition of Ministerial responsibility is to be upheld, the Treasurer must quit or be sacked. Due to the incompetence of the government State Bank Victoria has lost almost $1·4 billion over the past eighteen months. It is the largest corporate loss in Victoria's history and the Treasurer is seen to be, and must be held, responsible. The State Bank scandal will be the Treasurer's epitaph. He must accept the responsibility. He implemented the policy; he was the architect, the ideas man, and he is trying to blame everyone but himself for the failures of the bank. Today he remains as Treasurer. The jury has come in-the man must go. Racked by internal division and indecision, bereft of standards and leadership, the government is allowing the Treasurer to hang on. He is being left to "run" the State's finances but is there any credibility in a man who has brought upon us the largest corporate loss in the State's history? The Treasurer is the loser. State Bank Victoria has lost $1·4 billion; WorkCare has $4·2 billion in unfunded liabilities; the Victorian Economic Development Corporation lost $138 million; and the Victorian Investment Corporation, $80 million. These were the brainchild of one man, the policies that he rigorously implemented; and every single one of them is a loser! The Hon. W. R. Baxter-Not one success! Session 1990-2 34 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL-Worse than that, we will all pay. What happens time and again is that the government expects us to pick up the tab for its losses and the Treasurer is the billion-dollar loser. Worse than that, he is the perpetual arrogant gambler. He wastes our money and the funds of the State year in and year out, and to top it off he brings in a so-called rescue package that is just as dodgy in its detail as the original handling of the State Bank, the VEDC and the VIC. Rob Jolly is a coward! He will not accept responsibility for his actions. Worse than that, he seeks to use his underlings as scapegoats for his own failings. He sacked the board of State Bank Victoria, including members of the board who had no direct responsibility for Tricontinental Corporation Ltd, but he will not accept the same standards that he imposed on board members Mr Ian Renard and Dr Duncan Ironmonger. This coward hopes that the political pressure will evaporate; this coward hopes that the factions can save him; this coward wants to lose billions of dollars more for Victoria. The Opposition calls him to account. Rob Jolly is casual with the truth. There were no straight answers when the Opposition asked questions about Tricontinental and the State Bank. There were no proper inquiries, as would be expected from a diligent Minister, into the operation of the bank or of its highly speculative subsidiary. Despite the losses, there was also no public inquiry. Or do we say, "You are wrong, Mark Birrell, he is not casual with the truth; the man is simply negligent"? When the Treasurer told the Legislative Assembly on 8 August 1989: In relation to the bank's capital base, I point out that it has never been in a stronger position- was he not telling the full truth, or did he simply not know? The Treasurer does not now stand by that statement. Are we simply to forget it? No! We are meant to say that it tells us a lot about the man and how he is not fit to hold the position of Treasurer. As the government's own statements indicate, Victoria is up for an annual bill of between $50 million and $100 million to pay for this mistake. The State must pay $50 million to $100 million every year to pay for Rob Jolly's error, an error that was inevitable if Labor government policy were implemented. At the heart of this is the suffering it will cause to Victoria. It is $50 million to $100 million a year that could have been spent on schools, public hospitals, roads, police or on many other essential services and capital works in this State. However, every year from now-it does not matter which party is in government-$50 million to $100 million will have to be extracted from the State Budget to pay for the mistake Rob Jolly made in 1989. When the Liberal Party is in government the payment for Rob Jolly's error will be a line item in the Budget. However, that will not take away the pain people feel when members of Parliament tell them that there is no money for a local school project or for road maintenance or that the State cannot afford more nurses or police because it is still paying off Jolly's debt. Some $795 million will be taken up in the budgetary process at a cost to Victorians increasing to $100 million a year. The facts are that in the eighteen months of trading since he changed the State Bank Act, Mr Jolly has left Victoria with enormous debts and a future debt servicing charge that will cut at the heart of Victoria's budgetary position. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 35

This mess is because of policy failure, and the architect of that policy is Rob Jolly. It is not simply incompetence; it is not simply mismanagement; it is both of those as well as being an indication of a misguided political party. The Labor Party had a political policy it put in place to run the economic strategy of the State and which would inevitably lead to the losses of the Victorian Economic Development Corporation, the Victorian Investment Corporation and the State Bank. Today's Labor Party has sought to achieve its stated socialist goal through old­ fashioned intervention in the marketplace. This theory happens to be obsolete everywhere else in the world. From Eastern Europe to Western Australia it has been abandoned, but not in Victoria! Intervention continues to be pursued in this State. Labor's policy is based on government dominance of the private sector through government-funded or government-owned corporate structures. The Victorian Economic Development Corporation was central to Labor's interventionist aims. Its failure was not only financial but was also symbolic of Lab or's failed economic strategy. State Bank Victoria was intended to be another of the key building blocks in Labor's strategy for controlling Victoria. Of course, State Bank Victoria was not the first of the financial disasters. The Treasurer himself has been personally involved in every major financial scandal in Victoria over the past seven and a half years. In addition to the State Bank and the VEDC, the list includes, as I said, the Victorian Investment Corporation, where the government took the high-fashion ground of picking high technology winners and­ surprise, surprise!-it picked the losers. Let us not forget WorkCare. It was our money that the Treasurer squandered in every case. I have heard people wondering: where did Labor start to go wrong? It was in 1982. Labor went wrong when if first embarked on the strategy of intervening in the marketplace, trying to "pick winners" and, to use the Premier's phrase, when he said, "We are going to kick-start the economy". He has kicked the damned economy to death! His policy was that Rob Jolly knew better than private enterprise; that Rob Jolly could use taxpayers' money to do better than the corporate sector. That is why our once-great State Bank has been turned into a bank that actually has to borrow money from other banks to survive. What an irony! The State Bank was meant to be the people's bank, the workers' bank, lending money to poor Victorians who otherwise would not be able to buy homes. Rob Jolly thought that he could plunder it, misdirect it so that it would benefit Victoria, and now all Victorians pay. Of course the baTIk's spending capacity will be impaired as a result of this chronic mismanagement. It will cost us so much, and the building blocks of Labor's economic strategy now lie in ruins around the government, which has lost its grip on policy. It now no longer has an economic strategy because every one" of the key themes has been dumped. I shall quote what the Treasurer said in 1984 when he announced Labor's economic strategy document called Victoria. The Next Step. He said: To support the government's economic strategy, the State Bank has agreed to expand its corporate lending activities. This statement alone completely negatives the government's argument that the State Bank was somehow acting independently. An agreement was struck between the Treasurer and the State Bank to "expand its corporate lending activities". That whole approach is an example of what this government did to expand the bank's role. 36 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

In 1984 Mr Jolly even cited as an achievement the purchase of all the Tricontinental Corporation Ltd shares. He thought it was something of an advance for the State of Victoria. It is completely untrue to say that the bank agreed to spontaneously support the government's strategy; that is complete nonsense. The State Bank had no choice in the matter. The State Bank's annual report makes it clear that the bank's attitude was determined by the Victorian government's strategy and was reinforced by the State Bank Act. For those who doubt the State Bank was forced into the position, I quote a statement in the State Bank's annual report of 1988: This course was encouraged by the Victorian government's 1983 economic strategy. The bank knew what "His Master's Voice" was saying, and now Victorians have to pick up the bill. In driving the bank into the unfamiliar but fashionable merchant banking area, the Treasurer was committing it to a risky future. If he did not know that he is an even bigger fool than the Opposition thinks he is. Liberal Party members have frequently aired concerns about this dangerous and costly approach, but the Australian Labor Party arrogantly proceeded with its plans, and 1ts reactions to the concerns we aired are interesting. In 1988 the Opposition started to ask questions about Tricontinental Corporation Ltd, the head of which is currently facing proceedin~s in the Supreme Court, about which the government does not want to talk. What d1d the Treasurer say in response to our concerns? In the Legislative Assembly on 12 April 1988, as recorded at page 1263 of H ansard, the Treasurer said: I was quite amazed at the obsession with Tricontinental Corporation Ltd of a number of Liberal Party members in this debate who seem to regard the company as evil. In fact, it is one of Australia's leading merchant banks. . He was singing the praises of Tricontinental, a crook bank if ever there was one. It is Labor's bank, a bank to be used to "kick some goals" and to achieve something for the workers whom it is stripping bare. On 5 May 1988, as reported at page 2043 of Hansard, the Premier, Mr Cain, said: The State Bank is under superb management and is competing well, and the government intends to ensure that it continues to do that. He did not just say the State Bank was under suberb management but that the government "intends to ensure" it continues to do so. The Premier was wrong, but the Treasurer's boasts on 21 December 1988 were even worse. He said: At the low risk end, we have the State Bank of Victoria. The bank has blossomed during the life of the present government. It has blossomed to the extent that for the only time in its history it has made a loss­ not just a small loss, but a loss of about $1·4 billion. I now come to the so-called fix of the problem, and a fix it is because just as the Treasurer has refused to take responsibility for his mistakes, so he has refused to be explicit about the so-called solution. The Treasurer has a preference for convoluted financial arran~ements that are designed to dis~uise the real impact of his failed economic polic1es. One can become so entranced 1n following the shifts and dodges of the Treasurer that one sometimes loses sight of how fundamentally dishonest they are. The Treasurer has tried two schemes to cover debt losses in the State Bank, both intended to disguise some aspects of the fiasco. The first scheme was the sell-off' scheme which became public only in December 1989 because the Leader of the Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 37

Opposition revealed it. The Treasurer did not come clean; the government did not come clean. It took the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Brown, to reveal the secret scheme, the funny money deal to prevent Victorians learning about the debt position. If the Treasurer had had his way, neither the debt losses nor the method of disguising those losses would have seen the light of day. The sell-off scheme was planned to sell part of the bank to other statutory corporations in return for the new co-owner taking responsibility for Tricontinental's bad debts as they fell due. The government wanted effectively to sell the State Bank, or part of it, to another statutory authority, to avoid the problems becoming public. The government would have sold part of the State Bank's problems to the State Electricity Commission, the Gas and Fuel Corporation or the Board of Works, and it was all to be done under cover. The government would not want Victorians to know because Labor policy is that it is better to be a liar than to be found out. Government members were the liars on this issue. They covered up and tried to stop the scandal coming out. It is now out and it will be their political epitaph. The sell-off scheme was exposed. The most important and gripping feature of the arrangement was to prevent the bad debt losses from appearing on the balance sheet of the State Bank and therefore affecting the bank's recorded profitability. The same considerations also apply to the second scheme. Why sell to statutory corporations rather than to the private sector? Why not have a private sector equity issue, which would have been possible? There are many reasons. Firstly, a private sector placement would go against all of the prejudices of the government. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-But we would have to know about it, as well. The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL-That is a second reason. The private sector would have required public scrutiny of all government records-but public scrutiny is something this government wants to avoid. Also, it may have permitted a completely independent investigation of the bank-but heaven forbid! The government would not want that! On 23 February of this year the Treasurer made the announcement about a second scheme for "solving" the State Bank crisis he had created. That action contained an assumption that is invalid: why expect the fool who created the problem to have the competence to solve it? We also know that a substantial minority of government members asked themselves the same question. Indeed, the socialist left has good reason to ask why the Labor unity or centre unity faction has been allowed to get away with all of the economic mistakes! I shall take this opportunity of issuing a public apology. I have always said that the socialist left members were economically irresponsible. That must now be regarded as a relative test, because they are nowhere near as bad as the centre unity or Labor unity faction. Rob Jolly's second scheme is as slippery a proposal as we would have expected. The Treasurer's proposal lacks detail. Indeed, the briefing received by the Opposition from the Department of Management and Budget completely contradicted the public statements made about the scheme by the Treasurer. The department's advice was contradictory because the bare bones of the details provided by the Treasurer are insufficient to provide answers to searching questions. Even the State Bank itself does not seem to understand very well the scheme as proposed. The Treasurer might want us to look at this arrangement as a capital injection equivalent to capital subscriptions made by the shareholders of private banks-but 38 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management this funny money deal does no such thing. The principal functions of this debt-funding ploy are twofold, and neither has been admitted to by either the bank or the Treasurer. Firstly, the government wants to shift the loss from the State Bank's balance sheet to the State Budget so that, at the end of this financial year, the bank will appear to be making a profit. If any of the bad debts should be recovered they could be used to bolster the so-called record profits of the bank! Secondly, the mechanism avoids the government's having to find new capital to put into the bank. The mechanism chosen by the Treasurer could actually reduce the size of the bank-not increase it, as a new capital injection would have done. The effect of a reduction in the size of the bank would be to lessen its capacity to lend to those people it was designed to lend to-the poor and middle-income earners who are not able to obtain finance for home loans from elsewhere. This funny money scheme raises a strong doubt about whether it is legal and whether it will fall into a heap soon after the Federal election. The most important question is whether it is within Australian Loan Council guidelines. Mr Jolly claims that his proposed sidestep will avoid Loan Council limits on State government borrowing. We have no reason to imagine that Mr Jolly is any more correct this time than he was the last time when he tried to argue that funds raised by the notorious Victorian Equity Trust would be outside Loan Council limitations. The Treasurer told the press that there was no problem with the Loan Council; he told the marketplace that Loan Council limits posed no problem. But what happened? The Federal Treasurer said there was a problem and pulled him up! The government has now gone silent about the Loan Council. During the Opposition's briefing by them, officers of the Department of Management and Budget did not want to talk about it, probably because the scheme could be in breach of Loan Council limits or, even more tragically, could lead to Victorians having fewer loans funds available for other projects. I issue this challenge to the government, which says it has received a legal opinion on the matter from the Solicitor-General. Regardless of the source, if the government is confident of its advice, it should table it-make it available to the Opposition­ because we know that that advice talks about the scheme, and if the government is prepared to table it, it shows it has confidence in the scheme. If not, it shows that the ~overnment doubts the legal validity of it anyway. Is the government going to table It? The Hon. D. R. White-The scheme is not a problem. You know about the operations of the Loan Council. The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL-The Opposition knows about the operation of the Loan Council. It is rich in experience. The Victorian Equity Trust was your scheme! You said it was outside the Loan Council limitations, and again you were proved wrong. What happened? We were again misled by the Treasurer. Borrowings by State banks can be excluded from Loan Council agreements provided such borrowings are not linked to or used for the purposes of government. If the Minister assisting the Treasurer wants to look it up and find out some of the facts, I refer him to the Commonwealth Budget Paper 4 at page 51. The test that has to be applied is simple. Even Rob Jolly can do the test. Nobody knows whether he can pass it. The test is whether the borrowings are for the purpose of meeting guarantees given by this government. Since the borrowings arise only as the debts fall due under the government's guarantee, the debt is clearly being used for the purpose of government. The money is not being used for the purposes of the bank separately from the government's guarantee. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 39

Let the discredited Treasurer explain whether what he is doing is lawful. Let him explain what arrangements he has with the Loan Council or with the soon to' retire Federal Treasurer, or whether there are none for fear of being knocked back again as the last funny money scheme, the VET, was. I said at the outset that this is not just a failure of administration; this is a failure of policy. The State Bank scandal cuts at the heart of the government's credibility because it has forced it to abandon its entire economic policy. It now does not have one. The government's nerves have been so badly shattered by this experience with the State Bank that it sacked the board, and the bank has been forced to accept the supervision of the Reserve Bank. The Treasurer's new policy is a complete and utter reversal of his government's previous plans for the State Bank and the economy. He has thrown into reverse the government's push into merchant banking. Typical of the Treasurer's managerial ineptitude, the directive which he claimed to have sent the bank was not actually sent. I refer to the Treasurer's statement of 23 February 1990 which was issued to the media and, after requests, issued to others. In that statement at page 11 the Treasurer made certain comments under the heading "Restriction on bank activities". This was seen as being a very important issue to press with the public-that the government had restricted the State Bank's activities, and that things the government had told it in the past it could do, it cannot now do. The statement reads, in part: Reflecting the importance of these new supervisory arrangements the Treasurer has issued a policy direction to the State Bank board to ensure that all its borrowing and lending activities, with some minor exceptions, take place within the bank and that all the credit exposures of the bank are subject to the board's credit committee procedures. We had a briefing with the Department of Management and Budget and asked, "Is the Treasurer's statement true?" The Hon. B. E. Davidson-Three of your backbenchers are asleep! The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL-I'm not surprised. If Mr Davidson goes to sleep he makes a better contribution than he does when he is awake. The Treasurer said that a policy direction "has" been issued. I said to the representative from the Department of Management and Budget, "Is this true?" One has to ask this question of Rob Jolly because he often will not tell you. The Treasurer's representative said, "No, it hasn't been issued". The heart and soul of the document would be a directive that what they have done wrong in the past they would not do wrong in the future. Honourable members should forget for a moment what they did wrong in the past. What was the government's policy? It had not issued that directive, but now the Treasurer is saying when asked, "Oh, we are going to issue it". Is that not a reflection or a signpost of his relationship with the State Bank? Is that not an indication of the managerial incompetence? It is an indication that if one is given information by the Treasurer one must first ask, "Is it a lie?" By the Treasurer's own admission his statement was not true. It was the linchpin that gave some confidence that he had ~ot it right for the future. He has also said, "In the future the State Bank will be prohIbited from entrepreneurial lending". What is that? Presumably an "entrepreneurial" loan is one that goes bad! What we do know is that the bank is not allowed to lend to anybody if the loan is likely to go bad. This is the directive in a time of modem finanCial management! These are the "smart guys", the Labor Party men who have found money in hollow logs and who have introduced us to program budgeting; they are guys who can get it 40 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management right! They can "pick winners", but they have picked losers. It was not a matter of modem financial management but it was a quick way to make a loss. They have said, "We will stop the State Bank from any entrepreneurial lending". What does that mean? The definition surely is: to lend money to people that the Labor Party believes should receive money. Those who have benefited from Labor Party policy are the ones who got the money that no bank would normally have loaned them because the Labor Party had said to State Bank Victoria, "Lend at any cost; expand the State Bank in any way you can". But the State Bank will not conduct its business in that way in the future. The Treasurer is ignorant of business practices; he is unable to change direction quickly. Did the Treasurer simply lie or was he ignorant? The man ~as got gall. There are two arguments used in Rob Jolly's defence. The government has argued that no-one should take responsibility. It has argued that the Treasurer is clearly not responsible and it is not responsible. It has also said, however, that two State Bank board members were not really responsible but they had to go because they could have been responsible. The General Manager of Tricontinental Corporation Ltd was the only one that was caught. He might be responsible, but the tellers are not responsible. Certainly the Treasurer is not responsible! However, we know that the government is responsible! The government appointed the directors and the ·government appointed the general manager. The government initiated the change in the State Bank Act. The government determined the bank's policy. However, it claims it is not responsible, even though when the bank was successful the government claimed all of that success. In all things the relevant Minister of government is the Treasurer and, under the Westminster doctrine, the Minister is legally and morally responsible for his department, its policy and its conduct as well as his own personal conduct. If the Treasurer does not own these responsibilities what is his role? If the Treasurer does not want these responsibilities he should not be in the job. In the case of the Treasurer not having the moral strength to accept responsibility, the government must make him step down. The Treasurer has applied far more responsibility to the bank's directors than he is prepared to apply to himself. This is one of the interesting cameos in the story. The Treasurer conceded that at least two of the bank's directors, Dr Ironmonger and Mr Renard, were not connected with Tricontinental Corporation Ltd and that they could not be held personally responsible for any of the decisions taken by Tricontinental. Furthermore, the State Bank board requested the Treasurer to leave Dr Ironmon$er and Mr Renard in place because they had not been involved in incurring the major bad debt losses, and because the State Bank board would be advantaged by having their experience. But the Treasurer demanded the resignations of those two members anyway. They had nothing to do with Tricontinental Corporation Ltd-nothing at all. In his explanation the Treasurer said: ...the full board of the State Bank must accept responsibility for the board and the management structure of Tricontinental and for the mistaken decisions which were made through that structure. That is what the Treasurer said on 23 February 1990. He said the full board of the State Bank, including those members who had nothing to do with Tricontinental, had to accept responsibility for the mistaken decisions of Tricontinental. Dr Ironmonger, I think correctly, responded by saying: I approved the Tricontinental board and that is the reason Mr Jolly gave for us to resign, but he appointed the State Bank board and so the same principle is involved. If it goes for him then it goes for me. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 41

Unless I am mistaken, Dr Ironmonger does not kick on our side of the political fence, but he has made a telling comment on the Labor Party. He said, in effect, "Yes, Jolly is a coward; he won't accept responsibilities but makes underlings the scapegoats". Mr Renard, who was also removed from the board despite the fact that he had nothing to do with the Tricontinental losses, said that his removal was "more a political action than something in the interests of the State Bank". He believed the aim was to give the impression to the media and the public that something had been done when in fact all the Treasurer had found were a few fall guys. Major newspapers in Victoria have commented on this in the most caustic of terms, and some of their comments are worth recording. The Herald of21 February states: The determination of Victorian Treasurer Rob Jolly to cling to his portfolio in the face of the State Bank debacle is l:ln arrogant denial of the Westminster system of Ministerial responsibility ... But the matter goes deeper than mere political expediency: in the interests of respect for our system of Parliamentary government it's essential the Premier acts to enforce the principle that ultimately the buck stops on the desk of the responsible Minister. The Sunday Age of 25 February 1990 concludes: ... as a result of WorkCare blowouts, and now the State Bank losses, business and public confidence in Mr Jolly's stewardship has been so weakened that his continuance as the Treasurer is untenable. Like his directors at the State Bank Mr Jolly should accept that he is part of the collective responsibility for the losses and go quietly. Ifhe does not, Mr Cain has no alternative but to terminate his commission. Nothing less can begin to restore the credibility of a government whose store of public confidence and goodwill in respect of financial matters has all but run out. The Australian Financial Review of 26 February 1990 states: ... Treasurer Rob Jolly should move on after eight years in the job. It is, of course, a politically charged decision. Jolly has been a key member of Australia's longest serving Labor government, and with the SBV debacle already damaging Labor's already diminished Federal election prospects in Victoria, the timing ofa change of the guard at Treasury is an issue. However, even if for political reasons the move is deferred until after the March 24 Federal election, the Treasurer's office cannot be quarantined from the disaster. The Treasurer must go. The commentators, who otherwise have stood by the Treasurer because they believed the public should have faith in the Treasurer, have said, "Here is a man we cannot trust". Ministerial responsibility should be a primary focus, and that is worth explaining. My colleagues, who will be speaking later, will outline in detail some of the principles the Treasurer should adhere to, but which he has breached. A recent example of Ministerial responsibility by a Minister occurred in Britain in 1982 when the British Foreign Office failed in that year to provide advance warning of the Argentine invasion of the Falkland Islands. Lord Carrington-and his two junior Ministers-accepted Ministerial responsibility and resigned. No-one can suggest that Lord Carrington should have been gathering the intelligence himself, but what he did was accept responsibility for a mammoth disaster for the government. He followed a standard, but it is not to occur under this government. There are many authorities, but I want to quote one of the lesser authorities on the Westminster system. The man whom I shall quote was in opposition when he made his comments, an honourable estate to which he will soon return. John Cain was speaking on public bodies, and I quote from a speech made on 21 March 1978 by the honourable member for Bundoora in the Legislative Assembly, who was talking about 42 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

"the most apt and down-to-earth definition of what Ministerial responsibility is". He said: ... in the Westminster tradition, a Minister is accountable not only for his own lapses but for the serious mistakes and failings of his underlings. The Hon. D. R. White-Where is that Minister now? You didn't apply the principle; you promoted him instead, so that you could become the Leader! The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL-Mr White is failing to understand that I have quoted the man he still supports as Leader even though a substantial proportion of his party wants to get rid of him. The standard John Cain applied at that time is not the standard he is prepared to apply to Mr Jolly. Mr Cain went on to say-and the irony is beautiful: If$4·5 million down the drain is not enough to call into account and make responsible a Minister, I ask this House what is? Is $5 million enough, or is it $6 million? At which amount does one start? If Ministerial responsibility started at $4 million or $5 million or $6 million for John Cain, why does it not start at $1·4 billion for Rob Jolly? The standards have changed so far as John Cain is concerned because he has to save his political mate. Rob Jolly is only hanging on-not because of his credentials, not because of his diligence, not because of his authority or leadership, but because his faction and particularly the Premier must stick by him. The rumours are rife that he is on the way out after the Federal election. They are holding, they are trying, they are pushing to keep him, but only for a short time. This lesser authority, John Cain, is the one honourable members should rely on in this $1·4 billion case. What is the Jolly defence? It is not very thick but it is one honourable members can deal with. Mr Jolly and Mr Cain offer variations on two arguments as to why the Treasurer should be allowed to stay. Mr Jolly has said: "Don't blame me; I am just an innocent bystander; yes, the State Bank has had a bit of trouble". At one stage the Premier called it a hiccup, although it is more like a thunderstorm of hiccups when it is $1·4 billion worth of hiccups! The Treasurer said in his defence that he was not involved in the day-to-day transactions of the State Bank; he did not authorise any of the day-to-day transactions, so how could he be blamed? The Opposition did not say that he had authorised those transactions; it is a defence to an argument that has never been raised! The Opposition does not know, but we do not believe he was involved in authorising any of the day­ to-day transactions. It was his policy; it was his board; it was his chief executive officer; it was his agreement, according to government documents. He says: "Don't worry", and his defence is quite trivial, but that is a secondary issue. The Treasurer says: "All banks are making losses and they are all in the same position; don't worry about it". He is referring to losses of$I·4 billion! There are a dozen reasons why our State Bank is different from other banks. I shall list two. The first is a fact: not one other major bank has recorded an actual loss. Yes, these are tough times but they are trading profitably. We are in tough times and the State Bank is going though the floor. The second difference from the private banks is that none of the major banks has a State government guarantee for its debt which allows it to hide $795 million in losses away from the balance sheet. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 43

No-one in this House or outside it is seriously suggesting that the Treasurer is not the Minister who should bear responsibility for this disaster. The Treasurer should resign because he has failed in his stewardship of Victoria's finances; because he was instrumental in putting in place the strateg)' and the policy which made this disaster inevitable; because as the chief financial officer of the State he has presided over its greatest ever corporate loss; and because ultimately the people of Victoria suffer through the incompetent and misguided ideology of his administration. We know what the government's reply will be. The Treasurer will bleat that he did not make any of these loans personally. The government will chorus that the bad debts have happened to all banks; don't worry about ours. The Premier might even provide some comic relief and tell us he has every faith in the Treasurer. However, if we trusted the Treasurer, if we trusted the Premier, or if we trusted the government, this motion would not be necessary. There is no public confidence in the Treasurer. Rob Jolly must go! Honourable Members-Hear, hear! The Hon. R. M. HALLAM (Western Province)-Victorians have just learnt that they have been asked to bear the cost of unbelievable losses incurred by the State Bank-unprecedented losses, which have broken new ground in corporate history. We have been told that just for the six months to the end of December we will be required to provide for a further $800 million of losses. We have seen new standards in failed stewardship, in lack of care, in economic and financial vandalism and in overt stupidity; the sheer dimension of the losses occasioned by the bank is almost unbelievable. I say to Mr Birrell, and I do so on behalf of the National Party to the last honourable member, that his motion is timely because it is the first opportunity we have had of debating it. Based upon the extent of the losses and the litany of disasters that preceded it, his motion is appropriate and, on the evidence he has provided to the House today, his case is compelling. I congratulate Mr Birrell on the content and presentation of the case he brought to the House, and I assure him that the National Party supports this motion, not in any other than a sense of sadness. It is a sad day for the State of Victoria that we should be debating an issue that goes to losses to the extent of $800 million visited upon the residents of this State. At least one aspect of the motion is debatable: that is, whether the Treasurer should resign as distinct from being dismissed by the Premier. In my view, given the enormity of the losses, given the history of gross mismanagement and, more particularly, given the disdain shown by the Treasurer-disdain in respect of his own responsibility-he has long since forfeited any right to personal consideration. In my view the issue now is one that confronts the Premier of this State. It becomes the test of his integrity and of his standards and the standards of the government over which he presides. I say to the members of the government sitting opposite that the credibility of the entire government is now at stake. I believe the Premier has no option other than to dismiss the Treasurer. I do not intend to canvass all the issues raised by Mr Birrell but I want to go to the separate arms of the motion he brings to the House. He levels two serious charges at the Treasurer. He charges that there has been continuous and gross mismanagement and then he charges the Treasurer with failure to honour his Ministerial responsibility. I shall deal with those two issues separately. I remind the House of the history against which we can see the charge of continuous and gross mismanagement. It is appropriate for the House to recall the major chapters in that book. We should go back to the earliest days of the Cain administration and be 44 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management reminded of the magnificent lease-back arrangements where we refinanced our own capital equipment, where we accepted a long-term liability for the State of Victoria to the year 2000 just for a short-term liquidity gain. We were not buying new assets or expanding the capital base of the State; we were grabbing some liquidity. I said at the time that that action would come back to haunt the administration-and it has. We should remember the stock market losses where $900 million was lost overnight on the Melbourne stock exchange. We should remember the foreign exchange losses that were acknowledged by the Auditor-General and reported to the House as being in excess of$700 million, not just because of their speculative nature but because this government chose not to hedge against the possibility of losses. That sort of roller­ coaster has continued right through the administration of the Cain government. We should remember the Victorian Investment Corporation, one of the flagships of the State, which lost $80 million for the people of Victoria. We should also remember the Victorian Equity Trust, mentioned by Mr Birrell, as the smart money manoeuvre to get around the restrictions of the Australian Loan Council. In return for the government getting immediate access to about $490 million, some mystical, magical person or authority has to find $700 million on one day in 1992. What a fantastic deal! We should also remember W orkCare, again a direct result of the policy of this government. We should recall that the most recent report tabled in this place showed unfunded liabilities of $4200 million for that one failed scheme. We should also recall that the aggregate debt of the State has continued to increase over the period of the government's administration at the rate of about 25 per cent in real terms year after year. We should also recall the transport losses, which would make a book on their own. One of the problems we have with public transport is that no-one is able to determine exactly what those losses have been simply because of the aggregation of debt. We saw the government manoeuvre debt into the big basket and there is no way of isolating the actual accumulated losses, which we calculate to now start at approximately $6000 million. We should also remember the golden handshakes that took place with consecutive Ministers, glorious failures that they were. Now we have the scratch ticket. About the only thing that can be said in favour of the scratch ticket is that at least it introduces some levity into an otherwise very sick joke about Victorian transport. We now come to the flagship, the Victorian Economic Development Corporation, which has occasioned losses in excess of $130 million. The extent of the failure has been acknowledged by no-one less than the Premier who, in a statement to the other House not long ago, turned this government's policies around 180 degrees and conceded that those policies had led this State into a parlous financial position. I now turn to the State Bank itself and make it clear that this latest disaster, which is the subject of Mr Birrell's motion, is only the second episode. The first episode occurred when the State Bank, at the end of June 1989, reported a loss of$200 million for the first time in its proud history-its 150-year history. The people of Victoria have suffered the embarrassment of "our" bank returning a loss. The significance of the reported loss, as Mr Birrell said, was that it was against the tide. All other banks in Australia have been making record profits. In the current high interest environment there is the potential for the profit of the bank to be maximised, given that the interest differential is expected to be greater. In that environment "our" bank, the State Bank~ returned the first loss in its history. It turned a $200 million profit from the previous year into a $200 million loss. The Hon. T. C. Theophanous-It wasn't the State Bank, it was Tricontinental. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 45

The Hon. R. M. HALLAM-Mr Theophanous, by interjection, says it was not the State Bank's fault. We do not really know the outcome of the Tricontinental matter because we have only been given the first chapter in what will obviously be a saga. It is clear that the National Safety Council of Australia (Victorian Division) borrowed more than $100 million from the State Bank on security that was non-existent. If we are going to pick and choose which organisation is responsible for the loss we should cast our minds back to the disaster of the National Safety Council. One of the most significant features of this issue has been the acceptance of the Victorian public. I regard that as one of the saddest features of this matter. It seems that Victorians have accepted the news of the losses incurred by the State Bank because they have been conditioned by the previous mismanagement of the State. The saddest feature of the State Bank disaster is that Victorians have got used to it. They have come to expect the economic vandalism and have become complacent about it. It is ironic that the State Bank disaster becomes that much more accepted because of the disasters that have preceded it. That is the most important line that will appear on the epitaph of this government, as painted by Mr Birrell, whose case has been well made. I turn now to the second part of the charge levelled against the government by Mr Birrell: the failure of the Treasurer to honour his Ministerial responsibilities. In fact, the charge against the Treasurer could be even more graphic not merely because he has failed to accept his responsibilities, but because he has denied that any such responsibility exists. The Treasurer simply says that it is not a matter of whether he accepts it or not; that there is no such thing as his responsibility. That is the thrust of what the Treasurer says. One of the features that has caused me most concern is the cavalier attitude exhibited by the Treasurer on this issue. To add insult to injury, the Treasurer has gone to great lengths to minimise and even rationalise the losses incurred by the State Bank and to cover up the bad news it represents. I want to canvass four grounds in respect of the call for the Treasurer's dismissal. The first, of course, relates to the Westminster tradition. I shall not canvass that at great length because Mr Birrell has already done so, but it is a long-established principle that a Minister is answerable for the actions of his subordinates. That is not challenged, and the Treasurer's refusal to resign and the refusal of the Premier to dismiss him are an arrant and arrogant contempt of Parliamentary traditions. The Treasurer's steadfast denial of his responsibility is one thing, but his attempt to redirect the responsibility to those under him exposes him for what he is; unprincipled and rotten in adopting that stand. Those people whom the Treasurer has fingered in the administration of the bank do not have a chance to defend themselves. The Treasurer has destroyed reputations when it is clear that some of the people concerned at least have a much better argument to disclaim responsibility than the Treasurer, yet he has pointed the poisoned finger at them. I refer the House to the quotation that Mr Birrell cited from a statement allegedly issued by the Treasurer on 23 February this year where, at page 8, Mr Jolly refers to his regret at the demise of the directors Mr lan Renard and Dr Duncan Ironmonger. He says that neither of those directors was closely involved on the Tricontinental board, nor in any other way directly associated with Tricontinental transactions. This is the crunch. The Treasurer then said that it is recognised by him that they cannot be held personally responsible for individual lending decisions of Tricontinental nor for the decisions taken by the board of that company, nevertheless-and this is the logic he implies-the Treasurer said that the full board of the State Bank must accept 46 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management responsibility for the board and management structure of Tricontinental and for the mistaken decisions made through that structure. The Treasurer admits those directors were not directly responsible for Tricontinental's decisions but he said that they still must go because of their association, being on the board of State Bank Victoria. What about applying the same logic one further step up the administration of government? If the directors go then it follows from the logic used by the Treasurer that he himself must suffer the same fate. The Hon. W. R. Baxter-There is no other way of looking at it. The Hon. R. M. HALLAM-That is right. I turn now to the second authority. It is clear from a reading of the State Bank Act that the directors are appointed by the Governor in Council on the specific recommendation of the Treasurer. That is not disputed by the Treasurer. The clear conclusion is that he is responsible for the appointment and therefore for the conduct and decisions of those directors. The Treasurer denies that and has stooped to the extent that he says some of the directors were in fact appointed by the previous Liberal administration. That is his defence! That is another example of the depths to which this Treasurer is prepared to plummet. The inference is that the directors are not up to scratch but they were imposed on him. Let the record show that is graphically and grotesquely unfair on the directors and is misleading. Clause 9 (1) of the State Bank Act says that the appointment period shall not exceed five years. In those circumstances it is clear that, as the Treasurer has been Treasurer of the State for more than five years, he must have appointed or reappointed those directors to the board. However, he blames someone else for their appointment. The Treasurer cannot deflect the blame in that way because he must have, at least by definition, reappointed those directors. If they are as negligent as he now suggests that they are, why did he not take the opportunity of replacing them in the interim? Certainly, there was plenty of time. His action in that one respect was nothing more or less than scurrilous. That is the first aspect of the action. But there were even greater effects. Under the provisions of the Act, it is clear that one director was appointed quite specifically as the representative of the Treasurer, clearly recognising-at least in my view-that there was a chain of command, and that the chain of command stops directly on the Treasurer's desk. It is nonsense to suggest otherwise. The question I then pose is: if that director was not reporting directly to the Treasurer, why was he not doing so when that is why he was appointed to the board? Not only was that his role, but also it was important to recognise that, as a director, he was privy to all the decisions taken at the board level. He had the background of those decisions. He had the responsibility to report directly to the Treasurer. On the one hand, if the director informed the Treasurer of the problems confronting the State Bank, the Treasurer should now be dismissed for his failure to take remedial action. On the other hand, if that director did not inform the Treasurer of the problems confronting the State Bank, the Treasurer should now be dismissed for not meeting his Ministerial responsibilities. The Hon. W. R. Baxter-Either way he should be gone. The Hon. R. M. HALLAM-Yes, he should be gone. I refer to section 20 (1) (c) of the State Bank Act, which requires that the Treasurer shall get a copy of the minutes of each board meeting of the State Bank within five days after the meeting at which they are signed. Again, it is a clear indication of the intent of the legislation; it is clear Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 47 that it was intended that the Treasurer keep abreast of the decisions being taken by the board. I offer the House three scenarios in respect of that situation: firstly, if the Treasurer received the minutes of the board meetings and those minutes did disclose the problems confronting the State Bank, he should now be dismissed for his failure to take appropriate remedial action; secondly, if he received the board minutes but they did not disclose the problems confronting the State Bank, he must be dismissed for not initiating appropriate and prudent investigations and inquiries-that was his responsibility; and, thirdly, if he did not receive a copy of the minutes from that source in particular, and therefore could not know of the background of the decisions, he should be dismissed for not ensuring that the board met the responsibility which it undertook under the direct terms of the legislation. In all cases, the Treasurer stands condemned for his inaction or his action-whichever way it appeared. Another authority for the Treasurer's dismissal goes to the very fundamentals of the State Bank and the basis on which it was established, as well as the objectives which underpin that establishment. It is clear that all the deposits lodged with the State Bank are guaranteed by the government of Victoria. I must emphasise as an aside that it must be clearly understood that Victorians should not be concerned about the security of their deposits. That is very important. It would be irresponsible of anyone in this House to imply otherwise. Deposits in the State Bank are underwritten by the government of the day and, to that extent, they are beyond question. However, while that may be some consolation to the depositors, it brings to light the enormous liability that the government accepts. The Hon. W. R. Baxter-The poor taxpayer! The Hon. R. M. HALLAM-The poor taxpayer, indeed. When the government accepts the responsibility to underwrite the deposits with the State Bank, it becomes a contingent liability. To my knowledge, this is the first time that the Treasurer of this State has denied responsibility for what have been published as contingent liabilities. That is a first for Victoria. Victoria has a Treasurer who is prepared to walk away and deny the responsibility that he accepts within the Budget documents. That is another authority for his dismissal. I refer to comments made and assurances given by the Treasurer; there is no better authority on which to call for the Treasurer's dismissal. Last November, shortly before Parliament rose for the Christmas recess, the Treasurer was asked to assure the other House about the level of provisions that had been made in respect of bad debts incurred by Tricontinental Corporation Ltd. In response to a question from the Leader of the Opposition in the other place-and the Treasurer's answer is crucial to this debate-as reported in Hansard of 14 November 1989, the Treasurer stated: I have also been advised by the chief executive ofthe bank that with respect to the performance of the bank group as a whole for this financial year, State Bank Victoria is on a normal profit path ... That terminology was used by the Treasurer, and given as an assurance in reply to a specific question to him in the Legislative Assembly. It should be recognised that at the very time he gave the assurance in the other place, more than two-thirds of the period during which Victorians are now told there is a need to write off another $800 million had elapsed. That comment was, at least, culpable in its negligence. There is a need for another $795 million of debts to be recognised as bad, and provided for. I remind the House of the environment in which the Treasurer made that statement. It was not as though he had not been put on inquiry; it was not as though there had 48 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

not been question marks raised about Tricontinental Corporation Ltd. He is meant to be the Treasurer! Twelve months ago I heard the dogs barking in Hamilton about the strengths ofTricontinental! He cannot say he was not on inquiry! In addition, the State Bank had just reported its first ever loss as a direct result of the losses of Tricontinental. The Treasurer cannot say he was not on inquiry. His assurance that the State Bank was on a normal profit path-and that is the terminology he used-at best, was reckless, negligent and, at worst, totally misleading. The Hon. W. R. Baxter-Grossly misleading. The Hon. R. M. HALLAM-Yes, grossly misleading. Honourable members can take their pick, particularly when they are now told by the Treasurer, in his statement of 23 February 1990, that there had been an extensive investigation under way for some months into the State Bank. Now honourable members are being asked to believe that he did not know about the extensive investigation. Even worse, Parliament is being told that the Treasurer did not know that there was a reason to hold an extensive investigation. He said, "I have advice and the bank is on a normal profit path". On that ground alone there is ample evidence that he should be summarily dismissed. Two days later, I posed a question to the Minister who is allegedly assistin~ the Treasurer in this place. I asked him to confirm whether all known bad debts wIthin Tricontinental had been provided for. As is his wont, he ran for cover. On 16 November 1989, in reply to my question, the Minister Assisting the Treasurer is reported in Hansard as having said: Clearly, the State Bank would have provided the Treasurer with advice about the nature and extent of any commitment or liability for which the State Bank may be responsible in respect of Tricontinental Corporation Ltd. The bank would have to give further consideration to whether any further provision should be made for debts of Tricontinental, and that is a matter for consideration by the Treasurer. They are the Minister's prophetic words! The Minister then went on to say, "It is appropriate that I should seek advice from the Treasurer". I put him on notice; I asked for that advice. We have not heard from the Minister. I should be interested to know whether he sought advice from the Treasurer on 16 November 1989 and what that advice was. Did the Treasurer tell the Minister that we were two-thirds of the way to losing a further $800 million, or did he forget to mention it? Then we have a classic from the Premier that is worth repeating. He said on 21 March 1978: ' If$4·5 million down the drain is not enough to call into account and make responsible a Minister, I ask this House what is? He then asked about $5 million. What is Mr White's figure-what about $1-5 billion? How does that qualify? That is the standard we are expected to accept from this failed government. On the basis of Parliamentary principle and precedent-thare are plenty on which we can rely-and on the basis of the legislation this House passed eighteen months ago, together with the statements of his colleagues in this and another place, it is clear that whatever else took place the responsibility goes directly and exclusively to the Treasurer of the State-that is beyond challenge. On those grounds the Treasurer must be dismissed. He cannot claim as a defence that it is inappropriate to interfere with commercial decisions taken by a bank. The Hon. T. C. Theophanous-Why not? Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 49

The Hon. R. M. HALLAM-We have to worry about the confidentiality between the bank and the client. The Hon. T. C. Theophanous-Would you have him intervene? The Hon. R. M. HALLAM-We have never said the Treasurer should intervene, but the Treasurer acknowledges that he has a supervisory role. If one reads his statement he talks about the responsibility for supervision. It is clear that he did not supervise the operation of the bank, and he stands condemned for not monitoring its operations. He did so carelessly or negligently. For the purpose of this debate, it is absolutely irrelevant whether the Treasurer acted negligently or incompetently-he stands condemned on those counts. The third basis upon which the call for his dismissal is justified relies upon the extent to which he and his Ministerial colleagues have stooped to cover up and deny the real situation. The extent to which the administration is prepared to go has set new standards. We have now heard that Parliamentary sitting times will depend upon how well they are going-that must be an embarrassment in not calling the Parliament together. That is a double standard if ever I have heard one. We should not be surprised because the administration has shown itself to be adept at subterfuge and sophistry. We saw the classic example with the Victorian Economic Development Corporation when the government kept the true story under wraps only to get it beyond the election date. That has not been challenged, and a compelling case can be made out that that was the single abiding objective. We remember the protestations that took place at the time. I remember vividly what the Treasurer and the Premier said regarding the VEDC losses and the lengths to which they went to minimise the nature of the problem. The Premier of the State is on record as saying that it was a red herring. It only turned out to be a $130 million loss-a red herring compared with what we are subjected to today. As a result of the Fergus Ryan report-a report that was commissioned only after agitation from Parliament-the position was made clear on the day of the election but, in fact, it had been clear for some time before. The VEDC minutes came to light in the Ryan report and these confirm that in June, three months before the Budget and almost five months before the election, the likely losses had been identified. Not only had the government recognised the dimension of the losses, but also the head of the Department of Management and Budget had offered $30 million from the public purse to prop up the VEDC until after the election. I stand by the charge I levelled at that time when I said it was worse than Watergate because it involved public funds. I said that there had been a conspiracy at the top level of government. I stand by that charge. We should not be surprised at the standard exhibited in this debate; the parameters have already been set by this administration. Now we have a new strategy. We have been told by the Treasurer, "Well, you needn't worry; it is all under control. I have sacked the board-they were the ones at fault. I gave them the flick; we put on a new lot in their place. We got rid of the chief executive officer and got someone to replace him; we have the Reserve Bank to monitor our bank". How is that for a resolution of the problem! They got someone else to run the bank. If that is not an admission of incompetence, I should like to know what is! The Reserve Bank is to monitor the State Bank. We have been told that there will be no more entrepreneurial banking. I take the point put by Mr Birrell: we are not sure what it means. I am not sure that anybody knows what it means, but it sounded good at the time. 50 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

Then we are told that the State Bank will provide annual and quarterly performance reports. We have four key strategies. We are told again in the Treasurer's statement that "We have cut the cancer of Trico out of the State Bank". The Hon. R. S. de Fegely-That sounds very much like Western Australia. The Hon. R. M. HALLAM-They are not my words; they are the words of the Treasurer. He also said, "The government's action ensures the State Bank's profitability". That is the central issue: "The government's action ensures the State Bank's profitability". That is what we are told to believe. If that is all that was required, why did not this incredibly bright Treasurer take that action months earlier when he was clearly put on inquiry about the way Tricontinental Corporation Ltd was performing? I heard the dogs barking at the other end of the State, and if the Treasurer did not hear the same advice he should not be Treasurer. The best we are told is that the losses incurred are based upon the best estimate presently available. In other words, there is a qualification: we do not know that the $795 million loss we now have to bear is the end of the story. The auditors' recommendations regarding the doubtful debts are qualified: they "depend on no further deterioration in the economy". In fact, it could be better. The Treasurer concedes that the precise cost "depends on a wide range of factors". I do not think anyone in this Chamber is prepared to believe the Treasurer would provide for bad debts in anticipation. The Hon. W. R. Baxter-Not on his record. The Hon. R. M. HALLAM-We can rest assured that the $795 million we are now told to provide for is as good as written off. That is based upon experience. The Treasurer says, "The precise cost will depend on a wide range of factors". In other words, he goes out of his way to formalise, rationalise and play down the extent of the losses placed upon the taxpayers of Victoria. He even has the gall and temerity to say, "The State Bank will benefit from having its problems fully disclosed and addressed at an early date. As the Trico problems are put behind us, the State Bank is expected to earn increased profits". The Treasurer's most extraordinary claim is that "increased tax and dividend flow is available to offset the cost to the Budget". In other words, he is asking us to believe that because money was paid to prop up Tricontinental Corporation Ltd, State Bank Victoria will be more profitable and will be able to pay back the money. What an enormous leap in logic! The facts are that $800 million has been squandered and we are now being asked to believe that, because it is being picked up by the State, profits will return to normal. I have never heard such ill-conceived and illogical, much less outrageous, statements from a treasurer of anything let alone a State of Australia! It is a figment of his imagination and I regard it not only as rubbish but also as insulting to the intelligence of those the Treasurer is trying to convince. I now refer to the bald statement that the State Bank is on a normal profit path. That statement is remarkable and more so because of the circumstances outlined by Mr Birrell. The circumstances that applied at the time the Treasurer made the statement must be taken into account. We are now being told that the State Bank had at least canvassed the sale of its shares-shares at the par value of $ I-at a premium of $4 and paid up to 1 cent. The scheme was that another authority would step in and pick up the debts of Tricontinental in return for the issue of shares in the State Bank. The payments attributed to the losses incurred by Tricontinental would have been offset against the paid-up level of the shares. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 51

What a brilliant scheme! It did two things: fIrstly, it got around the problems with the prudential standards imposed by the Reserve Bank. That was a nasty problem confronted by the Treasurer. Secondly, the thing which made the scheme so attractive is that the matter would be taken off the balance sheet. The obvious advantage was that it would be extremely difficult for the taxpayers of this State to know exactly what had taken place. I put it to the House-and I do not do so lightly-that because of that scheme and the principles it involved, we are justified in demanding the resignation of the Treasurer. He has put at risk the entire structure of one of the most important institutions in the State that is owned by Victorians from whom the Treasurer has the temerity to claim stewardship. It is a sad day for this State. That is not the end of the story; there is a whole new range of episodes. Honourable members have learnt that there have been "discussions" between the State Bank of New South Wales and State Bank Victoria regarding a prospective merger. It has also been charged that not only were the executives of the banks and the officials of the two treasury departments involved in the discussions but also the Federal Treasurer had a finger in the pie. I want to know what degree of merger was being canvassed, what it was that Victorian taxpayers were being asked to accept and what was to be the outcome for State Bank Victoria. None of those issues has yet been reported on by the Treasurer. The Treasurer has come out with a magnificent explanation about the woes of the State Bank, and yet his statement remains silent on two crucial aspects of the debate. The Treasurer failed to mention that the government had intended to sell off a few of the shares and he failed to mention that discussions were taking place regarding a prospective merger between State Bank Victoria and the New South Wales State Bank. At the end of the day the Treasurer has said, "Apart from all that, just trust me". People would have to be wrong in their heads to take that advice! The Treasurer stands condemned on other issues-not simply these. I wish to refer to two aspects of the statement the Treasurer issued for public consumption. One of those relates to the roles of the directors. I have spoken about that in passing, but there is one crucial issue which makes the Treasurer's statement that bit more remarkable not for what it says, but for what it does not say. The Treasurer referred to the fact that he agreed with the acquisition of the shares in Tricontinental Corporation Ltd-in other words, it was not at his instigation. That is interesting because members of the board of the State Bank say that the circumstances were different. It is clear that they did not initiate the acquisition of shares in Tricontinental but that it was done at the direction of the Treasurer. Victorians are entitled to be told the truth because they will be picking up the enormous costs involved. The Treasurer's statement also refers to a legally binding agreement between the board of State Bank Victoria and the Treasurer. This Parliament and the people of Victoria are entitled to know what is in that agreement. If Victorians have a Treasurer who is prepared on their behalf to accept responsibility for $800 million of debt, they are entitled to know what he has agreed to on their behalf. The Treasurer has given no detail at all; he has just said, "Trust me". I call upon the government, especially the Minister Assisting the Treasurer, to release the agreement. Let us bring it into the open and see what the government has agreed to on our behalf. I do not trust the figures. Let us see how the figure of $800 million was arrived at. Who is represented in the $800 million? If we are going to make instant millionaires of some individuals, I want to know who they are. One can 52 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management talk about the need for confidentiality but the day the debt is written off and handed over to Victorians is the day confidentiality goes out the window. Victorians are entitled to know what is going on! The dirty part of it all is the way the cost has been painted. The Treasurer says we will be up for $100 million each year. What the Treasurer's statement fails to point out is that that is just the interest; that does not do anything about the legacy that we will pass on to future ~enerations of this State. That is simply the cost a year and it will go on in perpetUIty. That is what this failed Treasurer has foisted upon the taxpayers of this State. I would love to know where the Treasurer gets his accommodation. With $800 million at an annual cost of $100 million, I want to know the financier so everyone can get some of the accommodation! I want to know how the finances were arrived at and I want to know who is picking up the tab. I want the Treasurer to tell the truth for once and explain to Victorians that, because of his mismanagement, each and every year from now to eternity there will be a charge of $100 million against them. The Treasurer has not told us that. He has said that it someone else's fault-"Those fools down the line that I have had to sack". The Treasurer stands condemned not only for his negligence but also for the fact that he wants to push the blame on to people who cannot defend themselves. I want to know what is in the letters that we have been told have been exchanged between the Reserve Bank and the government of Victoria. I should like to know what it is that has been done to State Bank Victoria. I believe we are entitled to know. Is the government going to place our bank in a straightjacket or do something with its construction? I do not trust the government enough to leave it alone. I want to know what it is doing. I again ask the Minister Assisting the Treasurer in Budget Expenditure to bring those documents forward and place them on the table. Parliament is entitled to see the letters that have been exchanged. In all of this, perhaps the most significant feature is that the Treasurer keeps saying, or implying at least, "Trust me; we have fixed it all up". No-one in Victoria trusts him. He has lost the trust of Victorians. I say that the risk now is to the Cain government because the next challenge is not for the Treasurer; it is for the Minister Assisting the Treasurer and his colleagues. Let us see how well they meet their responsibilities. If the failed Treasurer is not prepared to meet his responsibility, he should step aside to make room for someone who is prepared to accept the responsibility. At least then we would have some chance of stemming the haemorrhage. I say that Mr Birrell brings a very powerful case to the House. I say that the Treasurer of this State has provided an extraordinary legacy of mismanagement and cost to future Victorians. I say he has failed miserably and that his failure has been compounded, not only by his flagrant and arrant disregard for the principles of this Parliament, but also by the degree to which he has stooped in his attempt to place the blame on others. He has asked for others to carry the can and, if on no other grounds, he should be asked to go on that basis. He must go. The National Party supports the motion moved by Mr Birrell. The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-In response to this urgency motion, it is quite clear that no-one would deny that this is a serious motion for the Chamber to deal with. In fact, it is a serious motion for the Opposition to raise. However, the first question that one has to ask is: how seriously can we take the Liberal Party, considering the way in which it has gone about it? One must ask: who is the most important person in the State who ought to be carrying this issue on behalf of the Opposition, and where is he? Where was the shadow Treasurer when the Federal Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 53 election was announced? Where was the shadow Treasurer when the major announcement was made on State Bank Victoria? Where is the shadow Treasurer today when Parliament has resumed? We know where he is. Is it not correct that he is sunning himself in the south of France? The Hon. M. A. Birrell-No. The Hon. R. I. Knowles-No, it is not. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-Is it not true that he is sunning himselfin the south of France? This issue is not significant enough to bring him back to Parliament. Who gets the job while Mr Stockdale is away? He has been away in December; he has been away in January; and he has been away in February. What Minister of the Crown has ever spent that time away, let alone a shadow Treasurer sunning himself in the south of France! The Hon. R. I. Knowles-He is not sunning himself in France. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-What is he doing while this is all happening? The Hon. R. I. Knowles-He is studying in England. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-He is studying economics at London University with Bill Hartley, who is studying politics! His job as shadow Treasurer is to be here. To use the words of the Opposition, there has been no more significant issue canvassed in the life of this government than the issue of State Bank Victoria, and the Liberal Party cannot even bring the shadow Treasurer back from the south of France or England to do the job. It is more important for him to study economics, which he should have done long ago, than to be here. Therefore, to whom does the Opposition give the job? It gives the job to the "master of condolence", the "shadow Minister for flower Shops", the bloke who all the time wants to hide from the main game. Why did he not keep the health portfolio? He did not keep it because he wanted an easier time; because he wanted to go to easier pasture. The Hon. M. A. Birrell interjected. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-In answer to Mr Birrell's interjection, it was because the Liberal Party got done, and we won the election, which is why Mr Birrell is sitting on the other side of the Chamber today. He is now going backwards and is turning himself into a latter-day greenie. If one reads the papers today in the Federal election context, one notes that he has even lost that issue. It is clear where the environmental vote will go-it will go to the Labor Party. Therefore, instead of bringing forward the main player, Mr Stockdale, the Opposition has given the job to the shadow Minister for Flower Shops. During the course of his contribution on Ministerial responsibility, Mr Birrell put forward the view that the latter-day Liberal Party had a new view on Ministerial responsibility. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-I was asking about the Premier's view and whether the government has changed its view. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-It was quite clear that Mr Birrell was expressing his own view about what constituted Ministerial responsibility. He was leading with that statement as an argument to put in place as the Opposition's proposition. Let us see how it is exercised. What the Liberal Party is saying is that, back in the 1970s when issues of Ministerial responsibility were being raised and the Liberal Party had the opportunity of acting on it, and when an opportunity came forward to do something about it, it was not prepard to do so. It had one office available in this Parliament over which it had some authority, and here we have today the subject of that issue now 54 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management being the President of the Legislative Council. That is how the Liberal Party views Ministerial responsibility; that is how it deals with Ministerial responsibility. The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN (Western Province )-On a point of order, Mr President, the Minister is being not only disrespectful to the Chair, regardless of who occupies it, but he is also misstating the situation. He has got it wrong again. The Hon. T. C. Theophanous-What is your point of order? The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN-The point of order is that the Minister is wrong and is being disrespectful to the Chair. There is a tradition, regardless of who occupies the chair, that an honourable member should not be disrespectful to that incumbent. I should be happy to supply the evidence to prove that the Minister is wrong. If he examines the Age editorial, he will see that the reference was to Mr Dickie, not to the President of the Legislative Council. The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-With respect to the issue, I am not reflecting on the President. I am saying quite clearly that the Opposition made it obvious that at all times it has not been interested in any way in adhering to any concept of Ministerial responsibility. It is not a reflection on the Chair. I have often expressed my view about the President and the way in which he occupies the chair as President. What I am really saying is that in the application of the concept of Ministerial responsibility in the 1970s the issue that was being raised was not confined to the Leader of the Government of the day in the Upper House, as every person who was present at the time and contributed to such debates knows. I am not interested in reflecting on the President. I am reflecting on the conduct of the Opposition and the way it makes appointments, which does not have regard to the concept of Ministerial responsibility either in the 1970s or here today. The Hon. HADDON STOREY (East Yarra Province)-Further on the point of order, Mr President, the Minister was speaking about what was said by the Premier, or Mr Cain as he then was, in the debate that took place in the Legislative Assembly. The subject of that debate was Ministerial responsibility in relation to a particular Minister who was not you, Mr President, but a Minister in the other House. Therefore, the Minister Assisting the Treasurer has simply got it wrong. The Hon. R. I. KNOWLES (Ballarat Province)-Further to the point of order, it is true, Mr President, that your presidency was determined by the House, not the Liberal Party. Apart from the relevance of the points that Mr Chamberlain and Mr Storey made about the inaccuracy of the Minister's comments, the Minister is in error in suggesting that your current position is a result ofa decision of the Liberal Party alone. It was a decision of the House as a whole. The PRESIDENT-Order! Honourable members will understand that my natural inclination in the circumstances is to uphold the point of order. However, the matters that have been raised by way of points of order are answers to what the Minister Assisting the Treasurer has said rather than points of order, as they are properly called. Opposition members will have the opportunity of quoting further from the reference that has been raised if they so desire at a later stage. Whatever the taste of the Minister's comments, I do not find that what he said was technically out of order. Therefore, I do not uphold the point of order. The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling on the point of order. I have indicated both at the time of your appointment as President and since that you enjoy my support and that of the government and myself and you will continue to do so because there is no question Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 55 that you have been and will remain a leading example of what is required of any person who becomes President. The substantive point I am making is that if one introduces the concept of Ministerial responsibility, which the Opposition is now seeking to do belatedly, as that which applied during the 1970s, one should remember that was not confined to the concept outlined in that speech in the Legislative Assembly. As honourable members will recall, there were substantial references to the issue on a number of occasions during the debates, and if one is to rely on that set of words as the concept of Ministerial responsibility that now applies, one must have regard to all the references in every respect and with respect to appointments made from time to time by the Opposition. In the 1970s the Opposition had the opportunity of doing so and it is not prepared now to have regard to them at any time or in any respect. The Hon. R. I. Knowles interjected. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-I shall come to the issue of Ministerial responsibility. There is no evidence on the part of the Opposition of any consistent attempt to introduce or apply a concept of Ministerial responsibility. The Opposition cannot call up the issue of Ministerial responsibility and give any evidence of having acted on it effectively. The Liberal Party may refer to those words and seek to apply them but it has no credibility on the issue of Ministerial responsibility. I have prepared some notes from a report entitled Ministerial Responsibility by Geoffrey Marshall, editor, Oxford Press. The reference to Australian Labor Party credibility was brought out by the Public Bodies Review Committee in Victoria in 1981. The report refers to the United Kingdom, and states: If we look at instances of resignation by Ministers as the result of public or Parliamentary criticism there are only about a dozen since 1945 in the United Kingdom. None of these involved a blameless Minister resigning as the result of departmental faults. Resignations have normally involved: (a) personal behaviour or questions of alleged moral scandal; (b) premature disclosure of sensitive Budget information; (c) acceptance of bribes, however small; (cl) consorting with spies; (e) financial conflict of interest. Resignation therefore must entail some degree of personal CUlpability. No British postwar resignation involved an assumption that a Ministerial head had to roll for a Civil Service error. The convention of Ministerial responsibility contains no requirement of any such vicarious accountability ... On the issue of Ministerial responsibility for non-departmental bodies, the matter is further compounded. One of the major purposes in establishing non-

The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL (East Yarra Province)-On a point of order, Mr President, it is common practice when a member is quoting that he reveal the source and date of the quote. The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-I am referring to a set of notes and the quote is by the Premier. I am unable to provide Mr Birrell with a prec~ se date. The words represent a statement by the Premier. I shall be more than happy to obtain from the Premier the date on which he used those words and provide the details to Mr Birrell. The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN (Western Province)-On the point of order, a few minutes ago the Minister told the House that he was referring to notes that he had prepared. Somehow he is now purporting to quote the Premier in detail, yet he cannot tell honourable members what the source is. Did the Minister write these notes himself or make them up? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-I indicated that I took some notes on the issue of Ministerial responsibility from Geoffrey Marshall and Dr D. P. Gracey and then went on to indicate that I had a note from the Premier on the words he has used in respect of Ministerial responsibility. I am relying on those words. The document I am referring to contains words the Premier has used but there is no source or date on the papers. However, I shall be happy to obtain those details. The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL (East Yarra Province)-Further on the point of order, the Minister has changed the argument. He told honourable members that he is quoting from the Premier; he has now said it is a note from the Premier. It is the uninterrupted convention of this House that a quote shall not be proffered unless its source or date is provided. I ask you, Mr President, to rule on whether it is a legitimate quote if no source or date can be provided. The PRESIDENT-Order! Several issues have become confused. The House accepts that the Minister Assisting the Treasurer talked about notes that he had prepared in relation to an overseas authority, Dr Donald Gracey, who prepared a report for the Public Bodies Review Committee. He then moved to a further document and his reference, I am sure, was not taken by the House as an indication that he prepared the next document himself. He purported to quote from it a statement by the Premier. It now appears that what he has is a note from the Department of the Premier and Cabinet. The Minister has made it abundantly clear that he is quoting words of the Premier on a recent occasion. The Minister Assisting the Treasurer has taken personal responsibility for making the statement and for attributing the remarks to the Premier. That is sufficient, in my view, ifhe frankly states to the House, as he has, that he cannot supply the actual date of the quotation at present. He is affirming, firstly, that it is recent and, secondly, that it is an actual statement by the Premier; also, he is offering to provide the date at the earliest possible time. I believe that satisfies the conventions of the House. The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-It is in a wholly owned subsidiary of an independent body-a bank that is enshrined in legislation. Parliament, with the support of all political parties, embraced the concept that the State Bank and Tricontinental should compete aggressively in the marketplace. There was no instruction to lend recklessly; the Treasurer sought information and was given assurances. Those assurances were ill founded. The Treasurer did all he could to be informed. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 57

In developing the issue of Ministerial responsibiliiy it is fitting and proper to have regard to sources on the subject that reflect on the practices in the United Kingdom and Australia, particularly in the House of Representatives. The 1976 report of the Royal Commission on Australian Government Administration is very relevant to the issue. Page 82 of the House ofRepresentatives Practice states: ... there is a little evidence that a Minister's responsibility is now seen as requiring him to bear the blame for all the faults and shortcomings of his public service subordinates, regardless of his own involvement, or to tender his resignation in every case where fault is found. That contains a partial reference to a quote from the Senate's practices. I also direct to the attention of honourable members a document entitled Ministerial Responsibility and Public Bodies in Victoria. ;.. In considering the statements made about Ministerial responsibility it is important to have regard not only to the references that I have cited but also to the words of the Treasurer, particularly where he points out-and I support him in this regard-that the State Bank board is an independent body vested with the responsibility of making commercial decisions in the best interests of the bank. All loan decisions by the State Bank are made by the board and the results of those decisions are the responsibility of the board and of the relevant senior executives. The role ofthe Treasurer in respect of the State Bank is clear: the Treasurer has responsibility for the appointment of board members; he needs to agree with the board's decisions concerning the appointment of the chief executive and the deputy chief executive; and he should provide a legislative framework to facilitate the achievement of commercial objectives. He also has a duty to monitor the State Bank's performance and not to intervene in decisions. As to the Treasurer's monitoring functions it is not surprising that on 21 April 1988 in another place, as reported on page 1699 of H ansard of that date, the honourable member for sunning himself in the south of France said, during the debate on the State Bank Bill: I put it to the Committee that- The Hon. R. J . Long-That is not true! The Hon. D. R. WHITE-He has no reason not to be here! Isn't it important for him to be here? We are here. He has been away for three months. He has not been in Parliament-- The Hon. R. J. Long-You know he can't speak in this House. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-He has developed Mr Long's working habits-he is always on holidays. The Hon. R. J. Long-He's not allowed in this House, and you know it. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-It seems he wants to be the Treasurer of Victoria in the south of France or at the University of London. It is very clear that the Liberal Party does not take its job seriously if it is not prepared to bring Mr Stockdale back. During that debate, the honourable member for Brighton said: I put to the Committee that, particularly in the final analysis, this gives Parliament the opportunity for effective control over undue influence by government over the bank. It is this provision that will secure the independence of the bank board, to allow it to operate on proper commercial principles rather than to be subject to the dictates of the government of the day in its day-to-day operation, as expressed by the Leader ofthe National Party. As the honourable member for Brighton said, it is important to have legislation that enshrines the commercial independence of the board and ensures that the Treasurer 58 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management and the government of the day do not interfere with the day-to-day operations of the bank. The Hon. R. M. Hallam interjected. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-Those sentiments were also expressed by the Leader of the National Party. It is clear that the application of the concept of Ministerial responsibility to the operations ofa utility must take account of the common practices of the House of Commons and the Federal Parliament-and I note that the Opposition has not referred to one Victorian precedent to support its case. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-The Premier! What about John Cain? The Hon. D. R. WHITE-Only one application in 27 years-and in that light it is important to examine the context in which the State Bank decision was made. During the debate the Opposition has failed to make clear how simple the transaction is. It is important to realise that there has been an attempt to create confusion about the decision that was made about Tricontinental Corporation Ltd. I shall refer to the Treasurer's statement of 23 February of this year. As a result of that investigation the Treasurer received a formal report from the auditors showing that very substantial additional bad debts should be expected to be incurred in respect of the Tricontinentalloan portfolio. The Treasurer has also received a report from the bank, which has been thoroughly reviewed by the auditors, on the bank's operations for the six months to 31 December 1989, as well as of the bank's financial position at that date. The central message of the Treasurer's statement is that the State Bank has always been and will continue to be sound and secure and that the government is taking decisive action to address all of the elements of the Tricontinental problem in a way that will not only protect but also enhance the position of the State Bank for the future. The statement issued by the Treasurer is intended to outline the background to the massive bad debts incurred by Tricontinental, to outline the financial decisions the government has taken to protect the position of the State Bank and its depositors, to outline the position of the board and the management of the State Bank and to emphasise other measures that the government is taking to ensure that the problems associated with Tricontinental have never been and do not become practices of the State Bank. It is in that context that the Treasurer went to some lengths to take steps to ensure the continuing strength of the bank. I reiterate that the financial difficulties of the State Bank group derived from the operations of Tricontinental and do not reflect any weakness in the State Bank itself. On page 5 of his statement the Treasurer points out that, as recorded in a half-yearly financial statement, the bank recorded an after-tax profit of $41 million in the first half of 1989-90. As to the asset position of Tricontinental, the reports of both the bank's internal auditors and its official auditors, Touche Ross, conclude that the operations of Tricontinental are responsible for the additional $795 million likely to be incurred in potential bad debts on Tricontinental's books. The ~overnment has been assured by the State Bank that the estimate of the future additional cost of the bad debts, having regard to all of the uncertainties, has been prepared on a conservative basis. In response to the situation resulting from the Tricontinental exposure-­ The Hon. R. M. Hallam-Why don't you answer the charge? The Hon. D. R. WHITE-It is important to put in context the events that have occurred since the auditors' report and the steps that are being taken so there is no confusion in the minds of honourable members as to what the government has done. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 59

Quite clearly, there are three principal objectives in the government's response: to provide the fullest possible disclosure of the true position, consistent with the legal and commercial requirements of confidentiality of the affairs of the bank's customers; to demonstrate and take decisive action to protect and enhance the strong position of the State Bank itself and to ensure that strong position for the future; and to put in place mechanisms to ensure that the mistakes made in Tricontinental can never be repeated. The Hon. R. M. Hallam interjected. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-In response to Mr Hallam's interjection, it is quite clear that during the course of his contribution he raised a number of questions. It is also clear by any reasonable person's standard that a number of those questions were of a complex nature; some called for information which I am happy to take up with the Treasurer and others were of a more political nature. The matters Mr Hallam has raised from time to time on the adjournment debate or by way of questions are referred to the Treasurer for his consideration, and if Mr Hallam wishes to pursue the matter beyond the course of the debate, which is neither questions without notice nor questions on notice, the Treasurer and I shall be more than happy to arrange for a response. Mr Hallam can put it in writing or on notice to the Treasurer or me or through one of the Parliamentary committees such as the Estimates Committee. I think he is satisfied that steps will be taken to provide him with a response to the question he has raised. In the context of this debate of the utmost importance is the nature of the financial package that the government has undertaken in response to the Tricontinental situation. From the Treasurer's statement I repeat that the government has entered into an agreement that the State Bank is protected and fully secure. It is equivalent to an injection of capital by the government over a period of years up to a maximum of $795 million. These arrangements will ensure that the bank remains within the Reserve Bank's capital adequacy guidelines. In other words, it will ensure that it meets the Reserve Bank's requirements. As part of the arrangements, the government will meet its obligations under this agreement with Tricontinental by assuming additional debt up to a maximum of$795 million and by providing the cash equivalent to this debt assumption to Tricontinental to meet its obligations. To give effect to this mechanism, the Treasurer has also entered into an agreement with the State Bank to assume-this means the total provision will not fall due immediately-from time to time State Bank term liabilities, in consideration for which the State Bank will provide an equivalent cash sum to Tricontinental to meet the Treasurer's obligations in respect of the potential bad debts. The cost to the Budget of this arrangement will depend on both the timing of drawdowns and the precise character of the term liability assumed. On the best estimates currently available, the cost to the Budget in 1990-91 is estimated at about $50 million, and this will rise in subsequent years. However, as the Tricontinental problems are put behind it, the government will be looking to the State Bank to earn increased profits so that an increased tax and dividend flow is available to offset the cost of the Budget of the agreements described here. The Hon. R. M. Hallam interjected. 60 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

The Hon. D. R. WHITE-In response to that interjection, it is correct to say in respect of the performance of the State Bank that dividends have been produced in the past and it is more than likely that that circumstance will come from the bank itself. The government has consulted extensively with the Reserve Bank of Australia in deciding upon these arrangements, and we want to make it clear that in regard to their application, the Reserve Bank has expressed the view that in recent years the government has placed some reliance on an informal agreement between the State Bank and the Reserve Bank of Australia for the Reserve Bank to supervise the State Bank and for the State Bank to meet the potential guidelines of the Reserve Bank under the arrangements that are now being proposed. Whereas the State Bank was not covered by the Federal Banking Act and the Reserve Bank's supervision of the State Bank has never been publicly acknowledged or formalised by either bank, the government has now reached an understanding with the Reserve Bank about its future supervision. As a result, the Reserve Bank will exercise prudential supervision over the State Bank as it does for banks authorised under Commonwealth legislation, and will meet from time to time with representatives of the government and of the board of the State Bank to discuss matters arising from its prudential supervision. For its part, the government has undertaken that the State Bank will meet all the Reserve Bank's prudential standards. It is important to put on record that that has been formalised. These arrangements are to be formalised in an exchange of letters between the government and the Reserve Bank and will supersede the State Bank's voluntary adherence to relevant Reserve Bank guidelines. They will enable the government to receive directly from the Reserve Bank notification of any concern about potential breaches by the State Bank in the guidelines, commentary on the bank's management systems and early warning of any other matters of concern. It is not surprising in that context that the Treasurer has seen fit to appoint the former head of banking supervision at the Reserve Bank, Mr John Brady, to be a representative and director of the State Bank. That will be relevant in terms of a careful development of the prudential guidelines of the Reserve Bank. It is clear therefore that the bank is required to make its own independent decisions about commercial matters. This is necessary on broad business grounds as it would be entirely inappropriate for the fifth largest bank in the country to be directed by government in respect of individual decisions. Over the past eight years the State Bank board and management have carefully guarded the independence of their commercial decision-making processes, and there has been no suggestion here today by the Leader of the Opposition or the shadow Minister for Flower Shops, Mr Hallam, in respect of a breach in any sense of that issue. The Treasurer has responsibility for the appointment of board members. He needs to confirm the board's decision in respect of the appointment of chief executives and deputy chief executives. He should provide the legislative framework and he has a duty to monitor the State Bank's performance and not to intervene in the decisions. In this context, it should be noted that the directors of the State Bank in their report released today say: It is also mentioned that the Treasurer, to whom the bank reports in relation to the specific matters covered in the State Bank Act, is not required to be, and never has been, consulted in relation to commercial decisions on individual corporate loans made by either the bank or Tricontinental. Clearly, any such requirement would be incompatible with the statutory requirement that the bank operate as a competitive commercial organisation under a separately constituted board. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 61

Going to the question of the management of the bank and to the role of the Treasurer, the previous board of directors of the bank has made it clear there is no evidence to suggest that at any stage the government was involved in and consulted in relation to commercial decisions on individual corporate loans. Therefore, the weakness in the Tricontinental portfolio as a result of lending policy could in no way be attributed to the conduct of the Treasurer as the Treasurer of Victoria. It is clear that no case has been made that the Treasurer has in any way contravened his responsibilities under the State Bank Act. Moreover the retiring dIrectors of the board have made it clear that he fulfilled his responsibilities in accordance with the legislation and therefore he is not responsible for the losses incurred by Tricontinental Corporation Ltd. It is clear that in respect of the State Bank budget the cost is not $795 million. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-Just say the words, "I support Rob Jolly". The Hon. D. R. WHITE-If there is any confusion in the mind of the shadow Minister for Flower Shops, I am happy to put on record in opposing the censure motion that I unequivocally support the Treasurer. If there is any confusion in Mr Birrell's mind, what I should like to see is the shadow Minister for Flower Shops come forward and say whether he supports the Leader of the Opposition in another place. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-Yes. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-And the honourable member for Brighton, Mr Stockdale. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-Yes. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-Because, if the issue is of any importance to him, it might be of some interest to see Mr Stockdale in Parliament this week. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-What, in here? The Hon. D. R. WHITE-In Parliament this week. It is clear that a case was made in respect of the operation of the Australian Loan Council. It is clear that the arrangement that has been proposed in the Treasurer's statement not only meets with the expectations of the incoming board of State Bank Victoria, the acting chief general manager-- The Hon. R. J. Long-We have heard all that before. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-It is true that during the debate today, the Opposition and the National Party have offered not one new issue or one new piece of information. The Hon. R. J. Long-We don't need to. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-In response to Mr Birrell, the honourable member for Ivanhoe in another place has been saying to the press and to the State's roundsmen, "Wait for the debate in the Council; wait until you hear the shadow Minister for Flower Shops-he has got a new scoop". However, it did not, rrive. Once again, when Mr Birrell was supposed to produce new evidence to enhance his case he has floundered like the Federal Leader of the Opposition in his campaign. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-Isn't $1·4 billion enough? The Hon. W. R. Baxter-We've shown you up as being all at sea. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-I make clear that the arrangement is outside the Loan Council on the following grounds: it is not State borrowing, because the'State does not receive any funds; the funds were received by Tricontinental. So it is regarded as a borrowing for the benefit of a financial institution outside the global limit. The State 62 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management will probably take over a mixture of new and existing liabilities and, to the extent that these are existing liabilities, it is not a new borrowing. From 1984 the arrangements with the Loan Council have been part of a voluntary agreement in respect of capital funds. In respect of the Victorian Equity Trust, it was agreed that new moneys of$320 million would be included in the global limit and certain exclusions would be involved such as the sale of the World Trade Centre for approximately $158 million and that the borrowing program for capital works would not be affected by the transaction. Once again as an extension of the Loan Council's action in respect of capital works, which is only a reasonably new phenomenon since 1983-84, the Victorian Treasurer in conjunction with the Federal Treasurer has been negotiating these arrangements as part of a voluntary agreement. It is clear that the Loan Council agreement on $1obal borrowings was negotiated as part of a gentlemen's agreement. It is also clear In the context of understanding what constitutes the item to be included in the limit and those outside the limit that the transactions with the State Bank on behalf of Tricontinental fall outside the Loan Council arrangements. The Hon. R. I. Knowles-Has Mr Keating agreed to that? The Hon. D. R. WHITE-It falls outside the Loan Council arrangements. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-It is totally illegal. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-IfMr Birrell is making a specific request for information in the context of this urgency debate, I ask him to put it into correspondence to me. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-I shall post my Hansard copy to you. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-Mr Birrell may correspond in whatever way he sees fit; and I shall provide the correspondence to the Treasurer who will provide an answer in due course. It is clear in the context of the Tricontinental issue that a substantial loss had to be provided for in the accounts of State Bank Victoria as Tricontinental is a totally owned subsidiary as from 21 December 1989. It was clear that the Premier could not provide a formal response to Mr Hallam's question on 16 November because there was no precise information available as to the circumstances of Tricontinental as at that date in the form of an independent auditor's report. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-Why not? The Hon. D. R. WHITE-There was a report to 30 June 1989, but no separate auditor's report was undertaken-- The Hon. R. M. Hallam-Why not? You knew the thing was going backwards. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-I have already indicated what State Bank Victoria sought to do as a board. It endeavoured to get a set of audited accounts for Tricontinental for the six months to 31 December 1989. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-It was under investigation. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-It was entirely appropriate-­ Honourable members interjecting. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-Circumstances occurred in the period from 30 June 1989 until 31 December 1989 for which evidence from one source or another has been provided to the bank, to Parliament or to the community, that showed a deterioration in Tricontinental. I do not suggest that the work was not being undertaken by the Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 63 auditors, but I am saying that at or about the time Mr Hallam asked his question there was not information provided beyond the auditor's report to 30 June 1989. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-You still have not responded. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-In respect to the question that Mr Hallam raised, the Treasurer sought, with the support of the State Bank board, to produce an audited report of the events to 31 December 1989 which became available on or about 22 February last. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-He is meant to monitor the situation. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-When making provision for doubtful debts in the course of normal practice-I am not referring to the State Bank practice but to normal audit practice-a sample is produced of the general exposure to debts, except in cases where it is known that a particular borrower is in receivership or in liquidation. In that context I also put to Mr Hallam that as recently as September 1989 in New York John Mclntosh was recommending that Qintex Ltd was the stock of the week to buy, so it was by no means clear which companies that have subsequently gone into receivership and which that have received loans from Tricontinental Corporation Ltd would be exposed. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-How come everybody else heard the rumours and you didn't? The Hon. D. R. WHITE-I am indicating that in September 1989, notwithstanding what Mr Hallam may have heard, in respect of Qintex, John Mclntosh-and he is by no means a fool as a professional stockbroker-was saying that it was a good buy. I am also suggesting that some of the major accounts were not then in receivership. What was clear was that there was some evidence of a deterioration in those accounts. The government took steps, on advice from the State Bank, to carry out a substantial audit of the debt situation. I shall provide the House with two examples. Firstly, I refer to the experience of the Victorian Economic Development Corporation with Arthur Young. Honourable members will recall that a provision for doubtful debt was provided by Arthur Young for the VEDC for the period around 30 June 1988. Subsequently, Fergus Ryan undertook a provision for doubtful debts audit by looking in detail at each account of the VEDC and made provision for in excess of$114 million. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-Subsequently the Deputy Premier was sacked, wasn't he? The Hon. D. R. WHITE-I shall come to that. In dC'ing that, Fergus Ryan made a far more rigorous appraisal of the VEDC circumstance tllan that undertaken by Arthur Young. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-You are saying there was no rigorous audit of the State Bank? The Hon. D. R. WHITE-Fergus Ryan reflected on the Arthur Young audit at the time. Subsequent to his audit, no-one could say that things were so bad. David Crawford, the liquidator, made another substantial review of the accounts and increased the provision from $114 million to, I think, $128 million. In response to Mr Birrell's earlier interjection, the position with respect to the former Deputy Premier was quite clear. It was unfortunate that the VEDC was closely associated with departmental activities. The VEDC circumstances involved senior departmental officers and the then Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources being involved in correspondence on a specific loan transaction to Wallace 64 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

International Ltd. There was a clear case of my predecessor but one being in a circumstance where he was directly involved, acting on advice from senior public servants, in loan transactions, but no-one has alleged that that has occurred with any activity of Tricontinental. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-That is true. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-And the State Bank situation is substantially different. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-So are the figures. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-There was a substantial deterioration in the performance of a number of clients of Tricontinental after 30 June. It is no use saying in retrospect that the Treasurer knew in advance about what would occur with each of these transactions. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-I did not claim that. I am not privy to that, but you are meant to be. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-No. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-The Treasurer says he is meant to monitor the State Bank. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-Whether it is the Herscu or Lintner groups of companies, it is impossible for the government and the commercial world to have known that the Goldberg and Lintner groups would have gone into receivership when they did. It is impossible. The Hon. Haddon Storey interjected. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-Let me pursue the point with Mr Hallam first. It is impossible for anyone in the commercial world in the period from 30 June to 31 December 1989 to predict that. I ask Mr Hallam if he was able to express any views about the Lintner organisation in that period. The company has 2500 employees in this State and a similar figure in New South Wales. There was no evidence of trouble there until the Goldberg group was in difficulty. The Hon. R. J. Long-The dogs were barking! The Hon. D. R. WHITE-That is not correct. It is true that where evidence was occurring of a further deterioration in a general sense from 30 June 1989-and that this could possibly involve a number of accounts-it was certainly necessary for an audit job to be done as sensitively as possible. To understand the complexity of that task, it was not possible for one professional person to do it expeditiously. It was not possible for one accountant or one auditor to undertake that job expeditiously. I understand that Touche Ross and Co. was involved with other companies in undertaking the audit for the period until 31 December 1989. I have been advised that up to 35 people were involved in making effective analysis because of the desires of the auditors to ensure that their credibility be maintained in carrying out that important task. If members of the opposition parties and, in turn, the public want to be satisfied with an independent audit review of the circumstances up until 31 December, they will not want anything short of the auditors being allowed to have the appropriate time to carry out a proper professional job. I recognise that Mr Hallam raised some matters in the middle of last November, but it is equally true, having regard to those matters and to the fact that it takes time to examine accounts, that an answer cannot be provided within 24 hours. The account referred to by Mr Hallam may have been the only one in difficulty, but it is important Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 65 in an audit of Tricontinental to examine all accounts. It was impossible to provide a quick response in the middle of November. . Further compounding the issue was the fact that there were additional difficulties with Tricontinental not known at that date. It was not clear until 22 February when the Treasurer had a proper indication of the nature and magnitude of the problem. It may be that, as a result ofMr Hallam's sources and the events referred to by Mr Birrell concerning the statement of the Leader of the Opposition in another place, the opposition parties had a view of the magnitude of the Tricontinental issue. That may be so, but it was impossible to respond in an authoritative fashion to the issue raised in November without an independent auditor's report; otherwise it is merely hearsay. One cannot provide a proper response until that job is done. Any other response falls short of the expectation that Mr Hallam, Mr Birrell or Mrs Varty might have. For that reason, to provide a coherent response, the government waited until 22 February. If members of the opposition parties asked the question when we would have preferred it, in the political context, of course we would have preferred it in November, December or January, taking into account the events that have subsequently unfolded. In fact, the government did not hesitate, knowing the Federal election campaign had been launched, to make the auditor's report available. The Hon. R. I. Knowles-You didn't have any choice. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-lam making it quite clear that having taken a course of action with the State Bank board-- The Hon. Rosemary Varty-You are really on the back foot now. You should be at the Melbourne Cricket Ground. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-The government, having decided on its course of action, was then in the hands of the auditors as the timing of the event. In response to the facetious interjection of Mr Knowles, the answer is, "You are correct". How often do I have to make that clear? That is why the question raised in November produced the form of response given on 22 February. In response to Mrs Varty and Mr Hallanl, if the government had provided a response to an individual account, and if they are seeking a response to the general picture, we have done it expeditiously and in accordance with the expectations of the State Bank and the auditors. I repeat: it was not within our scope to hasten the auditors in producing their report and it was not within our scope-nor would the opposition parties have agreed to it-to push them to produce something less adequate at an earlier date. The Hon. R. J. Long-What about Mr Storey's question? The Hon. D. R. WHITE-What was his question? The Hon. Haddon Storey-Why did you sack the directors of State Bank Victoria, in view of your argument? The Hon. M. A. Birrell-In view of the argument that they could not have expected the losses, why did you sack the board? The Hon. D. R. WHITE-I refer firstly to the Treasurer's statement on responsibility. The bank is required to make its own individual decisions and it was quite clear that it was the bank itself which determined the lending policies of Tricontinental. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-But who appointed the board of the bank? Session \990-3 66 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

The Hon. D. R. WHITE-In response to Mr Birrell, to stop his repetitious interjection, it is quite clear that most of the people appointed to the board of the State Bank-'-:as he well knows-were in fact appointed by the previous administration. The Hon. W. R. Baxter-Mr Hallam dealt with that! The Hon. Haddon Storey-They were all appointed by Jolly! The Hon. D. R. WHITE-It is quite clear that the State Bank determined the lending policy. It is clear also that there was a distinction in the lending policy of Tricontinental, compared with that of the State Bank. We are not dealing with the same lending policy. It is clear also that the State Bank board delegated the responsibility of lending to the chief executive, Mr Johns. It is clear also that in delegating that responsibility-- The Hon. R. J. Long-That is nonsense! The Hon. D. R. WHITE-It is correct that they delegated the lending policy to Mr Johns. Moreover, the Chief General Manager of the State Bank had no authority on the day-to-day lending policy of Tricontinental in his capacity as general manager of the bank. So there were two separate lending policies in train, both of which were discrete and distinct. The board was responsible for the development of the lending policy and its application and the delegation to Mr J ohns. I am sure that in retrospect all the past members of the board would now hold the view that they should not have had a separate lending policy for Tricontinental and should not have delegated that responsibility to Mr J ohns. The government did not determine the lending policy, in accordance with being at arm's length, and the government was not responsible for its application. That application was a decision ofTricontinental and the Tricontinental board and it was a position delegated by the State Bank board. The government did not determine the lending policy or its application, or make the delegation to Tricontinental. As events have unfolded-as honourable members would be aware if they had read a recent article published in Business Review Weekly on the role of the State Bank in Tricontinental-the board would have much preferred not to have allowed that delegation to be made to Tricontinental's chief manager. It is important to put in context that in response to the concerns being expressed about the dimension of the activity in relation to the State Bank the government expressed the view that there should be an effective auditors' report. In response to the auditors' report, we recognised the magnitude of the problem confronting the State Bank and Tricontinental. We sought to avoid the circumstances occurring in which the State Bank in its day-to-day operations would be adversely affected by Tricontinental. Obviously, in the course of looking at a number of options, the government had to consider how best to enhance the bank's reputation and standing. Clearly the government wanted to separate the impact of what Tricontinental had experienced from the day-to-day operations of the State Bank, to preserve and enhance its security. In taking the step we did, we have introduced an obligation on the State Budget, by ensuring that as it falls due the debt for Tricontinental becomes a responsibility and obligation of the State Budget. The Hon. J. G. Miles-Of the people of Victoria! The Hon. D. R. WHITE-The government does not resile from the fact that in the application this may have an effect on the taxpayer. We are saying we do not intend Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 67 to change our tax pledge and we shall endeavour to take steps to ensure that we do not have to take revenue steps which will affect the taxpayer in order to meet that obliga.tion. We are unable to say for certain whether that will transpire. The government has indicated that we have taken the Tricontinental debt as a responsibility of the government and therefore part of the Budget. The obligation of meeting the debt requirement of $795 million as it falls due-and it will not all fall due in the first year; it will fall due from time to time progressively over the next few years-will be an obligation of the State government. In meeting that obligation, the government states-notwithstanding Mr Hallam's earlier interjection-that we have a responsibility to enhance the activities of the State Bank. The government recognises, other things being equal-that is, if economic circumstances are reasonable-the State Bank will continue, as it has in the past, to record a fairly substantial profit from its own activities. It will have a tax and public dividend liability to the State government and as that revenue becomes available to the State government in turn it will be used as a means of meeting the debt requirement of the Tricontinentallosses. The government is indicating that that responsibility is significant and that it is within the Loan Council requirements, not outside them. It is a simple transaction; it is not complex; it distances the activities of the State Bank; it has the support of the Reserve Bank of Australia; and it is clearly a way of enhancing the prudential requirements of the State Bank in a difficult circumstance. Having put that, and having made it clear that that is the setting, the question that arises is: what is the responsibility of the Treasurer in the course of those activities? The government makes it clear that it is now known that beyond 30 June 1989 there was a significant deterioration from the activities ofTricontinental. As a result of that and the auditors' report, the government has taken some steps to ensure that that does not impact on the day-to-day operations of the State Bank. I repeat that there is no evidence to suggest that the Treasurer has in any sense breached any of the major tenets of Ministerial responsibility in his day-to-day activities or that he has been involved on any occasion in any of the commercial transactions of the State Bank. The Hon. R. J. Long-Tricontinental was carrying out the instructions of your government-deny that! The Hon. D. R. WHITE-It is very difficult to imagine that Tricontinental was carrying out the policies or directions of the State government when Tricontinental made a loan to the State President of the Liberal Party, Michael Kroger, who in turn invited lan Johns to be a member of his board, of the company that is a beneficiary of the loan! There is no evidence that that is a State government policy! What evidence does Mr Long have to show that it was government policy to lend to the State President of the Liberal Party and to incite lan Johns to accept an invitation of Mr Kroger to be a member of the board? Ifanybody is in bed with lan Johns, it is Michael Kroger! It is clear that Kroger and Johns were on the board together. Kroger was a beneficiary of a loan from Tricontinental and put Johns on the Board. The Hon. R. J. Long interjected. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-Don't you read the papers? You shouldn't bother to get out of bed. You should be in the south of France with your mate! It is clear that-in dealing with this difficult situation, in dealing with the magnitude of the Tricontinentallosses, in receiving the response and in acting on the auditor's response on a proposal that we continue to put to Mr Hallam is consistent with the Loan Council requirements and is even designed to enhance the State Bank's standing-we maintain the view that no evidence has been brought forward either here today or prior to today of any breach of Ministerial responsibility by the Treasurer. 68 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

Mr Birrell tried to draw a distinction with what happened with the Victorian Economic Development Corporation. He tried to make the VEDC situation a precedent. I repeat that in that circumstance the relevant Minister was directly involved in loan-making decisions. There is no evidence here of the Treasurer being involved in any commercial transaction or directing the State Bank to adopt any lending policy that might have favoured a commercial transaction; in fact, there is a report from the directors to that effect. Therefore, no case has been made out to support the motion that, as a result of dealing with the difficult circumstances relating to Tricontinental, the Treasurer should resign. For that reason the government opposes the motion. The Hon. HADDON STOREY (East Yarra Province)-We have just heard one of the most facile and pathetic defences of a Minister facing a serious motion that I have ever heard in this House. The Minister has spent about an hour and a quarter telling us what a wonderful job the government has done in fixing up the mess that has been made of the State Bank. He spent about 2 seconds talking about the Treasurer's responsibility for that mess occurring in the first place. It is a pathetic approach by the Minister and typical of the arrogance of the government, which simply takes the view that it can preside over unmitigated disasters one after the other and take no responsibility for them. The Treasurer has been involved in a litany of disasters of monumental proportion, all of them being brainchildren of the Treasurer, adopted by the government and inflicted upon the State of Victoria with massive losses being incurred. Mr Birrell and Mr Hallam have gone into detail about the Victorian Economic Development Corporation, the Victorian Investment Corporation, WorkCare and the general economic strategy, and I shall not repeat all of those matters because they stand absolutely unsullied and uncontested by anything the Minister has said. He did not respond to the strong and persuasive arguments put forward by Mr Birrell and Mr Hallam about the Treasurer's responsibility. We know the Treasurer is a master of evasion and diversion and the Minister is not bad at evasion and diversion, either, because today he has simply avoided all the major points being made by the opposition parties and has gone on and on forever about what the government has done in trying to fix up the mess. Even that raises some profound questions that need to be answered because it could involve this State in further disaster. We really need to know the degree of Ministerial responsibility that should be applied in this case because the Minister took us through some selective statements about Ministerial responsibility and then simply said that they did not apply in this case to the Treasurer. I shall refer again to what the Premier said in opposition in the context of a debate, not about our President when he was a Minister in this House but about a Minister in another House and what he believed was the tradition of the Westminster system on Ministerial responsibility. He said: I think the most apt and down-to--earth definition of what Ministerial responsibility is can be found in the Melbourne Age editorial of 15 March ... It is simply expressed but it is beyond the capacity of the government backbenchers to understand: The editorial said that in the Westminster tradition a Minister is accountable not only for his own lapses but for the serious mistakes and failings of his underlings. On that basis the Treasurer stands condemned. However, that is not the only statement by the Premier about Ministerial responsibility and I should like to take the House to some of his other statements. For instance, the Minister for Industry, Technology and Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 69

Resources today referred to the fact that the former Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources, Mr Fordham, was sacked because of the VEDC position. He did not refer to another former Minister of this government who also was removed from his position by this Premier. The Premier said about Mr Landeryou having to leave his position as a Minister: Ministers carry a particular obligation to exercise the responsibilities of their commissions and their duties under statute in a manner in which the public can have full confidence. The Premier believed that that confidence had been breached and he required Mr Landeryou to resign from his position as a Minister. Surely if there is anythin$lacking about this Treasurer's administration of the financial affairs of this State it IS public confidence. Far from there being full confidence in the Treasurer there is an enormous lack of confidence, as portrayed in the editorials of all the daily and weekly newspapers read out by Mr Birrell. That is not the only thing the Premier has said about Ministerial responsibility. We should consider some of his other statements because he expresses a view different from that put by the Minister today. In 1984 in addressing the Victorian Branch of the Royal Australian Institute of Public Administration the Premier enunciated a doctrine. His doctrine seems to vary every time he speaks on this subject and it is a doctrine that I suggest will come back to haunt him over the Treasurer and perhaps over the activities of other Ministers of this government, because the Premier in that speech was critical of trends whereby the principle of distancing politicians from management of personnel tends to extend to the idea that civil servants, not Ministers, should be responsible for administration generally. The Premier said: Ministers are held accountable in Parliament for administration of their portfolios, regardless of where legal authority or administration lies ... The general style of Ministers of this government, therefore, is to act as executive directors in their portfolios, rather than as chairmen of a board of directors. One might think that the very reason why the government has got into so much trouble and why the State has suffered so many financial disasters was because Ministers have been acting as executive directors rather than as chairmen of boards of directors, and the Treasurer falls into that category. Should members of the government not be prepared to accept the statements made by the Premier-and they were made by him as Premier, not when he was just a member of the opposition-I should refer them to a former Attorney-General of Victoria, who wrote a letter to the Age on 24 June 1987, in the days before he had aspirations for leadership and took on such jobs as Minister for Transport. The then AttorneY--General, now the Minister for Transport, states: The Westminster tradition requires Ministers to accept responsibility for policy decisions and the adequacy of the process of government. I want the Minister Assisting the Treasurer to reply to that criteria and relate it to what has happened to the Treasurer and the many financial disasters he has created for the government. Finally, the Minister referred to Dr Gracey and the comments he made about Ministerial responsibility. The Minister did not say very much about what Dr Gracey said so I shall tell the House what Dr Gracey said in this regard. In general, he said that for an individual Minister in charge of a non-departmental body-which the Treasurer clearly is, in regard to State Bank-the rock bottom minimum floor of Ministerial responsibility consists of three parts. Ministers alone are responsible for determining policy and taking responsibility for it before the Parliament. 70 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

What can be more apt than to apply that to the Treasurer, especially in relation to establishing the policy for the State Bank's involvement with Tricontinental Corporation Ltd and for the taking over of Tricontinental and for the entrepreneurial philosophy as set out in the government's economic statement? Dr Gracey says that Ministers are responsible for taking appropriate correcting action when affairs of the non-departmental body have gone seriously wrong. This implies, according to Dr Gracey, that: Parliament expects Ministers to keep reasonably informed of the activities of non-departmental bodies. The motion is about a Minister who told Parliament that the annual report of the State Bank adequately provided for all future losses and there was no need to worry, that everything was going along well-at a time when the State Bank was suffering enormous losses. Not only were Mr Hallam's dogs barking about losses, but also the Leader of the Opposition in another place was asking questions about it in Parliament. Yet the Treasurer still had no idea what was going on. Finally, Dr Gracey states: The Minister is responsible for exercising, or failing to exercise, his statutory powers of control, direction and accountability. Everything that happened occurred because the Treasurer did not exercise those statutory powers of control, direction and accountability; if he did exercise those powers he would be even more directly responsible for the State Bank. The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-Mr Jolly was a member of the Public Bodies Review Committee which commissioned the report. The Hon. HADDON STOREY-In either case the Treasurer stands condemned, as established by the criteria of responsibilities that the Minister has quoted to the House. Mr Chamberlain points out that the Treasurer was a member of the Public Bodies Review Committee at the time the report was made. It is patently clear that responsibility must be accepted by the Treasurer for what has happened. It is patently clear from the statements of the Premier, the Minister for Transport and Dr Gracey, relied on by the Minister Assisting the Treasurer, that the Treasurer has to accept Ministerial responsibility for a disaster of such monumental proportions, that there is no doubt that the Treasurer ought to be dismissed. During the course of the reply by the Minister Assisting the Treasurer I asked by way of interjection: if he believes the Treasurer is not responsible on the ground that nobody could have known that all of those companies would suffer such disastrous losses, why were the directors of the State Bank and Tricontinental Corporation Ltd sacked? The Minister's answer basically was that they took responsibility for policy. Who takes on the responsibility for policy? of course, the ultimate person responsible is the Minister in charge, the Treasurer. This Treasurer is not prepared to accept responsibility. The government is obviously not prepared to take on this responsibility. It is the Teflon government. It has no responsibility for anything. If something goes wrong it is somebody else's fault. Victoria can suffer the most massive losses such as have occurred with the State Bank and the government wipes its hands! It wipes its hands by sacking the board of the State Bank and entering into an agreement that will cost Victorians millions and millions of dollars for ever. The Minister Assisting the Treasurer is coy about the terms of the agreement with the Reserve Bank. He has not tabled the agreement so that honourable members can read it in detail, but it is clear from the Minister's statements that it will cost $50 Treasurerls Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 71 million in the first year and $100 million thereafter. The Minister did not say "for~ver", but that is what it means. The State will pay the interest on those moneys that are required to get the State Bank out of the mire. How does the government say we are going to recover from that loss? Well, the Minister Assisting the Treasurer says that in time the State Bank will recover and make profits and will increase its dividends to the State which will be offset against the interest required to be paid. What an absolute nonsense that argument is. If the State Bank in the future is to increase its profitability-it has no profitability at the moment-and pay higher dividends, those higher dividends should be for the benefit of the taxpayers of the State and go to provide further works and services. Instead, the money will be used to offset this perpetual interest payment to which the government has committed the State. One wonders why the government did not consider the alternative approach of selling Tricontinental. I note that the Treasurer has now considered it worth examining. Why did not the government consider alternatives before mortgaging the future of the State in this way? Even on the basis that the Minister Assisting the Treasurer says that the losses have been disclosed, but says nothing about how the losses came about in the first instance and the responsibility for them, the government has failed the taxpayers of the State and the Treasurer is primarily responsible for it. The House can do only one thing: pass the motion that requires the government and the Premier to act responsibly and to dismiss the Treasurer forthwith. The Hon. W. R. BAXTER (North Eastern Province)-Since I have been in this Chamber I have heard some extraordinary debates and many of them have been of tremendous power and interest. Today I expected a similar debate. I heard a good introduction from Mr Birrell and an excellent follow-up contribution from Mr Hallam, but what did the House get from the Minister Assisting the Treasurer, the Minister defending the government? Where was the slashing David White of old defending the indefensible? The House heard a pathetic performance, with the Minister quoting at length from the statement of23 February. Not once did the Minister say he supported the Treasurer. After persistent interjections from the Leader of the Opposition the Minister finally conceded that the Treasurer had his support, but he was not prepared to put that on the record of his own volition. The Minister skirted around the issue all the time until finally he had to answer an interjection and somewhat half-heartedly he said that he supported the Treasurer. Honourable members know that in his own heart he knows that is not so. I turn now to some of the specious arguments advanced by the Minister. The Minister tried to make something of the fact that the shadow Treasurer is not present in Parliament. What relevance has that to the Legislative Council? The shadow Treasurer is not a member of this House, which is a sovereign House. The Leader of the Opposition is the obvious person to move this motion in the Legislative Council. Why did the Minister not examine his own government's performance on this issue? In the other place, where the shadow Treasurer might have been able to make a contribution, I understand the government will not allow the issue to be debated. The government is running for cover. What is the government doing next week when the shadow Treasurer may have had the opportunity of raising the issue? The government is closing the Legislative Assembly; it is running for cover. What a specious argument for the Minister Assisting the Treasurer to present to the House today to try to make a cheap political point about the shadow Treasurer not being here! 72 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

The next argument advanced by the Minister concerned Ministerial responsibility. He tried to say that the former Liberal government did not abide by his definition of Ministerial responsibility or the definition of Ministerial responsibility advanced today by Mr Birrell. That is an irrelevant argument. The argument is: is the Treasurer in this government today-in 1990-abiding by any concept of Westminster Ministerial responsibility? Clearly, the answer is no. What may have happened previously is of no relevance. The issue is whether the Minister is prepared to abide by that responsibility; clearly he is not. Then followed a quote from H ansard about what the shadow Treasurer said during the debate on extending the powers of State Bank Victoria. The Minister was very selective in his quotation, but that is not surprising. The little he did quote referred to the honourable member for Brighton in the other place saying that the legislation must allow for the board to have commercial independence. He tried to suggest that, therefore, that was exonerating the Treasurer because the shadow Treasurer had made that comment. Of course the opposition parties wanted the bank to have commercial independence; no suggestion has been made by anyone on this side of the House that the Treasurer should have examined every loan application and given his opinion whether each loan should have been granted. That is not the argument. That is the sort of commercial independence that the Opposition was supporting. The argument is whether the Treasurer should have exercised any overview or supervision on behalf of the taxpayers and shareholders of that bank-clearly the Treasurer did not do so. Further, the House heard why Mr Hallam received no answer to the questions he posed on 16 November 1989. It was said then that everything in the garden was lovely and there was no need to send a direct reply; that it could not be done within 24 hours. Already there had been an acknowledged $200 million shortfall; the Treasurer and the government were on notice that things were not going very well in the State Bank. Today Mr Hallam still awaits his answers. The Minister said in answer to Mr Birrell's interjection and to Mr Hallam's request about information on Reserve Bank agreements and other documentation, "Why don't you write and ask?" We will take up that invitation. Why is it that a request made in Parliament for that information to be produced and tabled is being ignored? Why must it be done in writing? This is the place where that information should be put on the record for Victorians to examine-yet the Minister has said, "I will not do it; write to me and I will ask the Treasurer whether he" will release it". We know when we will receive an answer-probably in 1999, and the answer still will be no in any event! This is the place to put the pressure on, and to ask for that information to be " made available. Then the House heard a further quotation from the statement of 23 February and the lie in that document was repeated when it was suggested that there would be an injection of capital. There will be no injection of capital. The government is reducing both sides of the balance sheet of the State Bank and it needs to do that so there will be no borrowing in order that it can circumvent the Loan Council. The government knows that the Federal Treasurer or whoever succeeds him on 24 March-Dr Hewson-will rule out borrowings as being outside the global limit. It will do the same as was done with the Victorian Equity Trust; it will knock it on the head. The government had to come up wi~h this contrivance to get around that problem; therefore, there will be no borrowings-simply a reduction on both sides of the balance sheet. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 73

Ancillary to that, the argument was advanced by the Minister-and very well dealt with by Mr Storey-that once that is done, in due course the State Bank will return on track and start paying its tax contributions and its public authority dividend; in some way that is supposed to help to offset the interest commitment made forever, in terms of the $100 million. I support what Mr Storey said. Clearly, if the Tricontinental debacle had not happened the State Bank now would be making its contribution to the State coffers via its tax payment and the public authority dividend; that would have been at a much higher level than it will be whenever the bank can resume payments. It is a specious argument to suggest that that action will put the bank back on track and that Victorians will benefit. It is an insulting argument because the cost is already there; Victorians are missing out on the public authority dividend and the tax equivalent that the State Bank has paid to the Department of Management and Budget instead of instalments of income tax. I disregard that argument. In reply to occasional interjections from the government back benches, including, HWhat about the other banks?" and "The other banks make losses and some of their loans have gone bad", I point out that the other banks have been making record profits despite the fact that they probably had a few loans that went bad-so much so that the Premier has called those profits "obscene". The one and only member of the Home Interest Association of Victoria-that public relations outfit-appeared on television and called the profits "obscene". Why is one not balanced against the other? The government cannot have it both ways. The government has incurred an obscene loss for its own bank, yet in the same circumstances and in the same economy the private banks have made record profits and the government refers to profits of these banks as obscene. A further interjection was heard from the government back bench that HTricontinental is different; it is not the State Bank". The same situation applies to private banks; many have ancillary finance arms, as was Tricontinental Corporation Ltd. Some may well have made losses. Nevertheless, Tricontinental is 100 per cent owned by State Bank Victoria and the consolidated accounts of the State Bank show it has made more horrendous losses; the consolidated accounts of the private banks demonstrate they have done very well. Many specious arguments have been put forward in this rather pathetic attempt to defend the indefensible, and the Treasurer. Honourable members should examine the modern money management theories, the glib and slick slogan that everyone heard so much about. It was introduced by the Treasurer, and supported on many occasions in this House by the Minister Assisting the Treasurer; apparently that was the way to reform. What does "reform" mean? It does not mean only change. The definition of "reform" according to this government is that everything that went before was wrong. All decisions made and management techniques that were used in the past are irrelevant and stupid; we should stand everything on its head. The government's motto is "Spend, spend, spend". That has been its byword. The government has used up reserves and found them in hollow logs. It took a lesson from the Wran government in New South Wales. Wran went around all the statutory authorities and bled them dry-they were referred to as hollow logs-by using all the funds that had been built up over the years by prudent management. He overturned conservative management. Wran did it and sent New South Wales bankrupt, and it is now paying dearly for it. The lesson was not learnt by Victoria; it emulated New South Wales and the people of Victoria are paying much more dearly because the losses have been even more staggering. The government has had the attitude, "Don't worry about tomorrow; the 74 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management economy will continue to expand. Things will continue to get better. We don't have to worry about how to pay off the debt because the policies that we are putting in place will work and things will go on the never-never." That is typical of those who have never earned a dollar in the real world. It is typical of those with academic backgrounds-from universities perhaps, like some of the people the government has employed in the Department of Management and Budget; to wit Dr Sheehan-and it is typical of those from the Trades Hall Council with an ACTU background who have never had to put their own money at risk and who are used to receiving their pay cheques every second Thursday come hail, rain or shine, regardless of whether the business is doing well or not. They do not have any sense of responsibility. That is the attitude that has become endemic in the government and we are now paying dearly for it. The government has no regard to prudence in its loans; no regard to the ability to service or repay in tougher times. It has been interested only in figures showing "growth". The government's idea of growth is to make out a balance sheet with trumped up figures, which often involves double counting and includes everything that is doubtful and without a sound foundation; but the chickens eventually come home to roost. Many of the figures are without foundation now that the bubble has burst. It has certainly burst for Tricontinental Corporation Ltd, the Victorian Economic Development Corporation, the Victorian Investment Corporation and also for many in private enterprise. A number of large private corporations have either gone under or are at least showing up to be a bit shaky. One vital difference between the public and private sectors, and one that has not been acknowledged by the government, is that in the private sector the shareholders put up their money knowing that they are taking a risk and knowing that their investment may bring them gain but if they lose it is bad luck. That is the decision that they make with their eyes open. If it does go wrong someone takes responsibility for it, someone is accountable and usually the directors and the senior management get short shrift. What do we have in the public sector, particularly in respect of State Bank Victoria and Tricontinental Corporation Ltd? The public-the taxpayers could be called involuntary shareholders-have no direct say in the running of the institution. They have, in effect, delegated it to the Minister of the day. Having done that, I am sure that they expect conservative management and faithful stewardship. They expect that their funds will not be put at risk by investments at the margin of profitability. Yet that sort of stewardship has been totally ignored by the Treasurer, not only in the State Bank-Tricontinental example-if that were the only one maybe there would be some ground for saying that it has been one bad mistake out of a lot of successes-but also by other bad investments. We have been unable to point to one success of modern money management by the Treasurer and the government. We have seen a litany of losses one after the other. There can be no exoneration. It has been proved that the government has no capacity to run anything at a profitable level; that its interventionist tactics in industry and business fail, and fail consistently. It is ironic that the advertising slogan for the State Bank was, "We never forget it's your money." That was probably a successful advertising jingle. It was implanted in people's minds rather more firmly than most advertising slogans, but how ironic it is now that the taxpayers of this State, who took the slogan at face value and thought that the institution was not forgetting it was their money, have seen the bank lose through shonky investments being made by Tricontinental Corporation Ltd! Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 75

In saying that I do not want to suggest-and I endorse the remarks made by Mr Hallam-that depositors' funds will be at risk. It should be made perfectly clear that all deposits in the bank are safe because of government guarantee but, nevertheless, we should never forget that "It's your money" turned out to be about as wrong as it could be when that was forgotten and the money was dished out to all sorts of people who clearly had very little capacity to service the loans. It is essential that those who are accountable for that policy must pay the penalty; they must go. One cannot maintain public confidence in government or any institution of government if these colossal losses can occur and no-one is seen to pay the price for it. That is effectively what we have at the moment. We have the biggest corporate loss in the nation's history so far as the man in the street is concerned. No-one is seen to pay the price for it except the poor unfortunate board members of the State Bank. We saw what happened in that instance; they were sacked by the Treasurer as he tried to shift the blame from himself to them. He even sacked two board members who had nothing to do with Tricontinental. It is the Treasurer who must ultimately accept the responsibility. We have heard a lot from the government about accountability. Making people accountable has been one of the tenets of the administration. We listened at length to Mr White when, as Minister of Water Supply, he introduced legislation to make water boards accountable. We had the same situation with the hospital boards. Many of the reports of committees of this Parliament have identified accountability, yet when the accountability comes to rest with the government it wants to skate out from under. It was the Treasurer who foisted this modern money management concept onto Victorians. He might have done it only as a stooge for Dr Sheehan, who has long held with the Keynesian theory of intervention by government in the economy, but I do not believe he can blame Dr Sheehan. Dr Sheehan is the Treasurer's guru; the Treasurer employed Dr Sheehan. The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-He might be his Rasputin! The Hon. W. R. BAXTER-Could well be. The Treasurer is the officer who is accountable to the Parliament, to the people and to the taxpayers. There can be no valid attempt to shift the blame to public servants and senior policy advisers because they have been directly employed by the Treasurer. We all know what happened when Labor came to office; it brought in these people. The government is responsible for employing them. If those people have been making the wrong decisions, clearly the employer, the Tr~asurer in this instance, must also bear the responsibility for that. Honourable members have heard a bit about why the Treasurer is accountable. I shall not go into detail about that because it has been well canvassed, but I shall refer to the matter briefly. The Treasurer appointed the board of State Bank Victoria. That issue was dealt with by Mr Hallam and the excuse trotted out by the Minister Assisting the Treasurer, as it has been trotted out by the Treasurer himself-I saw him on television once or twice using this excuse-is that the directors involved were appointed by the Liberal Party prior to the Labor Party coming to office in 1982 and, therefore, it is the fault of the Liberal Party. I reject that argument outright on a number of grounds. The directors are appointed for terms of five years and the government has been in office for almost eight years. Clearly, all the original terms have expired, so the directors have been reappointed by this government. If the government were unhappy with them and believed they were appointees of a former government and were, therefore, unsuitable, the opportunity was available of making fresh appointments without any difficulty. All the positions have expired through the eftluxion of time and, clearly, the Treasurer had the 76 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management opportunity of putting in his own people. Let us not have any of this "it is not my board" business. Clearly it is the Treasurer's board because he appointed the directors. The Treasurer also sacked the board. One cannot have it both ways; the Treasurer cannot on the one hand say that it has nothing to do with him, that it is the board's fault and that he did not appoint the board and then on the other hand sack the board. It is a contradiction in logic and I cannot allow it to ~o unchallenged. The fact that the Treasurer sacked the board is a clear admission of hIS control. The Treasurer set the policy for the board's lending. Mr Birrell referred to this and I shall do so again. Page 69 of the glossy document entitled Victoria. The Next Step, a publication dealing with economic initIatives and opportunities for the 1980s, states: To support the government's economic strategy the State Bank has agreed to ... Some six subparagraphs are set out and they go to the concept of modem money management. The phraseology used is interesting: "the bank has agreed to" suggests that a good deal of pressure was exerted on State Bank Victoria and that there was some sort of square-off or compromise. It is an odd way of phrasing it if no pressure were applied. I am very much of the view that the bank resisted that type of policy direction from the government but was finally forced, bearing in mind that it is an instrument of government, to agree to it. That wording is contained in a document dated 9 April 1984. It is interesting to look back on that and ponder what might have been the discussions of those days and the resistance that was clearly put up by the bank's board. The Treasurer imposed his will on that board in the same way he imposed his will on the board he just sacked by giving it the virtual direction to eventually take up 100 per cent holding in Tricontinental Corporation Ltd. Another issue of accountability goes to the guarantee the government provides for the State Bank's liabilities and the safety of deposits. No-one contests that guarantee; it has been in place ever since the bank commenced operation 143 years ago. However, it is akin to the Treasurer giving someone the authority to sign cheques on his behalf. It is virtually saying, "Whatever you do, we'll pick up the tab if it goes wrong". I should have thought that if anyone were prepared to give that sort of guarantee, one would surely have a close oversight on the person signing the cheques. If one commits oneself to that type of baling out possibility, one would want to keep a close eye on how it was operated. What have we seen? There was apparently very little oversight of the bank's activities despite the fact that a director on the board was put there as the Treasurer's representative. What was that representative doing? Was he reporting to the Treasurer and no notice was being taken of him? Was he not reporting? If that were the case, the Treasurer should have hauled him over the coals because he should have been reporting. Minutes of board meetings were sent to the Department of Management and Budget. What was happening with them? Were they not being sent? If not, the Treasurer should have done something. If they were being sent, were they not being read and absorbed? Were they just going into the files? The fact that the Treasurer failed to maintain the oversight I believe was essential, bearing in mind the government guarantee, is a dereliction of duty, and that alone is sufficient to demand the Treasurer's resignation. The key question is: did the Treasurer, as custodian of the people's money-I mean the taxes being paid into consolidated revenue-that was at risk through the government guarantee to the bank, maintain sufficient oversight to ensure that undue risks were not being taken? Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 77

By the Treasurer's own admission, he did not maintain that sort of oversight. Despite having his own director on the board and despite receiving the minutes of board meetings, the Treasurer obviously did not maintain an oversight of the bank's activities. No-one is suggesting that the Treasurer should be at the bank day after day going through the books and individual loans. The demand I make is that the Treasurer­ the person who gives a government guarantee to meet liabilities which might be incurred by the bank-surely has a duty to maintain a reasonable oversight of the bank's activities. However, the Treasurer did not and he admits to that. For months before it first became general knowledge that things were not going too well, to use Mr Hallam's terms, the dogs were barking in Hamilton, Wodonga and I presume all over the State. It was common knowledge that if one could not get money from anywhere else because one did not have enough security or other bankers deemed one's proposal to be unlikely to succeed, one went to Tricontinental and it would dish out the money. If we were hearing that, why was the Treasurer not hearing it? If he was hearing it, why was he not doing something about it? Does the Treasurer spend all his time training his trotters, totally oblivious of what is being talked about, or does he just ignore this sort of thing? The Hon. R. J. Long-He knew the dogs were barking. The Hon. W. R. BAXTER-If that is the case, he was derelict in his duty in not making inquiries as to the validity or otherwise of what was being talked about. It certainly should have set alarm bells ringing and action should have been taken. It is no good for members of the Labor Party and the Treasurer to say that lending is a risky business and some loans go bad. Of course they do, but in the case of Tricontinental Corporation Ltd so far at least 25 per cent of the loans have gone bad. I am not sure how high the percentage will rise; perhaps it will get worse. There have been suggestions from the Minister Assisting the Treasurer that the $795 million could turn out to be incorrect and that the loss might not be that much. That is whistling in the dark. Knowing how this Treasurer and government operate, I believe the $795 million will be those loans which have already been identified and there is absolutely no hope of any recovery. There is likely to be a whole raft of further loans going bad over the next few months on no security. But let it not be said that lending is a risky business and loans go bad. Of course they do, but most of the banks with which I have discussed the matter do not even contemplate that they would have a portfolio that could go bad to the extent of anything like 25 per cent. It could be 4 or 5 per cent in tough times, but 25 per cent, plus what we do not know about yet, has never been heard of. The Treasurer must be accountable for that. If he is not accountable the public of this State can quite rightly begin to think that Victoria has a Treasurer in this government who is the good news Treasurer, who wants to make only the good news announcements, to bask in the limelight when things are going well and to claim credit for the good times. The Hon. Robert Lawson-It has been a while since that has happened. The Hon. W. R. BAXTER-It has been a while, but the government is very good at gilding the lily and even for dressing up things that are not very good. If the Treasurer intends to do only that, if he is to be a mere figurehead and claim credit when things are going well but distance himself when the news is bad, the people of this State can quite rightly lose faith in politicians and in Ministers. 78 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

The Victorian public demands a hands-on Minister, whether it be the Treasurer or another Minister, who has some capacity to run his department and who knows what his department is up to-and that extends to the authorities which come under his jurisdiction-and not someone who just turns up to the office and attends to photo opportunities and gets his picture in the newspaper when announcing the good news. The public wants people who are actually hands-on administrators, who know what is going on and who will take steps to arrest situations that are occurring. However, in this instance, and clearly in others, which I shall not go into today­ like WorkCare-this Treasurer does not believe in doing that. He just lets it run its diabolical, costly course. Therefore, to restore credibility in Parliamentary government in the eyes of the people of this State, the Treasurer must go. I suggest to him that he should go now while he can retrieve at least some honour by going voluntarily. If he does not go voluntarily, I can forecast what will occur. After 24 March he will go by a direction of the Premier, who will withdraw his commission. However, something else will probably happen in order to soften the blow and to enable the Premier to look as if he is not exactly sacking his mate. It is obvious that the Treasurer is really the Premier's mate. The Premier did not have any qualms about getting rid of Mr Landeryou and Mr Fordham, but he has a lot of hesitation in getting rid of Mr Jolly, even though Mr Jolly's sins have been of tremendous magnitude compared with those of the other two. The Hon. R. I. Knowles interjected. The Hon. W. R. BAXTER-As Mr Knowles says by interjection, that certainly brings the analogy of a parking offence by Mr Landeryou into stark relief. What will happen after the Federal election is that, if the Treasurer does not go shortly by resigning voluntarily, he will go, but he will take others with him. The Premier will feel bound to get rid of a few others so that he can somewhat cover his tracks. If I were a Minister in the Cabinet and one of the less successful Ministers-I do not wish today to name those who I believe are the less successful ones, but there are half a dozen-I would be worried. Some of them are at great risk-in fact, at grave risk. They will go, too-perhaps not necessarily through any fault of their own, but they will simply be got rid of along with the Treasurer to make it look as though it is a general reshuffle. I suggest to the Treasurer that he should go now while he has the opportunity of retrieving at least a semblance of honour because, if he does not, he will go in dishonour very shortly. The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS (Jika Jika Province)-I came to this Chamber today believing that I would hear something useful from the Opposition in the form of arguments or something new to contribute to this debate. Instead, honourable members have heard one speech delivered by Mr Birrell which was then regurgitated in one way or another by the three subsequent speakers. There is nothing new and nothing that we did not know before. The speeches were full of copious assertions and copious cliches, but no arguments. The Hon. W. R. Baxter-What is a copious assertion? The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-The speeches have been full of half-truths and dishonesty. Honourable members interjecting. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 79

The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-I shall give a few examples of the half-truths and the dishonesty. To one extent or another all the speakers from the opposition parties continued to refuse to differentiate between State Bank Victoria and its merchant arm. They continued to say falsely that the State Bank made losses of some millions without specifying the basis of the losses. If one applies the same criteria to the other banks and examines the merchant arms of those banks in a fair analogy, not half-truths, one notes that many of them have now merged in the same way as did the State Bank, and that will have its repercussions throughout the system. I refer to the Commonwealth and Westpac banks, which merged with their merchant arms recently. That will affect their profits in the years to come. It is not true that it is only the merchant arm of the State Bank that has made a loss. It is not the only merchant arm, nor is it the only merchant bank to face difficulties. In fact, I should like to quote from the Reserve Bank Bulletin of September 1989, which states: Several merchant banks have reported particularly large losses. In the case of bank-owned merchant banks the parents have stepped in with support. For those without strong parents losses have led to the appointment of liquidators. Since late 1988 six non-bank owned merchant banks have been placed in voluntary liquidation, Therefore, it is not true. that Tricontinental Corporation Ltd is the only merchant bank which has suffered difficulties, nor is it true that it is the only merchant bank which has a larger bank as a parent and which is in trouble. In their contributions to the debate Mr Storey and Mr Baxter referred to their idea that it was the government's policy decisions or the Treasurer's policy decisions that were at fault and that somehow the decisions were a direct link to the policy decisions of State Bank Victoria. However, the fact remains that the lending policy of the State Bank was its responsibility, not the responsibility of the State government or the Treasurer; the lending policy was the bank's responsibility. Under current circumstances, the Treasurer is not allowed to intervene. The Opposition cannot have it both ways: either one has a bank that is an instrumentality, owned by the government bu't with autonomy in its decision-making processes, or one does not have a bank at all. If the Opposition is saying it should be autonomous and that was the correct policy stance of this government, the Treasurer is not culpable. If the Opposition is saying that the State Bank should not be autonomous, it should say so. The Treasurer did not exert any pressure on the State Bank in regard to its lending policy because that would not have been allowed under the autonomous arrangements. Another point that must be made is that the sale of Tricontinental Corporation Ltd su~ested by Mr Storey as an alternative simply displays his ignorance. It is clear that selhng Tricontinental will not remove the debt of Tricontinental, nor will it remove the government's responsibility in the sense of the State Bank's responsibility for that debt. He was suggesting that the way through the problems was simply to sell Tricontinental to remove the debt, but that is not true and it shows his ignorance. The considerations on the sale of Tricontinental taking place now include continuation of the guarantees the government set in place because that is the only basis on which the problem can be solved. Mr Baxter and other opposition party members simply regurgitate the same arguments about all the other banks having made profits. It is not true when one considers merchant banks, and it will not be true in the future. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-Which banks have not made profits? 80 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-I shall get to that in a moment. Opposition members have referred to the alleged superiority of the private sector over the public sector. It is true that the banks lent the money, but who lost the money? The private sector lost the money. It was Bond Corporation Holdings Ltd, Qintex Ltd, Hooker Corporation Ltd and the Goldberg Corporation. The banks may have lent money, but everyone knows who lost the money. So much for the philosophical argument about the private sector always doing everything better than the public sector! In the period since the crash the total amount lent to the private sector has increased dramatically, by up to $78 billion, and 60 per cent of the debt is covered by the banks. The estimates of the total exposure of the banks vary. In the Age of 24 February Kenneth Davidson estimates that the extent of the exposure of the top twenty corporations that are suffering financial difficulty is approximately $11 billion. McIntosh Corporate Ltd estimates the figure for the top 25 at a more conservative $8·842 billion, and for the top four the amount of $5·7 billion-these are Bond Corporation Holdings Ltd, Qintex, Hooker Corporation Ltd and the Goldberg Corporation. That amount of$5·7 billion is not owed to the State Bank alone; that is not the extent of its exposure. Other banks must have been exposed as well. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-How is this in defence of your Treasurer? The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-I shall get to that. The point is that these losses will be shared by all of the banks, both public and private. They all made mistakes and they did so because the environment was different. To put the matter in perspective I shall quote Kenneth Davidson again. He says: The SBV exposure to the major corporations that are in difficulty is about 10 per cent of the total, which is slightly more than its share of bank business of about 8 per cent. So much for the State Bank being a one-out financial institution! There are three ways of considering the problem. Each one of the banks and financial institutions is able to have a particular response, depending on the type of institution it is. Private banks with large overseas parent companies will simply have capital injected from the parent company to cover their losses or, as the McIntosh document argues, they may simply withdraw their operations in Australia. The second response is that the private banks based in Australia can generate a new share issue to provide capital injection or, if they are big enough, they may be able to cover the loss from existing operations. Unfortunately those options are not open to the State Bank because it is not private and cannot float additional shares. For publicly owned banks, including the State Bank, a capital injection is the only solution to the problem. That is what the government has done, and it has done it quickly in order for the State Bank to meet the Reserve Bank requirements and be able to function normally. Two important questions arise from the debate. The first is: is the State Bank's involvement substantially different from that of other State banks and, therefore, is the State Bank more culpable than other State banks and, by extension, is the Treasurer also culpable? The Hon. W. R. Baxter-You are admitting the Treasurer has some culpability! The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-No, I am not admitting that at all. I am putting the argument in terms of whether there is a substantial difference among the State banks. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COU~CIL 81

The second question is: is the government's response appropriate, and what is likely to be the real cost to Victorians of the rescue package? In answer to the first question, I do not believe it is unusual. In fact, in my view the three State banks that have been involved in these operations have, to a lesser or greater extent, all exposed themselves to the loans that have caused difficulties. The Hon. W. R. Baxter-Are you producing any evidence of that, or is it just your opinion? The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-I am, and I shall get to that. • I have a document that was produced by McIntosh Corporate Ltd on 16 February 1990. It is a review of the financial institutions' exposures to the troubled companies. The document makes interesting reading because it outlines the exposure of all the banks to the loans that are likely not to be repaid. Based on that document I have produced a table showing a breakdown of the exposures of the ten most exposed companies involving State banks. The Hon. Rosemary Varty-What, as a percentage of their total outstanding debts? The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-McIntosh Corporate Ltd lists 25 companies which are exposed and which are the major contributors to the debts of the banks. I have listed the top ten, the total exposures of which amount to $8·013 billion, compared with the total exposures of the 25 companies listed of approximately $8·9 billion. The Hon. ROSEMARY VARTY (Nunawading Province)-On a point of order, Mr Deputy President, Mr Theophanous is quoting from a document. I ask him to table the document because the Opposition would like to check the veracity of the figures he is quoting. The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS (Jika Jika Province)-On the point of order, Mr Deputy President, it is my intention to seek to have the document incorporated in Hansard. As I said, it is a table that I have produced based on a document-- The Hon. R. I. Koowles-Is that what you are quoting from now? The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-Yes, it is. My list is based on the document that I have discussed with members of the Opposition. They agreed to allow me leave to incorporate it in Hansard. The Hon. HADDON STOREY (East Yarra Province)-Mr Deputy President, I should say that Mr Theophanous has shown a copy of the document to members of the Opposition. He asked whether we would grant him leave to have it incorporated in Hansard. The Opposition acknowledges that that is the procedure to be followed; but in the normal course of events copies should be made available, and the Opposition asks Mr Theophanous to arrange for that. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (the Hoo. K. I. M. Wright)-Order! There is no point of order. In the ordinary course of events an honourable member would verify the source of the document. I understand that the situation is as Mr Storey has stated it and that, in due course, Mr Theophanous will seek leave of the House to have the document incorporated in Hansard. The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS (Jika Jika Province)-I seek leave of the House to have the table incorporated. 82 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

Leave was granted, and the table was as follows: BREAKDOWN OF EXPOSURE OF 10 LARGEST COMPANIES CONSIDERED TO BE IN ANANCIAL DIffiCULTY FOR STATE BANKS (lN$M) Total Estimated State Bank/ State Bank State Bank Exposures Tricontinental NSW STHAUS. I. Bond Corporation 1 708 77 100 +40* 2. Qintex 1 512 133 139 +65* 118 3. Hooker Corporation 1 301 41 50 30 4. Goldberg Corporation 1 201 96 25 20 S. Equiticorp Group 518 48 30 100 6. Interwest 554 215 10* 52 7. Fairfax 450 ANZ ANZ ANZ 8. Westmex-Charterhall 290 165 9. Girvan-T AP 279 53* 10. Thompson Land 200

Totals 8013 639 648 320

Source: McIntosh Corporate Ltd review of financial institutions and exposures to troubled companies, 16.2.1990. • Represents estimated proportion of exposure by the bank when only aggregate figures for exposure for a number of banks is supplied-calculated by dividing the number of banks into the aggregate exposure figure.

The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-The table makes interesting reading. When one looks at the companies that are in financial difficulties and facing the prospect of going into receivership, and when one examines their financial exposures according to the analysis done by McIntosh, one discovers an interesting pattern: of the $8 billion of ex~sures of those companies, the State Bank-Tricontinental group has exposures of$639 million. When one compares that figure with that of the State banks of New South Wales and South Australia one finds that the State Bank of New South Wales has total exposures of $648 million, a figure that is roughly similar to that of State Bank Victoria; and, as one would expect, the State Bank of South Australia has exposures that are approximately half those of State Bank Victoria. There is nothing out of the ordinary about the exposures of the State Bank. It will be interesting to see whether, once the New South Wales government realises that its bank has problems with its lending practices, the members of the Opposition will be calling for the resignation of the New South Wales Treasurer as vehemently as they have been calling for the resignation of the Victorian Treasurer. The Hon. Haddon Storey-Are you saying that the State Bank of New South Wales has suffered a loss? The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-There is no difference between the way State Bank Victoria has conducted its business and the way the other State banks have conducted their businesses when one examines the exposures to debt of each of them. In addition, the exposures of the larger banks are far greater than the State banks. However, they are more capable than the State banks of absorbing those exposures­ and that is the point of the argument. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 83

In its report McIntosh Corporate Ltd states that the established major banks have a substantial proportion of the estimated bad debts but are sufficiently large to withstand the problem loans. As to the State Bank the company states that the State banks of Victoria, New South Wales and South Australia may require capital injections from their shareholders. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-So that's your defence? The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-That statement was made by the McIntosh company, not by me. I shall now examine the performance of the State Bank over the past five years, as well as the Treasurer's responsibility. Firstly, one must ask whether it is reasonable to expect the Treasurer to have known about the extent of Tricontinental losses. Honourable Members-Yes, yes! The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-It is not that simple. The recorded profits of Tricontinental from 1986 to 1988 were in the order of $65·1 million. No loss was recorded by Tricontinental until the last financial year-that is, 1989. It is unreasonable to expect that the Treasurer should have known about the losses before then because, up until 1989, the company was operating at a profit. The business community was of the opinion that Tricontinental was being run extraordinarily well. A Bulletin article of July 1986 states that under Mr lan Johns's management Tricontinental, wholly owned by State Bank Victoria, had become one of three Australian merchant banks with an A-plus rating. It is unreasonable to expect that, in light of the profits of Tricontinental over three years, the Treasurer should have known about the difficulties faced by the merchant bank, especially when one considers that it was twice removed from the Treasurer-that is, the State Bank board-- The Hon. R. M. Hallam-Once removed! That is what the motion calls for. The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-The State Bank board stood between the Treasurer and Tricontinental. It is not true that the Treasurer did not take quick action to resolve this issue. In fact, he took the most appropriate action. He had to obtain a full and comprehensive report, which he did as soon as it became clear that Tricontinental was in difficulty. He arranged for that report, but it took a considerable amount of time because it was very extensive, and the job was not an easy one. As soon as the report was delivered to the Treasurer, he took action to ensure that the equity base of the State Bank would be protected and would meet the Reserve Bank's prudential requirements. I wish to say a few things about the profits of the State Bank. It is true that the State Bank delivered a profit to the State government of approximately $322 million over the last five-year period. In response, the government provided a capital injection to the State Bank of a mere $41 million, so the return for the State of Victoria was significant. In the context of the Tricontinental difficulties, it is true that last year there was no dividend to the State. It is also true that arrangements entered into by the Treasurer will involve a cost of between $50 million and $100 million. However, it isjust as true that the State Bank will become competitive enough to deliver dividends to the State of Victoria in consequence. The Hon. K. M. Smith-When? When? 84 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-There will be no dividends next year but from the following year there will be dividends to the State which will offset substantially the payments from the State Budget. Mr Birrell and Dr Hewson, the shadow Federal Treasurer, have tried to argue that the State Bank arrangements that have been entered into by the Victorian government are outside the borrowing limits agreement. If this man wishes to be Treasurer of Australia, clearly he should take the trouble to look up the agreement and find out what it says. If he did take that trouble he would find, as would Mr Birrell, that the agreement specifically says it does not include borrowings by institutions except where these are on-lent to governments. The State Bank is not going to on-lend the borrowings that have been arranged. It is not going to on-lend them back to the government. That is clearly outside the definition provided in the agreement on borrowing limits between the governments. It is preposterous to suggest that a government guarantee to pay interest on loans which are acquired by an agency such as the State Bank should be subject to the Australian Loan Council, especially when they will be on-lent and will not be used for any government purposes. They are going to be used by the State Bank. They are not going to be used to provide government services, nor to service government activities. For that reason the borrowings are not included in global limits, and Dr Hewson should know that, as should Mr Birrell, and they should desist from saying they are. What would the Liberals do in such a situation? It is clear what they would do. They would sell the bank! We know they would because they have already said at a national level that it is their policy to sell the Commonwealth Bank. That is the policy of the Liberal Party; it wants to sell the Commonwealth Bank. Let us look at the terms on which it wants to sell it. The Age on Wednesday, 7 March-- The Hon. Robert Lawson-On a point of order, what has the sale of the Commonwealth Bank to do with the subject of this debate? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-On the point of order, we have listened extensively to a whole range of sale issues from the Leader of the Opposition and Mr Hallam about castles they built in the air and then endeavoured to demolish. They link the Commonwealth Bank, the State banks of New South Wales and South Australia-- The Hon. M. A. Birrell-I didn't mention that. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-In that context it is relevant. There is a whole train of thought about the issue of the sale of the State Bank. It was protected. There was debate about the sale of the State Bank, and in that context it is more than reasonable that this whole issue be canvassed. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT-On the point of order, this debate has taken financial management in a wide range of directions. I was listening intently to Mr Theophanous and I feel it is in order for him to touch on the subject of the Commonwealth Bank but I would ask him to return to the main theme of the motion at the earliest opportunity. The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-My point was that the Liberal Party policy is one of wanting to sell off the Commonwealth Bank. I was about to quote from an article in the Age of Wednesday, 7 March 1990, which states: The Commonwealth Bank is worth more than four times the coalition's price tag of $1·6 billion, according to an independent report commissioned by the Commonwealth Bank Officers Association. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUl~CIL 85

The report goes on to say: The study found that the coalition's sale plans, as well as underpricing the bank, ignored the bank's contribution to the government and the social services it provided for the community. It is quite clear that the Liberal Party's policies would be a disaster from the point of view of a response to either the State Bank issue or, at a Federal level, to banking in Australia in terms of maintaining a public presence within the banking system. The Liberal Party would sell off these valuable public assets at bargain basement prices to its mates. I shall move to some of the arguments about the economy of Victoria and the comparisons that have been made between Victoria's economy and the economy of other States. One can make many comparisons of the years before the Labor Party came to power and the subsequent period, but it is clear that when our party came to power there was record unemployment. The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN (Western Province)-On a point of order, Mr President, Mr Theophanous said in the prelude to his remarks that he wanted to respond to the issues about the State of Victoria's economy in the Australian context. I have sat here through most of the debate and I heard the rest in my room, but I have not heard any previous speaker except the Minister deal with that issue. It is unrelated to the motion and I ask you, Mr President, to rule Mr Theophanous out of order and ask him to confine himself to rebutting the matters put because in this case he is dealing with matter that was not raised. The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-On the point of order, I do not see how it is possible to debate the issue of Ministerial responsibility in the context of State Bank Victoria without regard to the economic environment in this country and without regard to the performance of banks in the commercial and public sectors in other States. The debate ought to be in that context and whether the Opposition has put the issue of the economic context of the bank's operation is not a relevant. It is a question of whether it is a relevant issue not whether the Opposition took the opportunity of debating that matter. We are examining Ministerial responsibility for State Bank Victoria and how it performed in this State compared with other State banks' performances in other States. The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI (Melbourne West Province)-On the point of order, Mr President, the motion drafted by Mr Birrell refers to gross economic mismanagement. If the Opposition is trying to challenge my colleague in his making of comparisons with other States I say that it is out of order. Mr Theophanous is responding to the motion and, if one is speaking about financial mismanagement, it must be seen as part of Australia'S economy of which we are part. The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL (East Yarra Province )-On the point of order, Mr President, Mr Theophanous introduced his comments by saying he was going to respond to both my comments and those of Mr Hallam and other speakers on this side of the House about the relative performance of the economies of Victoria and other States. Firstly, those comments were not made by this side. It is now a matter of his response to comments made by the Opposition or the National Party. Standing Order No. 99 states that no member shall digress from the subject matter under discussion. The motion has not been worded as a general opportunity for discussing the economy. It specifically calls for the Treasurer to be sacked. I request you, Mr President, to ask Mr Theophanous to respond to that topic and if in so doing he refers to the Victorian economy he should not compare it with the economy of other States. 86 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-Further on the point of order, if the issue before the House is of gross financial mismanagement it is of significance whether the mismanagement in respect of Tricontinental was unique or isolated or whether there are other examples of similar financial mismanagement occurring. The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-Like Western Australia? The Hon. D. R. WHITE-No, as among the commercial banks that were similarly exposed and State banks in other States. It is significant and relevant to the performance ofTricontinental. One cannot refer to financial mismanagement in isolation from the general economic setting and the general economic performances of other financial institutions that have been exposed to similar circumstances to those ofTricontinental. Not to allow other honourable members to do so will mean that the debate is not put in the proper financial context and that we are dealing with the State Bank in isolation. The PRESIDENT-Order! On the point of order, the motion does not deal only with the proposal to dismiss the Treasurer. It gives a reason and it deals with his alleged gross financial mismanagement. In discussing the Treasurer's gross financial mismanagement, the speakers on the Opposition side of the House have used the economic context and they have referred to the fact that in the present economic context other banks are making money. That is making use of the economic context to indicate that there has been financial mismanagement because the bank, as it has been suggested, has made enormous losses. Just as the Opposition is entitled to use the economic context and the record of other banks to illustrate the point of financial mismanagement in this instance, so it seems to me that the government is equally entitled to use the general economic context as an illustration. The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-Within limits. The PRESIDENT-Yes, within the same sorts of limits as were available to the Opposition. I ask honourable members on all sides of the House to recognise that they are constrained by the motion. If an honourable member goes too far and seeks to debate the question of the Commonwealth government or the Opposition's economic policies generally and not the motion, of course that will be the time for me to pull up the honourable member. To this point it cannot be suggested that Mr Theophanous has gone beyond the bounds, particularly in the light of what has been said about the performance of other banks. I therefore do not uphold the point of order. The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS (Jika Jika Province)-The economic context is important. I reject the suggestion made by Mr Baxter that our economic strategy involved the notion of spend, spend, spend. The reality is that, if one examines the government's economic policy-Mr Baxterquoted from one of the documents which was produced by the government on its economic strategy-one can reflect on what the differences are. The sitting was suspended at 6.30 p.m. until 8.2 p.m. The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-Before the suspension of the sitting I was advising the House that one of the factors that should be considered in this debate is the economic and financial performance of the Victorian government. One must compare that with the performance of its predecessor. One can refer to a whole range of figures and much evidence to demonstrate the difference in the outcomes of the performance of this government as opposed to the previous Liberal government. I shall not do that, but I shall highlight the clear differences between the former Liberal government and the Cain Labor government. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 87

When the Labor government came to office Victoria had record unemployment; investment had dried up and nothing was moving. The public sector was inefficient in many of its operations. There was no growth and no hope for Victorians. That is the main reason the Labor Party was elected to office. Immediately it took up the challenge and created a dynamic, competitive economy. It was responsible for bringing the Victorian economy into the twentieth century. As a consequence of our policies, Victoria now has the lowest unemployment and the strongest growth rates in Australia. These facts are so well known that they are common knowledge. It is unnecessary to repeat them because they are the basic facts about economic life in this State. Victoria's debt has been progressively reduced. Last year it was reduced by $289 million. Taxes and charges are much lower in Victoria than in States such as New South Wales. The comparative figure for New St{)uth Wales is $174 per capita more being paid in taxes and charges than in Victoria. The Victorian government introduced the family budget pled$e which guaranteed low taxes and charges for Victorian families. The government sald it would not raise taxes and charges for Victorian families. It is a pledge; it is not pie in the sky stuff; it is part of the Labor government's policy. There is nothing philosophically or economically irresponsible about the approach adopted by the government. It is not mad Keynesian or monetarist philosophy, to take two economic extremes. Our economic philosophy is concerned with getting on with the job of creating a dynamic economy in this State. The Hon. P. R. Hall-Creating a debt! The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-The fact is that the debt figures are coming down in Victoria. That is what is happening as a consequence of the Labor government's policies. We are building a competitive market in Victoria based on the competitive strengths of the Victorian economy. It has been recognised that Victoria has a strong knowledge base and that it is the educational centre of Australia. Victoria is also the manufacturing centre of Australia. It is important for all these aspects to be consolidated, and that has been done by the Labor government. Victoria has a strong cultural base. The government's commitment to the diversity of our cultural base and its input into that has ensured a wide tourist appeal and has brought in foreign currency. In the context of an improving dynamic and aggressive economy the government is also mindful of the fact that Victoria should have an equitable economy and society. The government has established its social justice and environment policies. These are the reasons Victorian voters have supported the government, and will continue to support it. Mr Hallam referred to the Victorian Economic Development Corporation and the last State election. He raised some convoluted argument and suggested that, had the VEDC issue been brought before the public earlier, the electors would have acted differently. I point out to Mr Hallam that the government was judged on the VEDC issue by the electors. It was judged on that issue at the Greensborough by-election, and it came up trumps. The Hon. Robert Lawson-Don't forget Thomastown. If that was your third safest seat, you would have lost office! The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-We did not come third in Thomastown, like the Liberal Party! 88 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

The Hon. B. A. ChamberIain-Y ou lost only about 24 per cent of your vote! The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-There is no basis for Mr Birrell's motion. I recapitulate some of the points I have made that I believe I have established beyond doubt. The first point is that the merchant arms of many banks are, as I have said, in finaLcial difficulties; it is not only the State Bank that is in that situation. The Hon. D. M. Evans-Which are the other ones? The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-I have been through the argument; if Mr Evans had listened he would have heard. The second point is that it is the private sector and not the public sector that has let the team down, as it were. Contrary to the arguments honourable members have heard, the private sector and the big private companies got themselves into difficulties through poor management decisions. I have mentioned those private companies in the course of my speech. The point is that they are private companies. So much for the notion that the private sector is always successful! The third point is that the State Bank is one of many that was exposed by the lending spree undertaken by all banks and to that extent it was not only the State Bank which exposed itself to the possibility of encountering difficulties. In fact, as I outlined, the State Bank of New South Wales has bad and doubtful debts at least as high as Victoria's, if one considers the top ten bad debt companies. I have not heard any members of the Opposition calling for the Treasurer in New South Wales to resign. I have not even heard them call for the Treasurer of New South Wales to conduct an investigation into the level of debt of the State Bank of New South Wales. The Victorian government got on top of the situation. We got in early, as soon as it became clear that there was a difficulty, and we established accurately the extent of the problem. Once the extent of the problem was established, we put in place the mechanisms required to ensure that State Bank Victoria would continue to serve the people of Victoria as it has in the past. Some short-term difficulties will be encountered. However, as has been stated, the cost to the Victorian public will be alleviated by the fact of increased future profitability for the State Bank as a consequence of the actions the government has taken. It is not unusual to inject capital into a bank-whether it be a State Bank or any other-to ensure that at a later period profits are enhanced and the State benefits through the public authority dividend that it collects from the bank. The fourth point is that through its Federal Treasurer and Mr Birrell's remarks the Liberal Party has served to undermine the State Bank and people's confidence in it. By suggesting that the present arrangements fall within the global limits, they have undermined confidence in the State Bank. They know very well that the arrangements do not fall within the global limits. The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-Produce the legal opinion to back that up. Where is the Solicitor-General's opinion? The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-They know that all it takes is the most cursory examination of the agreement to establish that fact, because, as I have already said, there is no on-lending by the State Bank to any government department. The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-That is what you say. The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-That is what the agreement provides. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 89

The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-Produce the agreement and produce the correspondence from the Reserve Bank of Australia. The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-The agreement provides that only those- ... borrowings by institutions exempt from global limits which are on-lent to governments ... fall within global limits. That is the agreement provision; it is not what I have said; it is clearly provided by the agreement. Mr Birrell's motion is just a furphy and an attempt to whip up a lack of confidence in the State Bank. It does him no credit at all. The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-Mr Jolly has ruined the reputation of the State Bank. The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-The Opposition's policy is one of privatisation. The Opposition would like to privatise the bank. As I have established, that policy has come from the Federal Liberal Party and it will be the State policy. Let the Opposition deny it if that is not the case. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-I deny it. The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-Mr Birrell goes against his Federal Liberal Party counterparts who seem to think that privatisation of banks is a $ood idea. They are prepared to sell the Commonwealth Bank for one quarter of what It is worth. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-Bob Hawke wanted to sell off Australian Airlines and Qantas! The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-The people of Australia would have lost $6 billion if the Commonwealth Bank were sold at that bargain basement price. That is the sort of policy the Opposition is promoting. I have established that the State Treasurer acted as quickly as possible. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-As quickly as possible to what-fix up the mistakes he had made? The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS-It was not possible to intervene in the commercial decisions of the State Bank or its lending policy because that would go against the fundamental principle of maintaining the autonomy of the State Bank. Members of the Opposition know that very well and yet they continue to follow this line of argument. I conclude with the statement that on all of the points the Opposition has raised there is no basis for supporting Mr Birrell's motion. The Victorian government will continue to receive the support of the Victorian people because it has provided and will provide the best standard of living, the highest growth, the most dynamic economy, protection for the environment, and, finally, an effective State Bank serving the people of Victoria in the long-term interests of those people. The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN (Western Province)-I am pleased to join this debate. In view of the contribution honourable members have just heard, I remind the House of the terms of the motion moved by Mr Birrell, because there certainly was little in the previous contribution which related to the issues in the motion. Mr Birrell's motion is: That this House calls on the Premier to dismiss the Treasurer immediately because· of the Treasurer's history of gross financial mismanagement and his failure to honour the principles of Ministerial responsibility. 90 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

Honourable members heard nothing about these issues from the honourable member who has just resumed his seat. There was no mention of Ministerial responsibility. He was not prepared even to admit that Tricontinental and therefore the State Bank had lost $1·4 billion-that is a mere bagatelle; why worry about things like that! That is the sort of attitude honourable members have seen demonstrated. The newest of the backbenchers is put up to support the Treasurer. Honourable members have not heard from the Leader of the House or any Minister apart from the Minister Assisting the Treasurer. His support of the Treasurer was nearly equivalent to the support he gave Mr Landeryou in 1983, and look where that left Mr Landeryou! Honourable members know that he has thrown Mr Jolly to the wolves; Mr Jolly is disposable and he has certainly been disposed of by Mr White and Mr Theophanous. I invite honourable members to come back to the issues, which are these: there is an expectation by the Australian public that certain standards will be observed by State and Federal governments. What are those standards? The first we would like to see is honesty, the second is propriety and the third is competence, at least at a reasonable level. It is the expectation of both the Victorian and the Australian communities that those standards will be observed by State and Federal governments. We must appreciate that governments are custodians of assets of the public, whether they are buildings such as this or whether they are the services that operate in the community. It is the obligation of governments to protect those assets and to protect the streams of income and to use them wisely in the public interest. When those standards are not met, accountability is required; someone has to accept the responsibility when things go wrong. The government agrees with that because on Monday we read in the newspapers that the ~overnment is proposing legislation to make parents responsible for the actions of theIr children. It may well be that parents take reasonable precautions to ensure that they know where their children are at specific times and that they are being supervised, and so on. Yet under the proposed legislation announced by the government this week those parents are to be held responsible for, for instance, graffiti damage caused by their children. That is exactly the sort of principle we are talking about tonight. How much more responsible is a Minister of the Crown for the actions of his agents? The Treasurer called on the board of the State Bank to bear responsibility for its actions regarding Tricontinental because it had appointed the board ofTricontinental. Even though two members were clearly acknowledged by the Treasurer as having had nothing to do with those Tricontinental matters they were kicked out as well, but the Minister refuses to accept responsibility for the actions of those he appointed. The Hon. T. C. Theophanous-You aren't going to regurgitate Mark Birrell's speech, are you? The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN-No, I'm going to regurgitate Dr Ironmonger's statements, which you did not address. If it was good enough for the Treasurer to get rid of the board of the State Bank because it had appointed the board ofTricontinental, which had incurred the loss, does it not follow that the man who appointed the board of the State Bank which led to those events should also bear responsibility? Dr Ironmonger is right in implying that we have double standards operating in this case. For the Treasurer it is not just this event; it is a whole litany of things with which he has been involved, all of which have been disastrous for the economy of this State. To go back to the early days, the Treasurer sold the railways rolling stock for $410 million. The Auditor-General did the work on that and he said that although the government received $410 million to prop up the Current Account, it undertook at Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 91 the same time leasing liabilities of$ 1000 million. We got rid of $400 million of assets and we acquired $1000 million of liabilities. That was stated in the report of the Auditor-General that was dealt with by the Estimates Committee of this House and it is a matter of public record. The Hon. T. C. Theophanous-When? The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN-The Legislative Council Estimates Committee was set up in 1986 and evidence of that was given to the committee. The Treasurer's statement for the year ended 30 June 1986 gives chapter and verse on that issue, and I refer Mr Theophanous to page 45 and following. In table 3.4 the Treasurer deals with the sale and lease-back of assets. It shows, for instance, that the book value of assets sold by the then Metropolitan Transit Authority was $189·8 million. The lease commitments undertaken were $309 million. That was only one authority. I shall give the honourable member the exact figures. We received $475·2 million from asset sales and, according to the Auditor-General, we hung around our necks liabilities of$1191· 7 million in exchange. That was one of the Treasurer's early forays into the area of modem money management. We know what happened with foreign exchange losses. That same report showed losses of tens of millions of dollars when the government became involved in foreign exchange borrowings. The government refused to hedge those borrowings against currency fluctuations despite professional advice to do so. The next issue is W orkCare, the legislation for which went through this place when the government had a temporary majority. It now has unfunded liabilities of $4·2 billion. The Hon. T. C. Theophanous-It has been dealt with. The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN-What do you mean: it has been dealt with? We are not talking about legislation passed last year, which will do nothing about those unfunded liabilities. IfMr Theophanous does not know what it is all about, he should not be here. The list goes on and on and the latest is this loss of $1·4 billion. That was not mentioned by Mr Theophanous. The Hon. T. C. Theophanous-You don't want to talk about the increase in revenue from WorkCare. The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN-Of course we can talk about the increase in revenue generated by taxing measures of this government. The taxes for Victoria are greater than for any other State in Australia. Again, that is a matter of public record. What more does one man have to do to lose the confidence of the public, let alone the confidence of Parliament? The Treasurer is personally responsible for the loss of thousands of millions of dollars. There has never been anything like it in the history of this country. Even a fellow such as R. F. X. Connor, who intended to borrow billions of dollars from Mr Khemlani and others, was not in this sort of market. What did Mr Cain, now the Premier, say about what we might expect from Ministers? On 19 October 1977 he said: Public confidence in a Minister of the Crown is absolutely essential. A Minister cannot function without it. As I said earlier, a Minister is not like any other citizen, he is a special person and must be seen as a special person. The Treasurer is a special person. He is so special that we have never seen the like of him before, and we hope never again to do so. 92 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

The Hon. R. M. Hallam-He has special standards, anyway. The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN-They are certainly not standards of accountability. Mr White, now the Minister Assisting the Treasurer, speaking in this House on 7 September 1977, said about Ministerial responsibility: The concept of Ministerial responsibility requires the Minister not only to take any initiative that he thinks fit based on the knowledge that he may have of the area, but also to exercise some vigilance and accountability for the expenditure of funds ... It is not good enough for Mr Theophanous to say that things have gone pretty well elsewhere and that the Treasurer is not really responsible for the actions of the people he has appointed. This certainly applies to the Treasurer, for the reasons set out by my colleagues. The Treasurer had a representative on the board of the State Bank; he appointed each individual member of the State Bank; he received reports of the bank meetings and he had the minutes made available to him. He had his staff of thousands available to ask questions about any aspect of the State Bank. He brought about the amendment to the State Bank Act that broadened its charter. The Hon. T. C. Theophanous-Who appointed the board ofTricontinental? The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN-The Treasurer's nominees did; his appointees did. The Hon. T. C. Theophanous-The State Bank did? The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN-That is right; and each one of that board was appointed by the Treasurer. The other point is that the Treasurer was the man who had to administer the State government guarantee for all the borrowings of the State Bank. For all these reasons he had a special responsibility. As the Premier said, a Minister is a special person. What more needs to be said? This is incompetence on a monumental scale. It is criminal negligence that so many hundreds of millions of dollars of the taxpayers' money has been frittered away. The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI (Melbourne West Province )-On a point of order, Mr President, Mr Chamberlain is saying that the Treasurer ought to face criminal charges, and I object to that unparliamentary statement. The PRESIDENT-Order! I did not hear Mr Chamberlain suggest that the Treasurer should face criminal negligence charges. What Mr Chamberlain said is that it is criminal negligence to waste that much of the taxpayers' money, which is not quite the same. The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN (Western Province )-Hundreds of millions of dollars were wasted by the Treasurer through his criminal negligence. The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS (Jika Jika Province)-On a point of order, Mr President, Mr Chamberlain has just said that hundreds of millions of dollars were wasted by the Treasurer through his criminal negligence. That is a direct reference to the criminal negligence of the Treasurer and is unparliamentary. The PRESIDENT-Order! The use of the phrase "criminal negligence" even when applied to a person does not necessarily mean that person ought to fact criminal charges. It is perhaps hyperbole used to denote extreme, gross negligence. I have already ruled that the expression was not unparliamentary as put and I do not believe a series of objections on the issue is necessary. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 93

The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN (Western Province)-This is negligence on a massive scale such as we have never seen. The Minister for Health is unable to care for the sick and the aged because money has been frittered away by the Treasurer. It is negligence of the highest order and the Treasurer should be accountable, but we know that does not mean anything to the government. If the Treasurer had any sense of public decency he would have resigned from his position years ago, but clearly that cannot be expected in this case because Victorians know that the government tries to tough these things out. I ask honourable members to examine the track record on these issues and examine the concept of Ministerial responsibility as practised by the government. The Nunawading re-election affair was an example of direct Ministerial intervention with the democratic process. Five eminent prosecutorial authorities said that there should be criminal prosecutions against three members of the Australian Labor Party-Mr Batchelor, Mr Salvaris and Mr Nikolaidou. Mr Habersberger, barrister; the Crown Solicitor, Mr Lambert; the legal assistant, Mr Grace; the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr Coldrey, QC; and Mr Morrissey, QC, all said that those people should be prosecuted for attempting to distort the democratic process. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal said that this matter went to the very heart of the democratic process. The former Minister for Property and Services, now Attorney-General, obtained a friendly opinion from the Solicitor-General and then approached the former Chief Electoral Officer and unduly influenced him. In 1986 the argument used was that the government was about to change the law in relation to the distribution of how-to-vote cards and that the change was imminent, and so there was some argument in saying that if the law was about to change it was not necessary to prosecute the offending persons. The legislation was amended last year, three years after the affair took place. Five legal advisers said that these people, supported by members of the Australian Labor Party who were actively involved, should be prosecuted for trying to fool the public by putting out bogus how-to-vote cards. The Hon. T. C. Theophanous-What does this have to do with the Treasurer? The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN-I am talking about the standards of Ministerial responsibility adopted by the government in the past. I do not believe there is another case like the Nunawading affair in Australia's recent political history. It involved a Minister of the Crown interfering with the prosecution process. The then Minister for Property and Services, now the Attorney-General, was supported by the Premier on every occasion. How can the people of Victoria expect standards of decency in relation to public office when that activity is accepted by the government? The Solicitor-General rang one of the officers of the then Crown Solicitor's Office and suggested to him that it would not be convenient for the government if a prosecution were started in that week-which happened to be the last week of the autumn sessional period-because he did not want anything running <"or several months until Parliament resumed in September. That is the standard Victorians have had from this government. We then had the Sidiropoulos case where the then Minister for Labour, now the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, allocated $160 000 to an organisation which, through a newspaper, promoted the Labor Party .. It was a breach of the Constitution, clearly demonstrated by an opinion of Mr Goldberg, QC. The Hon. T. C. Theophanous-Mr Sidiropoulos has since left the Labor Party. 94 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN-I know that and understand why. Mr Goldberg said there was quite probably a breach of section 55 (a) of the Constitution Act and that Mr Sidiropoulos's Legislative Assembly seat was probably vacant. The government's response on that occasion was so pathetic that it even moved Simon Clarke, a journalist with the Age, to write on 16 April 1986 that: The government showed admirable loyalty but little substance in defending Mr Sidiropoulos yesterday. The response was wishy-washy. The Premier, Mr Cain, the Minister for Labour, Mr Crabb and others failed to refute any ofthe detail ofthe Liberal argument. Public money was used for private political party purposes in breach of the Constitution and the Minister, in this case the present Minister for Police and Emergency Services, supported by the Premier, refused to enforce any standards of decency. There is obviously no accountability under the government. By contrast, if honourable members examine the so-called Landeryou affair which occurred in 1983 we find that other standards were applied. Allegations were made that Mr Landeryou had retained benefits from his union membership even after he was a Minister of the Crown. An exhaustive inquiry was conducted by Mr Balmford, an accountant, and Mr Michael Black, QC, which cleared Mr Landeryou of any impropriety. Yet, for his own reasons, the Premier gave Mr Landeryou the chop. In the Age of 1 September 1983 the Premier said that a Minister should not put himself in or allow himself to remain in such a position, that he should not be under a personal financial obligation to a person or organisation where that person or organisation could seek some return or benefit from the Minister in the exercise of his portfolio or responsibility or any concession. The Premier went on to say-one can imagine the self-righteousness of the Premier­ that he was not prepared to compromise or in any other way diminish the standards that should be set in government. One can imagine him saying that. The Premier has no standards of public morality, nor has the former Minister for Property and Services, now the Attorney-General. The Hon. W. A. Landeryou interjected. The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN-I said before Mr Landeryou entered the Chamber that he was cleared of any impropriety but he was still put to the chop. If that rationale is used then how much greater is the responsibility of the Treasurer? The Treasurer has long lost the confidence of the Victorian people. In political terms he is dead meat. The Premier should bury the carcass before the stench overwhelms his government. However, based upon the Premier's past performance, it is obvious that the blowflies are in for a picnic. The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI (Melbourne West Province)-The motion before the House reads: That this House calls on the Premier to dismiss the Treasurer immediately because of the Treasurer's history of gross financial mismanagement and his failure to honour the principles of Ministerial responsibility. The motion is extremely broad and allows the government to entertain a number of aspects in this debate. I shall concentrate on the charge of "gross financial mismanagement", as described in the motion. Actually, the Opposition ought to learn how to write motions better. The Hon. G. H. Cox-That is your opinion. The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-Yes, it is. There has never been such a robust economy in Victoria as has occurred since Labor came to power in 1982. Prior to that, Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 9S

Victoria was woefully behind the other States and nationally in business investments, ,export, employment growth, and unemployment rates. In the ten years to 1982, business investments increased by only 8 per cent; exports increased by 6 per cent; and employment growth had risen by only 9 per cent. The Hon. T. C. Theophanous-That is less than 1 per cent a year. The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-Yes. The Opposition talks about financial mismanagement, yet in the seven years since Labor came to office a grand reversal in the affairs of this State has occurred. Some members talk about selling off farms, and that the government is a socialist one, yet, private investment has increased by 118 per cent in real terms in that seven years; that figure has not been matched by the growth in any other State. Exports have increased by 70 per cent; and employment rates have grown by 22 per cent in the past seven years with the establishment of more than 390 000 new jobs. The Opposition talks about financial mismanagement but Victoria now has more people with jobs who can look after their families because the growth rate in employment has been greater than anywhere else in Australia. In the past eight years Victoria has experienced an unprecedented restraint in the public sector. The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-Y ou are closing hospitals, police stations, courthouses and-- The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-Mr Chamberlain says on the one hand we are a big-spending government and on the other hand, when we have to show financial restraint, he still criticises. Why does he want to have it both ways? Talk is cheap when one is in opposition! The Hon. M. A. Birrell-Y ou waste the money. The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-You don't know how to handle it. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-You're rattled because you know you are heading for opposition. The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-That is absolute rubbish. The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-Which figures are these? The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-Australian Bureau of Statistics figures show that. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-Does the pledge show the State Bank losses? The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-An article in the Sydney Morning Herald states that Victoria has become the highest taxing government in the country. The Treasurer sent the following reply to the editor: Fact: Over the past six years Victoria has had by far the lowest growth in taxes and charges. Real revenue growth has been about 10 per cent below other States and 20 per cent below the Commonwealth. Last year's Budget Papers indicate that taxes, fees and fines are $174 per capita less in Victoria than New South Wales. The Sydney State and local government charges component of the CPI has increased at twice the rate to Melbourne since I became Treasurer in 1982. Since the ABS statistics have been mentioned, for the six years to 1989-90 the total real spending in the public sector has increased by 2 per cent-not 2 per cent a year but 2 per cent over the six years. So much for the freewheeling, big-spending, high­ taxing government, and so much for the financial mismanagement charge that is attempted to be levelled at the government! 96 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

The growth in expenditure in other States has been 10 per cent, and 12 per cent in the Commonwealth. The Hon. G. H. Cox-Do you believe that? The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-That is from the ABS, if Mr Cox does not mind-they must be wrong; or, may I ask, as the journalist said to Mr Peacock last night, "Are you trying to tell me that the ABS is wrong?" If Victoria had spent like other States it would have had to increase its expenditure by $1·3 billion more. In the six years of the former Liberal government, led by Mr Thompson and earlier by Sir Rupert Hamer, government expenditure increased by more than 15 per cent. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-Why do you use the six years? The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-They are the figures I have available. While public expenditure has been severely restricted, revenue has also been restricted. The real growth in revenue has increased by only 12 per cent compared with a total of 31 per cent for the Commonwealth and 22 per cent for the other States. The charge of financial mismanagement really needs to be carefully considered. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-You've made the case; we withdraw the motion! The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-So you should; you cannot even draw up a proper motion! Under the government's tight spending regime, public sector spending has increased dramatically. The Opposition referred to the health sector and the number of patients now being treated-it has increased by 13 per cent in the six years up to 1988-89. The Hon. G. H. Cox-That is absolute rubbish! The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-Mr Cox believes only himself; he should do some proper research. The number of passenger journeys on public rail transport has increased by 17 per cent in the metropolitan area, and by 30 per cent in the rural area. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-I wouldn't go on using those statistics. The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-Productivity in the T AFE sector has also increased dramatically and, probably because of Victoria's growing population, the demand on energy resources-on gas and electricity production-has dramatically increased. The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-The highest energy charges in Australia. The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-Not the way Mr Chamberlain's government used to give it away; it encouraged people to use more so that "the more you use, the less you pay". Victoria must conserve its electricity. The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-That's right, instead of the highest charges. The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-We cannot continue using energy willy-nilly as your government used to encourage us to do. I hope my contribution has rebutted the charge of gross financial mismanagement­ those figures are not bad for a State that is not doing very well! The Hon. R. I. Knowles-$1·4 billion lost on the State Bank, and you say it is doing well! Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 97

The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-That is a loss by the private sector, not the public sector. In February I recall some meagre coverage was given to a senior Liberal Party person who implied that people's deposits in the State Bank would not be safe. The Hon. R. I. Knowles-Who said that? The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-Malcolm Fraser said to keep your money under the bed. The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-That is financial irresponsibility if ever anything was. The Hon. R. I. Knowles-Who said that? The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-The State Bank is experiencing financial problems and the government is not walking away from them. The State Bank will continue with the services that it provides to the public. Those services will not decline. The State Bank has 520 branches and, so far as I am aware, those branches will remain. It has the largest branch network of any bank in the State. The bank has moved into international circles. Its deposits are guaranteed by the government. The State Bank has reached pre-eminence in housing finance. Thirty per cent of all housing loans come from the State Bank; it is still the major source of housing finance for Victorians, particularly young families, and the bank will continue to provide that service to its customers. It also helps rural people and will continue to do so. I am aware that the State Bank has set up a computer package to assist farmers to computerise their small businesses. That is an acknowledgment of the remoteness of various farmers. The bank has moved into a market that has been totally ignored by other financiers. The State Bank will continue the insurance services it provides through its branch network. Corporate banking teams were developed some years ago and they will continue in the metropolitan and regional centres. The financial investment advisory service is one of the success stories of the bank, and that service will continue. Investment programs on the radio, particularly the one I like listening to on Saturday mornings, always direct people to the State Bank advisory service when listeners have doubts about where to invest their money. The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-But they don't invest their money in the State Bank. The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-That, again, is untrue. There was general agreement that people should not panic. During the stock market crash of 1987 there was a tendency for people to panic and sell their shares when, in fact, the best thing would have been to have held onto them. I do not have any shares; therefore, I cannot say whether it was sensible. The general consensus was that people should have held onto their shares and not panicked. The introduction of the State banking system led all the other savings banks into services that the State Bank provides to the public, and the State Bank will continue with those services. The bank provides competitive interest rates and, despite financial pressures, the bank will maintain its support for the arts, whether it be the Melbourne Spoleto Festival, the Victoria State Opera or the Australian ballet. The bank has sponsored many of the community activities in Victoria and, no doubt, that will continue. The bank is trying to obtain a greater share of the market and has also assisted our youth. It has sponsored a music festival and it does not Session 1990-4 98 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management matter whether people bank with it or not: if one wants to get into the market, one has to market the goods aggressively. We all know that the State Bank goes around to the schools and collects the children's money to put into bank accounts, and I presume that will continue; but I was advised yesterday that there will be some change. That is the way children learn how to save. The State Bank will continue with its housing awards, with sponsoring sporting events and sponsoring Crimestoppers. In the field of business finance, in 1988 the State Bank's share of small to medium­ sized lending had grown to 12 per cent, and it is highly profitable and secure. Because of the Tricontinental disaster, the bankers made a decision that they would revert to small to medium lending, which is the most profitable and most secure. The 12 per cent is as competitive as the other banks, and 34 per cent of Victorians still claim that the State Bank is their main bank and will continue to be their main bank. Despite its problems, the bank is a key financier of local government and semigovernment instrumentalities. It provides loans for sewerage, drainage, lighting and a whole range of services that are provided for the community. The bank will continue to be part of our community and, indeed, a profitable part of it. Home buyers make up 40 per cent of all home loan recipients and the majority are first home buyers. That makes the bank the biggest lender for housing in the State. VvTe all know that the State Bank will not return any taxes and dividends to the State government for this financial year. The community will have to bear that cost to maintain the viability and success of the State Bank and to ensure that the people of Victoria maintain their confidence in a financial system. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-It is only this year, is it? The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-Yes. In 1988-89 the State Bank paid approximately $80 million to the government. We know that will not happen this financial year, but will certainly look forward to the interest payments that the government has guaranteed this financial year for the State Bank to cover the Tricontinental debts which will be offset by future dividends. Despite the troubles of Tricontinental Corporation Ltd, Standard and Poors Corporation has given the State Bank an AA rating. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-Underwritten by the State. The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-It is a mark of confidence from that institution. I reject strongly the motion moved by the Opposition and look forward to supporting the Treasurer; the work of the State Bank will continue. The Hon. ROSEMARY V ARTY (Nunawading Province)-It is interesting that the speakers we have heard from the government have not addressed the issue that the motion seeks to address, which is to call the Treasurer to account and to remove him for his gross mismanagement, particularly over the State Bank issue. My colleagues have detailed the disasters, and 1 compliment Mr Birrell and Mr Hallam for their contributions to the debate when they outlined the actions of the Treasurer. It is clear that the Treasurer's actions show a total lack of financial and economic ability and accountability in his public office. The Opposition continues and will continue to call for the Treasurer's removal. Nothing less will suffice. Other honourable members have dealt with what has happened in the past. Ms Kokocinski assured honourable members that State Bank Victoria will continue. 1 am pleased about that. However, that does not address the future debt problem. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 99

It is interesting to consider what can be interpreted from the information honourable members have been given. The information has come from a variety of sources, including what was said by the Minister Assisting the Treasurer, what was included in the Treasurer's statement and what was contained in the Touche Ross report. I shall briefly go through some of the points. It is interesting that the Minister qualified some of his remarks by saying, "If there are reasonable economic circumstances". That was one of the key points he made, and similar comments are included in both the Touche Ross report and the Treasurer's statement. At page 5 of his statement the Treasurer says: The actions announced in this statement are intended to ensure that the State Bank of Victoria is well placed in the turbulent period to come in the Australian financial system. The Touche Ross report states: Thus it is noted that any assessment of the value of the portfolio can only be made having regard to the economic environment. In other words, they are saying that there could well be more problems; they are saying that it is not possible to forecast what will happen. Honourable members already know that the Federal Treasurer is unable to guarantee a decrease in interest rates. He is not able to give the sort of guarantee that would help to overcome the present difficulty. People working within the Department of Management and Budget have not been involved in market operations. They are academically brilliant, but they have no concept of how to operate in the market. They are ideologues and they do not know how to read the signs. When one reads the Treasurer's statement, it is clear that he still has not come to grips with the time bomb that this issue is. I assure honourable members that we have not heard the end of it. We have not yet heard from the government how it will cope with the situation other than how it stands today; it is not said what will happen in the future. It is unbelievable that the government is only now putting into place the checks and balances that should have been there in the first place. The Treasurer's statement refers to stratifying the loan portfolio by risk exposure. If the State Bank and Tricontinental Corporation Ltd had been run as proper commercial enterprises and if the Treasurer had exercised proper control with regard to his nominee on the board reporting to him, t~e current mess would not exist. I shall refer briefly to the agreement honourable members have not seen. How can we know what is ahead when we do not know what is in the agreement? How can we possibly know where we will end up with interest rates and inflation? What happens if the losses are more than has been stated? Honourable members have not heard one word about that, yet the commercial world is already saying that the losses will be far higher than is disclosed in the documentation. Honourable members heard not one word from the Minister about what would happen if that were the case, nor did we hear anything from Mr Theophanous or any other speaker from the government. We must simply wait and see, but I suspect that we have another VEDC or WorkCare catastrophe on our hands. At page 11 of his report the Treasurer states: For its part, the government has undertaken that the State Bank will meet all the Reserve Bank's prudential standards. 100 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

That means that, in the past, the bank has not met those prudential standards; otherwise why make the comment? The report further states that the government will ensure that: ... all its borrowing and lending activities, with some minor exceptions, take place within the bank and that all the credit exposures ofthe bank are subject to the board's credit committee procedures. One must assume that a number of loans went through without being subject to the board's credit committee review. Is it any wonder that the level oflosses through State Bank loans was higher than would normally be expected from a commercial risk? The proper checks and balances were not in place to ensure that the risk was spread. The Treasurer's report also states: This measure will also complement the new and more formal arrangements agreed with the Reserve Bank, as it will mean that all lending activities are carried out within the bank and hence are subject to Reserve Bank supervision. Again that is an admission that things had not been done correctly. As to reporting requirements, the statement says that the bank will now be required to report to the Treasurer on a quarterly basis rather than that presently provided, backed up by monthly meetings with the Treasurer and the chairman of the bank. The Treasurer has a representative on the board, so what has happened to the reporting? In effect, that statement is an admission that the reporting that should have been occurring was not. Again, it is shades of the Victorian Economic Development Corporation, which had two representatives of the Treasurer on its board who, through lack of ability or will, did not report to the Treasurer. One can only assume that their lack of business competence did not allow them to understand or appreciate what was happenins. They may have known plenty about the theory but they were short on commercIal sense. They were unable to see what was happening. I know honourable members are anxious to draw the debate to a conclusion, but I wish to touch briefly on the provisions that were made for bad or doubtful debts. When the report on State Bank Victoria was tabled at the end of the last sessional period, Mr Hallam and I sat down and studied it. We looked at each other and said, "There is no way that figure can be right". How true that has turned out to be. When one is making provision for bad and doubtful debts, naturally, one must adequately provide for a certain time. It may well be that the State Bank has had a problem for a very long time and has only just realised it. It is fine to say that the current economic conditions have caused the need to provide a massive amount for bad debts, but it may well be that those amounts were not adequately provided for over a lengthy period, in which case, again, it is bad management, bad checking by the Treasurer, or bad reporting to the Treasurer on the condition of our bank, the State Bank. Therefore, even if it had been necessary to catch up, there should have been some indication that there was a problem, and that problem was not identified by the Treasurer through the reporting mechanisms that are provided for in the Act. Everyone in Victoria has had some contact with the State Bank over a period of time, whether it be as a small child who had a savings account or as a person buying his or her first home with a credit foncier loan or through some other dealing with the bank. It really is the people's bank, and this government has not recognised that this episode of bad management has made the electorate realise just what a debacle exists in this State. This episode quantifies in people's minds exactly what is happening. When one talked about the VEDC and the VIC, it had no meaning to people in the general community-they did not even understand what the acronyms meant. Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 101

However, when one talks about State Bank Victoria suddenly it means something to them. It means a lot to them, and they are extremely concerned-they are not concerned that they will lose money, because they know that is guaranteed by the government­ and are saying that if this government has to fund these losses there are other things in which members of the general community are involved at the local level that will not be funded. I have already had people come to my electorate office saying, "We did not receive $500 for our group which is helping small children in some way. Yet the government and the bank can lose $1·4 billion, so where does that leave us? We will have to pay for it". The other item that I wish to touch on is the impact upon the employees of the State Bank. The Treasurer is responsible for this. They are a very loyal and dedicated team of people, but suddenly, because the bank is no longer making a profit, their profit­ sharing arrangement has been taken away from them. Therefore, in effect, the Treasurer of this State has said to those employees, "You will take a pay cut". I can assure the House that the employees were not happy about that. Apparently the morale in the bank is at an all-time low. A massive number of skilled people are leaving the State Bank's service because of the actions of this Treasurer. The bank is having the utmost difficulty in finding skilled staff. Many branches can no longer obtain the required number of staff because this Treasurer has said, "Too bad for you folk. Not only will you have to put in your $184 each as taxpayers, but also you will have to take a pay cut. The bank does not make a profit, so you do not get a share in the profit. You have lost out. Your profit sharing has gone by the board". It seems to me that the ultimate irony of the whole episode is that nowhere along the line has the Treasurer been able to appreciate that, in the final analysis, it is people that one is dealing with; it is people who will suffer. It is not only the taxpayers out in the community who will have to foot the bill for the extra $184 each but also the employees of State Bank Victoria will suffer. I fully support the motion. The Hon. R. A. MACKENZIE (Geelong Province)-If I had the opportunity of having a seconder, I would probably amend the motion because I do not wish to dwell at all on the first part of it, which calls on the Premier to dismiss the Treasurer immediately because of the Treasurer's history of gross financial mismanagement. I do not profess to have a sufficient understanding of high finance to argue that case. From listening to the debate today it seems that there is a great deal of argument on both sides of the House about whether the Treasurer has been guilty of gross financial mismanagement. In regard to the other part of the motion which refers to the Treasurer's failure to honour the principles of Ministerial responsibility, I feel very strongly about this aspect. In fact, it is really the original reason why I came to be involved in politics way back in the 1970s. I remember only too well how the conventions of the Parliament were completely ignored and abused by conservative governments in those days. One does not need to have a long memory to remember Sir Robert Askin and Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen ignoring the conventions of Parliament and appointing for the Senate vacancies non-Labor members-in other words, appointing people not to represent the parties that had been voted for but, in fact, to represent the opposite side of politics-and in so doing, being able to go in and abuse the Parliament even further by blocking Supply in the Senate. I shall never forget those days, and I do not think I felt more strongly about any other issue. Here was a party that was prepared to use every possible means available to it to hang on to power, and I have been quite a supporter ever since of this institution of Parliament and its conventions. 102 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management

In this particular case honourable members are talking about the conventions of Ministerial responsibility, and there are some arguments in this regard. It is a grey area in some respects, and parties on both sides of the Chamber can quote instances where someone has not accepted responsibility and where someone else has. Nevertheless, there is one overriding factor that must prevail: what the public perception is, not what we, as members of parties or otherwise, think. In the debate today members of the Liberal Party and the National Party have expressed their opinions and called for the resignation of the Treasurer, citing examples to suit their purposes in regard to Ministerial responsibility. Naturally enough, the Labor Party has been defending the Treasurer. That is the way Parliament operates. However, when one really examines the issue, it boils down to the perception of the people of Victoria, and that is what I shall speak about briefly. The perception that the people have should be the overriding factor in considering whether the Treasurer does or does not resign. There is no doubt that the people of Victoria believe the State Bank to be a people's bank and the government's bank. The bank is older than this institution. Not many institutions in Victoria are older than the Legislative Council, but the State Bank was established in 1841 and the first branch was set up in 1842. It was legislated for by the Legislative Council of New South Wales for the Port Phillip District. Therefore, the bank has a long history. When one considers that remarkable history of the savings bank, one notes it was set up for the sole reason of serving the shepherds who went out and lived on various properties throughout Victoria and who, when they received their pay of some 40 pounds a year, came into town once a year with their cheques and had nowhere to put them. Of course, they were victims of the gaming houses and ladies of ill repute and so on. That is why the State Bank was formed-to look after the little people and the battlers. La Trobe was one of the main supporters of the bank. Throughout history it has been the battlers' bank, the bank that provided access to funds for the little people. It was not really involved in some of the other practices that other banks were involved in. In the 1920s the State Bank built houses. In 1927 it was building houses for 500 pounds-houses that working-class people could afford. The bank had its own building department and designers. It lent money to people. The people of Victoria have a strong attachment to their bank and there is no doubt that they believe it belongs to the government. There is no doubt that the government has considerable influence. It was only recently that the House passed legislation in line with government policy to alter the whole nature of the State Bank. That legislation gave it the authority and power to participate in entrepreneuriallendin~ and borrowing. The measure. was debated and I understand there was one dissentlng voice in the Legislative Assembly but none in this House. We all agreed: the government's bank should have the power to engage in entrepreneurial lending. Let us consider that aspect. That is the perception the people have of the State Bank. As examples of Ministerial responsibility in recent times one will recall the days of Don Chipp, who resigned as Minister for the Navy because a public servant in his department gave him wrong information that he gave to Parliament and inadvertently misled Parliament because the information turned out to be incorrect. It was not Don Chipp's fault. He did not do anything dishonest. He was passing on information given to him by a person in his department, yet he resigned because he inadvertently misled Parliament. Andrew Peacock offered to resign because his wife appeared in an advertisement for bed sheets. Michael MacKellar resigned because he declared a colour television set as Treasurer's Financial Management 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 103 a black and white set when returning from overseas. Mick Young on the Labor side of politics resigned over a Paddington bear. Bed sheets, a colour television and a Paddington bear have caused three Ministers to resign, but $1·4 billion has disappeared and the Treasurer of Victoria is still there! I feel sad that honourable members are debating this motion tonight because there is no doubt in my mind that the Treasurer, Rob Jolly, has made an enormous contribution to this State. I remember when the Labor government took over the reins of the State and Rob Jolly had to take over the financial management of Victoria, which was not an easy task. He had no-one from the previous government to advise him. He was on his own, like every other Minister of the day, and no other Minister could help him because they were all tied up with their own portfolios. He had to bring about changes and he had the confidence of everybody in the party and the government. I feel sorry for the Treasurer, Rob Jolly, because I believe he has been and will be remembered as a person who has made an enormous contribution to this State. Honourable members are not questioning his personality, his ability or his honesty; we are questioning his responsibility. That is what I am arguing tonight. I do not believe he is honouring that responsibility. If he had stepped down immediately the situation came to light, many people would have been better off. It would certainly have been better for Rob Jolly. He would have been looked upon by the vast majority of Victorians as a man prepared to stand up and accept responsibility. It would certainly have taken the wind out of the Opposition, and the Chamber would not be having this debate tonight. He would not be lost to the government. Even as a backbencher, he would still be able to provide advice to the government on his experiences and knowledge in the area. What upsets me about this whole affair is what has happened to some members of the board and the way in which they have been made scapegoats. I am talking about people like Dr Duncan Ironmonger, Neil Smith, and particularly lan Morton, who is a man for whom I have enormous respect. As Minister for Conservation, Forests and Lands I worked closely with him during the drought in 1983 and saw his capacity for work. Mr Morton and other members of the then Rural Finance Commission worked twelve hours a day, seven days a week for seven weeks straight without any break so that they could get the cheques out to farmers desperately in need of sustenance. For the record, Mr Morton was appointed by the Premier's father and had been involved in the Rural Finance Commission virtually since the second world war. He was responsible for the huge success of the Heytesbury Settlement, which would have been Henry Bolte's folly if not for the work oflan Morton. I know the Minister for the Arts also worked closely with Ian Morton and knows of his capacity and integrity. He made the Rural Finance Commission the best run statutory authority in this State. I will stand here and defy anyone to tell me otherwise about his ability. No-one can tell me that a man of his ability should be held responsible and have black marks placed against his marvellous career of public service to this State under a few governments of both political persuasions. It is absolutely disgraceful that he should go out in the twilight years of his career with such a tarnish on his record. The same can be said about Neil Smith, another man who has made an enormous contribution to Victoria. I do not know the facts and I do not believe anyone of us will ever know exactly what went wrong, but I can say without fear of contradiction that Ian Morton would never go about any deal that would risk the funds of the people of Victoria unless some other reason were behind it. For example, during the drought when many farmers were applying for subsidies, several of them came to me and said that Mr Morton of the Rural Finance Commission would not provide them with finance. They 104 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Treasurer's Financial Management said they were battling and struggling and needed the loans to survive. I asked lan to tell me what was happening. We got out the files and found that the people to whom Mr Morton would not lend money had been going broke before the drought. He used to say that it was no good lending taxpayers' money to people who were already going broke. He said the money should be given to farmers who will survive, and that public funds should not be wasted on farmers who were going broke before the drought. That is an example of his attitude. I am sad that lan Morton and other members of the board have been made the losers in this instance. I also feel sorry for the other losers, the people of Victoria, because Victoria is already in difficult circumstances. Important programs are being cut back and it worries me that many battlers, people in need of social welfare, will suffer because this debt will have to be paid. It is up to the Treasurer to accept Ministerial responsibility. I have no doubt from talking to people in my electorate that they believe he is responsible for the State Bank and, whether or not a fine line says he is or is not, the point is that the people of Victoria believe him to be responsible and he would do a great service not only to himself but also to Parliament by accepting that Ministerial responsibility. There have been too many threats against Parliamentary conventions, and honourable members cannot allow constant overriding of the conventions that have made the Westminster system what it is not only in this country but also in the rest of the world. That tradition has been undermined recently in many ways. If the Treasurer does not resign his actions will further undermine that tradition, which belongs to the people. I am very sorry to say I shall have to support the motion moved by the Opposition. I will do so with considerable sadness. I am genuine when I say that because I have much respect for the Treasurer, Rob Jolly, but in this instance I shall support the motion because I believe Ministerial responsibility is extremely important at this time. The House divided on the motion (the Hon. A. J. Hunt in the chair). Ayes 24 Noes 17 Majority for the motion 7 AYES NOES Mr Baxter MrCrawford Mr Birrell MrDavidson Mr Chamberlain MrHenshaw MrConnard MrsHogg MrCox Mrlves MrCraige MrKennedy Mrde Fegely Ms Kokocinski MrEvans Mrs Lyster MrGuest MrsMcLean MrHallam MrPullen MrKnowles MrSgro MrLawson Mr Theophanous MrLong MrVan Buren MrMacey MrWalker Mr Mackenzie MrWhite Mr Miles MrSkeggs Tellers: MrSmith Mr Landeryou MrStorey MrMier Mrs Tehan Business ofthe House 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 105

AYES NOES Mrs Varty MrWright Tellers: Mr Ashman MrHall PAIR Mr Best I Mrs Coxsedge

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts)-I suggest, by agreement, that questions without notice, which would normally be taken now, be postponed until later this day, on the understanding that in 10 or so minutes time, when other formal business has been dealt with, we will return to questions without notice. Following this procedure will mean that we will not have to move a special motion concerning the Sessional Order that deals with business after 10 p.m. I have discussed the matter with the Leader of the Opposition and, although I have not had the chance of discussing it with Mr Baxter, I am sure he will be in agreement.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Suspension of Standing Orders The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts)-By leave, I move: That so much of the Standing Orders as require answers to questions on notice to be delivered verbally in the House be suspended for the sitting of the Council this day. It is traditional that on the first day of a sessional period a great many answers to questions on notice are available. The motion was agreed to.

"HANSARD"RECORD The Hon. B. T. PULLEN (Minister for Housing and Construction)-By leave, I move: . That the second-reading speech of the Minister on the Racing (TAB Surplus) Bill delivered on 16 November 1989 and appearing at pages 1393 to 1395 of the weekly edition be expunged from the Hansard record, and that the correct speech taking into account amendments made to the Bill prior to its transmission to the Council, now in the hands ofMr President, be incorporated in the bound edition of Hansard in its place. The purpose of this motion is to correct an error which occurred in relation to the second-reading notes for the Racing (TAB Surplus) Bill when this House considered that matter on 16 November 1989. As is normal practice, notes had been prepared in advance for this Bill. However, the Bill was extensively amended in another place and revised second-reading notes were therefore prepared having regard to those amendments. Regrettably there was a mix-up with the two sets of notes and unfortunately the wrong set of notes was distributed in this Chamber. I used these notes when delivering the second-reading speech, and the wrong notes have therefore been incorporated in 106 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 HHansard" Record

Ha nsard. The notes as presented do not accurately reflect the Racing (TAB Surplus) Bill that was presented to and passed by this House. Mr President, I apologise to you and to all honourable members of this House that this mistake occurred, and I move to correct the situation. The Hon. W. R. BAXTER (North Eastern Province)-I do not wish to oppose the motion but I do not want to let it pass without placing on the record that, to my recollection, this is at least the third occasion in the past twelve months that an incident such as this has occurred. This one has gone slightly further in that the wrong speech has actually been printed in H ansard. I am not entirely certain that the Minister is at fault. It may well be the system, and it may be the responsibility of the Government Whip. Whatever the mechanism that is in place, it is clearly not operating as efficiently as it might, and I make the earnest plea that this be the last example that we have of this sort of confusion. The motion was agreed to. Editor's Note: For the information of readers of weekly editions ofHHansard" who do not have access to bound volumes, the correct speech referred to in the motion is as follows: The purpose of the Bill is to implement a revised arrangement in respect of the Totalizator Agency Board-TAB-surplus. A profit-sharing arrangement was foreshadowed in the Budget delivered by the Treasurer on behalf of the government on 9 August 1989. This Bill incorporates revisions agreed after consultation with the industry. The Bill provides that, in respect of the TAB surplus from operations in the year ended 31 July 1989, an amount of $86·21 million, $75·2 million shall be paid to the industry participating clubs, and $11·01 million shall be paid to the Treasurer for payment into the Consolidated Fund. The Bill also provides for a reduction from 0·5 per cent to 0·3 per cent in the proportion of TAB turnover to be paid to the TAB Development Reserve, the 0·2 per cent so freed also being paid to the Consolidated Fund. This is one ofa limited range of revenue-raising initiatives to supplement the stringent expenditure restraint of the Budget in ways which will have a minimal effect on households. In accordance with an .undertaking given in the Budget speech, the government has had extensive consultation with the racing industry on ways of achieving its Budget target while allowing the industry to adjust to the new arrangement and avoid the need to reduce advertised stakes. The Bill reflects the agreement that was negotiated between the industry and the government, rather than the proposal to distribute that residual part of the TAB surplus in excess of 3·525 per cent of turnover in the proportion 80-20 in the government's favour, as originally proposed in the Budget speech. The surplus is what remains after paying dividends to punters, the cost of the TAB, and duty to the government. Government duty was $123 million in 1988-89 of which about $15 million went to the racing industry trust funds. The revised proposal allows the industry a distribution of surplus on 1988-89 operations of$75·2 million, $2·2 million more than the distribution on 1987-88 operations. In addition, a one-offadjusting payment to the industry from the section 129 racing industry trust funds of$4·8 million is proposed. The package will deliver $80 million to the industry in 1989-90 compared to the $66 million implied by the Budget proposal. The $80 million represents an increase of 6 per cent over last year's total distribution and a shortfall of only $3 million or 3·6 per cent from the industry'S pre-Budget expectations. The government's Budget estimate requirements can still be achieved under the revised proposal by bringing forward into 1989-90 payment of "fractions" and "commission" to the extent of $6·19 million which otherwise would be payable in 1990-91. This arrangement has been agreed to by the industry. The estimated government revenue of$21·2 million from this arrangement in 1989-90 comprises: (a) $11·01 million from residual surplus on 1988-89 operations; (b) $4 million which otherwise would have been paid into the TAB Development Reserve in 1989-90; and Petitions 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 107

(c) $6·19 million by way of an advance of fractions and connmissions otherwise payable in July 1990. I emphasise that the Bill provides that from this arrangement, the additional amounts of$II·01 million and $4 million flowing to the government will be transferred automatically from the Consolidated Fund to the Hospitals and Charities Fund. The Bill does not disturb the existing legislative requirements for a minimum of 3·525 per cent ofturnover to be distributed to the industry or the provision for this amount to be underwritten in the event ofa shortfall of the surplus. It should be noted that from 1981-82 to 1987-88 the total return from the TAB to the racing industry­ payments to industry trust funds plus surplus-increased at an average annual rate of more than 18 per cent. Over the same period the return to the government from duty on turnover increased at an average annual rate of about 12 per cent. The relatively modest transfers provided by the Bill can be managed in such a way as not to cause damage to an industry, which is estimated to generate about 1·5 per cent of gross domestic product in Victoria. I direct to the attention of honourable members that, by agreement with the industry, the measures in the Bill will apply for one year only and the measures are subject to a specific sunset date of31 July 1990. Further to this arrangement, the industry has agreed to participate in a working group to review the sources of finance available to the racing industry and to government from racing. The Bill should be seen as reflecting a balanced judgment about overall priorities in the context of significant and ongoing changes in the budgetary circumstances of the State. These in turn reflect the structural changes the Australian economy is undergoing, and which are adversely impacting on both Commonwealth and State governments. I commend the Bill to the House.

PETITIONS Geelong Hospital The Hon. R. A. MACKENZIE (Geelong Province) presented a petition from certain citizens of Victoria praying that the government reconsider its decision which will result in the closure of 47 beds and assist the Geelong Hospital to overcome its financial deficit. He stated that the petition was respectfully worded, in order, and bore 7694 signatures. It was ordered that the petition be laid on the table.

Child health nurse service, Central Gippsland The Hon. P. R. HALL (Gippsland Province) presented a petition from certain citizens of Victoria praying that the government immediately reverse its decision to terminate the visiting child health nurse service in Central Gippsland. He stated that the petition was respectfully worded, in order, and bore 678 signatures. It was ordered that the petition be laid on the table.

NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts)-By leave, I move: That the Honourable D. E. Henshaw be a member ofthe Natural Resources and Environment Committee. The motion was agreed to. 108 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Custodian's Reports-BLF

CUSTODIAN'S REPORTS-BLF The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts)-By leave, I move: That there be laid before this House a copy of Report No. 9 dated 1989 and Report No. 10 dated 28 February 1990 given to Mr President, pursuant to section 7A of the BLF (De-recognition) Act 1985, by the Custodian appointed under section 7 (1) of that Act. The motion was agreed to. The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts) presented the reports in compliance with the foregoing order. It was ordered that the reports be laid on the table. On the motion of the Hon. HADDON STOREY (East Yarra Province), it was ordered that the reports be taken into consideration on the next day of meeting.

COMMAND PAPER The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts) presented, by command of His Excellency the Governor, the report on the behaviour of the Office of Corrections. It was ordered that the report be laid on the table. On the motion of the Hon. HAD DON STOREY (East Yarra Province), it was ordered that the report be taken into consideration on the next day of meeting.

ACCIDENT COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ACCIDENT COMPENSATION TRIBUNAL, VICTORIAN ACCIDENT REHABILITATION COUNCIL The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources)-By leave, I move: That there be laid before this House a copy of the reports and financial statements of the- (a) Accident Compensation Commission for the quarter ending 31 December 1989 given to Mr President, pursuant to section 37C of the Accident Compensation Act 1985. (b) Accident Compensation Tribunal for the quarter ending 31 December 1989 given to Mr President, pursuant to section 78B of the Accident Compensation Act 1985; and (c) Victorian Accident Rehabilitation Council for the quarter ending 31 December 1989 given to Mr President, pursuant to section 176B of the Accident Compensation Act 1985. The motion was agreed to. The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources) presented the reports in compliance with the foregoing order. It was ordered that they be laid on the table. On the motion of the Hon. HADDON STOREY (East Yarra Province), it was ordered that the reports be taken into consideration on the next day of meeting.

LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEE Constitution Act 1975 The Hon. D. M. EVANS (North Eastern Province) presented a report from the Legal and Constitutional Committee on the Constitution Act 1975 together with Papers 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 109 appendices, extracts from the proceedings of the committee, minority reports and minutes of evidence. The Hon. D. M. EV ANS (North Eastern Province)-I move: That they be laid on the table and that the report, appendices, extracts and minority reports be printed. The report follows a charge to the Legal and Constitutional Committee to examine the issue of the requirement under the Constitution Act for absolute majorities where the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court may be seen to be varied or reduced. The committee examined the issue carefully and, although its report recommends that the existing fetter on amendments to the Supreme Court Act and therefore on the reduction in jurisdiction of the Supreme Court remains as an important element of justice and of the .,eparation of powers, there are still nevertheless the difficult practical problems that Parliament has faced from time to time which may well be faced by the judiciary should Parliament not correctly pass a Bill through the House with the required absolute majority. The motion was agreed to. On the motion of the Hon. HAD DON STOREY (East Yarra Province), it was ordered that the report be taken into consideration on the next day of meeting.

PAPERS The following papers, pursuant to the directions of several Acts of Parliament, were laid on the table by the Clerk: Albury-Wodonga (Victoria) Corporation-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Alexandra District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Alfred Group of Hospitals-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Altona District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Anne Caudle Centre-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Ararat and District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Arts Centre Trust-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Bacchus Marsh and District War Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. BaHarat Base Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Beeac and District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Birregurra and District Community Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Bright District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Bundoora Extended Care Centre-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Burwood and District Community Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Camperdown District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Casterton Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Central Gippsland Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Cobram District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Cohuna District Hospital Incorporated-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Colac District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Coleraine and District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Corryong District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. 110 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Papers

Daylesford District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Deakin University-Report and financial statements of the Council, together with Statutes approved by the Governor in Council for the year 1987 (seven papers). Dunmunkle Health Services-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. East Gippsland Centre-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Eastern Suburbs Geriatric Centre-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Echuca District Hospital Incorporated-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Edenhope and District Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Education Act 1958-Teachers Registration Board Regulations 1989. Educational Administration Institute-Report and statement of accounts for the year 1988-89. Eildon and District Community Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Elmore District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Ethnic Affairs Commission-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Gippsland Base Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Goulburn Valley Base Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Grain Elevators Board-Report and financial statements for the year ended 30 September 1989. Greyhound Racing Control Board-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Hampton Rehabilitation Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Harness Racing Board-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Healesville and District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Heathcote District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Heywood and District Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Kerang and District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Kilmore and District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Kingston Centre-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Koroit and District Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Korumburra District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Kyabram and District Memorial Community Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. La Trobe University-Report and financial statements of the Council, together with Statutes approved by the Governor in Council for the year 1988 (25 papers). Little Company ofMary Hospital Inc.-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Loddon-Campaspe Regional Planning Authority-Report and financial statements for the year ended 30 September 1989. Lyndoch Home and Hospital for the Aged-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Macarthur and District Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Manangatang and District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Mansfield District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Maroondah Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Maryborough and District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works Employees' Superannuation Fund-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Mildura Base Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Monash Medical Centre-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Papers 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 111

Mordialloc-Cheltenham Community Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Mortlake District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Mount Eliza Centre-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Mount Royal Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Myrtleford District War Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Nathalia and District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. National Companies and Securities Commission-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. National Gallery of Victoria Council-Report for the year 1988-89. National Parks-Report to the Director for the year 1988-89. Numurkah and District War Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Omeo District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Orbost and District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Ouyen and District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Ovens and Murray Hospital for the Aged-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Ovens District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Parliamentary Committees Act 1968-Minister's response to recommendations in Social Development Committee's report upon the Role and Welfare of Companion Animals in Society. Penshurst and District Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Planning and Environment Act 1987-Notices of Approval ofthe following amendments to planning schemes: Alexandra Planning Scheme-Amendment L9. Altona Planning Scheme-Amendment L5. Arapiles Planning Scheme-Amendment L3 Part 1. Ararat (City) Planning Scheme-Amendment L9. Ararat (Shire) Planning Scheme-Amendment Ll. Avon Planning Scheme-Amendment L3. Bacchus Marsh Planning Scheme-Amendment Lli Part I A. Ballaarat (City) Planning Scheme-Amendment L8. Ballan Planning Scheme-Amendment L4. Ballarat (Shire) Planning Scheme-Amendment L3. Bass Planning Scheme-Amendment L 13. Berwick Planning Scheme-Amendments L 10 and L 11. Box Hill Planning Scheme-Amendments L3 Part 2 and RL48 Part 5. Broadmeadows Planning Scheme-Amendments L3, L14 and RL81 Part 2. Brunswick Planning Scheme-Amendments R84 and RL 100. Bulla Planning Scheme-Amendments L4, L6 to L8, R85 and RL48 Part 6. Buln Buln Planning Scheme-Amendment L 1. Bungaree Planning Scheme-Amendment L5. Camberwell Planning Scheme-Amendments L6, R84 and RL58. Castlemaine Planning Scheme-Amendment L3. Caul field Planning Scheme-Amendment R84. Chelsea Planning Scheme-Amendment RL38. Cobra m Planning Scheme-Amendments L5 to L7. 112 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Papers

Coburg Planning Scheme-Amendment RL81 Part 2. Collingwood Planning Scheme-Amendment R84. Cranbourne Planning Scheme-Amendments L14, L21 and RL69 Part 2. Dandenong Planning Scheme-Amendments L4 and RL 120. Doncaster and Templestowe Planning Scheme-Amendments L6, R84 and RL25. Essendon Planning Scheme-Amendments L2, L5, L6, L9, R84 and RL81 Part 2. Fitzroy Planning Scheme-Amendments LI and R84. Flinders Planning Scheme-Amendments L9, L19, L20, L22, L29, L31 and L32. Footscray Planning Scheme-Amendments L 7 and R84. Frankston Planning Scheme-Amendments L5 and L7. Geelong Regional Planning Scheme-Amendments R8, R22 Part 2, R26 Part lA, R26 Part 2, R42 and R46. Gisborne Planning Scheme-Amendment L4. Hampden Planning Scheme-Amendment L2, Part I. Hastings Planning Scheme-Amendments L6, L20 and L32. Hawthorn Planning Scheme-Amendments L2, L4 and R84. Healesville Planning Scheme-Amendments L 7, L24 and L28. Horsham Planning Scheme-Amendment L 13. Huntly Planning Scheme-Amendments L8, LII and L12. Keilor Planning Scheme-Amendments LII and L18. Kew Planning Scheme-Amendments L4, R84 and RL114. Kilmore Planning Scheme-Amendments L20, L21, L27 and L28. Knox Planning Scheme-Amendments L8, L 14 and L 16. Korumburra Planning Scheme-Amendments L8 and L23. Lillydale Planning Scheme-Amendments L23, L43 and L52. Mclvor Planning Scheme-Amendment LI Parts 1 and 2. Malvern Planning Scheme-Amendments R84 and RL69 Part 3. Marong Planning Scheme-Amendments L9 and LII. Maryborough Planning Scheme-Amendment L6. Melbourne Planning Scheme-Amendments L37, L40 to L42, R84 and RL27 Part 3. Melton Planning Scheme-Amendments L4 and L6. Metcalfe Planning Scheme-Amendment L5. Metropolitan Region Planning Schemes-Amendments R73, R83, R87, RL27 Part I and RL51 Part 3. Mildura (City) Planning Scheme-Amendments L8, L9 and L15. Mildura (Shire) Planning Scheme-Amendments L6, L 7, L9, L 11 and L 14. Moe Planning Scheme-Amendments L9, LII Part A and L12. Mornington Planning Scheme-Amendments L20, L22 and L23. Morwell Planning Scheme-Amendments L2, L9, LI8 and L23. Myrtleford Planning Scheme-Amendments LII to LI3 and L16. Narracan Planning Scheme-Amendment LI Part B. Newham and Woodend Planning Scheme-Amendments L5, LI7 Part 2 and L19. Newstead Planning Scheme-Amendment L3. Papers 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 113

Northcote Planning Scheme-Amendments L5 and R84. Nunawading Planning Scheme-Amendment R84. Pakenham Planning Scheme-Amendments L 11, L 14 and L20. Phillip Island Planning Scheme-Amendments LlO, Ul Part A and L13. Port Melbourne Planning Scheme-Amendment R84. Port of Melbourne Planning Scheme-Amendments R84 and RL27 Part 4. Prahran Planning Scheme-Amendments L9 and R84. Preston Planning Scheme-Amendments L3, L6, L9 and R84. Richmond Planning Scheme-Amendments L4 and R84. Ringwood Planning Scheme-Amendment L2. Rodney Planning Scheme-Amendments L 13, L21 and L22. Romsey Planning Scheme-Amendment LII. St Kilda Planning Scheme-Amendments R84 and RL4 7. Sandringham Planning Scheme-Amendment R84. Seymour Planning Scheme-Amendments LI7 and L18. Shepparton (City) Planning Scheme-Amendments LI5 and Ll9. Shepparton (Shire) Planning Scheme-Amendment L18. Sherbrooke Planning Scheme-Amendments Ll2 Part I A, Ll2 Part 2 and L23. South Gippsland Planning Scheme-Amendment Ll3. South Melbourne Planning Scheme-Amendments L9, LII, R84 and RL27 Part 2. Springvale Planning Scheme-Amendments R52, R57 and RL38. Stawell (Shire) Planning Scheme-Amendment L8. Stawell (Town) Planning Scheme-Amendments L9 and LlO Part l. Sunshine Planning Scheme-Amendments L3, L6 Part I, Ll2, LI4 and RLll Part 8. Swan Hill (City) Planning Scheme-Amendment L4. Tambo Planning Scheme-Amendments Ll, L27, L29 and L34. Traralgon (City) Planning Scheme-Amendments L23, L26 and L30. Traralgon (Shire) Planning Scheme-Amendments L23 and L29. Upper Yarra Planning Scheme-Amendments L4 and L 12. Victoria-State Section Planning Schemes-Amendments S4 and S6. Wangaratta Planning Scheme-Amendment Llt. Wangaratta (City) Planning Scheme-Amendment Ll2. Warracknabeal Planning Scheme-Amendment L4. Warragul Planning Scheme-Amendments L3, L9 and Ll4. Warrnambool (City) Planning Scheme-Amendments Ll 0, Ll3 and L14. Waverley Planning Scheme-Amendments L3, RL51 Part 2 and RL86. Whittlesea Planning Scheme-Amendments Ll6, Ll8, R32, RL35 Part 3, RL102 and RL115. Williamstown Planning Scheme-Amendment R84. Wodonga Development Areas Planning Scheme-Amendment L4. Yarrawonga Planning Scheme-Amendment L4. Yea Planning Scheme-Amendment Ll. Police Service Board­ Determinations Nos 519 to 522. 114 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Paptrs I

Determination No. 17 For Police Recruits. Determinations Nos 17 to 19 for Protective Services Officers. Determination No. 13 for the Retired Police Reserve. Port Fairy Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Portland and District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Post-Secondary Education Commission-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Preston and Northcote Community Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986-Code of Practice relating to the Housing of Caged Birds. Queen Elizabeth Centre-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Queen Elizabeth Geriatric Centre-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Relief Committee-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Ripon Peace Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Robinvale and District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Rochester and District War Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Royal Women's Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Sandringham and District Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Seymour District Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Shelley Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Skipton and District Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Southern Peninsula Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. State Electricity Commisison Superannuation Fund-Financial statements for the year 1988-89. State Employees Retirement Benefits Board-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. State Library Council-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89 (incorporating the report and financial statements of the Library Council for the year 1988-89. Statutory Rules under the following Acts of Parliament: Accident Compensation Act 1985-No. 407/1989. Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1984-Subdivision Act 1988-No. 263/1989. Alpine Resorts Act 1983-No. 385/1989. Architects Act 1958-No. 408/1989. Associations Incorporation Act 1981-No. 359/1989. Boilers and Pressure Vessels Act I 970-Nos 285 and 286/1989. Building Control Act 1981-No. 278/1989; and Nos 27, 28 and 32/1990. Business Franchise (Tobacco) Act 1974-Business Franchise (Petroleum Products) Act 1979-Nos 297/1989 and 14/1990. Business Names Act 1962-No. 360/1989. Chattel Securities Act 1987-No. 5/1990. Chiropodists Act 1968-No. 345/1989. Chiropractors and Osteopaths Act 1978-Nos 332 and 341/1989. Construction Industry Long Service Leave Act 1983-No. 266/1989. Co-operation Act 1981-No. 362/1989. Co-operative Housing Societies Act 1958-No. 364/1989. Corrections Act 1986-SR No. 350/1989. Country Fire Authority Act 1958-Nos 17 and 19/1990. Papers 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 115

County Court Act 1958- No. 272/1989, together with a copy of Group Ill, Parts 4.1 to 4.5 and Tables 2 and 5 of Appendix E of the Public Service Determinations 1985 which, by section 32 of the Interpretation ofLegislation Act 1984, are also required to be laid upon the Table: Nos 354 and 355/1989; No. 380/1989, together with a copy of Group Ill, Parts 4.1 to 4_5 and Tables 2 and 5 of Appendix E of the Public Service Determinations 1985 which, by section 32 of the Interpretation ofLegislation Act 1984, are also required to be laid upon the Table; Credit (Administration) Act 1984-No. 373/1989. Crimes Act 1958-No. 395/1989. Dangerous Goods Act 1985- Nos 287 to 289/1989; No. 323/1989, together with copies of the following documents which, by section 32 of the Interpretation ofLegislation Act 1984, are also required to be laid upon the Table: AS 1894-1976-Code of Practice for the Safe Handling of Cryogenic Auids (as amended). AS 2022-1983-Anhydrous Ammonia Code (as amended). AS 2927-1987-The Storage and Handling of Liquefied Chlorine Gas (as amended). AS 1940-1988-The Storage and Handling of Hammable and Combustible Liquids (as amended). AS 2714-1984-The Storage and Handling of Hazardous Chemical Materials-Class 5.2 Substances-Organic Peroxides. National Health and Medical Research Council-Approved Occupational Health Guide­ Threshold Limit Values (1983-84). IP 36/84-Standard Method of Test for Hash and Fire points by Cleveland Open Cup. AS 1530.4-1985-Methods for Fire Tests on Building Materials, Components and Structures­ Part 4-Fire Resistance Tests of Elements of Building Construction. AS 2106-1980-Methods of Test for the Determination ofthe Aashpoint of Aamm able Liquids (Closed Cup). AS 1563-1974-General Purpose Freight Containers (International Sizes). Classification of Hazardous Areas- AS 2430.1-1987-Part I-Explosive Gas Atmospheres. AS 2430.2-1986-Part 2-Combustible Dusts. AS 2430.3-1987-Part 3-Specific Occupancies. AS 1763-1 985-lndustrial Trucks-Glossary of Terms. AS 1580-1975-Methods of Test for Paints, Varnishes, Lacquers and Related Materials (Metric U nits)-Methods 30 1.1 Non-Volatile Content. National Health and Medical Research Council-Standard for the Uniform Scheduling of Drugs and Poisons No. 4. AS 1719-1981-Recommended Common Names for Pesticides. AS 1319-1983-Safety Signs for the Occupational Environment (as amended). AS 2118-1982-SAA Code for Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems (as amended). AS 1851.3-1985-Maintenance of Fire Protection Equipment-Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems. AS 1221-1989-Fire Hose Reels. AS 2441-1 988-lnstallation of Fire Hose Reels. AS 1851.2-1988-Maintenance of Fire Protection Equipment-Part 2-Fire Hose Reels. AS 1851.4-1988-Maintenance of Fire Protection Equipment-Part 4-Fire Hydrant Installations. 116 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Papers

AS 2419.1-1988-Fire Hydrant Installations-Part I-System Design, Installation and Commissioning (as amended). AS 1851.1-1989-Maintenance of Fire Protection Equipment-Part I-Portable Fire Extinguishers. AS 1841-1985-Portable Fire Extinguishers-Water (Gas Container) Type. AS 1842-1985-Portable Fire Extinguishers-Water (Stored Pressure) Type. AS 1844-1985-Portable Fire Extinguishers-Foam (Gas Container) Type. AS 1845-1985-Portable Fire Extinguishers-Foam (Stored Pressure) Type. AS 1846-1985-Portable Fire Extinguishers-Powder Type (as amended). AS 1847-1985-Portable Fire Extinguishers-Carbon Dioxide Type. AS 1848-1985-Portabl~ Fire Extinguishers-Halon Type (as amended). AS 1850-1981-Portable Fire Extinguishers-Classification, Rating and Fire Testing (as amended). AS 2243, Part 1-1982-Safety in Laboratories-Part I-General. AS 2243, Part 2-1982-Safety in Laboratories-Part 2-Chemical. AS 2243, Part 6-1 980--Code of Practice for Safety in Laboratories-Part 6-Mechanical Aspects. AS 2243, Part 7-1 980-Code of Practice for Safety in Laboratories-Part 7-Electrical Aspects. AS 2243.8-1 986-Safety in Laboratories-Part 8-Fume Cupboards. AS 2982-1 987-Laboratory Construction. AS 3000-1986-SAA Wiring Rules (as amended). AS 1020-1984-The Control of Undesirable Static Electricity. AS 1680-1976-Code of Practice for Interior Lighting and the Visual Environment. AS 1915-1983-Electrical Equipment for Explosive Gas Atmospheres-Battery Operated Vehicles. AS 2359.1-1985-SAA Industrial Truck Code-Part I-Design and Manufacture. Transport Code-Australian code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road and Rail (Commonwealth Government Gazette No. P 15, 1987). AS 121 0-1989-SAA U nfired Pressure Vessels Code. API 620-1986-Recommended Rules for Design and Construction of Large, Welded, Low­ Pressure Storage Tanks (seventh edition). API 650-1 988-Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage (eighth edition). SAA Gas Cylinders Code- AS 2030.1-1989-Part I-Cylinders for Compressed Gases other than Acetylene. AS 2030.2-1 985-Part 2-Cylinders for Dissolved Acetylene. AS 2030.3-1 982-Part 3-Non-refillable Cylinders for Compressed Gases. AS 2030.4-1 985-Part 4-Welded Cylinders-Insulated. Supplement No. 1-1 986-Supplement No. 1 to AS 2030-Foreign Gas Cylinder Specifications. AS 1942-1987-Refrigerant Gas Cylinder Identification. AS 1943-1 987-Industrial Gas Cylinder Identification. AS 1944-1 987-Medical Gas Cylinder Identification. AS 1596-1989-LP Gas-Storage and Handling. AG 504-1 987-Code of Practice for NGV Refuelling Stations. AS 2906-1 986-Fuel Containers-Portable-Plastics and Metal (as amended). AS 2236-1985-Electrical Equipment for Explosive Atmospheres-Dust-Excluding Ignition­ Proof(DIP) Enclosure. Papers 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 117

AS 1692-1983-Tanks for Flammable and Corn bustible Liquids. AS 2634-1 983-Chemical Plant Equip~nt made from Glass-Fibre Reinforced Plastics (GRP) based on Thermosetting Resins. AS CBI8, Part 1-1967-SAA Pressure Piping Code-Part I-Ferrous Piping. AS 2117-1983-Hose and Hose Assemblies for Petroleum and Petroleum Products-Suction and Discharge. Institute of Petroleum-IP Standards for Petroleum and its Products-Part I-Methods for Analysis and Testing-Volume I-Methods IPI to 261. AS 2700-1985-Colour Standards for General Purposes. Methods for Fire Tests on Building Materials, Components and Structures­ AS 1530.1-1984-Part I-Combustibility Test for Materials. AS 1530.2-1973-Part 2-Test for Flammability of Materials. AS 1530.3-1989-Part 3-Simultaneous determination ofignitability, flame propagation, heat release and smoke release. Dental Technicians Act 1972-Nos 308, 309, 339 and 344/1989. Dentists Act 1972-Nos 307 and 337/1989. Dietitians Act 1981-No. 329/1989. Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981-Nos 275,310 and 333/1989; and 23/1990. Environment Protection Act 1970-No. 276/1989. Estate Agents Act 1980-Nos 284,305 and 306/1989. Evidence Act 1958-Nos 352 and 353/1989. Extractive Industries Act 1966-No. 318/1989. Fisheries Act 1968-Nos 372/1989; and 25/1990. Food Act 1984- No. 340/1989; No. 26/1990, together with a copy of Amendments 3, 4 and 5 to the National Health and Medical Research Council Food Standards Code, Commonwealth Gazette Nos P28, P33 and P38/1989 which, by section 32 of the Interpretation oJ Legis/ation Act 1984, are also required to be laid upon the Table. Forests Act 1958-Nos 270 and 371/1989. Friendly Societies Act 1986-No. 363/1989. Groundwater Act 1969-No. 298/1989. Guardianship and Administration Board Act 1986-No. 361/1989. Health Act 1958-Nos 280, 281, 312 to 316, 330, 336 and 338/1989. Health Services Act 1988-Nos 317,328 and 347/1989. Intellectually Disabled Persons' Services Act 1986-No. 365/1989; and 3/1990. Juries Act 1967-No. 356/1989. Land Act 1958-Nos 366 and 387/1989. Land Tax Act 1958-No. 379/1989. Legal Profession Practice Act 1958-No. 410/1989. Lifts and Cranes Act 1967-Nos 290 to 292/1989. Liquor Control Act 1987-Nos 374 and 377/1989. Lotteries Gaming and Betting Act 1966-Nos 388, 389 and 402/1989. Magistrates' Courts Act 1971-Nos 301 and 351/1989. 118 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Papers

Marine Act 1988-No. 283/1989, together with copies of the following documents which, by section 32 of the Interpretation ofLegislation Act 1984, are also required to be laid upon the Table: Notices under section 15 (2) of the Marine Act 1988- No. I-Notice setting out certain rules to be observed by operators of vessels and other users of specified State Waters (Gazette No. G49 21 December 1988). No. 2-Amendment to Notice No. 1 (Gazette No. G9, 1 March 1989). No. 3-Amendments to Notice No. 1 (Gazette, No. G42, 25 October 1989). AS 2260-1988-Buoyancy Garments. AS Z27-1968-Life Jackets. AS 1499-1977-Buoyancy Vests (as amended). AS 1499-1979-Buoyancy Vests. AS 1499-1983-Buoyancy Vests. Commonwealth Navigation Act 1912. Commonwealth Marine Orders No. 19/1983, Part 25-Equipment-Life Saving. AS 1512-1979-Life Jackets (as amended). International Code of Signals 1969-Extracts of Alphabetical flags and Single-letter signals. Marine Information Manual-Reproduction of extracts from International Code of Signals. AS 1512-1981-LifeJackets. AS 1512-1984-Life Jackets. AS 1512-1988-Personal Hotation Devices-Type I. AS 1499-1988-Personal Hotation Devices-Type 2. AS 2260-1988-Personal Hotation Devices-Type 3. Uniform Shipping Laws Code-Australian Transport Advisory Council-Section 16: Collision Regulations. Martial Arts Control Act 1986-No. 406/1989. Medical Practitioners Act 1970-Nos 342 and 346/1989. Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works Act 1958-Nos 304/1989; and No. 2/1990. Metropolitan Fire Brigades Act 1958-No. 18/1990. Metropolitan Fire Brigades Superannuation Act 1976-No. 383/1989. Mines Act 1958-No. 319/ 1989. Mining Development Act 1958-No. 320/1989. Motor Car Traders Act 1986-No. 279/1989. National Parks Act 1975-Nos 367 and 368/1989. Nurses Act 1958-Nos 411,412 and 413/1989. Occupational Health and Safety Act 1985-No. 349/1989, together with copies of the following documents which by section 32 of the Interpretation ofLegislation Act 1984, are also required to be laid upon the Table: AS 1270-1988-Acoustics-Hearing Protectors. AS 1337 -1984-Eye Protectors for Industrial Applications. AS 1873-1978-Explosive-Powered Hand-held Fastening Tools, Fasteners and Explosive Charges. Optometrists Registration Act 1958-Nos 269, 311 and 343/1989. Parliamentary Salaries and Superannuation Act 1968-No. 33/1990. Petroleum Act 1958-No. 321/1989. Pharmacists Act 1974-Nos 331 and 335/1989. Papers 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 119

Physiotherapists Act 1978-Nos 282 and 334/1989. Pipelines Act 1967-No. 322/1989. Police Regulation Act 1958-No. 324/1989; and No. 29/1990. Post-Secondary Education Act 1978-Nos 326 and 327/1989. Private Agents Act 1966-No. 277/1989. Professional Boxing Control Act 1985-Nos 403 and 405/1989. Public Service Act 1974-Nos 265 and 386/1989; Nos 20 and 21/1990; PSD Nos 37 to 50/1989; and Nos 1 and 2/1 990. Racing Act 1958-Nos 296, 390 to 396 and 401/1989. Reference Areas Act 1978-No. 370/1989. Registration of Births Deaths and Marriages Act 1959-No. 24/1990. Residential Tenancies Act 1980-No. 375/1989.

Road Safety Act 1986-Nos 267,271 and 325/1989; and Nos 6, 7~ 12 and 13/1990. Scaffolding Act 1971-Nos 293 to 295/1989. Small Claims Tribunals Act 1973-No. 376/1989. Sport and Recreation Act 1972-No. 404/1989. State Casual Employees Superannuation Act 1989-No. 382/1989. State Electricity Commission Act 1958- No. 274/1989 together with copies of the following documents which, section 32 of the Interpretation ofLegis/ation Act 1984, are also required to be laid upon the Table: AS 3198-1977 -Approval and Test Specification for XLPE Insulated Electric Cables for working voltages of 0·6/1 kV. International Standard IEC56-1987-High-Voltage alternating-current circuit-breakers. No. 414/1989, together with copies of the following documents which, by section 32 of the Interpretation ofLegis/ation Act 1984, are also required to be laid upon the Table: AS 1024-1971-Direct Recording Electrical Measuring Instruments and their Accessories. AS 1042-1973-Direct-Acting Indicating Electrical Measuring Instruments and their Accessories. AS 2040-1977 -Household Electric Clothes Washing Machi nes. AS 2442-1 981-Performance of Household Electrical Appliances-Rotary Clothes Dryers. AS 3185-1986-Approval and Test Specification-Electric Rotary Clothes Dryers for Household Use. State Superannuation Act 1988-Nos 299 and 381/1989. Subdivision Act 1988-No. 384/1989. Supreme Court Act 1986- Nos 273,300 and 302/1989; No. 303/1989, together with a copy of the Commonwealth Admiralty Rules (SR No. 269/1988) which, by section 32 of the Interpretation of Legis/ation Act 1984, are also required to be laid upon the Table: Nos 357 and 358/1989; and No. 1/1990. Teaching Service Act 1981-No. 409/1989. Tobacco Act 1987-No. 348/1989. Transport Act 1983-Nos 8 to 11/1990. Transport Accident Act 1986-No. 378/1989. Travel Agents Act 1986-No. 4/1990. 120 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Papers

Very Fast Train (Route Investigation) Act 1989-No. 22/1990. Water Act 1958-No. 34/1990. Wildlife Act 1975-Nos 369/1989; and No. 16/1990. Swan Hill District Hospital-Report and financial statements for year 1988-89. Tawonga District General Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Tel,ng and District (Norah Cosgrove) Community Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. The Constitution Act Amendment Act 1958-Statement of functions conferred upon the Electoral Commissioner, December 1989. Totalizator Agency Board-Supplementary financial statements for the year 1988-89. Transport Superannuation Board-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Upper Yarra Valley and Dandenong Ranges Authority-Report and financial statements for the year ended 30 September 1989. Wangaratta District Base Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Waranga Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Werribee District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. West Gippsland Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Westernport Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. William Angliss Knox and Sherbrooke Community Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Williamstown Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Wimmera Base Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Wonthaggi and District Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Woorayl District Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Yea and District Memorial Hospital-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. * * * * * * Proclamations of His Excellency the Governor in Council fixing operative dates in respect of the following Acts: Accident Compensation (General Amendment) Act 1989-Sections 5 to 8, 10, 20, 27 (a) and 30 to 35- 5 March 1990; section 36-1 July 1990 (Gazette No. G8, 21 February 1990). Adoption (Amendment) Act 1989-Whole Act (except section 11 (2»-5 December 1989 (Gazette No. G48, 6 December 1989). Agriculture Acts (General Amendment) Act 1989-Sections 1 to 6, 8 to 10, 12 to 16, 18 to 23, 25 and 26-20 December 1989 (Gazette No. G50, 20 December 1989). Crimes (Fingerprinting) Act 1988-Sections 1 to 5, 7 (except paragraph (b», 8 and 9-1 January 1990 (Gazette No. G50, 20 December 1989). Crimes Legislation (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 1989-Sections 40, 43 to 48 and 54-20 December 1989; sections 11 to 13-1 January 1990 (Gazette No. G50, 20 December 1989). Fire Authorities Act 1989-Section 26 (10)-5 December 1989; sections 17 (a), 21, 26 (11) to (13), 32 and 44 (2), (7), and (8)-1 January 1990 (Gazette No. S71, 5 December 1989). Fire Authorities (Contributions) Act 1989-Sections 1 to 6, 7 (b) to (h) and 8-12 December 1989 (Gazette ~o. S72, 12 December 1989) . .Fisheries (Amendment) Act 1989-Whole Act (except sections 7 and 9)-20 December 1989 (Gazette No. G50, 20 December 1989). Land (Miscellaneous Matters) Act 1989-Part 7-24 January 1990 (Gazette No. G4, 24 January 1990). Standing Orders Committee 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 121

National Parks (Alpine National Park) Act 1989-Whole Act (except sections 11 (1) to (5»-2 December 1989 (Gazette No. G47, 29 November 1989). Ombudsman (Amendment) Act 1989-12 December 1989 (Gazette No. S72, 12 December 1989). Pathology Services Accreditation Act 1984-Section 22-10 December 1989 (Gazette No. G48, 6 December 1989). Prince Henry's Institute of Medical Research Act 1988-1 January 1990 (Gazette No. G48, 6 December 1989). Road Safety (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 1989-Sections 4, 5, 8 (2), 14, 15, 17 and 18-11 November 1989 (Gazette No. S61, 9 November 1989). Subdivision (Further Amendment) Act 1989-12 December 1989 (Gazette No. G48, 6 December 1989). Very Fast Train (Route Investigation) Act 1989-7 February 1990 (Gazette No. G6, 7 February 1990). On the motion of the Hon. HAD DON STOREY (East Yarra Province), it was ordered that the reports be taken into consideration on the next day of meeting.

STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE Answers to questions on notice The Hon. W. A. LANDERYOU (Doutta Galla Province), on behalf of the President, presented a report from the Standing Orders Committee upon answers to questions on notice. The Hon. W. A. LANDERYOU (Doutta Galla Province)-I move: That the report do lie on the table and be printed. In so doing, I refer to the attention of honourable members the most salient points of the report. The Legislative Council decided by resolution in November last year to instruct the Standing Orders Committee to apply its mind to what could be seen as a logjam on the time taken to respond to questions on notice. The committee considered the issues involved and it has unanimously come to the view that a procedure not dissimilar to that adopted by and used in the Australian Senate should be the one that is adopted by the Council on a temporary basis to ascertain whether it will work practically to the benefit of the Council and its members. I refer honourable members to appendices A and B attached to the report, which consist of an analysis of the answers provided to questions on notice asked during a specified period and a survey of the various Parliaments of this country and the methods and practices adopted by them. The committee was mindful of the responsibilities that fall on both the questioned, and the questioner and, although it was tempted from one viewpoint to go the route proposed with respect to limitations on questions, it decided on balance that it was in the best interests of all that we should be reminded of our obligations with respect to asking questions as well as obligations and responsibilities with respect to answers. The committee unanimously recommends its report to the Council. The motion was agreed to. On the motion of the Hon. W. A. LANDERYOU (Doutta Galla Province), it was ordered that the report be taken into consideration on the next day of meeting. 122 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Questions without Notice

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

STATE BANK VICTORIA The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL (East Yarra Province)-I ask the Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources whether during the past eighteen months either the Gas and Fuel Corporation or the State Electricity Commission has been directed or asked by the government to invest funds in the State Bank Victoria group or to have funds managed by the State Bank Victoria Group? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources)-To the best of my knowledge no direction has been given to the Gas and Fuel Corporation by the government during the past eighteen months-I have been the responsible Minister since February 1989-nor has the State Electricity Commission been instructed to invest in State Bank Victoria. The Hon. M. A. Birrell-Or to have funds managed by it? The Hon. D. R. WHITE-Or to have funds managed by State Bank Victoria. To the best of my knowledge I cannot recall a direction to that effect in respect of the SEC or the Gas and Fuel Corporation. The Hon. Haddon Storey-What about encouragement? The Hon. D. R. WHITE-Or encouragement. The Hon. R. M. HALLAM (Western Province)-Will the Minister Assisting the Treasurer now table the documents referred to in the Treasurer's statement of 23 February on Tricontinental Corporation Ltd and State Bank Victoria specifically including: firstly, the agreement he entered into with the State Bank to assume responsibility for the $795 million of bad debts incurred by Tricontinental; secondly, the letters that have been exchanged with the Reserve Bank of Australia on the future supervision of the State Bank; and, thirdly, the instruction that has been issued to the State Bank board outlining the required change in the lending policy? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-As I said during the debate that occurred earlier today when Mr Hallam posed those questions, I look forward to taking up those matters with the Treasurer and providing him with an answer in due course.

HIGHER EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES The Hon. B. W. MIER (Waverley Province)-The Minister responsible for Post­ Secondary Education will be aware of the record number of Victorian students now completing year 12 at secondary school. Will he advise the House what action the government is taking to provide higher education opportunities for these students? The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister responsible for Post-Secondary Education)-I am happy to respond to the question. Honourable members interjecting. The Hon. E. H. W ALKER-I understand why members of the Opposition are embarrassed. Their record in government was atrocious. Questions without Notice 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 123

The record school retention rates are one of the sigruificant achievements of this government. I understand that we are now well on track towards achieving our ~et of a 70 per cent retention rate from years 7 to 12. The ~oivernment has taken positIve action to ensure that there are sufficient higher educatIOn and training places for the record number of schoolleavers. Once again this year we will achieve a 50 per cent transition rate to higher education institutions. In other words, we have achieved the policy goal that we set ourselves a few years ago of a 50 per cent transition rate. We achieved it last year and we will achieve it again this year. This government is providing additional funds to institutions to provide more than 2000 additional full-time tertiary places. That is one of the major programs that has made it possible for us to achieve the 50 per cent target. As Minister it gives me great satisfaction to see such tangible evidence of our achievements in education. Not so long ago only a minority of students completed secondary school. A few short years ago we had very poor retention and transition rates. The success of our educatIonal policies will fundamentally strengthen the knowledge and skills base of our community. All individuals in our socIety will be enriched. In view of this I am saddened to see the Liberals and Nationals reverting to the policies of the 1950s. The introduction of tertiary fees would dramatically restrict access to higher education, and that is what they are promising to do if elected. Many courses would become the preserve of the rich, certainly not the preserve of the talented. The Australian community has responded to the greater educational opportunities provided by the Federal and State Labor governments. The statistics prove that our record is good. I am confident that the citizens of Australia, particularly those in this State, do not want the clock turned back to the dark days of the 1950s and Liberal governments.

GAS AND FUEL CORPORATIONCHAIRMAN The Hon. ROSEMARY VARTY (Nunawading Province)-In view of the pre­ eminent responsibility of Mr Neil Smlth as chairman of the board of Tricontinental Corporation Ltd for the losses suffered by that organisation, does the Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources intend to allow Mr Smith to continue as Chairman of the Gas and Fuel Corporation? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister for Industry, Technology. and Resources)­ There is no doubt that throughout the community Mr Smith's record with the Gas and Fuel Corporation has been held in high esteem. I look forward to discussing his future when his term as chairman expires.

STATE BANK VICTORIA The Hon. W. R. BAXTER (North Eastern Province)-I refer the Minister Assisting the Treasurer to the estimate of$100 million for the cost of servicing the $795 million of doubtful debts ofTricontinental Corporation Ltd now that Victorian taxpayers are responsible for underwriting this sum. Will the Minister explain to the House how this figure was arrived at? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasuter)-Although Mr Baxter has expressed some disquiet that I have already referred him to the Treasurer's statement, I refer him to it again. The Treasurer indicated that for the financial year 124 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Questions without Notice commencing 1 July 1990 he anticipates that the impact of the Tricontinental Corporation Ltd provision for doubtful debts on the State Budget is estimated to be about $50 million. It was also clear from the Treasurer's statement that it is the view of the State Bank that the provision for doubtful debts and the exposure of $795 million will not fall due in the financial year commencing 1 July 1990 but will fall due over a period. It is also true that in the Treasurer's statement he has indicated in financial years beyond 1 July 1990 the commitment will be in excess of $50 million, and he has made an estimate of approximately $100 million. The Hon. W. R. Baxter-I want to know how that has been calculated. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-IfMr Baxter is seeking details of that calculation from the Treasurer, as I advised Mr Hallam earlier, I look forward to discussing the matter with the Treasurer and providing Mr Baxter with a further response.

ENERGY CONSERVATION The Hon. C. J. KENNEDY (Waverley Province)-My question is directed to the Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources. Energy conservation is becoming an increasingly important area of concern within the community. One of the new pieces of energy technology that has attracted a lot of publicity recently is the energy efficient light globe. Will the Minister inform the House what steps the government is taking to encourage the greater use of these globes? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources)­ When the government introduced its greenhouse statement in May 1989 it made a commitment to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 20 per cent by 2005. It is also true that the State Electricity Commission produced a demand management study in November explaining what it believed the demand for electricity would be in the next decade and the types of power stations that would need to be constructed to meet that demand. The government has commenced the construction of the first two units of the Loy Yang B power station. The government has available to it a major critic of the efficiency with which we use our power, and Mr Amory Lovins has received some publicity over the past few days. He has had a great deal of success in both the United States of America and Europe in persuading utilities to change their objectives and methods of using electricity. Mr Lovins clearly has a great deal of of credibility among managers of utilities like the SEC. The commission accepted the fact that he should be engaged to undertake a critique of the organisation's demand management study because Mr Lovins believes much more efficient management of the present energy production can be achieved, which would result in a postponement of the need for subsequent brown coal-fired power station construction. The government, as does the SEC, looks forward to inviting Mr Lovins to make some comment. In that context, one of the major initiatives he proposes is a form of light globe that currently costs $30 per unit. The globes use significantly less energy in commercial, industrial and domestic usage. In response to a successful and effective campaign in California, where many of the globes have been distributed free of charge, the SEC proposed to seek tenders for 30 000 of such light globes to discover whether they can be manufactured locally at substantially less than the current $30-that is, whether it is possible to reduce the cost to around $10 to $15 as a result of a mass order. Questions without Notice 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 125

It is worth noting that the life of the light globes is about ten times that of existing domestic globes and that they use substantially less energy, being 10, 15 or 20 watt globes, but more efficient in their lighting power. Honourable members interjecting. In response to Mr Birrell's and Mr Knowles's points, it is clear that major construction is occurring on the first two units of Loy Yang B but it may well be that as a result of this initiative there will be a substantial deferment in the construction of the third and fourth units alone. It would be a significant step towards the realisation of the greenhouse target for a 20 per cent reduction. It would be a significant reduction also on the capital requirements of the SEC. If that particular initiative of Mr Lovins-and others he might propose-is adopted, it would reduce the capital works pressure on the SEC as a utility. Moreover, if we use our existing energy resources more efficiently it would have the effect of reducing our overseas borrowings for capital works of utilities. If the examination of the SEC mission statement and the capital works construction comes to fruition and there is less pressure on the need for capital in the SEC and lower cost to energy consumers, it could have a substantial enhancement effect on the quality of life of Victorians. The government, as does the SEC, looks forward with much enthusiasm to the work of Amory Lovins and his institute and to the work which will be conducted over the next two or three months. We look forward to examining seriously the proposals he makes in addition to the one to which I have referred. I thank Mr Kennedy for his initiative in asking the question.

FUNCTIONS OF TREASURER The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN (Western Province)-I refer to the Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources the Premier's statement of 23 February that some industry-related trade and technology functions will be stripped from the portfolio of the Treasurer and will be handed over to the Minister. What is the nature of those functions, and has the transfer of those responsibilities already taken place? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources)-As Mr Chamberlain is aware, it is the responsibility of the Premier to allocate functions from time to time. The Premier indicated on that date that a small activity in the Department of Management and Budget-I think related to technology precincts and some other high-tech issues-will be transferred to the Department of Industry, Technology and Resources. I am unaware whether as of this date that transfer has occurred. The Hon. K. M. Smith interjected. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-In response to Mr Smith's interjection, I am pleased to say that in handing down the report on WorkCare it is obvious that it is substantially improved financially. WorkCare certainly will not be an issue that Mr Smith will be able to campaign on in the next State election. In response to Mr Chamberlain's question, I am not aware whether the transfer has occurred but I look forward to undertaking that responsibility when the transfer does occur. 126 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Questions without Notice

STATE BANK VICTORIA The Hon. R. M. HALLAM (Western Province)-I refer to the Minister Assisting the Treasurer the letter of comfort given by the board of the State Bank to the board of Tricontinental Corporation Ltd in March 1989, which has directly exposed the people of this State to losses in excess of $1 000 million. Did the Minister know of the letter at the time it was given and did he agree with its provision? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-I was not aware of the letter when it was provided. Subsequently the Treasurer has indicated that that letter was provided. It is quite clear that the State Bank indicated an obligation to Tricontinental and, in turn, the government has indicated-as is well known-its commitment in the form provided by the State Bank Act, which is that it has a responsibility to guarantee the activities of the State Bank. The government has taken steps to preserve the standing and integrity of the State Bank's operations in the future.

MINISTRY OF HOUSING AND CONSTRUCTION REDEVELOPMENT The Hon. D. E. HENSHAW (Geelong Province)-I direct a question without notice to the Minister for Housing and Construction. Since being elected in 1982, I have become aware that a number of units and houses of the Ministry of Housing and Construction have walls of solid concrete construction-that is, without cavities. The consequence of that is that there is a high level of condensation and a need for high levels of heating in those units and houses. Several months ago, the Minister and I visited a concentrated development of such units in Coxon Parade, North Geelong. Will the Minister advise the House of the conclusions he arrived at after that visit and whether anything can be done about those units? The Hon. B. T. PULLEN (Minister for Housing and Construction)-I am pleased to advise that today' I have been able to announce a $4 million redevelopment project for Geelong that WIll involve 42 new homes being built for public housing tenants. In mid-1990 the Ministry of Housing and Construction will start demolishing old Ministry walk-up flats in Coxon Parade, North Geelon~. They will be replaced with 42 new single and double-storey units that will blend WIth the surrounding neighbourhood. Plans have also been submitted to the Shire of Corio for another redevelopment project in Norlane, involving the demolition of seven old weatherboard homes to be replaced with 30 units for the elderly, plus a community centre. Together these two projects represent the largest redevelopment the Ministry has undertaken in Geelong. They will see high quality homes being built for public housing tenants. As Mr Henshaw indicated, the projects follow a visit I made to Geelong before Christmas and discussions I had with local members and councillors. The issue we needed to address was whether it was better to redevelop or upgrade old housing stock, and I am pleased to say that we were able to redevelop the housing and provide better quality housing for tenants. In a sense the Liberal Party should be pleased that some change is occurring because it left a heritage of poor housing in the State, especially units built of concrete. South Australia has only one three-storey unit made of concrete. In Victoria under a Liberal government some 23 000 units, mainly of concrete, were constructed. It is the heritage of that poor period of building that we are now addressing by heavy maintenance programs, as honourable members would know if they cared to examine Questions without Notice 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 127 those buildings in their electorates. I would prefer whenever possible to redevelop those units with dwellings commensurate with the standards we should be providing for people in our community, especially elderly people, who deserve much better than the form of accommodation that was provided during the period of office of the Liberal government. I am pleased to say that in the redevelopment other matters are bein$ attended to, such as consultation with and placement of the Coxon Parade tenants In alternative accommodation. We have been able to relocate those tenants in the Geelong area and the Ministry will assist with relocation costs. The construction of the $4-million development is expected to be completed in mid-l 992. Over the past seven years the government has spent more than $500 million maintaining and upgrading this heritage of extremely poor stock that was left in an unmaintained state by the previous Liberal government. The Geelong redevelopment project represents another step in the Ministry's stock management program.

GORDON TECHNICAL COLLEGE The Hon. R. A. MACKENZIE (Geelong Province)-I direct a question to the Minister responsible for Post-Secondary Education. I refer to the announcement he made in this House in October last year that several million dollars was bein, allocated to the Gordon Technical College for the provision of engineering premises In a ca..rpet factory at the back of the Ford Motor Co. of Australia Ltd. I understand that nothIng has occurred to date and that the college is unable to carry out its practical engineering program because the current premises are falling into such disrepair that a ban has been placed on them. I ask the Minister to take urgent action so that the college can have the use of those premises as soon as possible. The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister responsible for Post-Secondary Education)­ This is an important initiative. Unfortunately it was delayed, but I have authorised the purchase of the carpet factory behind the Ford factory to proceed. Mr Mackenzie will be pleased to note that the action he asks for has begun and the transfer of occupation will be managed as soon as possible.

EMERGENCY AND CRITICAL CARE SERVICES The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS (Jika Jika Province)-Will the Minister for Health inform the House of the initiatives proposed to further develop emergency and critical care services in Victoria? The Hon. C. J. HOGG (Minister for Health)-I take the opportunity of making several comments about the allocation for emergency and critIcal care, which is a response to the report of the Consultative Council on Emergency and Critical Care Services. That council is chaired by Mr John Clarebrough. Or lan Brand, who is well known to a number of members of this House, was a member of the council and had substantial consultation with various hospitals. The co~ lcil has brought down a most substantial set of recommendations, some short term and some long term. I believe the recurrent sum-and I stress "recurrent sum"-of $23 million being allocated to the hospital system for emergency and critical care is significant; $4 million will be spent in this financial year to expand the emergency and critical care areas, which have been strained, especially during last winter and possibly the winter before by an enormous demand. Nobody quite understands the reason for such a high level of demand but suffice to say that it was certainly there last winter. I guess the imperative is to make certain that there are expanded services for the winter of 1990. 128 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Questions without Notice

Those services include between 80 and 90 general acute beds, 9 additional intensive care beds, 18 additional high dependency step-down beds, additional funding for nurse training in the critical care area, additional funding for more nurses and medical staffin emergency departments and, in some hospitals, emergency department deputy directors. That is a well thought out and well integrated package. It is well targeted. The demand for the health dollar is probably almost infinite. I guess the health system could be described as almost insatiable. What we have tried to do is to make certain that this is a well targeted action. The critical care council spent sixteen months on this review. Wehave responded to it substantially and quickly, bearing in mind some of the demands of the winter.

STATE BANK VICTORIA The Hon. HADDON STOREY (East Yarra Province)-I direct a question to the Minister Assisting the Treasurer in Budget Expenditure and in whatever other capacity he now has, about which he does not appear to be certain. Will the $795 million required to meet the bad debts of Tricontinental be found by the State Bank raising additional debt, as stated in the Treasurer's press release of 23 February 1990, or are such debts to be met from the bank's own existing internal resources as explained by the Department of Management and Budget officers at a briefing provided to the Opposition by the Treasurer? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-It is my understanding that the State Bank will raise further debt and the obligation to meet that commitment will be the responsibility of the State government. However, to clarify that situation I shall take the matter up with the Treasurer and provide Mr Storey with an answer in due course. The Hon. Haddon Storey-Next week? The Hon. D. R. WHITE-In due course.

PUBLIC HOSPITAL BEDS The Hon. M. T. TEHAN (Central Highlands Province)-On 23 May 1989 the Minister for Health, in reply to a question from Mr Birrell, said that in November 1988 there was a total of 1463 closed beds within the public hospital system. Will the Minister inform the House how many beds were closed as at 28 February 1990? The Hon. C. J. HOGG (Minister for Health)-I do not have the precise figure for Mrs Tehan. The question of closed beds is a complicated one. Within the figure that I gave when last I addressed this question in the House were a number of beds in Fairfield Hospital which had never been opened and which it was hoped would never be used, which inflated the number. From time to time hospitals close beds; they reopen beds and they leave beds closed for some time. Health Department Victoria does not keep precise figures because the number of closed beds fluctuates from time to time. I remind honourable members that although the Opposition likes to use the number of beds closed in the system as an indication of performance, it is not an accurate estimate of performance when there are extensive day procedures that more and more people use and like to use. Health (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 129

The number of hospital patients treated in the public hospital system was greater last year than it has ever been. It was 4 per cent more than the figure expected and targeted by hospitals. Hospitals have become more productive; those are the figures that we ought to examine and analyse rather than a notional figure of closed beds. The Hon. D. R. White-Where is the Federal Opposition's health policy? The Hon. C. J. HOGG-As my colleague points out, the health care debate is going on in Victoria and in other States in the run-up to the Federal election. It has not been enhanced by the fact that the Federal Opposition has not been able to produce a health policy. Medicare remains a system that gives access, equity and a good deal of satisfaction to many people.

VERY FAST TRAIN PROJECT The Hon. G. A. SGRO (Melbourne North Province)-Will the Minister for Local Government explain to the House how local government can express its views on the Very Fast Train proposal? The Hon. M. A. L YSTER (Minister for Local Government)-There has been considerable interest and speculation on the Very Fast Train proposal in local government circles, as one would expect. A good public hearing process is being conducted around the Very Fast Train issue and it is in that process of consultation that local government has been able to make its views known. The Local Government Department worked closely with the Ministry of Transport in formulating the terms of reference which were specifically designed to encourage local governments along the various proposed routes to express their views on the substance of the proposals. This matter has also been placed on the agenda of the third State-Local Government Consultative Council by the peak local government associations, and I look forward to an ongoing association with those bodies and with individual councils on this interesting proposal.

HEALTH (AMENDMENT) BILL This Bill was returned from the Assembly with a message relating to an amendment. It was ordered that the message be taken into consideration on the next day of meeting.

LAND (FURTHER MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS) BILL This Bill was received from the Assembly and, on the motion of the Hon. B. T. PULLEN (Minister for Housing and Construction), was read a first time.

EDUCATION (AMENDMENT) BILL This Bill was returned from the Assembly with a message relating to an amendment. It was ordered that the message be taken into consideration on the next day of meeting. Session \990-5 130 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Adjournment

ADJOURNMENT Order of business-Consumer price index figures-Role and responsibilities of State Coroner-Conference on public hospitals crisis-Local government boundaries at Torquay-Primary school at Weerangourt-Integration teacher for Donvale Primary School-State Emergency Service-Westernport Memorial Hospital, Koo-wee­ rup-Travel concessions for Senior Citizens Week-Visiting child health nurses­ Wearing of seat belts-St Andrew's Hospital-Speed limits on Burwood Highway The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts)-I move: That the Council, at its rising, adjourn until Tuesday, March 13. The Hon. D. M. EVANS (North Eastern Province)-On a point of order, Mr President, the Notice Paper has Notices of Motion, Business to take Precedence, which should be dealt with before the motion for the adjournment of the sitting is put. The PRESIDENT-Order! Unfortunately, Sessional Orders provide that no new business be taken after 10 o'clock and that business includes Business to take Precedence. Sessional Orders have not been breached. In fact, prior to 10 o'clock the House only just completed formal business. The only other business that it must attend to is the receipt of messages from another place and that has now been done. Business to take Precedence will take precedence on the next day of meeting. The Hon. D. M. EVANS- The issue raises an interesting question. Fortunately the subjects of Notices of Motion, Business to take Precedence, have some days remaining before they have to be dealt with. Had the situation occurred that this was the last day for those matters to be dealt with the House would have been in a most difficult position and the important reports of a committee of Parliament could not be dealt with. The PRESIDENT-Order! The question raised is academic. However, it would have been possible for Mr Evans to seek to arrange with the Leader of the House for the postponement of Sessional Orders. That was not done and that is what precludes the taking of that business at this stage after 10 o'clock. Mr Evans may need to watch his rights the next time the House meets. The Hon. D. M. EVANS-It would be helpful if one were told what was happening. I have been waiting 2 hours for this matter to come forward. The PRESIDENT-Order! The subject was not raised before 10 o'clock and that is the end of the matter. The motion was agreed to. The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts)-I move: That the House do now adjourn. The Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN (Western Province)-I raise for the attention of the Minister Assisting the Treasurer the fact that the consumer price index figure for Melbourne for the quarter ending 31 December 1989 is dramatically higher than the figures in other States. The implication is the increase in costs of commerce and industry in the State. The consumer price index figures produced by the Australian Bureau of Statistics for December 1989 show that the twelve-month period 1989-90 figure for Melbourne was 8·5 per cent, but for Sydney it was 7·4 per cent, a difference of 1·1 per cent; in Brisbane it was 7·7 per cent; in Adelaide it was 7·5 per cent; and in Perth, 7·8 per cent. Many costs in the community are affected by movements in the consumer price index; for example, many rental agreements are written with an escalation clause Adjournment 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 131 taking into account movements in the CPI. Similarly, government taxes and charges are often based upon the maximum increase in the CPI, or some variation thereof. Obviously there is a reason for the very substantial difference between Melbourne and Sydney. I ask the Minister whether the ingredients of that CPI have been examined, and whether government policy has impinged on that outcome. The Hon. K. I. M. WRIGHT (North Western Province)-I direct the attention of the Minister for the Arts, who represents the Attorney-General in the other place, to a matter concerning the State Coroner. Concern has been expressed to me by residents in my province-and no doubt there have been similar problems elsewhere-and by essential service organisations about the chaos and confusion caused by the State Coroner when he has caused delays in dealing with accidents, murders, and the like. I raise concern about this matter well aware of the enthusiasm and dedication of the State Coroner. In support of my claim, I advise that one incident involved the Sturt Highway near Mildura being unnecessarily closed to traffic for more than 6 hours on 18 November 1989, following a two-car collision where three lives were lost. Apparently Mr Hallenstein demanded that the scene of the accident be left intact until his arrival with, as I understand it, a party of up to six others. Traffic had to be diverted on that busy highway, forcing a lengthy detour. The next of kin could not be informed. A body remained in the vehicle because that was a stated requirement. The accident happened at 3.25 p.m. but it was not until 10 p.m. that word was received that the State Coroner would not be attending. Even his aircraft experiencing engine trouble is no excuse for such a lengthy delay. My informants have advised that Mr Hallenstein has a record of such behaviour, including examples of accidents on the Hume Highway with a delay of 6 to 7 hours; a railway accident at Richmond resulting in a 4-hour delay; and an embarrassing delay in viewing a murder victim at Kerang. I request the Minister to convey to the Attorney-General my request for an examination of the powers of the State Coroner to unduly and unnecessarily delay the clearing of accident sites. I would appreciate subsequent advice. Other capable people in the area, such as district coroners and inspectors of police, could deal with such emergencies; they are perfectly capable of conveying a report to the State Coroner. I agree with the interjection that the State Coroner has too much power in this respect, and it should be obligatory in such situations that he delegate to other persons. The Hon. M. T. 'FEHAN (Central Highlands Province)-I direct my concern to the attention of the Minister for Health. Recently there has been considerable publicity in the press and on television about what has been described as a health crisis. Victoria is facing the situation of beds in hospitals being closed; of patients being turned away from elective surgery; of a blow-out of waiting lists for elective surgery; of allegations of between 20 to 36 deaths from inter-hospital transfers; and of information about cancer services in Victoria being in a critical state. The resultant impact is confusion and concern among the public, and certainly a whittling of confidence in the community. The Minister will recognise that it is a complicated situation because of the Federal and State areas of responsibility; it has been complicated by demand and throughput, but recently there has been a call for an inquiry, a review or a summit so that experts in the field-from hospitals, medical patient representatives, and perhaps university experts-could convene to isolate problems and seek possible solutions. 132 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Adjournment

If the Minister is prepared to convene such a summit to examine the situation in Victoria she can be assured of bipartisan support from the Liberal Party. Such a conference would be on the basis that problems could be identified and solutions sought and, where appropriate, bipartisan proposals made to the Federal government for the necessary requirements for funding or Medicare changes. I ask the Minister for Health to consider this proposal, which today has had support from a number of people-academics, hospital administrators, and doctors. I suggest a conference could be called within the next three or four weeks; it would provide an opportunity for the public to have confidence restored to it. There is concern on both sides of the House to identify the problems and to seek redress and solutions. I ask the Minister to consider that suggestion seriously. The Hon. R. A. MACKENZIE (Geelong Province)-I refer the Minister for Local Government to a subject that her predecessor was involved in regarding the township of Torquay. The previous Minister received representations from the ratepayers in the area who were concerned because the township is divided by the main Torquay to Geelong highway; one portion of the township is in the City of South Barwon, the other portion is in the Shire of Barrabool. The previous Minister told the ratepayers that if they were able to produce a properly constituted petition containing signatures of 10 per cent of the residents in the area, in accordance with the provisions of the Act, he would consider granting them the right to have a poll of the whole of that region so that he would have an indication of how people were affected. I understand that the Minister for Local Government has received that petition and request. I ask the Minister to clarify the situation because people in the area are of the opinion that she has refused to allow the poll to occur. I ask the Minister to reconsider the situation. The residents have complied with the Act; as honourable members are aware, the Minister does not have to abide by any poll, if taken; she has the ultimate right to agree or disagree. However, I should like the Minister to make an informed decision and to know exactly how people in that area feel about changing from the City of South Barwon to the Shire ofBarrabool. The Hon. R. M. HALLAM (Western Province)-I direct a matter to the attention of the Leader of the Government in this House. The background commenced in th~ 1940s when an agreement was reached between the government and the tiny community of Weerangourt in south-west Victoria, in response to the demonstrated need for a school. The agreement was that the community should build the school on Ministry of Education land and agree to maintain the school building, in return for which the Minister agreed to lease the building and to provide the necessary staff. That scheme worked beautifully until the early 1980s but then there was a need for revision because school numbers were declining. In fact, the school closed in 1986. At that time further agreement was reached by the Minister for Education and the trustees of the school not only to sell the property but also about the way the proceeds were to be divided. The trustees expected to receive $6500. The property was sold in February last year and there is no doubt the proceeds have been received by the government because that has been confirmed by the person who bought the property. I have sought to have the funds directed to the trustees and have received some assistance from several members opposite and several public servants. I am grateful for that assistance, but we still do not have the cheque. Will the Minister take up the issue, because it is embarrassing for the trustees, who have offered the money to other parties? Because of the delay I suggest that it would not be untoward that a component of interest may be added to the cheque. Adjournment 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 133

The Hon. B. A. E. SKEGGS (Templestowe Province)-I direct the attention of the Minister responsible for Post-Secondary Education, representing the Minister for Education, to concern regarding integration teachers. I refer to the need for an integration teacher at Donvale Primary School, particularly as it concerns the needs of a very talented young person, Emily Rickards, who is a special needs child who suffers from Down's syndrome. She has been attending Panoramic Heights Kindergarten and was due to go to Donvale Primary School when this matter was raised. I received a letter signed by 31 parents and staff of the Panoramic Heights Kindergarten and they state that Emily Rickards has unusual ability. They state: We have observed her development over the year with interest. We have all been struck by her spirit and by her determination to succeed as she, along with the other children in the group, tackles each new challenge set before her. For Emily, each achievement has been hard won. They have been very impressed by her effort, concentration and willingness to learn, but it is obvious there is a need for extra adult assistance to ensure that she is able to cope with each new learning situation. In the letter the parents and staff members comment that they were appalled to learn that the request by the Donvale Primary School for an integration teacher to fulfil this role for Emily had been refused. Not only will this deny Emily her right to learn effectively but it will have a deleterious effect on the other children in her class. The teacher will be placed in an impossible situation. What they are asking for is an allocation of an additional integration teacher. The allocation of 0·5 of an integration aide to the school is clearly inadequate. There is a need to step it up to a full integration teacher at least. The final comment by the parents in their letter to the Minister states: Your government introduced the policy of integration of all children into normal schools. Failure by your department to provide the necessary support services, such as an integration teacher for Emily Rickards, makes a mockery of that policy. In our view, it also represents a dishonouring of the promises made when it was introduced. Will the Minister take up the matter with the Minister for Education to ensure that a full integration teacher is provided at Donvale Primary School to assist this very talented young person who suffers from Down's syndrome? The Hon. W. ,R. BAXTER (North Eastern Province)-I direct a matter to the attention of the Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources as the representative of the Minister for Police and Emergency Services. I refer to the State Emergency Service in Victoria and the recent announcement by the Minister that certain units are to be given accreditation for road accident rescue. My particular concern to the Minister is to protest as vigorously as I am able about the way the decision was conveyed or not conveyed to the respective units. In the area I represent, a number are not to be accredited for road accident rescue, in particular Murchison and Chiltern. I should have thought that when one is dealing with a group of volunteers which, over the years, has raised a lot of money for equipment, whose members have undergone training in their own time and provided a service to the community and who are, in fact, to be stopped from providing that service, the least courtesy that could have been extended would be that they would have been officially advised rather than reading about it in the newspapers. That is exactly what transpired. These two units were not advised that they were not to be accredited, despite attending the so-called consultation meetings. They read 134 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Adjournment it in the newspapers, and it is an absolute disgrace that volunteers are treated in that way. I protest also about the way those units lost accreditation. If it were done on the basis that they had insufficient equipment or were lacking in skills, it might have been acceptable, but the decision was made entirely on location on the basis that they are allegedly too close to another unit. This has led to an absurd situation. For example, Chiltern, which is on the Hume Freeway where one would expect that accidents might occur, is not to be accredited. Accidents on the freeway are to be dealt with or handled by the unit at Rutherglen, which is more than twelve miles from the freeway. The Chiltern unit is the best qualified of all the units in the north east. The controller himself conducts training courses for other units. Chiltern has the most qualified of trained operators and is the most experienced with semitrailer accidents, bearing in mind the number that occur on the Hume Freeway and will doubtless continue to occur. It is extraordinary that a unit of that capability is being left out in the cold. It is all very well for the Minister to say that the unit members can continue to assist during floods and fires and to search for lost bushwalkers. Fortunately those sorts of incidents do not occur often. One cannot sustain interest and enthusiasm if there is nothing for the members to do. If they are unable to carry out accident rescue work the unit will die. Will the Minister direct the attention of his colleague to the disgraceful manner in which this decision was conveyed and also seek to review the unit at Chiltern, because that unit can clearly demonstrate a high degree of skill and adequate equipment to be accredited? The Hon. K. M. SMITH (South Eastern Province)-The matter I direct to the attention of the Minister for Health concerns a hospital in my province. Last Thursday I, together with Mrs Tehan, visited the Westernport Memorial Hospital at Koo-wee­ rup. Last October I visited the hospital when it was opened and ten beds were empty at that time. Last Thursday I was appalled to find that there were still ten empty beds that should have been full of aged people who are in need of those beds. The other beds in the hospital are filled with patients who should be in the aged care area. The beds the aged people are presently occupying are the acute beds. The ten beds that are not being used have sheets and pillow slips on them, but the hospital needs $130 000. I am sure the Minister is aware of that. Recently the Minister spoke about spending $23 million on hospitals. Is it possible that $130 000 of the $23 million can go towards a hospital that has ten empty beds, particularly when the building of that hospital was funded by State and Federal moneys? Community contributions went towards the hospital, and those beds could at least be filled by the Minister giving $130 000 to the hospital to have them available for a twelve-month period. The Hon. HADDON STOREY (East Yarra Province)-I direct to the Minister responsible for the aged and the Minister for Housing and Construction, who is the representative in this place of the Minister for Transport, the matter of free public transport provided for senior citizens by the government during Senior Citizens Week. Unfortunately that promise has been hopelessly mismanaged and has resulted in old people being turned away without receiving tickets after having waited for several hours at Spencer Street railway station. Bookings opened at 10 a.m. on Monday, 5 March for free travel on V/Line during Senior Citizens Week, which is at the end of this month. A constituent of mine arrived Adjournment 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 135 at Spencer Street station at 8.45 a.m. on the morning of 5 March and was given 46 as his number in the queue for tickets. The constituent left the station 5 hours later without a ticket and after announcements were posted saying that most trains were fully booked. This is an absolute disaster, and a fiasco on the part of the management of the Ministry of Transport. The government has created unreasonable expectations in setting up Senior Citizens Week. It is obvious that many people take advantage of the opportunity of free travel during that week to visit country Victoria. Last year many people found that their anticipated pleasant outings were marred by difficulties with bookings and overcrowded trains. For a 70-year-old person to stand for 5 hours in a queue at Spencer Street railway station and be No. 46 in the queue, having arrived at 8.45 a.m., and then be told that the trains are booked out is unbelievable and an absolute disgrace. It is despicable organisation on the part of the government and it shows that it has not given any real thought to the arrangements that should be made for Senior Citizens Week. If the Premier is going to make grandiose announcements about travel concessions, he should make sure they are in place. If someone advertises that there are so many items for sale at much less than the normal price and if a person comes along and is unable to purchase such an item because there was really only one for sale, the vendor commits an offence and, under Victorian legislation, can be prosecuted, fined or sent to gaol. Despite that, this government does it with complete impunity because it does not care about the interests of the poor, disadvantaged and senior citizens of this State. The Hon. D. R. White-Come on! The Hon. HADDON STOREy-It is all very well for the Minister to interject; however, this situation happened last year and it has happened again. It is an absolute disgrace and I ask both Ministers concerned to do what they can to reopen the bookings, to ensure that there are adequate arrangements for people to make bookings, to ensure that adequate trains are available to take senior citizens on the trips and to pay some respect to what senior citizens deserve instead of simply trying to grandstand. The Hon. R. S. de FEGELY (Ballarat Province)-I direct to the attention of the Minister for Health, who is the representative in this place of the Minister for Community Services, the treatment meted out to the former State visiting child health nurses since Community Services Victoria disbanded the service in December last year. A number of the nurses have remained in their positions awaiting the offer of redeployment or retraining made by the Premier in 1988 to members of the Victorian Public Service As'sociation. I have been able to contact fourteen nurses so far, and I believe there are many more scattered around the State in similar situations in the Goulburn Valley, Warragul, Western Port, Geelong, Mildura and the outer western areas of Melbourne. I wish to speak specifically about what has happened in Ararat. At this stage for the three months the two nurses at Ararat have been out of work they have not been given any specific tasks to perform; in other words, they have not been given tasks related to their nursing skills. I have been told that some have been given menial tasks, such as washing cars for Community Services Victoria. The two nurses in Ararat have been given the task of collating the organisations in Ararat that deal with welfare and which could be associated with Community Services Victoria. The Minister for Health promised the people of Ararat that a replacement service would be provided. So far that has not happened and the treatment of the nurses has been outrageous. The two nurses in Ararat and their counterparts in Ballarat have been instructed by the staff of Community Services Victoria in Ballarat to have no 136 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Adjournment contact with their former clients and to have nothing to do with any meetin~, committee or organisation with which they were formerly involved in their positions as visiting child health nurses. They were told that if they belonged to any of those organisations they were to resign. In case members of the government do not believe me, I have a letter from Sister Erin Ballinger written to the President of the Ark Toy Library in Ararat, which states: On direction from Community Services Victoria, please accept my resignation from the toy library committee due to the closure of the visiting child health nurse program. I also have a letter from the president of that committee to Mr Volk, the regional director of Community Services Victoria in that area. The letter expresses the disgust of the committee that it has lost the services ofa valuable member skilled in the art of looking after families and children and who is no longer allowed to take part in the work of the committee. It is an outrageous intrusion on civil liberties, and the Cain government, the Minister and the bureaucracy have no right to make such demands of any of their employees. I wonder whether we are living in Australia or one of those Eastern European countries in pre-Gorbachev times. The two nurses from Ararat have been moved from the offices they occupied and are now accommodated in the already overcrowded offices of Community Services Victoria in Barkly Street, Ararat. The only workplace available for them is at the kitchen table. They have been told that that is their workplace and that they do not have access to telephones or any other facilities in the office. I ask the Minister for Health to take up this matter with the Minister for Community Services and tell him that there is evidence that families who were previously served by the nurses are running into problems and some children have already been put into protection services. I ask that the nurses be given the promised opportunity of redeployment or retraining in areas that utilise their experience not only so that they can usefully serve the community but also to use taxpayers' money wisely. The nurses earn approximately $30 000 a year and I do not believe they should be performing such menial tasks. The Hon. ROBERT LA WSON (Higinbotham Province)-I raise a matter with the Minister for Housing and Construction, who is the representative in this place of the Minister for Transport. The question I have to discuss with him was raised with me by Margaret Nuttall, who is Assistant Secretary for the Emergency Nursing Special Interest Group, which is part of the Australian Nursing Federation (Victorian Branch). These are devoted people who have charge of our emergency wards. They have the very difficult and onerous task of patching up people who have been injured in car accldents and the terrible task of sitting with the relatives and trying to comfort them when their loved ones have been grossly injured or killed. The group has come to the conclusion that it wants the drivers of cars in which any of the passengers are not secured by seat belts to lose their licences. The Hon. M. A. Lyster-You are very slow with your mail. I answered that four months ago. The Hon. ROBERT LA WSON-Apparently nothing has been done about it. The group wants the drivers of cars in which any passengers are not secured by seat belts to lose their licences. The group also makes the further request that if any films are shown on television­ regardless of whether they are foreign or Australian films-in which the passengers in motor cars are not secured by seat belts, there be a disclaimer shown on the screen .Adjournment 7 March 1990 COU~CIL 137 saying, "These people are not seated according to the Australian rules of safety". I commend the idea to the Minister, andJ hope he will raise it with the Minister for Transport. I should think we could very well consider proposed legislation along those lines. The Hon. G. P. CONNARD (Higinbotham Province)-I direct the attention of the Minister for Health to the affairs of St Andrew's Hospital, and seek her advice. The Minister will be aware that the debts of that hospital, which is now in the hands of receivers and managers, total more than $46 million. As an aside, I note that those debts were caused by the policies of the Federal Labor government and its lack of support for health insurance. I note that the tenders for the sale of the hospital closed late last year. It is now some four or five months since the tenders closed, and I should like the Minister to inform the House whether any of those tenders will be picked up and whether the hospital will be sold. Ifit will not be sold, I ask the Minister to inform the House tonight of the intentions of her department regarding the continuance of the hospital and the form that that will take. If the government is to acquire the hospital per se, I should like to know whether there will be any residual equity for the Presbyterian Church of Victoria and the Uniting Church in Australia. The Hon. G. B. ASHMAN (Boronia Province)-The matter that I direct to the attention of the Minister for Housing and Construction, who is the representative in this place of the Minister for Transport, concerns what are now almost weekly changes to the speed limits on Burwood Highway. Prior to Christmas the speed limits on Burwood Highway from Station Street, Box Hill through to Ferntree Gully varied from 100 kilometres an hour down to 75 kilometres an hour. They were then adjusted just after Christmas to 80 kilometres an hour for the full distance, which seems to be quite a sensible speed limit to impose on a dual carriageway and quite a safe and well-constructed highway. In recent weeks that speed limit has been adjusted down to 75 kilometres an hour. There is no doubt that quite a significant cost was involved in changing the speed limit from 80 to 75 kilometres an hour, and I can see no rational argument for that reduction. Indeed, the VIC ROADS speed management strategy is now in conflict with that speed limit. I ask the Minister to inform the House whether this is now an indication that the VIC ROADS speed management strategy, which is a Statewide strategy on speed limits, is being discarded, or whether the Burwood Highway limit is just an anomaly that has been created to confuse local motorists. The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts)-Mr Wright directed my attention to the State Coroner. He was kind enough to hand me a letter that he had received. I shall ensure that it is transferred to the Attorney-General for comment. Mr Hallam, likewise, handed me a note or a letter which explains the Weerangourt State School issue, which I find interesting and which deserves a response. I shall see if I can manage to obtain a response quickly from the Minister for Education. The Hon. R. M. Hallam-And get the details checked, too. The Hon. E. H. W ALKER-I understand commitments have been made. Mr Skeggs is seeking an additional integration teacher in Donvale Primary School and has presented a significant case. I shall bring that to the attention of the Minister for Education as well. 138 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Adjournment

The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-Mr Chamberlain asked a question about causes of increases in the consumer price index relative to other States and their impact on, among other things, certain rental arrangements. I shall take up those issues with the Treasurer. Mr Baxter raised a concern about the State Emergency Service, particularly certain units not being accredited. I shall take up that matter with my colleague, the Minister for Police and Emergency Services. The Hon. C. J. HOGG (Minister for Health)-In answer to Mrs Tehan, of course I shall take up the question that she has raised and consider it seriously. I am grateful for the assurance that she gives of bipartisan support, were we to have a community debate about a variety of health issues. Mrs Tehan has mentioned some but there are others that we all discuss from time to time that probably need community debate. I shall also seek other sources of advice over the next few days, but I certainly give an assurance that I shall take her question seriously. In answer to Mr Smith, who raised the subject of the Koo-wee-rup hospital and the ten additional nursing home beds with me last year, I have to reiterate that the arrangement and the negotiation for those ten additional nursing home beds was between the hospital and the Commonwealth. So far as I have been able to work out, the only involvement of the State was-and it is customary-that the facilities development section of the Finance and Administration Division of Health Department Victoria approved the working drawings and specifications for nursing home beds in September 1988 on the understanding that all costs of the project would be met from the committee of management and Commonwealth funds. Indeed, I seem to remember Mr Smith mentioning this to me when he first raised the topic with me last year. When the openin~ occurred on 22 October last year, in the absence of the Honourable Peter Staples, who IS the Minister for Housing and Aged Care and who has particular responsibility for community services and the home and community care program, the local Federal member of Parliament, Mr Reith, performed the opening ceremony. I do not remember even being invited to attend the opening ceremony. The Hon. K. M. Smith-I am happy to invite you to come along and have a look. The Hon. C. J. HOGG-I may indeed respond to Mr Smith's invitation, if that is what it is. I am at pains to explain that there really has not been any State government involvement in providing those ten nursing home beds. I remember seeing a letter from the regional office to the hospital confirming that there was to be no expectation of State money in this development. I have not seen any response from the hospital to that, but I have certainly seen the letter from the region to the hospital, and I think it was dated some time last year. None of this, however, fills the beds or gets them going. I want to reiterate that when I was talking earlier about the special allocation for critical care I did mean just that, and I obviously cannot respond to Mr Smith's humane request to find a much smaller amount from that rather large sum to open the beds. The discussions about the level of funding for nursing home beds have been continuing with the Commonwealth and will continue. I understand that the region has been pursuing on the hospital's behalf the anticipated difference between the offer from the Commonwealth-that is, the subsidy from the Commonwealth-and the hospital's records on the cost of operating the beds. I shall continue to follow it up with the regional director and shall ask questions tomorrow to see whether progress has been made. It seems to me to be caught up with the question of free nursing home use or the benefits of such use. It is difficult at this stage to see what the way will be. Adjournment 7 iv1arch 1990 COUNCIL 139

In many ways it would be an unfortunate precedent for the State to do more than try to sort it out, given the fact that ironclad assurances between the hospital and the Commonwealth have been given in the past. I acknowledge the need for nursing home beds in that area as I understand that the original ten nursing beds are full all the time and that there are 96 people on the waiting list. I shall get back to Mr Smith next Tuesday or Wednesday to indicate whether progress has been made. Mr de Fegely raised the third matter for the attention of the Minister for Community Services. I shall certainly follow up the substance and details that he has raised. In reply to Mr Connard, as I have said on several occasions in this House, the substantial responsibility for finances rests with the Treasurer, although there is obviously some question of input from Health Department Victoria. I expect there will be cl meeting with the Treasurer over the next few days or within a week or two, and I understand a commitment has been made to meet With the St Andrews Hospital board. That commitment would be honoured by the Treasurer. The Hon. B. T. PULLEN (Minister for Housing and Construction)-Mr Lawson raised an issue on behalf of the Australian Nursing Federation regarding the need for stronger requirements for the wearing of seat belts. I understand that the people working in close contact with the victims of terrible road accidents and trauma wish that situation could be alleviated and that strong action be taken in insisting that drivers and passen~ers wear seat belts. He also raised the issue about films being shown with a disclaImer in some cases to reinforce the message to some people. I shall pass on those comments to the Minister for Transport. Mr Ashman referred to the Burwood Highway and indicated that he has observed changes in the speed limit signs along particular sections between Station Street, Box Hill, and Femtree Gully over the past few months. He asked why this has occurred and whether the highway is a special case or simply part of a general change. I shall seek to have an answer provided to him. The Hon. M. A. L YSTER (Minister for Local Govemment)-Mr Mackenzie raised an issue that has been around in the Geelong area for quite a while. I am well aware of the petition that has been presented to me. It perhaps exemplifies the difficulty that faces any Minister for Local Government in attempting to meet the needs of the community and a variety of councils because, on the one hand, the Torquay Improvement Association and the Shire of Barrabool are most keen for the poll to be taken in the near future. On the other hand, the City of South Barwon and some other councils in the Geelong region would prefer not to have one annexation issue dealt with in isolation because they still hold the hope that there could be a broader examination of the issue of municipal boundaries in the Geelong region. I assure Mr Mackenzie that I have not refused the request of those residents; I have asked that they accept my view that this matter should be put on hold-and I think they were the words I used in my letter-to give us all an opportunity of seeing whether any progress can be made this time in meeting a desire that is strong on the part of at least four councils in the Geelong region to examine the whole issue. Mr Mackenzie points out that the Shire of Barrabool is not included in the four and I agree with that. I hope that in the near future I shall receive a communication from those councils as to whether they believe their aspirations for a broader consideration of the issue will have any chance of real success this time. My attitude to the request for a poll is by no means that I have refused it but I repeat that I have put the request on hold. I do not intend to allow that request to remain in place indefinitely. I can give that assurance. Once I get an indication from the other councils as to whether they think their own work has any future, I shall act on the request for the poll from the community. 140 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Adjournment

The matter raised by Mr Storey concerns me greatly. Just before I became Minister responsible for the aged I was aware of the disaster that surrounded some of the pre­ travel arrangements for senior citizens last year. I assure Mr Storey that some weeks ago I asked that appropriate steps be taken to ensure that the situation was not repeated this year. I confess that my concern related to the number of carriages on the trains, not the booking situation. There is an element of what Mr Storey said that relates to the number of carriages. I assure Mr Storey that, first thing in the morning, I shall contact the Minister for Transport and the people who assist in the organisation of Senior Citizens Week to put this account to them to find out whether they have an explanation for it and to attempt to remedy the situation. The motion was agreed to. The House adjourned at 11.29 p.m. until Tuesday, March 13. Questions on Notice 7 March 1'990 COUNCIL 141

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

The following answers to questions on notice were circulcated-

ACCIDENT COMPENSATION COMMlSSION CLAIMS (Question No. 23) The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL (East Yarra Province) asked the Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources, for the Treasurer: . (a) What was the total number of Accident Compensation Commission claims for public and private hospitals, respectively in 1987-88 and what was the ratio of claims per $1 million of wages? (b) What was the average estimated cost per claim for public and private hospitals, respectively in 1987-88? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources)-The answer supplied by the Treasurer is: (a) The numbers of claims occurring in 1987-88 and reported up to the end of January 1989 for public and private hospitals are 2822 and 581 respectively. The ratios of claims per $1 million of wages for claims occurring in 1987-88 and reported up to the end of January 1989 for public and private hospitals are 2·01 and 2·61 respectively. (b) This information is not available because final cost case estimates are no longer made by the Accident Compensation Commission.

PORT PHILLIP BAY PROJECTS (Question No. 46) The Hon. G. P. CONNARD (Higinbotham Province) as.ked the Minister for Housing and Construction, for the Minister for Transport: (a) What revenue was received from boat owners operatIng in Port Phillip Bay in each of the years 1985-86, 1986-87 and 1987-88? (b) From that revenue, how much has been spent in Port Phillip Bay in each of those years, delineating the cost of each project? The Hon. B. T. PULLEN (Minister for Housing and Construction)-The answer supplied by the Minister for Transport is: (a) The Roads Corporation as agent for the Marine Board of Victoria, is responsible for the collection of all boat registration fees. It is not possible to determine what revenue is collected from boat owners operating in Port Phillip Bay as no differentiation is made between boat owners throughout the State in respect of where they may operate their boats. (b) The matter of revenue spent in Port Phillip Bay fell within the responsibility of my colleague, the Minister for Tourism. However, the Victorian Tourism Commission has provided the following information in respect of expenditure from the boating facility fund in Port Phillip Bay: BOATING FACILITY FUND EXPENDITURE: 1985-86-1987-88 Financial Year Allocated to Details ofProject Allocation $ 1985-86 City of Frankston Olivers HiIl--completion of car-trailer parking area 20000 142 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Questions on Notice

Financial Year Allocated to Details ofProject Allocation $ Port of Gee long Authority Yarra Street pier-repairs to trial floating tyre breakwater 7211 Shire of Flinders Rye boat ramp-channel dredging 40000 City ofWilliamstown Newport launching complex-proposed: design and consultancy fees 20000 Borough of Queenscliff Jordan Reserve boat ramp-construction of catwalks 6400 City of Sandringham Half Moon Bay ramp-construction ofjetty 34800 City Of Mordialloc Chute Street ramp-construction of catwalk jetty 14400 Shire of Werribee Werribee South ramp-completion of catwalk 7086 City of Altona Cresser Reserve ramp-construction ofjetty 36000 Port of Geelong Authority Provision of signs at boat ramps-various 2500 Total 1985-86 188397 1986-87 Shire ofBellarine Point Richards-ramp improvements, construction ofjetty and toilet block 94400 Borough of Queenscliff Jordan Reserve boat ramp-construction and sealing access road 24000 Port of Geelong Authority Limberbumers Point-extension of parking area 40000 Port of Melbourne Replacement of "No Boating" buoys at various Authority locations 68000 Total 1986-87 226400 1987-88 Ministry for Planningand Contribution towards assessment of potential Environment marine sites 50000 Total 1987-88 50000

CARRUM DISTRICT MANAGEMENT PLAN (Question No. 81) The Hon. G. P. CONNARD (Higinbotham Province) asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, for the Minister for Conservation, Forests and Lands: (a) What is the progress of the Carrum district management plan, indicating-(i) how many people responded to it; and (ii) how many indicated they were in favour of an intensive recreation zoning for each of Mordialloc, Chelsea and Frankston foreshores? (b) What funding will be provided for the implementation of the plan? (c) When will the plan be implemented and concluded? The Hon. B. T. PULLEN (Minister for Housing and Construction)-The answer supplied by the Minister for Conservation, Forests and Lands is: (a) The draft Carrum district management plan was available for public comment for two months early in 1986. This draft strategy affected the area from Beaumaris to M t Eliza. A total of 91 submissions were received in response to the draft. The draft Carrum district management plan was not proceeded with in the form of a management plan, as a decision was taken to· deal with the extensive length of foreshore in sections. This enables the consideration of issues in greater detail than was previously envisaged under the Carrum plan. The Mordialloc foreshore and environments strategy plan is an example of this approach. In addition, many of the issues of a more regional nature have been addressed in the draft plan for Port Phillip Bay­ "Making the Most of the Bay". There were no submissions which commented directly on the issue of possible intensive recreation zoning for the Mordialloc, Chelsea and Frankston foreshores. The submissions contained valuable Questions on Notice 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 143 information and ideas which are being utilized in ongoing studies and strategies along this segment of coast. (b) Government funding for implementation of elements of the draft plan has been directed to specific areas such as Mordialloc and Frankston. Funding to 1988-89 inclusive includes: Mordialloc - Mordialloc foreshore and environs strategy plan, $5000 - Implementation of the foreshore promenade, $20 000 Frankston - Frankston boating, recreation and tourist facilities study, $20000. (c) The implementation of plans for the area affected by the draft Carrum district management plan will now be undertaken in specific segments and will depend on the resources and priorities of councils and agencies to complete the work.

PUBLIC RELATIONS FUNDING (Question No. 90) The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL (East Yarra Province) asked the Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources, for the Treasurer: (a) What funds have been provided to Holt Public Relations in each financial year since 1982-83 and for what purpose? (b) From which program Budget item have these funds been drawn? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources)-The answer supplied by the Treasurer is: In 1982-83 and 1983-84 no funds were provided to Holt Public Relations by the Department of Management and Budget. In 1984-85 a total of$18 978.45 was paid in fees for the launch of WorkCare. In 1985-86 a further $58 627.74 was paid for the WorkCare launch. The fees for the WorkCare launch were paid by an advance from the public account and were recouped in full from the Accident Compensation Commission. In 1985-86 the Department of Management and Budget also paid Holt $3717.00 in fees for the promotion ofthe economic strategy, paid from the economic strategy promotion trust fund; $229 924.14 was paid to Holt from the trust fund in 1986-87 and a further $191 299, lOin 1987-88, for the ongoing promotion of the economic strategy. During 1987-88, $3250.00 was also paid to Holt in fees for the preparation of information technology publications, from operating expenses Program No. 723, item 2000. As of 21 April 1989, a total of $65 383.37 had been paid to Holt Public Relations in 1988-89. This comprised $13 345.10 from Program No. 723, item 2000 for work on information technology publications; $585.89 from strategic research fund Program No. 473, item 7873 in fees for the Victorian Information and Communication Technology Research Institute logo and $51 452.38 from special projects Program No. 726, item 3548 for the promotion of economic strategy initiatives. The total of $571 179.80 provided to Holt Public Relations up to 21 April 1989 includes funds which were reimbursed from the Accident Compensation Commission, the Department ofIndustry, Technology and Resources and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs.

CONSTRUCTION OF DRAINS (Question No. 92) The Hon. W. R. BAXTER (North Eastern Province) asked the Minister for Local Government, for the Minister for Water Resources: (a) What progress has been made towards determining the route ofDra~n 11 in the Shire ofNathalia? (b) When is construction expected to commence and conclude? (c) To what extent will the construction of Drain 11 relieve over-capacity problems in Drain 13? 144 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Questions on Notice

The Hon. M. A. LYSTER (Minister for Local Government)-The answer supplied by the Minister for Water Resources is: (a) Preliminary investigation and survey has established the most likely route of the main drain and many of the spurs. The route will generally follow well defined depressions where possible and subject to further investigation, may be located along the western spilling path from Green's Swamp which enters Broken Creek near Barmah Forest. (b) The Rural Water Commission and the community are currently engaged in preparation of the Shepparton region surface drainage strategy as part of the Shepparton irrigation region land and water salinity management plan. This plan, which includes the Drain 11 project and other projects in the Murray Valley area, will provide future directions for drainage across the entire Shepparton region based on the priorities of the various projects. The plan will be available for public comment in the latter half of 1989 and will contain a proposed implementation program for all projects including Drain 11. (c) Drain 13 currently accepts water from both the Drains 7 and 10 Systems. The proposed Drain 11 may ultimately tap both Drains 7 and 10 depressions and provide some relief to Drain 13. The Drain 10 pumping station lifts water from Drains 7 and 10 into Drain 13. The rate of discharge into Drain 13 is controlled by the capacity of this pumping station, which is 54 megalitres per day. The frequency of use will be reduced if Drain 11 is constructed to tap the Drains 7 and 10 depressions; however, the pumps will still be required to operate at full capacity after high rainfall events. In lesser events the performance of Drain 13 would be significantly improved.

PUBLIC HOUSING VACANCIES (Question No. 96) The Hon. R. S. de FEGELY (Ballarat Province) asked the Minister for the Housing and Construction: (a) How many housing units owned by the Ministry of Housing and Construction are presently vacant in Victoria? (b) What is the average period between tenants vacating premises and new tenants being installed? (c) What average amount is spent on maintenance per unit during the above vacant periods? The Hon. B. T. PULLEN (Minister for Housing and Construction)-The answer is: (a) There were 1113 rental units-l·9 per cent of overall stock-vacant in Victoria as at 13 December 1989. (b) The average period between vacation of premises and allocation to new tenants is approximately four weeks with a variance of two weeks to either side. This period will vary depending on what level of maintenance is required prior to the unit being at a standard suitable for reletting. (c) The approximate number of vacated units for the period 1 July 1988 to 30 April 1989 was 6350. Total expenditure to 30 April 1989 was $9 930424 and the approximate average cost per unit being $1563.84. These figures reflect all Ministry owned properties. We have no method to relate vacated expenditure to the specific units on which that expenditure has been incurred. Figures do not include Aboriginal housing, Defence housing or electrical and plumbing works.

LOCHGARRY (Question No. 119) The Hon. W. R. BAXTER (North Eastern Province) asked the Minister for Local Government, for the Minister for Water Resources: Further to Question No. 361 answered in this House on 9 October 1974, on what dates and for how many days on each occasion have the bars of the Loch Garry been removed since 31 December 1974 and what was the peak river height at Shepparton for each event? Questions on Notice 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 145

The Hon. M. A. L YSTER (Minister for Local Govemment)-The answer supplied by the Minister for Water Resources is: 20.9.75 8 a.m. Commenced removal of bars Peak gauge height 21.9.75 7 a.m. All bars removed Shepparton 22.9.75 8 p.m. Commenced replacing bars 11·14m 20.9.75 28.9.75 4 a.m. All bars replaced 12.10.75 7 a.m. Commenced removal of bars Peak gauge height 13.10.75 11 a.m. 386 bars removed Shepparton 13.10.75 6 p.m. Commenced replacing bars lo-87m 12.10.75 18.10.75 7 a.m. 386 bars replaced 27.10.75 10 p.m. Commenced removal of bars Peak gauge height 28.10.75 6 p.m. All bars removed Shepparton 29.10.75 8 p.m. Commenced replacing bars 11·09m 28.10.75 31.10.75 8 p.m. All bars replaced 3.11.75 2 a.m. Commenced removal of bars Peak gauge height 4.11.75 10 a.m. 218 bars removed Shepparton 4.11.75 11 a.m. Commenced replacing bars lo-65m 3.11.75 6.11.75 11 a.m. 218 bars replaced 24.7.81 5 a.m. Commenced removal of bars Peak gauge height 26.7.81 6 p.m. All bars removed Shepparton 27.7.81 9 p.m. Commenced replacing bars 11·005m 26.7.81 29.7.81 10 p.m. All bars removed 17.8.81 9 a.m. Commenced removal of bars Peak gauge height 17.8.81 IOp.m. 60 bars removed Shepparton 18.8.81 6 a.m. Commenced replacing bars lo-43m 17.8.81 18.8.81 9 p.m. 60 bars replaced 2.8.83 1 p.m. Commenced removal of bars Peak gauge height 3.8.83 6 a.m. 136 bars removed Shepparton 3.8.83 7 a.m. Commenced replacing bars lo-535m 2.8.83 4.8.83 10 a.m. 136 bars replaced No operation of Loch Garry was required in 1989.

COUNTRY FIRE AUTHORITY (Question No. 120) The Hon. W. R. BAXTER (North Eastern Province) asked the Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources, for the Minister for Police and Emergency Services: (a) What is the intended building program of the Country Fire Authority for 1989-90 and the following two financial years? (b) Further to Question No. 14 answered in this House on 29 June 1982 where Mooroopna fire station was listed for building works in 198'3-84-(i) why did this project not proceed as scheduled; and (ii) when is it now expected that work will commence? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources)-The answer supplied by the Minister for Police and Emergency Services is: (a) The intended fire station building program for the Country Fire Authority for 1989-90 and the two following financial years, is as follows: 1989-90 Belmont Wattle Glen Churchill Kallista Stawell Koondrook Bulla Upper Beaconsfield Lindenow Avenel

Session 1990-6 146 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Questions on Notice

In addition, the following rural fire stations will be completed: Cape Clear Mt Wallace Bahgallah Porcupine Ridge Caramut Brewster Mooralla Willaura Nullawarre Neuarpurr Strathmore Vectis Choclyn Beazley's Bridge Darlington Carapooee Kilcunda Axe Creek Merrena Baringhup West Westbury Corop Clydebank Locksley Perry Bridge Toolleen AaggyCreek Lurg Glenaladale Whitegate Knowsley Indigo Valley Clonbinane Walwa Bungaree Wooragee 1990-91 Mooroopna Birchip Mooroolbark Kallista Portland Trentham Cockatoo Clunes Tungamah In addition to the above twenty rural fire stations, yet to be nominated, will be constructed. 1991-92 Bacchus March South Morang Swan Hill Heyfield Yarrawonga Penshurst Edenhope Pyramid Hill In addition to the above twenty rural fire stations, yet to be nominated, will be constructed. (b) (i) During 1982 the Mooroopna fire brigade had sketch plans prepared to refurbish its present station and build additional engine bays on a site behind the premises. It was initially intended that these works should commence in 1983-84. However, this proposal did not proceed at that time, because after several amendments to the sketch plans were considered, it became apparent that a total reassessment of the type and size of construction for fire stations in not only Mooroopna but other brigades throughout the State was necessary. As a consequence, the authority is now developing a methodology which will enable it to determine the type and size of fire stations and other facilities necessary for fire brigades to maintain an appropriate standard of service within their areas. (ii) At this time sketch plans for a new fire station at Mooroopna are being prepared, and the authority proposes to complete construction of the building during 1990-1991.

RELOCATION OF POWER LINE (Question No. 121) The Hon. R. M. HALLAM (Western Province) asked the Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources: What is the projected cost associated with the relocation of the SEC power supply line made necessary by the government's purchase of the property, Kangaroo Park, at Hotspur in south-west Victoria for the planting of pines? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources)-The answer is: The total cost of the SEC works associated with the proposed relocation of the high voltage line required to enable the planting of pines at Kangaroo Park is $13 500. The Department of Conservation, Forests and Lands has reimbursed the SEC for the cost of these works. Questions on Notice 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 147

The work to be carried out by the SEC is the construction of 1700 metres of a new single wire earth return high voltage line and the dismantling of approximately 1900 metres of existing single wire earth return high voltage line. The Department of Conservation, Forests and Lands is responsible for the removal of two poles and 1060 metres of conductor, which are located on its property.

LAND TAX (Question No. 122) The Hon. G. P. CONNARD (Higinbotham Province) asked the Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources, for the Treasurer: (a) How many properties in each of the cities of Mordialloc, Sandringham, Brighton, Caulfield and Moorabbin were assessed for land tax in each of the years from 1985 to 1988 and in 1989 to date? (b) How much land tax was assessed in each of those years for each of the municipalities? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources)-The answer supplied by the Treasurer is: I. Details of the number of properties assessed for land tax and the amount of land tax assessed in the years 1985 to 1988 for the municipalities of Brighton, Caulfield, Moorabbin, Mordialloc and Sandringham are available in the paper released to all members of Parliament in March 1989, entitled "Land Tax Data for Victoria" . 2. Estimates for properties assessed for land tax and the amount of land tax assessed in 1989 are as follows: Suburb Properties Assessed

$ Brighton 6452 2704035 Caulfield 10924 3090623 Moorabbin 5790 6284306 Mordialloc 1799 833856 Sandringham 2589 1177012

ASBESTOS-RELATED DISEASES (Question No. 124) The Hon. M. T. TEHAN (Central Highlands Province) asked the Minister for Health: (a) How many cases of asbestqsis have been reported to Health Department Victoria over the past ten years? (b) How many people have died in Victoria from asbestosis or asbestos-related illness over the past ten years? (c) How many people are currently being treated in Victoria for asbestosis or asbestos-related diseases? The Hon. C. J. HOGG (Minister for Health)-The answer is: (a) No cases of asbestosis have been reported to Health Department Victoria over the past ten years. Labour and Industry (Asbestos) Regulations 1978, Regulation 33 provides for such notification. These regulations are administered by the Department of Labour. (b) The Australian Bureau of Statistics figures show for the years 1977 to 1986 fifteen deaths in total from asbestosis and 141 deaths from mesothelioma. It is estimated that approximately 75 per cent of mesothelioma deaths can be attributed to asbestos so that 106 deaths could be attributed to asbestos from mesothelioma in Victoria for those ten years. 148 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Questions on Notice

An association between exposure to asbestos and bronchogenic carcinoma-lung cancer-has been demonstrated in occupational settings. It remains uncertain whether any type of asbestos acting alone can cause lung cancer in non-smokers. The proportion of workers who were cigarette smokers dying of lung cancer attributable to asbestos cannot be readily estimated. The total number of reported deaths from lung cancer for the period 1977 to 1986 is 13 827. (c) There is currently no reliable data in response to this question. During the 1987-88 financial year there were thirteen discharges from Victorian public hospitals with asbestosis as the principal diagnosis and 79 with mesothelioma. These figures include multiple counting of patients discharged more than once during the year and exclude inpatients still in hospital at the end of the year.

RESTORATION FUNDS (Question No. 127) The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL (East Yarra Province) asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, for the Minister for Planning and Environment: (a) What public funds have been provided in each year since 1987 to each of the following restoration funds: Ballarat; Beechworth, Chiltern and Yackandandah; Bendigo; Central Goldfields; Clunes and Talbot; Melbourne; Portland and Queensclift? (b) What projects have been funded by each restoration fund in each year since 1987? (c) What are the names and titles of the people who currently administer the operation of each fund? The Hon. B. T. PULLEN (Minister for Housing and Construction)-The answer supplied by the Minister for Planning and Environment is: The Ministry operates restoration funds in: Maldon Beechworth, Chiltern and Yackandandah Queen scli ff Ballarat Bendigo Talbot and Clunes Central Goldfields. The City of Portland and the Borough of Port Fairy manage their own funds with Ministry assistance and the government, in conjunction with Melbourne City Council, has formed the Melbourne Restoration Fund Ltd. The State government has provided $300 000 in both 1987-88 and 1988-89 matched by equal amounts from the Melbourne City Council. An additional $100 000 was provided from the Bicentennial to establish the fund. These restoration funds are administered in conjunction with the provision of professional heritage advice by the Ministry. The following table shows the amount of State funds directed towards the employment of heritage advisors and the provision of restoration funds to the above seven areas over the financial years 1987-88 and 1988-89. In some instances local authorities have also contributed to the restoration funds. 1987-88 1988-89 EXPENDITURE (a) Employment of heritage advisors 104776 114867 (b) State contribution 14431 (c) Repayments ofloans 355972 368635 TOTAL EXPENDITURE 475 179 483502

The break-up of the funds at items (b) and (c) above across the respective areas is provided in the attached Statement 1. Statement 2 is a schedule of loans and grants approved and paid during the period. Statement 3 is a list of people who currently administer the operations of each fund. le;: ~ -.-<:) :os STATEMENT I AREA CONSERVATION PROGRAM t.oJ <:) Maldon Ballarat Queenscliff Beechworth, Bendigo Talbotand Goldfields TOTAL :os Chiltemand Clunes ~ Yackan- dandah -~. $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 1987-88 EXPENDITURE FROM APPROPRIATION Allocation Loans and grants-carryover 3000 5000 6000 11000 10000 35 000

Appropriation 3()()() 5000 6000 11 000 to 000 35 ()()()I Repayments-Treasurer's Advances 9051 23098 9588 12 197 4189 14559 47 154 119835

Final allocation 12051 28098 15588 23 197 14189 14559 47154 154835 Expenditure 8636 45822 19654 29200 9700 6840 35000 154852 Variance 3415 (17724) (4066) (6003) 4489 7719 12 154 (17)2 li ~ TOTAL EXPENDITURE -From appropriation (above) 8636 45822 19654 29200 9700 6840 35000 154852 -From trust 110 551 105000 215551 I~ \0 0 8636 45822 19654 29200 9700 117391 140 000 370403 (1 Note 1: Includes State contribution of$14 431. 0 Note 2: The apparent overexpenditure of$17 was funded from a re-allocation from the historic towns garden fund. ~ (1 1-4 ~

-\0~ v. -0 8

Maldon Ballarat Queenscliff Beech worth, Bendigo Talbotand Goldfields TOTAL Chiltern and Clunes Yackan- I~ dandah -....J $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 1988-99 ~ EXPENDITURE FROM APPROPRIATION ~ Allocation t:r' Carryover-1987-88 variance 3415 (17724) (4066) (6003) 4489 7719 12154 (17) \0 -\0 Prior year repayments 8486 13081 6506 9548 4913 23304 36274 102 110 0

Appropriation 11 901 (4643) 2439 3545 9402 31022 48428 102094 Repayments-Treasurer's Advances 14526 46886 16641 20127 10240 35773 120012 264205

Final allocation 26427 42243 19080 23672 19642 66795 168439 366298 Expenditure 25250 51364 23220 32281 15479 40738 170950 359282

Variance 1177 (9121) (4140) (8609) 4163 26057 (2511) 7016

TOTAL EXPENDITURE -From appropriation (above) 25250 51364 23220 32281 15479 40738 170950 359282 -From trust 9353 9353

25250 51 364 23220 32281 15479 50091 170950 368635 ItO;: ~ -.c -;:s c;.., C ;:s

~ --.r') ~ Questions on Notice 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 151

STATEMENT 2 RESTORATION FUND EXPENDITURE 1987-88

Loan or Area Recipient Amount Grant $ Maldon Maldon Baptist Church 400 Grant S. A. Cox 2000 Loan D. M. Gibbs, Pty Ltd 5000 Loan D. R. Davies 1236 Loan 8636 Ballarat City of Ballarat 8422 Grant Ministry of Education, Dana St, School 5000 Grant G. B. and E. L. Ebbs 5000 Loan R. and E. Draper 5000 Loan Zorba Nominees 5300 Loan W. Pinder 4000 Loan M. A. andJ. A. Wright 3600 Loan Ramsay, Gaunt and Fraser 7000 Loan G. M.Jensen 2500 Loan 45822 Bendigo R. Hugh and D. Were 200 Grant A. Caldow 8000 Loan D. and S. Hayes 1500 Loan 9700 Beechworth, Shire of Chiltern 1000 Grant Chiltern and Yackandandah Historical Society 1000 Grant Yackandandah Shire of Chiltern 700 Loan Shire ofYackandandah 8000 Loan K. Andrew and K. McCarthy 7500 Loan A. and J. Cahill 3000 Loan St Paul's Anglican Church 5000 Loan J. and E. A. Kraus 3000 Loan 29200 Queenscliff R. Sands 124 Grant J. Blizzard 2000 Loan P. Coyte 800 Loan F. Stanford 6000 Loan H. Shapter 730 Loan R. Champion-Sager 4000 Loan Melbourne Anglican Trust Corporation 6000 Loan 19654 Talbot and Clunes Shire ofTalbot and Clunes 1500 Grant Shire ofTalbot and Clunes 1000 Grant Shire ofTalbot and Clunes 7746 Grant Shire ofTalbot and Clunes 9000 Grant Shire ofTalbot and Clunes 1000 Grant Shire ofTalbot and Clunes 9500 Grant Ballarat Diocesan Trust 700 Grant Ballarat Diocesan Trust 1160 Grant Uniting Church in Australia 500 Grant Uniting Church in Australia 1225 Grant Uniting Church in Australia 1000 Grant Uniting Church in Australia 5500 Grant Clunes Cemetery Trust 7000 Grant 152 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Questions on Notice

Loan or Area Recipient Amount Grant

$ A. J. Matthews and Sons 1360 Grant RSL Clunes Sub-branch 10000 Grant D. M. and E. E. Phillips 17000 Loan Mud and Stone Pty Ltd 33000 Loan A. L. and J. R. Keeble 8000 Loan A. C. Ferguson 1200 Loan 117391 Central Goldfields Shire of Daylesford and Glenlyon 85000 Loan A. Samargis 10000 Loan G. J. Bunn 15000 Loan M. F. Corbett 5000 Loan J. Wade 10000 Loan A. McCormick 5000 Loan M. Marwe and F. Alban 10000 Loan 140000 TOTAL 1987-88 370403

1988-89 $ Maldon C. R. Murdoch 5000 Loan R. T. Fuller 3250 Loan E. Brantingham 4500 Loan V. Kaye 6500 Loan A. Gibson 2000 Loan R. S. and C. M. Cox 2000 Loan K. Liffman 2000 Loan 25250 Banarat J. and M. H. Smith 4000 Loan J. F. Quinn 5500 Loan Positive Contactors 8000 Loan Positive Contractors 7000 Loan G. A. Ingles 7000 Loan B. E. and L. R. Whymark 8128 Loan S. L. and C. J. Grant 1834 Loan D. F. Macleod 2752 Loan N. J. Heard 7150 Loan 51364 Bendigo A. Ward 500 Grant Bendigo Cemetery Trust 4900 Grant Bendigo Cemetery Trust 1350 Grant Creative Image 155 Grant Creative Image 42 Grant Creative Image 32 Grant C. and W. Wilson 1500 Loan R. H. Were 1500 Loan Central Victorian 1500 Loan Shire of Huntly 4000 Loan 15479 Beechworth, I. Schen 2400 Loan Chiltern and B. J. and K. J. Collins 2000 Loan Yackandandah A. Fanning 2000 Loan T. Matthews and J. Gordon 600 Loan Questions on Notice 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 153

Loan or Arca Rccipient Amount Grant 1988-89 $ J. F. McCormack 4000 Loan A. and J. Roseby 4000 Loan B. Jones 3000 Loan A.O'Meara 3000 Loan Anglican Church of Australia 2000 Loan E. Paterson 4000 Loan M. Darling 2281 Loan J. Fendyk 1000 Loan P. Taylor 2000 Loan 32281 'Queensclitf SEC-power pole relocation 1220 Grant Anglican Church of Australia 2000 Grant K. Short 8000 Loan R. Threadwell 3000 Loan G. G. and A. Scorgie 5000 Loan P. Roberts 2000 Loan R. and N. Shalless 2000 Loan 23220 Talbot and Clunes P.A. Kenny 12000 Loan P. A. andJ. M. Miles 3000 Loan Clunes Bowling Club 3000 Grant Roman Catholic Trust 2000 Grant Shire ofTalbot and Clunes 9000 Grant Shire ofTalbot and Clunes 2500 Grant Shire ofTalbot and Clunes 1000 Grant Shire ofTalbot and Clunes 1500 Grant St Arnaud Diocesan Trust 680 Grant Ballarat Diocesan Trust 3000 Grant Uniting Church in Australia 3000 Grant St Thomas Aquinas Church 2000 Grant Anglican Church of Australia 500 Loan T. J. and D. C. Bevern 3500 Loan D. A. Birkinbeil 3411 Loan 50091 Central Goldfields G. and A. Clague 2250 Loan S. S. Barty 10000 Loan P. Sullivan and D. Hill 4700 Loan L. and M. Simmons 10000 Loan Town ofSt Arnaud 25000 Loan K. D. and G. Ali 10000 Loan City ofBendigo 55000 Loan J. R. Coppens 20000 Loan M. Marwe and F. Alban 5000 Loan C. R. Murdoch 10000 Loan D. Bond and M. Towers 13000 Loan R. Ballinger and G. Jackson 6000 Loan 170950 TOTAL 1988-89 368635 154 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Questions on Notice

STATEMENT 3 RESTORA TION FUND COMMITTEE MEMBERS AS AT 23.10.1989 MALOON Cr Moira Whiteman Shire of Maidon-Chair Mr Graham Calder Shire secretary, Maldon Mr John Abbott Regional manager, MPE Mr John Hancock Heritage branch, MPE MrsA. Poole National Trust Fr John Stockdale National Trust Mr Spencer Tunks Community representative Mr Arch Martin Community repres Mr Max Kitchell Regional manager, C, F and L

BEECHWORTH, CHILTERN, YACKANDANDAH Cr John Bruncken Shire of Beechworth Cr Peter Adams Shire ofYackandandah Cr John McLean Shire of Chiltern MrDonPope Shire engineer, Beechworth Mr David Parker Shire engineer, Yackandandah Mr Albert Mitchell Shire engineer, Chiltern Community representative from Beechworth Mr Charles Summerfield Community representative from Chiltern-Chair Mrs Sue Reynolds Community representative from Yackandandah Ms Amanda Ring Heritage branch, MPE Mr Ron Lutton Regional manager, MPE Mr Dudley Shepherd National Trust

QUEENSCLIFF Cr John Barry Borough of Queenscliff-Chair Mr Bill Reynolds Community representative Mr Leon Righetti Community representative Mr Ray Raison Community representative MrEdLukey Community representative Mr Andrew Simms Community representative Mr Stephen Lee Community representative MrNeil Laws Community representative Mr Frank Heweston Community representative Mr Trevor Norton Geelong Regional Commission Mr Rod Duncan MPE,Barwon Ms Megan McDougall Heritage branch, MPE

BALLARAT Mr Jack Chisholm Nominee of City of Ballarat-Chair Questions on Notice 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 155

Mr Gerald Jenzen Town planner, City ofBallarat Mr Peter Leschke Regional manager, MPE, BaHarat Mr David Wixted Heritage branch, MPE Mrs Nina Valentine Community representative, BaHarat Cr Wanda Chapman City of BaHarat Dr O'SuHivan National Trust

BENDIGO Mr Steve Jarick National Trust, Bendigo division-Chair Fr John Stockdale National Trust Ron Watts Engineer and planning officer, Borough of Eagle hawk David Johnston MPE, Bendigo David Breaden Community representative Norm Cameron Town planner, City ofBendigo John Hancock Heritage branch, MPE Mike Butcher Community representative Peter RusseH BCAandE David Bode Ministry of Education Trevor Budge Community representative David Martin Community representative Cr Karl Liffman Borough of Eaglehawk Cr Rod Fyffe City of Bendigo Felicity Kingerlee Bendigo Historical Society

T ALBOT AND CLUNES Cr WaIter Cooke Shire president-Chair Cr Bob Gordon Shire ofTalbot and Clunes Cr lan MacFarlane Shire ofTalbot and Clunes Mr Harry Toole Community representative Mr Charles Fenton Community representative Ms Robyn MuHens Heritage branch, MPE MrBobBevem MPE, BaHarat MrLes Mason Shire engineer, Talbot and Clunes MrRon Pryor Shire se,::retary, Talbot and Clunes

CENTRAL GOLDFIELDS Mr Ray Tonkin Manager, Heritage branch, MPE Mr Ray Supple Historic places section, C, F and L Ms Gwen Schwarts Projects and properties branch, MPE Vacant Victorian Tourism Commission Mr Peter Leschke Regional manager, MPE, BaHarat Mr David Johnston MPE, Bendigo 156 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Questions on Notice

MELBOURNE RESTORATION FUND LTD The Hon. Tom Roper Minister for Planning and Environment-Chair Cr Bill Deveney Lord Mayor, City of Melbourne Ms Roz Hansen Chairperson, Historic Buildings Council Mr Simon Molesworth Chairman, National Trust of Australia (Vic) Mr John Mellors* Secretary, Ministry for Planning and Environment Mr Des Bethke* Chief executive and Town Clerk, City of Melbourne

* Act as joint company secretary.

DUMPING OF TOXIC WASTE (Question No. 136) The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL (East Yarra Province) asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, for the Minister for Planning and Environment: (a) What steps have been taken to carry out an environmental effects study into toxic waste being dumped at Tullamarine? (b) What action has been or is planned to be taken to reduce the risk to the community as a result of the dumping at this site? The Hon. B. T. PULLEN (Minister for Housing and Congtruction)-The answer supplied by the Minister for Planning and Environment is: I. The industrial waste landfill at Tullamarine has been operated by Cleanaway since the early 1970s. It is Victoria's only secure landfill. As currently operated, the site poses no significant risk to the surrounding community. The wastes accepted at the site are controlled by.the terms of the company's EPA licence which prohibits the disposal of highly flammable wastes or untreated highly toxic wastes. Liquid wastes have not been accepted at the site since 1988. This has significantly reduced odour generation. All prescribed wastes transported to the site for disposal must be accompanied by a transport certificate giving details of the waste. 2. Monitoring bores around the site are used to ensure there is no seepage of contaminated leachate into the groundwater. The leachate is collected, treated and analysed before being discharged to sewer. EPA has required the company to cap the site progressively as it is filled and to install a gas collection and treatment system. When full, capping of the site will be completed. The site will then be landscaped and will provide additional open space in the area.

ALCOHOL AND DRUGS SERVICES PROGRAM (Question No. 138) The Hon. M. T. TEHAN (Central Highlands Province) asked the Minister for Health: What are the details of the following expenditure under Health Department Victoria's Alcohol and Drugs Services Program for 1988-89 on-(i) office requisites, $86 786; (ii) postal and telephone, $104 340; (iii) fuel, light and power, $177 157; and (iv) incidental expenses, $51 480? The Hon. C. J. HOGG (Minister for Health)-The answer is: Operating expenditure under Health Department Victoria's financial information management system is summarised by nine subgroups: 210 1 Travel and subsistence 2 Office requisites, equipment 3 Books and publications 4 Postal and telephone 5 Motor vehicle, purchase and running 6 Fuel, light, power and water Questions on Notice 7 March 1990 COUNCIL 157

7 Incidental expenses 8 Stores, equipment, maintenance 9 Medicine and drugs Each expenditure subgroup is supported by a range of accounts. For the expenditure details as requested, the account details are as follows:

Office requisites is comprised of the following accounts: Printing reports Facsimile-rental and materials Printing stationery Photocopy paper Printing forms Computer stationery Printing medical records Special EDP stationery Stationery Office equipment-purchase Office requisites -rental Photocopying-rental and materials -repair and maintance

Postal and telephone is comprised of the following accounts: Postage bulk Data lines Postal charge Coin telephones Postage stamps Telecom-rent PO box rental -calls, other -telex

Fuel, light and power is comprised ofthe following accounts: FL&P-Coal FL&P-Water Coke Gas Electricity Gas levy Electricity grant Registration of pressure vessels Fuel and oil Other

Incidental expenditure is comprised of the following accounts: Advertising recruitment Advertising Advertising publicity Advertising other Bank charges Bank accounts debits tax Scholarships etc. Australian traineeship system FID Ex gratia payments Compassionate grant Freight including truck hire Insurance-Workers compensation WorkCare grant Insurance-WorkCare levy Insurance-5 day $250 Insurance-self Insurance-industrial Insurance-ISR ($1000 excess) Insurance-public liability Insurance-ambulance motor vehicle Insurance-other Property valuation Legal expenses Legal inquiries Sampling costs Licence-registration Lectures and instructions Training-external Security services Conference fees Educational requisites Educational supplies Hire of film Film purchase Photography costs Rental of property Other rentals Expenses-other Hospitality costs Hospitality costs-non CGM Patient gratuities Accommodation costs Microfilm-not EDP VD-GID tests Video materials Work experience Health CATS In-service training Occupational health and safety The Alcohol and Drug Services Program consists of Pleasant View Centre, Gresswell Centre, Smith Street Clinic, Heatherton Hospital and ADSU Central. Expenditure details requested have been incurred as follows: 158 COUNCIL 7 March 1990 Questions on Notice

Office Postal and Fuel, Light Requisites Telephone and Power Incidental $ $ $ $ Heatherton 6733 15000 30000 675 Gresswell 27774 31 522 39548 17687 Pleasant View 23832 48284 90172 8088 Smith Street Clinic 4110 9436 17437 10 901 ADSU Central 24337 98 14 129(i) 86786 104340 177 157 51 480 (i) Includes $10 800 WorkCare penalty departmental charge. The time and resources required to further analyse this expenditure cannot be justified.

POLLUTION IN PORT PHILLIP BAY (Question No. 145) The Hon. G. P. CONNARD (Higinbotham Province) asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, for the Minister for Planning and Environment: (a) What tests are undertaken by the Environment Protection Authority to ascertain the various types of pollution in Port Phillip Bay? (b) What were the relative results of such tests over the past three years? The Hon. B. T. PULLEN (Minister for Housing and Construction)-The answer supplied by the Minister for Planning and Environment is: 1. The EPA conducts tests on water quality which include the analysis of trace metals along with clarity indicators, nutrients, algal pigments, bacteria, and physico-ch~mical measurements. 2. The results of tests conducted during 1987 and 1988 have been published and provided to the Parliamentary Library. The results of tests conducted during 1989 are still being prepared but will be forwarded to the Library when available.

DELAYS IN WELFARE FUNDING (Question No. 168) The Hon. G. P. CONNARD (Higinbotham Province) asked the Minister for Health, for the Minister for Community Services: Is the Minister aware that delays of up to four months are being experienced by Victorian welfare organizations in receiving payments due by the government; if so, what action will be taken to speed up the processing of.payments so welfare organizations are not financially disadvantaged? The Hon. C. J. HOGG (Minister for Health)-The answer supplied by the Minister for Community Services is: The government is acutely aware of the important role of non-government agencies in the provision of welfare services throughout Victoria. The majority of grants paid by my department to non-government organisations are paid in advance of the period being funded, generally quarterly or monthly. The alternative accommodation and care program has historically experienced some delays in the payment of subsidies; however this has been resolved through a system of cash floats introduced this financial year. Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 13 March 1990 COUNCIL 159

Tuesday, 13 March 1990

The PRESIDENT (the Hon. A. J. Hunt) took the chair at 3.3 p.m. and read the prayer.

ROAD SAFETY (AMENDMENT) BILL This Bill was returned from the Assembly with a message relating to amendments. It was ordered that the message be taken into consideration later this day.

TELEVISING OF PROCEEDINGS The PRESIDENT-Order! Before the commencement of questions without notice I indicate to the House that I received from the Channel GTV9 television network this morning a request for permission to film question time this day. After consultation with the two Leaders who were then available I agreed to that request, and I understand that since then the third Leader has also confirmed agreement to that request.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

STATE BANK VICTORIA The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL (East Yarra Province)-I direct my question to the Leader of the Government, who represents the Premier. Prior to the event, was the government aware in any manner of State Bank Victoria decidin~ to issue an injunction against the Sunday Herald and of its threat to issue an injunctIon against the Leader of the Opposition? Ifnot, does the government support these injunctions being issued? The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts)-The answer is no. The Hon. R. I. Knowles-To both questions? The Hon. E. H. W ALKER-If the answer to the first part of the question is no I do not believe a response to the other part is called for. The Hon. R. M. HALLAM (Western Province)-In answer to a question on his role, the Minister Assisting the Treasurer said that this included the responsibility "from time to time" to provide assistance on specific issues. Has the performance of the State Bank been one such specific issue and what assistance has he provided? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-The responsibility for the operations of the State Bank is the responsibility of the Treasurer. From time to time he seeks advice from various members of Cabinet and the Premier. It is his initiative to decide when that might take place from time to time. In doing that, it is also true that the final decision about what should occur in respect of major policy issues is for the Cabinet to make on advice from the Treasurer. I look forward to assisting the Treasurer from time to time when requests are made from him.

STATE LIBRARY The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI (Melbourne West Province)-Will the Minister for the Arts inform the House of the progress of the redevelopment and restoration of the State Library? 160 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Questions without Notice

The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts)-This morning the Premier and I announced the go-ahead for construction of the $29·2 million first stage of the redevelopment and restoration of the State Library. The whole job is now costed at some $115 million. This first stage begins the process, which will take some eight years to complete because there will be a major decanting with the museum being taken from this site and relocated on the Southbank site. The first stage includes erecting two six-storey buildings at Russell Street on either side of the present building and in keeping with it and of the same height. The administration, the La Trobe Library and one or two other uses will be transferred to those buildings so that the second phase of the work can get under way. Tenders will be let in June for the construction of those two buildings and work will begin in July. That same contract will include a plant room-which will be sufficient to air-condition the whole of the complex-and a major substation. The building of the historic State Library was begun in 1856, as was work on this Chamber. Our forebears in the community built with great foresight. One need only reflect that it was just 21 years after the founding of the colony that such magnificent buildings were begun by' people who, as I said, could see so far into the future. The time has come for the hbrary to be upgraded, particularly as the whole block will be devoted to library use whereas it was once a museum and a f.!llery as well as a library. The architects are Ancher, Mortlock and Woolley Pty Ltd, WIth Ken Woolley in charge of the project. The State Library must service people from all walks of life in Victoria. Although libraries have been established in every secondary school, college and university, whereas in the past there was only the State Library, this library must serve the needs of the public, including primary and secondary students through to those who are studying for their PhOse Its servIceS must be highly flexible. The skylights in Queen's Hall and McCoy Hall will be uncovered so that daylight once again will flood into the main building. McCoy Hall will become one of the major reading rooms. Access to it will be through the foyer to the public reference area and up a half level into McCoy Hall. The current reading room will become reading rooms that are capable of providing seating accommodation for some 740 people compared with the present 306. Storage will be more than doubled to 29 000 square metres. It will provide space for ready access to 300 000 books rather than the present 50 000. It will also provide storage for 1·5 million volumes with a capacity to extend that at a later stage. I am delighted that this major project to move the museum and extend the library is about to get under way. Within a few years the community will enjoy and be proud of two major cultural facilities.

STATE BANK VICTORIA The Hon. M. A. BIRRELL (East Yarra Province)-I direct a question to the Minister for the Arts representing the Premier. Does the government support an injunction being issued by State Bank Victoria against the Leader of the Opposition? The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts).-This is a continuation of the question I answered earlier. I was able to answer no to the first question that he asked. In fact, he is now asking for an opinion. The Hon. K. M. Smith-Stand up and be counted! Questions without No~ce 13 March 1990 COUl':CIL 161 \ \ The Hon. E. H. WA$ER-I do not appreciate that comment. Mr Birrell asks for an opinion which requir~s that I consult with the Premier. The Hon. M. A. BirreU\nterjected.

The Hon. E. H. W ALK~R-Of course I must consult. I was able to answer no to his first question; I am not ip a position to answer yes or no to his current question. I am happy to take it to the Minister responsible, who happens to be the Premier, and I shall give Mr Birrell an answer in due course.

HEALTH BUDGET The Hon. W. R. BAXTER (North Eastern Province)-Will the Minister for Health advise what discussions, if any, she has had with the Treasurer about the possible impact on the health budget of the State Bank losses and what assurances, ifany, she has received that despite the State Bank's staggering losses sufficient funding will be available in the next Budget to alleviate the crisis currently overwhelming public hospitals in this State? The Hon. C. J. HOGG (Minister for Health)-I thank Mr Baxter for his question, although I emphatically reject his final sentence. I have not had specific talks about the health budget with the Treasurer, although I am due to begin such talks later this week. I should have thought that the additional allocation to the health budget of $4 million for emergency and critical care this year and the $23 million for the full year to be added to the budget base of the health system should be sufficient reassurance that the health budget will receive, as it has received since 1982, incremental style growth.

ENERGY CONSERVATION The Hon. W. A. LANDERYOU (Doutta Galla Province)-I direct a question to the Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources, who last month released the government's Green Paper on renewable energy and energy conservation. Will the Minister advise the House whether there has been any early public response to that document and, if so, what action the government has already taken to promote discussion of the issues involved? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources)-It is clear that the community has enormous expectation that the work on both renewable energy issues and more efficient use of existing energy sources becomes a major plank of government policy in the 1990s. Honourable members interjecting. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-It is disappointing to hear the derisive comments of Opposition members who have not seen fit to develop any policy in this area in the 1980s, let alone in the 1990s. The Hon. M. A. Birrell interjected. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-I heard Mr Birrell's derisive comment last week about the issue of lighting and it is quite clear that in the commercial area alone a change in the lighting policy would have a substantial effect because 40 per cent of energy consumption in the commercial area is directly attributable to lighting. 162 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Questions without Notice

More than 1500 requests have been received for copies of the renewable energy paper released last December and more than 200 people were present at a public meeting held last week on renewable energy issues. Oearly, there is a public expectation that governments should work towards achieving the greenhouse target of a 20 per cent reduction of CO2 emissions by 2005. The implications of that aim on power station construction in the Latrobe Valley are being addressed. I join with the Federal member for McMillan, Mr Barry Cunningham, in his comments on that issue. Clearly, while the construction ofLoy Yang A 1 and 2 units will peak both this year and next year, bringing Victoria's energy requirements to 90 per cent capacity, in respect of the second unit due for completion in 1994 there is significant interest in the work Amory Lovins will be doing as a critique of the management study to show both how energy can be used more efficiently for lighting purposes in the commercial sector and how renewable energy can be used in domestic, commercial and the industrial sectors. The community has also shown its support for the government's proposal to introduce a new regulation which would make it compulsory for new home owners to install both wall and ceiling insulation. It will mean an additional cost of $1500 for the construction of each new home but it will produce energy savings of $300 a year from the reduction of energy costs. Those initiatives, together with further initiatives that will flow from Amory Lovins's work this year, are of tremendous importance. A major saving in energy is involved; further, if there is a reduction in the pressure of the capital works construction of the State Electricity Commission, that will be an additional benefit; most of the funding required for the capital works program in the Latrobe Valley allocated to power station construction will be reduced. As most of the capital works program is financed by debt, ifthere is a reduction or a deferral of capital works there will be a corresponding reduction in the obligation of State and Federal governments to borrow in Australia and overseas. In turn, any deferment of major construction makes it easier within the global borrowing limits to have more funds available for health, education and transport. Moreover, a reduction in costs provided by more efficient use of energy both commercially and privately will result in an immediate reduction in home ener$Y bills, an improvement in individual standards of living, a corresponding increase In disposable income and a reduced need for global borrowings. The environmental issue and the implication on debt and borrowings from a deferment in capital works construction by the State Electricity Commission in the Latrobe Valley, in the terms expressed in today's issue of the Latrobe Valley Express, are of immense social and economic significance to this community. I hope in that context the Opposition and the National Party will start to address these issues constructively, as the government is doing.

STATE BANK VICTORIA The Hon. HADDON STOREY (East Yarra Province)-I ask the Minister Assisting the Treasurer: is it not a fact that the exact nature of the liabilities of State Bank Victoria to be assumed by the government is yet to be determined and, if so, does this mean that the government expects new liabilities to be established? What process is the government undertaking to determine this? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-From advice I have received I understand that Mr Storey has received a written response to a question that he asked last week concerning the magnitude of the debt of Tricontinental Questions without Notice 13 ~Aarch 1990 COUNCIL 163

Corporation Ltd and about that part of it that will fall due during the financial year commencing 1 July 1990 and ending on 30 June 1991. The Treasurer has made it clear that the whole of that provision will not fall due as an obligation on the State Budget in the financial year commencing 1 July. He has stated that only part of the $795 million will fall due as an obligation in the next financial year commencing 1 July 1990. He has also made it clear that the obligation will fall due progressively over a number of financial years commencing 1 July 1990. In a published statement the Treasurer has also said that the likely impact on the recurrent portion of the State Budget will be approximately $50 million per annum in the financial year commencing 1 July. Advice I have received from the Department of Management and Budget shows that, towards the end of the financial year, State Bank Victoria will reach a view, independently and in the normal commercial way in which it operates, about the part of the $795 million that will fall due in the financial year commencing 1 July 1990 as well as the subsequent impact that will have on the State Budget-which will be, as the Treasurer has said, round about $50 million per annum. When the information is made available to the Treasurer by the State Bank towards the end of the financial year it will be made public and given to Mr Storey. Further, it is clear from the letter of the Treasurer in response to Mr Storey's question that to date there is no suggestion, based on advice from Touche Ross and Co., for the period ending 22 February of any obligation or responsibility for any provision beyond the $795 million. The Hon. D. M. EVANS (North Eastern Province)-Did the Minister Assisting the Treasurer raise any objection to the Treasurer's demand that Mr lan Renard and Or Duncan Ironmonger resign from the board of State Bank Victoria when it is acknowledged that neither had any direct involvement in the lending decisions taken by Tricontinental Corporation Ltd? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-In respect of the State Bank issue the government took a decision, on advice from the Treasurer, that all of the directors of the State Bank had a responsibility bothjointiy and severally in respect of the operations of the bank. The government was more than happy to act on that advice and supported that proposition unanimously. The Hon. Haddon Storey-What about you, though? The Hon. D. R. WHITE-Unanimously!

MENTAL HEALTH RESEARCH INSTITUTE The Hon. JOAN COXSEDGE (Melbourne West Province)-Honourable members will be aware of the international standing of Victoria's medical and clinical research institutes. Will the Minister for Health tell the House of recent developments at the Mental Health Research Institute in the area of psychiatric research-which could come in handy for the future well-being of members of this House? The Hon. C. J. HOGG (Minister for Health)-I thank Mrs Cox sedge for her question-although I am not certain that all members of the House will want to be associated with her last sentence! On 2 March this year I had the pleasure of attending the opening of the Aubrey Lewis Unit at Royal Park Psychiatric Hospital. The opening of the unit was celebrated by a symposium, a special guest at which was Emeritus Professor Michael Shepherd from the University of London. 164 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Questions without Notice

The important thing about the Aubrey Lewis Unit is that it forms a central clinical facility for the National Health and Medical Research Council's schizophrenia research unit, which was established in January 1988. The research unit is the only one of its kind in Victoria and is closely linked with the Mental Health Research Institute, the Department of Psychological Medicine at Monash University and Royal Park Psychiatric Hospital. Honourable members will be aware of the proud record of research at Royal Park hospital in recent years, which has been continued by Professor Bruce Singh, who is the foundation professor of psychological medicine based at Royal Park hospital, and by Or David Copolov, who was appointed as the director of the Mental Health Research Institute in 1986. Dr Copolov moved the Mental Health Research Institute of Victoria from its previous address at the Parkville centre to Royal Park Psychiatric Hospital. Professor Singh and Dr Copolov are now codirectors of the National Health and Medical Research Council Schizophrenia Research Unit. That disease touches many Victorians and Australians and their families. The disease is being studied at that unit; the research is generating an enormous amount of information around which it is hoped a good deal of progress will be made in the future. Also the field of dementia is being studied and in particular Alzheimer's disease, which affects a number of healthy people. I am delighted to inform the House that last year the Mental Health Research Institute fortunately attracted Professor Colin Masters, who is regarded as a world authority in the pathology and causation of Alzheimer's disease. We do not take much time to celebrate some of the work being done in our research institutes, but certainly there is a most robust and dynamic area of work being done at Royal Park hospital, led by Professor Bruce Singh and Dr David Copolov; in the future the results are likely to benefit perhaps hundreds of thousands of Australians.

GAS AND FUEL CORPORATION CHAIRMAN The Hon. ROSEMARY VARTY (Nunawading Province)-In response to my question on 7 March 1990 about the future of Mr Neil Smith, Chairman of the Gas and Fuel Corporation, the Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources replied, as reported in H ansard: I look forward to discussing his future when his term as chairman expires. Will the Minister be asking Mr Smith to continue, and will he be offering Mr Smith a further contract? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources)-That is a matter between the government and the chairman of the corporation at the appropriate time. When those discussions have occurred, I shall provide advice and seek endorsement of that advice from Cabinet. As I indicated to the House previously, and as I said to Mrs Varty at the time the earlier question was asked, the government-and the whole of the Victorian community-owes a great debt to the chairman of the corporation because of the outstanding contribution he has made to the Gas and Fuel Corporation. One must remember that each year, as a result of an outstanding agreement entered into with Esso-BHP in the 1950s for the provision of gas, not only do Victorians enjoy the lowest gas tariffs for industrial and commercial purposes in Australia but also, as a result of negotiations entered into in the 1980s with the Gas and Fuel Corporation, Questions without Notice 13 March 1990 COUNCIL 165 the State government receives from the Gas and Fuel Corporation by way of the public authority dividend a contribution of $270 million a year towards the State Budget. The public authority dividend and company taxation provide a tremendous boost to the efficiency and effectiveness of the Gas and Fuel Corporation under the leadership of its chairman, Mr Neil Smith.

1996 OLYMPIC GAMES The Hon. R. S. IVES (Eumemmerring Province )-Some community groups have expressed concern about the possible impact of the 1996 Olympic Games bid on the supply of housing. Will the Minister for Housing and Construction advise the House of any initiatives he has put in place to address those community concerns? The Hon. B. T. PULLEN (Minister for Housing and Construction)-It is legitimate for the community to be concerned about any social impacts associated with the 1996 Olympic Games. In Montreal the impact of the games on housing is a topic of considerable concern, and this has been detrimental to the positioning of Montreal's bid for the games. The Victorian government has put in place a public process of consultation and has appointed a panel chaired by Fay Marles. The panel has been established to advise on how to minimise social impacts. The Opposition does not know very much about social impacts, particularly in relation to housing. Housing is not an area about which the Opposition has much to say, either at a State or Federal level. The Opposition's performance over the past has been pitiful. The Ministry of Housing and Construction is providing an opportunity for groups that are concerned about social impacts to work with the department over the next few months to prepare a submission for the Premier on what can be done to alleviate any untoward social impacts of conducting the Olympic Games in Melbourne. There is wide representation of concerned groups in Melbourne, such as the Brotherhood of St Laurence; the Tenants Union of Victoria; the Victorian Council of Social Service and the Melbourne City Mission, which will be represented by the Reverend Don Saltmarsh, a former representative of the Liberal Party. He at least aspires to some principles and is not coerced by the new right, and is prepared to be involved in questions of social impact. It is a pity that most Liberal Party members do nothing but deride the mention of social impacts and social justice. Those words and ideas have long been lost from the Liberal Party's vocabulary. That is also evidenced when the subject of housing is mentioned. All the opposition parties can do is to carry on; they have nothing to say, they have no housing policies and no mention is made about social justice. The Reverend Bob Uren, Director of Hanover Welfare Services, is also a member of the group which will work with the Department of Housing and Construction over the next two months to prepare a report to be received by the Premier so that all citizens of Melbourne will be aware not only that the Olympic Games can be supported and will be of benefit for those interested in sport but also that disadvantaged people will not be pushed out of their houses. Measures will be put in place to protect them.

STATE BANK VICTORIA The Hon. M. T. TEHAN (Central Highlands Province)-I direct my question to the Minister Assisting the Treasurer. Pursuant to the power granted under the provisions of the State Bank Act, what monitoring role did the Treasurer or the Minister Assisting the Treasurer play in considering State Bank loans after concern 166 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Petition for bad debts of the bank and its subsidiary, Tricontinental Corporation Ltd, was raised? The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister Assisting the Treasurer)-Consistent with Ministerial practice about statutory authorities involved in commercially confidential loans, the Treasurer has made it explicitly clear that he has not been involved in any commercial loan transactions of the State Bank, or any other matters relating to the monitoring of the bank's activities, nor has he indicated the frequency with which he may have met from time to time with the chairman or chief executive to discuss State Bank policy. I look forward to taking the matter up with the Treasurer. The Hon. M. T. Tehan-And powers under the legislation. The Hon. D. R. WHITE-It is up to the Treasurer to answer. In my role as Minister Assisting the Treasurer I do not have any day-to-day association with the State Bank; I have responsibility for other utilities, and I am more than happy to indicate to the House the nature of those arrangements from time to time.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES IN COUNTRY VICTORIA The Hon. JEAN McLEAN (Boronia Province)-Will the Minister for Local Government advise whether any initiatives are being taken by the State government to assist local government in the provision of services in country Victoria? The Hon. M. A. L YSTER (Minister for Local Government)-Although this matter may not provoke the excitement or vigour of some other questions that have been asked, I believe it is worthy of the attention of the House because it relates to issues that are an example of the excellent commonsense and cooperation that can take place. One way in which services can be provided to remote and isolated areas of Victoria is by the promotion of colocation. On Friday I had the pleasure of officially openin~ a facility that exemplifies the principle of colocation. I opened the new communIty resource centre in Robinvale, which has been provided by the Shire of Swan Hill. I commend the shire for its initiative. Within that resource centre there are already twelve different agencies of local, State and Federal governments, as well as local groups. They provide a one-stop shop for that community in a way that is not threatening to the community and is easily accessible. The shire, together with the State government, has shown foresight in opening a neighbourhood house at the rear of the centre so that the clients of this one­ stop shop can have access to a range of other services, among which is child-care. I compliment the Shire of Swan Hill for its initiatives. The shire, in turn, is delighted with the responses that have been received from a wide range of State and Federal agencies. I commend that model to other similar municipalities throughout the State.

PETITION Visiting child health nurse service The Hon. R. J. LONG (Gippsland Province) presented a petition from certain citizens of Victoria praying that the government immediately reverse its decision to terminate the visiting child health nurse service in Warragul. He stated that the petition was respectfully worded, in order, and bore 383 signatures. It was ordered that the petition be laid on the table. Command Paper 13 March 1990 COUNCIL 167

NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts)-By leave, I move: That the resolution of the House of 7 March 1990 appointing the Honourable D. E. Henshaw to the Natural Resources and Environment Committee be rescinded. Last Wednesday two government members were discharged from attendance on the committee by the Legislative Assembly and, at the government's request, steps were taken in the Legislative Council to appoint Mr Henshaw as a replacement for one of those members. It was not realised until after the resolution was carried that six members of the Council-the maximum permitted under the Parliamentary Committees Act-were already appointed to the committee. This motion, therefore, will correct the record and the appointment will have to be made from honourable members in the Legislative Assembly. The motion was agreed to.

COMMAND PAPER The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts) presented, by command of His Excellency the Governor, the report of the Supreme Court judges for the year 1988. It was ordered that the report be laid on the table. On the motion of the Hon. HADDON STOREY (East Yarra Province), it was ordered that the report be taken into consideration on the next day of meeting.

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Vehicle occupant protection The Hon. G. P. CONNARD (Higinbotham Province) presented a report from the Social Development Committee on vehicle occupant protection, together with appendices, extracts from the proceedings and a minority report. The Hon. G. P. CONNARD (Higinbotham Province)-I move: That they be laid on the table and be printed. In support of that motion, I wish to inform the House of the significance of the recommendations, and I particularly direct attention to the minority report, which is supported by me, Mr Craige, the honourable member for Berwick in the other place, Mr Maclellan, and the honourable member for Portland in the other place, Dr Napthine, together with my National Party colleagues in the other place, the honourable member for Rodney, Mr Maughan, and the honourable member for Gippsland South, MrWallace. The minority report recommends that Parliament establish a Select Committee on road safety to examine all aspects of road safety. The six members of the opposition parties on the Social Development Committee support the minority report and beg the Parliament of Victoria to note the remarks in the minority report. The motion was agreed to. On the motion of the Hon. HADDON STOREY (East Yarra Province), it was ordered that the reports be taken into consideration on the next day of meeting. 168 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Papers

PAPERS The following papers, pursuant to the directions of several Acts of Parliament, were laid on the table by the Clerk: Gas and Fuel Corporation Superannuation Board-Report and financial statements for the year 1988-89. Planning and Environment Act 1987-Notice of Approval of Amendment L6 to the Bairnsdale (Shire) Planning Scheme. Statutory Rules under the following Acts of Parliament: Pathology Services Accreditation Act 1984-No. 31, together with copies of the following documents which, by section 32 ofthe Interpretation of Legislation Act 1984, are also required to be laid upon the Table: AS 1216.1-1984-Classification, Hazard Identification and Information Systems for Dangerous Goods-Part I-Classification and Class Labels for Dangerous Goods. AS 1216, Parts 2 to 4-l981-Classification, Hazard Identification and Information Systems for Dangerous Goods. Part 2-Hazchem Emergency Action Code Part 3-NFPA Hazard Identification System. Part 4-UN Substance Identification Numbers. AS 2252, Part 1-1981-Biological Safety Cabinets-Biological Safety Cabinets (Class I) for Personnel Protection. AS 2252.2-l985-Biological Safety Cabinets-Part 2-Laminar Flow Biological Safety Cabinets (Class 11) for Personnel and Product Protection. AS 2647-1 983-Biological Safety Cabinets-Installation and Use. AS 2714-1984-The Storage and Handling of Hazardous Chemical Materials-Class 5.2 Substances-Organic Peroxides. Criteria for Assessment of External Quality Assurance Programs-National Pathology Accreditation Advisory Council-Volume I-Clinical Biochemistry, Haematology, Microbiology, March 1984. Retention of Laboratory Records and Diagnostic Material-National Pathology Accreditation Advisory Council, September 1987. Safety in Laboratories- AS 2243, Part l-1982-General. AS 2243, Part 2-1982-Chemical. AS 2243.3-l985-Part 3-Microbiology. AS 2243.4-1986-Part 4-Ionising Radiations. AS 2243, Part 5-1 980-Non-Ionising Radiations. AS 2243, Part 6-1 980-Mechanical Aspects. AS 2243, Part 7-1980-Electrical Aspects. AS 2243.8-1 986-Part 8-Fume Cupboards. The Constitution Act Amendment Act 1958-Statement of functions conferred upon the Electoral Commissioner, February 1990. On the motion of the Hon. B. A. CHAMBERLAIN (Western Province), it was ordered that the report tabled by the Clerk be taken into consideration on the next day of meeting. Notices o/Motion 13 March 1990 COUNCIL 169

NOTICES OF MOTION The Hon. D. M. EV ANS (North Eastern Province)-I move: That consideration of the Notices of Motion, Business to Take Precedence be postponed until the next day of meeting. In so doing I advise the House that I will be withdrawing notices of motion Nos 1 and 3 from the Notice Paper. Notice of motion No. 1 refers to Regulation 7 (a) (iii) of the Tobacco (Promotion of Exempt Sponsorship) Regulations 1989. After examining the regulation when it was first promulgated, the Subordinate Le~slation Subcommittee of the Legal and Constitutional Committee expressed senous concern about it. However, in a written reply, the Minister for Health advised the subcommittee that amendments to the regulation would be introduced to satisfy the concerns expressed. A motion was moved and carried by the Legal and Constitutional Committee that the protective notice of motion be withdrawn. Notice of motion No. 3 refers to the Water (Lake Eildon Recreational Area) (Amendment) Regulations 1989. Again the Subordinate Legislation Subcommittee of the Legal and Constitutional Committee expressed some concern about that regulation. However, on receipt of an extensive reply from the Minister responsible, members of the committee were satisfied with the explanation. Again the committee moved that the protective notice of motion be withdrawn. Therefore, I propose to withdraw notices of motion Nos 1 and 3. The PRESIDENT-Order! Before I put the question that consideration of the Notices of Motion, Business to Take Precedence be postponed until the next day of meeting, will Mr Evans clarify whether he desires notices of motion Nos 1 and 3 to be withdrawn? The Hon. D. M. Evans-Yes, that is my intention. The PRESIDENT-Order! The question is: that consideration of the Notices of Motion, Business to Take Precedence be postponed until the next day of meeting. The motion was agreed to.

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION The Hon. D. R. WHITE (Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources)-I move: 1. That a joint Select Committee be appointed to inquire into and report upon the proposals contained in the Constitution (Proportional Representation) Bill considered by the Parliament in 1988, and in particular- (a) necessary changes to the electoral system for the Legislative Council in order to provide fair representation for all Victorians through the adoption of a quota-preferential (proportional representation) voting system; (b) taking into account the different systems adopted in other Australian States and other Western democracies, whether a system of proportional representation should be based on a single "whole of State" electorate or on several regionally based or other electorates and, if the latter option is preferred, the basis on which boundaries should be determined and the number of representatives of such regionally based or other electorates; (c) whether the system should include "overlapping terms" or whether all representatives should be elected at anyone time and concurrently with the Legislative Assembly; (d) if it is decided to use overlapping terms, how it would be determined whether a particular member has a long term or a short term, and by whom; (e) what form the ballot paper should take and in particular whether a group voting option should be offered; 170 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Proportional Representation

(j) the method of filling casual vacancies; (g) the establishment of rules to determine the formality of a vote cast, i.e., how many squares need to be filled in, and in what manner, to ensure that the ballot paper is valid; and (h) any other matter arising from and incidental to the question of proportional representation. Reporting 2. That the committee may report from time to time but shall present its final report no later than 31 December 1990. Membership 3. That the committee shall consist of ten members comprising five members of the Council and five members of the Assembly. Quorum 4. That five members of the committee shall constitute a quorum of the committee, but a quorum shall not consist exclusively of members of the Council or members of the Assembly. Chairman 5. That the committee shall elect one of the government members of the committee to be chairman. 6. That the chairman shall have a deliberative vote and, in the event of an equality of votes, shall have a casting vote. Deputy Chairman 7. That the committee may elect a deputy chairman who shall exercise all the powers and perform all the duties of the chairman at any time when the chairman is not present at a meeting ofthe committee. Sitting Times and Places 8. That the committee may sit in such places in Victoria as seems most convenient for the proper and speedy despatch of business. 9. That the committee shall not sit while either House is actually sitting except by leave of the House and may not, while either House is actually sitting, sit in any place other than a place that is within the Parliament building. Evidence 10. That the committee may send for persons, papers and records and report the minutes of evidence from time to time. 11. That the committee shall, unless it otherwise resolves, take all evidence in public. 12. That the committee shall keep a record of all evidence given before it and determinations made by it. 13. That the committee have the power to authorise publication of any evidence given before it in public and any document presented to it. 14. That as soon as practicable after the completion of each day's proceedings a transcript of the evidence taken in public by the committee shall be published. Payment of Members 15. That the committee be a committee to which section 51A of the Parliamentary Committees Act 1968 applies.

Conflict with Standing Ord~rs 16. That the foregoing provisions of this resolution so far as they are inconsistent with the Standing Orders and practices of the Houses shall have effect notwithstanding anything contained in those Standing Orders. Expiry of Resolution 17. That this resolution shall have effect up to and until 31 December 1990. Proportional Representation 13 March 1990 COUNCIL 171

The purpose of the motion is to appoint a joint Select Committee to inquire into and report upon the proposals contained in the Constitution (Proportional Representation) Bill considered by Parliament in 1988. The reform of the Legislative Council, including the introduction of proportional representation, was a clearly stated government position during the 1985 and 1988 State elections. The government does have a mandate from the people for these reforms. In 1988 the government sought to implement that mandate through a Bill which my colleague the Minister for the Arts introduced in the House. In response no argument against proportional representation was led by the Opposition or the National Party. In fact, the argument against that specific Bill was on the basis that the opposition parties were not in agreement with the specific proposal. The opposition parties in the Legislative Council rejected that Bill. Once again the opposition parties used their numerical advantage in the Council to obstruct the wishes of the Victorian people as expressed through their votes in the 1985 and 1988 elections. I remind Mr Evans, who interjects, that proportional representation now exists in every Upper House in this country, including Western Australia, with National Party support. Since that time the government, in its campaign policy speech on 20 September 1988, specifically repeated its commitment to proportional representation in the Legislative Council to bring Victoria into line with other States of Australia. In October 1988 the government received a clear mandate to introduce its reform. In the 1970s the role of the Legislative Council was referred to the then Statute Law Revision Committee for review. During debate in the committee at that time it was made clear to members of the government party that the Liberal Party was prepared to consider all issues relating to reform of the Upper House provided that the government dropped its intention to abolish the Legislative Council. Therefore, there was a rider, and it was made clear that any proposal for reform of the Upper House would be considered on its merits if the government dropped its abolition plank. I remind honourable members of that proposal and the fact that the abolition plank has been dropped. It is pleasing to note the presence in the Chamber this afternoon of honourable members who served on that committee-and are now on the Subordinate Legislation Subcommittee of the Legal and Constitutional Committee-during the course of those discussions. I speak of members like Mr Guest, who would be aware of the circumstances under which those discussions occurred at a committee level, and others would also have been present. When the government introduced the Bill on proportional representation in 1987 it was made clear that the issue of concern was that the government was attempting to bring about other reforms to the Victorian Constitution by including them in a Bill introducing the concept of proportional representation. In 1988 the government introduced a new Bill which dealt with proportional representation alone. It was introduced separately, in anticipation that it would be received differently because it was attending to the major concerns of the Opposition. In 1987 the Opposition stated that the reason for objecting to the Bill that was then introduced was that it included other issues relating to constitutional reform. In 1988 it was stated that the issue was the specific Bill that was then before the House. There were three levels of criticism: firstly, a criticism from the Subordinate Legislation Subcommittee that the abolition plank was present; secondly, a criticism 172 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Proportional Representation that the 1987 Bill incorporated other constitutional matters; and, thirdly, a criticism that the 1988 Bill was not a proportional representation proposal to which the Opposition was prepared to accede. In other words, on the latter occasion the Opposition found a new concern: the manner in which proportional representation was being introduced. During the debate on that matter in this House the government sought an adjournment of the debate. Government members were prepared to make themselves available for further discussion on the merits of proportional representation because the Opposition said its concern was the manner in which proportional representation was being introduced, not that the government was introducing proportional representation. The government was prepared to examine other proposals, such as different boundaries, and other systems of proportional representation. The government made it clear in the debate that it would like the opportunity of examining the merits of such proposals. Historic constitutional change should not be treated lightly, and the government has always been prepared to examine the issue of proportional representation in detail. To date the Opposition has denied the House that opportunity. The motion that I have moved will enable all the reservations and concerns that have been expressed to date to be dealt with in an appropriate forum, because the House will have the opportunity of and the vehicle for undertaking such an examination. I propose the establishment of a joint Select Committee which will comprise five members of the Legislative Council and five members of the Legislative Assembly. The committee would provide a final report no later than 31 December 1990. In particular, the committee would examine necessary changes in the electoral system to provide fair representation for all Victorians through the adoption of a quota preferential voting system; single whole-of-State electorates, regionally based or other electorates and the basis on which the boundaries and the numbers of representatives should be determined; whether the system should include overlapping terms; how to determine the length of terms if overlapping terms existed; the form of the ballot paper and group voting options; the method of filling casual vacancies; the establishment of rules to determine the formality of a vote cast; and any other matters arising from and incidental to the question of proportional representation. The government has a mandate to consider proportional representation in the Legislative Council and it is up to Parliament to ensure that the wishes of the people are carried out as has occurred in other Upper Houses of other Parliaments. On two occasions the opposition parties have rejected Bills prepared by the government. This is an opportunity for the opposition parties to support the proposal and participate in a full examination of proportional representation prior to the introduction of this historic reform. The government indicates that it is continuing to pursue this and will remain persistent in the pursuit of the issue. It is seeking to make major constitutional change on a considered basis in respect of the role and operations of the Upper House, so that it reflects the notion of the reform the government is seeking, namely, in respect of proportional representation. The government indicates also that the nature of the misgivings felt previously have been dealt with. The issue of the abolition· of the Upper House has been dealt with by the government as a policy commitment and by the conference of the Labor Party. The issue of the proposed 1987 le~slation, which was knocked out on the grounds that it included extraneous constitutional-matters, has been dealt with by this resolution. The notion of the proposed 1988 legislation, about which there were misgivings because of the form of the Bill, has been dealt with by this motion. Proportional Representation 13 March 1990 COUNCIL 173

I indicate also that the government wishes to pursue the matter and seeks to do so by resolution of both Houses of Parliament to establish a joint Select Committee to investigate this issue and this issue alone. There is sufficient evidence to suggest, as a result of debate that has occurred from time to time over the past ten to fifteen years within the former Statute Law Revision Committee, that if an appropriate setting is created-one free from the issue of the abolition of the Upper House and free from a specific Bill-due and fair consideration will be given to this proposition. I indicate that the government has on more than one occasion said that it will put this specific issue of its policy as a policy plank, and that that ought to have some weight. I indicate also that the government will continue to pursue the matter throughout the life of this Parliament in order to find a constructive resolution. Over the past ten or fifteen years no case has been argued by any person who has addressed this issue that the establishment of a Parliamentary committee to examine proportional representation is an inappropriate way of dealing with the matter. The Hon. B. A. Chamberlain-Up to 1985 you were going to abolish this place. It was not relevant before! The Hon. D. R. WHITE-In response to Mr Chamberlain's interjection, it is correct that the government had an abolition plank of long standing in its platform. It is also correct that one of the major inhibitors of effective debate on reform of the Upper House was that the now Opposition-then the government-said that it was not prepared to consider the issue because it questioned the bona fides of the now government so long as it retained its policy on the abolition of this Chamber. The government has given serious consideration to the role of the Upper House within caucus and in Cabinet and the policy-making forums of the party and has resolved at each of those policy-making levels that the abolition plank should be removed. As Mr Chamberlain said, that was done in early 1985 and no suggestion has been made in the five years since, that there should be an attempt to reintroduce the policy. It was a significant and historic decision and the change in policy is now firmly implanted in the party, and the government has now put in place a proposal that should be given due consideration if the Legislative Council is, as honourable members on the other side have often said, to be a genuine House of review. The electoral boundaries of the Legislative Council effectively mirror the set-up in the Legislative Assembly; so it does not constitute an effective House of review. In fact, ar$ument to that effect was led by members of the former Statute Law Revision CommIttee from time to time, albeit with a certain caveat. It is true that the government achieved substantial constitutional reform during the 1980s, and it is hoped that that will continue in the 1990s as a result of significant consultation. The four-year term was a product of serious and extensive negotiation across the parties and it produced an agreed outcome. We believe the establishment of a committee that can give significant and serious consideration to the proposals in the Bill is necessary, and we shall continue to push for that. No argument against it has been led in the past and no argument can be foreshadowed for denying the government the opportunity of a forum to pursue in a constructive fashion the introduction of proportional representation and the opportunity of considering, across parties, as the former Statute Law Revision Committee did from time to time, the role of the Upper House. It is clear that the community expects that this will be attended to. In both the 1985 and 1988 State elections more than 50 per cent of the community showed a preference 174 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Agricultural Industry Development Bill for proportional representation. That should be a sufficient basis for this Parliament giving it due consideration. Nowhere is that more appropriate than in the Upper House. A failure on the part of the Upper House to deal adequately with the issue of proportional representation in a bipartisan, serious and considered fashion through a Parliamentary committee denies the rights of individuals in the community, who, by their voting habits, have expressed the wish that Parliament deal with the matter. The failure to do that would mean that the Upper House is out of touch with community expectations. I do not believe that will occur. I believe, now the government has met the reservations of the Opposition and the National Party, the proposal for a Parliamentary committee will proceed, and I look forward to the motion being supported. On the motion of the Hon. HADDON STOREY (East Yarra Province), the debate was adjourned. It was ordered that the debate be adjourned until Tuesday, March 27.

AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT BILL The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister for the Arts)-I move: That this Bill be now read a second time. This Bill has three major purposes: 1. to provide enabling legislation to assist agricultural industry groups to raise money for market promotion and research; 2. to repeal the Wine Grape Processing Industry Act 1978 and put in its place a mechanism to provide market pricing information for wine grape growers and wine makers in the Mildura and Swan Hill areas; and 3. to provide a way by which grower and processor groups could discuss and recommend a price prior to harvest similar to that proposed for wine grapes. I shall provide some background on the Bill and then deal briefly with its major proposals. BACKGROUND In recent years agricultural industry groups have become increasingly aware of the need for greater investment in market development, promotion and research to compete successfully on domestic and export markets. A number of industries which are supported by statutory marketing arrangements have been able to raise funds for these purposes. Also, industries which are organised nationally have begun to take advantage of Commonwealth government support such as that offered by the Australian Horticultural Corporation. However, a number of smaller Victorian agricultural industries, particularly in horticulture, which are not supported in these ways recognise the need to increase promotion and improve the marketing of their products. A number of horticultural industry groups have for several years requested simple statutory help lo enable them to raise funds for marketing and research without the overheads or permanency ofa statutory marketing authority. Enabling legislation to allow participating industry groups to raise levies for promotion and research is a major part of this Bill. The other major component of the Bill relates to price negotiating committees and particularly to the setting of prices for multipurpose wine grapes grown in the Mildura and Swan Hill areas. Agricultural Industry Development Bill 13 March 1990 COUNCIL 175

In 1987 the Public Bodies Review Committee recommended in its majority report that price fixing of multipurpose wine grapes grown in the Mildura and Swan Hill areas should not be continued. Arrangements were made in 1988 to repeal the le~slation under which these grape prices were set. However, following requests by WIne grape growers for more time to establish an alternative market price information mechanism, the price-fixing legislation was retained for the 1989 vintage. Since that time extensive discussions have been held with affected winemakers and wine $fape growers to develop an alternative to price fixing. In developing this alternatIve a framework has been established to provide options for the operation of other agricultural price negotiating committees. LEGISLA TION TO ASSIST AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY GROUPS TO RAISE MONEY FOR PROMOTION AND RESEARCH Under this enabling legislation participating industry groups in a defined area may request that an industry development committee be established to administer fees collected from all growers in that area to assist with market promotion or research. Before a committee can be formed there are requirements for a public report, public meeting, submissions from affected parties and a poll of participating producers to be held. It must be clearly demonstrated that there is widespread industry support before an industry development committee can be established. Such committees would operate for a maximum of four years. Groups which have shown interest in this legislation include producers of stone fruit, berries, apples, nuts, table grapes and vegetables. This enabling legislation, however, is equally applicable to other agricultural industries such as deer, oats or cereal rye. WINE GRAPE PRICING This Bill will repeal the Wine Grape Processing Industry Act 1978 and replace it with a negotiating committee which will recommend likely market prices for multipurpose and other wine grapes grown in the Mildura and Swan Hill area. Winemakers and wine grape growers will be involved in recommending prices prior to vintage which will be publicised in the production areas. These will be recommended prices only but they should provide market information to the industry and the basis for negotiations between individual growers and winemakers. The negotiating committee will also be able to set terms and conditions of payment for wine grapes purchased in the Mildura and Swan Hill areas. FRAMEWORK FOR PRICE NEGOTIATING COMMITTEES This Bill provides a way by which grower and processor groups could discuss and recommend a price prior to harvest in a way similar to wine grape pricing. This could be used as a general framework whereby the functions of existing price-fixing committees could be simplified or limited in a way similar to that proposed for wine grape pricing. The legislation does not enable additional price-fixing bodies to be established but allows for a range of options to be considered and implemented as the role of price fixing is reviewed in the future. This Bill provides an enabling framework to assist participating agricultural industry groups to raise funds for market promotion and research; repeals the Wine Grape Processing Industry Act 1978 but provides support for the wine grape industry in line with the recommendations of the Public Bodies Review Committee; enables grower and processor groups to discuss prices prior to harvest; and provides a number of options which can be considered when agricultural price-fixing committees are reviewed in the future. I commend the Bill to the House. 176 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Land (Further Miscellaneous M aUers) Bill

On the motion of the Hon. R. S. de FEGELY (Ballarat Province), the debate was adjourned. It was ordered that the debate be adjourned until Tuesday, March 27.

LAND (FURTHER MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS) BILL The Hon. B. T. PULLEN (Minister for Housing and Construction)-I move: That this Bill be now read a second time. The Bill provides for the revocation of permanent reservations in respect of certain parcels of land, the particulars of which are described in the schedules to the Bill. The use of these parcels of land for the purpose for which they are reserved is either no longer required, or the land is more urgently required for other purposes. The appropriate honourable members have been consulted in respect of land in their provinces. The Bill amends the Albert Park Land Act 1972 to correct references in line with amendments outlined in Part 4 of the Bill. It also repeals the Dookie Agricultural College Land Act 1972 and the Bendigo Aerodrome Act 1973 as these Acts no longer serve any useful purpose. I refer to each of the Parts of the Bill. PRELIMINARY-PART 1 This Part states the purpose of the Bill and provides for the commencement dates of various provisions. SEBASTOPOLLAND-PART 2 The land referred to in item 1 of Schedule 1 and shown by hatching on the plan in Schedule 2 is part of St Georges Park, Sebastopol. The park is an area of 5· 7 hectares of Crown land in Beverin Street, Sebastopol permanently reserved in 1965 for the recreation, convenience and amusement of the people. The Borough of Sebastopol was appointed as a committee of management for the reserve in 1940, with the reserve being formally vested in the borough under section 16 of the Crown Land (Reserves) Act in 1979. The reserve is extensively developed with facilities for a wide range of community interests including soccer, squash, an adventure playground, a swimming pool and clubrooms for elderly citizens. Part of a bitumen road known as Vickers Street bisects the reserve. The road has existed for more than fifteen years and provides access to the reserve's facilities and adjoining residential developments. Use of the portion of the reserve as a road is inconsistent with the purposes of the existing reservation. The Bill provides for the area of 3187 square metres used as road to be revoked from the permanent reserve. After revocation, the land will be proclaimed as a road under section 25 (3) (c) of the Land Act 1958. The Borough of Sebastopol supports the proposal. NORTH BENDIGO LAND-PART 3 The area of 4·912 hectares referred to in item 2 of Schedule 1 is permanently reserved for railway purposes and vested in the Public Transport Corporation under the Transport Act 1983. Since the early 1970s, 1·165 hectares of the reserve no longer required for railway purposes was developed under lease for industrial purposes in conjunction with adjoining freehold land owned by the lessee, Pacific Textiles. Land (Further Miscellaneous M aUers) Bill 13 March 1990 COUNCIL 177

The Public Transport Corporation desires that the permanent reservation be revoked to enable it to obtain the freehold of the land held under lease. The freehold of the site is to be granted to the corporation under section 46 of the Transport Act 1983. Revocation is necessary as section 8 of the Crown Land Act 1978 prevents sale of reserved land. The corporation then proposes to offer the freehold of the area held under lease to the existing lessee. The revocation of the remainder of the reserve does not affect the control and use of that land by the corporation as that land remains vested in the corporation. The City of Bendigo supports the proposal. ALBERT PARK LAND-PART 4 The land referred to in item 3 of Schedule 1 and shown by hatching on the plan in Schedule 3 is part of Albert Park Reserve. That reserve consists of about 225 hectares of Crown land permanently reserved for public park purposes and managed by an incorporated committee of management under the Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978. As part of Melbourne's bid for the Olympic Games 1996, the Premier announced that a major new sporting complex will be built at the Albert Park Reserve. The new facilities are required for basketball, badminton, table tennis, swimming and volleyball and will include the new State swimming centre. During the games the complex will seat 48000 people and in post-games 19000 people. It is proposed to locate the complex on the northern end of the lake, on and adjoining the site of the existing South Melbourne Cricket Ground. This site has been selected because of its proximity to the proposed Olympic Village and the need to redevelop the poor facilities at the site. The new complex will replace existing facilities at the cricket ground and at the existing sporting complex further west on Albert Road. The new facilities will occupy a lesser area than the cricket ground and the existing sporting complex thus creating an additional 18 000 square metres in the park for passive recreation. Existing leaseholders and permissive tenants will be offered the opportunity of relocating into new facilities or accepting normal compensation. 'The cricket club is to be relocated to another site within the reserve. Although there are many existing recreational developments in Albert Park Reserve recent legal opinion is to the effect that a change in the purpose of the reservation is necessary to allow the construction of the proposed sporting complex on the subject land. The Bill revokes the reservation over this part of Albert Park Reserve and provides for re-reservation of that land for public recreation. This will demonstrate to the International Olympic Federation that there is no legal impediment to delivering an appropriate site for Olympic competition. The Bill has been drafted in a way which will allow flexible responses to be made as the future management of the area for the Olympics and afterwards is developed. The provisions ofthis part will only be brought into operation if Melbourne's Olympic Games bid is successful. The Albert Park management plan being prepared by widely represented interest groups under the guidance of the Department of Conservation, Forests and Lands also proposes development of a sporting complex in this, location. However, as that plan has not yet been approved, provisions suitable to that plan cannot be included in a Bill at present. If Melbourne's Olympic Games bid is successful that plan would be made compatible with the proposed sporting complex. If the bid is unsuccessful, legislation in line with any approved plan will be sought at that time. The Albert Park Committee of Management and the South Melbourne City Council are agreeable to the proposal. Session 1990-7 178 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Land (Further Miscellaneous Matters) Bill

LILYDALE LAND-PART 5 The land referred to in item 4 of Schedule 1 and shown by hatching on the plan in Schedule 4 is part of Lions Park at Lilydale. The park is an area of 6004 square metres of land adjoining the Olinda Creek and Main Street in Lilydale and is permanently reserved for the purposes of public park and picnic ground. The park is managed by the Shire of Lillydale as a committee of management appointed under the Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978. To rationalise the movement of traffic servicing nearby shops, the Shire ofLillydale has constructed a narrow road between John and Hutchinson streets on land adjoining the reserve. While most of the road is situated on freehold land which is being purchased by the Shire of Lillydale, an area of 52·4 square metres of Lions Park has been used for the road, leaving a further 6· 3 square metres isolated from the reserve. In view of the present use of the land for other purposes, the Shire of Lillydale sought revocation of the combined area of 58· 7 square metres from the reserve and the Bill includes the appropriate provisions. This will enable the 52·4 square metres either to be sold to the Shire of Lillydale for use as a road or to be proclaimed as a road under section 25 (3) (c) of the Land Act 1958. The 6·3 square metres, which is fenced in with adjoining freehold land, is to be sold to the owner of that land under section 209 of the Land Act 1958. Lions Park was reserved in accordance with an approved recommendation of the Land Conservation Council. That council has agreed to the proposed revocation.

DOOKIE LAND-PART 6 The Dookie campus of the Council of the Victorian College of Agriculture and Horticulture is situated on an area of some 2443 hectares of land which is permanently reserved under the Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978 as a site for the purposes of an agricultural college by the provisions of the Victorian College of Agriculture and Horticulture Act 1972. The reserve is controlled by the Council of the Victorian College of Agriculture and Horticulture. As a result of proposals to construct a deviation of the Midland Highway to improve safety and overcome problems associated with the flooding of the Broken River, the Dookie Agricultural College Land Act 1972 was enacted to authorise the roadworks. That Act authorised the construction of the highway through the permanent reserve, provided for the excision of 6·976 hectares of land from the reserve and for the closure of surplus road comprising 9·095 hectares. The Act also provided for the addition of an area of 9·804 hectares of Crown land, including the closed roads, and freehold land owned by the Roads Corporation to the permanent reservation. These works did not proceed and an alternative design has been developed. A major concern in the 1972 proposal was the creation of a dangerous intersection. Moving the deviation further south not only removed the dangerous intersection but it was found that the whole deviation was also better located for reasons of safety, staging of works and less earthworks. The current proposed realignment through the Nalinga Hills still requires the construction of the road through the agricultural college reserve. Minor works at the intersection of the highway and Dookie-Gowangardie Road require use of part of the reserve. The current proposal requires the excision of 4·046 hectares of land from the permanent reserve and will sever a further area of 3·150 hectares, in two parcels, from the balance of the reserve. Health (Amendment) Bill 13 March 1990 COUNCIL 179

The Roads Corporation and Dookie campus h.ave agreed that the severed areas should also be excised from the reserve and, together with adjacent areas of surplus roads, Crown lands and freehold land owned by the Roads Corporation, comprising a total of 8·22 hectares should be permanently reserved for the conservation of an area of natural interest. A copy of the plans of the land involved in the proposal and referred to in Schedule 5 are available in the Parliamentary Library for perusal by honourable members. As the Dookie Agricultural Land Act 1972 will no longer be of any use, the Bill provides in Part 7 for its repeal. GENERAL PROVISIONS-PART 7 This Part provides for the repeal of the Dookie Agricultural Land Act 1972, which is no longer required because of replacement provisions in the Bill. The Part also repeals the Bendigo Aerodrome Act 1973 which no longer serves any useful purpose because the loan that was authorised by that Act has been repaid in full. This Part also amends the Albert Park Land Act 1972 to exclude provisions relating to the South Melbourne Cricket Ground from that Act. This provision in the Bill will come into operation only when provisions in Part 4 of the Bill relating to Albert Park Reserve are brought into operation. Another provision in this Part is the usual clause to ensure that no compensation is payable by the Crown as a result of anything done under or arising out of this Act. Finally, this Part instructs the Registrar of Titles to make the necessary amendments to Land Titles Office records as a result of the operation of this Act. I commend the Bill to the House. On the motion of the Hon. R. I. KNOWLES (Ballarat Province), the debate was adjourned. It was ordered that the debate be adjourned until later this day.

HEALTH (AMENDMENT) BILL The message from the Assembly relating to the amendment in this Bill was taken into consideration. Assembly's amendment: l. Clause 2, line 9, omit "I January 1990" and insert "a day to be proclaimed". On the motion of the Hon. E. H. Walker (Minister for the Arts), for the Hon. C. J. HOGG (Minister for Health), the amendment was agreed to.

EDUCATION (AMENDMENT) BILL The message from the Assembly relating to the amendment in this Bill was taken into consideration. Assembly's amendment: 1. Clause 2, lines 7 and 8, omit "I January 1990" and insert "a day to be proclaimed". The Hon. E. H. WALKER (Minister responsible for Post-Secondary Education)-I move: That the amendment be agreed to. 180 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Rooming Houses Bill

The Hon. HADDON STOREY (East Yarra Province)-I move: That the debate be now adjourned. I suggest that the debate be adjourned until later this day. The Hon. E. H. Walker-It's only a date. The Hon. HAD DON STOREY-Yes, but I have no instructions on it. The motion for the adjournment of the debate was agreed to, and it was ordered that the debate be adjourned until later this day.

ROOMING HOUSES BILL The debate (adjourned from October 24, 1989) on the motion of the Hon. B. T. Pullen (Minister for Housing and Construction) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed. The Hon. K. M. SMITH (South Eastern Province)-The opposition parties have been looking forward to this debate for some time. The Bill has been redrafted because, after speaking to many people about the issue, the Opposition discovered that many of the concerns it had were not addressed in the Bill. Although the Minister has claimed that the Bill has been redrafted as a result of further consultation, it is the Opposition that called for the redrafting of the Bill because of the need to do something positive to overcome the many problems faced by the owners and the tenants of rooming houses. Rooming houses comprise groups of rooms that contain one or more communal bathrooms, kitchens and laundries. The tenants live in single rooms within the houses and mix with other tenants in the communal rooms if they wish. The number of establishments that the Ministry has turned into rooming houses, as well as the number of rooming houses it has renovated, has increased in recent years. The private sector is being squeezed out of the market because of over-regulation by the government and by local government. Although it is important that rooming house tenants are protected from the dangers of fire, the regulations imposed by the Metropolitan Fire Brigades Board make life difficult for rooming house owners in the private sector. Rooming house tenants usually come from the lower socioeconomic groups; they are seeking privacy and do not want to have to take too much responsibility for the places in which they live. In 1947 there were approximately 5000 rooming houses in Victoria. In 1983 there were 917 rooming houses, comprising 730 apartment houses, as they were called at that time, and 187 boarding houses; and by 1985 only 550 rooming houses remained, which amounts to only 10 per cent of the number in 1947. The Ministry of Housing and Construction owns 12 per cent of all rooming houses in the State, although it has purchased many such houses during the past couple of years. Under freedom of information provisions, I have been able to obtain information from the Ministry about the number of houses it has purchased or renovated in recent years, as well as the costs involved. I have been alarmed not only by the price of purchasing such rooming houses but also by the amount of money the Ministry is spending to renovate them. For instance, the total cost per room can range from $15000 to $53 000, even though tenants share bathrooms and kitchens. A rooming house in Canterbury Road, South Melbourne cost the Ministry ofHousing and Construction $77 000 a room to buy-that is a disgrace! The funds expended on one room would almost enable the purchase of one house. A twenty-room building in Ferrars Place, South Melbourne cost $62000 a room; another, in Victoria Avenue, Rooming Houses Bill 13 March 1990 COUNCIL 181

Albert Park, cost $61 000 a room. Those large expenditures attract very little rental; whole families could be housed for the cost of a room that accommodates one person. The Ministry has examined the possibility of building new rooming houses; some figures are a little more attractive. Recently accommodation which cost the Ministry $37000 a room was opened in Frankston. I consider that to be reasonable. However, accommodation in Brunswick Road, Brunswick, cost $61 000 a room; also, it cost $51 000 for a room in a new property in Brougham Street, North Melbourne. That is excessive spending by the Ministry and by the government. Many in the community will be concerned about the way the Ministry of Housing and Construction is prepared to splash its funds around; certainly the rooming houses accommodate those who are in need of accommodation. However, I doubt that there is a need as urgent as the desperate need of the families that contact my electorate office. The}' may be living in cars because they cannot obtain Ministry houses. Others ring my office; they complain that they have contacted the Ministry and requested one-bedroom units. They ask when their names are likely to be removed from the waiting list-only to be told they will never get off the list! Their names may have been on that list for three years, but they are told they will never be removed from it! It is a disgrace and the Minister should hang his head in shame. Many people wanting two or three-bedroom houses must wait for up to five years; yet the Ministry of Housing and Construction spent more than $1 million renovating a mansion in St Kilda which it purchased for a huge capital cost. It is senseless that the Ministry's allocation of funds is not directed to those in need-families that are desperately in need of accommodation. The honourable member for Evelyn in the other place and I visited approximately ten rooming houses in St Kilda, Elsternwick and Footscray. When we visited the old renovated mansion in St Kilda I could not believe it was a rooming house; it was a mansion. That accommodation-dependent upon the income of tenants-returns approximately $42 a week for each room. Each management group appointed by the Ministry to look after the rooming houses receives $21 of the $42 a week. I am concerned at the small return to the Ministry. The pay-back period for the Ministry-and not taking into account the interest on funds-is of concern. A property in Lygon Street, North Carlton, was purchased in 1987 for $533 000, and is averaging $35 000 a year for its fifteen rooms. On the basis of each tenant paying $44.52 a week and the Ministry receiving only $21 a week because of the management group fee, the cost of the property based on the yearly rental return to the Ministry will be made up in approximately 31 years-an extremely lon~ time! Another property in Beaconsfield Parade, South Melbourne has a pay-back penod of about 35 years. However, when tenants receive either the dole or a minimum income, the situation is different; for example, on that basis, the $533 000 property in North Carlton would result in a pay-back period of 214 years. All honourable members know what can be done with statistics but I have grave concerns about the Ministry of Housing and Construction spending its funds incorrectly. Apparently the Ministry is prepared to renovate mansions instead of building new accommodation. The Ministry should examine the lower capital cost of construction in new areas, and of moving people away from the city into country areas where probably they could be accommodated for a lesser cost. In 1985-86 many houses were constructed in country locations; the room cost was different from the $77000 and $60 000 expenditure for each room in Melbourne. For example, a property in High Street, Traralgon, cost $18 000 a room; another in Mildura cost $27 000 a room; another near Geelong cost $23 000 a room; while a Ballarat 182 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Rooming Houses Bill property averaged $28000 a room. Those are very different costs from the large expenditure by the Ministry to accommodate those who are not desperate for housing. The shadow Minister for Housing and Construction in the other place has spoken to representatives of the Tenants Union of Victoria, including a further deputation today. That union has approximately twenty pages of further submissions for the Opposition and the Minister. I doubt whether the union will obtain much relief from the government benches because the Minister appears to have lost sight of the purposes of the Bill; namely, to provide for those people housed in rooming houses. At this stage, landlords and their tenants have an understanding of cooperation but the Bill will put those people at odds. They will be placed in situations where they will be running to the Residential Tenancies Tribunal at each turn, instead of cooperating. At present, the manager or owner of a property is normally on hand to discuss problems with the tenants. By introducing the Bill, the Minister for Housing and Construction is putting people at odds with one another. They will be fighting and taking one another to the Residential Tenancies Tribunal for stupid reasons arising from provisions in the Bill. The Rooming Houses Bill is the final part of the trilogy. The Residential Tenancies Act was the first part; the Caravan Parks and Movable Dwellings Act was the second part and the proposed legislation is the third. The reason for widening the scope of the Residential Tenancies Tribunal-RTT­ is to look after people in rental accommodation. The tribunal will be used as a tool by people who do not want to pay their bills; it will be used to run down landlords financially and to test their morals. The Minister states that the Bill is important as it gives people the right to go to the tribunal. When one examines the track record of the tribunal and the number of tenants who go before it one must wonder what the Minister is thinking. He does not care about the tenants. Only 5 per cent of tenants use the tribunal because they are the smart ones who want to hang in there and push on. Some of them have been placed in a difficult spot by the landlord and the outcome of the tribunal's decision rests on the landlord's head; for instance, if he or she has done the wrong thing by the tenant, he or she deserves to run into problems with the tribunal. Landlords represent 95 per cent of appearances before the tribunal. The Minister, through the proposed legislation, grants the tenants the opportunity of using the tribunal, but they already have that opportunity. One must question the legitimacy of the tribunal to solve problems because of the red tape that it creates which, in turn, takes a long time to solve problems. . Those living in rooming houses will not be in the position of wanting to go to the tribunal because they tend to move from one type of accommodation to another in a short time; they walk out of one rooming house one morning leaving behind all their gear and equipment and go to another rooming house that night to get a bed. They are the people who will be unable to use the provisions of the proposed legislation. The Minister has stated that the Ministry of Housing and Construction is putting together a booklet for tenants to read and that that booklet will advise tenants of their rights. It should make it easier for them, but they are not the people who will care about the hassles it will create for them. The Hon. B. T. Pullen-You are condescending; you don't think people can think, except yourself. People have rights and they should have a chance to exercise those rights. Rooming Houses Bill 13 March 1990 COUNCIL 183

The Hon. K. M. SMITH-Tenants have rights; they are exercising their rights and appearing before the Residential Tenancies Tribunal. All they want is a roof over their heads and somewhere to store their clothes. The Minister proposes to introduce legislation that will set up a battlefield in which the tenant unions will stir up trouble. Unfortunately, from time to time the tenants will be led by the tenants unions that will try to overstep the mark when the proposed legislation is introduced. At times the tenants unions do a good job and receive funds from the Ministry of Consumer Affairs. That is why they will probably come to the Opposition again with another twenty pages of changes that they would like made to the Bill. In an article in the Age of 2 November 1989, Mr Roper, the Minister for Planning and Environment, was critical of the Ministry of Housing and Construction. He wants to take away some of its control. The Ministry of Housing and Construction does not have the guts to go in and do the right thing for the tenants. The Ministry has thrown out 91 people from their houses and many people have left their houses after having received their first notice. One wonders whether the Ministry will have the courage to pursue the rooming house people who have not paid their $21 a week rent. Will it allow that to increase to many thousands of dollars, as has been the case with other types of accommodation? Will the Ministry be game enough to throw them out by using the provisions of the proposed legislation? The Ministry's actions will be held up for three to four months before the matter is finally listed for hearing by the Residential Tenancies Tribunal, and I ask: will the Ministry be prepared to sit back for many weeks until the orders are issued for those people to be removed from their houses and for them to pay back rent? At present landlords or rooming house owners talk out their problems with the tenants and come to an arrangement. That is a far better system than what the Ministry proposes in the Bill. The Opposition has tried to work out an effective way so that residents and rooming house owners can be protected. The Minister does not care. The first Bill was a hash and the second Bill is a mishmash that will create further problems if it is passed. The Opposition proposes to move amendments during the Committee stage to sort out the matter. The Opposition will have further discussions with the tenants unions and other groups. I am disappointed in the Minister and in the way the Bill has been introduced. The Opposition has to sort out the Bill for the Minister, as it has done on many occasions. It is unfortunate that it has taken so long for the Bill to be introduced. The sooner it is debated in the Committee stage, the better. The Minister has said today that the Bill will not be debated in the Committee stage. The Opposition will be working hard to ensure that any problems are sorted out to enable the Bill to be workable, to ensure that each person who is involved with rooming houses has some rights and to ensure that those rights are respected. The Hon. R. A. BEST (North Western Province)-The Rooming Houses Bill has been a long time coming. It first appeared on the Notice Paper last year during the autumn sessional period and it has been rewritten once. The National Party proposes to move amendments during the Committee stage and will seek negotiations with the Minister on certain aspects of the Bill in an effort to introduce the best possible legislation. 184 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Rooming Houses Bill

Three questions should be asked: firstly, will the Bill benefit the tenants who reside in this type of accommodation; secondly, will it benefit the rooming house owners, and, thirdly, is there a need to regulate this section of the accommodation sector? According to the second-reading speech the Minister for Housing and Construction had no doubt in his mind that this area should be regulated. He stated: All in all this Act will simply formalise the provision of tenancy protection to the only segment of the tenancy market as yet untouched by legislation. It is an important initiative which is essential in the interests of social justice and which implements an aspect of tenancy reform first outlined in 1982 and repeated prior to the 1988 State election. I do not disagree with that, so long as the legislation is necessary. Do we need the proposed legislation? In my opinion it is essential that we have some form of regulation that addresses some of the difficulties that are currently being experienced. Rooming houses play an important role in accommodating those at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale by supplying housing at affordable rates. However, an important question is: why were changes made to the original Bill that was introduced during the 1989 autumn sessional period? Clearly it was because the Minister realised that that Bill was totally unacceptable to the opposition parties. The Hon. B. T. Pullen-It was deliberately held over for consultation. The Hon. R. A. BEST-The Bill before the House overcomes many of the problems contained in the original Bill. The Hon. B. T. Pullen-Don't you support people having the opportunity to read a Bill between sessions? The Hon. R. A. BEST-The point I make to the Minister is that a Bill should have been researched properly and everybody should have had the opportunity of scrutinising it prior to its introduction. This is a matter that the Minister needs to address. It would have been preferable for the Bill to have been debated last year. The Hon. B. T. Pullen-People do not always comment straightaway. The Hon. R. A. BEST-I shall not respond to that interjection. After consulting rooming house operators, the Tenants Union of Victoria and other people associated with the industry, I foreshadow that the Liberal Party, in conjunction with the National Party, will be moving amendments during the Committee stage to rectify many of the problems still contained in the Bill. In an effort to gain first-hand knowledge and an understanding of the industry, I spent three days visiting many of the privately owned and operated rooming houses in the St Kilda, Fitzroy and Toorak areas. I evaluated both the types of people who were using rooming house accommodation and the operation of the establishments. Many of the buildings operated as rooming houses represent a much greater value as properties than they realise by operating as rooming houses. The return on the investment in these properties is not high when one considers that many of them are situated on prime real estate. I am convinced that, if the proposed legislation is passed, undue hardship will be inflicted on rooming house operators and many may decide to close their establishments and realise the value of their properties as real estate assets. This action will have a drastic impact on the accommodation industry, which, as the Minister said in his second-reading speech, is in a severe decline. The Minister said: In 1947 there were almost 5000 rooming houses in the then metropolitan statistical district, of which 70 per cent were located in the inner ring. In 1983 the total number of rooming houses in Victoria was 917, comprising 730 apartment houses and 187 boarding houses ... the period from 1984 to 1988 has seen a Rooming Houses Bill 13 March 1990 COUNCIL 185 drop in rooming house numbers from 144 to 100, serving a population of 21 00 persons ... there are now fewer than 600 rooming houses remaining in Victoria. Should we force legislation and regulations on an industry that is in decline or should we allow the industry to continue to operate as it has done under the Residential Tenancies Act? I do not believe any harm will be done by bringing in legislation that will benefit the industry but to bring in legislation based on ideological or philosophical beliefs purely to satisfy factional interests is not the way to go. The Rooming Houses Bill addresses many of the problems identified in the original Bill but the people affected by the Bill are still concerned about its provisions. The Tenants Union of Victoria, the operators and the opposition parties are all concerned about the Bill. I shall refer to some of the views that were expressed to me during my research into the Bill. Mr Greg McConville, project worker for the Tenants Union of Victoria, in his letter of 30 October 1989 says: The Bill, which is currently before the Legislative Council, is markedly different from its predecessor which was introduced to the Legislative Assembly in autumn of this year. The main change to the Bill is contained in clauses 6 (3), (4) and 41 (7)-(12), which introduce a system of "self-help" eviction, whereby a rooming house owner can evict a resident of a rooming house without giving notice and without reference to the Residential Tenancies Tribunal. Mr McConville further states that he is concerned about the dangerous situation of a rooming house owner evicting a resident in order to defuse a dangerous situation. He said that it allowed the rooming house owner to be the sole arbiter of what constitutes dangerous or violent behaviour. The union believes that if a rooming house owner evicts a tenant it could lead to charges of trespass and assault against the owner. Mr McConville continues: In summary, the self-help proposal is unnecessary, open to abuse and is of demonstrable detriment to all parties. Why then has the Ministry of Housing chosen to introduce this draconian measure? Clearly, as the single largest landlord of rooming houses in Victoria, it is in the Ministry's interest to do so. The union directed attention to a number of other problems in this poorly drafted Bill. In brief, the Bill falls far short of the protections provided by the Residential Tenancies Act, which applies to over 70 per cent of rooming houses. Why are those who will be affected by the Bill adamant about its being a poor piece of legislation? I received a letter dated 24 Au~ust 1989 from Mr David Bogatin of the Toorak Private Hotel in which he expressed hIS concern about the proposed legislation: The proposed Rooming House Bill offers no worthwhile protection to the rooming house owner. We feel that the potential losses to the proprietor will result in further closures of rooming houses. The letter was cosigned by other rooming house proprietors who represented 586 rooms in rooming house accommodation. He goes on to say: The aim of rooming house proprietors is to run a viable business. That is one of the key issues that must be understood and appreciated. The Ministry of Housing and Construction is the largest proprietor of rooming houses, and it would appreciate the need to give operators of rooming houses as much opportunity as possible to run viable businesses so that they will provide accommodation for people at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale. Mr Bogatin's final comment is: We believe that rooming houses provide a much-needed service to our society and implementation of certain parts of the proposed Act will result in further rooming house closures. This will further aggravate the current housing shortage. 186 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Rooming Houses Bill

That is a vital point. There is no doubt that rooming house tenancy is unlike any other tenancy. In most cases, people using such accommodation are on the lower socioeconomic scale. They pay their rents on a daily basis and rely heavily on social welfare. To inflict on the industry regulations and legislation that will threaten the viability of operating rooming houses will be detrimental to those using that type of accommodation. The Liberal Party and the National Party will propose amendments to the Bill for the Minister to consider. If the Bill is to proceed through the House, it is both important and imperative that consideration be given to the proposed amendments. The Bill must benefit the industry and not just represent a philosophical belief of some members of the Labor Party. It is interesting to reflect on some of the changes to the original Bill that are included in this Bill. The classification of the term "room in a rooming house" has now been expanded so that it ensures that premises providing accommodation for education and training are excluded. The original Bill introduced in the other place during the autumn sessional period did not make adequate provision for a rooming house operator to undertake urgent repairs, and this Bill deals more adequately with that situation. The Bill allows a rooming house owner to evict a person whom he considers dangerous or threatening to the other inhabitants of the rooming house, and that is a major concession and one which has brought conflict with the Tenants Union of Victoria. I congratulate the Minister on one aspect of the Bill: I refer to his foresight in including a clause allowing a rooming house owner to receive compensation if it can be justified to the Residential Tenancies Tribunal that he had to evict someone from a room. That provision overcomes a difficult problem. Clause 41 is a safety provision which enables compensation to be paid for non-compliance with the provisions of clause 6 (3) and (4). The opposition parties will propose amendments to the Bill and I shall be more specific when it is debated in the Committee stage. The National Party agrees that the rooming house industry should be regulated. There is no concern about that; however, after much consultation-there has been plenty of time for that-proposed amendments will be put to the Minister. I hope the Minister will give honourable members the opportunity of putting forward their arguments to ensure better legislation. The Hon. T. C. THEOPHANOUS (Jika Jika Province)-This is an important Bill which should be taken seriously by the Opposition. I was heartened to hear the reasonable and constructive approach of Mr Best. I should have preferred Mr Smith to have adopted a similar approach, but he did not find anything in the Bill to endear it to him. The Bill fills a gap in the rights of tenants and defines the obligations of both tenants and landlords of rooming houses. Before I speak in general terms about the Bill I shall address some of the issues raised by the two previous speakers. Both honourable members were concerned about rooming houses becoming overregulated which would force out the private sector from the rooming house market. That is a simplistic way of looking at the problem. Many complex historical and economic factors have led to a decline in the use of rooming houses, not the least of which are such factors as the urban sprawl of Melbourne and the preference of people for private accommodation in flats, units or private housing. With the development of Melbourne in the past 50 years or so there has been a corresponding decline in the use of rooming houses. That has little to do Rooming Houses Bill 13 March 1990 COUNCIL 187 with regulation and has a lot to do with the changing preferences of the community. The Bill does not seek to overregulate the industry; it seeks to assist rooming house owners and those who use that type of accommodation. The government has made a commitment to assist the development of rooming houses. It is a question of taking up the slack not taken up by the private sector. It is untrue to claim, as Mr Smith did, that the cost of renovations is excessive. That cost must be compared with the cost of providing alternative accommodation. That is the central point; the cost of alternative accommodation is far greater than the cost of providing rooming house accommodation. The cost of rooming houses is approximately 60 to 80 per cent of the cost of providing a one-bedroom flat, which is the only other option. The differential referred to by Mr Smith relates to the difference in areas. The figure of 60 to 80 per cent relates to the median price of housing in each locality. Obviously, it will cost more in some localities than others depending on the cost of housing in different areas. However, in all cases it is more expensive to provide one-bedroom flats than rooming house accommodation. The Bill fills an important gap; it seeks to promote and maintain rooming houses in the mix of housing provided in this State. Rooming houses have important characteristics that make them ideal for certain types of people. Many people wish to live independently but still have the opportunity of living close to or in company with other people. For a long time it has been recognised that rooming houses have many problems such as substandard conditions and inadequate levels of privacy. There have also been problems with notices, rent increases, and so on. The Bill attempts to address those issues, together with the most controversial component-the process of eviction. Clause 6 (3) is a controversial provision. It is a sensitive attempt to ensure that safeguards are provided for tenants in circumstances where evictions may occur. The Bill attempts to address the problems of violence and serious personal danger that often arise in rooming houses. It is not true for honourable members opposite to suggest that current legislation adequately deals with evictions. The Residential Tenancies Tribunal has been reluctant to extend the provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act to cover a number of cases involving the eviction of people from rooming houses. Honourable members are well aware that evictions occur from time to time and that problems are faced by both tenants and proprietors. Tenants may need to resort to common law to have their rights upheld while proprietors may not feel they are protected adequately by the current law when deciding whether to take some action. The Bill will provide specific safeguards. Once an eviction occurs the proprietor must notify in writing the registrar of the tribunal by the end of the business day following the eviction. The government will then have an accurate record of when and where evictions occur, something that has not been available in the past and which will be of assistance in dealing with specific problem areas and specific rooming houses. The same notification period is required for tenants to lodge appeals. Subclause 41 (9) (a) and (b) provides for the tribunal to make orders to permit residents to resume residencies in rooms and requires rooming house owners to pay compensation. The proprietors will not be able to let out the rooms until the close of business of the following day, so that they can be advised whether appeals have been made. If appeals are made, proprietors will not be able to let out rooms until the appeal proceedings are completed. If appeals are successful the safeguard provision will allow tenants to return to rooms. They can also seek compensation from proprietors. 188 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Rooming Houses Bill

The Bill also protects the owners of rooming houses. Clause 41 (12) provides for moneys to be paid from the Residential Tenancies Fund to proprietors if they win the cases following appeals by tenants to the tribunal. The Bill has many provisions that parallel the Residential Tenancies Act, but it introduces specific amendments to take account of the special characteristics of rooming houses and the circumstances in which rooming house residents find themselves. For example, no more than one week's rental in advance can be requested by rooming house owners. Under the Residential Tenancies Act, proprietors may ask for two weeks rental in advance. The Bill clearly reflects the fact that rooming houses are generally used by people from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Another distinction is that the Bill allows for a 30-day rather than 60-day notice of rent increases, which again reflects the special nature of rooming houses. . Honourable members will appreciate that there is a need in communal settings to have house rules. The Bill provides for a challenge to be made to house rules made by proprietors if more than half the tenants, or five of them, whichever is the smaller number, wish to challenge house rules. The Bill defines areas that have not been defined in the past. The proposed legislation is important not only because it establishes the rights and duties of proprietors and tenants but also because this additional clarity in rights and duties is likely to assist in arresting the decline in the number of rooming houses. It is important to remember that rooming houses cater for up to 15 000 people, a reasonable proportion of the State's population. The government has a strong commitment to this aspect of accommodation. It has upgraded services and increased public involvement i.n the o~ration of r

As was stated earlier the residents to be covered by the Bill are in a specific category: more often than not they are short-term residents. Once upon a time residents of rooming houses were predominantly middle-aged single males. However, all manner of people are now seeking to live as lodgers in rooming houses and they must be catered for. Mr Best referred to the controversial provisions relating to evictions. The Bill quite clearly specifies the rights and obligations of tenants as well as those of owners of rooming houses. However, instant eviction can occur where violence has been directed at other lodgers. This is extremely important. It is the only instance in which summary eviction can occur; it cannot occur in respect of other grievances. The government found it necessary to include in the Bill a provision to enable the owners or managers of rooming houses to effect summary evictions in cases where violence occurs. Iflodgers believe evictions are illegal or that they have been wronged, they will have two days to appeal to the Residential Tenancies Tribunal. Rooming house owners must inform the registrar by the end of business on the following day-so it can be within 12 hours-that evictions have occurred. These provisions were inserted in the Bill to allay the fears of some groups about rooming house owners evicting people willy-nilly and claiming that acts of gross violence had occurred. The Bill will enable the registrar to examine the records six months down the track and to monitor where summary evictions have been occurring. If it appears that too many people are being evicted from a particular rooming house, the legislation can be brought back to Parliament and the relevant provisions can be examined with a view to addressing the problem and ensuring that unscrupulous owners are dealt with. Unscrupulous owners will be found out because there will be an official register. This will ensure that instant evictions do not occur willy-nilly. The Bill is balanced. The original Bill was withdrawn last year, not because the government did not want the Bill to proceed or because there was too much conflict, but because it wanted to finetune the measure. Like all the other measures relating to residences that the government has introduced, the Bill required much consultation and input from all sorts of players. It required input not only from occupiers but also owners, managers and organisers who needed to have their say. Six months have elapsed since the Bill was withdrawn, and that has enabled many groups to have their say. The Bill has been modified; consultations have occurred and compromises have been reached to ensure that as many sectors of the community as possible are catered for. Naturally one cannot satisfy everybody all the time, and the government recognises that. Consequently, the Tenants Union of Victoria is apparently still aggrieved and believes many of its concerns have not been met. However, as Mrs Tehan pointed out, owners of rooming houses have rights as well as the residents. The Bill attempts to strike a balance and to preserve what is in the best interests of as many players as possible. Part of the consultation process involved the conduct of five public meetings throughout Victoria. They did not occur only in Melbourne, where the majority of rooming houses exist; they also took place in the larger provincial cities, such as Geelong and Ballarat. Special meetings with various interest groups were also held on matters that were of specific interest to them rather than in a general public meeting atmosphere. Special meetings between owners and managers and officers of the Ministry of Housing and Construction were also held in an attempt to accommodate as many viewpoints as possible. 192 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Rooming Houses Bill

The Bill certainly demonstrates that the consultative process has worked. I know that one cannot please everyone all the time, but there is a need to try to strike a balance and attempt to protect the interests of everyone concerned. The provisions of the Rooming Houses Bill are similar in many respects to those of the Residential Tenancies Act. However, there are some differences. The Bill's main thrust is to acknowledge the difference in the clientele who will use a rooming house from those covered under the Residential Tenancies Act. They may be itinerant workers who have contract jobs in a town or city for six months and who need only a place to stay-in fact, just a bed. They do not want to go to the expense of purchasing all of the paraphernaha necessary for living in a flat or a house. The Bill suits them. The Bill attempts to address these needs and also the needs of low-income people who, by and large, use rooming houses. . Some of the differences between the Bill and the Residential Tenancies Act have been pointed out. One is that 30 days notice of an intention to increase the rent has to be given, whereas under the Residential Tenancies Act it is 60 days. If a resident is behind with his rent, he has to be $iven two days termination notice, instead of the fourteen days provided by the Resldential Tenancies Act. In a rooming house, rent must be paid seven days in advance, instead of fourteen days. These provisions point to the fact that many people stay in rooming houses for short periods only; not six months or a year but perhaps only a couple of weeks or months. Under the Rooming Houses Bill, people must give only two days notice of intention to vacate, whereas under the Residential Tenancies Act they must give 28 days notice. This is another acknowledgment than many of the people resident in rooming houses are itinerant workers. As I said, the Bill tries to address the fact that the clientele is changing. Despite what has been said by other honourable members, in the compromises and discussions quite a deal of unanimity was reached before the final draft of the Bill was prepared. Support for the proposed legislation has come from associations representing the boarders and lodgers-not part of the Tenants Union-rooming house tenants and the owners of rooming houses, who support particularly the provisions relating to immediate eviction. . Honourable members must understand why there is a provision to evict people summarily. The reality often is-as presented to the Ministry for Housing and Construction-that in some units violent people cause trouble. The sort of trouble that they cause is not just arguing or haranguing but actually physically attacking people. While honourable members might not like to take the high moral ground, it should be noted that although problems might be discussed often those discussions do not matter at all. The fear of overregulation was mentioned. It is preferable to describe the Bill as an attempt to regulate an area and in doing so giving both potential developers of rooming houses and their owners a playing field on which everybody knows the rules. Before the introduction of the Roomlng Houses Bill, nobody knew what the rules were. There were some good and some bad rooming house owners and managers. No rules were in place that attempted to achieve a balance in the standard of accommodation. The Bill attempts to establish a level playing field-a sporting term that a lot of people tend to use these days-on which everybody knows the rules. Mention has been made of the decline in the development of rooming houses. That decline is not due to o.verregulation but to the changing sociological and economic climate. In many of the areas where rooming houses are located the property values have gone through the roof over the past ten years and so running rooming houses has R~oming Houses Bill 131tlarch 1990 COUN·CIL 193 become unprofitable. The standard of accommodation has been allowed to decline over the years so when owners are presented with bills by a firefighting service or Health Department Victoria to cover the cost of upgrading the standards of the rooming houses they are faced with enormous sums to be paid to bring the rooming house up to scratch so that people can live in reasonable accommodation in this day and age. As I said, the Bill provides investors with accurate guidelines as to what is expec1ed of owners of rooming houses. Mr Best said that he had a letter from an individual who castigated the proposed legislation. I was trying to listen to what Mr Best was saying and to ascertain what evidence the person was submitting in his letter. Perhaps I was not hearing properly but I do not believe I heard any specific evidence or reasons for rejecting the legislation. What I heard were general motherhood statements that covered everything. There was reference to less profitability and so on. It would have been more helpful to the Ministry of Housing and Construction if people who had specific reasons for rejecting provisions of the Bill stated those reasons clearly so that they could be raised in Parliament and provide the Ministry with something to work on. The Ministry could then attempt to introduce some compromise in addressing problems such as those to which Mr Best referred. I wonder whether the lack of profitability in running some rooming houses is related more to the value of the land on which those houses are situated, because of what could be done with the land. Honourable members will be aware that over the years it has been more profitable for investors to bulldoze rooming houses and turn them into tourist flats or condominiums, or even retail outlets or office space. In a comparative sense, I suppose that running a rooming house does not compare with building a three or four-level condominium because an investor can make a lot more money through a tourist facility in an area like St Kilda than by running a rooming house. The Hon. R. A. Best-There has to be a balance between the survival of the investor and providing accommodation. The Hon. LICIA KOKOCINSKI-One cannot compare a rooming house with a tourist facility because in a rooming house people are charged $40 a week and some condominiums are let at $300, $400 or $500 a week or even a day. Profitability between the two does not compare. The comparison is artificial and it IS mischievous for people to try to make those sorts of comparisons. The Bill specifies that urgent repairs will be done so that people do not have to wait many years down the track while the rooming house becomes run down. Honourable members will appreciate the problems that confront the owners and managers of older rooming houses who face restoration and renovation costs. Mr Smith mentioned figures of$50 000 to $70 000 per room. It must be borne in mind that that figure will include the price of the land on which the rooming house is located, and that will of necessity be high if it is in an inner urban area. That amount also takes into account the cost of renovating the rooms and furnishing them with good quality furniture that will last over the years. One cannot use in furnishing a boarding house, say, a bed or a cupboard that one has purchased for $70 from McEwans; one needs furniture that will stand up to a lot of use. The other factor relating to the cost of rooming houses in the inner urban area is that although the tenants face higher nominal rents than would be the case in outer areas they have around them all manner of public transport and will not need to buy cars. In fact, many of them would not be able to afford to buy cars. Public transport costs in the inner urban area are extremely low. If a rooming house were to be built in an outer urban area, the rent and unit cost would possibly be less but the tenants would probably need to purchase cars to travel to work. A balance must be struck. 194 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Rooming Houses Bill

In the case of Ministry rooming houses, as Mr Best mentioned, if the rent payable is $44 a week, $22 of that is returned to the Ministry. One must remember that $44 a week includes energy costs such as heating and lighting. From the $22 the Ministry must pay for servicing and administration, replacement of furniture and linen and the cost of cleaning. Bad debts must also be provided for. The actual cost of all these items is between $15 and $22 a week. That is not a profit to the Ministry; it merely covers the costs. I commend the Bill to the House. The Hon. ROSEMARY VARTY (Nunawading Province)-It is interesting that we have just heard from the government side a statement that encapsulates the impact of the government's economic policy on a specific segment of our society. It is as though the government has just discovered the decline in the provision of rooming houses and boarding houses; as though it is something that has just happened. The government tries to explain it away with all sorts of excuses about regulatory matters, whereas in reality the decline has been brought about by the government's economic policies. Four separate pieces of legislation relate to tenants: the retail tenancies legislation, the residential tenancies legislation, the caravan parks legislation and now the Bill before the House. As m¥ colleagues have said, the Opposition supports the principle of the Bill. However, it trks me that the assumption implicit in what Ms Kokocinski has said is that suddenly the provision of rooming house accommodation has become a problem. In the past boarding houses played an important role in the housins of people in Melbourne. As a youngster I lived in Young Women's Christian AssociatIon residences whose boarders were mainly country lasses attending teacher training colleges or universities, or working. Some of the larger residences in this category catered for 200 to 300 girls. There was also private board, to which Mrs Tehan referred, in large houses often run by widows or spinsters. I stayed at one in Canterbury for a number of years. It was extremely well run and had rules by which everyone abided and which everyone accepted. I had an aunt who ran a large boarding house called Kyalite on the corner of St Georges and Toorak roads. It has since been pulled down and, as Ms Kokocinski rightly said, the corner has condominium-type residences on it. My aunt's boarding house catered for long-term residents. Few people were in the category of itinerants, as mentioned by Ms Kokocinski. Many of the people living there were retired public servants or diplomatic personnel who had served their country well for many years. That house fulfilled an important role in community housing. Residents had their own rooms and were supplied with breakfast and evening meals. It also had a community centre where the residents could gather. That was in the days before television, so it goes back a long time. On occasions my aunt had problems with odd people-sometimes in both senses of the word-but they were usually short-term residents. Every now and then one of the tenants may have gone on a bit of a binge but the other tenants would agree that that person would be all right and would sober up b¥ morning. Everyone was considerate. There were 30 or 40 people living in that house In a true family atmosphere; everyone looked after everyone else. Nowadays the suggestion is that all owners are bad and all tenants are good. In fact, that is the philosophical base of the government. It regards the rights of tenants as paramount. That is obvious from the chequered history of all the legislation relating to tenants that has passed through this House. Each of those pieces of legislation has had to be amended extensively. The Rooming Houses Bill, as originally introduced, Rooming Houses Bill 13 ~farch 1990 COU~TCIL 195 had to be withdrawn because not only did it not meet the Opposition's requirements but lit also did not meet the requirements of a number of organisations that support the government. I take issue with Ms Kokocinski's remarks about long-term residents. All of the rooming house proprietors to whom I have spoken say that their core is lon$-term residents who give them no· trouble. However, they are now noticing a significant change in tenants in a segment of the market and those are the ones who are causing the problems. Honourable members should examine the profile of these people. They are usually unemployed or people who have been deinstitutionalised under the government's program of deinstitutionalisation. In other words, many of these people have been tipped out of institutions and the government has made no provision for housing them. It is as though the government wants to wipe its hands of problems associated with these people. In effect, the government is now trying to force boarding house proprietors to take in people whom the government should be caring for. It is creating a real problem. Over the past seven years the Ministry of Housing and Construction has purchased 63 properties. What does that say about the issue? It says that the commercial sector has moved out of the market and that the government, realising that it has made a mess of deinstitutionalisation, is trying to retrieve the situation at enormous cost to the community. Mrs Tehan spoke of the cost of a rooming house room. It is either all or nothing with the government. It wastes or loses money or goes to the other extreme and wastes money with per capita outlays on rooming houses. Mrs Tehan said that rooming house tenants want clean, dry, secure accommodation. They do not want motel accommodation. In fact, some tenants say that they could not live in high-class establishments because they are not the sorts of places in which they are used to living. The government is building palaces for people who do not want palaces. The Hon. B. T. Pullen-Why don't you say that they don't deserve it? The Hon. ROSEMARY VARTY-That is your statement; it is not a statement from the Opposition. The reality is the Opposition wants to help many more people than the government. Has the government ever asked these people what they really want? The Hon. B. T. Pullen-Yes. The Hon. ROSEMARY VARTY-The Minister was obviously not listening to their replies, because they are not asking for palaces; they want to live in clean and safe accommodation. The Hon. B. T. Pullen-And that is what it is. The Hon. ROSEMARY VARTY-The government is incredible. Rooming house tenants do not want substandard accommodation. The Hon. T. C. Theophanous-That is what you want for them. The Hon. ROSEMARY VARTY -No, that is not correct. Mr Theophanous heard what I said and is now trying to twist my remarks. Mr Theophanous, with his airy­ fairy ideas and sociological background, wants to reform the world instead of providing appropriate accommodation for a special group in our community. Tenants in rooming houses have rights and special needs, but rooming house proprietors may have to remove from their establishments tenants who are 196 COUNCIL 13 March 1990 Rooming Houses Bill troublemakers. The troublemakers are a small component of most rooming houses, but if a proprietor has a person who is trying to destroy that establishment he needs to take action. In the past one bluffed one's way through, called the police, or physically removed that person. Troublemakers destroy the peace and enjoyment of the 99·9 per cent of people who live in these houses and who, in those cases, are hardworking people who just want clean and safe accommodation. The Hon. T. C. Theophanous-What is your point? The Hon. ROSEMARY V ARTY -Mr Theophanous says: what is my point? He obviously does not observe the people in his own province. He is too busy working out factional deals with his colleagues. He should talk to the real people of the world instead of coming out with all this rubbish. The Opposition supports the proposed legislation but, as my colleagues have said, proposed amendments will be moved during the Committee stage of the debate because of the extreme difficulties with the government's proposal to overcome a definite problem brought about by its poor economic management. The Hon. R. A. MACKENZIE (Geelong Province)-I support the Bill. I have listened with considerable interest to the contributions made by my colleagues on both sides of the Chamber. Most honourable members have had some experience with rooming houses or boarding homes, especially those members who are of my vintage. I spent some time in an establishment in Adelaide when I went to work there as a plumber. I stayed at Mrs Jackman's boarding home for young men. I well remember this large old house in Cheltenham, Adelaide. There were approximately seven or eight young men aged from 20 to 25 years in this old house. It was a boarding house for Irish people and I happened to be the only Protestant there at that time. I am not sure how I slipped in under Mrs Jackman's guard, but I shared the rooms with some Irish lads. I well remember that they resented me because Mrs Jackman made them get up and attend early morning mass on Sunday morning and I was the only one who slept in. They resented this one Protestant boarder who could spend hIS Sunday mornings under the blankets, much appreciated after a heavy night out, while they went off to mass. / Rooming houses were of value to many' people, especially country people who came to the city looking for work. They were hke a second home. Many of the owners were widows who had inherited large homes upon the deaths of their husbands and whose sole income was gained from letting rooms. They often treated their tenants like extended families. They would hover over us at breakfast time, cut our lunch and do our washing and ironing for four pounds a week. We could not do better than that because we had the company at night of the other tenants. We would often go out together as a group and we would discuss politics and other issues in our bedrooms during the evenings. I shall never forget that experience; it was an important part of my life and I learnt a great deal during that period. Mr Smith said the statistics show that the number of rooming houses has fallen dramatically from 9000 some years ago to a figure in the hundreds. There are many reasons for the reduction in the number of rooming houses and I do not believe people know all the reasons for it. Mr Smith referred to some reasons for the reduction of rooming houses and they may be correct, but there are many more reasons why rooming houses have ceased to be as popular as they once were. A demand still exists for that type of accommodation and I commend the government for purchasing rooming houses. Mr Smith may argue about the amount paid for those houses, but should not argue about the principle of purchasing rooming houses for the accommodation of single people.