COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Official Hansard

WEDNESDAY, 15 MARCH 2000

THIRTY-NINTH PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—FIFTH PERIOD

BY AUTHORITY OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

CONTENTS

WEDNESDAY, 15 MARCH

CHAMBER HANSARD Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No. 5) 2000— Second Reading...... 14701 Third Reading...... 14714 Primary Industries (Excise) Levies (GST Consequential Amendments) Bill 2000— Second Reading...... 14714 Third Reading...... 14733 Health Legislation Amendment (Gap Cover Schemes) Bill 2000— Second Reading...... 14733 Questions Without Notice Telstra: Sale ...... 14749 Families: Government Policy...... 14749 Telstra: Services...... 14750 Economy: Growth ...... 14752 Telstra: Job Cuts ...... 14753 Goods and Services Tax: Fuel Excise...... 14753 Goods and Services Tax: First Home Owners Scheme ...... 14755 Victoria: Business Confidence...... 14755 Goods and Services Tax: Business ...... 14756 Literacy: National Standards ...... 14758 Goods and Services Tax: Draught Beer...... 14759 Goods and Services Tax: Seminars ...... 14760 Nursing Homes: Riverside ...... 14761 Tax Reform: Families and Self-funded Retirees...... 14761 Nursing Homes: Riverside ...... 14762 Work for the Dole: Benefits...... 14762 Nursing Homes: Riverside ...... 14764 Immigration: Parent Migration Applications...... 14764 Nursing Homes: Riverside ...... 14765 Minister for Aged Care...... 14766 Motion of Censure...... 14766 Personal Explanations...... 14779 Papers...... 14779 Parliament: Broadcast Of Proceedings ...... 14779 Privilege...... 14780 Matters of Public Importance...... 14780 Nursing Homes: Standards of Care ...... 14780 Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1999— Main Committee Report...... 14781 ii CONTENTS—continued

Third Reading...... 14781 Road Transport Charges (Australian Capital Territory) Amendment Bill 2000— Main Committee Report...... 14781 Third Reading...... 14781 Interstate Road Transport Charge Amendment Bill 2000— Main Committee Report...... 14781 Third Reading...... 14781 Interstate Road Transport Amendment Bill 2000— Main Committee Report...... 14781 Third Reading...... 14781 Transport and Territories Legislation Amendment Bill 1999— Main Committee Report...... 14781 Parliamentary Zone...... 14781 Proposal for Works ...... 14781 Human Rights (Mandatory Sentencing of Juvenile Offenders) Bill 1999— First Reading ...... 14781 Dissent from Ruling...... 14783 Health Legislation Amendment (Gap Cover Schemes) Bill 2000— Second Reading...... 14793 Corporations Law Amendment (Employee Entitlements) Bill 2000— Second Reading...... 14800 Consideration in Detail...... 14801 Third Reading...... 14807 Adjournment ...... 14807 Child Abuse...... 14807 Gilmore Electorate: Visit by Prime Minister and Cabinet...... 14808 Job Network: Second Contract...... 14809 McEwen Electorate: Thornton Primary School Anniversary...... 14810 East Timor: INTERFET ...... 14811 Second Sydney Airport: Badgerys Creek...... 14812 Sydney Electorate: Kings Cross ...... 14813 Health: Cystic Fibrosis ...... 14813 Ministerial Reply...... 14813 Notices ...... 14814 MAIN COMMITTEE HANSARD Statements by Members...... 14816 Port Adelaide Electorate: Gillman Highway...... 14816 Paralympic Games...... 14817 Mandatory Sentencing...... 14817 Petrie Electorate: Redcliffe City Council ...... 14818 Aviation: Essendon Airport ...... 14819 Sport: Townsville Crocodiles Basketball Team...... 14820 Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1999— Second Reading...... 14820 Road Transport Charges (Australian Capital Territory) Amendment Bill 2000— Interstate Road Transport Charge Amendment Bill 2000— Interstate Road Transport Amendment Bill 2000— Second Reading...... 14827 Interstate Road Transport Charge Amendment Bill 2000— CONTENTS—continued

Second Reading...... 14843 Interstate Road Transport Amendment Bill 2000— Second Reading...... 14843 Transport and Territories Legislation Amendment Bill 1999— Second Reading...... 14843 CONTENTS—continued Wednesday, 15 March 2000REPRESENTATIVES 14701

Wednesday, 15 March 2000 This would eliminate the problem of artificial ————— discounts which are currently contained in the legislation whereby, because of the cur- Mr SPEAKER (Mr Neil Andrew) took rent system, it can appear as if an employee the chair at 9.30 a.m., and read prayers. got an additional benefit because of an artifi- TAXATION LAWS AMENDMENT BILL cially discounted price being counted for tax (No. 5) 2000 purposes. Second Reading This is part of a scheme of arrangements Debate resumed from 14 March, on mo- relating to employee share ownership which tion by Mr Slipper: forms part of our tax legislation. This scheme That the bill be now read a second time. of arrangements is contained in division 13A. The general provision is that if a taxpayer upon which Mr Kelvin Thomson moved by gets a discount in relation to the provision of way of amendment: a share the value of that discount is taxable. That all words after “That” be omitted with a The scheme then goes on to provide two ex- view to substituting the following words: emptions for employee share ownership “whilst not declining to give the Bill a second plans. Those two exemptions are to allow the reading, the House: assessability of taxation to be deferred under (1) expresses its concern with the fundamental certain circumstances and to allow the first unfairness of the Government’s approach to taxa- $1,000 of discounts of the value accruing to tion generally and the fundamental unfairness of a the employee shareholder to be exempted goods and services tax, including the heavy com- from taxation. Obviously, under the current pliance burden on small business, and in particular scheme in the taxation legislation there is a the Government’s decision to tax health items including, for the first time in fifty years, taxing series of fairly rigorous conditions as to who tampons and sanitary pads; and qualifies for that concessional tax treatment. In the broad sense, to qualify for that conces- (2) calls on the Treasurer to amend the GST legislation or the Minister for Health to honour the sional tax treatment, the employee share Government’s pre-election promise that health ownership scheme must be a broadly based products would be GST-free by including tampons one, so it cannot simply be the offering of and sanitary pads in the Minister’s determination”. shares to a very limited class of employees. Ms GILLARD (Lalor) (9.31 a.m.)—I Indeed the scheme must be broadly available continue my remarks on Taxation Laws to 75 per cent of employees. Amendment Bill (No. 5) 2000, the debate In addition, to qualify for that kind of tax having been adjourned yesterday. I thought treatment, there needs to be a genuine em- we had an extraordinary level of interest in ployer-employee relationship. Then if you this debate, but maybe that is not so. Yester- qualify under that scheme you get the benefit day I addressed the amendment moved by the of the concessional tax treatment. One benefit member for Wills and seconded by the mem- can be the deferral of the assessibility of ber for Jagajaga dealing with the question of taxation to be paid on the discounts. Whilst GST on tampons and sanitary products. I there is a very complex definition of when move now in the time remaining to me to the taxation would be paid, in the broad a discuss the aspect of the bill which deals with continuing employee under that provision of employee share ownership schemes. The bill the tax legislation can defer payment of the contains a proposed modification to the way tax for ten years. Alternatively a taxpayer, an in which the public offer price is determined employee, who has benefited under an em- for determining the market value of shares ployee share ownership scheme can elect to that are required under an employee share pay the tax and can benefit from an exemp- scheme. When there is a public offer made in tion of the first $1,000 of benefits that the relation to a listed public company then, un- employee has received because of the dis- der the system that this bill proposes, there count available on the shares. would be a way of determining a share price Looking at that concessional tax treatment which would equal the public offer price. for broadly based employee share ownership 14702 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 schemes, we would say that, as a matter of that. We also need to be mindful, particularly public policy, that is a valid scheme of ar- given the National Textiles and Braybrook rangements in that there is a public policy examples, of encouraging, through the taxa- good to be garnered by encouraging em- tion system, the investment of employees’ ployee share ownership. Obviously, it creates discretionary moneys—their savings—into a community of purpose between the em- the same company for which they work. Ob- ployer and the employee. If the employee has viously that increases their exposure in terms shares in the business then that focuses the of corporate failure. They could lose not only employee’s mind on the profitability of the their entitlements but also their discretionary business and on its long-term performance in savings because they have invested through the same way in which one would hope that various share ownership arrangements in the the employer’s mind is so focused. So, driven very company for which they work. I do not by that public policy, it has been seen as ap- want to overstate that, but it seems to me that propriate over the years to give some conces- imbalance in the public policy arrangements sional taxation arrangements to employee in the way in which we facilitate employee share ownership schemes. share ownership schemes is a matter which As a member of the House of Representa- needs to be noted. Having said that, the tives Standing Committee on Employment, amendment in this legislation, which deals Education, and Workplace Relations, I have with the assessment of price, is one which we been participating in a major public inquiry support. into the question of employee share owner- Ms BURKE (Chisholm) (9.39 a.m.)—In ship. The Hansard is available on the web speaking to the Taxation Laws Amendment site. We have had a number of employers and Bill (No. 5) 2000 I refer particularly to the trade unions come along and speak about the second reading amendment moved by the productivity and other benefits of employee member for Wills and seconded by the mem- share ownership schemes. Having said that, it ber for Jagajaga. I will concentrate on the seems to me that we need to balance that government’s decision to tax particular health public policy good with some words of cau- items. The GST is no longer just a cradle to tion about the level of Commonwealth or grave tax; it is now a tax that goes from con- government investment in supporting em- ception to birth. As many people realise, this ployee share ownership schemes. Obviously is of particular interest to me at this time. The when one is creating a concessional taxation only thing that does not seem to be taxed is regime that is revenue forgone and it is, if the part in the middle, the enjoyable part— you like, a Commonwealth government in- the actual conception phase of birth. GST vestment in supporting that scheme of ar- will not be applied to condoms, the pill or rangements. indeed Viagra because these items are The words of caution, I guess, that I would available on prescription and condoms have sound in relation to employee share owner- been made exempt by the Minister for Health ship schemes is that they are a benefit that is and Aged Care. Everything else to do with really available only to a section of the work this whole process, everything else that force, and that is the section of the work seems to fall into the prerogative of women, force that is employed by public listed or will be taxed. That is what I want to unlisted companies, that is, companies in concentrate on in my speech this morning. which there is a market for shares. There are The amendment reads: not employee share ownership schemes in a broad sense for the many hundreds of thou- ... expresses its concern with the fundamental sands of employees who are engaged by unfairness of the Government’s approach to taxa- small business. tion generally and the fundamental unfairness of a So already we have a Commonwealth goods and services tax, including the heavy com- government investment in the sense of tax pliance burden on small business, and in particular revenue forgone for a scheme that benefits a the Government’s decision to tax health items section of the work force but not all of the including, for the first time in fifty years, taxing work force, and we need to be mindful of tampons and sanitary pads; Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14703

I spoke about tampons when we discussed this issue. She said that a lot of people had the appropriation bills on Monday. My office, the misconception that there was a luxury tax like many, has been inundated by women and on tampons and sanitary items. People still men—which is quite interesting—furious at believe there is a luxury tax on them. They the government’s refusal to lift the GST on found out that, of course, there was not. They sanitary products. As the member for Jaga- had a meeting, and the article continues: jaga pointed out, 70 per cent of Australians ‘Let’s get rid of it,’ they concluded. have indicated that they believe the tax One of the women ministers was lined up to make should be removed from these items. Using the running on the issue; press announcements sanitary products is not a lifestyle choice, as were planned. We were all feeling pretty pleased all women in this place will attest, but rather with ourselves. There was only one problem. an absolute necessity and, indeed, a health It turned out there was no tax, luxury or other- necessity. None of the women I have spoken wise, on tampons—or any of the other products to see this as getting special treatment. It is women need to use each month. Nor had there something that they must do, not just for ever been. But the belief that there is such a tax is themselves but for the broader community, one of the most pervasive and persistent urban for health purposes. It is both a matter of myths in this country, and one which refuses to go money for many women struggling to make away. ends meet and a matter of principle. As many It is so widespread that in 1986 the Deputy Com- have pointed out, the minister has the power, missioner of Taxation even issued a press release under section 36.47 of the GST legislation, to confirming the no-tax status of these products, declare all these goods exempt, without hoping no doubt to kill the myth once and for all. needing further legislation. Indeed, 1,000 It did not work. amendments have already been moved by the Even today, the myth of the luxury tax lives on as Treasurer in respect of this tax and it has not the news spreads that sanitary products will be even been introduced. I am waiting to see subject to the GST. what further amendments we will have to Some women on the various online chat groups deal with once the GST has been introduced that have been discussing this over recent days and we actually come to grips with the issue have enthused that the price of these products will on the ground. Here we have this absolute fall as the GST replaces the ‘luxury tax’. These anomaly that Australian women are going to women are in for a rude shock on July 1. be taxed very heavily. This tax is not just a I think most of them have already woken up tax mess; it is also proving to be a tax on to the fact that these products are going up women in particular. I quote from an article and not down. The article continues: written by Anne Summers which I think sums up quite a deal of this issue. It is enti- Women who feel ripped off can take comfort from the fact that two separate prices surveillance in- tled ‘When PMT meets GST’ and states: quiries into tampon prices concurred with them. The taxing of tampons under the GST will cause the Federal Government serious electoral pain ... There is a belief that tampons and sanitary items are already too expensive. The PSA has I think they are already feeling this. It contin- inquired into this extensively and has con- ues: curred that the price is too high. A staggering I hope for their sakes that the Federal Treasurer, amount is spent on the total female hygiene Peter Costello, and the Health Minister, Dr Mi- market, as it is called. It is worth roughly chael Wooldridge, are not faint-hearted sorts of $202.1 million and is set to reap about $20 chaps, because they have in front of them the for- midable task of trying to explain to the women of million in GST revenue. It is not a small item Australia why penile clamps (to treat male incon- of revenue that we are looking at here. In tinence) will be exempt from the GST whereas, 1994 the PSA said that about four million for the first time ever, tampons and other sanitary women would be affected by the pricing of products are about to be taxed. tampons. That is now much higher by virtue Summers, in the article, goes on to mention of the fact that women are menstruating for working for the Prime Minister at the time, longer in their total lifespan. Anne Summers Paul Keating, in 1992 when they looked into concludes: 14704 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

In other words there are likely to be millions of It is interesting that part of the bill we are women for whom the monthly GST bill will be as debating today is in respect of mobility and bad as PMT—and who will let the government changes to the sales tax of vehicles made for know how they feel. disabled access. Here we are on the one hand And they have been in their thousands. I, like recognising that people with a disability need every member in this place, have been re- to be exempt but saying on the other that ceiving hundreds of emails on this issue. I other people with a visual disability are not. I believe it is one issue that the Minister for think this is quite an anomaly. My constituent Health and Aged Care should be looking at. went on to say: As I said, he has the power under the GST Many Guide Dog users are limited in their in- legislation as it currently stands—under sec- come, and their ability to earn income, and the tion 36.47—to remove it, as he has done for addition of a 10 per cent across the board GST certain other areas. He has exempted con- becomes an unreasonable impost on their financial doms, sunscreen, folate pills and personal resources. lubricants. So the enjoyment part of con- She asked me if I could look into this matter. ceiving a baby can be exempted, but not eve- I have looked into this matter and I have been rything else. In 1992 the Administrative Ap- absolutely appalled to find that, yes, GST is peals Tribunal ruled that tampons were a now going to apply to these people when therapeutic good. The President of the AMA, they are currently not liable for wholesale Dr Brand, has called for tampons to be GST sales tax. On Monday I spoke about this issue free. The former head of the committee ad- in my speech on the second reading for the vising the government on GST implementa- appropriations bill, and I think it is very wor- tion, David Vos, has said that he has no ob- rying that the Australian Taxation Office has jection to tampons being GST free and, most already handed down a ruling in respect of importantly, 70 per cent of Australians want this saying that pet food for guide dogs and it removed—both men and women. I believe associated veterinary expenses will be subject that the minister should come forward now to GST. It appears that this cost will be im- and remove this ridiculous tax from an area posed on these people. These people are of- that will be a great impost on Australian ten limited income earners. If they are pen- women—and Australian women only. As I sioners, they will be getting a whole $20 a say, it is not a lifestyle choice to be using fortnight increase within four months time. these things; it is a health issue. I call upon Somehow that is supposed to offset feeding the minister to do something about it ur- and maintaining a guide dog. A guide dog is gently. a vision impaired person’s link to freedom of Another area that I want to speak on in re- movement and hence the need for tax ex- spect of this legislation is, I believe, a health emption. The fact that vision impaired people concern. I have been written to by one of my will have their guide dog’s food taxed by the constituents about this, and several other GST is tantamount to taxing their disability. members have also referred to it. It is about Most guide dog users are on a fixed income, the issue of the GST being applied to food such as a pension, and will receive the mea- and veterinary bills for guide dogs. Currently, sly four per cent increase in entitlements be- both these areas are wholesale sales tax ex- ing doled out to compensate for the GST. empt, but now the government will be im- Guide dogs are not known for their small posing GST on this area. I think it is a dis- appetites, and the quality of their food must grace. I have been written to by one of my be high in order for them to undertake their constituents whose name is Jacqui. She important role. It is my fear that many visu- writes: ally impaired people on low incomes will be I would like you to lobby on behalf of all blind forced to skimp on the quality of food and the and vision-impaired Guide Dog users in regard to regularity of veterinary examinations to meet the likelihood of GST being applied to the Guide the added burden of the new tax. This is just Dogs’ food. Currently a guide dog user is sales-tax another example of the harsh and unequal exempt in this category, as a Guide Dog is a mo- application of the GST. Again, I call upon the bility aid rather than a pet. relevant minister to review this immediately. Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14705

The final issue I want to speak on this of four months to six months. The Breast- morning is something that, again, I believe is feeding Review, journal, Vol. 7, No. 1 states: a gross anomaly in this terrible tax, and that Current levels are close to the national goals and is in respect of lactation aids. It seems to me target recommendation of 90% of women breast- that it is highly ludicrous that formula is go- feeding on discharge from hospital, but the ing to be GST free because it is baby food prevalence of women breastfeeding at three and but other items for lactation purposes, such as six months falls short of the national target of 80% a breast pump to give baby mother’s milk, of women breastfeeding at these times. are not going to be GST free. I hold up one The Nursing Mothers Association of Austra- that I personally use myself to feed my baby lia wrote to the federal Treasurer in 1999 when I am in Canberra. Bottles are not going seeking an explanation for how these lacta- to be GST free, nor are other items of neces- tion products would be taxed. The federal sity like bra nursing pads. These items for me Treasurer stated that ‘exemptions would be to feed my baby will not be GST free, but restricted to health-related products which formula—which has the same purpose—to would not include lactation aids’. It seems feed a baby will be. I think it is an absolute highly curious that the federal Treasurer is disgrace and an anomaly that has caused saying that these aids are not health related genuine concern across the airwaves. Indeed, products while at the same the Australian I read an article recently that said the health government has committed $2 million to the minister was looking at considering this is- National Breastfeeding Strategy. The under- sue, and I urge him to revisit this, to look into lying part of that strategy recognises the this issue of great concern to many women health benefits to babies of being breastfed. out there and, under his powers under the I would like to say from the outset that I legislation, to remove the tax on these items, am not condemning women who do not in particular, on breast pumps. breastfeed, because it is not actually an easy Mechanical breast pumps can be bought thing to do. There are lots of problems in- for $1,500. This is not a small cost. Most volved in doing it. A lot of babies do not ac- women do not actually purchase these cept it and a lot of women do not have pumps; they hire them through a wonderful enough supply, so I certainly would not want association known as the Nursing Mothers to be condemning or saying anything else. Association of Australia which has put out But women such as me who have chosen to some wonderful information on this issue. breastfeed and who have been lucky enough The Nursing Mothers Association will be up to do it, often cannot be there to breastfeed for a huge impost on purchasing these items, their baby—as in the case of my job—so ex- which are then hired by women such as me. pressing milk, putting it into bags and into The hiring cost is anywhere between $10 and the freezer and then having husbands give a $20 a week, and the actual pump that you bottle to the baby is something we need to must use and the kit to go with the hired do. breast pump is $41.95. So we are looking at It is also something that a lot of women on an item that costs money that is not small lower wages who return to the work force change to a lot of people. Indeed, on top of fairly early on need to do. The government in the GST for these things, people will actually one breath is providing $2 million to support be slugged another 10 per cent for service, breastfeeding but at the same time is taxing because the hiring of a breast pump is a women who are in that lower income area service in itself. who need to be able to do it and return to the I would like to turn to why this is most work force at the same time. If formula is definitely a health issue. Breastfeeding is going to be exempt, I know what women will recognised as being one of the most natural turn to. A baby is not a cheap item—trust me and best forms of preventive medicine and is on that. As my husband keeps telling me: it promoted internationally as the preferred was a great idea to halve our income and tri- method of feeding for infants up to the ages ple our expenses! And here we are putting on 14706 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 a GST and incurring a greater cost for a lot of Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler) (9.57 women. a.m.)—I am pleased to speak in this debate, The Nursing Mothers Association puts out and in particular to speak in support of the some wonderful information. They say: amendment that has been moved by my col- league the member for Wills and seconded by Protection, promotion and support of breastfeed- ing is a fundamental preventative health measure, my colleague the member for Jagajaga. That globally recognised as capable of saving millions amendment goes to the very heart of the un- of lives and billions of dollars. For this reason the fairness of the application of this GST. It Australian government has always endorsed inter- goes to the heart of it because, in a number of national initiatives to protect, promote and support ways, the government made commitments breastfeeding. prior to the last election about what would be ...... GST free and what would not be. One of the In 1990, at the World Summit for Children, nu- categories they said would be GST free was, merous heads of state set as a nutritional goal for of course, health products. the year 2000, “Empowerment of all women to The amendment being debated today by exclusively breastfeed their children for four to this House calls on the Treasurer to amend six months and to continue breastfeeding while the GST legislation or the Minister for Health giving appropriate complementary food well into and Aged Care to honour the government’s the second year.” pre-election promise that health products be So, Australia has adopted these guidelines. GST free by including tampons and sanitary They also say: pads in the minister’s determination. This In 1982 Australia was the first country to adopt debate shows that there has been consider- Dietary Guidelines which included “Promote able progress. My colleague the member for breastfeeding.” “Encourage and support breast- Chisholm is representative of the progress feeding” is now the eighth point of the Australian that has occurred in this parliament with her Dietary Guidelines 1992, and the first point on the outstanding contribution to the debate. Some Australian Dietary Guidelines for Children and 50 years ago there were no women sitting in Adolescents, which were endorsed by the this House—or, if there were, there were only NHMRC in June 1995. one or two at a time. At the last three elec- So Australia has set targets. The goals are to tions we have seen that rate increase consid- have ‘90 per cent of babies up to two months erably. Jeannette McHugh, my predecessor as of age breastfed following discharge; babies the member for Grayndler, was in fact the up to three months of age 60 per cent fully first ALP women to be elected from New breastfed and 80 per cent partially breastfed; South Wales to the House of Representatives. and babies up to six months 50 per cent fully That was only in 1983, not that long ago. But breastfed and 80 per cent partially breastfed’. it seems that the decision makers, the men in So on one hand we are saying that this is a positions of power, in this place still do not health issue, but on the other hand the tax understand the fact that, for us to be a truly system is saying that lactation aids are not a representative parliament and for government health issue. As I said at the outset, this tax is to do its job properly, they have to govern for a disgrace overall. It seems that it is now a all Australians, not just for men. It is only heavier impost upon women and children, men who could have classified tampons and and I call upon the minister to use his powers sanitary products as not being a health issue. under the current legislation to exempt such The minister himself exposed that situa- products, to treat the women of Australia tion. When asked about it by the ABC, his fairly and to ensure that children in our soci- comment was, ‘If I was a bloke I’d like ety get a better start so that women are not shaving cream to be exempt, but I’m not ex- turning to formula if they cannot afford any pecting it to be. I wasn’t aware that men- more to purchase or hire breast pumps. I con- struation was an illness.’ How offensive is clude by stating that this tax is a tax mess as that? How ignorant is it? Apart from the mi- well as a tax adventure; it is certainly a heavy nor fact that shaving cream is exempt, which burden on women. has been pointed out before, it really shows Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14707 how out of touch this minister is with the says it cannot change the GST, and it is de- electorate. All of us in this parliament have termined not to budge an inch no matter how received perhaps more representation on this just the case, but on the other hand we have issue than any other specific issue relating to seen thousands of technical amendments to the GST. I will read into the Hansard just a the GST legislation. Hardly a day goes past couple of those which have come to us. One without an amendment to the GST legislation was from Joanne Gould, who said: being moved in the House of Representatives I urge you to please listen to the women of Aus- or in the Senate. That is why this bill is called tralia on this subject and grant an exemption to Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No. 5) GST on feminine sanitary hygiene products. Far 2000. The way that the government is going, from this being a Barbie Doll issue, or comparable we will probably be up to No. 55 before the to soap and shaving cream, we have no choice in end of the financial year. The government is how or when or even whether we use these prod- stubborn, and it is out of touch. I ask the gov- ucts. ernment to give real consideration to carrying Another one from Sandra Schultz, who this amendment moved by the member for wrote: Wills, and to fixing what is a growing source I am writing to implore you on behalf of 50 per of anger. This issue will not go away be- cent of the population to abandon plans to impose cause, for every woman in Australia, there is the GST on sanitary items. These could hardly be a monthly reminder of what this government classed as luxury items, and it is disgusting that has done in imposing a GST on their men- tax is going to be added to these products. strual cycle. That is an outrageous proposi- So, whilst we have progress on the one hand, tion for any government in the year 2000. with representatives in this chamber such as It does not just concern women; it con- the member for Chisholm—who gave birth to cerns men such as me, and others who be- the beautiful and charming Madeleine last lieve that an injustice and an inequity towards year and who enlivens this place and enriches any individual or any section of society on us all by having Madeleine around the corri- the basis of gender is unfair and must be op- dor where I reside and around this House—it posed. Many of the representations that I still appears that we have such a long way to have had on this issue are in fact from fami- go. lies and from men. It is not just women who This GST will also apply to a number of are concerned. Pass the amendment, and that other health products. It will apply to specta- specific aspect of the GST debate will be cle frames, vitamins, cough mixtures, over- over. It is typical of this government’s intran- the-counter medicines, baby bottles and sigence. On a whole range of issues which cleaning solutions. It will also apply to der- could be fixed up easily, the government has matology products, as my colleague the shown that it is unprepared to listen to ra- member for Bruce has pointed out and has tional argument. It said that health products campaigned very strongly on. So the argu- would be GST free; they are not. It said that ment that health products are GST free is education would be GST free; it is not. They simply not the case. With regard to tampons said that rent would be GST free; it is not. and sanitary products, the Administrative Yesterday I was very pleased to meet with Appeals Tribunal ruled in 1992 that tampons permanent residents of caravan parks who were a therapeutic good. On this issue, which came to Canberra to lobby the government to all members of this House have been lobbied remove the GST on their site fees, which are about, there has been support not only from their rent. They came and met with the leader communities but also from radical organisa- of the Labor Party, Kim Beazley. They met tions such as the AMA. David Brand has with our caucus committee, and they met called for tampons to be GST free. The Min- with many members and senators, but they ister for Health and Aged Care should simply did not meet with a single member of the stop defending an unfair, discriminatory tax. government. The residents wrote to the Prime This bill itself is about amending the GST Minister; he did not bother to respond. They legislation. On the one hand, the government wrote to the Treasurer; he said no, he was too 14708 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 busy. The government whip was given an sues will become self-evident. There is no invitation to fax out to all government mem- point saying it is not true. They will know bers and senators; not one came. Individual because their rents will go up. They have members of the House of Representatives already been notified. who have large caravan park populations Ms Ellis—They have already started, were personally invited; none came. They are some of them. not interested in listening on this issue. Mr ALBANESE—As my colleague has When I asked the Prime Minister a ques- pointed out, many rents have already gone tion in question time yesterday, he responded up. It is an extraordinary position. The debate by saying that there would be no change to yesterday was interesting because the mem- the current situation—no change in spite of ber for Mitchell had changed his position a the fact that this is an unfair tax on the most little bit, just a day later, as the government’s vulnerable people in our community. That lead speaker on the MPI. He said: stands in stark contrast to the dishonesty of There is a choice. It is one of the choices owners this government. Prior to the last election, the of long-term caravan parks have. A concession member for Lyne told his whole electorate offered by the government to no other section of through a pamphlet that there would be no the rental market, to no other owner of any rental GST on caravan park permanent residents. property and to no other people staying in rental Yesterday the Prime Minister ruled out a accommodation is the capacity to put a goods and change but at least acknowledged that GST services tax on half the value of the rent. applies. That is one day later, so sometime between Earlier in this debate, on Monday evening, Monday night and Tuesday afternoon the tax the member for Mitchell made an extraordi- came on. That was okay, because he said: nary speech on this bill. He said: I believe it gives the owner of the property and the Long-term stayers in caravan parks are going to residents of the property a choice that no other be treated in exactly the same way as any long- section of the market has. term renter anywhere else. Ms Ellis—Aren’t they lucky? He did not say it just once; he went on. The Mr ALBANESE—Aren’t they lucky? Hansard records me saying, ‘Rubbish, that is They have a choice. Pay the tax or become wrong.’ The member for Mitchell said, ‘You homeless: that is the choice. The choice is can argue as much as you like, but there is no solely in the hands of the caravan park own- GST on the rent they will pay.’ He went on: ers. The government were very brave yester- The fact is that long-term stayers in caravan parks day; they got out the marginal seats, Mitchell will not be paying a goods and services tax. There and Curtin, to debate this issue, instead of is no goods and services tax charged on their rent. those members who actually live in elector- It is an extraordinary situation when you can ates which do have large numbers of caravan come into this place and say, ‘Black is parks with permanent residents, such as white’. What is even more extraordinary is Richmond, with 6,649, Dawson with 5,796, that when the government had to choose their Cowper with 4,471, Leichhardt with 5,639, speakers for the matter of public importance Lyne with 3,421, Kalgoorlie with 14,509, yesterday, guess who they chose? The mem- Kennedy with 7,148 and Capricornia with ber for Mitchell was the government’s lead 3,894. The member for Capricornia is doing speaker in the MPI debate yesterday on the the right thing and campaigning on this issue, imposition of a GST on permanent residents but the members on the other side say in their of caravan parks. If there isn’t one, why was electorates that they are opposed to it. The he participating in the debate? Why was there member for Gilmore has said that it is a stuff- a debate? Why was there a question of the up and it is a discriminatory tax. The member Prime Minister? Why did people spend five for Richmond has said that it was being re- hours travelling to Canberra in a bus? It considered by the government and hopefully really is quite extraordinary that we have lies he would get back to his constituents with a and dishonesty coming from members of the positive answer soon. They all have one mes- government when, from 1 July, all these is- sage in their electorates but when they come Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14709 to Canberra they are silent and do not partici- There has been no wholesale sales tax on pate in the debate. Whom did they get to par- tampons and pads for more than 45 years. For ticipate in the debate? The member for more than 45 years these products have been Curtin. She has four residents of caravan tax free, and rightly so. I said to a group of parks in her electorate and the member for women I was speaking to recently in my con- Mitchell has 300. It really does expose the stituency, ‘Why should we in fact be sur- fact that this government is just not going to prised that the Prime Minister sees nothing be prepared to listen to rational argument wrong with imposing taxes on this? He tends when it comes to the GST, and that is be- to look at most things from a 1940s, 1950s cause the GST is an ideological obsession and 1960s perspective, so it is probably rea- with this government and with this particular sonable to understand why he thinks we Prime Minister. should reverse the tax position on an issue like this.’ It is absolutely within the power of I will now come back to the amendment. I the Minister for Health and Aged Care, Dr note that this is a fundamental inequity. I also Wooldridge, to add these items to the list of note that a majority of Australians voted those exempted from the GST. It would be a against the GST at the last election. But that very simple and easy thing for him to do. minority of Australians who did vote for the GST were told health products, education and The previous speaker made reference to rent would be GST free. None of that is true. another item on which there is going to be a I would urge the government to vote for this GST imposed, and that was spectacle frames. amendment. It is a good amendment. It is a This is just a side issue to illustrate some of sound amendment. It is an amendment about the stupidity of this. If you—as I did in the equity for all Australians, and I think it last two weeks—get new lenses prescribed, should be carried unanimously by this House. you can get those GST free after July but you cannot get the frames in which to put them Ms ELLIS (Canberra) (10.15 a.m.)—I am without paying the GST. I would defy any- pleased to have the opportunity today to body to make a choice as a consumer to try to speak on the Taxation Laws Amendment Bill avoid the GST by wearing only the lenses (No. 5) 2000 and on the amendment to the and not the frames. There is just so much second reading motion moved by this side of inconsistency in the illogical approach to so the House, as referred to by the previous many aspects of this fantastic new tax system speaker. In this debate I particularly want to that we are having forced down our throats. address the GST on sanitary products. It is an I have also, with some lament, noticed in issue of enormous concern. The government some of the press that some members oppo- says that the new tax system is for the na- site—I have a particular one in mind—have tional good, that there may be some winners found it somewhat offensive when they have and some losers on some of the detail but that seen some forms of the demonstrations by the sacrifice that we make—should we see women around the country through their cit- any of this as a sacrifice—is really in the na- ies and their communities in relation to the tional interest. I am here today to tell the GST on women’s sanitary products, particu- government that the women I know in my larly tampons. All I can say is that nothing electorate are not at all happy with this par- could be more offensive to women—and far ticular sacrifice. Being the last speaker on more so than the feelings that that particular this issue from this side of the House, so member may be experiencing—than to be- much has already been said, and I do not lieve that this government feels justified in want to repeat it, but other colleagues have imposing a GST on these products. As other mentioned the issues relating to feeding speakers have said, menstruation may not be products for nursing mothers. These are all an illness in the medical definition used by terribly important issues and are examples of the minister but I do not understand why this unfair, very stupid, tax imposition— shaving for men is a medical problem either. something that the government seems hell- Shaving cream will not incur the GST, but bent on keeping. products related to women’s menstruation 14710 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 will. There is something really strange about In other words, tampons—a modern inven- the approach by this government. tion—have been of enormous assistance to If there has ever been an issue that has women in many ways. Why on earth place a emerged out of the community with great tax on them? energy and great enthusiasm in terms of There has been a range of emails, phone wishing to respond, it is this issue. I have calls and letters. Mr Deputy Speaker, I do not seen many things in my four or so years in know about you, but as a female representa- this place, but the reaction from the commu- tive of the community here in this place I can nity on this issue has been enormous. And I no longer go to a community dinner—Rotary do not overstate it at all when I say that the dinners, Lions dinners, dinners celebrating email system in my office almost reached Australia Day—without this issue coming up. meltdown at one point because of the number You sit down to a meal with a group of peo- of contacts we were receiving from people ple from the community, and what is the from everywhere—men, women, families, topic of the discussion? The GST on tampons groups, community representatives—on this and sanitary pads. It is just extraordinary. I do issue. A gentleman called Harry—I will not not know that the government really under- read out his surname, but I have it in front of stands—and I have to say this to excuse its me—who lives in Kambah in my electorate otherwise inactive attitude to this—the depth sent an email on behalf of him and his wife. of feeling, anger and frustration that people He said: are feeling. I am dismayed (annoyed, irritated, stunned ... the That was epitomised the best by the day superlatives are endless) at the attitude of the Fed- the door to my electorate office flew open eral Government, and the comments of Dr Wool- and an 83-year-old woman—she told us who ridge in particular, regarding feminine hygiene she was and how old she was—burst in. She products. These items, which are far too expen- had been to the bank over the road because it sive anyway, must surely be considered as health care products and, therefore, GST exempt. To use was pension day. She was fairly frail but she the words of Dr Woolridge (in relation to con- was down doing her business at the bank, doms), they must be health care products because saw my office, went straight across the road, they ‘prevent disease’. came in and just went so mad at the govern- Harry has asked me as his parliamentarian to ment. Unfortunately, I was not there at the lobby the government on behalf of him and time that she came in, but she said to my others in the community, and I can tell Harry staff, ‘You have simply got to tell Annette of Kambah that it is my pleasure to do that Ellis to do something about this. I am an 83- and I am grateful for his acknowledgment year-old woman obviously not requiring and his representation. I also received an these products anymore. I only wish they had email from a woman named Kerry, which been an invention when I was of the age that said: I began to need them. I have daughters, grand-daughters, sisters and nieces and I can I find it absurd that sunscreen, condoms, personal tell you that, from my point of view, this is lubricants for men and women, and incontinence pads are all to be GST free, on the basis that if one one of the worst decisions affecting women didn’t use them, one would suffer a ‘disability’, that a government could take. It is an insult.’ yet menstruation products will not. I think that She went through the whole raft of objections women not using tampons or pads would cause that she had. If an 83-year-old woman can more than a ‘disability’ ... it would cause a furore, come into my office and say that, I think that and enormous health risks to all Australians. really illustrates how far the reaction in the I also received an email from Helen from the community has gone on this issue. ANU in Canberra. Amongst her comments, I The government’s accusation throughout would like to read this particular part: this debate, that the anti-GST on tampons It no longer matters what time of the month it is if movement was somehow a tampon industry you wish to go swimming or participate in any promotion, almost left me speechless when I number of other sporting activities where the first heard it. If ever we needed a wonderful wearing of a pad is not effective. example of a government completely block- Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14711 ing its ears with cotton wool and not wishing for their contributions, their wide-ranging at all to hear any message from the commu- speeches, some of which would lead people nity, this is it. I cannot think of a better ex- listening to this debate to be unaware of the ample. Fifty per cent of the community are fact that this legislation covers three very women. But it is not only the women: as I specific measures. Of course, one of the rea- said, Harry from Kambah cares about this sons we have wide-ranging debate on taxa- issue as well. There are enormous feelings of tion matters is that often in the title of the resentment, of frustration and of a lack of legislation the words ‘and for related pur- acknowledgment of a woman as she is. The poses’ are added which does give honourable role of childbearing—the whole thing—is members the opportunity to traverse a range being assaulted. Almost our very existence as of matters relating to taxation. women is being assaulted by the fact that this This bill contains three measures, all of government believes that shaving cream can which are good news for taxpayers. The sales be a comparative in tax terms to products tax measure ensures that the extra cost of affecting women’s menstruation. It is so ri- making a car suitable for use by the disabled diculous that you would have to laugh at it. will not be subject to sales tax. This amend- The reality is that, if this government does ment will apply to dealings on or after 26 not hear this message and the members on June 1998, being the date the New South the other side of this House come in at the Wales government announced the release of end of this debate and decide to vote against 400 additional wheelchair accessible taxi this amendment, it will be on their heads at licences. The amendment will therefore assist the ballot boxes next time there is an election, to ensure that the transportation needs of dis- because this will not go away. As the member abled participants at the Sydney Paralympic for Grayndler rightly said, and as many other Games this year are met. people have said, a great number of women The employee share schemes measure rec- in this country have a monthly reminder of ognises that the market value of shares and the government’s attitude to their health and unlisted rights to acquire shares, under an wellbeing. It is a nonsense to suggest that this employee share scheme offered in association is not a health issue. And it is a nonsense to with a secondary or subsequent public offer believe that the minister does not agree with of shares, is more equitably reflected in the that. If he does not agree with that, then he public offer price of the shares. The final should not be the minister for health, quite measure relates to the closely held trust divi- frankly. If he cannot understand the require- sions. These provisions require trustees to ment to remove this tax, I believe he should give details of the ultimate beneficiaries to re-examine his view of the world in terms of whom their income is distributed where the health care. In finishing, I again thank the distributions are made through a chain of people in the community who have made trusts. This bill will maintain the integrity their views on this issue very clear to me. I nature of these provisions whilst easing the implore the members opposite to use their compliance burden on trustees. They are the heads to think very carefully about this vote. three matters which are specifically covered We are giving them a way of getting out of in this bill. It will not be a surprise to the op- this—the amendment is very sensible; it al- position that the government wholeheartedly lows the exemption to occur—and we on this rejects the amendment moved by the honour- side of the House will not hesitate at all to able member for Wills, who has sought to remind the people out there in the community focus, as has much of the debate from the of exactly how their members voted on this Labor side, on the issue of tampons and particular amendment. sanitary pads. Mr SLIPPER (Fisher—Parliamentary Maybe it would assist honourable mem- Secretary to the Minister for Finance and bers representing the Labor Party if they had Administration) (10.26 a.m.)—I would like to listened to the Sunday program on television thank all the participants in this debate on the a couple of weeks ago when the New Zea- Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No. 5) 2000 land Labour Prime Minister, Helen Clark, 14712 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 pointed out that the GST is there to stay and which simply has not been accepted by this that GST-free items should be kept to a country and by the Australian people as we minimum. enter the 21st century. Mr Horne—Half of New Zealand lives in The honourable member for Wills, in a Australia! fairly wide-ranging contribution, sought to Mr SLIPPER—The honourable member concentrate on matters other than the items opposite said that there are many New Zea- specifically relating to this bill. He referred to landers in Australia, and many of them are what he said was the GST’s application to making a very strong and worthwhile contri- guide dogs, food and veterinary services. I bution to our national economy and to our want to place on record that the government national society. In my area of the Sunshine is acting to assist charities through the GST Coast, there is a very strong New Zealand system and in preparing for the GST system. community, and I very much welcome their The GST legislation contains a number of support. Ms Clark said: concessions for charities. For instance, non- commercial activities are GST free, so where It is a very well accepted tax ... and no one seri- ously thinks it would ever be changed. The tax a guide dog is provided for less than 75 per was applied to everything that moved. It is true to cent of the cost it will be GST free and the say that once you start differentiating between charity providing the guide dog will get input classes of goods, you get into anomalies that can tax credits. To assist charities to prepare for get a bit hard to explain. So we simply apply it to the GST, the ATO has provided seminars and everything. an information booklet and has established That was the Sunday program on 27 Febru- the Charities Consultative Committee. In ad- ary. I would also like to draw the attention of dition, charities will benefit from the funds honourable members to an interview with provided to the GST Start-Up Assistance Of- Professor Judith Whitworth, a leading health fice to assist with implementation. academic, who was a member of an inde- The honourable member for Jagajaga, who pendent committee. On radio, she said she is back in the chamber, claimed that the gov- was quite comfortable with the decision to ernment has broken a promise that health is apply GST to tampons: GST free. The government has ensured that The Committee felt there were no compelling the supply of a medical service is GST free. reasons to exempt tampons. They are a personal A medical service is defined as a service that hygiene product rather than a product used to treat is supplied by, or on behalf of, a medical an illness or a disease or a disability. practitioner or approved pathology practitio- She went on to say: ner, and that is generally accepted in the I don’t think ... that there’s a lot of logic to con- medical profession as being necessary for the tinue to exempt product after product. appropriate treatment of the recipient of the It ought to be recognised that, if you select supply. The GST legislation also lists other individual items and you seek to make a case GST-free health services, including nursing, for their exemption, you could exempt prod- occupational therapy, paramedical services, uct after product. But the nature of a GST is psychology and social work. Many drugs and that it is a broadly based tax across a wide medicines will also be GST free. It ought to range of items. It has also been calculated by be seen that, in relation to this particular mat- newspapers that any increase in the cost of ter, the Labor Party is playing to the gallery tampons as a result of tax reform would and is not prepared to stand up and be amount to about $4 per annum—that is what counted. the newspapers are saying. I believe that the The honourable member for Lowe levelled point of view being put by the opposition in the incredible accusation that the government this matter could be summed up as much ado did not put taxation policy out before the about nothing. What they are really doing is 1996 campaign. The last election was in Oc- playing on the heartstrings and being hypo- tober 1998. The Labor Party had a policy, but critical, because for 13 years the Labor Party we had a policy for complete and meaningful presided over a dismal, failed tax system tax reform. We pointed out that if we were Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14713 elected to government we would bring in a Ayes………… 73 new tax system which would see dramatic Noes………… 64 reductions in personal income tax, and com- pensation for retirees and pensioners. It Majority……… 9 would also see the abolition of a range of AYES other taxes, including Labor’s wholesale Abbott, A.J. Andrews, K.J. sales tax. What we said was: if you vote for Anthony, L.J. Bailey, F.E. us, you will get a new tax system. And the Baird, B.G. Barresi, P.A. legislation which we have brought into the Bartlett, K.J. Billson, B.F. parliament is legislation which seeks to im- Bishop, B.K. Bishop, J.I. plement the mandate of the Australian people which was given to us in the October 1998 Brough, M.T. Cadman, A.G. election. We are certainly not going to apolo- Cameron, R.A. Causley, I.R. gise for standing up and being counted and Charles, R.E. Downer, A.J.G. carrying out our election promises—unlike Draper, P. Elson, K.S. the sad and sorry record of our predecessors. Entsch, W.G. Fahey, J.J. The honourable member for Rankin Fischer, T.A. Forrest, J.A.* started to talk about milk given to the cat and Gallus, C.A. Gambaro, T. tax avoidance, and I believe that was cer- Gash, J. Georgiou, P. tainly a red herring. Milk that is for human consumption is GST free; the actual use of Haase, B.W. Hardgrave, G.D. the milk is not relevant. Feeding cats and Hawker, D.P.M. Hockey, J.B. dogs with meat and milk that is fit for human Hull, K.E. Jull, D.F. consumption does not amount to tax avoid- Katter, R.C. Kelly, D.M. ance. I think that any reasonable person Kemp, D.A. Lawler, A.J. would accept that that is an appropriate Lieberman, L.S. Lindsay, P.J. situation. Lloyd, J.E. Macfarlane, I.E. The government is particularly pleased May, M.A. McArthur, S.* with this legislation which is currently before McGauran, P.J. Moore, J.C. the chamber. It is regrettable that in bill after bill we have had to confront a redebate of the Moylan, J. E. Nairn, G. R. essence of our new tax system which was Nehl, G. B. Nelson, B.J. voted for so strongly by the Australian peo- Neville, P.C. Nugent, P.E. ple. This legislation contains three measures, Prosser, G.D. Pyne, C. all of which are good news for taxpayers. The Reith, P.K. Ronaldson, M.J.C. sales tax measure ensures that the extra cost Ruddock, P.M. Schultz, A. of making a car suitable for use by the dis- abled will not be subject to sales tax, and I Scott, B.C. Secker, P.D. have outlined the circumstances in which this Slipper, P.N. Southcott, A.J. occurs. The other two measures relate to the ST Clair, S.R. Stone, S.N. employee share schemes measure and to Sullivan, K.J.M. Thompson, C.P. closely held trusts. I commend the legislation Thomson, A.P. Truss, W.E. to the chamber. Vaile, M.A.J. Vale, D.S. Question put: Wakelin, B.H. Washer, M.J. That the words proposed to be omitted (Mr Williams, D.R. Wooldridge, M.R.L. Kelvin Thomson’s amendment) stand part of the NOES question. Adams, D.G.H. Albanese, A.N. The House divided. [10.41 a.m.] Bevis, A.R. Brereton, L.J. Burke, A.E. Byrne, A.M. (Mr Deputy Speaker—Mr H.A. Jenkins) Cox, D.A. Crean, S.F. 14714 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

Crosio, J.A. Danby, M. PRIMARY INDUSTRIES (EXCISE) Edwards, G.J. Ellis, A.L. LEVIES (GST CONSEQUENTIAL Emerson, C.A. Evans, M.J. AMENDMENTS) BILL 2000 Ferguson, L.D.T. Ferguson, M.J. Second Reading Fitzgibbon, J.A. Gerick, J.F. Debate resumed from 16 February, on Gibbons, S.W. Gillard, J.E. motion by Mr Truss: Griffin, A.P. Hall, J.G. That the bill be now read a second time. Hoare, K.J. Hollis, C. Mr O’CONNOR (Corio) (10.47 a.m.)— Horne, R. Irwin, J. The Primary Industries (Excise) Levies (GST Consequential Amendments) Bill 2000 is a Kernot, C. Kerr, D.J.C. bill to exclude the GST from the base for Latham, M.W. Lawrence, C.M. calculating the levy on deer velvet and goat Lee, M.J. Livermore, K.F. fibre. I give notice of my intention to move Macklin, J.L. Martin, S.P. the following second reading amendment: McClelland, R.B. McFarlane, J.S. That all words after ‘That’ be omitted with a McLeay, L.B. McMullan, R.F. view to substituting the following words: Melham, D. Morris, A.A. ‘whilst not declining to give the Bill a second reading, the House expresses its concern at the Mossfield, F.W. Murphy, J. P. adverse impact the GST will have on the small O’Byrne, M.A. O’Connor, G.M. business and farm sectors, particularly the com- O’Keefe, N.P. Plibersek, T. pliance burden’. Price, L.R.S. Quick, H.V. Under existing legislation, the amount col- Ripoll, B.F. Roxon, N.L. lected as levies from deer velvet and goat fibre producers would increase because these Rudd, K.M. Sawford, R.W.* levies are calculated as a percentage of the Sciacca, C.A. Sercombe, R.C.G.* price received for the product, and that price Sidebottom, P.S. Smith, S.F. would include the GST were this legislation Snowdon, W.E. Swan, W.M. not to come into effect. The majority of pri- Tanner, L. Theophanous, A.C. mary industry levies are not affected by this measure because they are calculated on the Thomson, K.J. Wilkie, K. basis of quantity or weight and not on price. PAIRS Of course, if this legislation was not passed Howard, J.W. Beazley, K.C. by this House, it would have the unintended consequence of ramping up the levies that are Kelly, J.M. Hatton, M.J. paid by producers in these two industries. * denotes teller Section 975 of the ANTS Act 1999 defines price as ‘an amount which includes the GST’. Question so resolved in the affirmative. Under this bill, the price for levy purposes is Original question resolved in the affirma- to exclude net GST so that the amount paid tive. by producers is not increased. These two industries are very important to Bill read a second time. the rural sector. They are not large industries, Third Reading but people who operate in them are innova- tive and the products that they produce are Leave granted for third reading to be quite valuable. The levies that are raised in moved forthwith. rural industries have a very important role in maintaining research and development and in Bill (on motion by Mr Slipper) read a some cases the promotional efforts of many third time. rural industries. These two industries are no exception. They are involved in the export trade and there is very important research Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14715 being done into both industries and their out- is not so, but you have only to go to question put. It is important to reflect on what is hap- time to hear the Treasurer gloating about the pening in research and development, not only fact that he has a balanced budget and that he across the Australian economy but also in intends to maintain it. We all know that that agriculture. As many farmers and people who balanced budget and the billions of dollars earn their living in the downstream process- that are going to be wasted on the introduc- ing of agricultural products would know, the tion of the GST come off the back of these cutting edge for agriculture in the new mil- very cuts to education and training that the lennium is going to come off the back of its coalition have been responsible for since they research and development effort. came to power. The record and performance of the How- I was at a dinner last night for the Prime ard government in education and training and Minister of Ireland. We hear much about the in research and development is very disap- unique Irish economic experiment in the pointing—it is a very poor record indeed. European Community. Ireland has had spec- Agriculture and other industries throughout tacular economic growth, and we can lay that the length and breadth of the Australian growth at the feet of many initiatives. But economy are suffering because of the benign one of the central features of the Irish eco- neglect by this government of very important nomic system and what you would call the areas of activity in education and training and modern economic miracle in Ireland has been research and development. The two indus- the emphasis the Irish nation has put on edu- tries which we are debating today fall into cation. That is not a focus that is shared in this category. They are innovative industries Australia under the policies of this govern- with considerable potential. That potential ment. We have seen a $2 billion reduction in will be realised in an economic sense only if innovation incentives that are being used to the levies raised are put to good purpose and, modernise Australian industry, and that is a if we go to the overall economy, the research tragedy. A lot of these programs—not only in and development effort in agriculture as well agriculture but elsewhere in the Australian as in other industries is maintained. economy—are designed to give us a cutting Let me reflect on the record of the Howard edge in an economic sense in a very com- government in this particular area. Over the petitive global environment. period this government has been in office, we A stocktake of the nation in these areas have seen a sustained attack on the research makes very depressing reading. I want to and development capacity of the nation and canvass some of the very poor statistics that on its educational and training capacity as Australia now has to own as an industrialised well. We have seen over $2 billion cut from nation wanting to compete in very competi- labour market programs that were aimed at tive global markets, and agriculture is no ex- skilling the Australian work force, making ception to that. For example, Commonwealth that work force more flexible and encourag- funding to universities fell as a percentage of ing those units of labour who have not been GDP from 0.94 per cent in 1996 to 0.82 per able to gain employment to gain employment cent just two years later. Most modern and work productively in the economy. We economies, most modern agricultural sys- have seen $3 billion cut from education. It is tems, have not seen this sort of drop in fund- one of the crowning indictments of this gov- ing to universities. We know that universities ernment that this policy has been pursued. It play a very critical role— is disturbing that the government members Mr Cadman—This is a levy bill! opposite are proud of it. They are proud of the fact that we have had a $3 billion cut to Mr O’CONNOR—The honourable mem- the education budget in this nation. ber for Mitchell was obviously not here when I foreshadowed a second reading amendment. Dr Stone—That is not true. If the honourable member wants to contest Mr O’CONNOR—The Parliamentary that fact, I will be quite happy to debate the Secretary to the Minister for the Environment issues. I know the honourable member knows and Heritage, who sits at the table, says that it very little about the agricultural sector. I 14716 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 know he is absolutely ignorant of the fact, but With these industries we are dealing with he might like to know that levies are raised in what the government euphemistically calls the deer and goat industries for research and the ‘unintended consequences’ of its own development. I am referring here to the im- legislation. Certainly the opposition does not portance of research and development not want to see these industries taxed unneces- only to these two particular industries but to sarily. We do not want to see the levy burden agriculture as a whole. If that is not relevant, on producers in the deer industry or the goat the honourable member for Mitchell can industry increased. So we are not going to contest the fact and I will be quite happy to oppose the legislation that is before us today. debate it. The statistics for Commonwealth But it is instructive to understand that the bill spending on science and innovation as a per- we are debating today is a consequence of the centage of GDP show that it is down from government’s GST legislation. The govern- 0.71 per cent to 0.64 per cent, again, in two ment had a long period to get this legislation years. The very basis of Australian agricul- right. In this instance it got it wrong. If this ture—its cutting edge—lies in science and in legislation is not passed, we are going to see innovation. We know this sector is very in- an increasing burden on some primary pro- novative; it has the capacity to develop new ducers which should not be there. products and processes and to grow substan- If we look at the application of the GST to tially. We know that that innovation comes the deer industry, to the goat industry, to beef, off the back of investment in science. We see to wool and to horticulture, the commitment overall in the Australian economy a very that was given by the government was that disturbing statistic, and that applies to agri- this was going to be a simple new taxation culture as well. system. The farmers these days are not get- The bill we are debating here today refers ting into the ute and loading it up with hay to to research and development. If we look at go out and feed the cows. They are telling the statistics on business expenditure on re- their sons and daughters, ‘Go out and clear search and development—and rural busi- the ute. I have to go in and see my accountant nesses are no exception to this—it rose and bring back a copy of the new tax sys- steadily from 0.33 per cent of GDP in 1985 to tem.’ This new ‘simplified’ tax system which 0.85 in 1996. You do not have to be an Ein- deer and goat producers now have to contend stein to work out those particular years: they with is extraordinary. occurred under a Labor government. But, if The GST legislation and the explanatory we now look at the last two years, it has memoranda are thousands of pages long. fallen two years in a row to 0.71 per cent to- They are thicker than three telephone books. day. We have to remember that this occurred They weigh in at 5.1 kilograms. We are al- when there has been an OECD average of 1.2 ready up to 1,026 amendments. The amend- per cent of GDP spent on research and devel- ments we are debating here today will be opment. The core of Australian agricultural added to that list. This is legislation that performance lies in research and develop- farmers are expected to come to terms with. ment. The statistics for the nation speak for The complexity of this legislation is breath- themselves, and that is repeated in agriculture taking. Farmers are having real difficulty in as well. Commonwealth spending on labour getting the answers they need to unravel this market programs is down from 0.4 per cent complexity. I am interested in what the ac- of GDP in 1996 to 0.32 per cent just two counting giant Arthur Andersen said in its years later. Whither knowledge, agriculture? submission to the GST inquiry: In the face of those statistics, one really won- The draft legislation as proposed is very complex ders where this government is going and and at times uses vague and imprecise language. whether it has any focus at all on the real, One thing that farmers do not like is vague substantial things that need to be done to en- and imprecise language. This is what Arthur courage investment in industries such as the Andersen had to say: deer industry and the goat industry in Aus- There are 67 pages of basic rules, which require a tralia. 28 page dictionary to apply, but these are im- Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14717 pacted by 30 pages of exemptions and 144 pages throughout the length and breadth of Austra- of special rules which are made even more diffi- lia, they are going to have to outlay signifi- cult by extensive cross-referencing to other acts. cant amounts of money to gear up for the Indeed, the draft legislation is far more complex introduction of this tax. Farm business are no than we were led to believe. different from any other small business and Try telling the farmers of Australia that this the demands on them are going to be the legislation is designed to make their lives a same. The farmers of Australia are going to lot simpler. Tell that to the goat and deer pro- become tax collectors for the Treasurer. The ducers in this country and they will laugh you Treasurer is foisting what we now know as off their properties. The government is hav- Costello’s curse on the sector and they are ing real difficulty in getting industry, includ- going to have to comply. In complying they ing farmers, to sign up for the administration will be up for thousands of dollars. That will of this new GST package. The Institute of be the cost of implementing the GST in their Chartered Accountants had this to say about industries. The purpose of the legislation be- the compliance burden. They were reflecting fore us today is to make sure that the burden on their own profession—deer farmers and is not increased in terms of the levies they goat farmers are going to be required to go to will pay. But I point out that there are some their accountants to get the sort of expert ad- burdens that goat producers and deer produc- vice to ensure that they are not disadvantaged ers, as well as other primary producers, will by this legislation: not be able to avoid—that is, those relating to There is a huge strain on the accounting profes- the costs associated with compliance. sion resulting from the massive number of com- The government is claiming massive bene- panies seeking advice on GST tax reform. fits to farmers as exporters of produce. We They are concerned that the demand for their know that 80 per cent of agricultural output is services far outweighs the supply. We are exported. The agriculture sector depends very importing accountants into this country to heavily on access to overseas markets, but cope with the deadlines that the government there are many primary producers throughout has on this legislation. Out in the bush, farm- the length and breadth of this country who ers are finding it extremely difficult, given produce goods for a domestic market. They the demands on their properties and the de- are not exporters and the government does mands on their accountants, to get the sort of not seem to have recognised them. advice that is necessary if they are going to One thing the government never talks effectively cope with the changes that are about is the impact of these measures on the being proposed in this legislation. costs to goat producers and deer producers, I referred to the complexity of the act itself as well as others in the rural sector. The gov- and the difficulty that farmers and other small ernment’s initial estimate was that the intro- businesses are going to have in coping with duction of the GST would add only 1.9 per this legislation and the ANTS package. But it cent to the pricing structures of the nation. is not a simple act. It is very complex. The The government later revised that to around honourable member for Rankin, in a debate three per cent. In the private sector, the gen- only last night, took us through the stupidity eral rule of thumb is that inflation, under this of this package as it applies to cow’s milk government, with the introduction of the and goat’s milk. I urge people to read that GST, will be ramped up by about five to six analysis by the member for Rankin. It was per cent. That will impact on the smaller rural quite a humorous account. But it is not so industries like the deer and goat industries. funny when farmers are called on to imple- But there are far more insidious develop- ment this, what you would call, pretty dopey ments in the pipeline. I want to allude to piece of legislation. these because the impact of the GST on the One of the impacts of the GST not only on inflation rate and on farm costs will be sub- deer farmers and goat producers but on all stantial. producers in the rural sector will be the cost Labor took 13 years of hard slog on the of compliance. Like other small businesses economic policy front to break the back of 14718 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 inflation in Australia. We were left double can see that there are several influences on digit inflation by the present Prime Minister. the inflation rate and also on interest rates. We were left with double digit unemploy- One thing we do know is that, where we have ment, double digit inflation and double digit this underlying pressure on the inflation rate, interest rates, and many other negative eco- we have a corresponding pressure on the nomic parameters. That is something the level of interest rates. I read in the Financial coalition does not want to hear. The great Review only today that the Governor of the architects of inflation in this country are the Reserve Bank is concerned about this prob- Liberal and National parties. It took us 13 lem. Comment by Alan Mitchell, under the years to exorcise it. We know the coalition headline ‘Macfarlane spurred by inflation does not like looking at and confronting the concern’, says that the Reserve Bank gover- facts, but these are the facts. It took us 13 nor is concerned about a surge in inflation in years to cut the Liberal inflation cancer out of the latter half of the year. As we know, there the Australian economy and we got it down are forces abroad that will put pressure on not to under two per cent. So what is the coali- only the inflation rate but also interest rates. tion going to do now? It is going to introduce We have seen interest rates in the United a policy initiative, a taxation reform, that will States increasing steadily and action taken by ramp up the inflation rate in the region of five their Central Bank to curb inflationary pres- to six per cent. If that is not dopey economic sures. We have seen that increase in interest policy I do not know what is. But it does not rates already and there are more projected by end there. In the economic pipeline are some the end of the year. things that might seem to be advantageous to We are going to see a rise in domestic de- the rural sector but, at the end of the day, they mand and, under certain economic condi- will impact heavily on inflation, in addition tions, this could lead to increasing pressure to the GST. on prices and, through that, interest rates. Of I refer here to the devaluation of the Aus- course, we have the domestic inflation pres- tralian dollar and the weakening of the cur- sures that are a direct result of the economic rency. Farmers know that there are some policies of this government putting pressure short-term benefits in this. Of course, a de- on inflation and, through that, pressure on valued dollar feeds into increased income for interest rates. There are two things that farm- many farmers under certain contractual ar- ers fear more than anything else: inflation rangements and circumstances. But there is a and interest rates. I know what the honour- more insidious influence and that is the way able members opposite are going to say, ‘Oh, in which a low dollar feeds into the inflation yes, when you were in government, you had rate of this country. At a time when we are double digit interest rates.’ Well, so did you. going to have a significant injection of in- You presided over double digit interest rates come into the income stream of the nation that affected the rural sector. You presided through measures that have been put in place over a double digit inflation rate that affected by this government, at a time when we can the rural sector. And, as for the sons and expect, if the current growth continues, a sig- daughters of farmers getting jobs in their own nificant pressure on demand, we will have communities or anywhere in the Australian the introduction of a GST which will feed in economy, you presided over double digit un- around five percentage points to the inflation employment. rate. Underlying that is going to be a move- These are things that the honourable mem- ment in the Australian currency which will bers opposite do not like to entertain or also impact on the inflation rate. countenance. Here we have two industries— What this adds up to for farmers is an in- two very small but growing and important flation rate well in excess of five and six per industries. They are export focused; they are cent which will feed into farm costs in a sub- growing, and they need to be encouraged. stantial way. This government rarely talks But in the piece of legislation we are debat- about the impact that its GST will have on ing today, there are a set of propositions to inflation and, through that, farm costs. We rectify the mistakes of government in imple- Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14719 menting this new tax package. This is a very title does give some opportunity for spread- complex piece of legislation and underlying ing the debate, that is acceptable, but I think it is very bad news for farmers and the rural we should all be aware that it is not appropri- sector. I can say to the honourable member ate to go totally wide of the mark. for Mitchell that they are waiting out there Mr CADMAN (Mitchell) (11.19 a.m.)— with baseball bats for you. On election night, So much for this being a very complex bill, we are going to sit back and we are going to as the previous speaker suggested. It is two watch seats fall that the coalition, especially half-pages. My friend, if you regard that— the National Party, never thought would fall, and I am sure you would agree— because of this government’s betrayal of farmers, not only in this particular package Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl)—I but in a whole lot of policy areas. When the am your friend, indeed, but you will address chickens come home to roost— your remarks through the chair. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl)— Mr CADMAN—Yes, Mr Deputy Speaker. Order! Before I advise the honourable I am sure that both you and the member for member for Corio that his time has expired, I Corio would feel that a bill that is comprised am fully conscious that he foreshadowed that of two half-pages could hardly be called a he would move an amendment. I am reliably complex measure. informed that the member has not yet done Mr Emerson—This is a complex bill! so. I will now give him the opportunity to Mr CADMAN—The distraction I will ig- move his amendment. nore. That distraction is exactly what the Mr O’CONNOR—In concluding my re- Deputy Speaker spoke about. We are not de- marks, I move: bating that whole measure. We are debating That all words after “That” be omitted with a two pages, my friend. If you are not prepared view to substituting the following words: to confine your remarks to the matter before the House, then you are incompetent. You are “whilst not declining to give the Bill a second reading, the House expresses its concern at the incompetent like the Leader of the Opposi- adverse impact the GST will have on the small tion. You are ruling out line by line, measure business and farm sectors, particularly the com- by measure, every option you have to reform pliance burden”. the tax system. You are here every day with Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER—Is the amendments for every piece of legislation amendment seconded? and taking every opportunity to have a go at the government’s tax reform. Mr Bevis—I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER—The member for Mitchell might confine his remarks to the Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER—Before I call bill as well. the next speaker, I wish to make a comment on the way the House appears to be going in Mr CADMAN—The amendment that has speaking to bills. Relevance has always been been moved is absolutely consistent with the raised in question time in regard to minister’s amendments moved to all other measures that answers, but the debate on this particular bill have come before the House this week. The so far has unfortunately been very wide opposition endeavours to divert the substance ranging indeed. I think all members of this of the debate to an attack on the govern- place should be aware that there is an obliga- ment’s tax reform system. I think that is in- tion to be relevant to the content of the bills appropriate. This is a two half-page measure before them at any time. This particular bill is that you should be prepared to deal with and quite specific. It concerns deer velvet and to debate. You have not spent the time to un- goat fibre. I am not going to be prescriptive derstand what the legislation does. You do on subsequent speakers because the debate not understand primary industry levies or has been wide ranging so far, but I think it is how they work. I am sure the whole opposi- in the interests of the House that we should tion does not understand the way in which all be aware that there is an obligation on the goods and services tax applies, nor do members to speak to the bills. Where the long you understand agricultural industries and 14720 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 nor do you understand whether they are gov- amongst themselves that they need to impose ernment imposed levies or whether they are a levy for research and development, as has industry imposed levies—that is, decisions been said, but also for promotion of the made by the industry across the nation. In product—would produce a $250 levy from this instance, we are dealing with just two the producer of the deer velvet to their asso- industries and it is a simple measure. We ciation. After 1 July things change because of need not spend long on it. We need not have the goods and services tax. What the gov- tirades about the problems that you see in the ernment has done is simple and easily under- goods and services tax. I say again: you are stood—because it is two half pages of legis- ruling out line by line, measure by measure, lation—nothing could be simpler. Anybody every option there is to change the tax sys- can read it, but evidently not the opposition. tem. After 1 July, of course, the price of that How would the Labor Party propose to $5,000 worth of deer velvet will grow to a deal with a broad based consumer tax as it sale price of $5,500. Growers have said, and applied to levies in primary industry? I have rightly so, that, if we put a levy on the not heard one argument about how you $5,500, we are putting a levy across the tax would cope with that. All we hear about is as well. So we would be asking growers to doom and gloom for primary industry, for the pay a grower levy on the 10 per cent goods farmers and the increases they are going to and services tax. That is completely inappro- have. I do not know, Mr Deputy Speaker, but priate, and the government has seen that I am sure that you, and many members of the problem. If the legislation were unchanged, government, have equipped yourself to un- that $5,000 that previously produced a $250 derstand the benefits to farmers in the pro- levy would produce a $275 levy. So that posed tax changes. would be a $25 difference. It is a levy on the GST, and so the government has said that, for Whether the levies are industry imposed or the sake of the goat hair and deer velvet in- government imposed, they have to be looked dustries, what it will encourage, what it will at as far as the goods and services tax is con- accept and what this legislation requires is cerned. One only has to refer to the schedule that the levy be struck on the GST-free prod- of the bill to understand precisely what is uct. So the $5,500 sale price, which is the implied by this measure. There is a very sim- price of the product plus the goods and serv- ple example given on deer velvet and goat ices tax, will be counted as being $5,000. It hair for these measures, because they are im- will be GST free for the purpose of the levy, portant export products. In fact, in my own and the levy will remain at $250. electorate I have a very significant producer Nothing could be easier, yet we received a of goat hair, a producer of cashmere. That great tirade today, an endeavour to frighten gentleman will be here to see me today or people about the changes that are coming. tomorrow, in fact, and is looking forward to a But we have such inconsistent views in the display of cashmere at the parliament. So opposition. What will you do with this thing? much for not understanding what the gov- It is going to come in on 1 July. These are the ernment does. Government members do un- changes that the government has proposed. derstand what this legislation is about. We This is a sensible change to industry levies. understand the significance of all sections of On 1 July, I wonder what the opposition will primary production, and we understand the do. Will they continue to oppose the goods advantages that are going to flow to primary and services tax, or are they going to roll industry from the changes in the whole of the over, like the member for Lilley? He said that tax regime. he will oppose it up until 30 June but that at The examples given in the schedule to the one minute past midnight on 1 July he will bill work this way: if, for instance, a producer accept it. I wonder what will be the attitude of deer velvet were to sell his velvet for, say, of the opposition towards our primary pro- $5,000, currently the five per cent industry ducers. They do not like being fooled around levy that would apply to that deer velvet—all with in the way that you are doing. They do producers of deer velvet have decided not like games being played with them. They Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14721 like people to be able to make a commitment, freshing and is therefore a refreshment. It is say what they are going to do and go ahead in order—it has happened on many occasions and do it. That is precisely what the govern- and will happen again—that members can ment has said it will do with these levies. display an object to expand and elucidate on I would like to stray slightly from the topic what they are saying. This has happened in to deal with levies on other primary produc- the past with Mr Barry Jones when he was a ers. I have had guidance from the tax office minister. The member for Hughes has dem- and from Treasury about whether or not the onstrated something that was not easily de- nursery industry imposed levy will be tax- scribed in words, and I have personally dis- able. The Treasurer has made determinations played photographs. However, I think every- on all levies, whether they be government body in Australia understands what a glass of imposed or industry imposed. Very few re- milk is, and therefore it is not necessary to quire specific legislation, but the government display a glass of milk to demonstrate what has seen the need in this instance to provide the member wants to speak about. I say to the support to the deer velvet and goat hair in- member for Rankin that he would be well dustries. It has proposed that the levy, for advised not to introduce refreshments into the industry purposes, be raised on GST-free chamber and not to conceal them. It is not prices for deer velvet and for goat hair. That really in order to display something that it is is a simple piece of legislation. It is practical. not necessary to display, such as a glass of Farmers can see, when they are doing their milk. bookkeeping on a monthly—or three- Mr EMERSON (Rankin) (11.31 a.m.)— monthly—basis just how they can apply the As the previous speaker said, the Primary In- levy and send off their cheque or the deduc- dustries (Excise) Levies (GST Consequential tions made by the industry itself; I do not Amendments) Bill 2000 does run to two know quite what the selling processes are of pages but, because it is an amendment bill, it those industries. If they sell centrally the is necessitated by this document, which is a seller will deduct the levy. If they sell as in- copy of the GST legislation. The GST legis- dividuals the growers themselves will for- lation is anything but a simple piece of leg- ward the levy. islation. The Treasurer has often said that the It is a very simple process, and one that GST legislation is a ‘streamlined new tax does not need a whole tirade about the so- system for a new century that replaces the called evils of the goods and services tax. 1930s Botswana style wholesale sales tax’. The goods and services tax will allow This ‘streamlined new tax system for a new changes that will be beneficial to farmers. It century’ runs to hundreds of pages. It is will bring down their costs. Exporters will be thicker than three telephone books. It weighs able to have a fairer go and be more com- more than 5.1 kilograms, and it already con- petitive in international markets. Fuel costs tains 1,026 amendments. The legislation on will change and fall as well. This is beneficial deer velvet and goat fibre that we are ad- to all primary producers, no matter what in- dressing here today is a consequential dustry in Australia they are in, including the amendment bill which, if it is possible, com- deer farmers and the goat farmers. plicates the GST legislation that much fur- Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl)— ther. Before I call the honourable member for Ran- In making my remarks, I wish to speak kin, I must say I have a sneaking suspicion both to the primary legislation before us and that he may have brought into the House a to the second reading amendment that has glass of milk, which by his actions I think he been proposed by the opposition. Just to re- acknowledges. If the member for Rankin mind members of parliament, that second consults House of Representatives Practice, reading amendment reads: he will find it is out of order to introduce into the chamber, or to consume in the chamber, ‘whilst not declining to give the Bill a second refreshments. I know that the dairy industry reading, the House expresses its concern at the would argue very strongly that milk is re- adverse impact the GST will have on the small 14722 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 business and farm sectors, particularly the com- legislation, calling for the government to re- pliance burden’. quire retailers to show the GST on dockets— We are talking about the burden that the GST that is, to fulfil the government’s com- legislation will impose on rural producers mitment that, by removing hidden taxes, they and other small businesses in Australia. will be introducing a transparent tax. But, no, Many of the small businesses in Australia are the government says, ‘We’re not going to do farms, as you well know, Mr Deputy Speaker. that. We do not want businesses to show the Therefore, it is entirely appropriate, and I GST on dockets.’ Why not? Because it would think illuminating, for us to have a debate be embarrassing for the government. It would about the impact of the GST on the paper- be informative for consumers but em- work burden on farms and the diversion of barrassing for the government, and that is farming activity into account keeping, be- why they do not want it shown. cause the compliance costs are going to be The never-ever man, the Prime Minister, very great indeed. who said he would never ever introduce a I draw the attention of the House to the GST, might reflect on this: if you never never original Regulation Impact Statement for the show, you will never never know. Our argu- introduction of a goods and services tax. It is ment is that the GST must be shown, other- now quite astonishing, with the benefit of just wise you will never ever know whether you a few months, to read over that document, no are paying the GST or not. This is a perfectly doubt produced by Treasury. It has in it some reasonable argument. It is an argument that quite remarkable statements. For example, on has been picked up by Coles Myer and by a page 4, it says: number of other retailers. On behalf of the The administrative burden for smaller firms with consumers of Australia, we would like other reasonable accounting practices will be minimal major retailers such as Woolworths and Big ... W to show the GST on dockets so that people So the government is claiming that the ad- know whether they are paying GST and, if ministrative burden of the GST on small so, how much. businesses, including on farming busi- The impact statement released by the gov- nesses—and that includes those which pro- ernment a few months ago, before this legis- duce deer velvet and goat fibre—will be lation was introduced, says: minimal. I will have something to say about The government estimates that recurrent gross that, because independent analysis shows that compliance costs of the GST are $1195 per firm. it is absolutely untrue. However, recurrent net compliance costs are much lower at $130 per firm. In relation to implementation costs for business, the impact statement goes on to They seriously want the small business say: community of Australia to believe that the compliance cost for small businesses is $130. However, these costs will be marginal in the case Well, wait—there’s more. Over the page the of well-managed businesses ... document says: I am sure that most farmers in Australia and As the compliance cost estimates are an average most small businesses would consider that figure, small businesses are likely to have even they are managing their businesses well, and smaller compliance costs. yet the Treasurer is saying that the impact of The government is saying the compliance the implementation costs of the GST will be costs for business, including deer velvet pro- marginal. The document goes on to say: ducers, are going to be less than $130 per The Government’s proposal for most goods and firm. How credible is that estimate? And the services to be taxed at 10 per cent will simplify total for the whole economy, estimated by the tax accounting arrangements for many businesses government, is $210 million. The govern- and increase the transparency of the tax to all con- ment and Treasury must be the only people sumers. who believe that, because if we go to some It is well known that Labor, on at least two independent and more reputable estimates, occasions, has moved an amendment to the we find that the compliance costs are going Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14723 to be much greater than less than $130 per is not $130, it is between $9,750 and firm. $19,428. Arthur Andersen—again, a reputa- Mr Cadman—Mr Deputy Speaker, I raise ble firm and a very large one—said to the a point of order. You rightly reminded me on Senate GST inquiry: a number of occasions that this is a levy bill We are deeply concerned that the Government’s dealing with the raising of a levy and the proposed $500 million compliance assistance GST on two industries alone. The bill is re- package is grossly inadequate, equating to ap- lated just to that narrow point. Could I draw proximately $300 each for the estimated 1.6 mil- your attention to the fact that the honourable lion taxpayers who will register for GST. member’s speech has nothing to do with the What is small business getting for this? If two industries. they are lucky, they may get a $200 voucher Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl)—I to cover compliance costs ranging between thank the honourable member for Mitchell. I $9,750 and $19,428. It is a scandal, it is an am very much aware of what is contained in insult to the small business community of the point of order. At the start of my time in this nation, and it is an insult to the farming this chair I did point out to the House that it community of this nation—including the had been a very wide-ranging debate, and I producers of deer velvet and goat fibre. encouraged members to stick to the subject of There has been a continuing saga in rela- the bill. I might say that I so encouraged the tion to the number of businesses that will be member for Mitchell as well, but he too required to register for the GST. The esti- transgressed. So I think, in the interests of mates change on an almost daily basis. In the consistency and being even-handed, I have to same impact statement, the government esti- allow the member for Rankin to go more mated the number of businesses that would widely than he should. I again remind the need to register for the GST at 1.4 million in House that while it has been a wide-ranging the first year. That was just a few months debate, members do have an obligation to ago. Subsequently, another impact statement speak to the contents of the bill. was released, and that was after the deal was Mr EMERSON—The member opposite done between the Democrats and the gov- should appreciate that I am being entirely ernment which exempted some food items. relevant to the second reading amendment, of Therefore, a new estimate needed to be pro- which he is obviously unaware. For his bene- vided on the number of businesses that would fit, I will read, yet again, the second reading be required to register for the GST. Surpris- ingly, the estimate is the same: 1.4 million. amendment: That was beyond the middle of last year, yet whilst not declining to give the Bill a second in response to a question asked of the Treas- reading, the House expresses its concern at the urer by the shadow Treasurer in relation to adverse impact the GST will have on the small business and farm sectors, particularly the com- the number of businesses, on 23 November pliance burden. last year, the Treasurer said: The compliance burden on small business is The figure for the number of GST registrations precisely what I am referring to. The Victo- estimated for the first year of operation has been rian Employers Chamber of Commerce and revised to 1,500,000 registrations and the number Industry estimates the GST start-up costs for is expected to grow by about 300,000 in the fol- lowing year. small businesses at $3,500 and 80 working hours. International accounting firm Ernst So we went from 1,400,000 to 1,500,000 in a and Young has conducted a study which es- matter of months, but the pace of revision timates that small businesses face costs of accelerated. In an article in the Australian between $9,750 and $19,428 to comply with Financial Review on 26 November last year, the GST. I invite the House to compare that Mr Matthews of the Taxation Office said: with the estimate released by the Treasury of Of the 2 million businesses expected to register less than $130 per small business. Here we for the GST, less than 5,000 taxpayers would be have a reputable study by an international affected by the wine equalisation tax and luxury accounting firm, Ernst and Young, saying it car tax. 14724 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

So the estimate went very rapidly from 1.5 is, of course, that ensuring practical compliance million businesses to two million businesses. by businesses in these circumstances is impossi- An article in the weekend edition of the Aus- ble. tralian Financial Review of 26-27 February The primary industries legislation to which this year stated: we are speaking deals with producers of goat The Tax Commissioner, Mr Michael Carmody, on fibre. Producers of goat fibre are also likely Tuesday revealed that about 85 per cent of the to be producers of goat milk. I would like to estimated 2.5 million eligible businesses had not draw the attention of the House to the com- registered for the GST. plexity of the arrangements for the applica- So over a period of a few months, the official tion of the GST to goat’s milk and cow’s estimate of the number of businesses that milk. At present, milk has no wholesale sales would be required to register for the GST has tax. I think that is a fairly simple tax treat- gone up from 1.4 million to 2.5 million. That ment. But, in moving from this tax treatment is another 1.1 million businesses. So we are to the GST, some milk will have the GST in this mad scramble to get GST registra- imposed and some will not. It all depends on tions, under threat from the Treasurer that if whether it is processed or unprocessed, plain you have not registered by 1 July and you or flavoured or from a cow or a goat. Un- have not applied by 31 May then you are op- processed cow’s milk sold by a farmer is erating in the black economy and will be hit subject to the GST but, for reasons best with a withholding tax of 48.5 per cent. So known to themselves, the government have much for estimates for the compliance bur- decreed that unprocessed goat’s milk is GST den of the GST of $130. It is quite clear that free. So unprocessed cow’s milk attracts the there will be an incredible burden on small GST and unprocessed goat’s milk is GST business, and an even greater burden on those free—and this is the simplified, streamlined small businesses who have to join the mas- new tax system for a new century! Processed sive queues to apply for GST registration cow’s milk is GST free except if it is fla- with the tax office. There will be a massive voured; in which case it attracts the GST. If burden for those if they do not get registered the milk is used to make cream, the cream by 1 July because they will be considered to will be GST free. But, if the milk is used to be tax cheats and will be hit by a 48½ per make ice-cream, the ice-cream will be subject cent withholding tax. to the GST. And I have no idea what the GST This is supposed to be a streamlined new treatment would be if goat’s milk is used to tax system for a new century. Nothing could make cheese. be further from the truth. I will refer to some The A New Tax System (Goods and Serv- examples of the complexity of this legisla- ices Tax) Act 1999 is the major piece of leg- tion. In a major speech before this legislation islation to which this is a consequential was introduced, the tax commissioner said to amendment bill. At section 38-4 the act de- the National Convention of the Taxation In- fines food. It says, ‘What is the meaning of stitute of Australia on 24 March last year in food?’—a little bit like ‘What is the meaning Tasmania: of life?’ It says: Non-compliance is inevitable. In the UK, fish and (1) Food means any of these, or any combination chip shops selling both fresh and cooked fish typi- of any of these: cally report that 30% of their sales are cooked fish (a) food for human consumption (whether or not (taxable) and 70% are fresh (tax-free). Anecdotal requiring processing or treatment); reports indicate the reverse is closer to the truth. (b) ingredients for food for human consumption; 70% cooked and taxable and 30% fresh and tax- * free. (c) beverages… He went on to say: ‘Beverages’ relates to beverages for human consumption. And then it goes on with other I also imagine that fish and chip shop owners don’t particularly like the VATman standing in the definitions. So, if beverages are purchased, business all day to observe the true picture—but including milk, for human consumption, un- that is the only viable type of compliance check der the legislation they are GST free. But, if where distinctions on food are made. The reality that milk is not purchased for human con- Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14725 sumption but is in fact purchased for my cat, effective and less complex. This is the type of then presumably the GST applies, because reform that the Labor opposition is against milk must be purchased with the intention of and we have certainly had a wide ranging being for human consumption. debate on this particular bill. The main ele- If I go into a supermarket and buy some ments of the new tax system package include milk for my cat and the VATman is standing the removal of the wholesale sales tax and there—just as the taxation commissioner the introduction of a 10 per cent GST that warned that the VATman will be in the fish will reduce business costs for rural indus- and shop, he will be in the supermarket too— tries—and, having been a member of rural and he stops me in the aisle after I have industries and having been living in a rural grabbed my litre of milk and he asks, ‘What area, I understand that. This is because the is your intention when purchasing this milk, wholesale sales tax is embedded in the prices Mr Emerson?’— of inputs used for farmers. Furthermore, combining the effect of the GST-free treat- Mr Latham—Where is the milk? ment for exports and the reduction in busi- Mr EMERSON—The milk is just here, ness input costs will improve the interna- but I will not drink the milk because I have tional competitiveness and profitability of been asked not to—and this particular milk is rural industries as about 80 per cent of pri- designed for the cat. If I say to the VATman mary production is exported. that I have purchased the milk for my own The bill before the House is to amend the use but, in fact, I have purchased the milk to Primary Industries (Excise) Levies Act 1999. give to my cat, then I have committed an act If enacted, the bill will exclude the goods and of tax avoidance. Therefore I would be sub- services tax from the base for calculating the ject to section 165.55 of the GST legislation deer velvet and goat fibre levies. This bill is which states: to prevent the unintentional increase of the For the purposes of making a declaration under two primary industry levies arising from the this Subdivision, the Commissioner may: introduction of the GST and to clarify the (a) treat a particular event that actually happened meanings of the terms ‘price’ and ‘amount as not having happened; and paid’ in the Primary Industries (Excise) Lev- (b) treat a particular event that did not actually ies Act 1999. Following the introduction of happen as having happened and, if appropriate, the GST, some primary industry levies that treat the event as: are calculated on the basis of ‘price’ or (i) having happened at a particular time; and ‘amount paid’ would rise because the base for (ii) having involved particular action by a par- the calculations of the levies would include ticular entity; GST. The deer velvet levy and the goat fibre If my cat drinks this milk I am a tax avoider levy require amendment to ensure that the and the VATman will get me. (Time expired) amount of levy does not unintentionally in- crease as the base increases. Mr ST CLAIR (New England) (11.51 a.m.)—What an enlightening discussion that The following hypothetical situation dem- was from the member for Rankin. Maybe in onstrates the rationale behind these important his suburb of Brisbane he could put a cow in amendments. A deer producer sells $5,000 his backyard and use the milk from that. I worth of deer velvet. Currently the five per rise to support the Primary Industries (Ex- cent levy on that sale would total $250. After cise) Levies (GST Consequential Amend- 1 July this year the producer sells the same ments) Bill 2000. Primary producers will be amount of deer velvet for $5,500, assuming the winners under the indirect tax and associ- of course that there is no adjustment to the ated reforms of the A New Tax System pack- cost base and profit margin, and remits $500 age. The tax system package will support in GST to the Australian Taxation Office. If stronger sustainable growth, higher produc- the Primary Industries (Excise) Levies Act tivity, more jobs and rising living standards. 1999 were not changed, the levy on the sale The reforms will achieve a tax system that is would be $275, as it would be calculated at fairer, more internationally competitive, more the rate of five per cent on the $5,500. The 14726 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 same principle will be extended to 12 other dollars a year. This means that farmers will levies through amendments to the appropriate have an extra billion dollars a year to spend regulations. These amendments have a in regional and rural Australia. This govern- precedent in the A New Tax System (Indirect ment has delivered to the people of Australia Tax and Consequential Amendments) Act $12 billion in personal income tax cuts. Let (No. 2) 1999, which amended the Wool Tax me give you an example of what that really Administration Act 1964. The wool tax is means to the average working people. Take a also calculated as a percentage of the sale single income family with two children—a price of wool and the amendments passed by daughter aged seven and a son aged three— parliament have excluded the GST from the where the father works full time and has an base for calculating this tax. The bill provides income of $40,000 a year. In addition to his a similar intent for the deer velvet and goat tax cuts of $27.27 a week, the family is better fibre levies. off by a further $20.30 a week through in- It is important to look at the other benefits creased family package benefits. This means of the new tax system for farmers. While we a total benefit to that family of $47.57 per are on that subject, I note the fact that the week. Labor Party voted against a reduction in the Let me give you another example, because excise on diesel of 23c a litre for road trans- I know the member for Paterson would really port. It also voted against a reduction of 36c a like to hear this one. This is an example of a litre in the excise on diesel used in rail trans- two-income family with three children—one port. That also reminds me of the fact that, in aged two, one aged six and the other 11. Both the lead-up to the 1993 election, the then parents work full time and have a combined Prime Minister, Paul Keating, said, ‘What I annual income of $50,000 a year. In addition am promising is not to put up tax.’ I would to tax cuts of $27.18 per week, the family like to give honourable members of the also gains a further $8.06 a week through House an example of what happened between increased family package benefits, and that 1993 and 1996. Petrol excise increased three makes a total of $35.24 a week. It is substan- times—300 per cent. Fringe benefits tax in- tial. creased three times. More than 80 per cent of all Australians Mr Horne—Is that 300 per cent for pet- earn less than $50,000 a year. Depending on rol? Are you sure that is 300 per cent? their income, their tax rate could be up to 43 Mr ST CLAIR—The Medicare levy—for cents in the dollar under the current tax sys- the member for Paterson because I am sure tem. Under the new tax system, these taxpay- he is vitally interested—went from 1.4 per ers will pay no more than 30 cents in the cent to 1.5 per cent. Company tax increased dollar. It was 43 cents—it will be down to 30 from 33 per cent to 36 per cent, as I am sure cents in the dollar. These workers will be able the shadow minister for small business, who to earn more income without paying higher is sitting at the table, would be more than taxes; therefore, effort will be rewarded. aware. Sales tax, that iniquitous tax that the Primary producers also benefit from these Labor Party had in, on passenger cars in- personal income tax cuts. Seventy per cent of creased from 16 per cent to 21 per cent. primary producers are currently taxed at the marginal rate of 20 per cent. They will bene- Mr Forrest—What? fit from the increase in the tax-free threshold Mr ST CLAIR—From 16 per cent—for from $5,400 to $6,000 and a reduction in the the member for Mallee—to 21 per cent. De- marginal tax rate to 17 per cent. Rural fami- parture tax—and we must remember that it lies will benefit from the abolition of the as- was Paul Keating who said in 1993 there sets test on family allowance. Youth allow- would be no increase in tax—increased from ance will be extended to cover dependent $20 to $25 and sales tax on wine and cider students of up to 25 years of age, and rate of increased in three stages. The Anderson- assistance for those aged 18 years and over Howard government’s new tax system will will be increased to $50 per fortnight. Pen- reduce the cost to farmers by nearly a billion sioners will also receive an increase in their Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14727 allowances and benefits. Their allowances mated that the grains industry alone will save and their benefits will increase by four per around $30 million annually as a result of the cent on 1 July 2000—a two per cent real in- reduction in rail costs. crease. This increase will be paid on top of I would like to reflect again on what the the existing requirement to maintain pensions Labor Party has done to taxes in this country. at no less than 25 per cent of male total aver- The period from 1983 to 1996 is an extraor- age weekly earnings and will be indexed to dinary period, especially when viewed in the maintain its real value. middle of these sorts of debates, at a time However, the biggest benefit to farmers when this government is reducing personal that could come from the new tax system is income tax, increasing pensions and reducing to reduce the burden on the transport indus- the cost of fuel. The federal Labor Party be- try. Remember, the Labor Party voted against tween 1983 and 1996 increased the total tax the truckies receiving a 23c a litre reduction revenue for this nation from $41 billion to in excise on diesel. Every 1c a litre reduction over $119 billion. It increased its spending— in the excise saves the industry about $115 the Labor Party is renowned for increasing its million in this nation. Without doubt, this spending—from $49 billion to $124 billion. will lead to huge savings for farmers. The member for Paterson will be vitally in- Mr Fitzgibbon—Tell us what is happen- terested to know that it increased the fuel ing with petrol prices. excise tax revenue—this is a good one—by 655 per cent. And what we have done is to Mr ST CLAIR—It is interesting that the reduce the excise on diesel by 23c a litre. member for Hunter interjects, thinking of all the trucks that operate in his electorate, that It actually cut road funding by 46 per cent go in and out towards the city. The member in real terms. It increased sales tax revenue for Hunter, together with his Labor Party by 306 per cent. It allowed rural debt—this is colleagues, voted against the reduction of 23c a good one, Madam Deputy Speaker, par- a litre in the excise on diesel. The decrease in ticularly for us in the country—to increase costs for farmers is certainly going to be wel- from $7 billion to $17 billion. It failed to get comed in my area of New England, particu- youth unemployment below 20 per cent since larly by those who move the stock and the August 1990. It allowed 10,000 farmers to products for the farms. These cuts to costs quit their land. It allowed an average inflation apply to both the on-road users and the rail rate of 5.2 per cent. I was interested to hear industry. For on-road users, the diesel grants the member for Rankin talking about milk will reduce the cost of transport for all vehi- and his passion for milk and its availability. cles over 4½ tonnes in gross vehicle mass Did you know, Madam Deputy Speaker, that that operate within or service regional Aus- the Labor Party introduced sales tax on food tralia. What a pity it was not over 1 tonne! products? It actually introduced sales tax on The Labor Party could have supported that food products, including flavoured milk, and we would have seen a 23c a litre reduc- chocolate and health food bars. Most impor- tion in the excise for diesel for all the one- tantly, the Labor Party government intro- tonne and above utes that operate in regional duced a sales tax on fruit juices. It is amaz- and rural areas. The diesel fuel grants, to- ing. gether with the GST input tax credits, will I get back to the bill because I know eve- reduce the cost of diesel by around that ryone is vitally interested, although it is well 23c—it may even be a touch more. and truly a broad-ranging discussion that is The excise for rail will fall, as I men- being held today. This bill is important, as it tioned, from 36c a litre to zero after the full will prevent an unnecessary increase for deer rebate of excise. Keep in mind that the Labor velvet and goat fibre producers. This bill is of Party voted against the reduction of 36c per technical nature designed to correct an unin- litre in the excise for rail. We have been able tended consequence of the definitions listed to achieve the result of falling transport costs in A New Tax System (Goods and Services for bulk commodities such as wheat, cotton, Tax) Act. It is very important. The bill is of a livestock and fertilisers. The NFF has esti- technical nature and is designed to correct an 14728 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 unintended consequence of the definitions of sources of this parliament have to be devoted the act applying to other Commonwealth to debating the issue. It is an unintended con- acts. These producers will also receive the sequence of the GST legislation that goes to full benefits of the new tax system package talking about deer velvet and goat fibre, but which I have spoken about. did I hear the member for New England I do not want to hold the debate up. In really talk about those industries? Not one closing, I just want to mention a couple of jot. Did he talk about the other 12 areas of other things that I think it is important to primary industry that are going to be affected know. In 1989 home loan interest rates were by this legislation and that now can be simply 17 per cent. Who was in government at the amended? No, he did not talk about that. He time? The Labor Party was in government in got straight on to the old issues that those 1989, and they allowed interest rates for opposite like to get out there and brainwash houses to go to 17 per cent. the people on. How many times have we heard the Treasurer come into this House and Mr Fitzgibbon—It was isolated to Aus- describe the new tax system as a simple tax tralia, was it? system? How many times has he described it Mr ST CLAIR—But what is more im- as a single tax to replace a number of taxes? portant, particularly for the member for And how many times has he told the people Hunter, because he is the shadow minister for of Australia that there will not be a tax on a small business, was the interest rate on small tax? What we are debating today is really a business loans in 1989. What were small bus- tax on a tax. It is a tax on a levy, and it was iness loans at in 1989? They were up to 25 merely an unintended consequence by the per cent. Treasurer, but we have to debate it and pass The good thing about being part of the legislation so that there will not be a tax on government is seeing these sorts of things de- the levy, which is really a tax. livered. It is great, because we are actually Mr Fitzgibbon—He should do the same delivering. I want to remind the House, and on petrol. those who listen to these broadcasts or read Mr HORNE—Exactly. He should do the these matters in Hansard, that before the same on a number of things. We have been 1993 election Labor promised those l-a-w reminded many times by the Treasurer that law tax cuts. Remember the ones: the l-a-w Australia is not Botswana or Swaziland. This law tax cuts, with Paul Keating saying they is Australia on the brink of a new millen- were enshrined in law. They were never de- nium, and we are debating this issue because livered. The one thing about this government our consummately confident Treasurer got it is that it delivers. It delivers income tax cuts, wrong again. It was an unintended conse- it delivers a reduction in excise on fuel and it quence. And we are advised that another 12 increases pensions by four per cent. What we primary industry levies could similarly in- are doing is to provide a system that rewards crease as a result of the GST. However, as a effort. I commend the bill to the House. result of this legislation, which we will sup- Mr HORNE (Paterson) (12.11 p.m.)—I port, they can now be altered by regulation think this debate on the Primary Industries and they will not need legislation. But today (Excise) Levies (GST Consequential Amend- is not about deer velvet and it is not about ments) Bill 2000 has been described as wide goat fibre; it is about a government that has ranging, and there is no doubt it is. I just had raced headlong into tax reform without doing a look through the ministerial list to see who its homework. is the minister for propaganda. I cannot see This tax, which we were promised would one there, but he is obviously active behind be simple, is turning out to be a nightmare in the scenes, because that speech came directly rural Australia. Only today we have seen re- from his department. Let me just say that ported in the newspapers that 40,000 busi- today is not about goat fibre and deer velvet. ness people in Australia have been refused an Today is about an unintended consequence Australian business number. I wonder by the Treasurer, and the whole of the re- whether the minister at the table, the Minister Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14729 for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, could of them. They are going to have to collect tell me how many of those small businesses that money free, gratis, for nothing. Firstly, would be in the primary industry sector. I they are going to have to determine which dare say many of them will be. He knows cattle are eligible to charge the GST on and it that many of them will be and that many pri- will have to be added on. Then it will have to mary producers out there will not go past the be collected from the purchaser and passed $50,000 threshold. He knows that they will on to the Australian Taxation Office. How not get an ABN, that they will not be able to much compensation do they get for that? claim back their GST inputs and that they Nothing. If they get it wrong, what will hap- will be paying tax at the 48.3 per cent mar- pen? I dare say there will be something hid- ginal rate. He knows that as well as I do. The den in the legislation that will tell us the pen- minister also knows that, come 1 July, there alty for that. will be a new form of chaos in every saleyard We are not talking about an insignificant around this country. amount of money. At the regional sales in I attend sales regularly. I like to think that Maitland, particularly a Saturday sale where some of my cattle do pretty well. I pride my- store cattle are sold, total sales could be in self on the quality of my cattle. People on the the order of a couple of million dollars. On a other side think it is strange that someone in Monday at the fats it could be the same. So the Labor Party might also be a farmer, but I we are talking about $200,000 in GST—all am very proud of that. I can read and I can the responsibility of the stock and station count and, as a result of that, I talk to many agents to pass on to the tax office for that primary producers. I tell you what: wait until fabulous payment of nothing. And you won- 1 July. Go to the very first cattle or sheep sale der why rural Australia is having a nightmare in your area after 1 July and watch how many about the GST. It is all very well for the people are sitting on their hands, not daring member for New England to come in here to send cattle or sheep for sale. They will not and talk about the reduction in diesel excise. do it because they know that different sorts of The thing is we do not know whether it is producers are going to be treated differen- going to be passed on. The minister and the tially. They may have the exact same product. Deputy Prime Minister in particular have They can send along a pen of heifers, but been holding out reduced transportation costs because they do not have an ABN, because to people in rural Australia. They know that they have not reached the $50,000 threshold, already that has been blown out of the water there will be no GST on their cattle. On the because the price of crude oil has gone to $32 other hand, a large producer might have a pen a barrel, the Australian dollar has dipped and of virtually identical cattle right next door, people are now paying prices for fuel which but because they will be attracting a GST, they did not dream would be possible. The when they go under the hammer, how are reduction of the excise is going to bring it they going to be treated? Small producers’ down only to the price they were paying two cattle, no GST; large producers’, GST. or three years ago and you cannot guarantee The minister will say, ‘Okay, the purchaser that one cent in saving from a transport com- can apply to get the GST back through GST pany will be passed on to the consumer. inputs.’ I know a few buyers who would have These are the issues that the government re- an account in excess of $1 million a month. fuses to stand and debate—the real issues. One million dollars a month at 10 per cent We often hear from the Treasurer about GST is $100,000. At current market rates, Swaziland and Botswana. They do not have that is a lot of steers, that is a lot of money this system. I cannot imagine a stock and tied up, a lot of money being held on behalf station agent in Swaziland or Botswana, but of the government, money which is not pro- if I could go and make contact with a few of ducing a cent for the dealer. Let us talk about them and I described our proposed tax system how this money is going to be collected. to them, telling them how simple it was sup- Stock and station agents are very generous posed to be and how it was one tax replacing people. I have a good relationship with a few a number of taxes, I bet they would say, 14730 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

‘Please, whatever you do, don’t bring it here. South Wales disappear. It is probably going Don’t let us have that system. Please don’t. to see the dairy industry in my immediate We don’t pay tax on our cattle sales now.’ area simply vanish. Even if people want to Essentially, as I said, this debate is about deer stay in it, the local government and the state velvet and goat fibre. Maybe the minister, planning laws will not allow them to enlarge when he is summing up, can tell us which their farm so that they can be big enough to components of the beast after slaughter will be competitive. What has the minister done attract GST and which will not. I believe the about replacing that? Nothing. He has done hide is GST liable, the hooves and the offal nothing about replacing that industry and are GST liable, but the carcass is not. If the replacing those workers and replacing those carcass is boned out, then the bones are GST people and ensuring that the country towns liable, and so it moves on. A simple tax! I that are dotted around coastal New South think not. Wales continue to flourish. He knows that If we go over to the fruit industry, what do with the passing of that industry goes the we find? We find that good, wholesome fruit passing of services—the banks, the small is GST free. But once it starts to spoil? Go to shops and the postal services that will no any of your local produce markets and see longer be viable. He knows that that industry what the agents do with the spoiled fruit. was vital to many areas and that the $1.7 bil- They sell it off to other sorts of producers to lion he put on the table before the debate turn into pig food and so on. Guess what? As about deregulation really started was only a soon as it gets a spot on it or starts to go rot- bribe to make them go. ten, it is GST liable. While it is in perfect I previously spoke about the reduction in condition, there is no GST, but once it starts diesel excise. This is the sort of thing that the to off and is no longer there for human con- minister and the Deputy Prime Minister keep sumption it is GST liable. coming into this house and batting us over Mr Truss—Rubbish! the head with. I put it to you, Minister, that last year an abattoir at Aberdeen closed, es- Mr HORNE—Yes, rubbish is GST liable sentially because Australian Meat Holdings, too. If you can make money out of rubbish by which is a wholly American owned com- converting it into something else, you will pany— pay GST on rubbish too. We have heard this described as a nightmare on main street. The Mr Truss—Madam Deputy Speaker, I rise minister at the table, the Minister for Agri- on a point of order. This is a bill about deer culture, Fisheries and Forestry, knows that velvet and goats. How can these comments out in rural Australia this is a nightmare in by the honourable member for Paterson be the long paddock, it is a nightmare in the relevant to the subject under discussion? He saleyards, it is a nightmare in the shearing has ranged on to the dairy industry, and now sheds—it is a nightmare in every facet of he has got on to abattoirs and diesel tax. I do rural life. And every time our Treasurer in- not think that has anything to do with the troduces a piece of legislation such as this matters before the House. ‘unintended consequence’, another ghost ap- Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mrs De- pears in that nightmare. How many more Anne Kelly)—Other Speakers have allowed before 1 July? How many other unintended a wide-ranging debate on both sides of the consequences will the Treasurer come in here House. The point of order is overruled. with and use all the resources of this House to change the legislation that he continues to Mr HORNE—Thank you Madam Deputy describe as a simplified tax system—a sim- Speaker. Minister, if you have a look at what plified tax system that is going to drive more we are debating—the second reading people out of the rural industry than any sin- amendment—the second reading amendment gle issue since the Second World War? The says: minister knows that. He presided over the whilst not declining to give the Bill a second dairy legislation last week that alone is going reading, the House expresses its concern at the to see 600 dairy farmers in my state of New adverse impact the GST will have on the small Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14731 business and farm sectors, particularly the com- the amount of money that it needs to buy out pliance burden. the dairy farmers for the compensation pack- With respect to the abattoir that closed, that age. It was a wholesale sales tax. So we have does not mean the beef producers of the the Treasurer saying that we have a single tax Hunter Valley have stopped producing beef. to replace all taxes. We have this special It does mean, however, that there is an added piece of legislation today because he made an burden because producers that formerly sent error. He is not in here debating it. He gets their stock directly to the Aberdeen abattoir his underlings to come in here and debate it. are now paying around $80 a head to send It does not matter how much the minister them to Dinmore. That is a burden they did postulates. He knows how badly this tax is not previously have. being received in rural Australia. Mr Fitzgibbon—That’s in Queensland, Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mrs De- isn’t it? Anne Kelly)—The original question was that Mr HORNE—That is in Queensland; it is this bill be now read a second time. To this up in Ipswich. It is a burden they did not pre- the honourable member for Corio has moved viously have. I do not care how much you as an amendment that all words after ‘that’ be reduce the diesel excise, they will still be omitted with a view to substituting other behind the eight ball and there will still be a words. The immediate question is that the negative effect on those producers caused by words proposed to be omitted stand part of the legislation passed by this government. the question. You can come in here and champion rural Mr TRUSS (Wide Bay—Minister for Ag- Australia all you like. I live in rural Australia; riculture, Fisheries and Forestry) (12.31 I know that Madam Deputy Speaker lives in p.m.)—Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, rural Australia. I know of the concern in rural for that history of this debate. It may draw Australia over this legislation, over the GST, the attention of the House to the fact that this over fuel prices, over the lack of Telstra bill, the Primary Industries (Excise) Levies services, over the lack of health services, (GST Consequential Amendments) Bill 2000, over the lack of education services and over is actually about deer velvet and goat fibre the cuts that have been made over four years levies. Debate has certainly ranged over a by this government. This farcical piece of wide range of subjects. The honourable legislation does nothing to assist that. I con- member for Paterson, who has quickly scur- tacted the Parliamentary Library today and I ried from the table, rather than hear the facts asked them if they could tell me the increase in response to his tirade of abuse, is desper- in GDP in Botswana and Swaziland last year. ately attempting to scaremonger about the Dr Kemp—The member for Botswana! new tax system—a new tax system which he knows will deliver $1 billion of savings to Mr HORNE—You keep knocking Bot- farmers and therefore provide significant swana. I hope that we get a delegation one benefits to his own constituents as well as to day from Swaziland. I bet the Treasurer will other people in rural and regional Australia. not want to meet them. But it is interesting to note that the GDP in Botswana increased last He raised a number of specific issues year by 6.9 per cent. It is also interesting to which have nothing whatever to do with this note that GDP in Swaziland increased by bill, but to which I feel I must respond. His about the same as Australia’s, that is, 3.7 per suggestion that somehow or other this gov- cent. Let the Treasurer keep getting up and ernment was bribing the states into dairy de- batting us over the head with the fact that regulation is clearly a nonsense. The dairy Swaziland and Botswana continue to have a deregulation is legislation being introduced wholesale sales tax. By the way, it was a by the various states, including his own state wholesale sales tax exactly like the one the Labor government in New South Wales. It is minister at the table put on milk last week— Richard Amery who will be introducing the the 11c a litre that was not a consumption tax. legislation to deregulate dairying in that state, It was a wholesale sales tax. It was put on not the federal government. It will be the there to provide this federal government with other Labor state agriculture ministers around 14732 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

Australia who will be introducing the legis- cover the opposition’s complete lack of ef- lation to deregulate. The federal government fective response to the need for tax reform in has responded to the self-evident fact that Australia, are empty issues. The opposition deregulation will significantly reduce dairy have used a comparatively insignificant piece incomes and will create considerable pain of legislation as a forum to rerun all of their and hardship, for both dairy farmers and their tired old arguments about the GST and to communities. So the levy has been intro- defend the economies of Botswana and Swa- duced to help fund some assistance to enable ziland rather than address the real issues of dairy farmers and their industry to adjust to the need for tax reform in this country. This the different circumstances. bill before the House is not a GST bill but a He also made some comments and en- bill about amending the base on which levy deavoured to suggest that there was going to payments for two primary industry excise be great confusion in saleyards on 1 July levies are calculated. It is necessary to ensure when the GST is introduced. Farm organisa- that the GST does not result in higher levies tions, auctioneers and buyers have been being paid than was originally intended. It is working very cooperatively on putting in not a mistake or an accident or anything else, place what will, I think, develop into a com- as has been suggested by opposition speakers mon system which will apply to cattle auc- on the bill. It is a fact that these levies are in tions around Australia. The legislation en- place and the way to calculate them needs to ables auctions to occur either GST inclu- be adjusted in accordance with the new tax sively or exclusively. But there seems to be a system arrangements. It is important for deer unanimity within the cattle industry that auc- velvet and goat fibre producers. tions should occur GST exclusive, with the Whilst this bill will directly affect those GST being added after the knock-down. So two levies, a further 12 primary industry ex- there will be no confusion about whether one cise levies and national residue survey levies or two of the vendors happen to not have an will be amended under the same principle ABN number or the like. The auction will that is being legislated in this bill through occur in exactly the same way and all cattle changes to the regulations. These levies are will be treated equally in the saleyards. not included in the bill, as the relevant sched- In relation to an alleged cost burden for ules in the Primary Industries (Excise) Levies auctioneers and agents, in administering the Act 1999 and the National Residue Survey tax system there will be some costs associ- (Excise) Levy Act 1998 used the term ated with administering the new GST but ‘value’, which is defined in the GST act as an they will be significantly offset by savings amount exclusive of GST. However, with the and getting rid of other taxes. In addition, the regulations for these levies defining value as honourable member referred to a cash flow of sale price, each individual regulation will be $200,000 that he said would have to be re- amended to indicate that the sale price is net mitted by a particular agent. That agent has of any GST. the benefit of using that $200,000 while he Amendments to the wool tax, passed by waits for the day when it must be remitted to parliament under the A New Tax System (In- the government. So there will be significant direct Tax and Consequential Amendments) cash flow advantages to auctioneers and Bill (No. 2) 1999, provided a precedent for agents. They get to keep the interest that is this bill. The wool tax is also calculated as a earned on that money. So the benefits to percentage of the sale price and the amend- agents and auctioneers will be significant ments passed by parliament last year ex- through the cash flow effects of the GST. Of cluded the GST from calculating this tax. course, auctioneers and agents trading prof- This bill achieves a similar outcome for the itably get the benefit of the income tax cuts deer velvet and goat fibre levies. The bill will and the other benefits that the new tax system assist the deer velvet and goat fibre industries provides. by maintaining their levies at the same level So those extraneous issues, which were after 1 July 2000 as would have occurred raised in the debate as a smokescreen to prior to that date. Whilst the opposition has Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14733 moved an amendment not closely related to vate health insurance rebate legislation. All this legislation, which we will obviously op- health funds are required to offer at least one pose, I welcome its support for the substance no-gap or known-gap scheme by 1 July 2000 of the legislation and commend the bill to all if they are to retain eligibility for the 30 per members of the House. cent rebate direct payment option. The major Amendment negatived. funds have already developed no-gap prod- ucts under the existing legislation to meet Original question resolved in the affirma- this requirement. These products have had tive. reasonable success in the market and are at- Bill read a second time. tracting a growing number of doctors. How- Third Reading ever, the AMA have the perception that the Leave granted for third reading to be existing arrangements infringe on the doctor- moved forthwith. patient relationship and has opposed the ex- pansion of the existing gap cover schemes. Bill (on motion by Mr Truss) read a third The opposition has consistently said that its time. view is that gap charges remain a major dis- HEALTH LEGISLATION AMENDMENT incentive for people to take out private health (GAP COVER SCHEMES) BILL 2000 insurance. Gap charges are an unacceptable Second Reading burden to many people coming on top of Debate resumed from 17 February, on their health insurance premiums and negating motion by Dr Wooldridge: the benefit of having insurance in the first place. The opposition supports measures that That the bill be now read a second time. will widen the availability of gap-free poli- Ms MACKLIN (Jagajaga) (12.40 p.m.)— cies, but this must not come at the expense of The Health Legislation Amendment (Gap starting a new round of medical fee inflation. Cover Schemes) Bill 2000 amends the Na- The opposition’s concerns about this bill tional Health Act 1953 to allow a new type of are as follows: the proposals may inhibit the arrangement between health insurers and no-gap schemes already in existence; the new doctors which is intended to eliminate, or at schemes may allow a rise in medical fees least make known, gap costs for privately which will flow through to higher health in- insured patients. These schemes are to be surance premiums; rising medical fees in the known as ‘gap cover schemes’ and will re- private sector will put pressure on public quire the approval of the minister. Under cur- hospitals to give large pay rises to retain spe- rent arrangements, the Medicare rebate cov- cialists, feeding an upward spiral in health ers 75 per cent of the schedule fee for private costs across the board; the increased costs in-hospital medical expenses while private paid for by the funds will not be offset by health insurance covers the remaining 25 per reductions in the gap payments paid by con- cent. Where doctors charge more than the sumers, resulting in a higher overall cost to schedule fee, the gap is the difference be- patients; the proposed form of ‘informed fi- tween the fee and the sum of the Medicare nancial consent’ may not be effective in en- benefit and the health insurance benefit. Cur- suring all patients are aware in advance of rent legislation allows health funds to cover any gap charges the doctor proposes to make; the gap by paying more than the 25 per cent the lack of definition of important terms in ceiling where a purchaser-provider agree- the legislation means that different organisa- ment exists with the medical provider or hos- tions have very different interpretations about pital concerned. how they see the legislation working; the This bill has been actively sought by the principal criteria of the scheme are contained Australian Medical Association as their pre- in regulations which have only recently been ferred option for expanding the availability of provided to major players—just last Thurs- ‘known gap’ health insurance policies. The day—and they were unable to provide opin- impetus for the bill came from the amend- ions on the regulations to the opposition. ment moved by Senator Harradine to the pri- 14734 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

As I have said over the last 12 months, in-hospital treatment. The average fee was substantial progress has been made by the $91.35 and the funds spent just over $63 major funds, including AXA, Medibank Pri- million paying out the 25 per cent of the vate and MBF, with no-gap schemes operat- schedule fee not met by Medicare. About 16 ing under the existing legislation. It is still per cent of these claims were made under a early days and the impact of these schemes, purchaser-provider agreement which allowed which now account for about 16 per cent of the funds to pay out the gap charge, and that all private medical cover in hospital claims, averaged a further $13 a claim. Thus the has yet to be properly studied. I am con- funds were able to pay the full bill by negoti- cerned that many of these deals are being ating seriously with providers to eliminate done at significantly higher prices and the the gap charged to the patient. Under this bill, effect is being masked by the flush of money this cap on payments may be removed. If all into health funds from the 30 per cent rebate. payments increase by the same proportion as At present, the great bulk of purchaser- the existing purchaser-provider agreements, provider arrangements are for no-gap prod- then the payouts by the funds would increase ucts. However, the new arrangements appear by around $37 million. The extent of the in- likely to favour known-gap arrangements creases in premiums that this would force is over no-gap schemes because they make it unknown, but indications from the industry much easier for the provider to add a fee are that there are already some upward pres- above the amount paid as a benefit by Medi- sures on prices. An even greater danger is care and the private health fund. Rather than that the average above schedule fee payout reduce the problem of gap payments, this under the new arrangements might be much could make them more entrenched and per- larger than what has been seen so far. haps make them more widespread than they are currently. Part of the AMA’s opposition to the exist- ing gap products is that the funds have tried The most important concern is that the to keep rebates down to around 20 per cent new schemes do not allow for a new round of above the schedule fee while the AMA has inflation in doctors’ fees that pushes up both been pushing for its own schedule of prices the gap paid by patients and the health insur- to be used, which are much higher. There are ance premiums. If a minority of doctors are no limits stipulated in this bill and the pro- able to extract high returns from the funds posed regulations simply provide that the and increase their personal incomes, this will criteria include that ‘the scheme does not flow through and put enormous pressure not have an inflationary effect’. There is no defi- just on private health insurance premiums but nition of how the inflationary impact is to be also on the public system. If the government measured. There is no sanction provided allows the insurance arrangements to be in- should the scheme result in higher fees, and flationary, that will destabilise not only the no definition of the starting point against health insurance funds but also the public which inflation will be measured. The regu- hospitals. There need to be fair and consistent lations do provide that the minister can re- remuneration policies across the health sector voke a scheme, but there is no linkage be- to ensure doctors are appropriately rewarded tween annual reporting on the performance of for their skills and lengthy training. But if the scheme and compliance with the criteria these policies allow some incomes to escalate for continued approval. far in excess of the rest then we will have serious problems with delivering health The third problem is that there is no bene- services. To understand how this might im- fit for the patient if they pay higher premiums pact on patients, it is worth putting on the to support larger benefits paid out by the fund record some facts about the current gap pay- if that does not result in an offsetting reduc- ments met by private health insurance funds. tion in the gap fees charged. If the doctor In the December 1999 quarter figures pro- simply increases his or her total fee and con- duced by the Private Health Insurance Ad- tinues to charge a similar sized known gap on ministration Council, there were some 2.75 top of the improved benefit from the fund, million claims made for medical benefits for the patient is left worse off. This is exactly Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14735 what happened in the recent experience with on—each of whom may have their own sepa- the obstetric gap payments. An increase in rate gap fees. The effort made by some funds the Medicare rebate for complex births had to provide simplified billing has been a defi- no impact on reducing the gap payment. Ob- nite improvement for consumers who hate stetricians simply increased their fees by the the practice of receiving multiple bills spread same amount because of their view that the over time from various providers, but the market could bear a large gap fee. Proof of regulations do not require simplified billing this is available from the Health Insurance to be part of any scheme. They only say that Commission. The average patient contribu- it should be available where appropriate. tion per service paid by obstetric patients, as In order to have informed financial con- recorded in table B5 of their quarterly Medi- sent, it is also necessary to have simplified care statistics, has climbed remorselessly. advice of the expected fees in advance of an An agreed cornerstone of the new ar- operation. Doctors will need to coordinate rangements for known-gap schemes is that themselves as a team providing a service so there should be informed financial consent— that the lead doctor can provide advice about in other words, wherever practical, the the total cost of the procedure by being able patient should be informed in advance of the to advise of the additional costs charged by gap fee that they will incur in either dollar each of the other providers involved. If they terms or as a percentage of the total fee. are unable to coordinate in this way, then There is no definition of informed financial there will only be informed financial consent consent in the legislation and no obligation if each provider separately deals with the on doctors to provide patients with a proper patient to convey their charges. statement of their expected bill. However, the doctors’ representatives argue that they are I just want to comment on a couple of firm believers in informed financial consent other particular issues that need to be ad- and agree that the logic is that it should apply dressed by the minister; firstly, in relation to to all patients and not just those dealing with trade practices implications. I was alarmed to their doctors under gap cover schemes. There discover that the explanatory memorandum is nothing new about professionals having for this bill is in breach of the Trade Practices rules to ensure that they properly inform their Act. The explanatory memorandum is meant clients about the fees they might be expected to be an accurate explanation to parliament of to incur. Such requirements already apply to the operation of a bill. In this case, it suggests lawyers under existing New South Wales that gap cover schemes might be negotiated legislation. A magistrate’s decision in South on an industry-wide basis or with reference to Australia set a precedent by determining that a particular hospital, groups of hospitals or to an above schedule fee was not enforceable if particular craft groups. This is obviously an- the patient had not been informed in advance. ticompetitive, and the minister should have The magistrate accepted that a debt was un- realised that. This matter was raised with the enforceable if the patient had a legitimate Australian Competition and Consumer expectation that the amount to be charged Commission, which advised that the state- was the schedule fee and that the doctor had ment was wrong. Competing doctors will not taken no steps to advise the patient otherwise. be allowed to negotiate as a group, as this Such a provision would need to be restricted would reduce competitive pressures in the to the reasonably foreseeable charges for industry. Section 73BDD states that the min- normal treatment, as emergency situations ister’s approval of a scheme does not limit would arise in a minority of cases and there the application of the Trade Practices Act. would be the potential for a decision to be But the government has already given doc- made to operate while the patient was not in a tors the impression that joint negotiating will fit condition to consider the financial aspects be possible. The opposition will support the of his or her treatment. There is also the expansion of the range of no gap products, complication that a patient may receive bills but only if it is convinced that the new from a number of providers—for example, a schemes will comply with the trade practices surgeon, a radiologist, an anaesthetist and so law and—and this is the most important 14736 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 thing—will help to hold down costs to con- Act 1973 to allow the automatic assignment sumers. of a contributor’s Medicare benefit to a reg- The issue of reform of the reinsurance istered organisation or other body to enable pool was highlighted in last year’s debate simplified billing and payment arrangements about Lifetime Health Cover and is a critical to be built into the gap cover scheme. I am one for the industry. Under current arrange- concerned that this is another way in which ments, there are disincentives for funds to bulk-billing could be undermined, coming on become more efficient. Some funds are liter- top of electronic transfer payments being ally paid to be inefficient by the payments introduced in general practice and elsewhere. they receive to equalise risk under the rein- What does all this mean for the poor pa- surance arrangements. The minister promised tient? If what I have said so far seems com- to complete this reform by the July com- plicated and just a variety of legal technicali- mencement of Lifetime Health Cover. He has ties, wait a few minutes while I try to explain apparently quietly shelved this, and I under- how it is going to pan out for the actual inter- stand that there will now be no changes. I call change between the doctor and the patient. on him today to explain his actions and to Let us consider the case of a patient who sees indicate when he will complete consideration his or her doctor to discuss an in-hospital of this reform. private medical procedure that is needed. It Another area I want to touch on is the se- would seem that, if this bill is passed in its rious flow-on costs to the government be- current form, the doctor would have seven cause of the 30 per cent private health insur- options for what he or she could say to the ance rebate if it fails to control inflation of patient about costs. Firstly, the doctor might premiums as a result of these gap products. say, ‘I am a bulk-billing doctor.’ This would Every time the funds agree to cover costs of mean no bill to either public or private pa- the schedule fee, the government will be tients, and I am pleased to say that over 81 picking up 30 per cent of the costs without per cent of medical services continue to be any ability to put a brake on the upward spi- bulk-billed. Secondly, the doctor can say, ‘I ral. The government, and this is truly ridicu- charge the Medicare schedule fee.’ This lous, will then be subsidising funds to pay means that uninsured patients would pay 25 some doctors higher fees than the govern- per cent of the schedule fee while a privately ment has said is appropriate. Already we insured patient would get a full refund. have witnessed the amazing $500 million Thirdly, the situation that uninsured patients blow-out in costs compared with the esti- dread to hear, the doctor can advise that they mates made just one year ago. The health charge above the schedule fee. An uninsured insurance sector will be receiving $2,200 patient has to pay the gap between the doc- million a year in government support by the tor’s fee and 75 per cent of the schedule fee. year 2002. This represents a huge ongoing As all of us have heard, this can run into expenditure for a marginal change in the hundreds of dollars, particularly for serious level of membership. The proportion of peo- operations. ple with health insurance is lower today than The next category is the one that is causing it was when the coalition came to power in a great deal of anxiety in the community and 1996. which has led to the pressure for introduction To understand the extent to which the of this legislation. There is a significant health insurance industry has been subsi- group of doctors who charge above the dised, it is instructive to compare the support schedule fee and who have chosen not to given to other industries. The total of current participate in one of the existing no gap tax concessions and direct assistance pro- schemes. Each insured patient having this vided to the entire primary industries sector is discussion about what they might pay will only $685 million a year. The entire manu- need to advise their doctor of the type of facturing sector gets $1,471 million, or about health insurance product they have and hope two-thirds of the cost of the health rebate. that the doctor they are seeing has an agree- This bill also amends the Health Insurance ment with their fund for no gaps. The next Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14737 option is that the doctor advises that he or she very important: individual doctors will not be is in a known gap scheme with the patient’s bound to consistently use any particular health insurer and is able to give a quote for method. They can give quotes to patients the known gap as a dollar amount. This will under any of the above options. Both the ex- be relatively straightforward, and the patient isting and the proposed gap schemes allow will know what they are up for before the the doctor not to charge a patient on a gap- treatment commences. If they are dissatisfied free basis, even if they are a member of a with the amount they are told, they will be relevant fund’s arrangement. free to seek an alternative quote from another It is important to point out that fortunately specialist. Lastly, we come to the case of a these options do not apply to out of hospital doctor in a known gap scheme with the pa- medical costs—that is, procedures in a doc- tient’s health insurer but who, for whatever tor’s rooms—where Medicare meets 85 per reason, chooses to use the option of quoting cent of the schedule fee and health insurance his or her prices as a percentage. The bill and funds are unable to pay benefits. Here a pa- the regulations do not explain how this op- tient is either bulk-billed or pays a gap fee tion will work, and the government might covering the difference—and, as a result, gap like to reconsider whether this option will fees have been kept down. This point may create more grievances in the marketplace well be lost on typical health fund members than it is worth. who do not appreciate that the government How the percentage is calculated might has oversold what it is doing about gaps. Any need to be spelt out much more clearly. Pa- effort to extend these arrangements to permit tients would need to get a clear statement of health insurance funds to insure out of hos- how a known gap expressed as a percentage pital medical costs would be highly inflation- translates into the actual gap costs they will ary—and, for this reason, up until now, it has have to pay in dollars. For example, if the been illegal under the Medicare legislation. If total fee was 160 per cent of the schedule fee, the government is thinking of changing this the Medicare rebate would cover 75 per cent, basic principle of Medicare, it would be a the health insurance fund would cover the breach of the commitment that the coalition gap up to, say, 120 per cent—that is another to date has given, which has been to not dis- 55 per cent of the schedule fee—and the mantle Medicare. known gap left for the patient to pay could be To summarise, it is my view that the gov- expressed as any one of three options: 40 per ernment has so far failed to make out a case cent of the schedule fee, 25 per cent of the that the proposed additional option for gap total fee or 66 per cent of the total gap pay- insurance cover will achieve the goals that ment. I imagine anybody listening would be they set out without causing unacceptable completely in the dark as to what that would inflation in health costs. If the legislation is mean they would actually have to pay. not subject to careful scrutiny and the intent Anyone who has been able to follow this of the regulations clarified, then the schemes explanation will understand the sheer confu- are doomed to fail. We are not opposed to sion that all of these options are likely to cre- working on the development of options in ate both for doctors and their patients. Any- addition to those that already exist, firstly, as one who manages to follow the intricacies of long as the new options are acceptable to all gap fee charging will be qualified then to go the players but, secondly and most impor- on to higher learning with the application of tantly, those new options will need to be re- the GST in a chemist shop. sponsible, non-inflationary and clear to con- The health insurance system is being bur- sumers in the way that they will work. dened with an increasingly bureaucratic and The trade-off that the doctors have agreed alienating range of conditions that I am afraid to is that there must be new rules for in- will frustrate doctors and patients alike. The formed financial consent so that patients will fact is that there will be a multitude of no longer be unclear about what costs they schemes run by different funds, with different will incur through treatment as a private pa- arrangements for each doctor. And this is tient. The cost of choosing to go private 14738 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 should be known to consumers up-front and talked about social visions, as it still does, but not come as a surprise to those patients who it repeatedly failed to deliver when in office. find out, in some circumstances at the mo- During Labor’s 13 years in government, the ment, long after their treatment. The days of private health system was almost irretrieva- nasty surprises in the shape of unexpected bly run down. In 1983, nearly 65 per cent of additional bills, sometimes from doctors that Australians were covered by private health the patient has never met, should be over. insurance; by September 1995, that figure We do want to achieve a good outcome had plummeted to just 34.5 per cent and was through the passage of workable legislation falling by two per cent each year. That was a to broaden the range of gap-free products on disastrous legacy—not just for our private the market. But the current draft does not health system, but because it put enormous assure this outcome and, therefore, the oppo- pressure on the public health system. sition will be seeking support in the Senate This was clearly reflected in the growing for the establishment of a legislation com- and unsustainable health budget under Labor. mittee inquiry into this bill and the policy In 1996, the Medicare benefits schedule bill implications of the national health amend- was $6.2 billion—more than the budget of ment regulations 2000. Issues the Senate Western Australia. What is worse is that it committee should examine and report on was expected to grow by a massive 40 per would include: the practicality of the pro- cent in the next four years. The Pharmaceuti- posed gap cover schemes and the likely ac- cal Benefits Scheme was $2.7 billion—larger ceptance of these schemes by medical pro- than the budget of Tasmania, and it was ex- viders; the effectiveness of measures pro- pected to rise by over 50 per cent. How did posed to cover gaps without inflation of Labor handle the situation? What was its so- health insurance premiums or total costs to lution? It turned to the standard Labor fall patients; the flow-on impact of increased back of raising taxes, increasing the Medicare costs on public hospitals; the best method to levy in the 1995 budget. But this extra tax measure inflation, and the process for revo- achieved nothing for better quality care and cation of schemes which fail to meet this hospital services for Australians because it criteria; the definition of ‘informed financial was offset by the continuing free-fall of pri- consent’ and ‘known gaps’; the form of dis- vate health insurance and the pressure this closure of costs to patients and the enforce- placed on the public system. ability of bills when there has been no disclo- But what astounds many of us on this side sure; the impact of the schemes on existing of the House is that Labor do not seem to medical purchaser-provider agreements; the have learnt by their mistakes. They are al- effectiveness of the reporting and review ways on the ready to try and play the class mechanisms; and the need for any additional warfare card when it comes to the private consumer safeguards. The opposition will health system; they are always ready to play develop amendments to be moved in the Sen- it off against the public health system when, ate to meet these concerns—particularly in fact, a stronger private health system will about how to make sure that this bill is not a mean a much stronger public health system. green light to put up medical fees. But that does not sit with the philosophical Mrs MAY (McPherson) (1.05 p.m.)—I position of Labor. They have adopted the rise today to support the Health Legislation least constructive, the most irresponsible and Amendment (Gap Cover Schemes) Bill 2000. negative position of any opposition this This important bill represents a significant country has ever seen. Their policy is to actu- further step in the Howard government’s ally stand for nothing but to say and do any- push to fix both the public and private sectors thing if they think it means they can scare of Australia’s health system. people into voting for them. Their duplicity is It is a matter of public record that this highlighted by the fact that the Leader of the government inherited a health system that, Opposition claims that the government’s 30 after 13 years of neglect by the Labor gov- per cent private health insurance rebate is a ernment, was in crisis. Labor constantly gross failure and a waste of money. But what Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14739 would Labor do if they were elected? They the number of people being covered by gap would keep it. The opposition leader has ad- products has gone up by around 25 per cent mitted this fact and, in doing so, he unravels since the December quarter of last year. I his own ridiculous argument. have no doubt that this figure will soar as The clear evidence is that the 30 per cent Australians become more aware of these private rebate is working. Membership has products. As more people join or rejoin the increased since the rebate was introduced; it ranks of private insurance by virtue of both increased by 0.2 per cent in each of the the 30 per cent rebate and the new Lifetime March and June quarters in 1999, by 0.4 per Health Cover rating, they will be expecting a cent in the September quarter and a further great deal more of their health cover than 0.3 per cent in the December quarter. While perhaps they did in the past. these are not enormous increases, we are fi- I want to go back to the fundamental rea- nally heading in the right direction. The son we have to ensure a thriving private Howard government has succeeded in stem- health sector in this country; quite simply, it ming the flow of people leaving private is to ensure the future of our public health health funds. In fact, this is the first time that system. Each year private health insurance membership has increased in three consecu- contributes around $3 billion in hospital tive quarters since quarterly membership rec- benefits and the private sector cares for ords were kept. While Labor will character- roughly a third of all hospital patients. Be- istically belittle this achievement, it is the cause it has such a major role in funding first step in reversing the trend they created Australia’s hospitals, it stands to reason that and helping to ensure a stronger private any fall in the proportion of people covered health system. by private health insurance has significant This legislation, as I said at the outset, is implications for the whole of the Australian another important step. The measures in this health care system. And this really begs the bill will make private health insurance more question: how could Labor just stand by for appealing by providing the health insurance 13 years and let the proportion of Australians industry with another avenue to offer known covered by private insurance almost halve? and no gap health insurance policies to their Yet at the same time, it was pouring more and customers. Importantly, these measures will more money into a system that was actually allow for gap cover schemes to be provided delivering a poorer standard of care for all without the need for contracts. It also safe- Australians. guards consumer interests with all gap I think New South Wales Labor Premier schemes requiring ministerial approval be- Bob Carr hit the nail on the head when he fore they can become operative. The minister said in February 1997, ‘As fast as we hurled will also have the power to revoke schemes money at the hospitals, there was a further that are not delivering better outcomes to abandonment of private health cover and a patients. further rise in demand on the public health This legislation also provides for simpli- system.’ Federal Labor will never admit the fied billing and payment arrangements for connection. They will never concede that a health fund members. Gap cover is the most strong private health sector is crucial for a obvious and commonsense way to make better public health system. The simple truth health cover more appealing for Australians. is that when people who can afford private This legislation will provide even greater health insurance take it out, they are also flexibility and allow for practitioners and helping to provide a better standard of health providers to work together more coopera- care for people on very low incomes who tively to develop schemes that will benefit perhaps may not be able to afford private their patients and customers. Clearly, gap health cover. The fact is that private health cover schemes have been, and will continue cover is more affordable for all Australians to be, welcomed by all consumers. As the because of this government’s policies: the 30 Minister for Health and Aged Care pointed per cent rebate, the surcharge for high in- out in his second reading speech on this bill, come earners and the Lifetime Health Cover 14740 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 rating. These all contribute to keeping premi- we have also launched a tough new campaign ums lower. which targets teenage binge drinking. With While premiums have increased, it must one in five young people saying that they be remembered that this is the flow-on effect drank more than 10 standard drinks the last of membership having been allowed to run time that they had alcohol, binge drinking is down to such a low level under the previous one of the most significant threats to the government. In fact, during Labor’s 13 years, health of our young people. the cost of private health cover increased by The Howard government has also funded an average of 10 per cent each year. If we can more programs to tackle the problem of increase private health fund membership and youth suicide and prevent this tragic loss of significantly address the issue of skewed age life. We have funded a number of special profile, as we are with the Lifetime Health programs to improve health services for peo- Cover policy, we can reduce the pressure on ple living in rural areas and to encourage premiums in the future. doctors back to the bush. And there is the As I said earlier, this legislation is a further huge ‘staying at home’ boost which is an step in our ongoing effort to repair the dam- enormous boost to carers. The list of innova- age to Australia’s health care system under tive, important and commonsense health pro- Labor and to deliver better health services to grams that the coalition government has all Australians. The government remains to- launched is long and comprehensive. It tally committed to Medicare and bulkbilling. would take me all day to run through each We have significantly increased funding to and every program, but the point I want to the states, particularly Queensland, under the make is that, as well as addressing the fun- new Australian health care agreements final- damentals of encouraging private health in- ised in 1998. In fact, under the agreement surance and providing more funding for hos- Labor had in place, Queensland would have pitals, the Howard government is taking a received $4.3 billion; under our agreement, more dynamic approach to Australia’s health Queensland will receive $5.5 billion in the system. We are tackling the hard issues that same time frame. We have also tackled sev- Labor ignored and let slide for so long. We eral health issues, which Labor had relegated are putting more focus on preventative medi- to the too-hard basket. The Immunise Aus- cine and encouraging good health. We all tralia Program has achieved remarkable re- understand that prevention is easier than cure, sults and helped protect our children from and the fact is that it makes good economic preventable illnesses by boosting immunisa- sense as well. tion levels in the community—which Labor Importantly, we are encouraging Austra- let fall to Third World levels. lians who can do so to take more responsibil- The Howard government’s Tough on ity for their health care. Labor has always Drugs strategy is a comprehensive approach worked on the premise that the state should to the drug problem with law enforcement, take responsibility for individuals. We be- education and treatment and rehabilitation lieve that wherever possible people ought to programs all receiving a boost. I know that be empowered to make their own decisions every Australian parent worries to some ex- and to take responsibility for their own lives. tent about the incidence of drugs in the com- Private health insurance encourages decision munity. And many of my local parents have making, independence and a more proactive said to me that one of the most fundamental approach. In my view this is a healthy ap- things that the government can do is to help proach which re-engages the community in reduce the risk of our kids falling victim to decision making and gives individuals a more drugs. Tough on Drugs is a very genuine and constructive role. Governments should not be significant initiative which has a great deal of something that just ‘happens’ to people. They community support. should be working with communities and individuals to give them more say. The coalition has also launched the largest and toughest anti-smoking campaign ever in Labor has always adopted the approach Australia’s history. I am pleased that recently that they know what is best for Australia, but Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14741 the legacy they left in the health system, in out of some $800 million. So, far from con- their economic mismanagement, in their taining costs, it has blown them out. empty social policy, clearly proved other- It is reasonable to ask where those addi- wise. This legislation is a great example of tional costs will come from. Out of the public how the Howard government is allowing hospitals again, perhaps? It was said it was more flexibility and encouraging a health going to increase private health insurance system that meets the needs and wishes of the very dramatically. Instead we have seen Australian people, rather than dictating them. something slightly over two per cent for that Gap health cover is a commonsense policy expenditure. When you work it out, that is which Labor put in the ‘too hard’ basket for roughly $5,500 per annum for each new pol- so many years, just as they did with taxation icy holder. You could actually pay for private policy. The coalition has had the guts to health insurance for people. So it has not in- tackle the things Labor shied away from, and creased the numbers very much, and it has Australia will be all the better for it, espe- done so at great cost to the taxpayer. cially in the long term. I am pleased to sup- port this bill, and commend it to the House. It was also said it would shift people from the public to the private sector. We hear this Dr LAWRENCE (Fremantle) (1.18 argument over and over again, that what this p.m.)—I want to speak about the Health rebate will do, what gap cover will do, is in- Legislation Amendment (Gap Cover duce more people to take up private health Schemes) Bill 2000 because I think it is ab- insurance and induce them to use the private solutely critical that we inject a sense of real- rather than the public hospital system. The ity into some of this debate. I am not sure evidence to date, and there is very little on what data the previous speaker looked at in this question, shows that that is not happen- relation to some of these matters, but clearly ing. Pressure continues on the public hospital it is not data that is on the public record be- system. They are having to do more with cause there has been lots of very careful in- less. The private hospital system is taking up vestigation of these matters from a variety of more elective surgeries, more of the things points of view. that people can wait for, and the public hos- pitals that deal with emergencies are being This legislation is related to the earlier in- squeezed. So there has not been any substan- troduction of the rebate for private health tial shift in the pattern of public and private insurance and in fact was a requirement as hospital use. part of the legislation being passed through I might say that one of the things that of- the Senate. Lots of promises were held out fends me deeply, as someone who believes for that 30 per cent rebate. First of all, it was that we should work together to provide for only going to cost approximately $1.2 billion the general good rather than selfishly for our a year—only that! It represents a huge in- own individual benefit all the time, is the crease in expenditure on private health insur- corrosive effects of the advertising about pri- ance. And, by the way, most of that money vate health insurance. The message that it is would be coming directly out of the public giving the community is that public health is system. So, every dollar going into private no good, that public hospitals are poor per- health insurance support was coming out of formers, that the only way you can be safe is the public hospitals that 70 per cent of the to have private health insurance and to use community use as opposed to roughly 30 per the private system. I ask the government: cent of the mainly wealthy—not exclusively, how do they think that makes the 70 per cent but mainly wealthy—who have private health of people feel who do not have private health insurance. But even that estimate was way insurance, particularly those who cannot af- below what actually occurred. The costs to ford it, when they are told that the public date per annum for the private health insur- system, funded by the taxpayers, is a second ance rebate, to increase the percentage of the cousin, a poor relation? I will tell you what it privately insured population from 31 to 33 does: it increases the sense of exclusion and per cent, is $2.2 billion per annum—a blow- inequality and unfairness. I might ask: why is 14742 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 the government spending so much advertis- gap policies are already available within ex- ing private health insurance? Why not a bit isting legislation, and I think it is likely that for the public system? And, while they are it, they will be overtaken by these known-gap why not inject some of those funds back into policies. And I think the government needs to our public hospitals. As I said, while we have be reminded that its own report from the In- seen increases in funds to private health in- dustry Commission on private health insur- surance on a scale never before seen in Aus- ance was not supportive of this unlimited gap tralia, we have also seen very significant cuts insurance. But we all know that it has been to public hospital expenditure. And they are part of the Liberal Party policy for the last splitting at the seams, there is no doubt about decade or so and that they are not likely to it—despite the very best efforts of a great change their views despite any amount of many good people. evidence or argument. This legislation was essentially introduced One of the things I find most extraordinary as a bribe to the Senate to pass the original about this legislation is that it actually ends legislation because lots of people said, ‘Well, up providing, through the regulations, for if you have a 30 per cent rebate on a figure of seven options for the advice a doctor can give an unknown size’—because it is 30 per cent a patient about the charges that can be made. of whatever the health funds charge, and it There are seven options—and these are sup- will get bigger and bigger—’there will need posed to make it simpler for the citizens of to be some restriction on what doctors can Australia to understand what gaps they are charge.’ While in government, we introduced facing. But when you actually look at these the capacity for doctors to enter into agree- options and, if you like, speak about them in ments with health funds—contracts, if you a way the doctors might, I think it would be a like—for a set fee. Now the doctors do not very unusual citizen, let alone an ill person like those no-gap contracts, but they have visiting a doctor or awaiting an operation, been increasing. What doctors prefer is who could fully understand what they were known-gap—if that makes any sense—poli- being told. This is not to insult the intelli- cies. gence of Australians but simply to say this is I think it is worth pointing out in this con- very complicated. In fact, it sort of has the text that there has been a steady escalation of resonance of a GST complexity about it. medical services costs over the last 10, 15 or The seven options go roughly like this. 20 years. The incomes of doctors have grown The doctor might say to you, ‘I am a bulk- faster than the rest of the community. At a billing doctor,’ which means that you get no time when most people’s wages are static or bill if you are either a public or a private pa- growing very slowly, that is not true of the tient. Or the doctor might say, ‘I charge the medical profession. A good deal of the in- schedule fee,’ which means that uninsured crease in their incomes comes from Medicare patients pay 25 per cent of the schedule and and from private health insurance and out of insured patients get the full refund. Or the consumers’ pockets. The gaps have been in- doctor might say, ‘I charge above the sched- creasing indeed, not reducing. I well know— ule fee.’ The uninsured patient will pay the because I have had many discussions with gap between the total doctor’s fee and 75 per them—of the medical profession’s resistance cent of the schedule fee. The fourth option is to entering into price agreements with the this: ‘I charge above the schedule fee and I funds. Legislation currently provides for it, am not a participant in a gap scheme with and there are quite a few of these no-gap your health insurer,’ which means the insured policies. They prefer the known-gap options patient pays the gap between the total doc- which will still leave them free to charge tor’s fee and the schedule fee. Option 5: ‘I whatever they want. So this legislation is am in a no-gap scheme with your health in- actually crazy because what it does is give surer.’ The patient gets a full refund of the the doctors a blank cheque to charge what- gap. Or, somewhat differently, ‘I am in a ever they like and get a portion of it paid for known-gap’—and you will have to be lis- by this additional insurance premium. No- tening closely to hear the difference— ’scheme with your health insurer, and the Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14743 e with your health insurer, and the known gap the option of increasing my charges.’ There is in your case will be $10 or $15,’ whatever it plenty of evidence around in public state- happens to be. So the patient will have to pay ments that doctors are hostile to any scheme however many dollars the doctor says is the that puts the brakes on their ability to charge known gap. Or he or she might say, ‘I am in a what they like. They are always raising the known-gap scheme with your health insurer, spectre of what they call ‘US-style managed and the known gap in your case will be X per care’ which they say interferes with the rela- cent of the schedule fee,’ which might be $5 tionship between the doctor and the patient. or $10 or whatever, and the patient then has What they are really worried about in most to pay that fee. cases is interference with the relationship that If members opposite think that that is sim- surrounds the charging of fees. plifying the system, I have another answer to Only five per cent of Medicare Private’s that question. What is already happening at purchaser-provider agreements are for these the moment is that doctors, to avoid being so-called known-gap products—there are caught, are actually saying to patients before some out there already—whereas 95 per cent they go to surgery, for example, ‘I want you are for no-gap products. Believe me, the lat- to understand that my fee is $100, $200 or ter are the ones that suit consumers. They are $300, but you will only get a rebate for half obviously far more satisfactory for the con- of that amount.’ I know of recent cases where sumer and for the funds alike. At the mo- doctors have done that while people have ment, they account for a quite substantial 15 been in the process of being prepared for sur- per cent of all the benefits that are being paid gery. In one case an anaesthetist, standing by Medicare Private. We are likely to see an over the patient, about to knock them out for erosion of that improvement. I think this is the operation, asked them whether they ob- indicated in the attitude of doctors who de- jected to this known gap. I can see there will scribe these no-gap schemes—these contracts be lots more cases like that once this legisla- between doctors and health funds—as ‘the tion comes in. As I said, doctors are not highway to hell’. Well, they are not for con- obliged to consistently adopt the same ap- sumers; they are far preferable to alternatives. proach, so you might go to the doctor on one It is also likely to have an inflationary im- occasion when he will tell you that it is a pact on medical fees, especially the known- known-gap price that he will charge but on gap product, because there is no brake on another occasion he might bulk-bill you. So charges and it will flow through to premiums, this will be utterly confusing for patients. 30 per cent of which will have to be paid by This legislation is not to assist the people of the taxpayer. We can expect a new round of Australia, let me tell you; it is to assist the inflation in doctor’s fees and charges, in- medical practitioners in this country who I creases in the gap and the premiums and a think are a group who do not particularly pressure particularly on small funds which need assistance. cannot absorb some of these costs. The leg- The issues that I have lots of concern islation, the scheme, is said to provide for no about in this legislation are many, but one of inflationary effect. But inflation is not de- them is the possibility that it will inhibit the fined. That is very important, because there no-gap schemes that are already in existence. are quite a wide range of indices of inflation The major funds have made quite a lot of in medical and health services. We do not progress with no-gap schemes under the ex- even know what the inflation measure will isting legislation. The funds, too, share the be. Nor have they set a baseline. From what concern that these new options under this date are we talking about? If it is inflationary, legislation could undermine the existing ar- what is the sanction? What is the penalty? rangements. In other words, doctors might There is nothing provided in this legislation. say, ‘I don’t want to be in that no-gap scheme So it is not clear what will happen if a par- because I will have to charge precisely what I ticular scheme does result in higher fees and am contracted to with the health fund. I want premiums. Knowing this government, it will a known-gap scheme where I can leave open just shrug its shoulders and move on. 14744 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

We have recent experience on this front, pretty satisfied with Medicare and bulk- particularly with obstetrics where the benefit billing. was increased substantially. There was no benefit to the patient from the higher Medi- There is going to be a big cost to revenue care rebate. The doctors increased their fees if premiums increase or more people take out by pretty much the same amount. That is the private health insurance as a result of this so- second time that has happened with obstet- called known-gap initiative. The taxpayer is rics. The taxpayer pays an additional $8.4 being asked to fund 30 per cent of an un- million for this rebate for complex childbirth known figure. As I have pointed out, those procedures. It was claimed by the govern- figures are already blowing out. It was an ment and by doctors that it would eliminate additional $800 million last year alone. We the gap—that extra money that mothers were are up to $2.2 billion already. If the premi- paying when their babies were born. At that ums go up, the taxpayer will be funding 30 time, 54 per cent of obstetricians charged per cent of whatever that figure might be, and above the schedule fee and the average gap the government quite clearly does not have a was around $300. A very short time after the clue what it might be. There is nothing in this injection of the additional $8.4 million, the legislation to indicate that they have. My real gap is $218 and about the same percentage of concern is that this will result in another doctors charge above the schedule fee. That blow-out and further pressure on funds and extra went via the patients’ pockets straight the public system. into the incomes of medical practitioners, Part of this bill is supposed to be about in- with no net benefit to either the government formed financial consent. I read out to you or the consumer. With this legislation, we can the seven very confusing options that con- expect to see more leapfrogging of that kind, sumers will be confronted with. We all agree especially since there are no penalties at all if with the principle that there should be in- the schemes are inflationary. formed financial consent and simplified bill- It is worth looking at the general question ing—that the patient should be informed in of the gap and medical expenses. Medicare advance of either the dollar or the percentage statistics show that the average gap in 1998 gap. But this legislation is not going to help. grew by 6.5 per cent. That is three times the There is no definition of informed consent in inflation rate. In my own state of Western the bill or about precisely how that informa- Australia, it was 8.3 per cent. That means that tion will be provided and when. As I say, if extra money the doctors are getting is grow- someone is lying on the trolley waiting to be ing exponentially, way above the inflation prepped for surgery, that is hardly the mo- rate and way above the increases in wages. ment to seek informed consent. There is no Doctors are reaping pretty rich rewards at a mechanism for ensuring that doctors do in- time when most Australians’ wages and sala- deed provide the information. As many peo- ries are static. Market research conducted by ple will know, on a lot of occasions, particu- the private health funds themselves, the larly surrounding surgery, there are a number AMA and private hospitals shows, not sur- of bills and you do not get to see a lot of the prisingly, substantial consumer scepticism doctors, for instance those doing tests. How about private health and gaps in particular. will that information be provided and when? Some people in these surveys described pri- This legislation is very short on the necessary vate health care as ‘cancer of the wallet’. I detail. But, in my view, the most worrying think that is why there has been so much ad- element is that it provides open slather with vertising by the government. The gaps, in these known-gap products and it is inevitable particular, are seen as ‘a farce’, ‘a joke’ and that premiums will rise. History suggests that ‘an insult’, to quote from some of the people that is likely. Economic behaviour suggests it that were interviewed. This legislation will is inevitable. Yet the government is trying to not change any of that. The research con- tell us this will not be inflationary and it will cluded that, for many, the gap destroyed the not cost the taxpayers more. Having seen credibility of private health insurance and, some of their previous assurances about in- furthermore, on the other side, that they were creases in private health insurance taking the Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14745 pressure off the public system and so on, I a charge. This is an important, milestone have to say that I do not believe a word of it. piece of legislation. Mr HARDGRAVE (Moreton) (1.36 The member for Fremantle talked a lot p.m.)—It is always a low-water mark in de- about gap—known gap and no gap. When it bate when you hear the absolute hatred of comes to keeping our word with those in freedom of choice of those opposite. It is a Australia who support our ongoing aspira- dreadful development in this debate to sug- tions in this area, while there certainly is a gest that Australians should conform to one known credibility gap on the other side there all-encompassing socialistic medical scheme is no gap on this side of the House. In their in the form of Medicare without having the time in office, those opposite did a couple of opportunity to take up the cudgels of self- things as far as health insurance was con- support. The member for Fremantle was cerned. They introduced the Medicare levy health minister for several years in the previ- and then they proceeded to increase the ous government, presiding over a decline in Medicare levy. I do not believe that workers the number of people who participated in of Australia, the people who make a contri- private health insurance in this country and at bution to the Medicare levy, were ever com- the same time presiding over an increase in pensated in any way, shape or form through health costs to this nation. It is very sad to the rest of the tax system. It just became an- see her come in here today to try and miscon- other one of those additional taxes that typi- strue the government’s intentions that are fied the Hawke-Keating era in Australia. before the House. During the 13 years of the Private health insurance has nothing to do previous government, as health costs rose and with any sort of any sort of class or—given kept rising, we saw doctors, patients, insur- the debate so far—classless warfare that ance companies and government ending up in might be suggested by the members of the separate corners of the whole health debate. Australian Labor Party. The key thing about We never saw initiatives such as have been private health insurance is that it is a matter presented by this government to try and bring of freedom of choice. It is also a matter of everyone together in some sort of cogent way dignity. It is a matter for those who are able to tackle spiralling health costs and declining to afford private health insurance, happily a membership of private health insurance growing number of people in Australia, to be funds, and to make sure that patients are well able to in fact subsidise the public system. I aware of the costs involved in whatever do not think any taxpayer in this nation be- medical procedures they were about to un- grudges the fact that the federal government dertake. directs funds towards meeting the cost of On this side of the chamber we have a public health. The Medicare levy is only a government that in its four short years in of- relatively small percentage of the total cost of fice has prided itself on, and has had a con- maintaining the health system in this coun- tinual theme of, not only promising before an try—somewhere between 10 and 20 per cent, election but also doing what it promised it certainly not a significant part of the cost of would do immediately after the election. The the health budget in this nation. We pay the matters before us here today are part and par- Medicare levy because it is prescribed in law cel of that. We are presenting initiatives to that we must. But those of us who contribute the people of Australia to try and deal with to private health insurance are not doing so what so many people in my own electorate just out of some sort of snobbery or because aspire to. They want to have an understand- we want to be able to pick and choose the ing of the big ticket health costs of proce- doctor that we have got or the hospital that dures involving operations well before they we go to. There is also a great element of agree to undertake those procedures. We are dignity associated with the payment of pri- also giving them the option to insure against vate health insurance premiums. We are say- the gap—the difference between what they ing very clearly that because of our circum- get as a rebate from the system as it currently stances we can afford to pay this extra. We stands and what the doctors themselves set as are one less person or set of persons in the 14746 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 queue at the public hospital. We are in fact of the people. Isn’t that a hallmark of this assisting those who cannot afford private coalition government? health insurance to know with some certainty I would also recommend to people that that they can gain attendance in a public in- they obtain a very simple brochure entitled stitution. Medical fees: know your rights, which is an- To paraphrase my recollection of the other thing that is worth seeing. All too often words of former senator Graham Richardson, I have had people come into my electorate there is some ideological hatred of private office and say to me, ‘I did not realise that I health insurance from those opposite, but it is was going to be paying this much. There is so very misplaced hatred. There is no sense to much uncertainty in the system as it currently the hatred that comes from those opposite stands. I do not know what the cost of my about private health insurance and initiatives operation is going to be.’ They perhaps do that this government has brought forward to not even appreciate that it is their right, and make private health insurance more attrac- the government is encouraging them to take tive. The people who are hurt most of all by up their right, to ask the doctor what the cost pumping up the public system as being better of the operation is going to be and to ask the than or more important than the private sys- hospital what the cost of the accommodation tem are the battlers of Australia, the aged is going to be. This is an important consumer pensioners, the unemployed and the low in- issue. I also know that doctors can be put come earners—the ones who may for what- under pressure to lower their price or to vary ever reason in their circumstances not be able their price, depending on the particular client or not choose to take up private health insur- involved. In full knowledge of a client’s cir- ance and take advantage of the government’s cumstances, many doctors will adjust what is rebates and other initiatives. It is ironic and their stated price. That is another important almost oxymoronic to see those opposite factor that is encouraged by the matters that talking down private health insurance and the are before us today. What we are doing, very initiatives of this government. Those who are simply, is asking doctors, hospitals and health hit most of all are the people who those op- insurers to reach agreement on the new no- posite pretend to represent. Private subscrib- gap products. The one important caveat for ers subsidise the system just as those who us all to remember is: as long as the benefit is send their children to non-government clearly demonstrated to go to the patient and schools subsidise the education system for also involves informed financial consent and the rest of us in society. simplified billing. We are empowering the average Australian and encouraging those I have had a few criticisms over the years who are not in private health insurance to about a couple of the funds. I have been a find another reason to be part of private subscriber to Medical Benefits Fund for a health insurance in this country to help take long time and I, up until the last four years, some of the pressure off the public system. have had some second thoughts about that Yesterday in this place we had a discussion organisation. I am happy to put on the record about employee entitlements and unions. I my joy in seeing that Medical Benefits Fund, made a suggestion in that debate, which is from what I can see, are actually playing their also relevant to this debate, that those who role of going around and putting the pressure want to get some sort of collectivism going on doctors and hospitals to be up-front and as far as the logic of being involved in a un- honest about the amount of money they are ion is concerned should offer some benefits. I going to charge people for procedures and suspect that MBF, HCF, Medibank Private hospital accommodation. Isn’t that good and other organisations have taken up the news? It means that people in my electorate pressure from this government, and in par- are going to be able to go to a private hospital ticular from this Minister for Health and choosing a doctor that they wish to have and Aged Care, Dr Michael Wooldridge, the knowing up-front exactly what the cost in- member for Casey, who will go down in his- volved is going to be. That is empowerment tory as the very best health minister this na- Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14747 tion has ever had. They have taken up those gap, and already we have seen that 10 per initiatives and that pressure and have begun cent improvement. Isn’t that terrific? to try to do things to encourage people back Given the growing success of the existing into private health insurance. If you want legislation, we expect that many doctors will people to join your association or your union stick with the present arrangements, but the or your health fund, you actually have to pro- amendments will add more flexibility to the vide some identifiable benefit. You actually industry. It is now up to funds, hospitals and have to give them a reason to join and a rea- doctors to work together to come up with son to participate. A lot of these health funds arrangements and to present them back to the have been doing just that, and I am pleased government, to the Health Insurance Com- about that. But one of the problems they have mission and to the Department of Health and had is that there has not been sufficient gov- Aged Care so that the minister himself can ernment legislation to back their efforts in oversee this to make sure that the intentions some cases and to enforce new efforts in that are contained within this legislation here other cases. today are fulfilled in reality. This is an im- These arrangements before us may involve portant step forward and a keeping of faith service delivery systems that are not even with the people of Australia. It is certainly contractually based. We do not even have to supporting my proposition that, as far as have the extra complication of some sort of credibility is concerned, there is no gap on written deal. But we are conscious of the this side and a real known gap on the other rapidly expanding range of no-gap health side. The government’s system of Lifetime products that are already available across the Health Cover is something that I would en- market and are encouraging more. We are courage all people in Australia to take up— now providing another option for this indus- the carrot and stick approach that we have try and, in particular, for the people of Aus- adopted. Lifetime Health Cover commences tralia. This measure will lead to reduced gaps on 1 July 2000, following the successful pas- for patients, not more money for doctors, and sage of government legislation in both cham- it is another consistent step in this coalition bers in September last year. This is a new government’s comprehensive strategy to in- system of private health insurance which re- troduce simplified billing for patients with wards membership loyalty and early joining. private health cover. I cannot quantify to the House how many The government’s initiatives to date have people have come and spoken to me and said, been first rate, and we are seeing people re- ‘I have been a member of whatever fund for entering private health insurance arrange- 30, 40 or 50 years and I do not feel that I am ments in droves. That is a great contrast to getting any benefit out of that loyalty and that what we saw in the 13 years of decline in that longtime contribution to the national good by sector and the 13 years of added pressure on being a member of a private health fund.’ As the public purse, taking up the cudgel as peo- a result of this government’s Lifetime Health ple were encouraged out of private health Cover initiative, we are going to give tangi- insurance by the policy initiatives, or perhaps ble benefits to those who have maintained lack of them, of those opposite. We have seen their membership and will continue to main- substantial success also in our strategy to tain it. That those who do not join a fund be- reduce and eliminate gaps, with the number fore 1 July 2000 are going to find themselves of no-gap private admissions now at more paying a higher premium as a result of join- than 10 per cent and rising rapidly. So more ing after 1 July 2000 is a direct incentive to Australians are already getting benefits be- people to join private health funds. People cause of this government’s initiative and taking out hospital cover early in their lives drive in this particular area and this govern- will pay lower premiums than those who take ment’s keeping faith with the electorate in it out later in life. Lifetime Health Cover will this particular area. That is good news. increase the stability of the industry by en- Twelve months ago virtually no admissions couraging younger and healthier people to into private hospitals were on the basis of no take out private health insurance. Of course, 14748 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 it will continue to help contain the rising ance Commission itself that people be kept in costs of health insurance premiums while focus in all of that. Let me quantify it just a maintaining the objectives of community little bit more. Let me take it away from the rating. It ensures that everyone pays a contri- hard, cold, Canberra style percentages that bution and that it is a fair and equal contribu- we often hear in debates in this place and say tion, whether you live in Thargomindah, in to the chamber that 300,000 new members Toowoomba, in Toowong, in Annerley, in have joined private health funds during that Mount Gravatt or wherever. time. Invariably, so many of those are As well, it is worth recording the success younger Australians who are appreciating of the 30 per cent rebate, because that has what their parents did 30 years ago in trying immediately improved the entire affordability to provide private health insurance and cer- of health insurance for all members of regis- tainty for their families. This is a new gen- tered health funds who are also eligible for eration of Australians who understand the Medicare. The response to the rebate has importance of playing their part in providing been very positive. Private health insurance for themselves and who are subsidising the membership has increased since the rebate health system in some way. was introduced. Membership has increased The matters before the House will con- by a small amount, on looking at it, but when tinue this welcome trend. They will continue one considers that there has been a huge de- to provide a signal to those who want to pro- cline chronicled for many years and mapped vide for themselves that this government is from the beginning of the Hawke-Keating going to back them all the way. It will con- years and through the first couple of years of tinue to keep faith with people in Australia this government, we have turned the corner. that this government, unlike those opposite, We are now seeing increases in membership promises something before an election and by 0.2 of a percentage point in each of the always delivers immediately after the elec- March and June quarters in 1999, by 0.4 per tion. This is a government that has prided cent in the September 1999 quarter and a itself on making sure that promises made by further 0.3 per cent in the December 1999 politicians are not broken and that we can quarter. I believe that we are all optimistic restore the standing of those who serve in this that we will see this trend continue and that place, with the people of Australia in mind, we will start to be very confident that more in the minds of average Australians. I com- and more people will take up the challenge of mend the bill to the House. being part of a private health insurance Mr WILKIE (Swan) (1.56 p.m.)—Despite scheme, providing themselves with dignity the rhetoric expressed by members of the and certainty and also assisting those in our government, the community knows that it community who are poorer and unable to be was the Labor Party that transformed the part of those schemes, giving them the dig- health industry in this nation. We did so be- nity and certainty of knowing that their place cause health care needs to be accessed by all in the queue at a public hospital will not be people in the community; it must not just be taken by those who can afford to make a the preserve of the wealthy. We also did it contribution themselves to an alternative because we recognised that public health method. could be operated efficiently. The most dis- This is the first time that membership in turbing issue is that this government has all private health funds has increased in three but gutted the public health options of Aus- successive quarters since the Private Health tralians. This was done not because of the Insurance Administration Council com- failure of the health care system; it was done menced publishing quarterly membership because of the ideological position of the records a decade ago. That is a hallmark of minister and the government. success for this government. It is a practical Our task today is to examine the rationale measure that has brought people into the of the Health Legislation Amendment (Gap system. It has demanded of private hospital Cover Schemes) Bill 2000. In doing so, it is providers, of doctors and of the Health Insur- necessary to pay particular attention to the Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14749 overall state of the health industry. Suffice to cover this difference where an agreement say that, if the many calls into my office have exists with a health care provider such as a been any indication, the community view the hospital. The bill might create inflationary health system as being in a state of decay pressures in this environment because new because it has been neglected by this minis- schemes do not allow for the new round of ter. He would stray down the American path medical charges. This in reality means that and, if he thought that he could get away with the gap itself might increase. As we know, it, he would destroy Medicare. In the face of the 30 per cent subsidy has allowed larger all the evidence, he refuses to believe that insurance companies to absorb the cost, public hospitals provide the best hedge whereas the smaller companies have had against inflated health prices. He does not problems even doing this. Therefore, a con- concede that public health provides access to dition exists whereby the competitive pres- everyone in the community, irrespective of sures may indeed lead to a reduction in the income. number of providers in the market. In the long term, we do not want to reduce con- There are two things that I wish to exam- sumer options. Nor do the regulations at- ine today: firstly, the impact of the bill and, tached to the bill adequately qualify infla- secondly, why members on this side of the tionary effects, although this is mentioned in House are very wary of any measures intro- the legislation. This is not appropriate pol- duced by this minister. The health insurance icy— gap cover scheme bill does three significant things. Firstly, it enables gap cover schemes Mr SPEAKER—Order! It being 2 p.m., to be developed with the minister’s consent. the debate is interrupted in accordance with In other words, signatories can charge more standing order 101A. The debate may be re- than a prescribed fee if the scheme has been sumed at a later hour and the member will approved by the minister. Secondly, on a have leave to continue speaking when the positive note, it allows for simplified billing debate is resumed. arrangements to be developed. Thirdly, it QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE includes in regulations rather than in the act Telstra: Sale matters pursuant to the scheme, but practi- Mr CREAN (2.00 p.m.)—My question is cally devolves the legislative model. It dele- to the Minister for Finance and Administra- gates greater responsibility to the department. tion. Minister, given the opposition in the It is a fine example of the minister avoiding Senate, and in your own ranks, to the full sale his responsibilities. This bill avoids the real, of Telstra, will you give a commitment that critical issue facing the minister and the the full sale of Telstra will not be factored community—that of the decline in standards into this year’s budget? and access by the public to the Australian health system. The other point of some note Mr FAHEY—The Labor Party in gov- is that the effects of this bill are potentially ernment were known on numerous occasions inflationary and may create problems for es- to factor in all sorts of weird and wonderful tablished no-gap policies. My concerns can ideas. This government operates on its policy be summarised as follows: there could be an and operates on factual information. You inflationary component to the bill, it might should wait about two months, when you can have an impact on the current schemes and have a good look at the budget and see what patients need to be made fully aware of the is in it. financial consent component of the bill. Families: Government Policy Let me briefly examine these issues. I un- Mr CHARLES (2.01 p.m.)—My question derstand that currently the Medicare rebate without notice is to the Prime Minister. Prime covers around 75 per cent of the schedule fee Minister, would you please outline to the imposed, while private health insurance cov- House the benefits to Australian families of ers the remaining portion. This difference, of government policies? course, is the gap. The current legislation Mr HOWARD—I thank the member for permits the health insurance organisations to La Trobe for his question. As always, the 14750 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 member for La Trobe expresses the concerns payers will know that no matter how much of the average Australian. The average Aus- harder they work, and no matter how much tralian is interested in benefits for their fam- more income they earn, the rate they pay on ily, and there are many benefits of govern- that marginal dollar can never be more than ment policy for Australian families. The first 30 cents. That is a truly historic reform, and most important benefit is that we have which says to the great bulk of Australian provided Australian families with more jobs. taxpayers: you can lift your incomes quite We have provided them with more than dramatically, but you do not go into a higher 650,000 jobs over the last four years. Not tax bracket. That will restore a massive only have we got more people into work but amount of incentive. the people we have got into work are earning I say to the member for La Trobe: you are more money. quite right to ask me about the application of I would not be the least bit surprised if the government policies for Australian families. Treasurer were asked about the national ac- It has been our determination over the last counts later today. Maybe the shadow Treas- four years to act in the interests of all Austra- urer will give the bloke a break and ask him a lian families. I am proud to say to the House question. As the national accounts reveal, one that, of all of the things this government has of the things that is underpinning the con- achieved, there are none more significant tinuing strength of the Australian economy is than the enormous benefits we have delivered the rise in disposable incomes of Australian to average families throughout the length and families—there are more people in work and breadth of our nation. there have been real wage rises. Under the Telstra: Services coalition, real wages have grown at an annual Mr STEPHEN SMITH (2.06 p.m.)—My rate of 2.3 per cent. Under 13 years of Labor, question is to the Prime Minister. Prime the average annual increase in real wages was Minister, do you recall the government’s barely anything—it was 0.3 per cent—so 1998 election commitment that the full sale there has, by comparison, been a massive rise of Telstra would not proceed without an in- in real wages under this government. But it dependent inquiry to assess service levels to does not stop there. We also have the benefits customers in metropolitan, rural and remote of lower interest rates—$266 a month the areas? Isn’t it a fact that the government average Australian family is better off as a promised that this inquiry would be presented result of lower interest rates. Despite the at- to the parliament as legislation; specifically, tempts of the Labor Party to stop the income that the performance criteria for Telstra, for tax cuts coming in on 1 July, and despite the assessment by the inquiry, would be detailed unwillingness of the Leader of the Opposi- in that legislation? Prime Minister, do you tion to rule out an increase in income tax on propose to honour this commitment by giving Australian families if he were ever to become the House an assurance today that the details Prime Minister of Australia, I have more of your inquiry—in particular, its terms of good news for Australian families. On 1 July, reference, composition and the performance Australian families will enjoy the largest per- criteria for Telstra—will be presented to the sonal income tax cuts in Australia’s history. parliament as legislation for consideration Australian families will share in a cut in in- and debate? come tax worth $12 billion. Mr HOWARD—I do, I do, I do. I thank But that is not the end of it. In addition to the honourable member for Perth. I do re- the personal income tax cuts, there is $2.5 member very clearly saying that—a long billion of increased family benefits. The av- time ago. I certainly do remember that com- erage family will receive a tax cut of $47 a mitment, and let me calmly say, for the bene- week after factoring in the goods and services fit of the parliament and particularly for the tax. The situation will be that 80 per cent of benefit of those members—all of whom sit Australian taxpayers will be on a top mar- behind me—who are interested in service ginal rate of no more than 30 per cent—in levels for regional Australia: the govern- other words, 80 per cent of Australian tax- ment’s policy has always been that the sale of Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14751 the rest of Telstra is conditional on there be- hypocrisy, particularly against the Leader of ing this transparent public inquiry and that the Opposition. Ever since Telstra made the transparent public inquiry reporting that there announcement last week, the Leader of the has been adequate delivery according to set Opposition has been in front of every micro- criteria of service levels. I will need to check phone that will come to a stop in front of with my office and with the minister, but my him. He has been talking into every single recollection—and I cannot at this stage, for microphone in Australia saying, ‘This is out- obvious reasons, put it stronger than that rageous. There are going to be jobs lost if without checking—is as follows: we pre- Telstra is allowed to do what it wants to do.’ I sented a bill to the parliament seeking sanc- might remind the Leader of the Opposition of tion for the full sale of Telstra. It contained a a speech he made to parliament on 4 June provision for the establishment of this in- 1992. He was waxing eloquent about his role quiry. That bill in that form was rejected in in economic reform in Australia. the Senate, including with the votes of the Mr Costello—He was being prolix. Australian Labor Party. As a consequence of that, we went back to the Senate and secured Mr HOWARD—The Treasurer tempts the passage of a bill to sell up to another 16- me. He says he was being prolix about his odd per cent, again in the teeth of opposition role in economic reform. The Leader of the from the Australian Labor Party—these peo- Opposition said this: ple who always say one thing in opposition I will point out one of the fundamental elements and do the completely opposite thing when of restructuring ... There is one essential accom- they are in government. It remains the case paniment to restructuring. Almost invariably where there are changes to work practices, where that our policy is that the rest of Telstra will industrial efficiencies are introduced, there will be be sold subject to that public inquiry, and redundancies. We cannot escape that. That is an there will be an announcement made about inevitable consequence of structural change. We that inquiry. cannot run away from that. The appropriate nature of this question That was a fair statement. What is not fair, from the member for Perth grows on me what is hypocritical, what is duplicitous and every minute, because there is going to be an what represents the absolute policy bank- announcement made by the relevant minister ruptcy of the Leader of the Opposition is that within the next few days about the terms of having had the responsibility of government, reference of the inquiry and the personnel to and knowing that to be a reality, he still pre- be on that inquiry. As I said, I will check my tends to the Australian people that you can recollection because I do not pretend to carry have the sort of economic change that is oc- all of these things around in my head—but curring, particularly in the communications that is my recollection. Our position is very sector, without some job implications. I do clear. We are not hypocrites on the issue of not pretend to the Australian people, I do not privatisation, unlike those who sit opposite. try to walk both sides of the street, I do not We all remember those ringing commitments try to be all things to all men on this issue. that were made to the Australian people by What I am trying to do is to point out—and I the Leader of the Opposition when he was a know those opposite do not like this because minister in the Hawke and Keating govern- it reminds them of the sheer policy bank- ments about how they would not privatise the ruptcy of the man who leads them—that it Commonwealth Bank. I remember being reminds the Australian people that, on this rung up by him when I was in opposition and particular issue, he is playing fast and loose being asked for opposition support to get a not only with the truth but with policy reality. privatisation proposal through the Senate. The communications sector, which the na- They were begging for the support of the tional accounts figures released today dem- Liberal and National parties for a privatisa- onstrate is one of the fastest, if not the fastest, tion proposal. growing areas of the Australian economy, is It is even better than that, though, from a an area where the sort of changes contem- point of view of demonstrating the charge of plated are unavoidable. Nobody likes it. The 14752 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 good thing is that we have generated a cli- 1996, unemployment was 8.6 per cent and mate where people who may be redundant in now it is 6.7 per cent. At a growth rate of one part of that industry sector can get a job four per cent per annum, unemployment re- elsewhere. I would remind the parliament duces at about half a percentage point per that when Mr Beazley made that statement in annum. If we were to keep the Australian June of 1992, the unemployment rate in economy growing at four per cent, you would Australia was massively above what it is expect the unemployment rate to reduce now, and the climate for people who are about half a per cent per annum for as long as made redundant is infinitely better now than that growth continued. what it was. On this issue, as on so many, the Because the national accounts came out Leader of the Opposition is without policy today, you might have expected that the credibility. shadow Treasurer would ask me a question Mr Stephen Smith—Mr Speaker, to help about them. He did have a question but not to the Prime Minister, I seek leave to table an me, and its subject matter was not the na- extract from the coalition policy document tional accounts. We are still waiting for the ‘Better Communications’, which includes the shadow Treasurer to make his first speech on reference— macroeconomic policy. He is yet to make a Mr SPEAKER—The member for Perth speech on macroeconomic policy. His record will resume his seat. Leave is denied. of speeches on macroeconomic issues looks a bit like the Leader of the Opposition’s tax Economy: Growth policy—a blank sheet on both sides. He is Mr CAUSLEY (2.14 p.m.)—My question still to ask his first question. He was audi- is directed to the Treasurer. Would the Treas- tioning before the News Ltd editors in Syd- urer advise the House of the results of the ney last night—and modesty prevents me December quarter national accounts which from telling him how he went—but he is yet were released today by the Australian Bureau to make his first speech on the economy. of Statistics? There would be a lot of Labor backbenchers Mr COSTELLO—I thank the honourable who would not realise how unusual it is to member for Page for his question. The na- have somebody in a position like this who tional accounts, which were released by the has not had an economic thought for the pe- Australian Bureau of Statistics for the De- riod that he has held the office. The member cember quarter this year, show that Australia for Werriwa said it before: change is hard. To is a high growth, low inflation economy. The actually support a policy—to be able to do Australian economy continues to perform more than cheapjack opportunist, populist strongly by world standards, recording a sloganeering—you have to actually take a solid one per cent growth in the December stand, you have to actually do something. quarter and 4.3 per cent through the year. In The shadow Treasurer’s contribution to tax terms of inflation, the consumption deflator policy, as I recall, was his big claim before increased by just 0.9 per cent through the the 1996 election that he was going to take year. What that shows is that the Australian the Toorak tractor off the road, which he de- economy has now grown at above four per cided after the election was a bad policy and cent for the last 11 consecutive quarters—a he abandoned it immediately. growth rate unrivalled in the last 30 years. Mr Howard interjecting— The Australian economy has grown at or Mr COSTELLO—What was he? Lucky above four per cent for the last 11 consecu- that he didn’t get elected. So the one policy tive quarters—a growth rate which is unri- that he had was the wrong one. The Labor valled in the last 30 years. There was nothing Party is yet to make a statement on economic like it in the nineties, the eighties or indeed policy. It is the big reforms over the last four the seventies. That indicates the strength of years—the changing of monetary policy, the the economy and the capacity to produce balancing of the budget, the changes in rela- jobs. Last month we had 50,000 new jobs. tion to tax reform—that are setting Australia When this government was elected in March up for the growth opportunities that Australia Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14753 deserves. We have seen unemployment fall rural guarantee, and I deemed what he had by two percentage points under the policies said to date to be in order. of this government, and if we continue with Mr ANDERSON—Whilst the Labor economic reform they can fall further. They Party makes these claims, to be fair and ob- are the benefits for Australians from good jective about this, the member for Calare, in policy. That is why the government’s policy good faith, asked me some questions about for economic reform should be supported in call centres last week, and I added to my an- this parliament and should proceed. swer. In that I actually quoted the CEO of Telstra: Job Cuts Telstra, who made it quite plain that, in rela- tion to call centres, there are a number of Ms KERNOT (2.18 p.m.)—My question very good reasons why Telstra might very is to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister well locate more, not less, jobs in rural and for Transport and Regional Services. Deputy regional Australia—to which I say, ‘Amen; Prime Minister, do you recall that Telstra’s you’ve got it right, and we would like to see recent announcement of a $2.1 billion half- some action on it.’ Finally, the member for year profit and 10,000 job cuts follows on Dickson, in some extraordinary leap of faith, Telstra’s August 1999 announcement of a implies that I have given some personal guar- $1.9 billion half-year profit and the com- antee. She misses the point. The guarantees mencement of charging for 013 directory that we have put in place are set in legisla- assistance services? Are you aware of reports tion. They are not mine; they are in legisla- today that Telstra’s 013 services conducted tion, which I would have thought was far out of regional call centres are to be outsour- more robust and of far more value to rural ced, leading to the loss of hundreds of full- and regional Australia. I can only conclude time jobs and over 1,000 casual jobs? Does by saying: (a) you have no credibility on this; the Deputy Prime Minis’s personal guarantee, and (b) you are plainly more interested in which he asserts prevents Telstra from pull- scaremongering than in addressing the real ing linesmen out of depots, apply to workers issue, which is services in rural and regional from Telstra regional call centres? Australia. Mr ANDERSON—I have not heard those Goods and Services Tax: Fuel Excise allegations, and I am not going to accept Mr LLOYD (2.22 p.m.)—My question is them on face value here this afternoon. Nei- addressed to the Treasurer. Would the Treas- ther am I going to be put in a position of de- urer please provide details to the House of fending Telstra’s performance in rural and the factors influencing the current price of regional areas because, as we have claimed, fuel in Australia? we believe that they ought to lift their game. Mr COSTELLO—I thank the honourable The member for Batman says that they are member for his question and— going to look after the interests of the bush and give it a voice because they are going to Mr Martin Ferguson interjecting— look after Telstra and Australia Post. They Mr SPEAKER—The member for Bat- are the people who closed 270 post offices man! The Treasurer has the call. around Australia, the people who did away Mr COSTELLO—I am quite happy to with analogue phones, the people who did talk to him about petrol prices because I be- nothing about a customer service guarantee— lieve he is a service station operator and he Ms Kernot—Mr Speaker, I take a point of has taken a great interest in the industry. The order on relevance. The question was price of petrol in Australia is governed by whether the Deputy Prime Minister will stand world oil prices and by retail and transport by and apply the personal guarantee that he costs. Approximately 60 per cent of Austra- gave. lia’s oil is imported but all of the oil, domes- tic and import, is set at a world price. The Mr SPEAKER—The Deputy Prime reason for that is that the oil price is in a Minister was asked a question about the global market and is set by global factors. profit level of Telstra and job losses and a The benchmark West Texas intermediate 14754 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 crude, which was at about an average of $12 that to the consumer the price will be equal- per barrel in February 1999, went to $21 a ised back with the goods and services tax, but barrel in August 1999, $27 in January this to business and anybody who is entitled to an year and is now averaging around $30 in input tax credit it actually amounts to a 10 March, which is almost a tripling of the price per cent cut in the price of petrol. So, for of crude oil over the course of the year from farmers and other people in business that are February 1999. As a consequence of that, using cars in the course of their business, the petrol prices have increased. consequence of that is that petrol will actu- Mr Fitzgibbon—What’s it mean for your ally become 10 per cent cheaper. GST promise? I have noticed that there has been some Mr COSTELLO—In relation to excise, criticism of the indexation system. There because I hear a question from one of the were some stories today making the false Labor frontbenchers in relation to excise: claim—incidentally, in one of the Fairfax excise on fuel is indexed. That was a system papers today—that the government was not which was introduced by the Hawke gov- reducing excise on petrol—it is, as I indi- ernment in 1983 and has never been opposed cated before—and saying that indexation by any member of the Labor Party. would drive up the price. I make this point: the indexation system, which has been in Mr Fitzgibbon interjecting— place since the Labor Party introduced it, has Mr SPEAKER—The member for Hunter! always worked off the consumer price index. Mr COSTELLO—To my knowledge, Obviously, the best way to minimise the ef- after 13 years of imposing it neither the fect of indexation is to have a lower con- member for Hunter nor his father ever voiced sumer price index. one day’s objection to that system. But of Mr Fitzgibbon interjecting— course not only did the petrol excise go up as Mr SPEAKER—The member for Hunter! a consequence of indexation; petrol excises were also increased by the Labor Party as a Mr COSTELLO—Under the Australian matter of discretion. Labor Party, the consumer price index in- creased by an average of 5.2 per cent per an- Mr Anderson—When was that? num— Mr COSTELLO—In 1983—1.87c per Mr Fitzgibbon interjecting— litre increase, discretionary; budget increase in 1986 of 3c; another budget increase in Mr SPEAKER—The member for Hunter! 1993 of 3c; another budget increase in 1994 Mr COSTELLO—whereas under this of, I believe, one cent; and another one in government it has been 1.1. 1995. So the Labor Party was legislating to Mr Fitzgibbon interjecting— increase the excises and, because they had indexation in place, those increases fitted into Mr SPEAKER—The member for Hunter the CPI and indexed it up in addition. This is warned. government, unlike its predecessor, has never Mr COSTELLO—So, Mr Speaker, the increased petrol excise as discretionary member for Hunter should explain why they budget increases. In fact, this government has were discretionary increasing—that is, legis- legislated, as part of its new tax package, to lating to increase it in budgets but pushing it actually reduce excise, and it will be, on the up 5.2 per cent on 5.2 per cent on 5.2 per cent costings in ANTS, reducing petrol excise to per annum over the course of 13 years. Under the order of $1.2 billion—although the actual this government, by doing it at 1.1 per cent, reduction will be set closer to the time—with there has been of course an enormous benefit reductions in diesel of around $0.7 billion. So for petrol buyers. I make the point that I see this government is the first government that that some of the lobbyists for some of the has ever proposed reductions in petrol excise. motoring organisations have a campaign The Labor Party not only put the excise up against indexation, which I suppose is fair but also used that to feed into indexation. The enough from their point of view. But the gov- consequence of that reduction in excise is ernment has always indicated that it would Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14755 keep the system of indexation. We do it for true that they will not qualify for one cent of this reason: we index the excise on petrol the $7,000 First Home Owners Scheme? because we index pensions and other bene- Mr COSTELLO—What the government fits. The motoring organisations who com- has done is introduce a First Home Owners plain about indexing in relation to petrol may Scheme for people who have not previously well explain to their members, particularly owned homes. The reason for that is that, if pensioners, why, if they are against indexa- you own a current home and the price of tion, they think pensioners should not have housing goes up, you will get the benefit of increases in their pension in line with the that in relation to your house. If you are not CPI. Obviously, if you are going to have in- in the market, you will not get it. So the gov- creases in pensions, family allowances and ernment, as part of its policy, has decided to all other government benefits in response to fund a First Home Owners Scheme. I am price rises, the revenues that are going to pay pleased to say that nobody has extolled the for that should also move in line with price benefits of the First Home Owners Scheme rises. That is the other half of the story that more than the Labor Treasurer of Tasmania, the lobbyists of the motoring organisations Dr David Crean, who is putting out press are not telling their members. They are not releases boasting about the wonderful policy telling their pensioners that, if it were the of the First Home Owners Scheme. I do case that the excise did not stay in proportion thank Dr Crean for extolling the benefits of to the price of the product, the government our policy which will protect first home own- would not be in the position to make sure the ers. spending power of the pensions kept propor- tion with the cost rises that those pensioners Mr Crean—Mr Speaker, my point of or- have to pay and that people on family allow- der goes to relevance. And why is it that they ances and other benefits have to pay. are slugging them for the GST but not giving them access to the First Home Owners On this side of the House, we think it is Scheme? important that pensions keep pace with infla- tion. In fact, on this side of the House we Mr SPEAKER—The Deputy Leader of think it is important that they go in front of the Opposition will resume his seat. Has the inflation, which is why we are increasing Treasurer concluded his answer? pensions by four per cent on 1 July. Obvi- Mr COSTELLO—Yes. ously, to pay for that you need a revenue base Victoria: Business Confidence which grows in proportion to the economy. Mr GEORGIOU (2.32 p.m.)—My ques- One of the ways that pensions will be funded tion is addressed to the Minister for Em- in the future is with a goods and services tax ployment, Workplace Relations and Small which will grow in line with the economy. If Business. Minister, are you aware of media we were not to broaden the base of the indi- reports on the level of business confidence in rect taxes, we would not be in a position to Victoria? Would you inform the House why pay those benefits. That is why the Labor confidence is at the level it is? Party in its opposition to GST has also been opposing increases in pensions and why it Mr REITH—I thank the member for would have no basis to pay for increased Kooyong for his question. All the Victorian family benefits if it were not to take the bene- members, with all the other members in the fit of the tax reform from this government. House, would be pleased to see the numbers that came out today on GDP. Goods and Services Tax: First Home Owners Scheme Mr Fitzgibbon interjecting— Mr CREAN (2.30 p.m.)—My question is Mr REITH—It is a great testament to the to the Treasurer. I ask him: isn’t it true that a leadership— couple signing a contract to build their first Mr SPEAKER—The member for Hunter home now will have to pay GST on that part will excuse himself from the House under the of the house built after 1 July? Isn’t it also provisions of standing order 304A. 14756 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

The member for Hunter then withdrew Victorian jobs and investment at risk. The from the chamber. other interesting reflection on the federal op- Mr REITH—Today’s GDP numbers give position from what is going on at the state us confidence in the reform program that the level is the state of confusion. If you listen to government has put in place. I am sure I am the Labor Party, my opposite number in the one of many who want to congratulate the federal parliament says that I am the most Prime Minister and the Treasurer on the work interventionist minister of all time, yet the that they have done. As a Victorian, however, state minister is saying, ‘Where are you?’ I am concerned to see developments in Victo- Mr Beazley interjecting— ria which show you what happens when you Mr REITH—Exactly. Thank you for the get a Labor government. This was very clear interjection. One minute I am too interven- in the survey results that were out this week tionist, the next minute it is, ‘Where are you? in the Melbourne Herald Sun under the title You ought to be intervening.’ ‘Projects slump as confidence takes a dive’. This is directly attributable to the Labor gov- Mr Bevis interjecting— ernment’s actions—or inaction—in Victoria Mr REITH—And then the state leader, and, in particular, to the fact that they are just like you— under the thumb of the unions, as the Leader Mr SPEAKER—By any measure, the of the Opposition federally would be under member for Brisbane has been granted a the thumb of the unions if ever he were great deal of latitude by the chair. He will elected. As one of the principal operators in now show some restraint. the building industry said in the Herald Sun Mr REITH—Mr Speaker, you give him a this week: lot more latitude than his union masters do, I This is the worst it has been for about a can tell you that. The state Premier in Victo- decade. There is not a lot of big projects ria says, ‘If only we had a system of arbitra- floating around. tion, which I am going to set up, then we He went on to say: would be able to manage the building indus- A client would have to have rocks in their head try in Victoria.’ Yet, when the matter was putting something out for tender now. before the federal commission yesterday, the Victorians did not turn up. Why didn’t they That is what you get when you get a Labor turn up? Because the union said, ‘We don’t government that is under the thumb of mili- want arbitration because we would never get tant trade union leaders, as is happening in a 36-hour week if the matter went to arbitra- Victoria today. As Nicole Feeley, the head of tion.’ It is hypocrisy upon hypocrisy. In the a Victorian employers association, said in end the reality is, at the state level as it is at regard to a survey: the federal level, that when it comes to policy Victoria cannot afford to slide. You lose six you do what the unions tell you to do, and the months now and it takes 12 months to recover. people who suffer are the average people Or, as the CEO of the retailers association who want a job. The average worker who said: wants to get on and build Victoria is jeop- I have to question whether the confidence of six ardised and put at disadvantage by your close months ago is here. relationship with the unions. Australia is go- The reason for this deteriorating state of cir- ing well because this government acts in the cumstances in Victoria is quite simple to see, national interest. If Labor were in power fed- and that is that we have had the election of a erally, you would get exactly the same as you Labor government and, sadly, the unions are have got with a weak state leader in Victoria. running amok. Martin Kingham, the head of Goods and Services Tax: Business the building workers in Victoria, said last Mr CREAN (2.38 p.m.)—My question year that, come the early part of this year, again is to the Treasurer. I ask him whether there would be industrial warfare, and the he has seen the paper submitted to the na- Labor Party failed to stand up to him and tell tional wage hearing today by the National him that it was unacceptable to be putting Farmers Federation, which states: Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14757

As a result of its GST implementation, Australian Mr Crean—Mr Speaker, can I address business will incur an additional one-off net cost you on that point? of about $2.8 billion. Most of these costs will ultimately be passed on to the consumers. This Mr SPEAKER—You can raise a further will add further pressure to the one-off rise in the point of order, of course, but not on the mat- consumer price level as a result of the introduction ter of relevance, which I have addressed. of the GST. The high implementation costs of the Mr Beazley—Mr Speaker, I raise a point GST cast doubts on the supposed welfare gains of of order on your ruling in relation to what the GST based tax reform. you have been prepared to hear from the Treasurer, if the National Farmers Federation Deputy Leader of the Opposition. As you do not believe you on the GST, why should rightly said, it is not unusual for points of ordinary Australians? order on relevance to be raised in this place. They have, and I had been here at least as Mr COSTELLO—Have I seen the NFF long as you, in that regard. But one thing I submission to the national wage case? No. I have seen from every Speaker, including you, do not write the NFF submission, nor do they on most occasions is that, as with a point of send it to me for checking. I have actually order on relevance or any other matter, the read the ACTU submission, which described standing orders require specifically—it is not Australia as a high growth, low inflation matter of silence; they require specifically— economy and said— that the reasons for the point of order be Mr Crean—Mr Speaker, I raise a point of heard. People do not stand in this place and order. say, ‘Standing order 32,’ and sit down, or Mr COSTELLO—Well, I agree with the ‘Standing order 144,’ and sit down. They say, ACTU on the point. Presumably you would ‘I raise the point of relevance for this reason,’ too. They are your masters. and then you adjudicate on the remarks that they made. That is not a courtesy; that is in Mr SPEAKER—The Treasurer and the fact a standing order. The standing order shadow Treasurer will resume their seats. permits the Deputy Leader of the Opposition Mr Crean—Mr Speaker, my point goes to to state why he raises the matter of relevance, relevance. and he should be heard. Mr SPEAKER—I will rule on the matter Mr SPEAKER—As I indicated to the of relevance. The Treasurer has the call. The House earlier, and as everyone in the House Treasurer’s comment has to be deemed to be knows, it has been my practice in the chair to relevant. He was talking about submissions note the question. It is also my responsibility, to the national wage hearings, and I invite not always properly discharged, to listen fully him to continue. to the answer. The Treasurer was, in my es- timation, being relevant to the question Mr Crean—Mr Speaker— asked, and for that reason I ruled a point of Mr SPEAKER—I have ruled on the order on relevance as in fact not relevant and matter of relevance. I have called the Treasurer, and I call him again. Mr McMullan—You have not heard it. Mr COSTELLO—I was asked whether I Mr SPEAKER—We do not need to go had seen the National Farmers Federation through this constant debate. I have the ques- submission to the national wage case, and I tion written down. I was listening to the an- say that I have not. The question then in- swer. I can rule whether it was relevant or cluded a long quote, including compliance not, as is consistent with the action taken by costs, and finishes off with a somewhat rhe- the chair for decades. I have, however, been torical flourish about compensation for tax prepared to listen to points of relevance at changes. I would have thought that this gov- greater length than most previous occupiers ernment has provided compensation, and not of the chair. I have ruled that in this case the just compensation but benefits, arising from Treasurer is being relevant to the question tax changes which are unrivalled in Austra- asked, and I invite him to continue. lian history. When Labor was putting up 14758 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 wholesale sales taxes, there was no compen- standards and what would these policies sation. When Labor was putting up petrol mean for the future of Australian education? excise, there was no compensation. What this Mr Beazley—Mr Speaker, I raise a point government does is it introduces goods and of order on the question of repetition of a services tax, abolishes wholesale sales tax, question. I think this is the eighth time this cuts income taxes by $12 billion, increases question has been asked. Would you at least pensions in advance of inflation, guarantees request of the minister that he get his answer to keep them in advance of the CPI, increases right this time instead of being obliged to— the level of family allowances, increases rent assistance by seven per cent, increases all Mr SPEAKER—The Leader of the Op- allowances under the social security regime, position makes the point that the question on cuts the company tax, halves capital gains tax national literacy benchmarks has been asked and introduces a simplified taxation system. on a number of occasions. It was a point I At the end of all of that, the Labor Party is so noted as it was being asked. In this instance, I opposed to the goods and services tax that if noted that the question was asked about its they ever get elected they plan to keep it. impact on parents and, for that reason, I could not deem it to be repetitious, but the When the Leader of the Opposition got up point made by the Leader of the Opposition last night to speak to the Irish Prime Minister, has been noted by the chair. I gave him a challenge. He should have said, ‘Taoiseach, you are wrong about goods and Dr KEMP—The establishment of the na- services tax. Europe is wrong, Germany is tional literacy standards, which all education wrong, France is wrong and England is systems are expected to meet, has been es- wrong. Taoiseach, what you need is a whole- sential to deal with the massive literacy sale sales tax, thought up by the modern problem left by the Labor Party after 13 years thinkers of the Australian Labor Party.’ I said in office. Members of this House will have yesterday that it was an oxymoron to be a noted that a number of the states are now Labor thinker. releasing the results of these benchmark as- sessments and there was significant comment Mr Crean interjecting— on these results in the press this morning. Mr SPEAKER—The Deputy Leader of These standards are the key to the most im- the Opposition knows that that was out of portant equity policy in Australian education order. today. If you do not support national stan- dards, if you do not support the publication Mr Crean—I seek leave to table the paper of results, you are simply not serious in ad- submitted by the National Farmers Federa- dressing the literacy problem in this country. tion showing that they do not believe the The Labor Party has not committed itself to Treasurer. the standards and has not committed itself to Mr Costello interjecting— the publication of these benchmark results. There are two essential elements to the na- Mr SPEAKER—The Treasurer and the tional benchmarks which define the national Deputy Leader of the Opposition will stop literacy standards. One is that they define the this cross-parliamentary exchange. Is leave literacy levels which a child will need in or- granted? der to successfully complete their education. Leave not granted. Mr Beazley interjecting— Literacy: National Standards Dr KEMP—The Leader of the Opposition Mr ANDREW THOMSON (2.45 p.m.)— is not interested in empowering parents to act My question is addressed to the Minister for so as to cope with literacy problems faced by Education, Training and Youth Affairs. their child. When the Leader of the Opposi- Would the minister inform the House how the tion was in office, 30 per cent of young peo- national literacy benchmarks assist parents ple in Australia could not read and write and schoolchildren? Is the minister aware of properly. What did the Leader of the Opposi- any alternative policies on national literacy tion do about it? Did he observe that there Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14759 was a problem? No, he said, ‘I thought there has allowed the literacy problem to persist in was less capacity to achieve in that portfolio this country. It is only the national standards than in just about any I have had.’ Thirty per established by this government in conjunc- cent of young people could not read and tion with the states which have put parents in write properly and the Leader of the Opposi- a position where they can go to schools and tion could not think of anything to do about begin to ask, ‘Where is my child in relation it. He went to sleep for two years. What an to the national standard? What action are you extraordinary record we have here. We have a taking to make sure my child is at the na- leader who did nothing in a key portfolio tional standard?’ I was asked whether there when he had the opportunity. At the last were any alternative policies and what the election, he brought out an education policy implications of these were. I am drawing a which was so bad that the shadow minister comparison with the lack of policy on the resigned. other side of the House. The Labor Party’s Mr Lee—Mr Speaker, the standing orders consistent policy on this, in conjunction with prohibit ministers from repetition. Would you the Australian Education Union, was to con- please ask this minister to wind up. ceal the results of literacy tests from parents. And they have still not committed themselves Mr SPEAKER—The minister is referring to the publication of these results. to national literacy standards, which is what the question was about. He has an obligation Today we see the Australian Education also to address parental involvement. Union in the media urging that the national benchmark be shunted to one side and saying Dr KEMP—Mr Speaker, the very point I that the unions and the Labor Party would put am making is that the Leader of the Opposi- in place a new policy framework that would, tion failed, when he was minister, to publish once again, conceal information from par- the results of literacy tests when they were ents. We have a disastrous record of disad- available and thus deprived parents of— vantaging and disempowering parents, which Mr Beazley interjecting— has led to the persistence of a long, serious Dr KEMP—One can understand their literacy problem in this country. When the sensitivity on this point because the record is Leader of the Opposition put forward an al- abysmal. When the Leader of the Opposition ternative at the last election, he devoted four was the minister, when he was wanting to be lines to the question of literacy, and the pol- defence minister but just happened to be edu- icy was so bad that his shadow minister re- cation minister, he sat on the results of liter- signed from it. When he attempted, in the last acy tests year after year, in partnership with fortnight, to set out some educational targets the Australian Education Union, and failed to and goals for Australia, he tripped over him- publish the results of those tests so that par- self, contradicted himself and contradicted ents could take appropriate action. his shadow minister—a movement from one Mr Beazley—Mr Speaker, on a point of bungle to another. There is no policy on the order as to relevance: the minister was asked other side of the House. He is the Frank what assistance he could provide parents in Spencer of education policy. Some mothers relation to literacy standards and what we do ‘ave ‘em, and we are certainly not going have is the same diatribe which we have had to get anything better from that side. every day. Goods and Services Tax: Draught Beer Mr SPEAKER—The minister was ad- Mr CREAN (2.54 p.m.)—My question is dressing the question of national literacy to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, do you standards and had not concluded his answer, agree with the Treasurer that draught beer so the chair could only presume that he was will go up by eight per cent because of the also addressing the question of parents. GST? If so, why did you tell Alan Jones on Dr KEMP—Parents are entitled to infor- 14 August 1998: mation about the performance of their chil- Across the board there is virtually no change in dren. It has been that lack of information relation to alcohol—a tiny CPI equivalent rise in available to parents for such a long time that relation to ordinary beer. 14760 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

Isn’t draught beer ordinary beer? And why election campaign. I would point out to the didn’t you tell the truth to the Australian public and to the House that drinkers, along people about the GST’s eight per cent hit on with all other sections of the Australian draught beer prices? community, will enjoy very significant tax Mr HOWARD—As is my custom in these cuts. matters, I will check all of the sources quoted Goods and Services Tax: Seminars by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. It is Mr SCHULTZ (2.58 p.m.)—My question no secret—and the Treasurer and I have cer- is addressed to the Minister for Agriculture, tainly been making this plain—that, because Fisheries and Forestry. Would the minister of the service component to draught beer, inform the House how the government is there will be a higher price rise for a glass of working cooperatively with industry leaders beer across the counter. We have never dis- to assist farmers and other small business guised that. My recollection is that, some operators prepare for the new tax system? weeks ago, I mentioned on the 7.30 Report a What has been the public response to the figure of seven per cent. government’s seminars for farmers? Mr Costello—And I said it on Laws. Mr TRUSS—I am very happy to inform Mr HOWARD—And the Treasurer said it the honourable member that there has been a on Laws. That is a double for you if ever remarkable response to the government’s there was one: the Prime Minister on the 7.30 program of arranging seminars for farmers to Report and the Treasurer on Laws. As far as explain the new tax system. Indeed, most of the election campaign is concerned, my rec- the seminars are heavily booked, and I have ollection is that I was asked some questions been pleased to announce in the last couple about this. I made it clear, certainly in the of days that we will provide for an additional context of the question I was asked on the 284 seminars across four states. Indeed, in Kempsey bottle shop—Mr O’Brien had a your own state of New South Wales, we will bundle of faxes in front of him and he asked be doubling the number of seminars to be me a number of questions—that there was conducted to 284. Across Australia there will 1.9 per cent on packaged beer. I will check all be 1,578 seminars and workshops—that is of the records. just for farmers—to help explain the new tax Mr Crean—Mr Speaker, on a point of system, providing around 75,000 places. relevance: the Kempsey bottle shop recollec- These seminars are being organised by tion was one month after this quote. farm organisations on behalf of the govern- Mr SPEAKER—No, the Deputy Leader ment—farmers explaining to farmers how the of the Opposition will resume his seat. The new tax system will work in language and answer was entirely relevant to the question with illustrations and examples that are fa- asked. miliar to them and that they can readily un- derstand. They are able to sweep away some Mr HOWARD—The Treasurer and I have of the nonsense and the scare tactics that we been making it very plain that there is a dif- have been hearing from the other side, ex- ference. The reason there is a difference is plain the way the new tax system will work that there is a service component in draught and provide opportunities for farmers to un- beer served across the counter. We have had derstand both their obligations and the bene- extensive discussions with the brewing in- fits of the system to them when it begins on 1 dustry about this. They wanted us to change July. There will also be 23 seminars for fish- it; they wanted us to give them a concession. ing and 15 for forestry. We took the view that we were not able to do that. The price of a glass of beer across the These seminars are being held in almost counter will rise by a higher factor than every country town right across Australia. packaged beer. Packaged beer will on aver- Farmers are keen to learn about the new sys- age rise by around 1.9 per cent or two per tem. They know that there is around $1 bil- cent. That was made clear in the document lion worth of tax savings for them and the released by the Treasurer and me before the removal of their costs. They know they will Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14761 be paying less income tax. Three-quarters of actions were being taken? Minister, what all farmers will be paying 17 cents in the were you doing during this time? dollar or less. They are keen to learn about Mrs BRONWYN BISHOP—I gave a the abolition of the wholesale sales tax sys- very full and detailed answer yesterday. I tem, the cheaper rail freight, the lower trans- would refer the member to that answer I gave port costs and the improvements in Austra- yesterday. At all times the Aged Care Stan- lia’s export competitiveness. They want the dards and Accreditation Agency and the de- facts because there has been so much scare- partment and the delegate of the secretary, mongering. We listened just before question who have the legal responsibility under the time to the honourable member for Paterson act, acted entirely properly and expeditiously advocating the ALP’s roll-back policy— while observing due process in accord with wanting to roll back these benefits to farmers legal service. I was appropriately advised and so that they would not be able to benefit from I was advised that appropriate action had the new system. He wanted to roll it all the been taken. way back to Swaziland and Botswana. He was lecturing the parliament about how Swa- Tax Reform: Families and Self-funded ziland and Botswana had a better economy Retirees than anybody else’s. Mrs MOYLAN (3.03 p.m.)—My question Mr Costello—Who was that? is addressed to the Minister for Community Services. Would the minister advise the Mr TRUSS—The honourable member for House how the Howard government will in- Paterson. That was his example of where he form Australians about the new tax system wants Australia to go. Fortunately, farmers and how it will benefit families? Also, would have higher ambitions. They want the ad- the minister explain how many families will vantage of a modern tax system so they can benefit from the introduction of the family compete effectively with other countries tax payments and the creation of the Family around the world where farmers have not had Assistance Office? to endure Australia’s archaic tax system as they attempt to fight on tough export mar- Mr ANTHONY—I am pleased to inform kets. These new seminars will help ensure the member for Pearce and indeed the House that farmers are well equipped for the new that today Senator Newman and I launched tax system when it begins on 1 July. the public information campaign for families and those receiving income support. Begin- Nursing Homes: Riverside ning today, millions of Australians will start Mr BEAZLEY (3.02 p.m.)—My question to receive information from us, through the is to the Minister for Aged Care. It follows letter box, through the weekend papers and up several of the answers she gave yesterday through television campaigns, about the in parliament on matters related to Riverside benefits of the new tax system. This mail-out Nursing Home. Minister, do you recall com- will go, over the next two months, to 2.2 ing into the parliament on 16 February to million Australians households who will announce that you had personally intervened benefit under these new changes—house- to ensure that the Riverside Nursing Home holds right around the country, and even in was inspected that day and that you wanted Dubbo. I welcome the Mayor of Dubbo and to ‘be advised if there is an immediate or se- his general manager here today. This very vere risk to individual residents’? That was presentable, very informative 20-page book- on 16 February. Are you now saying that you let will explain why we are simplifying 12 did not follow up on this commitment given payments into three payments, and the en- to the House on that day? Do you mean to hanced pay rates— tell us that you ignored the findings of the Mr Horne—Has it got your picture in it? first serious risk report until 22 February? Do you mean to tell us that between the 16th, Mr ANTHONY—Yes. And the enhanced when you personally intervened, and the pay rates are even for the constituents in 22nd, you did not seek to inform yourself so Paterson. More than 90 per cent of Austra- as to ensure that the necessary immediate lians with dependent children will be receiv- 14762 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 ing increased payments from 1 July. As the gent inspection in the first place, why didn’t Prime Minister has very accurately articu- you use your ministerial power to get urgent lated today, this means substantial increases advice about immediate serious risks to the through personal income tax cuts. Eighty per health and safety of residents on the day the cent of Australians will pay no more than 30 inspection was taken, not a week later? per cent tax. We have increases in pensions Mr Beazley interjecting— and allowances. We have increases in family payments, with more generous income test Mrs BRONWYN BISHOP—I put down rules. We have increases in child-care assis- a very detailed answer on the record yester- tance, particularly to low income families, day. I did hear the Leader of the Opposition and major benefits to older Australians and complain about repetitious questions earlier self-funded retirees through the increase in today. Clearly, this is what he is about now. the bonus payments. Very simply, I would refer the honourable member to the answer that I gave yesterday. Administering this will be the Family As- sistance Office, which will help simplify Work for the Dole: Benefits payments in over 500 locations across the Mr HARDGRAVE (3.09 p.m.)—My country. Even opposition members might question is addressed to the Minister for Em- want to avail themselves of this, because they ployment Services. Minister, would you in- need to be educated. They can ring 136150 form the House what progress has been made and get the family assistance hotline, an of- on expanding the successful Work for the fice that will actually be open from 8 a.m. to Dole program? How is this program now 8 p.m.—not like the old days of the DSS being delivered and how will this help job where the office certainly was not open on seekers in my electorate of Moreton? Are Wednesday afternoons. What we are doing is there any alternative views on the benefits of being positive for families. It is about posi- Work for the Dole and what is the govern- tive policies. We actually do have policies, ment’s response to them? unlike the opposition, who do not have poli- Mr Emerson—Mr Speaker— cies. Well, they do have some policies—they have spatial economics, they have loopy Mr Sidebottom interjecting— policies— Mr SPEAKER—The member for Rankin Mr Swan—Mr Swan interjecting— will resume his seat. He is still waiting for Mr ANTHONY—And your policy, some measure of courtesy to be extended to Wayne, of course, which is the family insecu- him by the member for Braddon. rity index, a made-up policy of 60 variables, Mr Emerson—Mr Speaker, I raise a point with half of them wrong. Our policy is about of order under the standing order covering assisting families, not scaring families. We the asking of repetitious questions. This are building on that great coalition tradition question has been asked before and we know of building stronger families and stronger exactly what answer we are going to get. communities. Mr SPEAKER—The question that was Nursing Homes: Riverside asked about the Work for the Dole scheme Ms MACKLIN (3.08 p.m.) My question is was about the scheme and its impact on the to the Minister for Aged Care. Minister, do electors of Moreton. In that context it had not you recall your press release of 1 March been asked earlier. That is why I allowed it to where you stated: stand. ... I used my ministerial powers to take action Mrs Hoare interjecting— against the operator and intervene on behalf of the residents of the facility. Mr ABBOTT—I have more good news That is Riverside Nursing Home. Minister, and more new news about the ever-changing, given that you used your ministerial power to ever-expanding Work for the Dole program take action against the operator, and that you from the Howard government. used your ministerial power to order the ur- Mrs Hoare interjecting— Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14763

Mr SPEAKER—Order! The minister will the most of the Work for the Dole program. resume his seat. I have persistently had to Councillor Jim Soorley has failed to heed the draw the attention of the member for Charl- advice of his Labor colleague the member for ton to what ought to be the courtesies nor- Batman. He should take the advice— mally extended in this House. I will not do so Mr Adams—Mr Speaker, I raise a point again. of order under standing order 85. This min- Mr ABBOTT—The government is ister gave exactly the same answer to a simi- changing the way Work for the Dole is being lar question yesterday. His answer is exactly administered. We are moving away from the the same, with the same terms. He is repeat- one sponsor, one project, one contract model ing the words he used yesterday. to a broken model under which community Mr SPEAKER—The minister was asked work coordinators around the country will a question about work for the dole schemes. work with more grassroots organisations to He was asked about the impact in Moreton, try to ensure we have an even wider range of and he was asked about any alternative pro- Work for the Dole projects. Today the gov- posals. I was listening closely to his answer. I ernment announced the first instalment of have to accept the comment made by the projects under this new model—more than member for Lyons that the information given 300 new projects, involving nearly 6,000 job at this stage is information that the House has seekers, at a cost of about $12 million. heard before. That does not mean it is out of I have been asked how Work for the Dole order, but it does need to be related to the is helping job seekers in the electorate of question as asked. Moreton. I am pleased to say that the very Mr ABBOTT—Speaking on behalf of the distinguished member for Moreton has re- job seekers of Moreton, Maleena Hardy has ceived no fewer than 500 letters from his some advice for Councillor Soorley. She constituents in support of this magnificent says: program of the Howard government, includ- I think the Lord Mayor and the Brisbane City ing one letter from a participant, just one of Council should stop playing political games and 500, detailing how she has been helped by help young people in our area gain the chance this program. Maleena Hardy says: they need and deserve by being part of the work Work for the dole made me more confident at for the dole project. interviews because as soon as I mentioned I was Councillor Soorley was man enough the doing work for the dole I was going to at least five other day to abandon his preference deal with interviews a week and getting better at it. One Nation. We are often told by members opposite that Mr O’Keefe—Mr Speaker, I raise a point Work for the Dole is deficient because it does of order. It is taken under standing order 85. not involve credentialled training. But what it It directly says in the standing order that: does do is give job seekers the right attitude The Speaker ... after having called the attention of to go on and seek credentialled training. the House ... to the conduct of a Member, who Maleena Hardy writes: persists in irrelevance, or tedious repetition ... may I got a full-time traineeship in office skills and direct the Member to discontinue his or her administration. That meant I was studying and speech. getting experience at the same time. I don’t think I I ask you to do that. would have got this chance unless I had the expe- rience I received from doing work for the dole at Opposition members—Hear, hear! PA hospital. Mr SPEAKER—The member for Burke I have been asked about alternative views. will resume his seat. I have already ruled that Unfortunately, the Labor controlled Brisbane the minister was asked a question in three City Council took extravagant advantage of parts, and he is responding. I ask him to Working Nation programs but has failed to come to his answer. heed the advice of the former employment Mr ABBOTT—Thank you, Mr Speaker. spokesman, the member for Batman, who Councillor Soorley has been man enough said that all community groups should make over the last couple of days to abandon his 14764 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 disgraceful One Nation preference deal. He Immigration: Parent Migration should be man enough to abandon bias and Applications bigotry in this matter as well— Mr ROSS CAMERON (3.21 p.m.)—My Mr SPEAKER—The minister’s reference question is to the Minister for Immigration to the preference deal could have no rele- and Multicultural Affairs— vance to Work for the Dole. Opposition members interjecting— Mr ABBOTT—and make use of Work for Mr SPEAKER—The member for Par- the Dole to help— ramatta will resume his seat. The member for Prospect! The member for Melbourne is Mr SPEAKER—The minister will re- warned. I call the member for Parramatta. sume his seat. Mr ROSS CAMERON—My question is Opposition members interjecting— to the Minister for Immigration and Multi- cultural Affairs. What are the political and Mr SPEAKER—The member for Bruce financial constraints operating on the number and the member for Braddon will exercise a of parents we can allow to permanently mi- good deal more restraint or they will be dealt grate to Australia? What would be the conse- with. quences of an immediate and significant in- Nursing Homes: Riverside crease in the size of the parent migration pro- gram? Mr MOSSFIELD (3.18 p.m.)—My ques- Mr RUDDOCK—I thank the member for tion without notice is to the Minister for Parramatta for his question. I note his con- Aged Care. Minister, given your claim that cern and constructive interest in the aspira- you first saw a report on the Riverside Nurs- tions that I know exist among some residents ing Home on 22 February, which included and citizens of Australia to have parents re- reference to the deaths of three residents, united with them. I note that members of the why didn’t you immediately have these opposition from time to time have expressed deaths referred to the Victorian Coroner? On some interest in this matter. what date did you instruct your department to refer this matter to the Federal Police? Why Mr Kerr—What is the waiting time? did it take seven days for this matter to be Mr SPEAKER—The member for reported to the Federal Police? Denison is warned. Mr RUDDOCK—I notice the continuing Mr Tuckey interjecting— interest of members of the Labor Party in this Mr SPEAKER—The Minister for For- matter, but the problem with the Labor Party estry and Conservation! The question asked is to know exactly where they really do stand by the member for Greenway—which I must on the question. When I try to find whether confess I had difficulty hearing in full—from they have a constructive view in relation to my recollection repeated part of what had this issue, I find a lot of comments of the sort been asked in an earlier question and in- that I see from those who want to walk both cluded a reference that had not been asked sides of the street and those who want to be earlier. I did not get a chance to write it all all things to all people. I notice that the down. I call the Minister for Aged Care. shadow minister for immigration, the mem- ber for Bowman, when he was speaking on Mrs BRONWYN BISHOP—Thank you, this matter back in July, accused the govern- Mr Speaker. I have some sympathy with the ment— member for Rankin and the member for Ly- Mr McMullan—Mr Speaker, I rise on a ons with regard to repetition—only it is on point of order that goes to relevance. The their own side of the House. I would simply question raised related to the financial con- say to the member who asked the question straints on the government with regard to the that, in fact, I gave a detailed response yes- parents. It is not the matter that the minister terday. I would refer him to that response. is now referring to with regard to somebody Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14765 else’s policies and what somebody else may a bond. Something of the order of $280,000 have said about something else. It was about worth of costs would be involved. We put financial constraints and it is not relevant. forward such a proposal, and what did the Mr SPEAKER—I am listening to the an- opposition do? swer. Mr Crean interjecting— Mr Ross Cameron—In relation to the Mr RUDDOCK—You disallowed it. point of order, Mr Speaker, the question spe- Mr SPEAKER—The Deputy Leader of cifically asked about the political and finan- the Opposition is warned. cial constraints. Mr RUDDOCK—That was the best pos- Mr RUDDOCK—To have some idea of sible deal that you could have got for parents. the financial constraints you need to have An up-front payment of about $16,000 was some idea about the sorts of numbers that the involved for a couple, of which $6,000 was Labor Party would have in mind. The ques- refundable if they did not access the benefits. tion related to the political and financial con- The fact is that, at $280,000 per single per- straints in relation to the number of parents son—so you are talking about almost a half a who might be allowed to permanently enter million dollars in lifetime costs—they effec- Australia. What you have is the opposition tively would have been able to get that for spokesman, who is prepared to hold out, as $16,000 up front. When the Australian tax- he did in the newspaper El Globo, that, payer understands that that is the nature of maybe, the Labor Party have in mind 10,000 the figures involved and the commitment that annual places to be available under this cate- would have been made, I think they would gory. He said that when he made reference to think that I probably had in mind a very poor what happened when the Labor Party was in deal for taxpayers. I suspect, given the life- office. time costs involved, that today they would If you think about 10,000 people entering expect a much more significant up-front Australia under a program and you know the payment to be reasonable in meeting those potential health costs that are associated for a costs. So if you are serious about meeting person over 65 years of age are of the order those aspirations for parents, with a reason- of $6,000 per year—and that includes their able idea of the costs involved maybe next hospital, pharmaceutical, dental and allied time you will take a more constructive ap- health and nursing home care—and when proach in relation to the issue. you know that such a person may live in Nursing Homes: Riverside Australia for up to 20 years, you can see it represents a cost to the Australian community Mr SWAN (3.28 p.m.)—My question for a lifetime of something of the order of without notice is directed to the Minister for $120,000 each. For the first two years after Aged Care. Minister, do you recall telling the arrival a welfare bond cost was recoverable, House on 13 March this year in relation to and data shows that very few parents access the deaths of residents in the Alchera Park special benefits in that time. But what it does nursing home last year: show is that two years after arrival, and for If the GPs consider the matter to be serious and up to 10 years after arrival, when costs are related to the death of a resident, they should re- not recoverable, the special benefits are ac- port it to the Queensland coroner. cessed in lieu of the age pension. At about Minister, why didn’t you take your own ad- $8,500 for a single person, based on eight vice and refer the three deaths of Riverside years of use, it represents a total cost per per- residents, noted in the report of your own son of $68,000. When you know that after 10 department, to the Victorian coroner? years residency they could also access an age pension, based on a life expectancy of 20 Mrs BRONWYN BISHOP—Again we years after arrival it represents another seem to be into repetitious questions, and that $95,000 in lifetime costs. We did put forward is precisely why I put down a detailed state- last year a proposal that would have enabled ment yesterday—so that we could have some some of those costs to be recouped by way of facts and not opposition fantasy. 14766 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

MINISTER FOR AGED CARE which referred to matters that were not cov- Motion of Censure ered yesterday in questions—the response we got from her was, ‘Refer back to my previous Mr BEAZLEY (Brand—Leader of the answers of yesterday.’ Opposition) (3.31 p.m.)—by leave—I move: This is a minister who has lost her capacity That this House censures the Minister for Aged Care for: to present the defence of her conduct of her portfolio in this place—the focal point of (1) placing at risk the safety, health and accountability for ministers who also happen well-being of residents of nursing homes through her inaction, incompetence and to be members of the House of Representa- inattention in the performance of her tives. She cannot answer questions on her ministerial duties; portfolio. She has been given a formula by (2) not actively overseeing the policing of her staff, after her bumbling, to say nothing, nursing home standards—notwithstand- ‘Refer back to previous answers,’ irrespective ing the wide range of powers available of whether those answers have any relevance under the Aged Care Act and subordi- at all to the questions asked. nate legislation; I was asked this morning about whether or (3) her misleading of the Australian public not we thought we would get any sense of and Par liament about the nature of her accountability from this minister in question personal intervention into the Riverside time today, and I was obliged to express a Nursing Home. certain amount of pessimism in that regard. I move this motion in a state of near despair That pessimism has been more than amply about getting any accountability whatsoever justified by her performance today. from this minister. We have witnessed her flounder for 10 days so far in this parliament. I ask you to cast your minds back to the She has floundered when answering the sim- first occasion that this issue was raised. She plest questions about the most fundamental roared into this House like a bolt from the responsibilities in her portfolio, which just blue, ‘I have a serious problem on my hands. happens to deal with the most vulnerable I have done my first spot check. I have put a people in our community—our frail aged in team into this nursing home’—she did not nursing homes: the heart of her portfolio. name it at that stage, but it happened to be Riverside Nursing Home—’and I am going We have watched her bumble through an- to be advised “if there is an immediate or swer after answer, contradicting herself day severe risk to individual residents”’. Was it after day. We asked a series of questions the delegate who was going to advise? Was it about a report which she put down in this the secretary to the department who was go- place the other day, a report which she should ing to advise? Was it the Victorian state gov- have had in her hands within two days of her ernment which was going to advise? Was it first raising this matter in the parliament. It her legal advisers who were going to advise? does not matter whether we ask her a ques- Was it the federal opposition who was going tion about Alchera or about Riverside. It does to advise? Was it any of those culprits? not matter whether we ask her to account for the days between report and action—days in I expressed the view that I expected the which she was missing in action. It does not minister to blame my dog, Allie, and I have matter whether we ask her questions about been disappointed that she did not say it. My serious matters such as her responsibility to dog Allie ate her homework, as far as this report her knowledge of suspicious deaths minister is concerned. But Allie is innocent; forthwith to coroners for them to have an Allie was not blamed today. But, as for the opportunity to adjudicate and to consider the responsibility of the minister, read ‘all above- matter. It is not as though they do not view it named culprits.’ The minister comes into this seriously: witness the actions of the Victorian place and says, ‘Load it on to me,’ and then Coroner’s office off its own bat. Today, in a when we ask her for some basic accountabil- series of answers to four questions, all deal- ity, what we get is, ‘Everyone else is to ing with totally different matters—two of blame. Refer to my previous answers.’ Ditto, Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14767 ditto in answer to the questions she was dents’ bedside. These residents are unable to ad- asked. minister their medications unassisted. Two staff members spoken to confirmed that this often oc- This minister walked into this chamber curs and announced that she had triggered a proc- ess which produced, two days later, to her And it goes on. On the question of nutrition departmental secretary a report that she did and hydration, the report states: not read or herself act on for days. What did The team observed that carer did not have enough that report say? I will go through this report time to offer residents extra drinks between meal because I think it is important that people times. The team observed that residents were understand what this minister ignored, having slumped in their chairs and appeared lethargic and this is an indicator of dehydration in the elderly. taken it upon herself in this parliament to take responsibility for it. It says: Then it goes to: At the time of the visits, some initial assessments poor maintenance of residents nails leads to skin had not been completed. The following significant tears. deficiencies were identified: Toileting times are not adhered to. • Residents’ needs and preferences regarding ...... complementary treatment and therapies are Data confirmed that 13 residents out of the 60 not acknowledged, and residents are not as- bathed— sisted to make informed choices. in the kerosene solution— • Pain management programs are not docu- mented, regularly reviewed or acted upon by suffered skin trauma as a result of this interven- relevant members of the health care team. tion. According to four staff members, the severity • of blistering and burns ranged from mild to se- Assessments are not always carried out to vere. Staff members spoken to were distressed and determine the causes of pain. upset about the treatment given to residents. • Residents’ palliative care wishes are not It goes on in relation to continence. identified. Details of funeral arrangements only are consistently identified. Two residents’ relatives spoken to confirm that when residents request to go to the toilet, they are • Individual palliative care programs are not consistently told by members of staff that they developed. ‘have to wait till after lunch’... • A dying resident was bathed in kerosene. 16 of the 17 current pressure sores have been ac- • Continence management is not consistent quired in the nursing home. Six staff members with contemporary practice and do not con- spoken to stated that they do not have time to turn sider residents’ individual preferences. the residents regularly as staff are ‘run off their • Programs are not designed to promote and feet’. enhance the residents’ quality of life And it goes on. • Care plans do not identify specific The confluence of prolonged times in soiled con- needs/problems/ strategies or detailed goals tinence aids and the lack of regular position and/or expected outcomes. changes particularly for immobile elderly resi- That may sound a little bland, but it is pretty dents has resulted in ongoing acquired wounds horrific when you contemplate the detail of The risk of infection as a result of this has sub- it. She was given the details of what this stantially increased. meant, and in the details she saw this—or And then it goes on to another area: would have seen this if she were exercising a Documentation in 1 resident’s progress notes modicum of responsibility as a minister: shows that maggots were found in a pressure area Reason for risk on 15/1/2000. The wound chart clearly describes the infestation. There is a note in the progress ...... notes ‘NO MENTION TO FAMILY PLEASE’ … medication is not safely administered ...... Evidence of risk A written signed statement from the RN division 1 Medications were not signed off in 18 of the 30 supervising the kerosene baths on 16/1/2000 states medication charts audited. A resident’s relative that bathroom doors were left open, windows said that medications are often left by the resi- close to the bathrooms opened and fans positioned 14768 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 in corridors to blow the smell of kerosene away. A That is why I suspect we do not have that written statement from an RN division 2 states report with us as we ought to. This minister that staff were advised to have constant breaks has acted only when she has had the needle when needed or at least every half hour, due to put into her by the opposition in this chamber kerosene fumes. or when she has had the needle put into her It goes on: by the press. Otherwise nothing has occurred. Relatives indicated that they were concerned about the comfort of residents during the long The first time the minister was asked what period of hot weather. happened to the outfit that perpetrated all I could go on in huge detail on this, but I just these events—and remember this was the want the House and the public to understand first time the minister was dragged out, what this minister has neglected and what she kicking and screaming, to the public to ex- failed to have herself informed about. The plain herself, which is the first time she report further states: shouldered the responsibility herself—she considered that a sufficient response was to There is ongoing serious risk that residents’ open change the management. She thought that a wounds can become flyblown and infected with maggots sufficient response at that point in time was to change the management. The minister will Because of the lack of adequate freezer space, try to claim that the act protects her or ties there is potential for food poisoning from spoilage of food. her hands—her act, I might say. But she will also find in her act that when there are cir- How they would have loved that industrial cumstances of special risk—such as those freezer that the Prime Minister has had put identified here, using the language in the act, into Kirribilli. in this report—there is a capacity for the sec- Residents are at serious risk of skin tears on their retary and, through him, her, to be advised genitalia or buttocks due to the bare wire holding immediately so that she can act upon it. And a commode seat on to the frame. of course she did not. Residents’ dignity is severely compromised by the lack of a proper toilet door. You would have thought, after the minister Lack of effective ambient temperature control: had made a statement in this parliament off Residents are at serious risk of dehydration due to her own back—in this case, the only occasion the high temperatures as elderly people have a on which she was not dragged in here—that reduced thirst response and do not drink enough in this was a minister determined to maintain a hot weather. grip on this, to use every part of the act and This minister put the report in train on the to ensure that at every point in time people night of the 15th, received this response from would be doing the things that they ought to the secretary of her department on the 18th, be doing to fix these problems. If you had and she did nothing. The only times this thought that, you would have been a reason- minister has acted have been when she was able person, but you would have not known braced—apart from that first night when she this minister. This is a minister for opening took upon herself the entire responsibility for nights. This is a minister for the social whirl. it. Remember that. Apart from that night This is a minister for the good times. She is when she took on herself the entire responsi- not a minister fit to be in the parliament of bility for it, this minister has acted only sub- Australia. She is not a minister fit to hold the sequently, when there has been an effort by a office that she holds. This is a minister who journalist to get at her or when she has had to must be drummed out of town. She will not confront this parliament. be drummed out of town by the Prime Min- I might say that there is still one missing ister but, if she is still here at the time of the report, and that is the report of the previous next election, every family who is concerned month. The minister has not released this, that their elderly parents get decent treatment and I will lay you London to a brick that a when they are placed in a nursing home will great number of the things that I have men- have a magnificent opportunity to make a tioned here today were in that report too. statement about the wretched Prime Minister Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14769 who protects her and the wretched way she duty to refer it. You might have got away saves her political hide. with that argument, Minister, if you were not There is a more serious matter. Incorpo- having these reported to you. But, remember, rated within these reports there are still very Minister, you set this in train. You said, ‘I clear-cut things. People have potentially— have put this inquiry in place. I have possibly, at least—suffered death as a direct launched my minions, my Myrmidons, upon result of the offences that I have described the battlements of the Riverside Nursing here. This government was warned about Home, and I will deal with it.’ From that mi- those possibilities, and what was the minis- nute, you accepted personal responsibility for ter’s response? Dithering along, she decided everything you found and for the proper han- that perhaps a note might be quietly sent to dling of it. What you did from that point on the Australian Federal Police. This was her was to ignore your responsibilities. The Vic- rhetoric—remember: ‘I have referred this torian Coroner, who should have been alerted matter to the police. I am seizing control.’ by you days previously and given time to The police did not even know that they had work on evidence when it was fresh, given had a reference. Why not? Because they got a time to look at the circumstances when it was chitchat letter. It was, ‘There are a few issues immediately there, took upon himself the here,’ not, ‘There are a few issues here which obligation of ringing you and getting out of might have to be referred to coroners.’ No you reports which should have been placed in report went to the Australian Federal Police. his hands days, if not weeks, before. This report did not go to the Federal Police Minister, you are not fit to hold this port- on the 29th. What went was a dithering little folio. This is your act which said that it gave letter. I have referred a few matters to the you the powers to do the things that you Federal Police in my time as a minister and needed to do to protect the interests of our have seen others refer a few matters to the senior citizens, our elderly, in nursing homes. Federal Police. When you refer matters to the You have failed to use your act. You have Federal Police you do not send a chitchat failed to observe the most basic elements of letter. You set out your problems. You set out ministerial accountability in this place, and any available information you have to you should just nick off. (Time expired) hand—like the report that deals with the Mr SPEAKER—Is the motion seconded? things that I have just covered. That is what you hand to the coppers. If you want a bit of Mr Swan—I second the motion and re- advice you give them a bit to go on. You do serve my right to speak. not send the Australian Federal Police a dith- Mrs BRONWYN BISHOP (Mackellar— ering little letter, because they will not re- Minister for Aged Care) (3.51 p.m.)—We spond to it—and, indeed, they did not. They have heard a lot of bombast. did not respond until the minister was caught Mr Martin Ferguson interjecting— out in this parliament. Only when the minis- Mr SPEAKER—The member for Bat- ter was caught out in this parliament did an man! The same courtesy as was extended to actual reference go to the police, and the po- the Leader of the Opposition will be extended lice of course immediately replied to her that to the Minister for Aged Care or I will take they had no jurisdiction. action. But there was somebody who had juris- Mrs BRONWYN BISHOP—We have diction, Minister. The person who had juris- heard a lot of bombast from the Leader of the diction was the Coroner in Victoria. He had Opposition—the same sort of bombast that jurisdiction. This claptrap that you go on we heard last week when he moved a censure with, that the only person capable of referring motion, followed by the Deputy Leader of a matter to the Coroner is a doctor in the the Opposition. Then, it was so important to nursing home, is nonsense. Like any other them that they forgot to vote on it. In other citizen, when you become apprised of the words, it is a political act; not one that is the possibility of a suspicious death, you have slightest bit concerned with bringing up to the capacity to refer it; indeed, you have the standard our residential aged care facilities. 14770 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

Let us set the scene a little bit as to what Mr Kerr—I apologise for the interjection. we inherited from the Labor Party when we Mrs BRONWYN BISHOP—At no stage came into office and why it was that we did the Labor Party, when it was in office for needed to put in place the reforms that were 13 years, show that it had any concern for the put in place in 1997. I refer to a report from residents who were the people who needed the Sunday Herald Sun of 3 July 1994. It was residential aged care. This government has headed ‘Firetrap alarm on aged homes’. It established a system—and it is a very large said: turnaround—and it has established a new Almost one in seven nursing homes in Australia is body called the Aged Care Standards and a firetrap, requiring urgent renovations, according Accreditation Agency. That agency is de- to the report. It said that one in 10 nursing homes signed to be the method of accrediting every was in such bad condition that it did not meet facility that receives Commonwealth funds— proper safety standards—lacking fire doors, that is over 3,000 homes—so that only peo- smoke detectors or fire hose mains. ple who have reached an accredited standard Who was the minister at the time? Should I will in fact be entitled to receive federal remind you that it was Dr Carmen Lawrence. funding—a quite new concept. The report was commissioned from Professor Gregory, to look into the adequacy of resi- It is designed to see that there is continu- dential aged care facilities, both nursing ing improvement, not just one-off improve- homes and hostels. And what did the Labor ment. As to what happened with this home at Party do about that report? Absolutely not a Riverside, it was quite clear that from 1988 it thing. Did they respond to it? Never. Did they had a history. It was a home that would begin take any action to improve standards? No. at standard, drop down, be brought up to Did they ever have any legislation which re- standard and then drop down. So it went on quired nursing homes and hostels to come up until in November 1999 its standard was that to standards? No. Did they ever have in leg- there was no serious risk. I have explained to islation any provision that required when this House before how I became aware of the registered nurses were to be present? No. In occurrence that occurred, and I will remind other words, there was never a time in the people of this incident, the horrendous bath- Labor Party’s legislation in all their time in ing of elderly, frail Australians. Some with office when they attempted to raise the stan- open wounds just taped up and some with dards of what had become known as an area catheters were placed in a bath containing 30 where there were many problems to solve. millilitres of kerosene to get rid of an alleged outbreak of scabies. As a result of that, the When the last censure motion was moved, agency went in the very next morning after I I said that the Labor Party had closed four found out about it and it did an inspection to homes under their scheme. I corrected that ascertain what was the position. The agency because in 13 years they closed only one. The reports properly—as it does in accordance fact of the matter is this: if the Labor Party with the act—to the delegate of the secretary, were still in office today, you would never who has the responsibility for that, and that is have heard about the Riverside Nursing precisely where that report went. The dele- Home, because there would have been no gate then considered that report and imposed means of having it made aware. There would sanctions, which I announced. They entailed have been no means of it becoming known so the revocation of approved provider status that something could be done about it. The and the revocation of licences, suspended on fact of the matter is that the Labor Party put the condition that the provider bring up the up with those standards. home to standard and put in place an admin- Mr Kerr interjecting— istrator who was acceptable to the secretary Mr SPEAKER—I am sorry to interrupt so that, if possible, those residents could re- the minister, but the member for Denison has main at Riverside and we could have it already been warned. He has the choice be- brought up to scratch. tween apologising to the House or excusing From that moment on we had our nurses himself from the House. going into that residential aged care facility. Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14771

They went in their continually and regularly partment was sufficiently concerned by re- to ensure the residents’ safety. But they were ports from the nurses whom we were sending concerned that the approved provider had in in that there should be a second inspection fact not done any of the things that were re- and that the delegate should review the situa- quired by the delegate when the first sanc- tion. That is precisely what happened. tions were imposed. Accordingly, the agency was instructed by the department to make a I also want to talk about the number of second inspection, which resulted in a second visits and the way in which they were used, risk report. So we have three reports in all: because this is important to the whole ac- the first risk report, the review audit report, creditation system. The agency has been car- which I tabled in this House, and the third rying out monitoring of the over 3,000 facili- report, which was released on the 6th of this ties that we have. It has conducted 1,250 vis- month, when in fact the evacuation of resi- its as of the end of the calendar year—I think dents began because it was no longer safe to it is now up around 1,300—and that includes leave them in that facility. If we had done something like 900 support visits. In other what the Labor Party asked us to do a week words, when some facility is found not to ago, we would have left those residents in have acceptable standards, then the agency Riverside. They said it was not necessary to works with that facility to bring it up to stan- remove the residents. First of all we had dard so that we have good, solid providers ‘Why don’t you use the powers?’ and then we and good, solid facilities. I would like to let had ‘They shouldn’t have been moved’ after people know how successful many of the the powers were used. If we had done what providers who have achieved accreditation they were demanding yesterday—that we status have found the whole process. When should have immediately revoked the status we had the last censure motion, I read out a of approved provider and removed the own- letter that had been received from one par- ership of the licences—we would have had ticular home which said how appalled they the residents still at Riverside and we could were to find out that they were below stan- have been in court. dard and how they had worked to bring it up to standard. There are many such messages The simple fact of the matter is that there that have come in from all over Australia. I is always due process to be followed and the was recently in the area of the member for Leader of the Opposition, for all his bombast, Newcastle. We were in a facility handing out understands that due process must be fol- the accreditation certificates and there was an lowed. At all times this act sets out the proc- expression not only of the management’s ess that must be followed, and that is the pro- support but of the residents’ support, because cess that was followed. This act has been they had been made part of the process and established along the lines of the DPP, where took great pride in the fact that they had it is not the Attorney-General who makes a achieved accreditation status. decision as to whether somebody is to be prosecuted. That was the old system and we In addition to the accreditation process moved away from that a long time ago when carried out by the agency, we also have a we established the office of the DPP. The certification process, and this goes right back DPP takes the evidence, makes a dispassion- to that report that Carmen Lawrence commis- ate analysis and in fact brings a prosecution if sioned and upon which the Labor Party did the analysis of that evidence warrants it. This not act at all. We had 300 facilities that were act has been put in place to be in exactly the not certifiable when we took over. That is same circumstances. It is not a political deci- now down to 53, and I can tell you that 17 of sion; it is a decision of the delegate, who them belong to the Victorian government. I looks at the evidence that is supplied and wrote to them and said: what are you going to makes a decision as to what ought to be done. do about bringing them up to standard by the That is precisely what was followed here. accreditation date? The minister has written The act gives the provider 14 days to comply. back to me and said, ‘We intend to work very But, in fact, the second lot of action was hard to try and meet that.’ But it was not until taken within that time frame because the de- I wrote that letter that we saw put in place 14772 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 any attempt to bring those 17 homes up to Nursing Home. How many more nursing scratch. The residential classification scale homes are there like that around this country? which we use is the way in which we pay the We would not know if it was happening be- subsidy. We have monitors in the department cause, under this deregulated system, there is who have carried out 1,500 visits around the no such thing as spot checks. The serious 3,000 facilities and have inspected 14,000 issues that are being raised here today are not care plans. For the first time, everybody has just about Riverside. They relate to the faith to have a care plan, and it is against that care of all of the relatives of people in nursing plan that the subsidy is paid. Those monitors homes right around this country—the 3,000 are to check that the care that is delineated in nursing homes. This case has put a huge the care plan is in fact being delivered to the question mark, a huge cloud, over the quality residents who are in need. of care that is being given to so many vulner- Throughout the entire process of the plan able people in our community. So many of being put into place, there is an enormous these nursing homes do a good job, but we change of culture and attitude. First and now know that deregulation of the system foremost in our minds is the care of older has caused a crisis in funding and a crisis in Australians who need residential aged care care, putting pressure on so many vulnerable and the circumstances in which they receive people in so many nursing homes. it. Part and parcel of this whole change has What did the minister do? As I said, on 17 been the vast increase in the number of February she received this report. It docu- community aged care packages which enable mented that a dying resident was vomiting older Australians to remain in their own and being bathed in kerosene, that residents’ homes. They do not want to be institutional- wounds had become maggot infested, that ised; they want to have that care and inde- numerous residents were suffering from pus pendence in their own home. We have now blisters and severe rashes and that tubes were put out 18,000 of those packages. I might add placed in residents’ bladders and they were that the Labor Party left us 10,000 places exposed to a toxic kerosene solution. For five short because they had cut funding. We have days the minister ignored that report. So for increased funding since we came into office the next 18 months, unless she is sacked by by $1 billion. For all their bluster, the last the weak Prime Minister, we will have an figure that they spent was $2.5 billion, and aged care minister who, when she acted five under us it is $3.5 billion. By next year, we days later, acted with a feather duster. What will have achieved the formula that was put did she do? She asked the proprietor of the in place by the Labor government but which home, ‘Can you nominate an administrator of they never achieved—in fact, they went the home?’ She took that decision in the face backwards. So I can simply say to you that of all the evidence in this report. The Leader what we have seen evidenced is bombast, of the Opposition spoke at length on and hypocrisy and a sheer disregard for people, quoted at length from the distressing and and it will come back again and again. Per- damning evidence in this report that makes haps today they will take their own motion every child in this country weep for what sufficiently seriously to remember to vote on might actually happen to their parents and it and not simply say, ‘We did it as a political their grandparents if they are so unfortunate exercise.’ as to end up in one of these homes. It must be Mr SWAN (Lilley) (4.06 p.m.)—I second of concern to all Australians, not just those this censure motion against the Minister for who have relatives in nursing homes. Aged Care because for the next 18 months, Welcome to John Howard’s social coali- unless she is sacked by that weak Prime tion. The social coalition is headed by the Minister, this nation will have an aged care compassionate face of Bronwyn Bishop. That minister who for at least five days, from 17 is what the elderly of Australia get and that is February to 22 February, failed to act on a what their families get. If there was one report that documented the systematic neglect ounce of compassion in this minister, if there and abuse of residents of the Riverside was one little bit of meaning to John How- Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14773 ard’s social coalition, how on earth could she The Prime Minister and his government not have acted more strongly at that time, claim to be compassionate conservatives, but during that five-day period? She walks in and the evidence before the House in this case says, ‘I finally know something about this. proves that they are cut-throat conservatives. We will let the owner nominate an adminis- This crisis has been brought about by funding trator.’ Despite all of that, this minister will cuts and deregulation of the system, so any- remain the minister for the next 18 months thing goes in the winner-take-all society of unless she is sacked, having said on 16 Feb- this government, whose motto is, ‘Do only ruary: what you can do for yourself and forget eve- rybody else.’ That is the philosophy that un- I immediately had my department refer the matter to the Aged Care Standards and Accreditation derlies the funding cuts, that is the philoso- Agency for swift action. My concern is to be ad- phy that underlies the deregulation of the vised if there is an immediate risk to individual system and that is the philosophy that under- residents. lies the Howard government. This so-called social coalition is just a smiley mask they We now know she was advised. That is what bring out every now and then to try and cover this report tells us. She was advised on 17 or up the consequences of the funding cuts 18 February and she did not act. There could across the board, not just in nursing homes be no greater dereliction of duty than that. but across the board across the whole social There could be no more negligent act than security system, the sorts of cuts that are that of the minister in the case of the River- causing so much pain and inequality in our side Nursing Home. Having been advised on community. 17 February, she simply allowed the provider to retain control. What I really want to know—perhaps someone who has been here longer than me But then it got a lot worse. We had exam- can enlighten me—is what the elderly of ples of residents getting broken arms and not Australia ever did to John Howard to get him receiving treatment. This is when the minister to impose Bronwyn Bishop as the Minister was supposedly in control. We had a resi- for Aged Care on the elderly of Australia. dent’s wounds treated with cornflour paste They voted for him overwhelmingly, but he during the period when she was supposed to still gave them Bronwyn Bishop as the Min- be in control. We had people’s bandages be- ister for Aged Care. I have been doing some ing washed and reused in a completely unac- reading on the minister. Her biographer, on ceptable way. This is during the time that she page 53, says: was supposed to be in control. So clearly the On her side of politics the contempt for her is minister’s claim that she was guarding the quite staggering. The reasons are mixed, but in health and welfare of Riverside residents is a essence what her colleagues have seen is undis- total deception. For the next 18 months, un- guised ambition, Lone Ranger relentlessly pursu- less she is sacked, the people of Australia ing her own goals whatever the cost to the party. will have the minister who allowed the situa- And whatever the cost of the people of Aus- tion to continue and in fact allowed the situa- tralia and the aged. Condemned by her own tion to get worse. From 17 February, when biographer! But let us not put all the blame she was first advised, to 6 March, when she on the minister. She should be sacked, but let finally closed the home, all those residents so us get down to the heart of the problem. The affected went through 19 days of pain and heart of the problem is the leadership of the distress. At each stage of the process, the Prime Minister, or lack of it. This weak only time she ever said anything publicly or Prime Minister is as responsible as the Min- pretended to take some action is when she ister for Aged Care for the deregulation of was sprung in the media. She has been the aged care industry in this country, where grossly negligent and incompetent. She has people who have worked all of their lives to acted only at those stages when there was make this country great get the privilege of media publicity. That is the charge against the being bathed in kerosene in the sauna of minister. summer. Minister, that is what you are guilty 14774 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 of, because you did not act for the five days removed from your job. You are a politician that you should have known, and when you who, for years, has made a reputation out of finally acted you did nothing to stop the dis- beating up public servants and condemning tress and pain for those poor people at the ministers for not taking direct and immediate Riverside home. control of their own actions and those of their What we on this side of the House want to subordinates. No-one in this House is sug- say today is that we have to fix this problem, gesting that you should have illegally influ- not just at Riverside but right across the enced the delegate to make the decision. country. We have to reregulate this industry What we are saying is that, if you accept one and take out the winner-take-all mentality shred of the Westminster system—which you where dollar values have completely replaced talk about all the time, including in your bi- human values. What we want is some human ography—your responsibility is very simply values. Minister, what you have done is taken this: it was your job to make sure that your the care out of aged care—not because it is subordinates were doing their jobs; it was the fault of the nurses or anyone who works your job to make sure that the delegate was in a nursing home or of those good people doing his job. Either the delegate was doing who run nursing homes but because of your his job and you knew, in which case you have government’s policies. And the Prime Min- lied to the House, or, if you did not know, ister and all those who sit opposite are as you are incompetent. Either way, you are guilty as you. But the elderly of this country damned. You, along with the whole of the deserve some immediate relief, and you government, are responsible for the Aged should be sacked. They at least deserve that, Care Act. That act does not in any way pre- on the evidence that is before us today. vent you from being informed immediately of serious risk to the health, safety and well- In July last year, this minister was prom- being of nursing home residents. ising strong public action against shonky op- erators. On 31 August, the minister told the I still have enough faith in the public ser- House that spot checks were taking place. vants of this nation to believe that you would They were not—another lie. We know that in have been told, Minister. When that piece of 1998-99 there were something like 4,000 paper surfaces, you will finally be gone, but complaints and not one spot check during surely you should go before, on the record that whole time. Every time Labor has ques- that we have before you. The point is that tioned this minister in the parliament, she you must have known and you did not act. responds like my old uncle’s white crested That is not good enough in a system where cockatoo. We get up and ask a question for your government and previous governments six months; she gets up and says, ‘Every- have removed essential controls. Spot checks thing’s fine’—the cockatoo used to say, are the only mechanism left in preventing ‘Pretty cocky, pretty cocky. Nothing’s wrong, what occurred at Riverside and at many other nothing’s wrong’—preening her feathers in homes throughout this country, but we do not this House, month after month. Every time have them. We got the first spot check only we ask the minister about the lack of spot when you were sprung in the media. That checks, the crisis in funding and waiting lists, says so much to all of those people out there all we get is the response of the white crested who have relatives in nursing homes and to cockatoo. all of those Australians who are so concerned about the quality of aged care in this country. What we have brought out in this House in the last month or three weeks is that that has Prior to the Howard government changes been a lie because you have been damned by to the aged care regulations and laws, aged your own reports. We know from the material care facility owners were given specific that you have tabled in this House that you funding for care. That money actually had to are guilty of gross negligence. You have be spent on care. Your 1997 act abolished caused the suffering of very many Austra- any degree of accountability. You have al- lians and you have caused unnecessary worry ready admitted that, under the new deregu- in the community. That is why you should be lated system, residents are assessed by nurs- Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14775 ing home providers and that it is the provider Dr WOOLDRIDGE (Casey—Minister who determines the degree of care, not the for Health and Aged Care) (4.21 p.m.)—This government. That is the structural problem, debate reflects the moral bankruptcy of the and it is all part of the funding cuts adminis- Labor Party. It shows how weak their leader tered by this government. is. It shows that they lack direction, they have In September last year, when Labor moved no ideas, they are unable to deliver anything amendments to try to increase your powers to and they are unable to take a stand. They protect the rights of residents, the govern- simply try to take short-term political advan- ment voted against those amendments. The tage, no matter what the cost, at the expense advocates of the social coalition said, ‘It’s not of a long-term solution. It is terribly easy to necessary to have tougher regulations.’ So defend the actions of the Minister for Aged you refused to take on the extra powers when Care, as I have watched her actions at close we moved amendments in the House. That is hand over the past several weeks. The simple the crux of the current problem: too much fact is that, under the act, the minister does power is left with nursing home owners and not have the individual power to close down the government simply refuses to police a nursing home. That is the province of a those homes which do not look after their delegate—in this case, the assistant secretary residents. Not only have you failed to police who is head of the Commonwealth Depart- the industry, Minister; you have failed to ment of Health and Aged Care in Victoria. regulate it. You have failed on all counts. You For the minister to seek to intervene in that have failed because you have been incompe- process and to seek to intervene in the dele- tent, you have failed because you have been gate’s decision would libel the delegate’s negligent and you have failed because you decision to be overturned in the Administra- have not put in place an appropriate regula- tive Appeals Tribunal. tory framework. That is why you should be This is simply proper process. It does not sacked. It is time that you took responsibility mean that nothing was happening—in fact, a and resigned. very great deal was happening. It means that We used to have a bipartisan approach to proper process was being followed, some- aged care in this country. We all used to be- thing that is quite incapable of being under- lieve that those who worked all of their lives stood by a number of people on the other for the country were entitled to dignity and side. I will go through this process and what respect in old age. But the message you have the minister did in a bit of detail. As someone been sending to the elderly of this country is who was shadow minister for aged care in that they are a burden, not worthy of gov- 1994 and 1995, I will remind the member for ernment support or expenditure. When I talk Lilley and others of the system over which to the elderly about this, they are so horrified they presided, the system that we are trying that they say, ‘Oh well, if this is the way it is to fix up. The very fact the some of these bad going, we will know what we do when the cases are bubbling to the surface is a mark of time comes.’ That is what they say. The really success because the bad operators are being shocking outcome of all of this is that you are forced out, they are being found, and we have sending a message to the elderly of Australia a substantially better industry today than we that they are not worthy of dignity and re- had four years ago. The opposition should spect and that they are not worthy of this cringe at the thought of Bob Gregory’s report country’s support in their old age. We on this that came out under their government and the side of the House say that they are. We will net effect of their neglect, which I will detail continue to move for a regulated system later. which respects that dignity and for a system To come back to the nursing home, the which appropriately provides the funds which minister, on finding out that we had a prob- they need. The problem with this government lem at Riverside, worked through the night to is that it just does not ever believe in helping see that everything that was properly in place the weak or lending them a helping hand. under the law could be made so. It was in- (Time expired) spected the next day and, from that time on, 14776 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 there was continuous monitoring, morning The community has the right to know why the and afternoon, by qualified nursing staff Minister is still refusing to exercise her full pow- brought in by the Department of Health and ers to revoke the provider’s licence. Aged Care. The act requires that the nursing The simple answer is that we are required to home be given time to attempt to rectify it- take the residents’ care as our primary con- self. There is a very good reason for this. cern in making a decision, and it was done so When you have a situation like this, which is because there was not an alternative facility uncommon, the paramount concern has to be and we had not exhausted all possibilities. the residents. Moving residents out of a fa- We should look at the hypocrisy of this cility which is their home is an incredibly and the way the opposition have been pre- distressing procedure whenever done. Had pared to make this unusual and isolated event we attempted to move the residents on 22 a political circus. After having criticised us February, we would first of all have been on four separate occasions for not removing required to have an alternative facility avail- the residents, what did they do once we had able. One was not immediately available. removed the residents? They criticised us for Secondly, we would have had to have been doing that. On 7 March, Senator Evans said convinced that moving them was a better that moving people 40 kilometres away from option than attempting to remedy the situa- their families was not a solution. Where else tion by keeping them in the place. This is did Senator Evans intend us to put the peo- what is required under the act, and properly ple? Has he nominated another single facility so. closer that they could have gone into? No. It So an attempt at remedying was made— is absolute humbug, absolute hypocrisy and but with continuous monitoring by the absolute immorality to use a situation like Department of Health and Aged Care. The this for cheap political purposes. On 7 March, remedial action was not undertaken properly Senator Jacinta Collins put this question to by the operator of the nursing home. When Senator Herron in the Senate: that happened, a second report was ordered, If this offer had been taken up, couldn’t these 57 as required under the act. When that report frail and elderly people have stayed in their home? was received on the Friday before the That is exactly what we were attempting to residents were evacuated, we physically put do under the act. That is exactly what we nursing home staff into the facility night and were being criticised for doing before the day, until the residents were finally fully residents’ move and then afterwards being evacuated on 7 March. Through their spoke- criticised for something completely opposite. speople, the Labor Party were encouraging us So these residents were moved, after they had at the time to get the people out of the nurs- been settled, after the relatives had been ing home sooner. On 28 February, Senator talked with and after we had taken every pos- Evans said in a press release: sible opportunity to make this transfer as easy as possible. Even having done that, it was The minister should explain to the residents and their relatives why she has not used her full pow- still extraordinary difficult. One thing that ers under the act to revoke the licence ... made it even more difficult was some of the media circus surrounding this. Very sadly, as On the next day, Senator Evans said: a result of it, the Victorian Minister assisting What does this provider have to do before the the Minister for Health, Bronwyn Pike, had Minister revokes his right to operate?’ her office leak the details to the media of the Senator Evans said the minister’s failure to revoke proposed evacuation of the residents for base the right to operate sends a message to older Aus- political purposes when her department had tralians that this treatment is acceptable. been contacted by my department seeking The next day, 1 March, Senator Evans said in ambulance assistance in the transfer. This is a press release: outrageous, and people should look at this ... the residents of the Riverside Nursing Home whole event in that light. remain in the care of the provider. We should try to reflect on the nursing On 3 March: home industry as a whole because many Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14777

Australians might think this is common or standards. Ten per cent of nursing homes in normal. Sadly, for the very many decent and Australia were substandard four years ago. good operators, this has caused great anguish Today, with 3,000 nursing homes, we have and distress. The simple fact is that Victoria’s approximately 50 nursing homes that are nursing homes are in dramatically better substandard. So less than two per cent of all shape today than they were four years ago. the nursing homes in Australia are at risk. So Let me give you some idea of the legacy we we have gone from 10 per cent to two per inherited—the legacy I had to deal with day cent in four years—an extraordinary achieve- after day in opposition when I was shadow ment, an achievement that I have seen per- minister for aged care. Four years ago we had sonally driven by this minister, who deserves a shortfall of 10,000 places in the number of praise and credit for taking this run-down nursing home beds available in Australia. We area and being prepared to try to make the had a nursing home sector desperately in changes that were so long overdue. need of capital funding, and I will talk more I mentioned nursing home capital because about that in a moment. this is actually at the nub of a lot of the We had an inflexible and over-regulated problems. In 1994, Professor Bob Gregory system that failed to recognise the individual from the ANU released a report into the care needs of residents. It failed to reward capital requirements of nursing homes. I re- innovation. It could only be described as Sta- member it. I was sitting in the chair where linist. We had an out-of-date, unfair and in- the Leader of the Opposition is sitting now. I equitable capital funding system. The Labor will not dob him in, but a senior Labor Party mismanagement meant that aged care provi- figure was sitting opposite me. After a debate sion in Australia actually dropped between in this House he leaned over to me and said: 1985 and 1991 from 100 places for every ‘I really thought the nursing home report was 1,000 people over 70 years of age to 93 much worse than you painted.’ Those oppo- places for every 1,000 people over 70 years site recognised the problem but they did not of age—a seven per cent drop in aged care act on it. Let me tell you the nursing home provision between 1985 and 1991. We had capital requirements Bob Gregory found. He continuous inaction over nursing home capi- said: tal funding—in fact, not only inaction; we There was a substantial need for improvement in had ‘mal’ action. We had capital funding de- nursing home buildings. Because of the govern- cisions made that worsened the situation. So ment’s funding formula there is a complete lack of we inherited an extraordinarily run-down any incentive to maintain good quality nursing nursing stock. Labor slashed capital funding home stock. for nursing homes by almost 70 per cent in ...... its last term of office. Under Labor, nearly 10 ... per cent of all the residents in hostels, and The present funding system is not providing suffi- that is some 70,000 residents, actually re- cient funds and is not attracting applications nec- quired a high level of care. But Labor did not essary for the placement and upgrading of nursing require hostels to have any nursing staff. La- homes. bor’s inequitable funding system that we in- ...... herited meant that a nursing home resident in Queensland received $6,500 a year less than In the calculations the government uses to pay for a nursing home resident in Tasmania for no its nursing homes there is no provision for re- placement of those nursing homes. They are liter- sensible reason whatsoever. We had to act to ally falling down. fix all of these problems, and it is impossible to fix them overnight...... Comparisons between different periods are The government hasn’t acted on the differences difficult because standards have changed. between states. There are around 3,000 nursing homes in ...... … Australia. When we came to government four It used to be the government would fund two- years ago, around 300 could not meet the thirds of replacement cost and the industry one- 14778 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 third. In 1991 that was changed to one-third con- Majority……… 9 tribution by the government. The net effect is that AYES replacement had not happened. Adams, D.G.H. Albanese, A.N. So over 10 per cent of nursing homes did not meet fire standards four years ago—an ex- Beazley, K.C. Bevis, A.R. traordinary condemnation of the stewardship Brereton, L.J. Burke, A.E. of Labor in this area. It is not an easy area. It Byrne, A.M. Cox, D.A. is an area where there has needed to be a lot Crean, S.F. Crosio, J.A. of work. That work is being done. Part of that Danby, M. Edwards, G.J. is seen by the extra funding that has gone into Ellis, A.L. Emerson, C.A. nursing homes. Far from cuts, as the opposi- tion continually talk about, nursing home Evans, M.J. Ferguson, L.D.T. funding has gone from $2.5 billion to $3.5 Ferguson, M.J. Fitzgibbon, J.A. billion in just four years. As someone who Gerick, J.F. Gibbons, S.W. sits on the government’s Expenditure Review Gillard, J.E. Griffin, A.P. Committee, I can tell you how difficult it is Hall, J.G. Hatton, M.J. to find that money. That is a commitment to older people in Australia. Hoare, K.J. Hollis, C. Horne, R. Irwin, J. The Labor Party has made some quite ex- traordinary comments about the minister’s Jenkins, H.A. Kernot, C. actions—that she, as a minister, should Kerr, D.J.C. Latham, M.W. somehow be writing to the Coroner, referring Lawrence, C.M. Lee, M.J. cases. As a former medical practitioner, I can Livermore, K.F. Macklin, J.L. tell you that that is none of her business. She Martin, S.P. McClelland, R.B. is no more responsible for deaths in nursing homes than I am for a death in a hospital. The McFarlane, J.S. McLeay, L.B. fact is that it is the general practitioner who McMullan, R.F. Melham, D. signs the death certificate who should be Morris, A.A. Mossfield, F.W. making that decision. She acted quickly. She Murphy, J. P. O’Byrne, M.A. acted within the law. She acted in the best O’Connor, G.M. O’Keefe, N.P. interests of the nursing home residents. Plibersek, T. Price, L.R.S. I heard that the previous speaker say that Quick, H.V. Ripoll, B.F. we used to have a bipartisan policy on aged care. That is rubbish. We never supported the Roxon, N.L. Rudd, K.M. ramshackle system we inherited. We never Sawford, R.W. * Sciacca, C.A. supported a CAM acquittal process that was Sercombe, R.C.G. * Sidebottom, P.S. seven years behind—so even though people Smith, S.F. Snowdon, W.E. might have had to acquit care, it would not Swan, W.M. Tanner, L. have been found out for seven years whether Theophanous, A.C. Thomson, K.J. they had done it or not. We inherited a farce. We inherited a shambles. It is being fixed up. Wilkie, K. Wilton, G.S. It is substantially better today than it was— NOES and a lot of credit for that has to taken by Abbott, A.J. Anderson, J.D. Bronwyn Bishop. Andrews, K.J. Anthony, L.J. Question put: Bailey, F.E. Baird, B.G. That the motion (Mr Beazley’s) be agreed to. Barresi, P.A. Bartlett, K.J. The House divided [4.40 p.m.] Billson, B.F. Bishop, B.K. (Mr Speaker—Mr Neil Andrew) Bishop, J.I. Brough, M.T. Ayes………… 67 Cadman, A.G. Cameron, R.A. Noes………… 76 Causley, I.R. Charles, R.E. Costello, P.H. Downer, A.J.G. Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14779

Draper, P. Elson, K.S. gave earlier today in which I stated that the Entsch, W.G. Fahey, J.J. GST treatment of cattle sales was so complex Fischer, T.A. Forrest, J.A. * that even stock and station agents in Bot- swana and Swaziland would not want it. Gallus, C.A. Gambaro, T. Gash, J. Haase, B.W. PAPERS Hardgrave, G.D. Hawker, D.P.M. Mr REITH (Flinders—Minister for Em- ployment, Workplace Relations and Small Hockey, J.B. Howard, J.W. Business)—Papers are tabled as listed in the Hull, K.E. Jull, D.F. schedule circulated to honourable members. Katter, R.C. Kelly, D.M. Details of the papers will be recorded in the Kemp, D.A. Lawler, A.J. Votes and Proceedings. Lieberman, L.S. Lindsay, P.J. PARLIAMENT: BROADCAST OF Lloyd, J.E. Macfarlane, I.E. PROCEEDINGS May, M.A. McArthur, S. * Mr SPEAKER (4.48 p.m.)—Members McGauran, P.J. Moore, J.C. will be aware that on Tuesdays and Wednes- Moylan, J. E. Nairn, G. R. days when the Parliamentary News Network broadcasts live the proceedings of the Senate, Nehl, G. B. Nelson, B.J. question time from this House is rebroadcast Neville, P.C. Nugent, P.E. in the evenings. The rebroadcast on Wednes- Prosser, G.D. Pyne, C. days is at 8 p.m., but on Tuesdays it is at 11 Reith, P.K. Ronaldson, M.J.C. p.m. The Tuesday rebroadcast is inconven- Ruddock, P.M. Schultz, A. iently late for many listeners. In addition, the listener gets a rather disjointed version of the Scott, B.C. Secker, P.D. parliamentary day as question time is re- Slipper, P.N. Southcott, A.J. broadcast following the adjournment debate. ST Clair, S.R. Stone, S.N. The late hour results from the fact that on Sullivan, K.J.M. Thompson, C.P. Tuesdays the House is broadcast live, fol- Thomson, A.P. Truss, W.E. lowing the Senate’s rise. Because the Senate Tuckey, C.W. Vaile, M.A.J. usually rises during this House’s dinner break, there is not sufficient time for the re- Vale, D.S. Wakelin, B.H. play of question time before proceedings in Washer, M.J. Williams, D.R. the House resume at 8 p.m. It is therefore * denotes teller held over until 11 p.m., when the House rises. Question so resolved in the negative. The interval between the Senate’s rising, usu- Mr Howard—Mr Speaker, I ask that fur- ally at about 7.20 p.m. or a little earlier, and 8 ther questions be placed on the Notice Paper. p.m. is filled with general news. I propose that the time of the House question time re- PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS broadcast on Tuesdays be changed from 11 Mr HORNE (Paterson) (4.46 p.m.)—Mr p.m. to immediately after the Senate rises. Speaker, I wish to make a personal explana- This will generally mean that the live broad- tion. cast of the House on Tuesdays will com- mence around 8.10 p.m. to 8.20 p.m., instead Mr SPEAKER—Does the honourable of 8 p.m. I consider this change will be more member claim to have been misrepresented? convenient to the listening public. I should add that I had decided against asking for the Mr HORNE—Certainly, Mr Speaker, views of members of the Joint Committee on most grievously. Broadcasting of Parliamentary Proceedings Mr SPEAKER—Please proceed. on this matter, as it is not of direct concern to the senators on that committee. In making my Mr HORNE—During question time, the proposal known to the House in this way, I Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and For- welcome any comments either from members estry deliberately misquoted from a speech I of the House or from members of the listen- 14780 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 ing public. Subject to any comments re- Committee I have regard to (1) whether the ceived, I would hope that the changed ar- matter has been raised at the earliest opportu- rangements will commence on Tuesday 4 nity, and (2) whether in my opinion a prima April. facie case of breach of privilege has been PRIVILEGE made out. I am satisfied that Mr Kerr raised the matter at the earliest opportunity. In rela- Mr SPEAKER (4.50 p.m.)—On 15 Feb- tion to the matter raised, allegations of im- ruary 2000, Mr Kerr raised as a matter of proper interference with witnesses who have privilege the possible interference with Mr given or are to give evidence before com- Wayne Sievers as a witness before the Joint mittees have been viewed very seriously. If Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and witnesses do not believe they are able freely Trade. Mr Wayne Sievers was one of four to give evidence to committees then the ca- officers proposed by the Australian Federal pacity of committees to undertake inquiries is Police to brief the foreign affairs subcom- undermined. mittee of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade at a private Given the direct denial of the AFP Com- briefing held on 22 November 1999 in rela- missioner that the issues being pursued with tion to its inquiry into the United Nations. At Mr Sievers do not relate to his involvement the briefing, Mr Sievers tabled a number of with the committee, I am not convinced that reports that he had made whilst in East Timor the AFP has improperly interfered with Mr as part of the United Nations mission in East Sievers as a witness and therefore a prima Timor, UNAMET. On 24 November 1999, an facie case has not been made out. However, article appeared in the Canberra Times refer- as these are very serious matters, if further ring to Mr Sievers’s briefing of the joint evidence comes to light I would be prepared committee. There was reference in the article to reconsider the matter. I table the relevant in general terms to the documents Mr Sievers documents for the information of members. I had provided to the committee. On 9 January will also make available the previous state- 2000, an article in the Sydney Age reported ment. that Mr Sievers is under investigation for alleged unauthorised disclosures of informa- MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE tion to the federal parliament’s Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Nursing Homes: Standards of Care Trade. The article went on to suggest that, following his appearance before the commit- Mr SPEAKER—I have received a letter tee, the AFP had contacted Mr Sievers and from the honourable member for Lilley pro- asked him to make no further comment on posing that a definite matter of public im- his experience in Timor, and had placed him portance be submitted to the House for dis- on stress leave pending possible disciplinary cussion, namely: action. The failure of the Minister for Aged Care to In response to the article, the chair of the ensure effective and adequate means of monitor- ing and enforcing standards of care in Australia’s committee wrote to the Commissioner of the nursing homes. AFP seeking the basis of any charges which might be considered in relation to Mr Siev- I call upon those members who approve of ers. The commissioner responded, stating that the proposed discussion to rise in their the concerns of the AFP only related to places. comments allegedly made by Mr Sievers di- rectly to the media and not to his appearance More than the number of members re- before your committee. He attached a letter quired by the standing orders having risen in that had been sent to the newspaper, correct- their places— ing the assertion to the article. Mr SPEAKER—The member for Lilley In determining whether a matter should be has indicated his willingness to withdraw the given precedence to refer it to the Privileges Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14781 motion, and I thank him for his considera- Third Reading tion. Bill (on motion by Mr Reith)—by FISHERIES LEGISLATION leave—read a third time. AMENDMENT BILL (No. 2) 1999 TRANSPORT AND TERRITORIES Main Committee Report LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL Bill returned from Main Committee with- 1999 out amendment; certified copy presented. Main Committee Report Ordered that the bill be taken into consid- Bill returned from Main Committee with- eration forthwith. out having been fully considered; certified Bill agreed to. copy presented. Third Reading Ordered that the bill be taken into consid- Bill (on motion by Mr Reith)—by eration at the next sitting. leave—read a third time. PARLIAMENTARY ZONE ROAD TRANSPORT CHARGES Proposal for Works (AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY) Mr SPEAKER—I have received a mes- AMENDMENT BILL 2000 sage from the Senate transmitting the fol- Main Committee Report lowing resolution agreed to by the Senate: Bill returned from Main Committee with- That, in accordance with section 5 of the Par- out amendment; certified copy presented. liament Act 1974, the Senate approves the pro- posal by the National Capital Authority for capital Ordered that the bill be taken into consid- works within the Parliamentary Zone, being the eration forthwith. reconstruction of the Old Parliament House gar- Bill agreed to. dens. Third Reading HUMAN RIGHTS (MANDATORY Bill (on motion by Mr Reith)—by SENTENCING OF JUVENILE leave—read a third time. OFFENDERS) BILL 1999 INTERSTATE ROAD TRANSPORT First Reading CHARGE AMENDMENT BILL 2000 Bill received from the Senate, and read a Main Committee Report first time. Bill returned from Main Committee with- Motion (by Mr Williams) proposed: out amendment; certified copy presented. That the second reading be made an order of Ordered that the bill be taken into consid- the day for the next sitting. eration forthwith. Mr BEAZLEY (Brand—Leader of the Bill agreed to. Opposition) (5.00 p.m.)—I move: Third Reading That all words after “that” be omitted, with a Bill (on motion by Mr Reith)—by view to substituting the following words “that the leave—read a third time. second reading be moved forthwith”. INTERSTATE ROAD TRANSPORT Mr Speaker, there is some urgency about this AMENDMENT BILL 2000 matter. There is the certainty that, if this par- ticular proposition is carried by this parlia- Main Committee Report ment, this bill will disappear into the archives Bill returned from Main Committee with- as far as the operations of the House of Rep- out amendment; certified copy presented. resentatives are concerned. The matter is ur- Ordered that the bill be taken into consid- gent and must be dealt with now. eration forthwith. Motion (by Mr Williams) proposed: Bill agreed to. That the question be now put. 14782 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

Mr Beazley—That is absolutely outra- raise is that, on the moving of the motion that geous. the question be now put, the incomplete mo- Mr McMullan—Mr Speaker, I rise on a tion for the amendment made by the Leader point of order. of the Opposition simply lapses. Mr SPEAKER—There is a question be- Mr SPEAKER—I was about to rule on fore the chair. the Attorney-General’s observation, but I will hear the Leader of the Opposition. Mr McMullan—It is in regard to the va- lidity of that question that I want to raise the Mr Beazley—To that observation, it may point of order. As I understand it, the Attor- have been possible under standing orders for ney-General moved that the question be now the Attorney-General to move that the motion put, but there has not been a seconder to this be put forthwith, but another question has amendment. Don’t we need to hear that be- been placed before the chair. That is the fore he can move that the question be put? question of my amendment. It is necessary, therefore—this having been placed before the Mr SPEAKER—I am happy to hear the chair, and you having recognised it—that this Leader of the Opposition, but I was going to matter be dealt with prior to any proposition comment on the point of order of the Man- that the motion be put. There is a form of ager of Opposition Business. words, but I am not going to advise the At- Mr Beazley—Then let him keep speaking, torney-General how to deal with this prob- Mr Speaker. lem. The fact of the matter is that the prob- Mr SPEAKER—The Leader of the Op- lem has already been created for him, and he position has not been recognised. The Man- has not responded appropriately to it. Whilst ager of Opposition Business makes the valid I am on my feet, recognised by you in cir- point that, currently before the chair, I have a cumstances where I am moving a proposition motion and a proposal for the motion to be before this chamber, I have a right to be amended by the Leader of the Opposition. heard out. That has not as yet been seconded, so I do not Mr SPEAKER—The situation, as I un- have the question. derstand it, is that the Leader of the Opposi- Mr Beazley—Mr Speaker, the reason that tion has moved a resolution, but the Leader we need to consider this now is that the mat- of the Opposition’s resolution has not been ter has some urgency. Every day in the seconded. Northern Territory children are jailed on a Mr Leo McLeay—You didn’t call for a routine basis for crimes such as stealing a seconder. bottle of water worth $1. Mr SPEAKER—I thought I was entitled Mr Williams—Mr Speaker, I rise on a to be heard at least in silence. The Leader of point of order. The question before the chair the Opposition’s amendment has not been is the motion that I proposed. seconded. Therefore, under the standing or- Mr SPEAKER—The question currently ders, it does not have status of its own right, before the chair is the motion as moved by which allowed the Attorney-General to move the Attorney-General. To this, the Leader of that the motion be put. the Opposition has sought to move an Mr Beazley—Mr Speaker, I therefore take amendment. At this stage, that amendment it I am still speaking on this. has not been seconded. That is my under- Mr SPEAKER—No, I am indicating to standing of the situation currently, and that is the Leader of the Opposition— why I had recognised the Leader of the Op- Mr Beazley—You are accepting the mo- position. tion that the motion be put? Mr Beazley—Every day in the Northern Mr SPEAKER—I am indicating to the Territory now, people— Leader of the Opposition that, because the Mr Williams—Mr Speaker, I rise on a amendment before the chair has not been point of order. The point of order I seek to seconded, and has not been stated from the Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14783 chair, it does not therefore have life as an Opposition, which is that there is no matter amendment. For that reason, the motion that which cannot be the subject of discussion. the motion be put— That would be a fine point except for the fact Debate interrupted. that the standing orders specifically state that there will be no discussion. That is the whole DISSENT FROM RULING point of standing order 93. Therefore, taking Mr BEAZLEY (Brand—Leader of the the Leader of the Opposition’s argument and Opposition) (5.05 p.m.)—I move: then shining some light onto it through the That the Speaker’s ruling be dissented from. operation of the standing orders, it is quite Mr Speaker, the reason I have moved that clear that the procedural motion does need to your motion be dissented from in relation to be put. standing orders is this: it is possible for a Mr BEAZLEY—Mr Speaker, if I could minister in most circumstances to move at draw your attention to another standing order, any point of time that the motion be put. That and that is standing order 100, ‘Objection to is true. ruling of Speaker’. It states: Mr Reith—Mr Speaker, I rise on a point If any objection is taken to any ruling of the of order. Speaker, such objection must be taken at once, and a motion of dissent, to be submitted in writ- Opposition members interjecting— ing— Mr SPEAKER—Order! The Leader of which I have just done— the House has as much right to the call as anyone else. As yet, he has not been recog- moved, which, if seconded, shall be proposed to the House, and debate thereon shall proceed nised; that is perfectly right. That was not a forthwith. matter of discourtesy on the part of the chair; it was a matter, as everyone would have been Mr Speaker, a ruling was required of you in aware, that a comment was being made by the circumstances in which an effort by me to the Clerk. amend a proposition had an override at- tempted by the Attorney-General. I am dis- Mr Reith—Mr Speaker, my point of order senting from a ruling which you took at that is very simple: the standing orders require point in time, and, according to standing or- that, once a procedural motion that the mo- der 100, it must have precedence. tion be put is moved, it should be put without Mr SPEAKER—The chair is in a situa- debate. On that basis, that motion should take tion where, while not wanting to thwart de- precedence, and it is incumbent on you under bate, we clearly have two standing orders that the standing orders to put that motion. I are relevant to the question before the chair. should explain that it is not a matter of a rul- The question is that the question be now put, ing. The reality is that the standing orders and there is a requirement for that to be put, require that. under standing order 93, forthwith and with- Mr BEAZLEY—Every standing order out amendment or debate. If for no other rea- requires interpretation. There is no standing son than the ‘forthwith’, I am required to put order that is so obvious to us all that it is ca- the question that the question be put. pable of being interpreted without discussion Mr Beazley—Mr Speaker, I move a fur- in this place. You have given one interpreta- ther dissent from that ruling. tion of standing orders, the effect of which is to ensure that an amendment that I moved to Mr SPEAKER—I must point out to the a proposition before the House cannot be Leader of the Opposition that it is simply not heard, and I am dissenting from that ruling. A possible for the chair, no matter what I may dissent motion, in those circumstances, has wish to do, to recognise him, because without precedence. debate it is necessary for this matter to be put. Mr Reith—Mr Speaker, I raise a point of Mr Beazley—It is possible for you to rec- order on standing order 93. I refer in particu- ognise, Mr Speaker, as you have, when I am lar to the submission from the Leader of the in the circumstances where I am moving a 14784 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000 dissent from your ruling. Ultimately they will this stage. For that reason, I propose to put succeed in their efforts to stop this thing the question. coming on, but they are not going to be able to do it without dissent from your ruling be- Mr McMullan—Mr Speaker, I raise a ing considered first. Standing order 100 is point of order— quite clear in that regard. I would submit to Mr SPEAKER—I understand that the you, Mr Speaker, that it is entirely appropri- Manager of Opposition Business was not ate for us to be debating now a dissent to seeking to be discourteous, and, as he must your ruling. This is the second dissent mo- appreciate, this is not an easy matter to re- tion, because I am now moving a dissent to a solve. I recognise him. further ruling by yourself on this matter. But Mr McMullan—My point of order relates that is fair enough. We can now proceed quite to the fact that you have raised the fact that it cheerfully. is the word ‘forthwith’ in standing order 93 Mr Reith—Mr Speaker, I raise a point of that requires you to proceed in the way you order. However tenaciously the Leader of the are. Why don’t the words ‘at once’ in stand- Opposition wants to put his proposition that ing order 100 have equal effect? he is entitled to obtain precedence of another Mr SPEAKER—The reason that the chair motion over the motion which is before the is currently fixed on standing order 93 is that chair, namely that the motion be put, it does the standing order outlines the obligation I not matter how he puts it, by whatever form have to put the question forthwith, without he attempts to put it. He cannot get around amendment or debate. I propose to put that the standing orders any more than you are question because I have no choice but to do entitled to get around the standing orders, so. If the Leader of the Opposition feels that which is exactly the point that you have in some ways he has been short-changed by made. He can then sit down and, in a huff, the decision made by the chair or the forms say, ‘You did not take my point of order, so of the House, then clearly there are avenues that is a ruling, so therefore I have another available for him to address it. dissent.’ We could have 50 dissents. The fact Opposition members interjecting— is that the standing orders are quite clear. Mr SPEAKER—The Leader of the Op- The fact is that the opposition did not put position must understand that the reason that up a seconder at the time. I understand why I am not accommodating his dissent motion they did not do so, and I understood that at at this time is that I am unable to do so, not the time, but the fact is: that did not happen. that I am unwilling to do so. I will hear the The motion put by the Attorney-General Leader of the Opposition and then put the therefore has precedence and should be put. question. Mr Beazley—Mr Speaker— Mr BEAZLEY (Brand—Leader of the Opposition) (5.15 p.m.)—Mr Speaker, it may Mr SPEAKER—I have not at this stage have been possible for the government to gag recognised the Leader of the Opposition be- the decision in that way if they had moved cause the chair finds itself in quite an invidi- immediately the motion that the question be ous position. It is of course entirely inappro- put— at the time the minister stood up and priate for the chair to be resisting a dissent, moved his motion. for obvious reasons. Equally, the chair has to Government members interjecting— deal with standing order 93, which indicates that when the motion before the chair is that Mr BEAZLEY—Mr Speaker, it is true the question be put, such a question shall be that he can move it at any time but, when he put forthwith, without amendment or debate. failed to move it at that point of time, allow- I propose to take that course of action. That ing me to start the process of amending that does not deny to the Leader of the Opposition proposition, he created a set of circumstances or to the Manager of Opposition Business the where you were obliged to give a ruling. Mr right to move dissent from my ruling, but I Speaker, because you were obliged to give a have no choice but to put that question first at ruling in that set of circumstances, you cre- Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14785 ated the circumstances whereby dissent from motion of dissent every time the Speaker is your ruling could be ruled on. It was in that required to put the motion under standing environment that I moved dissent from your order 93, there would be no point in having ruling. You were obliged to rule because of standing order 93. the circumstances in which the original gag Mr BEAZLEY (Brand—Leader of the motion was put and, having given a ruling, Opposition) (5.18 p.m.)—On page 489 of you created the situation whereby dissent House of Representatives Practice it says: from your ruling must be dealt with at once. The motion cannot be moved when a Member is Mr Speaker, we are in the situation now giving a notice of motion or is formally moving where the only appropriate motion for you to the terms of a motion allowed under the standing consider is the dissent from your ruling. orders— There is no other point at which this dissent so it cannot be moved— could be moved, unless you have a different or if, when the same question has been negatived, view—that is, that a motion of dissent from the Chair is of the opinion that the further motion your ruling can be taken after the particular is an abuse of the orders or forms of the House ... proposition is voted on in this House, which I was on my feet moving a motion within the would probably put you in all sorts of diffi- context of the meaning of that proposition. It culties. The correct point at which you ought may have been possible for the Leader of the to consider the motion of dissent is at this House to move that I be no longer heard or to point. You may have what you think is a do a number of other things, but it was not clash of ‘forthwiths’ and ‘at onces’, but I possible for him to move closure while I was would submit that in these circumstances my on my scrapers specifically moving a motion. ‘at once’ outweighs his ‘forthwith’, and the Mr Speaker, in those circumstances, you most sensible way to dispose of this business effectively had to give a ruling. You had to is to deal with my motion first and then the give a ruling because the automaticity associ- other, because it would be extraordinarily ated with the forthwith element of a closure difficult to deal with it the other way around. no longer applied, because I was on my feet Mr REITH (Flinders—Minister for Em- moving a motion in this place and I had been ployment, Workplace Relations and Small recognised by you to move that motion. In Business) (5.17 p.m.)—Mr Speaker, the logic those circumstances, there is not the pure of the Leader of the Opposition’s position is application of the closure motion before us. that every time a Speaker requires a motion In those circumstances, what is before us is to be put in accordance with the standing the fact that they have tried to close me down orders it would be appropriate and possible at a particular point of time. Mr Speaker, you for a member of the opposition or any other have reached a conclusion about the legiti- member to stand and move a motion of dis- macy of that, but the conclusion that you sent. That would make a complete nonsense have reached and the circumstances in which of the standing orders if every time you you have reached it do not obviate a motion abided by the standing orders they could of dissent from your ruling at this point. move a motion of dissent. Just as a matter of Mr ANDREWS (Menzies) (5.20 p.m.)— logic, it would render useless and futile the Mr Speaker, the reference which the Leader very standing order which is constraining of the Opposition has just made to on page your conduct and which, in the end— 489 of House of Representatives Practice is— Mr Kerr interjecting— Opposition members interjecting— Mr SPEAKER—The member for Mr SPEAKER—The member for Men- Denison might remember his status in the zies is entitled to be heard in silence and House. should be extended the same courtesy as eve- Mr REITH—While courtesy allows the rybody else. I will act with those who fail to Leader of the Opposition to present his point recognise standing order 55. of view, the fact is that, if you can have a 14786 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

Mr ANDREWS—The reference which Any Member may at any time raise a point of the Leader of the Opposition made to page order which shall, until disposed of, suspend the 489 of House of Representatives Practice is consideration and decision of every other ques- a reference to a motion that a member be not tion. further heard. The motion from the Attorney- I believe that is the standing order that ap- General before you was a motion that the plies in this case. Other matters that have question be now put. I refer to page 490 of been raised may have been raised in the de- House of Representatives Practice, which bate of a dissent from your original ruling, says that the motion must be put forthwith but the problem that we confront is that, un- and decided without amendment or debate. less the dissent debate goes ahead, the mat- Mr McCLELLAND (Barton) (5.21 ters about which you have ruled and on p.m.)—Mr Speaker, I refer to page 311 of which there is dissent will have to be final- House of Representatives Practice, which ised and it would make it futile to have the says: dissent motion. I believe that the only avenue open to you by standing orders 98 through to The principal means by which a question may be 100 is to take the dissent motion—and to take superseded is by way of amendment. Once an it now. amendment is moved and the question on the amendment proposed to the House the original Mr Williams—Mr Speaker, I rise on a question is temporarily superseded. point of order. We have had some interesting So what happened with the Leader of the suggestions as to what is the relevant issue. Opposition’s amendment is that the Attorney- Can I suggest to you that the particular point General’s original motion was superseded. So of view that is relevant is on page 341, which it is no longer before the House and it cannot deals with the motion that the question be now be put. now put. It provides that, once an amendment is moved and seconded, the question on the Mr SPEAKER—Before I recognise the amendment must thereupon be proposed by Attorney-General or the member for Scul- the chair. At this point it has not been sec- lin—if they would both resume their seats—I onded. It says that, while a member is mov- will comment. This is going to get an air of ing an amendment, the closure motion—that the absurd about it unless I deal with some of the question be now put—may not be moved. the issues that have been raised. The member I understood that it had been moved and that for Barton makes a valid point except that, the Leader of the Opposition was speaking to for the motion in fact to have status, it needed the motion. to be stated from the chair. The chair is obvi- Mr Kerr interjecting— ously being guided by House of Representa- tives Practice. It is inappropriate for the chair Mr SPEAKER—The member for to be mounting its own defence but can I be Denison, you have been warned. forgiven for pointing out this statement Mr Williams—But a member speaking to which applies entirely to the question that the a motion or amendment that he or she has question be now put: moved may be interrupted by a closure mo- The motion for the closure may also be moved tion, so that the moment that the Leader of while the member who has seconded an amend- the Opposition has moved his motion and ment is addressing the House. starts speaking to it—as I understood he was doing—a closure motion is competent. Once again, the closure applies to the original question as in both cases the question on the Mr Beazley—Mr Speaker, I rise to speak amendment has not yet been proposed from on that point of order. His comment does not the chair. actually assist the Attorney-General to get back to the point at which he wishes to be. Mr Jenkins—Mr Speaker, you would un- That is an argument he could legitimately derstand that I rise on a point of order with raise in the course of a debate about dissent great reluctance. First of all, I indicate that I from your ruling but it is not an argument am not a lawyer. I refer you to standing order that he can legitimately raise to prevent a 98—’Point of order’—which says: Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14787 dissent from your ruling being placed before The House divided. [5.33 p.m.] the chamber. (Mr Speaker—Mr Neil Andrew) Mr Speaker, we are a chamber which pro- Ayes………… 75 ceeds by standing orders, and must do so. Those standing orders are there for the rights Noes………… 68 of all members of parliament, not just simply Majority……… 7 for the convenience of the government. One AYES of the rights that are there for us is that, when you, Mr Speaker, find yourself at any point in Abbott, A.J. Anderson, J.D. time constrained to give a ruling, it is capable Andrews, K.J. Anthony, L.J. of being challenged in this way. You are Bailey, F.E. Baird, B.G. obliged to give a ruling on this matter be- Barresi, P.A. Bartlett, K.J. cause something had occurred in this cham- ber beyond the original moving of the motion Billson, B.F. Bishop, B.K. by the Attorney-General; namely, I was on Bishop, J.I. Brough, M.T. my scrapers talking about a motion that I was Cadman, A.G. Cameron, R.A. moving. Therefore an interpretation was re- quired by you of the circumstances in which Causley, I.R. Charles, R.E. you found yourself. You gave that interpreta- Costello, P.H. Downer, A.J.G. tion. It did not go my way. The option that Draper, P. Elson, K.S. was available to me in any set of circum- Entsch, W.G. Fahey, J.J. stances—and then to take precedence at once, as the standing order says—is my capacity or Fischer, T.A. Forrest, J.A. * any other member of this parliament’s capac- Gallus, C.A. Gambaro, T. ity to move dissent from your ruling. Gash, J. Haase, B.W. All sorts of points can be made about Hardgrave, G.D. Hawker, D.P.M. whether or not I am reasonable and about Hockey, J.B. Howard, J.W. moving dissent from your ruling, but what Hull, K.E. Jull, D.F. cannot happen is the capacity to dissent from a ruling in this place being obviated effec- Katter, R.C. Kelly, D.M. tively by force majeure, and that is what is Kemp, D.A. Lawler, A.J. going on here. This is an overriding position Lieberman, L.S. Lindsay, P.J. because each step of the processes of this Lloyd, J.E. Macfarlane, I.E. parliament in the end has to proceed on the basis of your interpretation of standing or- May, M.A. McArthur, S. * ders, and you cannot just simply brush it McGauran, P.J. Moore, J.C. aside. That is quite evident from the select Moylan, J. E. Nairn, G. R. part of House of Representatives Practice Nehl, G. B. Nelson, B.J. that we moved in that regard, which gave us an absolute right of precedence as far as these Neville, P.C. Nugent, P.E. sorts of motions are concerned. Prosser, G.D. Pyne, C. Reith, P.K. Ronaldson, Mr SPEAKER—I am sure that the Leader of the Opposition understands that it M.J.C. is not the wish of the chair to ever deny him Ruddock, P.M. Schultz, A. the right to move dissent. That must be Scott, B.C. Secker, P.D. clearly understood. However, the chair is Slipper, P.N. Southcott, A.J. bound by standing order 93, which obliges me to put the question that the question be Stone, S.N. Sullivan, K.J.M. put forthwith without amendment or debate, Thompson, C.P. Thomson, A.P. and I propose to put that question. The ques- Truss, W.E. Tuckey, C.W. tion is that the question be now put. 14788 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

Vaile, M.A.J. Vale, D.S. Question put: Wakelin, B.H. Washer, M.J. That the second reading be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Williams, D.R. Wooldridge, The House divided. [5.39 p.m.] M.R.L. NOES (Mr Speaker—Mr Neil Andrew) Ayes……… 75 Adams, D.G.H. Albanese, A.N. Noes………… 68 Andren, P.J. Beazley, K.C. Majority………… 7 Bevis, A.R. Brereton, L.J. AYES Burke, A.E. Byrne, A.M. Abbott, A.J. Anderson, J.D. Cox, D.A. Crean, S.F. Andrews, K.J. Anthony, L.J. Crosio, J.A. Danby, M. Bailey, F.E. Baird, B.G. Edwards, G.J. Ellis, A.L. Barresi, P.A. Bartlett, K.J. Emerson, C.A. Evans, M.J. Billson, B.F. Bishop, B.K. Ferguson, L.D.T. Ferguson, M.J. Bishop, J.I. Brough, M.T. Fitzgibbon, J.A. Gerick, J.F. Cadman, A.G. Cameron, R.A. Gibbons, S.W. Gillard, J.E. Causley, I.R. Charles, R.E. Griffin, A.P. Hall, J.G. Costello, P.H. Downer, A.J.G. Hatton, M.J. Hoare, K.J. Draper, P. Elson, K.S. Hollis, C. Horne, R. Entsch, W.G. Fahey, J.J. Irwin, J. Jenkins, H.A. Fischer, T.A. Forrest, J.A. * Kernot, C. Kerr, D.J.C. Gallus, C.A. Gambaro, T. Latham, M.W. Lawrence, C.M. Gash, J. Haase, B.W. Lee, M.J. Livermore, K.F. Hardgrave, G.D. Hawker, D.P.M. Macklin, J.L. Martin, S.P. Hockey, J.B. Howard, J.W. McClelland, R.B. McFarlane, J.S. Hull, K.E. Jull, D.F. McLeay, L.B. McMullan, R.F. Katter, R.C. Kelly, D.M. Melham, D. Morris, A.A. Kemp, D.A. Lawler, A.J. Mossfield, F.W. Murphy, J. P. Lieberman, L.S. Lindsay, P.J. O’Byrne, M.A. O’Connor, G.M. Lloyd, J.E. Macfarlane, I.E. O’Keefe, N.P. Plibersek, T. May, M.A. McArthur, S. * Price, L.R.S. Quick, H.V. McGauran, P.J. Moore, J.C. Ripoll, B.F. Roxon, N.L. Moylan, J. E. Nairn, G. R. Rudd, K.M. Sawford, R.W.* Nehl, G. B. Nelson, B.J. Sciacca, C.A. Sercombe, Neville, P.C. Nugent, P.E. R.C.G.* Prosser, G.D. Pyne, C. Sidebottom, P.S. Smith, S.F. Reith, P.K. Ronaldson, M.J.C. Snowdon, W.E. Swan, W.M. Ruddock, P.M. Schultz, A. Tanner, L. Theophanous, Scott, B.C. Secker, P.D. A.C. Slipper, P.N. Southcott, A.J. Thomson, K.J. Wilkie, K. * denotes teller Stone, S.N. Sullivan, K.J.M. Question so resolved in the affirmative. Thompson, C.P. Thomson, A.P. Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14789

Truss, W.E. Tuckey, C.W. * denotes teller Vaile, M.A.J. Vale, D.S. Question so resolved in the affirmative. Wakelin, B.H. Washer, M.J. Mr BEAZLEY (Brand—Leader of the Opposition) (5.40 p.m.)—I move: Williams, D.R. Wooldridge, That so much of the standing and sessional or- M.R.L. ders be suspended as would prevent the Leader of NOES the Opposition from moving forthwith: Adams, D.G.H. Albanese, A.N. That the order of the House that the second read- Andren, P.J. Beazley, K.C. ing of the Human Rights (Mandatory Sentencing of Juvenile Offenders) Bill be made an order of Bevis, A.R. Brereton, L.J. the day for the next sitting be rescinded so that the Burke, A.E. Byrne, A.M. second reading can be moved forthwith. Cox, D.A. Crean, S.F. Mr Speaker, I believe that it is necessary to rescind the motion that we have just passed Crosio, J.A. Danby, M. because, if we fail to rescind this motion— Edwards, G.J. Ellis, A.L. Motion (by Mr Hockey) put: Emerson, C.A. Evans, M.J. That the member be not further heard. Ferguson, L.D.T. Ferguson, M.J. A division having been called and the bells Fitzgibbon, J.A. Gerick, J.F. being rung— Gibbons, S.W. Gillard, J.E. Mr Melham interjecting— Griffin, A.P. Hall, J.G. Mrs Gash—If you’ve got something to Hatton, M.J. Hoare, K.J. say, Daryl, come out and say it. Hollis, C. Horne, R. Mr Melham—You’d gag me. Irwin, J. Jenkins, H.A. Mr SPEAKER—Order! The member for Kernot, C. Kerr, D.J.C. Gilmore and the member for Banks! Latham, M.W. Lawrence, C.M. Mr Melham—I’m not going to take that crap. Lee, M.J. Livermore, K.F. Mr SPEAKER—The member for Banks Macklin, J.L. Martin, S.P. is warned! McClelland, R.B. McFarlane, J.S. The House divided. [5.44 p.m.] McLeay, L.B. McMullan, R.F. (Mr Speaker—Mr Neil Andrew) Melham, D. Morris, A.A. Ayes……… 75 Noes………… 68 Mossfield, F.W. Murphy, J. P. Majority………… 7 AYES O’Byrne, M.A. O’Connor, G.M. Abbott, A.J. Anderson, J.D.

O’Keefe, N.P. Plibersek, T. Andrews, K.J. Anthony, L.J. Price, L.R.S. Quick, H.V. Bailey, F.E. Baird, B.G. Ripoll, B.F. Roxon, N.L. Barresi, P.A. Bartlett, K.J. Rudd, K.M. Sawford, R.W.* Billson, B.F. Bishop, B.K. Sciacca, C.A. Sercombe, R.C.G.* Bishop, J.I. Brough, M.T. Sidebottom, P.S. Smith, S.F. Cadman, A.G. Cameron, R.A. Snowdon, W.E. Swan, W.M. Causley, I.R. Charles, R.E. Tanner, L. Theophanous, A.C. Costello, P.H. Downer, A.J.G. Thomson, K.J. Wilkie, K. Draper, P. Elson, K.S. 14790 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

Entsch, W.G. Fahey, J.J. Hollis, C. Horne, R. Fischer, T.A. Forrest, J.A. * Irwin, J. Jenkins, H.A. Gallus, C.A. Gambaro, T. Kernot, C. Kerr, D.J.C. Gash, J. Haase, B.W. Latham, M.W. Lawrence, C.M. Hardgrave, G.D. Hawker, D.P.M. Lee, M.J. Livermore, K.F. Hockey, J.B. Howard, J.W. Macklin, J.L. Martin, S.P. Hull, K.E. Jull, D.F. McClelland, R.B. McFarlane, J.S. Katter, R.C. Kelly, D.M. McLeay, L.B. McMullan, R.F. Kemp, D.A. Lawler, A.J. Melham, D. Morris, A.A. Lieberman, L.S. Lindsay, P.J. Mossfield, F.W. Murphy, J. P. Lloyd, J.E. Macfarlane, I.E. O’Byrne, M.A. O’Connor, G.M. May, M.A. McArthur, S. * O’Keefe, N.P. Plibersek, T. McGauran, P.J. Moore, J.C. Price, L.R.S. Quick, H.V. Moylan, J. E. Nairn, G. R. Ripoll, B.F. Roxon, N.L. Nehl, G. B. Nelson, B.J. Rudd, K.M. Sawford, R.W.* Neville, P.C. Nugent, P.E. Sciacca, C.A. Sercombe, R.C.G.* Prosser, G.D. Pyne, C. Sidebottom, P.S. Smith, S.F. Reith, P.K. Ronaldson, M.J.C. Snowdon, W.E. Swan, W.M. Ruddock, P.M. Schultz, A. Tanner, L. Theophanous, A.C. Scott, B.C. Secker, P.D. Thomson, K.J. Wilkie, K. Slipper, P.N. Southcott, A.J. * denotes teller Stone, S.N. Sullivan, K.J.M. Question so resolved in the affirmative. Thompson, C.P. Thomson, A.P. Mr SPEAKER—Is the motion seconded? Truss, W.E. Tuckey, C.W. Mr ANDREN (Calare) (5.47 p.m.)—Mr Speaker, I second the motion. Today we have Vaile, M.A.J. Vale, D.S. seen a travesty of justice and democracy in Wakelin, B.H. Washer, M.J. this place in the failure of the government to Williams, D.R. Wooldridge, debate— M.R.L. Motion (by Mr Hockey) put: NOES That the member be not further heard. Adams, D.G.H. Albanese, A.N. The House divided. [5.49 p.m.] Andren, P.J. Beazley, K.C. (Mr Speaker—Mr Neil Andrew) Bevis, A.R. Brereton, L.J. Ayes……… 75 Burke, A.E. Byrne, A.M. Noes………… 68 Cox, D.A. Crean, S.F. Majority………… 7 Crosio, J.A. Danby, M. AYES Edwards, G.J. Ellis, A.L. Abbott, A.J. Anderson, J.D. Emerson, C.A. Evans, M.J. Andrews, K.J. Anthony, L.J. Ferguson, L.D.T. Ferguson, M.J. Bailey, F.E. Baird, B.G. Fitzgibbon, J.A. Gerick, J.F. Barresi, P.A. Bartlett, K.J. Gibbons, S.W. Gillard, J.E. Billson, B.F. Bishop, B.K. Griffin, A.P. Hall, J.G. Bishop, J.I. Brough, M.T. Hatton, M.J. Hoare, K.J. Cadman, A.G. Cameron, R.A. Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14791

Causley, I.R. Charles, R.E. Gibbons, S.W. Gillard, J.E. Costello, P.H. Downer, A.J.G. Griffin, A.P. Hall, J.G. Draper, P. Elson, K.S. Hatton, M.J. Hoare, K.J. Entsch, W.G. Fahey, J.J. Hollis, C. Horne, R. Fischer, T.A. Forrest, J.A. * Irwin, J. Jenkins, H.A. Gallus, C.A. Gambaro, T. Kernot, C. Kerr, D.J.C. Gash, J. Haase, B.W. Latham, M.W. Lawrence, C.M. Hardgrave, G.D. Hawker, D.P.M. Lee, M.J. Livermore, K.F. Hockey, J.B. Howard, J.W. Macklin, J.L. Martin, S.P. Hull, K.E. Jull, D.F. McClelland, R.B. McFarlane, J.S. Katter, R.C. Kelly, D.M. McLeay, L.B. McMullan, R.F. Kemp, D.A. Lawler, A.J. Melham, D. Morris, A.A. Lieberman, L.S. Lindsay, P.J. Mossfield, F.W. Murphy, J. P. Lloyd, J.E. Macfarlane, I.E. O’Byrne, M.A. O’Connor, G.M. May, M.A. McArthur, S. * O’Keefe, N.P. Plibersek, T. McGauran, P.J. Moore, J.C. Price, L.R.S. Quick, H.V. Moylan, J. E. Nairn, G. R. Ripoll, B.F. Roxon, N.L. Nehl, G. B. Nelson, B.J. Rudd, K.M. Sawford, R.W.* Neville, P.C. Nugent, P.E. Sciacca, C.A. Sercombe, R.C.G.* Prosser, G.D. Pyne, C. Sidebottom, P.S. Smith, S.F. Reith, P.K. Ronaldson, M.J.C. Snowdon, W.E. Swan, W.M. Ruddock, P.M. Schultz, A. Tanner, L. Theophanous, A.C. Scott, B.C. Secker, P.D. Thomson, K.J. Wilkie, K. Slipper, P.N. Southcott, A.J. * denotes teller Stone, S.N. Sullivan, K.J.M. In division— Thompson, C.P. Thomson, A.P. Mr Kerr—On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I note that the member for Par- Truss, W.E. Tuckey, C.W. ramatta appears to have moved from his seat, Vaile, M.A.J. Vale, D.S. in defiance of the standing orders and proce- Wakelin, B.H. Washer, M.J. dures of this place, during a one-minute divi- Williams, D.R. Wooldridge, sion. I ask you to rule on that fact. M.R.L. Mr Melham—He was over there! NOES Mr SPEAKER—Order! I do not need the assistance of the member for Banks, who will Adams, D.G.H. Albanese, A.N. be dealt with very sternly, or the member for Andren, P.J. Beazley, K.C. McEwen, who seems to feel that she too has Bevis, A.R. Brereton, L.J. authority to advise the chair. I require only to Burke, A.E. Byrne, A.M. ask the member for Parramatta whether in fact he has moved from his seat, which he Cox, D.A. Crean, S.F. occupied in the previous division. Crosio, J.A. Danby, M. Mr Ross Cameron—Mr Speaker, I do not Edwards, G.J. Ellis, A.L. understand the standing orders to require me Emerson, C.A. Evans, M.J. to be seated while the bells are ringing. I was Ferguson, L.D.T. Ferguson, M.J. seated here for the last division and I have returned to the place where I was seated. Fitzgibbon, J.A. Gerick, J.F. 14792 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

Mr SPEAKER—I thank the member for Cadman, A.G. Cameron, R.A. Paramatta. Causley, I.R. Charles, R.E. Question so resolved in the affirmative. Costello, P.H. Downer, A.J.G. Mr SPEAKER—The question is that standing orders be suspended to enable the Draper, P. Elson, K.S. order of the day nominated by the Leader of Entsch, W.G. Fahey, J.J. the Opposition to be brought on. Fischer, T.A. Forrest, J.A. * Mr McMULLAN (Fraser) (5.53 p.m.)— Gallus, C.A. Gambaro, T. Mr Speaker, I wish to speak to that motion. Gash, J. Haase, B.W. Motion (by Mr Hockey) put: Hardgrave, G.D. Hawker, D.P.M. That the question be now put. Hockey, J.B. Howard, J.W. Mr McMullan—On a point of order, Mr Hull, K.E. Jull, D.F. Speaker: how did he get the call before me? Katter, R.C. Kelly, D.M. Mr SPEAKER—I refer you once again to standing order 53, which obliges me to put a Kemp, D.A. Lawler, A.J. motion. Lieberman, L.S. Lindsay, P.J. Opposition members interjecting— Lloyd, J.E. Macfarlane, I.E. Mr SPEAKER—If the House will come May, M.A. McArthur, S. * to order, I will hear the Manager of Opposi- McGauran, P.J. Moore, J.C. tion Business. Moylan, J. E. Nairn, G. R. Mr McMullan—Mr Speaker, I understand once the motion is moved the standing orders Nehl, G. B. Nelson, B.J. under which you operate. What I was con- Neville, P.C. Nugent, P.E. testing is that you gave the call to the minis- Prosser, G.D. Pyne, C. ter over there while I was on my feet rather Reith, P.K. Ronaldson, M.J.C. than to me when I wanted to speak to the motion before the chair. I should have re- Ruddock, P.M. Schultz, A. ceived the call. If you think he jumped before Scott, B.C. Secker, P.D. me, that is an amazing piece of judgment on Slipper, P.N. Southcott, A.J. your part. Stone, S.N. Sullivan, K.J.M. Mr SPEAKER—The position is that the Thompson, C.P. Thomson, A.P. question that the question be now put has precedence over all other questions, and I Truss, W.E. Tuckey, C.W. now propose to put it. The question is that the Vaile, M.A.J. Vale, D.S. question be now put. Wakelin, B.H. Washer, M.J. The House divided. [5.55 p.m.] Williams, D.R. Wooldridge, (Mr Speaker—Mr Neil Andrew) M.R.L. Ayes………… 75 NOES Noes………… 68 Adams, D.G.H. Albanese, A.N. Majority……… 7 Andren, P.J. Beazley, K.C. AYES Bevis, A.R. Brereton, L.J. Abbott, A.J. Anderson, J.D. Burke, A.E. Byrne, A.M. Andrews, K.J. Anthony, L.J. Cox, D.A. Crean, S.F. Bailey, F.E. Baird, B.G. Crosio, J.A. Danby, M. Barresi, P.A. Bartlett, K.J. Edwards, G.J. Ellis, A.L. Billson, B.F. Bishop, B.K. Emerson, C.A. Evans, M.J. Bishop, J.I. Brough, M.T. Ferguson, L.D.T. Ferguson, M.J. Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14793

Fitzgibbon, J.A. Gerick, J.F. Emerson, C.A. Evans, M.J. Gibbons, S.W. Gillard, J.E. Ferguson, L.D.T. Ferguson, M.J. Griffin, A.P. Hall, J.G. Fitzgibbon, J.A. Gerick, J.F. Hatton, M.J. Hoare, K.J. Gibbons, S.W. Gillard, J.E. Hollis, C. Horne, R. Griffin, A.P. Hall, J.G. Irwin, J. Jenkins, H.A. Hatton, M.J. Hoare, K.J. Kernot, C. Kerr, D.J.C. Hollis, C. Horne, R. Latham, M.W. Lawrence, C.M. Irwin, J. Jenkins, H.A. Lee, M.J. Livermore, K.F. Kernot, C. Kerr, D.J.C. Macklin, J.L. Martin, S.P. Latham, M.W. Lawrence, C.M. McClelland, R.B. McFarlane, J.S. Lee, M.J. Livermore, K.F. McLeay, L.B. McMullan, R.F. Macklin, J.L. Martin, S.P. Melham, D. Morris, A.A. McClelland, R.B. McFarlane, J.S. Mossfield, F.W. Murphy, J. P. McLeay, L.B. McMullan, R.F. O’Byrne, M.A. O’Connor, G.M. Melham, D. Morris, A.A. O’Keefe, N.P. Plibersek, T. Mossfield, F.W. Murphy, J. P. Price, L.R.S. Quick, H.V. O’Byrne, M.A. O’Connor, G.M. Ripoll, B.F. Roxon, N.L. O’Keefe, N.P. Plibersek, T. Rudd, K.M. Sawford, R.W.* Price, L.R.S. Quick, H.V. Sciacca, C.A. Sercombe, R.C.G.* Ripoll, B.F. Roxon, N.L. Sidebottom, P.S. Smith, S.F. Rudd, K.M. Sawford, R.W.* Snowdon, W.E. Swan, W.M. Sciacca, C.A. Sercombe, R.C.G.* Tanner, L. Theophanous, A.C. Sidebottom, P.S. Smith, S.F. Thomson, K.J. Wilkie, K. Snowdon, W.E. Swan, W.M. * denotes teller Tanner, L. Theophanous, A.C. Thomson, K.J. Wilkie, K. Question so resolved in the affirmative. NOES Original question put: Abbott, A.J. Anderson, J.D. That the motion (Mr Beazley’s) be agreed to. Andrews, K.J. Anthony, L.J. The House divided. [5.57 p.m.] Bailey, F.E. Baird, B.G. (Mr Speaker—Mr Neil Andrew) Barresi, P.A. Bartlett, K.J. Ayes………… 68 Billson, B.F. Bishop, B.K. Noes………… 75 Bishop, J.I. Brough, M.T. Majority……… 7 Cadman, A.G. Cameron, R.A. AYES Causley, I.R. Charles, R.E. Adams, D.G.H. Albanese, A.N. Costello, P.H. Downer, A.J.G. Andren, P.J. Beazley, K.C. Draper, P. Elson, K.S. Bevis, A.R. Brereton, L.J. Entsch, W.G. Fahey, J.J. Burke, A.E. Byrne, A.M. Fischer, T.A. Forrest, J.A. * Cox, D.A. Crean, S.F. Gallus, C.A. Gambaro, T. Crosio, J.A. Danby, M. Gash, J. Haase, B.W. Edwards, G.J. Ellis, A.L. Hardgrave, G.D. Hawker, D.P.M. 14794 REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, 15 March 2000

Hockey, J.B. Howard, J.W. at this stage are of the no-gap variety. The development of these policies certainly Hull, K.E. Jull, D.F. should not be discouraged, and this is one of Katter, R.C. Kelly, D.M. our principal concerns. I would like to see Kemp, D.A. Lawler, A.J. further examination of the potential effects of Lieberman, L.S. Lindsay, P.J. the bill on these schemes. Lloyd, J.E. Macfarlane, I.E. I am led to believe that the medical profes- sion has a vested interest in seeing the bill May, M.A. McArthur, S. * before this House passed. I do not want to see McGauran, P.J. Moore, J.C. the public robbed of both public hospitals Moylan, J. E. Nairn, G. R. and any potential beneficial private option Nehl, G. B. Nelson, B.J. because of profit taking by this sector. We need more information regarding the detailed Neville, P.C. Nugent, P.E. impact on current schemes. Finally, and im- Prosser, G.D. Pyne, C. portantly, whenever a patient enters the care Reith, P.K. Ronaldson, M.J.C.of a hospital or anywhere in the medical pro- fession where care is provided, it is reason- Ruddock, P.M. Schultz, A. able to expect that the patient will know the Scott, B.C. Secker, P.D. cost of the procedures and what gap will need Slipper, P.N. Southcott, A.J. to be covered; therefore, they will be able to Stone, S.N. Sullivan, K.J.M.make an informed choice. This is called fi- nancial consent. This is not, however, defined Thompson, C.P. Thomson, A.P. in the legislation before us today. Unfortu- Truss, W.E. Tuckey, C.W. nately, in my reading of the bill, there is little Vaile, M.A.J. Vale, D.S. or no reference to this commercial informa- tion. Also of some concern is that it is possi- Wakelin, B.H. Washer, M.J. ble for a patient to be multi-billed—that is, to Williams, D.R. Wooldridge, receive a series of individual bills from vari- M.R.L. ous sources related to separate treatments. * denotes teller Simplified billing arrangements are of para- mount importance, and the current moves to Question so resolved in the negative. continue this practice should be pursued. Given these complexities and that many of HEALTH LEGISLATION AMENDMENT the questions need extensive examination, it (GAP COVER SCHEMES) BILL 2000 would be appropriate if we moved to exam- Second Reading ine the bill in more detail at the consideration Debate resumed. in detail stage. Mr WILKIE (Swan) (6.02 p.m.)—Fol- Not so long ago, the Sydney Morning Her- lowing on from my speech earlier, no mecha- ald’s Ross Gittins wrote a piece quoting Don nisms seem to be in place pertaining to what Harding from the Melbourne Institute. Gittins action could be taken against transgressors. made a number of salient points that we What benefit would there be to consumers if should consider in relation to this bill. They the medical fraternity simply increased the go to the heart of the strategy of this govern- fee schedule? My second concern goes to the ment and why members on this side of the matter of the impact on current schemes. As House look with some trepidation on the in- we have seen, some measure of success has troduction of this bill when there are limitless been achieved by consumers in obtaining no- problems borne of neglect that need ad- gap policies. As members following the de- dressing. Perhaps the most salient of all of bate are aware, the Labor Party has been the points made was that we have had in this pleased that many insurance companies have country for quite some time significant cost been implementing no-gap alternatives. Of control over the public part of Australia’s course, only a minimal proportion of policies health system. For the two decades since the Wednesday, 15 March 2000 REPRESENTATIVES 14795 introduction of Medicare, we have managed membership increased by a miserable 60,000 to keep aggregate costs below those of other people around Australia. Recently the premi- nations, as well as cover all of our popula- ums have jumped five per cent, or $110 a tion. Contrast this with private dominated year for an average family. marketplaces like the United States that do Let us look briefly at key issues mentioned not cover all of the population and cannot in the budget. I remember that our criticism control costs. In fact, prices increased by six centred on three principal issues: firstly, radi- times the Australian rate. The pri