COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

SENATE

Official Hansard No. 4, 2001 TUESDAY, 27 MARCH 2001

THIRTY-NINTH PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—EIGHTH PERIOD

BY AUTHORITY OF THE SENATE INTERNET The Votes and Proceedings for the House of Representatives are available at: http://www.aph.gov.au/house/info/votes Proof and Official Hansards for the House of Representatives, the Senate and committee hearings are available at: http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard

SITTING DAYS—2001 Month Date February 6, 7, 8, 26, 27, 28 March 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 26, 27, 28, 29 April 2, 3, 4, 5, May 22, 23, 24 June 4, 5, 6, 7, 18, 19, 20, 21, 25, 26, 27, 28 August 6, 7, 8, 9, 20, 21, 22, 23, 27, 28, 29, 30 September 17, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, 26, 27 October 15, 16, 17, 18, 22, 23,24, 25 November 12, 13, 14, 15, 19, 20, 21, 22 December 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13

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

CANBERRA 1440 AM SYDNEY 630 AM NEWCASTLE 1458 AM BRISBANE 936 AM MELBOURNE 1026 AM ADELAIDE 972 AM PERTH 585 AM HOBART 729 AM DARWIN 102.5 FM CONTENTS

TUESDAY, 27 MARCH

Questions Without Notice— COP6: Greenhouse Gas Negotiations...... 23067 Rural and Remote Australia: Postal and Banking Services...... 23068 Telecommunications: Spectrum Sale...... 23069 Family Tax Benefit...... 23070 Goods and Services Tax: Rural and Regional Australia...... 23071 Environment: Land Clearing ...... 23072 Economy: Business Expectations...... 23074 Parliament House: Greenhouse Advertising Program...... 23075 Goods and Services Tax: Small Business...... 23076 Nuclear Waste...... 23077 Goods and Services Tax: Small Business...... 23078 Answers To Questions Without Notice— Goods and Services Tax: Pensions ...... 23079 Centrelink: Goondiwindi District ...... 23080 Health Services: Positron Emission Tomography ...... 23080 Gene Technology...... 23081 Goods and Services Tax: First Home Owners Scheme ...... 23082 Telecommunications: Spectrum Sale...... 23082 Goods and Services Tax: Small Business...... 23082 Nuclear Waste...... 23088 Condolences— Martin, Mr Vincent Joseph...... 23089 Petitions— Australian Broadcasting Corporation: Independence and Funding...... 23089 Australia Post: Deregulation...... 23089 Non-Violent Erotica...... 23090 Woodside Petroleum: Proposed Takeover by Shell Australia ...... 23090 Notices— Presentation ...... 23090 Withdrawal ...... 23090 Committees— Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee— Extension of Time ...... 23091 Economics Legislation Committee—Extension of Time ...... 23091 Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee—Extension of Time...... 23091 Leave of Absence...... 23091 Notices— Postponement ...... 23091 Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee— Return to Order...... 23091 Business— Government Business...... 23092 Business of the Senate...... 23092 Committees— Superannuation and Financial Services Committee—Reference ...... 23092 Community Affairs Legislation Committee—Extension of Time...... 23092 Community Affairs Legislation Committee—Meeting...... 23093 Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee—Extension of Time...... 23093 CONTENTS—continued

Superannuation and Financial Services Committee—Reference ...... 23093 Corporations and Securities Committee—Extension of Time...... 23093 Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts References Committee—Extension of Time ...... 23093 Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts References Committee—Extension of Time ...... 23096 Television Broadcasting: Asia Pacific Region...... 23096 Foot-And-Mouth Disease: Europe...... 23097 Matters Of Public Importance— National Competition Policy ...... 23097 Budget 2000-01— Consideration by Legislation Committees—Reports ...... 23109 Consideration by Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee—Additional Information ...... 23109 Committees— Membership...... 23109 Migration Legislation Amendment (Integrity of Regional Migration Schemes) Bill 2000 and Taxation Laws Amendment (Excise Arrangements) Bill 2000— First Reading ...... 23110 Second Reading...... 23110 Bills Returned From The House Of Representatives...... 23112 Renewable Energy (Electricity) Regulations 2001...... 23112 Crimes Amendment (Age Determination) Bill 2001— Report of Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee...... 23126 Taxation Laws Amendment (Excise Arrangements) Bill 2000— Second Reading...... 23126 Documents— Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency...... 23130 Adjournment— Political Heroes ...... 23132 Environment: Water Management...... 23134 Australian Defence Industries: Proposed Sale...... 23134 Gloucester, New South Wales: Job Losses...... 23136 Federal Election: Labor Party Preselections...... 23138 Questions on Notice— Civil Aviation Safety Authority: Staff—(Question No. 2537) ...... 23142 Transport and Regional Services Portfolio: Legal Advice— (Question No. 3367)...... 23142 Defence Portfolio: Value of Market Research—(Question No. 3390) ...... 23142 Indonesian Military Personnel: Training—(Question No. 3428) ...... 23144 Transport Safety: Seat Belts on School Buses—(Question No. 3434)...... 23144 Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23067

Tuesday, 27 March 2001 ferences between the European Union coun- ————— tries and the umbrella group countries, which basically means the other countries of the The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. developed world, and also differences be- Margaret Reid) took the chair at 2.00 p.m., tween the developing countries and the de- and read prayers. veloped world. I certainly wrote to the new QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE US minister saying that Australia was keen COP6: Greenhouse Gas Negotiations to progress the issue in the terms that I have just explained to the Senate, and that remains Senator BOLKUS (2.00 p.m.)—My our position. I will be hosting a meeting of question is directed to Minister Hill, the greenhouse ministers in New York in a cou- Minister for the Environment and Heritage. I ple of weeks time. I will be attending an ex- ask the minister whether he can confirm that tended bureau meeting— a month ago he wrote to the United States government offering himself as a bridge Senator Bolkus—Madam President, I rise between the United States and the EU when on a point of order. The minister is having a greenhouse negotiations resume at COP6. fairly wide ramble on the issue of green- Did the minister also write to the Prime house, but the question was quite direct, and Minister advising him of this action and it went to the minister offering himself as a seeking the Prime Minister’s approval? Is it negotiator between the EU and the US. He further true that the Prime Minister referred has not answered that question. I ask you to the matter to the ministerial council on direct him to the question. He is irrelevant, at greenhouse, where it was vetoed? the moment. Senator HILL—I read that in a newspa- The PRESIDENT—There is no point of per. It is basically untrue. I am certainly in- order. terested in facilitating progress on imple- Senator HILL—We have been chairing mentation of the Kyoto protocol. That proto- the umbrella group and, in that capacity, we col is the first attempt by developed coun- will look to advance the negotiations. We tries to agree to an actual reduction in green- have been facilitating a dialogue between the house gas emissions. It would be some five umbrella group and the EU, and we will be per cent of 1990 levels by the year 2010— continuing that. We hosted the first meeting that is, of the group as a whole. It is therefore between the umbrella group and the devel- very important in terms of being about a oped world at The Hague, and we will be changed culture on greenhouse emissions continuing that, as I said. I have a series of across the globe. The implementation of the such meetings lined up in New York in about Kyoto protocol has been stalled whilst par- a fortnight’s time, including a meeting of the ties have addressed matters of details that extended bureau of the COP, under Dutch were unresolved at Kyoto, in particular mat- Minister Pronk. I hope that out of these in- ters relating to the flexibility mechanisms, terim meetings progress will be made to- the detail of emissions trading, the clean de- wards a situation where I can be more confi- velopment mechanism and the like, and dent that the meeting in July will achieve the matters concerning the definition of sinks objectives that I said were so important. I am and whether they would apply in the CDM, keen, and the Australian government is keen, and the participation of developing countries. to get the Kyoto protocol implemented. We As Senator Bolkus knows, at The Hague are therefore keen to get the unresolved is- last year at COP6, the international commu- sues settled as soon as possible. Anything we nity was unable to reach resolution on these can do to assist in that regard we will be do- matters. That particular conference of the ing. parties has now been adjourned until July of Senator BOLKUS—I ask a supplemen- this year, and Australia is keen to make prog- tary question and I note that the minister has ress in the meantime—in other words, keen skirted the issue raised in the question. I ask to facilitate dialogue that could reduce the the minister: how does he explain writing to outstanding differences, in particular the dif- the US government about his negotiating 23068 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 strategy, offering himself, without the prior all know by now that to date we have opened approval of either the Prime Minister or in excess of 100 postal outlets, and I think cabinet? we all know that the Labor Party over their Senator HILL—I can write to my last six years of government managed to American counterpart as often as I like and close 277 outlets. But do you know what the when I like but, in this instance, it was after figure was in the last three years alone? It discussion with the Prime Minister. was 500. This is appalling. Now, of course, they want to turn the clock back and pre- Rural and Remote Australia: Postal and sumably—in theory—spend hundreds of Banking Services millions of dollars on reopening the very Senator EGGLESTON (2.06 p.m.)—My post office outlets that they closed. I think question is to the Minister for Communica- their postal position is stark naked. But the tions, Information Technology and the Arts, banking one is even worse because there are Senator Alston. Will the minister inform the very serious implications here for anyone Senate of the government’s recent initiatives who wants to think that they can have confi- to improve postal and banking services, in dential discussions with the Labor Party. Mr particular for rural and remote areas? Is the Beazley said today in his doorstop about the minister aware of any alternative policy ap- banking announcement: proaches? What would be the impact of these I’m pleased to be here to release our policy. were they to be implemented? He really means ‘the policy we pinched from Senator ALSTON—I thank Senator Eg- the banking association’, but he continued: gleston for a very important question. It pro- This is the work of extensive consultation with vides the opportunity to highlight the chasm the banks. Banks have been consulted. This is that exists between the approaches of the two what you do when you are producing serious major parties on postal and banking services, policy for the Australian people. particularly in rural and regional areas. Not A very laudable statement—correct? He is only have we been committed for a long time then asked: to retaining Australia Post in full public Have you approached the banks? ownership and continuing provision of the Of course, the leader says: standard letter service at a uniform rate to all Australians but we have introduced for the Well actually Steven— first time ever a postal services charter. We and unfortunately he is not here. Presumably actually put consumers first. I know the other he is outside being counselled by Senator side put unions first. That is where they get Ray for plagiarism, and one would hope that their policies from, and presumably the that lesson will dawn on him that this will ACTU has not yet delivered the final form of react fundamentally against them. Mr the documentation, so naturally enough they Beazley said: do not have a policy position on that. Let it Steven has been having consultations with the be absolutely clear that we believe in codes banks. I will just ask him to answer that. of practice. We believe in requiring standards Senator Conroy said: to be in place, like our customer service Look, we’ve spoken with the banks and given guarantee for telecommunications services. them a briefing as much as we could this morning We have also ensured that Australia Post and we haven’t yet received a response from continues to provide vital subsidies to 700 them. licensed post offices. That is a very impor- In other words: ‘We have done no consulta- tant initiative as well. GiroPost is expected to tions at all and why would we? We have be fully rolled out across regional Australia gone out there and pinched their policies by June this year, and again there will be the over the weekend, we got a confidential capacity for banking and bill paying services briefing from them on the Friday, we tarted it through 2,800 postal outlets. up a bit, put it out in the marketplace and of Let us look at what Labor managed to course we haven’t consulted with them.’ achieve in their period in office. I think we Imagine if you did. Imagine if you rang them Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23069 on the Sunday night. They would be ap- The PRESIDENT—Order! The shouting palled. They would have an injunction out to that is going on on my left is totally disor- restrain you from misleading and deceptive derly, and those doing it know that that is the conduct. If this is what consultation is all case. I draw your attention to the standing about, if this is listening to the community, I orders. call it plain old-fashioned theft. This is the Senator KEMP—I am pointing out to high-water mark of policy laziness. This Senator Schacht that with changed condi- crowd clearly are not interested in doing tions we made revisions. We consulted their own homework. I do not know why the widely. A reserve price was set, and the final ACTU did not have a policy on this one, but price that we received for the spectrum sale unfortunately it probably did not arrive on was in the order of $1.17 billion, which was time, so they had to pinch one and I am sure just above the reserve price. they will try to do it again. (Time expired) Senator SCHACHT—Madam President, Telecommunications: Spectrum Sale I ask a supplementary question. Despite the Senator SCHACHT (2.11 p.m.)—My fact that the minister could not in any way question is to Senator Kemp, the Assistant answer the question, I will give him one Treasurer. Does the Assistant Treasurer stand more chance to provide relevant information by the claim he made in the Senate yesterday to the Senate. Does the Assistant Treasurer that ‘as responsible governments do in these recall that at estimates hearings last month matters where a different range of factors officials from both the department of finance present themselves, the budget estimates for and the department of communications con- the 3G auction were revised downwards’? If firmed that the government had not varied so, can he inform the Senate who conducted the budget estimates of $2.6 billion from the these revisions, when they were conducted 3G spectrum option? If this is correct, on and the quantum of the downward revisions? what basis did the Assistant Treasurer assert Senator KEMP—These are done in the yesterday that the government had varied its normal course of events as the government budget estimate? prepares estimates. There is no big surprise Senator Hill—Madam President, I raise a in this. We work closely with the relevant point of order. This practice, which is be- departments. coming somewhat common, of commenting Opposition senators interjecting— on an answer before asking the supplemen- Senator KEMP—Yes, of course we do. tary is out of order. We consult widely, quite unlike the Labor Senator Bolkus—What do you think sup- Party. We would certainly make sure that plementaries are for? when we revise the estimates that— Senator Alston—They are about ques- Senator Sherry interjecting— tions, not statements. Senator KEMP—I am pointing out to Senator Hill—No, they are not about— you that the estimates were revised down- wards and, as I mentioned in my remarks Senator Schacht interjecting— yesterday, the final price of, I think, $1.17 The PRESIDENT—Order, Senator billion came in just above the reserve price. Schacht! Senator Hill has sought to raise a Opposition senators interjecting— point of order. For you to be sitting there The PRESIDENT—Order! There are too shouting during the answer is totally disor- many interjections and the Senate will come derly and disrespectful of the chamber. I am listening to the point that is being made. to order and observe the standing orders. Senator KEMP—I am pointing out to Senator Hill—Madam President, taking Senator Schacht that in the light of changed the interjection, supplementaries are not market conditions revisions were made, and about Senator Schacht’s opinion of the an- the reserve price was just under— swer he has been given. He has the opportu- nity to ask a supplementary question. In this Opposition senators interjecting— instance, he premised it with a commentary. 23070 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001

As I said, if this was an occasional occur- Senator VANSTONE—I thank Senator rence, one would not be particularly dis- Tchen for the question. This government has turbed, but it has become common practice made a strong commitment to families and and in effect it is being used as a tool to has delivered on that commitment. We have make statements after each question. I re- massively increased assistance to families spectfully request that you draw the standing with the introduction of the family tax bene- orders to the attention of the Senate. fit: 2.2 million Australian families and over Senator Faulkner—Madam President, on four million children have benefited from the the point of order: you might note that new family tax benefit which was introduced Senator Schacht’s question went to an an- on 1 July last year; that is, over 90 per cent swer to a question directed originally to of Australian families with dependent chil- Senator Kemp in question time yesterday. dren. Rates have increased by $140 a year Senator Schacht is following through in his per child under part A. Under family tax supplementary question a clear inconsistency benefit part B, single income families with a with the information presented by Senator child under five have received an additional Kemp in the Senate chamber and the infor- $350 a year. The income testing arrange- mation that was provided to opposition ments are more generous with more families senators in estimates committees. Of course receiving maximum levels of assistance and it is in order. This is an attempt by the Leader more families able to keep more of what they of the Government in the Senate to cover up earn. again. Low income families are the big winners. The PRESIDENT—I will allow the sup- A couple with children aged four and eight plementary question, but I think all senators on one income of $20,000 a year saw an in- know that the appropriate course is to ask crease in their disposable income of $58 a questions and supplementary questions. week. A couple with children aged four and Commentary is not part of it; it certainly eight on one income of $26,000 saw an in- should, if anything, be kept absolutely to a crease of $42 a week. A single parent in full- minimum. time work with the sole care of children aged Senator KEMP—Let me make it clear to between four and eight, an income of Senator Schacht: these estimates have obvi- $20,000 and who uses child care saw an in- ously been kept under active review and, in crease in their disposable income of $52 a the light of changed market conditions, have week. A single parent in full-time work with been revised. I did point out to Senator the sole care of children between four and Schacht that— eight, an income of $26,000 and who uses Senator Alston—At the appropriate time. child care saw an increase of $64 a week. So the government has delivered on its com- Senator KEMP—Thank you, Senator Al- mitment to Australian families. ston. I did point out to Senator Schacht—and I will repeat it—that a reserve price was set In contrast, the opposition deserves some and the final price that we received for the attention. Mr Swan is prepared to spout a lot sale was, I think, $1.17 billion, which was of rhetoric about the need for increased fi- just above the reserve price. nancial resources when children are young. Family Tax Benefit However, like the rest of his Labor col- leagues, he will not make any commitments. Senator TCHEN (2.17 p.m.)—My ques- As Mr Beazley told everybody, if you do not tion without notice is to the Minister for have any policies, how can you possibly cost Family and Community Services, Senator them? Now is the time for Mr Swan to come Vanstone. When the government introduced forward and tell us what Labor is prepared to family tax benefits, the government prom- pay. Mr Swan is Labor’s hollow man. Coin- ised to increase payments to Australian cidentally, those of you who were watching families by more than $2 billion a year. Will the Academy Awards last night would have the minister inform the Senate of the benefits seen the movie Hollow Man nominated for of this package to working families? best visual effects. If Mr Swan were in the Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23071 movies, he would be nominated for the best Senator Cook—If I have said anything verbal effects. He would be a shoo-in for the that offends the standing orders, I withdraw. nomination. There is a lot of talk but, when The PRESIDENT—Senator, I ask you to you talk the talk, you have got to walk the withdraw. walk. Hollow Man did not win last night and Mr Swan, the hollow man of verbal effects, Senator Cook—I withdraw. will not get anywhere unless he delivers. Goods and Services Tax: Rural and Now is the time for Labor to show us the Regional Australia colour of their money. Mr Swan has been Senator WEST (2.23 p.m.)—My question going around and leading pensioners to be- is— lieve that their pensions have been cut by Senator Cook—Standing orders mean two per cent. That is, of course, wrong. But you can’t tell the truth in this chamber. That if he really believes it, now is the time for is what the standing orders mean. him to make a firm commitment. Pensioners are now saying, as they did in the movie Senator WEST—My question is to— Jerry Maguire, ‘Show us the money.’ From Senator Cook—Standing orders prevent 1998 to the end of this financial year, this you from telling the truth. government will have spent $4 billion more The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator on pensioners than Labor’s policies would Cook! I have called Senator West to ask a ever have delivered. question. Senator Cook—Wrong! Senator WEST—My question is to Senator VANSTONE—Quite right: $4 Senator Kemp, the Assistant Treasurer. Can billion more on pensioners than Labor’s the minister confirm that, according to the policies would ever have delivered. New South Wales Chamber of Commerce, Senator Cook—Wrong! business confidence in regional New South Senator VANSTONE—I will take you on Wales has fallen to its lowest level in five any time, sport. The question is: are Labor years as a direct result of the GST? Isn’t it a prepared to make a commitment to increase fact that 77 per cent of respondents reported pensions by a further two per cent? Are you that, since the introduction of the GST, they prepared to make a $3 billion to $4 billion have had to pay additional fees for profes- commitment to pensioners? Are you pre- sional services in order to calculate and pared to make that commitment? I am wait- lodge their BAS and that more than 40 per ing. Are you going to make a forward esti- cent of these firms paid in excess of $1,000? mate commitment of $4 billion? Come on, Is this what the Prime Minister meant by the show them your money or shut up! GST being good for the bush, with collaps- ing business confidence and skyrocketing Honourable senators interjecting— accounting fees? Senator Cook—And she can’t tell the Senator KEMP—Thank you for that truth, either. question, Senator West. Let me respond by Senator Vanstone—Madam President, I making a number of comments. First of all, raise a point of order. As Senator Harradine there is the obvious response that, if the GST knows, I do not often take points of order on is so bad, as it is according to Senator West, people who make interjections and say nasty why is the Labor Party proposing to keep it? things because it is the nature of the people It is a very valid question. on the other side to do that. But, ‘She can’t Senator Cook—Madam President, I raise tell the truth,’ is not an interjection I am a point of order. I draw your attention to the happy to have on the record, so I ask you, standing orders, which say, ‘In answering a Madam President, to ask Senator Cook to question, a senator shall not debate it.’ This unconditionally withdraw. minister has started his answer by debating The PRESIDENT—Senator Cook, I call it, by alleging something that is entirely un- on you to withdraw that interjection, please. true about the Labor Party—and he is a serial offender on that—and proceeding to debate 23072 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 that point as if it were a matter of fact. jumping to his feet and making comments Madam President, if it is proper for you to about roll-back. caution Senator Schacht about commenting The other point I make is that there is no on questions before he asks them, it is proper doubt that one of the driving forces behind now for you to tell Senator Kemp not to de- tax reform came from the farming sector. bate questions but to in fact give an answer. The reason they were such hard drivers for That would be consistent with the standing tax reform was that they recognised that the orders. farming sector were carrying a lot of embed- The PRESIDENT—Order! You are ab- ded taxes in their exports which were making solutely— it difficult to compete on world markets. In- deed, one of the many pluses of tax reform is Honourable senators interjecting— that it delivers these very substantial benefits The PRESIDENT—Order! I am at- to the farming sector, which have been very tempting to rule on a point of order that has widely welcomed. been raised by Senator Cook. Senator Cook, So it is not correct, as Senator West has you are right: it is not appropriate to debate alleged, that somehow tax reform is causing answers to questions. Whether or not Senator particular problems in rural and regional Kemp is at this stage, it is too early to tell, Australia. The fact of the matter is that tax but he knows that he is not allowed to debate reform is good for rural and regional Austra- answers. I invite him to answer the question. lia. I think the very strong performance of Senator KEMP—Thank you, Madam the export sector that we have seen over the President. Indeed, I had barely started my last year is just one particular point that one response before Senator Cook, who is well can make to argue that in fact tax reform has known for his excessively short temper, I been particularly good for rural and regional might say, immediately jumped to his feet. I Australia. was making the point—and I think it is a Senator WEST—Madam President, I ask very important point—that we had an exam- a supplementary question. I would draw the ple with the questioner jumping to her feet attention of the minister to the fact that pri- and the thrust of the question was to attack mary industry and primary production is not the GST. Okay, she is entitled to do that, but the only business and industry in rural and it does raise the issue that if the Labor Party regional Australia. In light of this collapsing is so opposed to the GST, why does the La- business confidence in the bush, will the bor Party propose to keep the GST? I think Howard government take up the Treasurer’s that is a fundamental issue which, as the proposal to slash the wages of workers in months roll on towards the next election, is rural and regional Australia as an attempted going to have to be addressed. I say to solution to this GST imposed collapse? Senator West and her colleagues: if you be- Senator KEMP—Madam President, the lieve that this tax change is so bad, why comment that was made by Senator West is don’t you stand up and propose to change it? totally wrong, as she well knows. That was Senator Cook—We’re going to roll it never proposed by the Treasurer. I point out back. to Senator West that this matter has been debated previously in this parliament, and I Senator KEMP—The answer is that the have had a previous occasion on which to Labor Party have already said that they pro- make a correction to that sort of comment. pose to keep it. Now Senator Cook has called So I refer you to previous Hansards on this out that it will be rolled back. Let us just take matter. the interjection from Senator Cook and let us say there was a 20 per cent roll-back, which Environment: Land Clearing is a pretty small roll-back. This would Senator BARTLETT (2.30 p.m.)—My probably cost the budget in the order of $5 question is to the environment minister. Can billion to $6 billion. So, in that context, it the minister outline what action the federal shows the utter absurdity of Senator Cook government is taking to reverse the ongoing Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23073 environmental disaster of land clearing The PRESIDENT—I draw your attention throughout Australia? Will the minister en- to the question, Senator Hill. sure that in the next round of funding for the Senator HILL—Certainly. What I am Natural Heritage Trust money is not pro- saying is that the Commonwealth can have a vided to anyone unless they give a clear role in supporting the states in meeting their commitment that they will not engage in constitutional responsibility. The government clearing vegetation? Can the minister guar- are prepared to do that with Queensland, antee that the taxpayer will not be paying which is the principal culprit in this area and money to someone to plant trees in one spot has not acted at all to curb broadacre land while they cut down trees and bushland in clearing of native vegetation. We have of- another? fered Premier Beattie financial support Senator HILL—The government believe which would assist the farmers who may lose that land clearing is continuing in Australia as a result of such restraint. We are doing at an unacceptable rate, principally in that in relation to Queensland in a way that Queensland. We believe that in the last year no Commonwealth government has done in in excess of 450,000 hectares of native relation to any other state, because we accept vegetation were cleared in Queensland and the size of the problem in Queensland and over 200,000 hectares of that were within the also the opportunity in that not as much of Murray-Darling Basin. the state has been cleared as in other states. It is true that in some other states, when the Senator Brown—And you let it happen. regulations to curb clearing were brought in, Senator HILL—As Senator Brown up to 90 per cent had already been cleared. knows, the constitutional responsibility in So we have made that offer to Mr Beattie. relation to natural resource management in Mr Beattie will not take it up, so the Com- this country rests with the states. monwealth is doing what it should do as a Senator Brown—It is your responsibility. partner towards achieving a better natural resource outcome. But unless the Queen- Senator HILL—It is therefore surprising sland government and the Queensland Labor that Senator Brown will not even urge the Premier are prepared to act to meet their Queensland Premier to meet his constitu- constitutional responsibility, there will be an tional responsibility to curb overclearing of ongoing problem. I say again: why aren’t Mr land. Senator Brown will not even mention Beazley and the Labor Party in Canberra, to the Queensland Premier that he has the Senator Brown—who claims to be the primary responsibility in this regard and guardian of native vegetation—and the Aus- should act. Other mainland states have all tralian Democrats demanding that the regulated land clearing of native vegetation. Queensland government act? Mr Beattie in In my home state of South Australia it was Queensland has a huge majority. He ought to done about 20 years ago and the South Aus- now have no excuse but to meet his consti- tralian people paid for it. The other states tutional responsibility and act in that regard. have done likewise. The state that has not If he is prepared to do so, as I said a few done it in relation to broadacre clearing is moments ago, this Commonwealth govern- Queensland under Labor Premier Mr Beattie. ment will be prepared to support him. Senator Bartlett—Madam President, I The Prime Minister wrote to Mr Beattie rise on a point of order, which goes to rele- before Christmas and said that that was the vance. My question specifically asked what case. Before Christmas we also had the two action the federal government is taking not principal farming/land-holder groups in just about land clearing in Queensland but Queensland acknowledge that there was a about land clearing around Australia, which need to curb land clearing—maybe they is causing major biodiversity impacts in were not enthusiastic about it but they recog- states other than Queensland. The question nised that it needed to be done. What they was: what action is the federal government wanted was proper support and compensa- taking? tion. This government has been prepared to 23074 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 offer that but the state government has not stroying tax of all time, at least in the eyes of been prepared to meet its constitutional re- Australian businesses, who are the primary sponsibility and act. (Time expired) employer group of this country? Just how do Senator BARTLETT—Madam Presi- these figures fit with the Prime Minister’s dent, I ask a supplementary question. Is it not statement on 30 September last year, when the case that the Commonwealth has the con- he said: stitutional, legal and financial power to act Well I don’t believe there will be short-term job now to address this issue, in terms of envi- losses from the introduction of our tax plan. ronmental damage being caused by inappro- Senator KEMP—It was interesting to priate land clearing, not just in Queensland listen to the quote from Senator Hogg. He but around the rest of the country? Given the argued—and I think I quote him correctly— continuing lack of progress—which the that the GST is the great job destroying minister has just clearly outlined is the factor which is currently present. I think that case—and the clear failure to meet the is what Senator Hogg said. Again, it poses vegetation targets set out under the federal the question: if that is what Senator Hogg be- government’s plan, will the minister now lieves, why is the Labor Party proposing to ensure that funding is not provided for keep the GST? It does raise that particularly revegetation unless measures are specifically intriguing question. If in fact that is the belief put in place to reduce clearing? of Senator Hogg, and if in fact it is the belief Senator HILL—Senator Bartlett will of the Labor Party that the GST— know that that is in fact a condition in the Senator Cook—It is not! new national action plan for salinity and water quality announced by the Prime Min- Senator KEMP—Hold on. Senator Cook ister and agreed to by the states before said that was not the belief of the Labor Christmas. But the Queensland government Party. I am not sure what the belief of the also agreed to the partnership under the Labor Party is. All I am saying is that this is Natural Heritage Trust. They agreed in fact a very valid issue of public debate. We have to a no net loss of native vegetation. That is had one of your colleagues, Senator Cook, the extent to which we can believe the standing up here and referring to the GST as Queensland government in these matters. I ‘job destroying’. I make the point again that say to Senator Bartlett that he will not get if that is the Labor Party position why are anywhere in this matter if he continues to they proposing to keep GST? I would have turn a blind eye to the principal culprit. In to say that in relation to Senator Hogg’s the case of Senator Brown, Senator Brown question there is an internal party problem rewarded Mr Beattie and Labor in the by- that has to be resolved. Senator Cook has one election the other day for failing to meet view, and Senator Hogg has a different view. their responsibility—a failure which has al- The other point I would make, Senator lowed 450,000 hectares to be cleared. Sena- Hogg, is that it is quite clear there is a tor Brown had the capacity to pressure Labor downturn, as you would know, in the world towards better policy but he abdicated that. economy. But I am not aware that the prob- (Time expired) lems that the US economy is facing at the Economy: Business Expectations moment are due, as you would allege, to the introduction of the goods and services tax. Senator HOGG (2.36 p.m.)—My ques- We do happen to be a great trading nation, tion is to Senator Kemp, the Assistant Treas- and we do happen to be affected by what urer. Can the minister confirm that the most occurs elsewhere in the world. recent Australian Bureau of Statistics survey of business expectations found that Austra- Senator Cook—The Reserve Bank said it lian businesses expect average profit levels is the GST. to drop by 10.7 per cent and full-time em- Senator KEMP—On the interjection, it is ployment to fall by 1.1 per cent in the June quite clear—and the Treasurer has said this, quarter? Isn’t this proof positive that the the Prime Minister has said this, I have said GST is now expected to be the great job de- this and the Reserve Bank has said this—that Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23075 in relation to the introduction of the GST proached by anybody, the Prime Minister or some expenses were pulled forward and the Minister for the Environment and Heri- some were pulled back. We are all aware that tage, to implement that program in Parlia- transitional issues have been involved, par- ment House? If so, how is it going? If not, is ticularly in the construction sector, and that it true that there are some 500 television sets was pointed out by the Reserve Bank as re- which could be turned off at the wall each cently as last weekend. I conclude my re- night in Parliament House but which may not sponse by completely rejecting the assump- be? Is it true that there are some 300 shower tion on which the question was asked—that heads in Parliament House which are not the GST is a job destroying tax. It is quite AAA shower heads, though householders wrong and quite false. I believe it is shown around Australia have been asked to put to be false by the fact that the Labor Party AAA shower heads into their showers? Are propose to keep the GST as part of their there 500 or more fridges in Parliament policy. House which could be turned up one degree, Senator Cook—We are not going to keep which, according to the advertising, would the GST; we are going to roll it back! save 50 kilograms of greenhouse gases for each fridge? That is about 25,000 kilograms Government senators interjecting— of greenhouse gases per annum. Senator HOGG—Madam President, I have a supplementary question. In view of The PRESIDENT—Senator Brown, I the minister’s response, does the minister think you would know, as all senators would recall his statement yesterday: know, that Parliament House has an out- standing record in terms of energy conserva- ... the government has always said that there tion. The amount of money that has been would be a one-off transitional effect of the new tax system ... saved from 1988 until now is quite incredi- ble, and many awards have been won. I have As the Assistant Treasurer did not take up reported to the Senate on some of the the opportunity offered to him yesterday, can awards. The specific matters you raised are the minister today refer us to any page num- not within my personal knowledge, and I ber in the 500-page ANTS document that will get an answer for you. mentions one-off transitional effects or con- fidence sapping annoyance with the admini- Senator BROWN—Madam President, I stration of the GST? ask a supplementary question. I now ask Senator KEMP—Let me point out to you: will you implement that program in Senator Hogg that this was a matter of in- Parliament House? It is not just a matter of tense public debate, and it was quite clear saving money; it is also a matter of saving prior to 30 June that in the construction sec- greenhouse gases and setting a lead— tor many people had decided to try to beat Government senators interjecting— the 30 June start-up date. In relation to cars, it was the reverse. It was a matter that was The PRESIDENT—Order! Senators on constantly debated in the media. That is the my right, I am attempting to hear the sup- point I make, Senator Hogg, and I am sur- plementary question. prised that you now stand up and make the Senator BROWN—Madam President, do claim that you were not aware of these tran- you not think it would be appropriate for the sitional effects. I must say, Senator Hogg, government and Parliament House to set a that that really surprises me. lead in this program that the government is Parliament House: Greenhouse asking the Australian populace to follow? Advertising Program The PRESIDENT—The government Senator BROWN (2.43 p.m.)—Madam does not run Parliament House. Parliament President, my question is directed to you. I House is run by the Presiding Officers, and refer to the government’s $3.9 million green- we will obtain advice on the matters that you house advertising program headed up by have raised. Don Burke and ask: have you been ap- 23076 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001

Goods and Services Tax: Small Business has undertaken 400,000 field visits, what is Senator CARR (2.45 p.m.)—My question the government’s estimate of the number of without notice is to Senator Kemp in his ca- small businesses, just like Graphic Attack in pacity as Assistant Treasurer. Can the min- Alexandra, which have hit the wall as a di- ister explain why Mr Jason McInnes, the rect result of the GST? How many victims of former co-owner of Graphic Attack in Alex- the ‘transitional one-off effects’ have there andra in the seat of McEwen, had a business been, Minister? that before the introduction of the GST had Senator KEMP—The hypocrisy of the supported both himself and his wife for 12 Labor Party has been graphically demon- years, but now after the GST he works as a strated by question time. Again, we have a chef and his wife works at the local council? constant attack on the GST, but the GST re- Government senators interjecting— mains a Labor Party policy. Senator Carr—How many businesses are The PRESIDENT—Order! The minister going broke? is entitled to hear the question, and I cer- tainly need to hear the question. I ask sena- Senator KEMP—If the Labor Party is tors to be quiet while it is being asked. opposed to the GST, why don’t you come out and say that you are proposing to repeal it? Senator CARR—Is the minister aware But you won’t say that. that Mr McInnes has publicly drawn the link between the imposition of the GST on 1 July Senator Carr—How many businesses are last year and his small business in a Victo- going broke? rian regional area suddenly becoming unvi- The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator Carr, able? Is this just another example of the GST you have asked your question and you being ‘good for the economy’—the destruc- should not be shouting during the answer. tion of a small business that was previously You can debate it later, if you wish. Senator profitable for 12 years? Kemp, you should not be speaking directly Senator KEMP—I make the point that I across the chamber; you should be directing am not aware of the business of Mr McInnes your remarks to the chair. that was raised by Senator Carr. Senator Senator Carr—Madam President, I rise Carr, there are many reasons why people on a point of order. My point of order goes to change their jobs. There are many reasons relevance. I think I am entitled to an answer. why in fact some businesses will boom and The minister has not addressed the question others will find things difficult. Senator Carr, that I have asked. I asked how many of these I am not aware of the particular circum- businesses are likely to go broke as a result stances; nor am I aware of the particular of the GST. He has failed to address that is- claim that has been made. However, a very sue. comprehensive program has been put in Honourable senators interjecting— place by the tax office to explain the GST, to The PRESIDENT—I cannot direct him provide advice to business. In fact, I think to as to how he answers the question. date there have been some 400,000 field of- ficer visits which have been made to help Honourable senators interjecting— those in business to comply with the GST. I The PRESIDENT—Order! There is too am not sure whether Mr McInnes in fact much noise in the chamber. availed himself of the opportunity of a field Senator KEMP—The fact of the matter officer visit. Perhaps he did; perhaps he did is that this government has brought in a not. But a very comprehensive program has highly competitive tax system which will be been put in place by the tax office to assist of great benefit to the Australian economy those in business who have particular con- and of great benefit particularly to small cerns. I think the success of the field officer business. If that is not the case, if the Labor visits particularly attests to that point. Party and Senator Carr believe what they are Senator CARR—Madam President, I ask saying, the solution is simple: they should a supplementary question. Since the Treasury then say that they do not propose to keep the Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23077

GST. But they do propose to keep it. What government. It so happens that Greenpeace we have seen today is gross hypocrisy on the have found some technical basis to bring an part of the Labor Party. action in a French tribunal. The French tri- Nuclear Waste bunal found that authorities in relation to the unloading were not properly authorised. That Senator STOTT DESPOJA (2.50 matter is under appeal. We expect to have an p.m.)—My question is addressed to the answer on the appeal fairly shortly, so there Minister for Industry, Science and Re- is not much more I can say about that mat- sources. Is the minister aware of the recent ter—although ANSTO, in its contacts with court decision that banned the unloading of Cogema, is very confident, based on advice Australian nuclear waste? Is he also aware from Cogema, that there is no doubt about that the Cherbourg court ruled that the stor- the proper authorisations that have been age of waste on French soil is illegal under made for the unloading of this material. the French Radioactive Waste Management Act 1991? In light of these actions, what are In any event, the French government have the implications for the agreement between indicated that they strongly support Cogema ANSTO and Cogema? Does the government on this. If, after appeal and all legal proc- acknowledge that even if this decision to ban esses have been duly met, there is any tech- the unloading of waste is overturned there nical difficulty, they have indicated their are now doubts cast on the legality of the willingness to ensure that that impediment is agreement between the French and the Aus- overcome. The spent fuel rods are a matter tralian government, just as there are doubts for Cogema now that they are actually sitting about the legality of the contract signed be- on a boat off that French port. tween Australia and INVAP given the provi- sions of the Argentine constitution? What I find very disappointing in all of Senator MINCHIN—There were a num- this is the determination by both Senator ber of questions there and I will do my best Bolkus and Senator Stott Despoja—pre- to answer them in the time available to me. It sumably in her desperate attempt to defeat is true that a French tribunal did grant Senator Lees in the pursuit of the leadership Greenpeace an injunction in relation to the of the Democrats—to make this a huge po- unloading of spent fuel rods from ANSTO. I litical issue. She ignores utterly the enor- think it is rather tragic that Greenpeace be- mous benefits which Australia gets from haves in this way. We, unlike our predeces- having a research reactor at Lucas Heights, sors, have introduced a proper process for which has operated to the benefit of all Aus- managing spent fuel rods in this country. The tralians for the last 40 years, and our deter- nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights is of course mination to ensure good management of the an essential piece of the scientific, medical spent fuel rods which it generates and their and industrial infrastructure of this country proper dispensation. and one in which we have magnificent inter- I have every confidence in ANSTO and national expertise. As I say, it is vital to this the contract it entered into with Cogema to country. It is also vital that we manage the ensure that this matter is properly dealt with issue of spent fuel rods from that facility and and that our spent fuel management proc- that they are not left lying around at Lucas esses are dealt with properly. In relation to Heights as they were under the previous Argentina, again, this is another furphy that government. ANSTO, a fine organisation, Senator Stott Despoja pursues in her cam- has instituted a proper process for dealing paign against Senator Lees, I imagine. But with spent fuel rods that involves them being there is no doubt whatsoever about Argen- reprocessed at Cogema, one of the world’s tina’s position. I met with the President of leading facilities for this purpose, and which Argentina and the foreign minister of Argen- I have visited. tina, who both gave me their absolute assur- The contract involved is between ANSTO ances on behalf of their government that and Cogema. It is a properly entered into there is no impediment whatsoever in Ar- contract with the full support of the French gentine law to bringing into Argentina spent 23078 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 fuel rods for conditioning and the return of Goods and Services Tax: Small Business the conditioned rods to Australia. Senator MURPHY (2.57 p.m.)—My question is to the Assistant Treasurer, Sena- Senator STOTT DESPOJA—Can I con- tor Kemp. Given that the Treasurer said on firm, then, that the government is confident Perth radio 6WF on 18 May 2000 ‘I don’t that the decision of the French court and its think anybody will go to the wall as a conse- deliberations will have no impact on the quence of GST,’ what advice have you got contract that has been signed? Given the for Ms Jai Simmons, the owner of Tasma- minister’s reference to INVAP, I am won- nia’s only specialty hat shop, which will dering if the minister can confirm that the close on 31 March, according to Ms Sim- Minister for Foreign Affairs has signed a ‘two-minute’ treaty with the Argentinians on mons? She said: nuclear issues. What preparations have been My figures dropped the exact day the GST came made under that treaty—which I believe was then. It has killed my business. initialled in the last couple of days—for the sensitive matter of handling nuclear waste? Senator Alston—Madam President, I rise Is the government confident that those issues on a point of order. Standing orders legiti- have been dealt with under the treaty, just as mately entitle a senator to pursue policy is- the minister seems confident of the legiti- sues, but surely it is not appropriate to seek macy of the contract between Argentina and constituency advice, which is the very thrust Australia, in spite of the Argentine constitu- of this question now being put. ‘What advice tion? does he have for that constituent?’ is the question. That is not an appropriate subject matter for question time. Senator MINCHIN—I think that Profes- sor Helen Garnett and her team at ANSTO The PRESIDENT—He is not allowed to are some of the finest scientists we have in ask for legal advice. this country. I deplore the consistent degra- dation of that organisation and its team by Senator Faulkner—Madam President, I Senator Bolkus and Senator Stott Despoja. rise on a further point of order. It is perfectly They really are an outstanding scientific fa- competent for Senator Murphy to ask a cility that we have. I have every confidence question about the transitional effects of the in ANSTO and its contractual arrangements GST, particularly the impact they are having with Cogema and that the spent fuel rods on a specific small business and small busi- will be dealt with properly. In relation to the ness person. I would have thought also, treaty with Argentina, we have treaties of Madam President, with respect, that before this kind in relation to nuclear safeguards you rule on Senator Alston’s question, if you with some 13 countries, as I understand it. have any intention of entertaining it at all, They are a very important part of our inter- you should listen to Senator Murphy com- national network in relation to nuclear non- plete his question. proliferation. It is important that we have The PRESIDENT—Nobody can ask for those sorts of associations. legal advice and the minister cannot give legal advice, but there are other aspects of Nuclear science is one of our most signifi- asking for advice that do not come into that cant forms and areas of scientific expertise. I category. I certainly will listen to the rest of am delighted that we have signed what is a Senator Murphy’s question. very important agreement with Argentina in relation to this matter. It is, again, idiotic to Senator MURPHY—Doesn’t the experi- call it a ‘two-minute’ treaty. There has been ence of Ms Simmons directly contradict the work going on in this treaty for months and Treasurer’s statement that the GST will not months, and it conforms with treaties that we send any businesses to the wall? Or is the have with a number of other countries. (Time destruction of small businesses such as this expired) just one of the transitional one-off effects of the GST? Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23079

Senator KEMP—Let me make a number ganda to sell this destructive tax, has the of comments in relation to the question from Howard government ever told the truth about Senator Murphy. the one-off transitional effects which would Honourable senators interjecting— send small businesses to the wall? The PRESIDENT—Order! There is too Senator KEMP—I notice that in the sup- much noise in the chamber, and I need to plementary Senator Murphy used the phrase hear the answer. There are people speaking ‘this destructive tax’. Isn’t it astonishing? across the chamber, which makes it very dif- Why would the Labor Party propose to keep ficult. a destructive tax? Why would they do it? Senator KEMP—I think this particular This has been the constant theme throughout case may have been raised by Senator Mur- the Labor Party questions today: attacking phy at the most recent estimates hearings. If the GST but, at the same time, the Labor that is the case, the advice I gave to the Party proposing to keep it. I have rarely seen senator was that, if there were particular a greater example of hypocrisy in my time in problems that someone in business was ex- parliament. The Labor Party want to get their periencing with the GST, they should make policy straight. If they propose to keep the contact with the tax office and we could ar- goods and services tax, as they do, it is gross range a field officer visit to assist them in hypocrisy to stand up here with question af- any areas of particular compliance. ter question and try to attack tax reform. Tax reform is good for Australia and good for Honourable senators interjecting— business. And that is why, in the end, the The PRESIDENT—Order! There are far Labor Party will propose to keep it as part of too many senators contributing. It makes it their tax package. hard to hear the answer, and it is totally out Senator Hill—Madam President, I ask of order. that further questions be placed on the Notice Senator KEMP—That is the first com- Paper. ment I would make. The second comment I would make in relation to Senator Murphy’s ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS WITHOUT question is this: if Ms Simmons is concerned NOTICE about the GST, she should then pose to Goods and Services Tax: Pensions Senator Murphy why the Labor Party pro- poses to keep it. The problem the Labor Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— Party has is that, on the one hand, it attacks Minister for Family and Community Serv- the goods and services tax but, on the other ices and Minister Assisting the Prime Min- hand, it proposes to keep the goods and ister for the Status of Women) (3.03 p.m.)— services tax. That is the problem it has. In the On 26 February I was asked a question with- more general sense, the advice that I would out notice by Senator Evans in relation to the give people in small business is that if they goods and services tax. I seek leave to incor- want to have interest rates at 17 per cent, if porate the answer in Hansard. they want to have record taxes, if they want Leave granted. to rack up government debt to record levels, if they want to make sure that a Labor gov- The answer read as follows— ernment turns a surplus into a deficit, they Senator Evans asked the Minister for Family and should vote Labor. Community Services on 26 February 2001: Senator MURPHY—That was an inter- Can the Minister explain how much of the $485 esting answer. Madam President, I ask a sup- million of taxpayers’ money spent by the Howard plementary question. Can I assume, Minister, Government on prime TV ads and glossy bro- that the closure of Ms Simmons’s hat store is chures to publicise the new tax system was actu- just another of the transitional one-off effects ally spent on alerting Australia’s 2.6 million pen- of the GST that this government is prepared sioners to the fact that half of the GST compensa- to bear? And just where, in the half a billion tion would be clawed back nine months after the dollars of taxpayers’ money spent on propa- GST impacted on their purchasing power? 23080 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001

Supplementary question The answer read as follows— Of the $480 million of taxpayers’ money you Senator McLucas asked the Minister for Family spent selling the package, how much of it did you and Community Services on 8 March 2001: use to explain to pensioners that you were going Is the Minister aware of the matters raised in to claw back half the compensation that they were Centrelink ministerial submission No. 8677, entitled to receive in March? dated 2 February 2001, concerning a police and Response Centrelink joint surveillance operation targeting FaCS spent $4,708,081 on advertising tax reform suspected welfare fraud and tax evasion on cotton elements that were the responsibility of my port- farms in the Goondiwindi district of Queensland? folio. This is the overall figure and it is not possi- Can the Minister confirm that, while the surveil- ble to specify how much was spent on tax reform lance and identification of suspects took place in advertising that was specific to pensioners. early November last year, warrants were not exe- This was on top of the extensive information that cuted until late January? Noting that floods have the ATO provided to the public through its media not been put forward for the delay over the whole campaign, the Essentials magazine, facts sheets of the chipping and harvesting seasons, just what and other PR products. was the reason for this delay? Age Pension News has been a key source of in- Supplementary: Could the operation have been formation for pensioners. The Age Pension News delayed by the cotton farmers’ need to have their is produced quarterly, and is sent to 2.2 million illegal work force on deck as outlined the brief? recipients, including community groups and self- Was a law enforcement operation delayed to meet funded retirees. Explanations of the GST com- the employment needs of local farmers using pensation package for pensioners were included illegal labour and, if so, on whose orders or re- in the June/July 1999 edition, the Septem- quest? ber/October 1999 edition, the December Response: 1999/January 2000 edition, and were repeated I have been advised by Centrelink that the delay again in the March/April 2000 edition. between the identification of a number of people The cost of producing the Age Pension News is suspected of social security fraud and tax evasion not included in the $4.7 million spent by FaCS on and the execution of search warrants was caused advertising tax reform elements specific to the by flooding which made the area difficult to ac- portfolio. It is not possible to separately identify cess. The shortage of agency staff to undertake the proportion of the cost of producing Age Pen- the work over the Christmas period also contrib- sion News associated with promoting the tax re- uted to the decision to postpone the operation form changes. until January. Decisions on timing were made FaCS undertook community briefing via printed jointly by the AFP, ATO and Centrelink. products and seminars for peak bodies, which I have been advised that the labour needs of the were another source of information on tax reform cotton farmers was in no way a determining fac- compensation and the indexation process for pen- tor as to when the agencies would execute the sions. warrant. The Council on the Ageing has confirmed that it I am advised that the public servants in advising relied for factual information on FaCS commu- the Minister for Community Services anticipated nity briefing kits, Government facts sheets, the the Minister’s interest in any possible effects on Age Pension News, and other government the cotton industry. The inference that the timing sources. of the execution of warrants was influenced by Centrelink: Goondiwindi District anything other than legitimate operational consid- erations is without foundation. In view of Centre- Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— link’s role in supporting communities in times of Minister for Family and Community Serv- crisis, I believe this advice was quite proper and ices and Minister Assisting the Prime Min- is certainly not evidence of collusion as implied ister for the Status of Women) (3.03 p.m.)— by the Senator’s question. On 8 March I was asked a question without Health Services: Positron Emission notice by Senator McLucas in relation to Tomography Centrelink. I seek leave to incorporate the Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— answer in Hansard. Minister for Family and Community Serv- Leave granted. ices and Minister Assisting the Prime Min- ister for the Status of Women) (3.03 p.m.)— Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23081

On 8 March I was asked a question without being on the development of the criteria for the notice by Senator Denman in relation to tender process. positron emission tomography. I seek leave In developing the selection criteria, consideration to incorporate the answer in Hansard. has been given to issues such as access, afforda- bility, and the health needs of the population to be Leave granted. serviced by the unit. The answer read as follows— The Department has secured the services of inde- Senator DENMAN - My question is to Senator pendent legal experts to provide legal advice in Vanstone, representing the Minister for Health relation to the tender process. and Aged Care. Given that the minister has failed The Department is also seeking an appropriate to answer a question she was asked on 8 Febru- expert to advise on the probity of the process. ary, I ask her again: Minister, can you confirm Consultations have been undertaken with State that the tender process for Positron Emission To- and Territory Governments to identify and priori- mography scanners has stalled and no progress is tise areas of need within their respective jurisdic- being made in getting this much needed new tions. technology into public hospitals? Are patients in Australia’s public hospitals now paying a second The Request for Tenders will be advertised price for the MRI scan scam because Minister widely, as soon as possible, in all major national Wooldridge is unable to make a decision, creating newspapers. a massive backlog in capital equipment provision With respect to confidentiality, it is entirely ap- in public hospitals? propriate that deliberations and work on the ten- Senator DENMAN - Madam President, I ask a der documents remain confidential until the ten- supplementary question. Minister, do you realise der is advertised nationally. I am sure the Oppo- that it is now a year since the MRI report by Dr sition is not suggesting otherwise. Blandford was completed and three months since Gene Technology the tender process for the new MRI machines was supposed to commence? When will the govern- Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— ment stop treating the public with contempt by Minister for Family and Community Serv- maintaining a veil of secrecy over the MRI tender ices and Minister Assisting the Prime Min- process? ister for the Status of Women) (3.03 p.m.)— Senator VANSTONE - The Minister for Health On 26 March I was asked a question by and Aged Care has provided the following an- Senator Harradine in relation to gene tech- swers to the honourable senator’s questions. I nology. I seek leave to incorporate the an- have addressed both Senator Denman and Senator swer in Hansard. Ludwig’s (which Senator Ludwig asked on 8 Leave granted. February) question on Positron Emission Tomog- raphy in session. The answer read as follows— On the subject of the Magnetic Resonance Imag- Senator HARRADINE - I am sorry. This cham- ing MRI the Minister for Health and Aged Care ber was misled by you and, of course, by the gov- has provided the following answer to the honour- ernment, and it was misled by the NHMRC. What able senator’s question: I want to know is: has an investigation been done? When are you going to change the law to There is no veil of secrecy over the MRI tender make it operable? In other words, when are you process. There is, however, an appropriate level going to take into account that mitochondrial of caution and confidentiality with respect to the DNA-which is about one per cent of the 100 per processes. cent identicality which you are insisting upon in Due to the complexity of the process, the devel- this legislation-which renders it inoperable? opment of the tender is taking more time than (Time expired). what was originally anticipated. The Government Senator VANSTONE - The Minister for Health is taking appropriate measures to ensure that the and Aged Care has provided the following an- process is carefully designed and legally sound. swers to the honourable senator’s questions: The Government established a specific Group to It is not correct that the Government and the oversee this process - the MRI Monitoring and NHMRC misled the chamber. To reiterate, the Evaluation Group. The Monitoring and Evalua- prohibition in the Gene Technology Act 2000 is a tion Group has met on five occasions, most re- strong statement of the Government’s intention cently on 15 March 2001, with its main focus that cloning of human beings will not occur in 23082 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001

Australia. There is no need for any “investiga- ate what was said previously “A human clone will tion” as alleged yesterday. have an identical genome to the original”. The Community concern regarding a lack of legisla- wording of the prohibition in the Gene Technol- tion in some States and Territories to regulate the ogy Act 2000 is “the use of technology for the cloning of human beings prompted the Govern- purpose of producing from one original, a dupli- ment to introduce an amendment to the Gene cate or descendant that is, or duplicates or de- Technology Bill 2000 which prohibits the cloning scendants that are, genetically identical to the of whole human beings. It is intended that meas- original”. In the nuclear transfer process - the ures in the Gene Technology Act 2000 (Clause Dolly process - the purpose is to produce from 192B) will be removed once each State and Ter- one original nucleus, duplicates or descendants ritory has implemented appropriate legislation in with genetically identical nuclei or genomes. The this area. genome determines all of the physical character- istics of the individual - somatic mutations, which In response to your questions in the Senate during happen in all individuals, aside. These are the debate of the Gene Technology Bill 2000, the issues to be clarified as stated previously. government stated that “A human clone will have an identical genome to the original, and therefore Legally, the test currently used to determine ge- the government believes that the definition we netic identity is that of DNA fingerprinting, which have adopted is a practical way of instituting a assays homology of 13 genetic markers. If this ban on cloning.” (Hansard 7 December 2000). test was applied to an individual and his or her clone, produced using the nuclear transfer proc- The term ‘genetically identical’ as used in the ess, this test would identify them as being geneti- Gene Technology Act 2000 is the same as that cally the same individual. used in Western Australian, South Australian and In conclusion, the prohibition in the Gene Tech- Victorian assisted reproductive technology legis- nology Act 2000 is considered by the Govern- lation. This wording is legally adequate in those ment to be a good basis for enacting the Govern- states, as the definition contained with those acts ment’s intent. is underpinned by supporting regulations and guidelines. Goods and Services Tax: First Home The wording in the Gene Technology Act 2000 is Owners Scheme a strong statement of the Government’s intention Senator KEMP (Victoria—Assistant that the cloning of whole human beings will not Treasurer) (3.03 p.m.)—I seek leave to pro- be carried out in Australia. Just like any Act of vide clarification of an answer I provided Parliament, clarification and implementation is yesterday in question time. achieved through additional more specific prohi- bitions. It is expected that further clarification of Leave granted. this intent will be provided. Senator KEMP—There was an inadver- Existing State and Territory legislation, in combi- tent error in a response to a question yester- nation with the NHMRC Ethical Guidelines on day regarding the first home buyers grant. Assisted Reproductive Technology (1996) and the The word ‘before’ was used instead of the Reproductive Technology Accreditation Com- word ‘after’. Clearly, the $14,000 grant is mittee Code of Practice has to date effectively payable in respect of those contracts which prevented any attempts to clone a human being are signed on or after 9 March. within Australia. Telecommunications: Spectrum Sale At the Australian Health Ministers’ Conference on 27 July 2000, Ministers agreed to ban cloning Goods and Services Tax: Small Business of human beings and that this should be pursued Senator SCHACHT (South Australia) by each State and Territory in a manner that com- (3.04 p.m.)—I move: plements the bans in other jurisdictions. The NHMRC has facilitated a process to develop a That the Senate take note of the answers given framework through which each State and Terri- by the Assistant Treasurer (Senator Kemp) to tory can implement complementary legislation to questions without notice asked today relating to ban cloning of human beings as soon as their the goods and services tax. legislative program allows. The government has We have seen a lot of extraordinarily bad asked the NHMRC to report on this process by performances by this minister in question March 2001. time in recent months and years, but today’s With regards to Senator Harradine’s criticism of performance really does take the cake. On the term ‘genetically identical’, I will just reiter- two fundamental issues, this minister was an Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23083 absolute disgrace in that he could not answer there had been no revision. Either they are once on matters of fact. I asked a question lying or the ministers are lying. They cannot about the downgrading of the assessment in both be right. the budget of how much the government The other aspect raised today was about would get from the 3G auction. Yesterday the performance of the impact of the GST on and again today, the minister said that the small business. We got the answer from the estimate in the budget of $2.6 billion—which minister today. He clearly has not got the was the basis of the government’s claim for a message from recent state elections and the surplus last year—had been revised down- Ryan by-election. I noticed that Senator wards. Today he gave no indication of when Lightfoot got a bit of the message. He was they were revised downwards and by whom quoted on the media a few days ago as say- they were revised downwards. He gave no ing that unless the government stopped the indication of which department had been sale of Woodside they would lose all but two consulted. seats in Western Australia. We pointed out to him as recently as esti- Senator Carr—Is that right? mates in February that there was information from both relevant departments and that Senator SCHACHT—That is what he there had been no revision to the $2.6 billion said. They would be left with only two seats estimate. The implication we had today was if the federal government allowed Shell to that some time between the February esti- take over Woodside. That is his criticism of mates and the auction conducted last week his own government. He did not mention the there had been some revision. But he could GST but there is no doubt that it is really not give us any detail because, as we all burning in the community. Kim Beazley said know, there was no revision. last year that when the GST came in it would be a slow burn. It would be a slow burn in Senator Alston—There was. the community and in the small business Senator SCHACHT—I thank Senator community. All the economic commentators Alston for his interjection: he says there was on 2 July said, ‘What a wonderful introduc- a revision. Perhaps, Senator, if you speak in tion it has been. How wonderful! It has all this debate, you can tell us— gone so well.’ They are not saying that now. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Address All those who wrote that back in July last the chair, please, Senator Schacht. year have headed for the hills, saying, ‘There has been a bit of a mess here. We did not Senator SCHACHT—Through you, quite understand what was going on.’ Madam Deputy President, Senator Alston can inform the Senate who conducted the The Assistant Treasurer, who is in charge revision, when it was conducted and when of the tax office administratively, has al- the information was given to the ministers. lowed the tax office to devise the most com- Of course, we know it was not. Certainly plicated set of paperwork to bedevil small Senator Alston has not come forth with it. It business. They have introduced the tax act is an extraordinary performance. They would that has gone from 3,500 pages to over 7,000 have been much better off as a government pages and then said, ‘We are going to reduce to admit their mistake, that they had got it red tape for small business by 50 per cent.’ completely wrong, rather than try to use the You have killed small business. (Time ex- obfuscation that there was some revision. It pired) is a terrible performance by this government. Senator LIGHTFOOT (Western Austra- This matter will not be left to rest by the op- lia) (3.09 p.m.)—Senator Schacht says that position. We will continue to seek the infor- this is going to be a slow burn. mation about how you could get it so wrong and then claim to the Senate that there was a Senator Schacht—Which two seats are revision, when every one of your officials, you going to keep? when they got the opportunity in Senate es- The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Senator timates to answer a direct question, said Schacht, please cease interjecting. You have 23084 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 had your five minutes. I expect silence, thank well? If you are going to do that, where is the you. money going to come from? You are going Senator LIGHTFOOT—This slow burn to boost defence. You are going to boost that Senator Schacht says we are going to spending on tertiary institutions. You are have with the GST is rather peculiar because going to boost spending on R&D. As your Senator Schacht did not say that he is going leader in the other house said, ‘If you do not to do away with the GST. Unlike Senator have any policies, the issue of how you can Cook, who at least had the honesty to say afford them does not come up.’ What a terri- that he is going to repeal the GST, Senator ble thing to say: ‘We are going to make Schacht does not have that honesty. Senator promises but because we do not have to cost Schacht does not say what he is going to do them they are not really promises.’ when he rolls back the GST. What are you What we need from the other side is not going to cut? What further are you going to the criticism of the biggest tax cut this nation cut? Six and half per cent of the GST any- has ever seen—the great evolution, or even way is going to go to local governments revolution, in a new taxation system that this throughout Australia—the old Gough Whit- nation has ever seen. We brought the com- lam trick. Is that rolling it back or is that in pany tax from 36 per cent down to 30 per addition to the roll-back? What are you go- cent and we have given everyone in Austra- ing to do then? Are you going to put the lia a tax cut for the first $60,000 of their in- business tax back up to 36 per cent? come. What are you going to do? Is it going The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order! to be death duties? You have to get the Senator Lightfoot, the chair is going to do money somewhere. The people of Australia nothing. Please address the chair and do not know that you are a big spending govern- use the word ‘you’ because that does refer to ment. You left us with $10 billion. the chair every time you use it. I presume The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Address that when you are saying ‘you’ you mean the the chair, please, Senator Lightfoot. opposition. Senator LIGHTFOOT—What are they Senator LIGHTFOOT—Madam Deputy going to do, Madam Deputy President? Are President, yes, I mean the opposition over they going to say that the rest of Telstra has there with the assistance of the Greens. With to go? Is that where they are going to get the the assistance of the Greens, of course, they additional funds? Is Telstra going to go? are going to roll this back. The Labor-Greens They say, ‘No, Telstra is not going to go— are going to roll this back. But what genu- trust me. We did not sell off the inely worries me is that when it is rolled Commonwealth Bank. We did not sell the back what degree of roll-back is it going to CBA. We would not do that. The CBA was a be? Is it going to be a five per cent GST or national icon. We would not sell that off. We are you saying, as Senator Cook is saying, would not sell off the Commonwealth Serum that you are going to take it away altogether? Laboratories—no, we would not do that. We If you are going to rescind it, are you going do not want the extra money.’ to reintroduce the wholesale sales tax? Are Of course you sold off the CBA. Of you going to put up the rate of business tax course you sold off the Commonwealth Se- from 30 per cent—which it will be in 2001- rum Laboratories. As it turned out, you sold 2002—to 36 per cent again? Are you going it off for a fraction of what it was worth. You to try to claw back the $12 billion tax cut— sold it for a pittance. The capitalisation of the biggest in this nation’s history and one of CSL has gone up about 30 times since you the biggest per capita tax cuts in the world— disposed of it at bargain basement prices. if you roll back the GST? And it was the same with the Common- Does that mean you are going to keep the wealth Bank of Australia. You are going to promise your spokesman on local govern- get the money from somewhere. Come clean ment matters, Senator Mackay, made that and tell the people of Australia what you are you are going to give 6½ per cent of the GST going to do. Is income tax going to go up? as a fixed income to local governments as Are you going to introduce death duties? Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23085

How much are you going to roll the GST what is really happening. It is interesting to back? That is what they should be telling this look an article by Richard Denniss in the parliament and the people of Australia. Canberra Times on 5 March this year. He I cannot stand people who criticise as the said: opposition does. At least Senator Cook is On the publication of January’s employment honest and says that he is going to get rid of statistics Tony Abbott, the Minister for Employ- the GST altogether. But that leaves a fright- ment, Workplace Relations, and Small Business, ening void and that void has to be filled stated that employment had fallen ‘marginally’ by 3,500 jobs. In fact, more than 44,000 full-time somehow. What are you going to do about jobs had been destroyed while 40,600 part-time the money that you are going to raise, be- jobs had been created. cause you spend big when you are in gov- ernment? Are you going to maintain pay- So if the truth be known, 44,000 full-time ments to the states? Are you going to do jobs have been destroyed and 40,600 cre- that? No-one can answer me. I do not know ated—that is not employment creation by whether they have been struck dumb over anyone’s standard. The article went on to there. One minute they are interjecting all say: over the place and the next minute they are The fact is, while the number of employed people silent. Someone has got their tongues. (Time may have fallen marginally, the amount of em- expired) ployment that was taking place had fallen by the equivalent of more than 20,000 full-time jobs. Senator HOGG (Queensland) (3.15 p.m.)—Having heard Senator Lightfoot And then he hit the key: speak about the issue of trust, it reminds me As long as the underemployed are treated that the GST itself was a ‘never, ever tax’, as separately from the unemployed in assessing the described by the then Leader of the Opposi- performance of the labour market, governments tion. It has become known now as the How- will have an incentive to implement policies ard-Lees GST or the Liberal-National- which encourage the substitution of part-time and Democrats GST. Whichever way one tries to casual work for full-time jobs. typify it, the thing that one knows is that it is This government is now trying to go into an immoral tax. It is a tax that shifted the tax denial mode, denying that the GST is im- burden from the rich to the poor. It shifted pacting on small business and impacting on the burden to those with the least financial employment in Australia. When you have a capacity to cope. It attacked pensioners, government in denial, you have a govern- fixed income earners, self-funded retirees ment that is losing its grip on things very and low income earners, and it affected small fast. business. It affected small business in a way One needs to only look at the recent re- that this government now cannot even face sult, as my friend and colleague Senator up to. It has also affected employment op- Schacht pointed out, in the seat of Ryan. portunities. People there obviously understand the poli- Late last year in September when I was on cies of this government and their impact on business in Adelaide, I walked down Mel- their lives. If you look at what happened in bourne Street in North Adelaide and, inter- Ryan, since 1998 the primary vote for Labor estingly, a small business had painted a sign has gone up 13.32 per cent, whilst at the fully across its window saying, ‘GST? No same time the Liberal vote has gone down by thanks. Closing down sale. All stock must 16.39 per cent. So one can see that they have go,’ and then the comment, ‘Die J. Howard.’ deserted the Liberal Party since the GST has If that is not an indictment by that small been mooted and operating. Also, you see business operator of the GST and of the that the two-party preferred vote for Labor Prime Minister, then nothing else is. What has gone up by 17.15 per cent in that same has happened is that small business has been period of time. These are people in one of suffering no end throughout the operation of the wealthiest electorates in Australia. They the GST. When it comes to employment, the are hurting; ordinary average Australians are government does not face up the facts of hurting. My former colleague Barry Jones 23086 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 said only the other night that we now have a addressed the policy weaknesses that the government that is in denial mode. We have Labor Party had, and we have been able to a government that is suffering amnesia, and make major inroads into the situation with we have a government that is languishing in unemployment and bankruptcies. What about nostalgia. When you have that, you have a home loans? Remember those? They have government that cannot see the wood for the fallen to 7.3 per cent from a peak of 17 per forest. It cannot accept the reality that its cent under Labor. Surely you people remem- policies are hurting, that the GST is affecting ber those, yet you get up there and carry on small business and employment. (Time ex- as though you have two minutes memory in pired) the back of your mind. Let me remind you— Senator CRANE (Western Australia) through you, Madam Deputy President—that (3.20 p.m.)—I rise to speak on this motion to the people out in the street remember that take note of an answer, as well. The first very, very clearly. point I wish to make to those on the other We can go on. Productivity growth has side—and we heard a lot of rhetoric a mo- been high under this government, leading to ment or two ago from them—is that counting solid wages growth of around 4.3 per cent your chickens before the eggs have hatched over the year to December, compared with is not a very wise way to drive your position. real wage reductions to low paid workers Compare our position right now with that of under the Accord. Do you remember that the Leader of the Opposition—leader reduction under the Accord, the document Beazley is in total confusion. Anyone can that you people signed off on, the document say, ‘If you do not have any policies, the is- that your former Prime Ministers and Treas- sue of how you can afford them does not urers signed off on? What happened? The so- come up.’ Let me tell you something: the called defenders of the rights of the lowly Australian public will demand answers to paid workers failed them miserably. everyone of the policy questions that do In addition, the Howard government has come up, and they will want precise and repaired Labor’s budget deficit and reduced proper answers—otherwise you will pay the Labor’s debt. Do you remember the $10 bil- price that you are already starting to pay. lion budget deficit inherited from Labor that I want to run through a few of these issues has been turned into a sustainable surplus? I before us. We talk about unemployment and pose that question in these debates to those things that have been done and things that on the other side of the chamber. They have not been done. Under the Howard gov- should answer it and they should address it. ernment, Australians enjoyed 14 consecutive By the end of 2001 the government will have quarters of annual growth of over four per repaid over $50 billion in net debt since cent before the December quarter—some- coming to office, a net debt that was created thing which was never, ever achieved, nor by former Prime Minister Keating and that likely to be achieved, by Labor. Since the still has $30 billion to be paid off on it. Howard government came to office, 800,000 Remember who borrowed to run this jobs have been created, cutting the unem- country in government, spent the money they ployment rate to 6.7 per cent compared with got from asset sales, spent all the taxes they the peak of 11.2 per cent under Labor. got and then still had to go out and borrow Through you, Madam Deputy President, more and more? I say very clearly in this don’t you people on the other side of this place to all those electors around the country, chamber remember those days? Don’t you ‘Buyer beware,’ because you will head down remember the pain you caused? Don’t you that track once again; there is no question remember all the bankruptcies—they were at about that. record levels—at that particular time? Hope- The ratio of public net debt to GDP will fully, and almost probably, that number will have fallen from around 20 per cent of GDP never be reached or gone close to again. in 1995-96 to an expected 6.4 per cent in It is a fact that the government, those of us 2000-01. We will know the exact figure in on this side of the chamber, have in effect June—it is not that far away—and I look Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23087 forward to it. In addition, the Howard gov- ported the introduction of the GST, coalition ernment delivered $12 billion in tax cuts, the members are today left with nothing more largest cuts in personal income tax history. than their blind faith that somehow, some- In my final moments I would like the an- where, the economy has benefited and that swer, through you, Madam Deputy President, Australians are winners. ‘Look,’ they say, ‘it to this: what is going to be rolled back? What was the right thing to do; it is good economic is going to happen to fuel excise? What is policy. There may be some losers in the short going to happen to the wholesale sales tax? term, but every Australian is a winner in the Are we going to see a revamp of the whole- long term. It is not our fault that we are on sale sales tax? What is going to happen to the nose in the community; it is a communi- employees’ tax? Are the Howard tax cuts cation thing.’ ‘It is a communication prob- going to be taken away from them? When lem,’ they tell us. Well, no; it is not a com- will we hear answers to those particular munication problem. It is not a lack of get- questions? It is time they were put on the ting the message out. Goodness knows, there table and became part of a sensible debate. were enough ads extolling the virtue of the (Time expired) GST that made the Australian government Australia’s biggest advertiser in the last 12 Senator JACINTA COLLINS (Victoria) months, according to today’s Courier-Mail. (3.25 p.m.)—On the same matter, it is inter- But to mix and paraphrase Marshall esting to listen to coalition members talk McLuhan and James Carville, ‘It is not the about the Australian economy and the impact medium; it’s the message, stupid.’ of the GST. Apart from, in this last question time and the time before, their obvious prac- The Australian people see beyond this de- tising for opposition and also their public nial that is being suffered by the coalition gloating about removing the surplus, it is a party room. They did not, let me remind the case study in denial. Let us look at Senator Senate, see the need for the GST. Unfortu- Alston’s performance in question time, nately they accepted the Prime Minister’s through a point of order where he sought to promise that there never ever would be one. bar questions in relation to small businesses They certainly did not accept that the pain that have gone bust under the GST; at Min- that its implementation has caused was nec- ister Kemp’s performance, where his only essary. And they do not accept and will not answer seems to be to misrepresent the op- forgive the government’s broken promises position’s position in relation to the GST; and the fine-print sleight of hand regarding and then at other senators misrepresenting the GST. The coalition has broken numerous Senator Cook in relation to what Labor will promises in relation to the GST, let alone its do with respect to the GST and roll-back. being brought into place. Then we move to Senator Lightfoot who, People are not better off as a result of the in denial, could not even accept that we are GST and they consider themselves to be in a slow burn. Nine months after the imple- worse off. Pensioners are no better off; they mentation of the GST, it is not semantic: we feel cheated. Petrol went up as a result of the are not saying that we are ‘going to’ slow GST. Ordinary beer prices rose 1.9 per cent. burn; we are in a slow burn. Finally there is Other prices rose far more than anticipated. Senator Crane, who seems lost in the past. Beyond that, it is not a simple tax. Beyond He is looking backwards, looking at what he these other deficits, simplicity was not one of thinks has been achieved by his government, the gains. But the grandaddy of broken but then he asks more questions of the oppo- promises was the Prime Minister’s promise sition rather than asking what this govern- during the election that, if you did not be- ment will do about the dire mess it has cre- lieve the GST would be good for you per- ated of the Australian economy. sonally, then at least accept that it would be Coalition members face a particular good for the Australian economy. We can problem at the moment. Having swallowed now see, nine months later, that that was hook, line and sinker the Prime Minister’s very hollow. The GST has mugged the Aus- and the Treasurer’s justifications and sup- tralian economy. That is why our economy 23088 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 was growing more slowly than the US’s, The minister claimed that the action taken even before the recession signals started to in France was tragic, to use his terminology, come from there. All of the indicators point and that somehow it was instigated by to the fact that the downturn began post July, Greenpeace as something to do with the post GST. Democrat leadership challenge. I am not The figures for the first quarter after the quite sure how I managed to convince GST had been introduced showed that corpo- Greenpeace to get in on the act half a world rate profits were at their lowest since 1991. away. Nonetheless, that was his convenient A recent Dun and Bradstreet survey high- way of dealing with the significant issues lighted the 10-year low we were in. This that have to be dealt with. He is right: the economic slowdown we did not have to have issue is under appeal and tomorrow a deci- is going to be with us for quite some time. sion may come down that does lift the ban- (Time expired) ning on the unloading of Australian nuclear waste in France. However, there are still is- Question resolved in the affirmative. sues surrounding the legitimacy of that con- Nuclear Waste tract—not just in a philosophical sense but in Senator STOTT DESPOJA (South Aus- a legal sense, particularly under the French tralia—Deputy Leader of the Australian radioactive waste management act of 1991. Democrats) (3.30 p.m.)—I move: Of more concern to me today was the That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Industry, Science and Re- minister’s inability to outline any details to sources (Senator Minchin) to a question without the Senate as to what was agreed or initialled notice asked by Senator Stott Despoja today, re- by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Alexan- lating to the handling of nuclear waste. der Downer, when he made his trip to Bue- I asked Senator Minchin a number of ques- nos Aires. The Sutherland Shire Council tions. The first was whether or not the gov- Mayor, Tracie Sonda, has good reason to be ernment was concerned about the implica- concerned about the implications of this nu- tions of a French court ruling in relation to clear treaty that has been signed and what it the unloading of nuclear waste from Austra- means for their region. She was particularly lia. The minister seemed confident, and I horrified, to use her word, to find out about gather from his response that that is not go- the two-minute treaty through the media, ing to be an issue for Australia. In fact, he simply because the two-minute treaty that claimed that it does not have implications for was signed by Minister Downer and the Ar- the contract that has been negotiated between gentinean government— ANSTO and Cogema. Unfortunately, when Senator Carr interjecting— Senator Collins was talking about some of the rather rude ways questions were dealt Senator STOTT DESPOJA—I am sure with today by those in the government cir- that Senator Carr is particularly interested in cles, she did not have need to mention this issue. Being a good lefty, I am sure that Senator Minchin because he did not com- he does not support the building of a new ment on the GST. However, I found his re- nuclear reactor in Australia and that he sponse somewhat aggressive, and unneces- would have even more concerns if he looked sarily so. He accused the Democrats, in par- into the issue. The treaty was apparently ticular, of somehow questioning the creden- supposed to take months to sign, but on 22 tials and making personal reflections on the February, the DFAT First Assistant Secretary people involved in ANSTO and thus other of the International Security Division, Bill scientific organisations. Nothing could be Paterson, implied that negotiations had yet to further from the truth. No-one made any ref- begin. He also told a Senate committee that erences to the head of ANSTO, other scien- Australia would expect that negotiations on a tists, their credentials or what have you. So bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement that was an unnecessary misrepresentation would begin some time this year and that by the minister, and one that I wish to cor- they would be expected to take a number of rect. months. He said that the department said it Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23089 would take six months or so to complete the PETITIONS negotiations. The Clerk—Petitions have been lodged On February 22, he said it was not under for presentation as follows: way and it was probably going to take six Australian Broadcasting Corporation: months. What has happened? We have seen Independence and Funding in the last week the signing of this particular agreement. More concerning is that we do To the Honourable the President and Members of not actually know what is in this two-minute the Senate in the Parliament assembled: treaty. So I hope that tomorrow, for the bene- The petition of the undersigned calls on the Fed- fit of the Senate, Senator Minchin will come eral Government to support: to the chamber and explain some of the de- i. the independence of the ABC Board; tails. How long has Australia been consider- ii. the Australian Democrats Private Members’ ing this nuclear treaty with Argentina? What Bill which provides for the establishment of a preparations have been made by the govern- joint Parliamentary Committee to oversee ment relating to the sensitive matter of nu- ABC Board appointments so that the Board is clear waste? That is the question I asked and constructed as a multi-partisan Board, truly got no answer to. Does the treaty include independent from the government of the day; issues other than nuclear waste, and what are iii. an immediate increase in funding to the ABC they? What is the relationship between the in order that the ABC can make the transition treaty and the Argentinean constitution with to digital technology without undermining respect to the importation of nuclear waste? existing programs and services, and that it Why has the process of passing the treaty will be able to do this independently from been rushed? Why is it a two-minute treaty? commercial pressures, including advertising Why didn’t it take six months of negotiation? and sponsorship; Maybe it did, but we just did not know about iv. news and current affairs programming is it. Has any serious public consultation been made, scheduled and broadcast free from planned? Obviously not with the Sutherland government interference, as required under Shire Council, and obviously not in a broad law; and sense or through a Senate committee proc- v. ABC programs and services which continue ess—other than the 15 sitting days of public to meet the Charter, and which are made and comment after the signing of such a treaty. broadcast free from pressures to comply with And is it the poorly planned ANSTO re- arbitrary ratings or other measures. placement reactor proposal that is driving by Senator Bourne (from 2,134 citizens) this acquisition of the treaty? If the govern- Australia Post: Deregulation ment knows the answers to any of these par- ticular questions, it would be enlightening To the Honourable the President and Members of not only for the Senate but for the commu- the Senate in Parliament assembled. nity at large, and in particular the Sutherland The Petition of the undersigned shows that we are shire who are going to deal with a new nu- opposed to the National Competition Council clear reactor which is unnecessary. (Time Report proposals to deregulate Australia's postal expired) service as they will drastically reduce the revenue of Australia Post resulting in adverse impacts for Question resolved in the affirmative. most Australians including increased postal CONDOLENCES charges, reduced frequency of services, a reduc- tion in counter and other services currently pro- Martin, Mr Vincent Joseph vided and a loss of thousands of jobs. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (3.35 Your petitioners request that the Senate reject the p.m.)—It is with deep regret that I inform the NCC Report proposals and support the retention Senate of the death on 10 March 2001, of of Australia Post's current reserved service and Vincent Joseph Martin, a former member of the uniform postage rate, the existing cross- the House of Representatives for the division subsidy funding arrangement for the uniform of Banks, New South Wales, from 1969 to standard letter service and require a government 1980. assurance that no post office (corporate or li- censed) will close due to these proposals. 23090 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001

Further we call on the Senate to support the ex- Senator Tierney to move, on the next day pansion of the existing community service obli- of sitting: gation of Australia Post to encompass a minimum level of service with respect to financial and bill That the Senate— paying services, delivery frequency, a parcels (a) notes: service and access to counter services, whether (i) the disgraceful behaviour of the through corporate or licensed post offices. Teachers Federation on Public by Senator Bourne (from 9,034 citizens) Education Day, when political propaganda was handed out to school Non-Violent Erotica children aimed at embarrassing the To the Honourable the President and Members of Federal Government, and the Senate assembled: (ii) that information within the document The petition of the undersigned shows that we that was given to school children was support legislation to introduce Non Violent incorrect on funding that the Erotica as a labelling category for sexually ex- Commonwealth provides to public plicit adult materials, and to do away with the schools and failed to mention that the current and outdated ‘X’ classification system. state governments have primary Your petitioners ask that the Senate should pass responsibility for funding schools; the Classifications (Publications, Films and Com- (b) criticises the Teachers Federation for not puter Games) Amendment Bill (2) 1999. passing on the true nature of by Senator Greig (from 177 citizens) Commonwealth spending on schools, Woodside Petroleum: Proposed Takeover which in the 2000-01 financial year is $5.2 billion (an increase of 7 per cent on by Shell Australia the 1999-2000 financial year) and over To the Honourable the President and Members of the 2001-04 period government schools the Senate in Parliament assembled. will receive an extra $1 billion; The Petition of the undersigned shows: (c) condemns unions for using children as That the proposed takeover of Woodside Austra- post offices to deliver mail to parents, lian Energy by Shell should be opposed in the when children at school should be free of interests of protecting Australian jobs and ensur- political point scoring and teachers ing the nation’s natural resources are retained by should not be using school time to Australian interests. lecture children on union policies; and Your petitioners ask that the Senate should: (d) calls on the Teachers Federation to come clean on public school spending, with Pass a resolution calling on the Government to the New South Wales Australian Labor reject the proposed takeover of Woodside Austra- Party Government increasing school lian Energy by Shell. spending to the tune of only 1.9 per cent by Senator Lightfoot (from 23 citizens) in the 2000-01 financial year. Petitions received. Senator Brown to move, on the next day of sitting: NOTICES That the Senate— Presentation (a) notes the success of microcredit Senator Woodley to move, on the next programs, such as the Grameen Bank of day of sitting: Bangladesh, in alleviating poverty and in That the time for the presentation of the report particular in addressing those in absolute of the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport poverty (those living on less than $US 1 References Committee on air safety be extended per day); and to 5 April 2001. (b) calls on the Government to implement Senator Hogg to move, on the next day of its promise to double the 1997 sitting: microcredit aid budget to $13 million by the end of this parliamentary term. That the time for the presentation of the report of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Withdrawal References Committee on the disposal of Defence Senator CALVERT (Tasmania) (3.37 properties be extended to 24 May 2001. p.m.)—On behalf of Senator Coonan, pursu- Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23091 ant to notice given on the last day of sitting NOTICES on behalf of the Regulations and Ordinances Postponement Committee, I now withdraw business of the Senate notice of motion No. 1 standing in her Items of business were postponed as fol- name for nine sitting days after today. lows: General business notice of motion no. 717 COMMITTEES standing in the name of the Leader of the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Australian Democrats (Senator Lees) for Legislation Committee 28 March 2001, relating to the introduction of the Australian Bill of Rights Bill 2000, Extension of Time postponed till 19 June 2001. Motion (by Senator Calvert, at the re- General business notice of motion no. 860 quest of Senator Crane)—by leave—agreed standing in the name of the Leader of the to: Australian Democrats (Senator Lees) for today, relating to medical and dental serv- That the time for the presentation of the fol- ices, postponed till 2 April 2001. lowing reports of the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee be extended General business notice of motion no. 862 as follows: standing in the name of the Leader of the Australian Democrats (Senator Lees) for (a)the provisions of the Aviation Legislation today, relating to alleged breaches of the Amendment Bill (No.1) 2001 to 5 April 2001; Forestry Practices Code 2000, postponed and till 2 April 2001. (b) in respect of the 2000-01 additional esti- PHARMACEUTICAL BENEFITS mates to 3 April 2001. ADVISORY COMMITTEE Economics Legislation Committee Return to Order Extension of Time Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— Motion (by Senator Calvert, at the re- Minister for Family and Community Serv- quest of Senator Gibson)—by leave— ices and Minister Assisting the Prime Min- agreed to: ister for the Status of Women) (3.40 p.m.)—I seek leave to make some brief remarks in That the time for the presentation of the report relation to a return to order passed by the of the Economics Legislation Committee in re- spect of the 2000-01 additional estimates be ex- Senate on 26 February this year. tended to 29 March 2001. Leave granted. Legal and Constitutional Legislation Senator VANSTONE—On 26 February, Committee the Senate called for some documents to be laid on the table. Pursuant to standing order Extension of Time 164, the Clerk of the Senate notified Senator Motion (by Senator Calvert, at the re- Hill of the details of the motion. Basically, quest of Senator Payne)—by leave—agreed the motion related to the listing of the drugs to: Celebrex and Vioxx and the appointment of That the time for the presentation of the report new Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory of the Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee members. I regret to advise the Committee on the provisions of the Crimes Senate that I will not be in a position to Amendment (Age Determination Bill) 2001 be comply with that order by 4 o’clock today. I postponed to a later hour of the day. have a letter from Dr Wooldridge, the Min- LEAVE OF ABSENCE ister for Health and Aged Care, in which he says that he regrets that a final response will Motion (by Senator Calvert, at the re- not be available today. The reason he offers quest of Senator Harris)—by leave—agreed is that a large number of documents within to: the scope of the request were prepared by That leave of absence be granted to Senator Har- third parties and there are necessary negotia- ris for the period 26 March to 5 April 2001, on ac- tions with them. He indicates that the prog- count of ill health. ress on that matter is very well advanced but 23092 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 not yet complete. He concludes by saying Whilst very well advanced, this consultation pro- that a detailed response will be made avail- cess is not yet complete and this means that un- able to the Senate as soon as possible. fortunately it will not be possible to table the documents in the Senate by 4:00pm 27 March as ‘As soon as possible’ is not, I assume, requested. Please let me assure you that all efforts what senators would be happy with as an are being made to keep the delay in tabling of the indication of when this order will be com- documents as short as possible. plied with. I had hoped to get further and A detailed response to the Motion will be pre- better particulars from Dr Wooldridge by sented to the Senate as soon as possible. now, but the House of Representatives ques- Yours sincerely tion time does go on and there are other Dr Michael Wooldridge commitments. I give an undertaking to the Senate that I will come back tomorrow, be- BUSINESS fore the close of business, and give such Government Business further and better particulars as I can from Motion (by Senator Ian Campbell) Dr Wooldridge as to the completion of the agreed to: task of complying with this order. Then, of That consideration of the Advance to the Fi- course, if the Senate is not happy with that nance Minister for the year ended 30 June 2000 in answer there will be a debate. If the Senate is committee of the whole be made an order of the happy with that answer, there will not be. I day for the next day of sitting, and be taken to- seek leave to incorporate in Hansard Dr gether with the government business order of the Wooldridge’s letter to me of 27 March. day relating to the consideration of the Advance Leave granted. to the President of the Senate for 1999-2000. Business of the Senate The letter read as follows— Motion (by Senator Ian Campbell) The Hon Dr Michael Wooldridge agreed to: Minister for Health and Aged Care That business of the Senate notices of motion 27 March 2001 nos 1, 2 and 3 for 27 March 2001, relating to the disallowance of regulations, be called on and Senator the Hon. Amanda Vanstone taken together when business of the Senate is Minister for Family and Community Services reached in the routine of business, but be voted on Minister representing the Minister for Health and separately. Aged Care COMMITTEES Parliament House Superannuation and Financial Services CANBERRA ACT 2600 Committee Dear Minister Reference I refer to the motion passed by the Senate on 26 Motion (by Senator Brown) agreed to: February 2001 seeking the tabling, no later than That the provisions of the Parliamentary 4pm on 27 March 2001, of documents relating to: (Choice of Superannuation) Bill 2001 be referred • The listing of the drugs celecoxib (Celebrex) to the Select Committee on Superannuation and and rofecoxib (Vioxx) on the Pharmaceutical Financial Services for inquiry and report by 23 Benefits Scheme; and May 2001. • The appointment of the new Pharmaceutical Community Affairs Legislation Benefits Advisory Committee. Committee I regret that a final response to the Motion is not Extension of Time available today. A large number of documents Motion (by Senator Calvert, at the re- within the scope of the request were prepared by third parties. Because many of these documents quest of Senator Knowles) agreed to: potentially raise issues related to commercially That the time for the presentation of the report sensitive information and personal privacy issues, of the Community Affairs Legislation Committee you will appreciate that it was necessary for all on the Australia New Zealand Food Authority third parties to be consulted before any release of Amendment Bill 2001 be extended to 3 April material could be made. 2001. Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23093

Community Affairs Legislation Committee on the Environment and Heritage Committee Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2000 [2001] and two related bills be extended to 4 April 2001. Meeting Motion (by Senator Calvert, at the re- Senator HILL (South Australia—Minis- quest of Senator Knowles) agreed to: ter for the Environment and Heritage) (3.46 p.m.)—by leave—Despite the fact that this That the Community Affairs Legislation Committee be authorised to hold a public meeting motion has been carried, I would express my during the sitting of the Senate on 29 March deep disappointment that an extension has 2001, from 3.30 pm, to take evidence for the been necessary until April for the committee committee’s inquiry into the Australia New Zea- to consider this matter relating to heritage land Food Authority Amendment Bill 2001. legislation. The committee received the ref- Legal and Constitutional Legislation erence before Christmas. I cannot see any Committee reason why the committee could not have done its job properly within that time and Extension of Time reported to the Senate. These reference of Motion (by Senator Calvert, at the re- bills procedures were set up in an informal quest of Senator Payne) agreed to: way and were designed so that matters could That the time for the presentation of the report be dealt with expeditiously. In fact, the con- of the Legal and Constitutional Legislation ceptual plan was that they would be looked Committee on the Freedom of Information at on the Friday following the referral and Amendment (Open Government) Bill 2000 be returned to the Senate the following week. It extended to 5 April 2001. has now become practice for these commit- Superannuation and Financial Services tees, rather than to deal with these matters Committee within a week or two, to take literally Reference months, and here is yet another example of that. Looking at bills that are currently held Motion (by Senator Calvert, at the re- up, I find that either today or yesterday there quest of Senator Watson) agreed to: are three bills where committees have come That the following matter be referred to the back to the Senate seeking extensions of the Select Committee on Superannuation and time for consideration. Financial Services for inquiry and report by 24 May 2001: I am one who believes that this chamber Issues arising from the committee’s report should properly scrutinise a piece of pro- on the Taxation Laws Amendment (Su- posed government legislation, but I fear that perannuation Contributions) Bill 2000. this process has gone well beyond that now. Corporations and Securities Committee It is, in fact, significantly retarding the gov- ernment from the right to have its program Extension of Time debated within reasonable time, and I just Motion (by Senator Calvert, at the re- wanted to express my disappointment in that quest of Senator Chapman) agreed to: regard on the public record today. That the time for the presentation of the report of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (3.48 Corporations and Securities on the provisions of p.m.)—by leave—The committee does regret the Corporate Code of Conduct Bill 2000 be having to seek an extension of time. But, extended to 24 May 2001. despite the minister’s complaints about the Environment, Communications, Senate, this matter is very complex. The Information Technology and the Arts committee did have a very short hearing References Committee time, but the extent of the issues that are contentious in this legislation is such that this Extension of Time bill warrants a very careful examination. I Motion (by Senator Allison) agreed to: think it is fair to say that, had the committee That the time for the presentation of the report received a lot of support for the legislation in of the Environment, Communications, its entirety, we would have had no difficulty Information Technology and the Arts References in returning a report quite quickly. But all 23094 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 efforts have been made to do that as effi- The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order! ciently and as quickly as possible. The Senator Campbell, would you please with- chair’s draft has gone to other members of draw your language. It is unparliamentary the committee. No doubt, if they determine it and you know it. will only take them a very short time to de- Senator Ian Campbell—I withdraw it. cide whether they agree with that report or not, we could table earlier. But, in my view, Senator O’BRIEN—It just seems to me this is a very complex matter and warrants that here we have a process which is pro- proper examination, and that is what the ceeding in an orderly fashion. This govern- committee has done. ment has had a great deal of cooperation in the passage of its legislative program. Senator O’BRIEN (Tasmania) (3.50 p.m.)—by leave—Whilst I am not aware of Senator Ian Campbell—If that is what the particular circumstances of this report, you are worried about, we will bring on the Senator Hill made a comment in his state- migration bill. ment that I think should be responded to. He Senator O’BRIEN—These particular talked about a practice of committees seek- bills and other bills which are before the ing extensions to reporting times which have Senate are being dealt with expeditiously— been established. Let me say that, on a num- so expeditiously that perhaps the government ber of occasions, reporting times have been is fearful that it will run out of legislation. established with the best of intentions but the Perhaps that is the real situation that the gov- taking of evidence and, indeed, the delay in ernment is seeking to prepare itself for. receiving answers to questions on notice in Honourable senators interjecting— relation to particularly important matters The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order! necessitates committees requiring an exten- Senator O’Brien has the call. sion of time to properly consider evidence so that they can properly report to the Senate. Senator O’BRIEN—I am not sure You would note, looking at the red today, whether we have a Democrat or a member of that each of the extensions proposed are by the government over there making interjec- government chairs of the committees. These tions. The fact of the matter is that there are a are committees— number of pieces of legislation which are before committees—and which are before Senator Ian Campbell—Do you want us committees for good reason—which will be to consult with the committee? dealt with properly by the opposition. As I Senator O’BRIEN—No, I am not sug- said, I am not in a position to comment on gesting that it is improper at all, Senator the particular resolution that Senator Hill has Campbell. What I am suggesting is that, in made a statement on, but I can say that there the bipartisan way in which these commit- is no practice of deliberately delaying any tees work, the committees are desirous of piece of legislation through the committee dealing properly with the references. Let us process. On the committee that I am a mem- take another example, that of the RFA legis- ber of, there has been a practice of ascer- lation. Senator Hill vigorously argued that taining the facts and reporting properly to the the committee should report on a certain Senate. That committee, the Rural and Re- date. I think we had a one-week extension, gional Affairs and Transport Legislation but do not hold me to that. Nevertheless, we Committee, very regularly brings down had a short extension to a reporting time on unanimous reports. It is not a matter of poli- the basis that the government needed to deal ticking at all. I am fearful that Senator Hill with the bill. How long did it take to deal has used the opportunity that he has been with the bill, Senator Hill? Months and given to try and set up an excuse for the gov- months and months. It is all right for Senator ernment running out of legislation. Hill to come and— Senator Hill—That does not make sense. Senator Ian Campbell—That’s because What I am suggesting is that you bring the you filibustered the tax bills. bill on. What an illogical suggestion! Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23095

Senator O’BRIEN—You have had a graceful filibusters in parliamentary history, chance and perhaps I can have a chance. The that RFA legislation was delayed until an- Senate has passed a resolution. The govern- other sitting period. ment clearly did not have the numbers and Senator O’Brien has attacked us, saying Senator Hill is upset about that. Perhaps he we do not have legislation to go on with. should go back to his office and cool down a Yesterday, we had about five or six different bit. The reality is that the matter will be bills that we wanted to deal with but, as often properly dealt with. The fact is that the happens, the opposition and other senators in resolution has been supported by the Senate, this place said they were not ready to deal just as five motions moved by Senator Cal- with it. Today, we issued a Senate daily pro- vert on behalf of government senators were gram—Order of Business—known around supported by the Senate. I do not think there the Senate as ‘the red’, with three bills on it: is anything particularly unusual about that. the migration legislation, the Taxation Laws The opposition will continue to give proper Amendment (Excise Arrangements) Bill and consideration— the Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No. 5). Senator Hill—I thought this was going to The Australian Labor Party said that for be a brief statement. various reasons they could not deal with the Senator O’BRIEN—It was a brief state- migration bill, apparently because it has not ment until you and other colleagues of yours gone to caucus. They had a caucus meeting decided to introduce other matters into the this morning and the shadow minister obvi- argument which I felt obliged to respond to. ously was not organised enough to take that The fact of the matter is that we will give bill there. We have been told, at late notice, proper consideration to this and other reso- that Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No. 5) lutions. We are not in the business of holding cannot be dealt with because the opposition up the business of the Senate improperly in are not ready to deal with that. any way. The fact of the matter is that this The Manager of Opposition Business and government has passed a huge amount of I work very hard to ensure this legislative legislation, and the statistics will show it. program. We work very closely with the Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western Australian Democrats and other senators to Australia—Manager of Government Busi- ensure this place operates successfully and ness in the Senate) (3.55 p.m.)—by leave—I deals with legislation in an orderly fashion. I thank my colleagues for the courtesy of will not cop criticism from the opposition granting leave. I just want to respond quickly whip when it comes to the management of to Senator O’Brien’s comments in relation to the program. He seems not ever to be in the committee reports and bringing on legisla- loop when it comes to the management of tion. In his speech he said—and I apologise the program. He is kept out of the loop, ob- for interjecting, but it got me quite angry— viously deliberately, because he does not that the RFA legislation was not brought on. know what he is talking about. If he wants to We sought for the RFA legislation to come make accusations in such terms as ‘the cup- back from committee quickly. I understand it board is bare of legislation’, I will ensure— was delayed on two or three occasions at Senator O’Brien interjecting— least. We sought to deal with that legislation Senator IAN CAMPBELL—He still but, as Senator Cook would know very well, nods, this goof opposite. the sitting fortnight when we sought to deal with that was the occasion of one of the most The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order, substantial filibusters in the history of par- Senator Campbell! liaments anywhere in the world. That was on Senator IAN CAMPBELL—I withdraw the tax system. In fact, there was a signifi- the word ‘goof’. This hopeless whip oppo- cant demand to get that legislation through. site— The industry wanted it through. Govern- ments around Australia wanted it through The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Senator, but, through one of the worst and most dis- do not reflect upon another member here. 23096 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001

Senator IAN CAMPBELL—If he wants practice here. There is no program of at- to continue to make that assertion, we will tempting to frustrate the government’s legis- bring on the migration bill immediately, and lation. There is no attempt being made by the we will not cooperate with them. If they Labor Party to avoid discussing legislation in come to us and say, ‘We can’t deal with it this chamber; on the contrary, I think if one because it has not gone through party proc- examines the amount of extra time that has esses,’ it would be the normal and sensible been granted by this chamber for the consid- thing for us to cooperate with them. But if a eration of government legislation, you will whip wants to come in here and say we have find, in fact, that a record amount of extra no legislation to do, when it has been the time has been agreed to. There are probably Australian Labor Party’s fault because they a record number of bills that have actually are not prepared to do it, then all I can sug- been dealt with by this chamber through that gest to him is that he should talk to Senator process. Carr and Senator Faulkner and get himself Our proposition is pretty straightforward: into the loop. If he wants to continue assert- we say that it is the government’s responsi- ing that, we will not rearrange business; we bility to bring legislation before the chamber will bring on the migration bill as planned. and it is our responsibility to assess the mer- Senator CARR (Victoria) (3.59 p.m.)—by its of that legislation. We give the govern- leave—It has been said that the Labor Party ment no commitment that we will actually has asked that the Migration Legislation vote for their legislation. What we do say is Amendment (Integrity of Regional Migration that we will give you a commitment that we Schemes) Bill 2000 not be proceeded with will consider the legislation in a speedy today because it has to go to the caucus of manner. There can be no excuse, however, the Labor Party, which is true. We maintain for the government to come into this cham- that that is a reasonable point of view to take. ber and say that we are not entitled to exam- I would have thought, however, that the gov- ine that legislation before the committees of ernment would have been on stronger ground this chamber and to ensure that that job is in putting to us their concerns about this done thoroughly and is done in a manner matter if this legislation had actually been which gives justice to the proposals that are introduced into the chamber. It is a some- being considered. I take offence, however, what feeble proposition for the government when an objection is raised that we are not to raise concerns about us asking that the prepared to consider legislation when it has matter go to caucus when it has yet to intro- not even been introduced into the chamber. duce this particular legislation to this cham- That seems to me to be a sleight of hand that ber. If one looks at the red, you will notice ought not to go unchallenged. that there are no numbers listed beside this Environment, Communications, particular— Information Technology and the Arts Senator Ian Campbell—It has to go to References Committee the Senate before it goes to caucus! Extension of Time Senator CARR—I think it is reasonable, however, if the government is going to talk Motion (by Senator Allison) agreed to: about how well it manages its program, to That the time for the presentation of the report actually introduce legislation before it com- of the Environment, Communications, plains about the failure of this chamber to Information Technology and the Arts References deal with it. It is a simple proposition, Sena- Committee on telecommunications and electro- tor—a very simple proposition. I would have magnetic emissions be extended to 5 April 2001. thought that you would be able to follow that TELEVISION BROADCASTING: ASIA argument quite easily. PACIFIC REGION It has been indicated to us that last night Motion (by Senator Crossin) agreed to: there were some bills that the government That the Senate— wanted to deal with and that a senator was not available to deal with it. That is common (a) notes: Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23097

(i) the recent closure by the Channel 7 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Network of Australia Television, National Competition Policy (ii) the problems caused by the sudden The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I have re- closure of Australia Television for ceived a letter from Senator Murray propos- Radio Australia, which has piggy- ing that a definite matter of public impor- backed into Asia and the Pacific on Australia Television’s leased Palapa tance be submitted to the Senate for discus- satellite service, and sion, namely: The rejection by the Australian public of the (iii) the importance of both Radio current National Competition Policy, particularly Australia and a quality television in view of its failure to balance economic with broadcasting service for Australia in social and environmental considerations, and the the Asia/Pacific region in terms of need to scrap Competition Policy and abolish the promoting Australia’s political and National Competition Council. economic interests and providing an independent news service to the I call upon those senators who approve of the region; proposed discussion to rise in their places. (b) condemns the Federal Government for More than the number of senators re- its tardiness in selecting a provider to quired by the standing orders having risen in establish a television broadcasting their places— service into the Asia/Pacific region since calling for expressions of interest to The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I under- provide such a service in August 2000; stand that informal arrangements have been and made to allocate specific times to each of the speakers in today’s debate. With the concur- (c) calls on the Federal Government to fast- rence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to track the establishment of an effective set the clock accordingly. television broadcasting service into the Asia/Pacific region as a matter of Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) urgency, preferably by funding the (4.04 p.m.)—A lot of people are finally Australian Broadcasting Corporation to climbing out of the woodwork to oppose this provide that service. competition policy, a creation of Labor sup- FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE: ported by the coalition. In 1995, the Austra- EUROPE lian Democrats were not supportive of the design of the national competition policy. Motion (by Senator Calvert, at the re- The Democrats believed that the policy quest of Senator Sandy Macdonald) agreed would result in substantial gains for big to: business and the cities at the expense of That the Senate— small business and the regions. Unfortunately, the evidence confirms (a) notes that the spread of foot and mouth Democrat fears. I was a member, together disease in Europe, particularly in the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland, with Acting Deputy President Lightfoot, who continues at a horrifying pace; is now sitting before us, of the Senate Select Committee on the Socio-Economic Conse- (b) acknowledges the pain, suffering and quences of the National Competition Policy financial loss being felt by farmers, their which reported in February last year. The families and their communities; evidence that that committee received by and (c) understands and empathises with the large vindicated the view of the Democrats incredible personal and genetic loss of benefits to the cities and detriments to being inflicted on British agriculture; many rural and regional parts of this country. and It is time to scrap this national competi- (d) requests that the President of the Senate tion policy. In the five years that it has been write to the British Farmers’ Federation in place, overall it has not proved itself to be expressing the Senate’s heartfelt capable of providing enough national bene- sympathy. fits to outweigh its many local and regional 23098 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 costs. Even on big picture issues such as to give consideration to the issues in the re- electricity, its failure to cost in externalities port, but the government commits to doing has left us with long-term environmental nothing else. problems and industry structure problems. In the last few months, the government The National Competition Council should be has suffered a battering in the polls and has abolished. Its members consider the cultiva- been defeated in Ryan, and the National tion of the almighty dollar a superior objec- Party have suffered an identity crisis of ex- tive to the objectives of healthy environ- treme proportions, particularly in Queen- ments and healthy communities. National sland. The government’s new-found con- competition policy is premised on deregula- cerns in relation to national competition tion unless it can be shown that there is pub- policy therefore seem more about politics lic benefit in retaining the regulation. It than principle. Only seven months ago, it should be the other way around. responded to the committee’s report, a report Put simply, competition policy is domi- that identified many of the very problems nated by economic assessment ahead of a that the Prime Minister says he wants to ad- consideration of the less tangible effects of dress. But only seven months ago the gov- the policy in social and environmental areas. ernment was not prepared to do anything It is much easier to count dollars and cents about those problems. than it is to measure the flows of people from One of the reforms being postulated is to small towns to regional centres and cities or try to form some sort of definition of the ex- to measure the effects on the local society or pression ‘public interest’. The Democrats the local environment. We need to evaluate have two problems with this approach. The the consequences that has for those who re- first is that we cannot see that just penning a main in small towns in terms of the with- definition of ‘public interest’ is going to help drawal of services and people, employment, all that much. ‘Public interest’ is a far- education and so on. reaching term that allows for consideration Back in 1995, when the parliament was of almost anything. It is a term that has been debating the Competition Policy Reform considered by courts and is used in a number Bill—which was the bill that legislated the of pieces of legislation. By trying to redefine introduction of the national competition pol- the term, you may end up limiting the mat- icy—the Australian Democrats criticised the ters that are considered rather than broaden- bill for its failure to include in pricing the ing them. Our second problem with a new negative social and environmental effects of definition of ‘public interest’ is that, quite a particular decision. The Democrats are still simply, it is too little too late. The problem trying to convey that message. with national competition policy is not the Whilst I am pleased that the Prime Min- absence of a definition of ‘public interest’; it ister is now taking a renewed interest in the is the underpinning philosophy which says impact of the national competition policy, I that deregulation and free market forces al- must admit that I am cynical about his mo- ways result in a better allocation of resources tives and about how late in the process he and better outcomes for society. has become concerned. Let me explain why. What is needed is a different attitude— The Senate select committee into NCP re- one that balances economic, social and envi- ported in February last year, over 12 months ronmental considerations, and one that val- ago. The government’s response to the select ues small business of itself and the regions of committee’s report was tabled in August themselves. Only by ridding the National 2000. You will find that in the 14 pages of Competition Council of free market ideo- that response the government commits to logues, however pleasant they may be as doing absolutely nothing in response to the individuals, can such an attitude start to be recommendations of the committee. Sorry— inculcated. Small business has a value of change that to ‘nearly nothing’. The report itself. The regions have value of themselves, does state that the Prime Minister will write not just as measures in the GDP ratios or as to premiers and chief ministers and ask them economic elements. They have value as Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23099 components of our society. It is time to let go ernment to decide its position in relation to of that thinking, scrap the lot and start afresh. some minor amendments made by the Sen- The NCP has had five years, has cost thou- ate. The government and the Labor Party sands of jobs and has, in our view, mostly both rejected my amendment to that bill, benefited a minority of big businesses in the which would have given the ACCC the cities. Its economic successes are out- power to break up ownership situations weighed by its social failures, and we are which substantially lessen competition. I will witnessing the consequence of those social be proposing that that amendment be sent to failures in the backlash in the community. a committee for further consideration. The government and the Labor Party have fortu- I accept that, at the time, the Labor Party, nately indicated their support for a reference who introduced it, and the coalition may of that issue. have had great hopes for its virtues, but the practice of the NCP has proven to be fatally Both the coalition and the Labor Party flawed. When we think of competition pol- supported competition policy in its current icy, we should also be thinking about legis- form back in 1995. To use a current phrase, it lation that protects key small business sec- is time for a roll-back on this issue from both tors and regulates the market power of big of them. Given that I expect that we will be business. Provisions like section 46, which is going to a general election in about seven the misuse of market power provision, and months time, my request is for a complete section 51AC, which is the unconscionable consideration of the underpinnings of the conduct provision of the Trade Practices Act policy by both sides of politics. The fact is 1974, are a good start, but more can be done that the effects of that policy are now known and more must be done. Australians urgently and the weakness of the policy is that it lacks need and want a competition policy which balance and is driven by a particular ideo- includes the safeguarding of key small busi- logical passion which is not the right answer ness sectors. This need is real and is repre- for our society. I look forward to seeing the sented in numerous letters from ordinary reforms that the Prime Minister has fore- Australians. Deregulating pharmacies, taxis, shadowed in his recent comments. However, liquor stores and retail hours, as recom- I do fear that it may still be the case that they mended by the National Competition Coun- are analogous, to use the old phrase, to rear- cil, hurts small business sectors in regional ranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Australia and benefits only big business. These are not national or global issues that Senator FERGUSON (South Australia) need big brother attention; they are state or (4.14 p.m.)—Senator Murray makes a lot of local issues and should not be subject to this considered contributions to the Senate. There policy. are often times when I am in agreement with him, but I must tell you that today Senator We need a totally different approach to Murray has got it totally wrong. This matter competition that reduces the opportunities before the Senate, which talks about ‘the for big business to engage in unfair trading rejection by the Australian public of the cur- practices against small business. Competition rent national competition policy’, is a rather policy is not just about efficiency; it is also broad, sweeping statement. The proposal that about society. It must be about laws that the Australian public have rejected the na- regulate the power of the powerful, not about tional competition policy simply cannot be removing laws that protect the bargaining supported by fact. There may be some mem- position of the weak. The first thing the gov- bers of the Australian public who do not like ernment can do is stop sitting on its hands in competition policy, but in fact it is not true to relation to the Trade Practices Amendment say that the Australian public in general are Bill (No. 1) 2000. That 17-page bill contains against competition policy. Half of them a number of very positive competition meas- probably do not even know that it exists, ures for small business. It was first intro- because it is part of their everyday lives and duced into the House of Representatives nine something that has been signed on to by all months ago. We are still waiting for the gov- state governments and by the federal gov- 23100 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 ernment, and of course it was signed on to by regarding the privatisation of many former the Labor federal government when they government monopolies. were in office. As you will well remember, Mr Acting I am looking forward to hearing Senator Deputy President Lightfoot, the Labor Party Cook’s contribution to this debate for a vari- were at the forefront when it came to priva- ety of reasons. Senator Cook’s views seem to tising what were previously existing gov- be changing as time goes by. Until today, we ernment monopolies. As a coalition govern- were of the belief that the Labor Party were ment we have continued in that vein. But it so supportive of a GST that they wanted to seems that the Labor Party have had a ‘road keep it. Now we know that all of the Labor to Damascus’ conversion: they now no Party want to keep it except Senator Cook. longer support the policies they had prior to This is a bit of a break. We now have one 1996 when they sought to get rid of govern- person in the Labor Party who does not want ment monopolies. That has been evidenced to keep the GST; he wants to get rid of the by their opposition, since 1996, to many of GST. It will be very interesting to see the privatisation arrangements that this gov- whether Senator Cook succeeds in persuad- ernment has attempted to put into place in ing his own party to get rid of the GST in order to improve competition and improve order to come to his point of view. the services that Australians get. The com- petition policy reflects the view that com- Senator Murray also mentioned in his petitive markets maximise productivity and speech that the Prime Minister’s recent inter- economic growth opportunities, increase est in the national competition policy was employment and improve services to con- brought about by falling polls. I had not no- sumers and business. ticed that the polls were showing support for A number of issues were brought to the the Democrats rising all that much in recent fore when the subject was discussed and times. As a matter of fact, in percentage agreed to at the COAG meeting in November terms you could probably say they had close 2000. The public interest test has been en- to a 50 per cent reduction in support in some hanced. The public interest test uses a broad areas. I can promise you that while the polls benefits cost ratio approach and considers all show that support for the government has relevant matters. I particularly draw to dropped, certainly there is nowhere near a 50 Senator Murray’s attention matters such as per cent reduction in support for the govern- economic, social and environmental impacts ment in the polls. I do not think it is a test of and a consideration of the interests of all of our attitude towards the national competition the parties affected are included. It is a mat- policy that is having any effect on that situa- ter of judgment whether you think the na- tion. tional competition policy has fulfilled all of When we are talking about the competi- those things to the fullest. In fact, they are tion policy I think it is important that we un- part of the policy, so it is no good blaming derstand exactly what we mean by the com- the policy for anything that might not even- petition policy that was introduced by the tuate. The policy is right, so the execution Labor Party and supported by the coalition. must be right—and it must be made right— Right at the very beginning the policy states as well. that it extends competition into areas of the Various media have recently displayed a economy which have been dominated by significant misunderstanding of the national government monopolies or where competi- competition policy. I believe the media have tion has been restricted by legislation. That is deliberately in many ways misinterpreted why we in opposition supported the intro- and misunderstood what the policy stands duction of a competition policy at that time. for. For instance, in spite of what the media We do not believe that areas of competition might say, the national competition policy should be dominated by government mo- does not ignore social, regional or environ- nopolies. I understand that the Labor Party mental considerations. It is part of the policy have now changed their views, particularly that they must be taken into account. It does Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23101 not require asset sales, privatisation, compul- a call to Germany. With the cheapest carrier sory tendering, contracting out or deregula- it now costs 21c. The benefits to consumers tion. They are not part of the competition of introducing competition policy in the tele- policy. It does not require that those things communications industry can be highlighted, be done. It does not require the removal of and I could give you a whole range of other monopolistic practices, and I instance single examples. For instance, even within Austra- desk marketing. It does not require that those lia, national long-distance call prices have things must be got rid of. It does not allow fallen substantially since there was market unelected officials to set the national compe- liberalisation in 1997. For example, the cost tition policy reform agenda. That is not part of a 15-minute off-peak intercapital call has of the national competition policy. Nor does fallen from $2.67 with Telstra in June 1997 it reduce services or remove community to $1.55 on 1 February this year with the service obligations. There is no greater bene- cheapest carrier—a saving of over 40 per fit of that than in the area of telecommunica- cent. tions, one of the greatest areas of community Instead of the price of local calls going up, service obligation in Australia. Whenever the price of untimed local calls has now there has been any privatisation regarding fallen to below 20c. Compare that with what Telstra, legislation that has been enacted has it was five or six years ago in real dollar always ensured that community service obli- terms. I could go through a whole range of gations which were in place prior to any pri- other areas where competition policy has vatisation taking place have been main- delivered benefits to consumers which are tained. tangible, which are significant and which The telecommunications industry was highlight the fact that, if we get rid of gov- opened up to full competition in July 1997, ernment monopolies and allow some compe- and a third party access regime was created tition into many of these industries, it pro- in 1997. At present there are 68 licensed car- vides tremendous benefits to consumers. riers. I can think of no greater example of the Senator Murray’s motion today is based on a success of this national competition policy very false premise, because there is a benefit than what it has done for telecommunica- to the Australian consumers of the national tions in Australia. All consumers are bene- competition policy. (Time expired) fiting from lower prices and from considera- Senator COOK (Western Australia— bly greater choice. Let me give some exam- Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the ples. For instance, consumers can make sub- Senate) (4.24 p.m.)—We are debating a stantial savings in the area of international matter of public importance proposed by the calls compared with pre-deregulation prices. Democrats about national competition Look how far we have come. In 1965 I re- policy. In a moment I want to come to some member being overseas when it cost about of the details on which this matter of public $3 for a three-minute telephone call. Imagine importance is based. First, I think it is how long $3 will give you today if you were appropriate to set out what the Labor Party’s spending that amount to make a telephone view is when we are dealing with matters of call. such importance to the basic economy. Savings in excess of 80 per cent can be We take the view in the Labor Party that made on calls to some countries. For exam- the issue is not that we live in an economy ple, if you made a call to Canada in June but that we live in a community. The purpose 1997, the off-peak price was 91c per minute. of economic reform is to serve the interests Currently with the cheapest carrier the price of the community. We do not exist to serve is 15c per minute from Canberra. Would we the interests of doctrinaire theory in eco- have achieved that without some competi- nomics; we exist for the purpose of making tion? Would we have achieved that if we still sure economics improves the living stan- had a government monopoly or a single mo- dards of ordinary Australians. The test is: nopoly in the telecommunications industry? I does it do that or does it not? In the case of think not. In June 1997 it cost $1.09 to make national competition policy, we would find a 23102 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 number of quite significant flaws in the way Prime Minister in the Howard government, in which this federal government has gone said to the Queensland Nationals 64th annual about its implementation, and the considera- state conference in Rockhampton: tion of the human interest—what is the value Quite simply, competition policy must be the to ordinary Australians—has been lost in a servant of the people, not their master. We must helter-skelter headlong pursuit for doctrinaire use it wisely to advance the public interest; not goals and for placing of economic theory diminish the public interest by trenchant adher- above the interests of ordinary people. ence to economic theory and ideology. Having said that, all governments in this That is a very fine sentiment. But, as so often country are faced with a significant chal- happens in a government controlled by spin lenge when it comes to reform. The political doctors and trying to massage the message to problem for all governments—and we were mislead people, when that fine sentiment is in government just five years ago; we know held against the actual test of ‘do their ac- what the problem was for us—is this: usu- tions conform with their words?’ we find that ally, and universally, the benefits of eco- their actions are desperately wanting. nomic reform are spread thinly across the The problem has been that the Howard entire economy, when the pain of economic government has sat back and watched while reform is felt sharply and often deeply by a pain has been inflicted through the imple- particular sector of the economy. Therefore, mentation of national competition policy. It governments get no good marks for the bene- has, in effect, vacated the field. It has not fits spread thinly for everybody, but they get been willing to convene meetings of the a lot of brickbats—and understandably—as Council of Australian Governments to over- the cries of pain reach through the electoral see the implementation of national competi- process to undermine government authority. tion policy and to discuss its impact and how Going back to this question of what is you manage it. As a result, national competi- primary, community or economics, the fun- tion policy has been implemented, in our damental concern is that when governments view, without adequate supervision by the undertake reform—and reform is necessary community’s elected representatives. to keep the economy modern and competi- Last November’s meeting of COAG—the tive—they must have in place adjustment Council of Australian Governments—dis- mechanisms to help people adjust. It is no cussed competition policy for the first time good, as the government these days says, that in years. That was, in our view, a welcome there is some sort of trickle-down effect. You development. This body, which has the state make massive reforms at the top, the benefits premiers and the federal government present, trickle down and eventually everyone is, in its collective personality, the body re- achieves some sort of positive outcome. sponsible for making this policy work—and They may trickle down. But what happens in for the first time, last November, it discussed the meantime—people are thrown out of it. Well, good. But while the changes in the work, put on the breadline or have their national competition policy agreed to at that companies cut from under them—while peo- meeting were intended to hand back control ple are waiting for the so-called benefits of of the implementation of national competi- trickle-down economics? We are not fans of tion policy to the elected representatives, the trickle-down economics; we are fans of put- National Competition Council’s third tranche ting in place the necessary adjustment assessment framework report, released on 5 mechanisms—the sort of support that is nec- February this year, provides—in our view— essary—to help transition, because reform to absolutely no evidence that things have im- an economy like Australia is important if we proved. Therefore, the Howard govern- are going to be a competitive nation in the ment—and that is where the buck stops—has modern world. failed to keep its hands on the wheel for na- I thought that the government may have tional competition policy. woken up when, in 1999, John Anderson, the Matters of important national policy are Leader of the National Party and the Deputy being handled by unelected bureaucrats, with Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23103 the government at arm’s length saying, human face, and the necessary management ‘Don’t blame me; it’s their fault.’ But the of the dislocative processes that sometimes supreme power here, the authority that is come in train with reform. given to those bureaucrats to implement We heard a moment ago from Senator what they do, comes from the government. It Ferguson, who, in a somewhat offhanded is about time—and we say this again with way, criticised the Labor Party for introduc- some force—that process was taken back by ing national competition policy and blamed elected representatives. us for the bad effects where there has been That brings me to what we in the Labor dislocation, blithely passing over the fact that Party think should be the ruling policy direc- he has been in government for five years and tion here. The Labor Party, of course, has a has responsibility for these effects, and lot of its policies announced and out in the claiming proprietary rights and pride of public domain, and it put this in the public authorship for the good outcomes of national domain some time ago. The fact that some competition policy. The example he cited elements of the media do not wish to report was telecommunications. I do not necessarily it, and then lambast us as having no policy, is want to join with Senator Ferguson in what a commentary on the ineffective way in would be, at the end of the day, a fairly which the media provide a journal of record pointless debate. But I just make one point in of what happens. Labor believes that it is passing with respect to what he has said: simply not good enough to leave the imple- competition in telecommunications was in- mentation of national competition policy to troduced by the Labor Party. His speech the unelected officials of the National Com- eulogised the effect of competition in tele- petition Council. Labor will ensure that the communications in reducing prices and costs implementation of national competition pol- for distance telecommunications. Thank you, icy is overseen by elected governments. La- Senator Ferguson. But, please, be historically bor will revitalise the COAG process, with accurate. Who introduced that competition in more frequent and more active meetings. the first place? We did. Labor will ensure—and here’s the rub—that Senator Murray—It predates national a strong public interest test is applied in competition policy. every application of national competition policy: each application should not simply Senator COOK—That is a fair comment, measure the direct economic impact of re- too, Senator Murray. The other issue that is form; it should have regard to other commu- referred to in Senator Murray’s matter of nity factors. public importance today on national compe- tition policy is: Labor’s balanced approach will consider ... particularly in view of its failure to balance the effect on issues such as jobs and job se- economic with social and environmental consid- curity, regional development, social welfare erations ... and equity considerations, health and safety, ecologically sustainable development and the The theme of what I have said is about bal- interests of the consumer. We are funda- ancing social and environmental considera- mentally committed to ensuring that the tions. But we cannot just stop at national strong public interest test be applied clearly competition policy when we talk about that; and transparently so that people can see what that has to be a guiding light, an organising is happening, who is responsible and why philosophy, for what we do in all areas of decisions are made. We think that is funda- government. I would find far more credibil- mental for proper government administra- ity in the Democrats’ position if they had tion; and in an area such as this, where there rigorously applied that view to all that they are sensitive adjustment processes, it is ab- have done. I am referring, of course, to the solutely vital. That is where we stand and GST. that is what we will do. That is not to back I recall vividly when last year Senator away from reform principles at all. But it is Lees said that in 13 hours of negotiations reform with the human dimension, with the with the Howard government she had 23104 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 achieved more than she had achieved in 13 Senator Knowles—Are you going to re- years of negotiating with Labor. What she move it? had achieved in those 13 hours was a pack- Senator COOK—Because some of the age of measures that implemented the GST elements of competition policy relate to re- and inflicted on the Australian economy gional and rural Australia, let me conclude what has given rise, in the last quarter of my remarks about the GST on petrol by ABS statistics, to negative economic growth making this observation: this is a tax on for the December quarter. The economy ac- country Australia. The further you live from tually shrunk in the December quarter by 0.6 an oil refinery, the more you pay for your per cent. And many believe—60 per cent, petrol and, because the GST is a percentage according to a survey I have just seen of tax on the final price, the price in country business leaders—that there will be two con- Australia is higher than in city Australia. secutive quarters of negative growth, mean- One of the great so-called ‘reforms’ this gov- ing a technical recession. We do not want to ernment—aided by the Democrats—have see the economy shrink; we do not want to delivered is higher petrol prices and more tax see the social and economic impacts of a paid by country Australians than by city shrinking economy. But we do believe that, Australians. That is not fair, that is not equi- having regard to social factors—as this mo- table and that imposes a huge cost on coun- tion calls upon us to do—and having regard try residents. (Time expired) to community factors, one cannot end the debate simply by talking about national Senator KNOWLES (Western Australia) competition policy. Clearly, as the Reserve (4.39 p.m.)—It is interesting to note that Bank has now said through its deputy chief Senator Cook had 15 minutes to make a executive in a recent address in Tokyo, the contribution on national competition policy so-called transitional effects of the GST, led and ran out of puff only about seven minutes by a massive downturn in the building in- into it. He then had to rail against the gov- dustry in Australia, along with other impacts ernment and the Democrats about the goods of the GST, have pushed Australia into and services tax and finished off by talking negative economic growth. There is no justi- about the goods and services tax on petrol. It fication for this. had absolutely nothing to do with the debate before the chamber at the moment. When When I go back to when the GST was not asked by me by way of interjection whether yet born as a new tax that would afflict Aus- the Labor Party would actually take away the tralians, I go back to the Australian Demo- goods and services tax on petrol he refused crats’ promises to the Australian commu- to answer. nity—promises they said they would stand up and negotiate for in the new tax package. Senator Cook—You were out of order. They made 31 undertakings, none of which Senator KNOWLES—It does not stop have been delivered. They were trampled Senator Cook interjecting when he says that I over by the government in those negotia- was out of order. But the interesting thing is tions. The Democrats backed away from the that he does not talk about removing it: he firm and sober undertakings that they had simply says that it is just a dreadful thing. made. I do not have time in the few moments Let him go back to the states and renegotiate remaining to me to go through all 31. One of the policy. Senator Cook is now strutting out them—I refer to it because it is of consider- of the chamber because he does not want to able interest to the community—was on pet- deal with this issue. The fact of the matter is rol, where they wanted to remove, and made that all of the goods and services tax goes a commitment to remove, the reductions in back to the states. Senator Cook’s contribu- petrol taxes in a trade-off by reducing payroll tion, quite frankly, was totally and utterly tax. Of course, they never insisted on that. irrelevant so I will now move back to the Another one in the case of petrol was where issue before the chamber, that is, Senator they wanted to remove the GST from petrol. Murray’s matter of public importance: But of course the GST is on petrol. The rejection by the Australian public of the current National Competition Policy, particularly Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23105 in view of its failure to balance economic with vance and progress. Since May 1995, elec- social and environmental considerations, and the tricity consumers in New South Wales, for need to scrap Competition Policy and abolish the example, have received savings of around National Competition Council. $930 million in real terms in their power On many things I concur with Senator bills. Murray but on this I fail to be able to do so, Senator Forshaw—Bob Carr is responsi- purely and simply because in Senator ble for that—that is right. Murray’s matter of public importance, he states—as Senator Ferguson said—that there Senator KNOWLES—Senator Forshaw is a rejection by the Australian public and is over there flapping his gums incessantly— that it fails ‘to balance economic with social about what, I do not know. He is from New and environmental considerations’. I am at a South Wales. I would have thought that he loss to understand exactly what Senator would actually quite relish the fact that it Murray means by that because the benefits was his government that brought in the na- that have accrued from the national competi- tional competition policy. I would have tion policy do not sit well with those words. thought that he would be quite proud—in- stead of sitting there mindlessly interject- I want to go through some of the benefits ing—of the fact that his state has received that the Australian public have gained from such a huge benefit. Also, since March 1997, the national competition policy in areas such Queensland customers can choose their own as aviation, shipping, rail, water reform, tele- electricity supplier and they have achieved communications, electricity and gas, to name savings of around $90 million per year. but a few. It is interesting when one looks at, for example, electricity because we look at Moving on to gas—and it is interesting because both Senator Murray and I come this on top of the benefits that Senator Ferguson mentioned in telecommunications: from Western Australia—I just happened to the decrease in costs that people have in- note that, with regular frequency, Western curred as a result of national competition Australia in the gas area has yet again been policy. able to provide some very big savings since the introduction and implementation of a For example, in electricity the benefits to national gas code. Following gas deregula- consumers include the fact that from 1993 to tion in the Pilbara in Western Australia, for 1997 electricity prices fell by over six per example—and that happened at the same cent. A survey of international electricity time as national competition policy, in prices as at January 2000 found that Austra- 1995—charges for large industrial users lia has the second lowest priced electricity typically fell by more than 50 per cent. We for both residential and industrial consumers. know that there are huge costs associated Australian electricity prices are about half with living in remote Australia. There are those in the United States. I cannot under- huge costs associated with a whole range of stand why the Labor Party would be against things, whether they be run on gas or elec- that. After all, this was their policy. Obvi- tricity. That type of reduction is most sub- ously, Senator Cook is now throwing that out stantial. As a result of further competition, along with the goods and services tax—he is prices for gas from the Goldfields gas pipe- the only one to do so, I might add. I cannot line in Western Australia have fallen by 25 understand why the Democrats would be per cent. Queensland Alumina Ltd has re- concerned about something that has deliv- ported a 25 per cent reduction in gas tariffs ered to Australia the world’s second lowest from one of its pipelines. prices for electricity. Moving to aviation—real domestic econ- Tariffs around Australian businesses have omy air fares were 18.7 per cent lower in fallen by up to 50 per cent since the 1980s June 1999 than in September 1990. Over the and I would have thought that that has a same period passenger numbers rose by 36.8 good flow-on effect, so that businesses have per cent. We have more and more people actually got more money to invest, more across this country wanting to travel by air, money to pay staff and more money to ad- and since the introduction of Impulse and 23106 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001

Virgin Blue we have seen more improve- some substantial side-effects for people in ments in the quality of service and the fre- particular communities. Competition policy quency of service. Service frequency in- is concerned with all facets of government creased by about 21 per cent between Sep- policy which influence the competitive be- tember 1991 and June 1999, and the number haviour and the competitive environment of of non-stop services has increased as well. firms, individuals and government agencies That is a very important factor because, engaged in the supply of traded goods and without national competition policy, many of services in the Australian economy. Australia those things would just simply fall flat on has a consistent national economic regula- their faces, including Australia’s open skies tory framework directed at maintaining and agreement for international air services. The promoting competition in all forms of busi- first one of those was made with New Zea- ness activity. As I said earlier, it is based on land at the end of last year, and that will al- an economist’s doctrinaire economic theory low Australian and New Zealand interna- of competition. There are a number of as- tional airlines to operate across the Tasman sumptions made by doctrinaire economists and then beyond to third countries without about competition. They include equal ac- restriction. That means with competition cess to goods and services, perfect knowl- there is the benefit of lower prices, and that edge of goods and services and their quality is the most important aspect for people. They and their pricing, and also the availability of really want to know: ‘Is there a benefit for sufficient suppliers and producers of goods me?’ and services within an economic market to Moving on to water costs—water reform ensure effective competition. That is the has seen real prices for Victorian household doctrinaire economic theory, but in reality consumers fall by 18 per cent, and water the doctrinaire economic theory of competi- costs for an average medium-sized business tion does not work out quite as easily. in WA have fallen by almost 50 per cent. Even when competition is measured at a Around 57 per cent of Western Australian national level and you can identify positive customers are expected to experience a de- economic gains, there are still problems. I crease in sewerage charges, as a result of refer to the example given by Senator tariff reform. Many of us would know that Knowles in respect of the operation of the those very people who have benefited from electricity market in this country. You can this policy were those who, quite justifiably, certainly measure nationally economic gains screamed loudest and longest at the high to the nation as a whole. However, when you costs of running their businesses and also at examine the impact of that at a local level, the high costs of their domestic usage. (Time particularly in rural and regional communi- expired) ties and in areas where substantial numbers Senator SHERRY (Tasmania) (4.47 of workers were involved in the production p.m.)—I have been listening to the debate, and distribution of power in this country, I do particularly to the contributions of Liberal not believe that they would give quite the Senators Ferguson and Knowles. I note their same glowing report or accolade about com- hardline support of the economic rationalist petition policy in the electricity market. theory of competition and, in particular, As my colleague Senator Cook outlined competition policy. I note that Senator earlier, there is a critical difference between McGauran is to follow me in the debate, and the Liberal-National Party, which is in coali- I will be interested to see if he, as a member tion, and the Labor Party in the way in which of the coalition between the National Party competition policy should apply in this and the Liberal Party, adopts such an ap- country. The Liberal-National Party sub- proach. scribes to the view that, where there is a I will touch firstly on the theory of com- positive economic gain nationally, ‘She will petition policy. I think it is important to em- be right, Jack, it will trickle down to every- phasise that it is an economic theory that, one in the community at some point in time.’ when implemented in practice, does have That is clearly not the case. There are many Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23107 people in our community, particularly in ru- postal services in rural and regional Austra- ral and regional areas, where the only trickle lia. So it is important when applying any down they see is the trickle down through economic theory to ensure that it serves the the occasional flood. They are not going to interests of the community. And I do not just be the beneficiaries of national competition mean the community in the big cities of policy. Australia, nor big business; I mean the com- It is important, particularly in a country munities right throughout Australia and par- with such massive distances and such a small ticularly communities in rural and regional economy, that we have an active industry areas. We do know that the Liberal Party and regional policy. It is important that we does represent the major urban cities of have decent safety net protections in place, Australia. It is a hardline economic rational- such as collective negotiations. When I say ist party. It does not shy away from that. The collective negotiations and bargaining, I do Prime Minister, Mr Howard, and the Treas- not just refer here to employees; I also refer urer, Mr Costello, boast that they are radical to farmers. Farmers are price takers and I economic reformers. Indeed, that is one of have always been a believer that farmers as their overriding ideologies. They worship price takers and as individual producers this approach. struggle to obtain a decent price beyond the The same could not have been said about farm gate; and I do not see collective agree- the National Party, certainly some years ago. ments between farmers, in whatever form What strikes you about the National Party, those may take, as necessarily being invalid. up until recent times anyway, is that in repre- It is important to take into account health and senting rural and regional areas they did have safety considerations and, overwhelmingly, concern about the economic and social con- the most important issue is jobs, particularly sequences of competition in rural and re- jobs in rural and regional centres. It is also gional communities. Indeed, the National important to maintain a decent level of serv- Party’s basic philosophy was one of social- ices in rural and regional communities. In ism in the bush. So long as socialism existed any theory of economic competition, there is 100 kilometres from the GPO in each capital no doubt that in some areas, if you applied city, the National Party was pleased to sub- strict competition theory, there would be no scribe to socialism. That was one of their suppliers of goods and services in many ar- major ideologies. That was in the past. Take eas of rural and regional Australia, no sup- their past leaders—Mr Anthony, Mr Sinclair, pliers at all. Mr McEwen. Mr McEwen would roll over in Senator McGauran—For example? his grave at the National Party today. The National Party, which supposedly is there to Senator SHERRY—Well, Telstra is a represent the interests of Australians living prime example. You could have so-called in rural and regional communities, is a total perfect competition in telecommunications, captive of the Liberal Party. It is the total Senator McGauran—and we notice your doormat of the Liberal Party, and Senator pledge to sell off the remaining 51 per cent McGauran knows this himself. The National of Telstra—but there are times when it is Party in Victoria receives four per cent of the necessary for government to provide those vote and, in order to survive, it has done a services, either directly or indirectly, through deal with the Liberal Party to ensure that publicly owned business enterprises. whoever is the National Party candidate is Senator Murray—And Australia Post. No. 2 on the Senate ticket. That is why the National Party exists today: it is only to sur- Senator SHERRY—Exactly, Senator vive; it is not about representing people in Murray. Australia Post is another classic ex- rural and regional Australia. ample. I do note again the policy trend by the Liberal-National Party—we will come to you I should conclude my remarks by saying again shortly, Senator McGauran—to want that Senator Murray said that competition to deregulate Australia Post, to bring about policy is good for big business and the cities the reduction, the slow strangulation, of at the expense of small business and the re- 23108 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 gions. I only wish, Senator Murray, that you I would say two things to Senator Murray. had thought more about that fundamental I am surprised now that you have come to before you signed up to the goods and serv- this conclusion, because that is not the con- ices tax. I only wish that you had thought clusion that you came to when the Senate long and hard about the impact on small Select Committee on Socio-Economic Con- business and rural and regional areas in par- sequences of the National Competition Pol- ticular. We have heard a lot from the Demo- icy inquired into this matter. You were a crats about competition policy in recent member of that committee, as I was. You times, but I am struggling to recall the came to a far more qualified conclusion than Democrats asking a question, proposing a you have today, Senator Murray. You never matter of public importance, or raising in told us, in your most esoteric contribution debate the horrendous impact of the goods here today, why you suddenly changed from and services tax—which you have inflicted, supporting the recommendations of that together with the Liberal-National Party, on committee inquiry and are now calling for the Australian community. (Time expired) the absolute abolition of national competition policy. Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (4.57 The Senate committee inquiry was a good p.m.)—Like my colleagues before me, I wel- one, a perfectly balanced one. It recognised come this debate on a matter of public im- the full benefits of competition and where portance proposed by Senator Murray. From they have worked. And I understand that, the outset, I would like to reject Senator quite rightly, the committee made recom- Sherry’s provocative words that the National mendations as to where improvements can Party has supported or does support social- be made and recognised where the policy has ism in the bush. I utterly reject that proposi- been greatly misunderstood. I notice that tion. It has never been true, least of all today. Senator Mackay was on that committee too. We support services in the bush. That is the She has not come in and made her contribu- difference, Senator Sherry. You may have tion on this, which surprises me greatly; in- made a Freudian slip about yourself, but we stead, the opposition have wheeled in the support services to the bush. Senator two finance experts, Senator Sherry and Murray’s motion today, as it has been read Senator Cook. So I ask you that question— out by previous speakers, calls for the rejec- perhaps you can answer it in the corridors of tion by the Australian public of the current the parliament. national competition policy, the scrapping of competition policy, and the abolition of na- The second proposition I would put to you, Senator Murray, is: if you are calling for tional competition policy. the scrapping of competition policy, then no doubt you are calling for the scrapping of the I am sure that Senator Murray has been ACCC. For heavens sake, what has been disappointed by the contributions thus far by more successful than Allan Fels’s ACCC? the opposition. Whatever he expected to get He is a household name, a crusader for the out of this debate, he will be very disap- consumer. He has a proven record. Professor pointed. Senator Sherry and Senator Cook Fels, under the powers that we have given made the only two contributions, and they him—only during the last parliamentary spoke down completely the positives of week we strengthened the Trade Practices competition. They did not recognise any Act to give him even more powers and benefits at all in regard to competition. strengthened section 50 of the mergers and Senator Sherry even qualified the most obvi- takeover act in relation to unconscionable ous benefit of competition, in the area of conduct—has the resources to take on the big electricity reform. You even qualified that end of town, which he has done, in the name there were benefits in that particular area. So of consumers, in the name of competition, I am sure that the lack of the intellectual de- and brought about the benefits that competi- bate and rigour that Senator Murray thought tion can bring. I would extrapolate that you he would get on this particular motion has are calling for the abolition of the ACCC. been a great disappointment to him. Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23109

I think Senator Ferguson put it very well that has not been properly understood; there in his contribution when he said that really has been confusion. It is up to govern- the Australian public do not know what we ments—past, present and future—to better are all talking about in here when we debate sell that so that they can better sell competi- the formalities of competition policy, public tion policy. benefit and all that; that it is just an intellec- tual debate. Senator Murray is a Rhodes The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT scholar; he loves to bring intellectual debate (Senator Hogg)—Order! The time for de- to this chamber. But the general public do bate has expired. not really know what we are talking about. As Senator Ferguson said, this is a matter of BUDGET 2000-01 everyday life to the Australian public. They Consideration by Legislation Committees are not into the intellectualism that Senator Murray brings, and Senator Sherry tries to Reports bring, to this debate. The essence of the matter is that competition policy is to break Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (5.05 up monopolies, in particular government p.m.)—Pursuant to order and at the request utilities. Who could deny over the years, un- of the chairs of the respective committees, I til the introduction of the formality of this present reports in respect of the 2000-01 ad- competition policy, the inefficiencies and the ditional estimates, together with the Hansard overpricing of government monopolies and record of the committees’ proceedings and government utilities? Householders now documents received by certain committees, have choice. from all legislation committees except the Economics and Rural and Regional Affairs Senator Sherry—You didn’t mention one and Transport Legislation Committees. rural industry. Senator McGAURAN—No, I am think- Ordered that the reports be printed. ing particularly of the state electricity Consideration by Foreign Affairs, Defence authority of Victoria. There was no greater and Trade Legislation Committee milking cow for a state government than the state electricity authority of Victoria. They Additional Information milked the tariffs as a tax to go into their coffers and, therefore, the authority became Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (5.05 more inefficient as time went on. The state p.m.)—On behalf of Senator Sandy Mac- electricity authority of Victoria and the union donald, I present a transcript of evidence and movement—you could almost check it by additional information received by the For- your watch—ensured that around Christmas eign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation time each year there was a blackout across Committee relating to supplementary hear- the state. Since the authority was privatised ings on the budget estimates for 2000-01. and broken up for competition prices have COMMITTEES come down and we have not had a blackout in the state of Victoria. That is particularly Membership what I am thinking of. The consumers now are being given choices: they have a choice The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT as to what phone line they will pick up, what (Senator Hogg)—The President has re- tap they will turn on and what light they will ceived a letter from a party leader seeking a switch on. variation to the membership of a committee. My point is that, in regard to competition Motion (by Senator Heffernan)—by policy, yes, of course, we all agree there has leave—agreed to: to be an underpinning of public interest that takes in not only economic considerations That Senator Sherry be appointed a partici- but also social considerations in regard to pating member of the Economics References employment. But the only fault there is that Committee. 23110 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001

MIGRATION LEGISLATION In order to gain a more even distribution of AMENDMENT (INTEGRITY OF skilled migrants across the country, substantial REGIONAL MIGRATION SCHEMES) concessions are made in relation to the criteria for BILL 2000 the grant of a regional sponsored migration scheme visa. TAXATION LAWS AMENDMENT (EXCISE ARRANGEMENTS) BILL 2000 These include the need only for diploma level qualifications and the possible waiver of language First Reading and age requirements. Bills received from the House of Repre- However, the key criterion for the grant of a re- sentatives. gional sponsored migration scheme visa relates to Senator HEFFERNAN (New South employment in Australia. Wales—Parliamentary Secretary to Cabinet) The criterion is that the visa applicant has been (5.07 p.m.)—I indicate to the Senate that nominated by an employer in respect of an ap- those bills which have just been announced proved appointment in the business of the em- are being introduced together. After debate ployer that will provide full-time employment for on the motion for the second reading has at least 2 years in regional or rural Australia. been adjourned, I will be moving a motion to This requires a two-year contract of employment have the bills listed separately on the Notice between the visa applicant and the nominating Paper. I move: employer. That these bills may proceed without formali- Ensuring compliance with this criterion is essen- ties, may be taken together and be now read a tial to the continued integrity of the scheme. first time. While there is little evidence at the moment to Question resolved in the affirmative. suggest widespread abuse of the scheme, the new visa cancellation powers are necessary to safe- Bills read a first time. guard against any future misuse and to deter per- Second Reading sons who do not have any genuine intention of Senator HEFFERNAN (New South settling in rural or regional Australia. Wales—Parliamentary Secretary to Cabinet) The business advisory panel, which provides ex- (5.07 p.m.)—I move: pert advice in relation to the government’s busi- ness entry programs, is also of the view that That these bills be now read a second time. measures to safeguard against possible future I seek leave to have the second reading abuse of the regional sponsored migration scheme speeches incorporated in Hansard. are necessary. Leave granted. In its recent review of the regional sponsored The speeches read as follows— migration scheme, the business advisory panel recommended that a regional sponsored migration MIGRATION LEGISLATION AMENDMENT scheme visa should be cancelled if the visa holder (INTEGRITY OF REGIONAL MIGRATION fails to fulfil a two year contract term with his or SCHEMES) BILL 2000 her employer. This bill introduces a new visa cancellation In addition, the regional sponsored migration scheme for regional sponsored migration scheme scheme is the subject of a current inquiry by the visas into the Migration Act 1958. joint standing committee on migration which is The regional sponsored migration scheme was reviewing the operation of “state-specific migra- established, as a pilot, in 1995. tion mechanisms”. It was established in recognition of the fact that The new visa cancellation scheme in the bill will regional and rural Australia have difficulty in enable the cancellation of a regional sponsored attracting, and retaining, skilled migrants to alle- migration scheme visa in two broad circum- viate local skills shortages. stances: Since 1995 there has been an increasing trend of First, where the visa holder has not commenced regional sponsored migration scheme visa grants. the employment referred to in the relevant em- 170 visas were granted in 1996/97; 581 visas ployer nomination with the period prescribed in were granted in 1997/98; 765 visas were granted the regulations and he or she has not made a in 1998/99 and 664 visas were granted in genuine effort to commence that employment; 1999/2000. and Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23111

Second, where the visa holder’s employment re- Administration of the ‘off-road’ Diesel Fuel Re- ferred to in the employer nomination, terminated bate Scheme, which provides a rebate of excise within the required employment period of 2 years duty or customs duty for a qualifying use of die- and he or she has not made a genuine effort to be sel, mainly in the mining, agricultural and rail and engaged in that employment for the required pe- marine transport sectors, is also to be transferred riod. to the Commissioner of Taxation. An example of a situation in which this new visa The ‘off-road’ scheme complements the ‘on-road’ cancellation power could be used occurred re- Diesel and Alternative Fuel Grants Scheme which cently. has been administered by the Commissioner since A person applied for and was granted an regional its introduction as part of this Government’s sponsored migration scheme visa at an overseas comprehensive reform of indirect taxes. DIMA office. The Bill contains amendments to excise, customs On arrival in Australia, this visa holder informed and taxation legislation to give statutory recogni- his nominating employer that he did not want to tion to the administrative changes. start work immediately. The amendments will ensure that officers cur- Subsequently, the visa holder and his family rently authorised to exercise search and seizure moved to a capital city in another state and pre- powers for excise purposes will continue to have sented at Centrelink for assistance. those powers. These relate to the search and sei- zure of evidential material and forfeited goods The visa holder is now apparently renting a house under a warrant issued by a magistrate. in that city, has a telephone connected and has bought two cars. In addition, the Excise Act will provided for for- feited goods seized by police officers to be dealt It would seem that this visa holder has no inten- with in the same way as if the goods had been tion of settling in regional or rural Australia. seized by excise officers. This particular measures The new power to cancel a regional sponsored will support the compliance improvement migration scheme visa would not generally be amendments enacted earlier this year to combat used where a nominating employer terminates the the trade in illicit tobacco. employment contract within the two-year period. The Bill will also repeal redundant provisions in Cancelling a regional sponsored migration the Spirits Act 1906 and the Distillation Act 1901 scheme visa in such a situation would not serve which are inconsistent with modern industry the purposes of the scheme particularly where the practices and with current tax compliance verifi- circumstances leading to the termination are out- cation methods. side the employer’s or visa holder’s control. Excise legislation will also be amended to adopt For example, a failure to commence or remain in gender-neutral language, and to replace the employment will not generally lead to visa can- maximum dollar amount of penalties stated for cellation where there downturn in business activ- excise offences in accordance with the ‘penalty ity, closure of the business, financial loss or bank- unit’ standard specified by the Crimes Act. ruptcy. Full details of the measures in the Bill are con- Finally, the new visa cancellation scheme will not tained in the explanatory memorandum. have any retrospective effect. It will only apply I commend the Bill. to regional sponsored migration scheme visas granted after the bill commences as a result of Debate (on motion by Senator O’Brien) applications made after the commencement of the adjourned. bill. Motion (by Senator Heffernan) pro- I commend the bill to the chamber. posed: ————— That the resumption of the debate be made an TAXATION LAWS AMENDMENT (EXCISE order of the day for a later hour. ARRANGEMENTS) BILL 2000 Senator O’Brien—Mr Acting Deputy This Bill amends the laws relating to excise in President, I understood that that was not nec- order to transfer the general administration of essarily to be the case in relation to these those laws to the Commissioner of Taxation from bills. the Chief Executive Officer of Customs. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT Excise is an indirect tax, and it is appropriate that (Senator Hogg)—You can leave it to a later the administration of excise laws be integrated hour and sort it out in the intervening period. with that of other taxation laws. 23112 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001

Senator O’Brien—I am happy to do that Senator BROWN—Thank you. There are as long as it is understood that the opposition two sets of regulations here that I am moving was not of the view that migration legislation to disallow, and I do so for very strong rea- would be proceeding today. sons. These regulations come from the re- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- newable energy act which senators will re- DENT—I think that is understood. That can member was passed to increase the amount be worked out by yourself and the govern- of renewable energy—that is, energy that ment. does not come from fossil fuels—in Austra- lia over the coming years. It has a very con- Question resolved in the affirmative. servative but good trajectory, in that two per Ordered that the bills be listed on the No- cent of new renewable energy is to come tice Paper as separate orders of the day. from non-fossil fuel sources. As you will remember, Mr Acting Deputy President, this BILLS RETURNED FROM THE is pretty poor when you line it up with other HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES countries which are aiming at 10 to 20 per Message received from the House of Rep- cent—and some European countries are resentatives returning the following bill aiming at over 20 per cent—for the same without amendment: period. Crimes Amendment (Forensic Procedures) Bill The aim of the legislation, in part at least, 2001 is to offset Australia’s awful reputation RENEWABLE ENERGY around the world as the world’s worst per (ELECTRICITY) REGULATIONS 2001 capita greenhouse gas producer. A lot of that Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (5.09 reputation comes because so much fossil fuel p.m.)—I move business of the Senate notices energy is consumed in Australia, together of motion Nos 1 and 3 standing in my name: with the fact that we have a prodigious pri- vate transport system and that we are clear- (1) That regulation 8 of the Renewable ing native vegetation in Queensland, as the Energy (Electricity) Regulations 2001, as contained in Statutory Rules 2001 No. 2 and Minister for the Environment and Heritage made under the Renewable Energy (Electricity) said during question time today, at more than Act 2000, be disallowed. 400,000 hectares per annum, and he is not prepared to use his obvious powers to put a (3) That regulations 11 and 19 of the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Regulations halt to that. 2001, as contained in Statutory Rules 2001 No. 2 Moreover, with the notable and somewhat and made under the Renewable Energy glorious exception of Western Australia, (Electricity) Act 2000, be disallowed. where the new Labor government, backed by At the outset, I wish to seek clarification the Greens, is bringing an end to the rapid about the speaking opportunity. I understand destruction of old-growth forests, the wood- that it is 20 minutes. Is that for motion No. chip industry is moving ahead in eastern 1? parts of New South Wales, in Victoria— The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT where there are currently protests in the (Senator Hogg)—You are moving motions Otways range area—and worst of all in Nos 1 and 3, as I understand it. Tasmania, where there is now the greatest rate of destruction of native forests for the Senator BROWN—That is right. fewest jobs and the lowest return in history. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- That is adding awesomely to greenhouse gas DENT—And the Democrats are moving No. production, because in the process the 2. biggest carbon banks in the Southern Senator BROWN—That is right. Hemisphere—the tallest forests, these great eucalypt forests of Tasmania, like those in The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- the Styx Valley, the Tarkine, the North-East DENT—You will have 20 minutes to speak Highlands and the Great Western Tiers—are and then you will have the right of reply. being destroyed under Mr Howard’s signature, and with the full and wholehearted Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23113 full and wholehearted support of the Tasma- tem with the mainland systems if the Bacon nian Labor Premier, Mr Bacon, and his gov- and Bracks governments have their way and ernment. the Howard government has its way. People These regulations might, on the face of in Melbourne getting up in the morning and them, be seen to be a step therefore in the turning on their toasters—these could be en- right direction. But what has been passed in vironmentally minded people who are paying the regulations is that the wood waste com- a premium for so-called green power—will ing from those forests can be burnt in fur- be unwittingly buying electricity from the naces and classified as green energy, as re- Judbury forest furnace, which is burning so- newable energy; but it is not renewable en- called wood waste out of Tasmania’s grand ergy. These forests are destroyed and the native forests. These forests are being de- wildlife in them is destroyed. Currently, 97 stroyed by the woodchip industry. That in- per cent of the trees in these Tasmanian for- dustry is finding that its prices are dropping ests are going to woodchipping. They go to and it is looking for an option. What is an the woodchip mills, they are exported to Ja- option? ‘We’ll burn the forests to make elec- pan, they come out as paper and they ulti- tricity.’ mately end up on the refuse, rubbish and What a disgusting way of treating this na- landfill entities in Japan where they become tion’s grand forest heritage and its wildlife— greenhouse gas anyway. Those components by the minister for the environment, under of the forest which are left after the loggers the signature of Prime Minister Howard. have taken the logs they want for woodchip- Have they no care for this nation’s heritage? ping are burnt. Yet to compound that, here we have legisla- In the last two weeks, Forestry Tasmania tion with regulations that make it legal to sell has put double-page advertisements in the that power as renewable energy when pat- newspapers of Tasmania—the Mercury, the ently it is not. You cannot burn forests and Examiner and the Advocate—saying what a replace them. You do not renew those for- good thing it is that they are about to enter ests. You do not renew those ecosystems. the burning season. What actually happens is You do not replace the burnt and poisoned that they will be flying helicopters over these marsupials, which Forestry Tasmania, under cutdown forests—these ancient forests which the Bacon government, is destroying at the until a few months ago were intact—drop- greatest rate in history. But the woodchip ping napalm-like incendiaries to create a corporations want this because their prices firestorm to burn what is left of the forests on are dropping in Japan as global plantations the forest floor. This means that nothing will come on line. They want a backstop for these be left alive: no insect, no reptile, no marsu- forests, under the Howard government’s re- pial, no component of rainforest or, indeed, gional forest agreements, and they want to eucalypt forest. There are people protesting burn our forests in furnaces. about this right around Tasmania. Now we But it is not just Judbury. There is the have this renewable energy bill which will Southwood project—and there will be a huge make things worse. protest about that in Hobart this Saturday, as In the course of the debate, the minister— people from all over the place come to object whose title is Minister ‘for’ the Environment to the Southwood project, which will ruin the and Heritage—said that, provided half of the lives and neighbourhoods of many people in forests being destroyed go somewhere else, southern Tasmania. There are also at least a the other half can go into furnaces built un- dozen more furnaces on the drawing board: der the aegis of Forestry Tasmania and Pre- Grafton, Ulladulla, south-west Western Aus- mier Bacon, be converted into electricity and tralia, Queensland, Victoria, and two more in sold on to the market as green energy, as re- Tasmania. The government knows that, and newable power. The people of Melbourne are it is simply saying to the corporations behind being aimed at as prime targets for this de- it, ‘We favour you over the majority of ordi- ceit. This will be done through the Basslink nary Australians who don’t want the forests cable, which will link Tasmania’s hydrosys- destroyed. So not only will we give you 23114 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 regulations that will allow you to do that but tem should be working. You get a benefit if we will validate it as a good thing for the you do the right thing by the environment. environment under the law, and we will give you a financial advantage to boot.’ What a The problem in Tasmania is that it is, by disgusting process this is. It is just plainly and large, a hydro-electric system, which is wrong. It is a deceit. renewable power in terms of the rain pro- viding the power through the rivers which turn the turbines, and the rain comes and The Greens and the Democrats might not have the numbers in here, but we should be comes and comes. Therefore, hot-water units put onto roofs are, on the face of it, going to stopping this deceit. I hope the Labor Party be replacing hydro power—renewable will be supporting us—and I expect they power—and will not qualify. Therefore Tas- will, after Western Australia. And if they do, manians are discriminated against. It may be we will stop it; if they do not, we will not. I that the minister—and it is good to see him might add that the weakest of arguments that could be brought up here is that, if we knock at last come into the chamber to hear this debate; he is all too often out of the chamber out these regulations, they will knock out when there are matters under his responsi- some other good things with it. The exercise bility being debated here, but he is here here is to say to the government: you go now—will argue that solar hot-water heaters away and draw up regulations which are in Tasmania will be eligible because they are dinkum, which will promote proper renew- able energy like solar power and wind power in fact displacing future fossil fuel electricity generation which, for example, will come but that do not burn forests, and come back down the Basslink line to Tasmania from the here and we will pass them—pass them to- brown coal fields of Victoria. Or, indeed, it night, pass them tomorrow, pass them next may be that he will argue that the solar hot- week. Only the government can bring regu- water units being put on the roofs in Tasma- lations in here, as you know, Mr Acting Deputy President Hogg. Our only way of nia will be replacing fossil fuel power gen- eration in Tasmania. The matter is not clear. stopping this deceit—which most Austra- As it stands on the face of it, Tasmanians are lians would absolutely oppose and abhor, if penalised because they do not get a deduc- they knew of it—is for us to knock out the tion of $200 to $600 if they put in a solar regulations in the way that we have pro- hot-water unit, whilst people on the mainland posed. do. That is why we believe this regulation should be withdrawn and fixed up to make it There is a second component to this—and very clear that that is not the case, and so that I know that the Tasmanian senators here will it promotes solar power in Tasmania as well be keen to ensure that Tasmania is not disad- as everywhere else. vantaged under another component of these regulations—and that is that, if you put a If you took back both the regulation com- solar hot-water system on your roof, you get ponents I am objecting to, you could come a certificate under this renewable energy up with a very good outcome. If you put so- legislation that gives you a deduction. As I lar hot-water units on the roofs of the almost have said earlier, the aim of this legislation is 200,000 homes in Tasmania, you would do to support true renewable energy, like solar away with the need for the forest furnace that power. But the regulations are worded in a Senator Hill, Prime Minister Howard and form that says that, to do that, you have to be Premier Bacon are planning for south of replacing non-renewable power—that is coal Hobart because you would free up more power, basically. In mainland states, when power for new small business—renewable you put your solar hot-water heater on your power—than would come out of that rotten roof, you are doing just that. The average furnace, that destructive furnace, that envi- household that puts in solar hot water gets ronment Minister Hill says produces renew- somewhere between a $200 and $600 de- able and sustainable energy when it does duction on that unit, which might cost you nothing of the sort. He knows it does not do $2,000 or $3,000—and that is how this sys- it, Forestry Tasmania knows it does not do it, Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23115 and most of all Prime Minister Howard, who want to see these great forests fall in that signed the death warrant on those forests in fashion. the regional forest agreement, knows it does Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (5.28 not do it. p.m.)—I move: Senator Hill no doubt is going to get up That item 3 of Schedule 3 of the Renewable and say, ‘Oh, well, we are only using wood Energy (Electricity) Regulations 2001, as con- waste here.’ We heard that with the wood- tained in Statutory Rules 2001 No. 2 and made chipping industry. They came to Tasmania in under the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 1970 and said, ‘We are only going to use 2000, be disallowed. waste from the forests. We will clean up after The Democrats are deeply concerned by the the sawlog industry.’ Here we are in 2001 prospective windfall gain to the existing with three per cent of the forest being cut generators that is likely to result from the under Senator Hill’s regional forest agree- operation of the renewable energy regula- ment going to sawmills and 95-plus per cent tions. I have been trying to get a response going to the woodchip mills. This destructive from the government on this issue since the process kills wildlife, destroys these grand beginning of February when it was drawn to forests, is wrecking the future opportunity of our attention. Under the act, additional elec- the tourism industry in Tasmania, and is tricity generated by existing hydro generators wrecking people’s environment in Tasmania. is going to be able to be counted towards the Senator Hill will not come down and speak act’s two per cent renewables target. This to the people at Mount Arthur. Senator Lees affects hydro schemes in Tasmania, Victoria, has been there in the last week, but not New South Wales and Queensland. Senator Hill, to see people whose backyards are being destroyed under Prime Minister To determine the proportion of electricity Howard’s destructive regional forest agree- generated by existing generators that can ment. count towards this target, the office of the renewables regulator will not assess new Senator Hill has not been down to see the energy production as a result of funding new Styx forests, the tallest forests in the South- infrastructure or technological innovation. ern Hemisphere which, as we speak here, are Instead, it will be calculated by establishing being cut down and carted up to Triabunna some notional production baseline for each on log trucks to total destruction. Under this existing power station. Accredited power disgraceful national government these grand stations will be able to claim renewable en- monuments of this nation are being de- ergy certificates, or RECs, for every mega- stroyed in this fashion. Here we have a piece watt hour produced that is additional to this of legislation which says, ‘We will promote notional baseline. In other words, when extra that further into the future, with woodchip rainfall—or in the case of Tasmania, an in- prices falling in Japan, if we can only get crease in demand—generates more electric- them into forest furnaces.’ Even the Styx ity, consumers will have to pay extra without Valley is not safe from this: a road has just any real or ongoing benefit to anybody but been put through, using taxpayers’ money, to the existing hydro schemes. We think this is connect it with the Southwood logging in- ludicrous when generators establishing and dustrial site at Judbury. Styx forests will be investing heavily in wind farms, biomass amongst those taken there and burnt, turned burners or solar systems have to compete into electricity and sold to unsuspecting with hydro generators that may pay abso- Melbourne people as green or renewable lutely nothing for additional infrastructure. power. I do not just regret what the govern- The baselining approach enunciated in the ment is doing here, which the opposition regulations will deliver a very significant supports. Whichever way you look at it, how windfall gain to existing hydro-electric deceitful this process is! It is dishonest. It is power stations that will be able to claim their not environmental; it is anti-environmental. RECs without having made an additional It is a sleight of hand against Australian con- investment to increase production. In other sumers, at least 80 per cent of whom do not words, they are likely to get something for 23116 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 nothing because the baselining approach in those investors in solar and wind energy will the regulations does not require them to have be struggling to get money from their in- made any investment. vestment in those first years at least. So, We do not feel that the current powers of firstly, that two per cent target is not high the regulator are adequate to deal with this enough and, secondly, the first two years of problem even under the regulations. That it will easily go in this measure through the means that consumers are essentially giving windfall gain to hydros. a free gift to existing renewable energy gen- Not only is this a problem of consumers erators, and the government, the Australian paying for one sector getting a windfall gain; Greenhouse Office and the office of the re- it is also a question of competitive disad- newables regulator are very well aware of vantage for others in the renewables sector. this and have been for some time. The ques- The existing baseline approach creates a very tion the Democrats keep asking is: why unfair advantage to existing generators. It should existing generators be able to claim also creates an unfair advantage to some hy- those additional certificates simply because it dro generators over other hydro generators. It rains more in a particular year and because appears that hydro in Tasmania stands to the amount of electricity they are able to benefit the most and, whilst we would all in produce goes up as a result? Why should this place like to see opportunities for im- they get further benefit for doing nothing proving the economy of Tasmania, the fact is more than they would do under business as this windfall is likely to be worth about $40 usual? million. That is a very large sum indeed The intent of the legislation, as we under- which consumers are going to have to find stand it, was not to give a free gift to existing for no real benefit. I understand that the generators no matter how many drought minister is concerned that Tasmania should years they might have suffered previously. In not be penalised for its existing use of re- fact the first objective of the legislation was newable energy, and that is the term that the to ‘encourage the additional generation of minister used—in other words, hydro. Surely electricity from renewable sources’. The im- it is not a penalty to require other new gen- portant word here is ‘additional’. It does not erators, existing generators, to make some say ‘business as usual’. We understand that capital outlay before they can claim the cer- one argument in support of the windfall gain tificates. What I find staggering about all this to existing generators is that additional cer- is that we are not talking about a penalty; we tificates will be needed in the early years of are actually talking about a free gift here, and the measure in order to meet the act’s yearly consumers will end up paying for it. I won- targets. That issue was canvassed at some der whether the public realise that their elec- length during the inquiry into this legislation. tricity bills could well go up to pay for the Most of those who appeared before the Sen- business as usual activities of these compa- ate committee said that two per cent was a nies. very modest target indeed and most agreed I am afraid, too, that for the wind and so- that 10 per cent was achievable. Not only lar energy industries the current baseline ap- that, but what was known as the ‘straight line proach operates as a serious barrier to com- uptake’ should have been adopted instead of petition, since they will have to factor the the very slow uptake indeed of the first cou- infrastructure costs of new production in to ple of years of the measure. the price of the certificates they sell; This argument really makes a mockery of whereas, hydro-electric power stations will the legislation. The whole idea is to get be- not have to at all or to a far lesser extent. I yond that business as usual model. Indeed, received a letter from an existing hydro gen- the current approach in the regulations will erator which confirmed our fears about the see that business as usual generation without impact on the wind and solar industries. additional investment to increase capacity They wrote: will take most of the first two years of that To exemplify the nature of the problem an abun- two per cent target. That means that all of dance of certificates wrongly allocated to existing Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23117 renewable energy generation capacity will have a technology with more efficient generating capac- devastating impact on the new renewable energy ity, should not be penalised. development. It will put at risk, or at least materi- ally delay, plans to put in place wind turbine As I said, nobody is talking about penalising manufacturing capability which will create at them. While a power station may not require least 600 new jobs and indirectly many more a capacity upgrade in order to generate more when the multiplier effect is put in place. This is electricity, it is unlikely that these actions because the incentive is for electricity retailers to will be undertaken with no financial incen- acquire certificates from the cheapest sources. tive to the generator due to the costs in- Therefore the existing renewable generators who volved. claim certificates with no additional capital outlay will secure the majority of contracts with artifi- We have suggested, as have others we cially low-cost certificates at the expense of new have spoken to in the industry, that this renewable investments. whole problem could be avoided if existing hydro-electric power stations were simply We appreciate the disallowance motion is a required to demonstrate that they had up- blunt mechanism and that item 3 of schedule graded the capacity of their stations before 3 does give the regulator the opportunity to they could claim any certificates. Hydro- determine special baselines where the base- electric power stations could show they had line for the three years prior to 1997 is not made a capital investment to increase pro- statistically representative. However, we duction. There are numerous opportunities to would argue that this does not go far enough, expand the generation capacity of existing particularly given the fact that there does not hydro schemes. They could install more ad- seem to be much dispute at all that there will vanced equipment that has a greater capacity still be a windfall gain of certificates to ex- to produce more electricity. Existing hydro isting generators. There is no assurance from infrastructure can be better utilised, for ex- the minister that this flexibility will actually ample through the installation of new hydro work to stop this windfall gain situation. generation facilities on existing dam walls. The regulator is given some flexibility, The government says that this system is too and the minister argues that he or she will difficult to implement, but that is not our have to go to the default baseline if this dis- advice. I understand that it would in fact be a allowance is successful. But he or she still very feasible option and there are consultants has to establish a baseline, and that is the available who could certify that capital up- fundamental problem. We have looked at grades have increased the capacity rating of various ways in which the flexibility might the power stations. be used, but still we come up with the same In conclusion, we suggest that if the gov- problem. More rainfall generates more cer- ernment had been serious about this issue it tificates, and every calculation suggests that could easily have moved to fix the problem this will be very significant indeed. The fact up. We suggest that this could still be done that hydro-electric power companies are by incorporating our suggestions into item 3. warning us about this would seem to be a I just want to say a couple of words about the very strong indication that it is going to hap- disallowance on wood waste. We will of pen. I think the minister accepts that it will course be supporting this. We have voted to happen. No doubt he will tell us that when he oppose the use of wood waste or wood mate- comes to speak, but he said in his letter to rials of any sort from native forests to pro- me: duce electricity at every stage of the debate on this legislation, and we will support this I consider that additional generation from existing disallowance too. We would have thought assets should be rewarded, as this represents re- that we would have a situation in Australia newable energy above that which was being gen- erated in ’97, which is the mandatory renewable where, under the guise of renewable energy, energy targets year. Additional generation, every time Australians turn on the TV, switch whether due to improved operating practices such on a light or use a washing machine they as better water management, more efficient use of would be very surprised indeed to know that existing equipment or replacement of ageing they were contributing to the destruction of 23118 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 our native forests. But now, because of this systems, particularly since solar power does legislation, coal fired power stations will be not have any adverse environmental out- able to tip unlimited quantities of woodchips, comes associated with it. I will conclude my logs and waste into their burners, and this remarks there and again indicate that the goes towards achieving the two per cent re- Democrats will support the two other disal- newables target. Again, no infrastructure lowance motions. would be required under those circum- Senator BOLKUS (South Australia) (5.43 stances. I think we need to ask: why would p.m.)—I also rise in this debate to make a generators invest in wind turbines and solar number of points. As has been signalled al- collectors if the price of wood, logs or waste ready, I indicate that the opposition will not products means that burning them without be supporting any of the three disallowance any investment in renewables is viable? We motions. At the outset, I wish to make it are certainly very worried and concerned that clear that the issues that have been discussed this is likely to be the case. today have not arisen since the passage of Adding woodchips or other products to the legislation. Those are issues that were burners will be easy and, depending on sup- discussed at the time the legislation was be- ply and demand and on how low the com- ing deliberated upon, and they were issues modity price of woodchips goes, it may also that drove us, for instance, to move amend- be a cheap option—probably a very cheap ments to ensure continuing scrutiny of the option. I would have thought, particularly sorts of issues that have been raised this af- following the election results in Western ternoon. We were successful in moving Australia, that the government and the ALP amendments which went a lot further than would consider their stand on this issue. We the Democrats had earlier indicated a prepar- would like to think that the government was edness to accept in terms of ongoing scrutiny getting the message loud and clear that the and amendment to the legislation. The ques- community are not happy about the logging tion before us today, given that we have had of our native forests and that they certainly these issues for a while, is essentially: will will not be happy about burning those forests supporting the disallowance actually do to create electricity and paying for it as con- anything to cater for Senator Brown’s major sumers. I find it particularly alarming that concern—that is, the use of native forest the government is now allowing wood waste timber—or do anything to satisfy Senator to be sourced from non-RFA areas. The Allison’s concerns? Democrats are not impressed by the man- It is a very strong contention on our part— agement and monitoring of RFAs to begin one that has not been disagreed to by the with, but this is of course even worse. proponents of this motion—that, if we were to disallow these regulations today, then the We also support Senator Brown’s disal- issues of concern to Green and Democrat lowance motion on the question of solar hot- senators would not be accommodated. If we water heaters. Like Senator Brown, we are were, for instance, to disallow and agree with very concerned. We raised the matter of the Senator Brown’s disallowance motion, then regulations in a letter to Senator Hill at the the concern he has about native forest timber beginning of February, but unfortunately so would be exacerbated rather than amelio- far we have not had a reply. We understand rated. It is the legislation that provides for that, under the regulations, renewable energy the sorts of outcomes that are of concern to certificates can be allocated only if they dis- Democrat and Green senators. Whatever we place non-renewable energy. In Tasmania, do with the regulations, we cannot amend this would seem to mean that you cannot that legislation. We expressed our concern claim certificates for solar hot-water sys- and we were successful in getting amend- tems, since they would displace hydro- ments to the legislation. We indicate even electricity, which is considered to be a re- now that that ongoing scrutiny will ensure a newable energy source. I am sure that many very comprehensive review of the legislation Tasmanians would like to be given the op- when we are elected to government. portunity to buy cheaper solar hot-water Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23119

I do stress this point: success this after- there be less or more protection for those noon—disallowance this afternoon—will not concerns that Senator Brown particularly satisfy our concerns because the disallow- talks about. The judgement we come to is ance motions basically leave us without a that there would be less protection. Two of regime to interpret the legislation. But the the major problems here are that, firstly, regulations that have been presented by the Senator Hill, in his indecent haste to promul- government are regulations that provide gate regulations, made a mistake and, sec- some meat for the bones. We on the opposi- ondly, mistakes were made in the legislation tion side continue to have some real con- itself. There is concern and confusion. cerns, which have been alive from the start, There is also concern that we had forced with the government’s legislation. on the government before Christmas a re- Let us keep in mind that, whatever we do quirement that there be a 30-day comment this afternoon, we cannot amend the regula- and public exposure period. That would have tions. We cannot force their amendment. If been good had it been deployed in the way it we disallow them, we will be left with the had been asked for by the Senate. But the bare bones of the legislation. That legislation government had a massive dose of malintent does not provide for the sorts of hurdles that in that process. There were supposed to be are in the regulations. It has been strongly 30 days during which a whole range of or- argued, and I agree with some of the argu- ganisations would have had a chance to ments, that those hurdles are not sufficient to make some constructive input. If you look at provide for certainty and adequate protec- the advice and the submissions to govern- tion. It is not just the Greens but also indus- ment, you see that there was a lot of advice, try who are saying that there is a lot of con- there were a lot of submissions made to pro- fusion and a lot of inconsistency in these vide for enhancement and amelioration of regulations. The one thing we cannot do in the legislation. But we had the government’s this parliament is to force an amendment to regulations dropped virtually on Christmas the regulations. In any event, we cannot Eve—the Friday before Christmas. The sug- amend the law. It is the law that provides for gestions were ignored. All we got from the the provisions that are of concern now to the government, in response to a whole range of Democrats but consistently to Senator submissions, were some minor changes, Brown. some minor embroidery at the edge of this We should also keep in mind that, if the legislation. It is no wonder that there is now regulations were to be disallowed, in the general unhappiness with the regulations, as normal course of statutory interpretation the reflected in what the Australian Conservation courts might be able to look at other guiding Foundation, Greenpeace, the Nature Conser- influences. They could look at the legislation vation Council, the Total Environment Cen- in its generality. As I say, that does not pro- tre and the Wilderness Society had to say: vide the sorts of prerequisites that are in the Much of the details relating to issues debated in regulations. They could look, for instance, at Parliament were left to the ORER to clarify in the administrative guidelines that this minister Regulations. We believe the regulations fail to may be able to promulgate. They could look close loopholes left open in the Act. at clarifying statements by the minister in That is a concern they had, which they raised parliament. They can, in the normal course with government. They acknowledged that of statutory interpretation, even look at press there were loopholes in the legislation. There releases. The last thing I would want is for a is some degree of protection in these regula- court to look at Wilson Tuckey’s press re- tions but nowhere near the protection that leases in interpreting legislation that might could have been adopted by the government. be before us. The Renewable Energy Generators Associa- Let us acknowledge that we cannot force tion believed that there were inconsistencies further amendments. At the end of the day, in the draft regulations, and stated: the question for us has been: if we were to REGA strongly encourages close scrutiny by a disallow the regulations before us, would legal firm acting for the AGO to remove these 23120 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 and any other ambiguities in the regulations to sistency, but they are also at this stage al- ensure that they are not open to legal challenge. ready signalling that they may find them- I am sure that the environment movement selves in court questioning some of the con- has already seized on the fact that these cepts. So without the regulations in place, regulations will be open to legal challenge. those sorts of avenues may not be available These regulations will provide triggers for to those people. It may in fact be doing the interest groups to contest, for instance, what government a favour to disallow some of is a primary purpose, and other concepts in these regulations. I have come down very the legislation. To the extent that the gov- strongly on the view that the regulations do ernment did not take the advice of organisa- add something—they are not sufficient, but tions like the Renewable Energy Generators they do add something. Disallowance will Association, they are leaving themselves not stop the sorts of concerns that Senator open to a degree of litigation. When one Brown and others in the community might makes a balance in the environment move- have. ment, I think some people are coming to the In terms of what the regulations might conclusion that an opportunity for litigation do—for instance, if you look at regulation 8 may be one thing that they get out of these that Senator Brown is concerned about— regulations that they would not otherwise get there are some prerequisites that have to be from legislation. The Sustainable Energy met before the timber can be accessible. Industry Association stated: Firstly, you have to satisfy a primary purpose Contradictions and omissions within the renew- test; secondly, you have to ensure that they able energy regulations suggest they would prove come from a place covered by an RFA; unworkable, particularly in the area of use of thirdly, you have to ensure that they are native forest biomass for energy production. produced in accordance with ecologically Senator Hill, in ignoring and railroading a sustainable forest management principles; consultation process with respect to these fourthly, if they are outside an RFA area, regulations, you have left yourself and inter- they have to be produced from harvest and ested parties open to a degree of litigation. taken in accordance with an ESF. They also This legislation can be litigated. To the ex- have to ensure that the minister is satisfied tent that you have not picked up the advice they are consistent with those required by an from a whole range of organisations, you RFA. The wood waste must be a by-product have played into the hands of those people or a waste product of a Commonwealth, state that you least want to assist. In terms of that or territory approved operation. All these general unhappiness, there were concerns, factors in the regulations ensure that there is for instance, with respect to the regulation going to be some level of external scrutiny as that Senator Brown wishes to disallow. to what sort of native forest can be used. Of particular concern to some industry Senator Brown—That is bunkum. groups is that the regulations will act as a Senator BOLKUS—Senator Brown, you significant disincentive to future plantation can say bunkum, but I know from your expe- investment. The concern is that the general- rience in this area—long and meritorious as ity, vagueness and uncertainty of regulation it is—that you understand the importance of 8(6)(a)(ii), which requires wood waste from having prerequisites in legislation on which a plantation to be the product of a harvesting government can be tested. Although these operation ‘for which no product of a higher regulations are not adequate for you, they do financial value than biomass for energy pro- provide some avenue of opportunity. You duction could be produced at the time of might say, ‘Bunkum,’ in respect of what I am harvesting’ to be an eligible energy source saying to you, but without these regulations under the act, will definitely lead to litiga- in place you will not be achieving what you tion. So I say to people like Senator Brown: want to achieve. It is not the regulations. If even people opposed to you in the debate we pass your disallowance motion this after- have real concerns about these regulations noon, you will not be able to achieve what and are concerned as to their clarity and con- you want from this. The debate that we are Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23121 having today is one that we had in terms of regulations then the situation we would find the legislation when it passed the parliament ourselves in and that the community would late last year. At the end of the day, if we find themselves in would be one of less pro- were to disallow regulation 8—which you tection for the concerns that the Democrats ask us to do—we will have a broad statement and the Greens are pursuing. Accordingly, of principle of availability access to native we will not be supporting the disallowance forest timber, and that is something that can- motions. not be stopped by disallowance this after- Senator HILL (South Australia—Minis- noon. ter for the Environment and Heritage) (5.58 In a sense, we have the same sort of p.m.)—The government, of course, opposes problem with regulations 11 and 19. If we the three disallowance motions. This is very disallow those regulations, it will not make a important legislation. It is going to provide a difference in the regulations, for instance, in major boost for renewable energy in this respect of solar water heaters and access to country that introduces increased mass and non-renewable energy and renewable energy. therefore brings down cost. A more eco- Basically, our position there is that, once nomically viable renewable energy industry again, if we were to disallow the regulation, in this country is very important to us in the bald statement of the legislation would terms of reducing greenhouse gas output. prevail without any trigger, without any pre- The regulations were prepared with con- requisite and without any machinery to pro- siderable care. Consultations were entered vide any degree of certainty. It does not pro- into before the draft was put out for public vide the protection that Senator Brown exposure. The 30-day requirement is un- would want were we to disallow regulations usual—nevertheless, it was written into the 11 and 19. legislation and there was that period for pub- As for item 3 schedule 3, the renewable lic examination. A number of representations power baselines, it was a concern that we were made. I know that it was over the mentioned in the debate last year—the base- Christmas period, but it did not seem to have line calculation. In respect of this, we see the the effect of dissuading those with an interest disallowance motion not only as misguided in this matter in considering the matter and but also as self-defeating. The regulations making their representations. Those repre- that the Democrats seek to disallow do in sentations were taken into account, and after fact offer the regulator some flexibility to the consultations the draft was refined and select an alternative baseline to address the the regulations were made. Now, some time issue that the Democrats are concerned later, we are debating three disallowance about. Were we to support that disallowance motions dealing with particular aspects of motion and disallow item 3 of schedule 3, those regulations. then we would be basically defeating the We have considered the arguments care- purpose. It would be an unknown goal in a fully because, as I have indicated, this is im- sense, because we would be removing from portant legislation and we want it to work the regulator any degree of power the regu- both fairly and effectively. I will deal first lator might have. with Senator Brown’s motion dealing with It could be argued that the power is not wood waste. We really cannot provide a sat- sufficient, but at the end of day in supporting isfactory answer for Senator Brown, in that that disallowance we would disallow the he is philosophically opposed to the com- only item that would mean a default method, mercial utilisation of native forests and this and so item 2 would apply. We find that self- legislation permits wood wastes arising from defeating. For us, it is an unsatisfactory turn native forests to be utilised in this way. So of events in the way that these regulations we have that philosophical inconsistency have been developed. We do not think the there. It is our view that if it is wood waste regulations are certain enough. We do think and can contribute to viable industry and the regulations will lead to litigation, but we therefore to jobs, then it should be permissi- also believe that were we to disallow these ble. He says in no circumstances should it be 23122 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 permissible because it is waste that has think Senator Allison would have to ac- arisen from native forest harvesting; and he knowledge the danger in not establishing would oppose even characterising it as baselines, because what we are talking about waste. But the legislation was passed last is clearly additional energy. We think the year, it provided for wood waste to be util- formula that we have provided in these ised and we needed to draw regulations that regulations is a sensible way to establish would enable that law to be administered those baselines. I think it was half conceded effectively. That is what we have sought to by Senator Allison that there is some flexi- do. bility on the part of the regulator to ensure If Senator Brown were to concede a that baselines allocated to individual power point—which is not his wont—moving be- stations do not understate the real level of yond the philosophical issue, he would have generation. We think it is the better way to thought that there was some comfort in these go. regulations: in the requirement that they ei- I could have a long debate here with ther be limited to regional forest agreements, Senator Allison about the difficulty in distin- which have therefore, by definition, been guishing between investments in terms of assessed by the Commonwealth, or, alterna- maintenance of existing capital as opposed to tively, be utilised only where, if they are not new capital. All of these matters would have RFAs, the Commonwealth is satisfied that been ongoing issues if we had adopted the the forest management practices are ecologi- Senator Allison approach to the matter. I do cally sustainable. But I do not expect to get not quarrel with her on principle—our ob- much recognition of that from Senator jective in the legislation is to ensure that we Brown. achieve additional renewable energy, and the On the other side of the debate there are incentives are provided for that purpose. We those who argue that we have been unduly believe that the way in which we have stringent in our restraint upon the characteri- sought to deal with hydro power and how sation of wood waste. That is just part and you determine what is additional energy in parcel of this debate. It is one of the reasons those circumstances is a more practical and Senator Bolkus was able to refer to a number efficient way of administering the legislation of representations from parties who are un- than the alternative she has advocated. happy with aspects of these regulations, be- In relation to the issue of solar water heat- cause parties have come to this issue with ers, the government again is bound by the very different starting positions. But, wood terms of the legislation that we passed last waste having been provided for in the legis- year, which specifically provides that the lation—which we think is philosophically solar water heater must displace non- sound—we do not accept his argument that it renewable electricity. That has led to the cir- is leading to the harvesting of native forests. cumstance of which Senator Brown quarrels It has got to be waste arising from a native in relation to Tasmania. I understand that forest that is being harvested for a higher argument; but in terms of the stricture of the value product. We think the regulations as act we have been unable to see a way around drafted are sensible and workable and will that. facilitate the administration of this legisla- One answer I could give to Senator Brown tion. which he would not receive enthusiastically In relation to the Australian Democrats’ is to suggest to him that it may not be long concern with hydro, I have, as Senator Alli- before Victorian power is exported, as part of son acknowledged, corresponded with her on a baseload, to Tasmania from a coal-sourced this issue. I understand her argument, that power supply. That would then allow Tas- she wants to ensure that there are no free mania to take advantage of the provisions kicks and that when benefits flow to hydro it included within the legislation. Similarly, is as a result of investment made to achieve Tasmania is looking at the prospect of gas- that additional energy. We nevertheless be- fired power for the future, which would en- lieve that baselines have to be established. I able this provision to come into effect. But Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23123 the circumstance at the moment is that the Woolnorth. They have been for some time legislation does require us to provide the seeking to process the necessary approvals certificates only when the water heater does but have had a series of issues placed before displace non-renewable electricity, which in them by Senator Hill’s department through current circumstances in Tasmania provides the Environment Protection and Biodiversity the difficulty of which Senator Brown com- Conservation Act, the latest of which appar- plains. If there was a way in which we could ently relate to examining the impact of the address that uniquely—in the case of Aus- wind turbines on wading migratory birds. tralia—Tasmanian circumstance, then I They may have some impact—although one would be prepared to consider it. It might should note that Woolnorth is on a plateau require legislative amendment for the future. and well away from the normal habitat of But, not surprisingly, I would encourage these birds—but it would have been better Tasmanians to install solar water heaters as had the minister’s department dealt with much as I would encourage any other Aus- these matters together, rather than raise is- tralians. sues in a fashion such that there was a series In those circumstances, the government of impediments put in the way of the Hydro- opposes the motions that are before the Sen- Electric Corporation establishing wind tur- ate today and trusts that the administration of bines as another means of power generation. the act will proceed and the benefits, in terms Hopefully, the minister will look at the op- of a growing renewable energy industry in erations of his department so that that can be Australia, can be achieved, with all of the expedited. environmental benefits—and in particular I simply make that contribution—saying greenhouse benefits—that would flow from that I support the submissions from Senator that. Bolkus on behalf of the opposition—to make Senator O’BRIEN (Tasmania) (6.10 it absolutely clear that Tasmania relies al- p.m.)—I want to make a very brief conbru- most exclusively on renewable energy and tion to the debate on the disallowance mo- the Hydro-Electric Corporation propose to tions. Following on from Senator Allison’s increase the amount of renewable energy contribution, people listening to the broad- generated: firstly, from their existing dam cast might have got the impression that there base; and secondly, from the newer wind would be a benefit to Tasmania arising from technology. There should be no doubt that setting a benchmark date and that there Tasmania will proceed further down the path would be no investment by the Hydro- of the use of renewable energy and nothing Electric Corporation in Tasmania in gener- should be put in its way in doing that. ating additional electricity from existing and Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (6.14 new resources. Perhaps Senator Allison did p.m.)—Clearly, Senator Allison and I are not mean to convey that impression but I going to be outvoted. The problem here is certainly got that impression. That is not the that the Labor Party are supporting the regu- case. I understand that there is a proposal to lations which allow forests to be burnt in improve the generation equipment which furnaces, converted into electricity and then attaches to the dams in Tasmania with a view sold as green power. It is inconsistent for to increasing the generation capacity—from them to do so, but they are every bit as bad existing resources of water—by some four to as Senator Hill and the Howard government six per cent. It seems to me that that is a in this matter. The aim and intent of the valid way of improving the generation of a move to disallow parts of these regulations renewable energy from existing resources was to get them improved, but the Labor and is valid under the legislation. Party are with the Howard government lock, A second and important measure being stock and barrel in this anti-environmental pursued by the Hydro-Electric Corporation component of a piece of legislation which, in Tasmania is wind farms. I understand they timid as it is, ought to have been pro- are seeking to establish wind farms on an old environment through and through. Not only property on the north-west tip of Tasmania— could the government not rise to that but nor 23124 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 could the Labor Party because, historically, able is not supportable. It is a logging inferno they cannot get away from supporting the exercise—an LIE—a lie—that we see here. woodchip industry and the fossil fuel indus- It is a government lie that we see here. It is a try. disgraceful way to be treating this nation’s forest heritage and burning for profit the It points to the fact that, if we do get a birthright of future generations to enjoy these Beazley government further down the line, in forests as we do. This process is saying not that regard we cannot hope for much from only that will we burn the forests but that the them. This is one of the reasons why so big woodchip corporations, which put those many people in the electorate are fed up with big cheques into the electoral accounts of the the big parties and want alternatives which Labor Party and the Liberal Party, will be offer some break away from this nexus be- able to convert it into money, profiting by it, tween the big parties which, on an issue like selling it on the market as green energy, woodchipping, which 80 per cent of Austra- when it is not. I do not know what you can lians want stopped as far as old-growth for- say about a government which deliberately ests are concerned, are hell bent on increas- brings into law a falsehood, a deceit of peo- ing it. You would think that Mr Beazley’s ple. If you do not know what to say about a opposition ranks would have the nous to put government that does that, how do you deal some distance between themselves and the with an opposition which supports it to the government over the woodchip industry, hilt? No wonder people are fed up with the which is marauding these great forests and big parties and their unbreakable nexus with their wildlife, but there is not. The problem the big end of town, going against the wishes in Tasmania is that the Bacon Labor gov- of the vast majority of Australians. ernment is gung-ho about this and is tying in the time-honoured relationship between the We will be outvoted on it, but this forest woodchippers and successive Labor gov- inferno, which increases all the time under ernments by taking the destruction of Tas- this government, is going to be an election mania’s forest to their illogical conclusion. issue. I can tell the Labor Party that, if they think they are going to get support from the Because I will not let it pass, I want to Greens while their policy is to burn just as take Senator Hill on over the debased argu- fast, they should think again, because, as far ment he has about this being good for the as I am concerned, that is not on. That is not environment. Senator Hill uses the term for what I am here for. I will never turn my back destruction of the forests as ‘ecologically on this despicable industry. Australia’s heri- sustainable forestry’. He says, ‘Goodness, tage is being destroyed by a number of cold- we won’t allow these forest furnaces to be hearted people who buy their way to political fed out of the wild forests of Australia unless suasion by putting money into the coffers of it is an ecologically sustainable process.’ But the big parties. I will never support that. That he knows it is not. Prime Minister Howard is what the Labor Party are doing here today knows it is not. Every member of the gov- and that is what the minister for the envi- ernment knows that you cannot replace an ronment is doing here in his disgraceful way intact ancient forest ecosystem after you of failing in his duty to defend this nation’s have moved in the chainsaws and bulldozers great environment. ‘Burn it and make money and cut it down, and then firebombed and out of it,’ is his way of doing things. And it is poisoned it, as happens every day of the coming direct from the Prime Minister’s of- week in Tasmania. Here is a picture of a for- fice, because we have a Prime Minister who est in the Tarkine in north-west Tasmania, does not have a heart when it comes to this ablaze from end to end, with a helicopter nation’s heritage. from Forestry Tasmania dropping incendiar- ies. Senator Hill might look away, because it Thank goodness we are in a democracy is hard to look at. But the whole of that for- where people will have a choice further mer rainforest is being destroyed by a fire down the line. Thank goodness we are in a holocaust, and the basis of Senator Hill’s democracy where people who do the right asseveration that this is ecologically sustain- thing can get rewarded, as happened in Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23125

Western Australia recently. When it comes to you. But if you don’t do that, if you want to the business of Tasmanians being penalised keep Tasmania clean and green, we’ll penal- because they will not get the rebate when ise you against everybody on the mainland they put solar hot-water systems into their who wants to put a unit on their roof,’ and houses, the best the opposition can do is say, the Labor Party supports that. Well, I do not. ‘We support the regulations as they stand,’ and the best the government can do is say, Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (6.25 ‘That is unfortunate for Tasmanians. We’ll p.m.)—To sum up the issue of the hydro have to wait until you get a Basslink cable so windfall, I think it was disappointing that that polluting brown coal comes into Tasma- Senator Bolkus was not able to give us some nia and then you will get an advantage.’ So assurances that the ALP would sort out this pollute and you are rewarded; don’t pollute problem if they were in government. In fact, and you get penalised. we heard little from the ALP about it. I do not know whether that is because the nature The minister says, ‘It’s too hard. If some- of the problem is not understood or what the one can offer me a way of getting a formula, reason is, but it is a very significant issue and I’d fix it.’ The question is: didn’t he have the I was disappointed that Senator Bolkus was wit or wisdom to put in his legislation a not able to give us a greater commitment on clause which says, ‘Tasmanians won’t be this issue. I am not convinced that scrutiny penalised. If they put a hot-water system on was going to help very much on this issue. their roof, they’ll get the same rebate as eve- We will have a review after two years, it is rybody else because they are investing in true, but it is that first two years where the renewable energy’? Solar power is better biggest problem is going to arise because, as renewable energy than hydro power, let me I said, there is a very strong indication that tell you, because at least it is not involved in the certificates will be generated which will flooding valleys and suffocating wildlife, take up that first two years of the measure. which itself leads to greenhouse gas produc- tion, something that goes unrecognised as far To respond to Senator O’Brien’s com- as hydro systems are concerned. ments, I thought I made it quite clear that the Democrats are quite amenable to the idea of I feel very frustrated by what we are wit- investment in existing hydro schemes being nessing here, and I am sure Senator Allison acknowledged and in fact certificates being shares that frustration. We have a minister generated if that investment ends up with for the environment who fails the very name more renewable energy as a result. That is of his ministry. We have an opposition which our whole point. What we need is not just fails to challenge him on that. I want to reit- some notional baseline but a way of deter- erate, though, that this should have been mining what that new investment—whether fixed here today, that these regulations it is in equipment or new generation, and I should have been amended, and that the gov- have seen examples of some excellent work ernment would have fixed them to some de- that has been done in North Queensland to gree if the opposition had stood ground but it increase the efficiency and the output of did not. So the forests are penalised, and electricity—would generate by way of extra people in Tasmania who want to put a solar electricity. It seems to me that it would not hot-water unit on their roof get penalised too. be an impossible task to determine what You pick on the poorest state in the Com- those measures would generate; in fact, the monwealth and you give them a disadvan- hydro companies would go through that pro- tage because they happen to have a hydro cess. What we are talking about is the wind- system instead of a polluting coal system, fall gain which comes from two main fac- and this minister for the environment says, tors, the first being higher rainfall. If you ‘The best way Tasmania can fix that is to get take an average over the previous period— some multinational corporation to put a cable no matter what that period is from our calcu- under Bass Strait which Tasmanians are go- lations—you are still going to get an in- ing to have to pay for to bring polluting coal crease, even if you have in some cases a power into their state, and then we’ll reward normal rainfall year or higher levels of rain 23126 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 than you might have had in the previous av- again, it will be too late: by the time that re- eraged period. So that is one point. view comes about, we could have $40 mil- In Tasmania’s case—and Tasmania stands lion worth of certificates generated for to gain most from the figures, from what we nothing, for ‘business as usual’. can see—it has undergenerated its capacity The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT for a very long time. Simply by choosing to (Senator Knowles)—The question is that generate electricity with all of the water at its the motion moved by Senator Brown, motion disposal, it can generate extra certificates. No. 1, be agreed to. Neither of those issues was dealt with by Question resolved in the negative. Senator Hill or Senator Bolkus. Senator Hill The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- says that he does not quarrel with the princi- DENT—The question is that the motion ple. I think we are looking for a bit more moved by Senator Allison, motion No. 2, be than not quarrelling with it; we want to see agreed to. what the government will do if the situation arises which everybody expects—that is, that Question resolved in the negative. enormous numbers of certificates are gener- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- ated. In fact, according to our calculation, for DENT—The question is that the motion Tasmania it is likely that, using the baseline moved by Senator Brown, motion No. 3, be of 8.88 million megawatt hours and taking agreed to. the current capability, which is 1.48 million Question resolved in the negative. megawatt hours higher than that, you are looking at a very substantial number of cer- CRIMES AMENDMENT (AGE tificates. In fact, we reckon the figure would DETERMINATION) BILL 2001 be about $44 million, based on the assump- Report of Legal and Constitutional tion that those certificates would be worth Legislation Committee about $30 a megawatt hour. Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (6.32 So we are talking here about very signifi- p.m.)—On behalf of the chair of the Legal cant sums of money and, as I said, consum- and Constitutional Legislation Committee, ers will be paying for this for no real extra Senator Payne, I present the report of the benefit. In other words, if they are not paying committee on the provisions of the Crimes extra, it will still happen and ‘business as Amendment (Age Determination) Bill 2001, usual’ will be very costly indeed and to the together with the Hansard record of the detriment not only of consumers, who will committee’s proceedings and tabled docu- pay extra for their electricity generated this ments. way, but also of the rest of the industry, who Ordered that the report be printed. will not get a kick-start, if you like: they are (Quorum formed) not going to be able to persuade their bank manager that, in the first couple of years of TAXATION LAWS AMENDMENT operation, they will be in a position to sell (EXCISE ARRANGEMENTS) BILL 2000 certificates at a reasonable level. Second Reading So it undermines the whole measure. Consideration resumed. Really, it is almost the last straw, in terms of Senator COOK (Western Australia— this legislation. It could have been good, but Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the it has been undermined continually by Senate) (6.35 p.m.)—The Taxation Laws changes since the first concept; and now the Amendment (Excise Arrangements) Bill regulations are, as I said, the last straw. We 2000 ensures that excise administration is are disappointed that we have, firstly, got no transferred from the customs office to the commitments from the ALP as to what they Australian Taxation Office. The transfer would do in government if they were to as- actually took place many months ago, and sume office. All we get is some sort of reas- this bill simply regularises what has been an surance that there is scrutiny. I do not think administrative reality. The Labor Party does there is scrutiny there. We have a review but, not, of course, oppose the transfer. Once again, though, this bill represents another Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23127 sents another example of the Assistant tion and in clamping down on the illicit to- Treasurer’s continuing incompetence in the bacco market. The shadow Assistant Treas- administration of his portfolio. Once again, urer, Mr Kelvin Thomson, has been particu- this chamber is being asked to give legisla- larly vigilant in exposing the government in tive effect to a government administrative these areas and he rightly deserves much of change that was made some time back. Is it the credit for the tightening of the law in this any wonder that we have the level of com- area which occurred last year. munity revolt against the GST and against This is not the only area of law where the this government more generally, when it has government and Senator Kemp have been ministers that act like this? asleep at the wheel. In the last sitting, we had Continued bungling and incompetence are the farce of the aircraft noise levy exposed the order of the day here; so we are now be- where the government has unlawfully been ing asked to clean up the mess. Senator collecting a tax to the value of almost $200 Kemp should be thankful that the opposition million. He had to introduce a bill to retro- is so cooperative and helpful and ready to spectively fix up the mistake. Labor, as a assist him. What we are witnessing, though, responsible opposition, supported that legis- is a government that has not got its eye on lation. But what do we find from the Howard the ball, a government that is not prepared to government and all its ministers? We find understand the detail of its own tax admini- blame shifting again. It is not the govern- stration system so as to address it in a way ment accepting responsibility for this but the that plugs the leakage of the revenue base. Treasury. We have seen the Prime Minister We have already seen how this government accepting credit for cuts in interest rates but is soft on tax cheats in the top end of town, blaming the Reserve Bank when they put as witnessed by the dumping of the bill that them up. This is a Prime Minister who would tax trusts as companies. Does this claims credit when everything is going well really come as any surprise, given that the but finds everyone else to blame when things discretionary trust is the tax avoidance vehi- are going wrong. I will now discuss the is- cle of choice for most of the Howard gov- sues raised in the opposition’s second read- ernment front bench, led by none other than ing amendment, which has been circularised. Senator Heffernan, the Prime Minister’s per- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT sonal selection for Parliamentary Secretary (Senator Knowles)—Would you care to to Cabinet? move that amendment, Senator Cook? Only last week we saw another govern- Senator COOK—I think that is probably ment backdown on key measures seeking to a necessary precondition before I discuss it! I shore up the revenue base. But because they move the opposition amendment on sheet would have impacted on the big end of town 2157: they were dumped. This is a government that At the end of the motion, add: claws back GST compensation from pen- “but the Senate condemns the Govern- sioners but lets its Liberal mates pillage and ment for: plunder the tax system. Let us get this clear: (a) failing to listen to the community pensioners pay the GST and watch their concerning the GST impact on ex- compensation getting clawed back while the cise levels; government does nothing to ensure that its (b) opposing Labor’s private member’s mates at the top end of town pay their fair bill giving a fuel excise cut to mo- share of tax. torists yet condoning a Government This is a government that has allowed backbencher’s private member’s bill general tax administration to suffer because that would tear up the Intergovern- mental Agreement signed with the of its ideological fixation with the GST. Ex- States; cise is simply one area where this has oc- curred. Labor forced the government to lift (c) belatedly reducing only a portion of its GST fuel excise windfall merely its game in the excise administration area because it is in a state of panic; and specifically on the question of fuel substitu- 23128 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001

(d) its poor administration of the excise tions, as did outraged people in the public— regime”. seeking to have the government honour its promise. If, in the lead-up to the campaign, Firstly, for months now, since the introduc- the government was telling Treasury of its tion of the GST, the Australian motoring policy and Treasury was looking at the gov- public have been calling for relief from ex- ernment’s promise, which was to reduce ex- cessively high petrol prices. It is true that cise by an equivalent amount when it re- part of the reason for higher fuel prices was duced it by only 6.7c per litre, then there had what happened to the international price of to be a windfall for the government, a wind- oil. But what is also undeniable is that the fall that was not budgeted for. Our argument other reason petrol prices were forced up always was that relief could be given on pet- more than they needed to be was that this rol without affecting the budget because it government broke a promise in relation to was a figure never budgeted for. It could not the GST. The promise was simple and it was have been, if the Treasury was taking notice unequivocal: the GST will not put up the of what the Treasurer and the Prime Minister price of petrol. Further, the Treasurer said promised. We were saying that this was not a that the government would ensure that the hit to the budget; that it was a windfall that excise on petrol fell by an amount equivalent should be given back to Australian motorists. to the amount the GST would go up by. But what happened when the government im- But the windfall did not stop there. The plemented its so-called policy? Bear in mind first of the windfalls was the 1.5c per litre. that this was the policy they enunciated dur- Remember that the price of petrol at which ing the election campaign: ‘The petrol price the government struck the decision about will not go up due to the GST and we will excise was a strike price which the govern- reduce the excise by an equivalent amount.’ ment said was 90c a litre. Subsequent to that What did they do, though? Through sleight decision, the price of petrol was consistently of hand the Prime Minister imposed a GST around the $1 mark, so there was a further that put the price of petrol up 8.2c per litre windfall by virtue of the fact that the strike but reduced the excise by only 6.7c a litre. rate was higher again than would have been This out of touch Prime Minister pocketed budgeted for. In addition to that, for every 1.5c on every litre of petrol sold. He imple- cent that the price of petrol goes up the gov- mented a non-core promise but just failed to ernment pockets one-eleventh of it, because tell the Australian motoring public about it. of the GST—the GST being a retail tax. The That was a huge deceit of the Australian excise tax is a flat rate tax but the GST is a motoring public. retail tax. So, if the price goes up and if it goes up above what the government was Interestingly, the Treasurer went missing projecting it would go up, there is another in action when this announcement was made. windfall. That is not to mention the other He flew to Paris and left it to the hapless windfall: what the government gets from Minister for Finance and Administration, Mr petroleum resource rent tax. The government Fahey, to make the announcement. Mr Cos- was telling motorists that it could not afford tello knew he had broken his promise and he to give them petrol price relief but was pock- fled the country; he fled the country as he eting not just one windfall but several. was slugging Australian motorists on every litre of petrol and breaking a promise that he This government has not come clean on swore hand on heart during the election the extent of the fuel tax windfall and to this campaign he would honour. This Prime day refuses to do so. It is a disgrace that it Minister and Treasurer cannot go to the has not, because it promised budget honesty. electorate and promise unequivocally that the We have been asking for the assumptions on price of petrol will not go up as a result of which Treasury and the government based the GST, dud them when it comes to the im- their projections and forecasts on petrol and plementation and be allowed to get away we still do not have them. Why? Because we with it, so the ALP mounted a campaign on know they are hiding something. We know this issue—as did the motoring organisa- there is a windfall; what we do not know is Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23129 the exact amount of the windfall. It is for this look at options for returning that windfall, in reason that Labor introduced a bill into the addition to the freeze last February. parliament through the Leader of the Oppo- We also want to look at the city-country sition to get the government, as the first in- divide, which is widening under the GST. We stalment of returning the windfall, to freeze now have a situation where people in re- the February adjustment on petrol excise. gional Australia pay more tax on their petrol Senator McGauran—What about abol- than do people in city Australia. This is be- ishing indexation? cause the GST is on the retail price. So, Senator COOK—We also established an where the margin is wider, the GST com- inquiry into what is going on in the industry pounds the cost—and it is worse in rural and and how the government is ripping off Aus- regional Australia than in the cities. Every- tralian motorists. I have been interjected one knows that people in rural and regional upon: what about the indexation increases? I Australia pay bigger margins, not just on understand that a bill is coming before the petrol but on many goods and services. Un- chamber later this week, probably Thursday, der the old system everyone paid the same in which we will vote for the abolition of amount of tax, regardless of where they those indexation steps. But I do point out to lived. Remember the Prime Minister’s Nyn- the interjector that our private member’s gan declaration? When the Prime Minister bill—a bill I personally introduced in this went on tour in January last year and started chamber on 1 February to abolish the first to see the anguish in regional Australia, he indexation step—well preceded the backflip said that nothing the government did would by the Prime Minister on petrol. This cham- see services taken from the regions and that ber could have voted for it but we were faced they would not seek to widen the city- with the odd occasion on the last sitting country divide. Yet six months later they Thursday that we convened of the Prime introduced, by deceit through their broken Minister announcing his backflip on petrol GST promise, a mechanism that—in addition and government senators speaking against to that deceit—widened the gap in tax now our bill. If they had voted on it, that would paid in regional Australia versus in the city. have removed the indexation for 1 February It is also important to note that nothing in immediately and we would have had the re- the Prime Minister’s announcement regard- lief of that from several weeks ago and not ing his backflip on petrol addressed the very be waiting for the legislation this Thursday. important issue of LPG, which is used a lot But I do digress because of the interjection. in regional Australia and will be used in- Let me return to what I was saying. creasingly, with the onset of winter, for We have also established an inquiry into heating in the colder states of Australia. It is what is occurring in the industry and how the encouraged as an environmentally sound government is ripping off Australian motor- substitute for petrol; but now we are seeing a ists. We tried to get the Democrats to agree situation where the price of LPG has sky- to that inquiry and to do it through the Sen- rocketed as well. LPG took the whole hit ate. They would not do that, so Labor estab- with the GST. There was no reduction: there lished its own inquiry. That inquiry has vis- was a total increase as a result of the GST. ited now over 30 locations around the coun- Yet nothing has been announced on that by try and taken formal submissions. It was that the government in its petrol backflip. inquiry that recommended to the parliamen- When we proposed the establishment of tary Labor Party the basis for the bill I talked an inquiry, what was the Prime Minister’s about before—and that is why the inquiry response? He said that petrol had been ‘in- will now continue. We also want the inquiry quired into to death’ and that we do not need to address a number of other issues. First of another inquiry. He said that there had been all, we want to know the full extent of the something like 40 inquiries. He was totally windfall because, as the second instalment, dismissive. Yet, when he did his backflip, our commitment was to establish the extent what did he announce? Apart from the of the windfall, the precise amount, and to backflip, apart from adopting Labor’s strat- 23130 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 egy, he announced another inquiry. How can deals with everything from uniformity of you take this Prime Minister seriously? That radiation protection frameworks through to is the question that has to be asked. This is a regulation and international liaison. Prime Minister who said that you could not My particular interest relates to page 8 of give increased funding to roads as well as this report in relation to the replacement re- give a cut in petrol excise, because that actor site licence. I prefer to refer to that as would wreck the budget. This is a Prime the new nuclear reactor, given that it is a new Minister who said that we do not need an- nuclear reactor that is being proposed and other inquiry into petrol—a Prime Minister will be developed as a consequence of this who is out of touch and not listening to the government’s decision—the tender, of Australian public when they are saying, course, has already been granted for that. But ‘Please, Prime Minister, do something about the report states that ARPANSA reviewed petrol.’ ANSTO’s compliance with the site licence, We have had some of the Prime Minister’s based on the quarterly reporting requirement. backbench in revolt. They were heroes at I also note that ARPANSA has assessed that home in their electorates, calling for relief on all licence conditions continue to be met by petrol prices, but when they came back here ANSTO. However, I think we are all entitled to Canberra they were cowards. They were to ask whether ARPANSA has copies of all running around their constituencies saying, the contracts—which goes to the broader ‘Isn’t the price of petrol terrible? We’re go- question of how effective ARPANSA can be ing to Canberra to tell the Prime Minister in assessing ANSTO’s performance if con- that he has to do something,’ and then they tracts are in doubt and there is no public dis- wimped out when they got here. When Labor closure of new contracts. This, of course, sought to introduce legislation to give relief, relates to some of the issues that I raised in which was the freeze on excise that they question time today and to certain issues that were telling their constituents they sup- cast doubt on the legitimacy of government ported, they would not vote for the Labor contracts in relation to nuclear waste, and the proposal. We made sure, though, that their shipment of spent fuel in particular. constituents knew that. In every circum- stance where a member of the coalition had In recent days we have heard the decision been urging petrol price relief at home but of the French court which saw the imposition had voted against it in Canberra, we made of a ban on the unloading of Australian nu- sure that their constituents knew about it— clear waste. The Cherbourg court ruled the and we believe that those constituents will re- storage of waste on French soil was illegal member that when they come to vote at the under the French radioactive waste manage- next election. (Time expired) ment act of 1991. We were expecting that there would be a decision overnight as to Debate adjourned. whether or not an appeal of that decision DOCUMENTS would be upheld. I believe it has been upheld Australian Radiation Protection and and that a final decision has been deferred until 3 April. No doubt that casts serious Nuclear Safety Agency doubts over the legitimacy of contracts that Senator STOTT DESPOJA (South Aus- have been signed between ANSTO and Co- tralia—Deputy Leader of the Australian gema. Democrats) (6.50 p.m.)—I move: Senator Minchin, on behalf of govern- That the Senate take note of the document. ment, should be a little more concerned than I rise to speak on the ARPANSA quarterly he was indicating today. In my questions to report, the report of the chief executive offi- the minister today on nuclear and radiation cer of ARPANSA, for the period 1 October issues in Australia, I asked the government to 31 December 2000. This report covers a about the so-called two-minute treaty that number of operations in relation to Austra- has been initialled by the Minister for For- lian radiation protection and nuclear safety eign Affairs, Mr Downer, and the govern- issues. Covering performance, it obviously ment. Senator Minchin was unable to answer Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23131 some of the questions I asked him, such as diation Protection and Nuclear Safety the following. How long had this process of Agency. I follow on from the comments of discussion of a treaty been going on? What Senator Stott Despoja. For a number of years preparations had been made by our govern- the government now has treated with disdain ment relating to the sensitive matter of nu- any requests for information for public ac- clear waste? For example, does the treaty countability with respect to these important actually include issues other than nuclear issues regarding the Lucas Heights reactor waste? What are they? Was the ANSTO pro- and the proposed new reactor. The govern- posal, the poorly planned nuclear reactor ment continues to bury its head in the sand proposal, driving the acquisition of that par- and ignore an increasing array of problems ticular treaty? Why was the process of the that are arising. treaty done so hastily? In this ARPANSA report there is reference Senator Tierney—Nonsense. It wasn’t to the replacement reactor site licence. It has poorly planned. become clear, particularly through the proc- Senator STOTT DESPOJA—I think esses of the Senate select committee looking even Senator Tierney has to acknowledge the into this issue, that before a licence to con- comments in relation to international matters struct a new reactor is issued the Australian that were made on this issue to a Senate Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety committee by the first assistant secretary of Agency will be requiring very strict under- the International Security Division from the takings that issues of waste disposal have Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. He been resolved. It has also become clear that was saying that treaties of this nature take up there is no strategy in place for the long-term to six months to debate and discuss and be treatment and disposal of the nuclear fuel resolved. On 22 February the minister rods from Lucas Heights. Minister Minchin claimed publicly that it had not even been and other spokespersons for the government started. What do we see now? A month later and for ANSTO have said, ‘We have a sys- we actually have a treaty under way. Those tem in place. The system is that we take the unanswered questions are still unanswered. spent fuel rods from Lucas Heights and we However, I note that I did prompt Minister ship them to France. They will be reproc- Downer to get a press release out this after- essed there under the contract with Cogema noon, so at least the Democrats have forced and then in 10 or 15 years time they will be the hand of the government on this issue. brought back to Australia and will be stored The government has actually responded in some waste facility.’ That strategy is in now, a little wary of criticisms that it is being tatters. a little secretive and that the processes have I remind the Senate that it was only a cou- been anything but open and accountable. ple of years ago that ANSTO and the gov- Certainly the people in the Sutherland Shire, ernment were saying we had a strategy in which I am sure Senator Forshaw will talk place, but at that time they were not being about shortly, had no knowledge of the treaty sent to France; they were being sent to and its contents and have good reason to be Dounreay in Scotland. That was the plan concerned, given that the new nuclear reactor then. What happened? The government in will be in their region. I welcome the the United Kingdom decided to close down ARPANSA quarterly report. It highlights the reprocessing plant at Dounreay and said, some issues but certainly there are more. I ‘We will not take any more of Australia’s cannot wait to hear explanations from gov- spent fuel rods. We will not process them.’ ernment as to the legitimacy of those con- ANSTO said, ‘Oh, well, we will go and talk tracts—not just between ANSTO and Co- to the French.’ They entered into a contract gema but also the INVAP contract with Aus- with Cogema. The problem now is that a tralia. court in France has upheld an action by Senator FORSHAW (New South Wales) Greenpeace and said that there is no provi- (6.55 p.m.)—I rise to make some comments sion to reprocess that waste in France and on the quarterly report of the Australian Ra- that it is, at the moment, illegal. So those 23132 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 spent fuel rods are sitting on a boat, off the vatives have. The fact that we hear Senator coast of France presumably, with no home to Mason from Queensland talking about Presi- go to—nowhere to be reprocessed. dent Ronald Reagan in an admiring and Similarly, this government has entered idolising way just confirmed for me how into a contract with INVAP, the Argentinian much they lack heroes. company, for waste from the new reactor But I will come back to that shortly be- potentially to be reprocessed or conditioned cause it would be wrong not to make com- in Argentina, but serious questions have been ments on Ronald Reagan’s presidency. As a raised as to whether or not that country can number of people may be aware, particularly accept nuclear waste from Australia. Minis- in America, one of the things that does stand ter Minchin says, ‘Yes, I have been told by out about Ronald Reagan and his admini- the Argentinian government that there are no stration was the despicable involvement of problems.’ Having seen what happened with his administration—even though he denied it Dounreay in Scotland and having now seen himself—in that terrible Iran-Contra deal. To what has happened with Cogema in France, remind people about the deal I have here an you have to seriously question whether the excerpt from the Independent Counsel’s strategy for the new reactor will stand up or summary on the Contra deal where he says whether, more likely, it will fail as it has that one of the surviving crew members of failed in the past. the plane that was shot down or fell out of The government has taken absolutely no the sky, an American called Eugene Hasen- notice of early reports which have said that fus, when taken into captivity stated that he the issue of waste disposal has to be resolved was employed by the CIA. In 1986, not more before any new reactor should be built. than six years after the Americans were pub- Again, Minister Minchin bowed to public licly humiliated by the forces that took over pressure and to pressure from his own state their embassy in Tehran, that administration colleagues in the coalition in South Australia or people connected to it were selling arms and said, ‘We will not put the waste facility to Iran and from the deal that was made there in South Australia.’ The problem you now they were giving money back to the Contras have is that no other state wants that nuclear in Nicaragua so that they could conduct an waste facility either and the likelihood is that illegal war against the government of that it will continue to be stored for the long term day. at Lucas Heights. That is a situation that the people of the Sutherland Shire will simply Senator McGauran—They were not ex- not accept. I seek leave to continue my re- actly democratic. marks. Senator HUTCHINS—They were not. I Leave granted; debate adjourned. would not say they were democratic, Senator ADJOURNMENT McGauran, but the Congress of the United The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT States had said that there should be no assis- (Senator Murphy)—Order! The time for tance given to them and that should have consideration of government documents been enough for their elected administration. having expired, I propose the question: However, because of what Ronald Reagan That the Senate do now adjourn. had started up, they were involved in this diversion. This diversion was against the will Political Heroes of the Congress and obviously of the people Senator HUTCHINS (New South Wales) of United States. And the senior levels of the (7.01 p.m.)—On the 8 March here in an ad- Reagan administration were connected to journment debate Senator Mason gave a very that grubby deal. I cannot imagine how any idolising speech on President Reagan reach- American would have allowed their govern- ing his ninetieth birthday. As I listened to ment to even entertain the idea of selling any Senator Mason, it struck me once again—as arms to Iran after what Iran had done to their it has on many occasions in my political ca- American personnel in the Tehran embassy reer—how few heroes the Australian conser- in 1979. However, they let that happen, and I Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23133 suppose that is something that will be com- tics? Where are their heroes? Where are their mented on later. Curtins? Where are their Chifleys? Where Senator Mason said that President Ronald are their Whitlams? Where are their Reagan had promoted the ‘cause of human Hawkes? Where are their Keatings? They rights, freedom and democracy’. This was were the men I followed, those last prime the same administration that was supplying ministers. They were our heroes, and we money and arms to the Islamic fundamen- treat them as heroes. What do you do to your talists in Afghanistan, and we are seeing the former leaders? You vilify Malcolm Fraser. I results of that today. This was the same ad- remember quite clearly the way they used to ministration that was supplying assistance to snicker about Billy McMahon and about the corrupt and discredited Marcos regime in Billy Snedden. What did they say about the Philippines. This was the same admini- Gorton? What did they do about him? stration that was supplying assistance and Senator McGauran—Who? support to the repressive regime in Chile under President Pinochet. I wonder how Senator HUTCHINS—Exactly. Senator Senator Mason can come into this place and McGauran, you may recall Sir John Gorton say that former President Ronald Reagan was a Prime Minister of this country and was indeed a supporter of these basic human head of the Liberal Party. How do they look rights and freedoms. Clearly, he was not and after their leadership? They do not, because he demonstrated that. they are petty-minded, little-minded and nar- row-minded people. They have no respect President Reagan in one of his speeches for history. You only have to look at the way misquoted a fellow 90-year-old former the Prime Minister is treating his former president, John Quincy Adams. He mis- leaders who are still alive now. I hope he quoted him when he said, ‘Facts are stupid gets to see the way he will be treated. You things.’ In fact, John Quincy Adams said, only have to see the gaping divisions within ‘Facts are stubborn things,’ and that is ex- the Liberal Party now to see how John How- actly what we have seen with President ard is going to be remembered when they get Reagan and this eulogising of him by Sena- the opportunity to write his history. tor Mason. I come back to this point, and I am pretty sure that you will agree with me. Look at someone like Ronald Reagan. When you look at the conservatives you see Ronald Reagan pursued supply-side eco- the lack of heroes that they have. When I nomics—something which you may say that was growing up in the 1960s my heroes were the Prime Minister has indeed pursued him- on Disneyland—Swamp Fox and Adven- self. His government cut taxes and reduced tureland—and we were taught at school inflation, but at the same time they never cut about Old Shep and the Man from Snowy spending. If you look at the 13 March edition River. I wonder what the conservatives were of the Bulletin, Max Walsh’s article quotes brought up on. You look at what they look at the independent Institute of Public Affairs. now. They have to look to Ronald Reagan The Institute of Public Affairs says that the and Margaret Thatcher. Look at what they do government have increased foreign debt by to Malcolm Fraser. Look what they have over $100 billion since they got into power. done to that leader. Irrespective of what we They are spending more and they are taxing might think about him, what do they do for more than any government in the history of Malcolm Fraser? They vilify him. They ter- this country, and that is the legacy John rorise him. They put him down. Not once do Howard will leave. That is the legacy that they look after their leaders. Where do you some of the people over there will try to de- go to find one political leader on the conser- fend. But I can tell you—as you would vative side that has done anything that they know, Mr Acting Deputy President Mur- can look up to? phy—that as soon as John Howard is kicked The National Party might have someone out of office you will have a lot of ragtag like Sir Earl Page or Sir Arthur Fadden. But rabble people over there trying to bring him what about the other non-Labor side of poli- down. 23134 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001

I disagree with John Howard on almost of Statistics, can shed some light on what we everything, but at least I will respect my are doing to the land and water of this conti- leader and respect the Prime Minister. The nent. While pasture, livestock, grains and coalition will not. They will go after him. other agriculture in the form of irrigated They will take him down peg by peg. You pastures use the most water, rice was the sin- could list now the number of members and gle thirstiest crop per hectare of land in Aus- senators who will go after him. It goes back tralia. The agricultural crop whose net water to my original point: they have no heroes. use is the greatest is cotton, due to the sheer They will never have any heroes because of size of the area that it covers. Australia is the the way they are inward looking. It is only us driest continent on earth. Very little of the in the Labor Party who have been able to rain that does fall finds its way to flowing provide heroes. As flawed as some of them rivers. Fifty-two per cent of the water con- may have been, at least we have our heroes. sumed in Australia is supplied by mains in- At least we can look back and say that these frastructure, with the remaining 48 per cent men and women made a contribution to our extracted directly from the environment. nation. The coalition cannot. They even take In Australia water use has increased by 65 apart their most recent leader, Malcolm per cent since the 1980s, with the greatest Fraser. He was almost shown the prime increase, according to the state of the envi- ministerial door. Senator McGauran did not ronment report, being in Queensland and even know who Sir John Gorton was, and New South Wales. Dams are still on the in- then you go back to the rest of them. We are crease, particularly in my home state of lucky that we can look to heroes in this Queensland. It seems that we are still at risk country. We are lucky that we have our own of repeating the mistakes of the past in this political heroes in the Labor movement. area. At present we are seeing the proposed They have none in the coalition or on the expansion of weirs and dams in areas such as conservative side. They have to look to peo- the Burnett and Fitzroy catchments. The re- ple overseas, like Ronald Reagan and Marga- cent approval by the Beattie government to ret Thatcher. build the Paradise Dam in the Burnett Environment: Water Management catchment, made on the first day of the offi- Australian Defence Industries: Proposed cial state election campaign, is a strong indi- Sale cation of the way Mr Beattie wants to take the state of Queensland when it comes to Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (7.10 water issues. p.m.)—I would like to speak tonight on an important environmental issue: water and The National Land and Water Resources water management. It is an issue that is be- Audit’s report, Australian water resources coming crucial, particularly in my home state assessment 2000, found that Queensland will of Queensland, as we try to avoid repeating have over three million hectares at high risk the mistakes of other states. My speaking on of dryland salinity problems by the year this issue is particularly appropriate because 2050. There is a lot of focus on the agricul- last Thursday, 22 March was World Water tural industry’s need for water at the expense Day. Despite Australia being the driest con- of the environment. To the Democrats, the tinent, Australians use more than one million ecological outcomes are crucial for the future litres of fresh water per person each year, of agriculture in this country. When we plan with agriculture accounting for 70 per cent of water allocations, the environmental flows this, households accounting for eight per cent need to be up there alongside the economic and electricity and gas accounting for six per needs in importance, not just put to the end cent. and to whatever is left over. Whilst we watch agriculture divert our Water resource plans must have the eco- rivers and streams to water-hungry crops, the logical needs of the water systems rigorously economic return per unit of water is rela- and scientifically determined and allocated, tively low. The Water account for Australia, and the economic needs have to fit in with released last year by the Australian Bureau this. Otherwise, we will simply have short- Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23135 term economics, with the long-term eco- experienced in these catchments. It is bizarre nomic cost far outweighing the short-term that the Queensland government is seeking gain. Of course, we are seeing that already federal funding to implement the national with salinity problems and other problems in action plan at the same time as implementing the Murray-Darling Basin and the enormous allocation and management regimes that risk cost that has to be incurred to fix up those further exacerbating the water quality and problems and make the land productive. It salinity problems in these regions. costs more in the long term to go down this track. It is particularly outrageous when you The Democrats certainly call on the fed- recognise that many of these activities, such eral government to ensure that taxpayers’ as the dam building activities of the Queen- money is not put to such negative and de- sland government, are subsidised by the tax- structive purposes, particularly under the payer. The taxpayer is spending money to pretext of an action plan to address salinity destroy the environment so that we can and water quality issues. Both the Paradise spend more money again in the future to try Dam and Nathan Dam are proposed to fa- to fix it up and address some of the economic cilitate the expansion of water intensive in- damage done to farmers who have to try to dustries. Despite Mr Beattie trying to portray work with degraded land. It is completely Queensland as the smart state—certainly that counterproductive and short-sighted. We potential is there—we are still running the know the damage that is caused by such ac- risk of making some very stupid decisions in tivities now, yet we still have governments this area. Clearly, there is already a problem wanting to go ahead and do them. of overallocation of use of water in the catchment areas in Queensland. A further Australia is at a stage in its agricultural expansion of dams and other infrastructure in life when it is time to say no to bad agricul- inappropriate locations will only make the tural expansion choices, to ensure that the problem worse. We do have the chance to broader agricultural industries can survive turn back before it is too late, before we run and prosper. We are a continent that does not into some of the degradation of other areas, have the luxury of abundant water supply and it is crucial that the Queensland govern- and we simply cannot continue to pretend ment recognises this and steps back from its that we do. It is a sustainable choice that we current course of action. have to make. There is a lot of focus on the Murray-Darling Basin because the problems I saw somewhere recently an astonishing are already there and they do desperately description of Mr Beattie as the greenest po- need addressing. But in Queensland we still litical leader in Australia—quite an extraor- have some time to address our water man- dinary description, given this direction in agement regimes to avoid the land degrada- relation to water issues and continuing dis- tion which has already been experienced graceful inaction in relation to land clearing lower in the Murray-Darling Basin. in Queensland, the worst in the country and amongst the worst in the world. On this issue Unfortunately, the Queensland govern- they are managing to run the two together in ment at this stage refuses to even agree to a some respects. The Queensland government cap on water extraction. The government is has already approved licensing for tree allowing for further water extraction that will clearing of over 3,000 hectares in the Burde- result in environmental flow targets not be- kin catchment to facilitate the development ing met, including in the aforementioned of intensive irrigated agriculture—in this Fitzroy and Burnett catchments. These case, cotton development. Clearing land is a catchments have also been identified as pri- big enough problem in itself. In conjunction ority targeted problem areas under the new with developing a water resource plan that national action plan for salinity and water will create further intensive use of water, it is quality. Plans to build additional major infra- hardly a clever approach. The Democrats structure, such as the Nathan Dam and the certainly call on the Queensland government Paradise Dam, will only intensify the current to step back from this path and on the federal salinity and water quality problems being government to ensure that there is not federal 23136 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 cooperation or assistance in such a destruc- shut recently with the loss of 36 jobs. The tive environmental approach at a time when headline in the Newcastle Herald on we are finally limping towards getting some 16 March read ‘Death of a town’. This is the coordinated action on addressing salinity and second major blow to the town of Gloucester water quality issues. in three years. In mid April, 36 jobs will go In the couple of minutes remaining to me I from the butter factory. Some workers will would like to return to a topic I raised last take redundancy packages, others will work night, a rally being held out at Penrith this at Hexham and others will retire. Workers Sunday from 1 p.m.—a public rally specifi- have seen a drop in production of 16 per cent cally aimed at trying to bring together the over the last few months and this has meant a community to send a clear message to the milk shortage in the area, which has meant federal government to keep the former Aus- that the Gloucester factory is about to close. tralian Defence Industries site at St Marys in Just three years ago the town faced another public ownership. The state government has major blow when Boral timbers closed rezoned this site for development, which down, cutting 31 jobs. The payroll for Boral frees the federal government and Lend Lease into the town of Gloucester was $90,000 to create Australia’s largest ever subdivision every month, and that disappeared. Three on one of the last remnants of Cumberland years later, there is a simular sort of number Plain woodland. Enormous numbers of being put out of work from the Dairy Farm- wildlife inhabit this site and there are im- ers factory. portant areas of endangered ecosystems that The effect that this sort of thing has on ru- will be under threat. It is an indictment of ral towns is quite massive: it affects local both the state Labor New South Wales gov- schools, it affects shops and it affects small ernment and the federal government that this businesses, who all feel the strain of a major clearly preventable action is being allowed to industry in that town shutting down. For too go ahead. Public lands in Defence ownership long now, towns like Gloucester have had to have been systematically developed to bear the brunt of New South Wales govern- maximise profit with no regard to commu- ment industry policies. For example, in 1998, nity opinion, with the department presuming the timber industry reforms introduced by the highest value use for it without any seri- the Carr Labor government in New South ous evaluation of the environmental, social Wales—as they bowed to green pressure, and other economic opportunities and impli- particularly from city interests—had meant cations of how it will be used. that 31 jobs were lost in the timber industry Both the state and federal governments are in a feelgood exercise to preserve so-called flouting their own environmental legislation old-growth forests and make timber practices by sacrificing hundreds of hectares of some more efficient. Three years later, the New of this last remaining threatened woodland to South Wales government again voted for allow for up to 8,000 homes in the area, in- dairy deregulation. This meant the introduc- cluding homes and shops in a 178-hectare tion of more competition to the industry as a part in the north-west sector. It will mean a result of lower dairy prices. significant environmental impact that should The dairy industry in the Hunter is hurt- not be allowed to occur, and certainly I en- ing. Unfortunately, the Carr ALP government courage everybody to get along who is in the is sitting on its hands in terms of doing any- region to lend their support at that campaign thing about this for the workers who have at the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Cen- lost their jobs. The state government ignored tre in Penrith at 1 p.m. this Sunday. the Dairy Farmers announcement that 36 Gloucester, New South Wales: Job Losses jobs were to go from Gloucester. In fact, the Senator TIERNEY (New South Wales) only response we have seen from the state (7.20 p.m.)—I rise tonight as a senator based government is from Minister Richard Amery, in the Hunter Valley to speak on a matter that who made no comment when it came to the directly affects the towns of the Hunter Val- closure of the factory of Dairy Farmers in ley, particularly the town of Gloucester, Gloucester. In fact, the state government has where a Dairy Farmers butter factory has just been sitting on its hands for some time now Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23137 on dairy deregulation, having voted yes to it est hit by the industry deregulation. With this last year. As a matter of fact, the Western in mind, the federal minister’s office has Australian government has put forward a made the area a priority in terms of federal dairy assistance package, and that was done government assistance. under the former Liberal Premier Richard The Chamber of Commerce is also look- Court. New South Wales has offered nothing. ing to a range of employment opportunities Dairy farmers in the area are angered by the in the town. During a meeting with the group lack of support from the state government. last week, they highlighted a number of areas Now, in their time of need, the state govern- where funding assistance could be brought to ment is nowhere to be seen. the town. One idea applied to the federal After hearing about the impending clo- government funding was the employment of sure, I travelled to Gloucester with the Lib- 36 workers on council roadworks and main- eral candidate and former member for tenance projects to repair flood damaged Paterson Bob Baldwin. We met with the bridges for a period of six months. As a Gloucester Shire Council, the Chamber of stopgap measure such things—while people Commerce, Dairy Farmers management and find a new form of employment and get the workers at the factory. The Mayor of themselves on their feet again—are quite Gloucester, Barry Ryan, likened the shut- useful. down of the factory to the closure of BHP in A more sustainable idea is the Gloucester Newcastle a few years ago. In terms of scale, snow festival in July. This occurs every year both things are comparable. The council and could do with some additional financial were optimistic—and this was one of the support to make this a centrepiece of tourism heartening things that came out of our visit— in Gloucester. The Gloucester area is very that the town could survive this latest blow. well known for its bushwalking and, of They are developing projects and applica- course, it is quite close to the very beautiful tions for assistance under the Howard gov- Barrington Tops, the second highest peak in ernment’s dairy RAP or dairy assistance Australia. It can, through the Snowfest, gen- package. erate greater levels of economic develop- Representatives from the federal govern- ment. Last year, the attraction to the town ment’s department of agriculture are travel- was over 8,000 people, so it was an event ling to Gloucester today to discuss assistance that doubled Gloucester’s population for the projects to stimulate employment with or- weekend. One of the biggest expenses in this ganisations such as the council. Bob Horne, exercise is trucking snow from Barrington the member for Paterson, has called for a Tops to the town. With that and other aspects fund like the Hunter Advantage Fund, which of the tourism of Snowfest, they certainly we set up for Newcastle post BHP. But that need assistance. We have been encouraging is not necessary. He obviously has not them to put in submissions in that regard. looked at what the federal government is It is very similar to a town that I have also already offering under the dairy RAP. I was seen thrive with a particular type of industry pleased to be able to tell the Gloucester Shire that suits the area: Tamworth, with the Council that Minister Truss is keen to help Country Music Festival. The festival cer- the hardest hit towns under dairy deregula- tainly more than doubles its population for tion. almost a month in January. They got federal Under the dairy assistance program, there assistance in their case to establish the festi- are grants of up to $500,000 available on val hall—the entertainment centre—which projects. This includes projects of existing has given such a great boost to country mu- businesses or one-off projects. Across Aus- sic in Tamworth. We hope that Snowfest, tralia, this is a $45 million funding package. near Barrington Tops in Gloucester, will take It is available to communities who have been on for the winter a very similar sort of harshly affected by dairy deregulation. Ac- theme. cording to the ABARE report, Gloucester Gloucester Council has come up with a and Dungog, which are both in the Hunter range of projects which will be presented to Valley, are two districts that have been hard- the departmental reps from the federal de- 23138 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 partment of agriculture who will be travel- ACTU president Ms Jennie George, and Pen- ling to Gloucester tomorrow night and rith mayor and ex-staffer of Labor Senator speaking to the business community there. Steve Hutchins, Mr David Bradbury. When we were at the Dairy Farmers factory Bent on their own wisdom, the major ALP we had discussions with a number of the players in New South Wales did away with workers who had their own ideas on how any semblance of grassroots democracy by they would move on to new forms of em- denying their rank and file members true ployment. choice in deciding who should represent One of the workers there is already run- them at the next federal election. So far, the ning a herb farm. He does this on a small Labor Party executive has suspended rank scale at the moment. He is quite successful and file preselections and imposed its own with it. He cannot produce enough. We im- chosen candidates in the Sydney-Illawarra port $300 million worth of herb products into seats of Werriwa, where the beneficiary is this country every year, and they cannot get sitting member Mr Mark Latham; in enough of his product. He even outsources Throsby, where the candidate is Ms Jennie the growing of parsley to people in the town. George; in Fowler, where the beneficiary is He could increase his production tenfold. sitting member Ms Julia Irwin; in Lindsay, There is one thing he said he needs. There is where the anointed candidate is Mr David a lot of grass on his property and he hand Bradbury; and in the North Coast seat of mows that. If he just had enough money to Cowper, where Ms Jenny Bonfield got the buy a ride-on mower, he would be able to nod, even though she had not been a member expand his herb production. Those sorts of of the party for the required 12 months, and businesses—that have great opportunities for her selection is now the subject of an appeal. expanding their own business and creating In respect of Throsby and Lindsay, the new ones—are what we could be interested national executive stepped in for both Ms in, and we have invited him to put in a sub- George and Mr Bradbury to ensure that rank mission. and file preselection candidates would not Some of the workers want to start other oust two of Labor’s party powerbrokers. Ms businesses in the town. We feel that the dairy George defeated her rival, Ms Sharon Bird, RAP can give those businesses in towns like only with the intervention of the national Gloucester new hope. The federal govern- ALP executive. Ms Bird stood in protest at ment, through this program of regional as- this intervention and suffered an inevitable sistance, is really looking at the economic defeat in the ensuing preselection. This says difficulties created for small towns by rapid a great deal about the calibre of these candi- economic change. We are there to assist dates, that they could not even muster the them. We wish them well in the future and support to go toe to toe with grassroots local we will be keeping an eye on what happens candidates unaided by party heavyweights. with their new phase of economic develop- Ms Bird in Throsby and firefighter cum law- ment. This federal government is there to yer Mr Jeff Collins in the electorate of Lind- assist. say are both candidates who had the support Federal Election: Labor Party of the rank and file Labor members in their Preselections electorates. No doubt local ALP members Senator COONAN (New South Wales) thought that their interests and those of the (7.30 p.m.)—It is an interesting but not en- electorate would be best served by having a tirely surprising development that, as we local candidate familiar with the electorate inch closer to the federal election, the true and its constituents to represent them. colours of the Labor Party continue to shine The lengths to which the Labor Party ex- through. Last week saw the New South ecutive would go to protect Mr Bradbury— Wales Labor Party hierarchy ignore the the party’s prodigal son—are astounding. As wishes of their rank and file members to en- a final blow, the ALP branch boundaries in sure the preselection of several party hacks Lindsay were changed so Mr Collins would into key federal seats. Somewhat predictably, not have a snowflake’s hope in hell of win- they included ex-union heavyweight, former ning. Labor must be really worried about Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23139 their chances of winning against the demo- lians would be trampled under the feet of the cratically selected, local and outstanding elite—those with connections or relatives in Lindsay Liberal MP, Miss Jackie Kelly. Mr the Labor hierarchy or noisy special interest Collins has since—not unexpectedly— groups. If the party cannot even listen to and lodged a protest, although he has said he heed the concerns of their rank and file does not expect it to get very far. Long members in their preselections across New before the preselection, Mr Collins predicted South Wales, how will they ever listen to the senior members of the New South Wales voting public? The Australian public could ALP would ‘conspire against his expect nothing less than arrogant rule under candidature’. He called Mr Bradbury a a Labor government—forget about the ‘blow-in’ and pointed the finger at Mr wishes of the people. Bradbury’s now former employer, Senator Against the background of his own prese- Hutchins, as the person who had orchestrated lection, it is diverting to learn that Mr Brad- the heavy-handed campaign. Mr Collins bury accused the Howard government of accused Senator Hutchins of effectively being ‘out of touch’ with the needs of the ‘forcing’ the New South Wales ALP to hold people. Few actions can be more profoundly off calling a rank and file preselection for the out of touch with the needs of people than to benefit of his protege. Mr Bradbury must be deny them their democratic right to partici- thanking his lucky stars he has such powerful pate in a vote for whom they want to repre- friends. He has gone pretty far without ever sent them. But can we really expect much having to subject himself to a vote from his out of a blow-in Labor candidate in Lindsay party’s rank and file for preselection in the like Mr Bradbury, or Ms George in Throsby, federal seat of Lindsay. when the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Kim The recent Lindsay preselection smacks a Beazley, appears incapable of independent little of the much reported preselection con- thought or policy formulation? test in Robertson, and Ms Belinda Neal’s Earlier this week, we were given a great attempt to overcome the resistance of local insight into the policy formulation strategy rank and file Labor members. In typical La- of the Labor Party: pinch it from someone bor Party style, it seemed to be assumed that else. I suppose we should be grateful that the family connection or party patronage would opposition have even managed to come up be sufficient to overcome the wishes of the with a policy—albeit a hot one flogged from local rank and file. While Labor’s bluster the Australian Banking Association—let about petrol prices, the GST and their inco- alone a costing. Mr Beazley put it best, I herent roll-back plan is well recognised but think, when on ABC radio last week his in- are transparent attempts to inflate public creasing frustration about claims that Labor concern with misinformation and to hide the have no policies led to this gaffe: fact that they are a policy lazy and oppor- ...I am getting heartily sick of the accusations tunistic opposition, it seems now they are being developed against us that we have no policy hell-bent on applying the same illogic to when, at the same time, people are saying how their internal party affairs. can you afford your policies. If you don’t have Labor’s move to suspend rank and file any policies, the issue of how you can afford preselections and impose outsiders on un- them doesn’t come up. willing locals does not bode well for Austra- While I think we can all agree the devil is lia should the opposition fluke their way into certainly in the detail, without concrete poli- government at the next election. Perhaps the cies it is unlikely that costing them will ever internal politics of the Labor Party that were become an issue for the Labor Party. displayed last week should be the true litmus The ineptitude and policy laziness of this test of how Labor would perform if they had opposition was clearly exposed on Monday the chance to govern the country. The Aus- in the scramble to upstage the ABA and re- tralian people should take heed. Events of lease an uncannily similar policy on banking. late have shown the Labor Party would never In contrast, this government has been work- listen to the Australian people if elected to ing for some time now alongside the banks government. The rights of ordinary Austra- to deliver low cost services, particularly to 23140 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001 pensioners. The results of those discussions ment. The only element of Labor’s banking partly formed the ABA briefing which was policy which did not have its origins in the delivered into the hands of the Labor Party ABA’s platform was a proposal to reopen last Friday. The Labor Party then promptly banks which had been previously closed. In turned around and made it their own during the last three years of Labor government, Monday’s announcement. 500 bank branches were closed without a This is the clearest indication yet of the protest, a bleat or a squeak out of the then extent to which the Labor Party will go to government. If you wanted to reopen them, disguise the fact that they are bereft of ideas the estimated cost would be $250 million to and incapable of sustained policy develop- $300 million per year. The first costing we have had for an appropriated Labor Party To be fair, the Labor Party do excel in policy puts aside a mere $20 million for the some areas. As long as it involves playing reopening of closed banks. As the Treasurer, catch-up on policy, manipulating hapless Mr Peter Costello, said this morning, that local ALP members or parachuting in a cho- would not even open one in 10 branches that sen interloper, they have proven their worth. were closed in the last three years of Labor The Australian people, however, deserve government. better. Senate adjourned at 7.40 p.m. Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23141

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE The following answers to questions were circulated: Civil Aviation Safety Authority: Staff (Question No. 2537) Senator O’Brien asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 29 June 2000: With reference to the Minister’s announcement, reported in the Australian on 23 June 2000, that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority is to receive 20 additional staff for surveillance and enforcement activi- ties: (1) Will the people filling these new positions be engaged on a full time basis. (2) When will the positions be advertised. (3) How many of the positions will be located in the following divisions: (a)Aviation Safety Stan- dards; (b)Aviation Safety Compliance; (c)Aviation Safety Promotion; and (d)Regulatory Services. (4) What are the job specifications for each of the positions, and in each case, what are the position numbers. Senator Ian Macdonald—The Minister for Transport and Regional Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has provided the following advice: (1) The new positions will be held on a full-time basis. (2) All of the positions have been advertised. However, position numbers 1727, 1731 and 1721 (see below) are currently in the process of being re-advertised. (3) The Article in The Australian on 23 June 2000, stated that CASA was “expected to gain about 20 extra Compliance staff……”. All the positions will be located in the Aviation Safety Compliance Division. However, when the final organisational charts were determined the end figure for this Division became 17 staff. The new staff will be located as follows: Darwin office, 5 positions International Surveillance Unit, 5 positions Melbourne Airline office, 2 positions Sydney Airline Office , 2 positions Technical staff to support Airline Offices, 3 positions (4) As at 12 February 2001, the position numbers and job specifications for each of the 17 positions are as follows: Position Number (PN)1679 – Manager – Northern Territory and Kimberley Area Office – Suc- cessful applicant commenced; PN 1729 – Administrative Services Office Grade 3 - Northern Territory and Kimberley Area Of- fice – Interviews held for position; PN 1730 - Administrative Services Office Grade 6 - Northern Territory and Kimberley Area Of- fice - Successful applicant to commence 23 February 2001; PN 1734 – Flying Operations Inspector Level 1 - Northern Territory and Kimberley Area Office – Advertised January 2001; PN 1735 – Airworthiness Officer Grade B – Northern Territory and Kimberley Area Office – Suc- cessful applicant commenced; PN 1725 – Manager – International Surveillance Unit – Advertised January 2001; PN 1734 – Flying Operations Inspector Level 1 - International Surveillance Unit – Successful ap- plicant commenced; PN 1723 – Senior Officer Grade B - International Surveillance Unit – Successful applicant com- menced; 23142 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001

PN 1727- Airworthiness Officer Grade B– International Surveillance Unit -Successful applicant declined position, position to be re-advertised; PN 1728 – Administrative Services Office Grade 5 - International Surveillance Unit – Position being short listed; PN 1733 – Flying Operations Inspector Level 3 –Melbourne Airline Office – Successful applicant commenced; PN 1615 – Airworthiness Officer Grade B –Melbourne Airline Office – Successful applicant commenced; PN 1731 – Flying Operations Inspector Level 3 – Sydney Airline Office – Preferred applicant ac- cepted an alternate position, position re-advertised February 2001; PN 1532 – Airworthiness Officer Grade B – Sydney Airline Office – offer made to successful ap- plicant; PN 1719 – Airworthiness Officer Grade B –Engineering – Successful applicant commenced; PN 1720 – Airworthiness Officer Grade B –Engineering – Successful applicant negotiating start date; PN 1721 – Airworthiness Officer Grade B –Engineering – Position re-advertised February 2001. Transport and Regional Services Portfolio: Legal Advice (Question No. 3367) Senator Robert Ray asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Re- gional Services, upon notice, on 29 January 2001: (1) What has been the total cost to the department in the 1999-2000 financial year of legal advice obtained from the Attorney-General’s Department. (2) What has been the total cost to the department in the 1999-2000 financial year of legal advice obtained by the department from other sources. Senator Ian Macdonald—The Minister for Transport and Regional Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) and (2) In responding to the question the phrase “total cost” has been taken to include legal related disburse- ments, as well as professional fees. The phrase “legal advice” has been taken to include all legal related services, including court appearances. The total cost to the department in the 1999-2000 financial year of legal advice obtained from the At- torney-General’s Department was $15,338.00. The total cost to the department in the 1999-2000 financial year of legal advice obtained from other sources was $1,866,289.43. This includes advice obtained from the Australian Government Solicitor which cost $1,563,565.91. The total does not include the cost of legal advice provided to the Department by the Department’s own legally qualified employees. Defence Portfolio: Value of Market Research (Question No. 3390) Senator Robert Ray asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon no- tice, on 29 January 2001: (1) What was the total value of market research sought by the department and any agencies of the department for the 1999-2000 financial year. (2) What was the purpose of each contract let. (3) In each instance: (a) how many firms were invited to submit proposals; and (b) how many tender proposals were received. (4) In each instance, which firm was selected to conduct the research. (5) In each instance: (a) what was the estimated or contract price of the research work; and (b) what was the actual amount expended by the department or any agency of the department. Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23143

Senator Minchin—The Minister for Defence has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) The Department of Defence spent $703,530 on market research in the 1999-2000 financial year.

(3)(a) Number of Firms invited to Tender (3)(b) Number of (5)(a) Estimated or [Done Prior to FY 99- Tender Proposals (4) Firm Selected to Contract Price of (5)(b) Actual (2) Purpose of Contract 00] Received Conduct Research Research Amount Paid Review of external communica- Open Tender 5 Buchan Communications $130,000 $120,000 tions. Group Defence White Paper communi- Open Tender 1 Buchan Communications $80,000 $80,000 cation strategy. Group Community attitudes towards Open Tender 1 Market Attitude Research $60,000 $45,000 Defence and Defence Industry Services related issues. Evaluation of communication Open Tender 1 Market Attitude Research $3,800 $3,800 impact of Defence exhibition at Services 2000 Royal Easter Show, Syd- ney. Army General Entry Non- Restricted Tender 1 Advertising Development $34,480 $34,480 Technical television commer- Solutions cial study Lifestyle advertising study. Restricted Tender 1 Advertising Development $34,480 $34,480 Solutions Navy General Entry television Restricted Tender 1 Advertising Development $34,480 $34,480 commercial study. Solutions

ADF lifestyle research study – Restricted Tender 1 Advertising Development $26,860 $26,860 round one. Solutions ADF lifestyle research study – Restricted Tender 1 Advertising Development $8,950 $8,950 round two. Solutions ADF lifestyle research study – Restricted Tender 1 Advertising Development $8,950 $8,950 round three. Solutions Navy television commercial Restricted Tender 1 Advertising Development $17,600 $17,600 research study. Solutions ADF aircrew television commer- Restricted Tender 1 Advertising Development $19,400 $19,400 cial study. Solutions ADFA television commercial Restricted Tender 1 Advertising Development $8,950 $8,950 study. Solutions ADF tri-Service television com- Restricted Tender 1 Advertising Development $8,700 $8,700 mercial study. Solutions Royal Military College research Restricted Tender 1 New Focus Research Pty $60,833 $60,833 study. Ltd RAAF Ground Defence Reserve Restricted Tender 1 New Focus Research Pty $16,834 $16,834 Group study. Ltd Defence tracking study. Restricted Tender 1 New Focus Research Pty $15,264 $15,264 Ltd Project Opera analysis. Restricted Tender 1 New Focus Research Pty $2,500 $2,500 Ltd Impact of the East Timor opera- Restricted Tender 1 New Focus Research Pty $103,215 $42,213 tion on business in the Northern Ltd Territory. Maintenance of a communica- Restricted Tender 1 PricewaterhouseCoopers $114,236 $114,236 tions and change management strategy for business process re- engineering. $789,532 $703,530 23144 SENATE Tuesday, 27 March 2001

Note: (3) All of these contracts sought and/or let in 1999-200, other than the first one, were “single source” contracts, chosen on the basis of earlier public tenders (open or restricted) during the period prior to FY 1999-2000 and from which these contractors had been chosen as long-term Professional Service Providers’ to the Department of Defence. Indonesian Military Personnel: Training (Question No. 3428) Senator Bourne asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 19 February 2001 With reference to the training of Indonesian military personnel by Australia: (1) Can the Minister confirm whether junior personnel from the Indonesian military are going to be, or have been, trained by Australia in defence management as reported in the Asia-Pacific Defence Reporter, August/September 2000; if so, where and when will this training take place. (2) What will be the course content of this defence training management. (3) Will human rights training be part of the management course. (4) Does the Government have any intention of ceasing such military cooperation given evidence of the TNI (Indonesian armed forces) being involved in unrest in areas such as Ambon, Aceh and West Papua. Senator Minchin—The Minister for Defence has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) Two junior TNI officers participated in the Defence Management Seminar (DMS), which was conducted in October 2000. Indonesia is asked to provide three nominees for each iteration of the DMS. Three TNI officers also participated in the February 2001 iteration of the DMS. (2) The Seminar is a biannual event usually held each year in February and October. Approximately 30 participants from ASEAN, Pacific nations and Australia attend a two-week program of lectures and workshops in Canberra. Sponsored by the International Policy Division’s Defence Cooperation Program, the DMS has been conducted twice a year since 1992, and approximately four hundred personnel around the Major, Lieu- tenant Colonel/Colonel (equivalent) level have attended. Thailand, Singapore, Indonesia, New Zealand, Tonga, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Malaysia, and recently Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos send participants who join colleagues from Australia. Directed by Professor Charles Newton from the Aus- tralian Defence Force Academy, the seminar revolves around the development and delivery of defence capability/project management. The DMS allows participants to build networks which facilitate cooperation in future years, and many genuine friendships have been formed. It also gives them insight into the way Australia manages de- fence processes and outcomes, particularly following the economic downturn in our region, and the recent success of coalition forces in security roles such as East Timor. The presentations by senior departmental officers, participation by Australian Defence organisation personnel, and discussions on relationships between Australia and neighbouring countries demonstrate to our visitors the value we place on their attendance. (3) No. (4) No. The bilateral defence cooperation program with Indonesia has at no point in time ceased to exist. We have continued to focus on providing training to the TNI in areas including education, health and safety and non-combat related fields. Transport Safety: Seat Belts on School Buses (Question No. 3434) Senator Brown asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 23 February 2001: Following the tragic bus accident at Cradle Mountain, Tasmania, on 18 February 2001, in which four people were killed, and recognising the value of the youngest members of our community who travel in Tuesday, 27 March 2001 SENATE 23145 buses daily, will the Minister support the installation of seatbelts in school buses; if so, what action will the Minister take to ensure that seat belts are installed in school buses Australia-wide. Senator Ian Macdonald—The Minister for Transport and Regional Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: A comprehensive review of school bus safety issues has been conducted by Austroads (the association of Australasian road and safety agencies) at the request of the Australian Transport Council (ATC). Austroads was requested to: - review current practice and research in relation to school bus safety; and - identify new or proven safety measures that may be used as part of a national approach to school bus safety. The Austroads report is expected to address a wide range of issues including the installation of seat belts. It is scheduled for consideration by Federal, State and Territory Transport Ministers at the next ATC meeting, on 25 May 2001. Without pre-empting the findings of the Austroads review or the response of Transport Ministers, I can provide some background facts and comment that are relevant to the Senator’s question: - Bus and coach travel in Australia has an extremely good safety record. In terms of fatalities and serious injuries per distance travelled, it is about ten times safer to travel in a bus than in a car. Even without a seat belt, a bus passenger is generally safer than a belted car occupant. This is not only because bus drivers have a lower rate of crash involvement than car drivers, but also because the size and mass of a bus substantially reduce the injury risk to passengers in the event of a crash. - For school children travelling by bus, the major safety issue by far is the risk of being hit by a car after alighting from the bus and attempting to cross the road. - Despite the relative safety of bus and coach travel, Federal Governments have taken steps to make this mode of transport even safer. For example, the Australian Design Rules for new vehicles were amended to require all new long distance coaches to be fitted with seat belts, as well as im- proved floor structures, emergency exits and rollover protection. Separate legislation was also in- troduced to mandate seatbelts for smaller buses from January 2000. - For vehicles already in service, the responsibility for setting standards lies with State and Territory Governments. However, a few years ago the Federal Government did investigate the scope for fitting seat belts to existing buses and coaches. The study concluded that retro-fitting would not be feasible for many older vehicles because of the major structural changes that would need to be made. Even for newer vehicles modification would not be a simple option and would be very costly. - If Governments mandated seatbelts for existing buses it could lead to a significant increase in the cost of bus transport, and a reduction in the number of available buses. This might have the unde- sirable effect of driving many passengers away from bus travel to less safe alternatives, such as private cars. - Subsidising the retro-fitting of in-service vehicles, or their replacement with new buses, could be a poor use of public funds compared to alternative road safety investments such as black spot treat- ments.