PROOF ISSN 1322-0330

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Hansard Home Page: http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/hansard/ E-mail: [email protected] Phone: (07) 3406 7314 Fax: (07) 3210 0182

Subject FIRST SESSION OF THE FIFTY-THIRD PARLIAMENT Page Wednesday, 15 June 2011

SPEAKER’S STATEMENTS ...... 1809 Appropriation Bills, Rule of Anticipation ...... 1809 Appropriation Bills, Incorporation of Speeches ...... 1809 SPEAKER’S RULING ...... 1809 Alleged Intimidation of a Member ...... 1809 MOTION OF CONDOLENCE ...... 1810 Eaton, Mr AG ...... 1810 PETITIONS ...... 1815 TABLED PAPERS ...... 1815 MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS ...... 1815 Budget, Community Ambulance Cover Levy ...... 1815 Budget, Tourism Industry ...... 1816 Budget, Construction Industry ...... 1816 Budget, Regional Queensland ...... 1817 State of Origin ...... 1817 Civil Court Fees; Real Estate Industry, Commissions ...... 1817 Budget ...... 1818 Business Commissioner ...... 1819 Food for a Growing Economy ...... 1820 Tabled paper: Queensland Government: Draft policy framework for public consultation titled ‘Food for a growing economy, an economic development framework for the Queensland food industry’...... 1820 Transport and Roads Investment Program ...... 1820 Tabled paper: Queensland Transport and Roads Investment Program—2011-12 to 2014-15...... 1820 Tabled paper: Queensland Transport and Roads Investment Program—2011-12 to 2014-15: Addendum titled ‘The Roads Alliance’...... 1820 Transport and Roads Investment Program ...... 1820 Budget, Cost of Living ...... 1821 Budget, Mental Health Services ...... 1821 Solar Hot Water Rebate ...... 1822

J MICKEL N J LAURIE L J OSMOND SPEAKER CLERK OF THE PARLIAMENT CHIEF HANSARD REPORTER Table of Contents — Wednesday, 15 June 2011

Budget, Police Resources ...... 1822 Budget, Tourism Industry ...... 1823 Budget, Environmental Protection ...... 1823 Skilling Queenslanders for Work ...... 1824 Budget, Construction Industry ...... 1824 Budget, Stephanie Alexander Kitchen Garden Program ...... 1825 NOTICES OF MOTION ...... 1825 Carbon Tax ...... 1825 Mineral Exploration ...... 1825 Tabled paper: Client Information Brief by Queensland Parliamentary Library, dated 19 May 2011, relating to rights of rural landholders in their dealings with resource companies...... 1826 SPEAKER’S STATEMENT ...... 1826 Visitors to Public Gallery ...... 1826 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ...... 1826 Budget, Stamp Duty ...... 1826 Budget, Electricity Prices ...... 1827 Business Investment ...... 1827 Budget, Electricity Prices ...... 1828 Budget, Regional Queensland ...... 1829 Budget, Queensland Health Payroll System ...... 1829 Construction Industry ...... 1830 Gateway Bridge ...... 1831 Budget, Construction Industry ...... 1831 Budget, Ministerial Accountability ...... 1832 Budget, Cost of Living ...... 1833 Strategic Cropping Land Policy ...... 1833 Budget, Tourism Industry ...... 1834 Nambour Hospital ...... 1834 Small Business ...... 1835 Maryborough Base Hospital, Renal Unit ...... 1835 Budget, Education Reform ...... 1836 Budget, Mackay Showgrounds ...... 1836 PRIVATE MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS ...... 1837 Bligh Labor Government, Budget ...... 1837 World Elder Abuse Awareness Day ...... 1837 Law and Order ...... 1837 Tabled paper: Terms of Reference—Sentencing Advisory Council...... 1838 Special Olympics World Summer Games ...... 1838 Live Cattle Trade ...... 1838 Former Refugees, Employment ...... 1839 Minister for Energy and Water Utilities, Documents ...... 1839 Tabled paper: Copy of a Department of Environment and Resource Management ministerial briefing note, dated 10 June 2009, ‘Resumption by Gold Coast City Council—LAB 12012’...... 1839 Tabled paper: Copy of page 1 of a letter, dated 18 January 2010, from Mr Peter Lehmann to Hon. Stephen Robertson MP...... 1839 Tabled paper: Copy of page 1 of a letter, dated 20 April 2010, from Hon. Stephen Robertson MP to Mr Peter Lehmann...... 1839 Tabled paper: Copy of a letter, dated 28 April 2010, from Mr Peter Lehmann to Hon. Stephen Robertson MP. ...1839 Tabled paper: Copy of a letter, dated 10 June 2010, from Hon. Stephen Robertson MP to Mr Peter Lehmann....1839 Skilling Queenslanders for Work ...... 1840 Budget, Mental Health Services ...... 1840 Leeding, Mr D ...... 1840 National Broadband Network ...... 1841 Tabled paper: Copy of document titled ‘2011 Platform’, 48th State Conference of the Queensland Branch of the Australian Labor Party’, 18-19 June 2011...... 1841 Queensland Reconciliation Awards ...... 1841 Lamington Bridge ...... 1842 TransLink, Train Timetables ...... 1842 Live Cattle Trade ...... 1843 ELECTRICITY PRICE REFORM AMENDMENT BILL ...... 1843 First Reading ...... 1843 Tabled paper: Electricity Price Reform Amendment Bill...... 1843 Tabled paper: Electricity Price Reform Amendment Bill, explanatory notes...... 1843 Second Reading ...... 1843 Table of Contents — Wednesday, 15 June 2011

FAIRER WATER PRICES FOR SEQ AMENDMENT BILL ...... 1845 Second Reading ...... 1845 Tabled paper: Copy of a letter, dated 2 January 2008, from the Premier of Queensland, Hon. Anna Bligh MP, to the Chair, Council of Mayors South East Queensland, Councillor Campbell Newman, regarding reform of the urban water supply industry...... 1867 Tabled paper: Brochure by Ray Smith, Lord Mayoral candidate, titled ‘$100 Water Rebate’...... 1874 MOTION ...... 1876 Carbon Tax ...... 1876 Division: Question put—That the amendment be agreed to...... 1885 Resolved in the affirmative...... 1885 Division: Question put—That the motion, as amended, be agreed to...... 1885 Resolved in the affirmative...... 1885 MOTION ...... 1886 Order of Business ...... 1886 DAYLIGHT SAVING FOR SOUTH EAST QUEENSLAND REFERENDUM BILL ...... 1886 Second Reading ...... 1886 Tabled paper: Correspondence, dated 7 March 2011, from Dr Allan Clarke to Mr Peter Wellington MP, in relation to daylight saving...... 1893 Resolved in the negative...... 1894 ADJOURNMENT ...... 1894 Caloundra Coast Guard ...... 1894 Live Cattle Trade ...... 1895 Live Cattle Trade ...... 1896 Organ and Tissue Donation ...... 1896 Coolum Police Station ...... 1897 Funeral Industry ...... 1897 Solar Hot Water Rebate Scheme; Mary Valley ...... 1898 Webb, Mr D ...... 1898 Leeding, Mr D ...... 1899 Tabled paper: Letter from Blake Carey to Parliament House in relation to the late Detective Senior Constable Damian Leeding...... 1899 Brisbane Pride; Brisbane Carnivale; Windsor Bowls Club ...... 1900 ATTENDANCE ...... 1900 15 Jun 2011 Legislative Assembly 1809 WEDNESDAY, 15 JUNE 2011

Legislative Assembly The Legislative Assembly met at 9.30 am. Mr Speaker (Hon. John Mickel, Logan) read prayers and took the chair.

SPEAKER’S STATEMENTS

Appropriation Bills, Rule of Anticipation Mr SPEAKER: I remind all honourable members that standing order 231, which deals with the rule of anticipation, was amended on 28 October 2009 so as to ensure that the rule no longer applies in respect of the debate on appropriation bills. I consider that the spirit of this amendment should also apply to other budget related bills introduced with the annual appropriation bills. Accordingly, members are at liberty to make statements or ask questions that touch upon the appropriation bills and the Community Ambulance Cover Levy Repeal and Revenue and Other Legislation Amendment Bill. Appropriation Bills, Incorporation of Speeches Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members, in accordance with the previous practice, I advise that for debate on the appropriation bills, which will commence on Thursday, members may incorporate a portion of their speech in the second reading debate. If you are incorporating, the following rules must be followed. The member’s total speech must not exceed that which would normally be allowed in a 20- minute speech, so no speech can exceed 3,500 words. No speech should contain a graph, a chart or other material. Members must provide Hansard with their speech in electronic form prior to rising to give their speech—and I stress that is only if you are incorporating. All speeches must be shown to me as Speaker or to the panel of deputy speakers prior to leave being sought for incorporation. Speeches intended to be incorporated should not offend standing orders in any way, such as by containing personal reflections.

SPEAKER’S RULING

Alleged Intimidation of a Member Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have ordered that a ruling regarding a complaint by the honourable member for Burnett be circulated. I have decided not to refer the matter to the Integrity, Ethics and Parliamentary Privileges Committee. I seek leave to have the statement incorporated in the parliamentary record. Leave granted. Honourable members On 17 May 2011, I received correspondence from the Member for Burnett relating to an allegation of intimidation by a law firm. The Member alleges that correspondence from the law firm is an attempt to improperly influence and intimidate him in discharging his duties as a Member of Parliament and is a contempt of Parliament. On 13 April 2011, the Member for Burnett received a letter from Anne Murray & Co Solicitors, acting on behalf of Mr Deryk Smith. Mr Smith’s solicitor suggests that if the words used by the Member for Burnett in his speech on the Environmental Protection and Other Acts Amendment Bill 2009, on 22 March 2011, had been used outside the protection of parliament, they would have been actionable for damages. The letter suggests that Mr Smith deserves an unqualified apology from the Member for Burnett which, similarly to his speech, should be published in parliament. The Definition of contempt Section 37 of the Parliament of Queensland Act 2001 (Qld) defines contempt as— Meaning of contempt of the Assembly (1) Contempt of the Assembly means a breach or disobedience of the powers, rights or immunities, or a contempt, of the Assembly or its members or committees. (2) Conduct, including words, is not contempt of the Assembly unless it amounts, or is intended or likely to amount, to an improper interference with— (a) the free exercise by the Assembly or a committee of its authority or functions; or (b) the free performance by a member of the member’s duties as a member. The Member for Burnett alleges that the firm’s correspondence to him constitutes a contempt of Parliament stating inter alia— ‘I believe the contents of the letter is an attempt to improperly influence and intimidate me in discharging my duty as a Member of Parliament and therefore a contempt of Parliament.’ 1810 Motion of Condolence 15 Jun 2011

Nature of contempt of intimidation of a member To attempt to intimidate a member in his or her parliamentary conduct by threats has been held by the United Kingdom House of Commons to be a contempt. (Erskine May, Parliamentary Practice, 23rd edition, 2004, p.146). Further, sending a threat to a member because of the member’s performance of his or her parliamentary duties is also a contempt. (Section 32 (2), example 3, the Parliament of Queensland Act 2001 (Qld)). The Standing Orders provide an example of contempt as being, inter alia, sending to a member a threatening letter on account of the member’s conduct in the House or a committee. (Standing Order 266 (20)). In 1993, the former Select Committee on Privileges of the Queensland Parliament noted in its report on the alleged intimidation of a member that— “‘It is important to note that merely attempting to intimidate or threaten is of itself not necessarily a breach of privilege. The alleged threat or attempted intimidation are a contempt only if they constitute ‘improper means to influence Members in their parliamentary conduct.’” (Erskine May at p. 128.), quoted in Privileges Committee, Report on a Matter of Privilege—Alleged Intimidation of a Member, 1993 at p.13). In that case the Select Committee on Privileges found that if an apology is demanded, this [does] not amount to a threat or attempted intimidation constituting an attempt [to] improperly influence [a member] in their capacity as a Member of Parliament. (Privileges Committee, Report on a Matter of Privilege—Alleged Intimidation of a Member, 1993 at pp.12-13). David McGee, in Parliamentary Practice in New Zealand, opines that— “‘There is no contempt in respect of attempts to influence members, even by bringing pressure to bear on them ... unless there is a threat to do something which is improper in itself or which is such an extraordinary or exaggerated nature that it goes beyond an attempt to influence the member and becomes an attempt to intimidate.’” (McGee, D, Parliamentary Practice in New Zealand, 2005, p.652). Intimidation or improper interference I am cognisant of the statement of Speaker Reynolds in April 2007 when he referred a matter of a letter from a legal firm to a member of the MEPPC that “‘those in the legal profession might not realise how inherently intimidating an action a legal letter itself is, especially if the tone is not moderate or rights not recognised’”. However, in the circumstances of this case it is difficult to argue that requesting an apology from the Member for Burnett in these terms constitutes an attempt to intimidate the Member for Burnett. There is nothing in the correspondence threatening any particular consequence if the Member for Burnett chooses not to accede to the request to apologise to Mr Smith. It is also difficult to see how a request for an apology to Mr Smith can in any way evidence an intention to improperly interfere with the Member for Burnett’s parliamentary duties. In this case the tone of the letter is moderate and the rights of the member under parliamentary privilege have been recognised. Accordingly, I cannot find that the request for an apology is so improper in itself or so extraordinary or exaggerated in nature that it goes beyond an attempt to influence the Member for Burnett in his parliamentary duties and becomes an attempt to intimidate as per the test outlined by McGee. It is important to note, however, that if the correspondence to the Member for Burnett threatened to commence legal proceedings against him seeking to restrain him from carrying out his official duties then this may have constituted a contempt of the Parliament. Having considered all the evidence, on the material before me, there is no prima facie suggestion of a contempt of the Parliament and I have, therefore, decided not to refer the matter to the Integrity, Ethics and Parliamentary Privileges Committee.

MOTION OF CONDOLENCE

Eaton, Mr AG Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Reconstruction) (9.33 am): I move— 1. That this House desires to place on record its appreciation of the services rendered to this State by the late Andrew George Eaton, a former member of the Parliament of Queensland and Minister of the Crown. 2. That Mr Speaker be requested to convey to the family of the deceased gentleman the above resolution, together with an expression of the sympathy and sorrow of the Members of the Parliament of Queensland, in the loss they have sustained. Andrew George Eaton, better known to all of us as Bill, was born in Gilgandra, New South Wales, on 29 November 1931. Bill Eaton was educated at the Dobies Bight State School and St Mary’s Convent in Casino, New South Wales, before moving to Queensland in 1945. Initially, he worked in the Mourilyan area as a labourer, fencer, timber cutter, stationhand and machinery operator. He went on to work for the Far North Queensland Electricity Board from 1963 to 1980 as a leading hand on a live-line gang. Bill Eaton was a member of the Australian Workers Union and he became active in the Australian Labor Party as branch secretary in Millaa Millaa and as secretary, vice-president and president of the Innisfail branch. In 1980 Mr Eaton was selected by the Australian Labor Party to contest the seat of Mourilyan at the next state election. On 29 November—his birthday—he won the seat from the National Party in a very close contest. In 1991 the seat of Mourilyan was abolished as part of an electoral redistribution and was subsumed into the electorates of Hinchinbrook and Tablelands. Consequently, Mr Eaton contested the seat of Hinchinbrook at the state election of 1992 but was unsuccessful in his bid against the then sitting member for Hinchinbrook, Marc Rowell. During his time in this parliament, from 1980 to 1992, Bill Eaton held various positions. In opposition he was variously spokesman for water resources and maritime services, land management and forestry. After 10 years in opposition, Bill Eaton secured the opportunity to serve as a minister of the Crown following the election of the Goss government in December 1989, when he became the minister for land management in the first ALP government in this state for 32 years. As minister he oversaw a 15 Jun 2011 Motion of Condolence 1811 number of reforms, but one that I think he would have been particularly proud of was that he was the minister who introduced the enduring power of attorney into the property law of Queensland, protecting the rights of people with a decision-making impairment—rights that they continue to enjoy today. Mr Eaton continued to serve in this portfolio until the 1992 election. Bill’s life was hit by tragedy when he was widowed while his children were still very young. Bill never remarried and he devoted himself to the raising of his children by himself—no easy task for a man of those times. Bill Eaton was a true character and a true son of North Queensland. He was what people might describe as a ‘bushie’. He loved his region. He loved his fishing. As people know, Tom Burns was also a great fisherman and they were here in this parliament together. Bill and Tom, I understand, would sometimes fish together. Bill was known as a man who took his time with things. This infuriated Tom, who was moved famously to complain on a number of occasions that Bill simply moved too slowly. By the time Tom had five rods in the water, Bill was still tying his shoelaces. You can only imagine the two of them. Bill of course came from a different time, when the understanding of health was different to what it is now. Bill, it would have to be said, loved a smoke. Bill was never very far from a packet of Champion Ruby, which he rolled himself. As I said, famously it was always in his pocket. Most people who can picture Bill will picture him rolling a cigarette or with a Champion Ruby stuck to his bottom lip. He also spoke plainly but had a number of famous sayings, one of which a former minister remembers. When he wanted to get something moving, he would say, ‘It’s time to put on my old hootenanny boots,’ and he would tell bureaucrats that it was time for them to put on their old hootenanny boots. I am not sure if they ever really understood what he was on about. Bill Eaton passed away peacefully on 22 May 2011, and a service to celebrate and remember his life was held at St Joseph’s Catholic Church in Atherton. The funeral was attended by the Hon. Curtis Pitt on behalf of the government on 27 May. Bill Eaton was known as a man with a heart of gold who cared deeply for the working people whom he served, and he will be sadly missed. Mr SEENEY (Callide—LNP) (Leader of the Opposition) (9.38 am): The Hon. Andrew George ‘Bill’ Eaton was a member of this House for 12 years, serving four terms as the Labor member for Mourilyan from 1980 to 1992. He served as minister for land management from December 1989 to September 1992 after serving as the opposition spokesman on land management and forestry prior to the election of the Goss government. Bill Eaton is well remembered by members who served in this House when he was here. He was widely respected and regarded by those members as an all-round good bloke. Born in Gilgandra in western New South Wales, Bill’s family moved to Casino on the New South Wales Northern Rivers, where his father served as a policeman and the family ran a dairy farm. When he was 13, Bill moved to Queensland, to the Millaa Millaa area, where his parents had a farm. Bill lived and worked in various places, including Innisfail and Tully. He worked in the Mourilyan area as a farm labourer, in cutting timber and in fencing. He also worked as a stationhand and in construction, travelling widely to find work. He became a leading hand on the live-line gang with the Far North Queensland Electricity Board and later a PNG linesman. Following in the footsteps of his father, who was a lifelong supporter of the ALP, Bill became a union rep with the AWU and the secretary of the Innisfail branch of the ALP before running successfully for state parliament. Bill Eaton is remembered as a fair dinkum, old-style Labor man by those who served with him. He was a man who worked many jobs in many fields before making a career as an electrical linesman and then entering parliament, and many felt that his early years made him a better member of parliament. He had many interests—family, youth, welfare, primary industries, northern development, camping and the outdoors and sport. He loved playing rugby league and he was also an A-grade referee. Bill Eaton rose from a farm labourer to become a government minister. Along the way and throughout his life he helped many people and made lifelong friends on both sides of parliament. Bill Eaton died peacefully at the Cairns Private Hospital on 22 May, aged 79. I speak for all members of the opposition and the LNP in offering our condolences to Bill Eaton’s family and his friends, many of whom attended his requiem mass at St Joseph’s Catholic Church at Atherton on 27 May. I support the condolence motion moved by the Premier. Hon. CW PITT (Mulgrave—ALP) (Minister for Disability Services, Mental Health and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships) (9.40 am): I rise today to support the condolence motion moved by the Premier. Andrew George ‘Bill’ Eaton was born in the Northern Rivers of New South Wales but spent all of his adult life in Far North Queensland. As a young man he was a keen sportsman and in particular an accomplished rugby league player. The Eaton clan was a fixture in community life and enjoyed a reputation for being close-knit and deeply involved in the Catholic Church. Bill pursued a career as a linesman with FNQEB, the forerunner of Ergon. He was a hardworking employee who earned the respect of workmates and bosses alike. His work was demanding and sometimes dangerous, taking him far and wide where his reputation as a good bloke continued to grow. Almost every person I have ever spoken to about Bill sings his praises as a man of integrity whose generosity and honesty were legend. Bill would never be wealthy, as his compassionate nature meant 1812 Motion of Condolence 15 Jun 2011 he would give someone in need the shirt off his back. I heard a story where he actually did this. This is a testament to who Bill was. This aura of fairness and decency carried on into his political career, marking Bill Eaton as one of those rare politicians who drew the respect of both sides of the House. On a personal level, tragedy struck with the death of his beloved wife, Shirley, whose passing at 28 years of age left Bill to raise a very young family. But the four children could not have asked for a better provider and role model. It is an absolute credit to his love and guidance that each of his children has grown into a fine adult. They have all carried on the family tradition of community service and become highly respected in their own right. Bill and his young family moved to Innisfail, where he continued to work for FNQEB. The Innisfail community was richer for their presence, with every child, like their father, becoming heavily involved in community life. To say the Eatons were into politics would be a huge understatement. Bill’s father, Sandy, was Labor to the core and it was no surprise that Bill would eventually put his name forward for election. He ran for the seat of Mulgrave in 1983 at a time when the gerrymander made it virtually impossible to win. On his campaign team was a very young schoolteacher—my father—who took on the task of fundraising for a man whom he admired so much. Bill was unsuccessful and in 1986 stood for the seat of Mourilyan, winning it for Labor. When the Goss government was elected in 1989, Bill became minister for lands and held that position until his defeat in 1992, when a redistribution cut the seat up to make it virtually unwinnable for Labor. This did not deter Bill and he gave it his best shot, showing great humility in defeat. Legend has it that many members of the National Party would man the booths all day, hand out for their party and then go into the polling booth and vote for Bill Eaton, the man. Some say that many of these very same people actually donated to his campaign. In an era when the value of academic qualifications became much overrated, some would be less than kind about his limited time of formal schooling. It was obvious to any who cared to look deeper that Bill Eaton had a masters degree in the school of hard knocks. His practical knowledge and grasp of real life ensured he could identify with his constituents and represent faithfully their views. As a local member he was without peer. He and his electorate officer Connie Bartaska formed a formidable team. No issue was too small or constituent unworthy of his full and undivided attention. Everyone got the same excellent service from Bill Eaton. Everyone was treated with courtesy and respect, supporter and political foe alike. Bill Eaton was not always the favourite son of bureaucracy, whether it be departmental or party. He was a person who called a spade a spade. Hubris and red tape were foreign to his way of doing business. He was a plain talker and an individual who saw through the less-than-transparent utterings of some career bureaucrats—in fact some career politicians. Mr Speaker, I had the honour of attending the funeral of Bill Eaton as the Queensland government representative along with my father, who had a lengthy friendship with this remarkable man. It was a huge funeral marked by the attendance of individuals from across the political spectrum. This in itself was a measure of the esteem in which he was held. Given to the occasional word of advice, my father has suggested I could do no better than to model myself after Bill Eaton in respect of the way I lead my life and more importantly carry out my political representation. I know that Bill had a big influence on him. This is one piece of advice I actually am willing to accept from my dad, knowing full well the magnitude of the challenge. Many people have regrets—often many years later—about something they may have said or not said in their maiden speech. Mine came only days afterwards when I talked about those politicians who had given me good advice—like former Cairns mayor Tom Pyne, the late, great Tom Burns, Wayne Goss, Kim Beazley and Gough Whitlam. It was my great regret that I failed to include Bill Eaton among those Labor legends who have influenced me. I was fortunate to tell Bill this the night before he died. I was grateful that I was able to say farewell and that I had the opportunity to hold his hand and say thank you. In the same hospital, just down the hallway, my wife, Kerry, was resting following the birth of our third child. I would later find out that Bill remarked to his son Steve that it was fitting that as one life faded another was beginning. I am told that this made Bill very happy. On behalf of my family, the Australian Workers Union, the Innisfail branch of the Australian Labor Party and my parliamentary colleagues from Far North Queensland—the member for Cairns, the member for Cook and the member for Barron River—collectively we say thank you. Today we mark the passing of a faithful servant to the people of Queensland. May his family be comforted by the knowledge his life was one well spent and one universally recognised by all who knew Bill Eaton. Mr CRIPPS (Hinchinbrook—LNP) (9.45 am): I rise to contribute to the condolence motion for Andrew George Eaton, known as Bill. Before the first state election held on the new boundaries following the recommendations of the Electoral and Administrative Review Commission in 1992, the rural communities along the coast between the provincial cities of Townsville and Cairns in North Queensland were divided into three seats, being Mulgrave, Hinchinbrook and Mourilyan. Each of these seats also included hinterland communities now located in the electorate of Dalrymple. Bill Eaton was elected as the Labor member for Mourilyan at the 1980 state election, defeating National Party member Vicky Kippin, who had held the seat since 1974. When the Goss Labor government won the election in December 1989, Bill Eaton became the minister for land management. 15 Jun 2011 Motion of Condolence 1813

This was an appropriate appointment for Bill, who had a very strong interest in regional and rural areas of Queensland and the industries that existed there. The redistribution of state electorates based on the EARC recommendations saw the abolition of a number of rural and regional seats, including Bill’s seat of Mourilyan. The communities in the former electorate of Mourilyan were then divided between the electorates of Mulgrave, Tablelands and Hinchinbrook, which continue to this day—the Tablelands being represented by the member for Dalrymple. The people in the communities in my electorate who were previously located in the electorate of Mourilyan continue to hold Bill Eaton in high esteem. Moving throughout my community, people will still recall how Bill represented them well in this House. Conservative people will express their respect for Bill and quite a number will admit to voting for him notwithstanding his politics. That is the mark of a local member who has earned the affection of his constituents. In 1992 Bill Eaton stood as the Labor candidate for the seat of Hinchinbrook but was defeated by the National Party candidate Marc Rowell, who is my predecessor in this place. The election was, however, a very close-run thing, with the National Party’s margin being only 2½ per cent. Bill commanded very significant support in the areas previously located in his former electorate of Mourilyan. I met Bill Eaton on several occasions, and in recent years Bill became a constituent of mine, living on a property at Mount Fox, a small rural community located at the top of the Great Dividing Range west of Ingham. I last saw Bill before he passed away on Christmas Eve last at the vigil mass at St Clare’s Catholic Church in Tully. Although he had been battling for some time with his health, he was in good spirits and we enjoyed friendly conversation about his family and about life. I know that Bill continued to command a great deal of respect in the local community well after he left public life. When I first contested the seat of Hinchinbrook for the National Party in 2006, I came across Bill Eaton handing out how-to-vote cards for Labor at the polling booth in the town of Mourilyan, just south of Innisfail. I lost the booth at Mourilyan badly on primary votes at that election. I watched helplessly as many of my prospective constituents made a beeline for Bill Eaton, had a cheerful chat and took a Labor how-to-vote card. At the 2009 election, without Bill handing out how-to-vote cards at that booth, I won the booth at Mourilyan comfortably. I am also aware that Bill Eaton is remembered fondly by long-serving staff here at Parliament House, and on several occasions they have asked after Bill Eaton, as he was a constituent of mine at the time. Bill was a warm, earthy and charming man. He was a man of faith in God and the traditional values of the Labor Party. It was well known that Bill was very concerned about some of the policies of his old party. He was particularly vocal about his concerns in relation to the closure of the timber industry in North Queensland that occurred following the declaration of vast tracts of land as World Heritage areas. This decision by the federal Labor government of the day badly affected a number of communities in my electorate as well as a number of hinterland communities in Bill’s former electorate of Mourilyan, now represented by the member for Dalrymple. The Bill Eaton Bridge over the South Johnstone River, located just south of the town of South Johnstone and just south of the South Johnstone Mill, stands as a constant reminder of Bill’s commitment to improving the circumstances of the people he represented. Bill Eaton will be fondly remembered by the people in my electorate whom he represented as the member for Mourilyan for 12 years, spanning four terms in the Queensland parliament. The member for Mulgrave will be aware that from time to time our performances as local members are compared to the record of Bill Eaton by our constituents in the areas that were previously part of the Mourilyan electorate, and that keeps us on our toes. My predecessor, Marc Rowell, attended Bill Eaton’s funeral in Atherton, such was his respect for the man who contested the 1992 state election against him. Marc asked me to place on the record during this condolence motion some remarks on his behalf— Due to a redistribution, part of the Mourilyan Electorate had been added to the Hinchinbrook Electorate for the 1992 state election. Bill was Minister for Land Management in the Goss Government. Due to the new boundaries and the abolition of Mourilyan as an electorate, Bill nominated to contest Hinchinbrook which included his home town of Innisfail. After serving only one term in state parliament, the prospects of contesting the seat against a Minister and a popular member of parliament were daunting. I can recall the not uncommon mud slinging and innuendo of electioneering never entered the contest. I believe Bill was true blue to the philosophy of the Labor Party. I met Bill on several occasions after the election. Nothing had changed his salutations and cheery demeanour. I had a great deal of respect for Bill’s no frills way he addressed the many endeavours he faced, but none more than the challenge of raising a family after the passing of his wife when the family was young. I am certain that those who knew him in the current parliament would agree with these sentiments. This was evident by the broad spectrum of people who attended his funeral in Atherton recently. Both Marc Rowell and I offer our sincere condolences to the family of the late Bill Eaton, a proud North Queenslander who strongly represented his electorate in this place. Although Bill and I are from different political parties, he is certainly a man whom I respected and whom many locals of longstanding in my electorate respected. Hon. JC SPENCE (Sunnybank—ALP) (9.52 am): As we have heard this morning, Bill Eaton was a very generous, kind, caring and gentle man. People who knew him loved him and thought he was a genuine and nice guy. I was very fortunate to be elected to parliament and get to know people like Bill 1814 Motion of Condolence 15 Jun 2011

Eaton. I guess it was a different era in this place then; it was an era when people generally got elected to parliament later in life and had lots of life experiences. Bill Eaton had already been a timber cutter, a fencer and an electricity linesman, and he had raised a family. He had a lot to talk about and he was a very interesting man. I remember spending lots of time talking to him and picking his brain about how to be a successful member of parliament. As we have heard this morning, Bill Eaton genuinely knew every single person in his electorate. He knew what their problems were, he felt empathy for them and their problems and he tried to solve their problems. That was a pretty good breeding ground and learning ground for a new member of parliament. Bill was not the only one like that in those days. His mates Tom Burns, Ron McLean and Ken Vaughan all had similar backgrounds, life experiences and attitudes to their electorates. I know that Bill was very proud to become part of the first reforming Labor government in 32 years and become a minister in that government. He did a lot of good work as a minister, but I have spoken to staff who worked for him in those days and I was told that he drove them crazy because he did not give up on his electorate so, as well as doing the ministerial job, they were solving every problem for the people in the Mourilyan electorate at the same time. That was the nature of the man. We have heard that he had lots of interests in life—including fishing and rugby league, and he was an A-grade rugby league referee—and he loved his children and he continued to love and look after his grandchildren in his retirement years. I also speak on behalf of my colleague Robert Schwarten today. Robert is at a funeral in Rockhampton this morning. He is sorry that he could not share his experiences about Bill Eaton because he actually kept in contact with Bill throughout the years. I pass on his condolences and best wishes to the family this morning. As we have heard, Bill Eaton was a man of the people. He was also a man who had deeply held Labor convictions and he was bred in the Labor tradition of his era. I guess it is no surprise that the staff at Parliament House loved him. The staff who worked in the Labor opposition office loved him, too. He brought trays of lychees and fresh fruit whenever he came down from Innisfail, so it was no wonder that people looked forward to seeing Bill when he came down to Parliament House. Honourable members interjected. Ms SPENCE: Yes, other members could take a leaf out of that book, I am sure. I am told that Bill took everyone to dinner here at Parliament House. Anyone who was from North Queensland and who came to Brisbane was taken to dinner at Parliament House by Bill and he made them feel very welcome, such was his generosity. I know that we all mourn the passing of a very generous, wonderful man who was a great member of parliament and a great man of the people. I pass on my best wishes to his family and particularly his grandchildren. Hon. DM WELLS (Murrumba—ALP) (9.55 am): When I was first elected to this parliament, the word from both sides of the chamber was that we would not have held the seat of Mourilyan if it had not been for Bill Eaton, and I think the honourable member for Hinchinbrook has just confirmed that that is still part of the folklore of the north. I decided at that time that I would try to find out the secret that enabled what was, on the face of it, an improbable seat to be in the hands of the Labor Party for such a long time without any interruption. I think the answer was respect. Bill Eaton used to show respect to people and in return he gained respect. In his quiet and unassuming way, he worked steadily during that stormy period before 1989 as part of the front bench that subsequently took office and became the first Goss Labor government. I do not think it would be appropriate if I told you what the substance of the matter was—indeed I would be drummed out of here most unceremoniously—but I think I probably can tell you that Bill was associated with one of the first significant debates that took place in the Goss cabinet. Different cabinets have different complexions; different cabinets operate in different ways. The way Wayne used to like to see things happen was that there should be robust argument inside the cabinet and that issues should be dealt with with a great deal of the clash of ideas out of which can come new ideas. Bill was involved in the very first discussion and the one that set the pattern for the way the Goss cabinet was going to work. One of the significant achievements that the honourable the Premier mentioned that Bill put on the table was the enduring power of attorney. I remember at one stage saying to officers in my department, ‘We don’t have an enduring power of attorney in Queensland. We ought to have that.’ They said to me, ‘We’ll think about it and come back to you.’ It was only very shortly after that that I discovered this was something that was in Bill’s portfolio and Bill was right on top of it. Indeed, within a short period of time he had delivered this very significant reform. It is a small thing but it is one that has changed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people in Queensland for the better. Bill was a steady achiever, an unaggressive achiever. I was talking to former premier Wayne Goss recently and we shared our respective sorrow with regard to Bill’s passing. Wayne said that Bill was one of those loyal and solid Labor members who worked during the dark years and whose work contributed to the election of a Labor government in 1989, that his life was vindicated and that he felt enormously elated by the result. Wayne asked me if I would associate him with my expression of 15 Jun 2011 Ministerial Statements 1815 condolence for Bill. It was an honour and a privilege to serve with Bill. To his friends and family who remain, I hope that they will always know that the contribution he made here was not only significant but also long lasting. I join with other members who have spoken in this House in paying tribute to this great and good man. Mr JOHNSON (Gregory—LNP) (9.59 am): In joining the Premier, the Leader of the Opposition and other speakers today, I can say that I was certainly touched by the man Bill Eaton. I came in here as the member for Gregory in 1989. Bill Glasson, my predecessor, was the lands minister before that and Mr Eaton took over from him. I remember that one evening I had a deputation with Mr Eaton down in room A9 or A11. After the deputation was over, he said, ‘Vaughan, stay awhile and we’ll have a cup of tea.’ I stayed back with him and had a cup of tea and he talked about losing his wife, as the member for Mulgrave said, and about rearing those four young children on his own, probably with the help of family and others. I thought, ‘This is the measure of a man.’ Mr Speaker and colleagues, in this world there are gentlemen and there are gentlemen. Bill Eaton was the latter. Bill Eaton was an absolute gentleman. He was a gentle man. He was a good and decent bloke. I think a lot of us who knew him were blessed to have known him. Bill was probably the last member of parliament who rolled his own cigarettes. I can still see him sitting back there rolling a smoke. I do not know how it would go down today, but that was the cut of the man and the type of bloke he was. I know that there is a divide in politics at times, but today it is good to see that that divide is not there when we talk about an honourable and decent and champion bloke in Bill Eaton. It was nice knowing you, Bill, and may you rest in peace. God bless you. Question put—That the motion be agreed to. Motion agreed to. Whereupon honourable members stood in silence.

PETITIONS

The Clerk presented the following paper petitions, lodged by the honourable members indicated—

Maleny-Kenilworth Road, Upgrade Mr Powell, from 34 petitioners, requesting the House to urgently upgrade the Maleny-Kenilworth Road, in particular, the section of road between Sandy Creek Bridge and Sunday Creek Road [4664].

Maryborough Hospital, Upgrade Mr Sorensen, from 5,606 petitioners, requesting the House to urgently upgrade the Emergency Department of the Maryborough Hospital and implement a low risk birthing unit at the Maryborough Hospital [4665].

Runaway Islands, Valuation Review Ms Croft, from 158 petitioners, requesting the House to review the valuation for the 600 properties fronting canal land on Runaway Islands and to explain to residents the reasons for the excessive 10% increase in average valuation compared to an increase of 3% for the Gold Coast as a whole [4666]. Petitions received.

TABLED PAPERS

MINISTERIAL PAPERS TABLED BY THE CLERK The following ministerial papers were tabled by the Clerk— Minister for Health (Mr Wilson)— 4667 Response from the Minister for Health (Mr Wilson) to a paper petition (1678-11) presented by Mr Cripps, from 485 petitioners, requesting the House to ensure adequate funding, resources and qualified medical professionals are provided to hospitals in rural areas of Queensland to deliver maternity and other medical services 4668 Response from the Minister for Health (Mr Wilson) to a paper petition (1679-11) presented by Mr McArdle, from 333 petitioners, requesting the House to rescind the decision to close the 10 palliative care beds currently at Canossa Private Hospital and to allow the funding of these beds to continue past 2011

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Budget, Community Ambulance Cover Levy Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Reconstruction) (10.04 am): Yesterday the Treasurer delivered a budget that focuses on rebuilding Queensland and relieving cost- of-living pressures on Queensland households. That is why, as part of yesterday’s groundbreaking budget, we announced the abolition of the community ambulance cover levy, giving cost-of-living relief of $113 every year to all Queensland households that pay the levy from 1 July. That means that more than 1.4 million Queensland households and small businesses will see that relief in their electricity bill every quarter from the beginning of July. 1816 Ministerial Statements 15 Jun 2011

Despite the removal of the levy, ambulance services in Queensland and for Queenslanders will remain free. Ambulance services will remain free for all Queenslanders, whether they need it in Queensland or around the nation. So if you are a Queenslander visiting another state and you need an ambulance, the Queensland government will cover you. The ambulance will always be there for Queenslanders, but now the bill will not be. We wanted to lessen the burden for families and small businesses that we know have been doing it tough, and this initiative will deliver more than 1.4 million Queenslanders with a $113 benefit. Importantly, the government will step in and maintain funding for the Ambulance Service to ensure those services remain free for all Queenslanders.

Budget, Tourism Industry Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Reconstruction) (10.05 am): The 2011-12 budget recognises that, while some industries in Queensland are booming, there are others still climbing out of the global financial crisis. Tourism is, without doubt, one of our most vital industries supporting more than 220,000 jobs, most of them in small businesses. We all know that nothing beats Queensland. But after our summer of disasters there is a job to do convincing southern states and the world that there is no better place for your next holiday. So what did we do? We launched a $12 million tourism industry support package with $10 million in joint state and federal funding as well as $2 million to help increase the capacity of tourism operators through post disaster recovery workshops and advice about making the most of emerging markets like China. In this year’s budget we have taken our support for Queensland tourism to a new level. We are determined to secure more of the world-class events that already deliver over 900,000 tourism nights into Queensland and more than 505,000 visitors from interstate and overseas every year. That is why we have announced in this year’s budget a record investment in major events funding—a boost of more than $80 million, which will double our investment over the next four years. The Queensland annual events calendar is diverse, it is dynamic and it is gaining momentum— events like the Brisbane International tennis, the Magic Millions, the Gold Coast Airport Marathon, blockbuster exhibitions at the Gallery of Modern Art, the Mooloolaba and Noosa triathlons, the Townsville V8 Supercars, the Cairns Indigenous Art Fair, the Challenge Cairns and many more. This year in Brisbane we will see two more Australian exclusive blockbusters at the Gallery of Modern Art— surrealism and Matisse—thanks to the continuing successful partnership between Events Queensland and the gallery. What is more, the budget also contains a big boost for regional events, taking the annual budget for that regional program from $2.4 million to $3 million for the Events Queensland Regional Development Program, which currently supports more than 100 events in communities all over Queensland every year. Regional events provide a very big boost to regional economies. Townsville’s V8s, for example, generate $19 million for the local economy and they attract more than 131,000 visitors from outside of Townsville. Smaller local events like the Chinchilla Melon Festival and the Innisfail Feast of the Senses promote the recovery of primary industries and are supporting the local community in the aftermath of cyclones and floods. Every dollar invested in major events delivers a return of $10 for the Queensland economy, and in the next 12 months we will be aggressively targeting bigger and better events for Queensland. We have a message for New South Wales and Victoria: watch out, because Queensland is on the march!

Budget, Construction Industry Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Reconstruction) (10.08 am): Two months ago I convened a building revival forum with key industry stakeholders to discuss ways of stimulating Queensland’s building industry. Yesterday, in conjunction with the state budget, we released our response, and that response is a definitive series of actions to help inject demand into the housing market, providing the shot in the arm the building industry needs right now. Chief among these actions is a $140 million Queensland Building Boost, with grants of $10,000 for all new homes up to $600,000 in value. For first home buyers, this means they not only pay zero stamp duty and zero mortgage duty; at the same time they receive an extra $7,000 in the form of the First Home Owner Grant, taking their total benefit to $17,000. That is $17,000 towards the cost of a new home across Queensland. It is a significant amount for a young couple wanting to buy and own their first house at a time when many people trying to break into the market may have thought it beyond their reach. This is the single most generous housing incentive package in the nation. It is a package that no other state comes close to. The Queensland Building Boost will not only make the cost of a new home cheaper; it will give the construction sector a much needed shot in the arm. It will keep developers in developments and builders in their trades. It is not just first home buyers who will benefit. The boost will be available to anybody building a new house, buying a house-and-land package or buying an apartment between 1 August 2011 and 31 January 2012, and that includes investors. 15 Jun 2011 Ministerial Statements 1817

Our government wants to see the Queensland building industry back on top, and I am pleased to say that stakeholders have rallied behind these initiatives. Master Builders executive director Graham Cuthbert described this initiative as— ... a kick-start measure, desperately needed by Queensland’s building industry ... increased activity brings job creation. But not only jobs on site. We know that for every job created on site a further five jobs are created throughout the supply chain. Housing Industry Association head Warwick Temby said— The home building industry has been on its knees since the global financial crisis and this is exactly the sort of stimulus that we need to get things going. Property Council of Australia Executive Director Kathy MacDermott said— The grant will allow thousands of families to access a new home. It will also protect jobs in the housing development sector throughout the state. The boost is one of a series of budget initiatives that will help restore Queensland’s appeal to investors. I am pleased to see that those who work in this part of the industry recognise the significance of the new Queensland Building Boost. Our government will continue to work with industry, local government and the community to deliver more affordable housing for all Queenslanders. Budget, Regional Queensland Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Reconstruction) (10.11 am): Our government understands the critical role that our regions play in the Queensland economy. Now more than ever, our regions are the driving force behind our remarkable economic growth. That is why in this year’s budget 58 per cent of our entire building program—some $8.7 billion—will be spent outside the greater Brisbane area. Right across the state we are building the schools, the hospitals and the roads that will allow us to make the most of the opportunities ahead for our state. Here in the South-East we are spending $2,850 per man, woman and child in this year’s budget. But what will we be spending in the regions of Queensland? We will be spending more than that per person. In Far North Queensland, we will be spending $1 billion this year. That is over $3,700 per person—almost $1,000 per person more—and it will deliver projects in Far North Queensland like the Cairns Base Hospital redevelopment and the Cairns city centre bus interchange. In North Queensland, we will spend nearly $900 million—again, more than $3,700 per person—on projects like the $66 million expansion of the Townsville Hospital, another $48 million for the Townsville Ring Road, and we will commission a new office building to revitalise the Townsville CBD. In Central Queensland, we will spend $650 million in the Mackay region—or $3,600 per person—and another $1 billion in the Fitzroy, bringing Fitzroy expenditure to $4,500 per person, for projects like new cyclone shelters, the Rockhampton riverbank redevelopment and the Gladstone Flinders Parade foreshore. Western Queensland is also looked after in this budget, with Western Queensland and the Darling Downs set to receive nearly $1.4 billion in total to fund the infrastructure needed to welcome new growth in resource projects. In areas with growth from CSG we are investing in infrastructure like the $96 million investment to expand the Warrego Highway to four lanes near Toowoomba, improving safety and efficiency; $4.4 million for the Surat Basin resources trade project at Miles State High School; and a refurbishment of Dalby State High School. Of course, in the mighty north-west we are spending more on upgrades and repairs to the Kennedy Developmental Road and the Landsborough Highway as well as $95 million across remote Queensland to restore road access to some of the most isolated parts of our state. This is a budget that recognises the importance of grassroots infrastructure delivery in every region of Queensland. We made a conscious decision to maintain our existing infrastructure program. We were not going to be deterred by the disasters that struck us. We know that Queensland is growing and we are building to meet that growth. State of Origin Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Reconstruction) (10.14 am): As everyone knows, the mighty Maroons will continue to rewrite the record books tonight and we hope that they will make it six in a row with a victory. I think special mention must be made of Queensland’s skipper, Darren Lockyer. When Darren runs onto the field tonight he becomes the State of Origin’s most decorated player. This will be his 35th appearance in the maroon jersey, surpassing Allan Langer’s record of 34 games. What an incredible Queensland player he has been. Darren has also played the most number of tests—55—and he has been the Kangaroos’ longest serving captain, with 34 games leading Australia. We wish Darren and the boys the best of luck tonight. Go the mighty Maroons! Civil Court Fees; Real Estate Industry, Commissions Hon. PT LUCAS (Lytton—ALP) (Deputy Premier and Attorney-General, Minister for Local Government and Special Minister of State) (10.15 am): This financial year the Bligh government will invest more than $1 billion in Queensland’s justice system. This massive investment will continue to build on our commitment to provide all Queenslanders with a fair, safe and just society. The 2009-10 1818 Ministerial Statements 15 Jun 2011

Department of Justice and Attorney-General annual report confirms that Queenslanders are well served by their justice system. The report shows that our Supreme, District and Magistrates courts recorded a combined average clearance rate last financial year of more than 100 per cent. Queensland courts charge some of the lowest fees in the country for their services. Unlike the courts in other states, Queensland courts do not levy setting-down or daily hearing fees. The federal government, through the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General, is working with Queensland and other states and territories to ensure that court fees across all jurisdictions are on a par with those of the Federal Court. This push for uniformity is important as there are concerns that people are shopping around. Setting-down and daily hearing fees in other states serve an important purpose. They strongly encourage parties to settle their dispute prior to approaching the courts, which is always the preferred option. However, if court proceedings are started, these fees can help to minimise the amount of court time required to deal with the matter. The introduction of setting-down and daily hearing fees is anticipated to bring the following advantages to users of Queensland courts: improving the parties’ preparation prior to a hearing or trial, improved planning and use of available court time, encouraging greater use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms rather than using the court; and potentially removing unnecessary proceedings from the courts. It is intended that the setting-down fees and daily hearing fees will apply only to civil matters dealt with in the Queensland Supreme and District courts. The fees will be introduced on 1 September. These fees will be levied only in the District Court, which deals with claims involving $150,000 but less than $750,000, and the Supreme Court, which deals with claims involving $750,000 or more. The vast majority of Queenslanders never go near a court and in particular the District and Supreme courts. A very small minority may at some time in their lives have a personal injuries claim in the District or Supreme courts. Access to justice will not be compromised, as the new fee structure will not apply to civil matters less than $150,000—that is, in the Magistrates Court. People and corporations, including not-for-profits, can also apply for a fee waiver depending on their financial circumstances. In any case, claims involving individual people predominately consist of personal injuries claims, where outlays such as court fees are carried by their lawyers and where most settle before court and usually involve the defendant insurance company paying those costs as part of the settlement or judgement. I think most Queenslanders would expect business to pay something towards the cost of the judges, the courts and their staff, just as they are prepared to pay big money for their legal representation or commercial mediations if they use them. It is not unreasonable to ask them to make a contribution to the Queensland court system like they do in other states. An estimated $3 million is expected to be generated each year by these new court charges. This money will go towards important initiatives such as the Murri Court, which provides a culturally appropriate environment for offenders and victims and operates in 17 locations across the state, and the Queensland Indigenous Alcohol Diversion Program, which aims to improve Indigenous health and reduce the number of Indigenous people involved in the criminal justice and child protection systems. Queenslanders are well served by their justice system, and under the Bligh government they will continue to be. While these changes will more closely align Queensland court fees with those levied in other states and territories, access to justice will not be compromised. Today I am pleased to inform the House that Queensland will commence the process for the deregulation of real estate commissions to bring us into line with other states and territories. Over the years there have been numerous national and state reviews recommending the deregulation of real estate commissions and it is also strongly supported by the industry. While deregulation will bring Queensland into line with other Australian jurisdictions, it will not be introduced at the expense of consumers. The government is keen to commence the negotiating process with the relevant stakeholders, but I want to make it clear that any changes will have strong consumer protections, including strong disclosure, and QCAT will be given the jurisdiction to deal with situations where it is alleged by a seller that a commission is harsh and unconscionable. QCAT will be able to set aside the commission or vary the terms of any relevant commission contract and substitute a fair commission. QCAT will be an accessible and affordable option where parties can represent themselves in dealing with these disputes. The problem with the current fixed commission system is that it does not take into account the circumstances, such as the saleability of a property or the amount of effort required for it ultimately to be sold. I want to involve consumer groups in the consultation process, as we need to make sure that any outcome is fair and that there is no ability to enter into any exotic retainer arrangements that lack transparency. Budget Hon. AP FRASER (Mount Coot-tha—ALP) (Treasurer and Minister for State Development and Trade) (10.20 am): The budget I handed down yesterday showed that this government has its eye firmly on the future. It provides cost-of-living relief for 1.4 million households and businesses, offers much needed boosts for struggling sectors, like housing construction and tourism, and relieves pressure on 15 Jun 2011 Ministerial Statements 1819 hundreds of thousands of Queensland pensioners. It outlines Queensland’s next wave of prosperity, driven by surging business investment, the might of our resources and the resurgence of our traditional strengths. Removing the ambulance levy means removing $113 off power bills next year. It is immediate, direct hip-pocket relief for Queenslanders. It is well known that the massive investment in the electricity network to meet surging peak demand has put pressure on electricity prices. Under this reform, when Queenslanders receive their power bills from 1 July they will not receive the quarterly charge that adds to that cost-of-living burden. The ambulance service will be free for all Queenslanders, just as it has been free for pensioners and seniors who have not paid the levy. It will continue to be free—free for all Queenslanders. Queenslanders will also continue to get the benefit of free ambulance services in other states—something some other states do not enjoy. As I said yesterday, the ambulance will always be there for Queenslanders, but now the bill will not be. It is important to note for the record that, when the state had the ambulance levy, the revenue raised from that levy was all given to the Ambulance Service but it was not sufficient to fund the entire budget of the Queensland Ambulance Service. Historically, the revenue from the levy only ever accounted for around 30 per cent of the total ambulance budget. The cost of abolishing the levy is recorded in the budget papers at $139 million. The budget last year for the Queensland Ambulance Service was $533.7 million. The budget this year for the Ambulance Service is $575.8 million—an increase. Let me state explicitly that the budget for the Ambulance Service will increase in this year’s budget. We are able to do this because yesterday we made choices—real policy choices that are set out in full in the budget papers. The levy has only ever been just part of the funds used to fund the Ambulance Service. The government has picked up the tab for the rest and in recent years has provided a massive funding boost to increase the number of paramedics, vehicles and stations right across the state. There are an additional 50 paramedics funded in this state budget. There are an additional 140 new and replacement ambulance vehicles funded in this state budget. The Ambulance Service in Queensland continues to provide a world-class service to all Queenslanders. We are committed to ensuring that that service is funded to continue that high standard into the future. That will not change. What will change is that these costs will not be passed onto Queenslanders on their power bills.

Business Commissioner Hon. RG NOLAN (Ipswich—ALP) (Minister for Finance and the Arts) (10.22 am): In the next financial year our state’s economy will take off, surging from a standing start to five per cent growth in 2011-12 and 5.25 per cent the year after that. As business prepares to make that step change, this government is acting to ensure that growth is not impeded by excessively onerous red tape. By September this year we will appoint Queensland’s first-ever business commissioner, a new position to cut red tape, establish clear time frames for turning around paperwork and work closely with key business representative groups in their strategic priority areas. The commissioner will be paid at senior Public Service rates and ideally will be someone who can speak the language of both government and business. They will be backed by specialist staff. The new business commissioner will have four key roles: leading the program to cut red tape; working with business through peak groups like the Australian Industry Group, Chamber of Commerce and Industry Queensland and the well-established Queensland Small Business Advisory Council that reports and works closely with the minister for small business; advising government agencies on best practice in regulation and deregulation; and communicating with businesses on red-tape reductions and the best way to minimise their own compliance burden. It will remain the case that before new laws are introduced government departments will require a regulatory assessment statement—meaning they have to prove publicly that the point of regulation outweighs the imposition of doing it. The new commissioner is being deliberately established with a strategic focus and a strong commitment to liaise closely with peak industry business bodies. It is easy to say that government red tape is bad for business, but a lot of it—like workplace health and safety, environmental protections, food safety standards and child protection laws—is established for very good reason. This change comes in addition to significant work already undertaken by the Bligh government to reduce ‘green tape’ in Queensland to simplify and fast-track environmental approvals for hundreds of businesses starting up operations in Queensland without compromising on environmental protection. Funding for the new business commissioner will be provided through the Department of Employment, Economic Development and Industry and through the Queensland Treasury, with $1 million allocated for the new commissioner to be resourced and have the grunt to work with businesses to increase efficiency in the economy. Mr SPEAKER: Under the sessional orders, question time will start at 11 o’clock. 1820 Ministerial Statements 15 Jun 2011

Food for a Growing Economy Hon. TS MULHERIN (Mackay—ALP) (Minister for Agriculture, Food and Regional Economies) (10.25 am): With Queensland’s food value chain worth $18.7 billion to the state economy and a workforce of more than 260,000 people, it is critical we plan for future growth in this industry. As such, it gives me great pleasure to today release for consultation Queensland’s first-ever food policy aimed at further building our multibillion dollar food industry. The policy, Food for a growing economy, puts the Bligh government’s plan to grow Queensland’s food industry on record. To support initiatives related to this policy, the Queensland government has made an initial allocation of $2 million in the state budget. Population growth, as well as a rise in affluence in developing countries, is increasing demand for food. Both of these factors are presenting significant opportunities for Queensland as a food exporter. We need to capitalise on these opportunities. Through this policy the Bligh government will deliver an investment framework to maximise growth in Queensland’s food sector. The policy is built around seven themes that recognise the links between food and areas such as environmental protection, health and land use planning. It sets out strategies to create job opportunities and wealth for Queenslanders and outlines initiatives for working with key stakeholders to maximise industry growth. In releasing this policy, I recognise that it presents significant complexities with debate across economic, health, environmental, social and national security agendas. As such, the policy has been released today for public comment and I urge all interested parties to consider the policy proposals and provide feedback. The Queensland government is determined to get Queensland’s first food policy right so that Queensland food has a bright future. The world is changing and growing and Queensland stands to grow with it as a producer of outstanding food. I table the policy. Tabled paper: Queensland Government: Draft policy framework for public consultation titled ‘Food for a growing economy, an economic development framework for the Queensland food industry’ [4669]. Transport and Roads Investment Program Hon. CA WALLACE (Thuringowa—ALP) (Minister for Main Roads, Fisheries and Marine Infrastructure) (10.27 am): Today I have great pleasure in tabling the 2011-12 to 2014-15 Queensland Transport and Roads Investment Program, or QTRIP as it is known. Tabled paper: Queensland Transport and Roads Investment Program—2011-12 to 2014-15 [4670]. Tabled paper: Queensland Transport and Roads Investment Program—2011-12 to 2014-15: Addendum titled ‘The Roads Alliance’ [4671]. This program details a plan for record expenditure of $19 billion on Queensland’s transport and road infrastructure over the next four years. This builds on the $30 billion already outlaid over the past 10 years in Queensland. It is a comprehensive program that brings together projects from the Australian government’s Nation Building Program and regional infrastructure fund as well as state commitments. This investment will be pumped into our road, rail, public transport and active transport networks to make them more efficient, reliable and safe. It helps Queenslanders get to where they need to go on time, reliably and safely and with an increasing choice about how they travel and enhance their lifestyles. The program of investment spreads over every region of Queensland and will sustain an estimated 58,000 jobs, supporting our industry and economy. Only a short while ago our state was devastated by floods and cyclones, leaving behind a level of destruction never seen before. Queensland’s transport network was hit hardest, sustaining more damage than any other piece of public infrastructure. Indeed, 9,170 kilometres, or 27 per cent, of our state controlled road network was affected by the natural disasters. An interesting statistic is that that is the distance from here to Beijing and back and it was damaged by the flood event. To further the good work already done in responding to this challenge, the Queensland Transport and Roads Investment Program includes more than $4 billion to restore damaged transport infrastructure as part of Operation Queenslander. In total, the program includes over $14 billion for construction, restoration, maintenance and increased safety on our national, state and local roads. It includes $48 million to enhance our principal cycle network, $16 million for our boating and maritime infrastructure and millions of dollars in grants to local governments for local priorities, such as regional airfields. This massive investment demonstrates our unwavering commitment and our vision for connecting Queensland. It shows that the Bligh government has a plan and a vision for Queensland roads. Contrast that with those opposite. Contrast that with Campbell Newman, who has nothing yet dares to compare himself to the great Mal Meninga. I reckon he should compare himself to ‘Gus’ Gould, the mouth from the south. Transport and Roads Investment Program Hon. A PALASZCZUK (Inala—ALP) (Minister for Transport and Multicultural Affairs) (10.30 am): As the Minister for Main Roads has outlined, the second edition of the Queensland Transport and Roads Investment Program, QTRIP, 2011-12 to 2014-15 will allow for a massive injection of funds for transport infrastructure. Queensland’s transport network was hit hard by the floods, sustaining more damage than 15 Jun 2011 Ministerial Statements 1821 any other piece of public infrastructure, yet the Bligh government will invest a massive $1.8 billion in transport infrastructure, as outlined in this year’s budget. It will drive forward key transport projects such as the Gold Coast rapid light-rail project and the Moreton Bay rail link. The Queensland Transport and Roads Investment Program includes $175.25 million to continue the Gold Coast Rapid Transit system project, which involves the delivery of stages of a light-rail project from Southport to Broadbeach; $12 million for early-stage works of the Moreton Bay rail link; $118.3 million to continue construction of the Richlands-Springfield railway project; $93.7 million to continue the construction of the Northern Busway between Enoggera Creek and Kedron, extending the existing busway from the Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital to Kedron at a total cost of $731.62 million; and $66.26 million to complete stage 2A of the Eastern Busway between the South East Busway and Main Avenue. Right across Queensland, $48.3 million will be spent on our cycle network, including $5 million to commence construction of the V1 Pacific Motorway cycleway between O’Keefe Street and Annerley; $2.2 million to commence construction of a section of cycleway for the David Low Way cycle facility; and $3 million to commence construction of the east of Sundale Bridge cycleway near Nerang River. However, we are not stopping there. In relation to trains, we have $61.8 million for the fabrication of an extra 30 three-car passenger trains. In relation to buses, Cairns members will be very pleased that $12 million will be provided to commence work on the City Place bus station, at a total cost of $36 million. I know that Cairns members have been calling for that. A sum of $1.1 million will be provided to construct the cycling and walking track between Yeppoon and Bondoola. This massive investment demonstrates our continued commitment to our vision of connecting Queensland. Transport across Queensland is vital, and that is why we are backing it with this substantial funding. Budget, Cost of Living Hon. KL STRUTHERS (Algester—ALP) (Minister for Community Services and Housing and Minister for Women) (10.32 am): Members on this side of the House know that every dollar counts for many Queenslanders. We know that the best way to take the pressure off families is to generate jobs, deliver more affordable housing and, for those on low incomes, provide a strong safety net with rebates and concessions. We are optimistic about Queensland, our growth and prosperity. We know that many Queenslanders will do well out of this growth, but our responsibility is also to those who do not—that is, people on fixed and limited incomes and pensioners. The Bligh government promised to ease the cost of living, and that is exactly what the Bligh government is doing, delivering on our promises. We have abolished the ambulance levy, saving $113 per year for all electricity account holders. That means savings for 1.4 million Queenslanders. The peak community service organisation, QCOSS, welcomed the $113 saving for householders and the boost to concessions, saying that this will be a great help for struggling Queenslanders. We have delivered the largest and strongest safety net of any state or territory, with almost $1.4 billion in concessions for 2011-12 to help Queenslanders with health care, electricity, water, rates, public transport costs and more. We have done that at a time when conservative governments in other states are cutting concessions. The $1.4 billion in concessions for 2011-12 includes an 11 per cent increase in the pensioner rates rebate, to $200 per annum; a 6.6 per cent increase in the electricity rebate, to $230 per annum; and a 20 per cent increase in the South-East Queensland water rebate, to $120. My Department of Communities is also creating jobs and bringing private housing to the market at 80 per cent of the market rent through the National Rent Affordability Scheme and $60 million through the Queensland Future Growth Fund to provide more social housing. Six hundred and ninety-seven new affordable rental homes have already been built under NRAS, with a further 3,000 homes set to be delivered under the scheme this financial year. With a $93 million commitment over five years, we are planning to deliver a total of 11,300 homes to be ready for people in need through NRAS by June 2014. These NRAS projects are in Buderim, Caboolture, Calamvale, Caloundra West, Gladstone, Gympie, Kingaroy, Mackay, Maroochydore, Urangan, Warwick and Yorkey’s Knob. They are all over the state. Yesterday the peak community housing organisation Shelter applauded this NRAS funding, saying— For the first time we have real growth in our housing portfolio ... the Treasurer has not forgotten low and moderate income households. This year many Queenslanders have experienced their darkest days following the devastation of floods and Cyclone Yasi. Our government is rising to the challenge with courage and optimism. Our government is building resilience and confidence. That is the Labor way of doing things. That is exactly what we have done in this budget. Budget, Mental Health Services Hon. GJ WILSON (Ferny Grove—ALP) (Minister for Health) (10.36 am): This year’s $11 billion Health budget delivers more services for Queenslanders sooner and closer to home. Our $7 billion hospital building program is the nation’s biggest, and this year we are spending $1.8 billion to deliver 1822 Ministerial Statements 15 Jun 2011 new and expanded services throughout the state. This includes $245.8 million to continue the major hospital expansions at Townsville, Mackay, Mount Isa, Cairns and Rockhampton to ensure regional Queenslanders have better access to vital health services. We are also delivering record funding for mental health services. This year’s $950 million investment is the largest in Queensland’s history. This funding will deliver promotion and prevention activities, community based services, acute inpatient services and extended treatment services. One hundred and twenty-six community mental health staff will be employed to help those affected by natural disasters, thanks to $37 million over two years from both the Bligh and Gillard governments. Our successful bid to the Australian government also resulted in an extra $73.5 million to provide 134 mental health beds across regional Queensland. This budget will also deliver a greater range of community based mental health programs for Queenslanders. A further $2.5 million will be spent to continue the $8.5 million mental health stigma campaign announced last year. That includes $600,000 over three years to help the Queensland Alliance for Mental Health boost public awareness about the impact of stigma on the lives of people experiencing mental illness and their loved ones. We want to do what we can to help this great community organisation address attitudes and behaviour towards mental health at the grassroots level. It is about greater community engagement, through innovative approaches like developing community workshops and radio programs, photographic competitions and a speakers bureau. I know the alliance has some fresh, creative ideas and we are looking forward to seeing them in action. The Bligh government is proud to partner the Queensland Alliance for Mental Health once again on this important initiative, which will help to make a significant difference in the lives of Queenslanders who have a mental illness. We are committed to working with the alliance to find innovative, new ways to support Queenslanders with a mental illness. It is another way in which we are doing things differently to help Queenslanders access the best quality health care. This is a budget that delivers for the future of Queensland. It delivers new projects, new services and new and exciting ways of doing things so that more Queenslanders can access the care they need in their local communities. Solar Hot Water Rebate Hon. S ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Energy and Water Utilities) (10.39 am): Queenslanders continue to embrace the benefits of solar energy as an affordable way to lower their household energy costs. Hot water accounts for up to 30 per cent of household energy use. Yet, by installing a solar hot-water system, Queenslanders can save up to 25 per cent on their energy bills. The Bligh government recognises the importance of these savings and provides incentives to switch to solar through our Queensland Solar Hot Water Rebate Scheme. The scheme pays a $1,000 rebate to pensioners and low-income householders to replace existing electric hot-water systems with a solar hot-water system. Other eligible applicants receive a $600 rebate. I am pleased to say that more than 17,800 Queenslanders have received solar hot water rebates since we started processing payments last July. They have collectively received more than $12.7 million towards the cost of replacing their existing electric hot-water system with a solar hot-water system or heat pump. Approximately 36 per cent of all recipients are pensioners and low-income earners. Coupled with the federal solar rebate, our rebate means the average recipient is paying less than $2,000 of their own money to install a solar hot-water system or heat pump. The Bligh government is also using the rebate scheme to provide practical help for Queenslanders affected by Cyclone Yasi and the flooding earlier this year. Many families had their hot- water systems damaged or destroyed as a result of these natural disasters. Up until recently, only householders replacing an existing electric hot-water system with a solar hot-water system were eligible to apply for payments under the rebate scheme. We have changed that to allow flood and cyclone affected householders to apply for rebates to replace an existing electric, solar or gas hot-water system damaged by the recent disaster events with a solar hot-water system. Budget, Police Resources Hon. NS ROBERTS (Nudgee—ALP) (Minister for Police, Corrective Services and Emergency Services) (10.41 am): Under Labor, increased resourcing for the Queensland Police Service has underpinned a significant reduction in crime rates. Crime rates against the person have reduced by 20 per cent over the past 10 years and the rate of property offences has reduced by 48 per cent. In this year’s budget the Police Service has been allocated more than $2.1 billion, comprising an operating budget of $1.889 billion and more than $227 million in capital expenditure. The budget includes funding for 150 additional police officers—the final instalment of the Bligh government’s election commitment to increase the number of police officers by up to 600 and to at least 10,600 by March 2012. On 1 March 2009 there were 10,043 police officers in Queensland and on 1 June 2011 there were 10,574 officers, already close to the government’s commitment of at least 10,600 officers by March next year. 15 Jun 2011 Ministerial Statements 1823

The 2011-12 budget also includes $43.8 million to fund new, refurbished and upgraded police facilities across the state including: the new Police Beat at Burleigh Heads and the refurbishment of the existing Burleigh Heads police complex; the upgrade of Calliope Police Station; further work to progress the new Townsville district police facility; and the replacement or upgrade of facilities at various locations including Lockhart River, Beenleigh and Goodna police stations, and the heritage listed police facility at Mackay, the Oxley district forensic facility and the Pine Rivers district office. The ongoing development of the new state-of-the-art $452 million Police Academy at Wacol has attracted $54.9 million in this budget. An amount of $51 million will be spent on a range of information and communication technology initiatives and the capabilities of the state’s water police will be significantly boosted by a $12.7 million funding allocation to purchase three new catamarans for North Queensland. In an effort to keep our roads safe and reduce the tragic number of deaths in traffic crashes, an additional $25.7 million has been allocated for the continued deployment of fixed and mobile speed cameras across the state. The budget also delivers $3.1 million to continue the trial of drink-safe precincts in Townsville, Surfers Paradise and Fortitude Valley. The Bligh government is giving the Police Service the resources it needs to continue to fight crime, keep our communities safe and continue to drive down crime rates. Budget, Tourism Industry Hon. JH JARRATT (Whitsunday—ALP) (Minister for Tourism, Manufacturing and Small Business) (10.43 am): Our state tourism operators are set to reap the benefits that flow from a massive $83 million injection over four years to support major events and regional events right across Queensland. The record allocation for Events Queensland of $175 million over four years is a down payment on the industry’s future. This is an engine kick-starter and it signals renewed optimism in our state and the year ahead. There is no doubt that events play a key role in supporting our $9 billion tourism industry—and so they should. After all, Queensland is where Australia shines. There are marathons, exhibitions like the blockbuster surrealism exhibition at GoMA, Gemfest, the Port Douglas Festival and the North Queensland Games to name just a few of the wonderful events across Queensland. Tourism powers 222,000 local jobs and 115,000 businesses right across the state. Every dollar that this government invests in events translates into a $10 return. That is a significant investment in our future. Take Challenge Cairns and what it has done for the morale and confidence of Far North Queensland. This show stopper ironman event gave the good people of Cairns reason to smile, boosting business confidence and ramping up enthusiasm for what is coming next. Mr Pitt: Hear, hear! Ms JARRATT: I take that interjection. A significant events program means more tourists, more business for tourism operators, more local jobs and a shot in the arm for local economies. On top of this great news on events funding, the budget contains $60 million for tourism marketing and business assistance to keep tourism in Queensland front and centre. We will continue to promote Queensland through a strong intra and interstate marketing campaign that builds on the success of the Nothing Beats Queensland campaign. International marketing remains an important part of the work of Tourism Queensland and, of course, we will continue to focus on the emerging markets of Asia including China, which grew by 29 per cent to 197,000 visitors in the year ending March 2011. But there is more good news in the budget for businesses including tourism businesses across the state. For small businesses and manufacturing, the Bligh government’s Jobs Assist program gets a $1.3 million boost—and that is on top of the $2.5 million Flood and Cyclone Recovery Business Program. There is $2.65 million going to QMI Solutions to continue driving more innovative business solutions and best practice in the manufacturing industry. Of course, there is the establishment of Queensland’s first business commissioner to oversee regulatory reform in the state and work with industry to reduce red tape. This is a strong budget, a budget for an optimistic year ahead for tourism, manufacturing and small business and it truly shows we are back in business in a big way. Budget, Environmental Protection Hon. KJ JONES (Ashgrove—ALP) (Minister for Environment and Resource Management) (10.47 am): Our government is committed to ensuring Queensland has a strong environmental watchdog. That is why in this year’s budget we are providing more than $27 million for the department’s strong compliance and regulatory regime to crack down on breaches of Queensland’s tough environmental laws. Among a range of compliance measures, this funding will allow our officers to undertake nearly 700 targeted inspections and audits of businesses and work sites across Queensland. This is a proactive approach to environmental protection and allows us to identify those who are breaking the law or at risk of causing environmental harm. We want to send a clear message to those individuals and businesses that operate in Queensland that we expect them to operate in an environmentally responsible way. We will act to protect our environment and environmental vandals will not be tolerated. 1824 Ministerial Statements 15 Jun 2011

This year a key focus of our compliance activities will be in the CSG sector. In particular, the state budget is continuing to bolster the operations of the government’s centralised LNG Enforcement Unit. We have this year beefed up the unit from 30 to 50 officers on the ground with expertise of officers from both the Department of Environment and Resource Management and DEEDI. The unit will be undertaking the proactive monitoring of 300 bores in 2011 and another 300 in 2012. Already this year the Department of Environment and Resource Management has proactively tested 127 bores with no adverse findings or impacts on aquifers identified. The Department of Environment and Resource Management is also undertaking almost 190 proactive inspections and audits across an extensive range of CSG operations as well as establishing the CSG compliance portal, which will fulfil the government’s commitment to transparency, particularly for landholders. In addition to these proactive activities, the LNG Enforcement Unit will also continue to ensure that any complaints received about the CSG industry are promptly investigated and appropriate enforcement action is taken. We are committed to ensuring that this growing industry is properly regulated and monitored and that companies know we are serious about protecting the environment. Skilling Queenslanders for Work Hon. SJ HINCHLIFFE (Stafford—ALP) (Minister for Employment, Skills and Mining) (10.49 am): The Bligh government wants to see as many Queenslanders as possible take advantage of the jobs being delivered by our state’s growth. That is why we have committed $104.5 million in the 2011-12 budget to help more than 24,000 Queenslanders into jobs through the very successful Skilling Queenslanders for Work program. Under the Skilling Queenslanders for Work program, Queenslanders who have been experiencing significant barriers to entering or re-entering the workforce are given a hand to find their way into jobs. Programs are run by community organisations which target training to local skills needs across local Queensland communities. Participants get jobs and training in diverse fields like construction, horticulture, retail, hospitality, administration, community services and aged care. This allows participants to join the workforce and increase the pool of skilled workers available in the community. Since becoming employment minister a few months ago, I have visited several of these projects in places like the Gold Coast, Rockhampton, Gladstone, Brisbane and Logan, and I am very pleased with what I have seen. Participants have been involved in a range of community based projects. They have learned important skills and demonstrated their work readiness by turning up to work on time and putting in a hard day’s work. Many of these projects are focused on flood and cyclone recovery, making it a win for participants and a win for the community. Newly developed skills and a strong work history help participants build a strong resume and put their best foot forward when it comes to applying for jobs in the wider market. There is no doubt that heavy investment in the mining and resources sectors is putting pressure on our existing workforce. That is why it is important that anyone who can work is working. This is a $104 million investment in the future of Queensland to help Queenslanders take full advantage of the jobs on offer. It is a $104 million investment to get all hands on deck so the Queensland economy can meet its full potential. Budget, Construction Industry Hon. SD FINN (Yeerongpilly—ALP) (Minister for Government Services, Building Industry and Information and Communication Technology) (10.51 am): The state budget delivers for Queenslanders in all parts of the state, from the Far North to the southern border. It is a budget designed to manage growth, tackle congestion and deliver major infrastructure projects through a skilled workforce. One of the central features of this budget is the $10,000 building boost to new homebuyers and builders. This is a targeted initiative to support jobs and reinvigorate the state’s building industry, which is still feeling the effects of the global financial crisis. The Queensland building industry supports over 220,000 jobs and is worth $85 billion a year to the state’s economy. I meet regularly with industry representatives and stakeholders to determine the support needed by the building and construction sectors. The key message I receive is that the industry continues to struggle following the GFC, particularly in the residential sector. I know that the industry supports the building boost initiative, which will stimulate a residential building revival across Queensland. I welcome the comments of Graham Cuthbert of the Queensland Master Builders Association and Warwick Temby of the HIA. Both of these men speak to me regularly and both have spoken about the need to create a stimulus in the industry just like this budget does. The Bligh government has a long-term vision to create stronger government services for Queenslanders no matter where they live. This budget will deliver important projects throughout the state, including CBD revitalisations in Cairns and Townsville, a new multipurpose cyclone shelter in Mackay and an extra $8 million over two years for a major redevelopment of Rockhampton’s riverside precinct. This budget also has a strong focus on managing growth and tackling congestion to ensure all Queenslanders continue to enjoy the state’s enviable lifestyle. 15 Jun 2011 Notices of Motion 1825

One of the key themes to emerge at the 2010 Queensland Growth Management Summit was the need to balance jobs, growth and development with improved livability. A key plank of the budget targeted at this theme is the $53.8 million initiative to decentralise government services and reduce pressure on Brisbane’s CBD. It means a new office building in Bowen Hills and the refurbishment of existing buildings at the former QUT campus at Carseldine, supporting 1,000 government workers by late 2012. It also means the fit-out of a new leased office building in Ipswich for 1,200 government workers. Yesterday’s budget also invests in skills and vital infrastructure throughout the state, including $8.6 million to employ 320 QBuild apprentices, $30 million to build 10 multipurpose cyclone shelters, $6.3 million to refurbish the Cairns Convention Centre and $1 million for the fit-out of the Yungaba Multicultural Centre at Kangaroo Point. In addition to all of this, the budget continues to support the delivery of major projects, including the $1.76 billion Gold Coast University Hospital; the $1.4 billion Queensland Children’s Hospital; the $570 million Supreme Court and District Court complex in Brisbane’s CBD; and hospital redevelopments in Ipswich, Cairns, Townsville, Mackay and Rockhampton. This is a budget which delivers on our vision to create a stronger, fairer, more prosperous and more livable Queensland. Budget, Stephanie Alexander Kitchen Garden Program Hon. CR DICK (Greenslopes—ALP) (Minister for Education and Industrial Relations) (10.55 am): The Queensland government is committed to enhancing the health and wellbeing of young Queenslanders. As a result, we provide students with a range of opportunities to develop their knowledge and skills so they can lead healthy lives. As an example of this, since 2005 the Department of Education and Training has implemented strategies such as the Smart Choices Healthy Food and Drink Supply Strategy and the Smart Moves physical activity strategy to ensure all state schools are healthy places for students to learn. Schools also have access to a range of quality programs to enhance a school-wide approach to health and nutrition. To that end, I am pleased to announce that this year’s state budget includes $1.82 million to support the ongoing implementation of the national Stephanie Alexander Kitchen Garden Program in state primary schools in Queensland. This program supports schools in building their own gardens and kitchens to help students learn about healthy cooking and eating. In fact, students in years 4 to 7 from schools that adopt the Stephanie Alexander program are exposed to a range of hands-on experiences as they grow, cook and share freshly grown foods. Students are supported by kitchen and garden specialists as part of the program, and they get the chance to design and build a garden where they grow their own fresh produce. They then use this produce to prepare healthy, delicious food for themselves, their families and their school communities. This program has already proved to be popular and worthwhile at Bulimba State School, which is a demonstration site for the program in Queensland. The member for Bulimba is a great champion of this program, and I know that she and other members of the government will welcome this announcement. Students who have participated in the program have shown an increased willingness to try new foods and have improved their knowledge, confidence and skills in cooking and gardening as a result. The Bligh government is keen to build on this success, and the funding allocation in the 2011-12 budget will allow a further 25 state primary schools to take part, doubling the number of Queensland schools currently involved. This is a positive program that will help us achieve our Toward Q2 health targets by encouraging healthy eating habits among young Queenslanders.

NOTICES OF MOTION

Carbon Tax Mr SEENEY (Callide—LNP) (Leader of the Opposition) (10.57 am): I give notice that I will move— That this House call on the Premier to rule out completely any support for the carbon tax being proposed by her Federal Labor colleagues, or require the Treasurer to immediately include the impacts of such a new tax in the budget forecasts so that the people of Queensland can fully understand the devastating effects of a new carbon tax on a State budget that is reliant on a major expansion of Queensland’s resources industries and massive international investment in new coal and gas projects for the increased income forecasts the Government is relying upon to reverse its ongoing disastrous financial decline? Mineral Exploration Mr MESSENGER (Burnett—Ind) (10.58 am): I give notice that I will move— That this House notes that: According to a Parliamentary Library study: 1) Public notification is required of the application of initial mineral exploration in all State jurisdictions (except Queensland). 1826 Questions Without Notice 15 Jun 2011

2) In Queensland notification is only required where the permit application is being processed in accordance with native title procedures. 3) Only Queensland and New South Wales have no provision for objections to the grant of the application for an initial mineral exploration. And calls on the Government and opposition to commit to amending Queensland mining laws: to 1) Require public notification of all initial mineral exploration. 2) Enable our land owners and farmers to formally object to the grant of initial application for mineral exploration. Thereby ensuring that our farmers and land owners have the same property rights and legal protection from mining companies as other Australian farmers and land owners. Tabled paper: Client Information Brief by Queensland Parliamentary Library, dated 19 May 2011, relating to rights of rural landholders in their dealings with resource companies [4672]. Mr SPEAKER: There are now six notices of motion on the Notice Paper. I ask the Leader of the House which notice of motion the House intends to debate today. Ms SPENCE: The government will debate the notice of motion put forward by the Leader of the Opposition this morning.

SPEAKER’S STATEMENT

Visitors to Public Gallery Mr SPEAKER: Today, honourable members will be visited by the St John’s Cathedral group and also by the students, teachers and parents of the Norris Road State School in the electorate of Sandgate.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Budget, Stamp Duty Mr SEENEY (10.59 am): My first question without notice is to the Treasurer. I refer to the announcement yesterday of the rises in stamp duty, which will cost Queenslanders buying a $400,000 house as their principal place of residence an extra $6,575, which is being justified as being necessary to fund the Building Boost Grant of $10,000. Why is the 125 per cent rise in stamp duty a permanent impost on Queenslanders while the Building Boost Grant will last for only six months? Mr FRASER: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question today. The answer is that the removal of the community ambulance cover levy from everyone’s power bills is a permanent removal; it is a permanent removal each and every year. In fact, in Budget Paper No. 4, right there in black and white—in fact, it is the proudest and last entry under the Treasury ‘Revenue measures’—is the complete abolition of the community ambulance cover levy, not just this year but also next year, the year after that and the year after that. Each and every year, it has gone. Of course, this morning we have had Campbell Newman out there on the radio, out there with his usual puffery and hot air, refusing to say what he would do. He said that of course he supports removing the ambulance levy, but has he told Queenslanders what he would do? No. Has he said how he would fund removing the ambulance levy? The answer is no because what we have seen already, 24 hours after the budget was handed down, is a return to type for the LNP. Now we have the arrangement whereby later this week the shadow Treasurer will deliver the budget reply, not the Leader of the Opposition. For the first time in the known history of this parliament, the Leader of the Opposition is not going to give the budget reply. I tell you what: if I turned up in budget week and did not do my job, I would be asked to give the pay cheque back at the end of the week. Maybe the Leader of the Opposition should hand back his pay cheque at the end of the week if he is not going to do the job. Given that he has asked the shadow Treasurer to do it, maybe he might find it within himself to donate his pay cheque to the St Vincent de Paul quest against homelessness, which is what the shadow Treasurer and I will be doing on Thursday night, because, sure as eggs, he has not earned one cent of that money this week. Queenslanders should know this: this government will continue to work, to put forward policies, to make the choices, to spell them out in detail, to put the detail in the budget and to explain to Queenslanders exactly what we propose to do and how we are going to do it. What we get from the other side is nothing but puffery and hot air. Yesterday I saw Campbell Newman comparing himself to Mal Meninga. Let me say this: I know that Mal Meninga’s game plan will include Darren Lockyer running onto the field tonight. I am pretty sure the captain is going to be on the field. I am pretty sure the captain will be in the middle. I am pretty sure that, like always, Locky will let the actions speak louder than the words. Maybe that is what we should see from Campbell Newman—a bit of action and not just words. At the moment, I am pretty sure it is not 15 Jun 2011 Questions Without Notice 1827

Mal’s idea that he will get the ball boy on the sidelines to cheer and direct the traffic. What we need to see from LNP members is them coming up with a policy, with something written down and put into the public arena so that we can have a policy debate. Mr SPEAKER: Before I call the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Buderim’s earlier interjection was unparliamentary. You will apologise to the House and withdraw it. Mr Dickson: I apologise and withdraw. Budget, Electricity Prices Mr SEENEY: My next question without notice is to the Premier. I refer to the removal of the regressive and unfair ambulance tax from the power bills of Queenslanders in yesterday’s budget. Is the removal of this regressive and unfair tax from Queenslanders’ power bills an overdue recognition that the price of electricity is a major burden for Queensland families? What plans does the government have to relieve the pressure of the additional $700 a year that has been added to the electricity costs of Queenslanders since the Premier promised that no Queenslander would be worse off under the government’s electricity reforms? Ms BLIGH: I thank the honourable Leader of the Opposition for his question. I am very pleased that in this year’s budget, despite the fact that our economy has been hit by the biggest disasters in this nation’s history, we are able to deliver a cost-of-living benefit to households and small businesses— 1.4 million of them right across Queensland. Honourable members interjected. Ms BLIGH: I listen to those opposite squawking. All I can assume is that, when it comes to voting on this measure, they will not only support the elimination of this levy but also support the tax measures in the budget that actually deliver it. He asked the first question— Honourable members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Both sides will come to order. Ms BLIGH: I grew up in a Queensland run by the Queensland National Party where the ambulance system in this state was funded by chook raffles. What we have delivered is one of the most modern— Opposition members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Stop the clock! The House will come to order. Ms BLIGH: With every budget that we have delivered, we are systematically transforming Queensland into a modern, thriving economy of the 21st century. This year, because we are prepared to make the hard decisions, we will deliver an Ambulance Service fully funded from the budget, as other emergency services in Queensland are. What is remarkable about the questions we have heard this morning is that the first question implies that opposition members do not support the budget measure that will actually fund the subject of their second question. So they want to abolish the ambulance levy but they do not want to support the budget measure that will deliver it. It is no surprise which member asked both of these questions that of course contradict each other, because this is the Leader of the Opposition who tomorrow will not be standing up and outlining on behalf of his party what his economic strategy is. What is one of the central responsibilities of an opposition leader anywhere in Australia? It is to stand up once a year and say what the economic plan is, to stand up once a year and say, ‘This is my strategy,’ to stand up once a year and say, ‘This is what I come in here and get paid for.’ But the member for Callide, having outsourced the leadership, is now outsourcing the budget reply. We now have three leaders in waiting: we have the leader who is being paid to do the job of leader but is not up to it; we have the indolent member for Clayfield, who wants to have a crack tomorrow; and then we have the guy outside, the overexcited candidate for Ashgrove, running up and down on the sidelines handing out the oranges. I note that Campbell Newman compared himself to Mal Meninga. Mal Meninga has run open training sessions for everyone to see his game plan. It is New South Wales that keeps them closed, and we know where that gets them. Business Investment Mr KILBURN: My question without notice is to the Premier. Could the Premier inform the House how this government intends to encourage investment in our state and tell the world that Queensland is back in business? Ms BLIGH: I cannot think of a better day than a State of Origin day to talk about Queensland and to make the obvious point that nothing beats Queensland. It seems that those on the other side have made it their business to constantly talk down our state. They have never been so wrong. Queensland is on a launch pad and we are set to rocket into a new era of prosperity. As our neighbours in Asia and our 1828 Questions Without Notice 15 Jun 2011 trading partners in South America gain more prosperous economies, we are the country that is best placed to sell them ideas, to sell them energy, to trade food, biotechnology and education and to sell them a breathtaking tourism destination. Growth in 2011-12 is forecast at five per cent, as an investment surge will drive a rapid economic expansion right through Queensland’s regions—way beyond our natural disasters. Business investment is expected to surge by a stellar 27.75 per cent. There is nothing like it anywhere else in the nation. The volume of exports is expected to grow by a decade-high rate of 10 per cent. We are maintaining the lowest tax rate in the nation. Our taxation is over $500 less per capita than the average of other Australian states. So if you are lucky enough to be a Queenslander, you are paying $500 less in state taxes every single year than any other Australian. We maintained the lowest payroll tax in Australia and the highest threshold for paying that tax. We have one of the lowest workers compensation regimes in the country. We expect to see employment numbers grow rapidly on the back of all of this investment. But it is not an accident and it is no coincidence that we are seeing this investment. We went to the last election promising to facilitate new industries like LNG, and in just 2½ years we have delivered it. Despite the efforts of those opposite to get in the way and despite the efforts of those opposite to scare and cause fear about this new industry, we are delivering it and it is delivering $40 billion into the regional economies of Queensland. In tourism we are seeing a steady increase of visitors from China—nine per cent last year—and it is a massive growing market. That is why we have invested in big marketing campaigns in China and that is why we are going to continue to drive investment like the events funding in this year’s budget into growing our tourism sector. Queenslanders can be full of optimism. Those on this side of the House look at the future of Queensland as a strong, bright future with opportunities for themselves, the people they represent, their families and their children. These opportunities are being created by a Labor government. Budget, Electricity Prices Mr NICHOLLS: My question is to the Treasurer. Yesterday when boasting about the budget, the Premier proudly proclaimed to the media that the Treasurer had ‘pulled a rabbit out of a hat’. Given that Queenslanders will still be out of pocket after this year’s electricity price rises, even when Labor’s ambulance tax is removed from power bills, what rabbits has the Treasurer got left in his hat to deal with future electricity price rises and cost-of-living increases, or was this year’s rabbit really a one-shot rabbit? Mr FRASER: I thank the shadow Treasurer for the question. Let us be really clear about what the government proposed yesterday. What the government proposed was a plan for the here and now of the Queensland economy and of the future and laid out in detail, in full, fully costed the way we are going to achieve it. I would recommend the shadow Treasurer buying a hat, and he should try pulling something out of it. He should try pulling a policy out of it and laying it on the table here so that we can have a fair dinkum policy debate in this state—a fair dinkum policy debate about the future of this state, a fair dinkum debate about the economic policies of this state and not just the political debate that those opposite want to have. Let us move it from the politics and on to the policy. Let us bring it on to the main field, because at the moment those opposite have a leader who cannot produce policies. They have a leader in here who cannot give the budget reply. They have a leader on the outside jumping up and down on the sidelines like one of those sponsored ball boys with a slogan on their front there to attract attention for the marketing people—just jumping up and down and drawing attention to himself but contributing nothing. What the LNP needs to do is to come into this parliament and present alternative policies. Last night the shadow Treasurer committed that on Thursday those opposite would be delivering a vision—a vision splendid; not a policy but a vision. The shimmer is taking place, because what did he say last night? What was the best quote from the shadow Treasurer on the 7.30 Report last night? He said— It doesn’t much matter what Standard & Poor’s say. There you go! Here is the vision! We all know what happened when Standard & Poor’s put a little bit of pressure on the little fellow at Brisbane City Council. He jumped right out the window, sacked them—got rid of Standard & Poor’s—and here is the vision! Here is the insight into the future. Two years he has been carrying on about the credit rating, and what does he say? ‘It doesn’t matter what they say.’ Yes, it does. Yes, it does and that is why each and every budget of this parliament this government has put forward an economic plan—an economic agenda that has delivered $17½ billion less debt this year and which has repositioned the state’s balance sheet ready for the future. What we will continue to see from this government is the proposals and the policies of the future and what we will see from the other side are just slogans, rhetoric, hot air and politics—no policy between them. They have three leaders now trying to write the budget speech—three leaders in waiting, all of whom are positioning. Yesterday it was the Pride of Erin and today it is Ring-a-Ring-a-Rosie: they 15 Jun 2011 Questions Without Notice 1829 will be in a circle trying to work out what to put in the budget speech. Well, here is a tip: why don’t you come into this place and tell the people of Queensland what you are going to do? Why don’t you tell them how you are going to pay for it? And why don’t you level with the people of Queensland about the absence of ideas this indolent lot has? Budget, Regional Queensland Ms NELSON-CARR: My question without notice is to the Premier. There has been a focus on the big spending for infrastructure for the regions in this budget, but could the Premier outline some of the ways this budget is delivering services and assistance to regional Queenslanders? Ms BLIGH: I thank the member for her question. The member for Mundingburra knows not only well some of the challenges of living in regional Queensland, as great as it is, but also some of the challenges of getting services there where people need them. As I said, with every budget that we have delivered we have been working to transform Queensland—to drag it out of the backwater status of the last century under the leadership of those opposite and into a thriving, modern economy of the 21st century, one where you can get up the day after the budget and see a headline in the national newspaper that says that Queensland is set to power the nation. Whether it is an extra year of schooling, whether it is more health services, whether it is Disabilities, Child Safety or Police, Queensland has been seeing an increased level of service delivery in every part of our regions thanks to a Labor government. That is why in this year’s budget there are subsidies to ensure that we can get those services to the regions—subsidies like more than $54 million to help people travel to access medical specialists and more than $400 million so that regional Queenslanders pay a similar price for electricity as the rest of the state. That is a subsidy of about $580 per customer in regional Queensland. I note the interest of those opposite talking about electricity prices today. What do you think is happening over the border in New South Wales? New South Wales power bills are to increase by 17 per cent—17 per cent! Honourable members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Stop the clock. I will just wait for the House to come to order. I call the Premier. Ms BLIGH: Thank you, Mr Speaker. A New South Wales Liberal government is delivering 17 per cent electricity price rises to the people who have the misfortune of living over the border. Honourable members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Stop the clock. I call the Premier. Ms BLIGH: Thank you, Mr Speaker. This week we look forward to hearing from those opposite what they would do about cost of living, how they would relieve pressure on households, how they would stimulate Queensland’s industries. That is what we saw outlined in full in yesterday’s budget. We know that it was such a good budget that the member for Callide cannot find a thing to say about it so he has given up. He has asked the member for Clayfield to pick up the baton. He is getting the water boy to run on and give him a few clues. This week it is time to shape up for the LNP. This week it is time for it to stand up and say what it believes in, what it will do, how it will do it and how it will fund it. I predict right now that it will not have a clue! Budget, Queensland Health Payroll System Mr McARDLE: My question is to the Minister for Health. Given it has been 422 days since the Premier said the government would work day and night to fix the Health payroll mess, will the minister admit that, if Labor had not had to spend $210 million fixing the bungled Health payroll system, the extra $91 million of taxpayer money wasted in yesterday’s budget to fix Labor’s mistakes could have been used to fund the 100 beds the Bligh Labor government failed to deliver last year? Mr WILSON: I thank the honourable member for the question. We are spending a record sum in Queensland in building— Honourable members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Minister, just resume your seat. I will wait for the House to come to order. Honourable members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The House will come to order. I call the Minister for Health. Mr WILSON: I thank the Speaker. This year’s budget is a record budget—providing more beds and more services sooner and closer to home for Queenslanders wherever they live—a $1.8 billion building program, part of our $7 billion program, expanding hospitals and emergency departments and building new hospitals right across the state. What we are doing— Mr McArdle: What about the Health payroll? 1830 Questions Without Notice 15 Jun 2011

Mr WILSON: The honourable member obviously has not been here for a long time. It has been made clear that the payroll system has been stabilised and we are implementing the recommendations of Ernst & Young to address the improvements that are taking place. That is on the record and it has been on the record for many, many months. Opposition members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Those on my left will cease interjecting. The minister was asked the question about the payroll system. I could understand some frustration if the minister was not addressing the payroll system. As I understand it, the minister is addressing that very aspect now. Mr WILSON: So what is the opposition’s vision for the future for Queensland Health and providing public health services in Queensland? We will never know about it, because it has no idea, no plans and no vision. We have just employed nearly 5,000 people—a record number of doctors, a record number of nurses, a record number of allied health professionals employed since 2009—fulfilling and, indeed, exceeding our election commitment to employ extra doctors, nurses and allied health professionals. We have increased the budget to $950 million for mental health care—a record in Queensland. We are rolling out cancer treatment services right across the state. For example, we are nearly doubling the capacity of the Townsville emergency department at the Townsville Hospital. We are spending more than $400 million expanding the Cairns Hospital, the Townsville Hospital, the Mackay Hospital and the Rockhampton Hospital. We are spending about $65 million expanding the Mount Isa Hospital. We are providing more beds and more services sooner and closer to home. We have no idea what the opposition would do in this area. (Time expired) Construction Industry Mr CHOI: My question is for the Deputy Premier. For the information of the House, I am very proud of the fact that my electorate of Capalaba has the highest number of construction workers and tradies in the whole state. Can the Deputy Premier inform the House about what steps the government is taking to support Queensland’s struggling construction industry? Mr LUCAS: The building and construction industry is one of our largest industries. It employs hundreds of thousands of Queenslanders. In fact, to put the industry in perspective, according to the AEC report, commissioned and delivered in April 2011, it contributed about $30.9 billion to Queensland’s gross state product in 2009-10. That is actually 1½ times the contribution of the traditional economic powerhouses of manufacturing and mining. So that figure gives some perspective of the size of the sector. The building and construction sector is also an industry that has been hit very hard by the global financial crisis. Access Economics reports show that that industry has lost potentially up to 35,000 jobs in the past 12 months. That is why the Bligh government hosted the Building Revival Forum earlier this year, bringing together industry, stakeholders and various groups to talk about how we might further stimulate and support the building industry, which is very, very critical. Members would be aware of the Queensland Building Boost—the six-month $140 million initiative with a $10,000 grant towards the purchase of a new home up to the value of $600,000. Mr Seeney: For six months. Mr LUCAS: The honourable member again neglects to think and understand that every quarter people will get relief off their power bills as part of this budget. This has been welcomed by the industry. There is up to $2 million for the council of mayors and the LGAQ to extend the successful Target 5 Days project into a state-wide development assessment process reform program supported by local government. But significantly, there is $1.8 million for the creation of a new major projects office. That office will facilitate economically significant projects that fall outside the province of the Coordinator- General or the Urban Land Development Authority. So it is a one-stop shop for those larger developments that are not CG or ULDA matters. People do not want to negotiate the morass of government approvals and negotiations with councils and the like. This office will work hand in hand with councils for those sorts of projects. A recent Urbis report demonstrated the importance of major projects, projecting that 10 identified major retail projects in Queensland would deliver 14,400 jobs and $351 million per annum in gross state product and $1.5 billion added expenditure. The Leader of the Opposition, who is not going to deliver a speech, ought to know that Kathy MacDermott from the Property Council said— The state government’s commitment to create a major projects office sends a powerful message to investors that Queensland is back in business. The Shopping Centre Council’s Angus Nardi said— The major projects office is a welcome commitment and it is pleasing the government has acted quickly on this initiative, which was raised as a major reform option at Premier Bligh’s Building Revival Forum. 15 Jun 2011 Questions Without Notice 1831

Warwick Temby said of the $10,000 grant— We think it is a fabulous initiative. Graham Cuthbert from the MBA said that the $10,000 grant— ... would be a significant boost to us over the next six months. We are getting on with the job. How could the Leader of the Opposition, when he cannot even deliver a speech, dare criticise the initiatives in the budget? He has no idea. He is bereft of them.

Gateway Bridge Dr ROBINSON: My question is to the Minister for Main Roads, Fisheries and Marine Infrastructure. Given that motorists have been paying the cost of building the Gateway Bridge for over 25 years, can the minister explain how the $3 billion sale of the Gateway Bridge returned only $14 million to taxpayers? Mr Lucas interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Deputy Premier! Mr Lucas interjected. Mr Seeney interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Both sides of the House. The Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting. Mr Lucas: You can’t deliver your own speech. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Deputy Premier will cease interjecting. Mr Lucas: You can’t deliver your own speech. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I will warn the Deputy Premier under standing order 253A(1). I will not have a repeat. I asked three times for the House to come to order. I do that because I want order. Mr WALLACE: I thank you, Mr Speaker, and thank you for your protection. What great projects at that Gateway—that second new bridge that Queenslanders enjoy. Indeed, over the Easter period there were record numbers on that bridge and also there is the work on those southern approaches that this Labor government is delivering. That is why that bridge was tolled and that is why its lease is such good news for motorists across Queensland. It frees us up to deliver a $19 billion package for roads and transport across the state of Queensland for the next four years—$19 billion that will help free up expenditure on our roads across the state for important projects in the north-west, important projects between Townsville and Charters Towers that will deliver two new overtaking lanes that we fought for; important projects at Rockhampton, like that Gracemere overpass that will deliver access to that very busy industrial park; important projects right up and down the state of Queensland, because we have made that tough decision and that is why we did it. We made the tough decisions to free up our assets, but that does not deflect from the great work that we have done on that Gateway Motorway—an engineering structure that I have had many people from across the globe come to have a look at and commend us on. That is why our decision to free up assets for a $19 billion spend on transport and roads is the right thing to do. From South-East Queensland to the tip of Cape York, we will be undertaking massive roadworks across our state for the next four years, because we made the tough decision. Ms Bligh: What about on the Bruce Highway? Mr WALLACE: Including the Bruce Highway. I take the Premier’s interjection. So from Brisbane up to Cairns along the Bruce Highway we have managed to fund a range of projects along with the federal government, because we made the tough decisions. Those roadworks that are much needed north of Caboolture are funded because we made the tough decisions. The Cooroy to Curra section of the Bruce Highway was funded because we made the tough decisions—decisions that they have run away from. What about that $921 million package that we announced for the Fitzroy yesterday— $921 million record funding for roads because we made the tough decisions? Those on the other side have made no decisions at all. All they do is whinge while on this side of the House we work. They have no plan for roads, they have no plan for transport. All they do is whinge. That is the only plan they have.

Budget, Construction Industry Mrs KEECH: My question is to the Treasurer and Minister for State Development and Trade. Can the Treasurer advise the House how the Queensland Building Boost initiative will create jobs and stimulate the housing industry in Queensland and in particular on the Gold Coast? 1832 Questions Without Notice 15 Jun 2011

Mr FRASER: I thank the member for Albert for her question and for her continued advocacy for the development of the Gold Coast economy to support jobs on the Gold Coast. The Queensland Building Boost, the $140 million stimulus package announced yesterday, will just do that—it will do it on the Gold Coast and it will do it right around the state. It will do it by funding new construction—new builds. What has the industry said about the Queensland Building Boost announced yesterday? The Property Council yesterday said that the state budget was highly commended. They said ‘the initiative would simultaneously stimulate demand in the residential housing sector and also address Queensland’s housing affordability’ and that the Queensland Building Boost ‘hits the target perfectly’. Kathy MacDermott went on to say that the grant will allow thousands of families to access a new home and it will protect jobs in the housing development sector throughout the state. Warwick Temby, from the Housing Industry Association, said, ‘We think it’s a fabulous initiative’. Kingsley Andrew from Stockland said that it is a smart move that will give homebuyers the confidence they have been looking for to make this move now. The UDIA said that we got the choice right in declining to go on with the tax break in making this decision, just as the Master Builders did, because those men, people like Brian Stewart and Graham Cuthbert, are able to see a policy and make a choice. They understand what it takes in the real world, and that is why they were able to go out and say very clearly that this is a targeted measure. Over the last 24 hours we have seen the Real Estate Institute, the association that represents real estate agents in this state, criticising the move and saying that it will be to the detriment of the real estate industry. As a politician who is the son of a car salesman, I might just question whether we should take at face value what real estate agents say. Let us be clear about this: when someone buys an established house a real estate agent gets the commission in the pack pocket, but when someone builds a new house what happens? When someone builds a new house there are jobs for builders, carpenters, plumbers and painters and jobs for those people who are working in retail stores for the new curtains, dishwasher and furniture going into the new home. This is unashamedly about new homes and new jobs. That is the choice we have made. We have the guts to make it. It is State of Origin week, so it is ‘game on’ tonight and it is ‘game on’ in the Queensland policy debate. The problem is that Campbell Newman still thinks he is playing in the Toyota Cup in under-20s. Well, this is State of Origin. This is the real deal here, where real men and women of substance get on the field. We want to see Campbell Newman get on the field and come up with the goods—to quit with the puffery, the rhetoric and the windbagging criticism and actually get into the middle of the field, to come in here where the real men play. It is a State of Origin policy debate and we want to see Campbell Newman turn up. Budget, Ministerial Accountability Ms SIMPSON: My question is to the Premier. I refer to the fact that the Premier let the Deputy Premier off the hook for the costly and outrageous Health payroll disaster and is yet to hold one of her ministers accountable for waste and mismanagement generally. Given that yesterday’s budget plunged the state into even more debt while Labor has raised power prices, rego, bulk water prices and stamp duty to help pay for this mismanagement, will the Premier pledge this year to make ministers accountable for spending money wisely and completing projects on time and on budget? Ms BLIGH: No wonder it is going to take three of them to write a budget reply speech! They can barely get halfway through question time with questions that have any grunt. What we see from those opposite is a constant attempt to drag Queensland down. I think it is very disappointing that the former Lord Mayor of Brisbane has so quickly become a Queensland basher. We on this side of the House are unashamedly pro Queensland. We are unashamedly optimistic about Queensland’s future. We believe that Queensland will lead the nation and it will happen because a Labor government in Queensland is driving that economy. Economies are driven by pulling the economic levers that are available. What members saw in yesterday’s budget was a government unafraid to pull those levers—a government determined and passionate about the future, a government with the stamina and the courage to make the decisions that have to be made. What members saw yesterday was a Treasurer who delivered a state budget that I think on any measure has to be described as a gutsy play—a play that your bloke would not have the guts or the imagination to deliver. Of course, it is hard to know which bloke I am talking about, whether it is the member for Callide, the member for Clayfield or the overexcited candidate for Ashgrove. Mr Wallace: It might be Maroochydore. Ms BLIGH: It might be the member for Maroochydore, who is always a dark horse in any contest. The member for Maroochydore obviously did not hear my answer to a previous question. I am very happy to remind her again that the New South Wales Liberal Party went to the recent election promising to cut electricity prices for the people of New South Wales. It did not have a plan. It did not have a clue how it would do it. What happened? It delivered a price rise of 17 per cent, almost three times the price rise in Queensland. 15 Jun 2011 Questions Without Notice 1833

Opposition members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Those on my left. Ms BLIGH: Those opposite do not like it. I will tell members where I would rather be paying electricity prices—in Queensland, not New South Wales. The electricity prices in Queensland are already cheaper than those in New South Wales, and after a 17 per cent increase delivered by a Liberal government in New South Wales our prices will be even cheaper in comparison. We have cheaper prices than the Liberal government has delivered in Victoria. We have lower increases than in Western Australia. This is a government delivering for households. This is a government growing an economy. This is a government unashamedly optimistic and pro Queensland. Budget, Cost of Living Ms DARLING: My question is for the Minister for Energy and Water Utilities. Can the minister please update the House on what the Bligh government has done to balance the pressures of providing essential electricity supply to Queenslanders and keeping electricity prices fair? Mr ROBERTSON: I thank the member for the question because cost-of-living issues are foremost in the minds of this government, and to provide relief is what yesterday’s budget was all about. That is why we are cutting the ambulance levy by $113—that is $113 less that Queenslanders will have to pay on their electricity bills. We have also increased a range of rebates for pensioners across-the- board. Their rebate has gone up by 6.6 per cent. The Electricity Life Support Concession Scheme will increase to almost $470. The rebate for consumers using oxygen concentrators will increase to over $314. These are practical measures that have been taken in this budget to provide some relief for consumers. In terms of what else can be done, later I shall be introducing into parliament the Electricity Price Reform Amendment Bill 2011, which supports the development of a new pricing methodology and tariff structure that will be used by the QCA to calculate electricity prices from 2012. This will deliver a new pricing system that is more flexible and fairer to Queenslanders. Those are just some of the initiatives that the Bligh government is putting in place to put downward pressure on electricity prices. Of course, as we have heard, apparently Campbell Newman has a plan, although we do not know the details of it. As we have heard this morning, it is probably appropriate that we look to interstate Liberal National Party governments to see what they do. As the Premier just mentioned, today we found out that New South Wales electricity prices will rise by 17 per cent, despite now Premier O’Farrell going to the last election saying that he would do something about increasing electricity prices in New South Wales. What has he done? Nothing! But it is not just New South Wales. Let us look at what has happened in Victoria since the tories have taken over. There have been increases of over 10 per cent. Since the Liberal National Party government took over in Western Australia, they have had an over-30 per cent increase in electricity prices. When a Liberal National Party government promises to do something about electricity prices, time and time again what do we see? They just increase! They are jacked up by more than CPI, hitting the consumers where it hurts most. That is why there is an obligation on Campbell Newman to come clean. As we have seen throughout the country, Liberal National Party governments can do nothing when it comes to electricity prices. It is about time Newman actually fessed up with some details about what he would do. Strategic Cropping Land Policy Mr CRIPPS: My question without notice is to the Minister for Environment and Resource Management. I refer to the new user charges associated with the implementation of the government’s strategic cropping legislation announced in yesterday’s budget. Will the minister advise who will pay these new user charges? Ms JONES: We on this side of the House have acted to protect some of Queensland’s best agricultural land. We have done that through our strategic cropping land policy. What is very clear in this policy, which we provided to the public—and I assume that someone as passionate about the bush as the member for Hinchinbrook claims to be would understand this—is that the proponent, the person looking to do any work on the strategic cropping land area, is required to pay for that assessment. That is very clear in our policy. It is the proponent’s responsibility. A government member interjected. Ms JONES: That is right. I am not sure what the LNP’s position is on this, because they have been deathly silent except to criticise it where and when it suits them. Let us be very clear: in the last week, some members on the other side of the House have attacked us in regard to our protection of the golden triangle, for example. In a Queensland Country Life article, the LNP’s position was articulated by the Leader of the Opposition in this House, although he is taking his money without delivering the budget speech. The Leader of the Opposition in this House stated that their alternative policy would only protect the Darling Downs—not the Surat Basin, not the golden triangle, but only the Darling Downs. That is the LNP position when it comes to protecting the best agricultural land in Queensland. 1834 Questions Without Notice 15 Jun 2011

Ours is the first government in Australia to put in place this policy. It is a tough decision, but it is one that we think is right and that is why we are taking action. We have a very strong agricultural sector in Queensland, representing—I think Tim knows this—17 per cent of Queensland’s economy. It is something that we value. We know that we need to strike the right the balance between our expanding coal and gas industry and the backbone of our economy, the agricultural industry. That is why we are putting this policy in place. The opposition will have an opportunity to move amendments if they want the farmer to pay. If that is your position, you can put that into the parliamentary debate. We have a whole new committee system where you will be able to articulate all of those views if you would like to. I will ring up the editor of Queensland Country Life to tell him that your position is that the farmer should pay, not the proponent. Is that what you are saying? Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable the minister will direct her comments through the chair. Ms JONES: This week what we have seen—and this question demonstrates it—is that we have the laziest opposition in Queensland’s history. They have outsourced their leader. In this budget week they have failed to articulate their alternative economic policy. In an area they are meant to represent, they have failed to read the policy we have put out to the Queensland people. (Time expired)

Budget, Tourism Industry Mr HOOLIHAN: My question is also to the Minister for Environment and Resource Management, although it is on a better note. The Premier has announced an $83 million package to help boost Queensland’s tourism industry. Could the minister advise of the other ways that this year’s budget is helping our tourism industry to recover? Ms JONES: I have more good news for Queensland. As members know, I am very passionate about protecting our Queensland environment. Every morning when I get up, that is what I aim to do. That is why in this year’s budget we now have another $18 million being invested in infrastructure in our national parks and Department of Environment and Resource Management facilities. As the Premier announced, we are providing record funding to attract new tourism events to Queensland. When those people are here, we want them to see the best parts of Queensland: our national parks. This government is the side of party politics that protects our national parks and invests in national parks. We now have 800 rangers in our national parks. Today I am very pleased to announce, as part of our budget, even more funding to make them better places to visit. In particular, I highlight one of the major projects that we are delivering through our Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service budget, which is a major upgrade in the Hinchinbrook electorate. I note that the member for Hinchinbrook has said on radio that Cardwell had missed out on any funding for the ranger station. Wrong! That is incorrect. There is over $860,000 in the budget—and the member for Hinchinbrook should read that, too—to upgrade the ranger base. Mr Wallace: You need to draw pictures for them. Ms JONES: Maybe I could. In this year’s budget more than $860,000 will be provided to build the new Cardwell ranger station, which will house 16 rangers who will look after our national parks in that region so that more Queenslanders can enjoy them. In that electorate some bridges are also being fixed, but it is not just about that electorate. Where is the member for Keppel? In Keppel we will be upgrading walking tracks in the Capricorn Coast National Park. Visitors to Byfield National Park will benefit from the investment. In the Glass House electorate we will start work on two new bridges. We are investing in the Kondalila National Park. The honourable member for Gregory will be pleased to know that we are spending $170,000 upgrading the Welford National Park camping facilities. In the Barron River electorate in Far North Queensland we will spend $50,000 to replace road bridges, providing access to Dinden Forest Reserve. Right across Queensland we are spending millions of dollars to upgrade facilities in our national parks. We are doing this because we know that every year our national parks bring millions of visitors to Queensland, generating around $4 billion in our economy. This is the side of politics that believes in the tourism industry and believes in protecting those special parts of Queensland that actually make it a great place to be. We are the ones protecting the Great Barrier Reef, the Wet Tropics, Springbrook and our World Heritage areas such as the cape while those opposite vote against that. They vote for environmental degradation every time.

Nambour Hospital Mr WELLINGTON: My question is to the Minister for Health. The Nambour General Hospital continues to be very busy. Has the department made any progress in investigating the purchase of land adjoining the hospital which I identified to the minister in a meeting earlier this year? 15 Jun 2011 Questions Without Notice 1835

Mr WILSON: I thank the honourable member for the question. This is an important issue that the member for Nicklin has taken up on behalf of his constituents. There is a real challenge around the car- parking availability associated with the Nambour Hospital. Several weeks ago at Parliament House I met with a representative group from the local community that arrived here with the local member. They presented to me their concerns. I recognise their concerns. They raised sincere points of view about some of the proposals for the expansion of car-parking capacity at Nambour Hospital. I gave them and the member for Nicklin an undertaking that this issue would be very carefully examined by the district CEO, Kevin Hegarty, and that he would work closely with the council, the local community and the member. It is my understanding that that is taking place. They are looking at some short-term options; for example, a park-and-ride facility for day-time hospital staff. That will be only a short-term solution. Some options are being considered for a longer term solution to the problem. I reiterate the commitment that I have already given to the member that the local district CEO will work very closely with the local community, the member and the local council to identify the best option for a long-term solution for the car-parking challenge.

Small Business

Ms MALE: My question without notice is to the Minister for Tourism, Manufacturing and Small Business. The manufacturing sector and small businesses are critical drivers of our economy, so it is great to see a responsible budget which prioritises economic recovery and growth. Could the minister inform the House what more is being done to help manufacturers and small businesses during these tough times? Ms JARRATT: I thank the member for the question. I had the pleasure to join her recently in her electorate for a networking morning with local small businesses and manufacturers. It is very clear to me that she is a great champion for businesses in her electorate. I thank her for that work. She is absolutely right. Many small businesses and manufacturers across the state have been doing it tough in recent times. I am really delighted this morning to assure those businesses that this government is absolutely determined to ensure that they are well positioned to take full advantage of the wave of investment confidence, the wave of investment that we see coming to Queensland in the months and years ahead. As the finance minister announced this morning, in this budget we will appoint a Queensland business commissioner whose dual roles will be to cut red tape and to drive reform right across our business communities. A Queensland business commissioner will oversee the state’s regulatory reform agenda and of course will work to ensure that the time lines around those regulatory instruments are actually of a timely manner. They are also going to work with our peak industry groups like the Queensland Tourism Industry Council, the Australian Industry Group, the Chamber of Commerce and Industry Queensland to have a fine look to identify the systemic issues that exist and seek remedies for them. I am pleased to say that they will also advise government agencies on international best practice in this regulatory area. The establishment of a Queensland business commissioner follows very strong advocacy from groups like the Australian Industry Group and the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Queensland. I am pleased to say that the announcement in the budget this week has been well received by these groups as well as by others. This great announcement about the establishment of a business commissioner comes in addition to other great news for business and manufacturing including the deferral of the waste levy from 1 July this year until December, giving a little bit more breathing time and some cost savings to those businesses. The question is: where is the opposition on this question of support for small business? What have we heard? We have heard some platitudes, ‘We’re going to slash red tape.’ That is good, but there have been no details. It appears that the opposition spokesperson does not even realise sometimes that she is the spokesperson for small business. She said in Cairns recently that she had not had time to develop policy around small business because she had only been the shadow for a month. That was not true. She had been the shadow minister for small business for six months and there was not one policy released during that time. (Time expired)

Maryborough Base Hospital, Renal Unit

Mr FOLEY: My question without notice is to the Minister for Health. Minister, the previous health minister advised that a renal unit would be established at the Maryborough Base Hospital by mid-2011. Will the minister advise when this unit will be operational? Mr WILSON: I thank the honourable member for the question. That detail is not at my fingertips. I will get some detail for the member and get back to him on that. 1836 Questions Without Notice 15 Jun 2011

Budget, Education Reform

Ms van LITSENBURG: My question is to the Minister for Education and Industrial Relations. I refer to the exciting education reforms funded in yesterday’s state budget and ask: is the minister aware of any alternative policies to moving year 7 into high school? Mr DICK: Like the member for Redcliffe, I am excited about the budget that was delivered yesterday and the centrepiece of the Education budget—the $622 million we have allocated for Flying Start, which places year 7 into high school from 2015. It is part of the continuum of education reform that Labor governments have delivered in this state since 1998. It has been one of the most consulted upon policies in recent education history. Everyone has had their say and I am very pleased that it has been well supported. It has been well supported by all of the peak stakeholders: the Queensland Catholic Education Commission, the Queensland Teachers Union, the Queensland Secondary Principals Association, the Queensland Association of State School Principals, and Independent Schools Queensland. They all support this significant reform to education. They had their say, but there is one person who has not had a say. There is one person who has been silent—as silent as the Clem7 tunnel during peak hour, as silent as a Blues supporter when the Maroons are leading by 20 points, as they will tonight—and that is, of course, Campbell Newman. Campbell Newman has said nothing about one of the most significant reforms to education in recent history in this state. I thought maybe he does not care, maybe he has no idea. I do not want to mislead the House. That might be true, but I do not know. But then I found a policy articulated by the shadow minister last Friday and confirmed in the House yesterday. Their policy is, ‘What we’ll do is we’ll introduce year 7 into high school over five years.’ That is a ridiculous, unworkable proposition. I want Campbell Newman to explain how this will occur. I want him to explain to students at The Gap State School who might not go to year 7 for up to five years—until 2020—what will happen if Mitchelton State High School does not take year 7 students until 2017 or 2018. What is going to happen to those year 7 students from The Gap State School? Under the LNP, year 7 becomes a twilight zone. Ms Bligh: He wants to turn the school system into a shambles like the LNP. Mr DICK: Like the LNP, it will become a twilight zone. It is not a policy; it is a recipe for chaos. You cannot introduce year 7 into high school over five years. It is a ridiculous proposition and is symbolic of the laziness and complacency of this state opposition led by Campbell Newman. That is his policy for Queensland. Under Labor, you get certainty, you get funding, you get a future for your children’s education. Under the LNP, you get two things: either silence, or chaos.

Budget, Mackay Showgrounds

Mrs STUCKEY: My question without notice is to the Minister for Tourism, Manufacturing and Small Business. With the Gold Coast securing $60 million and Cairns $38 million for showground projects, why is there nothing in the budget for Mackay showgrounds, which has needed major works for years? What does the minister say to the Mackay mayor, who says the region ‘can’t get anything to help them along’ despite being the second fastest growing region in the state? Ms JARRATT: I am delighted to answer this question. I do recall that the member for Currumbin was in Mackay for the regional parliament along with most of the rest of us. Mr Wallace: She was asleep. Ms JARRATT: Maybe she was asleep. I take that interjection. Perhaps she did miss some of the wonderful announcements that this government made for Mackay and the region. Let me see, there was $40 million for a new bridge across Fursden Creek so that people have all-weather access across that wonderful Edmund Casey Bridge. What about the $300 million in reconstruction funding for our road network right across the Isaac, Mackay and Whitsunday regions? How good was that? What about the new regional plan, the plan that is out there now for consultation, that will show the Mackay Regional Council about the government’s plans going forward for Mackay and the region? What about the new hospital we are building in Mackay? Let me think how that might possibly benefit the people of Mackay! I am astounded; I am absolutely shocked that the member cannot even see how Mackay might benefit from some of that $83 million in events funding that we are adding to our Queensland events budget over the next four years. Surely the Mackay Regional Council will be able to put in applications with its ideas about great events for our region. I am gobsmacked. Not only does the shadow minister for tourism, manufacturing and small business not have a policy in any of those areas—she does not even realise sometimes that she is the shadow minister for some of those areas—but she is entirely misinformed about what this budget will deliver for the Mackay region. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The time for question time is over. 15 Jun 2011 Private Members’ Statements 1837

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

Bligh Labor Government, Budget Mr SEENEY (Callide—LNP) (Leader of the Opposition) (11.59 am): The headline on the front page of the Courier-Mail this morning said it all—the ‘big steal’. Every idea that the opposition has brought into this parliament has ended up in the Treasurer’s budget. It is a big steal but it is still not enough. Those opposite come in here this morning and demand more. ‘Give us more. Give us more ideas. Give us more policies,’ they say over and over. This is from a government that did not have a policy to sell assets before the last election. Where was their policy to sell Queensland Rail? Where was their policy to abolish the fuel tax subsidy? Where was their policy to sell $17 billion worth of assets that Queenslanders own? They have no policies, no ideas and are bereft of initiative. They come in here and demand that the opposition provide them with ideas because they have no plans. They have no plans to address the escalating cost of living that the people of Queensland are suffering from. They have no plans to address the electricity costs that are a burden on every Queensland family. They have no plans to address the runaway water prices that are being inflicted on every family because of this government’s incompetence. This is a government that is out of ideas. This is a government that is suddenly beginning to realise the consequences of its own financial mismanagement, and the government is begging us for solutions. We will release our policies to the people of Queensland at a time of our own choosing, not for the government’s convenience, not for the government to steal. You will not see another ‘big steal’, as the Courier-Mail so rightly identified this morning. The people of Queensland know full well that this government is out of ideas. (Time expired)

World Elder Abuse Awareness Day Mrs SMITH (Burleigh—ALP) (12.02 pm): Today is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. It began five years ago in Canada and is now observed each year across the world. The abuse of older people is an issue of growing concern for our community, as our population ages and the number of people vulnerable to abuse is increasing. Older persons whose decision making is impaired are particularly vulnerable to abuse. We would all like to think that such abuse is non-existent, but elder abuse has been a silent problem for far too long. Our seniors should be cared for and valued, but we are not a perfect society and some people look to exploit the vulnerable. Last week I joined the Minister for Community Services, Karen Struthers, at the launch of the government’s Act as 1 Against Elder Abuse campaign. The Gold Coast has an elder abuse task force which includes a number of local organisations doing great work, but more work is needed to bring the issue out from behind closed doors. The incidence of elder abuse on the coast is aligned with the rest of the state in terms of psychological and financial abuse being the most common reported, but it can also be in the form of physical and sexual abuse. Statistics show that it is more likely to be a family member, usually a son or a daughter, who is responsible for the abuse. It can be that an enduring power of attorney is being misused. Transfer of property and assets is a common theme—the parent finds themselves destitute and a falling out with a family member leaves them with no financial or social support. Shame and embarrassment often make it difficult for people to reveal abuse—they do not want others to know it occurs in their families. Nobody wants to admit that someone they love is abusing them. Sadly, this means the abuse of older people is largely unspoken and unrecognised by many. This is something the Bligh government is determined to change. In the last 12 months Lifeline’s elder abuse helpline took 1,575 crisis calls from across the state. No-one, regardless of age, should be subjected to abusive or neglectful behaviour. (Time expired)

Law and Order Mr BLEIJIE (Kawana—LNP) (12.04 pm): This government is bereft of ideas and is a backflipping government, nowhere more so than on law-and-order issues. The recent escalation of armed robberies on the Gold Coast is of great concern and it is time to restore some order. The problem is that punishment so often does not serve as an adequate deterrent and does not reflect community values. This long-term Labor government has a legacy of soft sentencing principles, and for armed robberies the statistics are poignant. Figures released currently show that, of the 906 offenders who were sentenced for aggravated robbery, including armed robbery, in the past three years, only 111 were sentenced to more than five years jail. The maximum penalty for this offence is life imprisonment. But out of 906 only 111 served more than five years jail. There is a massive crisis of confidence in the existing sentencing laws and urgent action is needed to address this imbalance. 1838 Private Members’ Statements 15 Jun 2011

I note the Sentencing Advisory Council, which was set up by the government to steer it in the direction of minimum mandatory non-parole periods. I table a copy of the terms of reference for the Sentencing Advisory Council. Tabled paper: Terms of Reference—Sentencing Advisory Council [4673]. The last paragraph states in part— The Sentencing Advisory Council is to report to the Attorney-General and Minister for Industrial Relations by 30 June 2011. However, I note that the Attorney-General is now saying that it is to report by September. When did the extension of three months happen? In two weeks time we should have had responses and results, but now it will not be until September. I have not seen any indication of an extension being granted or of what the issues are. The government wants to talk about policy. How about this policy? Campbell Newman called for the establishment of a major crime squad on the Gold Coast. The government said at the time, ‘It’s not necessary. We don’t need it.’ What happened two weeks later? The Premier announced a major crime squad on the Gold Coast. On and on it goes with the government copying ideas. On the issue of GPS tracking devices, Campbell Newman said that offenders should be tracked; the government said no. What happened then? The Premier announced it. (Time expired) Mr ROBERTS: Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise to a point of order. The member is misleading the House. The member for Clayfield said on 3 June that the LNP was thinking about GPS monitoring. It announced its decision that it would do it after the government already announced that it would. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr O’Brien): Order! The minister is engaging in debate. There is no point of order. Special Olympics World Summer Games Ms DARLING (Sandgate—ALP) (12.06 pm): In three days time, Team Australia takes off. One hundred and thirty Australians with an intellectual disability are flying to Greece to participate in the Special Olympics World Summer Games, along with 40 volunteer officials and family and friends. The games run from 25 June to 4 July and will be the largest sporting event in the world in 2011, with 7,500 athletes from 185 countries participating in 22 sports. The world games athletes have been very busy raising funds to cover the cost of the journey to Greece for the athletes and their support team. The member for Brisbane Central and I were both lobbied by Special Olympics athletes who were seeking assistance with fundraising. I would like to pay tribute to Sean McKee of Bracken Ridge who is an outstanding athlete and will represent Australia in Football 7s at the games. Sean presented the Minister for Sport and me with a compelling case for government funding, and the Queensland government is providing $5,400 per Queensland athlete to cover the costs of travelling to compete, just as we do for Olympians, Paralympians and Commonwealth Games athletes. We are the only jurisdiction in Australia to do so. I was thrilled to join sport minister Phil Reeves at a special state farewell function for our 32 Queensland athletes held here at Parliament House recently. If the enthusiasm of our athletes is anything to go by, we are in for a big medal haul. But even if they return with no medals at all, I know that they are already winners because they have lived up to the Special Olympics motto: ‘reach your personal best’. Seventy per cent of our Australian athletes have never competed in a world games before. So I am encouraging every member of this House and all community members to send our athletes a herogram. Go to the Special Olympics website at www.specialolympics.com.au, click on the world summer games link and fill in your herogram message. I know that Australians embrace the herogram concept during the Commonwealth and Olympic Games, and I know that the Special Olympics athletes will love receiving messages from home to encourage them to reach their personal best. Live Cattle Trade Mr JOHNSON (Gregory—LNP) (12.08 pm): The Premier said in this House this morning that the current budget is providing strong opportunities for Queensland families and that those opportunities have been created by a Labor government. I have to tell you, Mr Deputy Speaker, that the strong opportunities for Queensland families have been decimated by the Labor government, especially by the federal Labor government, because of what has happened to the live cattle export industry in this state. Thanks to the emotion that has crept into this issue after the Four Corners program aired a couple of weeks ago, what we have seen is a fallout that will absolutely destroy the live cattle export market in this country—all because a few people did the wrong thing, all because some let their emotions take control of themselves and they did not let people put in place an agenda for correction. I say to Joe Ludwig: reverse this idiotic decision. To Bob Brown and Andrew Wilkie, I say cut the trace chain and let Tasmania float away into the Southern Ocean. The cattle market in North Queensland is huge. Between 500,000 and 850,000 head of cattle come out of our gulf region for live cattle export. This is like a 10- year drought. 15 Jun 2011 Private Members’ Statements 1839

Mrs Sullivan interjected. Mr JOHNSON: These markets are lost and you don’t damn well care. Mrs Sullivan interjected. Mr JOHNSON: You wouldn’t know. The point I am making— Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Your language is unparliamentary. I ask you to withdraw. Mr JOHNSON: I withdraw whatever is unparliamentary. This will affect many businesses, such as transport companies, fuel companies, commercial suppliers of fencing materials et cetera, helicopter mustering services, contract musterers, storekeepers who provide credit to rural producers—the whole lot. What about the banks? Is Julia Gillard going to go along to the banks with some of our pastoral operators and say, ‘Here is your $250,000 or $300,000 for interest redemption payments’? No, she will not be there because they do not care and they do not understand. (Time expired) Former Refugees, Employment Mrs SCOTT (Woodridge—ALP) (12.11 pm): We have all heard the laments from our regional towns and cities crying out for workers to come and live in their communities. ACCES Services in Woodridge, our nation’s most successful refugee settlement agency, saw the opportunity and is now embarking on a very successful Rural Employment Assistance Program. Its clients come from countries as diverse as Burma, Afghanistan, Sudan, Burundi, Iraq, Sierra Leone and Tanzania, to name but a few. In 2009 ACCES received funding from the federal government to run a pilot program. Rockhampton and Biloela were selected and an employment broker and reference groups were set up in these centres. Back in Logan, families and individuals were carefully selected. Following the settlement in their new location, our new residents were to undertake competency and skills training and receive support and Australian work culture training. Ensuring these prospective employees were well prepared and then supported in their new environment has meant a most successful result. Morning teas were held to welcome the new residents, and social and support networks were established with schools, churches, health services, TAFE and the local PCYC. An important aspect was that each group came from a similar cultural community to support one another. A total of 24 adults and 15 dependent children from a Burmese background were located at Biloela, and 14 African and 10 Afghani males were located in Rockhampton. They are now employed at Teys Bros meatworks, while other family members are in aged care and one is in a grocery store. Since that time, groups of workers have been resettled in Cardwell, Yanco, Millmerran, Dalby and Tara—in total, 46 workers plus family members. Our families are happy in their smaller centres and they are contributing to these communities both socially and economically, thanks to the very special people at ACCES Services. Minister for Energy and Water Utilities, Documents Mr CRANDON (Coomera—LNP) (12.13 pm): I rise to bring to the attention of the House a matter of grave concern. This matter concerns the Minister for Energy and Water Utilities. I have here documents procured through right to information legislation and other documents, and I table them now. Tabled paper: Copy of a Department of Environment and Resource Management ministerial briefing note, dated 10 June 2009, ‘Resumption by Gold Coast City Council—LAB 12012’ [4674]. Tabled paper: Copy of page 1 of a letter, dated 18 January 2010, from Mr Peter Lehmann to Hon. Stephen Robertson MP [4675]. Tabled paper: Copy of page 1 of a letter, dated 20 April 2010, from Hon. Stephen Robertson MP to Mr Peter Lehmann [4676]. Tabled paper: Copy of a letter, dated 28 April 2010, from Mr Peter Lehmann to Hon. Stephen Robertson MP [4677]. Tabled paper: Copy of a letter, dated 10 June 2010, from Hon. Stephen Robertson MP to Mr Peter Lehmann [4678]. This first document is a document that was signed off by the minister. It is a document referred to as a ministerial briefing note from the Department of Environment and Resource Management. The first page of this RTI document I tabled is page 7; the following pages are numbered in sequence to page 14. Page 14 is a statement required to be signed by the then Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy and Minister for Trade under the Acquisition of Land Act 1967. The problem is that page 14 is not signed. It should have been signed on the same day that the briefing note was signed by the minister. Page 7 in the briefing note is signed but the minister neglected to sign the statement as required. The second document is a letter from my constituent to the minister which, among other things, asks this specific question: ‘Can you please advise, as the minister, if you have in fact sighted, signed and dated the statement authorising the taking of this easement.’ The third document is a letter from the minister to my constituent which in paragraph 3 states that the minister ‘signed the original statement on 30 June 2009’. The fourth document is a letter from my constituent asking for a copy of the statement. The fifth and final document is a letter from the minister to my constituent which encloses a statement that has been signed and dated 30 June 2009. 1840 Private Members’ Statements 15 Jun 2011

The implication from the document trail is that the relevant document was not signed on 30 June 2009, probably as an oversight, but was signed sometime after my constituent’s request for a copy of it. As further evidence, I note that the documents are photocopies but look different. I intend referring the matter to the Crime and Misconduct Commission unless the minister can come forward with a credible, innocent explanation. Skilling Queenslanders for Work Ms O’NEILL (Kallangur—ALP) (12.15 pm): The Skilling Queenslanders for Work initiative aims to give job seekers customised employment and training assistance to meet their individual needs and the demands of the labour market for a skilled workforce. This year, 25 projects have been funded in the Moreton Bay region, with more than $5.2 million to assist 1,009 people. Since it began in July 2007, $27.2 million has been provided to assist more than 6,200 people through 126 projects in the Moreton Bay region. One project in particular provided the Pine Rivers Neighbourhood Centre with $64,280 to run the Kick Start Project. The Kick Start Project provided 10 disadvantaged job seekers with the opportunity to undertake a full Certificate III in Community Services Work qualification under the Productivity Places Program. I was fortunate to present the graduates of the Kick Start Program with their certificates last week. They were inspirational and eloquent, and I could see that their family and friends were so proud of them. Earning a Certificate III in Community Services Work is a big achievement and I was happy to hear that the participants of this Kick Start Project are already looking at their next steps. Two people have found new jobs, while six others are pursuing certificate IV level qualifications and another is going for a graduate certificate. These are wonderful outcomes. These new opportunities have been built on 13 weeks of accredited training and vocational placements and I would like to recognise the efforts of the Pine Rivers Neighbourhood Centre which has organised the Kick Start Project. I want to especially congratulate Melinda, Sandy, Elissa and all at the Pine Rivers Neighbourhood Centre for their vision and unselfish development of community volunteers. I recognise the fabulous DEEDI regional officer whose commitment and enthusiasm was obvious. I thank the trainer from Equalis for a great job and for taking the time to mention each participant and their achievements. Of course, I congratulate all the participants for their hard work and courage. I particularly want to mention the presentation that the group created to show us all and as a record of their journey. Melissa and Keira narrated the presentation and no-one could have guessed by their confident and professional presentation that they had only just been trained in public speaking and presentation. The whole event was an outstanding example of a wonderful initiative. Budget, Mental Health Services Ms DAVIS (Aspley—LNP) (12.17 pm): Sadly, yet again, community mental health was largely forgotten in the budget by this government. There is an essential misunderstanding of mental health by this government—a perception that mental illness belongs only in hospitals or clinical facilities. There is no real understanding of the need for community support, prevention, early intervention or the encouragement of mental health work. The work of the community sector is invaluable—breaking down the stigma of mental illness, giving people hope and access to help, providing supports within a person’s own community. They tell people that it is okay to ask for help, to admit their vulnerability. This morning I attended the post budget breakfast hosted by the Queensland Alliance and NDS, two organisations which do great work in changing community attitudes and delivering better services for people in need. They deserve the support and recognition of the government, but again the needs of the people they represent were largely overlooked in the budget. The budget’s only concession to community mental health was in disaster affected areas. While there is certainly a need, and an acute need, in these areas, disasters are not the only cause of mental illness, depression or even suicide. Focusing only on disaster related issues ignores the wider problem. Mental health and suicide are huge problems and increasingly urgent issues in our community, particularly in our regional areas. People around the state have told me of their desperation about the increase in this problem. They passionately try to reach out to people, but there are simply not enough resources or even attention given to the problem by this government. We are losing too many lives, younger and older, to suicide. I also attended the White Wreath Day ceremony recently, where the tragedy of suicide, the lifetime of suffering it leaves behind, the waste of life and opportunity, the anger and grief were all very tangible. But still this government ignores the real need in the community. There are no excuses for further delays. Leeding, Mr D Ms CROFT (Broadwater—ALP) (12.19 pm): On 29 May a terrible event occurred on the Gold Coast that claimed the life of one of the Gold Coast’s finest police officers—Detective Senior Constable Damian Leeding. A fit and healthy young man dedicated to his work in protecting our community with distinct energy, Senior Constable Leeding was well respected in the Queensland Police Service, and his passing has had an enormous impact on his colleagues. 15 Jun 2011 Private Members’ Statements 1841

Officers at Coomera Police Station have had to endure the pain of losing a comrade and friend while on duty, and officers at Runaway Bay station in my electorate have felt deeply the pain of one of their comrades losing her husband. Sonya Leeding is an officer based at Runaway Bay Police Station and has recently been on maternity leave for the birth of baby Grace, little sister to Hudson, who is two. Sonya is a great friend to all at Runaway Bay Police Station, and her pain and grief has been felt by many whom she works with. I know that Senior Sergeant Murray Underwood cares deeply for his staff and there is no doubt that officers found it difficult to continue to work and carry out their duties as they came to terms with the death of Senior Constable Leeding. The recent outpouring of support shown by the community demonstrates a side of humanity not often observed or felt by our Police Service, and I know it is this support that has been greatly appreciated by the officers at Runaway Bay. It has helped them in some way feel confident in the work they do and why they do it. This show of public support for the Leeding family and the Police Service has also been a demonstration against such violence and crime. This tragedy serves as a reminder to us all of the difficult and dangerous work our police officers do, day in and day out. To all our police I say thank you for the work that you do. On behalf of the Broadwater community, I extend our sincere condolences to Senior Constable Damian Leeding’s wife, Sonya, their children, their family, their friends and their colleagues in the Queensland Police Service. National Broadband Network Ms BATES (Mudgeeraba—LNP) (12.21 pm): Today I rise to highlight the hypocrisy of the Bligh Labor government and its real intentions for the ICT industry in Queensland and the rollout of the NBN. The Queensland state Labor Party will be announcing its policy platform at its Labor conference on 17 and 18 June. I table a copy of the Queensland ALP’s draft policy platform. Tabled paper: Copy of document titled ‘2011 Platform’, 48th State Conference of the Queensland Branch of the Australian Labor Party’, 18-19 June 2011 [4679]. It is clear that Labor’s ICT policy goes from talking about what Labor will do to being a watered down version of talking about supporting and recognising things instead. Labor is abandoning any promise to do anything, and that is clear from what it has chosen to delete. On pages 1 and 2 it has deleted— Committed to delivering world standard communications and information services to the people of Queensland regardless of where they live ... and has replaced it with— ... developing a Digital Economy Strategy, with input from the community, government, business and researchers to guide the implementation of new services and adoption of new models of doing business online. Again, on page 3 it has abandoned a commitment to— ... identifying and implementing measures to deal with communications black spots by rolling out broadband networks connecting cities, major regional centres and rural towns, to deliver improvements to broadband services in the short term ... and instead talks about— ... identifying communities that may not receive NBN FTTP connections or NBN wireless coverage and developing strategies to ensure that NBN services will meet community needs ... Section 3.3 is a bit more alarming. The NBN was sold to the public as a wholesale-only network, yet there is industry talk about government agencies buying direct, but no decision has been made. If you allow the NBN to retail once, they will do it again when revenues fall short of projection and time. This has the potential to turn into another Telstra. The NBN is a federal project and should not require funding from state government levels such as using Main Roads budgets to dig up roads to duct the NBN at a cost to the state. This Bligh Labor government should come clean on how much it intends to top up the federal rollout of the NBN. Queensland Reconciliation Awards Mr WETTENHALL (Barron River—ALP) (12.23 pm): On Tuesday, 31 May 2011 I had the honour of representing the Premier at the 2011 Queensland Reconciliation Awards in Cairns, the first time those awards have not been held in Brisbane. The awards highlight the great work being done by businesses, community organisations, educational institutions and partnership projects that are all making reconciliation their business. The winner of the Premier’s Reconciliation Award was the Cherbourg Historical Precinct Group Inc. for the Ration Shed. Through the efforts of senior Aboriginal women, the Cherbourg Ration Shed opened in 2004 and evolved into a community controlled, not-for-profit organisation to tell the stories of living under the Aboriginal Protection Act. The Ration Shed Museum offers tours and educational programs for schools and visitors and provides space for the community to remember its history and celebrate the achievements of community elders. 1842 Private Members’ Statements 15 Jun 2011

Other winners included Virgin Australia for its Indigenous employment strategy; the Napranum Preschool Parents and Learning Group for its program that supports and empowers parents and family members to engage in their children’s education; Murri Watch, Australians for Native Title and Reconciliation and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Women’s Legal and Advocacy Service for the Project 10% campaign, which aims to reduce Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander imprisonment by 10 per cent over 10 years; and Kirwan State High School for embedding intercultural perspectives in all aspects of school life. Time does not permit me to mention all of the finalists, but I want to commend James Cook University and the Queensland Police Service for their project to reduce the negative impacts of drug use in Indigenous communities and Tourism Queensland and Queensland Indigenous tourism businesses for their business development program that supports the economic and employment aspirations of Indigenous Queenslanders. I congratulate all of the winners and finalists.

Lamington Bridge

Mr FOLEY (Maryborough—Ind) (12.25 pm): I rise to bring to the House’s attention a problem in my electorate with the Lamington Bridge. The Lamington Bridge is an historical bridge from the 1800s which has served our community very well. One of the features of Maryborough, which has a river winding through its centre, is that quite often if there is a flood event, like we had back in January, our bridge regularly goes under. To that end, the rails on the Lamington Bridge are actually removable. They simply drop into slots and when it is likely the bridge will go under they are removed. That way, it does not catch debris and cause unnecessary structural damage to the bridge. However, with the flood- warning system not being optimal, in the January floods there was a situation where the rails were removed and when the flood threat dropped they were put back on again. Then the waters rose very quickly, which caught everybody out, and those rails were significantly damaged with the flood event. We have now waited six months for those rails to be fixed. In the meantime, the speed limit on the bridge has been reduced to 40 kilometres an hour. That is driving my community absolutely crazy. When I went down to inspect the bridge the other day I realised that the other side of the bridge has identical rails which simply could be picked up and moved to the other side. A new box steel footpath was put there, so the rails on the left side of the bridge are completely superfluous. I have raised this suggestion with the officers and they are looking into it, but it would seem to me to be such a common-sense decision just to take the rails from one side and put them on the other side and then sort out the safety barriers later on, because the rails are not even needed on the other side of the bridge yet we are putting up with traffic travelling at 40 kilometres an hour.

TransLink, Train Timetables

Ms MALE (Pine Rivers—ALP) (12.27 pm): Last week the new TransLink rail timetables for the Caboolture line came into effect. The new timetable has added more than 70,000 weekly train seats to the Caboolture and north coast line, and commuters have told me that the additional seats on the line are welcome. As I have stated previously, there are no longer any express services operating out of Lawnton, Bray Park or Strathpine stations, and some people are still unhappy about this. During consultation some commuters said that they valued the express services whilst others were more interested in reliable services running on time and services that were not held up waiting at stations. To that end, more services are starting from Petrie, which means more available seating and reliable arrival times. The timetable is also simpler, which means the stopping patterns during peak hour will be either six or 12 minutes apart instead of a whole range of times, with big breaks of anywhere up to 24 minutes. As more capacity becomes available, the minister has assured me that services will be slotted into three-minute intervals when they become available. Over the past couple of years I have successfully lobbied for and delivered four additional peak-hour services, so I will continue my efforts in this regard. Bus connectivity and improved bus timetables were issues I raised extensively with the minister, so I am pleased to announce that an improved timetable for our area was introduced last week which includes an additional 2,000 weekly bus seats connecting to Bray Park train station and the Westfield shopping centre, which is just next to the Strathpine station. There are six additional weekday services for Bray Park station and timetable adjustments to all other connecting bus services to connect to the new train timetables. At this stage I believe it is vital that TransLink does a review of how the new timetable is working. I specifically want the issue of reliability, running times and availability of seating for Lawnton, Bray Park and Strathpine commuters assessed. I believe it is vital for the integrity of the new timetable that these issues are reviewed and reported on as soon as possible to ensure confidence in the services and to encourage more people to use public transport options. 15 Jun 2011 Electricity Price Reform Amendment Bill 1843

Live Cattle Trade Mr MALONE (Mirani—LNP) (12.29 pm): We have all seen the recent horror stories aired on the ABC’s Four Corners program and there is no denying that these images were disturbing and totally unacceptable. The full extent of a short- or long-term ban on live cattle exports to Indonesia had not been taken into account before the decision had been made. For graziers and cattle producers in the northern one-third of this country, live exports provide them with both a living and a lifestyle. But this ban affects not only the owners of these vast aggregations but also a massive workforce, both white and Indigenous. The flow-on effects of this ban continue further into the banking sector, as most of these livestock operations rely solely on the live export trade to meet their financial obligations. Properties are now being devalued by the animal liberation movement to the extent that the industry will no longer exist in the northern part of Australia. But this is only the tip of the iceberg. The effects of the ban have continued to move south rapidly, affecting the seed stock sector that supplies replacement genetics to the northern breeder operations. Also, machinery and merchandise suppliers will have major losses of revenue, which will ultimately put companies and industries out of business. Accounting, legal and business advisers based in southern centres will be out of pocket to the tune of millions of dollars. Do-gooders in organisations who lead a life without the knowledge of where the money comes from to supply them with their lifestyle so they can push their green agendas need to realise that without the pastoral industry there would be a mass reduction in the workforce, which would plunge this major industry into recession. A mass exodus out of a major marketplace cannot be conceived as a triumph for animal welfare. Moreover, it is just brushing the issue under the carpet to be dealt with by another country’s government. If we leave this market to be taken up by another country, then any progress that we have made in Indonesia will be lost and it will plunge back into the Dark Ages without any support, direction, techniques or quality assurance. (Time expired) Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Farmer): Order! The time for private members’ statements has expired.

ELECTRICITY PRICE REFORM AMENDMENT BILL

First Reading Hon. S ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Energy and Water Utilities) (12.31 pm): I present a bill for an act to amend the Electricity Act 1994 and the Electricity Regulation 2006. I present the explanatory notes, and I move— That the bill be now read a first time. Question put—That the bill be now read a first time. Motion agreed to. Bill read a first time. Tabled paper: Electricity Price Reform Amendment Bill [4680]. Tabled paper: Electricity Price Reform Amendment Bill, explanatory notes [4681]. Second Reading Hon. S ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Energy and Water Utilities) (12.31 pm): I move— That the bill be now read a second time. The Electricity Price Reform Bill 2011 seeks to introduce amendments to the Electricity Act 1994 and the Electricity Regulation 2006 to allow for the introduction of a new methodology for determining Queensland’s regulated retail electricity prices, known as notified prices. In March 2011, cabinet approved the replacement of the current methodology for determining notified prices in Queensland, the Benchmark Retail Cost Index. Cabinet also gave approval for the state’s independent economic regulator, the Queensland Competition Authority, to commence developing new regulated retail tariffs based on a cost-reflective pricing structure to take effect from 1 July 2012. This included the implementation of an inclining block tariff for residential customers on tariff 11. On 11 May 2011, I wrote to the Queensland Competition Authority advising of the government’s decision to introduce a new methodology and directing it to replace the existing price setting methodology for 2012-13. The new methodology will mean future electricity prices in Queensland will be determined using a fairer and more flexible pricing framework based on tariff structures that reflect the underlying cost to supply electricity to consumers in Queensland. We have to ensure we maintain a reliable and secure electricity network for all Queenslanders and that would not be possible unless retail electricity prices are based on genuine increases in supply costs. 1844 Electricity Price Reform Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011

To allow a new price setting methodology to be implemented, amendments to the Electricity Act and Electricity Regulation are required. The new methodology will address issues with the prescriptive and inflexible nature of the current methodology and provide a more enabling legislative framework which will allow for greater flexibility and responsiveness in calculating notified prices. The amendments will also provide sufficient flexibility to deal with any unidentified policy changes or market upheavals. In particular, this approach will ensure the regulatory framework is flexible enough to allow any future carbon costs or additional costs associated with environmental obligations to be captured and passed through to customers.

Essentially, the new methodology will ensure that prices more accurately reflect the underlying costs of supplying electricity to consumers and, in doing so, ensure the ongoing safety and reliability of supply for all Queenslanders. Consumers will benefit from a fairer system, which will aim to encourage customers to use electricity more efficiently, with the benefits of more efficient electricity use reflected in the notified prices.

The most significant change will be for residential consumers with the introduction of an inclining block tariff structure. The inclining block tariff will involve a series of consumption blocks priced so that the more you use, the more you pay. This means that low-to-average volume users of electricity will pay less than higher volume users.

Consistent with the current Electricity Act, the minister responsible for energy will retain the authority to delegate responsibility for determining notified prices to the Queensland Competition Authority. It is also proposed to include a new general head of power which will give the minister the authority to direct the Queensland Competition Authority to provide information or advice to government on any matter related to the Queensland electricity market.

The notified prices for 2011-12 have been determined by the Queensland Competition Authority in accordance with the BRCI methodology as prescribed in the Electricity Act and the Electricity Regulation. The notified prices for 2011-12 will commence on 1 July 2011. Once these prices take effect, the current provisions in the legislation pertaining to the Benchmark Retail Cost Index methodology can be omitted from the Electricity Act and regulation and replaced with the proposed new provisions which allow for a new methodology to be introduced.

The Queensland Competition Authority will undertake a comprehensive and robust consultation program with stakeholders on the new methodology and tariff structures in accordance with the direction that was issued to it on 11 May 2011. Any consultation undertaken in accordance with this direction will be considered valid under the new legislation for the purposes of the 2012-13 price determination process.

It should be noted that the proposed legislative amendments do not set specific requirements for individual tariff structures. The amendments will only apply to the manner in which the cost of supplying electricity is determined for each tariff. As a result, these amendments will not affect the development of the new voluntary residential time-of-use tariff or the inclining block tariff that have been announced.

This bill will also make changes to eligibility for the Queensland Solar Bonus Scheme. The net- metered Queensland scheme has exceeded all expectations in delivering affordable solar energy and jobs for Queenslanders. There has been a phenomenal growth rate in solar PV uptake in Queensland since the scheme was introduced. From June 2008, we have seen an increase from 1,200 rooftop solar systems with a generating capacity of 3.2 megawatts to today where we have over 78,500 Queenslanders providing 165 megawatts generating capacity to the Queensland electricity grid.

The changes to the scheme will limit the size of eligible individual solar photovoltaic systems to one five-kilowatt system per premises. Most participating solar PV systems have a generating capacity well below five kilowatts and are used by homeowners simply to generate power for household use. The five kilowatt system limit is being introduced due to the growing number of people installing large systems of up to 30 kilowatts for investment purposes.

It is not the intent of the Solar Bonus Scheme to provide investment returns to some individuals at the expense of all Queensland electricity consumers. While these changes will apply retrospectively from 8 June 2011, my announcement on 10 May 2011 provided four weeks advance notice and clearly foreshadowed the Queensland government’s intentions to introduce these amendments to the scheme. Importantly, there are no other changes to how the scheme operates, including its feed-in tariff rate of 44c per kilowatt hour. I commend the bill to the House.

Debate, on motion of Mr Dickson, adjourned. 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1845

FAIRER WATER PRICES FOR SEQ AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading Resumed from 14 June (see p. 1795), on motion of Mr Robertson— That the bill be now read a second time. Mr DICKSON (Buderim—LNP) (12.40 pm), continuing: The government admits through this bill that residential water bills, which include both state bulk water costs and distribution, retail water and wastewater charges, increased across the majority of South-East Queensland council areas. The government claims that the state bulk water charge increased by approximately $60 per annum for a household using 200 kilolitres per year. Water and wastewater increases of over $200 per annum occurred on the Gold Coast, Logan and Moreton Bay. The government claims that in one particular council area—namely Redcliffe—the water bill increase was over $300 for a household using 200 kilolitres, or approximately five times the amount required to pass through the increase in the bulk water charges. If, as the government is claiming through this bill, these charges to the consumer have increased as outlined then that is clearly unacceptable. The Queensland Treasury currently allows the grid service providers—Seqwater, LinkWater and WaterSecure—to use what is termed as pass-through pricing. I am advised that pass-through pricing allows these authorities to budget whatever they like on operations, maintenance, asset renewal and delivery of new budgeted assets and that these costs are passed on to the retailer via the grid manager as the bulk water charge. This pass-through pricing does not have any efficiency objectives such as CPI. This pass-through pricing policy promotes inefficiencies by allowing these authorities to overmaintain their assets. What is occurring with South-East Queensland water bills is a direct result of Labor’s so-called water reform. This government has legislated to make this happen. This never occurred in the past. Councils controlled everything to do with water and water consumers were paying a fair price for water. I made a point a couple of weeks ago that this Labor government’s intention to cap retail costs of water but not cap bulk water prices would see the cost of water to councils flow across to South-East Queenslander’s rate notices. It is inconceivable that councils will absorb the increased cost of bulk water that they buy from this Labor government. Nobody believes that one can keep paying more and more for something and then turn around and sell it for a capped price. It will not happen. It cannot happen. Queensland households will pay the increased cost of bulk water and this Labor government knows it. So do the water consumers of South-East Queensland. They know that they might get a water bill separate to their rates notice and that the cost of water on their water bill will be capped to CPI. But they also know that when their household water bill arrives down the track, the cost of bulk water councils have had to buy from this Labor government will be reflected in the water bills and rates notices of councils that opt out of the current system. There is nothing surer than that. A report to the council of mayors by Aspire Consulting dated April 2011 showed that for every $100 spent on water the state government’s water authority takes $50. The return on assets taken by these state water authorities is at the high end of acceptable returns. Why can ratepayers not hold state government owned water authorities accountable for their unrestricted spending? This legislation has been introduced into this parliament without proper consultation with councils and retailers and will shift appropriate price increases by local government and retailers to some unknown time in the future while allowing the state owned water entities to continue unrestrained spending. The CPI cap for the period from 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2013 does not take into account that local governments have deferred major capital works due to the transfer of the retail assets to the new water retailers. Subsequent to the formation of these new retailers, planning of major works had taken place. Now this unfair amendment bill restricts the retailers in properly funding these essential and major capital works until after 2013. What will happen is a major price spike at some time in the future and this government knows it. The government claims that the bulk water charge is set by the state government to pay for the costs of the establishment and operation of the SEQ water grid and, further, that the bulk water cost represents around one-quarter of the average water and wastewater household bill. That is as it stands now. Today the bulk water cost represents 25 per cent of the average water bill. Let us remember that the cap on retail water to the consumer is only for two years. The minister detailed that the Queensland government intends to require the publication of a council’s price mitigation plan. A council that decides to withdraw from the distributor-retailer must, as part of the advice to the Queensland government, provide a price mitigation plan and publish its plan by 1 September 2011. The minister stated that a council that decides to stay with the distributor-retailer will be required to submit their price mitigation plan by 1 September 2011 and publish its plan by 1 July 2012. The government can require the publication of however many plans it likes. But what if the councils do not stick to the plan? What then? The minister is crystal clear about it: the Queensland government will not approve these plans. The minister appears to be relying on the publication of the 1846 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011 plan—making them open to public scrutiny—to be the watchdog. The minister states that the Queensland Competition Authority will have a price-monitoring role. But will that role include having the power to direct councils to adhere to their price mitigation plan? These price mitigation plans seem to be totally unregulated. I wish to refer to a paragraph from the minister’s second reading speech on this bill. During the second reading speech the minister stated— The South East Queensland Water Grid, on the other hand, is already delivering and has proven to be of value during emergencies, such as the 2011 major flood event here in South-East Queensland. The Gold Coast desalination plant began supplying the water grid in February 2009 and has supplied almost 38 billion litres of water since that time. The Western Corridor Recycled Water Scheme has now supplied more than 40 billion litres of purified recycled water to power stations. The total volume of water transferred across the grid is 557,865 megalitres. Here is the good bit. The minister went on to say— As a result of our investment in the South East Queensland Water Grid, it is now not likely that new bulk water supplies will be needed until at least 2027. Arising from the minister’s statement I just referred to, and in particular the very last sentence—let me read that bit again: ‘As a result of our investment in the South East Queensland Water Grid, it is now not likely that new bulk water supplies will be needed until at least 2027’—I have a question. What was the Traveston Dam all about? Why were we told that the Traveston Crossing Dam was an essential element of Labor’s water reform process in establishing the water grid? They could not do without it. So much so that Labor went ahead and blew three-quarters of a billion dollars on it before getting any necessary approvals on its assertion that it could not wait. In relation to that, we have these stranded assets resulting from the failed construction of the Traveston Dam. And there is the Wyaralong Dam that was constructed without a water treatment plant. Firstly, the state government purchased the large pipes for the northern pipeline interconnector to Traveston Dam before the dam was even approved. Currently LinkWater Constructions is supervising the construction of this pipeline, which now will only be used to take water north if there is a failure of the Noosa water supply system or there is a drought and insufficient supplies from the Mary River or Lake MacDonald near Cooroy. Both of these systems currently supply Noosa to Peregian Beach. It should also be noted that there are no pumps across this water grid to return water to the Sunshine Coast. Sunshine Coast water flows only one way along Labor’s water grid and it is away from the Sunshine Coast. The second stranded asset is Wyaralong Dam, which does not have a water treatment plant. The argument is that it is a non-performing grid asset which increases the state’s rate of return on assets and thereby the cost of water to the community. On 11 November 2009, the day after Peter Garrett knocked the Traveston Dam on the head, the Premier issued a media statement. The Premier’s statement said that the only alternative to Traveston Dam was to have the new desalination plants. I suppose that raises two more questions. The Minister for Energy and Water Utilities seems to be confirming that Labor is not intending to undertake any further construction of bulk water assets before 2027—no new dams. The minister has poor form when it comes to planning in respect to dams. Back as far as 2003 I was calling for further dam construction. On 14 October 2003 the current Minister for Energy and Water Utilities issued a media statement attacking me. The statement read— Natural Resources Minister Stephen Robertson today warned against knee-jerk reactions to the issue of the Sunshine Coast’s water supply, saying that the South East Queensland Water Supply Strategy was the best way forward for the area. Mr Robertson said comments by Maroochy Shire Councillor Steve Dickson calling for action on new dam projects were both “premature” and “alarmist”. As Cr Dickson would be aware, the State Government is currently working with 18 South East Queensland councils—including his own—to develop a comprehensive strategy to secure short, medium and long term water needs of the region stretching from Noosa to the NSW border. Mr Robertson said that in the past, demands for instant solutions had sometimes led to inefficient or badly located dams that were not the best way of meeting regional needs. In 2003 the minister referred to ‘badly located dams’ and then they blew three-quarters of a billion dollars on the Traveston Dam. How is that for hypocrisy? And what about the two desalination plants that the Premier referred to? That is indeed a revelation. The Minister for Energy and Water Utilities is telling all of Queensland that this is it; there will be no more bulk water assets for 16 years. But what if we have another drought? As announced on 3 May 2011, the LNP’s four-point plan for prices is, firstly, to amalgamate the five bulk water entities into one, to provide greater efficiencies and to hand back to councils control of water retailers. We will then write-off some non-performing water grid assets, such as sewerage plants that were designed to recycle sewage to Wivenhoe Dam. Not all western corridor plants will be written off, because some supply cooling water to power stations and we anticipate that some will be utilised for agricultural purposes. We will immediately adopt a 40-year price path to repay the state government’s $7 billion grid debt. 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1847

There are three things that this Labor government needs to come clean on. Why are the state owned water authorities not required to have a price mitigation plan for their water spending? Why can those state water authorities not publish their price mitigation plans in the newspapers for everyone to see? Are the profits from the state owned water entities really to pay back the state’s debt or is there another reason? What on earth is this Labor state government hiding from the people of Queensland? Why does this Labor government want to blame the local authorities for its mistakes? Everyone in South-East Queensland knows that the state Labor government is responsible for the charges of bulk water, which are going to go up by roughly 25.8 per cent every year until 2018. This is the Labor way; this is the new era of water charges in South-East Queensland. I refer to an earlier part of my speech where I noted that the Premier and the Minister for Energy and Water Utilities continue to blame Campbell Newman and the council of mayors for this debacle that has been created in Queensland. I challenge the minister and the Premier to table all the diary notes taken at the meetings with Campbell Newman and the council of mayors. I challenge them to table those notes so that finally the truth can be laid on the table. I challenge both the Premier and the minister. A government member: Campbell Newman wrote a letter. Mr DICKSON: Let us throw them on the table. A government member has asked for it. Let us be honest with the people of Queensland and tell the truth. We have not seen that for a while. The opposition will be opposing this political stunt that calls for fairer water prices in South-East Queensland. This bill is nothing but a political ploy by a desperate government that is in its death throes. This government is blaming anybody but itself for this mess, for this massive increase in water charges. Just a couple of hours ago, I received a media release from the council of mayors, dated 15 June 2011. I think it is very important, because it relates to this specific issue. It states that the state should double the pensioner rebate to compensate for the bulk water blow-out. It states— SOUTH East Queensland Mayors today called for the State Government pensioner rebate to be doubled to $240 to fully compensate pensioners for the 141% increase in State bulk water charges since 2007. Council of Mayors (SEQ) Chairman Graham Quirk expressed disappointment that yesterday’s State Budget failed to cap State Government bulk water charges despite the Bligh Government set to today approve a cap on retail water charges for two years. He said increasing State Government bulk water charges would cost pensioners an extra $5.7 million next year with the $20 increase in pensioner rebates failing to cover the $58 increase in State Government bulk water charges. “When it comes to the Queensland Government and water charges, it is a case of ‘do as I say not do as I do’,” Cr Quirk said. “Today, the State Government will make a great song and dance about the benefit of capping retail water charges at 3.6%, but missed the opportunity in yesterday’s State Budget to cap their planned 19% increase in State Government bulk water charges. “The State’s pensioner rebate on water increases announced yesterday will cover just a third of the cost of the increase in water charges, leaving pensioners across SEQ worse off.” “Ratepayers continue to be slugged by a combination of rising electricity, car registration and bulk water prices which have skyrocketed 141 per cent during the past three years.” Cr Quirk said poor planning and management of the water grid had seen prices grow higher than the State Government originally promised. “This has accelerated the bulk water price path and driven up household water bills and this is the sort of cost-of-living pain in household water bills all Mayors in SEQ were warning their communities about back in 2007,” he said. “The State Government should stretch out the timeframe of their repayments or use some of the $1 billion in profits and taxes from its energy and transport companies to immediately wipe away some of their water debt. “At the very least, the State should ensure that SEQ’s pensioners are not left out of pocket by the cost of paying for the white elephants in its $7 billion water grid.” I will finish by making a very clear statement: this Labor government knew exactly what it was doing when it created this water debacle in South-East Queensland. We have a grid that is not being utilised to its maximum potential. We have what one could only call a bad investment in a lot of different areas. The implications are that local authorities are going to have their bills capped at 3.6 per cent, but in my region bulk water charges continue to go up by 25.88 per cent. If we broaden that across South- East Queensland, people will continue to pay year in, year out. Off the top of my head, a rough calculation would be that until 2018 there will be about 175 per cent compounding interest on those bulk water charges alone. Is that something that any government would be proud to deliver to the battlers and the people struggling to pay their household debts in Queensland? Not the politicians on this side of the House! We will be putting forward some amendments as we debate the clauses of the bill. I hope that finally the government will take some notice of our concerns, as it did with bracelets for paedophiles and the ambulance levy. Our side of politics comes up with the good ideas and the other side of the House steals those ideas. We know it. They continue to call upon the LNP for ideas, because they do not have any of their own. All they do is put up fees and charges. Today is the best example of that. They are going to put councils in a position where they will not be able to deliver the required infrastructure and water utilities. This government took away the 40 per cent subsidy for sewerage and water suppliers in Queensland. That was the first grab for the big money bundle. Now they have said, ‘We don’t want you to make any money; we’re taking it all. We are going to stitch up the mums and dads of Queensland and we will continually put your bills through the roof.’ 1848 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011

Queensland is becoming the unaffordable state, not the smart state. Once upon a time it was the smart state. This government is trying to ride on the back of the people who really work hard. It is called private industry. It is the people who work their guts out every single day of their lives. They work seven days a week. They will put in 12 hours a day. They are people such as the miners. They are the real backbone of this country. They are private enterprise. If the government knew what private enterprise was about, it would not be stitching them up. That is a kick in the guts to the public, the mums and dads that the Labor Party pretends to represent. The bill before the House today victimises the people of Queensland. It does not help them. The government is doing this in an election year, which is related directly to the ploy to offer $10,000 for building a new home. How long will that last? Six whole months! Isn’t that exciting? I wonder whether there will be an election within that six months? The 3.6 per cent cap on retail water charges will last for only two years. What happens when the Labor Party gets back into government? Will it do what it did with the fuel charges and when it said, ‘We promise not to sell any assets’? Will it get back into power and change its mind? Will it change its opinion? Mr Robertson: It will be up to council to determine what happens. Mr DICKSON: I wish that it was up to council, but the government takes away council’s authority. Slowly but surely the government has ripped away any ability council has to direct the three water utilities that are being created. How much authority do the councils have to direct those utilities? I am sure that the minister has the ability to do that. Sitting suspended from 1.00 pm to 2.30 pm. Dr DOUGLAS (Gaven—LNP) (2.30 pm): This bill is all about eating humble pie after a very poorly executed political triple backflip by the Bligh Labor government. The problem, as is everything to do with Labor in government in Queensland, is that it is all in the eating. To jump straight into the worst aspects of the former legislation for the public and the councils, this bill is about unwinding these dreadful water utilities and the state government unfairly charging those councils that wish to withdraw from the arrangement exorbitant costs to exit. In the case of the Gold Coast, the projected cost is $50 million and maybe even more. ‘No pay, no way’ is the argument put to councils such as the Gold Coast City Council by Labor’s proxy. Talk about a disincentive, unconscionable behaviour and callous disregard! The minister and his department, as the stewards of this outrageous management strategy, have left us in this current situation. Staring the public down constantly will lead to awful consequences. Secondly, the bill sensibly imposes a CPI cap for two years on the distribution and retail component of the water and wastewater charges. In doing so, the government has decided to avoid taking its own fair share of the pain of water costs by keeping its outrageous bulk or wholesale water charges, now at $1.67 per kilolitre and will move to $2.85 per kilolitre by 2014-15. This effectively leads to a final end retail cost to the consumer on the Gold Coast of nearly $4 per kilolitre when the equivalent volume charge in Victoria and New South Wales is less than half and just over half respectively. This final price will only fall if Labor further yields on its bulk water charges. In the last two years I have stood in this place 17 times and warned against the government’s water price hikes. On 17 occasions I raised not only my concerns but also the concerns of those whom I represent. So I find it hypocritical for the minister to state in his second reading speech that councils ‘needed to step up, listen to their community and take responsibility for water and wastewater prices’. When exactly is the Labor government going to begin listening to the needs of residents and what they are saying? In particular, when is this Labor government going to listen to Gold Coast residents suffering to scrape together every last cent to ensure they can afford their water bill? That is after they have paid their electricity bill and a variety of other bills such as registration that come their way. Is the government listening after the years of neglect? Are members of the government, including the backbench members, listening? I am able to quote exactly what constituents have told me about their recent water bills. They are not my words but theirs. One constituent states, ‘In 1999 the cost of water was $1.02 a kilolitre. In 12 years the increase in water charges exceeded that of inflation or CPI. Can you explain why this is so?’ Another constituent stated, ‘Watching the water spill out over the dam recently, then to have received this account borders on insanity.’ Another, referring to the government’s Allconnex water bungle, stated, ‘With the introduction of yet another level of inefficient administration it appears that we are bearing the inevitable costs’. Another stated, ‘I want to say how disgusted I am with the price of water in this state and region,’ that being the Gold Coast. ‘Soon we will not be able to afford to live in our community with the increases in basic services provision that should be provided by government.’ ‘Water reform—what nonsense!’ Those sentiments and, as a matter of fact, the whole essence of the government’s intent through the bill is summed up by the concise comment of a constituent again: ‘I consider that the public is being ripped off and deceived.’ The public have spoken and they do not like the taste of Labor’s water reforms. 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1849

I do not think either the government or the minister get it—it being that no-one will swallow this line that the water crisis was anyone’s fault other than Labor’s and of course we have droughts in Australia, which we have always had. The councils, the councillors and the South-East Queensland mayors are not to blame. To continue blaming councils and referring to section 49 of the South-East Queensland water act 2009 as the mechanism to charge what was forced upon them by a reckless government is false and misleading. Councils are not permitted to run up losses that they cannot recover. I urge the minister to read the Local Government Act. South-East Queensland councils such as the Gold Coast City Council have successfully managed water, built dams and conservatively billed residents—ratepayers—for nearly a hundred years. The public were happy, but then the government got involved and within two years there were all sorts of protests in the streets and demands for the government to start again and basically get out of it. To then move on to the second reading speech and state ‘that the Queensland government has been up front about bulk water charges’ is utterly untrue and is not supported by verifiable evidence. The facts are that the bulk water price is attempting to salvage or ratchet back costs associated with the failed $10 billion water grid that is to be repaid over a 10-year period as opposed to the normal 30- to 50-year period, which is the norm when applied to dams. The next element that went wrong was the water grid, which was marred by financial and engineering disasters. They were the Tugun desalination plant, the western corridor bypass, the northern link and the Traveston Dam, which was not built. These are $5 billion worth of infrastructure capital losses that must be treated as such—as capital losses. In his second reading speech the minister has made a number of completely outrageous claims which are standard false statements that are routinely delivered to our councils who have had the courage to stand up to this rapacious Bligh Labor government. It is no wonder that one of their group, the former Lord Mayor, Campbell Newman, said that he had had quite enough of this perpetual issue going on and on and he sought representation here, which is of course what subsequently happened. What else would members have expected when faced with repeated false claims from what is, in fact, a coward’s castle here in parliament? In other words, you can say things under privilege against other people and they cannot defend themselves. Like many of the closely consulted councillors, particularly in my area—and I talk to councils a lot and I make no bones about it; my wife is a councillor on the Gold Coast City Council—I have had enough of the abuse of the councils by the minister and a number of other members and I intend to refute each and every false claim they make, particularly when they are made under privilege. The truth of the matter is that councils do what the communities need. They do their best within their very tight budgets. They are not represented under the federal Constitution, as most people know. So they need the protection generally of the state parliament. Of course, they have this dreadful code of conduct rule under which they operate which we here in parliament, including the government, do not operate under and so they have to make sure they do everything that that code of conduct dictates. Why does the government not impose the same rules upon itself? If you are actually going to get up and say that the councils should do what you want and then you decide to change your mind and basically— Mr Moorhead interjected. Dr DOUGLAS: Hear me out. Ms Jones interjected. Dr DOUGLAS: It is all within the bill. For the record, the return of income back to the Gold Coast City Council for the state water asset has had to be loaned back to Allconnex. I am going through the points made by the minister in his second reading speech. They pay a five per cent return, which the government has demanded is reinvested back in infrastructure. That is the truth of the matter. There is no rip-off from councils, no secret slush fund and the government only paid the Gold Coast City Council half the correct value of the asset in the first place. Logan has no real water storage because the Wolffdene Dam was not built. Wayne Goss’s government—and Kevin Rudd was involved at the time— ensured that that did not happen. The Gold Coast City Council would be very happy to work out a very good arrangement with the Logan council if only to get around this terrible $50 million surcharge which the— Mr Moorhead: Logan and Gold Coast were suing each other. Dr DOUGLAS: No, they are not suing anybody. Actually that is incorrect, member for Waterford. That is a quite incorrect statement. You need to check your facts. If you want to interject—through the chair—hop in your seat. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr O’Brien): Order! There is too much audible conversation and too much interjection. Whoever has a pager that is not on silent can put it on silent right now, please. The member for Gaven has the call. 1850 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011

Dr DOUGLAS: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Allconnex is the water utility owned by the Gold Coast City Council, Logan and Redlands. I am sure something can be arranged and I think the department could facilitate that. I will not get down into the trivialities of the minister’s argument of justification for the western corridor bypass, the Traveston Dam that wasn’t and the desal plant. These are the facts: power station turbines are very poorly dealt with by having to use treated effluent. In fact, the justification in this bill that the minister used in his second reading speech about the success of that process has to be predicated on the fact that it is water that power stations do not want. Turbine blades are braised by that sort of treatment. They deteriorate much faster and they require a lot more servicing. There also has to be extensive pretreatment of the water. It is poor practice to use it. Desalination requires seven to eight times as much energy to produce one litre as would be required to produce the equivalent amount from a dam. The desal water is of poorer quality and should only be used for emergencies. The desal plant was designed to be a 50-megalitre maximum plant, and that is what should have resulted. The $50 year-on-year rebate which the Gold Coast City Council is actually being criticised for is 10 times that being offered by the state—enough said. The northern corridor link was just an exercise in futility. The Traveston Dam that wasn’t—and I thank the Premier for withdrawing it after advice from the federal government—was an exercise in futility and extreme waste which was raised by multiple members here in parliament at the time. There is now a lot of land left fallow in the Mary Valley, which is probably one of our most fertile regions. We need to do something to get that land back into production. If the minister genuinely wants to stop the blame game, he should stop blaming councils and stop blaming anyone. The minister incorrectly states that the first step is this bill. The first step towards reconciliation is to stop blaming those whom you seek to reconcile with. Why not just say to councils, ‘How do we get this to work and how can I help?’ I ask the minister: why set a deadline for 1 July this year if he wants reconciliation? I thought Labor claimed to be the experts on reconciliation. They certainly seem to state that enough, from what I have heard. Councils need time to carefully consider and plan their exit from or restructuring of these entities possibly into what is a new structure for themselves—and one would hope that they can just bring them back into the old structures that worked for the benefit of the ratepayers and consumers. There are many ways to unscramble an egg, but certainly Labor scrambles are the hardest to fix. Councils will obviously consult their communities and their finance and technical staff to work through this to find the best solution. I propose that we all support that. I see no reason to object to the four principles that are laid out in the minister’s second reading speech. For those councils that wish to stay with their water retailer, I think that for them to have to adhere to those principles is entirely appropriate. What I remain concerned about is further government demands to mandate for change that may be imposed upon them by the government that they cannot plan for. Labor does this all the time. Councils can be trusted. They are trusted partners. I would think that a memorandum of understanding should be arranged, not a formalised agreement. There should be a two- to three-year time frame over which you would work through most of the difficulties. That might be a better process for the price mitigation plan to be subsequently mandated and which I am sure the councils could agree to. The Queensland Competition Authority is not necessarily the correct arbiter of whether all is fair since it is appointed by the state government and is therefore not completely independent. Why not refer the matters—if indeed these things have been in such contention—to the national referee, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission? I cannot understand why Labor wants to pick a fight with councils. Councils are natural partners of government. Why argue with friends when one might resolve a difference of opinion over a beer or a cup of coffee or whatever is appropriate at the time? Councils are very good at informing their constituents, as they do routinely. Roads, rates, rubbish, water and waste are their currency. Labor needs to stick to its own knitting. Labor’s water experiment was a monumental failure. Accept it and move on. Clearly, water does need regulation, but the government needs to understand that this water bill only confirms how poorly understood water management is by Labor in government. Generally there is a saying, ‘If you can’t do, teach.’ Maybe for Labor that might be, ‘If you can’t do, don’t.’ Mrs STUCKEY (Currumbin—LNP) (2.44 pm): In joining the debate on the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 2011, which was introduced into the House by the Minister for Energy and Water Utilities, the honourable member for Stretton, on 12 May, let me echo the sentiment of the shadow minister, the honourable member for Buderim, and other LNP members in saying that this amendment bill is little more than a cheap political stunt, which is why we on this side of the House cannot support it. 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1851

Water prices have gone through the roof for residents and community groups in South-East Queensland due to the Bligh Labor government’s incompetence and poor management. The honourable member for Buderim quite rightly pointed out early in his speech that the very title of this bill ‘Fairer Water Prices for SEQ’ pretends to be something it is not. Rather, it is deceptive and misleading. It is also downright dishonest, as the honourable member also pointed out in his well-researched presentation to the House. Both the Premier and the minister, the honourable member for Stretton, have resorted to fabrication of the truth by attempting to shift the blame onto the former mayor of Brisbane when this mess was of their own making. Here we stand debating this the seventh piece of water reform legislation dished up by the inept and sneaky Beattie then Bligh governments since 2006. On behalf of the good people of Currumbin, whom I am proud to represent and who have tolerated enormous disruption through the construction of the billion dollar Tugun desalination plant, I wish to place on record my total disgust at this Labor government’s arrogance and absolute disregard for the negative effects its legislation has on everyday people. On a daily basis this expensive eyesore reminds residents of this government’s ineptitude and reason for the cost blow-outs in water prices. People in my electorate would not trust this lot to run a chook raffle let alone something as vital as a water distribution system. Now Labor says that it will permit councils to opt out of the very legislation they forced them into less than two years ago. My LNP colleagues and I said at the time the government introduced the three water retail companies that price rises would be a certainty as the new entities would issue separate bills independent of their rate levels. And just look what has happened. How many times have we seen this lazy and ineffective government rush legislation into the House only to find that it did not plan properly and had to bring it back to amend, sometimes even before debate on the bill was completed? According to the explanatory notes, the primary objectives of this bill are to amend the South-East Queensland Water (Distribution and Retail Restructuring) Act 2009 to provide for prices charged by distributor-retailers for the supply of water and wastewater services to residential and small business customers in South-East Queensland to be capped annually by the consumer price index. They are also to extend the period in which the minister may make a transfer notice and to provide for the portability of long service leave entitlements when staff move from one distributor-retailer to another. Additionally, the Queensland Competition Authority Act 1997 will be amended to remove the price determination role of the Queensland Competition Authority for water and wastewater charges by distributor-retailers that was to apply from 1 July 2013. Other subsequent amendments are proposed to be made to the South- East Queensland Water (Distribution and Retail Restructuring) and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2010 and the Water Act 2000. During the course of this year we have seen a blame game of epic proportions as this toxic Bligh Labor government turns itself inside out trying to abrogate its responsibility regarding the management of our water supplies. Nowhere was the rage more public and protracted than on the Gold Coast, where a community group called Disconex was formed in protest to unreasonably high water prices being imposed on residents. Thousands of people signed petitions and attended rallies to voice their total objection to wickedly high water bills that they discovered in their letter boxes earlier this year. Not only residents but also community groups felt the inexcusable water price spikes, with bills doubling and even trebling in some cases. This caused enormous concerns for many about their survival into the future. A representative from Disconex mailed me today and asked me to make the following points on their behalf. I do so now— The Bill for Fairer Water Prices misses the point for the people. Thousands of people are hurting because of higher water prices, but they are also extremely concerned about the loss of this essential service into what could very well be in the future, privatisation. Gold Coast City ratepayers will subsidise Logan & Redland council’s infrastructure to the tune of 62.5 cents in the dollar, for all future infrastructure needs. The mail continued— There is no accountability of Allconnex to the people. The largest shareholder of Allconnex, Gold Coast City Council has absolutely no say in the running of our utility nor in the price increases that will follow after the capping will be removed in two years. Gold Coast residents have lost their water assets and have had no adequate compensation for these assets and will again be further penalised by having to support two other councils and pay massive increasing bulk water charges to the State Govt. The Fairer Water bill is only fair to Logan and Redlands Councils. The whole structure of Allconnex and the water reform has left 500,000 people terribly disadvantaged. The cost of dismantling Allconnex should not be viewed in short term costs, but as long term savings to the community. Maintaining public ownership and community control over the water and wastewater facilities, and other vital services are essential to ensure the community has democratic, equitable, and affordable services for the future. This has been lost to the Gold Coast community. That is the end of the mail from the Disconex representative. 1852 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011

I wonder what the Labor members on the Gold Coast have been telling their angry constituents when they call their offices in pure rage over their massive water bills. Let me guess: ‘It’s all the councils’ fault.’ Is that why none of them—not the member for Burleigh, not the member for Broadwater, not the member for Southport, not the member for Albert—bothered to turn up at any of these rallies? Rather than face the irate constituents, they hid away in a cowardly manner. The Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill was introduced following the Premier’s statement in parliament on 7 April this year, which amounted to a backflip of major proportions on the government’s own water reform bill. It contains provisions that would allow local councils the option of regaining control of water, as well as announcing a cap on charges from council owned water entities. This bill introduces a price cap to constrain water and wastewater distribution and retail price increases to the annual CPI increase, which is currently 3.6 per cent according to the minister’s second reading speech in May but is 2.7 per cent according to the Premier’s statement on 7 April. Perhaps the minister would be kind enough to offer some clarification on this anomaly in his reply, or is this yet another example of the government not being able to get anything right, even basic figures? This cap is due to commence on 1 July 2011, in two weeks time, which is why we are debating this bill this week— conveniently, a day before we begin debate on the state budget. Provisions will apply for two years, ending on 30 June 2013. Notably, this cap is only to apply to water and wastewater services as supplied by the council owned distributor-retailer entities—Unitywater, Queensland Urban Utilities and Allconnex. The state government’s own bulk water charges will be exempt, and during this time frame they are expected to rise by up to 25 per cent in order to repay their $7 billion south-east water grid debt over a 20-year period. How unfair is this, but it is typical of this arrogant Labor government—one rule for them and another for the rest of us. What this means for households already struggling against the huge tide of cost-of-living pressure created by the Bligh Labor government is that their water bills will keep going up and up due to state government bulk water charges. Queenslanders are hurting under this Bligh Labor government, and the bill before us does nothing to alleviate the issue of costly water bills. In the June-July issue of the Council Leader magazine, Craig Johnstone wrote this with regard to the Premier’s latest somersault— The undisputed queen of contradiction is Premier Anna Bligh, with her recent actions meaning ratepayers could ultimately pay an unnecessary price. He continued— In allowing councils to opt out of the current water utilities, the premier is washing her hands of political responsibility, siphoning that negative fallout directly to councils. Mr Johnstone hit the nail right on the head, and I encourage residents in South-East Queensland to read his comments. Provisions in this bill will also require South-East Queensland councils to submit a plan on how they intend to mitigate price increases on customers after the cessation of this proposed two-year cap. They will also be required to publish a quantifiable price path for prices for residential and small- business customers by 1 March 2013 which must cover at least five years of price rises. According to the explanatory notes, this is to ensure price increases are transparent and remain subject to public scrutiny. However, a similar provision is not included for the state government. Nor does the state government have to reinstate the 40 per cent of funding historically available for infrastructure upgrades—yet another example of do as I say, not as I do. Supposedly, there are no new or additional costs to the state government resulting from this bill. However—and here is the catch—by capping distributor-retailer water prices, the state government will force councils to increase rates to make up for any shortfall in their water revenue. Additionally, councils will be required to spend approximately $2.837 billion by 2013 for new water and wastewater infrastructure to comply with a new environmental standard set by the government. It is an understatement to say that this Labor government’s water reform has been an incredibly expensive exercise in government waste. This bill has the potential to cripple our water services by preventing the water entities from making any money at all. Setting up the new utilities was estimated at about $83 million; however, it will cost upwards of $200 million to dismantle them. A Courier-Mail article on 4 June by Koren Helbig exposed the fact that millions of litres of recycled water from the western corridor recycled scheme are being flushed down the Brisbane River along with millions of taxpayer dollars. It was revealed that an average of 25 million litres a day is wasted, at an approximate daily cost of $38,000, and that an alarming 40 per cent of the wastewater purified through the scheme since 2007 has been dumped in the Brisbane River. Tell the residents of the Gold Coast that that is good bang for their buck. We all know about waste in the Currumbin electorate. We have a desal plant that has had more episodes than Days of our Lives and now, as many are saying, it has been sent to an early grave in hot standby mode. This billion dollar piece of infrastructure was the result of a panic attack from the Beattie- Bligh Labor governments and their dismal failure to plan for the future needs of Queensland. Now, 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1853 adding further insult to injury, already fed-up taxpayers are having to foot the bill for these largely redundant facilities, not to mention the overly bureaucratic regimes the Bligh government’s water reform imposed on local governments and ratepayers, which is undoubtedly the root cause of this grossly deceiving blame game that will end up with huge financial burdens being placed on local residents. Before the state’s intervention in 2006, the Gold Coast City Council was producing water for residents for just $160 a megalitre. In 2010 the cost of treated dam water had reached $300 a megalitre, and it was revealed that the supply produced by the Tugun desalination plant cost $731 a megalitre. On the Gold Coast this financial year, bulk water charges made up $1.69 of the $2.68 per kilolitre charged to households. In 2011-12, this is expected to rise to $1.90 a kilolitre, a 12.5 per cent increase, and it will increase to $2.12 a kilolitre in 2012-13, a further 12 per cent increase, excluding inflation and based on the price path published on the Queensland Water Commission website. These rises are to pay off the government’s $7 billion debt for the ill-conceived water grid. Increasing bulk water charges will continue to crush struggling households, and the government will not be able to shift the blame any longer. Premier’ Bligh’s announcement in parliament on 7 April was without a doubt a reaction to LNP leader Campbell Newman’s announcement on 23 March on water reform in an attempt to play catch-up. Can-do’s policy received enormous public support. Let me share with honourable members Campbell Newman and the LNP’s four-point plan for water: amalgamation of the five bulk water entities into one to provide greater efficiencies; to hand back control of water retailing to councils; to write off some of the non-performing water grid assets; and immediately adopt a 40-year price path to repay the state government’s $7 billion water grid debt. Our plan is far more comprehensive than Labor’s unfair regime and will save householders more on their water bills. We will get action on the basics and cut the waste. The Gold Coast City Council is in the process of running focus groups to determine if people want to split from Allconnex. According to media reports, some 500 people will be contacted but the total will come down to 40. This is a very complex issue to be expecting everyday ratepayers to understand. I imagine understanding fully the legal implications of this water divorce are beyond most people without law degrees. This whole sorry saga was caused by an incompetent Labor government which is now continuing to inflict pain and cost on Queenslanders. Members of the Campbell Newman led LNP team oppose the foisting of higher costs of living on the good people of Queensland, which is what this legislation will do. Labor has made it clear by stating that further legislation will be needed if councils choose to opt out of the current scheme with water distributor-retailers. This government sent us bust in a boom, went on a reckless spending campaign and now will not even face up to the mess it has created. Instead it is trying to pass the buck once again with this unacceptable piece of legislation that, like many before it, will be back for reform in the near future. Under a Campbell Newman LNP government, Queenslanders will power Queensland again, not politics. Hon. KL STRUTHERS (Algester—ALP) (Minister for Community Services and Housing and Minister for Women) (3.01 pm): I welcome the changes proposed in the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill. We know that many people are concerned about utility costs, but we also know that people have been doing a great job at conserving water. People in my own local area are pretty proud to say that they have reduced their water use. Part of what we have seen over the past few years is people actively doing their bit, and what we are trying to do as a government is do our bit. As many speakers have said and as the minister has said on many occasions, the state government is doing our bit, subsidising the cost of bulk water by $400 million plus, and we are maintaining that commitment. After meeting with the Australian Pensioners and Superannuants League in Logan just a few weeks ago, we know that water prices are on people’s minds and we know that they are confused about who has what responsibility in relation to water. What the minister has been trying to achieve and making a very determined effort in is being very clear about what is our state responsibility and what rests with councils. We are asking councils to step up here and take responsibility for their part in the price pathways to try to reduce the cost for consumers in their area, like the pensioners in Logan. For instance, in Logan the state charges make up less than 30 per cent of bills. For an average three-person household using 180 litres of water per day, the state government component of that charge is about $369 a year compared to the council charge of $962. There is wriggle room for councils to offer greater rebates. There is wriggle room for councils to reduce prices and help ease some of these price pressures for people in their own local areas. The Bligh government, particularly with the announcements this week in the state budget, has the largest and broadest range of concessions of any state or territory in Australia. Our concessions payments across the state to millions of Queenslanders now total about $1.4 billion, and this includes support to help people keep up with the rising costs of utilities. In the last year alone, South-East Queensland pensioners received a water subsidy that went to about 150,000 households and cost about $16.2 million. We are serious about offering the support that we can to seniors, and those rebates have been increased this year. This year households in South-East Queensland will get $120 as a water rebate, and the rates rebate has been increased by our government to up to $200 per year. 1854 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011

As I have said, it is local councils that need to be held accountable for their part in the rising cost of water, and that is what is proposed in this bill today. The changes in the bill will provide price relief to households and small business owners in South-East Queensland by imposing a two-year CPI cap on council owned distributor-retailer water and wastewater charges. Councils will also have to prepare public mitigation plans to better manage water prices after the cap expires. It is disturbing to hear the nonsense from those opposite. They have to come clean on what they are going to do to provide some relief to people paying these costs. They have to come clean on what their plan actually is. It is fine for Campbell Newman to liken himself to Mal Meninga, but really what he is resembling is the person prancing around on the sideline with the sandwich board and the slogans. People are seeing through that. He needs to come clean on what he is actually going to do to help ease some of these pressures. We know that other states and territories that have conservative governments have also had rising costs for water and utilities. For instance, one of the first steps taken by the new conservative government in Western Australia was to cut concessions by $17 million. Those opposite have form on this, and they need to come clean to the people of Queensland. They need to come clean on what they are going to do to help ease some of these cost-of-living pressures. This legislation will go a long way to helping ease some of those price pressures, making the system fairer. I certainly commend the minister for his determined efforts in trying to do what he can to manage those costs, rein in those costs and provide relief for people who are finding those cost pressures pretty tough. I commend the minister for his efforts and I commend the bill to the House. Mrs ATTWOOD (Mount Ommaney—ALP) (3.06 pm): I rise to speak on the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 2011, which will impose a price cap on water and wastewater, excluding trade waste and recycled water, distribution and retail prices for residential and small business customers in South-East Queensland for two years from 1 July 2011. Residents of the Mount Ommaney electorate are concerned about the increasing price of water by councils and their need to make huge profits through their water distributor-retailers. Following the long period of drought which hit Queensland between 2001 and 2009, the state government built the $6.9 billion water grid which provides long-term water security for Queensland. The grid means that we do not have to leave our future water supply and lifestyle to chance. The state paid councils in Queensland a total of $1.9 billion to take over water assets, which councils had long neglected to invest in in terms of their upkeep. The state will make a loss of $499 million supplying water to council owned water businesses to keep bulk water prices low. Considering councils’ irresponsible profiteering, this state needed to legislate on water prices. The key elements of the bill are the two-year price cap, of increases of no more than CPI at 3.6 per cent, commencing from 1 July 2011; ensuring councils take responsibility for water and wastewater prices by requiring councils to have a price mitigation plan to manage price increases after the CPI period; and removing the price deterministic role of the Queensland Competition Authority. The QCA will continue to have a price-monitoring role during the price cap period. The bill provides for other amendments to: enable deferral of making new grid contracts until the possible restructure of South-East Queensland water business is finalised; allow the minister to fix any omissions that occur during the July 2010 transfer of assets from councils to the distributor-retailers; and ensure that a person is able to transfer from one distributor-retailer to another without losing any long service leave entitlements. The bill has been developed in accordance with the Premier’s announcement on 7 April 2011 to impose a price cap on the water and wastewater distribution and retail prices of residential and small business customers in South-East Queensland for two years from 1 July 2011. Queensland Urban Utilities—QUU—is owned by the Brisbane, Ipswich, Lockyer Valley, Scenic Rim and Somerset regional councils. On 9 May 2011, QUU released its water and wastewater prices for the 2011-12 financial year. QUU’s announced prices all fall below the government’s announced CPI cap on distribution and retail water and wastewater charges. At the same time as the announced reductions, QUU stated that it will invest $341.343 million in capital expenditure in the next 12 months. QUU’s announcements prove that there continues to be efficiencies—and therefore savings—that can be provided to customers. Even with the price cap, the Brisbane City Council is receiving significant financial returns from QUU. The BCC in its budget, announced in early June 2011, has stated that it will receive from QUU $221 million in 2011-12 and $227 million in 2012-13. The price cap is for two years, providing much needed price relief to households and small businesses and providing the opportunity for councils as owners of the distributor-retailers to put in place price mitigation plans and a price path to manage price increases and to support their residents. Although the legislation has been prepared within a tight time frame, councillors and the distributor-retailers have been consulted on both the application and the specific provisions of the draft bill and these stakeholders do not support a price cap. By 1 July 2011, councils must provide to the government their decision to stay in or to withdraw from their distributor- retailer. The outcome of these decisions will require legislation to be progressed in late 2011. 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1855

At the end of the drought in South-East Queensland, the Queensland Water Commission changed its focus from severe water restrictions aiming to conserve limited water supplies to encouraging wise and efficient use of water through avenues such as permanent water conservation measures. Permanent water conservation measures aim to encourage and embed long-term responsible use of water. These measures align with community expectations of the sustainability and conservation of this precious resource. What is meant by the responsible use of water? One of the permanent water conservation measures allows the use of efficient sprinklers and hoses to water gardens and lawns. However, sprinklers and hoses cannot be used on Mondays or between 10 am or 4 pm. That means that water is not wasted by being used during the hottest hours of the day and the loss of water through evaporation is avoided. South-East Queensland residents have responded to the measures. For instance, South-East Queensland residents have more than met the residential consumption targets set at 200 litres per person per day, with residents averaging around 158 litres per person per day since December 2009. They are all committed to conserving water as our precious resource in the future. I commend the bill to the House. Mrs SULLIVAN (Pumicestone—ALP) (3.12 pm): I rise to speak in support of the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 2011. Let me say at the outset that I am not the only one who is very pleased that this bill has come before the House. I have received many letters and emails from people who believe that the local council could not do the job of mitigating fair water prices and wanted us to step in. In fact, I attended a water meeting on Bribie Island, organised by the ratepayers of the Moreton Bay Regional Council. Unfortunately, not one single councillor bothered to attend to try to defend the council’s position on water—not even the local councillor Gary Parsons, who should have been there. It is his job to represent ratepayers and listen to their concerns. A government member: He was hiding. Mrs SULLIVAN: I take that interjection. Unfortunately, he was hiding. He sent his wife to spy on the meeting, which is quite disgraceful. If you make a decision in council, you should be prepared to defend it. To his credit, the CEO of Unitywater, John Black, attended and, of course, he copped most of the flak. I wish to address the impact of this bill on the residents of the Moreton Bay Regional Council in particular. As a result of the water reform program, which commenced in July 2010, the distributor- retailers, through economies of scale, had the opportunity to achieve the following three things: improve water supply, coordination and management; deliver improved and more efficient water and wastewater services to customers; and improve the management of water and wastewater infrastructure. Even with the economies of scale, the council owned distributor-retailers have increased water and wastewater prices to residential and small-business customers by amounts significantly in excess of the increase in the state government bulk water input costs, which are associated with the investment in the South-East Queensland water grid. Everyone knows that the only way to get water for free is to catch rainwater in a bucket. Treating water to an acceptable drinking standard and sending it through pipes is a costly business. Maintaining that infrastructure also costs. But ratepayers should not have to foot any extra money so that councils can make huge profits over and above the cost of infrastructure and maintenance every time someone turns on a tap. This bill amends the South-East Queensland Water (Distribution and Retail Restructuring) Act 2009 to provide for price charges by distributor-retailers for certain water and wastewater services supplied to residential and small business customers in South-East Queensland to be capped annually by the consumer price index, or CPI. Through the media, councils have continually blamed both the state and their own water entities for the price increases and have claimed to have no control over the operation of distributor-retailers. But the ratepayers and the state government know better. The distributor-retailers are under council ownership. In exchange for their transferred assets and resources, councils received returns on equity and tax equivalent payments from their distributor-retailers. For my region, Unitywater was previously proposing an increase of $180 for a typical household. The passing of this state government bill, without the support of the opposition, will mean that the maximum increase will be only $78—a reduction of $102. Distributor-retailers can charge below the imposed CPI level and, of course, with a bit of willpower it can be done. The state government is already capping its bulk water price. In fact, we are selling it at a loss of $407 million to the councils. We cannot decrease that price any further. In 2008 the state announced a 10-year bulk water price path to support the development and operation of the South-East Queensland water grid, which has drought proofed the entire area of South-East Queensland after a 10-year drought. Furthermore, the state government has acted to ensure that bulk water prices are kept to a minimum by doing the following: establishing a bulk water price path to gradually increase bulk water prices over 10 years; forgoing a commercial return on its investment in drought proofing South-East Queensland; accepting a $407 million financial loss for water supplied to the council owned water business for the 2011-12 financial year—effectively a subsidy of $348 per residential and non-residential property; and, lastly, providing for a South-East Queensland pensioner subsidy of $100, rising in this budget to $120. 1856 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011

Unitywater is not a private business. It is a statutory authority jointly and wholly owned by the Moreton Bay and Sunshine Coast regional councils. Mr Ryan: That’s right. They get all the profits. Mrs SULLIVAN: That is correct. We actually do not get any of the profits at all. It is governed by an independent board appointed by the two councils. Unitywater can, under the direction from both councils, charge water prices below the CPI if councils are dedicated to keeping the price for their ratepayers low. I commend the bill to the House and thank the minister and his staff for finally resolving this issue to the satisfaction of my ratepayers. Mr SEENEY (Callide—LNP) (Leader of the Opposition) (3.17 pm): This bill before the House is called the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 2011. Even this bill’s title is an affront to anyone who has sat in this parliament and witnessed the incompetence and mismanagement of this Labor government with regard to the water supply system in South-East Queensland. There is nothing fair about water prices in South-East Queensland. There is nothing competent about the way in which this government has managed the water system in South-East Queensland, and this bill before the House will certainly not make the water prices fairer in any way, shape or form. This afternoon I have listened with a rising tide of nausea to the rubbish—the absolute garbage— that has been shovelled up one after the other by the token Labor backbenchers over on the other side of the House who have come in here with speeches that have been written by somebody down in the department and who have tried to rewrite history. They have tried to set aside Labor’s greatest failure in public administration in a long history of failures. I have said before in this place and it is worth putting on record again that students for generations to come who want to study public administration will study as the greatest example of public administrative failure the administration of the water supply system in South-East Queensland over the 18-odd years that this state Labor government has been in power in Queensland. Water infrastructure, like all infrastructure, has a long lead time between cause and effect. There is a long time between the decisions that are made—or not made, more importantly, in this case—and those effects being felt by the people who depend on that particular service. In this particular case the decision that was made was the decision not to build the Wolffdene Dam. That was a decision that was made by a Labor government for purely political purposes. For straight-out politics it decided not to build the Wolffdene Dam. But then it did not build anything else, either. It felt so good about not building the Wolffdene Dam, which would have guaranteed a water supply not just for Brisbane but also for the Gold Coast and the entire growing urban population centre of South-East Queensland, that it did not build anything else, either. When the next drought came along it was a surprise to those opposite that they were in trouble. The next drought came along, as it was always going to because we live in Queensland. There have been droughts in South-East Queensland for the 200 years that records have been kept and there will be droughts for the next 200 years. A responsible government would have ensured that the water infrastructure and the water storage structures were in place to deal with that. But not this Labor government. This Labor government waited until we had a water crisis. In about 2005-06 the incompetent minister who still sits over there, struck dumb by his own shame and embarrassment, was part of a government that suddenly realised that we had a crisis on our hands. Its response to the water crisis was, too, a political response. Part of that political response was to put in place the distributor-retailer entities that this bill seeks now to amend. This bill seeks now to correct part of that absurd political response. But it, too, is about politics. This bill is about politics. It is about playing the political game rather than addressing the situation. It is about trying to get some political point-scoring advantage rather than addressing the systemic failures that have been built into the water supply system in South-East Queensland and that will forever be an embarrassment to anybody who carries the brand of Labor in Queensland but which must be an acute embarrassment to the minister who has to come in here with this legislation this afternoon. Let us set the record straight. Let us set aside some of the nonsense that has been sprouted unknowingly by members such as the poor old member for Mount Ommaney and the poor old member for Pumicestone, neither of whom had a clue about what they were saying when they read out those pre-prepared speeches. Neither of them had any understanding of the history that has brought this catastrophe to this House. Mrs SULLIVAN: I find those words offensive and I ask that they be withdrawn. I wrote my own speech, as I always do, and they all know it. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms van Litsenburg): Order! Will the member withdraw his comments. Mr SEENEY: Yes, I withdraw. Mrs ATTWOOD: I ask that those statements be withdrawn. 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1857

Mr SEENEY: Did the member find it offensive? If the member found it offensive I will withdraw. I will help her out. Let us talk about how these distributor-retailer entities came about. Let us talk about why the government has come in here with a piece of legislation called the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill. It did it because it knows that water prices in South-East Queensland are unfair. Those opposite know because they are getting the message loud and clear from every one of their constituents. They are getting a very justifiable message. They are being told in no uncertain terms, as they deserve to be told, that the water prices that are being imposed on the people of South-East Queensland are unfair, unjust and unreasonable. They are that way because of the absolute incompetence of this government. This is a government that set out to solve a political crisis. It was called the water crisis, but it was a political crisis. It set out to solve that crisis by throwing money at it. It threw money at it in huge amounts. It set out to construct infrastructure in a panic that eventually cost a huge amount of money. There are figures bandied around of $5 billion and $7 billion, depending on which pieces of infrastructure are added into that calculation. The government was lucky it was able to do that at the time because the Queensland state economy was booming. The mining industry was booming. The receipts the government was enjoying from their other main income streams, such as housing taxes, were high. So the government was able to throw money at the problem. It did not care how much it cost. We in this place heard about the absurd contracting arrangements that were part of that whole panic-stricken, politically motivated approach to its failure to build infrastructure. We heard about the contracts that were let on a ‘just do it and we’ll pay you’ basis. We heard about the tender-by-invoice type contracting arrangements that became the norm. Basically anybody who had an excavator, truck or machine of any sort could name their own price from the government just so long as they got this pipeline built or this water treatment plant built. But those billions and billions of dollars are now built into the system and the cost of that infrastructure. It is the requirement to show a return on that infrastructure and the requirement to pay the interest on the loans that were necessary to fund that infrastructure that is reflected in the water prices. It is reflected in a water price that generations of Queenslanders will be burdened with. Part of the political response was to seek to blame the councils—to force a political confrontation between the state government and the councils, to somehow promulgate this argument that the councils were to blame, that the councils had not invested in their infrastructure. What an enormous hypocrisy for any member of this government to come in here and suggest, as members have done in this debate, that somehow or other the councils neglected to maintain their infrastructure, that the councils neglected to invest in the infrastructure that was necessary to guarantee the water supply to South-East Queensland. The kindest thing that I can say about that is that it is the ultimate example of the pot calling the kettle black. There is nobody in this state government who can legitimately level that accusation at anybody else. This state government represents the greatest example of an entity that did not maintain the infrastructure that was its responsibility, that did not invest in a timely way in the infrastructure necessary to ensure that the services it was responsible for providing were provided in a proper and appropriate way until such time as it found itself in that crisis situation. And then it sought to blame the councils. It continues to do so again today. Those opposite continue to do so in this debate, just as they have continued to do so with the establishment of these distributor-retailer entities that are the subject of this bill. It is all about political blame-shifting. It is all about shifting the blame for the failures of the minister who sits over there still today, and the other members of the government, who failed dismally. The people of Queensland are not going to fall for that. The people of Queensland know full well that the water prices they pay now, the water prices they have been forced to pay, are the direct responsibility of the state government. That is the message that I want to reinforce again today. The people of South-East Queensland should never forget, and I am confident that they know, that the incredibly unfair and unjust water prices they have been saddled with are a direct result of the incompetence of this state government. I have said before and I will say again—and I will say it over and over and over until such time as the people of Queensland go to an election—that here in South-East Queensland the best how-to-vote card anybody can get is their water bill. Next time the people of South-East Queensland get their water bill they should keep it, stick it on the fridge and save it for election day and then go to the polling booths with their water bills in their hand, because that is the best how-to-vote card they will ever get. The water bills that the people in South-East Queensland receive in their mail will be the best how-to-vote cards they will ever get, because there is no better reason to throw this Labor government out of power, to consign this incompetent bunch to the political oblivion that they so richly deserve, than the water prices that generations of South-East Queensland residents will have to pay. The bill sets out to somehow tinker with this issue by capping the amount that the distributor- retailer entities are allowed to charge. Once again the government is trying to play a silly political game and claim that somehow it is the good guy in this, that somehow it is on the consumers’ side, that somehow it is setting out to stop the big bad councils from ripping off the consumers. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. It will not be accepted by the population of South-East Queensland, because it is fundamentally flawed and dishonest. 1858 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011

The bill seeks to cap one part of the water price and leave the other part to escalate. It seeks to cap at 3.6 per cent the amount that the retail entities are able to charge. They make a great song and dance about the fact that they are capping it at 3.6 per cent, but they completely ignore and fail to talk about the fact that there is a 19 per cent escalation in that part of the price calculation that the state has direct responsibility for—that is, the bulk water price. There will be a 19 per cent escalation in the price path that some members meaninglessly spoke about before. The distributor-retailer is confronted with a 19 per cent escalation in the product that it must buy in bulk form. It must buy bulk water from the state and it will be faced with a 19 per cent escalation in that price. The legislation then seeks to cap at 3.6 per cent the price that it is able to impose in its billing structure. Such is the absurdity of the proposition that it is not hard to understand that any entity that did that for any period would end up bankrupt. If a shopkeeper or business owner had a 19 per cent escalation imposed on their inputs and then, legislatively, by the incompetents who sit in this parliament, had a 3.6 per cent cap imposed upon their receipts, they would have a short road to bankruptcy and financial ruin. Yet that is the proposition that this parliament is being presented with this afternoon. That is the proposition that this Labor government is suggesting will bring about fairer water prices for people who are struggling with water prices that are grossly unfair. Of course, it is an absurdity. Of course, it will appear absurd to anybody who looks at it in anything other than a very shallow way indeed. For this government it is all about the political message, as it has always been. It is all about the politics. That is why the bill is called ‘fairer water prices’. The government is only interested in the political message and the cheap political hit. This is the sort of nonsense we have already seen telegraphed, where they will go into the electorate and suggest that we voted against fairer water prices. What an absurdly cheap, nasty nonsense and they expect the people of South-East Queensland to swallow it. They have played these tricks once too often. I think that the people of South-East Queensland are over that sort of cheap political nonsense. They know the reality of the mismanagement that this government has imposed upon them and they know where lies the responsibility for the escalation in their water prices. We will oppose the bill, as the shadow minister indicated in his contribution to the debate. I congratulate the member for Buderim on the contribution that he made to what is the first piece of legislation in this House that he has had responsibility for. It was a very detailed analysis of the situation. I commend the shadow minister for the contribution that he made. It is important that the people of Queensland understand that an alternative is being developed that seeks to address the real underlying problem. It is an alternative that seeks to address the problem, not the politics. If this government wants to address the problem, it would move to separate the cost of its incompetence from the people of Queensland who are currently bearing it. Essentially, the problem is that the cost of the government’s incompetence is now built into the system. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Hoolihan): Order! Member for Callide, I have been fairly tolerant. We talk about relevance, but repetition—tedious repetition—is quite irrelevant. We have just heard 15 minutes of it. Government members interjected. Mr SEENEY: I understand it is a message that the members on that side of the House do not want to hear. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Callide, are you taking issue with what I have said to you? Mr SEENEY: No. I take issue with the interjections from the back of the room. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: It sounded awfully like you were disagreeing. Let us deal with the bill and cut out the tedious repetition. Mr SEENEY: As I was saying, let us deal with the only real solution to the problem that the bill sets out to address. The only real solution is to remove from the water price calculation the result of the government’s incompetence. To do that we have to understand why the water prices are as high as they are. We have to understand what part of that calculation is actually contributing to the supply of water in South-East Queensland at the moment and what is essentially a white elephant. The government likes to call it insurance. It would have to be the dearest insurance policy in history to spend $5 billion to $7 billion, as they have done, and for that not to contribute anything to the water supply yet contribute grossly to the water price. If we are going to have fairer water prices, we have to address that essential element. We have to ensure that the costs that are part of that calculation and that determine what the water price is going to be, at both the bulk water level and the retail level, accurately reflect the production and delivery of that water. This bill does not do that. This bill simply seeks to make a political point, which I believe will be soundly rejected by the people of South-East Queensland. As I was saying, I commend the shadow minister. I fully expect that we will see the cheap politics played through this bill before the House, as we have seen cheap politics played with the water issue in South-East Queensland over the past five or six years. It is important that the government members who set out to rewrite history in that regard do not have a free run. It is important that we put on the 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1859 record the elements that have brought us to this point and that they are clearly enunciated when the parliament considers this sort of legislation. I suggest that any member of the parliament who is interested in fully understanding the situation can do no better than to read the record of the various debates that have taken place in this House over that period. Ms SIMPSON (Maroochydore—LNP) (3.38 pm): This lazy, arrogant government cannot fix the cost of living, because they will not admit why the prices are going up. I have had a gutful of my constituents not being able to pay their bills, facing situations— Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Hoolihan): Order! Member for Maroochydore, your language is unparliamentary. Mr Watt interjected. Mr Finn interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Everton, member for Yeerongpilly, the member for Maroochydore has the call. I would appreciate it if you would accord her the courtesy to which she is entitled to. Ms SIMPSON: These Labor members are so arrogant that they have no understanding of the distress they are causing constituents throughout South-East Queensland. People literally cannot pay their everyday bills. This government has added layer upon layer of unnecessary costs and is causing a situation where people are in financial distress. I hear the flippant laughter from the Labor backbenchers who are patting themselves on the back and saying they are doing something because this legislation says it is going to address water costs. However, none of them can seriously say that the $7 billion spent on the South-East Queensland water grid was well spent. At least $2 billion of that was wasted. I appreciate that those members are living in this little thought bubble of pollie land and that when their government mucks up the costing and delivery of infrastructure and then tries to foist the costs onto people who do not have their pay packets they do not understand the distress that causes. However, I see it happening in my electorate and throughout other electorates here in Queensland. I will give members a bit of a breakdown of that $2 billion—and that is just the figures we know about. An amount of $600 million was wasted on Traveston Dam. More than $500 million was wasted on another pipeline to nowhere that will never carry the volume of water for which it was designed. More than $700 million was blown on the western corridor recycled water pipeline—beyond its original estimated value. We know that contractors talked about invoice tendering. There was no proper business case made for these projects, except the western corridor project and even then they blew the budget—no business case. What sort of an incompetent, lazy government spends billions of dollars without even doing a business case? There was no business case made for how they were actually going to make the South-East Queensland water grid operate. When we say that this legislation does not address the real issue of overinflated costs of bulk water, we have the evidence, and that is only the $2 billion worth of projects they we have outlined to date. What we are hearing from industry is that this was a complete white elephant. It was possible to provide emergency and ongoing drought proofing of Queensland with good planning, but to not even do a business case? No wonder Queenslanders are hurting. This government thought that with the so- called rivers of gold coming in and the fact that the economy was up they could do anything. Ultimately, what we have seen is that they cannot. Yet we see a situation where this legislation does not address the facts. You see, you cannot fix the cost of living unless you address the underlying problems. When this government will not admit its mistakes, tries to cover them up, laughs them off and treats them so trivially, which I have witnessed in the form of interjections from members, we realise that this government does not have the answers. You have to cut waste and address the issues with regard to effective service delivery and infrastructure delivery to really take the pressure off Queenslanders, who are now facing some of the highest costs of living in generations. I know also that some of the contracts that were let under this government involved spin doctors who were employed to go and try to chat up the local MPs and massage their response to overinflated infrastructure going into the local areas. More was spent on spin doctors than on business cases, and that is a disgrace. That is why today we see that there is a soaring water price. This legislation before the House will still not address the fact that the way the bulk water assets were not scoped or invoiced properly and the fact that they never had a business case—except for one project—are the reasons we see these outrageous water prices in Queensland. We have outlined our plan with regard to addressing these issues because we do address the fundamental mistakes that have been made by this government. You cannot keep foisting all those incompetent mistakes on the taxpayer in the way of higher water costs. However, this government will not say sorry. All it does is tax more and tax more. We see small businesses closing around our state, but in South-East Queensland, with all the added layers of regulation—there has been a 13 per cent increase in regulation under this government in the last couple of years alone—this government has no understanding of how it is strangling our local economies and strangling people who once were so proud of the booming economy in Queensland and how they were a part of it. It is ironic that the Labor Party that said it was the party for the battlers is creating so many more battlers because of the way it is imposing costs on people who once were able to pay their bills but are now on the edge of poverty. 1860 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011

The rates of poverty are increasing in Queensland. We have seen recent QCOSS reports which clearly indicate the soaring numbers of people proportionately in our community who are falling below the poverty level. Do I care about the costs of living of my constituents and those in other parts of Queensland? Yes, I do. Will we stand up to see some fair dinkum response to those cost-of-living impacts by addressing the underlying issues? Yes, we will. By cutting waste and addressing the underlying problems, particularly with regard to the bad assets in the South-East Queensland water grid and the overpricing that has been forced onto customers, we are saying that there is an opportunity to relieve those costs of living. But this government not only will not say sorry; it will not fix the problem, it will not cut the waste and it will not cut people’s real cost of living as a result. Yes, I get angry when I hear people being flippant about the real issues behind the water crisis and the increase in the costs because this is not a legacy of which the government should be proud. I remember that when we voted against certain key aspects of this water grid and we issued warnings about the way it was being done, there was this flippant response from government. They said, ‘Just trust us. It is all in hand.’ Unfortunately, the concerns that we raised have been proven to be founded. Queenslanders deserve to know that their state can be the leading state again. However, at the most basic of levels, people need to know that they are not going to fall below the poverty line because of costs of living that have been imposed upon them by an incompetent government and a range of Labor members who have no idea what happened but are not going to say sorry. So they have no hope of fixing the mess. I support my colleague the member for Buderim in his speech in which he outlined the position of the state opposition. I support our policy that we have made quite clear in this regard. There is a way to address these issues, and it is certainly not in the way that this government is handling it. Mr McLINDON (Beaudesert—TQP) (3.46 pm): I rise to make a contribution to the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 2011. I have seen a lot of repetition regarding this issue during the last 2½ years. I have said it before and I will say it again: the reality is that there has been a lack of clearly defined core responsibilities and roles of the local and state governments. That is seen no clearer than in the debacle that faces both the parliament and Queenslanders today. Since taking these critical assets from the local councils, the government has tried on numerous occasions to rectify the mess that it has got itself into. I must say that the terminology of the bill in using the words ‘fairer water prices’ is rather cunning. Had we gone with the status quo and nothing had changed, we would not be here today going backwards and forwards. Often I wonder why we do actually stand up and talk in this place when the reality is that the numbers are 51 to 32. So it is already signed, sealed and delivered. If we had an upper house or a second checkpoint of scrutiny, the situation would be different. However, that is the political process that we have to deal with and we have to make the most of that. I must admit that all credit is due to Campbell Newman. You might call him a frustrated little Tasmanian garden gnome, but the reality is that he gave the government a run for its money—and I have said it. Mr Moorhead: That’s xenophobic. Mr McLINDON: It is not xenophobia. Campbell Newman did give the government a run for its money in talking about amalgamating those four government entities. That was the first step in the right direction, but it does not go far enough. The Queensland Party will suggest that there should be community boards in place instead of those three retail entities: Urban Utilities, Allconnex and Unitywater. Only when we have community boards working in partnership with councils will we get a very balanced outcome of the revenue needed for councils to operate and the necessary infrastructure. Also, that would ensure the cost impost is not over the top for the ratepayer. Nothing will change until we have those community boards in place and replace that middle management, where millions of dollars are going. We have seen billions of dollars wasted since water was taken away from councils. Back in my days on the Logan City Council, it certainly put the Logan water staff in limbo as they were unaware of what their jobs would entail. As the member for Maroochydore suggested, government often does not understand either the unintended consequences or the impact of the decisions that are made in haste on the family and on the home front. I remember talking to some staff who were literally in tears not knowing whether they would have job security within the Logan water utility. That lack of certainty, coupled with the forced amalgamations, was a huge stress for those families. We are now seeing the government trying to rectify some of that mess. However, this is a short-term bill in terms of the price increases being capped by the CPI for the next two years. So we are going to see this debated yet again in the House. If no councils decide to split and this has all been in vain, we will be revisiting this again no doubt. If this fails, we will be debating it again next year or the year after. 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1861

What we need to understand is that the roles and responsibilities of local and state government need to be clearly outlined. If the government wants to get rid of local councils over a period of time, then it should do it sooner rather than later because it has been an expensive process—since the Local Government Act 2009 was implemented—for the ratepayer who is also a taxpayer. They have been getting hit twice because of the lack of clearly defined roles and responsibilities of the levels of government. As I said in Mackay, for the 553 councils—with their staff, the buildings, the perks, the cars, the fuel and all of the elections run by the ECQ—the cost is in excess of $250 million a year. In one council term, that equates to over $1 billion. The Queensland ratepayers are paying over $1 billion for good quality local representation that they clearly cannot get under the Local Government Act 2009 and under a state government that rules with an iron fist and creates a culture of fear across local councils to the point that they have become mini pseudo state governments who have to jump to the tune of the Queensland government. It is clearly not good enough. Ratepayers will continue to have to foot the bill for the arguments that have been created. Clearly it is the state government that created this debacle and that now finds itself having to clean up the mess. There is no dispute about that. The only reason we are here is that those critical assets were taken from local councils across Queensland at a time when they needed them the most, post the forced amalgamations. The reality is that the unintended consequence of the price increases being capped by the CPI is that if councils are not getting the revenue flow that they need to pay for the necessary infrastructure then clearly rates will go up anyway. That is why I think this bill is a token gesture. Not only is it a token gesture; but it has a false intent. Councils are going to need revenue in whatever shape or form. If it is not found in one of the most basic commodities of council, then it will be found elsewhere. Until we start empowering local councils, there is very little use for them. Unfortunately this state government has made an absolute debacle of local government in terms of undermining their roles and responsibilities. We need to get back to the basics to ensure that councils are empowered to do their job. The member for Gaven said in his speech that it is ridiculous for the state government to create huge imposts on local government when they should be working together. Local and state governments working in partnership could create one of the best working relationships in public process. With three levels of government, people often complain that they are overgoverned or are governed inefficiently. I would say that it is a bit of both. However, I would say that we are governed inefficiently because of the lack of clearly defined roles and responsibilities. Until local governments are recognised in the federal Constitution and until the state government empowers them to get on with it and to do their job, we are going to continue to see this finger pointing and buck passing between the two levels of government. It is no wonder that people are sick of the way the political process is played out in the public arena to a point that they have given up. This is just another example of why the cost of living in Queensland is going up. Why at a time of one of the state’s greatest mining booms is the cost of living going up? Because of irresponsible decisions that are politically motivated. I also question the top end of the Public Service in terms of their role in these debacles. I think quite often the ministers are on autopilot and they have no idea what the department is doing. I believe that is probably more often the case than not. When you have a complacent government that is on autopilot then naturally the top end of the Public Service will run the agenda. I think there needs to be a few questions asked in terms of the top level of the Public Service and those people who have been running an agenda behind the scenes. We are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars now on a middle management level that did not need to exist. It is such a huge injustice to all of those local councils and to the ratepayers of Queensland that these expensive, public political arguments have such a huge impost on families who are struggling from week to week, not to mention the pensioners of course who are surviving on around $36 a day. We can talk about these figures here and think that we can brush them off, but the reality is that they do have an impact on household budgets. We already have a housing crisis. There is over a 10-year wait for social housing. This will certainly push more people to join that queue. We need to learn from the mistakes of our Western counterparts such as the United States, where the gap between rich and poor is such that there are homeless people in every city across America— this is already occurring right here in Brisbane. We need to create a level playing field and to stop the political buck passing. We need to get the roles and responsibilities right and to show a bit of decency between the levels of government regardless of people’s political persuasions, because we need to realise that the people who are struggling with their household budgets are the ones who suffer in this process. We need to step aside from our political agendas and realise that this is not a game; this is very, very serious. Queensland families are struggling and we need to realise how serious the impact of the decisions we make in this House is and exactly what that impact is on our local communities and families across Queensland. The bill is fundamentally flawed not only in its title but also in its intent. Therefore, I, on behalf of The Queensland Party, cannot support it. Mr RYAN (Morayfield—ALP) (3.55 pm): I rise to contribute to the debate on the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill. It was not long ago that our communities faced a bleak future. We were experiencing the most severe and prolonged drought in many years and quite alarmingly we were 1862 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011 running out of water. Tough decisions had to be made to guarantee water security for our communities both now and in the future. Accordingly, this government acted to build the infrastructure that our communities needed to guarantee water security and supply. Thank goodness for that action and for this future-thinking government. Part of guaranteeing water security and supply for our communities also involved considering how local governments, how councils, supplied water to water users. I have heard about the evidence of a legacy of council operated water businesses not investing adequately in the water supply network— rusty fire hydrants, concrete cancer in reservoirs, sewerage systems under pressure and pipes that were beyond their useable life. Something had to be done to guarantee water supply and security. Something had to be done to ensure sustainability for the service provided by council operated water businesses. So, in consultation with the Local Government Association of Queensland, three South-East Queensland water distributor-retailers, wholly owned by local governments, were established. To be very clear, these water businesses are wholly owned by councils. In the Moreton Bay and Sunshine Coast regions, the water business Unitywater is owned jointly by the Moreton Bay Regional Council and the Sunshine Coast Regional Council. There are only two shareholders of the Unitywater water business—the Moreton Bay and Sunshine Coast regional councils. As shareholders they receive a return from the water business. The state government receives no return from this water business. In fact, the state government supplies water to the council owned water businesses at a loss. Last year that effective subsidy was around $400 million. It is a shame that this bill has had to be brought before this House, but this government had to act to stop the blame game, to rein in water price increases and to protect water users. Before I address the significant benefit that this bill and the consumer price index price cap contained in this bill delivers to the South-East Queensland community, it is important for me to once again note that it is this government that is prepared to make the hard decisions. The reform model when it came to water reform has worked. However, it is the greed and a history of poor council water infrastructure and service planning that has made it hard for our community. This bill is the first step in putting a stop to the media blame game that has carried on for the last 12 months. This bill addresses community concerns about the significant increases in water and wastewater prices and the level of accountability for water and wastewater prices in South-East Queensland. The people of the Morayfield state electorate will be pleased to hear that this bill will introduce a price cap to contain water and wastewater distribution and retail price increases to a CPI increase per annum for residential and small business customers from 1 July this year for two years. To avoid any doubt, it is important to note that this bill is only necessary because the guarantee by councils, as the owner of these distributor-retailers, to keep pressure down on water price and wastewater price increases has not been honoured. This bill is only necessary because the council owned water businesses have not responded to community concerns about high water and wastewater prices. Whilst I note that the Moreton Bay Regional Council did the right thing by introducing a water rebate for its ratepayers, most councils failed to use the financial returns from their council owned distributor-retailer water businesses to provide price relief to their communities through rebates or subsidies. Accordingly, this government has had to act to introduce price capping for residential and small business customers. Because the council owned distributor-retailer water businesses have increased distribution and retail water and wastewater charges to residential and small business customers across the majority of South-East Queensland council areas and because these increases have been significantly in excess of the increase in the state bulk water input costs which are associated with the investment in the South-East Queensland water grid, this price cap will deliver a much needed reprieve to those water users. This legislation is about protecting residential and small business customers across South-East Queensland from unreasonable increases in water and wastewater prices. This bill will achieve three policy outcomes. Firstly, it provides an opportunity for cooling down and for councils to think about their future role and how they will support our community. Secondly, it reduces water and wastewater price increases. Finally, it manages future price increases. I take this opportunity to commend the minister, his staff and the departmental staff on their hard work in respect of this matter. I thank the minister for listening to my advocacy on this issue. This bill is about ending the blame game, limiting water price increases and responding to community concerns. For those reasons, I encourage all members of the House to support this bill. I commend the bill to the House. Mr CHOI (Capalaba—ALP) (4.02 pm): Thank you for the opportunity to speak on the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill. The primary objective of this bill is to amend the South-East Queensland (Distribution and Retail Restructuring) Water Act 2009 to provide for prices charged by distributor-retailers for water and wastewater services supplied to residential and small business 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1863 customers in South-East Queensland by the local council to be capped annually to increases in CPI. The bill also addresses the portability of long service leave entitlements when staff move from one entity to another. These are obviously very important issues to the people in my area in the Redland City Council area. In order to understand the need for this bill, we need to look at the genesis of the water reform process in South-East Queensland. With the indulgence of the House, I would like to address some of the misconceptions about this issue in the Redland City Council area. Most people living in the Redland City Council area have the misconception that we are totally water self-sufficient. I can understand why they have that impression, because some 25 or 30 years ago, when the Redland City Council, which was then known as the Redland Shire Council, ran out of water, we went cap in hand to the Brisbane City Council and asked for support. We went to the Brisbane City Council and asked for water, and the answer was no. The Brisbane City Council flat-out refused to support the Redland Shire Council and support the citizens of this great city. In doing so, it basically forced the hand of the council at the time to think of alternatives. One of those alternatives was to construct a trunk water main from Cleveland to North Stradbroke Island to take advantage of the underground water table on that beautiful island. The council did not have the money at the time and it borrowed money from the state government. It was only recently that some of that money was returned. I can understand, therefore, that the people in the Redland City Council area have this misconception that we are totally water self-sufficient, but the fact is that we are not. There are two sources of drinking water for people in the Redland area. The first one is Leslie Harrison Dam and the second one, as I mentioned earlier, is North Stradbroke Island. I have looked at some of the figures from Leslie Harrison Dam. It is a very, very small dam, with a capacity of only 24,800 megalitres. If each person consumed 200 litres of water per day—that is the average water consumption at the moment, even though some consumers may use less—and there were no other water sources for Redland City Council, which has a population base at the moment of 145,000, Leslie Harrison Dam could only supply drinking water for the good people of Redland for fewer than 100 days. Without rain, without any other water sources and without North Stradbroke Island, Leslie Harrison Dam—assuming it is totally full on day one—could only supply drinking water to the people of the Redland City Council area for fewer than 100 days. Fortunately, we do have other sources. We have water from North Stradbroke Island, but that water is limited. Most people think we can just keep pumping water from North Stradbroke Island, that we have unlimited drinking water. It is the best drinking water ever, but we cannot just keep pumping water out. There is a limit on how much water can be pumped out from North Stradbroke Island without causing salt intrusion into the underground water table which would cause irreversible ecological damage to the island. Clearly, that is not permissible. With 145,000 people living in the Redland City Council area—and that number is increasing—I believe that we do not have water security unless we are part of the water grid. That is why I support this state government including the Redland City Council area as part of the water grid. A lot of people in my electorate believed that the state government just marched into the Redland City Council and took over all of the water assets. That is not the case. In fact, the state government paid the Redland City Council a princely sum of $81.2 million for the acquisition of its bulk water assets. There has been an argument by some councillors that the assets were actually worth more than $81 million, and I can understand this. It is like any buyer or any seller: the sellers always believe that their property or their assets are worth more than what the market is prepared to pay. Suffice it to say, that process was independently assessed and that is the value the assessor came up with and the state government simply paid that price. Why is it important to have such water reform? The current model of three council owned distributor-retailers providing water and wastewater services in South-East Queensland was proposed and endorsed by the South-East Queensland Council of Mayors in May 2009. In fact, the minister had a letter from the then Lord Mayor of Brisbane, Mr Campbell Newman, arguing for the council of mayors to put in place the current model. The distributor-retailers were created as part of the South-East Queensland urban water reform. That reform was aimed at, among other things, improving water supply reliability and increasing efficiency over time by reducing the number of entities responsible for water and sewerage delivery. We did reduce the number of entities, from 21 before the reform to seven. One can argue that that number could go down to less than seven, and I am prepared to look at some of those business cases, but one should not forget that we started with 21 entities. The Labor government’s reform process reduced that number from 21 to seven, as it is today. This reform also ensures that water infrastructure is maintained—that is the whole purpose of it— and upgraded in a timely and efficient way and the economies of scale of amalgamating council businesses into a large specialist distributor-retailer will hopefully ensure a stronger customer delivery focus. But why build the water grid? Everybody would remember that only a few years ago we were 1864 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011 staring at the bottom of the proverbial water barrel with less than 17 per cent of water supply left. No-one could deny that building a water grid in order to connect all of the water dams and reservoirs was a good thing in order to share water among residents of the South-East Queensland area, but it cost money. It cost a massive $7 billion for that to take place. However, the state government could not stand by and do nothing. We had to invest that money to ensure that water was available to the residents of South- East Queensland. The grid has proven to be valuable during emergencies such as the floods in January this year in that the desalination plant at Tugun supplied potable water to Brisbane, Ipswich, the Gold Coast and Logan as water at the main water intakes at the Mount Crosby Water Treatment Plant was heavily silted. Why do we need a cap? That is the purpose of this legislation. Why is a cap necessary? The decision to end the blame game on South-East Queensland water pricing starts today. Some councils, the Gold Coast in particular, have been calling publicly for the return of water businesses to individual councils. This bill removes the ability for any council to use corporate structure and assume that they are powerless to influence pricing while pocketing financial returns from their water business. The state government has been required to step in and take action because of the inaction by some councils of managing water prices. The state government has also been criticised for not capping our water prices while insisting that we should cap prices for councils for two years. The state government is losing money in its first few years with this water reform. We are losing up to $450 million to $500 million in the first year. We cannot give a bigger discount than losing money. We are simply asking councils not to take a profit for two years—that is, only cap water charges to CPI—while we are taking a massive loss of up to $450 million to $500 million. That is better than a cap. That is making a loss in order to reduce water prices for the ratepayers of South-East Queensland. We cannot do better than that. I have asked councils to maybe consider taking some losses on their water entities and I have obviously got nothing in return from them in response. I conclude by saying that councils should have income. They need income to provide services to ratepayers. They have to provide libraries, they have to provide footpaths and they have to provide other infrastructure, and it is fair enough for councils to have income. However, I believe income for general purposes should come from general rates. Water income should be used for water purposes. I understand from the legislation that they have to make a return on their investment, and that is fair enough—make a reasonable return on their investment, not hide behind a corporate structure like the Gold Coast to rein in massive profits and not respond to the needs of the community. We are going through some very tough times at the moment. The state government is willing to put its hand up and say, ‘We are willing to take some losses on water charges.’ We are simply asking the councils to do the same. Given the evidence that councils are not prepared to do so, that is why we need to legislate. I commend this bill to the House. Mrs MILLER (Bundamba—ALP) (4.13 pm): On behalf of the people of the Bundamba electorate, I rise to support in the strongest possible way the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 2011. At the outset I must say that the people whom I represent have been sick and tired of the blatant lies and outright mistruths that have been peddled about— Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr O’Brien): Order! Sorry, member for Bundamba, but you have used an unparliamentary expression and I would ask you to withdraw. Mrs MILLER: I withdraw. They are tired of the outright mistruths that have been peddled about the price of water by local governments. People have been told anything and everything to take the heat off the councils, but the truth remains the same—that local governments own the distributor-retailers. Queensland Urban Utilities is responsible for the water bills and Queensland Urban Utilities is owned by local government. It is very good that this bill enshrines in legislation the accountability of councils and the distributor-retailers for the price of water and wastewater. Council owners will be required by law to do certain things. A CPI price cap is in place for residential customers from 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2013. By 1 March 2013 councils must publish a price mitigation plan for water which must contain information about price increases, how groups like pensioners or any other groups may be assisted in any price increases and how councils may use profits to provide relief to residents through rebates and subsidies. It must also contain a five-year price path so that all residents know what they are up for in terms of the price of water and residents can have their say direct to councils and councillors, making them accountable to the community that elects them. In spite of South-East Queensland councils having the legal ability and in my view—stronger than that—the moral and ethical obligation to direct their distributor-retailers to go back to the drawing board and better manage any price increases, they have failed to do so. They squibbed it. It was easier for them to try to muddy the waters, to try to blame our Labor government, to refer constituents such as the elderly and vulnerable pensioners to the state government when they knew full well that it was their responsibility and they could have fixed it through a legal direction to their distributor-retailers. But they chose not to do so. They chose to tell mistruths to their own constituents. I will not forget the callous disregard councils demonstrated to elderly pensioners and to others who were complaining about the price of water, and these people were put on a merry-go-round of intergovernmental mistruths just to take the heat off the councils’ backs. How bad is that! This legislation seeks to enshrine a truth in water 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1865 pricing obligation on councils, and that has been very well done. I want to thank the minister for bringing this legislation before the House so that finally there can be truth in the water pricing issue. I commend the bill to the House. Mr BLEIJIE (Kawana—LNP) (4.17 pm): This afternoon I rise to contribute to debate on the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 2011 introduced by the government. For ease of reference when discussing this bill and the broader issue of water reform, I will refer essentially to a Bligh government backflip on its own recent water reforms, highlighting the fact that this long-term Labor government is out of touch with the community and out of ideas. In fact, as we have heard in this chamber today, it is totally bereft of ideas. I was most amused to hear the member for Morayfield’s contribution to this debate when he said that the Labor government is a future-thinking government. The member for Morayfield’s comrades were nodding in total agreement. I say this to the member for Morayfield: there is nothing future thinking about a government policy that some 12 months ago was in total contrast to what we are debating today. That is not future thinking, because if the government was thinking about this bill today then it would not have introduced the legislation it brought in 12 months ago, because this legislation today is in total contradiction to the bills we debated then. There is nothing futuristic about the Labor Party in Queensland. There is nothing futuristic about this government. It is stuck in the past— stuck in the past without any new ideas! Ms Croft interjected. Mr BLEIJIE: I take the member for Broadwater’s interjection asking what our policies are. To ease the member for Broadwater’s anticipation and enthusiasm for my contribution today, I will let her know that I intend to set out our four-point plan. I am more than pleased to be able to explain to the member for Broadwater, and in particular the constituents of the electorate of Broadwater, exactly what our policy is because, in actual fact, some of this government’s policy is a direct copy of the LNP’s position. So let us talk about policy. Let us have this policy debate, but let us be fair dinkum about Campbell Newman’s four-point plan, which forced this government into presenting this bill. It is nothing more than that. It was not any futuristic plan that this Labor Party had; it was Campbell Newman getting great media coverage for an issue in Queensland. The government, as is always the case—the reactionary state government it is—had to introduce this legislation, because Campbell was getting the great coverage. Do members know why? Campbell Newman listens to the people, and the people in our electorates in South-East Queensland are saying that they can least afford water prices and that they can least afford increases in water prices. That is what the people of Queensland— Ms Boyle interjected. Mr BLEIJIE: That is what the people in Cairns are saying to their local member. They are saying, ‘We cannot cope with the increases in electricity prices and water prices.’ That is what they have told Campbell Newman. Campbell Newman then put out a four-point plan. The government may attack that plan—it may do this and that—but the reality is that Campbell Newman forced the Labor Party into a policy position and into realising that its total legislation at the start was wrong, that it should never have happened in the first place. We talk about ending the blame game. All I have heard in the contributions today from the members opposite is blaming councils. It is a total contradiction for members of the Labor Party to on the one hand say, ‘We are ending the blame game but, by the way, it is all councils’ fault,’ because that is blaming someone. That is blaming the councils. That is typical of the Labor Party in Queensland— hypocrisy at its highest. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr O’Brien): Order! Your language is not parliamentary. I ask you to withdraw. Mr BLEIJIE: I withdraw. I congratulate the LNP election leader, Campbell Newman. It was his leadership that led to yet another government backflip and its recognition of the failure of its own water policies that stood for nothing more than waste, inefficiency and driving up the cost of water for all residents in South-East Queensland. The Bligh government’s backflip came into effect just weeks after Campbell Newman announced the LNP’s four-point plan to address the skyrocketing cost of water for South-East Queenslanders. If backflipping were an Olympic sport, the Labor Party would win gold every single day. If backflipping were a sport in the Commonwealth Games, the Labor Party would win gold each and every time, because— A government member: You just said that. Mr BLEIJIE: No, I did not. I said that if backflipping were an Olympic sport the Labor Party would win gold. If it were a Commonwealth Games sport, the Labor Party would win the Commonwealth gold medal in backflipping as well. 1866 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011

For the record, as other members on this side of the House will today, I will outline the historical context of what has taken place. Earlier this year Campbell Newman announced a four-point plan for water reform for residents in South-East Queensland. That plan was as follows: the amalgamation of the five bulk water entities into one to provide greater efficiencies; handing back control of the water- retailing bodies to councils; writing off the non-performing water grid assets; and, finally, immediately adopting a 40-year price path to repay the state government’s $7 billion water grid. We on this side of the House know that what Labor stands for is waste and higher taxes. That impacts on the people of Queensland. Cost-of-living pressures in key areas such as water and electricity are a contrast to the promises of Labor Party Premiers over the past four years. The promises from this long-term Labor government on one issue in particular related to the electricity reform that we had. I remind members that in 2007 it was the Premier at the time, Peter Beattie, who promised that no- one would be worse off when he announced that the electricity market would be deregulated. Four years later, the average electricity bill for Queensland families has continued to rise. Water prices also demonstrate absolute disregard for people who can least afford them in Queensland. We have seen this situation before with the asset sales, with car registration, with fuel taxes and with electricity prices, as I have just mentioned, and we see the situation with water prices today. The legislation before the House has been introduced to undo the government’s own water reform agenda. The government is repealing its own legislation because it was so poorly conceived in the first instance. When we debate this legislation, it is important to include the historical context of the issues at hand. I turn to the debate of the South-East Queensland Water (Distribution and Retail Restructuring) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2010. We do not have to delve too far back in our history books, because that bill was debated in only April 2010. Hansard of the minister’s second reading speech makes for some interesting reading. It states— This is the latest step in the Bligh government’s delivery of better water services in South-East Queensland. That step lasted for just over a year. During the same speech the minister also said— As a result of these reforms, better customer service can be expected over the coming years. The minister left out of his speech one of the most important facts, and that was the exorbitant cost of these services. In my contribution to the debate on that bill in 2010 I stated— Prior to amalgamation, the 10 local governments in South-East Queensland operated their own entities to distribute water and waste water. Like all dictatorships, the Bligh government initially intended a full state government takeover of those entities as part of its water and wastewater reforms. Last year, when what we thought was the final bill in terms of the government’s water reforms was debated, the LNP predicted that these reforms would impose an additional burden by adding to the cost- of-living pressures and expenses of residents in South-East Queensland. At that time in my contribution to the debate I said— What the minister did not mention was the increase in costs ... of the state government’s takeover and continual backflips. That was said a year ago. On 19 May 2010, the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Callide, said in his contribution to the second reading debate of that bill— Like the rest of Queensland, they knew that the government had bungled the water reform process from the start. It had bungled the process to such an extent that consumers in South-East Queensland will pay exceptionally high water costs for years to come. So if we go back to the prediction of the member for Morayfield of futuristic governments, the future was predicted by the LNP a year ago. We predicted higher costs of living. We predicted higher costs for water based on this government’s reform agenda. What have we seen? As a member of parliament representing an area in South-East Queensland, I continually get people coming into my office saying that they just cannot afford the price of water and I cannot explain for that purpose why they are paying so much for water and what help and assistance is available because they cannot afford it. What else would we expect from a tired, stale long-term Labor government than another policy change—another thought bubble and another backflip? That is exactly what this bill is. I heard the Premier in this place say that they are going to end the blame game with the mayors and councils across South-East Queensland. Yet in the minister’s second reading speech on the current bill before the House he has again put all the blame for skyrocketing increases in water prices in South- East Queensland back on the councils. Talk about ending the blame game! In his second reading speech the minister said that this is being introduced as a response to the community which has been calling for the government to take action against the high water and wastewater prices being charged by councils and the council owned distributor-retailers. Well, yes, it was—it was community feedback led by the LNP opposition in Queensland and by Campbell Newman. That is the reality of the situation. To quote from the minister’s speech at the time, he said— This bill is also a direct response to South-East Queensland councils’ continuing inaction. 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1867

I am sorry? Was this the minister again trying to end the blame game on this issue? It sounded more like he was perpetuating the issue and the blame on the councils in South-East Queensland in a desperate attempt to rid the Bligh government of the responsibility for the increase in water costs for residents in South-East Queensland. Queenslanders are smart enough, tough enough and big enough to know what is going on here. They know what happens when no minister takes responsibility for health payroll bungles. They know what happens when no minister takes responsibility for bungled water reform processes. Queenslanders are smart enough to understand what is going on here. One word lies at the heart of this Labor government in Queensland—incompetence. There has been absolute incompetence from a minister and absolute incompetence from a cabinet. I think Queenslanders understand that. I think the government is starting to understand that or we would not be debating this bill. If the government thought it had won this issue then this bill would not be introduced today. I think it is important to also put this bill in the context of the great water swindle and reform agenda of this government. Before we clarify the historical context of the current bill I want to address some of the comments in the minister’s second reading speech. In his speech the minister obviously left out the part that it was his government and his legislation that legislated water retail distribution entities in Queensland. It was not the councils; it was the Queensland Labor Party’s legislation that set up those entities. In fact, it was legislation that I referred to earlier on in this debate today, debated in this parliament just over 12 months ago. He left out the part that it was his government and his legislation that ensured that councils had no control. Now, I heard members say that Unitywater is 50 per cent owned by the Moreton Bay Regional Council and 50 per cent owned by the Sunshine Coast Regional Council. Usually when one owns something one has some level of control over it from an ownership perspective. That is not the case with Unitywater. There is no control over the pricing structure for water by the water entities Allconnex, Queensland Urban Utilities and Unitywater. They have to set their retail pricing schedule in accordance with Queensland competition policy. Last year we had a water forum on the Sunshine Coast. At that forum we had 450 members of the public turn up screaming about their water bills. The first message I gave those people was to take the water bill they brought that night to the next election. I have said it in this place before: the only way we can address these serious issues of cost-of-living pressures is to change the minister and to change the government. I did the right thing and invited the minister to attend the forum. It was not a secret forum. I said that in his absence if he would like to send a representative please feel free and they can address the crowd. Of course, no government representative appeared. The council was represented, Unitywater was represented, I was the host as local MP, but there was no government representative. In fact, the government was represented by an empty chair in that place. The minister left out that this whole reform agenda was an agenda of the Labor government, not the councils. The councils did not pick up the phone one day and say, ‘We have got this great idea for you to take over all the bulk water assets and set up all these retail entities which will charge exorbitant fees and bulk water charges for constituents into the future.’ The councils did not do it. The Labor government in Queensland did it. It is an absolute shame that things like that happen with this government over and over again. It is so reactionary. Most bills in this place either correct errors of judgement of government or correct errors in government policy. We see that again today where we are debating a bill which changes the goalposts in terms of the components of the water reform process that the government introduced over 12 months ago. I note with interest in a right-to-information request of the Sunshine Coast Regional Council, which I will table for the benefit of members, a letter from the Premier dated 2 January 2008. Tabled paper: Copy of a letter, dated 2 January 2008, from the Premier of Queensland, Hon. Anna Bligh MP, to the Chair, Council of Mayors South East Queensland, Councillor Campbell Newman, regarding reform of the urban water supply industry [4682]. The Premier said in that letter to Councillor Campbell Newman, chair of the Council of Mayors of South-East Queensland—

The Government has no intention to revisit the structural form of the water industry that I announced on 4 September 2008 which provided for— and there are many points but I will list the last two— between three and ten retailers, which will be structurally separate from Councils by no later than 1 June 2010; and a distribution entity which provides distribution services to retailers through local pipe networks and potable storage reservoirs, which will be structurally separate from Councils by no later than 1 July 2010. This was the water reform process that was to end all water reform processes in Queensland. If it had not been for the LNP, the community’s outrage about their bills and members of the Labor Party in this House looking at their local polling and recognising that water and the increase in cost-of-living pressures is a big issue in South-East Queensland, then this bill would not be debated today. 1868 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011

The people who should be congratulated for any change in the entities is Campbell Newman and the LNP because there we will start addressing the issue of cost-of-living pressures. The government has named this bill the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill. There is nothing fair about this water reform process. I say to members of the public in Queensland: if we are going to be fair dinkum about getting change in Queensland then the only way we can do it is with a can-do attitude, a can-do policy initiative—as I have indicated, four processes—and vote this terrible incompetent government out. Mr POWELL (Glass House—LNP) (4.37 pm): I rise to speak on the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 2011. One would be a brave individual not to agree that water management and distribution is nothing short of a dog’s breakfast in South-East Queensland. It is a diabolical mess. But let us also be clear on why—one word: Labor. After years of inactivity, with a worsening drought and with the opposition and media and the broader community breathing down its neck, Labor responded with an extraordinary knee-jerk approach, one that demonstrated that it had not kept up and it showed little to no planning and very poor policy. There was the Traveston Dam announcement, the SEQ water grid—and can I pause there for a moment, because in the electorate of Glass House we continue to see the manifestation of that poor planning through the northern pipeline interconnector stage 2. I understand and note from the budget papers that already the anticipated costs have gone from $400 million to $440 million and now to $463 million—all for a 48-kilometre pipe to nowhere, a pipe that will drain Lake Macdonald overnight should it ever be turned on. I also note that staff from the Northern Network Alliance are leaving in protest because they are fed up with having to go to landholders and tell them that what they told them last week is no longer the case, it has now changed and the work is not commencing on this day, it is not commencing on that day, they do not really know when it is commencing and, ‘Oh, by the way, those plans that we drew up with you are no longer the plans.’ When staff are resigning because of that we know there is poor planning. There was the Traveston Dam announcement, there was and still is the SEQ water grid, there is the forced removal of water infrastructure from local government control and the establishment of new distribution and retail bodies such as Unitywater in the Moreton Bay and Sunshine Coast region. The opposition saw the flaws from day one. The bureaucrats and the public servants were advising against this course of action and increasingly the community understood that their taxpayer dollars were and still are being squandered and their water bills were only going to go in one direction—up. And we were all right. The Bligh Labor government would have you believe that it is all the fault of local government. That is simply not true. The mess was not created by local governments; it was created by this state government. So while this legislation attempts to put the blame back on the local government, it has missed the mark in addressing the root causes of our spiralling water bills in South-East Queensland. Sure, capping retail annual increases to CPI will deliver some cost-of-living benefit to households in South-East Queensland. However, in reality, the long-term effect could lead to even further disasters in water management in South-East Queensland. Members should not forget that, as well as removing key water assets from council control, the Bligh Labor government has also ceased the subsidy program for water and sewerage infrastructure. So instead of cash-rich councils and distribution companies, the councils and Unitywater must use what profits they can gain from water bills to cover the shortfalls created by the state government in no longer investing in infrastructure. The results of this CPI cap could be that councils will not have the funds for vital infrastructure upgrades. I return to my previous comment: this bill does nothing to address the root causes of water bill increases in South-East Queensland—that is, the bulk wholesale water price set not by the local government or by the retailers but by this Bligh Labor government. There is only one way to deliver real savings for householders facing increasing water bills: get rid of this tired, old Labor government. Only Campbell Newman’s four-point water plan will address the real issues and save everyone money. What is that plan? It is (1) amalgamate the five bulk water entities into one to provide greater efficiencies; (2) hand back control of water retailing to councils; (3) write off some of the non-performing water grid assets—and I could add a few names to that list; and (4) immediately adopt a 40-year price path for the state government’s $7 billion water grid debt. That plan will deliver real savings to households in Glass House and across South-East Queensland, because it addresses the real problems with water. It is a plan that cuts waste and demonstrates sound economic management. South-East Queenslanders have a real choice at the next election: keep supporting a tired, old Labor government that wants to blame everyone but itself for the water debacle in South-East Queensland or vote for a Campbell Newman led LNP that will get on with delivering real cost-of-living savings. As the member for Kawana and the Leader of the Opposition have said, on election day when you go to the polling booth do not forget to take your water bill as it is the best how-to-vote card around. Mr DOWLING (Redlands—LNP) (4.42 pm): Today I rise to speak to the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill. The expectation is going to be high as the title says it all. People should expect that their water prices will go down and that there will be some form of economic wonder. However, the delivery will be complex, it will involve a number of players and I can tell members that the possibility of it succeeding is absolutely non-existent. 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1869

Redlands has a long history with water and a long stewardship of water management. I put on record an acknowledgement of the comments of the member for Capalaba in his contribution to the debate. He talked about that history. Our community has a long and proud history with water, not only through Leslie Harrison Dam but also through the foresight and wisdom that looked to Stradbroke Island as a source of water. It has been a long and reliable source. I also acknowledge that, as highlighted by the member for Capalaba, Leslie Harrison Dam was not a long-term secure water source. That is clearly acknowledged. However, Stradbroke Island was a different kettle of fish. Stradbroke was what was required. Our community became self-reliant in terms of water. Was it fragile? Any supply system is fragile, but in the 30-plus years that the Redlands has had an association with water that fragility has been tested but has never left the community without water. The community planned and they were very diligent. Long before the drought came along, they were very responsive and respectful of water. They were pioneers in having on-and-off sprinkler days. All of those strategies were put in place to ensure that the community was well served and that the supply, which we knew was precious and finite, was managed well. Because of those good management practices, even through the drought the Redlands community did not suffer from a lack of water. My community feels a great connection with water and the water issue. The member for Capalaba also highlighted this. However, I do not believe that in his contribution the member adequately addressed the question of compensation. The community feels that they were not adequately compensated. On any reasonable assessment, in a modern society it is hardly fair to suggest that assets worth somewhere north of $120 million should be purchased for somewhere around $82 million. That is hardly fair. Certainly it is not fair when the only buyers are forcing the sale. It is certainly not what one would consider fair compensation. Certainly my community does not feel that they were fairly or adequately compensated for a business unit that they were running fairly. The Redlands community had done everything that the state government had asked of them. They had planned, they had delivered on that water infrastructure and they had put all of the checks and balances in place. They had a clear vision. They knew their growth pattern. They knew the number of people who were coming to the community and they made provision for them. Then, all of a sudden, along came the drought. Along came the confirmation that this government had failed to plan for the growth that was occurring across the region. It started to panic. I believe it looked to Stradbroke Island as some kind of huge vat of water that could be called upon, but the truth is quite different. The Stradbroke Island supply is very tenuous and it needs careful management. It is not a great reservoir that you can tap into. I think the Redlands was drawn into this because of the water on Stradbroke, but that backfired. When I was on council, in the initial planning stage of the connection to Logan it came to light that the water grid only pumped one way. It was not a case of the Redlands community being in the grid; it was the Redlands community tipping into the grid to carry the rest of South-East Queensland. My community took that very personally. Obviously, that issue has been addressed and now it is a two-way system. However, the community took it very personally that they were undercompensated and that the insurance we were being brought into was not an insurance policy at all. The Redlands has a long and wonderful history in water supply. This fairer water prices legislation is a knee-jerk reaction. In many respects, it is a panic reaction to the cost of living escalating across-the-board, largely brought about by this government and its lack of planning. There is pressure on the cost of living through the price of power, vehicle registrations, fuel— everything you care to name. The budget will increase stamp duty. That is not forward planning; that is gouging. That is not good economic financial planning. That will hurt communities. This fairer water prices legislation will further penalise local government. It will further penalise councils. When this legislation is passed, the Redlands council will have huge, multimillion dollar holes in its budget. This legislation will be the direct catalyst for the council struggling financially. I am trying to recall the amount. I thought it was in the order of $10 million, but I would not commit that to stone. This government fails to recognise the elephant in the room with this fairer prices legislation. The elephant in the room is bulk water pricing. How can it possibly impose on local government a cap of CPI—3.6 per cent—when between 2010-11 and 2014-15 the bulk water price is set to more than double? How is that going to see councils survive? How is that going to be recognised and rationalised in their bottom lines, in their financial viability? Clearly, it cannot be and it will not be. This legislation sets councils on a collision course with absolute financial ruin. They will pass on all of those costs to ratepayers. They have no choice. To suggest for one minute that they are owners of a company, which on paper they are, is unrealistic. They actually have no real control, no real say. There is only one person they can buy water from and that is this state government. There is only one price that they can pay for that water and it is set by this state government. There is no wriggle room here. It is not an open marketplace and those companies are bound by that. They are absolutely locked into that. It just will not work. 1870 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011

Oftentimes, members on the other side of the House refer to our side as having some magic pudding, that we make stuff up and the magic pudding is how we are going to fund things. This is the magic pudding. If we are ever looking for it, this policy, this legislation and this water debacle is the magic pudding. CPI increases will simply kill councils and, as I say, that burden will be passed on to local government. The South-East Queensland water grid has become a necessary evil because of a long-term, systemic failure to plan. That is all it is. It is something that in coming years we will grow to use and will grow to rely on, but it was done badly, too late and without proper consultation. Government did not do things well. We on this side of the House have argued and lamented and raised these issues time and time again. This state did not plan for the growth. We promoted for people to come to Queensland. We encouraged them actively to be a part of the wonderful lifestyle we enjoy. There would be very few people in this room who will not be cheering for the Maroons tonight. We wanted to share the joy that is living in Queensland. We wanted the prosperity that that growth brings with it, but we failed to plan for one of life’s essentials—that is, water. It goes way back. I was drawing parallels in my mind between this issue and the program Seconds from Disaster in terms of catastrophic failures. When you get to that final point when the disaster hits you see that, ordinarily, it was not one thing that caused it; it was a trail of little things that went wrong. It was a whole lot of little things that culminated in a final failure. The very first thing the Labor government did was do away with Wolffdene. That was the very first little chink in the armour. That is when things started to unravel. Then day by day, year by year, government by government, it continued to accumulate. We ended up with the drought, the water crisis, the water grid, the desalination plant, the Traveston Dam, the wastewater recycling project—a whole lot of things—and we paid far too much for most of them. They were all mismanaged. It all started way back with Wolffdene when the Labor government said no. History will show that that is where it all began. That is where Queensland started to unravel. That is where we started to lose that high ground. That is where we started to go backwards. They had a wonderful plan for growth and development in Queensland but they failed to plan for that simple essential, the one thing that we all need for life, and that is water. The chickens have now come home to roost. This fairer water prices legislation will not deliver a fairer pricing mechanism—certainly not fairer to local government. The government might cap the price that people end up paying for water, but it certainly will not be fairer to local government. It will not be fairer to Queensland in the long run. It will not be the panacea that this government hopes it will be through tonight’s headlines or through tomorrow’s Courier-Mail, through the local pamphlets and flyers that the Labor members will be sending out telling everyone how wonderful they have performed and how they have saved them. They have not saved them from fuel price increases. They have not saved them from registration price increases. They have not saved them from power price increases. They have not saved them from anything. We need a change. We need it now. Only a can-do government will be able to start to turn this state around to again hold the position it should—at the top of the food chain, at the top of the pecking order for everything. Ms CROFT (Broadwater—ALP) (4.55 pm): I rise this afternoon to participate in the debate on the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 2011. The objective of the fairer water prices bill is to amend the South-East Queensland Water (Distribution and Retail Restructuring) Act 2009 to provide for price charges by distributor-retailers for certain water and wastewater services applied to residential and small business customers in South-East Queensland to be capped annually by the consumer price index. In the media, councils have blamed both the state government and distributor-retailers for the price increases and claimed to have had no control over the operation of distributor-retailers. Distributor- retailers are under council’s ownership. In exchange for their transferred assets and resources, councils received participation rights—that is, a right to receive returns on equity and tax equivalent payments from their distributor-retailers. The Gold Coast City Council has consistently criticised the South-East Queensland water reforms and its own distributor-retailer, Allconnex Water. The matter of council withdrawing or opting out of their distributor-retailer is not addressed in this bill. However, it is important that the facts are known. Yes, the state did propose water reforms for South-East Queensland. This was reformed both at the bulk level and at the distribution-retail level. The state had no choice but to respond to the South-East Queensland millennium drought and to address long-term network planning and investment. In 2004 councils such as the Gold Coast City Council were still happily taking water revenue and still happy to avoid any responsibility for reinvestment and proper maintenance in water supply. The state paid the Gold Coast City Council $560 million for its bulk assets. In restructuring water supply to ensure this security, this government worked closely with councils. In fact, in 2009 the South-East Queensland Council of Mayors acknowledged the government’s and minister’s ‘willingness to consider a mutually agreed model’, so said by none other than the then chairman of the South-East Queensland Council of Mayors, Campbell Newman. The state had proposed a single distribution entity with three retailers. What did Campbell Newman and the South-East Queensland mayors propose? He proposed three council controlled water distribution entities, and this is what they got. 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1871

Councils have until 1 July 2011 to advise the Queensland government on their preferred water business structure, whether they stay with the distributor-retailer or return to council-direct operations. The Gold Coast has questioned whether the Queensland government will pay for any disestablishment or demerger costs from Allconnex. The government response has been that councils have the choice of withdrawing from their distributor-retailer. They are not required to do so, however. Therefore, any disestablishment costs are entirely avoidable. Councils can re-establish council-specific water businesses and lower prices to customers. If they do that, these charges will pay for themselves. Either way, any council decision must consider the customer and the impacts of any decision on the customer. These changes that we are discussing today only relate to the distribution and retail charges which, for the price cap period of 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2013, can only increase by CPI. There will be a reduction in the 2011-12 bills compared to what was being proposed by the distributor-retailers. Prior to the Queensland government’s announced consumer price index price caps, Allconnex Water reported that the total amount to be paid to the Gold Coast City Council for 2011-12 would be around $110 million, which includes a dividend of approximately $18 million. On 25 March 2011, Allconnex Water announced its proposed residential water and wastewater price charges for 2011-12. As a result of the Queensland government’s CPI cap, a Gold Coast household using 200 kilolitres per annum will see reduced price increases from what was originally proposed by Allconnex Water for 2011-12 of $116. The Gold Coast City Council has also stated that the state bulk water price should also be capped by the CPI. The bulk water price contributes to the establishment, operation and ongoing maintenance of the South-East Queensland water grid, ensuring that South-East Queensland has long-term security of climate resilient water resources and the technical ability to move that water where it is needed most. The South-East Queensland water grid provides long-term water security, meeting the demands of our population growth and climate change. The state has acted to ensure that bulk water prices are kept to a minimum by establishing a bulk water price path to gradually increase bulk water prices over a 10-year period; forgoing a commercial return on its investment in drought proofing South-East Queensland; accepting an approximate $499 million financial loss for water supplied to council owned water businesses for the 2010-11 financial year—effectively a subsidy of $427.43 per residential and non-residential property; and by providing for the South-East Queensland pensioner a subsidy of now up to $120 per annum. I congratulate the minister for listening to the concerns of residents on the Gold Coast. It was actually the mayor of the Gold Coast who asked us to do what we are doing today, and we are delivering on that commitment for the Gold Coast and for its residents. I commend the bill to the House. Mr WATT (Everton—ALP) (5.01 pm): One of the main issues raised with me by people in the Everton electorate is the rising cost of living. Consequently, it is one of the main issues I have taken up with various ministers on behalf of local residents. I recognise that a number of my fellow government backbenchers have done likewise. That is why I am so pleased that the government has listened by announcing a number of measures to relieve cost-of-living pressures on working families in Queensland. This morning we introduced legislation to bring in a new tariff system for electricity that will charge people higher tariffs according to their electricity use—the more they use, the more they will pay. That will deliver cost savings for those people who conserve power. Yesterday’s state budget increased rebates and subsidies for pensioners and seniors. It extended the ClimateSmart Home Service, delivering potential electricity savings of $480 per year. It also abolished the ambulance levy, delivering a $113 reduction to electricity bills. I will say more about these measures during the debate on the Appropriation Bill, but all of them will deliver real cost-of-living relief for families in the Everton electorate and, indeed, Queensland as a whole. This bill adds to that cost-of-living relief by limiting increases to the water and sewerage bills charged by council owned water businesses. The electorate of Everton is split between the Moreton Bay Regional Council and the Brisbane City Council, so the water businesses involved are Unitywater and Queensland Urban Utilities. I acknowledge that since the changes to our water billing system the Moreton Bay Regional Council has paid a subsidy to water users, and I acknowledge that this has softened the water bill increases within the Moreton Bay region. However, the fact is that this subsidy was to be withdrawn over time, leading to higher bill increases for water users. The changes ushered in by this bill mean that charges for council owned water and sewerage services can only rise by the CPI for two years, starting 1 July 2011. The end result is that a typical family’s water and sewerage bill for the part of my electorate in the Moreton Bay Regional Council will increase by $89 this year—$27 lower than what the increase would have been without these changes. In the Brisbane City Council area, a typical family’s bill will increase by $81 this year—$38 lower than what it would have been without these changes. So these measures are going to again deliver real cost- of-living relief for average families both in my electorate and throughout South-East Queensland. 1872 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011

Beyond council water and sewerage charges, the other component of a consumer’s water bill is bulk water costs. These charges pay for long-term water security through the South-East Queensland water grid. Contrary to popular belief, the water grid has already been a critical part of South-East Queensland’s water supply. During the recent floods, we used parts of the grid, such as the Tugun desalination plant, to supply water following the destruction of a number of water treatment plants. The grid came at a cost, and this must be paid for through water charges. By and large, I have to say that people in my electorate do recognise that the long-term water security being provided by the water grid is something that is worth paying for. However, the state government has already taken action to control these costs. To help contain water bills, the state government sells bulk water to council water businesses below cost—at a loss of $480 million this year alone—and that sort of subsidy will continue into the future. And it should be remembered that bulk water costs only represent one-quarter of an average water and sewerage bill. So, having taken action to control bulk water costs, with this bill we now take action to control water and sewerage charges imposed by council owned water businesses. It is the latest step in assisting working families with cost-of-living pressures from a government that cares about them. I commend the bill to the House. Mrs CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (5.05 pm): I rise to speak to this bill. Can I say that I do think the title is a bit novel. If it is delivering fairer water prices, I am sure the community will make that decision rather than have some facetious title— Mr Ryan: Are we going to have a debate about the title of the bill? Mrs CUNNINGHAM: We can, on clause 1 if you like. A government member interjected. Mrs CUNNINGHAM: That is part of the issue—thank you very much. With a bill that is called ‘Fairer Water Prices for South-East Queensland’, soon we will have the ‘Extremely Beneficial (If Somewhat Modest) Excellent Health Act’! Give me a break. Water is an essential commodity for all of us. A community without water is a community that cannot function. That is part of the reason there has been the reaction there has been to LNG, which is not related to this. But it just shows the importance and the value of water in a community. The ability of a community and an individual in that community to be able to pay for their water is also incredibly important. In local government, state government and federal government, the cost of commodities and the cost of services is escalating markedly. So anything that governments can do in relation to moderating those costs in a reasonable manner is welcome. There have been a number of things said today that I would seek the minister’s response on prior to the vote. The member for Everton just said that the Queensland government sells bulk water to local governments at a loss, and he stated an amount. Other speakers have said that over the past short period the state government’s cost of water to local authorities has escalated 19 per cent. Those amounts appear to be at odds with each other, and I would certainly seek the minister’s clarification. To place a cap on the price of water of 3.6 per cent by local governments in the south-east corner is untenable if the actual cost of providing the service is greater than that. Let us be honest: if the council cannot recoup the real cost of water provision from the ratepayers through water charges, they will do it through another mechanism. They have only a limited area in which they can revenue raise. I would not like to see a transfer of costs either transparently or otherwise, but local governments have to charge for the services that they provide. The bill, as I said, notwithstanding the title, debates an issue that is important to all. I believe that this state government has escalated the cost of living. I do not believe that we need another artificial attempt at arguing the opposite. I would seek the minister’s response prior to the vote in relation to that contradictory information. Mr CRANDON (Coomera—LNP) (5.08 pm): I rise to add to the debate on the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 2011. Clause 7(2) (b), under the definition of ‘water supplier’ on page 8, specifically excludes all bulk water supply entities owned by the state. I am sponsoring an e-petition on the website calling on the government to freeze bulk water prices. I would ask all members from both sides of the House to go on to the website and support that petition. These government members ignored water supply in the south-east corner for too long. In a nutshell, they panicked. After ignoring water supply issues for far too long, they panicked. They hit the panic button and they had to build a grid at all costs. They overspent and, boy, did they overspend; they overspent by a couple of billion dollars. They found themselves landing helicopters up around Traveston Dam and making big, broad statements, waving their arms and saying, ‘We’re going to build a dam here and this will solve all the problems of South-East Queensland.’ They invited contractors to come in and build a grid—and what a way to build the grid! They said, ‘Don’t worry about giving us any indication about what it might cost to build the grid. Why don’t you just send us the invoice after you’ve knocked it together? Add a little bit of profit for yourself and we’ll just 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1873 pay it. You just keep on doing that. Keep giving us those invoices and adding your profit on top of it. Don’t worry about what it will cost because we’ve got deep pockets. We’ll be able to give you whatever it takes to build this grid because we’re in panic mode as a government. We have this situation that we’ve ignored for 20 years and we are panicking. For goodness sake, just get out there and do it, boys.’ There were billions of dollars in overspending, and now the people of my electorate are paying through the nose for this government’s incompetence. This morning the Minister for Energy and Water Utilities talked about solar power. There are flaws in the legislation around entitlements to solar power rebates. People in manufactured home parks miss out on ongoing rebates for installing solar panels. An individual living in a house next door to a manufactured home park could get the rebate, but if they decided to sell their house and move into the park they would suddenly miss out on the rebate on an ongoing basis. There is a flaw in the legislation. The owners of manufactured home parks are also let down by the legislation. There is a difference between an electricity retailer who can charge a fee for reading meters and those who own a manufactured home park and who are not allowed to charge that fee. This is clearly an error in the drafting of the legislation that is putting pressure on and causing angst between manufactured home park owners and those people living in manufactured home parks. Ms CROFT: Madam Deputy Speaker, I raise the question of relevance in relation to what the member is talking about. I would like to ask what relevance this has to the bill we are debating here today. Mr CRANDON: A lovely segue into exactly what I was going to say. Mr Ryan: Hang on, there is a point of order. Mr CRANDON: Well, hop up and make your point of order if you want to make one. Ms CROFT: Madam Deputy Speaker, I ask for your ruling on my point of order. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms O’Neill): I would ask the member please to return to the bill. Mr CRANDON: Yes, certainly, Madam Deputy Speaker, and thank you for your guidance in that respect. The relevance of what I was just talking about is that there are faults in that legislation and there are faults in this legislation. It was just a demonstration that this government, on an ongoing basis over an extended period of time, has been consistently introducing faulty legislation into this House for debate and has been riding roughshod over this side of the House in seeking to make the changes necessary to resolve that faulty legislation. This has, unfortunately, been getting us nowhere and we now find ourselves in the mess that we are in with so many pieces of legislation with faulty aspects to them. Those two aspects that I have just talked about, to do with electricity and what have you, are further examples of faulty legislation, just as this is faulty legislation. The fault in this legislation is that the government is arguing that we should cap the retail side of water pricing without capping the wholesale side of it. The government is specifically excluding capping the cost of the wholesale side. Why is that? Because there has been an overspend and the government has to try to get the revenue back to take care of that overspend. This incompetent government overspent by billions and billions of dollars on the water grid, on the Traveston Dam debacle and on the mess of a water resource that we see on the Gold Coast. That alone cost in the order of $400 million more than it was meant to. The travesty in the whole mess is caused by this incompetent government. Twenty years ago the government started to ignore the problem, then 10 years ago it continued to ignore the problem, and now the government continues the mess by doing half the job in this legislation. These are not fairer water prices. Fairer water prices are long gone. The Premier said a few weeks ago, ‘Today the blame game on water in South-East Queensland ends.’ I have to say that the blame will never be taken from this government. It started a long time ago and it continues. A few years back, in former Premier Beattie’s time, the government announced a ‘new era for water in SEQ’. It was reported at the time— A streamlined 21st century water management system for South East Queensland water was unveiled by Premier Peter Beattie and Deputy Premier Anna Bligh. And— The State will assume control and operate the larger water assets that hold, manufacture ... and distribute bulk water across the South East. What the government did not say at that time was that it would also overspend—‘We’ll spend whatever we have to. We’ll pay above the odds. We’ll pay 10, 20, 30, 40 or 50 per cent above what it should cost to build these water assets.’ When the government members said that, they did not also say that they would take control of these water assets. The minister said— The bulk water price contributes to the cost of the South East Queensland Water Grid. The state does not make a profit from the water grid ... Let us be sure to call it what it is. The government is clawing back the money it overspent on the water grid. It overspent that money in panic over the years. At the end of the day, the people are paying for this overspend and we will do so for generations to come—on top of higher fuel costs, on top of 1874 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 15 Jun 2011 higher electricity costs and on top of all the other costs that have escalated under the management of this incompetent government. Elderly Queenslanders are being denied rebates on solar power because of faulty legislation, and here we go again with more faulty legislation. The government has put another piece of faulty legislation into the mix. When we move into government, this is something else that we will have to fix. We are going to fix the stuff-ups that this government has created. I congratulate the shadow minister for his fine contribution. I urge all members on both sides of the House to go online and support the petition that I have sponsored to freeze wholesale water prices. Ms DARLING (Sandgate—ALP) (5.17 pm): It is with pleasure that I rise to speak on the Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 2011. It is a very important bill which amends the South-East Queensland Water (Distribution and Retail Restructuring) Act 2009. It will impose a cap of CPI on increases in the distribution and retail component of residential or small business water and wastewater. I will read an extract from the explanatory notes to the bill because it makes this issue clear. It states— The Council owners of the Distributor-retailers have not responded to community concerns about high water and wastewater prices. This is the entire reason we need to bring this bill before the parliament tonight. The explanatory notes continue— Despite the legal ability to do so, SEQ councils have not directed their Distributor-retailers to better manage price increases through the implementation of price paths. Most Councils have also failed to use their financial returns from their Distributor- retailers to provide price relief to their community through rebates or subsidies. As members opposite have actually mentioned, the bulk water providers are not a profit-making entity for the state government. They have been subsidised for some time. We do not pass on the full cost of those bulk water prices. We made the tough decision several years ago to construct the South- East Queensland water grid for the security of all South-East Queensland residents and businesses. It is a grid that I know we are going to call upon in the future. During our recent natural disasters, for example, the desalination plant came into its own. I heard some people refer to it as a white elephant. It has never been a white elephant. It could be switched on when needed and provided very necessary fresh water at those times when water treatment plants were not working following South-East Queensland flooding. The bill will introduce a price cap to constrain water and wastewater distribution and retail price increases to a CPI increase per annum for residential and small business customers from 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2013. South-East Queensland councils as owners of the distributor-retailers will also be required to submit a plan for how they intend to mitigate price impacts on customers after the two-year CPI price cap period. There is a lot of information about how Queensland Urban Utilities has been operating due to the budget papers released by the Brisbane City Council. Queensland Urban Utilities is owned by Brisbane, Ipswich, Lockyer Valley, Scenic Rim and Somerset regional councils, with Brisbane City Council having 85 per cent ownership of that entity. Sadly, the entity has been allowed to profiteer at the expense of the residents of Brisbane. The Brisbane City Council budget papers just released show that QUU will receive $221 million in profit in 2011-12 and $227 million in 2012-13. That does not sound like an entity that cannot afford to trim its costs and actually reduce the retail price for its consumers. The Brisbane City Council with 85 per cent ownership does not sound like a powerless owner that cannot do anything to control the water costs to residents in Brisbane. The entire Sandgate electorate sits within the Brisbane City Council and we have been watching water prices go up. I am very pleased that residents in my area were always the champion water savers of South-East Queensland. They got a big tick for the fact that they took those water-saving measures to heart during those drought times and saved a lot of water, and now they expect something in return. The only person who seems to be able to offer it—who is looking to make a real change in the Brisbane City Council—is Ray Smith, the Labor candidate for Lord Mayor. I want to table for the information of the House Ray Smith’s water rebate policy. If elected as Lord Mayor, he says that he will give a $100 rebate each year to owner-occupier residential ratepayers and renters who pay their own water bills. I table that for the information of the House. Tabled paper: Brochure by Ray Smith, Lord Mayoral candidate, titled ‘$100 Water Rebate’ [4683]. I strongly recommend that residents in the Brisbane area look at what Ray Smith has to offer. He has seen the budget papers. They are there for everyone to see. Savings can be made. This legislation will ensure that there is a cap on increases. I now call upon the Brisbane City Council to do the right thing and make sure that it reduces the retail cost to residents in Brisbane. Hon. S ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Energy and Water Utilities) (5.22 pm), in reply: I thank all members for their participation in this debate. I want to start my summary by expressing how disappointed but not surprised I am and the rest of South-East Queensland should be with the LNP’s stance in terms of opposing this bill, because this bill is all about providing real relief to the residents of South-East Queensland in terms of the water bills that they will have to pay. Mr Seeney: Rubbish! Absolute rubbish! 15 Jun 2011 Fairer Water Prices for SEQ Amendment Bill 1875

Mr ROBERTSON: Member for Callide, I heard you in silence. I would have hoped you could have given me the same level of courtesy. Mr Seeney interjected. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms O’Neill): Order! Member for— Mr Watt: If you get back to your seat you can interject. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: As the member for Everton says—thank you—member for Callide, please resume your correct seat and cease interjecting. Mr ROBERTSON: I do note the interjection from the member for Callide during this debate. It is just a shame he will have nothing to say tomorrow when it comes time to debate the budget. One has to actually wonder: apart from turning up every day to ask two prepared questions, what else does the Leader of the Opposition now contribute to this place? But I will return to the bill. Mr Seeney interjected. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: I would ask the member for Callide to cease interjecting. The minister has the call. Mr ROBERTSON: I can understand how sensitive you are given how humiliated you are by Campbell Newman. Mr Seeney interjected. Mr ROBERTSON: At the heart of this bill, as I was saying— Mr Seeney interjected. Mr ROBERTSON: You right? At the heart of this bill is delivering lower water bills for the people of South-East Queensland. How can the LNP object to that? Given all of the puffery of the candidate for Ashgrove and given all of the sloganeering by members like the member for Callide and others, when push comes to shove they squib it! They squibbed the hard decisions imposing a CPI cap on councils in South-East Queensland despite the LNP candidate for Ashgrove in an interview with Madonna King shortly after his ascension actually saying that he believed that councils should be imposing water increases at around about CPI type levels. But let us not worry what he actually said when it comes to some sort of consistent policy position. In the time that is available to me before we adjourn this debate I want to remind members of the LNP what they are voting against. What they are voting against is a minimum saving on average water bills on the Sunshine Coast of $94 in the 2011-12 financial year. That is right: the opposition spokesperson, who comes from the Sunshine Coast, is voting against a reduction in Sunshine Coast water bills next financial year of $94. In terms of Redcliffe— Mr Dickson interjected. Mr ROBERTSON: It does not matter whether you believe it is political or not. The fact is that it is a saving of $95 that you do not want to pass on to your constituents. What is the saving in Redcliffe? What is the saving in Redcliffe that the LNP is opposing? It is $95. In Pine Rivers what is the saving? It is $27. In terms of Caboolture, what is the saving that the LNP opposes for the people of Caboolture? It is $42. Let us move to another part of South-East Queensland, because what the LNP is opposing here tonight is a saving on the Gold Coast on water bills—for the good people of the Gold Coast who have done it harder than everyone else—of $116 by not supporting this government’s bill. What is it in Redlands, and I heard the puffery of the member going on as he did about his petition? The best thing he could do in supporting his constituents is support this bill, because his constituents will save $87 next financial year on their water bill as a result of this legislation. Then of course in Logan the saving will be $111 next financial year as a result of this bill. But that is what the LNP is opposing, and I have to say how delighted I am about that, because what it does is give every ALP candidate in the run-up to next year’s election, including members in this House, the ability to go out and say, ‘We saved you $116 on the Gold Coast but the LNP opposed that. The LNP wanted you, the residents of the Gold Coast, to pay $116 more than you are having to pay as a result of the passage of this legislation.’ That is what it means for the LNP’s decision—Campbell Newman’s decision—to oppose this legislation. Can there be any more cynical exercise than that exposed here tonight by the LNP? Fancy opposing reductions in water bills across South-East Queensland! I do not think you actually understood what you were actually voting on in your party room. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: I ask the minister to address his comments through the chair. Mr ROBERTSON: I do not think LNP members actually understood what they were opposing in the party room when the honourable member presented this bill for discussion. Did he actually tell them that at the heart of this bill were savings of the quantum that I have just outlined before the members now? I do not think so. Based on what I am seeing—the looks of surprise of members opposite—they clearly did not understand or they were clearly misled by the opposition spokesperson about the quantum of savings that the passage of this legislation will actually mean. 1876 Motion 15 Jun 2011

How can they vote against a saving of $116 on the Gold Coast? How can they vote against a saving of $87 in Redlands? How can they vote against a $111 saving in Logan? How can the opposition spokesperson vote against savings for his own constituents of $94 next financial year? I have been in this place for a while but I have never seen anything so stupid in my life. Fancy LNP members being sucked in by Campbell Newman and the opposition spokesperson for water utilities to oppose a reduction in water bills for the forthcoming financial year. Debate, on motion of Mr Robertson, adjourned.

MOTION

Carbon Tax Mr SEENEY (Callide—LNP) (Leader of the Opposition) (5.30 pm): I move— That this House call on the Premier to rule out completely any support for the carbon tax being proposed by her Federal Labor colleagues, or require the Treasurer to immediately include the impacts of such a new tax in the budget forecasts so that the people of Queensland can fully understand the devastating effects of a new carbon tax on a State budget that is reliant on a major expansion of Queensland’s resources industries and massive international investment in new coal and gas projects for the increased income forecasts the Government is relying upon to reverse its ongoing disastrous financial decline? There is no doubt that a carbon tax will be devastating for all Australians, but it will be especially devastating for Queenslanders. At a time when Australian families are facing increased cost-of-living pressures and family budgets are being squeezed, Julia Gillard, as Prime Minister, has caved into the Greens and broken her solemn promise not to introduce a carbon tax. Julia Gillard’s carbon tax will hit every Australian household, but it will hit Queenslanders worse. A carbon tax will unnecessarily lift electricity, grocery and petrol prices and will attack jobs in our key industries. Modelling of the impact of a carbon tax using a carbon price of $26 a tonne showed that a carbon tax would add an average of $300 a year to electricity bills—$500 in New South Wales—and 6.5c to the cost of every litre of petrol. A carbon tax would also increase the cost of groceries, because power and transport costs are embedded in that price. A carbon tax would add $6,200 to the cost of every new home. According to the recently released Treasury calculations, if the government decided to impose a carbon price of $30 per tonne, the cost impacts on households without petrol tax concessions would be $863 a year. It will drive manufacturing jobs offshore. Most of all, the carbon tax will impact on the mining industry Australia-wide. The chief executive of Australia’s second largest metallurgical coal exporter, Anglo American coal, has warned that a $25 per tonne carbon tax could put at risk 3,000 regional jobs in Queensland and New South Wales as well as up to $2 billion in planned investment. A $26 per tonne carbon tax would mean that 16 coalmines would close across Australia, many of them in Queensland; 23,000 mining jobs would be lost; and 40,000 jobs would be lost in industries like steel, aluminium, cement, glass, chemicals and motor cars. According to Acil Tasman, it would cost 24,000 jobs in mining generally. The Minerals Council of Australia fears that a carbon-pricing scheme could cost the industry $30 billion in 2020 and threaten an investment pipeline of $140 billion. If there is anyone in Australia who should be worried about those statistics, those predictions and the carbon tax that Julia Gillard is proposing it should be the Treasurer of Queensland—the Treasurer who yesterday introduced into this House a budget that depends for its integrity on a massive increase in our resources industry, a resources industry that continues to provide the basis for the Queensland economy, a resources industry that is set for a big expansion and a resources industry that has the potential to provide a lot more income to the Treasury of Queensland. But that potential is threatened by Julia Gillard’s carbon tax. The extent of Queensland’s reliance on our resources industry can be seen in the government’s own budget documents. The budget that was introduced yesterday predicts a five per cent—in fact, 5¼ per cent—growth rate by 2012-13. The budget predicts an increase in operating revenue of some $7.8 billion before 2014-15. That growth rate and that increase in government revenue is dependent upon investment in the resources industry. It is dependent upon a huge increase in private business investment. The budget documents state that business investment is expected to continue to surge, rising to a forecast 21¾ per cent as LNG and other mining projects gather pace. The integrity of the Treasurer’s budget is built on the expansion of the resources industry coming to pass. But does anybody seriously expect that to happen if a carbon tax is introduced? Does anybody seriously expect that Queensland will achieve a five per cent growth rate if a carbon tax is introduced? If those projects that the Treasurer is reliant upon are subject to that sort of great big new tax, the international investors will invest somewhere else, because that investment does not need to come to Queensland. There are plenty of other places in the world where that sort of investment would be welcome. In fact, Queensland—and Australia generally—competes in an international investment market for those investment dollars, and those multinational companies can make the decision to invest in any other country in the world where resources exist. Queensland is not the only place that has coal, 15 Jun 2011 Motion 1877

Queensland is not the only place that has coal seam gas and Queensland is not the only place that is bidding for the developing LNG market. Those industries have a huge potential here in Queensland, but that potential is threatened by Julia Gillard and her carbon tax in Canberra. This morning, when talking about the budget, the Treasurer said that the investments are loaded and locked. I think that was the term he used. What is locked and loaded is an Exocet missile in Canberra that is aimed fairly and squarely at the Queensland economy, and it is called Julia Gillard’s carbon tax. If that locked-and-loaded missile is fired and becomes a reality, the Queensland economy will be shattered. But what will be shattered into a million pieces of despair will be the Treasurer’s budget that was introduced into this parliament, because it simply cannot withstand the type of carbon tax that Julia Gillard is introducing. Nobody with any credibility would suggest that our resource based economy can achieve a five per cent growth rate in the face of such a taxation regime. Nobody would seriously suggest that the sort of revenue increases that are necessary to achieve a surplus by 2015-16, and which the Treasurer has written into the forward estimates in these budget documents, can be realised in the face of a carbon tax being introduced into Australia. So the Treasurer and the Premier—and every other member of the government who sits over there and says mindlessly, ‘Hear, hear!’ when the Premier and the Treasurer talk about this budget— should be on the phone to Julia Gillard. They should be on the phone to their colleagues in Canberra. They should be putting forward the case that Queensland cannot withstand a carbon tax. The credibility of the Treasurer cannot withstand a carbon tax. There has been nothing written into this budget that reflects the risk that a carbon tax poses to the Queensland economy. In terms of risk analysis, this is the biggest example of a head-in-the-sand approach that anybody could possibly imagine. The Treasurer takes no account of the risk that a carbon tax presents to the Queensland economy. The Treasurer in these budget documents takes no account of the risk that that potential tax represents to the figures that he bases Queensland’s future on. He has his head firmly in the sand talking about the boom that is coming. This is a government that went broke in the last boom. It is waiting for the next boom to break even, but the next boom is threatened by Julia Gillard and her carbon tax. The next boom will not eventuate if that carbon tax becomes a reality. That is the message that the Treasurer and the Premier should be taking to Canberra. The Queensland budget cannot survive in the face of a carbon tax. The Premier and the Treasurer should be loud and long expressing their opposition to the carbon tax. They should join with Tony Abbott and his federal colleagues and they should put the message very clearly to Julia Gillard and the Greens who drive her agenda that a carbon tax would destroy the Queensland budget and it would destroy the lifestyle of every Queenslander who depends on this government. (Time expired) Mr DICKSON (Buderim—LNP) (5.40 pm): I rise to second the motion moved by the member for Callide. From the beginning we have to look at two women: one is the Prime Minister and the other is the Premier of Queensland. They both have a very strong and similar record. The Prime Minister tells people before an election that there will not be a carbon tax, but lo and behold her party gets elected and it is going to introduce a carbon tax. The Premier of Queensland tells us before an election that there will not be a fuel tax and we will not sell assets, but guess what? They are like sisters, hand-in- hand, and they do not tell the truth to the people of Queensland or the people of Australia. Let us look at the whole situation. The most devastating tax in our living memory will be this carbon tax. We have a Treasurer who dropped a budget yesterday, which we will debate for the next couple of days, but we do not know whether or not there is going to be 10 per cent on top of everything he has put forward. The cost to the people of Queensland will be devastating. When one looks at the impact on electricity alone at $20 a tonne—and we still do not know what the cost of the carbon tax will be—it will put up the price of electricity by a minimum of 10 per cent. Bob Brown wants $40 a tonne. That must mean that electricity is going to go up by 20 per cent. We just had a rise a couple of weeks ago of 6.6 per cent. Let us turn it into something liquid. Let us look at Alumina, one of the biggest companies and employers in this state. Can one imagine what would happen if 25 per cent was added to the cost of Alumina? How many jobs will we lose in the state of Queensland? That will impact on mums and dads. That is what this side of politics cares about. We care about people being able to go to the shop and buy their groceries. We care about the mums and dads who want to put their kids through school. These are good, honest, hardworking people. What we are calling on the Premier of Queensland to do is come clean. She is either for it or against it. A simple yes or no will do. If she had a bit of intestinal fortitude she would call an election on the topic. We would be very pleased to go to an election on this topic. I am sure everyone on the other side of the chamber would love to go to the polls and talk up the carbon tax—how good it will be for the people of Queensland and how good it will be for the people of Australia. I read the paper regularly and I have actually heard that Julia Gillard is not polling all that well when it comes to this carbon tax. I do not know whether those on the other side have heard that in recent times, but that is what is coming back to us. 1878 Motion 15 Jun 2011

I will bring it back to a personal level. I do Meals on Wheels every now and then—actually four times a year—and the first lady I served a meal to the other day was sitting in the room in the dark watching a little TV. She did not have a heater on. She was freezing. She cannot afford to pay the electricity costs in Queensland now. What do those opposite think a carbon tax will do to that poor old lady? For every single poor old lady I deliver to there are a thousand more out there freezing to death in the cold of winter. That is what those opposite will do to the people of Queensland. There are a lot of people who cannot afford what we in this House can afford. We can afford to consume those bills when they come and they are a little bit higher. What a piece of bait the Treasurer’s handout of $10,000 for six months that he decided to give out to first home buyers yesterday is. That will reel a few in I am sure. But the problem is that it is only for six months. There is nothing sustainable about this government. Everything is about a quick fix. Let us talk about all the other little costs that might rise: the cost of food, the cost of transport and the cost of labour. Do those opposite think none of those things will go through the roof with a carbon tax? I will bet any money in the world that all of them will go through the roof. The Treasurer does not want to talk about it, but I will go back to where I started: can we have a simple yes or no from the Treasurer and from the Premier as to whether they support a carbon tax and whether they are prepared to go to the polls. That is what they should do. If they have the intestinal fortitude to talk about it in the House, go out and wear on their sleeve or on their back ‘we support a carbon tax’. The leader of our party—his name is Campbell Newman—says he does not support a carbon tax, he will not support a carbon tax, and if Labor wishes to do so go to the polls and see how good it is out there. Those opposite will not put it up to Campbell Newman. They do not have the heart to do so. Bring on an election and that way those opposite can go to the people of Queensland and tell them how good they are and how bright they are and how much they support a carbon tax. This side of the House does not. We know what the implications are. Those opposite know what the implications are, but they just do not care. As is the case in relation to water and electricity, those opposite do not care about the people of Queensland. They steal the money from their pockets. Hon. AP FRASER (Mount Coot-tha—ALP) (Treasurer and Minister for State Development and Trade) (5.46 pm): I move the following amendment— That all words after ‘House’ be deleted and the following words inserted: • acknowledges that the Government has submitted to the Commonwealth Government advising the Queensland Government’s support for strong action on carbon pricing to be implemented in a way that is in the long term interest of Queenslanders; • notes that the details of a carbon price are yet to be determined by the Commonwealth Government, and • notes that unmitigated climate change has the potential to have serious economic impacts on tourism and agriculture in Queensland; and • notes the importance of the CSG and LNG industries to Queensland’s economy and its potential as a lower emission energy source for domestic and international power production. Let us be really clear about this debate. Mr Seeney: You are too embarrassed to read it. Mr FRASER: I am happy to read it if you would like me to. Just as I am sure you were particularly unhappy to read out the speech that was handed to you by the young Liberals in the opposition office. I remember a time when the Leader of the Opposition would walk in here and give a speech that he felt he believed in rather than just read out a speech that someone else gave to him along the way. What does the motion say? It notes this government’s very strong support to deal with the challenge of climate change, because this is a government that believes in the science of human induced climate change. What this amendment says is that we will delete the words after ‘House’ and we will acknowledge that this government has submitted to the Commonwealth government advising the Queensland government’s support for strong action on carbon pricing to be implemented in a way that is in the long-term interests of Queensland. We note that the details of the carbon price are yet to be determined by the Commonwealth government and note that unmitigated climate change has the potential to have serious economic impacts on tourism and agriculture in Queensland and, finally, note the importance of the CSG and LNG industries to Queensland’s economy and its potential as a lower emission energy source for domestic and international power production. Why do we support this? Because we will make an assessment of whatever might be proposed into the future against this benchmark: what is in the long-term interests of the Queensland economy. What is the way to deal with resources scarcity into the future? Ultimately it is to ensure that all scarce resources are priced. That is the way that this government believes we should deal with the reality of human induced climate change. We will only ever sign up for an arrangement that is in the long-term interests of Queensland, just as we did with the proposal around resource rent taxation. This government advocated for changes. What was the result? There were changes that were made and that is now a settled arrangement. Despite the hyperbole of those opposite and despite the hyperbole of those in industry, what is occurring in Queensland and Australia right now? Massive investment in resource projects as an MRRT comes online. 15 Jun 2011 Motion 1879

I have actually been around for a little while now. I remember in my first budget increasing the royalty on coal, removing the discount that the coal industry enjoyed at the time. What was I told by those opposite and those in industry? That it would be the end of the coal industry in Queensland. I remember when the Leader of the Opposition said in this place when we introduced the gas mandate that it would be the end of the coal industry in Queensland. No, it was not the end. What it was the start of was a fantastic new export industry—the CSG to LNG industry. The electricity produced from that industry is 70 per cent cleaner than brown coal thermal produced electricity in Victoria and up to 50 per cent more efficient than black coal electricity generation. It is a key transition fuel for the future. Therefore, at this point we have the theoretical Leader of the Opposition, who has a theoretical commitment to policy commitment, wanting to doing a theoretical assessment of a theoretical proposal that does not yet exist. When it is put into the parliament, of course this government will look at those details and assess them and we will make a decision that is in the long-term interests of Queensland. In the meantime, let us remember that this is a debate about dog whistling on the other side, where they are horribly torn between two constituencies: those who believe in climate change and those who do not. There is a piece of modelling they can do: a linear equation between what Campbell Newman says and his distance from the Ashgrove post office. When he is in Ashgrove, he tells everybody that he believes in climate change and he believes in the science. He says that he wants to protect the environment. However, as soon as they send him out bush and introduce him to the rest of Queensland, as soon as they roll him up the Bruce Highway and introduce him to the fact that there is a road that runs the length of Queensland, as soon as he gets further out, what does he say? He says, ‘No, I’m with my National Party mates and none of us has done anything to cause any of this horrible climate change and we never have to do anything about it.’ This government will always front up to deal with the long-term challenges. We will always confront the challenges of the future and we will make sure that, each and every time, we only ever do it in the long-term interests of the Queensland economy. That means a future for our resources sector just as much as it means a future for the Great Barrier Reef, our tourism industry and our farmers’ ability to continue to produce quality food for export. I commend the amendment to the House. Hon. SJ HINCHLIFFE (Stafford—ALP) (Minister for Employment, Skills and Mining) (5.51 pm): I second the amendment moved by the Treasurer. The biggest threat to the Queensland economy and the environment is the LNP. They have no plan, they have no policies and they have no belief in climate change. The truth is that in this state the mining and resources industry is not running scared, as the Leader of the Opposition would have Queenslanders believe. Rather, it is confident that Queensland will continue to be a leading producer of minerals and petroleum resources for many years to come. As the Leader of the Opposition said himself in this House about three hours ago, the mining industry is booming. It is booming because the mining and resources industry knows that Queensland is a great place to carry out business. Despite Campbell Newman’s habit of talking down the Queensland economy, they know that it is the right place to invest. Supposedly under some sort of threat of a great big new tax about which the Leader of the Opposition channels Tony Abbott, since the beginning of this year APLNG has finalised a contract with Sinopec in China to supply LNG for 20 years; BG has signed a contract with Chubu Electric Power Co. in Japan to supply LNG for 20 years, with Queensland LNG in the mix; BMA has committed to spend $5 billion on Central Queensland coal projects; and Adani has agreed to take on the lease of the Abbot Point coal terminal to ensure the terminal’s continued industry led growth. The truth is that the world is reacting to climate change and Australia cannot afford to be left behind. In her written submission to the federal government on carbon tax, the Premier made it clear that the government will be fighting for a good outcome for Queensland that supports and ensures a strong future for emissions-intensive industries. The reality is that Queensland is very well placed to serve international markets as the world searches for energy sources that burn cleaner than coal. The Productivity Commission’s recent report identified gas fired power as being the most effective method of lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Already we are seeing demand driven by increasing international demand, with key export markets identified in Japan and China that are seeking lower emission transition fuels such as LNG. The truth is that if big economies like those in Asia continue to turn to Queensland LNG instead of coal for large scale power generation, their greenhouse gas emissions will be significantly reduced and our economy will benefit. In his budget speech the Treasurer forecast that for 2011-12 economic growth would be at five per cent and then 5.25 per cent in the following year as a new era of investment ushers in new jobs and a broad based expansion of our economy. The Treasurer highlighted the importance of the emerging LNG industry when he told the House that LNG is as significant an economic development for Queensland as the opening of the Bowen Basin was in the 1970s. The truth is that electricity produced from Queensland LNG is up to 70 per cent cleaner than that produced from brown coal in Victoria and it is up to 50 per cent cleaner than the electricity produced from black coal. It is an industry of the future. 1880 Motion 15 Jun 2011

This is where we have the opportunity to build an economy that responds not only to the international environmental challenge of climate change but also to the international and local economic challenges of climate change. As a government, we have a commitment to responding to those issues and working with the federal government in responding to those issues. We will not stick our heads in the sand and pretend while we are out and about that we do not believe in climate change but, like Campbell Newman, when in Ashgrove decide finally that climate change is real. The reality is that this is an opportunity for Queensland to play a significant role in leading this change. It starts right here and now. The genesis is here. We want all stakeholders to work together to make sure it works for Queensland. Scaremongering from those opposite does not do anything to help our economy. Scaremongering from those opposite only talks down the great potential and opportunity of this state to be a part of responding to the global challenge of mitigating climate change. We can be a part of that with great transition fuels like CSG-LNG. Dr FLEGG (Moggill—LNP) (5.56 pm): ‘These expansions will further cement Queensland as the world’s largest exporter of coal and are critical to the economy and wealth of Queensland.’ Do members know who uttered those words? Premier Anna Bligh! That is what the Premier says when she is not in Ashgrove but is heading up the coast to talk to people who know the importance of this state as an energy province. It is nothing more than hypocrisy and we have heard the nonsense from the minister who just spoke. This government has to answer to Queenslanders for two things. One is a budget with a $2 billion deficit this year and a $4 billion deficit next year, which will ultimately result in a debt of $84 billion. The other is the resultant impact on the cost of living for Queenslanders—the cost of water, electricity, petrol, cars, council charges and now a new tax on the family home. What will happen to that cost of living now that their federal colleagues want to introduce a new tax? It is not an environmental measure. Nobody is trying to argue that the earth’s climate will be better because of this tax. It is just a new tax, like the mining tax, the flood tax and this government’s taxes on things like petrol and property. Who will get burned by this new tax? Queenslanders will be burned by this new tax! I have a news flash for those opposite, and the minister might want to listen: we live in an energy province. Nearly 10 per cent of yesterday’s budget comes from energy royalties and related charges. This is a budget predicated on a boom of tens of billions of dollars of energy investment and thousands of new jobs in the energy industry that, by the way, this government will tax the payrolls of. Page 50 of budget paper No. 2 tells us that China will triple its energy needs, India will double its energy needs and 80 per cent of that will be fossil fuels. Queensland is dependent on profiting from those markets. Do members think the climate will change by hitting Queensland families with a new tax, by making them pay more for transport, food, homes and petrol? It is a deception. We cannot pretend that taxing energy has no budget implications. We are not just an energy province; we are a trade exposed economy. We cannot consider a new tax without knowing its cost to industry and jobs. We cannot consider a major new tax without regard to its impact on Queensland’s cost of living. Above all, we cannot countenance a major new tax without having the courage to take it to the people. Remember the fear campaign that those opposite, including the current Treasurer, ran against John Howard’s GST? John Howard believed Australia needed a GST but he took it to the people. Like their federal colleagues, this government has no intention of going to the upcoming state election being honest. They will not tell you the effect on revenue and tax in this budget or on jobs or on the cost of living. Julia Gillard deceived the people of Australia. This government wants to do the same at the next state election. I know that those opposite will be painting us as polluters or wreckers of the earth’s climate and the Barrier Reef. In this place in early 2007, over four years ago, I introduced a bill that the Premier recently reminded us made me and the Queensland LNP the first Australian politicians to seek to put a price on carbon. I am all for modifying people’s behaviour to make our footprint on the earth as light as possible. We on this side do care. Campbell Newman, likewise, cares about modifying behaviour. That is why he planted a million trees, made Brisbane’s CBD bike friendly, ran our buses on LNG and provided green energy. We do not need a destructive tax on Queensland households and jobs. Members opposite should go back and read that debate on 6 June 2007. Those opposite were supporting a state based tax proposed by their Labor colleagues to sell industry permits to pollute and they were going to pocket the money. It is a fair bet they will not be mentioning that here tonight. This motion is about honesty. Those opposite will be calling an election in six months time— (Time expired) Hon. KJ JONES (Ashgrove—ALP) (Minister for Environment and Resource Management) (6.01 pm): I thank the opposition for giving us another opportunity to highlight the truth to the people of Queensland that the LNP in Queensland stand for nothing. They stand for nothing and they will do and say anything to get into government. They are desperate people who have no values, who do not believe in anything and cannot hold a position because they have no values. The reason I articulate this is that I think it is really important that the people of Queensland actually know what the LNP do and say. 15 Jun 2011 Motion 1881

Back when climate change was in vogue, back when they all thought that climate change was a vote winner all they were interested in was winning votes, not having a position, not trying to protect the Great Barrier Reef, not trying to protect Queensland’s tourism industry. All they are interested in is doing and saying anything to try to sneak into office. We can demonstrate this because when they thought— Mr Gibson: That’s not like you to be so nasty. Ms JONES: I am being honest, which is what the member should be. Mr Gibson: Let’s be honest about Traveston then. Ms JONES: Back when they thought climate change was in vogue, what did they say? Mr Seeney: Let’s talk about the motion. Ms JONES: Mr Speaker, can I please talk? I think it is really important. Mr SPEAKER: Stop the clock. Those on my left, the minister has the call. Ms JONES: Back when the opposition thought that supporting climate change would get them into government and it was in vogue and it was what they thought the people of Queensland wanted, what did they do? They introduced their own voluntary carbon credit trading bill so Queensland could have its own— An opposition member interjected. Ms JONES: You bet we did. What they wanted was a Queensland based system. Now they are saying that Australia cannot make a difference, the world cannot make a difference, but three years ago they thought that Queensland alone could make a difference. A government member: Queensland volunteering could make a difference. Ms JONES: Yes, volunteering. What did they say at the time? The member for Moggill said— Perhaps there is an opportunity for a bipartisan approach in relation to one of the most important issues confronting the state of Queensland. One of the greatest challenges confronting Queensland is to deal with this climate change issue— and protect the Great Barrier Reef. That is what the honourable member for Moggill said in 2007 when he thought climate change was in vogue. Similar comments were made by John-Paul Langbroek, the member for Surfers Paradise, when he thought that it was a vote winner to say that he supported action on climate change. What did the then Lord Mayor of Brisbane say in 2009? A government member interjected. Ms JONES: That is right. Their new leader does not sit in this House and so does not have to follow the rules of the Queensland parliament. In 2009 Campbell Newman said— It is no longer new to say climate change is one of the great challenges facing the world. Today’s focus is the urgent generation of solutions ... That is what he said when he thought it was going to be a vote winner for him. What did they do? The Brisbane City Council under his leadership made a submission to the federal government at the time saying that it supported in principle a carbon policy and carbon pricing. That is what he said when he thought it was a vote winner. What we know about the LNP in Queensland is that it stands for nothing. It cannot hold a position from morning to afternoon. We have seen this week— Opposition members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Those on my left, the honourable minister has the call. Mr Seeney: That’s the third time you’ve said that. Ms JONES: I am hoping it will sink in. Opposition members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Those on my left! Mr Seeney: Five minutes and you can’t talk about carbon tax. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition, the minister has the call. Ms JONES: I am passionate about this issue, and protecting our environment is one of the reasons I joined the great Australian Labor Party. It is one of the reasons I believe that we do need to take clear action when it comes to protecting our environment, whether that is carbon pricing, whether that is the vegetation management laws that members opposite say they will repeal, whether that is the Great Barrier Reef protection bill that they say they will repeal or whether it is green zones in Moreton Bay that they say they will repeal. The LNP tries to say that it is different because it has a leader from outside the House. However, the truth is that the LNP does not have an environmental policy. Its policy is to wind back the improvements we have made over 15 years. Mr Gibson: You have no credibility on this issue. Ms JONES: Say it differently. 1882 Motion 15 Jun 2011

Mr SPEAKER: Those on my left. It is impossible to hear the person I called upon to speak. I call the minister. Ms JONES: Let me be very clear: if you want to put out a press release tonight saying you will not repeal vegetation management laws, you will not repeal the Great Barrier Reef protection bill, you will not repeal the green zones in Moreton Bay, you can go and issue that tonight because— Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable minister, address your comments through the chair. Ms JONES: To date Campbell Newman has failed to say where he stands on any of those issues and I will bring him to account. A man of substance! (Time expired) Mr Gibson interjected. Ms Bates interjected. Mr SPEAKER: The member for Gympie and the member for Mudgeeraba! Ms Jones interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The minister will cease interjecting. Mr JOHNSON (Gregory—LNP) (6.06 pm): If the government wants to take real action on a strong economy and do away with the smokescreen of this amended motion it would support the motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition and it would find that the economy would be stronger. The Gillard government and the Greens are betraying Australian voters and democracy in their bloody- minded pursuit of a carbon tax. They are both cowardly and condescending, punishing and patronising all at the same time. They went to the last election with the Prime Minister explicitly promising there would be no carbon tax under a Gillard government. Now she denies this. They are virtually saying to the Australian people, ‘It does not matter what you voted for at the last election, you boofheads don’t know what’s good for you. So we’re going to force you to do it.’ They intend to punish us while they patronise us. Poll after poll shows that an increasing majority of Australians oppose this tax. Labor enlists celebrities to manipulate us to just say yes to shooting ourselves in the foot. Better still, blow our economic brains out; that is what they want to do. Thousands of Australians have attended public rallies since March to protest the tax. The Prime Minister refuses to address them and a federal Labor backbencher calls protesters extremists. With 60 per cent of Australians against it, I think that makes them mainstream, not marginal. Now Labor tries to tell us that this week’s Productivity Commission report justifies the tax. It does no such thing. In fact, it exposes the argument that we should do this because everyone else is and we are getting left behind as false and childish nonsense. The Productivity Commission tells us that Australia—today, as we speak—is already in the middle of the pack in terms of its actions on emissions. Further, it clearly shows that none of the other big coal exporting countries are considering taxes on their mines. In yesterday’s Herald Sun, Terry McCrann stated— The Productivity Commission report did not prove the carbon tax was good policy, far less that Australia must implement it. All it did was show that if we are intent on attacking the foundation of our prosperity, the carbon tax and/or an emissions trading scheme would be the least stupid way of doing it. Mr McCrann is right: a carbon tax will destroy our prosperity. That is why none of our competitors are doing it. Tragically, it will destroy our prosperity for very little purpose. It will be a futile gesture which condemns Australia to a second-class future. I oppose this carbon tax not just because I am a sceptic but because I am a realist. I have been a politician for 21 years and I know all about the art of compromise. So it does not surprise me to see Kyoto failing. Canada, Japan and Russia have all pulled out, and the United States has never been a signatory. Copenhagen failed because there were far too many competing interests for anything else to happen. According to today’s newspaper, the World Bank has declared the world carbon-trading market stalled. The lead author of this report is quoted as saying that no other country has proposed a level of action or coverage Australia has, not our markets or our competitors—not India, China, USA, Japan, Korea, Canada, Brazil or Africa. The realists are telling the idealists that they are about to damage us for absolutely no gain, but there are alternatives. Eminent economist Warwick McKibbon offers a global way forward involving 17 countries who account for 80 per cent of the emissions instead of 193 countries. As a politician, I can tell you that our chances are better with 17 parties than 193. In conclusion, I implacably oppose this carbon tax. As the member for Gregory, I know that it will destroy the lives of my constituents. Queensland will lose a wealth generator, just as Labor has done by trying to destroy our cattle industry thanks to ‘Prime Minister’ Bob Brown. But, make no mistake, it will trash the future prosperity of all Australians. It will do nothing to save the planet. Driving our coal customers to purchase an inferior product from other countries may actually result in an increase in emissions. 15 Jun 2011 Motion 1883

Queensland will lose a wealth generator, as I just said. West Africa will be the beneficiary—not Queensland, not Australia. We are heading towards a Third World economy if we allow Labor governments and Labor administrations and Greens administrations to continue taking wealth- generating opportunities away from Australians rather than creating an environment where we can continue to enjoy the quality of life of a First World economy. (Time expired) Mr WETTENHALL (Barron River—ALP) (6.12 pm): I oppose the motion and support the amendment. Throughout Queensland’s history there have been three key economic drivers: agriculture, mining and, as our transportation logistics have developed, tourism. In Queensland there are many different regions. Each has its own dynamic and unique personality and each has its own strengths, depending on which of the three economic drivers it is built on. In fact, three regions in Queensland are in the top five regions within Australia to be affected by carbon-pricing impacts—and they are identified in the Access Economics study in 2009 on carbon pricing. That is why the impacts of carbon pricing have always been, and will continue to be, high on the Queensland government’s agenda, just as climate change impacts have. Of course, people think of specific industries being affected by carbon pricing, but what is at the forefront of my mind, as Parliamentary Secretary Assisting the Premier on Economic Development in the Far North, are the specific effects climate change and carbon pricing will have on the Far Northern regional economy and, most importantly, the people who live in that region. I am particularly concerned for those communities which rely heavily on carbon-intensive industries such as mining, agriculture and indeed tourism for their living. For this reason, it will be critical for the Queensland government to work closely with businesses and industry to assist them in effectively preparing for these impacts. Preparedness for a carbon economy is the best way to mitigate the impacts. I see it as part of my role to represent these communities, as well as the agriculture, mining and tourism sectors, to ensure all impacts are considered and addressed as part of whole-of-government policy making. As such, I note that the Premier’s submission to the Commonwealth government seeks that all agriculture be excluded from carbon price mechanisms. In that submission, the Queensland government is also calling for support for carbon-farming opportunities in rural Queensland. Carbon farming will make a real difference to carbon-pricing impacts in the agricultural sector. Just as many communities are built around mining as their key driver—towns such as Weipa in Far North Queensland—many are also highly dependent on tourism. It is true that the input costs of many tourism businesses are transport fuels, whether it be operating land or marine based tours. I note that the Queensland government’s submission is that transport fuels should also be excluded unless there is a proportional reduction in the Commonwealth fuel excise and that the proposed ‘recession buffer’ assistance to industries under the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme should be retained for Queensland industries affected by the recent floods and cyclones. Certainly no industry has been more affected by the floods and cyclones than the tourism industry. But, just as the impact of the proposed carbon tax poses challenges, it also presents a great opportunity for a region like Tropical North Queensland. Firstly, I believe that tourists are becoming increasingly discerning and sophisticated about the impact they have on their environment. The tourist of the future will be looking to destinations and experiences where they can be assured their travel has the minimum impact on the environment. This is nowhere more likely to be the case than in a place like Tropical North Queensland, a destination famous for the natural wonders of the Great Barrier Reef and the oldest rainforests on earth. Our natural attractions are the pillars of our $9 billion tourism industry. As a high-emitting nation, if we are to remain an attractive tourist destination we must be seen to pull our weight and play our part to reduce our carbon emissions and mitigate the threats of climate change to the very environments people travel here from all over the world to enjoy. Secondly, I believe that a region such as Tropical North Queensland must build on its sustainability credentials. Our region already enjoys a competitive advantage over others with a strong renewable energy sector, with established hydroelectric power stations and wind powered generators. But we need to drive investment in major renewable energy generating capacity in our region even further, and I believe that we can with the right incentives and policy settings. To do this, we need to make investment in renewable energy attractive and competitive. This cannot happen without pricing carbon. A prosperous regional community comes from communities working in partnership between all levels of government and industry. We are committed to addressing climate change by getting carbon pricing right for Queensland in partnership with the Australian government. We want Queensland to remain a strong, diverse economy—one that takes advantage of the opportunities that a low-carbon future presents. Mr SPRINGBORG (Southern Downs—LNP) (6.17 pm): The Labor Party would have us believe that this is a debate about climate change. The Labor Party would have us believe that this is a debate about the environment. Nothing could be further from the truth. What we have here is the Labor Party constructing a narrative which justifies nothing more than the introduction of a brand-new tax in 1884 Motion 15 Jun 2011

Australia. This is a party which is totally and absolutely addicted to taxation. This is a party which is totally and absolutely addicted to putting its hands deeper and deeper into the pockets of Queensland’s and Australia’s long-suffering taxpayers. So for them this is about a new tax. Yet, as I have sat here tonight and listened to members of the government and listened to the multiheaded Hydra in Canberra—which is the Greens-Gillard-Independents mutant Labor government which is destroying the economy of Australia—not once have I heard any of them justify how the introduction of a new tax in Australia in any way makes the planet cooler. No-one has ever been able to tell me how the introduction of a new tax in Australia is going to make the planet cooler, particularly when they are going to give half of the money back straightaway because they are saying they are punishing too many Australians as a consequence. That in itself is nothing more than an admission from the Labor Party in Australia that this is a brand-new tax from a government which has gone broke in a boom in Queensland and from a government at a federal level which is just thirsty for more revenue to make up for the fact that it is going broke as well. Even Tim Flannery, a person who is an arch advocate of human induced climate change, said only recently that, even if we put these mitigation processes in place today, it will be hundreds of years before we see any effect that would come from this. So the jury is still well and truly out as to whether a new carbon tax is going to indeed cool the planet that we live on. Where are the predictions of the impact this carbon tax will have on the Queensland budget? The Queensland budget is a book full of cliches which was delivered in this place yesterday by a zombie on Mogadon. He stood over there with all the enthusiasm of a mummified vulture, telling us about how wonderful the Labor Party’s halcyon days were and about the wonderful golden fields that lie before us. They are the sorts of predictions we have seen year after year from a failing Labor government. How can we have any confidence in those particular predictions when the government has got it wrong year after year, prediction after prediction, when it comes to the fiscal and economic indicators in the state of Queensland? How can anyone believe them? Yesterday we heard them say, ‘We can’t talk about a carbon tax because we don’t know what the rate is.’ Last year when we asked about it they said, ‘We can’t hypothesise and we can’t model because we don’t know what the rate is.’ We have already heard Bob Brown talk about $40 a tonne and we have got the federal government talking about $20 a tonne. Why doesn’t Labor model on both scenarios— that is, on $20 and $40 a tonne? That would give us a chance to get a clearer picture. This is a government that says it cannot model on hypotheticals, yet it is also a party which was more than happy to go out there and model on hypotheticals when it came to the Howard government’s GST and when it tried to pick that apart. The government was more than happy to model on any number of proposed Howard government initiatives, and it included them in its budget even though the GST had not been properly settled in the Senate. So it can do it. What we have is a government which is running scared of the stench of a carbon tax which the people of Australia smartly and properly know is going to make their cost of living and their survival even worse. The carbon tax is going to put up the price of fuel and it is going to put up the cost of basic commodities like bread, meat, milk and vegetables. We know that. We know that it is going to put up the price of electricity. We know all those sorts of things. The Australian public knows that and the government knows that. The federal government even knows it to the extent that it is going to have to give half of it back. What sort of a harebrained idea is that? It will save half the planet. We heard the minister tonight talking about gas as a transitional fuel. That argument would have some veracity if it were not for the fact that we are continuing to build and expand our coalmines in Queensland and Australia, and so we should because we are a resource-rich state and nation. We have a very, very hungry world for energy. They are not doing this; we are, and this should be calculated in our budget. Hon. RG NOLAN (Ipswich—ALP) (Minister for Finance and the Arts) (6.22 pm): The member for Southern Downs has just made an entire contribution around the proposition that the federal government’s proposed carbon tax is some kind of revenue grab on the part of that level of government— Opposition members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Stop the clock. I will wait for the House to come to order. Ms NOLAN: He did that, notwithstanding the fact that one of the fundamental tenets of this debate is the federal government’s commitment that the tax will ultimately be revenue neutral because all of the tax collected will be returned to environmental initiatives and to the community. But why would the LNP now seek to let the facts get in the way of a good scare campaign? Because that is all this is. Today the LNP members seek to merge two of their more notorious scare campaigns into one. The debate we are having tonight in this place is not entirely about a carbon tax; this debate is about the LNP’s economic fix. The fix from that party is on, and the people of Queensland should see it for what it is. At the heart of the budget that was brought down yesterday are some fundamental propositions 15 Jun 2011 Motion 1885 which this opposition has to respond to tomorrow. What are they doing in here today? Rather than responding, they are seeking to undermine the very credibility of the budget itself. They do that because the proposition that has been put on the table is hard and because they do not have the gumption at the end of the day to respond. Two years ago, the Premier stood in this House and told the people of Queensland that this government was going to embark on a major program of economic reform. She said that we were going to make the tough decisions, that we were going to lead the policy debate, that we were going to take on the vested interests and that we were going to see it through. Two years have passed and that is exactly what this government has done. Under enormous pressure—from the unions to the federal government to the cashed-up coal companies—this government stuck. This team stuck. We took the tough decisions and we saw them through. Through all of that, what did the LNP members do? They failed under pressure. Despite the shadow Treasurer for years claiming to believe in the free market, he ultimately squibbed it. They came in here for two years and said that they would spend more on infrastructure, but they oppose the measures to fund it. Yesterday the Treasurer came in here and put another courageous proposition on the table. He said that this government would beef up the tourism industry when it needs it, that we would get tradies into work by supporting the building industry, that we would put cash back into Queenslanders’ pockets by abolishing the ambulance tax and that we would change the stamp duty arrangements to do it. That is the proposition that is on the table of the House this week, and that is the proposition to which these opposition members have to respond. But they cannot because they do not have the ideas, they do not have the economic credibility and they do not have the guts. Instead, what have they done? First, they said, ‘The numbers changed between breakfast and lunch time so we can’t have a plan.’ Then last night on the 7.30 Report they said, ‘We don’t trust the numbers at all.’ Now, with this motion, they seek to undermine the credibility of the budget by putting on the table the ridiculous assertion that the budget cannot be trusted because it does not include a hypothetical tax. These people will impugn the integrity of the Treasury and they will put up a proposition that is patently absurd when it comes to economic management. They will do it as scene setting because tomorrow, as they have done for the last two years, they are going to squib the tough decisions. They are not going to tell us where they stand. They are going to go weak at the wrist and at the knees. Division: Question put—That the amendment be agreed to. AYES, 50—Attwood, Bligh, Boyle, Choi, Croft, Darling, Dick, Farmer, Finn, Fraser, Grace, Hinchliffe, Hoolihan, Jarratt, Johnstone, Jones, Kiernan, Kilburn, Lawlor, Lucas, Miller, Moorhead, Mulherin, Nelson-Carr, Nolan, O’Brien, O’Neill, Palaszczuk, Pitt, Reeves, Roberts, Robertson, Ryan, Schwarten, Scott, Shine, Smith, Spence, Stone, Struthers, Sullivan, van Litsenburg, Wallace, Watt, Wells, Wendt, Wettenhall, Wilson. Tellers: Keech, Male NOES, 38—Bates, Bleijie, Crandon, Cripps, Cunningham, Davis, Dempsey, Dickson, Douglas, Dowling, Elmes, Emerson, Flegg, Foley, Gibson, Hobbs, Hopper, Horan, Johnson, Knuth, Langbroek, McArdle, McLindon, Malone, Menkens, Messenger, Nicholls, Powell, Pratt, Robinson, Seeney, Simpson, Springborg, Stevens, Stuckey, Wellington. Tellers: Rickuss, Sorensen Resolved in the affirmative. Division: Question put—That the motion, as amended, be agreed to. Mr SPEAKER: Ring the bells for one minute. AYES, 50—Attwood, Bligh, Boyle, Choi, Croft, Darling, Dick, Farmer, Finn, Fraser, Grace, Hinchliffe, Hoolihan, Jarratt, Johnstone, Jones, Kiernan, Kilburn, Lawlor, Lucas, Miller, Moorhead, Mulherin, Nelson-Carr, Nolan, O’Brien, O’Neill, Palaszczuk, Pitt, Reeves, Roberts, Robertson, Ryan, Schwarten, Scott, Shine, Smith, Spence, Stone, Struthers, Sullivan, van Litsenburg, Wallace, Watt, Wells, Wendt, Wettenhall, Wilson. Tellers: Keech, Male NOES, 38—Bates, Bleijie, Crandon, Cripps, Cunningham, Davis, Dempsey, Dickson, Douglas, Dowling, Elmes, Emerson, Flegg, Foley, Gibson, Hobbs, Hopper, Horan, Johnson, Knuth, Langbroek, McArdle, McLindon, Malone, Menkens, Messenger, Nicholls, Powell, Pratt, Robinson, Seeney, Simpson, Springborg, Stevens, Stuckey, Wellington. Tellers: Rickuss, Sorensen Resolved in the affirmative. Motion, as agreed— That this House: • acknowledges that the Government has submitted to the Commonwealth Government advising the Queensland Government’s support for strong action on carbon pricing to be implemented in a way that is in the long term interest of Queenslanders; • notes that the details of a carbon price are yet to be determined by the Commonwealth Government, and • notes that unmitigated climate change has the potential to have serious economic impacts on tourism and agriculture in Queensland; and • notes the importance of the CSG and LNG industries to Queensland’s economy and its potential as a lower emission energy source for domestic and international power production. Sitting suspended from 6.36 pm to 7.30 pm. 1886 Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Referendum Bill 15 Jun 2011

MOTION

Order of Business Hon. KL STRUTHERS (Algester—ALP) (Acting Leader of the House) (7.30 pm), by leave, without notice: I move— That general business notice of motion No. 1, disallowance of statutory instrument, be postponed. Question put—That the motion be agreed to. Motion agreed to.

DAYLIGHT SAVING FOR SOUTH EAST QUEENSLAND REFERENDUM BILL

Second Reading Resumed from 14 April 2010 (see p. 1352), on motion of Mr Wellington— That the bill be now read a second time. Mr WETTENHALL (Barron River—ALP) (7.30 pm): I rise to oppose the Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Referendum Bill. I do so reflecting what I judge to be the overwhelming extent of opposition to the introduction of daylight saving among my constituents and the Far North generally. The people of Far North Queensland also have legitimate concerns that their views will be overwhelmed by the more populous south-east of the state in any referendum on this question. I recognise that many people in South-East Queensland support daylight saving and I accept that there are lifestyle and business benefits for them if it were introduced. But maintaining the status quo means that those benefits are being foregone in recognition of the disadvantages that daylight saving would bring to life in the north of our great state. I am sure that most members can understand that Far Northerners experience relentlessly hot summer days and they look forward to the relief from those conditions that sundown brings. An extension of daylight hours, even by an hour, is a burden that would not be fair to ask Far Northerners to shoulder. There would also be significant disadvantages for business if our state were split into two time zones, and it does not take a lot of imagination to realise just what those disadvantages would be. For example, for the all-important tourism industry in our region, flights crossing two different time zones is just one example of the difficulties that would be presented by splitting our great state. The vast size and diversity of our state presents many challenges for government, and from time to time this parliament has the duty and the opportunity to balance the interests and aspirations of the people of one geographic area with another. We have a great tradition of supporting people who live in the regions, acknowledging their special needs and striving to provide them with the same opportunities that people who live in the south-east of the state enjoy and sometimes perhaps even take for granted. For those reasons, I urge all honourable members to continue this tradition and oppose this bill. Mr KILBURN (Chatsworth—ALP) (7.33 pm): I rise to speak on the Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Referendum Bill and in doing so will be representing the wishes of the majority of people in my electorate whom I spoke to or those who took the time to speak to me on this issue. I believe that I am representing them by opposing this bill and I have no doubt that daylight saving has been and will continue to be a very contentious topic throughout Queensland. I suppose like many other members of this House I received an email from a Mr David Jones, the Chair of the Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Party, imploring me to represent the views of the people who elected me, and that is exactly what I am doing when I oppose this bill tonight. Unlike Mr Jones, I did not come to this with any personal position on daylight saving. Personally, I could take it or leave it. I did not come into this debate with my mind already made up, as Mr Jones so obviously has. Instead, I took the time to listen to the views of my constituents, not imposing my views upon them. Whilst many residents did not oppose daylight saving per se, overwhelmingly the residents I spoke to opposed splitting the state into two time zones to achieve it. This bill does not propose a referendum for daylight saving for the entire state but only for South- East Queensland, and therefore that is what we have to deal with. I understand those who support daylight saving pointing as they do to the results of the internet poll that had a majority of people voting for a trial. However, I would say that that is only one part of the community. I also took into account the views of the people that I spoke to at Neighbourhood Watch meetings, seniors groups, sports groups and mobile offices. When I tallied those opinions with those who attended my office directly to speak to me, the majority, as I have said, opposed splitting Queensland in two. I have also spoken to the member for Bulimba and the member for Brisbane Central, and they have told me that they had the same results from constituents in their electorates. 15 Jun 2011 Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Referendum Bill 1887

On the very night that we see the Queensland State of Origin team working together to achieve a historic sixth series win for Queensland, the Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Party is proposing drawing a line through our state and dividing Queensland communities. As I mentioned earlier, I have no personal opinion about daylight saving. However, I did live in Far North Queensland for over 15 years and I can fully understand the strong objection of people in Far North and North Queensland to daylight saving. However, I can also understand the desire of South-East Queensland residents for daylight saving—some—but my decision to oppose this bill is purely based on the clear message from the residents of the Chatsworth electorate, and that is that we should not draw a line through Queensland to achieve that outcome. Mrs KIERNAN (Mount Isa—ALP) (7.35 pm): I can say most emphatically at the outset that the residents of the Mount Isa electorate and indeed across the north of this state are completely opposed to daylight saving and do not support any form of split time zones, and we certainly do not support this proposal to hold a referendum on having split time zones in this state. I have to say that tonight of all nights we are a united state. We are all Queenslanders and the State of Origin team is our team. It is reflective of us all. They are hard workers, love who they are and who they represent, and this is the image that each and every one of us holds. One of the strengths of our government is that every member on this side of the House has a great respect for each other. We have respect for our leader, the Premier, and each and every member of the team is very conscious of each other’s views and opinions. We respect each other’s views and know that with this issue, particularly for our members in the south-east corner, those members in the south-east corner are standing by many regional members and our regional members fully understand decisions that will impact on the south-east corner. Last year when this bill was introduced I went back to my electorate and encouraged residents to have their say, and so they did—no to a referendum, no to split time zones and no to daylight saving. We are one state. We celebrate our vast lands and the diversity of our people and places. In my part of the world we take pride that our population is spread across a third of this state. Our great iconic city of Mount Isa, the great Gulf of Carpentaria and the many small towns that service our great and vast pastoral industry, our mines and our Indigenous communities have all said no. As I said, I respect my colleagues and their communities in the south-east corner. But, like me, they know that we are one state and we are also a state of great regions. In conclusion, I also want to respond to the chair of the Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Party who kindly sent me an email today. My message to him is, firstly, old mate, you might like to have a look on the map and actually see where the electorate of Mount Isa is. Secondly, thanks for asking what I propose to do and thanks for urging me, as if I needed to be told to do what I was elected to do, and that is to represent in this House the views of the electorate that I was put here to represent. You said that it is my job to represent their views—to do the job I was elected to do—and I am doing just that. I and my electorate say ‘No, no, no,’ but I will say yes to one thing tonight: go Queenslander, yes, yes, yes. Mr SEENEY (Callide—LNP) (Leader of the Opposition) (7.39 pm): The opposition in this parliament will be opposing the bill before the House. I do not intend to make a long contribution to the debate of this bill before the House, which members would know is somewhat uncommon for me. An honourable member interjected. Mr SEENEY: I do not intend to make a long contribution because I do not think this bill ever had any real chance of success. I think it was something of a political move to take advantage of an issue that has quite often been used as a political football by other politicians in this state, not the least of whom was the former Premier, who made something of an art form of using daylight saving as a political issue. So I do not speak ill of the member who introduced this bill in what I believe was something of a political move, because he is following a tradition that was well and truly established by former Premier Beattie, who used this issue as a political football on a number of occasions when he found himself in a spot of political difficulty. As opposition leader at the time, I sometimes marvelled at the ability of this issue to successfully divert public attention from the failings of the government. Daylight saving is a contentious issue in the state. There are a range of views but I think those views are not divided along political lines so much as geographical lines. I think the further north and west we travel in Queensland, the more ardent is the opposition to this proposition of daylight saving, per se. Certainly, my electorate in Central Queensland is vigorously opposed to daylight saving. I note the comments of the members for Mount Isa and Barron River, who obviously represent electorates that are considerably further to the north and west. I think it is pertinent to observe that few people understand how far west Cairns is of Brisbane. A lot of people have this idea that the coastline of Queensland runs somehow directly north and south. It does not, and the fact that it does not accentuates the effects of daylight saving as you go further north in the state, because you are actually going west as well as north. I know that daylight saving is an issue that has some support in the south-east corner. For those who lead an urban lifestyle, especially on the Gold Coast and in the south-east corner generally, there is considerable support for daylight saving. I acknowledge that for people in those areas the idea of daylight saving has some attraction. However, I join with other members who have spoken previously in this debate to say that, irrespective of the support or otherwise for the concept of daylight saving, there 1888 Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Referendum Bill 15 Jun 2011 is very little or no support for the idea of splitting the state into two time zones and that is what this bill sets out to do. In that I think Queenslanders would be almost universally united—that that is not an option that would solve a problem that is difficult to solve any other way. The fact that that proposition is put forward is in itself an indication of the impossibility of catering for the vastly different lifestyles that the geography of Queensland presents—the urban lifestyle in the south-east corner and the people of the north and the west who are separated by such a long distance. The fact that geography presents that particular problem and presents a very different reaction to daylight saving depending upon where people live in the state does not in itself justify opting for an option that would produce satisfaction for no-one. As some of the previous speakers have already outlined, it would create a whole range of problems. So the opposition will not be supporting the bill before the House. Mrs PRATT (Nanango—Ind) (7.44 pm): I rise to speak to the Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Referendum Bill. I would have to say that I am not quite sure why the member for Nicklin raised this matter, other than over the past few years or so people have approached him to say that they were in support of daylight saving. Members in this House would probably like to give all Queenslanders a say in what happens to them at any time in the future in relation to any particular bill. I have to say that we have proven that in the House because, with the recent amendments to the parliament, every bill will soon be put to the people. From what I can gather, when it comes to daylight saving the member for Nicklin is saying that, yes, it is a little bit early because the parliament has not gone into that way of operating yet, but let the people have a say. I believe that that is not an unnatural thing to do. Daylight saving is an issue that the member for Nicklin has had a lot of feedback on. From what I understand from radio reports and from what I have looked at on the internet, comments were made to the member for Nicklin that were quite awful. The truth is that the people who oppose things are often more vocal than those who support them. So I do not think you can take a lot of that feedback as being a true and honest reflection of the state of Queensland. I have been a member here for almost 13 years now, and over those years I have conducted a voluntary poll of my constituents on daylight saving. In the first instance daylight saving was overwhelmingly opposed in my electorate. The last survey that I conducted showed—and I cannot quote the figures—that opinion was awfully close. It was something along the lines of 48-52—very close. That shows me that the views of the people in my electorate, which is a little bit west but not so far west as Callide and further north in North Queensland—and I can honestly understand why people in those areas do not want it—are changing. I know that the last referendum on daylight saving was held back in 1992. I expect this issue to be a generational issue. It will raise its head again and again over time. I would have to be honest to the member for Nicklin and say that I hope that the proposal to have daylight saving gets defeated every time, because I lived with daylight saving when my children were young and it was difficult. I would not like to go through it again and I would not expect any young family to go through it. I can understand people in the south wanting daylight saving, because the conditions there are just so different. But I think we already have daylight saving in Queensland because at times our days can be so long. I cannot really see why businesses perceive there to be a problem with not having daylight saving. So often businesses operate under flexitime. What is so wrong with businesses having some of their staff starting one hour earlier and finishing an hour earlier and the others working the hours of a normal day? That way to some extent traffic conditions on the road would be relieved because the peak hours would be spread over a longer period in the morning and in the evening. In many ways that would have to be a plus. I agree that we should not cut Queensland into bits. I know that the North Queenslanders are just looking for an opportunity to cut themselves off from the south. They would love their own state up north. Ms Johnstone interjected. Mrs PRATT: I hear it quite often that the people in the north would like their own state. They may feel that they could do a better job. I have often heard it said that the people in the north believe that if they had their own state they would do a lot better in the money stakes than they are doing currently. Who can argue with them? We all think we can do things a little better. I do not know how many members have operated a business and have had to deal with people overseas. When doing business with people in other countries an awful lot of time zones are crossed. There is not a problem there so I cannot see a problem operating between Queensland and other states. Working with those in Western Australian one operates on the same format. Going up and down the coast should not be a problem for anyone. As I said, flexi-time is of great benefit for businesses that feel they would be affected by this. I do not have a lot more to say, except that I have always been a supporter of referendums. I was a supporter of referendums when One Nation came into being. One of its tenets was to have referendums of the people. I will be a supporter of referendums until the day I die. I am one person, I have one vote and I do not particularly want daylight saving. The climate of feeling about daylight saving is actually changing. I commend the member for Nicklin for putting this bill forward. He knew he was in for a pizzling—sorry. 15 Jun 2011 Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Referendum Bill 1889

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr O’Brien): Order! Yes, the member’s language is unparliamentary. Mrs PRATT: Country language just pops out every now and then. We all know what it means, but I apologise for that. I think members got the gist of what I was saying. He was in for a caning, a flogging to nowhere, but he had the courage to put it forward. Too many people were afraid to face this question. Too many people did not even really want to give an opinion. We can see by the speaking list that very few people wanted to offer an opinion. We can see that the LNP is not all that interested because there are only a couple of its members here. The truth is that on all things people have to have the courage of their convictions. We do have to support our electorate, but I would like to ask how many in this chamber have actually surveyed their electorates on this particular bill? Ms O’Neill interjected. Mrs PRATT: It is good that people do it. As I have said, I have done it twice and I have seen a change in the figures over the last 12 to 13 years. It is important that we do that. I know that a lot of people have not done that. I know a lot of people are probably glad that an Independent has put it forward rather than them because then he will be the one wearing the flak. Although I do not support daylight saving and splitting the state into time zones, I do support the member for Nicklin for having the courage to put this forward. I commend him for his courage for taking the flak. I know there are times when he actually threatened to withdraw the bill because there was so much feeling against it. I know his family have probably suffered. I know when I have made statements in this House that a select group were not supportive of I received some very abusive emails and phone calls. An honourable member interjected. Mrs PRATT: It was quite amazing that they did. I will take that interjection because the ones that were really offensive did not come from my electorate. That did not surprise me because, as I said, it was from a select group. Although I do not support daylight saving, I do support the right of people to have a say. Mrs CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (7.54 pm): I rise to speak to the Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Referendum Bill 2010. It has taken some time for this bill to come forward for debate. The issue that we are debating is two-fold: firstly, whether we support a daylight saving split in the state and, secondly, whether we support a referendum to determine the community’s view. Other speakers have talked about the importance of referendums. I hold the view that they are incredibly important. I put a bill forward many years ago on citizens’ initiated referendums, which was soundly defeated, but I think the principles of referendums are important. There are many matters that we determine in this chamber that are controversial, that the community is significantly opposed to and remain aggrieved about for a great deal of time. I think privatisation is an issue that should have gone to referendum. We had the opportunity via a general election, but people were not given the opportunity because they were not told the facts. Referendums are incredibly important to properly administer democracy on specific issues. I support the use of referendums to gain community view. The second issue intrinsic in this bill, although the bill is to refer the matter to a committee and also to a referendum, is the core issue of the bill and that is daylight saving in the south-east corner. Much of the opposition by the south-east corner to Queensland’s non-adherence to daylight saving is because they, for a period of time in a year, step out of the time zone with New South Wales and Victoria in particular. It has to be borne in mind that for all of the year we are out of step with South Australia and Western Australia, but that does not seem to count. For South-East Queensland, daylight saving has become almost an obsession. My non support for daylight saving falls into a number of areas. One is that our climate in Queensland does give us a good period of daylight in the summer and the heat that is attendant with that, particularly if one lives in Northern or Western Queensland. The other issue is the fact that this bill, by referendum, would pose a different time zone for the south-east corner to the rest of Queensland and I cannot support that. The businesses in the south-east corner have claimed that it is a disadvantage for businesses in New South Wales. How much greater a disadvantage would it be for the residents of Queensland to be out of kilter with the capital city? Sadly my electorate does not have good health facilities. The people who work there do a brilliant job. They work tirelessly. But we do not have a government or a minister that is prepared to improve and enhance the services at the Gladstone Hospital. Consequently, many constituents have to travel either to Rockhampton or to Brisbane to access health services. If the time zone splits, it could mean that patients who have to access services in Brisbane would have to stay an additional night because when one considers the plane flights and the hospital operating times—the last planes are six or seven o’clock and it would probably be five o’clock or eight o’clock here, I cannot remember which way it goes—it would mean they have a time differential. They would either have to leave the next day or come a day earlier. That is a significant disadvantage to rural and regional people. There is a cost attached to that. There are impacts on families. There are impacts on accessibility. It is not just health, but for us health is one of the main issues. 1890 Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Referendum Bill 15 Jun 2011

While some businesses in the south-east corner are saying it is disadvantageous for them to be in a different time zone to New South Wales, they are at least not trying to access state based services in a state that is divided. On that basis, on that principle alone, I cannot support a split system in Queensland as far as the daylight saving time zones are concerned. I do not support daylight saving per se but this splits the state and I believe that is a great disadvantage to rural and regional Queensland. Again I am a great believer in referendums. I think they are an important determinant for the community, an important tool for the community, and I support the principle of referendums but I cannot support the underlying principle for which the referendum would be held. Given the cost of referendums it would be misleading of me to say that I support the principle of a referendum but not the issue because they are intrinsically linked. On that basis alone, I will not be supporting the bill. As other speakers have, I commend the member for bringing the issue forward. It is always a hot debate that causes a great deal of emotion, but I will not be supporting this bill. Mr HOOLIHAN (Keppel—ALP) (7.59 pm): At the outset, in speaking against this bill I should indicate that I am very vocally and ideologically opposed to the concept of daylight saving. I want to know where everyone banks daylight when they save it. For time immemorial, the sun comes up and the sun goes down—there was even a song written about it—and still we have only the same amount of daylight. It cannot be saved. If anyone really wants to look at the chaos that exists because there are differing time zones, I commend to them a reading of Geoff Blainey’s book Black Kettle and Full Moon. The area titled ‘The Quarrelling Clocks’, at pages 169-175, sets out how we came to have a standard time in Australia. In 1895 Queensland led the way with the Standard Time Act, which accepted our time as 10 hours ahead of Greenwich Mean Time. It was quite interesting that the member for Callide mentioned Cairns. The coastline of Queensland does not run from north to south. In actual fact, Cairns is west of Barcaldine. Mount Isa is on almost the same latitude as Broken Hill, and Broken Hill operates on South Australian time. Since 1895 Queensland has accepted that the whole state should have one time zone. The people of the west have accepted that and the people of the north have accepted that. As the member for Gladstone said, it is claimed now to be so difficult for businesses to deal with New South Wales and Victoria. Why would we accept that our capital and some of the cities around it should be on a separate time zone? It could not work. If there is chaos now in business, what would be the chaos in the state under that proposal? I commend the member for Nicklin for bringing the bill forward, because there are people who support it. I surveyed a lot of people in my electorate. When this issue was first brought up, many people came to see me. I think four people were in favour of daylight saving, although, sadly, two of them were my electorate officer and her husband. However, not one person was in favour of separating the state of Queensland. Members coming to this House from places such as Cairns, Townsville, Rockhampton and Gladstone would at some stage have to change their clocks on arriving in Brisbane. How silly is that? Today I also received an email from Mr Jones. I would say to Mr Jones that as Queenslanders we have stood together for 115 years; let us continue to stick together. I know that people will feel so strongly that they will throw abuse, send vicious letters and make vicious comments. I feel sorry for the member for Nicklin if he has suffered that. However, at least he has put forward something that he believes is of some benefit to people who have approached him. In relation to having a referendum, the worst part is that very often the question asked can determine the answer. Any lawyers in this House know that you can ask a leading question. For those members who do not understand what a leading question is, it is a question that gives you the answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’. That is the sadness of a referendum. While the bill actually sets out the terms of a referendum question, even that question is loaded. If members want to see an example of how badly a referendum can be butchered, they should look at the referendum that was run for the republic campaign in 1999. The question that was asked only gave one answer. It was a loaded question. I cannot support a bill that separates the time zones in Queensland. Personally, I could not support it even if introduced daylight saving across the whole of Queensland. Many members of my family still live in Western Queensland. Can members imagine sitting in an unairconditioned house at seven o’clock at night with a temperature of 47 degrees? If you move the clock forward an hour it would be eight o’clock at night and the temperature would still be 47 degrees. How bad is that? As the skin cancer capital of Australia, should we add an extra hour in areas where the sun is already up early and sets very late? I cannot support the bill. I cannot support daylight saving. I will be voting against it. Mr SHINE (Toowoomba North—ALP) (8.05 pm): I wish to speak briefly on this bill to oppose it and to put on the record my opposition and that of the vast majority of people in my electorate. When I was looking at the speaking list and looking around the House, I was looking for evidence of what the old Liberals might think about this proposal, but alas— A government member: You won’t be troubled. Mr SHINE: I am not troubled, but I am intrigued as to their absence from the chamber tonight. Indeed, their absence from tonight’s speaking list shows a want of basic courage to face up to an issue on which their constituents ought to know where they stand. Nevertheless, that is what we are faced with in this House at this time. 15 Jun 2011 Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Referendum Bill 1891

I am opposing this proposition, firstly from a personal preference point of view. I experienced the experiment in daylight saving way back in the early sixties, if my memory— Mr Schwarten: There was one in the seventies and one in the late eighties. Mr SHINE: I take the interjection. We had one in the early seventies and my friend from Rockhampton tells me in the eighties as well. Mr Schwarten: Under Goss. Mr SHINE: We had a referendum under Goss— Mr Schwarten: And we had the trial. Mr SHINE:—and a trial as well. Certainly the one that stands in my mind is the one under Joh. I do not know why that is; it just seemed to be longer. My personal recollection is that, being a person who likes to get up early in the morning to do exercise and things of that nature, it interfered with my enjoyment of life. Most people in Queensland would decide the issue based on how it affects them personally, as opposed to other factors. That is how it affected me. Certainly I can say that, in terms of seeking out the views of my electorate, when this issue was raised members on my side of the House were encouraged to obtain the views, as best they could, of their electorate. We invited people to phone in, to email and to see us at mobile offices to express to us their views and send in their preferences. In Toowoomba, people are overwhelmingly against any form of daylight saving. There were one or two people, particularly in business, who saw advantages in being aligned to the same time frames as those in southern states. I can understand that, particularly with businesses that undertake national and international work in their daily lives. However, they were by a great deal in the minority. As I said, surveys taken in my office, by the Toowoomba Chronicle and Win TV showed that people are overwhelmingly against any form of daylight saving. Therefore, I was somewhat amazed when my friend the member for Nanango said that her experience was that there was an almost equal feedback of pro and con. Nanango is a neighbouring electorate to Toowoomba and is comprised of mainly country people, so I would have thought they would have similar views to Toowoomba people in their vehement opposition to daylight saving. It is an interesting phenomenon how people have reacted to this issue. Certainly in Toowoomba they are stridently against daylight saving, per se, not to mention against the division of the state into the south-east corner versus the rest. The honourable member for Nicklin is a person whom I respect and he is well respected in this House, but I think he was being extremely different in coming up with the proposition that the south-east should be separated from the rest of Queensland. Mrs Pratt: He was thinking outside the square. Mr SHINE: He was certainly thinking outside the square. Some said tonight that he was courageous in what he has done. There are other people who are less charitable—not me of course— who would come up with a different description. Nevertheless, it is on the table. It is before us in the House tonight and we do have to debate and vote for or against it. In my case, it will be against it. When you stand on the edge of the Great Dividing Range at Picnic Point on a clear day you can see Brisbane. To imagine that that would be a different time zone would be, in my mind, ridiculous. Likewise, if you went up to the 24th floor of the Parliamentary Annexe and looked west with a good pair of binoculars you would see Picnic Point in Toowoomba. In other words, you can see a place where there is a different time zone. It gets even more absurd than that if you take the example of the chief town of the honourable member for Lockyer, Gatton. People in Gatton would regard Ipswich as their regional capital—more so than Toowoomba, I would have thought. They go there for business reasons, medical reasons, schooling and so on. Under this proposal, the Lockyer shire, which is outside the Ipswich local government area, would be outside the South-East Queensland area. Despite Ipswich being its centre of activity, it would be on a different time zone. If you went back again to Toowoomba which is, as I said, only 120 kilometres away, our official day would start an hour later than that of the people in Brisbane. If people in Toowoomba had to go to Brisbane or had dealings with people in Brisbane, basically they would be an hour later in the morning, an hour behind in the afternoon and that two-hour period over lunch would not be out of kilter at all. So for four hours out of an eight-hour day two major centres only 120 kilometres apart would be out of kilter. How inefficient would that be? Mr Wettenhall: Chaos! Mr SHINE: Chaos, as the honourable member said, echoing the remarks of the honourable member for Keppel earlier who described the end result as being one of chaos. I agree with that wholeheartedly. As far as I can discern, my people do not want it. I do not want it. I oppose it. I agree with the honourable member for Keppel who has said that this matter is a divisive matter. Tonight of all nights we in Queensland stand united in our opposition to foreign forces from down south. This type of legislation would only exacerbate that city-country divide which has been there but which, with Blueprint for the Bush and other measures that this government has taken, we have tried to heal. Courageous or not, this reckless type of legislation is something that is not in the interests of Queensland, is divisive and should be treated with the attention it deserves. 1892 Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Referendum Bill 15 Jun 2011

Ms MALE (Pine Rivers—ALP) (8.13 pm): Each year when summer rolls around commentators from southern states take great delight in poking fun at Queensland for not introducing daylight saving. They like to ridicule Queensland as being backward and behind the times. In southern states, it makes perfect sense to adopt daylight saving. Their solar pattern lends itself to an extra hour of sunlight at the end of the day so that sunset is at about 7.00 to 7.30. It would be a completely different matter if the sun did not come up until 7.00 and did not recede until 9.00 or 9.30. But that would be the case for the majority of Queenslanders in the north and west of the state. After all, daylight saving is more of a quality of life issue, and daylight saving for northern and western Queenslanders would reduce their quality of life quite significantly. This is widely accepted by most people, even those who support daylight saving. The next argument to counteract this problem is to set arbitrary boundaries within Queensland itself. However, the issue with this argument is that, no matter where the boundary is set, it automatically creates disadvantage and division on the non-daylight saving side. At the moment that disadvantage is confined to businesses on the Queensland border and those that regularly trade interstate. Setting up an arbitrary boundary just transfers this disadvantage to another part of the state. It is the fundamental problem with putting lines on the map and it is also something which pro daylight saving people would widely acknowledge. It is a catch 22 situation: no matter what is decided, a large portion of the population will suffer. All I can suggest is that those people who want to take advantage of the longer days in summer try to negotiate a flexible work arrangement. Then they can negotiate to start work earlier so they can end earlier so they can make more use of the after hours. I know this situation would not suit all people, especially those in retail, but it is an option that is available for people to take advantage of. It is one thing for us to talk about how daylight saving would operate in Queensland as opposed to other states, however we have to remember that we operate in a global economy. We deal with people overseas all the time and they are 12 to 14 hours different to what we are here. The difference between one hour of saving here as opposed to what it is in New South Wales at any point in time is something that as businesspeople you learn to work around. You are not always just going to deal with people in the same time zone. I am not sure that that is a reasonable argument to put the time back as well. Personally, my husband, for example, would love to have daylight savings. He thinks it is a great idea. He would love to have extra time to spend with our family at the end of the day but that is assuming he could get teenagers off their gadgets, out from in front of the TV and outside. That is another problem in itself. I, on the other hand, am not a supporter of daylight saving. I like my early mornings in summer. I like it just the way it is. I like to be able to exercise in the cool and have that time to myself. My parents were farmers. If daylight saving were implemented they would find it difficult. Because they had chickens, the chickens would have to be put to bed at a certain time, which was when the sun went down. So if the sun went down at seven o’clock at night, you could get home, watch the news and do all that sort of stuff. But if you had to wait till eight o’clock at night, you would miss all of your evening meetings and everything else that was there because you worked according to when the sun rose and when the sun set. There are those sorts of issues that cannot be changed with daylight saving. As I said, personally, I am not pro daylight saving. I can see why people would want it. I have been contacted by people from both sides of the argument in my electorate. It is one of those things that we will be constantly dealing with. At the end of the day, I think the disadvantage to the rest of the state is so great that you just cannot bring in daylight saving across the state. I do not believe in setting two different time zones for Queensland. I do not think that is fair to the people of Queensland. In that case, I do not think I can support this bill. Mr Foley: Queensland is at 2-0. Mr McLINDON (Beaudesert—TQP) (8.17 pm): I take that interjection from the member for Maryborough. The score is currently 2-0. During any other origin I would have cracked my second beer by now, elbowed somebody in a Blues jersey and probably been in a brawl in the middle of the ground, but, no, such is the sacrifice that we make for democracy in Queensland. I wish to make a few comments on the Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Referendum Bill. I do support this bill even though I do not support daylight savings itself. I think the more referendums Queensland has the better, particularly with our least accountable system of government in Australia with only the one house. In the United States they ask some 35 to 40 questions at their elections ranging from which judges should be appointed to extra police resourcing. There is a whole range of issues. In fact, the Swiss system is another one without a living constitution and people get so much more say from the grassroots. I certainly support the concept of the bill. I have met with the leader of the Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Party, Jason Furze, who I note is in the public gallery. I congratulate these men for putting this bill before the House. As I said, I support the fact that we should be putting this to the 15 Jun 2011 Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Referendum Bill 1893 people. In fact, if we had half a dozen referendums, whether that be on asset sales, daylight saving, a moratorium on coal seam gas—all those important issues—we could put those issues to the people and we would have a far more democratic state than the one we have currently. I do remember that as a child I relished daylight saving. I am not sure all parents would share that view. Whether or not I agree with it, I think it is something that needs to be put to the people. That is the difference with The Queensland Party: elected members of The Queensland Party will have the right to represent their electorates without fear or favour. If that were the case with our primitive two-party system of the Labor Party and the LNP here tonight and it did go to a division, we would certainly have a very different outcome from what we will see here. The constitution and the model of The Queensland Party allow people a conscience vote in representing their electorates in the parliament as opposed to voting along party lines as the two major parties in Queensland currently do. Personally I think it should be a federal issue when it comes to time zones in terms of trade. It should be streamlined and it should be a case of one in, all in. Of course that will disadvantage some, but that is why we have to govern for the majority. On behalf of the member for Nicklin, I table a proposal put forward by Dr Allan Clarke. He has done a lot of research and a lot of work on this issue. Tabled paper: Correspondence, dated 7 March 2011, from Dr Allan Clarke to Mr Peter Wellington MP, in relation to daylight saving [4685]. As I said, I met with the Daylight Saving for South East Queensland Party. I have heard what they have to say. But we do have a problem with group-think in this parliament with the major parties. I think it would be a very different result if members were able to have a conscience vote or even a secret ballot for that matter, but that is clearly not the case. I hope that one day people will have a far greater say in how our democracy in Queensland is run. That is essentially why I am supporting the concept of a referendum. Yes, of course it is contentious. We did have daylight saving. Maybe we can look at the results of the State of Origin and say, ‘If we win the Origin we will have daylight saving the following year; if we lose it we won’t.’ Maybe we could outsource it to subcontractors in the field. Who knows? But it is a contentious issue. It is often raised and it rears its head year in, year out. I support the concept, and I thank the member for Nicklin for putting it forward on behalf of many interest groups across South-East Queensland. It is a contentious issue. That is all the more reason we should let the population have a say on it. Mr FOLEY (Maryborough—Ind) (8.21 pm): I rise to make a short contribution to the debate on this bill. Those members in the House who know me well know that I always try to reflect the views of my electorate on any given issue unless it is an issue of a moral nature, on which I will make my own decisions and the ballot box can sort out whether it was a good decision or not. My electorate clearly does not want daylight saving. I have run polling software on my website and I have had countless letters and emails from people, and I am quite clear about the fact that the majority of people in my electorate do not want daylight saving. However, this is not a bill to introduce daylight saving but to ask the question of the people. That is, after all, the hallmark and cornerstone of democracy. I also put on the record that I am not happy with the split time zone. To me, if you are going to have daylight saving, it is all or nothing for the whole of Queensland. Personally, I have lived in two states that had daylight saving and I really enjoyed it. I personally like daylight saving, but I do not have babies anymore and I am not a farmer, and I understand that people are not in favour of it for a number of those reasons. I would not vote for daylight saving because, as I said, the majority of my constituents are very much against it. But I am equally very happy tonight to support the member for Nicklin and his call to put the question to the people. Mr Schwarten: Toeing the party line. Mr FOLEY: Well, the member for Rockhampton would know all about that. Mr Schwarten: I do. I don’t make any secret of it, though—fraud. Mr FOLEY: The member for Rockhampton does not value democracy like we do. I would not only like to put this question to a referendum—and I agree with the member for Nicklin on that—but why not use it as an opportunity to ask a number of other questions? There are always a number of pointy questions that people on both sides of politics would like to put to the people. So let us put a number of issues on the paper at a referendum. It is more efficient and economical to ask more than one question at a referendum. At the end of the day, I would not vote for daylight saving but I would vote for a call to put it to the people. Mr WELLINGTON (Nicklin—Ind) (8.24 pm), in reply: I thank all members who have taken the opportunity to speak to this very important bill tonight. I start by referring to the contribution of the member for Nanango. She clearly identified what this bill is about. It is about allowing Queenslanders to have a say. That is all the bill is about: letting Queenslanders have a say—first, by referring it to an all- party committee and, hopefully second, by putting it to a referendum in Queensland. 1894 Adjournment 15 Jun 2011

But what do we see here tonight? The government and the opposition—the alternative government—as one, passionately opposed to the forming of an all-party committee to investigate this matter, to consult with Queenslanders, to have public hearings and to report back to parliament. They are passionately opposed to it. Yet what did we see in this very chamber less than a month ago? All members of this parliament passionately supporting, as a mandated requirement for all future proposed changes to laws in Queensland, that those proposed changes must—must, not may—go to an all-party committee and that the all-party committee would have the chance to receive submissions from Queenslanders and to have public hearings about the matters contained in the bills. The Independents and The Queensland Party representative identified that referendums are important, and they supported those very concepts. Just to reiterate the importance of this, I refer all members to the second paragraph of my second reading speech, and I repeat it for the purpose of the record— I hope as a result of the presentation of this bill to parliament the government will agree to form an all-party committee. This committee would be charged with investigating the proposed split time zone boundary by consulting with Queenslanders and reporting back to parliament before the bill proceeded to debate. One cannot get clearer than that. Yet here tonight government and opposition do not want to have a bar of it. They do not want to have a bar of referendums, either. The member for Gladstone spoke about her support for a citizens’ initiated referenda bill and the bill that she introduced some years ago. I share the member for Gladstone’s passion for that issue. I introduced a similar private member’s bill for citizens’ initiated referenda in a different form. Again, in both those instances we saw the major parties passionately opposed to it. Tonight we again see the government and the alternative government passionately opposed to allowing Queenslanders to have say on issues which they are not comfortable with. A number of members have touched on the issue of the split time zone. I refer members again to my second reading speech. The second last paragraph states— Mr Speaker, I am not being at all dogmatic about the proposed “time boundary”. As I have just said, it is a first draft. It is a first draft. A draft is a starting point for the committee to receive and consider submissions and come back to the parliament with a further recommendation. I introduced this bill because I was approached by people who supported a referendum on daylight saving and I thought it was worthy of debate in this chamber. I must confess that I was surprised at there being only one speaker from the opposition when I reflect on previous petitions which have been tabled in this parliament and in former parliaments in favour of this very issue of daylight saving. Before I resume my seat, I flag that I will not be calling for a division because I am very aware of the numbers on this matter. This brings to memory a debate we had in the chamber only last year where again we saw the government and the opposition as one. That was a debate in relation to proposed amendments in the City of Brisbane Bill. It was about trying to lock up secrets in the Brisbane City Council. In that instance we saw the government and the opposition pass amendments to the Right to Information Act that provided unique protection for Queensland local councils, especially the Brisbane City Council, so that they could lock up secrets to prevent Queenslanders from having an opportunity to see what is going on. In that instance, it was only the Independents who were prepared to stand up and say, ‘We oppose this. We believe the major parties have got it wrong.’ Tonight again we see the government and the opposition as one. I hope all Queenslanders can see the government and the opposition for what they are. I commend the bill to the House. Question put—That the bill be now read a second time. Resolved in the negative.

ADJOURNMENT Hon. RE SCHWARTEN (Rockhampton—ALP) (Acting Leader of the House) (8.30 pm): I move— That the House do now adjourn. Caloundra Coast Guard Mr McARDLE (Caloundra—LNP) (8.30 pm): I rise to talk tonight about the Caloundra Coast Guard which has now been trying for two years to obtain a new lease on a premise it has occupied for some 20 to 25 years. In that two-year period, both the state government and the Sunshine Coast Regional Council have been batting back and forth as to who is obligated to extend the lease or grant a lease and who is obligated to take the first step. At the end of the day, we have a volunteer organisation that has had no security of tenure for two years. 15 Jun 2011 Adjournment 1895

This organisation provides a vital service for the many people who use Pumicestone Passage or cross the Caloundra Bar to go out to the ocean. The coast guard is manned by volunteers—men and women who put their lives at risk when called upon and who go out in monstrous seas and provide help and assistance to those who are caught either by their own stupidity or because of a change in the weather. These men and women devote their time every day, every week, every month, every year to ensuring a safe and secure passage on Pumicestone Passage and the waterways. Indeed, in any sense, these men and women provide a vital service. To my knowledge, there has been a proposal for a lease but in essence the lease they would get will reduce the area of land in which they can operate. They will lose a portion of the land on which they house their third vessel. This third vessel operates in shallow water but it is as critical as the two larger vessels which operate in the open sea. The coast guard will also lose a portion of land which they use to reverse their much larger vessels. Members of the House who have coast guards in their region would understand that the size of these large vessels means that a four-wheel drive is required to move them in and out of their sheds. The loss of this land is dramatic because it means these much larger vessels can no longer be manoeuvred into these sheds, given the shape and the location of the land on which they operate. Also, a portion of land that they use as a fire escape will be locked away by a gate. The workers have been told that if a fire breaks out and they are required to use this route they should take a key with them to unlock the gate. When you are trying to escape a fire, you get out as quickly as possible through a proven route. What you do not do is take a key with you in the hope that you can unlock the gate with a key. At the end of the day, this issue comes down to saving lives and the use of a Coastal Pathway in Caloundra and the mangroves. These issues are very, very important, but the question is this: what is more important? The lives of the men and women whom these volunteers save by putting their own lives at risk or the Coastal Pathway and mangroves? At the end of the day, the state government and the Sunshine Coast Regional Council have to understand that these men and women are volunteers who provide an essential service. Live Cattle Trade Ms NELSON-CARR (Mundingburra—ALP) (8.33 pm): The recent decision by the Gillard government to place a freeze on the live export of cattle to Indonesian abattoirs is to be commended. I have long been against the export of live anything for many of the reasons which have recently been highlighted. The absolute cruelty to these magnificent animals is appalling and in my view it will not change because it is not about introducing new methods and mandating procedures; it is all about a massive cultural difference. These people have no regard for animal welfare so the introduction of more humane methods will do nothing to address the heart of the matter. What will happen is that people with cameras will not be granted access to these abattoirs at all. I can tell you that the AMIEU has been campaigning for over a decade to halt these exports for some of the reasons that I feel so passionately about today. I mostly feel passionate about this because it is so detrimental to Queensland workers in the meat industry. When we export our live cattle to overseas abattoirs, we take away employment opportunities for thousands of Queensland meatworkers. This is something that this government takes very seriously. My electorate is home to many local meatworkers, but so many meatworks have closed down because every time we load Australian cattle onto ships at the Townsville port destined for overseas abattoirs we take away their jobs. We have already closed two abattoirs in Townsville alone, and that is because there were not enough cattle to process. The 30 May 2011 episode of Four Corners demonstrated the inhumane conditions ensconced in live cattle export. I was shocked and disturbed by the intense levels of animal cruelty exhibited in those Indonesian abattoirs, but this would never occur in an Australian abattoir where the strictest, safest, most humane conditions exist. The sad truth is, however, that because we ship our cattle to these locations we lose the ability to police and scrutinise. We can of course spend our own money by providing adequate facilities and training— Mr Schwarten interjected. Ms NELSON-CARR: Exactly, or we could at least assist with better refrigeration processes, but my argument has always been that those restrictions, if they are going to happen, should be handled by the cattle owners themselves not governments. Keeping the cattle in Australia and keeping our local meatworkers employed on the other hand is government business. I accept that the exporting of live cattle provides a significant amount of revenue but it is only to a few in the local meat industry. What it does do is destroy value-adding and, with it, thousands of jobs. A Galaxy poll conducted for the World Society for the Protection of Animals revealed that most people hate and find absolutely appalling the export of live sheep, and I am sure that after the Four Corners special they will feel exactly the same way about most live exports. 1896 Adjournment 15 Jun 2011

Mr Schwarten: Every beast exported is worth $5 less. Ms NELSON-CARR: That is exactly right. I realise that the majority of the public outrage has been focused on the scenes from Four Corners, but this is an opportunity to take action to protect jobs while protecting animal welfare. With public opinion weighed against the export of live cattle, surely it is time to revisit the expansion of processing, job expansion and boxed beef export. Live Cattle Trade Mr KNUTH (Dalrymple—LNP) (8.36 pm): I would also like to speak on the imminent collapse of the live export industry, an industry worth over $350 million to the national economy and over $100 million to the Queensland economy. The images that were displayed on the Four Corners program two weeks ago were disturbing, appalling and unacceptable, but the program represented only one side of the story. The rash decision by the federal Labor government and the feeble acceptance by this state Labor government on the basis of a single TV program can only be described as foolish and disastrous. Our state has been hit by successive natural disasters and many small businesses and industries are struggling, and now because of a non-thought-out, knee-jerk reaction we are facing the imminent collapse of a $100 million Queensland industry and the best this government can do is say, ‘We’ll look into other markets for you’. This is a bad move by the federal government which has caused shock waves through the meat industry. The government’s handling of this issue is very poor. It should have been worked through with Indonesia to improve some of their abattoir standards. We all agree it was shocking footage of the treatment of Australian live export cattle as they were beaten, kicked and whipped prior to slaughter. But the ban on live cattle export to Indonesia will only encourage Indonesia to source cattle from elsewhere and it will do nothing to address the problem of abattoir standards. There are 700 abattoirs in Indonesia. Obviously certain abattoirs do not meet appropriate international standards, but do not shut down the entire industry—which costs local jobs and causes confusion—without working through a resolution. The ban has serious ramifications on cattle producers, employees on properties, contract musterers, ringers, helicopter pilots, transport operators, produce stores, saleyard operators and businesses supplying and servicing the industry. If there is genuine interest in animal welfare, the best chance for cattle to be treated humanely in Indonesian abattoirs is through the participation of Australian live cattle. No other country exporting live cattle spends money raised by levies on domestic producers to educate their customers in the humane treatment of animals. Even Elders’ Indonesian feedlot and abattoir operations already operate at the level expected by the Australian market, having spent 10 years investing in infrastructure and training. They have been penalised through this ban and their operation is at world’s best standards. There are tens of thousands of cattle stranded throughout northern Australia as a result of a bad decision and there are current animal welfare issues for these stranded cattle. The Gillard government cannot blame anyone else for their actions. They must compensate the industry for their incompetence. The Bligh government should also stand up for Queensland cattle producers and demand that the Gillard government reopen appropriately controlled export trade to Indonesia right now. Both state and federal governments should hang their heads in shame and come up with actions to support the processing industry as well. (Time expired) Organ and Tissue Donation Mrs ATTWOOD (Mount Ommaney—ALP) (8.39 pm): In my role as Parliamentary Secretary for Health, I recently attended the 20th annual service of thanksgiving hosted by DonateLife Queensland to pay tribute to the generosity of those who, as organ and tissue donors, gave life and healing to thousands of Queenslanders. Memorials and thanksgiving services form an important part of the national donor family support service framework for DonateLife and the annual services of thanksgiving held around the state are an opportunity to acknowledge and provide thanks to donors and their families. The attendance of approximately 1,000 people at the Brisbane service, which was held at the University of Queensland on 28 May, shows just how much support exists in our community for organ and tissue donation. The service of thanksgiving provides a valuable experience for both donor and recipient families by providing an opportunity for public acknowledgement and expression of appreciation for transplantation. I found the event to be a very moving experience and was privileged to be part of a ceremony that is so important in the life of donor families and recipients. During the ceremony we heard the personal experiences of donor families and recipients of vital organs and tissue transplantation. These accounts included stories about a full lung transplant taking place when a 62-year-old grandmother was told she had 24 hours to live and the heart-rending story of how a young mother coped with the prospect of losing her young twin boys and the transformation of their lives when donor organs eventually became available. One of the donor families spoke about how the family members made a decision to allow their mother’s organs to be used in a life-saving operation because she would have wanted to help someone. 15 Jun 2011 Adjournment 1897

At the end of the ceremony all of the donor families were warmly provided with the gift of a red rose from a number of very grateful recipients. Although none of the families knew who received their loved one’s gift of life, they know how vital their decision was and what it meant to the recipients and their families. Organ and tissue donation saves lives and improves quality of life for hundreds of Queenslanders every year. Queensland Health estimates that each organ donor has the potential to improve the lives of 10 people and tissue donors have the potential to improve the lives of dozens more. I am advised that over 1,600 Australians are currently waiting for life-saving organ transplants. Fifty of those are children. The sad reality is that in Australia more than one person will die every week waiting for an organ transplant. The good news is that Australia boasts one of the highest transplantation success rates in the world. Kidney transplant survival rates are about 90 per cent in the first year and over 75 per cent in the five years following a transplant. In Queensland the Organ and Tissue Donation Service is partly funded through an agreement between the Commonwealth government and Queensland Health. By the end of the current two-year funding period, from 2010-11 to 2011-12, this agreement will have provided approximately up to $9.5 million in funding to Queensland. (Time expired) Coolum Police Station Ms SIMPSON (Maroochydore—LNP) (8.42 pm): We need to give police the right resources to keep our communities safe. That is a sentiment everyone would agree is so important, but it needs to be put into action. We have seen tragic events in recent times to reaffirm that our police really are at the front line of our communities doing tough and dangerous work. Sadly, when tragedies such as the recent shooting occur, it just brings into focus how much we have to be thankful for those who put their lives on the line for the rest of the community. I want to raise a specific issue of police resourcing on the Sunshine Coast, and that is the Coolum Police Station. This police station is in a temporary facility with a lease that was about to expire. I understand that negotiations have been underway to extend the lease, but the history of the Coolum Police Station and its uncertain tenure is something that I want to highlight in this House. It is unacceptable to have a community of this size without a permanent police station and with a lease in such a tenuous situation. The site on which the temporary police station was leased in 2003 in Williams Street and built at a cost of $700,000 recently saw a situation where that tenure was running out. When this station was opened in 2005 the then police minister, Judy Spence, said that it would operate on this site in this building for about five to seven years. Well, it is 2011, the lease has almost expired and still a permanent site has not been acquired. Good planning saves money, but it also provides a message to a community that their services and those police officers at the front line are being properly supported. I call on the police minister and this government to ensure that a permanent site in the centre of Coolum is found—not this situation where the lease almost expired and they scrambled to extend it with no permanency. It must be resolved. It is about ensuring that this community has certainty and that the police officers who are out there doing the difficult work that they do know that they are receiving the appropriate support. Funeral Industry Mrs SULLIVAN (Pumicestone—ALP) (8.45 pm): On Friday, 10 June the Environment and Resources Committee tabled an issues paper from its inquiry into the environmental impacts of conventional funerals in Queensland. This paper presents a snapshot of our partially finished inquiry, cut short by the imminent changes to the committee system, and flags the issues we believe need to be addressed to complete this work. To date the committee has written to key stakeholders—namely, government ministers, local governments, church leaders, funeral industry peak bodies and individual funeral directors. We have received and authorised the release of 22 written submissions. We have researched the legislation governing the transport, burial and cremation of bodies and met with people who have expert knowledge of funerary practices in Australia and other countries, as well as the hydrogeological impacts of cemeteries. The next phase of our work would include further research, extensive and sensitive public consultation and testing of the evidence at a public hearing. I believe that our issues paper presents a fair summary of the main points from our work so far. For the people in South-East Queensland, the No. 1 environmental impact of conventional funeral practices will be the accelerating demand for land for graves. As the population grows and ages over the coming decades, the demand for graves will be unprecedented. In fact, the Brisbane City Council told the committee that its cemeteries are likely to run out of new grave sites in as little as 10 to 15 years. The paper listed a range of measures that could be introduced to extend the life of the region’s existing cemeteries but did not make any recommendations. I repeat that it is an issues paper only and that the committee made no recommendations to the government. 1898 Adjournment 15 Jun 2011

It was disappointing, then, to hear the Channel 10 news headline on Monday night about the committee’s work. The headline ‘State government plans to dig up the dead and reuse the graves’ has given the wrong impression. The station picked up on just one of the seven measures discussed in the paper as possible options to address land use issues. Someone from the Queensland Times must have seen the Channel 10 coverage because it ran a similar story. It did not bother to contact me. Thankfully, the ABC news on the same night and the Brisbane Times ran sensitive and factually based stories. I had long interviews with both of them. I encourage anyone who wants to find out about our work on funerals to seek out these news items. I also suggest that they log on to the Queensland parliament’s website at www.parliament.qld.gov.au and read the issues paper. I am happy to receive any feedback people may have, because this is an important issue and one which my committee takes very seriously. I have held a number of funeral information sessions in my electorate of Pumicestone and they have all been well attended. What I know is that people want more information on the funeral industry. They want options so that when the time comes they can make the best decision for their deceased loved one. I reassure everyone that the state government has no plans whatsoever to dig up deceased remains and reuse graves. Your deceased loved ones are safe wherever they are. Solar Hot Water Rebate Scheme; Mary Valley Mr WELLINGTON (Nicklin—Ind) (8.47 pm): Recently I received a letter from a constituent. It was a response to a letter that my constituent received from the Premier’s office. The letter from the Premier’s office states— Congratulations for participating in the Queensland Government’s Solar Hot Water Rebate Scheme and installing a solar water heater. I would like to personally thank you for taking this positive action in your home to harness clean energy from the sun. Our solar hot water rebates are one of many of the Queensland government’s initiatives to help us build a virtual power station and make Queensland the solar state of Australia. We are working together to double Queensland’s use of solar energy in five years. By installing a solar water system or heat pump, you are helping Queensland reduce its carbon footprint. With our climate, solar hot water systems are the natural choice. Over the lifetime of your solar water heater on average you could save up to 30 tonnes of harmful greenhouse gas emissions from being released into our environment. That is enough gas to fill over half a million balloons. Not only are you helping to protect our environment; your new solar water heater can reduce your electricity use and your electricity bills. Although the issue of climate change is a challenging one, we can all be part of the solution. I encourage you to talk to your friends and neighbours about your new solar water heater and encourage them to do the bright thing and help them to make the positive switch to solar today. The Queensland government also has solar incentives for schools, businesses, sporting clubs and community groups and under the Solar Bonus Scheme eligible residents and businesses who install rooftop solar panels could get paid for the surplus power they produce. Further details are available online... Please find enclosed a sign that you may wish to display to show you are doing the bright thing. Thank you for being part of Queensland’s clean energy future. Yours sincerely, Premier of Queensland. My constituent is more than happy and keen to be involved in the solar program, but she saw red like a bull sees a red rag when she received this poster in the mail. I will not put on the parliamentary record her views about that. My constituent was of the view that she was perhaps being used for part of a promotion for the government. I reiterate that, whilst my constituent was very happy with the letter from the Premier’s office, she really had a perception that she was going to be used by being invited to put this placard—this promotional item—on a wall on her house. She really did not want that to happen. She tells me that she has spoken to a few of her neighbours and they share her strong view. This elderly constituent of mine was very insistent that I share with the House that, whilst she was very keen and very happy with the solar program of the state government, she really did not want to be part of a promotion that might be seen to be promoting the government. On one other matter before I resume my seat, I urge the government to bring forward the sale of the land in the Mary Valley that the government purchased for the now abandoned Traveston Dam. (Time expired)

Webb, Mr D Ms van LITSENBURG (Redcliffe—ALP) (8.51 pm): On Tuesday we celebrated the life of Desmond ‘Spider’ Webb, the president of the Redcliffe Dolphins Rugby League Football Club. Des started playing for the Dolphins in 1956 and he had a stellar career, raising the Dolphins profile with the seven premierships they won in the 10 years he played for them. He also won the prestigious Jack Martin Award for his services to the leagues club. After Des’s playing career ended, he dedicated his considerable talents to the development and administration of the leagues club for half a century. Des’s vision, his ability to work in a team and his persistence allowed the club to prosper and deliver for its members and the whole Redcliffe community. He turned their humble clubhouse into the magnificent facilities that we have today. 15 Jun 2011 Adjournment 1899

The Queensland government has been proud to partner with a Des Webb-led leagues club to deliver the hydrotherapy and heated pools and the gym that make up the Dolphins Health Precinct. Des was involved in those projects from the ground floor and drove them to completion. I recall going on a tour of hydrotherapy pools with Des and other board members and discussing their vision for the ultimate pool. Des found a scrap of paper and sketched out their vision. That vision has been a reality for more than two years. Under Des’s watch the number of juniors playing for the Dolphins reached 850. He established the Narangba Rangers Rugby League Club, which is sponsored by the Dolphins and which now has nearly 300 players. The Redcliffe Leagues Club now sponsors many sports clubs and community groups on the peninsula. This is a powerful legacy and one that demonstrates the compassion and enthusiasm that Des had for people, the wellbeing of his community and all sport as well as his first love, the Redcliffe Dolphins. Aileen, Des’s wife, was the love of his life and the architect of his success, because it was she who set him on his path playing for the Dolphins. Des was a loving role model to his sons Mick and Terry and his grandchildren and great-grandchild. It is fitting that I end with the words of Redcliffe poet Rupert McCall from his poem The Rock— And teams may come and teams may go and tides will flow and ebb But never will this Club forget the name of Dessy Webb. Leeding, Mr D Dr DOUGLAS (Gaven—LNP) (8.53 pm): I wish pay to tribute to Detective Senior Constable Damian Leeding and the police who provide the most essential services to our community on the Gold Coast and across Queensland. I would like to recognise Senior Constable Leeding’s family—his wife, Sonya, who is also a police officer at Runaway Bay, and their children, Hudson and Grace. Sonya, we all are indebted to you and your family forever for the sacrifices made by Damian. On an ordinary Sunday evening Damian and his partner, Senior Detective Nicole Jackson, were simply doing their job by responding to a 000 call at the Pacific Pines Tavern, which is in my electorate of Gaven. Tragically, Damian, in an attempt to apprehend an offender who had taken hostages in a robbery, was shot and subsequently died in hospital three days later. Not many are ever called upon to give so much with so little warning as Damian did. The fact that he did so without hesitation says much for his courage, integrity and professionalism. Damian’s family have ensured that he lives on, after donating his organs, which was spoken about by the member for Mount Ommaney earlier. This incident has shaken the whole Pacific Pines and surrounding community and certainly my electorate of Gaven. The police have been truly overwhelmed by the community’s support and I want to share with the House just a few of the tributes to the police that I have received. I quote— It is a sad day when one, who so many rely on for protection throughout our country is taken from us. Our hearts and thoughts go out to his family and those close to him. He will be remembered by many. And another resident said— The protection of the community and that of the officers on duty keeping us protected should be the paramount. My heart goes out to Damian’s family. And another stated— My heart goes out to Damian’s family in this difficult time. He came to the call of help from others and now leaves a family behind, so sad. Despite the grief and sadness, the community opened its heart in support of Damian and his work with the police at a local tribute, the Pacific Pines United Expo, which was booked for other reasons and which was still held on 5 June 2011. In particular, I would like to thank the president of the Pacific Pines Residents Group, Melita Scully, who spent many hours organising the tribute with a variety of others, including the local councillor, Peter Young, me and very willing helpers who worked on that committee. On the day Police Commissioner Bob Atkinson, Assistant Commissioner Paul Wilson, Senior Constable Steve Disley, who is the police beat policeman, and Ian Leavers from the Police Union all came along to the ceremony held at midday. I would like to table a letter from Blake Carey, a 10-year-old from Pacific Pines. Tabled paper: Letter from Blake Carey to Parliament House in relation to the late Detective Senior Constable Damian Leeding [4684]. It reads— Dear Parliament House ... I heard the gun shot bang from the Tavern, we were confused ... but when we woke up in the morning I was shocked ... that is all kids were talking about at school ... I’m going to be a police officer when I’m older and I don’t want that to happen to me. I finish on this note—and I hope the Premier and the police minister will hear this. Ten-year-old Blake wrote further— You should get more police so nothing like that will ever happen again. 1900 Attendance 15 Jun 2011

Brisbane Pride; Brisbane Carnivale; Windsor Bowls Club Ms GRACE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (8.56 pm): Last Saturday it was a pleasure to represent the Premier and open Brisbane Pride and to also attend the Brisbane Carnivale festival, which was held at Perry Park, Breakfast Creek. I want to acknowledge the vital role that Carnivale plays in recognising and celebrating lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Queenslanders. I warmly welcome the $2,000 one- off funding to support the LGBT community publicise its work in overcoming the issues that can lead to youth suicide. As we know, Queenslanders make up a large percentage of the LGBT community—around five to 10 per cent. I want to acknowledge that members of this community still experience significant hurdles and barriers to fulfilment in the course of their daily lives. The $2,000 to Carnivale went a long way to highlighting the issue of youth suicide in this community and I warmly welcome and support that money going to this diverse community. I think it is important that we reduce the barriers, and Brisbane Pride helps to celebrate the diversity of our LGBT communities. It is important that we provide fair, cohesive and equitable services for LGBT Queenslanders. I am very happy to say that these services were very much on display at Carnivale at Perry Park. Carnivale is a fantastic way for that community to come together. They come together in a wonderful part of our city. They throw a great party and it was well attended by a lot of members and others in that community. I congratulate the president, Deeje Hancock, and others who did a great job in not only coordinating Brisbane Pride but also partaking in Brisbane Carnivale. I also want to wish the Windsor Bowls Club a very happy 90th birthday, which the members of that club celebrated on Sunday, 28 May 2011. This great community club has done a lot of work in the local community over its 90-year history. It is a sturdy club that has survived many years. Since its inception it has seen a lot of members come and go, but it still has a great community spirit. I was joined by chair Trevor O’Neill, secretary Wendy Horgan, treasurer Alan Brown, men’s section president Murray Robinson, ladies section president Margaret Corke and the longest serving member, Lottie Redfern, who helped cut the cake along with Norman Jolly, the son of the late William Jolly, the former Lord Mayor of Brisbane. Windsor Bowls Club is a great community hub. It was hit significantly by the floods and we are working with the members of the club to make sure that we get the funds in their hands to bring that club back to the state that it was in before the floods. A great day was had by all. We cut a great cake. There were bucketloads of community spirit. But the best part of the day was when I bowled that lawn bowl and it went six inches from the jack. I beat the other two parliamentarians who were there and it was a great day. Question put—That the House do now adjourn. Motion agreed to. The House adjourned at 9.00 pm.

ATTENDANCE Attwood, Bates, Bleijie, Bligh, Boyle, Choi, Crandon, Cripps, Croft, Cunningham, Darling, Davis, Dempsey, Dick, Dickson, Douglas, Dowling, Elmes, Emerson, Farmer, Finn, Flegg, Foley, Fraser, Gibson, Grace, Hinchliffe, Hobbs, Hoolihan, Hopper, Horan, Jarratt, Johnson, Johnstone, Jones, Keech, Kiernan, Kilburn, Knuth, Langbroek, Lucas, McArdle, McLindon, Male, Malone, Menkens, Messenger, Mickel, Miller, Moorhead, Mulherin, Nelson-Carr, Nicholls, Nolan, O’Brien, O’Neill, Palaszczuk, Pitt, Powell, Pratt, Reeves, Rickuss, Roberts, Robertson, Robinson, Ryan, Schwarten, Scott, Seeney, Shine, Simpson, Smith, Sorensen, Spence, Springborg, Stevens, Stone, Struthers, Stuckey, Sullivan, van Litsenburg, Wallace, Watt, Wellington, Wells, Wendt, Wettenhall, Wilson