PROOF ISSN 1322-0330

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

51ST PARLIAMENT

Subject CONTENTS Page Friday, 10 June 2005

BEHAVIOUR OF MEMBERS ...... 2067 PETITION ...... 2067 PAPERS ...... 2067 MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...... 2067 Morris Inquiry ...... 2067 MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...... 2071 Office of the Speaker ...... 2071 MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...... 2071 Incorporation of Ministerial Statements ...... 2071 MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...... 2076 Morris Inquiry ...... 2076 MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...... 2076 Criminal History Checks, Mature-Age Students ...... 2076 MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...... 2077 BIO2005 ...... 2077 PRIVILEGE ...... 2077 Comments by Minister for Emergency Services ...... 2077 QUESTIONS ...... 2077 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ...... 2078 Patel, Dr J ...... 2078 Patel, Dr J ...... 2079 Unemployment Rate ...... 2079 Patel, Dr J ...... 2080 Science and Research ...... 2081 Ambulance Levy ...... 2081 Ethanol ...... 2082 Health System ...... 2083 Brisbane City Council Budget ...... 2083 MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS REGISTRATION AMENDMENT BILL ...... 2084 First Reading ...... 2084 Second Reading ...... 2084

BY AUTHORITY L.J. OSMOND, CHIEF HANSARD REPORTER—2005 Table of Contents — Friday, 10 June 2005

MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS REGISTRATION AMENDMENT BILL ...... 2085 Sitting Days and Hours; Remaining Stages; Allocation of Time Limit Order ...... 2085 APPROPRIATION (PARLIAMENT) BILL; APPROPRIATION BILL ...... 2086 Second Reading (Cognate Debate) ...... 2086 PERSONAL EXPLANATION ...... 2099 Behaviour of Members ...... 2099 APPROPRIATION (PARLIAMENT) BILL; APPROPRIATION BILL ...... 2099 Second Reading (Cognate Debate) ...... 2099 MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS REGISTRATION AMENDMENT BILL ...... 2109 Second Reading ...... 2109 Consideration in Detail ...... 2125 Third Reading ...... 2127 APPROPRIATION (PARLIAMENT) BILL; APPROPRIATION BILL ...... 2127 Second Reading (Cognate Debate) ...... 2127 Reference to Estimates Committees ...... 2131 PETITION ...... 2131 SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT ...... 2132 ADJOURNMENT ...... 2132 Water Supply Infrastructure, Dawson River ...... 2132 Blackwater Hospital ...... 2132 Sunshine Coast ...... 2133 Moreton Bay Region Export Awards ...... 2133 Burnett Heads State School; School Buses ...... 2134 Trinity Lutheran College ...... 2134 Gladstone Show Society, Closure ...... 2135 State Education Week, Mackay ...... 2135 Population Growth, Beaudesert Area ...... 2136 Bundaberg Base Hospital ...... 2136 Youth Parties ...... 2137 10 Jun 2005 Legislative Assembly 2067 FRIDAY, 10 JUNE 2005

Legislative Assembly Mr ACTING SPEAKER (Hon. J Fouras, Ashgrove) read prayers and took the chair at 9.30 am.

BEHAVIOUR OF MEMBERS Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Honourable members, a matter involving gross disrespect to one of the temporary chairs last night has been brought to my attention this morning. I will be investigating this matter today and further action may be taken. In the interim, I wish to remind all members that persons occupying the chair are to be accorded the respect and dignity due to the chair at all times.

PETITION

The following honourable member has lodged a paper petition for presentation—

Shingle Inn Mr Fraser from 1,283 petitioners requesting the House to review the removal of the Shingle Inn from the Queensland Heritage Register, ensure that the Shingle Inn is reinstated in the Central Business District as originally as possible, as was agreed, and reinstate it on the Queensland Heritage Register ensuring that it remains protected in the future.

PAPERS

MINISTERIAL PAPERS TABLED BY THE CLERK The following ministerial papers were tabled by the Clerk— Attorney-General and Minister for Justice (Mr Welford)— • Response from the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice (Mr Welford) to an e-petition sponsored by Ms Male from 139 petitioners regarding improvements to the justice system and the legal rights for victims of crime. Minister for Natural Resources and Mines (Mr Robertson)— • Response from the Minister for Natural Resources and Mines (Mr Robertson) to a paper petition presented by Ms Stuckey from 138 petitions regarding a suburb name change back to Tugun. Minister for Health (Mr Nuttall)— • Response from the Minister for Health (Mr Nuttall) to a paper petition presented by Mr Wilson from 1170 petitioners requesting the House to improve maternity care services • Response from the Minister for Health (Mr Nuttall) to a paper petition presented by Ms Lee Long from 1 petitioner requesting the House to seek a range of remedial action in respect of a decision by the Health Practitioners Tribunal to cancel the Christina Wong’s medical registration

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

Morris Inquiry Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.32 am): At 9 am today I received an interim report from Mr Tony Morris QC, the Commissioner of the Bundaberg Hospital Commission of Inquiry and Deputy Commissioners, Sir Llew Edwards and Margaret Vider RN. I welcome the report and its 10 recommendations and I commit my government to their immediate implementation. I table the report for the information of the House. Every member will receive a copy as provided to me by Tony Morris, Commissioner. When I established the inquiry in April I gave the commissioners a reporting deadline of 30 September 2005. They have moved swiftly and diligently to produce an interim report less than three weeks after the beginning of public hearings. No royal commission in the history of Queensland has moved as effectively or as fast as this and I thank them for it. This is further evidence of the fearless impartiality of this independent inquiry. The 10 recommendations fall into three categories: legislative changes, administrative changes and recommendations relating to charges against Dr Patel and his extradition. The government fully supports all recommendations and they will be implemented immediately. Commissioner Morris and his deputy commissioners are in the gallery today and, on behalf of the parliament, I want to thank them for what they have done. This morning I held an extraordinary cabinet meeting to consider the interim report and approve amendments that I will introduce to the House to give full effect to the recommendations 2068 Ministerial Statement 10 Jun 2005 without delay. As members will be aware, parliament is not scheduled to sit again until August. Given the importance of this issue, the government is not prepared to delay these reforms. The people of Bundaberg would expect us to get on with it, and so would the people of Queensland, and that is exactly what we are going to do. I will therefore seek the support of the parliament, including the opposition, the Liberal Party and Independents, to suspend standing orders later today so that this can be debated this afternoon. I will introduce the bill after question time and offer a full briefing to the opposition, the Liberal Party and Independents at midday. I have personally rung the Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of the Liberal Party to offer them that invitation. I offer that invitation to Independents. I simply did not get time to call them. Further, it is my intention to ensure that these amendments are passed today and can take effect as soon as possible. The government will therefore move that the debate and consideration of the bill be limited to two hours, from 2.30 pm until 4.30 pm this afternoon. It is proposed that debate on the budget be suspended during this time and resume after 4.30 pm. Let me deal with the categories in the Morris royal commission recommendations. First is legislative changes. The proposed legislative changes target the Medical Practitioners Registration Act 2001. The act governs the registration of medical practitioners and includes provisions that aim to prevent doctors or others obtaining registration fraudulently. The commissioners recommend broadening the grounds upon which the Queensland Medical Board can cancel a doctor’s registration to cover the sorts of fraud that the Patel situation has brought to light. They recommend creating new offences to punish people who pretend to be doctors or who practise as a doctor after they have received their registration from the Medical Board through false information. They recommend tough new penalties of up to three years imprisonment for these offences. This will also apply to the offence of giving the Queensland Medical Board false information when applying for registration. The bill I will introduce today implements all of the commissioners’ recommendations for legislative change. I will do everything in my power as Premier of this state to prevent a repeat of what happened at Bundaberg Hospital and the pain that went with it. That is why I will introduce the amendments in parliament today and I will ask parliament to make them law. The administrative recommendations relate to the administrative process for the Minister for Health to declare an area of need for a medical service under section 135 of the Medical Practitioners Registration Act 2001. Section 135 enables the minister to decide that there is an area of need for a medical service if the minister considers that there are insufficient medical practitioners in the state or part of the state to provide that service. An area of need may be a geographical area or a certain specialisation within that area. This is relevant to the Patel situation, because temporary resident doctors like Patel usually enter Australia to work in medical positions designated as being in an area of need. The commissioners say that the process to assess whether the minister should declare an area of need is unsatisfactory. They also believe that Queensland Health’s reliance on a nine-year-old policy document to govern the process is nothing short of scandalous. The commissioners want a number of changes to the current process, with the aim of ensuring that every effort is made to fill vacancies from within Australia before we resort to sourcing doctors from overseas. I have had lengthy discussions with the Minister for Health about these matters and he has advised me as follows: firstly, that he will direct Queensland Health to develop a new policy immediately that implements the commissioners’ recommendations; secondly, that he and the Director-General of Queensland Health will personally discuss the importance of these matters with the current holders of ministerial delegations, and, indeed, the minister and I have just met with his senior officers, including the Director-General of Health to discuss the implementation of these recommendations; thirdly, that he will assess the outcomes of these discussions, including whether there is a need for new or additional delegates to be appointed; and, fourthly, that he and the director-general will meet with members of the Office of the Health Practitioner Registration Boards to discuss their possible future role in exercising such delegations. The Minister for Health will bring a submission to cabinet on 27 June 2005 to ensure support for the new policy, the outcomes of these discussion and the steps he proposes to take. The Minister for Health will make a ministerial statement in relation to this report in a moment. I now move to the third aspect of the recommendation—that is, charges against Patel. The report recommends that Patel be charged with the Criminal Code offences of making false representations and fraud. It recommends a criminal charge of a negligent act causing harm in the case of Marilyn Daisy. It recommends Patel be charged with the murder of James Edward Phillips or, in the alternative, unlawful killing—that is, manslaughter—of Mr Phillips. It recommends that the appropriate steps be taken to procure Patel’s extradition to Australia. A copy of the interim report was hand delivered to the office of the police commissioner at 9 am today. Last night I wrote to the Minister for Police and Corrective Services, Judy Spence, seeking urgent advice about the next steps to be taken by the Queensland Police Service to pursue the extradition of Patel and his return to Queensland. Because of its importance, I seek leave to incorporate my letter in Hansard. Leave granted. 10 Jun 2005 Ministerial Statement 2069

Queensland Government Premier of Queensland and Minister for Trade The Honourable Judy Spence MP Minister for Police and Corrective Services P 0 Box 15195 CITY EAST Q 4002 Dear Judy The Commissioner of the Bundaberg Hospital Commission of Inquiry, Anthony Morris QC has tonight publicly announced that he will deliver an interim report about his findings to me tomorrow morning at 9 am. Please provide to me as a matter of urgency advice about the next steps to be taken by the Queensland Police Service to pursue the extradition of Dr Patel and his return to Queensland. If Commissioner Morris’ interim report should contain any information that provides evidence for possible charges against Dr Patel, I would like the police service to be in a position to take immediate action. As I have indicated to you in previous correspondence and in our joint press conference of 4 June 2005 I am keen to do what ever it takes to bring Dr Patel back to Queensland. I look forward to your advice in regard to this matter. Yours sincerely (sgd) PETER BEATTIE MP PREMIER AND MINISTER FOR TRADE Mr BEATTIE: I also said that if the interim report contained evidence regarding possible charges against Patel, I would like the police to take immediate action. I thank the minister for her speedy response. I received a letter last night from Judy Spence which says as follows— Further to your correspondence of earlier today and to our conversations with the Police Commissioner on 4 June 2005, regarding the Bundaberg Hospital Commission of Inquiry, the Queensland Police Service is ready to pursue possible charges and commence the processes necessary for the potential extradition of Dr Patel. The Police Commissioner has advised me— that is the police minister— that the Queensland Police Service has been actively advancing the Patel investigation. These actions include: • Forming an investigative team from the Homicide Squad and Bundaberg Criminal Investigation Branch consisting of five detectives. This will be increased if necessary. • Ongoing cooperation with the State Coroner on a number of files relating to patients of Dr Patel. • Forming a Medical Tribunal to assist in gathering medical evidence. This Tribunal will consist of two senior surgeons and one senior anaesthetist. • Locating Dr Patel. As you have stated and to which I agree, the vital issue is acquiring the necessary evidence to support potential charges and an extradition application for Dr Patel. The minister goes on— I understand that the Queensland Police Service has not yet received any evidentiary material from Commissioner Tony Morris. The Police Commissioner will pursue this matter with Mr Morris on Friday the 10th of June 2005. My letter was written after the news release was issued by Tony Morris yesterday. The response came last night. As I have indicated, the commissioner will now have a copy of this report. The minister goes on to state— Fundamentally, the Queensland Police Service will now: • Interview the surgical, medical and nursing staff involved in the operations conducted by Dr Patel. • Refer all the available medical evidence to the Tribunal. • Obtain other necessary evidentiary material. • Complete a full brief of evidence. • Obtain the advice of the Director of Public Prosecutions. • Commence the prescribed requirements for extradition. As you are aware, police require the strongest possible brief of evidence. As was announced by the Police Commissioner at our press conference on 4 June 2005, police would prefer to pursue the strongest 3 to 5 cases at this stage against Dr Patel. As we discussed, the Police Commissioner has informed me that the QPS are poised to act quickly on any reference of charges recommended by Tony Morris and the QPS will progress these matters as quickly as possible. Judy Spence Minister for Police and Corrective Services I table that letter from the minister. Again I would refer members to its information. I thank the minister for her support. I also thank Commissioner Morris and Deputy Commissioners Edwards and Vider for their speed and independence. Their diligence in providing the government with early recommendations is a huge service to the people of Bundaberg and Queensland. I will continue to do whatever I can to assist the inquiry. That includes meeting with Commissioner Morris should he find that useful. 2070 Ministerial Statement 10 Jun 2005

This inquiry is about finding what is wrong with the health system and then fixing it. I will not have the commissioner criticised for meeting with me to ensure that my government is in a position to take swift action where this is required. It is in the interest of the people of Queensland. When we met on Wednesday afternoon, the commissioner left me with draft recommendations which enabled us to get ready for the release of the interim report today. I stress again: this is about fixing the health system. Today we take an important step in that direction. I understand that my proposal for urgent parliamentary consideration of these amendments is unusual. However, I would hope that the opposition supports my view about the urgency of these legislative measures. The circumstances demand bipartisan action and I look forward to the unanimous support of the parliament. It is very important that I agree to meet with Mr Morris from time to time for updates on his work because it has so much potential impact on Queenslanders. We will seriously consider implementing all of the recommendations that he makes in any of his reports because I know that he is not only fiercely independent but also totally determined to find solutions to the issues that caused the Dr Patel problems. As I said, I will not allow anyone to stand in the way of my government making the necessary reforms to the system. We owe it to the patients in Bundaberg to do this and to do it as quickly as possible. I do want to highlight the importance of meeting that I had with Mr Morris. When recommending a criminal prosecution, which the commission has done, and especially one which involves extradition, one does not announce one’s intentions so that the bird can fly the coop. The commissioner, Mr Morris, had to meet with me to put arrangements in place before the interim report was published. That is why I wrote to the police minister last night. Under the Order in Council setting up the Bundaberg Hospital inquiry the Premier is the only appropriate contact in government for Commissioner Morris. Those Executive Council decisions state at ministerial direction 6— The honourable the Premier and Minister for Trade is to give the necessary direction herein accordingly. The Order in Council for the Fitzgerald inquiry and most other inquiries has been in exactly the same terms. Naturally Tony Morris informed me of these issues which the interim report would cover and provided me with a draft. Otherwise, the meeting would have been pointless. Following the meeting between Tony Morris and me I authorised Tony Morris to communicate with the Queensland Police Service to start the ball rolling and he did that. If there have been any leaks in relation to this matter, that is a matter for others to consider. It had originally been suggested that Mr Morris enter the Executive Building through the back door for our meeting. Both Mr Morris and I felt that this was unseemly and inappropriate. Mr Morris took the view that if he was spotted sneaking into the building, hiding around corners and lurking in the shadows it would create an impression that either he or I had something to hide. Accordingly, both Mr Morris and I agreed that, as the meeting was essential and as neither of us had anything to hide, the appropriate course was to let the media know that the meeting was taking place and do it in an open and transparent way. Regarding the venue of the meeting, as the commission of inquiry is not sitting this week but parliament is it was mutually convenient to meet at the Executive Building, part way. Both Mr Morris and I are more interested in getting things done than in meeting expectations that some others may have which are not in the interests of getting things done. In fact, for this morning’s hand over of the report I did offer to come to the commission of inquiry’s offices at the Magistrates Court building, but there were obviously problems with this. Firstly, the inquiry courtroom is in use by the Magistrates Court this week. Secondly, any public event in that building would have to have been cleared with the Chief Magistrate, Judge Irwin, who is lending facilities to the inquiry. Thirdly, parliament is sitting this morning and it would have been untimely for me to be at the other end of town. Mr Morris suggested the old Legislative Council chamber as a suitable neutral venue being where, for example, the Governor opens parliament. I wanted to deal with those issues because I do not want any nonsense that will distract us from resolving these matters. Finally, I have asked my office to distribute to members of the House a table that went to cabinet this morning. It is a comparison of existing offences in the act and new offences under the bill. I am doing that so that members will be better informed when the debate comes up this afternoon. It is one piece of paper. It will give members better information about how to proceed with this debate. I thank honourable members for their attention on this matter. As I have said, I am absolutely determined that we will do everything we can to fix this problem. 10 Jun 2005 Ministerial Statement 2071

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

Office of the Speaker Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.48 am): I table a copy of a report by the Speaker on trips undertaken to: the United Kingdom and Singapore from 3 September to 26 September 2004; Singapore from the 7 to 11 June 2004; and Thailand from 28 January to 3 February 2003. This is the material supplied to me by the Speaker at my request. I table a letter I wrote to the Speaker on 30 May 2005 asking for an urgent detailed report on his overseas trips, on the basis that I wanted to assess the public value of his travel and would welcome him seeking my approval for trips that did not have my prior approval. The Deputy Premier and I subsequently met with the Speaker. This week I promised I would table the Speaker’s report and now I deliver on that commitment. In view of the fact that the Director of Public Prosecutions has not made a determination on matters referred to that office by the Crime and Misconduct Commission, I am concerned that any determination as to whether or not to approve the Speaker’s travel could be prejudicial to the DPP’s determination. I am concerned about that. I have consulted with the Clerk. I share his view that the test in determining whether approval should be given, or whether reimbursement is required, is whether the expenditure was primarily for an official purpose—Speaker or Parliamentary Service related issues or other official purpose—and in all of the circumstances reasonable. I have now, as I promised, tabled the reports from the Speaker. As soon as the DPP has made a determination, I will apply this test and make an appropriate recommendation.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

Incorporation of Ministerial Statements Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.49 am): On other matters, I indicate to the House that on Tuesday next week I will leave for a Smart State trade, biotechnology and investment mission to the United States and Italy. I also want to report on trade performance for the March 2005 quarter, Exercise Orchard Alert, give the House an update on nurse practitioners, and ammonium nitrate. I also want to report on the community cabinet to be held on the Gold Coast on Sunday, 10 July, and Monday, 11 July. I report to the House in relation to the latest figures on waiting times. I also want to report to the House on the Queensland Week business lunch today and Reconciliation Awards for Business. I also want to report on Vivian Solon. Mr Acting Speaker, with your approval, I seek leave to have all of those ministerial statements incorporated in Hansard. Leave granted. BIO2005 On Tuesday next week I will lead a Smart State trade, biotechnology and investment mission to the United States and Italy. More than 80 biotechnology and business leaders will join me for various sections of the mission. The main focus of the mission will be to attend BIO 2005 in Philadelphia in order to advance the Smart State’s position as a biotechnology hub. BIO 2005 is the largest international biotechnology convention and exhibition in the world and members of my mission and I will be talking to as many people as possible among the 20,000 industry leaders, scientists, policy makers and academics from all areas of the life sciences industry. We will focus on: • Queensland’s biodiversity, • the exciting research being carried out in Queensland, • the Smart State companies exhibiting at BIO 2005 • the cutting-edge, biotechnology-related facilities we have built in the Smart State as part of the $2.4 billion we have invested in innovation, science and research since 1998 and the $473 million being spent over the next four years; • opportunities to enter into partnerships and co-operation with Queensland enterprises; • the fact that Queensland is an ideal location for international companies to establish a headquarters or Asia-Pacific office; • the opportunities for investing in Smart State biotech ventures. I will also be seeking to increase Queensland exports of goods and services to the USA and Italy, especially in the areas of tourism, creative industries, food and education. While much of the mission will involve new industries, I will also be promoting our traditional industries such as coal. There will be important meetings in the United States regarding the development of clean coal technology and the prospects for construction of coal-fired power plants which don’t contribute to global climate change. And in Italy I will talk to the major users of coal about Queensland’s clean coal, the clean coal technology and the way we are increasing our capacity to export more coal. I thank all the companies who are accompanying me because they are obviously keen to export and expand. 2072 Ministerial Statement 10 Jun 2005

Trade Missions The latest export results demonstrate that the Government’s five year Trade Strategy Export Solutions, launched in October 2001, continues to deliver excellent results for Queensland. In the 2005 January-March quarter, an additional 71 new exporters were added to the list of exporters. The number of new exporters since commencing the Strategy in 2001 was 512 at the end of May. These 512 new exporters have contributed an extra $690 million to the Queensland economy. My department has undertaken a range of strategic projects to assist Queensland companies to export. In the January-March quarter alone, these strategic projects generated approximately $55 million in confirmed export sales. Some examples of our achievements in the January- March quarter include: In India, a Queensland company signed a contract with Taj Hotels to provide water-saving systems for 10 hotels worth $160,000. In China, SIMTARS announced sales of 2 gas chronometers to China, totalling $90,000. SIMTARS will receive a deposit of $100,000 as part of a deal for a further 14 chronometers valued at $1 million. In the Middle East, a Queensland company has won a $6 million landscaping contract for a palace in Abu Dhabi. Gold Coast based Sunland Group and its joint venture partner Emirates Investments Group have made an early start on their $920 million Versace resort in Dubai with construction to begin in early 2006 with opportunities to emerge for Queensland suppliers. One of our marine companies has reported sales of $1 million in Dubai as a direct result of the marine trade mission led by my department. In the UK market, one of our companies which took part in the Queensland Government medical devices market research project, has generated exports to date valued at approximately $121,000. 80% of my department’s current strategic projects are focused on increasing export sales of knowledge intensive goods and services. Not only are more jobs being achieved, but “smart” jobs consistent with our Smart State strategy. The January-March quarter results show the continuing strength and diversification of Queensland’s export performance.

Counter-Terrorism In July, Queensland is hosting a counter-terrorism exercise in conjunction with the Australian Government as part of the National Counter-Terrorism Committee exercise program. Queensland’s efforts are focused on preventing an attack. But we also need to have the capability to respond and deal with the consequences of a terrorist incident, should it occur. Exercise Orchid Alert demonstrates my Government’s proactive approach to the threat of terrorism by further enhancing our ability to prevent, prepare for, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism. Exercise Orchid Alert has involved over six months of planning and will involve more than 20 Queensland and Australian Government agencies. The exercise program will incorporate a number of different activities including a deployment phase on 19-20 July, where agencies will practise their ability to respond in the field to a devised scenario. There are 5 supporting activities which allow agencies to practise specialist skills such as those required in situations involving Urban Search and Rescue, Dignitary Protection and Forensic capabilities. There are 6 discussion exercises which provide a forum for organisations to play out their planned responses to scenarios in a round table discussion. Themes across the exercise include the issues of communication and cooperation. We understand that managing the consequence of an actual terrorist act will involve a wide range of local, State and Australian Government agencies and non-Government agencies. By involving agencies from these sectors in this exercise we will improve our ability to work together and strengthen our collaboration with other key stakeholders. Queensland is committed to the continual enhancement of its counter-terrorism arrangements and capabilities. We will continue to test our arrangements every two years in line with the national exercise program.

Nurse Practitioners The significant challenges facing our health system call for new ways of thinking and working. This must involve more flexible roles for our health professionals, including nurses, and over recent years we’ve seen the expansion of the nursing role to include advance practice nurses and now nurse practitioners. The success of nurse practitioner trials that began in Queensland in July 2002 prompted the government to extend the trials. The current 12 month round of demonstration projects commenced between January and March this year, in the following areas: • QEII Hospital; • Southern Downs; • Charleville; • Redcliffe-Caboolture; • The Prince Charles Hospital; and • Townsville. 10 Jun 2005 Ministerial Statement 2073

The government is now looking at ways to fast-track the introduction of nurse practitioners, and we expect to see significant progress within the next 12 months. The Queensland State Steering Committee on Nurse Practitioners is overseeing the development and implementation of the nurse practitioner model in Queensland. We are working with nurses and other professionals to put in place the training, legislation and co-operation between professions that are prerequisites for the safety and success of nurse practitioners. Given the importance of this issue for the future of health services in Queensland, I will update the House on progress. Expert Panels The Queensland Nursing Council is establishing and training expert panels to assess applications from nurses to become nurse practitioners. These panels are expected to be operational after October 2005. Until Queensland universities are able to offer accredited nurse practitioner programs, the Queensland Nursing Council is proposing a three year grandfather arrangement, whereby nurses who have obtained a Masters Degree in Nursing or a related discipline may apply to become a nurse practitioner. In 2006, Queensland universities will begin offering formal masters level curricula. Four universities are preparing applications for course accreditation with the Queensland Nursing Council namely. They are Queensland University of Technology, Australian Catholic University, the University of Queensland, and the University of Southern Queensland. Legislative Reform The Health (Drugs and Poisons) Regulation has recently been amended to allow nurse practitioners (as endorsed by the Queensland Nursing Council) to prescribe medications according to a Drug Therapy Protocol. The Queensland Nurse Practitioner Drug Therapy Protocol is being developed with extensive consultation with stakeholders. It is expected to be finalised and approved by the end of July 2005. Queensland Health is investigating other amendments to allow nurses to request radiology tests (under the Radiation Safety Regulation 1999) and provide workers’ compensation certificates to patients (under the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003). Professional Accountability The success of the nurse practitioner model hinges on medical, nursing, and allied health professionals agreeing on who does what, when and who is accountable for clinical decisions. Quality and safety are paramount, and there must be agreement on the circumstances in which a nurse practitioner makes a clinical decision independent of a medical practitioner. This is being progressed through development of the Health Management Protocols and through the Queensland State Steering Committee on Nurse Practitioners. The Australian Medical Association (Qld) has indicated its “in principle” support for the introduction of nurse practitioners in a collaborative role with other health professionals. The AMA is on the Queensland State Steering Committee, which also includes the Queensland Divisions of General Practice; the Rural Doctors’ Association; Queensland Nursing Council; the Queensland Nurses Union; as well as the Queensland Health zonal representatives and the Principal Nursing, Allied Health and Medical Advisors to Queensland Health. It has links with the specialist interests of pharmacy and radiology through the Principal Allied Health Adviser as well as the Drug Therapy Protocol Committee. District Committees are responsible for the development of health management protocols, which also draw in specialist representation as required. By the end of this year, the State Steering Committee will have produced an Implementation Framework including: • whether the current level and mix of health services supports implementation of a nurse practitioner model; and • the availability of multi-disciplinary clinical support and supervision. National Consistency Nurse practitioners are working in other parts of Australia, but we need nationally consistent standards. The National Nursing and Nursing Education Taskforce (comprised of Australia’s leading nursing, nursing education, and training specialists) is developing a comprehensive national strategy and is due to report to the Australian Health Ministers’ Advisory Council by May 2006. This report will inform the Queensland Steering Committee on Nurse Practitioners.

COAG Mr Acting Speaker— You will recall that at the COAG meeting in June 2004, we agreed to limit access to security sensitive ammonium nitrate to only those people who could establish they had a legitimate need to use it. At that meeting, we also agreed that by 1 November 2004, all jurisdictions would endeavour to have in place legislative arrangements for a licensing regime to regulate security sensitive ammonium nitrate. Queensland played a lead role in the development of the nationally consistent regime and was the first Australian government to implement its licensing regime. In fact, Queensland is the only jurisdiction to meet the COAG deadline of 1 November 2004. 2074 Ministerial Statement 10 Jun 2005

On 1 November 2004, the Queensland Government declared security sensitive ammonium nitrate as an explosive and commenced regulating it through licensing arrangements under the Explosives Act 1999. A nationally agreed transition period was put in place to allow users and stakeholders to become compliant. This transition period will cease in Queensland on 30 June 2005 as agreed. Queensland’s licensing system is fully operational and the required security checking procedures are now in place. However, I understand Mr Acting Speaker, that the other States and Territories are still in the process of finalising their licensing regimes. The Explosives Inspectorate of the Department of Natural Resources and Mines has been working closely and collaboratively with all stakeholders in the ammonium nitrate supply chain. This collaboration is essential to ensure that the compliance process is as smooth as possible and that the impact on day to day operations is minimised. The Explosives Inspectorate has undertaken an extensive range of communications and awareness raising activities. Presentations and workshops have been held in a number of locations statewide including Mareeba, Brisbane, Rockhampton and Mackay, with further workshops planned for Toowoomba, Quilpie, Emerald, Bundaberg, Townsville, Cairns and Mount Isa. A number of new licence applications, and applications for licence amendments from existing explosives licence holders, are now being received by the Explosives Inspectorate. Currently, about 1400 existing explosives licence holders can use security sensitive ammonium nitrate, and the Explosives Inspectorate has been fielding up to 30 licence queries per day from Queenslanders. There is also anecdotal evidence from the Inspectorate that some primary producers are moving to alternative products for use on their crops, in preference to ammonium nitrate. As 30 June 2005 is fast approaching, I would encourage all Queenslanders who require a licence for security sensitive ammonium nitrate to apply as soon as possible. Mr Acting Speaker, it is a sad fact of life that measures such as these are now required to prevent the misuse of ammonium nitrate products. However, our regulatory regime will limit the scope for its abuse in Queensland, making our community safer.

Community Cabinet, Gold Coast Mr Acting Speaker .. Cabinet is again to meet on the Gold Coast. It will be our fifth Community Cabinet of the year and the 84th since election in 1998. It will be on Sunday July 10 and Monday July 11. As I have said before—we will meet with, listen to and respond to Queenslanders wherever they live and work. It is all about us listening—and by continuing to keep in touch—by going to the people and listening to them on their turf and on their terms. This is the ideal opportunity for Coast residents to again meet first-hand with the State’s key decision-makers. The two-day gathering allows people to meet me, the Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries and Directors-General, but it will also allow the region to highlight its successes. Cabinet last met on the Gold Coast on 28 June 2004. Informal Community Cabinet proceedings will occur on Sunday 10 July from 1.30pm to 3.30pm, at the Sports Hall, Pacific Pines State High School, Santa Isobel Boulevard, Gaven. Formal deputations will follow at the Sports Hall from 3.30pm to 5pm that day. On Monday 11 July, Cabinet will meet from 9.30am at the Gold Coast Convention Centre, Cnr Gold Coast Highway and T E Peters Drive, Broadbeach. Deputations can be booked by filling out request forms from: 1. Electorate Office, Member for Gaven, Robert Poole MP, Suite 6, Maid of Sker Building, 39—41 Nerang Street, Nerang, Qld, 4211. Phone 5502 1411 Fax 5502 1433; 2. Electorate Office, Member for Albert, the Hon Margaret Keech MP, 2 Rochester Drive, Mt Warren Park, Qld, 4207. Phone 3807 0809. Fax 3807 6296; 3. Electorate Office, Member for Broadwater, Peta-Kaye Croft MP, Suite 17, Runaway Bay Marina, 247 Bayview Street, Runaway Bay, Qld, 4216. Phone 5529 6000. Fax 5529 6070; 4. Electorate Office, Member for Burleigh, Christine Smith MP, 1 Paradise Avenue, Miami, Qld, 4220. Phone 5526 6024. Fax 5526 6135; 5. Electorate Office, Member for Mudgeeraba, Dianne Reilly MP, Mudgeeraba Professional Centre, Swan Lane, Mudgeeraba, Qld, 4213. Phone 5569 0482. Fax 5569 0675; 6. Electorate Office, Member for Southport, Peter Lawlor MP, Shop 2, 24 Musgrave Avenue, Chirn Park, Qld, 4215. Phone 5532 5068. Fax 5532 0394; 7. Cabinet Secretariat on 1800 448 377 or 1800 448 378; 8. Council Chambers, Gold Coast City Council, Nerang-Southport Road, Nerang, Qld, 4211. Phone 5582 8211. Fax 5596 3653. Deputation request forms must be received by noon on Wednesday 29 June 2005. Cabinet has in the past 12 months met at: Innisfail, the Ekka, Queensland Art Gallery, the Whitsundays, Brisbane Convention Centre (Ausbiotech), Caboolture, Charleville, Ipswich, the University of Queensland (Smart Queensland launch) and Kawana. 10 Jun 2005 Ministerial Statement 2075

Hospital Waiting Lists Federal Government statistics for elective surgery show that Queensland has the shortest waiting times in Australia. The Opposition has conned some gullible sections of the media into believing these official figures have been fudged. The Opposition says the waiting times are shortest because people can’t get on the waiting lists and that it takes ages to get on the lists. Proof that this is a con comes from these same official Federal Government figures which show that there were more hospital admissions for every 1,000 of the population in Queensland than anywhere else. In other words—not only are our waiting times the shortest but we are admitting more patients into our hospitals for treatment than anyone else. I am delighted that these official figures prove once again that doctors and nurses working in Queensland Health’s public hospitals provided the best results in the country. Queenslanders can see for themselves on the internet if they go to the web site of the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare report on Australian Hospital Statistics 2003-04 and go to table 6.2 on page 120. It is a table of waiting times for all states and territories. As I have repeatedly said, there are problems in the health system which will be fixed by the Morris Inquiry and the Forster Review but we should not lose sight of the fact that there are thousands of people working in Queensland Health who are providing a wonderful service to Queenslanders. Waiting times are taken for the number of days patients have had to wait when 50 per cent and 90 per cent of those waiting are admitted. The average for Queensland for the 50% mark was 22 days, compared with 27 in Victoria and Western Australia and 46 in the ACT—and an Australian average of 28. The average for Queensland for the 90% mark was 115 compared with the next best of 175 in Victoria, a high of 373 in the ACT and an Australian average of 193. Only 2.8 per cent of Queenslanders waited longer than a year for surgery, compared with the next best of 3.3 in Victoria, a high of 10.4 in the ACT and an Australian average of 3.9.

Reconciliation Awards Today I will declare open the 2005 Reconciliation Awards for Business open for nominations at the Queensland Week Business Lunch. Now in their third year, the Reconciliation Awards for Business provide an excellent opportunity to showcase the positive benefits of reconciliation and acknowledge the great work of Queensland businesses who are striving for a better and smarter future. These awards are a great way to recognise Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous individuals, employers and organisations promoting cross-cultural awareness and progressing reconciliation in Queensland. My Government recognises and acknowledges the disadvantages that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have had to endure as a result of past Government policies. That’s why my Government is working in a range of ways to see that all Queenslanders have the same opportunities in employment, education and a fairer future in the Smart State. The Reconciliation Awards for Business are part of our plan. The calibre of nominations in 2004 was outstanding and testament to the excellent cross cultural partnerships established across our Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous communities. 2004 winners of the Reconciliation Awards for Business included; Jim Ralph Employment Consultancy in Ipswich, Paronella Park and the Baddagun Aboriginal Corporation, Walker Family Tours in the Daintree and the North Queensland Gas Pipeline Project. In 2005 Awards are offered in the following categories: • Emerging business • Employment • Joint ventures Awards will be judged by a panel of business, industry and public sector representatives and nominations close on Monday 18 July 2005. Winners will be announced at a ceremony at Parliament House in September. The Reconciliation Awards for Business demonstrate the commitment of the Queensland Government, and Queenslanders, towards reconciliation. I encourage all Queensland businesses that are making a difference to nominate for an Award More information on the Awards and nomination forms are available at www.reconciliation.qld.gov.au

Vivian Solon Representatives of Vivian Solon issued a media release last night thanking the Queensland Government for establishing a central contact point for Ms Solon in Queensland to ensure available assistance is coordinated. The release acknowledged my government is committed to providing assistance to Ms Solon to help her resettle and will commence investigations into avenues of assistance for her. In the release, Mr George Newhouse said “We contacted the Queensland Government today and were surprised how quickly they reacted to our request. “Dealing with the State Government of Queensland and the Federal Government was like chalk and cheese. Mr Newhouse went on to say “The Federal Government is nitpicking and point-scoring without considering the outcomes for a wheelchair bound woman.” Vivian is not only wheelchair bound, she also has difficulty manipulating her hands. She requires constant personal and medical attention and care. She does not own even the most basic household items. 2076 Ministerial Statement 10 Jun 2005

Vivian is keen to come home to Australia, but she needs proper facilities and care. My Government will do whatever we can to assist, but it really is up to the Federal Government now to respond to her requests for help. According to the media release, Vivian’s representatives are disappointed that the Howard Government has still not properly addressed: • Vivian’s continuing need for a carer; • Reuniting Vivian with her children; • Vivian’s travel arrangements and visas to allow family members to accompany her; • Some money for Vivian to live on; and • Vivian’s continuing accommodation needs. Senator Kay Patterson responded last night with a media release in which she said the Commonwealth had agreed to pay Vivian’s airfares, but accuses Vivian of not yet saying when she wants to return. Senator Patterson went on to accuse Vivian of having failed so far to accept the assistance package the Commonwealth has offered. I don’t know whether what Senator Patterson said is correct, but I do know that Vivian Solon has been through a tragedy through no fault of her own and deserves better.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

Morris Inquiry Hon. GR NUTTALL (Sandgate—ALP) (Minister for Health) (9.50 am): It is imperative that my department manages Queensland’s medical work force to the highest possible standards. Commissioner Morris has found that this has not been happening in a number of key areas and, as the Premier has already indicated, it will be fixed. Section 135 of the Medical Practitioners Registration Act 2001 is a very important piece of legislation. It enables the minister, or a holder of a ministerial delegation, to determine an area of need for a medical service if it is considered that there are insufficient medical practitioners in the state, or part of the state, to provide that service. This is how Patel came to Queensland. As we all now know, temporary resident doctors usually enter the country to work in an area of need. It is vital that we get the administrative process for declaring areas of need right. Clearly, relying on a nine-year-old policy document is simply not good enough. Again, it will be fixed. This morning I have directed my department to immediately develop a new policy that implements in full the commissioner’s recommendations. As a matter of urgency, I will be discussing with the director-general of my department the serious responsibilities that come with ministerial delegations. I will be seeking assurance that those responsibilities are understood and asking whether we need to look at other arrangements to get this policy right. As a matter of urgency, the director-general and I will meet with the Office of the Health Practitioner Registration Boards to discuss its possible future role in exercising these important delegations. We will fix the problems identified in the interim report. I will bring a submission to cabinet on 27 June and over the next couple of weeks we will do whatever it takes to get the policy in this important area right and deliver on the commissioner’s recommendations.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

Criminal History Checks, Mature-Age Students Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Minister for Education and the Arts) (9.52 am): The Queensland government is committed to keeping our school students safe from the threat of sexual predators and any criminal element in our schoolyards. That is why in January this year we implemented new legislation requiring the criminal history checking of mature-age students seeking to enrol in our state high schools. Today I am pleased to announce to the House that the system is working. Between January and May the department, in close consultation with the Queensland Police Service, has received and considered 971 applications from mature-age students. Of these, 949 mature-age applicants have been issued with positive notices, meaning that they have been found to be suitable to enrol in our state schools. Some 13 are still being processed, eight have been issued with negative notices and one has been asked to show cause as to why enrolment would not be harmful. These eight mature-age applicants who have been issued with negative notices have been found to be unfit to continue their education in the company of schoolchildren. This means that they are unable to enrol in state schools other than the School of Distance Education. These eight applicants were found to have had significant criminal histories, ranging from recent drug offences to violent robberies to assaults, and are naturally unsuitable people to be present on high school campuses. What this shows us is a system that works in the best interests of Queensland adolescents and teenagers and goes a long way to keeping them protected from potential harm while they are at school. 10 Jun 2005 Questions 2077

We know the potential for harm and for criminal influence from a mature, street-wise person with a history of drug use or violence if that person was able to infiltrate a high school. However, that is not to say that we are denying an education to any mature-age student who wants to return to the education system—far from it. If applicants issued with negative notices through this system are determined to continue with their education, they are entitled to enrol with the School of Distance Education and not be subject to these checks. Furthermore, this system is not intended to discourage mature-age students from furthering their education. In fact, of the 971 applications received during the last five months, 186 applicants were found to actually have a criminal history. But these offences were either extremely minor—traffic offences, for example—or perhaps dated back many years. Of those 186 applicants, only the eight I mentioned earlier were issued negative notices. People who may have committed an offence when they were younger or have been found guilty of a minor crime deserve a second chance, and we encourage all mature-age applicants who want to go back to school to make an application. Departmental officers use discretion and take into consideration the nature of the conviction or charge, the time when the offence was committed and other matters such as the applicant’s intended mode of attendance at the school. I am sure that my colleagues will agree that the protection of our students across the education system is vital, and criminal history checking is a fundamental part of that.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

BIO2005 Hon. T McGRADY (Mount Isa—ALP) (Minister for State Development and Innovation) (9.55 am): In just over one week’s time, the strength and diversity of Queensland’s biotechnology sector will be shown at the world’s biggest biotechnology conference, BIO2005, in Philadelphia. The Premier and I will be very proud to lead a 76-member delegation representing some of the state’s leading biotech companies, universities and research and commercialisation bodies. BIO2005 is a very important project for the Queensland economy. Having a strong presence in Philadelphia will enable one of Queensland’s fastest growing industries to pursue new business and investment opportunities from around the world. This will create new export markets for Queensland and more jobs for Queenslanders working in the biotech sector and related industries. Let us take a look at what happened last year. Industry has estimated that our involvement in BIO2004 will generate more than $33 million for Queensland over two years. The state government plans to go all out this year to attract even more international interest in our state. We will make a number of exciting announcements, including the details of a new biotech strategic plan for Queensland as well as a host of initiatives to bring global firms to the Smart State. This adds up to a very exciting three days between 19 and 22 June. I look forward to bringing members news of BIO2005 and the many benefits it will bring to our state.

PRIVILEGE

Comments by Minister for Emergency Services Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Honourable members, on 16 May 2005 the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and member for Callide wrote to me alleging that the Hon. Chris Cummins MP, Minister for Emergency Services, deliberately misled the House in his response tabled on 22 March 2005 to question on notice No. 345. In particular, the member referred to the reason given by the minister for delays in the construction of a new ambulance station at Emu Park. The member also referred to subsequent comments attributed to the minister that appeared seven weeks later in the 13 May 2005 edition of the Morning Bulletin. These comments suggest a further reason for the existence of a further reason for the delay in the project. I am unaware of the accuracy of the comments in the Morning Bulletin attributed to the minister. However, the comments do not in themselves establish that the minister’s response to question on notice No. 345 in March was incorrect or misleading. I find that there is no basis to demonstrate a prima facie contempt of deliberately misleading the House and intend to take no further action in respect of this matter.

QUESTIONS Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Honourable members, I believe it is important that I make a few observations to the House about questions, both on notice and without notice. Standing order 115 clearly outlines the general rules applying to both types of questions. The standing orders provide, amongst other things, that questions shall be brief and related to one issue, shall not contain arguments, inferences or imputations or ask for opinions. In recent days I have made comment about 2078 Questions Without Notice 10 Jun 2005 needless preambles in questions without notice. I note that this problem also occurs in questions on notice. I am also becoming concerned at the number of parts or subquestions in questions. I would urge all members to take the time to read standing order 115 and frame their questions more carefully, having regard to the rules. I also advise that the clerks at the table are able to assist members with the drafting of questions to ensure that they are in order. In relation to answers to questions, I note recent correspondence from members of the opposition essentially complaining about the quality of answers and alleged unparliamentary language, imputations or personal reflections in answers to questions. In relation to answers to both types of questions, I advise as follows. The general rules of procedure apply to answers. Therefore, answers should not contain matters that would not be allowed in the House generally. For example, unparliamentary language, imputations or personal reflections offending standing order 234 are not permitted in answers. Answers that offend the rules may be ruled out of order. However, apart from that, it is a longstanding rule of practice and procedure in our House that the answer to a question is a matter for the minister. The Speaker cannot intervene to improve the quality of an answer or force the minister to answer the question in the way that members asking would prefer. If a minister does not answer the question to a member’s satisfaction, the member can either ask further questions on the topic or make whatever comment in debate or elsewhere they believe is appropriate given the answer. In conclusion, I remind all members that questions are a vital part of parliament’s proceedings, especially to its scrutiny function, and it is important that both members asking questions and ministers answering questions observe not only the rules but also the spirit of such proceedings.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Patel, Dr J Mr SPRINGBORG (10.01 am): I refer the Premier to his cruel speculation regarding web access from Oregon to the Dr Patel letter, which he has claimed may have been from Labor’s ‘Dr Death’ himself. Despite the Premier’s desperate attempt at distraction and spin, why is it that with all the resources of the Police Service and the Premier’s government at his disposal it was the opposition that has been able to confirm that the access was actually by a Dr Russ Faria, a family physician from Oregon who read about Labor’s ‘Dr Death’ in the headlines of the Portland Oregonian and has confirmed with the opposition his access of 1 June and also in the latter part of May? Given that the Premier’s government paid for Dr Patel to escape in the first place, just how hard has the Premier really been looking for Labor’s ‘Dr Death’? Mr BEATTIE: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question and say that I am delighted that he has advised the House of that. It proves that putting the letter on the web site worked. It sent a message to the world that Patel is not a suitable doctor. It sent a message to the world that anyone who is involved in the medical fraternity should not have anything to do with him. I am delighted that a doctor from Oregon, which is where Dr Patel has a home, has noted that Dr Patel is not a person with whom he should share his medical practice. Putting the letter on the web site worked. I am delighted that the opposition has come in here and confirmed that the government’s strategy has worked. I want to make sure that Dr Patel never works as a doctor ever again anywhere in the world. That is what I want to see. How do we do that? We tell the world via the net. It is fantastic that a doctor from Oregon is out there doing that. So I thank the Leader of the Opposition. Well done! Mr SPRINGBORG: I rise to a point of order. He actually confirmed all this on springborg.com.au., not on the Premier’s web site. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The Leader of the Opposition knows that that is not a point of order. This is the fourth day of sittings. I warn members that I am not going to allow frivolous points of order. Mr BEATTIE: The reality is that what the Leader of the Opposition has done today has just confirmed that the government’s strategy is working. I think that is fantastic. I said that we would send a message to the world and we have sent a message to the world. The important thing is that the world is listening. Mr Schwarten: He wanted to keep it quiet. Mr BEATTIE: That is right. The good thing about this is that it is not me saying that the world is listening; the Leader of the Opposition is saying that. I have to say that is the sort of bipartisan support I like. I want to put it on the record today that I am gratified by the detective work undertaken by the Leader of the Opposition. All I can say is: good on you, digger. That is absolutely fantastic. Thank you for confirming to the House that the government’s strategy is working. 10 Jun 2005 Questions Without Notice 2079

Patel, Dr J Mr SPRINGBORG: That was a triumph of forensic analysis over speculation and spin. I direct my second question to the Premier. Is it not true that the information that has been provided at the public hearings of the Morris inquiry was known by his government three months ago and, for that matter, had been provided to the management of the Bundaberg Hospital long before that without any action being taken by his government? Now after aiding Labor’s ‘Dr Death’ to escape in the first place, the Premier has finally been forced to act. But with regard to many of these recommendations, is it not true that action should have been taken by the Premier’s government months ago? Mr BEATTIE: Just so I am clear, the Leader of the Opposition is talking about the health department submission to the inquiry? What information is the Leader of the Opposition talking about? I am trying to be helpful. Mr SPRINGBORG: Let me clarify. I am referring to the information regarding the patients’ deaths and the matters that were provided to the Police Service and Queensland Health months ago. Mr BEATTIE: Fair enough. The people of Bundaberg have been to hell and back through this. We all know that. If both sides agree on one thing, we agree on that. We needed to have an independent royal commission established to ensure that every piece of information that was provided by the health department to the government was tested objectively by a fiercely independent royal commission. That is what is happening. The deaths that have taken place in Bundaberg needed to be dealt with by a very effective legislative and legal tool, that is, a royal commission. That is exactly what has happened. Frankly, after receiving some of the initial information, neither the minister nor I were prepared to accept the information that we were given without it being tested by a royal commission. That is the appropriate thing to be done. The royal commission enables that information to be tested by someone fiercely independent. No-one in this place or anyone else can argue about the fierce independence of Tony Morris. Not only that, the royal commission also gives the people of Bundaberg who have suffered through all of this an opportunity to go before this royal commission and not only share the grief that they have gone through but also be given an opportunity to ensure that their experience is never repeated by anyone else again, that is, that the system can be improved. I am not making and will not make excuses for what has happened. What happened is simply unacceptable and unforgivable. That is why we have moved to implement the recommendations of this report that was given to us today. We are implementing those recommendations today because those people should never have gone through this in the first place. There are things that happened that should never have happened. Members will not get any excuses from me or the minister about that. Unemployment Rate Mr POOLE: My question is directed to the Premier. It is reported that the state’s unemployment position remains under five per cent. Is this true? Can the Premier detail just how many jobs have been created in this state since 1998? Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for his question. Over the past seven years I have had no greater privilege than watching Queensland’s job meter rise. Since June 1998 Queensland has created an extra 382,300 jobs. That is just phenomenal. I have to say that is almost beyond my wildest dreams. Mr Lucas: It is great being a Labor loyalist. Mr BEATTIE: That is what the Labor Party is all about. Despite Queensland having less than 20 per cent of Australia’s population, since June 1998 we have created 28 per cent of all new jobs in Australia. I ask members to think about that. Queensland has about 19 per cent of the population. In other words, we are fighting above our weight. In fact, we are leading Australia. Of the jobs that were created, 245,200 of them were full time. That means that 33.4 per cent of the Australian total of full-time jobs were created in Queensland. That is why we have the lowest level of unemployment in Australia. The Australian Bureau of Statistics shows that Queensland’s trend unemployment rate has been at or below five per cent for seven consecutive months and below the national unemployment rate for 10 months in a row. Queensland’s trend unemployment rate for May was 4.9 per cent compared to the national trend unemployment rate of 5.1 per cent. We are on target to achieve the budget forecast year-average unemployment rate in 2004-05 of five per cent— Queensland’s lowest rate in 30 years. Lawrence was seven when we had this unemployment rate the last time round. Just think about that! Mr Springborg: I was working then, too. Mr BEATTIE: I just say to Lawrence that we are very happy he was born—do not misunderstand me—and we will be there for his birthday. 2080 Questions Without Notice 10 Jun 2005

As the jobs factory of Australia, our productivity is rising. Over the past 12 months we generated 112,600 jobs—33.6 per cent of the national total. This represents the highest annual increase in employment of any state. Nearly two-thirds of the new jobs created in the past five years were full time. Incredibly, unemployment has stayed below five per cent despite us having the highest participation rate on record of 66.6 per cent—the highest number of people ever looking for jobs in the state’s history. The green paper that the Minister for Employment, Training and Industrial Relations and I released yesterday is designed to maintain jobs growth in the future. We have a skills shortage and in some areas it is critical, but without the right skills in the right places we will lose our competitive edge. As in other facets of the Smart State, without innovation in skills and training we risk stagnation. We need Queenslanders to comment on our proposed reforms to vocational education and training so that we can continue powering the jobs factory. I promised jobs, jobs, jobs and we have delivered, delivered, delivered. The next challenge for us is skills, skills, skills and that is exactly what we are going to deliver as well. Patel, Dr J Mr SEENEY: My question without notice is to the Premier. Given the Premier’s long ministerial statement this morning and his self-congratulations on finally beginning to act to address the problems that have beset the health system and Bundaberg Base Hospital, in particular, will the Premier now finally apologise to the opposition and apologise to the member for Burnett, in particular, for the attacks that his government levelled towards us and the member for Burnett when we first raised this issue in this parliament? Mr BEATTIE: Let me make it clear: there is nothing self-congratulatory about any of this— absolutely nothing. There is no room for anybody to be gloating about this interim report. There is no room for us to be gloating about it and there is no room for anyone to be gloating about it. If the member has interpreted anything I have said to be self-congratulatory in any way then that is a wrong interpretation. I have not done that, and I reject that. The government in a number of areas here has been embarrassed by what happened in Bundaberg, and so we should be. I have apologised to the people of Bundaberg, and so we should have. I have said to the House before that I make no apologies for saying that, frankly, we could have done better. I am not going to try in any way to make excuses for what has happened. I have made that clear. Mr Seeney: Are you going to apologise to Rob? Acknowledge that he brought the issue up when your health minister didn’t know about it. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! That is enough. You have made your point. Mr BEATTIE: The other thing I wanted to say is this— Mr Seeney: You’re not going to. Mr BEATTIE: I am going to come back to it. Mr Seeney: You’re not big enough. Government members interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Hold it! Let me deal with this. There are two things I want to say here. In terms of getting Patel to return to Australia—I do not want to leave this misunderstanding—now that this reference has been made by the commission, we will move heaven and earth to try to get him back within the law. We will do that. In terms of what happened in Bundaberg and who should be congratulated, in my view Toni Hoffman should be congratulated. Toni Hoffman, who I have written to in the last few days authorising her to make whatever public comments she wants—and I have done that previously— Mr Copeland interjected. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Member for Cunningham—253. Mr BEATTIE: Can I be really frank: it is a pretty miserable day if politicians are going to try to take political credit for human misery. I think it is pathetic on everybody’s part. We should not do it and those opposite should not do it either. If it were not for Toni Hoffman, who had the courage to come forward, no-one would be any the wiser in here. Miss Simpson: You just about drove her to suicide. Mr BEATTIE: You cannot even allow me to make a tribute to Toni Hoffman without interjecting. Miss Simpson: She was vilified by your mob. Mr BEATTIE: Not by the minister and not by me. Toni Hoffman is a great Queenslander and I have enormous regard for her. The people who should be applauded today are people like Toni Hoffman and the people who had the guts to be whistleblowers. I stand by all of that. This is not about political credit. This is about ensuring we do the right thing. I am not going to move away from the fact that Toni Hoffman is the hero here. I am prepared to acknowledge that Mr Messenger did what he should do as a 10 Jun 2005 Questions Without Notice 2081 local member and raised these matters. He has pursued this matter. Yes, he should have done all those things. Miss Simpson interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Hang on! Does the member want me to answer this or does she just want to carry on? The minister has tried to respond to this. The member for Bundaberg has responded to this. We have tried to respond to this. I acknowledge that, as a local member, the member for Burnett has worked hard to bring this to the attention of the inquiry and he should take appropriate credit for it. Science and Research Mrs DESLEY SCOTT: My question without notice is to the Premier. Premier, the success of the Smart State snowball continues. How has the state’s investment in science and research been returned? Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for Woodridge for her question because she knows that, as a result of this, science people in her electorate are going to have their lives prolonged and saved. That is what the QIMR is about. Among all the exciting research under way in the Smart State, there is none more worthy than health and medical research at the QIMR. Michael Good’s team are, in my view, the real heroes of research in this state. Our health and medical institutes are beacons of hope for people with chronic and debilitating illness and injuries as well as for sufferers of genetic conditions and their children. Every institute and hospital research centre is a gem. But today I will single out the Queensland Institute of Medical Research. QIMR, as it is known, is the largest medical research centre in the Southern Hemisphere, with more than 800 scientists and support staff. In five years QIMR has recruited 16 senior faculty members including our newly announced Queenslander of the Year, Dr Geoff Hill, and each has established a major research group. Six of these senior people hail from overseas. They are among more than 100 personnel who are visiting from other institutions. QIMR has earned the backing of the Queensland government as well as other funding sources. For example, last year the government awarded QIMR $2.52 million to establish a collaborative venture: the Queensland Viral Testing and Product Characterisation Centre in Brisbane. The centre is a major step forward in the development of Queensland’s medical drug development industry. Last year I announced a $500,000 senior research fellowship over five years for ovarian cancer research by QIMR’s Dr Penny Webb. Last year the institute also received the Peter Doherty Award from Education Queensland, as the minister for education would know. The government also granted $28 million, including $8 million in land value, to the QIMR Clive Berghofer Cancer Centre. Last year QIMR had the distinction of gaining more than $8 million from the United States National Institute of Health, which is believed to be the most this institute has ever granted an Australian organisation. In five years, competitive funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council to QIMR has grown from $5 million to $17 million. QIMR has six companies including Q-Pharm—Queensland’s pre-eminent dedicated phase 1 clinical trials centre, with 60 employees—and Q-Gen, an accredited facility producing materials for pre-clinical research with 16 employees. So QIMR has a diverse patronage and a strong international network. No researcher is an island—the brainy people of our world must cross-fertilise and add value to each other’s work. That is how life-saving breakthroughs eventuate. That is why QIMR is not only fantastic in Australian terms but also internationally renowned. Out of this program, as I said at the beginning to the member for Woodridge, people’s lives will be saved. On Tuesday I, along with the minister for innovation, Tony McGrady, embark on a visit to the international biotechnology conference in Philadelphia. There will be 80 scientists accompanying us and they will include representatives from QIMR. We are determined to build a Smart State, with research institutions like this as part of it. The Smart State is very broad and very innovative, as we know—for example, even including the Premier’s award for drama last night, which was the first performance of the new season. I thought it was a fantastic performance, which the minister for arts and I attended. These are the sorts of things that will give Queensland the edge. This is about opening up our minds with innovation, research and creativity that will give us the future we need. That is why the QIMR is so important for the Smart State. It is not the only one. We have the Institute of Molecular Bioscience at the University of Queensland, QUT, Griffith University, the Mater—the whole lot. We have the brains coming here. There is a brain gain, not a brain drain anymore. Ambulance Levy Mr McARDLE: My question is directed to the Minister for Emergency Services. I refer the minister to the ministerial statement he made on Tuesday, claiming that the Liberal Party policy of exempting businesses from paying the ambulance levy would mean fewer ambulances, paramedics and stations. Given that the shortfall between the amount collected from the levy and the overall budget of the service is made up from consolidated revenue, I ask: why does the minister feel that business 2082 Questions Without Notice 10 Jun 2005 owners should be discriminated against by paying the levy on multiple occasions when most Queenslanders pay the levy once, or does the minister ascribe to the Labor Party policy of taxing business owners over and over and over? Mr CUMMINS: I thank the member for the question. Again, he has showed his ignorance of the portfolio, realising that the community ambulance cover is raised through Treasury. Every cent the Treasury gives the Queensland Ambulance Service for the community ambulance cover is spent on the Queensland Ambulance Service. The other side of the House wishes to reduce funding. It wishes to reduce the community ambulance cover, which will in turn reduce funding to the Queensland Ambulance Service. It would rather go back to the old days of the chocolate wheel. Dr Flegg interjected. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! I warn the member for Moggill under standing order 253. It is not your question. Mr CUMMINS: It would rather that the Queensland Ambulance Service personnel, instead of saving lives, were out there selling chook raffles. It wants to take us back to the dim, dark days when the service was underfunded. Through the subscription level, we received approximately $65 million a year. Mr McArdle: All you want to do is tax business. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! The member for Caloundra has asked his question. I now warn him under standing order 253. Honourable members, I do not understand why you are getting so excited. Can we just cool it a bit? Let the minister answer the question he has been asked. Mr CUMMINS: Mr Acting Speaker, with all due respect, what is happening in the Queensland Ambulance Service is very exciting. We are putting on 350 extra paramedics over a four-year period. Every electorate in the state will benefit from the community ambulance cover, yet the Liberal Party wants to take us back to the old days of underfunding and of budgets being in the red. Those opposite say, ‘Let’s reduce the community ambulance cover.’ Well, it is about time they tell us whether they are going to reduce the 350 paramedics that we are going to employ over a four-year period, whether they are going to reduce the 200 extra vehicles over a three-year period in this term of government or whether they are going to not proceed with the 20 new or refurbished ambulance stations that we are going to build in this term of government. Paramedics are working harder than ever before. Those opposite want to work them longer hours. We on this side of the House are very pleased that we are delivering for the people of Queensland. We are delivering better outcomes and improved response times. With 5,000 extra code 1 cases over the last financial year, we are still improving response times. The other side wants to reduce funding. It will reduce funding; it will reduce services. Ethanol Mr MULHERIN: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for State Development and Innovation. Can the minister advise the House as to how the ethanol action plan is being supported in regional Queensland? Mr McGRADY: I thank the member for Mackay for the question. I take a great deal of interest every morning in reading the regional press. One gets a far better understanding of what is happening right across Queensland. In doing so, I have discovered a startling new trend in the opposition. It goes something like this: when the opposition leader is here in Brisbane, he whinges and he whines about every single thing we do. There is nothing constructive from him; he just whinges and whines. When members of the National Party go back to their electorates, where Mr Springborg does not see them and cannot hear what they say, something happens. I think it is the fresh air from the farms. What happens is that all of a sudden the backbenchers start to talk about the positive things that the government is doing. Mr Malone interjected. Mr McGRADY: They try to get on the bandwagon of the government through our policies. I am really worried because the more I think about this, the more I worry that there is something sinister happening amongst those members opposite. I am very worried that maybe the member for Southern Downs’s leadership— Mr Mickel: Is under threat? Mr McGRADY: Is under threat. Ethanol is a great example. Back in his electorate, enjoying the wide open spaces and out of earshot of the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Lockyer, who is sitting here now, heaped praise on the Beattie government’s ethanol plan. He wrote to his local paper and said, ‘I urge all fuel station owners to submit their applications for assistance to upgrade bowsers to E10.’ Meanwhile, the Leader of the Opposition comes down to Brisbane and pours scorn on the plan, labelling this as simply a token part of the budget. Mr Schwarten: What humbug! 10 Jun 2005 Questions Without Notice 2083

Mr McGRADY: What humbug! There is nothing tokenistic about a $7.3 million commitment of taxpayers’ money. This is not a one-off. What did opposition members do when we held our very successful roadshow? They fell over themselves getting to the nearest camera to be seen on the roadshow. They tripped over the electric wires of the television cameras trying to get to the media. The reality is that it is people in those sugar towns which have a great involvement in the future of ethanol who are supporting us. It is time that the opposition got down to Canberra and tried to force the federal government to mandate ethanol. Health System Mrs PRATT: My question is directed to the Premier. Since the Premier has retrospectively offered $60,000 to cover the Speaker’s overseas travel expenses, will he now find $3,500 to ensure that one of my constituents gets the wheelchair recommended as best suited to his needs by his OT and previous MASS personnel so that this pensioner does not have a $3,500 millstone around his neck? Mr BEATTIE: I have just spoken to the Minister for Health. Is this the issue that the member raised with him the other day? Mrs Pratt interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Well, I understand that she is actually going to get the wheelchair. The minister is advising that. So, the answer to the question, based on the advice from the minister, is, yes, she is going to get the wheelchair. So there is a really happy ending. There is something I do want to clarify in relation to the Speaker’s position. I do not know where the figure of $60,000 has come from. That is Lawrence’s figure. I have not approved anything. I have not approved $60,000. I have not approved those trips. I have not approved anything of the kind. There were two requirements that I indicated to the House or publicly—I cannot remember which—that I would do. One is that there would be a report to the parliament by the Speaker. Two is that I said I would examine whether I would approve those trips in accordance with the guidelines as to whether they were official travel or not. I have honoured the first part of that today by tabling details of all of the Speaker’s overseas trips—the three that were referred to. I have done that, so I have honoured the first part of what I said. People will go and look at them and the press will beat up on them. That is fair enough. That is democracy. The opposition will have a look at it. It is entitled to do that. That is why the reports are tabled here. I have no problem with anyone doing that. I have tabled the three overseas reports, and the Speaker has provided me with that information. He signed it at the front, he has dated it today, and he went through it again this morning with my staff to make sure that he was satisfied with it. So we now have a report from the Speaker. The argument is: has he reported? Yes, he has now reported to the parliament in accordance with the guidelines. As I have indicated, I need to determine these issues further once the DPP has made its recommendations. The only reason I have done that, and I have advised the House of that today, is that I do not want in any way as Premier to do anything that could interfere with the normal processes of the DPP or any recommendations it may make. I have thought more about this and, on reflection, that was the appropriate thing to do. So there were two things that I was going to do. One was to ensure that the Speaker reported. He has done that, and I thank him for that. The second thing is that I now need to make a determination as to whether it fits within official business, as I indicated in my ministerial statement this morning. So we are 50 per cent of the way there, but it is the next 50 per cent that will be the most interesting. Brisbane City Council Budget Mr REEVES: My question without notice is to the minister for public works and housing. On Wednesday the Brisbane Lord Mayor, ‘Can’t Do’ Campbell Newman, brought down the Brisbane City Council budget. Can the minister please inform members what impacts he expects the budget to have with regard to affordable housing? Mr SCHWARTEN: The reality is that it is bad news for anybody who rents a home in Brisbane, because Newman is going to simply jack up the rates of people in rental homes. That simply means that people who are renting a home will now pay more rates than the people who own it. It is a disgraceful and despicable action, as far as I am concerned, and it sharply contrasts with what our government is doing in reducing land tax to make housing more affordable. Next time people see Newman up on his hind legs talking about affordable housing in Queensland— Mr Welford: Or homelessness. Mr SCHWARTEN:—or homelessness, the reality is that he speaks with a forked tongue. The truth is that the owners of 168,000 rental homes in Brisbane are about to jack up their rents to cover what Newman is doing. If Newman wants to be equitable he should have the decency and courage to 2084 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 10 Jun 2005 charge all home owners, not just pick out the rental section—the people who can afford to pay the least—and make them pay more rates. The fact of the matter is that a 70 per cent increase in some of these places will send an horrific message to landlords. It will be a disincentive for people to invest in housing and, of course, we will end up with higher rents. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Fraser): Order! The time allotted for questions has now expired.

MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS REGISTRATION AMENDMENT BILL

First Reading Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (10.31 am): I present a bill for an act to amend the Medical Practitioners Registration Act 2001. I present the explanatory notes, and I move— That the bill be now read a first time. Motion agreed to. Second Reading Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (10.31 am): I move— That the bill be now read a second time. The Bundaberg Hospital Commission of Inquiry was established on 26 April 2005. Earlier today I was given a copy of the commission of inquiry’s interim report. In the ministerial statement I made about the report I committed the government to implementing all of the report’s 10 recommendations. Recommendations A to D of the interim report were about amendments to the Medical Practitioners Registration Act 2001. The Medical Practitioners Registration Act 2001 governs the registration of medical practitioners. Recommendation A is implemented by clauses 3, 4 and 5 of the bill, which amend sections 84, 149 and 150J of the act respectively. These three sections currently describe when a registration may be cancelled. The amendments aim to improve and broaden the circumstances in which the giving of materially false information or a document will enable cancellation of a registration under the act. Each of the three amended sections do this through referral to the proposed new section 273 which, as I will explain, seeks to broaden the circumstances when information or a document is taken to be materially false. Recommendation B is implemented by clause 6 of the bill, which inserts a new section 161 into the act. The new section 161 does two things. First, the new section 161(1) adds a new limb to the existing offences in section 161 by creating the new offence of a person who is not a registrant allowing himself or herself to be held out as being eligible to registration under the act. Second, the new section 161(2) creates a new offence of a person who is not a registrant doing certain things under the colour or pretence of being a registered medical practitioner. The penalty for this second offence is set at up to 2,000 penalty units or three years imprisonment. Recommendation C is implemented by clause 7 of the bill, which lists the new indictable offences in the act. Recommendation D is implemented by clause 8 of the bill, which inserts a new section 273 of the act. The new section 273 defines the circumstances in which information or a document is taken to be materially false. The aim of comprehensively describing these circumstances is to ensure that the sorts of problems that have been raised through the Patel case are covered off in the act. As discussed in the interim report, these include the provision of a copy of a document that is no longer accurate or one that is incomplete or is misleading. The new section 273 then goes on to create new offences arising out of the provision of materially false information. Section 273(2) makes it an offence to give materially false information or a document to the Queensland Medical Board. The penalty for this offence is increased from 50 penalty units to 200 penalty units. Section 273(3) makes it an offence to breach section 273(2) in relation to an application for registration as a medical practitioner. The penalty is a maximum of 2,000 penalty units or three years imprisonment. Section 273(4) makes it an offence to not tell the Queensland Medical Board that information or a document previously provided is false as soon as the offender becomes aware that it is false. The penalty for this offence is 200 penalty units. Finally, the new section 273(5) makes it an offence for a person to act or practise as a registered medical practitioner after also contravening section 273(2), which relates to providing materially false information to the Queensland Medical Board when seeking registration, or failing to convey that the information was false after becoming aware of it. Again, the maximum penalty is 2,000 penalty units or up to three years imprisonment. 10 Jun 2005 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2085

For the record, I would ask that the ministerial statement that I delivered this morning and the ministerial statement delivered by the Minister for Health be viewed as being part of this second reading speech. I do that because, under the rules of interpretation, second reading speeches are in fact looked at in terms of interpretation of the legislation. Rather than waste the time of the House today, I want the ministerial statements of both the Minister for Health and me to be viewed as part of the second reading speech. I also want to draw to the attention of the House the media release issued by the royal commission last night. It sets out a number of matters that took place in discussion between the minister and me. I seek leave to have that incorporated in Hansard. Leave granted. Bundaberg Hospital Commission of Inquiry MEDIA RELEASE The Commissioner, Anthony Morris QC, together with Deputy Commissioners Sir Llew Edwards AC and Margaret Vider RN, will be attending on the Premier of Queensland, the Honourable Peter Beattie MP, at 9.00 am on Friday 10th June 2005, in the former Legislative Council Chamber, Parliament House, Brisbane. The purpose of the attendance will be to convey to the Premier an Interim Report with respect to certain matters arising out of the existing Terms of Reference of the Commission of Inquiry, and the evidence received by the Commission of Inquiry to date. Separately, the Commissioner and Senior Counsel assisting the Commission of Inquiry (Mr. David Andrews SC) met with the Premier on Wednesday afternoon (8th June), to inform the Premier regarding progress of the Inquiry. Other than arranging to present an Interim Report to the Premier, the outcomes of the meeting were: • The Premier invited Mr. Morris to advise whether he considers that any amendments to the existing Terms of Reference are required. It was agreed that there is no present need to amend the Terms of Reference. • The Premier invited Mr. Morris to advise if he expects that the Commission of Inquiry will conclude by the date originally scheduled, namely 30th September 2005. Mr. Morris informed the Premier that he remains optimistic that no extension of time will be necessary. David Groth Secretary 9 June 2005 Mr BEATTIE: Finally, I commend the bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Springborg, adjourned.

MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS REGISTRATION AMENDMENT BILL

Sitting Days and Hours; Remaining Stages; Allocation of Time Limit Order Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Leader of the House) (10.36 am), by leave, without notice: I move— That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended to enable the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill to pass through all its remaining stages at this day’s sitting. Further, that under the provisions of Standing Order 159, the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill be declared an urgent Bill and the following time limits apply to enable the Bill to be passed through its remaining stages at this day’s sitting- (a) Minister in reply by 3.55 pm (b) Second reading by 4.15 pm; (c) Consideration in detail by 4.27 pm; (d) Third reading by 4.29 pm; and (e) Long Title agreed by 4.30 pm. If the stage has not been completed by the time specified, Mr Speaker shall put all remaining questions necessary to pass the Bill, including clauses and schedules en bloc and any amendments to be moved by the Minister in charge of the Bill, without further amendment or debate. Further, that for this Bill, speaking times on the second reading debate be as follows- (a) Leader of the Opposition or nominee—20 minutes; (b) Other Members—10 minutes; and (c) Mover in reply—20 minutes." Motion agreed to. 2086 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 10 Jun 2005

APPROPRIATION (PARLIAMENT) BILL APPROPRIATION BILL

Second Reading (Cognate Debate)

Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill Resumed from 9 June (see p. 2061). Mr FENLON (Greenslopes—ALP) (10.38 am): I rise to speak in support of the appropriation bills for the 2005-06 Queensland budget. This is a budget that continues to establish a great future for Queensland at a macro level and at a micro level. It is very clear that we have a very sound macro approach in Queensland, especially with the Treasurer’s pronouncements in his budget speech, in three parts: for the first time there is a long-term plan for infrastructure development for south-east Queensland, including an additional investment of approximately $2 billion over four years for the first phase of the plan; the earmarking of more than $470 million over four years to support the 10-year Smart State Strategy; and a comprehensive set of measures to assist the most disadvantaged people in our communities, including an additional $180 million over four years for various disability services, further funding to support child safety reforms, initiatives to improve Indigenous health and a package of initiatives to address homelessness. Often governments are seen as remote from the people. If you ask the person in the street what a certain government is doing or has been doing or will do, they are often lost for words. That is not the case here in Queensland. When I talk to people in the street in my electorate and around the community one clear element that they all identify with is that the job that this government is getting on with is the Smart State Strategy. They see that as something that is very important in terms of the future of their families, the future of their children in particular in relation to their prospects of gaining good employment in the future. What I mean by good employment is well-paying jobs that are going to be sustained through high levels of education, and an education and career progression in jobs that will stand very proudly in the international marketplace. That is what we are about here in Queensland. At a micro level I am very pleased that the achievements that have been made in the past years under this Beattie government are being built on. Central to those achievements in my local area are the achievements in the education area; making sure that our schools at a micro level are going to achieve what is needed to drive the Smart State Strategy. Indeed, Greenslopes schools are great winners and the Greenslopes electorate is a winner out of this state budget. Some of the impacts of the budget include the following: $4.86 million to support people with disabilities and their families, including $973,000 to support adults with a disability to maintain their living arrangements and to participate in the community and $926,000 to assist families caring for people with high support needs. One of the clear areas that we are seeing emerge in electorates such as mine are families where parents are reaching a stage at which they are unable to care for a disabled adult and they are going to need a lot of support in the future. I hope that this funding will go a long way to supporting those people. Some $4.27 million will be allocated to community organisations under the Home and Community Care program; $30,000 for school-age care services at Coorparoo State School, Holland Park State School, Marshall Road State School, Our Lady of Mount Carmel Catholic Primary School and St Joachim’s Catholic Primary School, with a total project cost of $89,000; $58,000 for domestic violence prevention and $265,000 to provide counselling and support for young people at risk of homelessness, at a total state government contribution of $796,000; $502,000 to community organisations to provide mental health services; $96,000 to community organisations under the National Drug Strategy for alcohol and drug prevention campaigns; $14,573 to the Metropolitan Touch Association to upgrade lighting for touch football at Whites Hill Reserve at Camp Hill under the Minor Facilities Program for 2005; $38,136 to the Tarragindi Churches Tigers Sporting Association to install lighting at their field at Tarragindi—the other end of the electorate; $84,000 towards constructing roads and drainage works in the Greenslopes electorate and a $44,000 contribution to the 2005-06 pedestrian crossing improvements at Mount Carmel Catholic Primary School. There is an allocation of $250,000 to Seville Road State School to upgrade special education facilities, including $20,000 for fitout. Some $48,000 is also allocated to Wellers Hill State School to complete the major upgrade of the resource centre which is under way right at this moment to support ICT initiatives, including $3,000 for a fitout, with a total project cost of $488,000. This is a major project that we are getting on with at that school which will complement the brand-new prep year facility that will be constructed. There is an allocation of $25,000 to Holland Park State School to commence planning for additional amenities, including $1,000 for fitout, with a total project cost of $305,000, and $559,000 will be allocated under the Triple R Maintenance Program for the asbestos roof replacement program and for repainting at Coorparoo State School, at Holland Park State High School, asbestos roofing at Cavendish Road State High School, Coorparoo Secondary College and Holland Park State High School. I am very pleased that Greenslopes has figured very prominently in this asbestos removal program. It certainly does acknowledge that a lot of our schools are the older schools in Brisbane which fell into the era when that obnoxious building product was used. There is an allocation of $72,000 for 10 Jun 2005 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 2087 high priority maintenance related to reflooring at Cavendish Road State High School and Holland Park State High School and money has been allocated for the playground at Seville Road State School. We will also benefit in Greenslopes from $76,000 in continued funding for the South Brisbane Tactical Crime Squad, which targets known crime hot spots with a strong emphasis on investigating property crime and drug offences. I am thrilled to see a continuation of this program because the feedback I continue to get from officers in my electorate is that these crime squads really are effective. They go in and they clean up the hot spots which are now identified under the intelligence system that the police are working with very effectively. This is a great initiative. There is $5 million to continue the installation of noise barriers along sections of the Citytrain network with a total project cost of $19.72 million. There is $1.5 million to begin planning of the eastern busway from Buranda to Carindale and to start staged implementation including bus priority measures and signature bus stops along Old Cleveland Road, with a total project cost of $711.41 million. I hope that we are able to provide the businesses and residents along that road with some information about that process in the very near future. There is an allocation of $200,000 to continue installation of traffic management devices on the Pacific Highway, with a total project cost of $2.1 million; $1.38 million towards traffic safety improvements at various locations in Brisbane which we are part of and which we will benefit from; $425,000 to continue upgrading signal coordination in Brisbane, with a total project cost of $1 million; and $375,000 to continue placing traffic management devices within Brisbane, with a total project cost of $1.27 million. There are many other elements that I could mention here in terms of sorting out traffic issues around Brisbane which I know the residents of Greenslopes, who are really inner-city dwellers, will benefit from a great deal. An amount of $1.04 million is allocated to manage demand for services in the QEII Health Service District; $1.35 million to manage demand for the Mater Hospital Health Service District; $3.76 million to manage demand for the Princess Alexandra Hospital Health Service District; and $3.94 million for the Princess Alexandra Hospital Health Service District for medical equipment, including anaesthetic units, electrocardiographic machines, transmitters, medical video cameras, patient monitors, sanitisers and vital signs monitors. These are important complements to an already fantastic hospital service provided on the south side, especially through the essentially brand-new Princess Alexandra Hospital. The amount of $6.93 million is also allocated to continue the Mater Hospital redevelopment, with a total project cost of $111 million. The Mater is a great hospital that services our southside suburbs. The amount of $768,000 is allocated to the QEII Health Service District for medical equipment including autoclaves, dental chairs, dental units and dental lights. This $8 billion capital program is indeed the largest ever delivered in Queensland and it will have a flow-on effect in terms of employment that will affect all of Queensland. This is always a great driver of the Queensland economy that previous Queensland governments have ensured is in place. This $8 billion will continue to drive the building sector in Queensland. It is a $1.9 billion increase over last year and will be spent on key building projects such as roads, hospitals and schools. This is a great budget that will, at the macro and micro level, drive the Queensland economy, provide a sound future for our families in terms of employment and ensure that the services are in place to meet the future demand and population growth in Queensland. I commend this bill to the House. Miss SIMPSON (Maroochydore—NPA) (10.50 am): I will be addressing issues within my electorate and my portfolio, the latter of which I will pursue further during the estimates process. I say at the outset that if the estimates process is to be of true value to this state then it is time we had a Senate style estimates process with the powers to properly and fully scrutinise the budget and departmental performance and the opportunity to question public servants directly. That does not happen under the current system. The estimates process must be reformed to allow greater accountability and scrutiny of the government’s actions. For example, MPs should not be prevented from directly asking public servants questions. Also non-government MPs, particularly the National Party opposition, require greater freedom to fully pursue lines of questioning without unreasonable time constraints. For example, the Transport and Main Roads portfolio has been assigned three hours for estimates questioning on 13 July. Half that time is for government members and of the non-government members’ time one-third is assigned to non-opposition members. Thus, the National Party opposition has 60 minutes to ask questions which amounts to about 20 questions without notice and seven questions on notice. Moving to issues within the budget. The Dr Death scandal which has claimed up to 87 lives and which is due to the corruption and bullying in the health department came on top of the previous health minister’s disgraceful behaviour during the indemnity crisis which saw scores of qualified Australian doctors leave the public hospital system. A pattern of bullying and a shoot-the-messenger culture was raised to an art form under the previous health minister, Wendy Edmond. It continues today. This budget does not fix that. 2088 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 10 Jun 2005

The interim report from Tony Morris QC has been tabled this morning. Some of its observations and recommendations vindicate the concerns expressed by the National Party opposition. One of the issues is the need for Queensland Health to try to recruit doctors, particularly VMOs, visiting medical officers, to positions before trying less orthodox avenues. Let me tell members what has happened on the Sunshine Coast. I relate this to today’s budget. Today there are Sunshine Coast women who are being sent to the Logan Hospital for gynae procedures. The budget outlines that there will be new hospital facilities. I welcome additional health services particularly where they do not cannibalise existing services. But today women from right throughout the Sunshine Coast are being referred to Logan Hospital for gynae procedures. It is damnable that this health department promised that they would receive their services locally. Instead they have been told that it will be a two or three-year wait on the Sunshine Coast. How does that relate to what happened with Wendy Edmond, the current disgrace in the health department and the visiting medical officers issue? Visiting medical officers spoke about quality issues and the indemnity crisis. They were rewarded by Queensland Health by having their sessions cut back. That is typical of the way this Beattie government has operated. We see announcements about health in the budget but in reality the culture goes on. This culture has seen good people, appropriately qualified people leave the Sunshine Coast health system as well as elsewhere in Australia. The Sunshine Coast health system relies heavily upon visiting medical officers who work in both the public and private system. Let us look at what happened with the indemnity crisis. There was a time when the last existing indemnity providers had collapsed and we had public servants relying not only on public system indemnity but also on private indemnity. There were concerns about inadequacy of the indemnity cover of Queensland Health. When the private provider collapsed they realised that they did not have adequate cover from the Queensland Health system. They went to the then health minister Wendy Edmond and raised their concerns. She did not want to deal with it. She said that if they commit criminal acts then of course we are not going to cover them. That is not what the doctors were asking for. They were asking for the same level of indemnity cover that other professionals have. They did not want to be indemnified from criminal acts but they wanted the same level of insurance cover that any public servant operating within their area of expertise would have. She refused to listen, abused them and called them terrible people. These people who had been supplying services to the public system for years felt that they were worthless, felt that they were not wanted by the system. Many walked but others were pushed. That is why today many services on the Sunshine Coast are still struggling to get back on an even keel. The state government still advertises certain positions and announces them at election time as being some new budget treat. But in fact they are old positions where it has forced well-qualified Australian people out of the positions. Despite the promises of this government, Sunshine Coast women are being forced to go to Logan Hospital for gynae procedures or else face a two to three-year wait. That is unacceptable and farcical when we consider the growth on the Sunshine Coast. The hospital facilities there do have the capacity to do this work, but the government is not funding the staff to carry out this work and VMOs have had their sessions cut back. I want to also address the issue of roads. Over the next four years a significant amount of funding is to be spent in my electorate. I welcome that though I will continue to draw people’s attention to the fact that for seven years there has been an infrastructure drought under this government. For seven years we have seen infrastructure dip, as a proportion of the overall budget. This budget starts to address that. Still only about 15 per cent of the overall budget is being assigned to this area. Our concern is that unless infrastructure, particularly in the boom times, is adequately and consistently funded then we are going to have a big problem when the wheel turns and the boom times are not as rosy. I welcome the allocation of $33.6 million towards roads in my electorate as part of a four-year program for $270 million upgrades on the Sunshine Motorway and Maroochydore Road. However, I repeat my calls for the Maroochy River Bridge on the Sunshine Motorway to be fast-tracked. Currently, 10,000 vehicles in excess of what the bridge should carry travel over that bridge on a daily basis. That is the arterial road that services the whole of the Sunshine Coast, not just my electorate. People from Noosa through to Caloundra commute through that area. It is impacting upon business and upon people’s quality of life. I campaigned on the need for the bridge’s duplication at the last election and the government refused to fund it. While I was pleased that after the election the government did include it in the Roads Implementation Program and mooted it in the budget, there still needs to be more funding in this budget in order to fast-track that project. At the start of this year Main Roads told me that it was investigating how to bring the project forward. I note that when the Premier later visited the Sunshine Coast he confirmed those investigations were under way, as I was previously advised. However, I believe more 10 Jun 2005 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 2089 can be done. I urge him to do it. Currently the whole of the Sunshine Coast is paying the price of the infrastructure drought that he forced upon Queensland and upon our area. I believe there are interim improvements that could be made to traffic through the Pacific Paradise roundabout and also the Ocean Drive intersection which I have drawn to the attention of Main Roads. I am awaiting its advice on that. I have been advised that some presettlement works may take place on some of the new lanes to the north and south of the bridge towards the end of the year. This would mean that road fill would be put in these lanes and allowed to settle for 12 months which is in keeping with geotechnical requirements. But still more needs to be done. That is why I will continue to raise this issue and demonstrate to the government that it must listen to the people. They have spoken strongly about this issue. Some $5.8 million is allocated to the Pacific Paradise bypass and interchange. The construction work is expected to start towards the end of 2006 with completion in early 2008. About $5 million of the $35 million has been allocated to the southern access ramps of the Sunshine Motorway. This is due to start in mid-2006 and be completed by June 2007. The southern access itself is a council road but the ramps are a state responsibility. Design work on the Maroochy River bridge and duplication works up to Maroochydore Road roundabout has an allocation of $1 million out of the $110 million total. Maroochydore Road at Kunda Park to the Bruce Highway has an allocation of $21 million of the $90 million. Construction on the Kunda Park section is to start later this year for completion in 2006. The Bruce Highway to Pike Street section will start in mid-2006 and be completed in 2007. But, as many landowners know, the land acquisitions and the route were resolved five to six years ago. This is just indicative of the fact that a lot of planning has been done—and I welcome appropriate planning—but the planning processes have been allowed to be strung out on all of these projects, particularly the Pacific Paradise bypass. That situation has been ludicrous beyond extreme in that there was not even a detailed design option or a preliminary design option in a planning study that lasted about six years from its conception to its completion. That is the sort of stupidity we have seen with this government. Let us talk further about roads. The Tugun bypass fiasco continues. The budget papers show that not one red cent of the $22.6 million for the Tugun bypass last year was spent. It has simply been rolled forward to this year. So $22.6 million allocated last year for the Tugun bypass was not spent and the project spending to date has actually been cut. To add insult to injury, the minister is conning Queenslanders that the project is still on track. Maybe he should get on down there for a ‘non’ sod turning ceremony, because if it is on track then his own budget papers have red ink and lies written all over them. Despite what has obviously been a massive budget blow-out in the operational cost of the TransLink integrated public transport project, total transport portfolio capital spending has only increased to 35.46 per cent compared to 45 per cent under the last Nationals-led government. Unfortunately, this increased transport portfolio funding is not being equitably distributed, with the percentage of road funding in the Brisbane region increasing by almost two per cent while funding in the regions of Wide Bay, Darling Downs, south-west, central-west, Mackay and north Queensland has reduced in percentage terms. Unfortunately, the Beattie government is squandering a unique opportunity to invest in Queensland’s future with the majority of meaningful infrastructure projects still only on the political horizon two decades away—two decades away! I do welcome long overdue increases in capital spending after the capital infrastructure drought under the Beattie government, but I do criticise the cuts to councils’ road funding. There have been cuts to councils’ road funding, and that is really going to impact. Road funding is budgeted to increase from $946 million to $1.252 billion thanks to the GST and increased federal road funding. In percentage terms, road funding has increased to 15.7 per cent of the state’s capital spending, up from the miserable 13.45 per cent last year. But this is still well down from the record 24 per cent under the last Nationals-led government. With regard to the transport infrastructure scheme, which provides funding to local councils, I was critical earlier in relation to those issues and the way in which this government has managed them. I also want to address issues in my electorate and the funding allocated in this budget towards the strategy for the Mooloolah River mouth or Mooloolaba harbour. I gave the government a big belt over the fact that it had allowed the silting up of this important port harbour and that it was very slow to act when it came to the need to dredge this particular river mouth. Finally, we forced its hand and I was pleased that it finally acted. Obviously I will be interested in the results of the strategy that will be implemented. I have campaigned very strongly about the need to ensure that the port harbour mouth is available as a safe harbour mouth. It is a train harbour mouth and has been one of the safest access points on the east coast until recent years because of the neglect due to a lack of maintenance by this government. There is a very important fishing industry there. Many people on the Sunshine Coast do not realise that the fishing industry is worth about $80 million in gross turnover of product—that is a huge amount—but the multiplier effect is far greater. Then of course there is the recreational fishing industry and recreational boating in general. It is extremely important that that is a safe harbour entrance and that it is maintained as such. I have mentioned in a previous address the changes to land 2090 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 10 Jun 2005 tax. I believe that they are certainly necessary with the increases in property values, and I welcome the alteration to the thresholds. What is important from an environmental point of view, though, is more investment in the area of water and waste water management, and this is an issue where the Beattie government has failed dismally. My colleagues have continually raised the need for appropriate funding assistance to help get the grey water project to the downs off the ground, but in addition to that very important project there are other areas of Queensland, too, where proper waste water recycling provisions need the subsidy and the assistance of government. It is big ticket stuff, but it is about the future. We do need good conservation and recycling of water. We do need additional water facilities. It is within the province of governments to ensure that these things are delivered in a timely way. Only too recently a number of towns in Queensland have come very close to running out of drinking water during this drought, let alone rural and regional areas which are already suffering not just from a lack of drinking water; their production has also suffered due to a lack of water supply. It has been too easy in our urban areas—and I live in an urban area—where we have taken it for granted that water would be on tap, but without proper infrastructure and investment in this area, which are lacking with this government, that is a very real threat. We are sitting right on the cusp at this time. It is time for action with infrastructure spending and recycling spending, and that action is disappointingly not present within this budget. Other project funding has been mooted within the budget with regard to child safety, and this continues to be a major area of concern to me. The funding increases in this area have been necessary in recent years, but what we have seen instead is a leaderless department in great distress as children continue not to be seen in a timely manner. I am most concerned that, once again, despite budget allocations, with regard to the accountability to ensure that staff are supported and, most importantly, potentially abused children are seen within the nominated times, this budget simply does not address these issues. It is not only a case of how much money there is; it is how well it is spent. In recent years there has been a deficit in good management, a deficit in good accountability by this government. Certainly, as evidenced by the health system, it is tragic when accountability is taken out of a system and we see the impact that that has on real lives. In my electorate there has been a recategorising of children who have been on the waitlist for investigation as being potentially abused. They have been downgraded to a status where they will never have a visit or maybe not even a phone call and follow-up. That, to my mind, is a recipe for disaster and is a recipe which is of great concern to our community. I also want to address the issue of public transport on the Sunshine Coast and the need to fast- track these provisions, as well as the upgrade of the north coast railway line. Maroochydore does need a new transit centre to help facilitate increases in public transport. CAMCOS has been one of those studies that has been out there for six or eight years now; it is certainly over six years since its inception. That corridor is under acquisition and some bus priority measures are being considered, but those recommendations have been on the table for years. Once again, we have seen some fairly paltry allocations when one considers that the report was there, the recommendations were there, the action plans, if the government was telling the truth, were there but the money was not. Until these issues are addressed in a timely way, we will see a desperate catch-up without proper and timely delivery of these services in a way that meets the growing needs of a very diverse area such as the Sunshine Coast. I would certainly impress upon the government that our public transport needs and in particular the CAMCOS corridor need to be fast-tracked and brought forward. I have one last comment to make with regard to the Maroochy River bridge. It relates to public transport and alternative transport. Once again, I urge the minister to ensure that there are pedestrian and cyclist connections on the bridge to the north and to the south. Although the minister has previously given positive indications that these connections would be considered, it is essential that we have not only proper road networks but also alternative transport networks for cycling. I am referring not only to recreational cycling but also to commuting cycling. In this day and age, I know that many people want to choose green transport alternatives. Hon. MF REYNOLDS (Townsville—ALP) (Minister for Child Safety) (11.09 am): It is quite appropriate that I follow the member for Maroochydore, because in my contribution to this debate I will refer to child safety matters. The statement that the member for Maroochydore made to the House yesterday was nonsense and cannot be substantiated in any way, shape or form. Firstly, I want to refer to the Child Safety budget. As Minister for Child Safety I am very proud not only of the budget that was handed down on Tuesday and the budget allocation for my area of ministerial responsibility but also of the staff about whom allegations were made in this House yesterday. I know the staff at the Sunshine Coast office of child safety are doing their very best for the vulnerable children and young people on the Sunshine Coast. The Child Safety budget provides an extra $123 million to my department and represents a record $45.3 per cent increase in spending on child protection. That budget has been increased because both the Premier and the Treasurer showed leadership and indicated that that increase was required to bring forward these three-year reforms in child safety. Our growth in funding for 2005-06 is more than double the money promised in the reform blueprint for implementing the CMC’s recommendations. That will ensure that our reforms stay on track and that we can account for growth in demand and services. 10 Jun 2005 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 2091

An amount of $88 million will be spent over the next four years on more foster-carers. Foster- carers across Queensland do a great job. They are the backbone of the child protection system. I want to again place on record that we value foster-carers and believe they are doing a great job. We hope to recruit an extra 500 carers in the next financial year and at least that number as well in subsequent years. An additional $28.8 million will be invested in employing child safety officers and support staff to deal with the up to 47,000 child protection notifications that we expect to receive in 2005-06. The members opposite, including the member for Maroochydore, seem to be blithely unaware that the number of new permanent positions will be increased by 151 as the department moves from temporary employment arrangements to permanent arrangements. If the member for Maroochydore had read the budget documentation she would know that. But she does not want to say anything about those new permanent positions and what they will mean for the Sunshine Coast. An additional $25 million in capital funding over two years will continue the extension and expansion of our child safety service centre accommodation for staff statewide. The Beattie government will invest $22.6 billion in a comprehensive cross-agency initiative to enhance mental health and behavioural counselling services for children in care who have complex needs. That will involve my department, it will involve Disability Services Queensland, it will involve Education Queensland and it will also involve Queensland Health. This $22.6 million will be spread incredibly well across all of those services. The service will be piloted on the Gold Coast, on the Sunshine Coast and at Townsville from August with a statewide roll-out in 2006. A new multisystemic therapy service will commence operations at Inala. It will provide community based intervention for children with significant and multiple needs. This service works with individual children, their families, their peer groups and their schools in a concerted and intensive way to prevent further harm. In 2005-06, $193.6 million—or almost half of the department’s total operating budget—will be allocated to grants and subsidies. By the way, we should remember that we are spending nearly $400 million. What did the National Party government spend in this area about seven years ago? About $60 million. Yet the National Party in this House has the audacity to be critical of social service spending by Labor governments. An amount of $19.6 million will be allocated to non-government organisations to deliver community based child protection services. An amount of $1.4 million will be allocated to staff and projects to strengthen local partnerships with the non-government sector. Importantly, an amount of $9.4 million has been allocated for new or enhanced Indigenous recognised agencies and a peak body will be allocated a further $0.43 million to help build the capacity of these agencies. I refer to the points that were raised by the member for Maroochydore in her two-minute speech in the House yesterday morning. It is a pity the member did not talk to me about these matters. As the minister, I have indicated that I will be open, transparent and accountable. I brief the opposition regularly. Last Wednesday night I briefed the Leader of the Opposition on matters pertaining to child safety. I brief the shadow minister, Rosemary Menkens, on a regular basis. But the member for Maroochydore seems to have used her shadow health status to be critical in this House rather than speak to the minister. I think the member can do a lot better for her constituents. It is disappointing. Yesterday in this House the member for Maroochydore attacked the Department of Child Safety and made a number of allegations against staff. I must say that in relation to this matter I am dismayed by the audacity of the member. She is attacking the staff of the Sunshine Coast office. The truth is—and all members know it, including those opposite—that the National Party left Queensland with a legacy of neglect across all social services, including child protection. The many decades of National Party rule in this state—and the Liberal Party was part of it as well—meant that social service expenditure lagged disgracefully behind such expenditure in every other state and territory in Australia. It has taken a Labor government to finally deliver fair and equitable social services to the people of Queensland in the area of Child Safety, in the area of Disability Services and in the area of Health. We have expended money in areas that the opposition would never have recognised as being worthy of expenditure. Although the opposition is happy to talk about child protection, while in government it never delivered. Assertions by the member for Maroochydore that my department is reworking lists and removing the notifications of children requiring an investigation are absolutely untrue. If the member had bothered to raise these issues with me, instead of coming into this House and making outrageous claims I could have provided her with a briefing on how thresholds for investigations are set and the work that we are doing in that very, very important area. Miss SIMPSON: I rise to a point of order. The minister is misleading the House. I find his comments offensive. I suggest that the minister investigate the recategorising of children and the downgrading of their status, which has occurred recently. Mr REYNOLDS: I do not think I have said that. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Shine): Order! What did the member find offensive? 2092 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 10 Jun 2005

Miss SIMPSON: I find it offensive that the minister said I have misled this House. I have not misled this House. I ask him to withdraw it. I also ask him to investigate the children whose categories have been downgraded. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Mr REYNOLDS: The perpetuation of this nonsense and claims that the child protection officers on the Sunshine Coast have been sacked are irresponsible and incorrect. We have increased the staffing numbers on the Sunshine Coast ahead of the blueprint’s requirements. I want to state this very clearly to the member for Maroochydore. Permanent staffing levels will have been increased by 55 per cent on the Sunshine Coast by the 2005-06 financial year. Additionally, a second office will be opened at Caloundra next year to improve responses to cases of child abuse and neglect. During the creation of the new stand-alone Department of Child Safety, some temporary staff were employed in various offices as a transitional arrangement. All members of this House know the tremendous work that staff of the Department of Child Safety do. I am going to stick up for the staff of the Sunshine Coast office even if the member is not going to. The work they do is often traumatic. It is challenging work and the staff deserve our support. I can advise the House today that the Beattie government is not only on track to deliver these unprecedented staff increases that were recommended in the blueprint but also on track to exceed those staff increases. We are making holistic and systemic reforms to child protection services in Queensland. The member for Maroochydore should stop showing her disrespect of this House by making unfounded claims. It is unfair for the staff of the Department of Child Safety to have to listen to what I believe is rubbish from members opposite. They are doing a magnificent job in reforming the child protection system. That is their job and they are doing it very, very well. Hon. NI CUNNINGHAM (Bundaberg—ALP) (11.19 am): My electorate of Bundaberg is a big winner in this budget, with another multimillion dollar investment in our city, our community and our future. The budget announcements have been widely welcomed in my community and, on behalf of our residents, I say thank you and congratulations to our Treasurer, our Premier, of course, and all ministers who have clearly listened to the needs of Queenslanders. The announcement in the budget of a commitment of $42 million to build a ring-road to the south of our city is great news. This road was badly needed during the Goss term when I was mayor of Bundaberg, and it was agreed to by the then minister for transport, Jim Elder. However, it has since lapsed and the travel congestion now in Bundaberg has reached the point where something has to be done quickly to answer the grave concerns of industry, commerce, community and parents whose children are battling it out on the way to and from school with B-doubles, cane trucks, refrigerated vans, semis, buses, fuel tankers and cement trucks, and the volume is growing daily. I hope this project can be fast-tracked, and if construction could start at the Bargara Road end then traffic lights at that corner, with safe pedestrian crossings, will assist students of St Lukes, Kalkie state primary and East Bundaberg primary schools. The other exciting allocation is the $20.3 million that will finish the major Burnett River Dam, or Paradise Dam as it is often called. It will be completed on time, bringing water security to not just Bundaberg but the entire region. This is valuable infrastructure being provided in the regions by this Beattie Labor government. As well, Bundaberg families are big winners, with over $26 million allocated to special projects, providing a real stimulus to our economy and a helping hand to those who need it most. Disabled people and their families will gain $5.47 million in support. Students and teachers will benefit from $2.1 million of upgrades at our schools. TAFE will gain $1.5 million and public housing construction will exceed $2 million. The amount of $906,000 will tackle domestic violence. A women’s shelter will be built and $4.99 million will be spent on better management of our natural resources. The Turtle Interpretive Centre has again been funded, with an increased allocation of $3.8 million, to allow the city council to proceed with that tourist project. The amount of $11.8 million has been committed to intersection work in our city, including traffic lights promised for Walter Street in North Bundaberg. Another allocation of $668,000 to sport and recreation clubs will help provide a healthy lifestyle with better venues and facilities. We will gain from some $56 million that will be invested in the Wide Bay-Burnett region for training programs and $8.1 million to create jobs through this government’s Breaking the Unemployment Cycle initiatives, which have succeeded in bringing unemployment in Queensland down to the lowest rate in 30 years. My constituents will benefit from the very welcome new land tax changes and the increased budgets for health, disability services, child safety, infrastructure, education and in almost every other portfolio. Indeed, the good news for regional Queensland is that, from the record capital works budget, 60 per cent will be spent outside the Brisbane region. The good news for Bundaberg residents and our health system is the assurances that I have received from the Premier and the Treasurer that whatever money is needed in relation to the Morris inquiry will be provided. 10 Jun 2005 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 2093

This budget is, indeed, the best ever for Queensland and congratulations are due to our Treasurer, Terry Mackenroth. There is something in this budget for everyone and it reinforces this government’s commitment to govern for all Queenslanders. I commend the bill to the House. Mr ROWELL (Hinchinbrook—NPA) (11.23 am): Queensland is enjoying a buoyant financial position due to a number of external factors that have added to the state’s coffers. The windfall in GST last year and the predicted continuance of a high level of receipts again in the 2005-06 financial year has been of immense benefit to the state. Considering that the Premier berated the introduction of the GST, it is interesting to note that Premier Beattie and Treasurer Hamill were the first cabs off the rank to sign up to the Howard government’s new tax that was benefiting the states. This provides all the states with a substantial gain and is now assisting their economies. Low interest rates were maintained by the federal Reserve Bank, instigating confidence in the business sector which brought down unemployment to five per cent across Australia. Not to be behind the door when taking credit for the federal government’s management of the economy, the Premier claims credit for the current 5.3 per cent unemployment rate in Queensland. With property values escalating in the southern states, many people who were cashed up after disposing their assets found their way north and started a buying frenzy which, in many cases, doubled property values in Queensland. Once again, through no reason that can be attributed to the Beattie government yet again, money flowed into Treasury from the enormous duty generated from the inflated property values. The coal and mining boom came and the government cashed in by way of unanticipated levels. Land tax is also a major source of government revenue, although the recent amendment will curb its excesses. Then there is the battlers, battling against unbeatable odds, who feed the poker machines, adding to higher than anticipated levels of receipt to top up the Treasury’s pocket. As the government battles from inquiry to inquiry in the running of Queensland, it must be nice to know somebody up there is looking after it. While most government members have no background in operating a business, it must give a warm inner glow to see the money keep flowing in. It is good news that keeps happening for Queensland, even though the distribution is disproportionate for many regions of the state. It was only a few years ago that the squeeze was on corporations, with the government’s ‘stand up and deliver’ policy requiring the corporations having to talk up the value of assets to borrow money to pay a dividend to the Beattie government because it was broke. In relation to emergency services, the Minister for Emergency Services told the House that the demand for ambulance services is growing at a rate of 10 per cent per annum and the Queensland Ambulance Service is struggling in the face of these challenges. Therefore, it is disappointing to note that funding for the ambulance services has only risen by six per cent in this budget. The Queensland Ambulance Service does great work in the community but cannot be expected to sustain such a level of underfunding by the Beattie Labor government. Members would also be aware of the increased role of the Counter Disaster and Rescue Service, given the uncertain global climate that we now find ourselves in. In the past year, the demands on Counter Disaster and Rescue Service staff have continued to grow in a way that many of us could not have imagined. For this reason, I was most disappointed that the funding for the Counter Disaster and Rescue Service has only increased by one per cent on last year’s budget. For all of us who rely on the Counter Disaster and Rescue Service’s ability to provide disaster mitigation and response services, we should feel a little less safe and secure as a result of this budget. It is a similar tale of underfunding for the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service. Given the extraordinary growth in Queensland’s population, particularly along the eastern seaboard and in the south-east corner, the need for expanded fire services has never been so apparent. Unfortunately, the Beattie government has ignored the growing demand upon our ‘firies’ and has delivered a funding increase of four per cent for the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service. Queensland is paying more in ambulance tax and fire levies than ever before, yet our essential emergency services are still not receiving the funding that they deserve. It should be noted by the House that the government reaped $224 million in fire levies and $108 million in ambulance levies in the 2004-05 financial year, and this is tipped to rise again in the forthcoming financial year. With reference to the budget for the portfolio of Employment and Training, while the capital works budget for Employment and Training has been given an increase—albeit much of this is rolled over from this financial year, including close to a $20 million underspend for major capital works construction—there is no funding commitment in 2005-06 for new capital works for any of Queensland’s four agricultural colleges. The funding provided for backlog maintenance for the colleges is the same as was provided last year, so there is no increase in maintenance funding, either. Funding for new infrastructure is vital to ensure that the campuses of the single colleges can continue to provide the required facilities to deliver a high standard of training now and into the future. These colleges have been a crucial training ground for our rural industries and contribute significantly to the local communities of Dalby, Emerald, Longreach, Burdekin and Mareeba. 2094 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 10 Jun 2005

Another aspect of this portfolio that I wish to make comment on is the budgeted funding directed towards employment initiatives. Despite the Premier and the minister for employment and training saying on many occasions that Queensland is and will continue to be the jobs hub of Australia, the budget for employment initiatives for 2005-06 is only $200,000 more than was actually spent this financial year. If we are to continue to assist the delivery of jobs across the state, including the need for specific groups of job seekers, the government has to continue to commit funding for these strategies. I want to speak about siam weed. When this House debated the Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Bill in April 2002, the Nationals raised a number of concerns about the proposed legislation. Unfortunately, we have seen those concerns realised. During the debate three years ago, I said that it would be the land-holders who would suffer the consequences of the government’s misguided approach to protection of land from pests. Land-holders would be required to be responsible for the control of pests on their land or face tough penalties if they failed to comply. I was critical of the bill because it included a clause that specifically exempted the state from the same responsibilities. That clause was unfair then and it is unfair now. Often the source of infestation comes from government land such as national parks and World Heritage areas. This act requires land-holders to wear the cost of controlling the pest on their property but allows the government to abrogate its responsibilities. It is a disgraceful double standard. It is a classic buck-passing exercise by the Beattie Labor government, which has been hammering land- holders since it came to office. The most recent example of this situation that has been brought to my attention is the incidence of the DNRM issuing notices to land-holders for the control of the declared pest siam weed at the site of the highly localised infestation along the Tully River in far-north Queensland. The Queensland government DNRM fact sheet on siam weed identifies it as one of the world’s worst weeds, with the potential to spread across northern Australia and down the eastern coastline. The fact sheet also claims that the DNRM strategic control team is working with other government departments and the community to eradicate this weed. The reality is that the DNRM is simply getting around issuing land-holders with notices to treat infestations of siam weed located on the banks of the Tully River within 14 days or cop the penalty that applies. A threat of fines is hardly indicative of a cooperative approach. Siam weed in far-north Queensland—it is good to see the minister is in the House—is highly localised at locations along the Tully River and at nearby Bingle Bay. Given that the DNRM considers it to be one of the world’s worst weeds, would it not make sense for the Queensland government to take immediate and full control of a concerted effort to eradicate siam weed once and for all? Surely it is worth the effort to eradicate siam weed in this localised area in view of the potential for it to spread across northern and eastern Australia and to do serious damage to the environment in these areas. Unfortunately, the buck-passing provisions of the Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Act 2002 conveniently mean that the Beattie Labor government can continue to shirk its responsibilities and hide behind a law that punishes land-holders and puts Queensland’s environment at risk. Although the Commonwealth government increased funding to the state for roads by $72 million, the Northern Statistical Division 45 had its already depressed budget from last year’s works program reduced from 5.6 per cent to 4.6 per cent. Had it not been for the federal government’s Roads to Recovery program over the last few years, many local roads would have fallen into disrepair and many councils would not have been able to keep on their drastically cut work force. In some cases, to avoid accumulating debt, machinery had to be sold off. But, once again, the apportionment of funds to councils for the matching dollar for dollar transport infrastructure fund has declined from $61.2 million to $57.5 million. This is bad news for ratepayers who cannot afford to pay more rates because they are drought stricken or, in the case of the sugar industry, still battling with adverse seasonal conditions and depressed world prices. The federal government recognised the difficulties facing people in north Queensland during the wetter months of the year, with the flooding of the Bruce Highway between Banyan Creek near Tully and Corduroy Creek, some 14 kilometres to the south. This area in the wet season causes major disruptions to commercial vehicles and travellers. Last year traffic built up for kilometres waiting for the water to subside. The federal transport minister and Deputy Prime Minister, John Anderson, promised $80 million last year and this was confirmed in the federal budget. Some $843,000 will be spent on the planning process at 30 June 2005 and $2.851 million will go towards the completion of planning and preliminary work this next financial year. The remaining $76.306 million will be spent post 2005-06 for the completion of the work. It is a bit rich that this allocation is included in the state budget. I have met with the Department of Main Roads and the planning consultants and will continue to do so on a regular basis to keep up to date with the planning process. This project will be a major benefit to the whole of north Queensland, and I have been pleased to have had success with lobbying and the allocation of funds for its construction. About three years ago it became apparent that the Ingham Hospital had exceeded its use-by date. There was no further point in spending funds to extend its life for more than three or four years. After visits by the then shadow minister for health, Fiona Simpson, the Nationals pledged to commit 10 Jun 2005 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 2095

$12 million for its replacement. In the last budget the government made an allocation of $11 million for its replacement, which confirmed that the facility was not suited to further repairs of a major nature. This year’s budget made an allocation and upgraded the government’s commitment to $22.1 million after a reassessment of the costs and the requirements of the health service in the district. There are definite prospects that the new facility could take in patients from Townsville and Thuringowa for minor surgery, which could relieve the pressure caused by the growth in those cities. That has occurred up to date, and it has worked extremely well. Planning is well under way. Some $12 million will be spent this financial year, with the remaining $10 million allocated post 2005-06. It is expected that the maternity ward will be re-established with additional services to cater for the needs of the Ingham community and beyond. Innisfail Hospital has been on the drawing board for a number of years. It is a critical health facility for far-north Queensland, servicing communities to the north, south and west of the town. In 2004-05 the budget showed a cost of $23.2 million, but this has been upgraded to $38.285 million. Some $4.441 million will be spent to 30 June 2005, with a further $20.286 million in the next financial year. The remaining $13.558 million will be spent post 2005-06. This hospital will serve the needs of the Mulgrave electorate and it also caters for the health care needs of people in the Hinchinbrook electorate down to El Arish. Thanks to a strong community drive about five years ago which raised $100,000, the Department of Health installed five dialysis chairs. I am sure that the member for Mundingburra would be aware of this. This number will be increased to eight when the new facility is built. The Ingham Police Station, with a budget allocation of $4 million, will have $2.386 million spent on it by 30 June 2005. The building is well advanced and should be completed in September, with the remaining $1.164 million to be spent at the conclusion. This will provide an up-to-date and much- improved facility compared to the station that has served the needs of the district for years. The Ingham special education facility is being moved to the Ingham State School at a cost of $414,000. Some $37,000 has been spent to date, with the remaining $377,000 to be spent next financial year. These facilities are essential for disabled and intellectually disabled students. There has been a tendency to integrate those students into schools before adequate facilities have been made available. I want to stress this point because this is a major problem. In the past no provision has been made for the ramps and special toilet facilities that are absolutely essential for disabled and intellectually disabled children. The Ingham State High School is a classic example of this. Negotiations are under way at the present time to deal with this issue. Tully high has been allocated $520,000 for additional amenities. Some $5,000 had been spent to date. A further $285,000 is to be spent next year, and a further $30,000 will be spent post 2005-06. Throughout the electorate a number of community facilities are required for cultural, entertainment and information services. The Cardwell shire is badly in need of a community hall. A meeting was held of the likely user organisations. The council has engaged a consultant to carry out an analysis. The current facilities are not suited for a wide range of functions held in the Cardwell shire and upgrading them is not practical. Mission Beach is lobbying for an aquatic complex to provide safe swimming for members of the local community and tourists. For a number of years funds have been raised through the aquatic carnival, but substantial funds are required through sporting grants. The Hinchinbrook shire is intending to build a tourist information centre, but to date it has received inadequate funding from government. The district is totally dependent on the sugar industry, and tourism is seen as an alternative. It is extremely important that this facility is built. I know that the current council is coming to grips with it. Mr WALLACE (Thuringowa—ALP) (11.43 am): I ask honourable members to cast their minds back to some of the most infamous apologists in recent history. Two former parliamentarians spring to mind, like former British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and his ‘peace in our day’ claim after sharing a cup of tea in Munich with a nice chap called Adolf Hitler or that Tory pin-up boy Bob Menzies and his insistence that selling pig iron to the Japanese before the outbreak of the war was okay. Well, it appears that our own parliament has spawned another bunch of conservative apologists. The mob opposite claim that this year’s ripper of a state budget is in some way due to the largesse of John Howard and his merry bunch of men in Canberra. Has anyone ever heard such sycophantic drivel in their life? What a load of poppycock! Peter Costello contributed as much to our state’s best budget as the Bjelke-Petersen government contributed to police ethics. Queensland is in such a strong position because of the hard work done by the Treasurer and the Premier. Indeed, I would go as far as saying that it should be Canberra saying thank you to the Beattie government for running such a strong economy rather than the other way round. I suppose that those members opposite will barrack for the Blues next Wednesday night, so strong does their dislike for our state seem to be. Mr Reeves interjected. Mr WALLACE: That is right. The electorate of Thuringowa has done very well out of this budget. Let us have a look at just some of the wins. The Thuringowa City Council will receive $1.5 million to construct a new aquatic facility at Northern Beaches. This area is growing very rapidly, with many young families moving there. Thuringowa City Council and the developer of the land where the centre will be 2096 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 10 Jun 2005 located will also help fund this $4.65 million project. It will incorporate a 50-metre swimming pool, toddler pool, learn to swim pool, lagoon area, amenities, reception and kiosk. As honourable members know, I am passionate about our state’s best Rugby League football team, the North Queensland Cowboys. Young Cowboys will get a boost with $41,832 allocated to the Townsville and District Junior Rugby League to help construct a four-tiered covered seating area for players and officials. Some $17,500 has been allocated to the Thuringowa City Council to develop a strategic sport and recreation plan. Then there is $2.42 million for the new Thuringowa Health Centre, which will cost about $13.4 million in total. Some $96,000 has been allocated for school-age care at various local schools. The upgrade of the Kirwan Police Station will continue with $791,000 for the $1.35 million project. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been set aside for various roadworks including new traffic lights on Upper Ross River Road and at Hervey’s Range Road. I represent one of the youngest electorates in this place. That means that Thuringowa has more than its fair share of school-age children, so I am pleased to advise that this budget looks after our schools. Whilst the list of wins is too long to read today, I will mention just a few. There is $1.36 million for Kirwan high, one of our state’s biggest schools, for classroom upgrades; $727,000 for the Bohlevale State School; $93,000 for Northern Beaches high for multipurpose courts; $45,000 for Weir school; and $40,000 for Willows State School. Continued remediation works on the Ross River Dam receive $33 million. The state is contributing $67.5 million to this important project. There is much more for Thuringowa than I will mention in my speech today. This budget is obviously a big winner. I will conclude, however, on one point. I would especially like to thank the Minister for Communities and Disability Services for the $1.5 million for a brand new Bohlevale Community Centre. This facility will replace the old, run-down house that the service currently operates from. The minister has personally visited the current operation and viewed the new site: thanks, Warren. I wholeheartedly commend this bill to the House. Miss ELISA ROBERTS (Gympie—Ind) (11.48 am): It gives me great pleasure to be able to speak to this budget in a positive way and to be able to articulate the things that my electorate will benefit from rather than having to bemoan what we do not have. The role of a member of parliament is to ensure that the electorate they represent is provided with the services and infrastructure that it deserves. I am happy to say that my electorate has done rather well in this budget. I believe that the highlights include the $7.8 million towards the replacement of the Gympie Police Station and watch- house and the $1.7 million for the new Gympie Ambulance Station. Since my election the Gympie Ambulance Station has been allocated an extra five paramedics. The Minister for Emergency Services has recently announced that nine new paramedics will be employed in the north coast region. I plan to continue lobbying the minister to ensure that the Gympie electorate gets its fair quota, particularly for the Tin Can Bay area. In last year’s budget we were only allocated $100,000 for the Gympie station. However, we actually received $450,000. Considering the years of intense lobbying, it is wonderful that the government seems to be making up for lost time in regard to the money being allocated for the station’s completion. Still on policing, this budget sees Rainbow Beach being allocated $432,000 for a much-needed neighbourhood police beat and $400,000 for the completion of the Tin Can Bay station. One area I am very impressed with, particularly in light of recent media attention, is the Beattie government’s response to the need for police to be trained in how to deal with people with a mental illness. Historically, caring for the mentally ill was never officially a part of police training but now, given the demand for mental health services and the limited number of beds available in public hospitals, particularly in rural and regional areas, police are facing situations and people whose needs are extremely high but they have not been trained to provide the care required. The government, in partnership with Queensland Health and the Department of Emergency Services, will see funding allocated for mental health crisis intervention teams and the training of 1,200 police officers in how to handle the mentally ill. Again in the area of policing, and of particular interest to myself, is the State Crime Operations Command initiated project with the RSPCA to examine the link between instances of animal cruelty and domestic violence. There has been a great deal of evidence that acts of animal cruelty by a child could indicate a predisposition to violent behaviour in later life. This budget also outlines details of reports and investigations which are to receive continued funding, such as the review into the operation of speed cameras. The review has been examining the length of time that a driver’s behaviour is influenced once they have passed an operational speed camera site. This phenomenon is known as the halo effect and the research is due to be finalised in the near future. Another project being funded is the broken windows project, which is testing the hypothesis that the use of visual law enforcement can reduce overall crime rates as well as reducing the number and impact of fatal and serious road crashes. I am sure that the people of my electorate would support any research which could identify reasons for accidents occurring, with the view that prevention is better than cure. On the subject of speed cameras, I have to mention the degree of scepticism that some people in my electorate have in relation to the use of speed cameras, with many believing them to be purely for the sake of revenue raising and that they are taking police away from their real jobs of solving crime. I 10 Jun 2005 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 2097 feel that one way to alleviate some of this doubt would be to increase the use of automated cameras which do not require a police presence like those I remember were used substantially in New South Wales when I lived there. This would prevent the number of police hours being used up sitting beside the road. The budget papers rightly mention the fact that with the current trend in population growth in south-east Queensland, traffic incident management will continue to be a significant issue for the police service. And finally—a point I wish to highlight to all Queenslanders—speed on our roads contributed to more than half of the total number of road crashes over the last 12 months as the primary causal factor. I find it amazing that people will do all sorts of things for their health, such as limiting their fat and carb intake, take up exercise, give up smoking, but then go out on the road and do 120kph in a 100kph zone. What is that about? Speed kills, full stop. There is no point being healthy if you get on the road and drive like a lunatic. The budget also includes over $4 million for 15 schools in my electorate for maintenance, and close to $4 million for transport infrastructure. The provision of equity for people without access to a private vehicle and access in rural and remote areas is much needed and I hope this funding will include the Gympie electorate, as the lack of public transport and frequency of public transport is a major issue and, until it is addressed, will continue to impede the extent of growth which could be achieved for the region. As a quick aside to the budget but still on the topic of transport, I am grateful to the Minister for Transport for meeting yesterday with me and senior staff of the Mary Valley Rattler in order to discuss a number of issues which are aimed at ensuring the continued success of the beloved Rattler, particularly in light of the despicable behaviour of Warren Truss of the federal National Party who, as part of his last re-election campaign, presented the Rattler with a cheque for over half a million dollars, only to take it off them once he was re-elected. No community organisation deserves to be treated so appallingly. To make such a substantial promise, to publicise it and then renege on that promise is beyond comprehension and the height of arrogance. An honourable member: Sack him! Miss ELISA ROBERTS: I wish. The problem south-east Queensland is facing in regard to a lack of affordable housing is nowhere less apparent than in my electorate. Gympie has been facing a housing crisis for a few years now, with low-income earners the most severely effected. Much of the problem has arisen in part from the fact that there was a general housing boom, the consequential rent rises and the fact that the population is increasing at a rapid rate. Whilst I am not an expert, I have racked my brain trying to come up with viable solutions to the problem. I am of the view that some of the current dilemma stems from the fact that there has been a dramatic turn away from high-density public housing and the block of unit type of housing that was popular in the seventies. I actually grew up very close to public housing estates and had many friends who lived in them. There were a number of problems associated with this type of housing in Sydney—I am not aware of the extent of this type of housing being built in Queensland—and the social problems were quite significant and included high levels of crime emanating from the ghetto type environments which evolved. That being said, at least people had somewhere to live. If there were some way that we could prevent this type of environment from occurring then perhaps part of the problem would be solved. Sadly, there will probably always be some sort of stigma associated with public housing, or housing commission flats as they were known when I grew up, and this is one social aspect that needs to be addressed. The reality of the current situation is that people are living longer, way past retirement age, and are on a reduced income, and more and more people are relying on social security which means that there are more people who cannot afford the private rental market. Realistically, no government can be expected to house all of these people. Unfortunately, many of the problems are social and governments of any persuasion are not able to legislate for this. In order to deal with the rising level of housing stress the government has allocated $235.5 million to a number of agencies to assist the homeless and those at threat of homelessness. As I said, no government could afford to build a home for every single person on a low income. In order to appreciate the extent of the problem I was listening to a speech by former Prime Minister Paul Keating the other day—purely by accident, I might add—and he was talking about the housing situation in Sydney— In order to house the growing population, 25,000 new dwellings will have to be built each single year. Now, I don’t care whether the Labor Party or the Liberal Party is in government, no government could realistic afford to build to this extent. Whilst we continue to allow people who are not genuine to receive benefits then there will be housing issues and housing crisis in the future. The housing crisis is a difficult one because it is not simply about building houses; we really need to delve deeper and look at the type of people who are experiencing housing crisis. It is often a vicious cycle for those people. To begin with, they may be unemployed or they may be single with a child. If we could address the social issues which prevent these people from finding employment then we could probably see more people who are able to work and therefore afford private rental. I see examples of this every day. If people were able to get their teeth fixed or replaced in less than four years, they might have more confidence and be in a better position to be employable. If single mothers were encouraged to go to TAFE and were able to leave their children 2098 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 10 Jun 2005 in a creche at the TAFE then these women would at least have some sort of chance to get ahead. If people on drugs could get access to drug rehab and beds in our hospitals then we might have more people able to work. But until these services are in place we are going to continue to have thousands of people who are just unemployable, reliant on welfare and therefore looking for cheap housing. In response to the housing crisis I support the allocation of $50 million for the provision of boarding house accommodation for single people and I am particularly happy about the allocation of $4 million for 25 new units in Gympie. The budget for health is a little lacklustre and I imagine this is partly due to the fact that no-one knows what the outcome will be in Bundaberg. The government is no doubt hanging on to as much money as it can, especially if they are found liable for nearly 100 wrongful deaths. If the relatives of these people get together under one umbrella and sue, this government will need to have some cash in reserve. That being said, I am very grateful for the $5.3 million to complete the Gympie Hospital Emergency Department upgrade. The hospital upgrade so far looks fantastic and is something we are all very proud of. However, I am slightly concerned about the proposed health hotline which has received $6.9 million in this budget. I am fearful that the provision of health information and triage services over the telephone could end in a fiasco not unlike that which happened in Bundaberg. How can anyone be diagnosed over the phone? How will these phones be manned when we do not have enough clinical personnel as it is? People are not always able to articulate how they feel over the phone, or they may downplay what they are feeling. I know of one example where an ambulance call centre operator cancelled an ambulance due to this and another had to be called because the patient was genuinely seriously ill. To triage a person over the phone could be extremely difficult, particularly as some illnesses can have similar symptoms. This is an area where mistakes cannot afford to be made and even one wrong diagnosis and death is too many. I am surprised that this government could take such a risk, especially following recent events in this state. On the other hand, imagine all the hypochondriacs taking up the phone lines or those who are lonely and just want someone to talk to. This whole idea is irresponsible and could end up being very dangerous. I hope that the minister will reassess his commitment to this project. Morale is so low at the moment in the Department of Health that money should not be redirected to new experiments such as those just mentioned but put straight back into lifting morale. Nurses do not feel valued the way that they should be. Nurses aids should be brought back into the system to ease the burden of our nurses. When a patient is unhappy, nursing staff are unhappy because they are the ones whom patients take their frustrations out on. Prior to Gympie Hospital employing the current district manager—who is fabulous—nurses were so afraid to come to me that they were actually asking patients to come to see me when they were discharged. If the minister or anyone denies that an oppressive culture has been allowed to grow within the department then they are living in fantasy land. I do not blame the current minister for this culture, as it was well and truly entrenched during the time of his predecessor who, I might add, has been very quiet throughout this whole disaster. If only she had believed those of us who tried to tell her what was going on. As time has shown, contrary to her belief, we were not playing politics; we were trying to make her see what was really going on. As time is running out I will touch on some of the things which I would still like to see occur within my electorate. They include the raising of Borumba Dam which has been promised repeatedly, an end to the use of drinking water to flush toilets, a publicly funded nursing home for the elderly, a publicly funded home for people with a disability whose parents have passed away and end up in old age homes, which are not appropriate, and an increase in funding for people who provide transport for those who have no means of getting to medical appointments. One area I am disappointed about is that of tourism. I not believe my electorate was mentioned once. I am left to wonder how the minister responsible for tourism will be assisting my electorate in lifting its profile as a tourist destination. Whilst the $2.8 million which has been allocated to people within the Gympie electorate who have a disability is appreciated, it really will not go very far under the current system of how it is disseminated through lifestyle support packages. This system does not work because it leaves too many people with no support at all. I feel this should be more of a combined state-federal responsibility as the needs of these people are so great and, in most cases, will never be alleviated. People with a severe disability and their carers need all the care that we can provide for their lives are more difficult than many of us could ever imagine. If we can at the very least ensure that there are enough respite hours for carers and basic assistance for the disabled, we will be able to make an often unbearably sad situation slightly more bearable for carers, who are such brave and strong people and whose levels of endurance are so admirable. Finally, I thank the government for what it has provided for my electorate. It certainly feels wonderful when I have good news to convey to the exceptional people whom I represent. Interruption. 10 Jun 2005 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 2099

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Behaviour of Members Miss ELISA ROBERTS (Gympie—Ind) (12.02 pm), by leave: I note Mr Acting Speaker’s statement in the House this morning regarding an incident which occurred last night. I have been provided with a statement by the Deputy Speaker who was in the chair last night. I will be responding in detail to Mr Acting Speaker. Whilst my recollection of events differs from those provided to the Deputy Speaker, in order to resolve the matter I apologise for any offence caused.

APPROPRIATION (PARLIAMENT) BILL APPROPRIATION BILL

Second Reading (Cognate Debate)

Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill Resumed. Hon. DM WELLS (Murrumba—ALP) (12.02 pm): I congratulate the Treasurer on the many achievements of this budget. I do not want to rehearse the many positives already covered thoroughly by honourable members, nor will I spend much time on the opposition’s sterile argument that the budget moneys come from Canberra. Whoever collected it, the money came from Queensland taxpayers and the size of the tax yield itself attests to the strength of the Queensland economy. I sometimes wonder, though, whether at some time in the future we could achieve even more with more sophisticated economic tools. When we think about it, the tools that are used in the construction of budgets in all jurisdictions of this country and in developed democracies are much more rudimentary than they need to be. Specifically, we quantify the costs of our initiatives but we do not quantify the benefits. At budget review committees in any jurisdictions ministers and public servants will have before them information as to exactly how much it will cost to employ additional teachers, police officers or welfare workers and, in some years and in some jurisdictions, how much would be saved by disemploying them. The benefits of employing additional teachers, police officers or welfare workers are palpable and a proposal to spend money on such services is seen as an undoubted benefit. What is not available to proponents of such expenditure is the statistical argument as to the extent of the benefit. Put shortly, they have no argument of the same logical form as that of opponents of the expenditure—namely, that it will cost a certain number of dollars. Yet expenditure on services does have a quantifiable benefit. The United Nations and the World Bank quantify these things. The United Nations human development index ranks countries according to the number of its citizens who complete schooling, the rate of infant mortality and the proportion of the population who reach the age of 80. Australia does well on the human development index. Expenditure on services promotes human development to an extent indicatively quantifiable, but in no jurisdictions do policy makers have such statistics before them when they decide whether to incur the cost of the expenditure. They have before them an equation with exact numbers on the costs side of the equals sign and only good intentions on the benefits side. The World Bank has ranked the wealth of nations in a way very different from the estimations of treasuries around this country and, indeed, around the world. In the 1990s the World Bank produced some papers which not only estimated the productive capital of nations—that is, the gross domestic product figures usually deployed by treasuries—but also estimated the value of a nation’s human capital, natural capital and social capital. Quantifying these things leads to very interesting consequences. The harvesting of a forest appears in the black column of the gross domestic product accounts—that is, as income—but it appears in the red column of accounts of natural capital; that is, as an asset loss. Such accounts, though recognised by the World Bank, have not made their way into the databases of budget review committees in this country or anywhere else in the world that I know of. What is lacking is a set of economic tools that reflect the fact that what governments should be aiming at is the improvement of the quality of life of their citizens. The pursuit of that objective is left to the goodwill and compassion of budget review committees around the country. The amount of those virtues varies alarmingly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, from party to party and from year to year. In the years to come, Queensland might be a good place to develop some smarter economic tools that better serve the real purpose of government, which is to improve the quality of life of its citizens. 2100 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 10 Jun 2005

Mr McARDLE (Caloundra—Lib) (12.16 pm): It is with pleasure that I rise to make a contribution to the budget debate. I will start by making some comments on the Department of Emergency Services. Firstly, I note that in the 2004-05 financial year the capital acquisition statement showed $10.65 million being allocated to construct ambulance stations whereas this year’s budget documentation shows that only $7.74 million was actually spent. This has resulted in an estimate for the 2005-06 year of $19.4 million for the same purpose. In essence, that is almost twice that for 2004-05. What this leads to is that this minister has allowed his department to fall behind in providing essential services to Queenslanders and because of that we are all going to have to pay larger sums of money to acquire what should have been put in place well over 12 months ago. If we further consider the budget for the department and look at the revenue paid to the department, we see that between the years 2004-05 and 2005-06 the federal contribution to revenue has increased by 27.5 per cent. This government’s revenue has increased by only 6.6 per cent. The Commonwealth’s contribution to counterdisaster and rescue services between 2004-05 and 2005-06 has increased by 10.8 per cent while this government’s contribution is up by only 5.5 per cent. When we consider the Fire and Rescue Service we see that the federal government revenue increase has been 56 per cent while the state government’s has been a paltry 7.4 per cent. I am certain the minister is overjoyed that the federal government is able to assist him financially in meeting the needs of Queenslanders. I would like to now turn to the question of Caloundra itself and touch, in small detail, on the Sunshine Coast region as a whole. Caloundra is one component of a region well known as the Sunshine Coast. Depending upon whom one talks to, it is comprised of either three local government areas or five. Irrespective, this is a region that is growing in importance economically. It is becoming a great economic region in its own right within the south-east corner of this great state. In my opinion, Caloundra has been dealt a rather pathetic hand in this budget. There are a number of matters that need to be addressed which include the upgrade of Caloundra Road from the Bruce Highway to Pierce Avenue, thereby making that stretch four lanes and thus making Caloundra Road itself into the CBD four lanes all the way. This is becoming critical when one considers the link between that and the new industrial complex which has been listed in the budget for development over the next financial year at a cost of some $10 million. The importance of Caloundra Road is simply the access that it provides to the industrial complex itself. That access is at the intersection of Caloundra and Racecourse roads. That intersection is at right angles and poses a major risk to traffic entering either road in its current formation. In fact, I recently held a meeting in my office with officials from the departments of main roads and state development, the local divisional councillor, the directors of Corbould Park racecourse and those who are keen to set up businesses in the industrial complex. The unanimous concern was the necessity to get the intersection constructed urgently, otherwise traffic would be accessing the industrial complex by way of Pierce Avenue or creating a dangerous situation at the existing intersection of Caloundra and Racecourse roads. Having been advised at the meeting that I would receive a package of the proposal to construct the intersection within three weeks of the meeting, which was held on 3 May 2005, I have not at this point in time received that document. I also note that in the MPS of the transport minister Caloundra Road is not referred to, though of course it is detailed for completion in the infrastructure document of April this year for 2008-09. The real concern with that is that, if the intersection is not upgraded, even on a temporary basis, then there will be delay in people moving into the industrial complex not because the complex is not available but because of the risk associated with the intersection and the hostility that has been generated from residents and other people and proprietors of businesses who reside and work on Pierce Avenue. The major concern is the exceptionally large volume of heavy traffic that will be using Pierce Avenue, creating a potential disaster area with the real risk of injury to person or even loss of life. Let us then turn to Caloundra Hospital. I note that under the infrastructure plan Caloundra Hospital is to be expanded by spending $50 million over the next four financial years. The budget shows, however, only an increase of $2 million in this coming financial year, leaving $48 million to be expended over the following three financial years. This whole issue smells very much like a second Caloundra Road. One matter of real concern for the coast is the blow-out in costings for the Sunshine Coast ambulatory and community centre. In the 2004-05 budget figures, the cost was set at $9.7 million whereas it appears in this year’s figures at a cost of $14.7 million—a difference of some $5 million. The government has stated that it would spend $1 million this financial year whereas only $20,000 has been expended. The cost of this facility will only get more expensive if it is to proceed. The health minister has again ignored the Sunshine Coast in relation to this issue. I also urge the education minister to move forward the replacement time schedule for asbestos ceilings in schools. Ten years is much too long and this is a substance, as we all know, that can kill with the smallest exposure. Only one school on the Sunshine Coast region will be dealt with over the next financial year, and that is simply an appalling statement as to how we care for the children of the Sunshine Coast. 10 Jun 2005 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 2101

There are a number of areas, though, where Caloundra has received funding and for which I am grateful. The first one is the upgrade and fitout of the new Caloundra West State College at a cost of $11.62 million; a share of the $17.3 million for new and upgraded public housing, which is badly needed on the Sunshine Coast, and funding for which must continue; and, further, a share of funds to bolster child protection. It will be a matter of watching this space on this issue, as the recent history of the north coast region shows that it has been poorly served by this department. There is a large degree of ill will on the coast towards the department and it will take a lot of effort to change that opinion. I want to now move into the future for the Sunshine Coast. Yesterday at the Innovation Centre a book entitled Surprisingly Smart was launched, and I table a copy of that book for members of the chamber. The foreward to the book by Colin Graham states in part— The region’s civic and business leaders are united in their commitment to diversifying the region’s economy and encouraging the growth of knowledge based businesses. We are confident that the hundreds of existing smaller innovative businesses will be joined by a steady flow of businesses of all sizes. While not taking away from the important industries of tourism and construction, the future of the coast must lie in diversification of its economic base. We must establish new industries that attract capital and income into the region and not go any other way. As Professor Karren Wooley stated, we need to establish businesses that are ‘lean and green’. The publication I referred to provides a snapshot of what is available not just to businesses on the coast but to all who desire a combination of lifestyle while sustaining a growing business. Two such businesses are Proscribe and Maverick Musicals. The former prepares documents for pharmaceutical, biotechnology and academic clients that need to have new drugs approved for sale and to educate doctors whilst the latter is Australia’s largest publisher of original music and theatre productions, with over 80 plays and musicals in print and being performed in Australia, New Zealand, the UK, the USA, Canada and Asia. These businesses are the future of the coast. If we are going to develop the coast to grow, then we must keep younger people there. If we want young families to settle on the coast, then this budget is nowhere near the result we need. There is a statement often used by this government with which it brands itself—the Smart State. It cannot claim a title like that when the Moreton region receives only 13.2 per cent of the capital works in this budget. I refer to the headline of the Sunshine Coast Daily today under the banner ‘25-year boom, 5000 homes a year needed’. An article by Gordon Clark reads in part as follows— To accommodate the growth, Mr Salt said 4000 new dwellings would need to be built on the coast each year between now and 2011, the rate jumping to 5000 a year during the 2020s. So let us be real in relation to the budget and the planning for the future of the Sunshine Coast. The infrastructure plan states that by 2025-26 almost $6 billion will be spent on transport infrastructure. This budget is a pathetic start to that goal with no time lines being drawn in. The transport minister has failed the coast yet again. If one considers the health component of the infrastructure plan, $607 million needs to be spent in the next 20 years, yet almost nothing is to be spent over the next 12 months. The health minister has not provided for the growth of the coast yet again. One could go on and on as to how this government, while saying the plan is on paper, has simply been unable or unwilling to provide for the coast, and certainly not for Queenslanders. The GST component of this budget is enormous, with Queensland receiving $7.4 billion in 2004-05 and set to receive $7.7 billion in 2005-06. In 2004-05 this resulted in $798 million extra and in 2005-06 Queensland will receive an extra $595 million, thus in two years this government will receive an extra $1.4 billion in GST revenue. The government, however, continues to ignore Caloundra, continues to ignore the Sunshine Coast and, on the whole, does not care. The Liberal Party, however, understands that we need to build for the future and, in doing so, acknowledges the need to assist a cross-section of our community. We have put in place plans to reduce a number of taxes to provide that relief. We have done that at a time when the federal government has had to drag this government to the table to get it to relinquish $42 million in 2005-06. This has occurred despite an agreement that it would do so and against an extra windfall of GST of $595 million. I want to touch very quickly on the issue of seniors. The budget barely acknowledges their existence as a distinct and important group. The issues affecting them and which mark them as a distinct group such as general health and aged care, housing, employment and grandparenting are barley touched. Again, this Smart State has shown that, although it has the words, it does not have a heart. This budget, if it is meant to set the stage for the future, has no drive, no ambition and fails the people of this great state. The decisions have now in essence been passed on to future generations and this government has lost the chance of history judging it as a government with vision. This government, at best, will be seen as never pushing the barrow of future prosperity. The timidity with which it approaches the future is seen in stark contrast to the drive of John Howard, who continues to push the boundaries and sees a country with enormous potential. When this government determines to use the same vision and the same drive, it might be able to claim the title of the Smart State. But this budget will not get it anywhere near it. 2102 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 10 Jun 2005

Mr REEVES (Mansfield—ALP) (12.19 pm): The only good thing that I can say about the previous member is that he represents a great area. The member referred to the Howard government’s vision of cutting services. That is really visionary! It is my pleasure to speak in support of the Beattie government’s eighth budget. As a resident of the suburb of Wishart, which lies in the very heart of the Mansfield electorate, I am thankful that this budget will deliver real results for local residents. Over 40,000 Mansfield residents will be affected by this budget. The result for each resident will be the same: better hospitals, superior schools and strong infrastructure today in preparation for the future. Some of the major highlights of this year’s budget include $7.7 million invested by Energex to continue works on a second 33/11kV module substation at Upper Mount Gravatt and the installation of capacitor banks at the Runcorn bulk supply substation. An amount of $2.4 million is allocated to continue the relocation of the Mount Gravatt fire station, which turns 50 this year. It is moving to a new home at the corner of Mount Gravatt-Capalaba Road and Newnham Road at Wishart. An amount of $1.78 million is allocated to community organisations under the Home and Community Care program. This program provides support and maintenance services for eligible people at home to prevent their early admission to residential care. An amount of $1.32 million has been allocated to continue installing guardrails on the Gateway Arterial between the Pacific Motorway and Mount Gravatt-Capalaba Road. An amount of $1.05 million has been allocated for renewal of 32 public rental houses at Rochedale South. I have lobbied the minister strongly on this matter. I really appreciate the minister achieving this allocation in the Public Works and Housing budget. An amount of $450,000 has been allocated to Mansfield State School for a major classroom upgrade, including $36,000 for a fit-out to support multimedia initiatives. This funding has come from the Smart State Building Fund and was announced prior to the last state election. It will be great for Mansfield State School to have these multimedia facilities. An amount of $326,000 has been allocated under the Triple R maintenance and asbestos roof replacement program for repainting at Wishart State School and removing the three asbestos roofs at Rochedale State School. An amount of $340,000 has been allocated to constructing roads and drainage in the Mansfield electorate. An amount of $76,000 has been allocated for continued funding for the South Brisbane Tactical Crime Squad, which targets known crime hot spots with a strong emphasis on investigating property crime and drug offences. The Mansfield electorate will share in the Beattie government’s record $5.35 billion contribution to Health. Mansfield residents will benefit from funding for many initiatives and services, including $6.83 million to continue the Mater Hospital redevelopment, which has a total project cost of $111 million. The Mater Hospital is located on Brisbane’s south side. It is great that this government is supporting the Mater Hospital in terms of its provision of public health services. An amount of $3.94 million has been allocated to the Princess Alexandra Hospital Health Service District for medical equipment, including anaesthetic units, electrocardiograph machines and transmitters, medical video camera equipment, patient monitors, sanitisers and a vital signs monitor. An amount of $1.04 million has been allocated to manage demand for services in the QEII Hospital Health Service District. An amount of $1.1 million has been allocated to the Logan-Beaudesert Health Service District for medical equipment, including X-ray units and operating tables. An amount of $768,000 has been allocated to the QEII Hospital Health Service District for medical equipment, including autoclaves, dental chairs, dental units and dental lights. An amount of $1.45 million has been allocated to manage demand for services at the Mater Hospital Health Service District. This budget has delivered significant funding for schools in the Mansfield electorate. I have already spoken about a couple of areas that have received funding. The government’s record $4.765 billion investment in Education demonstrates that our classrooms and the schoolchildren within them are vital to ensuring that Queensland continues to be the Smart State. Schools in the Mansfield electorate will reap the benefits of Queensland’s largest ever educational capital works program with $454.1 million going towards improving infrastructure. Major funding for the Mansfield electorate includes an allocation of $86,000 to Rochedale State School to complete an electrical upgrade, including $26,000 for fit-out, with a total project cost of $90,000; $70,000 to Rochedale South State School to complete an electrical upgrade, including $21,000 for fit-out, with a total project cost of $73,000; $34,000 to Mansfield State School to upgrade the play area for landscaping; $78,000 for high- priority maintenance related to reflooring at the Mansfield State High School and Mount Gravatt Special School; and $45,000 for school-age care at Mansfield State School, Mount Gravatt East State School, Rochedale South State School, Rochedale State School, St Catherine’s School, St Peter’s School and Wishart State School. After many years of ridicule, our southern cousins have finally realised that Queensland is the best place in Australia in which to live. If members want to see an example of that, they should look at the massive influx of residents to Queensland. We are going to have another massive influx of residents over the next 20 years. I am proud to be part of a state government that is thinking about the future and 10 Jun 2005 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 2103 is establishing the infrastructure that will ensure that Queenslanders can move forward while welcoming many new residents. We have the plan and we have the vision. Obviously the member for Caloundra has not been reading these budget documents. This budget starts putting that plan into action by allocating the funds to it. Within the next 10 years there will be another bridge standing next to the Gateway Bridge; a world-class education precinct linking schools, vocational education and higher learning at South Bank; and another link in the highly impressive busway network. Members might not realise that I am the No. 1 ticket holder for the South-East Busway. The busway will be further extended with the construction of a new busway at Boggo Road. It must be a sign that Queensland is moving in the right direction that the area that once housed some of Queensland’s most notorious criminals will become a vital link in connecting south-side residents to the Princess Alexandra Hospital and the University of Queensland. This budget provides real results for real Queenslanders—people like the residents of the Mansfield electorate. As always, it is the people who will decide whether or not this budget is successful. I will continue to work hard to ensure that the residents of the Mansfield electorate continue to get the very best from this budget and this state government. Mr CHRIS FOLEY (Maryborough—Ind) (12.26 pm): This week when my local media called me for my reaction to the budget I said that, as a regional electorate, like Oliver Twist we always want more. Generally speaking, I am not very happy with the level of support that the Maryborough electorate received in the state budget. However, I must temper that comment with the fact that last November Maryborough’s EDI and Bombardier was awarded a $212 million contract. Also, Maryborough received $10 million in a previous budget. So I guess what goes around comes around. The $32.4 million contract for 24 new rail carriages, which features so prominently on the front page of the regional budget statement, seems to be simply part of that $212 million contract that was announced last November. In 2003 I said in my budget reply speech that the Maryborough electorate is thankful and positive about any new funding that comes its way. But it is entirely cynical about the leftovers from last night’s dinner being tossed into a casserole and being dished up again as a new meal, complete with glossy and expensive packaging. Announcing, then reannouncing and then renouncing again and, when it finally starts getting a bit obvious, celebrating the fact that there are millions of dollars to finalise construction of an already budgeted project that has already been celebrated leads to a delicate medical condition called EVC—extreme voter cynicism. This practice is like telling one of our kids that you are going to buy them a DVD for their birthday and then giving them a brochure on it on their 10th birthday, the packaging for it on their 11th birthday, the case for it on their 12th birthday and the actual DVD on their 13th birthday and then claiming to be a good father for giving them four birthday presents in a row. I must give credit where credit is due. Around $20 million has been allocated to widen and rehabilitate the Maryborough-Hervey Bay Road. Planning will also commence for the final three additional innovative support and housing trials to be developed in Maryborough, Loganlea and Ipswich by 2008-09. These houses will provide purpose-built accommodation for people with a disability who have high and complex support needs. Many people have sought support in that area through my office. The Maryborough regional office of the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service will be replaced as part of a $7.2 million package, which is planned for building and minor works. Maryborough has also received around $1 million for its new neighbourhood centre. I had the pleasure of participating in the sod turning for that centre with Minister Warren Pitt. There is an allocation of $1.81 million to the Fraser Coast Health Service District for various items of medical equipment, including a CT scanner for which we have been asking and negotiating with the Health Minister for some time. I look forward to its delivery to Maryborough. Also, $595,000 has been allotted to manage demand for services in the Fraser Coast Health Service District. Maryborough West State School, which was the school at which a lot of my children did their schooling, will happily receive an upgrade to its special education facilities to the tune of $300,000. New relocatable forensic laboratories delivered to Maryborough and Nerang under the NATA implementation project are now operational and satisfy international standards for laboratory accreditation. This complements the wonderful tactical crime squad, which I fought very hard for and which now happily has its headquarters in Maryborough and is serving our police district. Plus there will be more beds commissioned at Maryborough Correctional Centre. Maryborough City Council will receive $359,840 to construct multipurpose facilities; a $20,000 grant to develop a sport and recreational plan for Maryborough; $30,000 to develop a regional sport and recreation plan for the whole Fraser Coast; and $74,500 to construct a walkway and cycleway linking Pioneer Country Park to playing fields in Maryborough. Also, for our northern cousins, $9,000 is allocated to develop a master plan for the Torbanlea Sports Reserve; $30,112 to construct a skate park at Howard, which my son Jarred will lobby me to take him to; and $1,250 to provide education and training workshops for sport and recreational organisations in Tiaro. The Burgowan Men’s Bowls Club will receive $69,829 to install a retractable shade structure for one bowling green at Torbanlea. Also, the 2104 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 10 Jun 2005

Maryborough District Cricket Association will receive $43,041 to construct toilets for access by disabled people, to install field lighting and to install irrigation for cricket at Maryborough. The Maryborough Skindivers Inc. will receive $57,107 to construct a multiuse training and storage facility to support scuba diving at Maryborough. The Maryborough Softball Association will receive $27,195 to upgrade three softball diamonds and a dugout and granite track runs. My electorate officer, who is a referee, is very pleased about that. The Maryborough Swimming Club Inc. will receive $75,000 to construct an all-weather enclosure over a 25-metre swimming pool so that people will not freeze when they go for a swim and so that they will not get wet—figure that out! That is a pool I use a lot personally, so I am very glad to see that. The Aztecs Softball Club will receive $4,000 to establish a men’s softball competition. The Brothers Maryborough Rugby League Football Club, a great institution, will receive $4,000 to establish stronger links with schools and clubs in the area. The Burrum District Community Centre Association will receive $4,000 to provide coaching and instruction classes at Howard. The Burrum Heads Bowls Club will receive $4,000 to develop a five-year development plan. The Fraser Coast Junior Rugby League will receive $4,000 for accredited Rugby League coaches and referees for training. The Hervey Bay Archers Inc. will receive $4,000 to conduct a come-and-try day for archery at Nikenbah. The Hilltop Squash Club will receive $3,480 to establish a new squash competition for youth in Maryborough. The Last Frontier Shooting Club—this is a fantastic place—will receive $2,200 to conduct an open day for shooting in Gunalda. That is where they dress up like cowboys and have a whale of a time. The Maryborough Active Riders Club will receive $2,798 to provide opportunities for club member access to first aid training. The Maryborough Australian Rules Football Club will receive $4,000 to provide combined sports medicine and level 1 courses. The Maryborough Brothers Junior Rugby League Football Club will receive $4,000 to establish school-club links. The Maryborough District Cricket Association will receive $2,750 to develop club development plans for cricket and soccer. The Maryborough Pony Club will receive $4,000 to increase the number of qualified instructors and provide first aid courses. The Maryborough Rugby League Referees will receive $4,000 to provide opportunity for referees to gain accreditation.The Maryborough Skindivers will receive $4,000 to update qualifications. Mr Finn interjected. Mr CHRIS FOLEY: I take that interjection from the member for Yeerongpilly. Members should remember that these are $4,000 amounts, not $400,000 amounts. The Maryborough Swimming Club will receive $3,625 to attend an eight-day Australian swimming coaches convention. The Tinana Soccer Club will receive $3,940 to develop and implement a five-year development plan. This funding is very welcome, as I have already said before. We also need further funding for the promenade project, which is the Mary River boardwalk. Urban Renewal, otherwise known as the Reddacliff plan, has provided some fantastic benefits to our city and will become a centrepiece and the jewel in the crown of our city. The Fraser Coast marine industry precinct development is vital to the future of our city and has a 200-hectare freehold site approximately five kilometres downstream of Maryborough on the Mary River. This site will include a designated marine industry park, incorporating boat and ship building, marine equipment manufacture, marine repairs and maintenance provision as well as a potential marine industry training facility. It has the potential to employ 400 to 2,500 people. So it is quite critical to the future of employment prospects for our city. I would also like to see some funding for a regional sporting complex jointly with the Hervey Bay electorate, including motor sports, shooting et cetera. We also need the normal amounts of money and more to be spent on roads, health, education and police services. One of the critical issues in my electorate—and it is on my way to where I live—is an overpass for those going to TAFE. We have a fantastic TAFE which is a little out of town and the kids have to go through a major roundabout over the Bruce Highway to get there. For a place like Maryborough that has relatively high youth unemployment we need more youth initiatives to stimulate jobs to keep kids in our area. There is a perception that they have to leave and go to ‘Bris Vegas’ to get anywhere. Our hospital needs increased funding and we are hoping to establish a centre of learning for young doctors in the first and second years of their training. I would also like to see the government donate land for an administrative detention centre, which is something we have called for for quite some time. Pinkenba certainly does not want one, but Maryborough does. I would also like to see some land become available for a detox and rehab centre, which is so badly needed in our electorate. I would also like to see some research funding—seed funding for alternative crops to sugar in our area. Maryborough has been very active in inner-city rejuvenation. We have so many beautiful historic buildings. As the Reddacliff plan comes on line and the focus is on the river and our city, we are hoping to turn Maryborough into a real cafe style city, a little like Montville and places like that. We need intensive upskilling and training in Maryborough. I thank the minister for coming to Maryborough recently to the opening of our new TAFE and the automotive area and engineering workshops that were recently launched. We do need more support for people who suffer from dyslexia and also literacy and numeracy issues. 10 Jun 2005 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 2105

Maryborough and council have jointly developed the state development centre project, in the marine industry precinct that I spoke about earlier, to a point where it is now ready and being sold to the marine industry. The Hervey Bay City Council is also a strong supporter of that project, because it complements its own planning for the consolidation and growth of the industry on the Fraser Coast. The big issue for Maryborough is our hospital. Around 5,000 people rallied last week—I thought it was more like 4,500, but I will not split hairs over it. Our hospital desperately needs a fully functioning accident and emergency unit. Senior doctors located in Brisbane could perhaps be rotated to Maryborough on a three-monthly basis. There has been a lot of talk about doctors who have been offered free accommodation to live at Hervey Bay, as opposed to having to pay for their own accommodation if they live in Maryborough even though they are working in the same district. I have asked the health minister to investigate those scandalous claims. Given the expanding population is centred around both Maryborough and Hervey Bay—I in no way want to denigrate Hervey Bay or Maryborough hospitals or the great work they do—the simple fact is that Hervey Bay needs a fully functioning accident and emergency unit and so does Maryborough. Hervey Bay serves a population of around 50,000 and Maryborough serves a population, including surrounding areas, of around 40,000. But most people who have read a map would know that they have to come through Maryborough to get to Hervey Bay. We are very concerned about that extra half an hour of travel which could cause a loss of life, and it already has. In addition, hundreds of Hervey Bay people daily come to Maryborough to work in its highly industrialised work force and Maryborough continually caters for trauma cases from the Bruce Highway. Given that the current role of community health councils has now been reduced to giving strategic advice, I also ask the health minister to investigate that. Queensland Health immediately needs to increase its pay levels for doctors to achieve parity or better with other states. If Queensland Health has a morale crisis and doctors are paid low, then why would anyone want to come and work in Queensland? But at least one of these problems could be fixed by the budget surplus. The Queensland government also needs to immediately begin restructuring Queensland Health—and I hope that some of the recommendations by Tony Morris will recognise that— and start to pull down the scandalous levels of bureaucracy that are consuming Queensland Health dollars in administrative salaries instead of paying higher salaries to medical staff. I want to close by quoting a reply that I received from the Minister for Emergency Services which has confirmed that Maryborough had 43.58 per cent of the code 1 calls for our region during the 2003- 04 year even though Hervey Bay has roughly double the population of Maryborough. So we had almost as many code 1 calls even though we have half the population. That equates to a code 1 call needed for every 13.81 persons in Maryborough compared with Hervey Bay only needing a code 1 call for every 21.72 persons. As we have a touch under double the need for emergency services of an acute nature, I ask the minister to advise what plans are in place to use the budget surplus to ramp up Maryborough A and E to full strength. I will conclude my contribution by saying what I opened with: we are glad for any new money but we certainly do not like rehashed dinner put up as a new meal. Mr HOPPER (Darling Downs—NPA) (12.40 pm): I rise to speak to the state budget for the 2005- 06 financial year to give an overview of what this budget really means for the Darling Downs electorate. While there have been some positives for the electorate, I am also justifiably concerned about the current government’s failure to recognise and commit to many critically required projects to sustain and secure the electorate’s long-term viability. Prior to delving into the nuts and bolts of this budget, I believe it is appropriate and timely to give recognition to the federal government for its funding boost of nearly $1 billion or maybe even a bit more. This funding has been handed down to this government by way of the GST and special purpose payments from Canberra. It is a bit like the Treasurer and the Premier wining the lottery. It is as simple as that. They have won the lottery in Queensland. The member for Burnett was telling me about that this morning. I think it is a very good saying: they have won the lottery. Here we see them gloating and walking around with their chests out, and it is thanks to John Howard in Canberra. I would also like to point out that, without the federal government’s input, the Queensland government’s budget would maybe just break even. I would now like to take this opportunity to thank the Treasurer and the Queensland government for the injection of funds which have been allocated as part of the 2005-06 budget in the electorate of Darling Downs. I will start with the good news and then I will finish with the disappointing side of this year’s budget. I have outlined the budget allocations within each department which gives a concise overview of this expenditure. Let us start with Health. We have had a $4.4 million upgrade to facilities at the outpatients maternity and emergency departments of the Dalby Hospital. I know what has been going on in Health in recent times. We have all seen what has occurred. I wrote to the health minister last year describing what was happening and I asked him for a deputation. I came and visited the health minister and he sat down and spoke with me at length about the Dalby Hospital. He said to me, ‘The best thing I could do is come out and have a look,’ and that is exactly what the minister did. I appreciate that the minister had a hands-on look. From that hands-on look, we now have $4.4 million put in to renew those facilities at the outpatients maternity and emergency departments. Colleen Rasmussen is the DON at Dalby, as she was at Gympie. She is an extremely talented and gifted woman. She has 2106 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 10 Jun 2005 terrific staff morale, and she has great ambition and thoughts as to what should be good for that hospital. So I would like to thank the health minister for coming forward with that money. There is a combined total of $3.07 million to be distributed between the Toowoomba, northern downs, southern downs and west Moreton health service districts to buy medical equipment in the 2005- 06 budget period. The Dalby residential aged care facility has received an additional $11.52 million to progress the construction of the 80-bed nursing home facility on the existing hospital nursing home site at Dalby. Dalby South State School has received a budget allocation for an administration upgrade, with $320,000 to be expended this year and an additional anticipated carryover amount of $267,000. Dalby State School is to receive $478,000 in this year’s budget, with an anticipated additional carryover amount of $319,000 to be expended for an administration upgrade. Dalby State School has received an allocation for a major upgrade of the outdoor learning environment for the amount of $405,000. There has been $2.2 million allocated towards the widening of existing pavement of the Toowoomba-Dalby roadway. There is $5.2 million to upgrade the Surat Basin railway track between Dalby and Rosewood, with a total project cost of $15.9 million. The Oakey Police Station has been allocated $495,000. I know that through my representation to the previous minister we put this in place. A lot of work has gone into that, and I thank the government for finally replacing that police station. It is a complete replacement of the existing police station. There has been $444.6 million to continue building the $1.2 billion Kogan Creek power station by CS Energy. This power station is located just outside my electorate. However, I believe Dalby will benefit greatly from its close proximity. Most people when they move to the country like to live on the eastern side closest to the coast. I know Chinchilla at this very moment has gone mad with the real estate boom, and Dalby will prosper as well from the power station and the fruits that this will bring. Some $19.5 million on a major new substation and powerline works and $34 million on various capital works in the broader south-west Queensland and Darling Downs area will improve the Ergon Energy distribution network. There has been $4.2 million to purchase and develop industrial land west of Toowoomba at Charlton and Wellcamp. We all know what is going to happen there with the industrial estate, the rail link and hopefully the second range crossing which is to be put in place very soon. I will now elaborate on the most disappointing side of this budget from my electorate’s perspective. Once again, I have categorised each area within the respective departments. There has been a failure to deliver incentives to encourage doctors, nurses and dentists to our rural and regional areas. This is a major problem for our rural and regional areas. I know only too well the lengths that the Dalby Hospital had gone to in trying to attract dentists to operate at Dalby Hospital, and I do believe there is one starting later this year. This position had been advertised throughout Australia over a number of years without success, and finally it was advertised overseas. However, this problem is not restricted to dentists; it is part of the entire medical profession, and the government must deliver incentives to change this attitude for the wellbeing of our rural and regional communities. There has been a failure to increase the Patient Travel Subsidy Scheme. This is a scheme which will be heavily utilised as a result of the continuous removal and downgrade of our existing rural and regional health services. There has been a failure to remove all asbestos from our schools, and we know what the member for Moggill has been on about recently. I believe he has a very valid point. There has been a failure to provide airconditioning for all of our state schools. I have made representations to the minister for education on numerous occasions on behalf of many P&C associations that have consistently sought my assistance in obtaining airconditioning for their respective schools. I know that at the Dalby State High School the windows on the western side have to be open as far as possible in the summer when it gets up near 40 degrees. When all the trucks on the Warrego Highway pull up at the traffic lights and take off, the students cannot hear the teachers trying to teach. That is one facility that must be airconditioned. We must aircondition the western side of the Dalby State High School at least. Unfortunately for all the schools located within my electorate, these requests are denied due to the fact that they are located outside the Cooler Schools zones. Perhaps the minister is not aware that outside her airconditioned office these students, teachers and support staff are working in classrooms which have regularly recorded temperatures of around 40 degrees. Even though we are not in the official Cooler Schools zone, unfortunately for my electorate mother nature does not recognise the Cooler Schools zone, unlike this Queensland government. There has been a failure to deliver funding for the highway upgrade for the Toowoomba range and the rail upgrade, both of which I believe are clearly on the current government’s never-never list. We look at the coal that Acland coalmine is pumping out now, and it is going to get bigger and bigger. There is a massive coal seam there that we have to try to tap into with our world high prices for coal. It would be great to have the facilities to get it to port. The big-ticket item for Toowoomba in the South East Queensland Infrastructure Plan was $680 million for the second range crossing, but the state government is not prepared to commit a cent of its own money to this project, with the expectation that the federal government will fully fund this major project. Think of the help this will bring Queensland. We are a Queensland government. 10 Jun 2005 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 2107

There has been a failure to deliver specific funding for the upgrade of the Bunya Highway north of Bell in this year’s budget. A lot of trucks use that road heavily. As with many roads in my electorate, the state’s road system is falling apart. Previously some money was allocated as part of the 2004-05 financial year budget. However, there is still a desperate need to continue this funding upgrade. I am also only too well aware of the need for a number of repairs and upgrades that are urgently required on numerous local roads within my electorate. There has been a failure to allocate two police liaison officers in Dalby. I have met with previous police ministers, and I have talked with this police minister. We desperately need two PLOs. The number of people who need that assistance is immense. I have spoken about the need for the appointment of these PLOs for a number of years. I have met with representatives from the police and the Indigenous community. Both parties are in agreement that this would be most advantageous for the Dalby community. This government has failed to abort its intention to reap a record level of profits from the energy sector during the 2005-06 budget period in spite of the crippling energy crisis that Queensland is currently facing. Ergon has been struggling over a number of years with antiquated infrastructure and understaffing. I believe that it would be in the best interests of all consumers for the government to put all profits back into upgrading the state’s electricity network. There was a failure in the budget to deliver funding for a desperately needed recycled water pipeline from Brisbane to the Lockyer and Darling Downs. The budget’s omission of funding for this particular project is the most disappointing aspect of the entire budget, especially when it is considered that over half of Queensland is crippled by this drought, and here we have the perfect solution to the problem. It will not only be a boost to regional production but also it will bring environmental advantages to Moreton Bay. This can only be good news for everyone. I met with a farmer only yesterday. The farmers can pay for it from Toowoomba to Cecil Plains. They will put enough money in to cover those costs. What we have to do is get that pipeline up to the top of the range. It has to be a Lockyer-Darling Downs project. We cannot talk about it as being a Lockyer project. That waste water must go up that range. We know what is happening. We have heard of the losses Queensland has had because of this drought. That area is one of the richest pieces of agricultural country in the world, and it is drying up. This pipeline could only be good for everyone. However, in its wisdom the Queensland government has once again ignored all the advice and failed the people in the Lockyer and Darling Downs regions. In all honesty, the Smart State government appears to go out of its way to prove it is anything but smart. I looked at every portfolio. As far as I could see every portfolio had an increase, and then we came to the DPI. One of the biggest disappointments of this budget is the failure to increase the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries’ budget, which has been subsequently slashed by $23 million. We have a minister who sits in cabinet. He is supposed to argue for his portfolio, but he is giving money away. We have this portfolio slashed beyond means. It sickens me to the core that this government takes its eyes off our rural producers and primary industries to the extent that it does. Mr Palaszczuk is everyone’s friends, but when it comes to fighting for farmers he does everything but fight for them. There is a failure to assist the cattle producers to cover the costs of the electronic tags required when the NLIS starts on 1 July, which is two or three weeks away. That is going to be a major change for our beef industry. Some producers sell thousands upon thousands of cattle. It is a major educational program. This government has not put a cent towards it, and that really annoys me. There is a failure to deliver the new drought assistance measures, despite more than half of the state being in the grip of drought. There is also a failure to itemise or declare what has been spent on the drought to date. There is a failure to provide a sufficient number of stock inspectors for regional areas. We have seen how the DPI has been taken out of our smaller towns. We have seen over 300 staff leave that department over the last few years. That disgusts me. The government has, in fact, decreased these numbers in recent times instead of taking the initiative to increase the numbers as they are required to by the industry. In summary, whilst I am appreciative of the funding allocations that the Darling Downs electorate has received, I am also desperately disappointed in respect to the failure of the current government to adequately deliver some of the most critical requirements of the electorate, especially the waste water pipeline and the terrible loss of $23 million out of the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN (Stafford—ALP) (12.53 pm): The people of the Stafford electorate are big winners out of this budget. Before I detail some of the specifics of the funding initiatives in the electorate, I want to put to rest some of the persistent propaganda and untruths being spread by some members opposite. The lie that the states are awash with GST funds and, therefore, we should be able to fund anything that anyone wants is just plain wrong. As you would know, Mr Deputy Speaker, because you made reference to this in your speech—and I thank you for providing that research to me—the Productivity Commission says that the GST income for all states is $33.1 billion. Income from company and income tax to the federal government is $131.3 billion. The federal government has $100 billion extra in its tax regime than all the states’ GST money. 2108 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 10 Jun 2005

In terms of percentages, today the Treasurer has made available to members a table to show the growth of taxes. Income tax from companies for the federal coffers is up 77 per cent. The income tax from individuals is up 29 per cent. The total income tax to the federal coffers is 41 per cent. The total increase for the GST to the states is only 22 per cent. Treasurer Costello and Prime Minister Howard continue to tell the lie but that does not make it true. In absolute figures, the Commonwealth government is raking in $100 billion more than the states’ GST. In percentage figures, it is getting a total of 41 per cent growth compared to 22 per cent growth for the states. It is disgraceful that the federal coalition government is neglectful in its duty by withdrawing from existing programs and by underfunding across-the-board. It fails to provide funding for roads. Members opposite, particularly from the National Party, are claiming that the road network needs to be upgraded. It sure does. Previous federal governments used their funding regime and their income regime to do that. The current federal National Party leader has failed in his duty to use his $100 billion excess to fund that. Mr Wallace interjected. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: I take the interjection from the member for Thuringowa; the leader of the federal National Party is weak. He is not standing up for the National Party as Black Jack McEwan and others before, including Doug Anthony, would have done. The federal government has failed in the areas of disability, public housing, health—both on the Medicare and pharmaceutical side—regional development and social security. But the Beattie state Labor government has, in fact, served the people of Queensland well and has certainly served the people of Stafford. In going to the election we promised two main things—a new Stafford Police Station and a general hospital at the Prince Charles Hospital site. This budget delivers $4.58 million to complete the new Stafford Police Station, which has a total project cost of $5.2 million. I want to pay special tribute to Senior Sergeant Tony Graham and his crew based at Stafford in the old cop shop at the corner of Webster and Stafford roads. They are working under some poor conditions at the moment. They have had great input into the new police station. The groundwork of the new police station started just last week. In fact, the whole of the north side of Brisbane will benefit from the $50.8 million to continue the upgrade of the Prince Charles Hospital to establish a full-scale emergency department and provide an additional 120 beds, operating theatres and renal dialysis facilities with a total project cost of $84.5 million. I want to thank the District Manager, Gloria Wallace; Jon Roberts, Executive Director of Corporate Services; Cheryl Burns, Director of Nursing; Michael Cleary, Executive Director of Medical Services; and all the other executives at the Prince Charles Hospital for the fantastic planing that has gone into that $84.5 million project, which will provide a general hospital for the people of the north side of Brisbane. The Prince Charles Hospital Health Service District is also getting $2.78 million for extra medical equipment. $1.25 million is going to go to community organisations under the Home and Community Care program which provides support and maintenance services for eligible people at home to prevent early admission to residential care. In particular, I want to thank Kevin Rouse, secretary/manager of Burnie Brae Senior Citizens Centre, Judy Schubert and the president, Al Fielding, who has been a long-time president of the Chermside and District Senior Citizens Centre. They work with a number of government agencies and other community groups to provide services to the elderly. I am also pleased that there is a massive input of $7.5 million for new public housing, including 44 medium-density units and a detached house out of a total project cost of $10.38 million. There will be a significant amount—$700,000—for the renewal of 19 public rental houses at Chermside with a total project cost of $5 million. The schools in my electorate are also winners as a result of this budget: Wavell Heights State School, with $270,000 to complete additional amenities; $53,000 for Stafford State School and Wavell State High School under the Triple R program; $54,000 for some high maintenance priority work at Kedron State School, Somerset Hills State School and Kedron State High School; and, importantly, $32,000 for outside school hours care at Holy Cross School at Wooloowin, St Anthony’s at Kedron, Queen of Apostles at Stafford, Somerset Hills State School, Stafford State School and Wavell Heights State School. That is catering for the families in my area, which has one of the highest percentages of single parents, and I thank the government for that. Also, significantly, $810,000 is allocated to provide accommodation and support for women and children escaping domestic and family violence and to provide counselling and support for families at risk of homelessness. This is part of the state government’s total contribution of $2.43 million. There are many other groups, individuals and families who will benefit from the budget that is before us. Because of the hour, I will stop there. However, through a press release I have detailed some of the individual allocations that those community groups have received. I thank the Treasurer, who has brought down a true Labor budget. There is support for those in greatest need. A measure of any 10 Jun 2005 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2109 civilised society is not how you treat the wealthiest and the most capable; it is how you treat those who are the least capable and those in most need. This budget addresses that. Those opposite, with their universities, their hospitals and their housing, say, ‘If you have got the money, good luck to you. Get more and we will give you the biggest tax cuts and those who are without, tough luck’. That is not Labor principles; that is not Labor policy. This is a true Labor budget and I give it my full support. Debate, on motion of Mr T Sullivan, adjourned. Sitting suspended from 1.00 pm to 2.30 pm.

MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS REGISTRATION AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading Resumed from p. 2085. Mr SPRINGBORG (Southern Downs—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (2.30 pm): I rise to support the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2005. I simply say that if it were not for the actions of the member for Burnett, we would probably not be here today debating this bill. We have to refresh our memories for a moment and consider the vilification of the member for Burnett when he raised this issue in parliament some three months ago. He raised this issue in parliament because of the vilification, the intimidation and the ignoring of courageous nurses like Toni Hoffman who had been trying to raise this issue for some two years. Letters had been referred to the minister going back to October last year and also the minister’s predecessor back in 2003, but those letters fell on deaf ears. This government needs to be reminded that it did not even want an inquiry when this issue was first raised. When Dr Patel jumped on the plane—paid for by this government, we now know—and left to go back overseas, the minister said that an inquiry was unnecessary. He said, ‘What would it achieve? What would it flesh out?’ The Premier himself said that maybe the CMC would be the appropriate organisation to hold such an inquiry. That would have been great: behind the scenes, behind closed doors and we would never have known. It was the tenacity of the Nationals that forced this government to set up a royal commission which is now bringing matters to a conclusion, matters which Queensland Health, this government, the Queensland Police Service and other authorities probably had the capability to bring to a conclusion much earlier. We strongly support endeavours to make sure that the victims of Dr Patel and their families can have some sort of effective closure, justice and redress. However, in lending support to the bill I wish to place on the public record that the opposition will not be party to a facade-building exercise, for which the Beattie government is renowned—a facade-building exercise in which the members opposite set out to make themselves the victims. I have not been very happy with the way that this matter has operated to date. This morning we received these recommendations from Commissioner Morris. We know that the recommendations have been devised only in the last couple of days, but if the government is going to require full bipartisan support we need to be involved much earlier. The opposition needs to be able to scrutinise these matters. There was not a lot of bipartisanship when the member for Burnett raised this issue in parliament some three months ago; however, there was a lot of vilification and intimidation. Now we have the call for bipartisanship from the government when the blowtorch is very near the belly. This morning before this bill was brought into parliament—and there was a pretabling at 9 o’clock—the opposition tried to obtain a copy of it. We were told that we were not able to get a copy of it until parliament resumed at 9.30 this morning. We were being rung before 9 o’clock by the media and actually told what was in it by members of the media who had actually been given a copy of it. We were trying to get a copy of it at the same time but, no, we were told that we would have to wait until parliament resumed at 9.30 this morning. It was only after some very, very serious remonstrations, wherein we asked why copies had been handed to the media and others when the official opposition could not get a copy of it, that we actually managed to obtain a copy of it. The opposition will support every endeavour to provide the victims of Dr Jayant Patel with quality medical and surgical care and, for that matter, the opposition will support every endeavour that provides Queenslanders with a public health system that delivers quality and safe medical and surgical procedures when and if those procedures are needed. I note that the objective of the bill is to implement recommendations A to D of the interim report of the Bundaberg Hospital Commission of Inquiry. I commend the Bundaberg Hospital Commission of Inquiry and, in particular, the chairman, Mr Tony Morris QC, for their diligent work and commitment to bring these preliminary urgent recommendations to the attention of the parliament. The Governor in Council appointed Mr Morris to conduct an inquiry into the various matters connected with the Bundaberg Base Hospital, Dr Jayant Patel and other health department issues. It must be remembered that the Premier was dragged kicking and screaming into the position of having to establish a commission of inquiry in the first instance. As I have already mentioned, and I will mention 2110 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 10 Jun 2005 again, the Premier desperately wanted the Crime and Misconduct Commission to do a quick inquiry into the horrendous activities of Dr Patel which were revealed in this parliament by the member for Burnett, Rob Messenger. I have mentioned that previously. Even under constant pressure from the opposition, Bundaberg patients and the media, the Premier kept delivering his line that the CMC was the right body to investigate. Fortunately for the victims of Dr Patel, the CMC adopted a contrary position. The CMC said that it was not equipped to investigate the matter. I say very well done to the CMC. Nevertheless, we now see the Premier deluding himself again and again that he was the one who set up the inquiry. But we remember the accurate historical sequence of events. Today I speak on behalf of all Queenslanders who have every right to be outraged by the revelations unfolding about this state’s damaged public health system—a damaged and disintegrating public health system that occurred on the Beattie Labor government’s watch and which the government constantly ignored despite repeated cries from the public, the medical and nursing professions and, of course, the opposition. What did the Premier do? What did the Labor health minister do? They hid behind their much- worn but ever-present public relations spin. There was so much spin that everyone was giddy from it; there was a profusion of propaganda messages that were going out to the electorate and the community at large. In fact, it had such a greedy desire for more spin that the government arrogantly published the supercilious health report written by the Premier’s senior media adviser only a couple of years ago. The amendments contained in the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2005 will endeavour to take care of some of the flawed administrative arrangements that have been identified to date. Whilst I lend mine and the opposition’s support to these amendments as stated, I must point out that the existing provisions should have picked up Dr Patel in the first place. If the existing provisions, properly overseen and administered by the authorities and checked by this government, had been followed through Dr Patel would have been picked up much earlier. It is a fallacy to say that there was no legislative provision to identify the inadequacies of Dr Patel’s qualifications or credentials. It was not a legislative problem or a legislative deficiency. It was purely and simply an administrative problem: firstly, with the checking of documentation and, secondly, with the lackadaisical approach to administrative procedure. Mediocrity is the benchmark of this government and its agencies and the casual processing of Dr Patel’s application is a classic example of that mediocrity. Then there is the incredible appointment by the Department of Health of an approved senior medical officer to the position of director of surgery. The Department of Health in Bundaberg and Brisbane knew that Dr Jayant Patel was approved by the Medical Board as a senior medical officer to an area of need only. That is what he was appointed as. The Department of Health knew that Dr Jayant Patel had not been clinically assessed to be anything other than a senior medical officer who would perform under supervision. When the Department of Health promoted Dr Patel to the exalted position of director of surgery it then put a clinically unassessed doctor in charge, thus removing any opportunity for supervision and ultimately any opportunity to question his competence. With the culture of bullying and intimidation which is rife through the Department of Health, how could any subordinates question the exalted one? These amendments will not eliminate mediocre standards within the Department of Health or the lack of appropriate watch from the government opposite. Nor will the amendments eliminate managers who will not manage or be accountable to the policies, directives or legislative structures in existence in the Department of Health. Nor will the amendments overcome the inadequacies of the Minister for Health, who has time and time again shown his lack of knowledge of what is going on in the department. As Minister for Health he is commissioned to administer this rather large portfolio. He swore an oath to administer the Department of Health and yet time and time again he conducts his ministerial duties from a distance. In fact, the Bette Midler song From a Distance could be used to describe the minister and could be his theme song. What does the Premier intend to do about this Minister for Health? Similarly, what does the government intend to do about its managers who do not or cannot manage the job they have been appointed to do? For example, on 19 May 2003, some two years ago, Toni Hoffman and Dr John Joiner went to see Dr Darren Keating, the director of medical services at Bundaberg Base Hospital, to tell them about a patient who had an oesophagectomy. I believe this patient is the one to whom Mr Morris referred. I speak of course of James Edward Phillips. As the director of medical services Dr Keating must have known that Bundaberg Hospital was ill equipped to be undertaking such complex surgery. When it all went wrong and he had complaints from the ICU nurse manager and Dr John Joiner, why did Dr Darren Keating not act immediately to stop such butchering? However, I suppose Dr Keating could have thought similarly to the Premier—that Dr Patel was suffering from the Jesus complex. Does the Premier still think along the lines he enunciated the other day on television and elsewhere with regard to Dr Patel? In the health department’s submission there were pages and pages of policies and directives outlining the department’s adherence to strict quality guidelines and a strict clinical auditing process. The reality is that there is a framework, but that is all. No-one seems to check that the framework has a purpose, that the directives under the framework are being adhered to or that recommendations made by a clinical audit process have been implemented in any way. 10 Jun 2005 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2111

A document came into my possession recently. It is a copy of the department’s operating theatre review. Recommendation 10 of that review states— Surgical throughput and complexity be monitored on a monthly basis at district and corporate levels, with reporting of variations in throughput. That is quite clear. It goes on to state— Action: District accountable officers monitor surgical throughput and complexity on a monthly basis, reporting to operating theatre management committee and district executive. Action: District executive report reasons for unexpected reduction in surgical throughput and complexity to zonal management units. These are things it says need to be done. It goes on to state further— Action: Surgical Access Service to continue monitoring and reporting surgical throughput and complexity to Queensland Health Executive and zonal management units on a monthly basis. So what went wrong with the monthly reporting mechanisms at the district, zonal and corporate office levels? As I stated before, these amendments, while supported, will not overcome the inadequacy of management in the government’s health department from the top down—and that includes the ministerial level. The amendments in this bill relate to administrative changes. However, Mr Morris’s interim report recommends actions to be taken by the Queensland Police Service in relation to alleged breaches of the Criminal Code sections 502, 408C, 328, 282, 288, 296, 302(1) (b) and 274. My question in this regard is very simple: what is wrong with the Attorney-General, the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Commissioner for Police, with the vast array of legal expertise within their respective departments, that they did not or could not identify the breaches of the Criminal Code and Dr Patel could have been pursued sooner rather than later? We have seen what has happened in that regard. There has been an appalling lack of administrative oversight from those within the Department of Health and a blase, ignorant and cavalier attitude from the Labor government in Queensland, from the minister down. It should have known something was going wrong and should have been able to hear the cries that were very much emanating from those people who worked in the Bundaberg Base Hospital and also the patients in that particular area. What is different in this report, particularly with regard to criminal prosecutions, from what was known when this particular inquiry was set up three months go? What is different in this report today with regard to prosecutions from what was known when Toni Hoffman wrote to Peter Leck in October last year referring to certain matters and probably referring to this particular case which is now being acted on as a murder charge? The evidence was there. It was clear; it was plain. It was an absolute dereliction of duty and a lack of proper oversight and commitment to justice which has seen it fail and get to this particular stage. There is one final point that I will touch on before concluding. There appears to be nothing in this legislation, and there seems to have been no mention whatsoever this morning from the Premier or anyone else, of addressing the issue of promotion without assessment, which is what caused the problem in the first place. That is what a lot of the problem was. The Medical Board did do part of its job because it appointed him to a medical officer. He was then appointed to a position at the local level above his capacity in Queensland Health. Mr Horan: The department promoted him. Mr SPRINGBORG: It was the Department of Health, as the member for Toowoomba South said. The Department of Health promoted him to that position. It has been termed ‘deeming’. I prefer to call it promotion without proper assessment and proper understanding of the qualifications of that particular position. It is still going on with consultant physicians in such places as Mount Isa. What is the government doing to address that issue which, by and large, caused this problem in the first place? Absolutely nothing. That is what is happening. We are having people appointed with certain riders on their appointment and then Queensland Health upgrades them and appoints them to do surgery and procedures which are over and above their capacity and qualifications to do. It was the system that failed. If the existing system had been properly overseen then we would not have had the carnage at the Bundaberg Base Hospital. By and large we support these amendments. There should have been more notice given to us, quite frankly. We would urge more notice in the future. This is certainly not going to be the last tranche of amendments. But amendments will not mean anything unless the resources and the internal commitment and external commitment are given to make sure that they are properly implemented and overseen. Hon. GR NUTTALL (Sandgate—ALP) (Minister for Health) (2.48 pm): I rise today to support the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2005. The bill amends a number of existing provisions in the Medical Practitioners Registration Act 2001 and creates a number of new offences with significant penalties for a person seeking registration as a medical practitioner in Queensland who does not tell the truth. The amendments included in this bill follow from recommendations made to the government by the Morris royal commission received today. What happened at the Bundaberg Base 2112 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 10 Jun 2005

Hospital has disappointed and appalled all of us. The recommendations implemented in this bill are the first step to ensuring appropriate safeguards to make sure this never happens again. The bill inserts a number of new sections into the Medical Practitioners Registration Act 2001. Under this bill, a number of offences are created for the first time, and these include an offence for any person who is not a doctor under the pretence of being registered to be a doctor; an offence for the giving of false information or a false document to the Medical Board when seeking registration; and offences for continuing to practise as a doctor after they have given false information or a false document to the Medical Board or they failed to tell the Medical Board about false information or a document when they have become aware that the information is false. All of these offences carry penalties of fines of up to $150,000 or three years imprisonment. There should be no question that this government is serious about addressing the concerns raised following what has occurred at the Bundaberg Base Hospital. These penalties are the toughest in the country and highlight the seriousness of the registration process and our commitment to making the system work to protect patients. The bill also amends a number of provisions already included in the act. Section 161 of the act is amended to include that a person who is not a registrant must not allow themselves to be held out as being eligible for registration. The penalty for this offence remains the same, with a fine of up to $75,000. The other section of the act that is amended is section 273 with the addition of a new subsection. This subsection creates the offence of giving false information or a false document to the Medical Board. The penalty for this offence is a maximum of 200 penalty units or $15,000. The bill also makes a number of minor amendments for the cancellation of a doctor’s registration if they are found to have committed an offence under the act. The report handed to the government by Mr Tony Morris and the assistant commissioners this morning clearly outlines the commission’s view that Dr Patel’s conduct in connection with his registration in Queensland as a medical practitioner was false and fraudulent. It also identifies that the current legislative arrangements surrounding such behaviour are inadequate. Under the legislation as it stands, this activity attracts a maximum fine of only 50 penalty units or $3,750. The commission is also quite clearly of the view that provisions of the registration act which are designed to prevent and punish attempts to obtain registration fraudulently are insufficiently comprehensive. The four recommendations made by the royal commission and included in this bill are aimed at fixing the deficiencies in the legislation and ensuring we have the best system possible to register doctors. In this debate, it is also important that we acknowledge the views of the commission with regard to the Medical Board of Queensland and reforms already undertaken by that body. I have made statements in this House before outlining the changes that the Medical Board of Queensland has adopted. In light of the reasonable time constraints of this debate, I do not intend to go into those details again. However, I would like to particularly note that the commission commends these initiatives and is satisfied that they have significantly reduced, if not eliminated, the risk of this happening again. The recommendations received today and included in this bill cannot be construed as criticisms of these reforms but rather a strengthening of the legislative foundations on which the board operates. As a government we cannot say, and the commission has not indicated, whether or not these are the only legislative reforms that will be necessary. This is a question for the commission to answer and to make recommendations on to this government. At this stage, what I do wish to say is that the government is supportive of the recommendations contained in this interim report and has acted as quickly as possible to ensure that they are implemented. In the report that was received today, there are a number of comments raised by Commissioner Morris and his assistant commissioners in relation to the board and a number of comments that I would like to comment on from the Leader of the Opposition in his address to the House this afternoon. In paragraph 26 of the report, the commission says— The initiatives taken by the Board— and he is referring to the Medical Board— are to be commended, and we are satisfied that they will very significantly reduce (if not eliminate) the risk of ‘another Patel’. Nonetheless, we believe that the legislative foundations on which the Board operates require to be substantially strengthened, not because we doubt the efficacy of the procedural improvements already adopted by the Board, but to provide further support for those procedural improvements in the form of appropriately severe criminal sanctions in cases where false information or documents are supplied to the Board. It is not at all unlikely that the final report of the Commission of Inquiry will recommend more far-reaching changes to the Registration Act. Of course, he is referring to the Medical Practitioners Registration Act. It continues— It is a matter for the Government—and, ultimately, for the Parliament—whether the amendments which we are recommending should be adopted immediately— and of course today we are doing that— or should await a more comprehensive revision of the Registration Act. 10 Jun 2005 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2113

Quite clearly, the commissioner has indicated in his report that there probably will be more recommendations around the Medical Practitioners Registration Act. As a government, we have shown today that we are willing and quite keen to support the recommendations that have been brought down in this interim report. I as the minister am looking forward to the final report and the final recommendations that may be contained in that report, particularly in relation to the Medical Practitioners Registration Act. The honourable Leader of the Opposition in his address to the House this afternoon spoke of his concerns about other areas within the hospital system where doctors may be practising above their competencies. We have done two things in that regard. Firstly, we have met with the AMA—and I have said this in the House before—and we have asked the AMA to work with us and put together a panel of assessors who will assess the skills of all overseas trained doctors who are currently in the system, and that work is being done as we speak. Secondly, I have asked my department to speak with all medical superintendents in all of our hospitals to assess and ensure that the doctors under their charge are acting appropriately and are also performing within the scope of their skills and their ability. We have done that to ensure that an incident such as Dr Patel does not happen again. I have, as I said, asked my department to do that to ensure that we have doctors who are performing within their scope of skills and ability. Last year the Premier and I opened the Skills Development Centre at the Royal Brisbane Hospital, and it is a facility which doctors who do need some support or upskilling or reskilling can attend and be guided by professionals in terms of their further development. We can all be proud that we have that facility here in Queensland. All of us in this House are obviously mortified at what has happened at Bundaberg. None of us ever wants to see that happen again. By the commission of inquiry going about its work—and we know that at the end of next week it is attending Bundaberg for several weeks for public hearings—we hope that at the end of the day we will be able to walk out of this knowing that we have the best possible systems in place to both vet and check overseas doctors who may wish to practise in Queensland. But I have to say that we will continue to struggle as a nation to supply the doctors that are needed. It is very difficult for us because of the shortage. Mr COPELAND (Cunningham—NPA) (2.58 pm): At the outset, I put on the record my congratulations to Tony Morris for the report that he has delivered. He has cut through and really seen the systematic failure of Queensland Health at every turn. If people listened to the minister, they would be of the belief that the systems were not in place to stop a Dr Patel from happening and the scandal at Bundaberg from happening. But if people were doing their jobs, if people were following the policies that were in place and if people were actually following the directives that were in place, then this would never have happened. This would never have happened! It is the absolute failure of Queensland Health, the failure of this minister and the failure of this government that has allowed this situation to occur. What is more, 87 deaths did not make this government finally act. It knew about the matter. It had been reported. The complaint was made as far back as May 2003. That was two years ago. But what happened? Absolutely nothing! Then in October 2004, when Toni Hoffman again put her complaints in writing, what happened? Absolutely nothing! An opposition member: A cover-up. Mr COPELAND: There was nothing but a cover-up and intimidation of that person who complained. It was not until March when this issue was raised by the opposition—by the member for Burnett and me—and following a week and a half of bullying and vilification that anything happened. I well remember the Premier saying that we did not need an inquiry or we did not need a royal commission. It was only when the political heat started to get too much that the Premier performed a backflip and on the Tuesday of the parliamentary sitting announced that we would have a royal commission. On that day we asked him to hold an extraordinary cabinet meeting to set out the terms of reference so that the inquiry could commence straightaway. But no, the matter was not urgent enough to do that. It was not until the following Monday that we received the terms of reference. Yet this morning we have seen that an extraordinary cabinet meeting can be held. As soon as this report was received, the Premier was able to call a cabinet meeting. Back when the inquiry was announced, it was not urgent enough to call an extraordinary cabinet meeting. It was not urgent enough to call an extraordinary cabinet meeting when we knew that there were people dead and injured. The situation was allowed to continue. I urge everyone in this parliament, everyone in the media and everyone in Queensland to read this report of Tony Morris, because it shows the systemic failure of Queensland Health. He said that it is nothing short of scandalous that four years after the Medical Practitioners Registration Act came into operation, Queensland Health is still using a policy document that was created nine years ago based on 1939 legislation and that this situation has been permitted to continue despite the Dr Patel issue. So even when concerns had been raised, the government still did not look into them. The government still did not realise that it was not complying with its own legislation. That is just extraordinary. If Queensland Health is not complying with the registration act, what other acts is it not complying with? What other things are not being done correctly? 2114 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 10 Jun 2005

We heard the minister say again that Queensland Health is struggling to find staff for these regional hospitals. I refer to point 50.4 of Tony Morris’s report, which states— Queensland Health has, in the past, required no proof that a public sector employer has been unable to fill a vacancy, merely assuming that the hospital has been unable to find a suitable applicant with the appropriate qualifications. Queensland Health is not even checking that. It is just saying, ‘Obviously, we are not going to be able to find a suitably qualified person. So we will just get someone from overseas.’ Then Queensland Health appoints an overseas trained doctor as senior medical officer without undergoing any assessment. Then it promotes them to a chief of surgery role. This whole situation has been created by Queensland Health. At every turn, we see the failure of Queensland Health. It is just extraordinary that the Premier and the minister have said, ‘We are going to put in place these recommendations and it will never happen again.’ It should not have happened in the first place. It has been allowed to happen and it is still happening. Even after all of the issues that have been raised, it is still going on. Thanks to Tony Morris, it is only now that we might have some progress—no thanks to the minister, no thanks to the Premier and no thanks to the government. Thanks to Tony Morris, that progress can be made. The only reason Tony Morris’s inquiry is fair is that we forced it to happen. There are serious concerns about what is going on in Queensland Health. It is not acceptable for the minister to continue saying that he did not know what was going on. It is not acceptable for people such as Toni Hoffman to be bullied, because that is what is happening out there in Queensland Health. Anyone who sticks up their head is getting it knocked off—just as it happened to Toni Hoffman. We need a complete cultural shift within Queensland Health. That culture comes from the top. It comes from the minister. We have seen what happens to anyone who speaks out. Members should talk to Con Aroney, Wendy Erglis or Toni Hoffman. They should talk to the myriad other people who are still too terrified to speak. Those people will tell them what the culture in Queensland Health is like. Let us not forget that 87 deaths were not a good enough reason to hold an inquiry. It was only when the political heat got too much for this government to endure that it set up the inquiry. Otherwise, this situation would still be going on. If that doctor had not been named in this parliament, he would still be operating in Bundaberg today. He would still be killing people, he would still be harming people and this government would still be ignoring complaints about his behaviour. I would have liked to have spoken longer, but given that other members want to make a contribution I will stop there. I am sure further legislative changes will come out of this inquiry. The government should stand condemned for allowing the situation to occur in the first place. Dr FLEGG (Moggill—Lib) (3.05 pm): I rise to speak to the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2005. At the outset let me say that the Liberal Party welcomes the interim report of Mr Tony Morris QC and supports the recommendations contained in that interim report. It should be noted that this bill covers one of three areas under which Mr Morris has made recommendations. In this interim report Tony Morris made recommendations in relation to charging Dr Patel with criminal matters; he made recommendations in relation to administrative procedures, particularly in relation to the area of need; and he made some legislative recommendations, which are contained in this bill that we are debating, that tighten up some of the definitions in the legislation that the Medical Board is working under and in some cases increase the penalties. These are matters of vital importance to Queenslanders. I do not believe that they should have been rushed through after essentially less than a day of preparation. Mr Morris’s recommendations were tabled only this morning. That does not allow us enough time to undertake a thorough reading of the report and to discuss his view. On page 9 at paragraph 24, Tony Morris makes it very clear that this legislative change was not critically urgent. That paragraph states— However, whilst these recommended amendments to the Registration Act are considered by us to be critical, they are not critically urgent. Yet despite that exhortation from Commissioner Morris, the government has treated this bill as the most urgent piece of legislation that I have encountered since I entered this House. I consider that part of the reason for this is a desire on the part of the government to look good out in the public arena and be seen as having adopted Mr Morris’s recommendations speedily. There are processes by which legislation before this House is assessed and any amendments are considered. All members are given the opportunity to speak in relation to legislation. Both the opportunity to consider the measures contained in the legislation and the opportunity for members to speak to this bill have been wiped out by the government’s haste, which even Mr Tony Morris did not think was reasonable. Mr Shine: What are you doing now? You’re speaking to it. Dr FLEGG: I am sure the member has not had the time to read all the material. There are over 1,200 overseas trained doctors working in the state, most under special provisions. It is my understanding that the increased penalties and powers that are contained in this bill which alter the terms of the registration will not be retrospective. Given that so many overseas trained doctors already working in the system will not be caught up in these changes, it is difficult to understand the haste with 10 Jun 2005 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2115 which the government is ramming this legislation through parliament. We have been given assurances that Tony Morris has seen this legislation and considers that it is in accordance with his recommendations; that, in effect, he has ticked off on it. Given the time frame in which this bill will be passed, we can only take it on trust that these assurances that have been given are a true reflection of Mr Morris’s attitude to the bill. The bill changes section 161 and prohibits a person not only from holding themselves out to be a medical practitioner or being eligible to be registered as a medical practitioner but also allowing themselves to be held out by others to be eligible to practise. I would presume that the wording ‘allow himself or herself’ implies that the registrant involved has a knowledge and understanding and would not catch up an innocent person. I hope that that wording implies that there would be knowledge and intent on the part of the person and not catch somebody who Queensland Health or others have put forward. Proposed new subsection 161(2) creates a new offence of pretending to be a doctor, not simply by holding oneself out to be a doctor but by obtaining employment, access to a hospital or clinic or an assortment of other ways in a way that one might pretend to be a doctor, including purporting to conduct autopsies, interestingly. Clearly we would not have any problems with these provisions. It strikes me as a bit unusual that the obtaining of employment fraudulently is an offence but seeking employment under fraudulent conditions is not. I can only assume that the offence of seeking employment under fraudulent conditions would come under proposed new subsection 161(1). Hopefully the minister will comment on that in his reply, if he is listening. It strikes me that it might have been reasonable to say one who ‘seeks or obtains’ employment. Nevertheless, we do not have any problems as long as that contingency has been met elsewhere. Proposed new subsections 273(2) and 273(3) tighten up provisions in relation to false documentation and significantly increase the penalties. Proposed new subsection 273(4) is interesting because it has a component of retrospectivity in that, if a person becomes aware of a change or an error in any of their information or documents previously given, there is an obligation to forward this information to the Medical Board and there is a penalty for not so doing. I did ask in the briefing if the bill was retrospective and the answer I was given was that it was not. This clause, then, is a bit confusing because it would appear to have a retrospective component. It is not certain whether a person having previously submitted a false document or information or whose circumstances have changed prior to the enactment of this legislation will be caught under these provisions and increased penalties. I would have preferred to see a clause clarifying this, saying that the provision applies to existing registrants. I also suspect that for existing registrants there should be a partial amnesty period to allow them voluntarily to bring forward information, because it is unclear at what point people may become criminally liable under the provisions contained in this bill. Given the large numbers of doctors already in the system, I think it is important that provisions apply to existing doctors but that time be given to them to disclose. It is in the public interest that they be encouraged to disclose. Proposed new subsection 273(5) makes it an offence with severe penalties to practise as a doctor after having given false information or a false document to the Medical Board. Again, to my mind it is not clear what the implications are for doctors already practising who have given false information, as there are undoubtedly doctors in the system who have done so. I note the Premier’s resistance to having the Morris inquiry in the first place, claiming that we would not waste the money by having it. He certainly seems to have become a convert to the Morris inquiry. I would like to very, very strongly make the following point: the introduction of this bill should not be allowed to act as a smokescreen. There were already ample laws in place to prevent what happened in Bundaberg. It is false to give the impression that somehow this bill is being raced through because otherwise we cannot stop this happening again. The laws were there. It should never have happened. We did not need this bill before the House today to stop what happened with Dr Patel in Bundaberg. What was lacking was commonsense in applying existing laws and procedures. Administrative procedures were lazy and, worse than that, they did not care about the outcomes that resulted from the lazy application of administrative procedures. We do not need these laws to do some simple reference checks. We do not need these laws to check the documents that doctors present when applying for registration. This was laziness. This was a system that did not care how bad the outcomes would be for the patients of Queensland. We do not need this legislation to make sure that doctors who are not normally qualified here are assessed on the job. Queensland Health not only had the opportunity but also had a duty of care to ensure that these doctors were assessed on their ability on the job, and it did not do it. People in this parliament and in the community should not be distracted that somehow this law brings with it important new powers. It simply redefines powers that already existed and in some cases increases the penalties. With the procedures that were in place—and I think Mr Morris’s interim report has made it patently clear—the failure to adequately have the correct procedures in place is what went wrong here. People can still break the law and tell lies to the Medical Board. All we have done with this 2116 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 10 Jun 2005 legislation is increase some penalties. We have to catch these doctors out. We have to catch them out by having the correct procedures and checks in place and, in particular, we should not allow people to be bullied. Time expired. Mr McNAMARA (Hervey Bay—ALP) (3.15 pm): I rise today in support of the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2005. The interim report handed to the government today marks the first of what I expect will be a number of important reforms to health care in Queensland. What has occurred at the Bundaberg Base Hospital is distressing not only for the residents of that city but also for every Queenslander and particularly for the near neighbours, such as Hervey Bay residents. Each and every member of this House will be acutely aware that the delivery of health care is an issue that touches all of us. When we or a loved one are sick or injured we need the best treatment possible provided by caring and competent health professionals in modern facilities with up-to-date equipment. The reforms included in this bill, following the interim recommendations of the Morris royal commission, will assist in ensuring that we can have confidence in the doctors in whom we place our trust now and in the future. The bill includes a number of new provisions aimed at broadening and strengthening the registration process for doctors. Under the bill, it will now be an offence for a prospective registrant to provide false information or false documentation to the Medical Board of Queensland. It will also now be an offence when a person who is not a registrant represents themselves under the pretence of being registered to be a doctor. An offence will also be created if a doctor practises after providing false information to the board. For each of these offences there will be a maximum penalty of up to 2,000 penalty units or $150,000 per offence. While the current provisions of the registration act have been clearly breached by Dr Patel, the penalties are inadequate as they currently stand. This bill ensures that Queensland has the toughest registration process in this country, and I wholeheartedly support those recommendations. The recommendations in the interim report also move to address policy concerns regarding the designation of areas of need within Queensland. These recommendations are important, not just for Bundaberg but for every area of Queensland. Both the Premier and the minister have made statements regarding the Morris royal commission’s interim report and the interim recommendations presented here today, and I support the comments they have made. Changes to the policy of designating areas of need are important to ensure that the people of Queensland, and particularly regional Queensland, can have confidence in the health services we are receiving. I strongly support this aspect of the royal commission’s interim report. It is clear that at no stage were these issues raised with members of the government or the minister before they were raised in this House. However, once being made aware, both the minister and the Premier have acted swiftly and appropriately. This bill is yet another example of the commitment of this government to solve this problem as quickly as possible. I am proud to be part of a government that faces up to the tough challenges and makes the hard choices. I am proud to be part of a government that is not afraid to face the scrutiny of a royal commission and to act on its findings and recommendations. I am proud to say that I will be part of a government that will always work to make things better for the people of Queensland. I commend the bill to the House. Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (3.18 pm): In rising to speak to the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill, I wish to commend the member for Burnett, Toni Hoffman and others who have had the backbone to keep these truths alive. I challenge both the Premier and the Minister for Health to ensure that in neither the short nor the long term will there be overt and, more particularly, covert retribution towards any government employee who assists in any way to uncover and make public problems in Queensland Health, Bundaberg or elsewhere. The time frame within which Patel was allowed to continue his reign of terror is unforgivable. The staff in Queensland Health across Queensland are threatened with breaches of the code of conduct in order to suppress, harass and bully staff who in this Bundaberg case—and I know in other situations—are genuinely concerned about their own, other staff or public safety. This bill is intended to make early modifications to the Medical Practitioners Registration Act 2001. However, there is and will be no excuse for inaction by the Premier, who has chosen to take over this matter—to correct the lax attitude and processes of the Queensland Medical Board, those Queensland Health officers to whom the minister’s powers have been delegated and any Queensland Health officers who have a role in receiving, investigating and determining applications from anyone, particularly overseas trained doctors wishing to practise in Queensland in areas of need or, indeed, anywhere. This legislative change is now identified as important because of Patel. However, we must never lose sight of the fact that current legislation, if followed appropriately, would have stopped Patel’s actions. Proper checks were not carried out. Section 140 of the registration act requires that registration as a special purpose registrant must be reviewed at intervals of six to 12 months. This did not happen. 10 Jun 2005 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2117

His registration was not reviewed; his performance not genuinely checked. He was instead promoted over the protestations of those health professionals who expressed concerns but who were silenced by the system. That Queensland Health is currently operating on policies issued in 1996 and repealed four years ago is totally unacceptable. That new legislation on these matters passed in 2001, four years ago, has not been implemented within the system is incompetent and incomprehensible. After all the trumpeting by past and current health ministers and the Premier that our health system is the best in the world, the fact that Queensland Health had to admit to the inquiry that Queensland Health has no protocols to assist with determinations under section 135 because ‘our data is not good enough’ is reprehensible. This legislation is necessary because Queensland Health took to protecting its hierarchy rather than its nurses and its patients. Fixing the approval process is essential. Fixing the health system is critical. Ensuring that those in Queensland Health responsible for this tragedy face the reality of their actions or inactions is vital to ensure that this does not ever happen again. Mr MESSENGER (Burnett—NPA) (3.21 pm): I rise to support the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2005. In 1962 on 26 October Irene Messenger gave birth to me in the Bundaberg Base Hospital, and she was born 19 years earlier in the Bundaberg Base Hospital. I can remember visiting my nana when she was sick at the Bundaberg Base Hospital, and both my brothers, Greg and Danny, were born there. I appreciate how important the hospital and its staff of medical professionals are to my community. Mum and dad lived about 20 kilometres away from the hospital in the cane fields of South Kolan on a half acre of red dirt which had a house, a chook pen and a shed beside an outdoor dunny. Occasionally we would get a rat that would come out of the cane fields and take up residence in the toilet, and it was my job to kill it. The way I would do that was to get a big stick, force it into a corner and then whack it over the head. This morning during question time—indeed, since the moment this place first learnt of ‘Dr Death’—the Premier of this state has shown all the political cunning and agility of a shedhouse dunny rat forced into a corner. This morning the Premier of this state was forced to table this legislation before the House—just like he was forced into calling the Morris royal commission. Remember he just wanted a CMC inquiry. Just like the Premier has been forced into calling any investigation at all. He had sent his health minister to Bundaberg on 7 April with the message, ‘There will be no investigation into “Dr Death”’ and two days later, 9 April, after the famous Hedley Thomas Google search on Dr Patel, the Premier made the poor old red-faced health minister front the cameras again. This time he said, ‘Yes, there will be an investigation.’ If more than 100 people had not died and more than 2,000 families had not been affected, you would almost feel like laughing—almost. Here we have the Premier using every political trick in the book, scurrying this way, scurrying that way, hiding under the trouser legs and the coat-tails of the health minister trying to avoid responsibility for the worst health disaster that this state has ever witnessed. All of a sudden the Premier and his mates are backed into a corner, and let me tell the House that the big stick is about to fall—hence this legislation. Let me refresh the memory of honourable members a little. The Premier’s political henchman, the member for Stafford—no doubt under orders from the Premier—tried to reduce the political heat after I highlighted to this House on numerous occasions, starting with my maiden speech, the problems at the Bundaberg Base Hospital, the culture of bullying and the culture of vilification of staff, of nurses. He lurched into this House on 29 September 2004 and offered these little pearls of wisdom— Earlier this year the Minister for Health wrote to all members, inviting us to bring any concerns to him or his office. He made district managers available to all members, of all political persuasions, to discuss issues. This is part of the government’s commitment to openness and accountability in the health system. But a system only works with the cooperation of members of this House who have the welfare of their constituents at heart. The member for Burnett is untruthful, untrustworthy and not fit to represent the good people of the Burnett region. How does it feel now? This morning the member for Callide asked the Premier if he would apologise for the vilification and lies told about me to the House by his Labor mates. I did not ask for that. I do not care what words the Premier says about me because whatever words come out of the Premier’s mouth are designed to increase his popularity and to save his own political skin—nothing more, nothing less. What got me really angry was when he started talking about Toni Hoffman, the nurse whistleblower. This is the same whistleblower who came to me desperate, frightened, scared witless and on the edge of a breakdown because of the treatment she received at the hands of a health system created and nurtured by the Premier. The other remark that the Premier made this morning was that I was just doing my job as the local member—yes, true, I was doing my job as the local member; my duty. But I would like to remind the Premier that there is another local member—a Labor Party local member—who has been in this place a lot longer than I and also has the responsibility to look after Bundaberg Hospital staff and patients. So the Premier, in saying that I was just doing my job, is in fact admitting that this local Labor member—the member for Bundaberg—is a dud. Unfortunately for the 87 families whose loved ones are officially being investigated because of their deaths, the dud for Bundaberg was asleep on the job at best or was part of this Labor Party cover-up at worst. 2118 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 10 Jun 2005

I support this legislation wholeheartedly. Let us find Patel and bring him back here to face the music. I am interested to hear what he has to say. What sort of deals did ‘Dr Death’ do with this Peter Beattie health department? Hon. NI CUNNINGHAM (Bundaberg—ALP) (3.27 pm): The member for Burnett has just displayed what has been going on in my electorate for some time. The opposition, in a quite ruthless attempt to win the seat of Bundaberg, has tried everything to discredit me. It has searched high and low just to— Opposition members interjected. Mrs NITA CUNNINGHAM: Can I have the peace and quiet that was given to them? They have searched high and low to justify their claim that I knew about the problems of Dr Patel for six months and did nothing. All these months and all they could find was one letter sent to me in 2003—two years ago. It was a letter from a lady whom I will not name who was complaining about surgery done at the hospital in 2000 and she complained about four other doctors. At the end of that letter she did mention a Dr Patel, who she said refused to operate again because it would be too dangerous and she did not like what she called his condescending attitude. That was certainly no indication of the tragedy that has now unfolded two years later, and it was certainly no indication of concerns about his ability as a surgeon. As I said in a speech to this House on 21 April, and as the Acting Speaker ruled on Tuesday, I took the appropriate action. I sent the complaint to the minister at that time. I received a response. I sent that on to the lady, and I had heard no more about it. I rise to support this bill. I am just as shocked as everyone else to hear the allegations coming forward at the Morris inquiry. I am amazed that this had been kept quietly behind the doors of our hospital and Queensland Health. Like everyone in Bundaberg, I want answers and I want the problems fixed. I am very grateful for the actions this government has already taken and the support being given to former patients of Dr Patel. That is certainly giving our residents confidence that these problems are being addressed. In the short term this government has been absolutely committed to offering care and support to the patients of Dr Patel. Letters have been received by 2,719 former patients of Dr Patel in Bundaberg, including all of those admitted and discharged under Dr Patel, all of those operated on and all patients who may have seen him as outpatients. A dedicated patient liaison team is still working at the hospital organising assistance for former patients who require further medical treatment. The patient and staff support team continue to provide assistance and counselling to former patients, their families and hospital staff. To date, 936 people have either contacted or been contacted by the patient liaison team. Following contact with the patient liaison team, former patients have been able to undergo initial assessments, discuss their case details and determine what, if any, further assistance is required. Where it has been identified that further treatment is necessary, arrangements have been made to ensure these patients are treated as a matter of priority. A local private surgeon has been engaged to assist patients, and a panel of specialists in Brisbane has been established. Contact has also been made with local general practitioners. Patients are able to visit their family doctor for treatment if they prefer. No patient will be out of pocket for any treatment that is necessary. The government’s commitment is to not only ensure that this tragedy is not repeated but also ensure that those who have been affected by what has happened in Bundaberg receive the care, attention and support that they so obviously need. This government also acted swiftly by announcing sweeping changes in the registration and training of overseas trained doctors. The Medical Board immediately began moving towards changes to the system of registration. Many of the changes have already been put into effect. The Morris commission has already mentioned the swift action that has been taken by the board in introducing the toughest registration system in the country. Prior to registration, applicants will have the medical board in the country in which they trained send a certificate of good standing directly to the Medical Board of Queensland. They will have the medical board in any country where they practised send a certificate of good standing directly to the Medical Board, provide specific references in support of their application for registration and have the recruiting agency certify that reference checks have been undertaken. The applicants will have their initial qualification certified by the international credential service of the US Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates, pass a computer administered screening examination from July 2006 and successfully pass the English language proficiency test. After registration, most registrants will be supervised for one to three months and, if necessary, referred to the Skills Development Centre at Herston for further skills assessment. Registrants undertaking speciality activity—such as surgery, anaesthetics and obstetrics—will be supervised by an external supervisor nominated by the relevant college. Within six months registrants will receive professional development and training about Queensland’s legislation, Aboriginal health, women’s health, cross-cultural training, health insurance and how best to work in the Australian health care system. 10 Jun 2005 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2119

Registrants must complete the Australian Medical Council’s examination or the relevant speciality college certification within four years of the initial registration. Supervisors will be required to report on the clinical competence of the registrant after one month, three months, six months and 12 months in each annual registration period. Registrants will be required to undertake further clinical assessment if an issue is raised about their competence. Supervisors must refer any issue to Queensland Health for a review of the registrant’s employment status and the board will consider any action necessary. These initiatives will ensure that Queensland has the toughest registration system in the country as well as ongoing monitoring, training and supervision. The passing of the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill before the House today will enforce those sweeping changes to registration by increasing the penalties for noncompliance. I attended a function in Bundaberg last night. It was clear that the residents do not want any more negativity, name calling or political games. They want the patients of Dr Patel looked after and they want the system fixed. They want quick and positive action. Most are satisfied that that is happening. Our priority must be helping the former patients of Dr Patel, ironing out the problems that have plagued our hospital for many, many years and bringing about a better health system for all Queenslanders. The Morris commission of inquiry is the cornerstone around which changes will occur. This bill, which has been brought forward so quickly for debate, will assure residents in my electorate, and indeed across Queensland, that the government is committed to fixing the problems and fixing them promptly, efficiently and with compassion. I commend the bill to the House. Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (3.36 pm): I rise to make a brief contribution to the consideration of the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill. It will be brief, given the time restraints that are on this debate. I participate in this debate with a heavy heart. I participate in this debate sick at heart at the misinformation and the downright dishonesty that we have already seen from the government benches in their contributions to this debate. The member for Bundaberg’s contribution was a shameful contribution given the history and the events that have led to us being in this House debating this legislation this afternoon. However, one thing she said at the end of her contribution to the debate illustrates quite clearly the government’s intent today. She said—quite rightly, I believe—that this legislation is all about convincing the people of Bundaberg that the government is acting quickly to solve the problem. That is what the legislation is for. That is what it is about. That is what the member for Bundaberg said, and she is dead right. There is no other purpose for this legislation. There is no other reason for this legislation to be rushed into this House today in the way that it was. This legislation provides no more opportunities for the government to get it right than it had before the passage of this legislation. In her contribution the member for Bundaberg summed up quite clearly why we are here. We are here to create a political perception. We are here as part of the political game that the government has played ever since the political heat was turned on it in this chamber by the member for Burnett and the opposition when the government refused to act. It ignored all the other signals. Quite rightly the parliament became the last resort to put the political heat on the government. The government’s response since then has been a political response. The government was not prepared to respond to the health needs of the people of Bundaberg. It was not prepared to respond to all of the signals about how dysfunctional the health system was. The government was not prepared to respond in the face of the increasing death toll—that it knew about, that the health department knew about, that the health managers in Bundaberg knew about, that everybody knew about. It was not sufficient to get a response from the government. However, as soon as the political heat was turned on the government and it was not able to escape the political heat by vilifying those who raised the issue and it was not able to escape the political scrutiny by attacking the people who had the courage to stand up and point out the problem, the government kicked in to what has been a political response ever since. The whole response since then has been to protect their political hides. And so it is with this legislation before the House. This legislation is before the House simply to create a political perception. It has been rushed into the House today and forced through all its stages in two hours to give the impression to people who do not have the time or the chance to fully understand its provisions that the government is acting and acting quickly to do something that it could not have done before. That is false and it is farcical, in the same way that the government’s response has been false and farcical from day one, because the laws to prevent the tragedy in Bundaberg happening already exist. The laws to pursue and prosecute those people who have done the wrong thing and committed crimes in Bundaberg already exist. Dr Patel is only one of them. I believe that there are a number of people who should eventually be called to account. The government does not need special legislation to do that. What the government needs is to take some responsibility. The government members need to do the job they were elected to do and the health department officials need to do the job they were appointed to do—the jobs that the public has entrusted them to do. 2120 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 10 Jun 2005

That has been the failing. There has not been a failing of legislation. There has not been a failing that this House needs to correct with an urgent bill rushed through on the last afternoon before a long adjournment. There has been a failing of a system that has been more focused on the government’s political stocks than on providing health care to the people of Queensland. Since those failings have been revealed, we have seen a government that has been more determined to recover those political stocks than to fix the problems in Bundaberg. There is no greater indication of that than the failure of the health minister to even visit Bundaberg. The minister went to Bundaberg once when the issue was first raised to lecture the staff about talking to the member for Burnett. He threatened them all with a whole range of consequences if they dared to talk to anybody about the problems that they knew so well. The only other time the minister went was with the Premier so that he could get his photo taken. They were there long enough to stand in front of the television cameras and have their photos taken and then they went back to Brisbane. Any self-respecting health minister who was interested in fixing the problem would have been in Bundaberg every week at least. He would have been there every couple of days in the initial stages of putting together a response to this tragedy. The political imperative was not to be seen to be too closely responsible. The way that the political spin doctors have decided to distance the government from the tragedy is to distance the health minister and the Premier from Bundaberg and to not be too closely associated with the hospital. They sought to blame it on the hospital management, blame it on Dr Patel and distance the government from it. It is all part of a political strategy, just as this legislation before the House this afternoon is part of a political strategy. It is all part of a political strategy that is about protecting the government rather than looking after the people who have suffered at the hands of Dr Patel. The tragedy is that this political strategy may well work. Given some of the successes that this government has had with its legion of spin doctors and public relations experts, it would not surprise me if this political strategy works—if the government is able to create this perception, if it is able to reconstruct history in the way that we have seen its members trying to today. I will not be surprised if their political strategy does work. One thing is for sure: the member for Bundaberg, the health minister, the Premier, the member for Stafford and all of the other government members who have been involved in this issue will have to live with their consciences. They can never avoid the reality and the truth that 87 Queenslanders lost their lives while they were responsible. That is something that no amount of political spin can ever spin away. I will never forget—and I apologise for getting upset about it—that night at the Bundaberg Brothers Leagues Club when the member for Burnett called a public meeting. I asked Rob, ‘How many people do you think we might get?’ and he said, ‘We might get 25 or 30.’ Two hundred and fifty people turned up that night to tell their tragic stories. Anybody who was there could not help but be touched by it. Anybody who was there could not help but be moved and affected by it forever. That is the result of the chronic failure of the member for Bundaberg and the chronic failure of the Minister for Health. That is the result when a health system is allowed to deteriorate in favour of political spin, silly grins, political reconstructions and dishonesty the like of which no government should be allowed to get away with. The government may well get away with it, but it does not deserve to. It does not deserve to exercise the responsibility that the people of Queensland have given it. The government can exercise that responsibility without this legislation before the House. It failed to exercise it when it had the tools to do it; there is no guarantee that this legislation will ensure that it does exercise that responsibility. This legislation does not mean that that responsibility will be exercised any better. Time expired. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN (Stafford—ALP) (3.46 pm): I rise to support the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill before the House. What happened in Bundaberg was terrible and no- one—no-one in this House or outside—wants patients harmed. No person or government can stop all cases of abuse, whether that abuse be within the family, within the community group, in the workplace or even in a hospital. The key criterion is, with what is known at the time, did the individual or the government act in a timely and responsible manner? There have been criticisms of the government, of the minister and the member for Bundaberg about their responses, but both the minister and the member have explained clearly what they knew and when they knew those things. In all cases they responded to the information at hand. Mr Messenger interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr English): Order! Member for Burnett. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: The member for Cunningham said that these things were known in May 2003. Mr Copeland: That’s when the complaints were made. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Cunningham. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: No, they were not. Their own member for Burnett, under oath at the commission, has sworn that he only knew the details of Dr Patel the Friday before the issue was raised in the parliament. 10 Jun 2005 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2121

Mr Copeland interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Cunningham. That is my final warning. Mr Messenger interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Burnett. That is my final warning. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: Their own member for Burnett, under oath, has sworn that he only knew the details of Dr Patel the Friday before he raised the issue in parliament on the following Tuesday. Using the opposition’s own principles, in hindsight it could be asked— Mr COPELAND: Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise to a point of order. The member is deliberately misleading the House. These complaints were made by Toni Hoffman back 2003. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: Using the opposition’s own principles, in hindsight it could be asked: why did the opposition or the member for Burnett, if they had the details of Dr Patel’s action on the Friday, not make contact on the Monday in Brisbane with the Health Rights Commission, the CMC, the minister or the Medical Practitioners Board? The opposition made the decision that its timely response was not to report these matters to those relevant authorities but to discuss it in their party room on the Monday afternoon and then wait to raise it in the parliament on the Tuesday. If the opposition appears comfortable with this course of action it could hardly be critical of the Premier introducing this bill today. The Premier could have waited almost two months until parliament resumed after the estimates hearings or he could have acted with speed and urgency. He has chosen the latter so that the recommendations from Commissioner Morris and the deputy commissioners can be implemented immediately. In one of the most important weeks of the parliamentary year, the budget week, there has been full, unfettered debate on the budget and the government has found time to implement the commissioner’s first set of recommendations. I hope we do not discover down the track that the opposition delayed acting on information it had received so that the political impact took precedence over the medical imperatives. History will judge whether the behaviour of those opposite in political point scoring helped the doctor in question to flee the country. When the Minister for Health, Gordon Nuttall, made a statement to this House and then wrote to all members in April and May 2004 he pleaded with the members of this House to work in the interest of patients and not politicians. The member for Burnett, having obtained evidence of concern regarding the clinical practices of Dr Patel, waited until after he brought this evidence to the party room and then waited again until he raised the issues in parliament and only then did he send the material to the minister’s office. That was his timely response. He is comfortable with that. The Leader of the Opposition is comfortable with that. All opposition members are comfortable with that. In contrast, the government has acted immediately today to implement Commissioner Morris’s recommendations concerning this aspect of the inquiry. The Premier is to be congratulated on his speedy and decisive actions in bringing about the recommendations from the independent inquiry. During his contribution a short time ago the member for Moggill said that this legislation had been rushed in and that because it was not retrospective doctors in the system today who have may have rorted the system or rorted their qualifications would not be caught up. That is not true. Any doctor working in the Queensland system today who has falsely claimed credentials or who is rorting the system in any way is caught up in the legislation because the doctor is practising in the system today. What would have to happen is that doctor would have to resign by midnight tonight and no longer be working in Queensland Health to escape this legislation. From tomorrow, any doctor who has falsely claimed any qualifications or is practising in a deceitful or dishonest way will be caught up in this legislation and will face the penalties that will be imposed. The member for Burnett in his contribution mentioned that I had acted under orders from the Premier. He is wrong. He certainly does not know how our Labor caucus operates. He mentioned that in September 2004 I had made a comment about his activities. That is correct. Within a short space of time the member for Burnett had claimed major crises in every area of activity within his electorate. This was six months before the member for Burnett was— Mr MESSENGER: I rise to a point of order. What the member for Stafford has said is incorrect. I did not claim crises in every area of my community. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr English): Order! There is no point of order. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: I take the member’s interjection. I think that he is more correct than I am. He claimed it in six areas—primary industries, sugar, education, child safety, transport and I forget what the other one was. Mr Messenger: I claimed a crisis in health. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: I know. We are talking about that. I am talking about the other areas. Part of the problem is to that when someone cries wolf in every area— Mr Messenger interjected. 2122 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 10 Jun 2005

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for Burnett is warned under standing order 253. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: When a member cries wolf in every area of activity it is sometimes hard to know what is legitimate and what is not. In summary, the Premier has acted with speed and decisiveness in responding to the independent commissioner’s recommendations. This legislation will tighten some loopholes in the current legislation. It should be supported by all members of the House. Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (3.53 pm), in reply: If this legislation is passed by the House it will become law today. It will be effective as of a second past midnight—that is early this morning—which means that anyone who breaches the act from this day forward, including today, will feel the full force of the law. I want to begin my contribution by reminding members of what this bill is about. It is about implementing immediately the recommendations of the royal commission. It is not about political strategy, gains or any other nonsense, nor is it about political spin. It is about the immediate implementation of the recommendations made by Tony Morris QC and his deputies today. That is what it is all about. I make no apology for moving fast. I thank the commissioners again for their prompt and diligent work and their fierce independence in providing today’s recommendations. What opposition members do in this regard is complain and attack. When we act and do the right thing they still complain and whinge because they are interested in politics. They are not interested in solutions or the patients. Let me start by thanking all members for their contributions to the debate. I do appreciate the support of all sides of parliament for this legislation that the government has introduced. I am disappointed to hear that the member for Southern Downs thinks this may be a facade. I assure the member that it is not. It is very serious indeed. It is about people’s lives, as we know. It is also about implementing the recommendations of an independent royal commission headed by a fiercely independent person. I remind everyone that this inquiry did not come from the man on the moon. This inquiry was established by my government following a cabinet decision on my recommendation, supported by the Minister for Health. We appointed a fiercely independent person in Tony Morris to carry out this inquiry. Frankly, morally we had a duty to do so. Opposition members interjected. Mr BEATTIE: They interject. Let the record show that. Let the record show that when we are bringing in positive legislation to try to resolve these issues, to try improve things for the future, the interjections continue. The point is very simple. We wanted someone fiercely independent. We wanted to make sure that the recommendations of the royal commission, like the accurate recommendations today, would improve the situation so this never happens again. That is what we wanted to do and that is what has happened. Therefore, the interim report justifies the government’s decision to set up a royal commission and to put someone fiercely independent in charge of it. Yes, it is true that initially I felt that the CMC should investigate this. I contacted the head of the CMC and he indicated that while it may investigate some aspects, which it is doing, it would not conduct a broad-ranging inquiry. We could have walked away from that, but we did not. I promised that there would be an inquiry and the minister supported that. So what did we do? We did not run away from it. We established this royal commission. Let me make it clear that nobody forced us into doing anything. We did it because it was the right thing to do, it was the moral thing to do, and the people of Bundaberg were entitled to nothing less. This inquiry was established by the government to make sure that we got to the bottom of these issues so that they never happen again. If we wanted to appoint someone who was going to simply do the government’s bidding we would not have appointed Tony Morris. He is fiercely independent. I stand by his appointment. Yes, it is true that some people thought that the government was mad to appoint him. It was not about that; it was about ensuring that we got someone independent, who would be seen to be independent, to get to the bottom of this issue and then we could fix it up. We acted honourably and decently from the beginning. The action today confirms that. I am also disappointed to hear allegations from the Leader of the Opposition that the media had the report before 9 am. To the best of my knowledge, the report was not provided to the media before being handed to me by the commissioner and the deputy commissioners. While I appreciate that the opposition would have liked more time to peruse the bill, unfortunately that was not possible in this time frame. I provided as much information as I possibly could in the time available. As the Leader of the Opposition is aware, I rang him straight after cabinet had considered the report and I offered an immediate briefing. The briefing took place at 12 o’clock. I thank him for attending. I thank his shadow minister and also the Leader of the Liberal Party and the member for Moggill for coming. The briefing 10 Jun 2005 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2123 was attended by the Minister for Health and in part by the Leader of the House and my departmental representatives. The briefing was provided at noon to provide as much opportunity as possible for the member to attend. I invited the Liberal Party to attend. While not able to personally contact the Independents, I invited them to attend when I delivered my ministerial statement this morning. While the Leader of the Opposition alleges that these amendments will not fix procedures, I can advise him that on page 9 of the commission’s interim report it states— ... we are fully satisfied that the Board ... And it goes on to state— has also taken prompt, appropriate and rigorous steps to ensure that such mistakes and oversights do not happen again. I reiterate that my government has responded quickly by setting up the inquiry. I am disappointed that the member is concerned about accessing the interim report. I stress that this interim report was released at 9 o’clock this morning. We have wasted no time in implementing all of its recommendations in full. That is why we are debating the bill that implements the required legislative changes. As I said before, they will be effective from today. The member for Southern Downs also raised the issue of promotion taking place without proper assessment. I can advise that the Minister for Health has agreed with the AMA on an audit of the competency of all overseas trained doctors. That was the point the Leader of the Opposition raised. I also remind the House that the minister and I opened the Skills Development Centre at the Royal Brisbane Hospital late last year to which the minister referred. Peter Forster’s health system review should also assist in improving systems to ascertain if medical practitioners are performing within their skills set. This also builds on announcements made earlier this year for the Patient Safety Centre and the Clinical Practice Improvement Centre. Peter Forster will also make recommendations with regard to cultural change to get rid of the alleged bullying referred to by the member for Cunningham. I am amazed that the members opposite are critical of the government for moving too quickly to implement these recommendations of the royal commission. What more can we do? For heaven’s sake, sometimes we have to put politics aside. Here we are trying to implement the recommendations of the inquiry as quickly as possible. To do otherwise would have meant a two-month delay. Those opposite have examined what the commissioner said. Point 24 states— However, whilst these recommended amendments to the Registration Act are considered by us to be critical, they are not critically urgent. But they are critical nevertheless. Further down in point 27 he says— It is a matter for the Government—and, ultimately, for the Parliament—whether the amendments which we are recommending should be adopted immediately, or should await a more comprehensive revision of the Registration Act. There is no way in the world we were going to wait. Here is a recommendation from an independent royal commission. Under those circumstances, if he says the law should be changed in an area like this, then it will be changed, and that is exactly what we have done. Anyone who possibly argues against these changes being made today does so for crude, vulgar political reasons and not in the interests of the people of Bundaberg or the people of this state. Surely if a government has had identified for it issues by a royal commission that need amendment to an act—obvious ones like this— then why would we sit on our tails and do nothing about it? We have an obligation to do something about it, and that is exactly what we have done. I urge the opposition to, for once in its life, put the politics aside and put the people first. When it comes to patient safety, we cannot move too quickly. We established a royal commission to get answers. We have been given some answers, and now we are implementing them. As I mentioned this morning, members have actually suggested that we should wait two more months until the House sits again in August to implement these changes. Surely that is not their position. If one listened to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, that seems to be what he is saying. That is an unsustainable position. He should go and tell the people of Bundaberg that that is his view. I know what will happen to him if he does. The member for Moggill queried whether in new section 161 the phrase ‘hold himself or herself out’ could capture an innocent bystander. The answer is no. The phrase is meant to capture the intent, the state of mind of a person holding himself or herself out. This means that one would really have to intend to mislead. That phrase is a continuation of the existing phrase in the legislation. The member also queried subsections (4) and (5) of section 273 and whether they would apply retrospectively, and I thought the member for Stafford dealt with this effectively. Subsection (4) states that a person must clarify with the board that something they told it previously was in fact false or has become false. Subsection (5) says that a registrant must not continue to practise as a registrant if the person has given the board something they knew was false at the time of registration. That is the crucial point. That is the point. Section 273, like all new offences, applies prospectively. These are stringent new requirements for true, positive and open disclosure to the Medical Board, an ongoing stringent new responsibility on registrants—all registrants, both new and existing—to ensure that the information and documents 2124 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 10 Jun 2005 provided to the board were and remain correct and accurate. The government does not resile from this. The Minister for Health will write to the Medical Board to make sure the message about practitioners’ new responsibilities gets out there in the community. They will all be told. No-one will have any opportunity for any excuse at any time from now on. I agree with the commission of inquiry that the existing penalties relating to the registration are too low. We are fixing this today with this bill. The Medical Board supports these new penalties, as does the government, to ensure that this situation never occurs again. For the first time, we have created offences that specifically relate to the giving of false information to the board at the time of or in relation to registration. Whereas currently the offence relates to providing information to the board generally and is penalised with 50 penalty points or $3,750, the new offences concerning misinformation to the board in relation to registration are penalised with 2,000 penalty units or $150,000 or up to three years imprisonment—up to three years imprisonment! All along I have said that this is about getting to the bottom of what happened at Bundaberg and fixing the problems in the health system. That is what this bill is about. As I said before, and I say it again: I make no apology for moving quickly. I make no apology for moving fast on this. Again, I thank the commissioners for their prompt and diligent work and their fierce independence in providing today’s recommendations. I have to again put on the record my appreciation for the work done by Tony Morris and his commissioners. The reality is that he has moved at the speed of greased lightning. That is what the community expects. That is what the community wants. When people are going through the pain, as the people in Bundaberg are, they want not only to ensure that justice is done—and this interim report starts the process of real justice—but also to ensure that the system is improved so that it never happens again. But for them—for those who have loved ones or know people who have been through this trauma—they want to know justice is done. They want to see that justice is done. That is actually part of the healing process, and that is why this report is so important. I also thank the Minister for Police and Corrective Services, Judy Spence, and the police commissioner for responding quickly to the government’s suggestions or requests or directions— however one wants to put it—to move as quickly as possible to have Patel returned to Queensland to face justice. What has happened out of this? There were three elements to this report. There were the legislative changes. We have made those and they are done today. There are the administrative recommendations, and I have spelt out the action that the minister will take in relation to those recommendations and he will come back to cabinet on 25 June 2005 to ensure support for that new policy in relation to administrative recommendations. Lastly, of course, there are the charges against Patel which will be dealt with by the police. So those three aspects as of now are being dealt with or have been dealt with. I want to refer again to the comments made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, who seemed to spend most of his time deriding the government for its attempt to bring this legislation in today. I refer him again to Tony Morris’s report, in particular paragraphs 24 and 27. I also make this point: this crisis requires people to be focused on actually assisting those who have gone through pain. Surely we have got to the stage where this is not about politics. Surely this is not about the government trying to congratulate itself, which it has not done. Surely this is not about the opposition trying to congratulate itself or any of its members. This is not about journalists trying to win Walkley Awards or planning to write books or newspapers increasing circulation. It is none of that. If people are fair dinkum and serious here, this is about an objective exercise to improve the system so this never happens again. I know we cannot take self-interest out totally when it comes to politics. I understand all of that, and I understand that the opposition has a right to pursue these things, and so do newspapers. But everybody, government included, has to contain their passion, if you like, for self-congratulatory behaviour or ego trips or self-praise. What we have to do is be humble in this. We have to remember that people have gone through an enormous amount of pain. People have died. It does not matter who is doing this. It does not matter whether it is the government or the opposition or whether it is the newspapers involved. That is irrelevant. What is relevant is the benefits that go to the people of Queensland. I would say to government, opposition, newspapers, everyone: let us put our egos in a box and think first about the people of Bundaberg—that is what is important here—and how to improve the system. It does not matter who is in office, from time to time problems will occur about which the government of the day may not be aware. The test of a good government is what it does when such a problem arises. Does the government hide it? The answer is no. The government has the guts to do what we did and that is set up a royal commission with a royal commissioner who is known in legal circles not to favour the government side of politics but who is a person of impeccable integrity and who is an honest person who is prepared to get to the truth. A lesser government would not have had the guts to do what we did and are doing. We have done that because this is about helping people. I do not look for any accolades for the government at all. We are not about that. We are about providing leadership and saying that we need to fix this problem. That is exactly what we are trying to do. 10 Jun 2005 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2125

Sometimes the speeches of the Leader of the Opposition in this place are more disappointing than his behaviour privately. In the meeting that we had with him and in my conversation with him this morning, I found him genuine in trying to work with us to resolve this matter. The fact that he has come into this place today and will vote with the government on this legislation is an acknowledgement that he is genuine to that extent. I acknowledge that. The Liberal Party has done the same. I gather the Independents will do the same. Yes, we can play the blame game. But we also have to play the fix-it game. We have to work together—and this is what the community wants us to do—to get these things right. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition seemed to be more concerned that we were going to get out of jail politically by doing the right thing. We do not know whether we are going to get out of jail. Who knows? We could lose the next election. The politics of this issue are totally irrelevant. What is relevant is that, when a royal commissioner’s report is received, the government does the right thing with it. We did not try to hide it. We did not try to move away from it. I want to make this very clear. We had a choice. We could have sat on this report for two months or we could have got off our bums and done something with it. That is exactly what we did. We chose to do something with it. It may well be that a number of us who are heading for a party conference may not get there when we were scheduled to. So what. That is not important. What is important is our determination to fix up this issue. That is why we rearranged the world to do it. Frankly, we have to be flexible enough and determined enough to rearrange our schedules and to rearrange the parliamentary process to do the bidding of the will of the people. Otherwise this parliament becomes irrelevant. Our responsibility is to use the legislative arm of this parliament to benefit the people of this state. Although I thank those opposite for their support, I am not going to hide the fact that some of the comments of the members opposite were disappointing. But in the spirit of trying to provide some leadership and working together, I have not gone into those to the extent that I otherwise would have. I do not think that is conducive to achieving a sensible outcome. We seem to have a unanimous position in the parliament to support this legislation that was introduced by the government. One matter that I have not shared with the House is that we have consulted the commissioner, Tony Morris, and he has indicated that the clauses before the House are consistent with his recommendations. We have done that to ensure that the legislation that we are passing achieves the objectives that Tony Morris set out to achieve in his recommendations. I have a moral obligation to advise the House of that and I do so. When the final report is brought down—and I do not know whether there will be more interim reports; I will be happy to meet with Mr Morris to achieve that—we will move as quickly on that as we have moved on this interim report. Motion agreed to. Consideration in Detail Clause 1, as read, agreed to. Clause 2— Mr SPRINGBORG (4.14 pm): This is the most appropriate point for me to raise these matters because they are policy issues and are covered within the objectives of the bill. A moment ago the Premier mentioned our commitment to this issue. Today I made it very clear to the Premier that we were committed to passing this legislation through the parliament and that we would support it in a bipartisan way. There has never been any equivocation on that. We were very concerned about the time frame in which this legislation would go through the House, because it is very difficult to analyse all of it in a short time frame. Even though from time to time debates on bills are truncated, often members have a day in which to read a bill and to gauge community opinion about it. Today I rang Tony Morris to see if he had any issues with the legislation. He said that the amendments, as presented to the parliament today, accurately reflect his aspirations as contained within his report. Given that in passing these urgent amendments we are relying upon his work, then I trust what he is seeking to achieve, I trust what he has said, and I trust that the government’s drafting of these clauses is in accordance with that. Also, the Premier has made much of what we have done in parliament today. I do not think that we had a choice to do anything else. It was the right thing to do. Mr Beattie: I agree. Mr SPRINGBORG: Today was the last day of this sittings of parliament. We had to pass this legislation today. We really had no other choice. The parliament was going to sit today and it would probably still be sitting now even if we were not passing this legislation. It was an appropriate time for us to pass this legislation. My question relates to the issue of promotion without assessment. The Premier referred to it in his reply. This is one of the key issues that caused the problems at Bundaberg Base Hospital. There were certainly some failings with the medical registration board in terms of it not properly checking the certificates of good standing or any of those other documents or doing the things that it should have 2126 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 10 Jun 2005 done in relation to doctors. It is also correct to say that if Dr Patel had practised at the Bundaberg Base Hospital at the level at which he was appointed, which was principal medical officer, then no operations would have been performed. That is my point. The incompetence would have been the failing and not the proper checking of doctors’ qualifications. The issue that I am concerned about is that there is nothing contained in this legislation—or in anything that I have seen—that stops that practice or curtails it. The Premier has said that the minister and his department are undertaking an audit of competencies of those people who to date have been promoted without assessment. That is fair enough. Hopefully that will fix those particular issues. The issue is that there is nothing—other than the public spotlight itself and the desire to avoid these sorts of Patel circumstances arising in the future—that curtails or prescribes a methodology or seeks to seriously restrict by way of policy objective or legislation the capacity of Queensland Health to do that. An opposition member: And it’s still not happening. Mr SPRINGBORG: It is still not happening even with this legislation. The Premier might say that that matter was not contained in Tony Morris’s recommendations. It is an important point. I will say it again. If people in Queensland Health had not promoted Patel beyond his capacity without assessment, then there would not have been any operations performed and we would not be facing this situation. Was it considered that there should have been an amendment along those lines put into this legislation? If not, why not? Is the Premier proposing to introduce an amendment at some future time? This is a crucial issue. It has to be addressed at some time because it is the fundamental issue. We are fixing a situation today which, by and large, if there had been proper oversight, would not have happened. Legislation is only as good as the commitment and the resources of the bodies that have to work within its jurisdiction. This is the key issue. It is a problem because we still have consultant physicians who have been promoted without assessment. Some of those people are practising in the areas of psychiatry and obstetrics and gynaecology. Of course, the Premier would say that some of those people could be dealt with through a retrospective assessment of competencies. But we still have this very grey area, which is a very serious issue that led to this whole problem arising. What is going to be done about it? Why is nothing being done? Mr BEATTIE: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. I am not being pedantic when I say that this is not about promotions; it is about overseas trained doctors being assessed in the job they are in. The member for Moggill will understand what I am saying. It is about people being assessed in the job they are in; it is not so much to do with promotions. I am not going to go on about it but that is what it is. The board has addressed this through the changes in the renewal and reassessment process. I think one of the useful things we can do—and I say this to the Minister for Health—is to organise a briefing with the Leader of the Opposition and some departmental people about what the Medical Board has done because the board has addressed this. It has changed the renewal and reassessment process, and that impacts on the job and the assessment of the job that the person is in. Let me come back to what I said before. The Leader of the Opposition raised this issue. I want to confirm that the Minister for Health has agreed with the AMA on an audit of the competency of all overseas trained doctors. What the Leader of the Opposition is on about, with respect, is the role those doctors play within the hospital. So what the Minister for Health has agreed to do with the AMA is assess those overseas doctors and their competency in the position they are in because this is the decision. Once the decision is made that they are in this position, the question is: are they competent to carry out the job for the position they are in? That is what it is about. As I said, the Medical Board has changed the renewal and reassessment process to achieve that. We also have this agreement involving the minister and the AMA about assessing the competency of overseas doctors in their positions. I also want to mention the skills development centre at the Royal Brisbane hospital, which Gordon and I opened last year. All the feedback the minister and I have received has been incredibly positive. I think I have actually answered specifically the Leader of the Opposition’s question. It is not about promotions; it is about the role that they are designated in. The board now has new assessment criteria and we have this reassessment of existing doctors. We now have a change in the board rule as to who gets put into those positions in future. So that overcomes the problem with regard to what happens in the future. In relation to the current problem, the Minister for Health has agreed with the AMA to do a competency assessment of all the overseas trained doctors in the positions they are in, as I understand it. I think I have this right. I have a nod from the head of the Medical Board. He tells me that I have that right. To the best of my ability, that is the situation as I understand it. It might be useful if we got a briefing. I am advised that the minister has also asked Queensland Health to speak to all supervisors of all hospitals to ensure medical practitioners are performing within their skills. I know that the Leader of the Opposition is serious about this; he has raised it a number of times publicly, and he has raised it twice today. I think I have given the detailed answer about what will happen in the future and what will happen to the current doctors. What I just said, again, means that the minister has asked Queensland Health to speak to all supervisors of all hospitals to ensure medical practitioners are performing within their skills. If the Leader of the Opposition thinks about what I have said, if these measures had been in place in 10 Jun 2005 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 2127

Bundaberg, as I understand it, then Patel would not have been in the position to do what he did, which is what the Leader of the Opposition is trying to get to. To the best of my understanding, I think that is correct. I have an indication that what I have said is correct. Mr SPRINGBORG: I have one last point of clarification. I understand where the Premier is coming from. He is saying that the amendments before the House today will address the issues of deficiencies within the medical registration process. I understand about the fraudulent presentation of documents and all of those sorts of things. I understand that particular issue. That was one part of the failing. The other part of the failing was that these people were promoted by what has been called deeming—promotion without appropriate assessment or understanding of their particular skills. Mr Beattie: That is what I have been talking about. Mr SPRINGBORG: Okay. The Premier has said to the parliament, as I understand it—and let me get this clear—that this particular skills audit that will be undertaken by agreement with the AMAQ will assess the particular skills of all of those people in our hospital system. Mr Beattie: Overseas trained doctors. Mr SPRINGBORG: It will assess the skills of those overseas trained doctors. Mr Beattie: Gordon has said it will. Mr SPRINGBORG: Okay. So, if there are any deficiencies, they will be picked up in the current positions they are in. If it is robust enough, it will pick them up. I understand that. It will also ensure a more robust process of monitoring those overseas trained doctors in the area they are actually practising in in the hospital. My issue is still with the capacity that exists within Queensland Health to deem or promote a practitioner within this area of need. Is the Premier saying that because he fixed this at the front that that is not going to happen or is he going to do something else? Will Queensland Health still be able to promote or deem these people in these areas without an appropriate assessment of skills? That is my question. That is what caused this problem in the first place. I understand how we might be properly working on the certification of those doctors coming in, but there still seems to me to be a grey area around the capacity of Queensland Health officers to promote people in these areas of need. That is what my issue is. Mr BEATTIE: The minister will arrange for the CEO of the board to brief the Leader of the Opposition about this because the board addressed this and it has changed the renewal and reassessment process. So we think this is covered. The second thing I want to say is that the reason it is not stated here in any amendments today is that it was not covered in Tony Morris’s report. Mr Springborg: I understand that. Mr BEATTIE: The Leader of the Opposition accepts that. This is what happens: on renewal of registration of a doctor, a change in position leads to cessation of registration and requires a new application for registration. So they then have to go through the process again and the person’s skills can be assessed again. Then a determination can be made about whether there is someone in the system who does not comply or who is trying to work outside his or her skills. I understand the point that the Leader of the Opposition is making. Now, as a result of all this being tidied up, we are dealing with the problem. We have a mechanism in place to deal with the issues that have been raised. The minister has indicated that he is prepared to organise for the CEO to brief the Leader of the Opposition. One of his staff will be there, of course. If the Leader of the Opposition still has any outstanding issues on this—because I know it is an important area—then we are prepared to hear his view and take his advice on board. We believe that we have covered this. We believe that we have now addressed this issue. Clause 2, as read, agreed to. Clauses 3 to 8, as read, agreed to. Third Reading Bill read a third time.

APPROPRIATION (PARLIAMENT) BILL APPROPRIATION BILL

Second Reading (Cognate Debate) Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill Resumed from p. 2109. Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (4.29 pm), in reply: As Acting Treasurer, I would like to thank all members who have spoken on the appropriation bills. On Tuesday the Treasurer presented a budget to the parliament of Queensland that I considered to be one of the most significant budgets in Queensland’s history. It is a budget that includes $5 billion in tax cuts 2128 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 10 Jun 2005 over the next seven years, including the abolition of $3.5 billion in state taxes and major reforms to the land tax system that will save taxpayers some $1.5 billion over the same period, and keeps us in the most competitive tax position of any state in Australia. It is a budget that has laid the foundation for an unprecedented expansion of the state’s infrastructure. No government in the history of Queensland has had an infrastructure plan like this. I know people talk about the Joh days. Well, let me tell them that we have succeeded in achieving an outcome that is much more significant than the Joh days. It is the biggest in the state’s history. It invests in Queensland’s human capital through a range of initiatives designed to promote research and development and give opportunities to Queensland students to excel and advance. The 2005-06 budget also delivers on major initiatives and funding enhancements to assist the disabled and the homeless, and again demonstrates our unequivocal commitment to child safety. This has been a budget with heart. The economic outcome for Queensland remains the envy of other states, with strong economic and employment growth, and continues this government’s proud record. It is regrettable but hardly surprising that, having been presented with this awesome budget, the opposition has chosen not to engage the government on these major issues. Instead, the budget reply turns out to be very similar to replies to our previous budgets, and unfortunately it repeats much of the opposition’s misinterpretation in areas it also made on those occasions. That disappoints me because this budget is about building the new Queensland. It is the bricks and mortar, the brain power and also the provision of services to those in need—everything from education to health and disabilities; you name it. The opposition’s contribution is backed by the publication of a four-page brochure called Opposition Analysis Budget Paper No. 4, which I read with some mirth. The opposition published a similar brochure with a picture of three balloons on the front page for the 2003-04 budget. Do members remember that? Mr Reeves: I remember that—very successful! Mr BEATTIE: That publication went down like a lead balloon, and this one is undoubtedly headed for the same fate. The first claim by the opposition is that a budget deficit in 2005-06 is being averted by cash from the Commonwealth. This is on the basis that, if we deduct growth in Commonwealth payments from the budget surplus of $934 million, then the budget would be deficient to the tune of $84 million. We could look at any government, any household or any business budget and claim that if we did not receive one particular revenue stream then there would be a deficit—like if we did not have a pay packet we would be in deficit. Fortunately, most people do not look at their budgets in such a juvenile way. The facts are that Queensland, like all states and territories, receives roughly 50 per cent of its funding from the Commonwealth. This is thanks to the very high level of vertical fiscal imbalance in this country. It is plainly ridiculous, therefore, to take out the growth component of Commonwealth payments as a legitimate funding source. The GST was meant to be a growth tax. I was there. Bob Carr and I are the last two premiers who were there for the negotiations. It was meant to be a growth tax. We need a growth tax. We need growth income. We are a growing state. We are the engine room of Australia. How can we deal with it without looking at its growth? Indeed, there are plenty of arguments in support of greater funding from the Commonwealth in a whole range of areas. Just look at AusLink. We do not get our fair share for roads, education, disability services, health in particular, and so on. The Queensland government’s approach to budgeting, therefore, stands in stark contrast to the juvenile approach promoted by the opposition in this publication. It would get a failing mark from any year 12 economics teacher. The Queensland government first calculates how much it is likely to collect in revenue in each year and then bases its policy and spending decisions around that assessment of available revenue, and that is the way we work. The next claim made by the opposition is that tax collections have increased markedly under this government and by 2008-09 will reach $8 billion, approximately double the taxation revenue of 1997-98, which was the last year the opposition was in power. Then it compares that to expected population growth of 23 per cent over the same period to make out that we are greedy. What a doozey! What complete rot! This so-called analysis completely ignores the impact of inflation and economic growth. One of the natural outcomes of having a strong economy with a growth rate significantly higher than the national average is that tax collections will also grow. At the same time, this government’s record of spending in areas such as health, education, social welfare and infrastructure is also growing. We make absolutely no apologies for this. We are about correcting the mean-spirited and gross neglect of the past of those opposite. The fact remains that on any reasonable measure Queensland continues to have the most competitive tax system of any state in Australia, particularly the one used by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, which puts our taxation effort at the lowest in Australia. Further, as a proportion of the economy, the state government’s tax take is actually forecast to decrease from 4.8 per cent of gross state product in 1997-98 under the coalition to only 4.2 per cent next year. I just say to the Leader of the Opposition: you will be hearing a bit more about that as the years roll by—or the months at least. Over the forward years, with the budget’s tax cuts cutting in, the 10 Jun 2005 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 2129 ratio falls even lower to four per cent by 2008-09. The opposition got it completely wrong. We in fact are taking less out of the economy in taxation than it did, not more. Let me also address the issues of royalties and the assertion that the government should somehow be embarrassed by the contribution of the mining industry to the budget. Why should we? The minerals that are being extracted do not belong to the industry—an important industry that it is, and one that I strongly support. Those minerals belong to the people of Queensland. Royalties are the mechanism by which Queenslanders, through the government, are compensated for their extraction. The government feels no shame whatsoever in using these funds to provide services to the community—and why should we? The claim that the government is raiding the profits of the energy sector GOCs has again been given prominence by the opposition. The opposition quotes figures of $601 million for 2004-05 and $635 million for 2005-06. To describe these payments as cash raids is just ridiculous. Again, it has been mischievous in its so-called analysis. The $635 million in 2005-06 includes a figure of $225 million in tax equivalent payments to be made by the energy sector’s GOCs. These are payments made under the national tax equivalence regime—a national regime—designed to ensure competitive neutrality between government owned corporations and private corporations across Australia. I have to say that this is a pretty embarrassing thing for the opposition to do. It does not actually understand what is happening in electricity. The scheme is administered now by—guess who?—the Australian Taxation Office. It is not even administered by us. It ensures that GOCs have no competitive advantage on taxation grounds over privately owned rivals. One can only describe that as a real goof. On constitutional grounds, the revenue comes to the state. So let us hear no more of this nonsense of adding tax equivalents to dividends as a so-called raid on GOCs. It is just misleading garbage—just rubbish. On the other hand, though, the opposition conveniently overlooks the other side of the equation. I guess we would expect that. The state is budgeting to pay very significant community service obligation payments of $1.34 billion in 2005-06 in order to ensure delivery of key policy outcomes as the uniform electricity tariff and Citytrain services. As well, we are budgeting to pay $271 million in 2005-06 in equity injections to Queensland Rail, Central Queensland Port Authority and Queensland Motorways to assist in the provision of new infrastructure. I would have thought the opposition would support those injections into infrastructure. That is over $1.6 billion we are paying to our GOCs in 2005-06 as opposed to the total dividend revenue we are expecting of $628 million. Even they can work out what that means—I hope. Within that total GOC flow of funds in the energy sector, after taking into account community service obligation payments to that sector, the net flows to government are expected to be only $60 million in 2005-06—down from $318 million in 2004-05. No dispassionate analysis could ever reasonably claim that such a budget was raiding the GOCs. It is in fact quite the opposite. Only someone after a fast headline would count on people not making a reasonable assessment of the full situation. There it is; it is on the record and they cannot argue with it. Many economists will tell them what I said is accurate. Sadly, the errors and misinformation do not end there. Over recent years the Deputy Premier and Treasurer and the Minister for Transport and Main Roads have tried on many occasions to explain to Mr Springborg and the other members of the opposition why we cannot compare the roads budget in the final year of the Borbidge-Sheldon government with the roads budget now. There are items that were included in the budget back then, in particular road maintenance funding, which are not considered capital expenditure under accrual accounting. My government brought in accrual accounting. It changes how these things are read. Accrual accounting has meant modernisation. The change has been dramatic. It is now accrual accounting. I just say to Lawrence: it is accrual accounting, it is accrual accounting, it is accrual accounting. It is a different system. Again, the point has been made that capital outlays, as a proportion of total outlays, have declined since 1997-98. Even leaving aside the fact that the two figures are not comparable, this view is oversimplistic. The Queensland government has just published a 20-year infrastructure plan that has been applauded by the government’s friends and critics alike. The South East Queensland Infrastructure Plan and program is a landmark planning document for the future of Queensland. It is a much more sensible approach to infrastructure planning and investment than Mr Springborg’s percentage of total outlays 1997-98 approach to capital planning. In 2005-06 the capital program will reach $8 billion—32 per cent higher than last year’s program. It is the highest capital program in real per capita terms in more than a quarter of a century. It is pretty good. This includes playing our part in major energy, rail and ports investment in support of the state exporters—building the infrastructure for the new Queensland. In the area of health, I simply provide the comments of an independent voice. The recently released Australian Hospital Statistics report for 2003-04, released on 27 May, reveals that Queensland has the lowest waiting times for elective surgery of all jurisdictions. For example, waiting times were only 22 days compared to the national total of 28 days for at least 50 per cent of admitted patients and 115 2130 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 10 Jun 2005 days compared to the national total of 193 days for 90 per cent of patients admitted. Of the number of patients having to wait more than 365 days for treatment, Queensland had the lowest percentage with 2.8 per cent compared to a national total of 3.9 per cent. They are not bad figures. They are not perfect, but they are better than the rest of Australia. The low waiting times are despite Queensland having the highest number of admissions per thousand population at 28.9 per cent compared to the national average of 26.5 per cent. The Leader of the Opposition at least attempted to put forward some alternative policy proposals in the area of health. I want to acknowledge this. In the area of health, of course, it is only proper that we should await the outcomes and recommendations of the Morris royal commission and the Forster review before making decisions, although I have given a clear indication in a major statement in this House about some of the issues that I want considered. Today we have implemented a number of recommendations from the interim report of the royal commission. Just as I put forward some ideas in this place a few weeks ago, the opposition leader is welcome to put forward any suggestions he has. I welcome those. It all adds to the debate, which can only be a good thing. Let us have this debate and fix this once and for all as best we can. I will make this commitment today: we will take these suggestions into consideration in framing our policy response. That is, we will consider the Leader of the Opposition’s suggestions on health. I might add that some of the suggestions are already government policy or at least we already have very similar policies. For example, since 1944 the state government has been offering Queensland students scholarships to study medicine if they agree to work in the bush for a designated period. The scheme initially covered only medicine, but over the years it has been expanded to fields such as dentistry, pharmacy and nursing. Students who receive scholarships are bonded to Queensland Health for a period of time. They are sent to work in regional and rural areas. On the proposed voucher system under the opposition’s promised charter of patient rights, the opposition leader might wish to note that we are already in partnership with private sector hospitals to deliver elective surgery when it cannot be done in the public system. This is achieved through our $130 million elective surgery blitz. Remember, we promised $110 million in the election campaign, and at the midyear review we promised another $20 million. We announced the $130 million elective surgery blitz during the last election campaign. Possibly this initiative has slipped the opposition leader’s mind. That sort of thing happens to him. In respect to dams, my government is already progressing water infrastructure in many parts of the state, some of which the National Party has identified in its 10-year plan. It is interesting that the National Party’s list of dams has barely changed in 10 years. Dams are now being built by this government, such as in the Burnett, or have been given the green light subject to economic and environmental feasibility studies. Unlike those opposite, my government believes that any future dam should be constructed within a comprehensive planning framework. It is called sustainability. I note that every other government in Australia, including the federal government, thinks likewise, hence the COAG National Water Initiative. We are hardly out on our own here. We are part of a national system. The process requires us to comprehensively assess the capacity of each water catchment to determine what is the environmentally appropriate level of water that may be available for storage and use within that catchment. This involves doing the hard yards of preparing comprehensive water resource plans and resource operation plans— things which it is glib and easy to ignore from the opposition benches. However, this ensures that future dams will be built in the right locations to maximise water storage, capacity and efficiency, and it ensures that dams are not built in politically expedient poor locations like many of the dams in Queensland built by the Nationals that now sit empty year after year at great cost to taxpayers and the environment. This is the Nationals’ disgraceful legacy of decades of pork-barrelling. Finally, I note that yesterday the members opposite again raised the concept of undergrounding powerlines. They neglected to mention the cost and who would pay for it. Undergrounding is not cheap. Boy, would we love to do that. It costs a bomb. The Department of Energy has advised that the total cost of dismantling all the existing overhead powerlines in Queensland and replacing them with underground lines is a whopping $57.5 billion. Boy, if we had that money, what would we do with it? Our infrastructure plan, over 20 years, is worth $55 billion. That is what that would cost. That is why we are not rushing into doing it statewide. An honourable member interjected. Mr BEATTIE: It would bankrupt us. That is one of the problems. Members of the opposition can make commitments, but they have to be economically sound and they have to be financially responsible. It is interesting that these days it is the Labor Party that takes on the mantra of being financially responsible. When it comes to economic credentials, that is exactly what the Labor Party stands for—sound economic management and financial responsibility. Recovery of this cost—that is, the $57.5 billion—on a megawatt per hour base shared with business would increase the electricity charge to the average householder by approximately $890 per 10 Jun 2005 Petition 2131 year in real terms for about the next 25 years. I look forward to Lawrence promising that in the next state election campaign in two years time. The total cost of dismantling the existing medium- and low-voltage overhead powerlines in urban Queensland alone and replacing them with underground lines would still cost over $6.9 billion, or about $4,135 per customer. Recovery of this cost, again on a megawatt per hour basis shared with business, would increase the electricity charge to the average household by approximately $150 per year in real terms for the next 25 years. So what the opposition stands for is increased electricity prices—very significantly increased electricity prices. I want to restate the claim that this is my government’s best budget yet. I have had the honour of being chairman of the Cabinet Budget Review Committee now for eight budgets. When we came to office in 1998 David Hamill, who was Treasurer at the time, brought on a budget at my request at the end of 1998 because we wanted to do some readjusting to overcome a number of problems. Unfortunately, our predecessors had done some borrowing for recurrent expenditure which, as we all know, is crazy. We do not mind borrowing for capital or infrastructure but not for recurrent expenditure. This is, in fact, the eighth budget for which I have chaired the Cabinet Budget Review Committee. Terry Mackenroth has been, in my view, probably the best Treasurer that Queensland has ever had. As members know, we are good friends. He is someone that I have worked with. I have enormous regard for him. We do an enormous amount of this work together. It is a great partnership. The beneficiaries of that are the people of Queensland. This budget tackles the issues of today head-on while at the same time setting out a genuine plan to secure the state’s future. The opposition would be well served to take a leap out of 1997-98 into 2005- 06 and join the rest of Queensland. On budgetary matters, I want to advise the House that for Queensland Week my department has produced a booklet, in conjunction with a range of people, called A great state of mind. It sets out some of the heroes of this state. I table it for the information of the House. On other financial matters, I did table some documents from the Speaker this morning to assist members in their deliberations. I table some reports of previous Speakers and the Leader of the Opposition to give some idea of how they compare. I have enjoyed working on this budget. As I said, this is our best budget. I can recall our first three years when we had to overcome this problem of the borrowings that had been made for recurrent expenditure and get the state on a sound financial footing. In those first three years our expenditure on key projects was not as high as we would have liked because we had to get the fundamentals right again. We did that. Now we are in a position where we have been able to take the reward for that hard work. Frankly, we are building, again, the new Queensland. From time to time I hear Peter Costello talk about the proceeds of the GST. GST is paid by Queenslanders. We get less from the GST reforms per capita than the Australian average. We abolished a number of taxes to get it. It was designed to be a growth tax so the growth state could be funded. We are just getting our money back. I could not care less what the Labor governments in New South Wales and Victoria have to say about the GST money coming to us. All we get is our fair share. The other reason I smile when Peter Costello says these things about the GST is that I did a deal with the Prime Minister at The Lodge one night after the dinner with the premiers and we got our money earlier. Yes, we have done very well, and so we should have. I want to put on record my appreciation to John Howard. I say to Peter Costello: if you are worried about the money, go and have a chat with John and he will explain the deal that we did. That deal has benefited this state. I make no apology for refusing to sign the GST deal until Queensland got a better deal. We were the last state to sign. The Prime Minister wanted us to sign; he knew the price to get us to sign and it was a significant price. I have to say that I am absolutely delighted with that significant price. I want to have it on the permanent record of this parliament that I am grateful to the Prime Minister for agreeing to the proposition that I put to him. Motion agreed to. Reference to Estimates Committees Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Fraser): Order! In accordance with the order of the House on 11 May 2005 the bills are referred to the estimates committees.

PETITION

The following honourable member has lodged a paper petition for presentation—

Domestic Violence Mrs Smith from 1,444 petitioners requesting the House to establish a Multi-Disciplinary Domestic Violence Death Review Board which would provide information on the nature and circumstance of each domestic violence death as well as possible gaps in legislation and/or service response, as with more information these deaths may be prevented. 2132 Adjournment 10 Jun 2005

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Leader of the House) (4.51 pm): I move— That the House, at its rising, do adjourn until 9.30 am on Tuesday, 9 August 2005. Motion agreed to.

ADJOURNMENT Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Leader of the House) (4.51 pm): I move— That the House do now adjourn. Water Supply Infrastructure, Dawson River Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (4.51 pm): I want to bring to the attention of the House again tonight the situation of water supply infrastructure on the Dawson River. The Nathan Gorge dam has been proposed as a solution to a water supply shortage in the Callide and Dawson valleys for many years. In fact, since about the 1920s this project has been mooted as a water supply infrastructure that is badly needed in the area. In the early years of the term of this government the project certainly found favour with the then minister, Jim Elder. I had a number of meetings with Mr Elder and I was convinced that he was proceeding with the project in a way that left me confident that we would see this project become a reality. Unfortunately, in recent times the project has dropped off the political radar and there seems to be no commitment from this government to ensure that the project proceeds. As the member who represents that area I understand only too well the impact that the provision of a secure water supply to the Callide and Dawson valleys would have on the communities of that area, particularly Biloela where there is a very great potential for industrial development in conjunction with the Callide Power Station and with the coal reserves that exist in that area. The essential element that is missing is a secure water supply. I take this opportunity to remind the government that the Nathan Gorge dam should still be a priority, and I urge it to take the same approach that was taken by the minister for state development in the first term of the Beattie Labor government and make this project a priority for the sake of all of Queensland but for that area of central Queensland in particular. I am aware that there was an action taken in the Federal Court by a number of conservation groups which has delayed the progress of this project but, from my understanding of the current situation, I think the whole project could be advanced in a very real way by a positive attitude by the state government. It is up to the state government to drive this issue. What is lacking at the moment is for somebody to take an interest in this issue and drive the issue forward—to overcome the obstacles that are being put in place. I think it has become convenient to let this limbo situation go on. For the sake of the areas that I represent, I call on the government tonight to ensure that this project proceeds. For the future of the Biloela community in particular and for the potential for industrial development and irrigated agricultural development in those areas to be realised, this project needs to happen. Blackwater Hospital Mr PEARCE (Fitzroy—ALP) (4.54 pm): Today we saw in this place our Premier and the Minister for Health, with the support of the parliament, immediately amend legislation in response to the interim report of Commissioner Anthony Morris into the Bundaberg Hospital. I congratulate all those associated with the interim report and the swift response to that report. On behalf of the people of Blackwater and the surrounding district, I wish to raise their concern at the lack of a suitably skilled doctor to service the town’s rural hospital. On 13 May Blackwater Hospital superintendent Mark Brown, who also holds a right to private practice, was forced to take sick leave with only two days notice. Because of the doctor shortage within the system we have not been able to find a replacement to cover Dr Brown’s absence. This has caused much anguish for the local people. Like all communities where a hospital exists, they rely on the hospital for emergency care. Located on the Capricorn Highway, two hours west of Rockhampton, the town of Blackwater supports a community of more than 7,000. It is home to a huge coal industry work force, has three schools, is surrounded by a busy rural industry and is within reach of several small communities. The coal industry is a high-risk, 24/7 heavy industry where a workplace incident can cause serious injury and loss of life. Blackwater residents therefore expect their hospital to have 24/7 coverage. That is why there is so much concern about the inability of the system to secure a locum to cover Dr Brown’s absence. The people, the mining unions and mine management are asking why the situation has been allowed to develop. I wish to assure the people I represent that, to the best of my knowledge, everything 10 Jun 2005 Adjournment 2133 possible has been done to find a relief doctor for Dr Brown. Dr Louise Russell, who lives in the Rollston/ Springsure area, committed herself to two and three days a week to help out but could not, due to family and isolation, commit herself to 24/7 coverage at the hospital. All 37 health districts were contacted by email requesting assistance with the situation at Blackwater. All known current and previous locums, semiretired doctors and GPs in the area were contacted to see if any assistance could be engaged. All known locum agencies, 15 in all in Queensland, were contacted, as was the RFDS. No relief doctor could be identified. No stone was left unturned in the search for a doctor. Today I wish to advise the House that I will be writing to Peter Forster, head of the Queensland health system review, to draw his attention to what has happened in Blackwater. I want the people I represent to hear from an independent person the reasons there are not enough doctors in Queensland Health and what can be done to fix the problem. Was the process used in the search for a locum effective in that it considered every possible option and gave consideration to sharing of the risk between those facilities where there are doctors to that of Blackwater with no doctor and a workplace environment of extremely high risk? I want to know what more I could have done to secure a doctor for the hospital. In closing, I thank the dedicated and highly skilled staff of Blackwater Hospital for their commitment to the task. I also thank Dr Louise Russell, who has given up family time and travelled long distances to provide what hours she can. Her time is sincerely appreciated. Thanks also to Pat Castle, acting manager, central highlands health district, for his outstanding effort in trying to find a doctor. Finally, thanks to the people of Blackwater for their understanding and cooperation. Time expired. Sunshine Coast Mr McARDLE (Caloundra—Lib) (4.58 pm): Sometimes in this House I think we tend to forget that, though we are seeking goods and services for our areas, we live in a very lucky country such as Australia. I also think that on occasions we tend to forget that we live in the wonderful regions from which we come. In this House there are many people who have seats on the Sunshine Coast. I think the fact that we do have such diversity of seats points to the diversity of the population and the diversity of the interests in the Sunshine Coast area itself. However, wherever people live on the coast they quickly come to understand what a wonderful region it is. When we consider the Blackall Range and the towns of Mapleton, Montville, Maleny, Cooroy, Tewantin and others, Nambour, Beerwah, Landsborough and areas such as Caloundra, Kawana, Maroochy, Noosa and other areas across the whole spectrum, we start to get an idea as to why people are moving there in their thousands. Irrespective of which party they come from, I believe that all members of this House who do hold seats on the coast have a deep and abiding affection for the area. In my opinion, one of the reasons the coast is such a special place to live is the community spirit that is generated by the people who live there. When I attend public functions or events there is always somebody there with a ready smile and an offer of a cup of tea or coffee and ready to have a chinwag about what is going on in their lives. It is that sort of camaraderie that distinguishes the Sunshine Coast and makes it a region of major significance and beauty. As people travel around the Sunshine Coast they feel the same warmth no matter who they are and where they come from. It is the social capital of a region that provides the catalyst for change and, at the same time, acceptance of things that are different. The Sunshine Coast region has been changing for many years. There has been a population explosion. Interests are changing across the Sunshine Coast. Change is essential if the region is going to continue to grow. Change brings with it new ideas and new concepts. That expands the vision of the people who reside there. As we continue to face hurdles over the next 20 to 30 years I am quite convinced that the people of the Sunshine Coast will find the answers to many of the issues that they face on a daily basis. We need to work as a region. We need to establish ourselves as a regional force with our own capacity and our own resources and our own future. There does come a time when a community has to pull together as one body, in unison to achieve a final goal. What the goal or goals may be may be some time in the reckoning. However, once we start down that process I can assure this House and all members that the Sunshine Coast will become a region of significant force. Time expired. Moreton Bay Region Export Awards Hon. KW HAYWARD (Kallangur—ALP) (5.01 pm): Recently I had the honour of representing the Premier at the launch of the Premier of Queensland’s Moreton Bay Region Export Awards. The launch of these awards was held in Narangba in the electorate of Kallangur. The government’s drive to boost exports is right on track with a diverse range of Moreton Bay companies starting to export for the first 2134 Adjournment 10 Jun 2005 time. The categories of these awards are: agribusiness, arts and entertainment, information and communications technology, education, large manufacturer, small to medium manufacturer, and emerging exporter. Overall winners will be announced for emerging exporter and regional exporter of the year. The awards provide an opportunity to promote a business and to showcase that business’s achievements and recognise the region from which the business comes. For the first time Queensland companies will be able to apply online and judges will be able to pre-judge applications online. Queensland is the first state to implement an internet based application system and is leading the way for the rest of Australia. It has been made as simple as possible to apply for an award. I take the opportunity here tonight—and I no doubt reflect the opinion of all members of parliament—to urge all exporters to visit www.exportawards.qld.gov.au and find the information they need. We are achieving export growth through our reputation for innovative exports and hard work. This is what these awards are about. That hard work has been undertaken by the Queensland government and Austrade. To build on our export markets the Queensland government is encouraging innovation and value adding to our traditional industries such as mining and agriculture where we really are world leaders. Our leading exporters increasingly epitomise the Smart State, excelling in the provision of services and expertise in many diverse fields. To date, close to 500 new exporters have been added to the ranks of Queensland companies trading in overseas markets. Congratulations to every one of them. In the Moreton Bay region exporters are doing a fantastic job. Entries close on Wednesday, 27 July. Winners for the Moreton Bay region will be announced at a dinner function on Saturday, 10 September. An application for these awards is also applicable to the prestigious Premier of Queensland’s 2005 export awards to be held in Brisbane on 27 October. Winners of the Queensland export awards are automatic finalists in the Australian export awards being held in Sydney in December. Burnett Heads State School; School Buses Mr MESSENGER (Burnett—NPA) (5.04 pm): I am pleased to see that the education minister is in the House tonight because I have a problem that I hope she can help me with. During the summer months children at the Burnett Heads State School are being eaten by mosquitoes. I think she may already be aware of this. The Burnett Shire Council is doing its fair share to control or eradicate these mozzies. A range of problems are facing them. First and foremost is the amount of water that naturally lays around Burnett Heads after it rains. The council has spent quite a deal of money upgrading the drains and helping out with the spraying programs. After a bit of rain quite a lot of mozzies hang around the Burnett Heads school grounds. A spraying program is needed. I think each spraying program costs around $300. That comes out of the school budget, which is quite difficult. The Burnett Shire Council has recently been helping out with the cost of that eradication program. One of the most effective ways of stopping the kids being eaten alive is to aircondition the school and have mozzie proof classrooms. I believe something has to be done before summer is upon us again. I know that the P&C is working like heck to find a solution. I implore the education minister to make sure her department does its fair share to eradicate these mozzies. I know that a number of children last year got quite sick because of the number of mozzie bites. The number of mosquitoes in the school ground has to be seen to be believed. They are virtually carried away. There were a number of media reports about the mosquito problem. It is a problem that we would like fixed. Another problem we should deal with is the age of the school bus. I pose the question to this House: will we still have the oldest school buses in Australia? If we do not allocate significantly more funds to the provision of school buses I predict that we are heading for disaster—and I do not like predicting that. No further funds have been allocated in the budget for the provision of school buses. The only funding is the already announced $12 million over four years. That is not going to be enough. Currently the government funds approximately 40 vehicles per year. With the additional $12 million over four years this will increase to 80 vehicles per year. To fix the problem we need a minimum of 100 buses per year, preferably 300 buses per year, provided over the next five years. Basically we require another $1.5 million in funding. Trinity Lutheran College Mr LAWLOR (Southport—ALP) (5.07 pm): Two weeks ago I had the pleasure of representing the Minister for Education and the Arts, Anna Bligh, at the official opening and dedication of the Trinity Lutheran College middle school. In attendance were: the chairman of the college council, John Stapleton; the head of the college, Mrs Anne Mitchell; Pastor Wayne Zweck, the secretary of the church 10 Jun 2005 Adjournment 2135 and director of mission and ministry of the Lutheran Church of Australia; the head of the middle school, Mrs Carrie Allwood; and pastor for the middle and senior school, Micke Nelder. The establishment of Trinity Lutheran College’s unique middle school system is a landmark event for the school and one that will guarantee the necessary smooth transition for students moving from primary to senior education. The new facilities are a total school suite of buildings for a fully self- contained middle school for students in years 6 to 9 for a maximum of 500 students and associated staff, both teaching and administration, and appropriate resource staff. By providing this longer and more efficient transition period for students entering their final years of schooling, Trinity Lutheran College is better preparing its students for the often more daunting and challenging demands of senior education. I am extremely proud of the state government’s contribution towards the valuable additions to Trinity’s education system. Over $303 million in recurrent state funding has been shared amongst Queensland’s non-state schools for the 2004-05 financial year. Trinity Lutheran College received $1.857 million in state government grant funding in 2004 and to date $485,610 for 2005. Much of this financial support has contributed towards the construction and road work for Trinity’s new middle school. These funds, in addition to approximately $62.8 million shared amongst non-state schools in 2004-05, are part of the state government’s continued support for schools within my electorate as well as all over Queensland. Trinity Lutheran Primary School opened its doors in 1981 as a result of the efforts of a small group of visionaries. The school began with 75 students with the first classes in the Southport church hall. The first building was on the Cotlew Street campus and consisted of four classrooms and an office. The secondary school on the Ashmore Road campus opened its doors in 1987. In the late 1990s the middle school planning commenced. I congratulate all involved in the middle school from its inception to its implementation. Gladstone Show Society, Closure Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (5.09 pm): I was disappointed to learn that this week Gladstone’s mayor has called for the Gladstone Show to close its doors. I acknowledge that shows across Queensland face challenges today. However, from the response by Noel Reddacliff, chairman of the Show Society, to the mayor’s call, no contact had been made by the mayor on a private basis with the Show Society to discuss his concerns. Noel’s response was typically Noel. He stated— The show will continue as long as people support them. That is a great attitude. Robyn and Noel have been involved in the Show Society for many years. They, along with past and present committees, work tirelessly to organise the show for exhibitors, competitors and visitors alike. The show has to compete with the Harbour Festival, which is also excellently run, held over the Easter weekend and which operates without entry cost but has a sideshow alley as well as a wide range of free entertainment. This takes its toll on the show. However, I support the Show Society and the great band of volunteers who work so hard for the institution that is the Gladstone Show. It is a fact that Gladstone’s show holiday is today and the activities of the show are in full swing as we speak. These include the wood chopping, show jumping and all of the centre ring activities that we have all enjoyed for many years, as well as displays and other exhibitions. The other show in my electorate is the Mount Larcom Show, which will be held later this month, which is a more traditional agricultural show. Both, however, succeed because people like Robyn and Noel Reddacliff and their committee members are prepared to invest a great deal of time and energy into planning for the benefit of the community. May the Gladstone Show continue, as Noel said, for as long as people will support it. My heartiest congratulations to all involved in both the Gladstone Show and the Mount Larcom Show. State Education Week, Mackay Mr MULHERIN (Mackay—ALP) (5.11 pm): State Education Week in Mackay saw students, teachers and parents come together through a variety of activities which celebrated learning. Activities ranged from morning tea, sports days and arts programs to debating competitions and visits from past students of many of the schools. A highlight of the week-long activities was the Showcase Awards for Excellence in Schools night, which was an ideal opportunity for schools in the Mackay region to share their achievements and recognise individuals who have contributed to excellence in state education through innovative and effective learning programs. I was privileged to attend this occasion and commend Pioneer State High School, the Mirani cluster, Fitzgerald State School, Slade Point State School and Moranbah East State School for receiving regional awards. Mackay has a history of doing well in the state finals of the showcase awards, and I wish these schools much success this year. I also had the opportunity to present Fitzgerald State School teacher Chris Neven with his My Favourite Teacher Award certificate. The My Favourite Teacher Award program is an excellent new initiative by the state government for recognising the commitment of teachers across the state. 2136 Adjournment 10 Jun 2005

Mr Neven is a young teacher who was quite humble in accepting his award. When asked what it was that made teaching special, Mr Neven said that it was the relationships formed with parents and students in creating a sense of community that inspired him. I also commend Mackay State High School for its outstanding efforts in coordinating a week full of interesting activities and the production of a brochure entitled Creative Generation, which outlined events and provided a registration form for the activities listed. The brochure was part of an advertising campaign supported by small ads appearing in the Daily Mercury newspaper to encourage attendance. I am proud to say that all schools in the Mackay region displayed a genuine effort in raising the awareness of State Education Week 2005. I offer special thanks to Mackay Education Queensland Manager of District Services, Grant Webb, and community participation officer Cillia Martland for their contributions to the program. Population Growth, Beaudesert Area Hon. KR LINGARD (Beaudesert—NPA) (5.14 pm): The population growth around Beaudesert, Canungra and Boonah has been quite amazing. Similarly, the real estate values in those areas have grown quite amazingly as well. One of the areas that really has grown is Kooralbyn. Some 18 months ago there were many homes at Kooralbyn for sale, but now there are probably only two houses at Kooralbyn on the market. The people of Kooralbyn, regardless of who they are, have allowed a $2 million development of the Kooralbyn Golf Course with a proposal to put 600 homes around that golf course. Quite obviously we all hope that this project at Kooralbyn goes extremely well. The only difficulty is that that sort of growth leads to a great population increase and the resultant need for police stations and the upgrade of police stations. One thing about Beaudesert is that, whilst it has a good police station, it does not have suitable facilities for a 24-hour police station. I remind the government that in 1997-98 the proposed capital works program of the police department allowed for a new police station to be provided at Beaudesert in 2005 regardless of the new station that was provided at Jimboomba. With this massive real estate growth in the Beaudesert and Kooralbyn areas and the resultant population growth in those areas, quite obviously the proposal to build a new police station in 2005 is one that still must be adhered to. The other issue I want to comment on relates to the Premier’s comments once again about dams and water in south-east Queensland. If the ALP is to continue with the idea of farmers and people who benefit from a dam paying for capital infrastructure growth and if it is to continue with the statements made by the Premier here today that some dams in the south-east corner are inefficient, it will never build any dams. In the 1930s and 1940s Maroon and Moogerah were seen as more desirable than Glendower and Wyaralong, which the government is now putting its faith in. If it continues the practice of allowing water from dams such as Moogerah to be taken to areas such as Swanbank when it gets to 10 per cent or 11 per cent full, then it is continuing to decrease the amount of water in those dams. I remind members of the government that people who depend on irrigation have not had any water from the Moogerah for two or three years. Why? Because areas like Swanbank are allowed to take four per cent or five per cent—once that dam gets to 10 per cent or 11 per cent—of the water and store it at Swanbank. That water is then used for the power at Swanbank, because Swanbank is a priority. I remind all government members that those dams were built for agricultural viability. For two or three years those dams have never supplied any water to irrigators because areas like Swanbank, Ipswich and Boonah have top priority. Once that dam gets to 11 per cent, those areas immediately take four per cent or five per cent off so that the costs can be paid to SunWater. Bundaberg Base Hospital Hon. NI CUNNINGHAM (Bundaberg—ALP) (5.17 pm): Earlier this afternoon I spoke to the health bill and mentioned that Bundaberg residents do not want any more negativity, name-calling or political games in relation to our hospital. They just want the patients looked after and the problems fixed. To give this House an indication of the feeling of our residents, I would like to place on record the words printed in a recent Neighbourhood Watch newsletter in Bundaberg. The newsletter states— We have seen plenty of bad news about the Bundaberg Base Hospital in the Newspapers and on the television recently, but we haven’t seen any good news about the hospital. The people that still work at the hospital each and every day and night looking after the care of our children, parents, family and friends seems to have been forgotten. The volunteers that visit the sick and lonely just to have a little chat to make them feel better, the volunteers that fix the flowers each day on the wards, the volunteers that man the Blood Bank desk, the volunteers that take books around the wards for people to read, the volunteers that read to the children, the volunteers that courier within the hospital five days a week, 4 to 6 hours a day on their feet. These people, along with the paid staff who work long hours and provide a huge number of services that help the community every day deserve to be told that we have faith in them, let your local member know or write to the newspaper and let them and others know that we still care what happens to our hospital and its staff. This is how our residents feel. They want the patients looked after and they want the problems resolved, but they are angry at the unnecessary constant interference for political gain that they are reading day in and day out. It does nothing but denigrate our hospital even further. 10 Jun 2005 Adjournment 2137

Youth Parties Mrs ATTWOOD (Mount Ommaney—ALP) (5.18 pm): On 24 May the Minister for Police and Corrective Services, the Hon. Judy Spence MP, announced the establishment of a review committee to look at youth parties and gatherings in public spaces that get out of control. I have been pleased with the public interest shown to date in the formation of this task force. There are many people across the state who have been affected by youth parties and gatherings in public spaces that have spiralled out of control. The task force will not only examine the level and extent of this problem in Queensland but also, and most importantly, provide recommendations on how the government can address this issue. Today the minister announced the opening of public submissions for the safe youth parties task force. An important part of the committee’s research will be to hear from Queenslanders about their views on youth parties. The task force will seek feedback from young people, parents and neighbours who have been involved in or who have been affected by youth parties that have become disruptive. We are also interested in hearing from people who have successfully hosted youth parties or have ideas to offer on how to manage youth parties successfully. The task force will also seek feedback from organisations and bodies that represent young people and touch base with other jurisdictions. This is the opportunity for Queenslanders to have their say on this issue and help come up with workable and safe solutions for youth parties and gatherings. This is not about finding ways to stop these types of gatherings or trying to take the fun out of parties. It is about finding a workable and safe solution to what are regular rites of passage for young people. A discussion paper has been prepared by the task force to assist people in providing relevant and useful information and ideas. I table a copy of that discussion paper with contact details for those wishing to make submissions. I encourage people to take the opportunity to make a submission before the 12 August deadline. I know that the committee looks forward to seeing what young people have to say. I look forward to reporting on further milestones as this committee progresses. Motion agreed to. The House adjourned at 5.21 pm.

GOVERNMENT PRINTER, QUEENSLAND—2005