PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD)

FIFTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT

AUTUMN SESSION 1990

Legislative Assembly

VOL. 397

[From 6 March 1990 to 1 May 1990J

MELBOURNE: L. V. NORTH, GOVERNMENT PRINTER

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

Minister for Labour The Hon. N. A. Pope, MP Minister for Housing and Construction The Hon. B. T. Pullen, MLC Minister for Planning and Environment, The Hon. T. W. Roper, MP and Minister for Consumer Affairs Minister for Agriculture and Rural The Hon. B. J. Rowe, MP Affairs ...... Minister for Conservation, Forests and The Hon. K. P. Setches, MP Lands Minister for Community Services, and The Hon. P. C. Spyker, MP Minister for Prices Minister for Sport and Recreation The Hon. N. B. Trezise, MP Minister for Property and Services, and The Hon. R. W. Walsh, MP Minister for Water Resources Parliamentary Secretary of the Cabinet M.J.Sandon,Esquire,MP [As FROM 2 APRIL 1990) Premier, and Minister for Ethnic Affairs The Hon. John Cain, MP Deputy Premier, and Minister for The Hon. J. E. Kirner, AM, MP Education Minister for Industry and Economic The Hon. D. R. White, MLC Planning, and Minister for Major Projects Minister for Health The Hon. C. J. Hogg, MLC Minister for Conservation and Environ- The Hon. S. M. Crabb, MP ment, and Minister for Tourism Attorney-General The Hon. J. H. Kennan, QC, MP Minister for Local Government The Hon. M. A. Lyster, MLC Minister for Planning and Urban The Hon. Andrew McCutcheon, MP Growth, and Minister for the Arts Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister The Hon. B. W. Mier, MLC for Prices, and Minister for Aboriginal Affairs Minister for Labour The Hon. N. A. Pope, MP Minister for Housing and Construction The Hon. B. T. Pullen, MLC Treasurer The Hon. T. W. Roper, MP Minister for Agriculture and Rural The Hon. B. J. Rowe, MP Affairs Minister for Police and Emergency Ser- The Hon. M. J. Sandon, MP vices, and Minister for Corrections Minister for Community Services The Hon. K. P. Setches, MP Minister for Transport The Hon. P. C. Spyker, MP Minister for Sport and Recreation The Hon. N. B. Trezise, MP Minister for Property and Services The Hon. R. W. Walsh, MP Parliamentary Secretary of the Cabinet The Hon. R. A. Jolly, MP Members of the Legislative Assembly FIFTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT-FIRST SESSION Speaker: THE HON. KEN COGHILL Chairman of Committees: Mr T. R. NORRIS Temporary Chairmen of Committees: Mr Delzoppo, Mr Emst, Mr Evans, Mr Harrowfield, Mr Jasper, Mr McDonald, Mr Plowman, Mrs Ray, Mr Rlchardson, Mr F. P. Sheehan, Mr Shell, Mr Stegall, and Or Vaughan. Leader of the Labor Party and Premier: THE HON. JOHN CAIN Deputy Leader of the Labor Party and Deputy Premier: THE HON. J. E. KIRNER. AM Leader of the Parliamentary Liberal Party and Leader of tile Opposition: MR A. 1. BROWN . Deputy Leader of the Parliamentary Liberal Party and Deputy Leader of the Opposition: MR ROGER PESCOTT Leader of the National Party: MR P. J. McNAMARA Deputy Leader ofthe National Party: MR W. D. McGRATH

Heads of Parliamentary Departments

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

Council-Clerk of the Legislative Council: Mr A. V. Bray

Hansard-ChiefReporter: Mr L. C. Johns

Library-Librarian: Mr B. J. Davidson

House-Acting Secretary: Mr W. F. McKelvie

Members of the Legislative Assembly Member District Party Member District Party Andrianopoulos, Alex St Albans ALP McGrath, John Francis NP Austin, Thomas Leslie Ripon LP McGrath, William Desmond Lowan NP Baker. lan Malcolm John Sunshine ALP McNamara, Patrick John Benalla NP Barker, Mrs Ann Patricia Bentleigh ALP Maclellan, Robert Roy Berwick LP "*Batchelor, Peter Thomastown ALP Cameron Bildstien, Craig Stephen Mildura LP Mathews, Charles Race Oakleigh ALP Brown, Alan John West LP Thorson Cain, John Bundoora ALP *Maughan, Noel John Rodney NP Clark, Robert William Balwyn LP Micallef, Edward Joseph Springvale ALP Coghill, Dr Kenneth Alastair Werribee ALP Napthine, Or Denis Vincent Portland LP Cole, Neil Donald ALP Norris, Terence Richard Dandenong ALP Coleman, Charles Geoffrey Syndal LP Perrin, David John Bulleen LP Cooper, Robert Fitzgerald Mornington LP Perton, Victor John Doncaster LP Crabb, Steven Marshall Knox ALP Pescott, Roger Bennettswood LP Cunningham, David James Derrimut ALP Plowman, Sidney James Evelyn LP Delzoppo, John Edward Narracan LP Pope, Neil Albert Monbulk ALP Dickinson, Harley Rivers, South Barwon LP Ray, Mrs Margaret Elizabeth Box Hill ALP KSJ Reynolds, Thomas Carter Gisborne LP Dollis, Demetri Richmond ALP Richardson, John InJles Forest Hill LP Elder, Stephen Noel North LP Roper, Thomas Wilham Brunswick ALP Ernst, Graham Keith Bellarine ALP Ross-Edwards, Peter, AM Shepparton NP Evans, Bruce James Gippsland East NP Rowe, Barry John Essendon ALP Fordham, Robert Clive Footscray ALP Sandon, Malcolm John Carrum ALP **Garbutt, Mrs Sherry I Maree Greensborough ALP Seitz, George Keilor ALP Gavin. Peter Murray Coburg ALP Sercombe, Robert Charles Niddrie ALP Grant Gude, Phillip Archibald Hawthorn LP Setches, Mrs Kay Patricia Ringwood ALP Hamilton, Keith Graeme Morwell ALP Sheehan, Anthony John Northcote ALP Harrowfield, John Dyson Mitcham ALP Sheehan, Francis Patrick Ballarat South ALP Hayward, Donald Keith Prahran LP Shell, Hayden Kevin Geelong ALP Heffeman, Vincent Patrick, lvanhoe LP Simmonds, James Lionel Reservoir ALP OAM Smith, Emest Ross Glen Waverley LP Hill, Mrs Jane Margaret Frankston North ALP Smith, lan Winton Polwarth LP Hirsh, Mrs Carolyn Dorothy Wantirna ALP Spyker, Peter Cornelis Mentone ALP Honeywood, Phillip Neville Warrandyte LP Steggall, Barry Edward Hector Swan Hill NP Jasper, Kenneth Stephen Murray Valley NP Stockdale, Alan Robert Brighton LP John, Michael Bendigo East LP Tanner, Edgar Miles Caulfield LP Jolly, Robert Alien Doveton ALP Ponsonby Kennan, James Harley, QC Broadmeadows ALP Thomson, Kelvin John Pascoe Vale ALP Kennedy, Andrew David Bendigo West ALP Trezise, Neil Benjamin Gcelong North ALP Kennett, Jeffrey Gibb Burwood LP Vaut.an, Or Gerard Marshall Clayton ALP Kimer, Ms Joan Elizabeth, WiIliamstown ALP Wa e, Mrs Jan Louise Murray Kew LP AM Wallace, Thomas William Gippsland South NP Lea, David John Sandringham LP Walsh, Ronald William Albert Park ALP Leigh, Geoffrey Graeme Malvern LP Weideman, George Graeme Frankston South LP Leighton, Michael Andrew Preston ALP Wells, Dr Ronald James Dromana LP Lieberman, Louis Stuart Benambra LP Herbert McCutcheon, Andrew St Kilda ALP Wilson, Mrs Janet Tindale Dandenong North ALP McDonald, Maxwell John Whittlesea ALP Calder ·Elected 4 March 1989 ··Elected 15 April 1989 ···Elected 2 February 1990

Televising ofProceedings 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 1

Tuesday, 6 March 1990

The SPEAKER (the Hon. Ken CoghiU) took the chair at 2.5 p.m. and read the prayer.

TELEVISING OF PROCEEDINGS The SPEAKER-Order! I desire to advise the House that I have approved the filming by Channel ATV10 of today's proceedings during consideration of the condolence motions. The filming will take place under the usual guidelines.

NEW MEMBER The SPEAKER announced that he had received a return to the writ Mr Acting Speaker had issued on 29 December 1989 for the election of a member to serve for the electoral district ofThomastown in the place ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson, deceased, by which it appeared that Mr Peter Batchelor had been duly elected for that electoral district. Mr Batchelor was introduced and affirmed.

FILMING OF PROCEEDINGS The SPEAKER-Order! In order to have Library footage of proceedings of the House I have requested that the Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs undertake filming during consideration of the condolence motions. The matter has been discussed with each of the three parties and I understand the parties are in agreement. However, for the filming to proceed, a resolution of the House is required. Mr ROPER (Minister for Planning and Environment)-By leave, I move: That Standing Orders Nos 28 and 29 relating to the admission of strangers be suspended for this day so far as may be necessary to permit the filming of certain proceedings of this House by the Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs. The motion was agreed to.

DEATH OF MRS ELIZABETH SUSAN GLEESON Mr CAIN (Premier)-I move: That this House expresses its sincere sorrow at the death of Mrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson, and places on record its acknowledgment of the valuable services rendered by her to the Parliament and the people of Victoria as member of the Legislative Assembly for the electoral district of Thomastown from 1985 to 1989. The death of Beth Gleeson, as she was known to us, on 16 December last shocked and saddened all members of this House and many outside who knew her so well. Her death was close and, I suppose, in circumstances similar to the untimely death of Pauline Toner some twelve months earlier. Both had been among us; they appeared robust; and, within a few days, were gone from us. Beth entered Parliament as the member for Thomastown in March 1985, but her involvement in politics and her great contribution to Labor Party commenced long before her Parliamentary career. Session 1990-1 2 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson

She was born and grew up in Warmambool, in that part of Victoria which has a large Irish component. She was educated at St Anne's College, Warmambool, and later came to Melbourne where she undertook tertiary education at , gaining a Bachelor of Arts degree in social science. In a sense, her entry into Parliament was a progression from her extensive work in the community, particularly among ethnic and women's groups, and her involvement in party politics with the . She had for a time been a research assistant to Dr Harry Jenkins, a former Speaker of the Federal Parliament, who was a member in the district. During the years leading up to her election, much of her work revolved around the development of local services, working with community groups on the kinds of things members of the community in which she lived were interested in. The list of community groups with which she was associated stands as testimony to her commitment to involving herself in local issues which heightened community awareness and, through that involvement, helped people to become more self-sufficient. Those two themes Dow through the organisations with which Beth Gleeson was involved. She was publicity officer with the Bundoora Progress Association; a member of the Bundoora/East Preston Tramline Action Group-which successfully sought an extension of the tram route along Plenty Road; a member of the Whittlesea Community Action Group; the Whittlesea Welfare Review Group; Region 14 Regional Consultative Committee and "The Plenty" Employment Support Committee and Unemployed Rights Centre. The list goes on, with a range of those kinds of organisations in which she was actively involved. Beth Gleeson was one of those members of a political party who was involved in most aspects of political life, and not just in her own area. She was secretary of the Bundoora branch of the Australian Labor Party and a member of the Civil Rights and Law Reform Policy Committee of the Labor Party. When I recontested the seat of Bundoora in 1979, Beth Gleeson was campaign director during what was my second campaign. A fairly robust campaign was promised by the Liberal Party, and we got it. In that campaign Beth attested to me and others her ~pacity for hard work and commitment. She had drive and organisational skill and a concern for detail which had to be experienced to be understood. She was inspirational to those around her in conducting the election campaign because of her determination, attitude and attention to detail. When Beth came to Parliament in 1985, she applied the same vigour and commitment to her new position as she had when she first campaigned for the seat of Thomastown in 1985. It was seen as a seat that would be won easily. However, she campaigned vigorously, for three reasons, as I recollect. The first reason was to reduce the potential for informal Senate votes in the forthcoming Federal poll. In an area with a high ethnic population, the informal Senate vote had been notorious for some time. It was felt that some vigorous attempt should be made to reduce the level of that vote. The second reason was to raise money for the party for the forthcoming Federal campaign. The third reason was to be closely involved with the ethnic community in the seat ofThomastown. During her time as a member. of Parliament it could be said that furthering the cause of the party was something she always sought to do, very often through innovation. An example of that was involving women and people from non-English­ speaking backgrounds in the electorate in participation in the political process. She went out of her way to encourage people who are often reluctant to present themselves to be part of the political process and to take part in a political party, which is the kind of thing people should be encouraged to do in the democratic process. Death ofM rs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 3

Beth Gleeson involved herself in establishing an information service for migrant women working in factories, of which there are a large number in Thomastown: It is typical of what she did: she found a way of involving people in the political process. She had drive and encouraged people to become more self-sufficient, as she was in so many of her achievements. Beth was co-author of a publication, Services for the Unemployed, which was translated into five languages. It sought to inform people of what was available through the Community Youth Support Scheme. As a member of Parliament, Beth will be remembered as energetic and enthusiastic. In a short time, she was able to achieve much for her electorate, while at the same time balancing her commitment to her family. She chaired the Economic and Budget Review Committee and she was a member of the Joint Select Committee on Budget Estimates in 1988-89, both of which were demanding jobs. She brought to those positions a sense of responsibility and purpose. Education was an area in which Beth had a special interest. When she was already quite ill-as is now known-Beth joined the Minister responsible for Post-Secondary Education on 5 December last to turn the first sod for Melbourne's new Northern Metropolitan College of T AFE. She regarded that, along with the establishment of community health centres and neighbourhood houses in her electorate, as among her greatest achievements. She was directly involved in all three areas and saw them as providing the kinds of services that were necessary for the people in the area that she represented, where those services had, in some instances, been denied previously. The neighbourhood house program enabled women particularly-but not just women-to rejoin the work force if they wished to pursue that course, with the support of the neighbourhood. She considered community health centres to be fundamental to the provision of basic health care needs in the suburbs she represented. Beth Gleeson will be remembered by all of us as a woman of great character and determination, one who never backed away from a fight or confrontation when she saw something that needed to be changed or put right. She was in a sense what I suppose all honourable members should aspire to be: a member very close to her electorate, in touch with it, and with an understanding of the complexities of the needs of the people she represented. It was, as I indicated, an area with a large ethnic component, a kaleidoscope of in the 1980s, and she served it well in meeting the hopes and aspirations of the people she represented. On behalfofmeIllbers of the government I extend sympathy to her husband, Mike, and her children, Megan and Lisa, and hope they have some consolation in the knowledge of the contribution that Beth made to the community and the high esteem in which she was held during her life's work. Mr BROWN (Leader of the Opposition)-On behalf of the Opposition I join the Premier in extending the sympathy of the House to the family of the late Elizabeth Susan Gleeson. Beth Gleeson was highly respected by members of the Parliamentary Liberal Party who had the good fortune to have worked with her on Parliamentary committees and to have participated with her and watched her general work as a local member. We all recognised that Beth cared about the problems of her constituents, particularly the problems facing women and their families. Her concerns were very much reflected in her work on several Parliamentary committees. Beth was elected to this House as the honourable member for Thomastown in March 1985, having spent her early years 4 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson in the Western District and having completed a Bachelor of Arts degree in social science at La Trobe University. Beth was probably best known in Parliament for her role as a member and Chairperson of the Economic and Budget Review Committee, a position that she assumed on her re-election in 1988. Honourable members knew her as a warm, caring and active member of Parliament. This impression is very much borne out when one examines the depth and breadth of her commitment to local community activities, of which I shall mention a few. Beth was closely associated with Melbourne's new Northern Metropolitan College of T AFE. She was involved in the establishment of neighbourhood houses and community health centres in her electorate. Beth regarded the establishment of those facilities in Thomastown as her greatest achievements as the local member. As the Premier said, Beth was involved in numerous other community groups, including the Bundoora Progress Association, the Bundoora/East Preston Tramline Action Group, the Whittlesea Community Action Group, the Whittlesea Welfare Review Group, Region 14 Regional Consultative Committee, "The Plenty" Employment Support Committee and Unemployed Rights Centre and the Migrant Women Factory Workers Information Services. Beth was also co-author of Services for the Unemployed, which has been translated into five languages, as the Premier pointed out. Beth was committed to helping people from all walks of life in her electorate. She showed great compassion and energy in her Parliamentary career, as well as the courage that came to the fore during her brave battle with cancer. To have now lost two fine, well-liked and respected female members of this House in the past twelve months to cancer is something many honourable members have had difficulty in facing emotionally. I believe there is some solace in the fact that fine members of this House such as Pauline Toner and Beth Gleeson have not only left an indelible impression in the minds of their families, friends and colleagues, but also have left lasting benefits for the entire community. Beth was like that; her work has certainly made Victoria a better place. Her death came as a shock to all members of this House and, on behalf of the Opposition, I extend our sincere sympathy to her husband, Mike, and her daughters, Megan and Lisa. Mr McNAMARA (Leader of the National Party)-I join the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition in speaking on the condolence motion for Elizabeth Susan Gleeson. Beth Gleeson did not have the opportunity of serving Parliament as long as we all would have liked. When a current member of Parliament dies the news of the death hits all members of Parliament very strongly. As the Leader of the Opposition said, it has now happened on two occasions to female members of this Assembly in recent times. Beth Gleeson was the honourable member for Thomastown from 1985 to 1989. She was a temporary Chairman of Committees from 1988 to 1989, a member of the House Committee from 1985 to 1988 and a member of the Economic and Budget Review Committee from 1985 to 1989. I had the privilege of serving with her on the Economic and Budget Review Committee between 1985 and 1988, and Beth took over the chairmanship of that committee from November 1988 until December 1989. She was a member of the Estimates Committee from 1987 to 1988. As was mentioned by the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition, Beth Gleeson had a wide involvement in her electorate and a particular interest in a number of areas such as youth health care services, technical and further education, and efforts to involve members of the migrant community in the political process. It is worth noting Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 5 that she was co-author of Services/or the Unemployed, which has since been translated into five languages. Beth obviously had a strong personal following, with the Australian Labor Party preferred vote at her last election being 81·6 per cent. I join members of this Parliament in expressing to members of Beth Gleeson's family our condolences on her death. Parliament has lost a valued member. Ms KIRNER (Minister for Education)-I rise to honour my friend and colleague, Beth Gleeson. As the Leader of the Opposition said, it is hard to believe within the space of just a year that we have lost two valued women members of Parliament, Pauline Toner and Beth Gleeson, and both from cancer. Beth was a terrific woman; one of the strongest women I have met-sometimes even a bit headstrong-and a great woman to work with. During her last few days in hospital she struggled to talk to some of us through the pain and drugs. Two memories of those conversations stay with me, namely, her insistence on independence to the end and her instruction to the honourable member for Wantirna and me-"Don't let the bastards get my seat!"-and we didn't, just! If we had, she would have been back to haunt us. Beth's refusal to give in to her illness from the start was, for me, a better portrayal of true grit than any John Wayne film. Perhaps it was in part her Irish background­ another thing we shared-which enabled her to take adversity head-on and beat it; and beat it she did. Why? She said it was because we had too much to do. She usually said, HWe have too much to do" while looking at Ministers with a piercing eye. I met Beth when she became a member of Parliament but, as the Premier indicated, I soon found that her life grew out of her community activities and lifelong commitment to turning the rhetoric of social justice into action. She did not do it from a distance; she became personally involved. Those who worked closely with Beth knew of her intense feeling for her constituents, especially if a Minister did not deliver or a neighbouring member of Parliament did not work with her as a team. She gave meaning to the word "empowerment", encouraging many women for the first time to gain the confidence to have a say on matters that affected their lives. The process of empowerment undertaken by Beth was evident in numerous community groups and among individuals. Women from Beth's neighbourhood house community wrote to me in tribute to her and said that she showed them there was another side to life: She proved to us that we were individuals and not someone that was chained to the sink or the house. Beth always encouraged us to do what was best for "No. I-Me". We learnt from Beth a quality of life that we didn't know. She showed us leadership, determination and lots of other qualities that we didn't know we had. She always encouraged us to try furthering our education and helped us help ourselves by establishing neighbourhood houses and learning centres. With what we have learnt from Beth we feel that we can contribute to the community and to life far more than we ever have. Women party members in Thomastown felt the same. They said in tribute: Although we were always interested in politics, we didn't feel we had the confidence or ability to contribute to the branch. Beth gave us both the courage and confidence and we are now active branch members. People with disabilities also spoke about Beth's support. One woman, Kathy, who has Parkinson's disease said: Without Beth I would have stayed at home; now I feel confident to go out into the public feeling self­ assured and comfortable. 6 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson

That kind of support extended from Beth to the community, and also to her Parliamentary colleagues. She was one of the first people to ring me after I became Deputy Premier: she said, "I know you'll be nervous but you'll be okay because you will have our support; we will work with you". Nonetheless she would tell one honestly how she felt about an issue, always in the context of support, although one must say that both the Premier and I suffered occasional exasperated outbursts from Beth when things were not moving fast enough either on policy or for her electorate. Such loyalty and integrity is a rare thing in politics and we shall miss it. As well as establishing community groups Beth had a deep commitment to ensuring that her electorate received the necessary resources and services that would increase the quality of life for her constituents. The Premier has outlined many of the projects she worked on with others to achieve neighbourhood houses, the Mill Park Secondary College-which is in the planning stages-T AFE colleges and, working with the honourable member for Whittlesea, the Outer Northern Suburbs Community Hospital. In fact, Beth was present at the official turning of the sod of the Epping campus of the Northern Metropolitan College of T AFE on 5 December last year, just eleven days before her tragic death. Her commitment to the electorate of Thomastown has been recognised by the . council of the Northern Metropolitan College of TAFE, which has decided to name the main building on the Epping campus in memory of Beth. Lalor High School will also name its gymnasium after Beth. Beth's commitments to these services was enthusiastic and efficient. In fact, one of her other characteristics was that she had no time for inefficiencies. She did not just want money to be spent, she wanted it spent well. As the Lalor District Community Health Centre staff wrote: Her input has meant more efficient client throughput coupled with higher quality and more diverse health promotional programs. Beth's death will leave a hole in this community which will be long in healing. At the Parliamentary level, Beth translated her commitment to the community into committee work. She was determined to persuade us women to take an active role in economic and trade union issues. She worked with the honourable member for Springvale and others on the WorkCare legislation and she worked on and led the Economic and Budget Review Committee. Beth had terrific support from her husband, Mike, and their daughters, Lisa and Megan. They are great people. Lisa and Megan have many of the committed, caring characteristics of their parents. I am sure their memories of Beth will stand them in good stead as they work through their grief and look to their futures. Beth's death has left a large void in many lives in the Thomastown electorate in the sense that people always knew she would be there. For those who worked closely with Beth, our deep sense of loss is lifted a little by the inspiration, leadership and support she gave to us. It was always Beth's intention that people, especially women, should take action to improve their own lives. She would expect us to continue to do that. She knows she can rely on us to continue the fight to improve the quality of life for working people and to extend the participation of women in all aspects of life. Mr Speaker, at times such as these one often thinks such things as, "What is the essence of our memory of Beth? What has she left behind?" For me it is encapsulated by the words of a woman from a neighbourhood house who, at Beth's memorial service, said through her tears, "She's gone, who will care for us now?" The answer for all of us must be, "We will". Mr CLARK (Balwyn)-I was overseas when I heard the news of Beth Gleeson's death; it was completely unexpected to me as, I think, it was to most other honourable Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 7 members. I served with Beth Gleeson on the Economic and Budget Review Committee and, more particularly, on the Public Accounts Subcommittee of that committee. Beth was a hard-working and capable committee chairperson. She took on the thankless task of performing the many hours of work that those duties required, despite knowing that those duties would take her away from her electorate, to which she was, as other honourable members have said, deeply committed. She carried out those committee duties with a great deal of dedication. She was always impartial and courteous to all members of the committee and she was committed to carrying out the tasks of the committee. It is a tragedy that Parliament has lost someone so young. Beth will be missed by all who worked with her. I join with other honourable members in extending my condolences to her husband and family. Mrs SETCHES (Minister for Conservation, Forests and Lands)-I join with previous speakers who have expressed their deep sorrow at the death ofBeth Gleeson, her loss to the Australian Labor Party as an activist and her loss to the Thomastown electorate. As has already been said, Beth was active in the Thomastown area for a long time. She understood her constituency and the community because she was part of it. She never placed herself apart from the people of Thomastown and always acted as a strong advocate on their behalf. She lived in the community and served it in a number of capacities. When policy issues were being discussed in the party or in Bill committees, Beth always had a view to express on behalf of the 40 ethnic groups that she represented. She always approached and interrogated a policy issue on the basis of whether it would assist and serve the community. She did that constantly and assiduously. Beth was respected and honoured not only in the electorate of Thomastown but also in the wider Australian Labor Party. In fact, the party showed that respect and honour by preselecting her for probably the second safest Labor seat. That was also done for a number of women whom the party thought had some merit and that will continue to be done. Beth understood that she did not work in her electorate only to be re-elected as a member of the party; she worked in it because she was a natural leader and a role model for the women of the electorate who have been described by the Deputy Premier as sometimes having no voice and no part in decision making. Beth realised that if their confidence could be developed and they could be given the opportunity, they could take part in decision making. That has been shown in some of the letters that have been received from women since Beth's death. Beth always hadJl strong feeling for women. She understood from the people who came to see her what effect policy making would have on them-for instance, what a policy on domestic violence might mean to Moslem women who lived in Thomastown. If the government intended making changes to women's health policies and practices, Beth understood that the cultural differences of women would have to be taken into account. Beth also worked hard to achieve educational opportunities and to get the bricks and mortar around those. I shall never forget the way she fought for the gymnasium at the Lalor High School. I am sure the Minister for Education and other honourable members will not forget, either. It is important for us to remember that the two women from this House who have died in the past twelve months or so have left their mark on the community as well as on Parliament. We must also consider the disease that has carried them off because that disease cannot be ignored. When I conducted women's health consultations in 8 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson

1986 in preparation for a women's health policy in Victoria, the figures for breast cancer were frightening. In all age groups, it is expected that one in sixteen women will contract breast cancer, and proportionately more women over of 60 will contract the disease. In 1986 one in 28 of those women who contracted breast cancer died as a result. The latest figures show that the position has deteriorated: at present one in 26 victims of breast cancer will die as a result of it-and a higher proportion of younger women are contracting the disease, women of the age ofPauline Toner and Beth Gleeson. Belatedly political parties have come to understand that resources must be allocated to combat a disease that is affecting so many women in our community. The day Beth was buried-20 December 1989-willlive in my memory for a long time. Certainly it will be remembered by all honourable members on this side of the House and by many on the other side. I will always remember the occasion because on that day I was forced to make a difficult decision-whether to be present at the birth of my daughter's first child or to attend Beth's funeral. In the end I decided to assist my daughter Vicki, who gave birth to a boy shortly before midnight on the day of Beth's funeral. I told my daughter that Beth would be very pleased by this latest addition to the community. Mr SPYKER (Minister for Community Services)-I have no hesitation in saying that Beth Gleeson was one of the best local members ever to represent an electorate­ indeed, Beth Gleeson was Thomastown. When making representations on behalf of her constituents, Beth always made clear that, as a Labor member of Parliament, she was under an obligation to ensure that the underprivileged-those people who do not know how to open doors and who need assistance, whether women, young children, the unemployed, or those from ethnic communities-were cared for. In an electorate with many diverse ethnic communities it would be easy for a local member to be divisive. Beth had the knack of bringing the diverse groups together and helping them to harness their resources to achieve their aims. In November of last year the Minister for Health and I visited Beth Gleeson's electorate to establish and develop home and community care services. Although Beth would not have been well at that time she showed no signs of distress. It was a very hot Sunday afternoon and many people had crowded into a hall that had no air­ conditioning, yet Beth was determined to ensure that the concerns of all those present, particularly the elderly, were heard. Afterwards Beth invited us back to her electorate office to meet some of her constituents. Whenever I attended Beth's electorate office I did not meet only one or two people; her office was always packed out by individuals wishing to put their points of view. The untimely death of Beth Gleeson will be felt around Parliament and throughout her electorate for many years. Few honourable members have what was Beth's capacity to use every means at her disposal, both inside and outside Parliament, to represent the interests of her constituents. I take pride in serving my electorate. But as the Minister for Community Services I would have spent more time in the electorate of Thomastown than in any other. Beth insisted that Ministers pay particular attention to the needs of her electorate. Although Thomastown was a safe Labor seat Beth always considered that the needs of her constituents deserved as much consideration as those of any other electorate. Along with the Premier and other honourable members I extend my condolences to Mike and the other members of Beth's family. The loss of Beth is tragic for the people of Victoria. Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 9

Mr McDONALD (Whittlesea)-It is a pleasure and a privilege to have known Beth Gleeson; it was always an honour to be recognised by Beth as a friend. I first met Beth Gleeson in 1979 when campaigning for the Central Highlands Province. I was very impressed by her dedication to and communication with the many welfare organisations in that area. In 1982 I stood for the seat of Evelyn, and Beth helped assiduously with that campaign, working a great deal in the Whittlesea and Epping areas that she knew so well. During that campaign Beth and I established a close working relationship which lasted until her death. The electorate of Thomastown comprises many ethnic groups and organisations, all of which Beth was involved with. She knew most of the people in her electorate and understood well their problems and concerns. As anyone who attended Beth's funeral would be aware, the high regard the ethnic community had for her was shown by the many people representing many nationalities who attended her funeral. Two matters of importance to Beth were the Northern Metropolitan College of T AFE and community housing. She was the chairperson of the Epping campus committee, a matter very close to her heart. At the turning of the first sod for the building of the new facility at the Northern Metropolitan College of TAFE I first became aware that all was not well with Beth. Her husband, Mike, called me aside and asked me to keep an eye on her, telling me that she was not well. I remember that, as I was helping Beth over a steep gutter near the site of the ceremony, she said to me, "What is the idea of an old bloke like you helping a young person like me?"-which she said with her usual mischievous grin. I thought little more about the episode until a couple of days later, when I received a message asking me to ring Beth's husband, Mike. I rang Mike that evening. When he answered the phone he asked me to hang on, which I did for some time. When he returned he told me that, although Beth had asked him to ring me, she did not want to be in the room during the conversation. Mike told me that Beth had terminal cancer and that she had only a matter of weeks to live. He also said that she did not want anyone else told about her condition. Beth was admitted to the Royal Melbourne Hospital the next day. I visited her on several occasions. On approximately the second day she asked me to tell the Premier that she had terminal cancer and the caucus that she was not well, which I did. On the day she entered the Royal Melbourne Hospital her room was bereft of cards or flowers, but on the day following my announcement there was not a SQuare inch of space in the hospital ward that was not covered with flowers and cards. Beth could tell you from whom every'bouquet of flowers had come. After advising me to tell the Premier and her caucus colleagues, Beth seemed greatly relieved as though a great load had been lifted from her shoulders. She had made the decision and that was it. Beth, of course, knew she was going to die and everyone who visited her in hospital during those last days of her life could not but be inspired by the way she faced her end. She never ceased to ask me what was taking place within her electorate. Right to the end she wanted to know exactly what was going on. I mentioned earlier Beth's concern about community houses. Beth had not always had an easy time in representing her electorate of Thomastown in the area of the City of Whittlesea. The Whittlesea City Council had put up obstacles to the funding of community houses. Beth mentioned that on at least one occasion in this House. At the last caucus meeting of the Labor Party before the Christmas break Beth was granted an overseas study tour. Of course, Beth soon realised she could not undertake 10 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofM rs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson that study tour. However, approximately a week before she died one of the local councillors of the Whittlesea City Council attacked her vehemently in a report in the local press for accepting an overseas study tour. Honourable members will realise that that person was no mental giant, and people have judged him accordingly and will continue to do so. I mention that incident as an indication of the difficulties Beth had. Fortunately, we were able to keep that unsavoury incident from her. I lost a friend in the passing of Beth Gleeson; the people of Thomastown lost a dedicated servant; and Parliament lost a very respected colleague. I believe I am a better person, the people of Thomastown are better people, and Parliament is a better place for having known Beth Gleeson. Mr J. F. McGRATH (Warrnambool)-I support the condolence motion in this House which recognises the great respect that was commanded by Beth Gleeson. As the Premier said earlier, Beth Gleeson was born in Warrnambool. I knew her during her later school years and as a teenager before she left Warrnambool. It was not until she was elected to Parliament that I realised that she was one and the same person that I had known years before. We often talked about our mutual interest in the area of Warrnambool and she was particularly interested in knowing what was happening in the fields in which she had a commItment: community houses, social justice and the aged. Beth gave all of us a great lesson-it was one for which I greatly respected her­ with her ability to tackle interests she believed in and with her great commitment, attachment and loyalty to her philosophy. I join with other honourable members, for instance, the honourable member for Balwyn, who have said how saddened they were because they did not realise how serious her illness was. I pass on the condolences of the people of the electorate of Warrnambool to her husband, Mike, and her two daughters. In particular I recognise her aged mother who has been greatly affected by the tragic death of Beth Gleeson, as have other members of her family, one of whom I have been a friend of for many years. Mrs HIRSH (Wantirna)-Beth's death was a tragedy and a shock to all of us. Beth had an operation for breast cancer and had fought off the disease and apparently recovered; she was back in here working hard and passionately, as always, for the people she represented in Thomastown and for the policies and actions of the government. So when Beth showed signs of becoming ill again during the last week of the last sessional period it was hard to believe all her fighting spirit and hard work and courage at curing herself had been in vain and that the breast cancer had spread quickly. I first met Beth Gleeson in 1984 at an Australian Labor Party preselection for candidates for Parliament. We came from different sides of Melbourne and had not met previously, but with our names being Gleeson and Hirsh our preselections followed each other. Australian Labor Party preselections are known as the last of the great blood sports and Beth and I both found that day to be an experience in our lives. We were both elected to Parliament in 1985 and both spent the first three years of our Parliamentary careers sitting in the back corner of this place doing more observing than participating. However, the Speaker would recall how Beth responded when, as a junior member in the House, she was not recognised by the previous Speaker when she rose to her feet: she would stand there firmly and would not sit down until such time as she was recognised. Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 11

Beth's fighting spirit, tenacity and courage were expressed in her work, in her illness, and in her passionate representation of the people of Thomastown, in particular, the women of Thomastown who were not familiar with the culture of this country and who were living in isolation. Beth encouraged them to get together in groups, first within their own ethnic groups and then with each other so that they could expand their own horizons. Honourable members have spoken about her passion for her electorate. This was expressed in her fight for the Northern Metropolitan College of T AFE of which she was a councillor, for the gymnasium at Lalor High School, for the community health centres which she continued to fight for right up until her death, and for the neighbourhood houses she established in her area. Beth's tenacity was expressed clearly at a meeting, perhaps the last meeting we attended together, during the last week of Parliament for 1989 when she was speaking again about her constituency in an assertive way. I attempted to say something about my own constituency and she said, "Back off, Hirsh!" Friendships aside, Beth pushed on with what she cared about and the people she cared for. Beth had another side to her. As a young girl she was a pianist in her local community at Warrnambool but stopped her interest in the piano and a band when she left Warrnambool. After her election to Parliament in 1985 she took up piano lessons again. She found it an extremely enjoyable thing to do and she often talked of the wonderful contrast of life as a member of Parliament that piano playing made and what a great relaxation it was. Beth also developed and planned a cottage garden at her home in which she took great pride and joy. During her illness she found it pleasurable to work in her garden and to develop it. . Beth's daughters, Megan and Lisa, have a model before them in the memory of their mother which I am sure they will take up and use for the rest of their lives. I wish to pass on my condolences and those of the people of the Wantirna electorate to Beth's husband, Michael Frazer, and to Lisa and Megan, and hope they will remember Beth as we all do. Mrs RAY (Box Hill)-Like the honourable member for Wantima, I first met Beth on the occasion of her preselection. She struck me as quietly spoken, determined and very clear about where she was going. I was never with her except in the context of our working environment. We actually represented electorates which were poles apart. Hers at the time of her preselection was close to being the safest seat in Victoria, and mine was remarkable for being next door to the safest Liberal seat in Victoria. Like many other women, Beth did not believe the forms and traditions of this place were conducive to women's fullest participation in its proceedings but, nevertheless, she very quickly came to terms with that and was a regular contributor to the adjournment debate. In many ways I think she made herself do that. She was very outspoken on the fact that, at the time of the debate on the firearms legislation, in a dozen speeches or so from this side of the House not one woman had spoken. This assured her in the future of many invitations to speak on all kinds of unlikely and likely Bills. She showed her interest in fully participating in the forums of Parliament by her membership of a variety of committees and finally, of course, as the Chairperson of the Economic and Budget Review Committee. Beth was a fighter. I could only admire that characteristic in her. She fought particularly for women, and the migrant women in her electorate of Thomastown were her special cause. She was very hard on herself and tough on people who got in 12 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson the way of women. Very early in her term I believe she defined one of her tasks as encouraging the women in her electorate to believe they could take on issues beyond their families and homes. I recall being invited to speak at an evening that she had organised as one of a series of meetings and, as the Minister for Community Services said, it was attended by not just a small group; it was a sizeable audience of women from a variety of backgrounds whom Beth was eager to expose to women in all walks of life. She was especially committed to further education and was very concerned that in the major restructuring of the TAFE system the needs of women may be swamped by the new emphasis on industrial training. I suppose it was an irony that would not have completely displeased Beth that, in the by-election which followed her death, one of the women she encouraged through her community work stood for election and made history for the Australian Democrats by polling the second highest vote in an election contested by the two major parties. As the honourable member for Wantirna indicated, Beth found ways of keeping in touch with herself by her enjoyment of music and, later, through her garden. Her two daughters were variously a source of pride, bafflement and enjoyment to her. This agenda she shared with me, but she certainly kept her illness very private and never discussed what she thought lay ahead for her. If she had a signature phrase it was "Backup". She gave this very generously to many people, and she gave it to me in a job we both agreed is often a very isolating occupation. Not many people can share it. I pay tribute to a hardworking and effective woman who was committed to making a difference for good in the lives of the people she represented in this place. She served them well; she stood beside them and she represented them faithfully. Mr SEITZ (Keilor)-Ijoin the Premier in speaking on the condolence motion, and endorse the statements made by other speakers. I had the good fortune to sit next to Beth in the back row of the Chamber when she was elected to this place, and we certainly had time to exchange many ideas as new members. She was very enthusiastic about representing her electorate, and I endorse what has been said before, particularly about ethnic women. Beth was concerned with getting them out of the house to join in the mainstream services the government was providing for those people. She would tell me that she was not only getting the groups to go, but assisting them in writing submissions and showing them how to become self-sufficient and to establish their own little discussion groups by taking informal education sessions. In that field I attended several meetings with her in her electorate office and in the community and assisted by using my skills in the Yugoslav language. One of the groups Beth worked with was the Macedonian community, and it has benefited a great deal in the Thomastown electorate through her activities and encouragement. However, the problems she faced were not only concerned with the women; she had to educate the men, and go into the welfare needs of whole families. In that area she was very strong, and I remember her standing up there with males of Macedonian origin telling them what life was all about in this society, what was expected of them towards their women and children, and about their commitments such as being on school councils and kindergarten committees and taking part in other activities involved in being an Australian citizen. Beth was always trying to motivate people to improve their conditions of life and helping them to help themselves instead of relying solely on government agencies. I learned quite a lot about her experience as a research officer for Dr Harry Jenkins and, Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 13 sitting alongside her in the House, I was amazed to see that she never tired even in the late sittings, and still she came up with ideas no matter what the hour. If she thought of a problem or received a phone call from someone in her electorate, she would go and discuss it and exchange opinions. She was a communicator, although it is often said that politicians do not socialise much and talk about their private lives. I gained some insight into Beth's life when my wife, Elenor, met and talked with her on social occasions. They exchanged ideas about teenage children and the household, and it went from there. We would have regular discussions about our teenage children's progress, their education, driver licences, desire to buy cars and the like, because they were the same age. I have met Lisa and Megan only on a casual basis in the strangers corridor of Parliament House, but Beth and I exchanged ideas and opinions about how they were growing up. Beth had time for her family, and took great pleasure in the development and education of her daughters. She was very proud of them. Her garden also gave her pleasure. She would discuss her front lawn and various shapes she was going to layout before she decided on the actual work with her family. Through those insights into Beth's life one can see that she was concerned about the community, but she had a lot of time for her role as a housewife and mother, and was particularly proud of her family and its endeavours, and of the values she instilled in her children for the future. I join other honourable members in saying that from our midst has gone a person whom both young and old can be proud to have known. We could all take a leaf out of her book. Mrs GARBUTT (Greensborough)-I rise to express my sorrow about the loss of Beth Gleeson. I first met Beth approximately fourteen years ago when we lived in neighbouring suburbs and we both had young families. Beth was active and a leading organiser of a small group of families which set up a cooperative to undertake bulk buying of groceries to cut household costs for the group. The group still continues and it has made an important contribution to those families. Beth Gleeson's involvement at the grassroots level in the community, among families, and in particular among women, is a typical story for a great number of women who knew Beth throughout the community in the north-eastern suburbs. My first working relationship with Beth was when I was an electorate officer and Beth was an electorate officer for Dr Harry Jenkins. I became aware of her immense concern about the community, her attention to detail and her hard work on behalf of the community. Since my election to Parliament I have come to appreciate Beth as a hardworking and effective local member who was committed to her electorate and who remained active still at the grassroots level by establishing groups and projects that furthered her interest in families and women in the community. Not only was she an effective local worker but also she held a much wider view of State issues. In this regard she assisted me to understand some of the regional and State issues, when we discussed education and transport issues that crossed electorate boundaries. Beth expressed her State view in her work as the Chairperson of the Economic and Budget Review Committee. I extend my condolences to Mike and his family. Beth will be greatly missed by Parliament and the community. Mr SANDON (Carrum)-I wish to be associated with the condolence motion for Beth Gleeson. I first met Beth when I joined the Australian Labor Party in 1973. In those years I lived with my wife, Pam, in the Eltham and Greensborough area which, 14 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson ofcourse, was characterised by a number of contested elections both State and Federal. Mike, Beth, Pam and I spent a lot of time together fighting those elections on the principles in which we believed. It was not unexpected that, both having young families, we would join forces and spend a lot of time together exchanging ideas and desires about the direction in which we would like to see the party heading. Our political lives and social lives were intertwined and our heavy involvement with the party during those years brought us together. At that time we were both party workers with no ambitions for a political life. We often remarked on the excesses of the factionalism that existed in our party. We believed there were heavy issues that needed to be addressed and we were prepared to and did in fact involve ourselves in those. When Beth was preselected and elected in 1985, Pam and I were delighted because it is not often that political parties get it right, but on this occasion we did. Beth's preselection and election were justified because of the part she had played not only as a party worker but also as a member of her local community. She had shown her commitment and capacity. Beth's maiden speech gave an indication of the style and approach that she would adopt in this place. I am sure honourable members will recall her commitment to a broad overview of what our party stands for and to those who were most disadvantaged, as well as to the "light on the hill". There are those on this side of the Chamber who still have and who will continue to have those principles indelibly ingrained in their approach and style. Beth also targeted a number of special issues that were relevant to her electorate such as education, training, women's issues and, of course, the ethnic focus that was imperative because of her knowledge of her area. Beth brought a balanced offering of opportunities to bear on education and training because she recognised they were clearly linked and that for too long people in her area had not had equal access to opportunities in those areas. In Parliament she pushed for those needs and rights for those in her electorate, not just by words but also by her activities and personal involvement in these areas. It was interesting to see that a number of college directors and deputy directors attended her funeral. She was an example of how a politician can use his or her position to be productive in achieving change and she was highly regarded for that. Beth's political aspiration came only after she had served a long apprenticeship. She was out of the work force for a long time to raise a family. She became a community and party activist and of course she later worked for the election of the Premier in Bundoora. She then returned to the work force and worked for Dr Harry J enkins. Beth was an example of what a woman, wife and mother can do. She never tried to push it on others but she advocated personal choice. This was an important feature of her life in Parliament. All honourable members are aware that she was a strong contributor not only in this place but also in caucus. She did not request the right to speak: she demanded it. She served on a number of Parliamentary committees and I had the good fortune to serve with her on the Estimates Committee. Above her understanding of economic resources was her commitment to social justice. She recognised that resources were only a means to an end. She was committed to social justice, not because it was popular or to gain personal advantage or credit but because it was her essence. It was what her electorate needed-access and equity. I believe one of the issues for the 1990s will be the role of women and an examination of their disadvantageous position in the work force. I believe we will come to recognise the need to reassess and redirect policies to overcome that disadvantage. I note that only 16 per cent of women are at the SES level of the Victorian Public Service, whereas Death ofM rs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 15 the lower level clerical positions with lower remuneration are filled predominantly by women. We must change our approach, in both the public and private sectors. People like Beth have put those issues on the agenda. Our society must change its approach to women in the work force. To Lisa and Mesan, I say you can be proud of your mother and her achievements. She did not do this for herself but for others. Beth was a shining example of what women are capable of and what they can achieve: they can balance competing demands yet never lose sight of the ultimate goal. Thank you, Beth, for your commitment to the principles that this party stands for. Thank you for your commitment to the social justice strategy of the government. Thank you for raising the real issues which you tenaciously pursued. Thank you for being a "true believer". Mrs HILL (Frankston North)-My contribution will be brief because there are no words that I can use to express the sorrow that I feel at the loss of a comrade. Although I may not have shared all facets of her life, and our electorates were poles apart, I did share a cup of coffee with her each day the House sat. We shared twelve months of illness: Beth lost her fight but I have won mine. She constantly berated me for crying in public, for not speaking in this House and for being afraid of the men on the other side, but she was wrong. I just have a different way of expressing myself and going about my work. Together we discussed many issues. We discussed the value of condolence motions in this House and whether they were really of any benefit to those who had gone. Beth believed, and now I also believe, condolence motions are for the benefit of those who are left behind. It is an important process that we must go through. I am not ashamed to cry for her or for what she contributed to this place. Perhaps I am crying for myself because I valued her friendship so much. On behalf of the senior female members of the Public Service who do not have the opportunity of contributing to this debate, I offer condolences to her family. We will all miss her. Beth will be missed by all the Victorian women who have benefited from her ideas that have been passed on to our electorates. Mr F. P. SHEEHAN (Ballarat South)-I shared with Beth Gleeson some extremely worthwhile times in the work we did as members of the Public Accounts Subcommittee of the Economic and Budget Review Committee. I clearly recall the commitment she had to public accounts and, on a national level, for the benefit of honourable members who may not be aware, she was one of the leading lights in this Parliamentary activity. That fact was recognised by the chairman of the Public Accounts Committee who attended her funeral. All honourable members have special memories of Beth. I recall an interstate visit of the Public Accounts Subcommittee when, after a hard day's work, which was always the case when Beth was in charge, we decided to spend half an hour at a tavern in one of the working-class areas of a major Australian city. Beth was the only lady in the bar, and after we had been talking for a while we were confronted by a few people who apparently were affronted by our presence. We were strangers in the bar. After having defended ourselves verbally, Beth decided that the days of chauvinism were over because we had taken her to a bar like that. At the end of the last sessional period I recall feeling uncomfortable because I thought Beth was not well. It was only a few weeks later, when friends rang me in my electorate, that I realised things were not right. All that should be said about Beth has been said. I endorse the remarks of previous speakers, and record my sorrow at Beth's passing. I express my sympathy to Mike and their children, Megan and Lisa. 16 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofMrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson

Mr MICALLEF (Springvale)-I support the condolence motion and add my support and feelings on the passing of a colleague, friend and comrade. I believe Beth Gleeson contributed significantly to Parliament and to the wider community. Perhaps I was first awakened to the wonderful work that she had been doing when she became ill and was not around this place for a week or so. A number of her colleagues had the strong feeling that if Beth was not around, something must be seriously wrong. Our belief was that if she could be here, she would be doing something. While doorknocking the Mill Park area during the Thomastown by-election campaign it was obvious that many members of the community held her in high regard. Not only did many of the people on whose doors I knocked know the identity ofthe former local member-and many of us have a problem with that-but also they knew about the issues with which Beth Gleeson was involved. That is a wonderful tribute to a local member and local activist. Beth and I shared common interests in community health and industry training issues. We served on many policy committees involving industry, technology and so on. On many occasions Beth invited us to her electorate to show us factories and so on. She was proud of the Thomastown electorate and was proud to represent that electorate in this place. Areas such as Thomastown have often been put down-I grew up in the northern suburbs and know them quite well-but Beth was happy to represent the constituents of Mill Park and associated areas. She adopted a dogged attitude in her quest for success. On a more pleasant note, Beth and I were associated with committees visiting rural Victoria. Not so long ago, at Falls Creek, we were driving around the mountains on a motor scooter. Beth was not as dogged and dour as some people believed. Beth Gleeson enjoyed life. She enjoyed a cup of coffee with her colleagues in the dining room and, whenever the honourable member for Wantirna and I wanted to find her, we knew where she would be at certain times of the day-with Alex, Jane and others. Beth was of great support to all of us and her death is a significant loss to honourable members as well as to Mike, Lisa and Megan. Mr ANDRIANOPOULOS (St Albans)-I support the motion moved by the Premier because Beth Gleeson was a close friend of mine, particularly in Parliamentary life. I first met Beth on preselection day; as the honourable member for Wantirna said, St Albans was first, Thomastown was second and Wantirna third. It was important to me to have the support of Beth on that day and on every subsequent day that we were together in this House. It came as a complete shock to me in the week preceding her death to hear of the seriousness of her illness. Although I was shocked when I visited her on the Thursday before the Saturday on which she died I was strengthened by the words she uttered on that day, particularly when she gave me the advice, "Never give up, always battle on, and always remember me and these words". As a parting gesture she said to me, "Alex, you have been stirring me about my cigarette smoking for a long time. I know that you have given up smoking. Well, I want to tell you that for the past seventeen days I have not had a cigarette. I have finally beaten the habit". Mr HARROWFIELD (Mitcham)-I join my colleagues in supporting the condolence motion for Beth Gleeson. It can be said that Beth's aim in becoming a Parliamentarian was to achieve outcomes. She was not the honourable member for Thomastown simply for the sake of being a member of Parliament; she was there to achieve results. As previous speakers have said, she certainly did that. There is no Death o/Hon. Sir Henry Bo/te, GCMG 6 ~1arch 1990 ASSEMBLY 17 better reflection of that approach to public life than the work she did on Parliamentary committees. It was in that context that I knew Beth best. I had the pleasure of serving with her on the Economic and Budget Review Committee prior to 1988 and I have worked on a number of inquiries with her on that committee. I was also able to work with Beth when I chaired the Estimates Committee last year. On that committee her fundamental commitment to social justice issues came through. She was always questioning Ministers, bureaucrats and public servants about the social justice aspects of the whole budgetary process. I was privileged also to have worked with Beth for most of last year on a review of local government financial management. We had much enjoyment working on that exercise and concluded our report just before her death. Beth was one member of this House who was able successfully to combine an understanding of economic issues with an understanding of the use to which resources could be put in a social justice context. Although Beth was the member for one of the safest seats in this House, she worked that seat as though it were a marginal one. She was always thinking of ways in which she could benefit local people and the general community. I pay tribute to Beth Gleeson. I enjoyed immensely working with Beth. I extend my deepest sympathy to Mike and to her family. The SPEAKER-Order! I desire to add my comments to the condolence motion in paying tribute to Beth Gleeson. Beth was an outstanding member of Parliament and, as much as anyone, gave the lie to the caricature by which members of Parliament are often described. She was an extremely dedicated person. She came to Parliament from a strong and active role in her own community and then, as a Parliamentarian, played a valuable role both for the community she represented and Parliament as a whole. I first got to know Beth after her election in 1985. From the first party meeting she attended and the first occasion on which she spoke in Parliament, she immediately impressed me as a person of considerable talent, education and integrity. I probably got to know her best in her capacity as Chairperson of the Economic and Budget Review Committee. It was apparent that she undertook that role in a professional manner. Often she would come and discuss with me how the committee might use its resources to the best advantage of the community and how the committee might work in pursuing its particular inquiries. It was quite a shock to me, as it was to other honourable members, to learn that Beth had died. I had seen her on the last sitting day, 17 November, and although it was obvious that she had a health problem, it was not apparent that it was a serious problem. Indeed, she did nothing to indicate that there was anything greater than perhaps a minor cold, or something of that order, about which to be worried. It typifies how Beth did not think of herself but put wider interests first. Indeed, I understand many honourable members were unaware that she had had an operation for breast cancer many months before, and, therefore, they were even more surprised to learn how ill she was and to hear of her sudden death. I pay tribute to Beth Gleeson and to the service she gave to the community and to Parliament. I offer my condolences to Mike, Megan and Lisa.

DEATH OF THE HONOURABLE SIR HENRY EDWARD BOLTE, GCMG Mr CAIN (Premier)-I move: That this House expresses its sincere sorrow at the death of the Honourable Sir Henry Edward Bolte, GCMG, and places on record its acknowledgment of the valuable services rendered by him to the 18 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Henry Bo/te, GCMG

Parliament and the people of Victoria as member of the Legislative Assembly for the electoral district of Hampden from 1947 to 1972, Minister of Water Supply and Minister of Mines from 1948 to 1950 and 1964, Premier from 1955 to 1972, Treasurer from 1955 to 1972, Minister of Conservation from 1949 to 1950 and Minister for Conservation from 1955 to 1961, Commissioner of Crown Lands and Survey and Minister of Soldier Settlement in 1955, Minister of State Development in 1964 and as Leader of the Opposition from 1953 to 1955. The death of Sir on 4 January has brought a sense of sadness and loss to members of this place and to all Victorians who knew him so well. It is as if a piece of history has been played out. Sir Henry was by far the State's longest serving Premier. He will be remembered as having led the State for some seventeen years. In doing so, he left an indelible stamp on Victorian and, indeed, Australian politics. Sir Henry was one of those politicians who-as has been said-had that rare natural instinct for politics. As the Honourable said, Sir Henry's outlook was that of the common man; he had the ability to say what the person in the street believed and felt about a particular issue. Sir Henry was born in Ballarat on 20 May 1908. He was educated at Skipton Primary School and at , where he displayed a considerable talent for sport, particularly cricket and football. He is on record as giving his own judgment about his scholastic capacities. He continued playing his sports until he was well into his forties. I suppose that demonstrates a longevity in sports; so his longevity was not confined to his political career. Later Sir Henry worked in the family drapery store in Skipton and on his family's sheep farm in the area. He displayed a keen interest in the sheep farm and from 1924 to 1934 he worked as a shed hand for other farmers in order to gain experience. In 1934, as honourable members will have heard, Sir Henry married Edith Lillian Elder, to whom he referred as Jill. He purchased "Kialla", a property of some 1144 acres, at Bamganie near Meredith. Sir Henry saw military service, joining up in 1940. He was an instructor with the 2nd Field Training Regiment at Puckapunyal; he was barred from overseas service for health reasons. From all that can be read and from what he said prior to his death, Sir Henry had no notion of entering politics when he was discharged. There are interesting accounts of how it came about that he did. It has been said that he was playing a game of golf and the discussion turned to the lack of talent among those offering themselves for the Parliament of the day. It has been said that that discussion, combined with the urging of friends, was the catalyst for his first attempt to enter State politics in 1945. That was unsuccessful but, two years later, while he was drinking in an hotel-it has been suggested-some friends said that the Liberal Party ofthe day was without a candidate for the seat of Hampden. I quote the reported response of Henry Bolte, who said, "This is stupid. Ifnobody stands, I will bloody well stand". He did, and remained in politics for some 25 years. I suppose being in politics is a bit like being the wicket­ keeper for the Australian Eleven; you have to have a bit of luck. The circumstances were such that, between 1945 and 1955, there were some ten governments that came and went, two of them led by my late father. Consequent upon the split in the Liberal Party over the two-for-one voting for seats in the House and the unfortunate demise of , Henry Bolte found himself Leader of the Opposition and, after a short time in Parliament-following the split-Premier of the State. My first memory of Henry Bolte is of him standing at the end of the table in this Chamber as Minister of Water Supply. He held that portfolio from 1948 to 1950, so Death o/Hon. Sir Henry Bo/te, GCMG 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 19 my memory is of about 1948-49. It was at the time of one of those customary no­ confidence motions which were endemic-and most of them were successful-and he was involved in the debate. He and my father were among the lions of that period, from the mid-1940s to the mid-1950s and a li1 tIe after. I can recall discussing those years with him at a later time, because to me he provided the link with contemporary politics and my father. He was a great raconteur. I saw him mostly at the cricket or the racing and he would talk about things. One story he told me probably would not be enjoyed by backbenchers. He said there was a clear understanding between my father and him when they were Leader of the Government and Leader of the Opposition. No matter which capacity each found himself in, they agreed on one thing: that there would be no offices for backbenchers because if they were provided they would be only places for the buggers to plot. In fact, that proved to be the case, and when I came into this place during Sir 's time honourable members did not have offices. Until 1976 there were no offices for Ministers. Sir Henry was unashamed about that view, he had no equivocation about it and he made no excuse; that was the sensible and right thing to do. He and my father brooked no interference or discussion about that. That was the end of the matter; move on to the next one. After a short time in Parliament, he came to office as Premier when growth was endemic. It was at a time when, to some extent, governments had to stand back and direct the traffic-and direct it he did. The development of this country was moving at a great pace and he endeavoured to assist in every way. The development of Victoria became the keynote to those years of office and from 1956 onwards he travelled abroad frequently encouraging investment. He involved around him a coterie of business people who sought potential investors from all over the world. They set up Victorian agencies in New York, San Francisco and London and created a division of State development. In the years following the war business people responded enthusiastically to that kind of approach. We enjoyed the benefits of that enthusiasm and desire for investment and the growth that followed. It can fairly be said that in those years Sir Henry Bolte brought to government a practical approach. It was a matter of gi ving the people what he thought they wanted most. He had no qualms about introducing late shopping hours despite the strident opposition from some of the retailers at that time. That was also true of a number of other issues about which he took a view. No matter how strongly minorities felt about issues and no matter how strident they were, they found him a tough opponent if a decision was made about change-and we all know how difficult it is to introduce change. Many of those issues were emotionally charged in those years, just as they are now. Maybe the interest groups and those who seek to frustrate change go about it in a different way today. There was, of course, the outcry we all recall about the of , which is always quoted by those who trace the history of those years. Many of us believe strongly about that issue, which certainly provoked controversy and debate at that time. It is fair to say that on that issue and others Henry Bolte played politics in a tough, forthright way. He played it hard. He did not expect that he would be given any quarter on that issue or others, nor did he give it. Other social changes such as liquor reform, 6 o'clock closing and gambling through the Totalizator Agency Board and starting-price bookmakers, were hard to bring about in the kind of society we enjoyed at that time. Just as with some of the more recent changes, one can see in retrospect that it is never easy to effect social changes. It has been a closed society and still is in some ways, some would say. Sir Henry broke 20 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death o/Hon. Sir Henry Bo/te, GCMG through the barriers, often in a robust way, and the pace of change he set has been reflected in more recent years by the more open society that has resulted. Other substantial achievements occurred during those years with two new universities and a large network of educational colleges around the State that have served us over the years and are now being put together again in another form. They have provided a large education resource for us through the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. In the recent reports following Sir Henry's death many adjectives have been used to describe him: earthy, belligerent, shrewd, blunt and irascible. I suppose some of the interest groups with which he was in conflict might have had other words. Teachers and State Electricity Commission workers would probably throw in a few of their own. "Earthy" is the adjective I would choose to describe him. I felt I got to know his earthy responses in my working with him as a trustee of the Melbourne Cricket Ground. I should say he had the same view about the role of the trustees and the place of the MCG in the community as did his predecessors and successors in the office of Premier, and indeed other notable citizens such as Arthur Calwell and Sir Robert Menzies who served on the trust. He was of the view that the MCG was the peoples ground and it did not matter what might be going on there or whether it was agreed to by the trustees. It might have been about reserved seats being made available, a new stand or its use for the Olympic Games. The new Southern Stand being planned now is also a matter of some controversy. Sir Henry took the view, as did my father, Sir Rupert Hamer and the present chairman, the Honourable Lindsay Thompson, that it was the people's ground. It had to be recognised as that at all times and any changes had to have regard to the long­ term benefits of the sports-loving people of Victoria. Whenever there were discussions, as the honourable member for Shepparton and others who were on the trust can confirm, he was forthright in expressing his views. As I said, he shared that with a long stream of former Premiers and prominent politicians who have served on the trust. May it long be the case that we have that great asset and we use it sensibly. It has been said that he called a spade a bloody shovel and left no doubt about his views on almost any issue of the day. Perhaps he put some noses out of joint but he had a colourful sense of humour and a good turn of phrase, which the television editors may say in this day and age is generally a "good grab". When he started in politics in 1956 television did not mean as much as it did later. There were longer "grabs" in those days-I am told it is down to about 8 seconds now. He always had the capacity to capture the mood of the moment in a fairly earthy phrase. He had a sharp wit and a mastery of the pithy phrase that can be so telling. Like his predecessors and his successors, he had some tough fights at Premiers Conferences. He did not always win but one always knew where he stood. At one of his first Premiers Conferences, true to form, he said that he was just a simple farmer who knew a bit about arithmetic. Paul Keating says that the important thing is horse trading. However, whatever it is, Sir Henry understood the politics and the dynamics of Premiers Conferences and Loan Council meetings. He said he was no great orator but he certainly gave to all who listened to him the impression of being a straightforward speaker with sincerity and goodwill and he never indulged in mud-slinging against opponents. He was determined to put his case based on the merits of the issue. In 1966, in the New Year's honours list, Henry Bolte became Sir Henry Bolte. That made no difference. Despite all the suggestions that seem to come to Premiers that they should retire, he just pushed on and made up his own mind in "his own bloody Death ofHon. Sir Henry Bo/te, GCMG 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 21 time". Despite the fact that he had accepted a knighthood he shrugged aside all the rumours about his impending retirement and made up his own mind in his own time. Sir Henry retired in 1972; but he never retired from the hustings and the political battle. He remained a part of the elections that took place after he retired and he was generally a campaigner. Sir Henry was a very enthusiastic racegoer. He had a great capacity to pick winners and he owned a few racehorses and raced them with mixed success. I often saw him at the races and he would always offer a view about a runner. One had to be careful not to get behind him in a queue at the T AB, especially when close to starting time, because he often had more than one investment and had to count the money that passed across the counter, which took some time. Sir Henry was often philosophical when one met him at the races. When I met him I would say "How are you going, Henry?" He would say "All right from the neck up". Following his car accident he felt some physical pain, particularly during the last years of his life, but he never really complained and was always emphasising the positive aspects of life. He was good from the neck up right until the end and for that he was eternally grateful. His famous remark about backing octogenarians to be at grand finals next year indicates the way he was feeling in his final years, but he remained sharp, on the ball and always wanted to discuss contemporary issues. Sir Henry had a view about these issues and was forthright about what he did. He indicated clearly, by that remark to me and to others, that he was enjoying life, especially his mental capacities, right until the end. Sir Henry was always very approachable. It did not matter whether one agreed or disagreed with a view that he expressed, be it political or otherwise, he was approachable and considerate and courteous to those around him. It is not easy to be always courteous in some of the situations in which one finds oneselfas Premier. His memory will live on in the minds of most Victorians for many years and he will remain in their affections, especially those who place him in the category of being a warm friend. On behalf of the government I offer my sincere condolences to the family of Sir Henry Bolte. Mr BROWN (Leader of the Opposition)-This condolence motion is like no other in the history of the Victorian Parliament. We are talking about a man who was a political giant, a man who is a legend and whose record term of office as Premier of the State will never be broken. Sir Henry Bolte was one of the most revered political Leaders of our time and, undoubtedly, we will never again see another politician like him. Sir Henry was one of those rare men who does not need a monument; the State of Victoria that we all love is his monument; he built it for us; and it is as simple as that. The enigma of Sir Henry Bolte has been summed up in this way: how was it that a shy little fat boy-as he once described himself-developed almost without trying into the living epitome of what most of the electorate felt and wanted? Young Henry Bolte was not quite the typical carefree, conformist, country lad, because he won a scholarship to Ballarat Grammar School. It was typical of his modesty that he considered he had no great scholastic ability. Just the same he did exceptionally well at mathematics both at school and in government. It should be noted, particularly in this day and age, that throughout the Bolte era Victoria paid its way. He was toughened by spartan life as a boarder and hardened by the struggle of farming under marginal conditions during the depressed 1930s. During his teenage years and until he was in his mid-twenties Henry Bolte worked in the family drapery store in Skipton and was also a shed hand. He served in the Australian Military Forces 22 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Henry Bo/te, GCMG between 1940 and 1944 in the 2nd Field Training Regiment. The success with his farming combined with his gregarious nature, quick-witted and earthy charm, made him a natural leader in the small local community. Henry Bolte's entry into politics was a little different from most. After his discharge from the Army he came home to Victoria and was enjoying a beer at the local golf club with two friends who had been looking for a candidate for the then Legislative Assembly seat for the electoral district ofHampden. They discussed their unsuccessful recruiting efforts for a while and after Henry was fairly relaxed they turned to him and said "What about you?" He later said, "I thought it was a joke when I was invited to stand for Parliament". Some joke! That was in 1945 and at that time he was not elected. Two years later he stood again for the same seat and won. Sir Henry's ability to tackle matters head-on and to always be forthright combined with his natural ability to establish rapport with people from all walks of life established him quickly as a contender for the leadership. Through an extraordinary series of events the Liberal Party had to pick four successive Leaders in less than eighteen months. He was the fourth Leader elected when he became Leader in 1953. As the Leader of a party with only eleven members he became Premier of the State during the Labor Party split of 1955. He was Premier for a record 6288 days until his retirement in 1972. Sir Hl,11ry held the following portfolios: he was Premier from 1955 to 1972; he was Treasurer from 1955 to 1972; he was Minister of Water Supply and Minister of Mines from 1948 to 1950 and again in 1964; he was Minister of Conservation from 1949 to 1950 and Minister for Conservation 1955 to 1961; he was Minister of Soldier Settlement in 1955; and Minister of State Development in 1964. He was Commissioner of Crown Lands and Survey in 1955 and President of the Board of Land and Works in 1955. He was Leader of the Liberal Party from 1953 to 1972. He was Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party from 1951 to 1952. He was Deputy Leader of the Opposition from 1952 to 1953 and Leader of the Opposition from 1953 to 1955 when, as I said, he assumed the mantle of Premier of the State of Victoria. Sir Henry was also a member of the Public Works Committee in 1948 and a member of the Potato Marketing Committee in 1953. Sir Henry's ability stemmed in part from his warm, out$oing nature. He had a straightforward manner which was refreshing, and it was Su Robert Menzies who attributed Sir Henry's success to the fact that he was an average man with a great faculty of communicating with men and women, not from a lofty position, but from one of equality with them. There was no doubt Sir Robert was right. Sir Henry would walk straight up to a stranger and introduce himself and immediately establish a rapport with that person. It was something for which he was well known. Central to Sir Henry's success-politicians today would do well to heed his example-was the fact that he continually immersed himself in the mainstream of community life. This ensured that his natural intuition and reactions were remarkably in tune with the electorate. He knew instinctively what Victorians wanted, what they thought and what they would not tolerate. In addition, Sir Henry Bolte possessed tremendous judgment and commonsense. It is well known and true that he governed for the city and for the bush. The so-called stopgap Leader went ahead and governed for seventeen consecutive years-a record that will never be beaten. Sir Henry was a straight shooter with a compelling honesty that earned him enormous respect. He had an unerring populist instinct, yet he had no pretensions. Sir Henry used to tell a story about how he used to drive his old green farm utility during the Death ofHon. Sir Henry Bolte, GCMG 6 ~,1arch 1990 ASSEMBLY 23 election campaign trail throughout his electorate. One day he was campaigning in the district and drove up to a farmhouse where a young boy was playing. He said to the boy, "Are Mum and Dad in?"; the boy went inside and shortly afterwards came out and said, "Mum said we don't have any bottles today". He was devastatingly realistic about political life. On being Premier, he said, "It's the one job where, after you become experienced, people want to get you out". Sir Henry was never forced out. He disregarded intrigue and got on with the job. The strength that Sir Henry conveyed came partly from the fact that he always knew his own mind; he had no doubts about what he believed in and was not afraid to express his views regardless of the consequences. That strength made him a father figure. He was seen as more than a political leader and as more than a Premier; certainly he reflected what the entire community wanted-he personified Victoria. Sir Henry had all the qualities of a truly great Australian Leader. He was tough, shrewd, and determined; he was direct, and he spoke a language that everyone understood. He was a man of few words and he usually got straight to the point. His words were often earthy and, at times, colourful. When Sir Henry retired from office his Cabinet colleagues presented him with a set of silver spurs-symbolic of the approach in leading his team during remarkable expansion under his stewardship. It must be said that he drove himself just as hard as he drove his team. By his own admission, consensus was foreign. His was an autocratic style, yet he gathered around him an administrative team of flair and drive capable of great outpourings of energy-all in the best interests of Victoria. It is known that Sir Henry Bolte was at times bad tempered; he was also quick-witted, charming and urbane. He could be earthy, gruff and dark of mood, but he had the fortune to be supported by an exceptional deputy in the form of Sir . Such was the bond between those men that Sir Henry offered to stand down to allow Sir Arthur to become ; that offer was rejected by Sir Arthur Rylah. Horseracing held a special place in the priorities of Sir Henry Bolte. The journalist whose telephone call interrupted Sir Henry's viewing of a special race stIll vividly recalls the tongue-lashing he received. Sir Henry was knighted KCMG in the Queen's New Year honours list in 1966, and GCMG in 1972. Sadly, in 1986 Sir Henry lost his greatest supporter and asset-his wife, Edith. The absence of her unselfish support and wonderful sense of humour after such a long time of sharing the difficulties-and there are difficulties in high office in public place-must have made his final years more difficult. He once stated, "My wife has far greater influence on me than many of my party colleagues". Sir Henry Bolte was Victoria's longest serving Premier. He harnessed the economic circumstances of the period and made Victoria the most progressive, the most expansionist and-per capj,ta-the wealthiest State of the post-war Commonwealth of Australia. He was committed to developing his beloved Victoria. It was a legacy in which he rightfully took considerable pride. On some issues Sir Henry has been described as stubborn and reactionary; on other issues, such as drinking and gambling, he took a liberal, and even a radical, view. He introduced liquor reforms and put an end to 6 o'clock closing. He laid the basis for a huge growth in Victoria's manufacturing base. He gave Victoria the Victorian Arts Centre, as well as two more universities and a network of colleges of advanced education. He fought with toughness for the State's finances. I refer to an article in the Age of 5 January 1990, which states: The Bolte era was a remarkable one and the man who led it was a politician of singular character and great accomplishment. He governed Victoria well, and all of us who live in the State remain in his debt. 24 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death of11 on. Sir Henry Bo/te, GCMG

Sir Henry guided Victoria to its premier position on the national scene and every indicator of economic activity and living standards grew rapidly under his guidance­ population, industrialisation, wealth, education, hospitals, and social welfare facilities. All expanded dramatically and prospered under his stewardship. . In the final years of his Premiership he noted that V ictoria enjoyed the lowest unemployment rate in Australia, the highest job opportunities, the highest bank savings, and the highest rate of home ownership. Also, he left the Liberal Party very much stronger than he had found it. Some of the tributes paid by politicians when referring to Sir Henry BoIte were that he was a team man, a loyal Leader, a great statesman, a very close friend, a man immensely admired, one of the truly great members of Parliament, the last ofa special breed, a people's Premier, an immensely friendly rnan, and a man with a clarity of vision and a surety of purpose. Also, it is clear that his quotable quotes made him a journalist's dream. The fact that he enjoyed the occasional late-night drink or game of snooker with members of the media may have had something to do with that. Even in his retirenlcnt, Sir Henry remained a busy man. He never ceased working and consequently retained his alertness throughout. He pursued his continued involvement with the Victoria Racing Club and the Melbourne Cricket Ground. Until shortly before his illness he was a committee member of the VRC and chairman of the MCG board of trustees. It is gratifying to note that a firm link between this Parliament, Sir Henry Bolte and the Liberal Party continues today and into the future with the presence in this House of his grand-nephew, the honourable member for Ballarat North, Stephen Elder. S\~phen's parents, Billie and Toby Elder, looked after Sir Henry after he lost Dame Edith, and took care of him during his final illness. On Sir Henry's last day as Premier, he said, ""It is the end of an era so far as I am concerned. It is a sad day". Sir Henry died at his Bamganie home after a short illness. So far as the history of this Parliament and the people of V ictoria are concerned, Sir Henry Bolte's passing marks the end of an era. I assure the House that the cartoonists are not the only ones who miss him. I refer to a quotation from a review of one biography: Whether you loved him or loathed him, you had to admit he possessed a touch of magic which made him a legend in his own lifetime. For many years he certainly wove a spell over the Victorian electorate. Unlike many politicians, Sir Henry Bolte chose the time of his departure [ronl office. He again exhibited the hallmark of a great Leader; many people should note that he got out while he was on top-even though the Liberal Party would have fully supported his continuance in office. Sir Henry Bolte was revered by all members of the Liberal Party and we will never forget him. We are all the poorer now that Sir Henry Bolte has gone. However, memories of him and his achievements-his monument-will continue to enrich our lives. On behalf of the Opposition, I extend sincere sympathy to Sir Henry's family. Mr McNAMARA (Leader of the National Party)-I join with the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition in the condolence motion for Sir Henry Edward Bolte. Sir Henry was the honourable member for Hampden from 1947 to 1972-for 25 years. He held. the dual positions of Premier and Treasurer from 1955 to 1972-for seventeen years. Prior to that, he was the Minister of Water Supply and Minister of Death ofHon. Sir flenry Ba/fe, GC111G 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 25

Mines from 1948 to 1950. He achieved Ministerial office within a short period of entering this place. As the Premier and Leader of the Opposition have said, it was certainly a unique achievement in that he served as Premier of Victoria for the record period of seventeen years. It will be a long time-if ever-before that performance is repeated. He was a farmer and grazier. He was born at Ballarat and educated at Ballarat Grammar School. He owned a farm of approximately 1144 acres at Meredith, which he purchased in 1934. Those attending Sir Henry's memorial service heard the address given by the Honourable Lindsay Thompson in which he detailed the condition of the property when Sir Henry purchased it, and he referred to the development work put into it-that was an obvious lifelong interest of Sir Henry. During his time there was an upgrading of rural land, through soil conservation and the like. Sir Henry was a larger-than-life figure. It was interesting to hear the comments of the Premier, who referred to his father's Premiership during what could be regarded as the Bolte era. They were interesting times in politics with governments changing with great regularity. I did not know Sir Henry in any personal capacity; I met him only occasionally at the races, unlike the Leader of the Liberal Party. I am reflecting on Sir Henry from what I saw of hinl when I was an adolescent-and growing up in the sixties there was no other politician in Victoria but Sir Henry Bolte; he seemed to run the whole show as he wanted. From the Olanner in which he ran it, he appeared to have the view that Victoria was not a monarchy, but was certainly a dictatorship. One of Sir Henry's great strengths was that he was an individual who inspired others and attracted great loyalty from his Parliamentary colleagues. Any person who could not attract that sort of loyalty would not be able to set the records of service that Sir Henry set. It was a time of great development in this State and politics was in a state offlux. Sir Henry was an individual who emerged at the time when he was appointed Leader of the Opposition and the early reports refer to him as a stopgap Leader, a short-ternl Leader. Sir Henry was elected and soon assumed the mantle of Premier of this State in a confIdent fashion. He stamped his personal mark on the direction he wanted Victoria to go. One of his great talents was intuition. He did not have to go to talk with Gary Morgan or the other pollsters to know what the public was thinking. He had the basic eommonsense to know what the majority of the people wanted in Victoria. Not only did he know what they wanted, he was able to express what they wanted in such earthy tones as to gain public support. He was a popular Premier, and certainly expressed his views in an earthy manner. We well remember the photograph, when he was discussing water pollution, of Sir Henry in a danl with the water up to his neck. We also know that he was a keen shooter. The government drivers tell me that on one occasion he used the government LTD to go spotlighting. I do not think that that is an activity the present Prenlier pursues-I think not. Sir Henry gave blunt advice to the teachers when they were protesting and marching in the streets. He said that they could march until they were footsore. He was able to tap a nerve with the majority of the people-he knew how they felt. He was a people's Premier; he had a great interest in what the public thought. He was a keen racing man and there were not Inany race meetings at Flemington that Sir Henry missed. He was also a State champion shooter, which was something that I did not know until the Honourable Lindsay Thompson mentioned it at Sir Henry's memorial service. 26 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Henry Bo/te, GCMG

Sir Henry was a lay preacher and had a range of interests; he was a keen local cricketer and footballer. He had the interests the community had and he continued to show those interests when he became Premier of Victoria. People expect individuals who achieve high office to distance themselves from the community, to take the view that somehow they are better than the rest. Sir Henry, as Premier of Victoria, was able to present the view that he was like every average Victorian and was able to represent their interests. He had a strong relationship with the media. Many young journalists saw Sir Henry as a father figure and waited pen in hand for his every word. He was also blessed with the internal divisions that racked the ALP in the early fifties and saw the creation of the Democratic Labor Party; it was that split, with the strong second preferences of the DLP, that ensured Sir Henry's long and strong reign as Premier. The primary vote never exceeded 39 per cent but there was never any doubt that Sir Henry would receive the majority of the votes at an election. Sir Henry fostered and encouraged major construction and development. He built a number of public monuments-the Victorian Arts Centre is one construction that is a monument to Sir Henry. He created two universities and a large number of post­ secondary institutes were set up around the State. He presided over a huge growth in manufacturing and fought for a better financial deal for Victoria. One legacy Sir Henry Bolte left when he retired after seventeen years as Premier and was a sound financial base. It was on that sound financial base that other governments were able to build and develop. He was a politician who was blunt in his comments-he was very much to the point. Although I did not experience it personally, I am told by the honourable member for Shepparton, the then Leader of the National Party, that when he first entered this Chamber Sir Henry gave him the advice he usually gave when members were to give their maiden speeches. Sir Henry said that Parliament would take less time to forget a bad short speech than it would to forget a bad long speech. That is perhaps advice that could be useful to many of us from time to time! In summary, Sir Henry was an institution in the Victorian political scene. If ever we see another person who can achieve a record of over 24 years of representation in Parliament and seventeen years as Premier and Treasurer, I shall be surprised. On behalf of the National Party, I join with the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition in expressing condolences to the Bolte family. Mr TREZISE (Minister for Sport and Recreation)-As someone from the Labor Party side of the House who served in the Parliament with Sir Henry Bolte, Ijoin with the previous speakers in expressing my sympathy to his family. I served in the House with Sir Henry for a total of eight years and had a number of links with him. Sir Henry lived at Meredith, which is between Ballarat and Geelong, and he went to school in Ballarat, as I did. Sir Henry loved his sport and was a footballer and cricketer of note for Skipton and Meredith and in his life was an avid follower of the racing game. As a member of the then Opposition I was an opponent of Henry's policies and his party, but I had great admiration for many of his personal attributes. He was a strong man, as is shown by the fact that, during the tirade on , he absorbed much criticism from Opposition members of Parliament and the community, but he pressed on regardless. He did the same, as the Premier said earlier, when introducing off-course betting in Victoria and the Totalizator Agency Board. He took a lot of opposition from influential people in the community, but his initiative has turned out to be a huge success for Victorian racing and for the State in general. In some regards, Sir Henry was a bit old-fashioned; he was not keen on academics or computers. His education, he claimed, came from the man in the street; on most Death ofHon. Sir Henry Boite, GCMG 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 27

Saturday mornings he would spend time in the Royal Hotel at Meredith talking to shearers and the locals, many of whom were Labor Party supporters. He would get the feeling of how the average people of Victoria felt and he used that to his political advantage for many years. Sir Henry was extremely quick-witted. I recall some years ago there was a teachers' strike and the public gallery in this Chamber was packed with striking teachers. Henry 'vas speaking about the strike and one teacher called out, "That's rubbish, Bolte". The Speaker at the time said, "Order! If there is one more complaint from the gallery, I shall have to clear the gallery". Henry looked at the clock and said, "There is no need for you to clear the gallery; it is 3.28 p.m. and in 2 minutes time it will take a team of draughthorses to keep them here". When the word "pollution" began to be bandied about, a photograph appeared of Henry in the dam outside his home. He said that he had drunk the water and had swam in it for years. In recent years Henry told me about an occasion when he was going· to the Flemington Racecourse and a long-haired, untidy person was collecting signatures for a petition against pollution. The person approached Henry and asked him to sign the petition against pollution and Henry asked what it was about. The person said it was about water pollution, and Henry said, "There is only one type of pollution I would sign a petition against, and that is visual pollution! Now get out of my view!" Sir Henry Bolte's record as Premier will perhaps never be broken. I express sympathy to his family. Sir Henry was fortunate that his niece, Billie, could take him to the races during the past few years because he found it difficult to drive or walk around. Despite that, he kept his faculties and judgment 100 per cent. Last October Henry backed three horses in the last Caul field Cup-$l 00 each way. The horses ran first, second and third, so he was still an excellent judge. I last saw Sir Henry in January at Dunkeld. It was a cold, wet day and he was huddled under a tree wearing his hat and coat and enjoying his races to the last. I express sympathy to Sir Henry's relatives. I did not know his brother personally, but I knew his nephew, Toby and his niece, Billie. I extend my deepest sympathy to them and to his great-nephew, the honourable member for Ballarat North. Mr PESCOTT (Bennettswood)-I support the condolence motion moved by the Premier and supported by the Leader of the Opposition and the Leader ofthe National Party. We are here to recognise a contribution to this Parliament and State by the late Sir Henry Bolte, and there is no doubt that Sir Henry was a giant figure in relatively recent political history in this State. So great was his contribution that his presence has continued to be felt ever since he retired. Like Sir Robert Menzies in the post-war Federal political scene, Henry Bolte has been a benchmark for Premiers in Victoria. Every Premier since Sir Henry cannot avoid the public comparison about their eras and the era of Bolte. That is not only in relation to the length of his time at the helm, but also because of the quality of his leadership. Like a number of others in this Chamber I grew up in the Bolte era. From primary school to the early years of my first job Henry Bolte was the undisputed Leader of the State. He was Victoria's spokesman; he was Victoria's guiding light irrespective of whether all groups agreed with him. In other words, his primacy was never in dispute. Sir Henry's qualities were fairly simple: he was straightforward and he was fair; he clearly had a good sense of humour and people knew where he stood just as he let them know where they stood. 2~ ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Henry Bo/te, GCMG

I met Sir Henry only once and that was at the house of his close friends, the Molesworths of Ballan, some years after his retirement. I have no direct personal experience in my dealings with him and that, again, is like many people in this Chamber. My comments are based on his reputation and from conversations with a vast number of people who knew him first-hand. While other honourable members have outlined the wide range of Sir Henry's qualities and achievements, I wish to refer to what I see as his most lasting monument. As I have said, Sir Henry is remembered still as a benchmark for the standards and success which a Premier might hope to achieve. However, in another generation his personality and the effect of his personal dominance as Premier will be remembered less and less. What will be left for historians will be the results of his deliberate policy to improve and build up manufacturing industries in this State. The 1940s in Australia, like the rest of the world, were dominated by the world war. The 1950s were a new start and in that decade Bolte's policies were geared towards building up Victoria and the future prosperity of the State. As the Leader of the Opposition said, that is the basis on which we are living today. Australia's current economic problems are caused largely by our export mix being weighted still far too much upon primary production, both agricultural and the mining sector. Other countries that do not have the possibility of that production take what we produce and either use it for direct consumption or turn it into something more profitable. The great postwar economic nations-Japan and Germany-have used the raw materials of countries like Australia to make their fortunes. Sir Henry Bolte introduced policies which meant that Victorians would benefit from the employment and economic rewards that manufacturing brings. He was, of course, a great supporter of rural industries. He liked to see value added to every product. Unfortunately, a combination of bad policies from State and Federal governments since the Bolte era has meant that the framework within which employers and employees have been operating has been inadequate for Australia to be competitive in manufacturing industries. My final point is this: if this country had had politicians and leaders in recent years of the calibre of Sir Henry Bolte, the country would not be in this current mess. I extend my sincere best wishes to Sir Henry's family and pay tribute to his life and service in this State. Mr ROSS-EDWARDS (Shepparton)-I join with other honourable members in paying tribute to the late Sir Henry Bolte, a former Premier of Victoria. He was Premier when I entered this place in 1967 and, of course, he was still Premier when I became Leader of my party in 1970. Sir Henry dominated the Parliament at that time and could be devastating to his political opponents. Fortunately, he was very kind to me. I was very much a new boy in this place at that time and I will be forever grateful for the consideration and kindness that he showed me. Sir Henry was the first to recognise that two people were of tremendous help to him. The first was Dame Edith who-I suppose, partly because they did not have children­ was with him virtually all the time. She travelled with him and lived in Melbourne with him. After she died in 1986 he was not the same person. Her death had a devastating effect on him. The other person to whom he was very grateful and to whom he recognised a debt was Sir Arthur Rylah. Sir Arthur had many of the attributes that Sir Henry did not have. He was a very competent lawyer, a businessman and a close associate of the Melbourne business community; he was a senior Army officer who served overseas, and a keen racing man. He was a human dynamo really who, according to my Death ofHon. Sir Henry Bolte. GCMG 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 29 calculations, carried out about four of the present-day portfolios and combined that with a very full social and sporting life into the bargain. Sir Arthur was a great deputy to Sir Henry. He was completely loyal and had the courage and capacity to stand up and tell Sir Henry when he believed Sir Henry was wrong. They had some fearful arguments between them, but the arguments started and finished quickly. Sir Henry recognised how much he owed to Sir Arthur Rylah. Henry Bolte was very much a man of the people. Honourable members have heard many stories-I shall not repeat them-about his involvement in his electorate as a cricketer and cricket watcher, and as a racing owner, administrator, watcher and better. In his various clubs in Melbourne he mixed with many people. Sir Henry was a very direct person. He answered questions directly and bluntly and insisted that his Ministers did likewise. He could not suffer fools, and not too many long speeches were made by backbenchers of the Liberal Party when he was Premier. If an honourable member talked nonsense, he received a glare from the Premier and sat dO'wn very quickly. I wish that tradition had continued after his retirement from politics. Many stories have been told about Sir Henry. Some have been told today, but there are some that nothing can be said about because they concern other people in the community who are still about and it could cause some embarrassment if their names were mentIoned. I shall tell one story that does not relate to particular people. When women came to the committee room of the Melbourne Cricket Club I do not think Sir Henry welcomed it, although he did not say much about it. Others of us were not terribly enthusiastic about it. Sir Henry respected women; he recognised their needs and he admired them, but there was a time and a place for everything! One day during a test match three women were chatting away about their grandchildren and the usual thing. Sir Henry walked over and said, "Well, girls, you have to make up your minds about today. You have to decide whether you are here to watch the cricket or to chat. If you want to watch, this is the place to do it. If you want to chat, go outside". I believe this has improved the standards in the committee room considerably. I welcome this opportunity of paying tribute to a great Australian who served his electorate, his State and the Australian nation with great distinction. Mr ELDER (Ballarat North)-I thank my fellow colleagues for their kind thoughts and genuine expressions of sadness at the recent passing of my great-uncle, Sir Henry Bolte. I shall convey their sentiments to Bill Bolte, Sir Henry's brother, and to my family. However, at this time my thoughts also go to the Gleeson family. As someone who has been through the death of someone very close to him, I know the heartache and pain that is caused not only to the patient but also to members of the family in nursing someone who is very close to and very much loved by them. Throughout the condolence speeches today I recognised that the qualities that made Uncle Henry very special to me also endeared him to others. His sense of humour was well renowned in this place and throughout Victoria. He could have ajoke: in particular he could have a joke about himself. Heaven knows he needed to have a sense of humour, particularly when the cartoonists took him off in the way that they did. I believe it was the well-known Melbourne cartoonist Weg who said SIr Henry was very easy to draw, because he was like looking at the front of a Volkswagen with its doors open. 30 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Henry Bo/te, GCMG

Even when he was sick Sir Henry was able to crack a joke about himself. This would help to relieve the tension of those who were looking after him. I remember one occasion sitting at his bedside at the Ballarat Base Hospital. He had congestion on the lungs and the doctors had prescribed all sorts of antibiotics to help clear up the congestion. After taking them for a couple of days Sir Henry said, "These pills aren't working. Get my smokes out of the bottom drawer". He lit up a fag, and 2 minutes later he was coughing up congestion. He said, "There-a self-diagnosis!" Another quality that I admired in Sir Henry was his honesty. It was recognised among his Parliamentary colleagues and the public that when one asked him a simple question one received a simple answer. When one asked him a very difficult question, one always received a straight reply. He did not beat around the bush. He did not mind if the reply was going to be electorally damaging to him. He believed honesty in politics was above everything. I also admired his integrity. His word was his bond. This is why so many large industrial companies established themselves in Victoria. Many a deal in setting them up was done by the shake of a hand. Sir Henry's integrity followed through into the timing of elections. He did not organise elections to coincide with popular public opinion polls. In fact, in his seventeen years as Premier I believe there was only two weeks difference between the time an election was held and the time it should have heen held. He believed in elections every three years and he worked towards that aim. Sir Henry had enormous leadership skills. He was a great manager of people. He got the best out of the people around him. He believed in putting someone in an environment where he could get the best out of that person rather than the worst. His Cabinet was like a family. Rarely was a vote taken within the Cabinet meeting; it was all done by consensus of opinion among those who were there. Sir Henry never took praise for the government's achievements. I have read many books and articles about him. Many questions were put to him about his achievements, and he always attributed achievements to his Ministers. When pressed further on personal achievements he would say something like, "I was just lucky. I had a good team around me". When the government made unpopular decisions Sir Henry would take full responsibility. He did not try to off-load that responsibility on other members of his Cabinet. I suppose the dark days of the Ryan hanging demonstrated the true leadership style of Sir Henry Bolte, when he accepted full responsibility for the twelve members of his Cabinet. This was further evidenced on 15 December 1969 after a by-election in Dandenong. His government had just suffered a 10 per cent swing against it and it was only six months before the State election. Sir Henry fronted the press conference. He offered no excuses and no apologies. He said, "Possibly I am responsible. After all I am the Leader of the party". That is a quality which the public look hard for in politicians today. His most endearing quality was his normal citizen image or, as he once called himself, "Billy from the bush". He had no degrees or high-flying company directorships. He did not come from the born-to-rule class and he preferred sport to academic studies, yet he became Victoria's longest serving Premier. His normality was reflected in the fact that he enjoyed having a punt. In fact, it was even known that he interrupted a budgetary session in his office one day to listen to race 3 at Flemington! He enjoyed a beer at the local pub and was often seen playing cards with the drivers at the drivers pool. Death o/Hon. Sir Henry Bolte, GCMG 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 31

In my early years I could not understand all the fuss that was made about Sir Henry, particularly from neighbours who came to our small Housing Commission home in Broadmeadows when he came to dinner. To me he was just plain Uncle Henry­ uncle first and Premier later. Sir Henry had a capacity for hard work. The farm that he took up at Bamganie was not even considered for soldier settlement because of its rugged state. He followed that hard work through into politics and worked his Ministers and members hard. It was said recently that the conservative parties maintain the status quo and do not make changes. Perhaps the person who made that statement did not consider the seventeen years of Bolte rule in this State. The Bolte record stands alone. In Sir Henry's first two and a half years of government 318 Bills passed through Parliament, which was the highest number since records were begun in the early 1900s. I am sure the many absent members of the government are aware, like members of the Liberal and National parties, of the great contribution Sir Henry made to the State, particularly to people in genuine need. During his term as Premier more than 500 000 Housing Commission houses and flats were built, 462 770 by private enterprise and 44857 by the Housing Commission. At that time Victoria had the highest rate of home ownership in the world. The Bolte government was the first government in fifteen years to complete a full three-year term. Sir Henry recognised that Victoria needed an industrial and manufacturing base. To this end he established the Victoria Promotion Committee. He made his first trip overseas in 1956, a lone figure telling overseas companies about Victoria, where it was, and that Victoria wanted them. The establishment of the Ford plant at Broadmeadows was negotiated over lunch in Toronto; the Timkin Rollerbearing Co. of Canton, Ohio, built a $2 million factory at Ballarat; the carbon black plant at Altona was established; the $20 million Volkswagen factory was set up; and a $4 million timber industry at Bacchus Marsh employing 200 people was developed. Sir Henry Bolte announced the establishment of two or three industries a week. I mention also the BP Australia Ltd development at Western Port employing 1500 people and the Esso-BHP joint venture in Bass Strait, providing jobs and other spin­ offs to the people of Victoria. For example, the Esso-BHP joint venture reduced by 10 per cent the fuel costs for Victorians who were using gas cookers in their homes, and for all gas homes energy costs were reduced by 25 per cent. He was also responsible for 1 331 489 appliances being converted to natural gas. In tourism, Sir Henry Bolte set up the Swan Hill Pioneer Settlement after a number of discussions he had when visiting Swan Hill. The Sovereign Hill project at Ballarat owes its success to Sir Henry Bolte, as do the National Gallery and the Heytesbury soldier settlement area, which was called Bolte's blunder at the time, but which turned out some years later to be Bolte's bonanza. I refer also to the building of freeways and the Tullamarine airport. I could go on and on. I know from letters I have received since Sir Henry Bolte's death that these were not the things that people regarded as his main achievements. Many of the needy believed his main achievements were the provision of simple things such as houses, in which to live, and jobs. The area that Sir Henry criticised most in his seventeen years as Premier was education. However, more grants were made in the seventeen years of the Bolte government than had beer! made in the previous 100 years. Education had absorbed 17·4 per cent of the State's Budget previously, but under the Bolte government that 32 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Henry Bolte, GCMG proportion increased to 37 per cent. Teachers' salaries as a proportion of the education budget increased from 70-6 per cent to 77-4 per cent under the Bolte government. Teachers' salaries were good in those days. From 1956 to 1972 the number of high schools increased from 84 to 253; the number of technical schools from 41 to 97; and two universities were built, as other honourable members have said. The number of high schools trebled during the Bolte years and the number of technical schools doubled. The number of schoolteachers in the State trebled, and the number of teachers in training increased by 500 per cent. Sir Henry Bolte was a hands-on Premier and Minister. In 1949, as the Minister of Water Supply, he went by packhorse into the Snowy Mountains to see the Snowy Mountains scheme. It was not until 1955, as Premier, that he signed the agreement for Victoria to participate in the scheme. The Bolte years were years of action. Some of the successes of Sir Henry Bolte must be attributed to the team comprising not only Sir Henry but also his wife, who was a capable public figure. She was involved in the Red Cross Society and the Girl Guides Association of Victoria, being president of the Meredith branch of the Girl Guides. When the Girl Guides proposed building extensions and set up a war memorial appeal, they raised $140000. Aunty Jill was out of bed at 5 a.m. every morning writing hundreds of personal letters to people to raise funds. The Yooralla Society of Victoria contacted her and asked for her support. She knew nothing about the Y ooralla Society but wrote to Channel 9 and requested that it support her. As honourable members know, the Yooralla Society appeal on Channel 9 is one of the best run appeals throughout the world, and that can be attributed in part to the foresight of Dame Edith Bolte. Sir Henry and Dame Edith were a strong team. He missed her greatly after her death four years ago. Perhaps Sir Henry will be best remembered for the quotable quotes that summed up in a few short words the feelin~s of most Victorians. I shall recite a few. He said, on striking teachers, "They can stnke till they're black in the face-it won't make any difference!"; on striking teachers at the door of Parliament House, "There's not a door low enough for them!"; on Portnoys Complaint, "I never read that stuff-by the time I finish the racing notes I just haven't got time!"; and on by-elections, "I feel we did take some risks in that by-election by leaving the results to the electors". Equally, his actions demonstrated his commitment to issues. When the price of potatoes reached $250 a tonne Sir Henry showed his disgust by not eating potatoes­ even French fries in the Parliamentary dining room-until the price went down. When the House Committee ruled out dancing with staff at the Parliamentary Christmas party, Sir Henry thought the ruling absurd and had the first dance at the party with one of the waitresses, after which the ruling went straight out the door. In concluding, I should like to say that I miss my great uncle very much. As a new and young politician in this place I often become disillusioned with the rate of change and wonder where we are going. It was always refreshing to sit down with someone who had an old head and knew this place backwards, as Sir Henry did. It was great to talk to him because he had a knack of putting things in perspective and would recount his own frustrations when he was Premier, Minister and backbencher. Sir Henry talked about the problems he faced in trying to get the House to agree to the establishment of off-course betting, which the opposition parties blocked on three or four occasions. Sir Henry's advice was always sound, and it was always offered rather than given. I grew up during the Bolte years; and Sir Henry was my motivation for going into politics. As a young man living in the working-class suburb of Broadmeadows I Death ofHon. Sir Henry Bo/te, GCMG 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 33 experienced the positive things that governments could do. Sir Henry and the Liberal government provided the necessities of life, such as housing and employment. Sir Henry also provided educational opportunities so that, with hard work, one could achieve a better standard of living and personal fulfilment. Like most Victorians of that time I shared his vision of a better Victoria. Sir Henry was my hero and I loved him very much. Perhaps Sir Henry's school magazine of 1923 best sums up our longest serving Premier-and the remark applies equaJly to cricket or politics. The magazine article says: He has not yet conquered a bad tendency to hit out at everything. I hope the House will see another Premier like Sir Henry-in achievement if not in looks! Mr AUSTIN (Ripon)-I am one of the few honourable members who knew Sir Henry Bolte long before he became a member of Parliament-and that is because I am a great deal older than most other honourable members! As other honourable members have said, Sir Henry described himself as a shy, little fat boy when he was at primary school. Although I did not know him then I cannot imagine him ever being shy. By the time I knew him he was a very confident man; certainly he became a very confident Leader who had the ability to inspire confidence in others. Sir Hell1)' down-played his scholastic ability, perhaps because he was always sceptical of academIcs and so did not want to appear too scholarly himself. The fact that he won a scholarship to Ballarat Grammar proves the lie to his supposed lack of scholastic ability. For instance, he was very good at mental arithmetic and many stories are told about how he often tricked his primary schoolmistresses because of that skill. I first met Sir Henry when he left Skipton and, with the help of his grandmother, purchased 500 acres at Bamganie. The land in the area was of poor quality; it was sandy, covered with bracken, and rabbits abounded. His next-door neIghbour was a fellow called Tommy Grant, who was known as the "Fox" and was one of the famous five Grant brothers who challenged any other gunshooters in the world to match their rabbit shooting skills for a prize of 500 pounds. If that challenge had been met the Grants would not have been able to raise the money between the lot of them, even with Henry Bolte thrown in! At that time rabbits were a grave problem in the area. Because he was unable to make sufficient money from farming to survive, Sir Henry became a capable trapper and rabbiter. There were times when he clashed with Tommy Grant-who was the official rabbiter for the area-at Sir Henry's property at Bamganie. After inspecting one burrow on his property, Sir Henry challenged Tommy about it, saying that nobody had attacked the burrow even though there were many rabbits about-no traps had been set and the burrow had not been filled or fumigated. Tommy Grant replied, "You have to protect the breeding burrow, otherwise we will all be out of business". Clyde Fisken-who was once the honourable member for Ballarat and the first chairman ofthe Australian Meat Board-and Selwyn Scott, who were highly respected in the area, were the two men who were responsible for Henry Bolte's decision to enter politics. They were thought of as king-makers because they were always on the lookout for candidates for political posts when the opportunities arose. It is true that after a round of golf the three men sat in the Buninyong Hotel discussing who could stand for the seat of Hampden at the 1945 election. They asked Henry if he was interested; he was somewhat surprised and, at first, took it as a joke. As he thou$ht about it, the offer became more attractive; and history shows that, after failing to WIn the seat in 1945, he won it for the Liberal Party in 1947. Today someone Session 1990-2 34 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death o/Hon. Sir Henry Bolte, GCMG like Henry Bolte would have no hope of winning a preselection, because these days political parties want the ready-made article rather than someone who shows potential, although inexperienced. Another factor to consider is that Sir Henry and Dame Edith did not have children. Whenever he reflected on that he said that he doubted he would have gone into politics if he and his wife had had children. Honourable members would do well to reflect on those two aspects of his life. Sir Henry's appointment as a stopgap Leader of the Liberal Party is a fascinating part of the State's history. A small number of Liberal Country Party members at that time were continually fighting among themselves about who the Leader should be; and as a result the leadership changed frequently. Henry was appointed Leader because he was considered a safe appointment while the arguments about who should be the long-term Leader were settled. They forgot the characteristic that he had shown since his preselection as a Liberal Party candidate: ifhe were given an opportunity he would take full advantage of it. Sir Henry had high standards, strong beliefs and deeply held principles. Once he made up his mind about an issue his determination did not waver, and he held fast to his beliefs and principles. His straightforward attitude enabled people to understand what he was saying and to be able to relate to it. Reference has already been made to his Saturday morning visits to Mooney's Hotel in Meredith, visits he always made on a Saturday unless he was off to the races. He always gained pleasure from meeting and talking to people with and against whom he had played cricket and football, golf and tennis in the local area. As the Premier has said, Sir Henry had a keen understanding of what ordinary people were thinking, something to which the Leader of the Opposition has also referred. Sir Henry was happiest when he was at home and next happiest when he was in Victoria, yet he knew he had to move in international circles, go overseas and attract industry, and 1 think the references that have been made in that regard have been accurate. He was successful in instilling confidence into people at the highest business level on the international scene. 1 suppose any Premier makes mistakes or has hiccups, and one that comes to mind was the fiasco of the Little Desert, which cost the Bolte government several safe seats. 1 do not suppose Sir Henry or anyone else realised when he went down that path that it would not just be a geographical event but would have widespread effects across Victoria. Many people forget that it was Sir Henry Bolte who set up the Land Conservation Council, which has been responsible for making the recommendations which have resulted in the establishment of our national parks and for general public land management in this State. As was said by the honourable member for Ballarat North, Dame Edith, popularly known to her friends as Jill, was a tremendous help to Sir Henry. They formed a great team. Sir Henry always had a tendency to exaggerate and even skite, and when he got out of control and went a bit too far, Dame Edith always brought him into line very quickly and tactfully, and he obeyed. That was always a very attractive part of their relationship. As the honourable member for Shepparton said, most of the stories about Sir Henry are difficult to tell. 1 remember being informed of what took place when decided to have a bet. When Sir Henry came to lunch one day he noticed that Brian had quite a few whiskers on his face and said, "What do you think you are doing?" Sir Henry hated beards and people who grew beards. Brian said, "I have had a bet to say 1 can grow a beard in a fortnight". Sir Henry said, "Pay up; you've lost your bet". Death ofHon. Sir Henry Bo/te, GCMG 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 35

Then there was the day Sir Henry went to the greyhound races. His car pulled up at the gate and he saw that nothing seemed to be happening so he said to his driver, "What have we stopped for?" The driver said, "We do not have a ticket so they will not let us in". Sir Henry said, "Tell them they had better let us in or I will bloody well shut the place down!" He was crazy about and very good at sport. I played cricket and football with him and he was always part of that very famous Western Plains cricket team. His cricket was a little like the way he lived his life; he would have a go at anything. Any ball a bit short or otherwise outside the off stump he would attempt to hit through the covers, and if it flew over the first slip and went for four, Henry would say, "I meant to do that". I think he convinced himself he meant to do it. As has been said, Sir Henry continued his active life after he retired from politics. My first political activity with him was when we formed the first branch of the Meredith Liberal Party. He was the president and I was the secretary. We would call a meeting at 8 o'clock on a Wednesday night, arrive to find nobody else there and go on to Barwick's pub, have a few beers and write up the minutes. Since his retirement, Sir Henry took a very active role in many things. He was on a large number of boards which he picked very carefully. He went on to the ones he wanted to go on-those to which he thought he could make the best contribution. He was a trustee of the Melbourne Cricket Ground and also a committee member of the Victoria Racing Club. Two of his great loves were racing and cricket. He also enjoyed the accolades of people and took a great deal of pleasure, after he left Parliament, in being invited to attend some function or be the guest speaker, where he received a rousing reception. He would start offby saying, "Isn't it amazing that I am so much more popular now than I ever was when I was Premier?" I think that is certainly correct. I called on Sir Henry and last saw him three days before he died. He was asleep, so to fill in time I went out and looked at his woolshed with which I have been familiar for years and years. We used to dance in it, drink in it and look at it with horror because it was so run down. In those days nobody could afford to spend money on any capital works, and one survived by not spending. When I looked at his woolshed not so long ago it was just the same, although Sir Henry by then would have had a pretty fair sized wool cheque. When he woke up I said to him, "I have just had a look at the old woolshed. It has not changed much". He said, "No, you don't ever want to be over capitalised!" As was said earlier, Sir Henry was still alert and right from the neck up, even if the rest of his body was giving up. I wish to extend my sympathy to Sir Henry Bolte's family. Mr I. W. SMITH (Polwarth)-I am grateful for the opportunity to join other speakers in speaking on the motion moved by the Premier and ably supported by the Leader of the Opposition. The late Sir Henry Bolte, as the honourable member for Hampden, represented most of the area I now represent, and from comments made to me over many years but particularly since his death, I know that his passing has saddened many of his former constituents, but they can reflect on the enrichment he brought to them as their local member. I recall first seeing Henry Bolte when I was a child at a football match, which was the grand final being played in Warrnambool. I was impressed by this man who came out and made a one-sentence opening speech and then strode vigorously towards the edge of the oval just as a young child ran on to the ground and kicked a football more or less in his direction. He made a few rapid strides towards the ball, marked it and 36 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Henry Bolte, GCMG delivered the most brilliant stab pass back to this child, who could not have hoped to mark it. Ifhe had, it would have knocked him out by winding him. I felt then that this was a man who certainly was going to go a long way if he had such a command of the game that was so important to the people ofVictona. When I was fortunate enough to be preselected as the candidate for Warrnambool, Sir Henry came down to support my candidature. Warrnambool in 1967 was regarded as the State's most marginal seat and it is not surprising that the Premier came to give that support. A crowd of 300 or 400 people was there in front of a petrified candidate to hear what was to be said and I recall that, during the Premier's speech, which was mixed with advice and entertainment, one particular interjector kept irritating him. He let him be for a while, but in the end he could not resist and said, "I'll bet you're a schoolteacher". The chap acknowledged that he was a schoolteacher. Sir Henry said, "It has cost the rest of the taxpayers $16 000 to educate you. I'll bet you have been a teacher for six or seven years". Sir Henry then said, "You should own a house and a Jag by now, but I guess you don't have two bob to rub together". That was the case. I must lend the Minister for Education a little booklet I have here which was published after Sir Henry retired. It is entitled Quotations from Chairman Henry Bo/te. There are perhaps a dozen quotations that relate to schoolteachers, which were appropriate at the time and are still appropriate. I am sure the Minister in the company of her own colleagues would certainly have under her breath uttered similar things to what Henry Bolte said publicly at that stage to teachers. The great quality Sir Henry had as Leader and as Premier was his capacity to chair meetings. He would not say much but he had the capacity to direct people to the point so that agreement was reached. Although some people doubted his capacity for consensus he appeared to achieve it promptly, with the result that everyone was clear about what the brief meeting had achieved because decisions were succinctly spelled out, yet nobody missed the opportunity to contribute if he or she wished. However, one had to be sure one's contribution brought new material to the discussion. I believe the quality of chairmanship of meetings is one of the secrets of good leadership. I had been a backbencher for three years from 1967 to 1970 when after the 1970 election, much to my amazement, Henry Bolte exercised his right given to him by the party of selecting two of his Cabinet and he selected me as one of those two and allocated to me the portfolio of water supply. I found that portfolio an interesting challenge and I held it for approximately six months, during which time there was much discussion about who would take on the new portfolio of social welfare, which was an area that had risen to prominence at that time. It was considered that an old hand experienced in legislation and administration would be given the job. I remember a call early one morning when the House was in session but was not actually sitting. I was asked to go to room 17. To be called to room 17 caused the heart of any member of. the party a little flutter; it was a small dogbox of a room that I believe nobody currently occupies. I knocked on the door and a duo of voices-which I recognised as those of the Premier and the Deputy Premier-called, "Come in". I entered the room where Henry Bolte and Arthur Rylah sat across a small table. They were drinking what appeared to be tumblers of neat Scotch. I said to myself, "My God, this doesn't look too good". Henry invited me to join them and, as I felt I would need it, I sat down to drink a tumbler of neat Scotch. Sir Henry said, "How would you like social welfare?" I said, "Are you asking me or telling me? If you are telling me you had better give me some ri<,ling instructions". The riding instructions were, "Firstly, I want you to get those kids out of the orphanages. I can't stand them being in orphanages". Those honourable members who knew the other side of the man would realise the sensitivity he felt towards the misfortune that Death ofHon. Sir Henry Bofte, GCMG 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 37 led children in those days to be cared for in the many orphana~es around the State. From those riding instructions was spawned the system of famdy group homes as a more satisfactory alternative group care for children in those circumstances. Sir Henry also indicated to me that I was not to worry too much about the need for staff and money because whatever I could organise to use in staff and money would be made available to me. In those days the restraint and constriction was the availability of trained, qualified people. We made use of the voluntary organisations. I lament the current lack of use of voluntary organisations. At that time they were permitted to apply for government funds. I remember the secretary of the department that I established, Basil Rush, would sit down for a fortnight and wade through the applications, and I would spend a couple of days with him on the funding. I suppose the administrative costs of distributing funds to voluntary organisations was approximately $1000. The funds went entirely to where they were meant to go with the voluntary organisations, but now approxImately $3 million is spent on administering the funding which goes to fewer organisations. Surely something has to be done about that sort· of syndrome. It was that type of administration that typified the Bolte era. There were not volumes of paper and pontificating about the desirability of certain thin$s. In order to win a case for something I needed in my Ministry, I used the long Parhamentary envelopes which fitted neatly in my inside top pocket. I would write down the pOInts as they came to me when sitting at my desk and so forth and then I would get Sir Henry's attention, perhaps when he was listening to a race. Henry would ask, "What is it?" One would have to precis one's points and then one would get either a yes or a no. Out of the twenty points one would often have eighteen on which one could go ahead. Now one can put a couple of points and, if one lives lon~ enough, one will eventually get an answer but usually a non-answer or a no. At least In those days one was able to get a decision and all one needed to do was write back to the head of the Treasury and say that one had discussed the matter with the Premier and that the following was his decision. Henry received the close support of his wife and Arthur Rylah. They were a formidable trio. They left their stamp on the State. I remember my father saying that the thin~ he liked most about Henry Bolte was that he said things clearly and then took actIon. To my father that was a refreshing change from other politicians he knew. Henry Bolte was a loyal subject of the Crown. He knew the advantage of tradition as a foundation for our society and as a strength for the individual. He was good for the State and he was good for his electorate. He was good to me personally, as he was to thousands of others in Victoria. I cherish his memory. Mr KENNETT (Burwood)-I shall briefly join in the condolence motion for Sir Henry Bolte. Any death is tra~c because of the upset that is caused to a number of people concerned, be they famdy or those who have had contact with the deceased. ' Every time I think of Sir Henry Bolte, a smile comes to my face. Having come to know him particularly well over the past six years, I can say that he was one of those characters whose life is worth celebrating. All honourable members were sad to learn of his death but, knowing he had the illness he did, it was a blessed relief that he died as quickly as he did with so little suffering. Sir Henry was not the kind of person who liked being dependent on others, and certainly his own attitude to life would have supported a rather quick passing. In my opinion he was a very rough but bright diamond. After listening to the Premier talk about days gone by, when his father, Sir Henry Bolte and Sir Arthur Rylah were in Parliament, one realises it might have been a wonderfully encouraging time to aspiring politicians. 38 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Henry Bolte, GCMG

The Premier referred to the Victorian Arts Centre and how it stands as a monument to Sir Henry. However, like many other things, it was John Cain, Sr who was responsible for originally purchasing the land; and it was his successor, Henry Bolte, who went about building the Victorian Arts Centre. There was another occasion when they got together for the Olympic Games in Melbourne. Again I think it was the Premier's father who initiated and secured the bid for the Olympic Games; Sir Henry, who was Premier of the day, saw through the holding of the games. I guess the message from that is that the change of government does not in any way inhibit the holding of the Olympic Games in this State. The Premier also referred to electorate offices and to how Sir Henry and the Premier's father agreed not to give backbenchers electorate offices. I have heard that story before and accept the wisdom of it. Sir Henry also told me how, when in opposition, he used to strongly argue that there should not be a shadow Cabinet. It was an entirely different method of running an organisation. Despite the bulk of the work falling on a few, it was his style of running a much smaller show. At the end of the week Sir Henry adopted the practice of never taking work home. Friday nights, Saturdays and Sundays were entirely his. I see the Minister for Planning and Environment sighing in disbelief. I guess, again, that is one of the changes in the pace and complexity of our lives. I do not know whether we have generated that complexity irresponsibly, but I do know that television, which had not been introduced when Sir Henry became Premier in 1955, now almost dictates our lives. Honourable members often reflect on the lives of members of Parliament who have passed away, particularly those who had been currently serving, such as Pauline Toner and Beth Gleeson. I often wonder whether we have made a rod for our own backs in believing that every time the telephone rings we should answer it and that we are on call 24 hours a day. No-one thanks us for it. If an honourable member dies on his or her feet, someone will $et up and say a few nice words, but that person will be pushing up daffodils for time Immemorial. Sir Henry's adage of not taking work home on Friday nights and not working on Saturdays and Sundays has a lot going for it. Sir Henry told me that immediately prior to every election he cleaned out his desk because, in the event of being defeated, he did not want to return to the scene of what had, over many years, been a time of enjoyment while involved in the State's administration. Over the past few years I have had lunch with Sir Henry every Christmas. I used to take with me a bottle of whisky, believing it was the right thing to do. When I first arrived, with what I thought was a good brand of whisky, Sir Henry said, "That won't last long". During the afternoon that statement proved to be correct. I had learnt yet another lesson about the prowess of this man. Mr Roper-Did you take two the next time? Mr KENNETI-Let me just say that we finished two the first time! The honourable member for Polwarth referred to Sir Henry's contact with tradition, his sense of being with respect to this Parliament and the office of Premier. Sir Henry always received tremendous pleasure in his contact with the Royal Family. It may not mean much to this generation but Sir Henry had a good close working relationship with Her Majesty the Queen, and the current Premier and his predecessors made sure that Sir Henry was invited to functions whenever members of the Royal Family visited Victoria. Sir Henry had a closer relationship with the Queen Mother. They had an association going back many years. Those who have visited Sir Henry's house will pe aware that the possessions he prized most were the chairs he and Dame Edith were given at the investiture of Prince Charles as the Prince of Wales. Death o/Hon. Sir Henry Bolle, GCMG 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 39

Sir Henry always impressed me with his ability to put his finger on the pulse, in particular with his honesty, his integrity, his real sense ofloyalty both to the party and to the community. As the honourable member for Ballarat North said, Sir Henry was able to discharge his duties and maintain his lifestyle with a magnificent sense of humour. He took seriously his private and personal responsibilities in public but he was also able to maintain a fantastic sense of humour and a special common touch both in his time as Premier of this State and since then. Sir Henry once told me about the importance of his involvement in ensuring the success of the Liberal government by securing the Democratic Labor Party vote and about how he promised State aid, which won over Archbishop Mannix at the time­ not openly-but in a positive way supporting this side of politics. Honourable members who attended either Sir Henry's private cremation or his memorial service would recognise from both events the simplicity that was Sir Henry. He did not want a large State affair. The private cremation was a special and solemn occasion, but it was full of Sir Henry Bolte's spirit. Everyone who attended the memorial service was struck by the ceremony and by the magnificent address given by The Honourable Lindsay Thompson, yet the simplicity of Sir Henry came through. It is easy to say that no two individuals are ever alike, and that is so. There will never be another Sir Henry Bolte. They do not make people in that mould any more. People do not grow up in the same environment that taught such values, irrespective of one's politics. Today there has been so much change that what Sir Henry had to fight for and achieve as an individual, particularly the lessons and values he learnt as a young boy, do not exist today. Honourable members on this side of the House will miss him but we certainly celebrate his life. Some honourable members, such as the honourable members for Ripon and Shepparton, and the Minister for Sport and Recreation, were fortunate in having served in Parliament with characters such as Sir Henry Bolte. Those honourable members were fortunate to have been around when such individuals existed. I do not know where we will find the next Sir Henry Bolte. That is not a political statement; it applies to both sides of politics. I do not know where the Leaders of future political parties will come from. It will certainly be difficult for them to have that simple approach to life, to have all the values ultimately necessary for success and, at the end of the day, still be able to remain very much themselves. Mr MACLELLAN (Berwick)-I wish to associate the electors of Berwick and myself with the motion of condolence for Sir Henry Bolte. I am reminded that it was Sir Henry who wasJ"esponsible for my becoming a member of Parliament, both by suggesting the seat I might stand for and by supporting me in the election campaign in which I was elected. I can remember him coming to Korumburra and addressing a meeting of 300 people in the church hall in days when public meetings were still the vogue. I recall also asking him before the meeting what he was going to speak about so that I might not clash with whatever he said. His response was, "You say whatever you like at the meeting; if you are wrong I will straighten you out". I was made aware that a candidate's role was very much the supporting rather than the starring role; it was a good lesson to learn. Afterwards, when Sir Henry was discussing something intently with one or two people-and something like 298 others were waiting to meet him-I can remember the difficulty I had in trying to work out how one should interrupt him. That was completely solved by Dame Edith-or Jill as we knew her-who said, "There's Henry 40 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death o/Hon. Sir Henry Bolte, GCMG talking away to a couple of old cronies. What you do is introduce people to me and then I will go up and introduce them to Henry". It worked like a charm. Dame Edith said to Sir Henry, "There is somebody here who wants to meet you", and got him away from the people he was speaking to intently. I disagree with what was said by one of my colleagues about Sir Henry's not being shy. I think underneath there was a shyness but it was reflected in a gruffness which made him seem more definite, perhaps, than he was at times. When I was elected and came into this place and went to my first party meeting, I expected that after some fifteen years as Premier Sir Henry would have only to snap his fingers and everyone would say, "Yes", but it was not like that in the party room meetings. On occasions I saw Sir Henry lose the argument and adjourn the matter. He never lost the matter; he would always adjourn the matter and it was never heard of again, but just quietly sorted out. That IS one of the great skills about being in Parliament: knoWlng when to lose gracefully or when to back off and not push something to a vote. I can remember occasions when there were droughts and unemployment schemes were introduced. Henry would remember what it was like to be a mere mortal and be out of work and he would introduce a scheme to provide employment opportunities in areas of the State where people were finding it difficult to cope. I can remember also the last administrative action of Henry before his resignation, which was to provide the money to enable what was then the Western port Waterworks Trust to put in a full-sized pipeline to Archies Creek, in the electorate of the present Leader of the Opposition. Instead of having a small extension of the scheme to a butter factory, Henry had the vision to see that in the fullness of time the water pipe had to be of a greater dimension than the trust could afford then. He found the Treasury money to meet the difference between the cost of doing it miserably and doing it well. Henry was not the sort of Premier who would count paper clips and see millions of dollars frittered away; he would not allow small things to ~et in the way of big things and the future. He had a vision; he had a sense of inspiratlon of where he wanted the State to go and he communicated that sense of vision to all of us. Members of the Opposition, of the government, and of the National Party-I think we all shared it. It was one of his great skills, that without being eloquent, without appearin$ over educated, without ever being condescending, he was able to be very direct, objective and honest and very sure and true. Henry gave us great hope and it was a privilege to be in Parliament with a great Parliamentarian. I am one of the few remaining dinosaurs in Parliament who can remember Henry Bolte in this House, although it was for only ei$hteen months or so that we were here together. It was a great privilege to be in Parhament with him, to share occasions and to see that the Premier of the State and the Leaders of the other parties could spar with one another but beyond it all remain firm friends off the stage. It is an atmosphere which many of us could remind ourselves should be encouraged and retained in the future. Henry had those special qualities and we have lost them with his death. We need to remind ourselves that they need not be lost if we communicate to each other the special qualities ~hat Parliamentary life has to offer all of us. Mr DICKINSON (South Barwon)-Sir Henry Bolte we shan't forget. I join in the contribution to the condol((nce motion for Sir Henry Bolte and my constituents extend to his family a tribute toijis life and work as an elder statesman of Victoria. Some honourable members werfj only--~oungsters when Sir Henry was Premier of this State. I recall him vividly as I grew up ih Geelong, and I recall as a schoolboy in 1956- along with the honourable member for Murray Valley-running with the Olympic Death o/Hon. Sir Henry Bolte, GCMG 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 41 torch in Sir Henry's shire, the Shire of Bannockburn. I now live in the shire where Sir Henry had his farm at Meredith. Many of the people in that area recall vividly that when they had a problem they could approach Sir Henry and get a frank answer. For instance, when work was to be done on powerlines and people were asked to conserve power, they would ask Sir Henry whether that meant that they could not shear the sheep. Sir Henry would say, ~~While there is power in the line, use it". A spokesman was sent out to speak to people in rural Gippsland. Sir Henry had said when the gas main was being laid that wherever a property's fences were cut the workers should ensure that the owner got a good gate. The public servants objected as they thought the scheme was extravagant, but Sir Henry's suggestion resulted in everyone being on side and it being possible to put the line through without any difficulties, and so the gas main went through to Melbourne. The service conducted in Ballarat for Sir Henry was presided over by the Right Reverend Bishop Hazelwood and Dean Thomas of Melbourne, showing the respect felt in the Anglican Church for the former Premier. It is probably not widely known that Sir Henry served on the vestry of his church and at one stage even thought he might go into the ministry. I recall that remark being made to me when I was registrar of the Melbourne Anglican diocese. Sir Henry grew up in Ballarat and attended Ballarat Grammar School, which was very much in its infancy at that time. It was not like Melbourne Grammar School, Scotch College, or Wesley, but a school in a major rural area. Other former honourable members connected with the Ballarat Grammar School were Mr Montgomery and Mr Hollway, along with the honourable member for Bennettswood. From time to time the wit .of Sir Henry was recorded. When people were critical of the new Victorian Arts Centre and pointed out that it looked like Pentridge Prison with no windows, Sir Henry replied, "All the more hanging space". Honourable members will recall that there was much political turmoil immediately after Sir Henry's election to Parliament. The tragic loss of Trevor Oldham forced the position of Leader of the Liberal Party onto Sir Henry. Some honourable members will recall that there were no electorate offices or staff so honourable members could not congregate in small yorridors and conspire; they went out into their electorates and did their job. Someone in Newtown recently reminded me about how wonderful it was to have a postman as a State member and an engine driver as a Federal member. People respond to those whom they can approach and who they can understand. That was the key to Sir Henry's success. He was a homely and simple man. He spoke to people at the Meredith pub each week and exchanged stories. It was not the response one might receive in the Hyatt, the Hilton or 36 Collins Street; it was the response of the ordinary man at village level in Meredith. That was the key to Sir Henry's success. He had his two feet well and truly planted on the ground. Sir Henry ran a well-run sheep farm which always received the highest price in the district for wool. He cleared the rabbits off his property. When he retired the seat of Ripon was held by another honourable member who is well versed in agriculture and the habits of rabbIts. Sir Henry recognised that power stemmed from popular needs and his ~overnment looked at housing and employment and did much to help young families In the 1950s who were trying to acquire their first homes and establish their families. Things such 42 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death a/Hon. Sir Henry Bolte, GCMG as legalised homosexuality, tram strikes, airline disputes, tax rates of 49 per cent and uncontrollable waterfront strikes were not on the agenda in that period. Henry Bolte and his fellow Liberals gave priority to Victorian families and encouraged a first-class education system. Sir Henry was closely linked with the establishment ofMonash and La Trobe universities and also signposted a university for Geelong-and that happened during his lifetime. His hand-picked Cabinet comprised excellent men such as Sir Gordon McArthur, who served something like 26 years on the back bench before becoming a Minister. Sir George Reid, Jim Balfour, Lindsay Thompson and Arthur Rylah, who held virtually three portolios, were all part of that strong team. Sir Rutherford Guthrie, who was a member of Parliament from 1947 to 1950, was in the Liberal Party structure doing a lot for rural Victoria during that Bolte era. Henry Bolte's statements were always clear and down to earth, and promises were translated into action. Time and again constituents in my electorate have reminded me of that. I remember doorknocking a home in Belmont during the run-up to the 1982 election and one retired railway worker said he was grateful for the period of Sir Henry's office because, had he left the railways under any other Premier, he might never have received a pension. What was foremost in the era of the Bolte government was that young families who were raising children, educating them and building homes had confidence in the State and Federal governments. The Bolte achievements that have been referred to today by various speakers include the freeway program and the South-Eastern Arterial, the duplication of the Hume Highway, the Bass Strait natural gas development, offshore oil agreements and the liberalising of our liquor licensing laws. Henry Bolte also had a plan to assist parents in sending their children to non-government schools. Unfortunately we have seen that eroded by attempts by socialist thinking governments to put education under State ownership. The real pluses for the Henry Bolte era were the new universities of Monash and La Trobe, the new high schools and 20 000 teachers. The office had its moments for the Premier, of course, and on one occasion when the teachers protested and went on strike, the children were deprived of their services in the schools. Sir Henry saw the changing circumstances which called for changing policies and he started the work of the Environment Protection Authority during his seventeen years as Premier. In Geelong we are mindful of the building of the Alcoa smelter at Point Henry and the power station at Anglesea. Sir Henry never had to sack any of his Ministers. He led his team like the captain of a country cricket or football team and things were under control. With his wife, Dame Edith, he had a close tie with the Meredith community. On many occasions I took my children to the Anzac Day service at Meredith and Sir Henry and Dame Edith were there chatting to the local people and inquiring after the welfare of different residents and children. They were in the midst of a community of which they had grown very fond. Beside the golf course on the outskirts of Meredlth is a memonal tree plantation to Dame Edith, and the people of the Meredith hotel remember the chair that Sir Henry sat on week after week exchanging stories. Although Sir Henry was not a regular attendant at the Meredith church, it was nevertheless part of his life. He followed the sport of kings. It was at race meetings that he met the top echelon of society as well as the stable hands and the workers on the farms. Sir Henry kept in touch with every stratum of society. The people ofBannockbum cherish his participation in the commemoration of the 100th anniversary of the district on 30 June 1964. Sir Henry and the Honourable Death ofHon. Sir Rutherford Guthrie, CMG 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 43

Murray Porter were special visitors and Sir Henry presented the shire furnishings for the council chamber of the municipality of Bannockburn. On 3 July 1964 the Boltes attended a centenary ball at the Bannockburn public hall. On Sir Henry's retirement on 20 November 1972, the district gave him a civic welcome back home. Politicians of the Bolte era were certain of one thing: they had sense and perception, they forgot about exposing the weakness of others and concentrated on their own strengths and they acted positively. Sir Henry gained stature from the family and he gave stature to the families of Victoria. Victorians are the poorer for his passing. Sir Henry Bolte was dearly loved by many Victorians and we have a lot to be grateful for. My constituents wish to extend to his family their tribute to his life and work as an elder statesman of Victoria. .The SPEAKER-I desire to add my comments and tribute to the late Sir Henry Bolte. He was a giant in his political impact on Victoria. He served for an extraordinarily long period and this is perhaps emphasised when one realises that the number of years during which he was Premier was at least half the age of some present members of this House. Indeed, for many members, their earliest memory of politics in Victoria would be with Sir Henry as Premier of the State. That was so in my case. At that stage he obviously dominated politics in Victoria and it was at that time that I first met him. What surprised me most was that, for a person who was such a giant in his political impact, he was short in physical stature. I was surprised because I had previously seen him only in photographs or on television. He made an enormous impact on the political life of Victoria from 1955 until 1972. As has already been said, he was practical in his approach to his responsibilities both as Premier and as Treasurer. One illustration of that is the story that, ifhe were asked to fund a certain matter in his capacity as Premier, he would write to the Treasurer advocating that funds be applied and he, as Treasurer, would write back refusing the request. He was a member of a conservative party but he was also a reformer in a wide range of areas such as drinking and gambling laws and protection of the environment, so he was a man who was not a literal conservative in the sense of wanting to leave things as they were but a man who used his position, authority and leadership to make changes which he believed to be in the interests of Victoria as a whole. I extend condolences to the family ofSir Henry Bolte, who will be dearly remembered by all Victorians.

DEATH OF THE HONOURABLE SIR RUTHERFORD CAMPBELL GUTHRIE, CMG Mr. CAIN (Premier)-I move: That this House expresses its sincere sorrow at the death of the Honourable Sir Rutherford Campbell Guthrie, CMG, and places on record its acknowledgment of the valuable services rendered by him to the Parliament and the people of Victoria as member of the Legislative Assembly for the electoral district of Ripon from 1947 to 1950 and as Commissioner of Crown Lands and Survey and Minister of Soldier Settlement from 1948 to 1950. Sir Rutherford Guthrie was the member for Ripon from 1947 to 1950. He was born in Donald on 28 November 1899 and was educated at Melbourne Grammar School and later at Cambridge University where he graduated with a degree of Bachelor of Arts in 1921. Sir Rutherford had a distinguished war record, having served in both world wars. During the first world war he served with the Royal Field Artillery from 1918 to 1919 and reached the rank of 2nd lieutenant. After completing his war service 44 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofHon. Sir Rutherford Guthrie, CMG

he returned to Australia. He had a cattle stud, Warrawidgee at Linton, where he also bred sheep. Sir Rutherford continued in that capacity until the second world war when his military career recommenced and he served in the 2nd AIF from 1939 until 1944. He was a major in the 9th Division Cavalry Regiment and was wounded at El Alamein. He was mentioned in dispatches. His political career commenced with his election to the Ripon Shire Council in 1946 where he served continuously through to 1974. He served terms as president on three occasions. He was a Minister in the Hollway government in 1948 and was Commissioner of Crown Lands and Survey and MinIster of Soldier Settlement, a very apt portfolio for someone of his background and experience. He was defeated in the election of 1950. This defeat did not signal the end of his involvement in politics. As I said earlier, he remained a shire councillor and in 1956 he became the State President of the Liberal Party and held that position until 1960. He was Treasurer of the Liberal Party from 1960 until 1963, so he remained active in politics as well as in local government. Sir Rutherford was also a very active member of numerous local committees such as the Central Highlands Regional Development Committee, Ballarat Legacy, the Ballarat Agricultural Society, and the Corriedale Breeders Association. He was a director and Chairman of the Phosphate Cooperative Co. Ltd and a director of Federated Woollen Mills Ltd and the Perpetual Executors and Trustees Association. He was an office bearer of the Skipton RSL. During a long lifetime he had a very active local and political career and he demonstrated a commitment to the community, the State and the country, as shown by his distinguished military service and the way he lived. On behalf of the government I offer sincere condolences to the family and friends of Sir Rutherford Guthrie. Mr BROWN (Leader of the Opposition)-On behalf of the Opposition I join with the Premier in expressing the sympathy of the House to the family of the late Sir Rutherford Guthrie. Sir Rutherford, or as he was better known, Ford Guthrie, was prominent in a number of significant areas of Victorian public life from the 1940s through to the 1970s. Ford was prominent in local government, being a member of the Ripon Shire Council from 1946 to 1974, and having served three separate terms as shire president. He was prominent in the Liberal Country Party', as it was then known, and became the president of the Victorian division of the LIberal Party from 1956 to 1960 and treasurer from 1960 to 1963. He was the member for Ripon from 1947 to 1950. Ford was particularly well known to Victorians between the years of 1948 and 1950 when he was Commissioner of Crown Lands and Survey and Minister of Soldier Settlement in the lIollway government. Having been a member of Parliament for about a year before he was appointed a Minister, there is a story that he was a little bemused when he moved into his new Ministerial office. On finding five telephones on his Ministerial desk he picked up each phone in turn and asked each person who answered to drop in to see him. Bureaucrats and public servants came from all directions to brief him and tell him what he should do in his capacity as Minister, which I understand bemused him even more. Ford Guthrie had a distinguished war record, having been on active service in both world wars, being a major with the 9th Division Cavalry Regiment of the Australian Death ofHon. Sir Rutherford Guthrie, CMG 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 45

Imperial Forces, where he was mentioned in· dispatches and was wounded at El Alamein. I understand from those who knew him well that Ford Guthrie would wish to be remembered for his love of cricket, particularly as a batsman of some repute in the Western Plains district competition and also for his beautiful herd of Poll Hereford cattle. His services to the community and particularly his work on behalf of primary industry were acknowledged in 1960 when he was awarded the CMG, and later in 1968, when he was knighted in the New Year's honours list. Other major public offices held by Sir Rutherford were that of President of the Board of Land and Works and Commissioner of Crown Lands and Survey. He was also a member of the Central Highlands Regional Development Committee, Ballarat Legacy, Ballarat Agricultural Society and the Corriedale Breeders Association. In 1973 Sir Rutherford retired to Gisborne. I am told that he was an invariably well­ mannered and kindly man. He had a natural flair for getting along well with everyone he met and he was extremely well liked wherever he went. On behalf of the Opposition, I extend condolences to Peter, his surviving son, and to his family. Mr McNAMARA (Leader of the National Party)-Ijoin with the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition in the condolence motion for Sir Rutherford Campbell Guthrie. Sir Rutherford was the member for the Legislative Assembly seat of Ripon from 1947 to 1950 and was Commissioner of Crown Lands and Survey and Minister of Soldier Settlement from 1948 to 1950. He also served as President of the Board of Land and Works from 1948 to 1950. He was a farmer and grazier and was born in Donald in November 1899. He was educated at Melbourne Grammar School and Cambridge University. He served in the 1st AIF, achieving the rank of 2nd lieutenant and in the 2nd AIF from 1939 to 1944 in the 9th Division Cavalry Regiment where he achieved the rank of major, and he was wounded at El Alamein. He was one of the few servicemen to see active service in both world wars. Sir Rutherford was well known in the farming community. He was involved in the Returned Services League and Legacy in the Ballarat area. He was also a member of the Central Highlands Regional Development Committee, the Ballarat Agricultural Society and the Corriedale Breeders Association. He was a director of a number of prominent companies in Victoria, in particular, the Phosphate Cooperative Co. Ltd and the Federated Woollen Mills Ltd. He was also a director of Perpetual Executors and Trustees Association. He had 28 years service in local government from 1946 to 1974. Sir Rutherford had considerable involvement with the Liberal Party on a political basis and was State President of the Liberal Party from 1956 to 1960. He was the nephew of Senator Guthrie, who represented the then Country Party in Victoria. I join with the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition in expressing the condolences of members of the National Party to the Guthrie family. Mr AUSTIN (Ripon)-I join with the Leaders to pay tribute to the late Sir Rutherford Campbell Guthrie, who was known by his friends as Ford. Sir Rutherford had a long and distinguished career-perhaps not so long in this place, but he had a long period in local government. 46 ASSEMBLY 6 March 1990 Death ofH on. Sir Rutherford Guthrie, CMG

Sir Rutherford was a prominent citizen in the Western District. He was a councillor for about 29 years and served three periods as a shire president. When I was elected to this place the first task I was asked to perform was to open the Beaufort caravan park when Ford Guthrie was president of the shire. In about 1950 the electorate of Ripon disappeared off the political map due to a redistribution. At that time the late Sir Henry Bolte was the honourable member for Hampden. Much later, I became the honourable member for Hampden and, in the 1976 redistribution that electorate disappeared from the political map, much to the horror of Sir Henry Bolte, but it was quite a pleasure to Sir Rutherford that Ripon again became a Parliamentary seat in 1976. Sir Rutherford Guthrie was a politician who became a Minister. He saw that as his duty; that he should make that sacrifice on behalf of Victorians. He was not particularly suited to the hurly-burly of politics. Many years ago I recall that he said he could not believe, after going to the bar to enjoy a beer or whisky with members of the then Opposition-the Labor Party-that they really were jolly decent chaps, who then returned to the House where they called honourable members opposite all the nasty and terrible things that one could imagine. I think that a former member of this place, Jack Galvin, may have been about at that time. Ford Guthrie was a very keen sportsman and an outstanding cricketer. At that time, Western Plains had many outstanding cricketers and was seldom beaten in the country week competition in either Melbourne or Ballarat. He was keen on fishing and with Lady Guthrie used to be seen fishing in the Noosa River at Noosa Heads during the winter. Ford was a member of and a one-time president of the Melbourne Club. He was in the Melbourne Club at the time of the rather savage fire; not many members would remember the photograph as it appeared in the daily newspapers on the day after the fire of Ford Guthrie standing in the middle of Collins Street in his pyjamas. On one occasion, after the Melbourne Club had installed smoke-sensitive detectors, Ford Guthrie was using the telephone in a booth at the club; obviously he had his pipe going rather well and activated the detectors. That was something for which he was long remembered and many jokes were told about it. . I express my condolences to the family of the late Ford Guthrie. Mr DICKINSON (South Barwon)-I endorse the remarks made by the honourable member for Ripon about Sir Rutherford Guthrie. Sir Rutherford was well known in the South Barwon electorate by many associated with the land, and by those retired and living at Barwon Heads. He was a farmer and grazier, and contributed much to rural Australia. His relative, Senator Guthrie, was connected with the Corriedale stud at Moorabool on the Moorabool River. The record speaks for itself in that Sir Rutherford Guthrie served his country in two world wars; also, through his contribution to Legacy at Ballarat, to the Returned Services League at Skipton, and as a director of the Federated Woollen Mills Ltd, and the Perpetual Executors and Trustees Association. He made a contribution in all areas in which he was involved. Sir Rutherford was the honourable member for Ripon from 1947 to 1950, and was the Commissioner of Crown Lands and Survey and Minister of Soldier Settlement; many will recall his involvement when returned servicemen were given land for the first time to start farming in western Victoria. Many large properties-for example, Morangurk-were subdivided to provide livelihoods for returned soldiers who had returned as shattered men from theatres of war such as the Pacific Islands and New Adjournment 6 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 47

Guinea. The work of Sir Rutherford and of the government at the time gave many people hope of new lives. I extend the sincere condolences of the people in my electorate to the Guthrie family on the passing of Sir Rutherford. The SPEAKER-I add my comments and pay tribute to the late Honourable Sir Rutherford Campbell Guthrie. Sir Rutherford must have been one of the longest living persons to be a member of this House, and yet he served only a three-year term. Clearly, that three years was a distinguished term for he was a Minister for approximately two-thirds of that time. As the honourable member for South Barwon has said, he played a key role in settling a large number of people who in wartime had served Victoria and Australia well and courageously. They were assisted in their resettlement by the soldier settlement scheme. Also, Sir Rutherford's own military service was notable. He was unusual for his time in that he had received a tertiary education. At that time, relatively few Victorians or Australians had that opportunity. Sir Rutherford used those opportunities and skills well, both in his Parliamentary career-brief as it was-and in his long local government career, as well as in his agricultural and investment activities. I extend my condolences to his surviving family. The motions were agreed to in silence, honourable members signifying their unanimous agreement by standing in their places.

ADJOURNMENT Mr CAIN (Premier)-I move: That, as a further mark of respect to the memory of the late Mrs Elizabeth Susan Gleeson, the late Honourable Sir Henry Edward Bolte, GCMG, and the late Honourable Sir Rutherford Campbell Guthrie, CMG, the House do now adjourn until tomorrow. The motion was agreed to. The House adjourned at 6.8 p.m.

Questions without Notice 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 49

Wednesday, 7 March 1990

The SPEAKER (the Hon. Ken Coghill) took the chair at 2.4 p.m. and read the prayer.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

STATE BANK VICTORIA Mr BROWN (Leader of the Opposition)-I direct my question to the Treasurer­ the world's worst! The SPEAKER-Order! The rulings of successive Speakers have required that questions without notice should be put simply when asking for information and should not be couched in terms such as those used by the Leader of the Opposition. I suggest to the Leader of the Opposition that he ask his question simply and without any sort of pejorative remark. Mr BROWN-I refer the Treasurer to information in the possession of the Opposition: that since 31 December 1989 there have been defaults on an additional $133·1 million of debts owing to Tricontinental Corporation Ltd. I ask the Treasurer to inform the House whether these debts are additional to the $795 million of potential bad debts included in the auditor's report on Tricontinental, which covered the period to 31 December 1989. Mr JOLLY (Treasurer)-At every opportunity that the Leader of the Opposition has had over recent months he has attempted to undermine-- Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! The question asked by the Leader of the Opposition is an important matter of great interest to all members. I suggest to honourable members on both sides of the House that they remain silent to enable the Treasurer to answer the question. Mr JOLLY-As I said, at every opportunity the Leader of the Opposition has attempted to undermine State Bank Victoria. There is no doubt about that whatsoever. Honourable members interjecting. Mr JOLLY-I have made sure that I have performed the opposite role-in other words, to protect State Bank Victoria. That has been my overwhelming objective during the past few months in particular. In relation to the accusation that the Leader of the Opposition has made today about debts, it should be understood that the independent assessment made by the auditors and undertaken under the supervision of Touche Ross was in fact very detailed and they also looked to the future. They were looking at the likely bad debts that may occur in the future. They took into account the future position. They said that they were making an assessment on the existing economic conditions; ifworsening economic conditions occurred then a reassessment may have to be made. I also point out in relation to the interest rate issue, which is a major factor in the assessment of the auditors, in terms of the economic conditions both the Prime Minister and the Federal Leader of the Opposition have made it clear that they expect interest rates to fall during the course of 1990, and that would in fact improve the 50 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Questions without Notice economic conditions. The point I make is that the only independent, detailed assessment that is available to me takes into account future years, and it puts the additional bad debts ofTricontinental at $795 million. Mr McNAMARA (Leader of the National Party)-I direct my question to the Treasurer. Mr Kennedy interjected. The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member for Bendigo West knows he has an equal obligation with other honourable members to enable the Leader of the National Party to put his question without interruption. Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! I suggest the honourable member for Sunshine similarly should give the Leader of the National Part)' an opportunity of asking his question and at the same time preserving his opportunIty of making contributions in the House. Mr McNAMARA-Given that the Treasurer was the Minister responsible for State Bank Victoria when it recorded the largest loss of an)' government institution or corporation in Australian history, will he follow the tradItions of the House and make a Ministerial statement on the losses of the State Bank? If not, why not? Mr JOLLY (Treasurer)-It is certainly not my intention to make a Ministerial statement on this issue. Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! Apin I remind honourable members that the Treasurer is entitled to reply to the question without interruption. I also remind them that their individual conduct contributes to the standing not only of themselves as individuals but also of the Chamber as a whole. I ask all honourable members to observe the forms of the House. Mr JOLLY-The Leader of the National Party should be aware that there is not a shortage of statements and documents on the State Bank. They have been made available and can be obtained everywhere. Mr McNamara interjected. The SPEAKER-Order! The Leader of the National Party has asked his question and the Treasurer is entitled to reply without interruption. I ask the Leader of the National Party, particularly with the position he holds, to respect the forms of the House to enable the Treasurer to reply without interruption. Mr JOLLY-As I said, Mr Speaker, there is no shortage of documentation or statements on the State Bank. As the honourable member for Springvale interjects, there is a shortage of talent on the other side of the House. The Leader of the National Party is not an able debater in any case. I repeat: I issued a detailed statement on the State Bank. I made it clear that the government has taken action to protect State Bank Victoria by assuring Victorians that we will assume the $795 million liability. For the edification of honourable members-and the Leader of the National Party should listen because it is about time he understood some aspects-the sum of$795 million is the provision for bad debts. Mr Brown interjected. Mr JOLLY-The Leader of the Opposition should know that it is not actually bad debts incurred. You would not know what a figure was. Questions without Notice 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 51

Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! Again I ask honourable members to observe the forms of the House. I remind the Leader of the Opposition that later in question time, if he rises in his place, he will have an opportunity of asking a further question. I ask the Treasurer to ignore interjections and to address his remarks to the Chair. Mr JOLLY-I do not have any intention of issuing a Ministerial statement. I have already issued detailed documents on this matter. I do not believe a Ministerial statement would lead to any greater understanding of the State Bank issue.

VICTORIAN ECONOMY Mr BAKER (Sunshine)-Has the Premier examined the report entitled The State ofAustralia? If so, will he advise the House of its implications for the continuing outstanding performance of the Victorian economy? Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! By continued interjections, honourable members simply erode the time available for questions without notice. Mr CAIN (Premier)-I thank the honourable member for Sunshine for his question. I have examined the document to which he refers. It was prepared by Or Kevin O'Connor of Monash University and gives the lie to a whole range of assertions that are being made irresponsibly at the moment about the state of health of the Victorian economy. It demonstrates clearly that the economy here is healthier and growing faster on every important economic indicator that is available. It indicates also that the ordinary people of this State are those who are benefiting from what is available in this economic climate that the government has generated. I want to say unequivocally that that is in marked contrast-- Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! It is impossible for question time to proceed with interjections. The Leader of the National Party and the honourable member for Hawthorn! I ask all honourable members to observe the practices and customs of the House and in particular I ask the honourable members for Berwick and Mildura to cease interjecting. Mr CAIN-It is in marked contrast to what appears clearly to be the economic direction of the Federal Liberal Party, as enunciated by the Federal Leader of the Opposition, because what the government has done in this State is to make provision for the women, for the ethnic groups and for the battlers, the very people-it is quite clear from the Liberal Party's glossy ads-the Liberal Party does not give a damn about. That is quite clear. Those very people we are caring for are the ones that will be paying for Andrew's plastic paradise. Honourable members interjecting. Mr CAIN-Andrew's plastic paradise-that is what it is! They are the ones who are being cared for in this State. The facts are that this State's economic performance ensures that young people in this State have a better chance of getting jobs than young people in any other State in the Commonwealth. This State also gives families a tax break. Since 1982-83 the growth in taxes and fees in this State has been the lowest of any State in Australia. The only conservative State government in office at the moment is showing what its commitments to families are all about, because its taxes and fees and fines are $175 a head more than those 52 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Questions without Notice charged in Victoria. That is the result of the sort of stagnant policies one gets from . Liberal Party governments! Kevin O'Connor's document points out that this State's economic performance has continually outstripped that of any of the other States. Gross State product has grown by an average of 4·3 per cent in the six years up to 1988-89, compared with 4·2 ~r cent for the rest of Australia. The publication shows also that since late 1982 Victona's share of total employment has held constant. Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! The Leader ofthe National Party is out of order. He knows that interjections are disorderly and he knows that ifhe is referrin$ to another member in the House he should refer to him or her by his or her correct title. I ask the Leader of the National Party to respect the position he holds and to respect Parliament. Mr CAIN-I was saying that this State's total employment has held constant and the State's unemployment rate has halved. The State's unemployment rate is the lowest of any State and has been for six years and eight months in a row; Victoria's figure this month is 4·5 per cent; the rest of Australia, 6·2 per cent. That is the kind of record that the reckless policies that are enunciated by the Liberals in would undo. It is critically important-- Honourable members interjecting. Mr CAIN-It may not be critically important to those opposite-- The SPEAKER-Order! There is too much interjection and I ask in particular the honourable member for Evelyn, who should recall Standing Orders with great detail, to resist the temptation to interject. I ask the Premier, who has now been answering the question for about 5 minutes, to round offhis answer. Mr CAIN-The document also shows that this State is leading the nation in new factory construction and in capital expenditure on manufacturing. In seven years we have led the way and we will continue to lead the State in that direction. Only this week we have seen positive evidence in the national accounts figures that this manufacturing investment means a massive boost to productivity. On all the hard indicators, the glib lines that are being trotted around this place about Victoria's economy are demonstrably wrong. We continue to lead growth in this country, we continue to provide better for our people than any other State, and we will go on doing it!

STATE BANK VICTORIA Mr BROWN (Leader of the Opposition)-I direct a question to the Treasurer and I refer to the fact that the Treasurer-- The SPEAKER-Order! I ask the honourable member for Sunshine to resist whatever temptation he is feeling to interject when the Leader of the Opposition is putting a question. The Leader of the Opposition has a right to be heard in silence and that right should be upheld by all honourable members. Mr BROWN-I refer to the fact that the Treasurer directed State instrumentalities to place funds with the State Bank group for management and, in particular, directed the Transport Accident Commission to place more than $500 million with the State Bank group. I ask: what advice has the Treasurer received about the State Bank group's policy governing external funds management and what is the status of the external funds under management which now exceed $2800 million with the State Bank? Questions without Notice 7 March 1990 ASSE~IBLY 53

Mr JOLLY (Treasurer)-The Leader of the Opposition is off the rails on these matters. The Transport Accident Commission-and every other instrumentality involved in financial investments-is required to operate under the investment and borrowing guidelines. They are all required to earn the best rates of return possible in respect of those investments. Mr Brown interjected. Mr JOLLY-That is the requirement I have of the organisations; no particular directions as the Leader of the Opposition is alluding to. It is important to ensure that authorities such as the Transport Accident Commission, the Accident Compensation Commission or any other investing authority invest that money wisely and maximise the return. Mr Brown interjected. Mr JOLLY-The Leader of the Opposition is wrong again on those matters. As I said, and I repeat: those orpnisations are required to maximise their returns and to spread their portfolio risks 1n relation to the guidelines I have suggested; and they are certainly all designed to make sure prudential requirements are met.

MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITY i1 Mr McNAMARA (Leader of the National Party)-I refer the Premier to a lecture he gave to this House-- Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! I suggest the honourable members for Mitcham and Derrimut remain silent and allow the Leader of the National Party to ask his question without interruption. Mr McNAMARA-I refer the Premier to a lecture he gave this House on 21 March 1978 when, as the honourable member for Bundoora, he said: If$4·5 million down the drain is not enough to call into account and make responsible a Minister, I ask this House what is? Will the Premier concede that $1·5 billion is enough to call into account and make responsible a Minister, and will the Premier dismiss the Treasurer? Mr CAIN (Premier)-I wish the Leader of the National Party and the other strident people opposite would look more deeply into issues of this kind and ignore the heat and hyperbole which seem to characterise their pronouncements and judgments on this issue. Mr Kennett interjected. Mr CAIN-It is interesting to hear the former Leader of the Opposition, the honourable member for Burwood, interject. Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member for Springvale should cease his interjections. All honourable members, including the honourable member for Burwood, should cease interjecting and enable the Premier to complete his reply without interruption. Mr CAIN-There is a concerted attempt on the part of those opposite to obfuscate and confuse the issue. If they want to talk about responsibilities of Ministers presiding 54 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Questions without Notice over government departments and the ~~nding in those departments then they can do so. The Opposition does not want to understand that State Bank Victoria is an independent body. Mr Brown-What! The SPEAKER-Order! There are a small number of honourable members who are preventing question time from proceeding in an orderly manner and I ask those honourable members, including the Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of the National Party, to respect the forms .of the House to enable the Premier to complete his reply without interruption. Mr CAIN-I repeat for those opposite who do not want to hear the answer that the State Bank is an independent body that is vested with responsibilities for making commercial decisions in the best interests of the bank. The Opposition should understand that that is its initial position. One of the major purposes in establishing-- . . Honourable members interjecting. ~ The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member for Portland should return to the relatively good behaviour shown by him in recent times and resist the temptation to interject. Again I remind the Leader of the National Party that he has asked his question and should let the Premier reply without interruption. Mr CAIN-I was endeavouring to··explain to those opposite who do not want to hear it that the major purpose of establishing bodies of this kind is to remove their operation from the day-to-day and direct control and involvement of Ministers. Mr Brown-Who is responsible? Honourable members interjecting.· The SPEAKER-Order! The Leader of the Opposition has a particular responsibility to uphold the forms of the House and the respect of Parliament. I ask the Leader of the Opposition and the honourable member for Hawthorn to respect the forms of the House and to enable the Premier to cOIl1plete his reply without interruption. Mr CAIN-What I believe honourable members opposite do not want to understand is that the consequence of what I have just said and the consequence of what we have in this State and elsewhere is that Ministerial responsibility for these agencies is different from that responsibility a Minister has in respect of a department that is controlled and managed by the Minister. If honourable members opposite Want me to take another 10 minutes, I shall be happy to do so. Honourable members interjecting. Mr CAIN-Don't let those opposite grizzle about the time I have taken when they continually try to prevent me from being heard! Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! Regardless of whether honourable members agree with what the Premier says in his reply, all honourable members are under an obligation to enable the answers of the Premier and his Ministers to be heard without interruption. The more interruptions there are, ·the less opportunity there is for questions to be asked and answers to be provided by Ministers. Questions without Notice 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 55

Mr CAIN-I repeat that officers of non-departmental bodies like the State Bank are given duties, rights and managerial powers that can be exercised independently of the Minister. That is what the State Bank does; that is what its statute guarantees. All loan decisions by the State Bank are made by the board and the results of those decisions are the responsibility of the board. Mr McNamara-Somebody has to be responsible. Mr CAIN-If the Leader of the National Party would use his endeavours to fix up the coalition, he would be better serving this State. You are the only one who can flail them into it-- The SPEAKER-Order! I suggest that the Leader of the National Party cease interjectin~, and I ask the Premier to ignore interjections and to address his remarks to the ChaIr. Mr CAIN-I now come to the Treasurer's role so far as the State Bank is concerned: it is to appoint the board members-and most ofthem were reappointed from original appointments made by the former government-the Treasurer needs to agree with the board's decisions on the appointment of the chief executive and the deputy chief executive; he needs to provide the legislative framework for the bank to achieve its commercial objectives; and, most importantly, he needs to do what he has done­ that is, to protect the independence of the board in making commercial decisions on individual loans. Maybe those opposite do not understand that notion! The Treasurer has met his responsibilities in that regard and I believe he has discharged them properly. If honourable members opposite are saying that he should have involved himselfin the day-to-day commercial decisions, let them say it and let them give the reasons for it. Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! There is far too much interjection. I hear interjections referring to "disgrace" and the level of interjections is a disgrace, not only from individuals like the honourable member for Swan Hill, who has been interjecting, but the interjections reflect on the Chamber as a whole. If the honourable member for Swan Hill wishes to remain and make a contribution to the House he should observe the forms of the House; likewise, the honourable member for Springvale. Mr CAIN-In conclusion, I regret that the answer has taken so long. The answer has taken so long because honourable members opposite have sought to prevent my answer from being heard by the House and by others. They continue to do it, they continue-- Honourable members interjecting. Mr CAIN-They go on and on, they continue to-- Mr PLOWMAN (Evelyn)-On a point of order, Mr Speaker, this is an important question of Ministerial responsibility under the Westminster system. In the past the Premier has made some statements on this and if he is going to answer the question fully and fairly, he should explain to the House the difference between the State Bank and the then Housing Commission-- The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member should come to the point of order. There is no point of order. Mr CAIN (Premier)-I round off by saying that I was asked a question that honourable members opposite seemed to regard as important, and I find it strange 56 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Petitions that for some 13 or 14 minutes they have chosen to prevent me from being heard. That seems to indicate quite clearly-- Mr MACLELLAN (Berwick)-Mr Speaker, on a point of order, and to assist you, because you have often asked honourable members to do so, I direct your attention to the fact that, despite your having previously asked the Premier to address you, he is no longer addressin~ you. Therefore, you should ask him to address you, and if he refuses you should SIt him down. The SPEAKER-Order! There is no point of order. Mr CAIN (Premier)-I conclude by saying that I regret the question has taken so long. There was a studied attempt by those opposite to prevent-- Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! Those few honourable members who are continuing to interject are doing themselves and the standing of this Parliament no service. I ask all honourable members to enable the Premier to complete his reply without interruption. Mr CAIN-I repeat what I started to say earlier, and regret that it took so long. Honourable members opposite regard it as serious, but they chose to try to prevent what I had to say from being heard opposite and heard elsewhere. That demonstrates their sincerity and concern on this issue. If they are prepared to read carefully what I have said, I believe they will understand-perhaps for the first time-what principles apply and what principles have been addressed in this place. I shall continue explaining to the best of my ability, despite the studied opposition from those who would seek to prevent me from being heard. The SPEAKER-Order! The time for questions without notice has expired. I direct to the attention of the House the fact that it was possible for only five questions to be answered in question time, and without doubt the principal reason for that was the very high level of interjection, particularly during the reply to the final question. I ask all honourable members to reflect on that in their conduct in future question times.

PETITIONS The Clerk-I have received the following petitions for presentation to Parliament:

Hunters' rights To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia (Vic) Inc. sheweth: Given that the rights of duly licensed and law abiding recreational hunters are being threatened by anti- hunting protesters who have: caused disruption to hunters on our wetlands; stolen game birds belonging to hunters; acted in a manner likely to result in a firearms accident; and incited each other to acts of violence against hunters. Your petitioners therefore pray that: 1. The government takes immediate action to ensure that hunters can conduct their recreational hunting free of harassment by these protesters. 2. That protesters found in possession of protected species be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Petitions 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 57

3. That the government sets about the drafting of a Bill for protection of hunters' rights. 4. That the government consults regularly with the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia (Vic.) Inc. as to the proposed content and impact of the aforementioned Bill for protection of hunters' rights. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr McNamara (439 signatures)

Logging in National Estate forests To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: We, the undersigned, give our full support to the Gippsland timber industry in their efforts to have the State Cabinet decision banning logging in National Estate forests reversed! We are strongly opposed to these bans being imposed! And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr W. D. McGratb (871 signatures)

U pfield transport services To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of north-west wishes to express their rejection of the Met's proposals to remove the Road tramline, the Upfteld railway line and replacing them with light rail. Your petitioners pray that the Victorian government will improve public transport services in the U pfield corridor by: (a) upgrading the Upfield train line with modern signalling and boom gates; IO-minute peak hour service; evening service; and Sunday service, so that the Upfield line service is at least equal to the services offered on other suburban routes; (b) keeping the Sydney Road tram service maintained and running at full effectiveness and improved safety; (c) improving access for people with disabilities and the elderly on the Upfteld train line and improving and extending the Sydney Road tram route in consultation with those people. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Gavin (210 signatures)

Talbot Avenue sand pit To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE AsSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: We, the undersigned, being residents of South Oakleigh, do humbly petition that the State government remove the noise and dust pollution by revoking all licences to the Talbot Avenue sand pit, which will improve the quality oflife of the undersigned. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Dr Vaugban (652 signatures)

Home and community care program To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of the State of Victoria sheweth that the home and community care-HACC-budget for Victoria in this the financial year 1989-90 is insufficient to meet the objectives ofthe HACC program. 58 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Petitions

HACC services include home help, delivered meals, home maintenance and renovations and home nursing. These services are provided in the main by local government and district nursing. These objectives are to increase access by people of all disabilities and all ages, including people of Aboriginal descent, of non-English speaking background, from remote and outlying areas and people who are financially disadvantaged, maintain their dignity and independence and to prevent their institutionalisation. Your petitioners therefore pray that the State home and community care budget allocation for this and subsequent years be increased by 20 per cent annually as allowed in the Commonwealth-Victoria HACC agreement. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Gavin (873 signatures), Mr Bildstien (707 signatures), Mr Hamilton (131 signatures), and Mr MauRhan (4667 signatures)

Specialised home care services To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: Receive the humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Victoria which relates to the provision of specialised home care to families with disabled persons. Your petitioners request that the House take action to ensure that the availability of specialised home care services be restored to its former level in the Eastern Region of Victoria so that the quality of life of the consumers return to the standard previously enjoyed. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Perton (84 signatures) To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE AssEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: Receive the humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Victoria which relates to the provision of specialised home care to families with disabled persons. Your petitioners request that the House take action to ensure that the availability of specialised home care services be restored to its former level in the Geelong Region of Victoria so that the quality oflife of the consumers return to the standard previously enjoyed. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Shell (168 signatures) To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: Receive the humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Victoria which relates to the provision of specialised home care to families with disabled persons. Your petitioners request that the House take action to ensure that the availability of specialised home care services be restored to its former level in the Gisborne Region of Victoria so that the quality oflife of the consumers return to the standard previously enjoyed. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Reynolds (30 signatures) To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: Receive the humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Victoria which relates to the provision of specialised home care to families with disabled persons. Your petitioners request that the House take action to ensure that the availability of specialised home care services be restored to its former level in the Swan Hill-Kerang Region of Victoria so that the quality oflife of the consumers return to the standard previously enjoyed. Petitions 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 59

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray .. By Mr Hayward (313 signatures) To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: Receive the humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Victoria which relates to the provision of specialised home care to families with disabled persons. Your petitioners request that the House take action to ensure that the availability of specialised home care services be restored to its former level in the North-East Region of Victoria so that the quality oflife of the consumers return to the standard previously enjoyed. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Leighton (63 signatures) To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: Receive the humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Victoria which relates to the provision of specialised home care to families with disabled persons. Your petitioners request that the House take action to ensure that the availability of specialised home care services be restored to its former level in the Goulburn Valley Region of Victoria so that the quality of life of the consumers return to the standard previously enjoyed. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Maughan (240 signatures)

Southern Peninsula Hospital To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of the State of Victoria sheweth: we are concerned that hospital facilities on the southern Mornington Peninsula are inadequate and continue to fall further behind. The Southern Peninsula Hospital is no longer able to meet the area's medical, surgical or maternity needs. There is a steady growth in surgical waiting lists and maternity cases are being turned away. The high permanent population growth rate of 5·5 per cent per annum-equal to the highest in Victoria-daily compounds this problem. At weekends the population increases by a further 20000 part-time residents. Over summer a further ioo 000 holiday-makers are added to the permanent and weekend population. Your petitioners therefore pray that the Victorian government will honour its commitment to the constituents of the area by expanding the hospital to at least 113 beds as required by Commonwealth government policy. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Dr Wells (83 signatures)

Safety Beach-Inland m~ina impact examination To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of the State of Victoria sheweth: we are concerned that the proposed development of an inland marina at Safety Beach may cause irreparable damage to the natural resources of the area through destruction of the northern end of Safety Beach and its associated foreshore and through obliteration of Tassell's Creek and through urbanisation of the valley approach to the southern peninsula. We are·further concerned that the development of a major marina-residential-commercial complex will severely -diminish the current residential and social amenity of the area. 60 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Petitions

Your petitioners therefore pray that the Victorian government will honour its commitment to full representation of all citizens in the area by requiring a full, public, environmental and economic impact examination of the proposal. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Dr Wells (93 signatures)

Safety Beach-Proposed inland marina To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of the State of Victoria sheweth: we are concerned that the proposed development of an inland marina at Safety Beach may cause irreparable damage to the natural resources of the area through destruction of the northern end of Safety Beach and its associated foreshore and through obliteration of Tassell's Creek and through urbanisation of the valley approach to the southern peninsula. We are further concerned that the development of a major marina-residential-commercial complex will severely diminish the current residential and social amenity of the area. Your petitioners therefore pray that the Victorian government act to stop the development of the proposed inland marina at Safety Beach by preventing the rezoning of the land in the immediate area of Tassell's Creek and surrounding valley. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, win ever pray. By Dr Wells (279 signatures)

Trial by in civil matters To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND· MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of the State of Victoria sheweth concern that the pursuit ofjustice may be impaired should the government proceed with the stated intention of repealing the right of trial by jury in civil matters thus negating the longstanding privilege granted by King John at Runnymede, England 1215 and incorporated in the Magna Carta. Your petitioners therefore pray that the Legislative Assembly take action to ensure that trial by jury in civil matters be enshrined in the Victorian Constitution. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr E. R. Smith (457 signatures)

Met's new ticket system and senior citizens To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE AssEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the. undersigned senior citizens of Northcote sheweth: their objections to the introduction of the Met's new ticket system and the subsequent loss ofconductors. We believe this system unnecessarily penalises us for our age, jeopardises our safety on public transport, and impedes our access to transport, shops, and much needed services. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr A. J. Sheehan (265 signatures) Petitions 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 61

Errinundra National Park To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of the State of Victoria sheweth that there is concern at the exclusion of horseriders from the roads and trails of the proposed Errinundra National Park in East Gippsland, Victoria. Your petitioners therefore pray that the government of Victoria acknowledge the need to add horseriding on the trails and roads to the multipurpose recreation use of Errinundra National Park. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Maughan (57 signatures)

Psychiatric nursing service in Echuca To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the community of Echuca and surrounding districts sheweth: our documented need for a comprehensive psychiatric service. Your petitioners therefore pray that the promised psychiatric nurses commence duties immediately. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Maughan (1509 signatures)

Geelong Hospital To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of the State of Victoria sheweth that your petitioners are gravely concerned by the decision to close two wards at the Geelong Hospital. We feel the health and well-being of our citizens is being put at grave risk for what is an overall quite small saving of government money. In view of plans by the government to spend multimillions on proposed Olympic Games, we feel it to be grossly unfair to deprive our citizens of even basic health care. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Victorian Parliament take immediate and positive action to ensure that the two wards are kept operational. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Dickinson (122 signatures)

Ascot Vale Public Tenants Group To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the residents/tenants of Ascot Vale respectively request funding from the Ministry for Housing ~nd Construction be fully restored to the Ascot Vale Public Tenants Group and in signing this petition sheweth that as tenants in this community we support as our aims and views the aims and views of the Ascot Vale Public Tenants Group. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Parliament take immediate action to ensure that funding is fully restored and inform the Minister for Housing and Construction of the recognition by tenants of the community of Ascot Vale ofthe Ascot Vale Public Tenants Group as their organisation. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Baker (321 signatures) 62 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Legal and Constitutional Committee

Braybrook-Maidstone Public Tenants Union To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the residents/tenants of Braybrook-Maidstone respectfully requests funding from the Ministry for Housing and Construction be fully restored to the Braybrook-Maidstone Public Tenants Union, and in signing this petition sheweth that as tenants in this community we support as our aims and views the aims and views of the Braybrook-Maidstone Public Tenants Union. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Parliament take immediate action to ensure that funding is fully restored and inform the Minister for Housing and Construction of the recognition by tenants of the community of Braybrook-Maidstone of the Braybrook-Maidstone Public Tenants Union as their organisation. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Baker (247 signatures) It was ordered that the petitions be laid on the table.

LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEE Constitution Act 1975 Mr E. R. SMITH (Glen Waverley) presented a report from the Legal and Constitutional Committee on the Constitution Act 1975, together with appendices, extracts from the proceedings of the committee, two minority reports and minutes of evidence. It was ordered that they be laid on the table and that the report, appendices, extracts from the proceedings and the minority reports be printed.

REPORTS OF BLF CUSTODIAN The SPEAKER-Order! Pursuant to the provisions of section 7A of the BLF (De-recognition) Act 1985, I have given to each member of the House copies of the ninth and tenth reports of the Custodian. I present to the House copies of the ninth and tenth reports of the Custodian, which I have received pursuant to the Act. It was ordered that the reports be laid on the table and be printed.

REPORTS OF ACCIDENT COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ACCIDENT COMPENSATION TRIBUNAL AND VICTORIAN ACCIDENT REHABILITATION COUNCIL The SPEAKER-Order! Pursuant to the provisions of section 72LB of the Accident Compensation Act 1985, I have given to each member of the House a copy of the following quarterly reports for December 1989: Accident Compensation Commission; Accident Compensation Tribunal; and Victorian Accident Rehabilitation Council. I present to the House copies of those reports, which I have received pursuant to the Act. It was ordered that the reports be laid on the table. Command Paper 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 63

COMMAND PAPER Mr McCUTCHEON (Attorney-General) presented, by command ofHis Excellency the Governor, the report of the board of inquiry on the behaviour of the Office of Corrections. I t was ordered that the report be laid on the table and be printed. Mr MACLELLAN (Berwick)-On a point of order, Mr Speaker, in relation to the report on the Office of Corrections, I raised with you in your chambers earlier the question ofexcerpts from the report being shown on the 7.30 Report on ABC television last night. I ask you to ascertain from the Attorney-General that there has not been a breach of privilege or a discourtesy to the House. The SPEAKER-Order! I shall examine the matter raised by the honourable member and advise him accordingly.

PAPERS The following papers, pursuant to the directions of several Acts of Parliament, were laid on the table by the Clerk: Albury-Wodonga (Victoria) Corporation-Report for the year 1988-89. Alexandra District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Altona District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Amalgamated Alfred, Caulfield and Royal Southern Memorial Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Amalgamated Central Gippsland and Morwell Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Anne Caudle Centre-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Ararat and District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Bacchus Marsh and District War Memorial Hospital-Report for the year 1988-89. Ballarat Base Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Beeac and District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Birregurra and District Community Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Bright Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Bundoora Extended Care Centre-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Burwood and District Community Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Camperdown District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Casterton Memorial Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Cobram District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Cohuna District Hospital and Cohuna Community Nursing Home-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Colac District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Coleraine and District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Constitution Act Amendment Act 1958-Statement of Functions conferred on the Electoral Commissioner, December 1989. Corryong District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Daylesford District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. 64 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Papers

Deakin University-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1987; together with statutes approved by the Governor in Council. Dunmunkle Health Services-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. East Gippsland Centre For Rehabilitation and Extended Care-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Eastern Suburbs Geriatric Centre-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Echuca District Hospital Inc.-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Edenhope and District Memorial Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Education Ministry-Report for the year 1988-89-0rdered to be printed (In substitution for report previously tabled 17 November 1989). Education Act 1958-Teachers Registration Board Regulations 1989. Education Administration Institute-Report for the year 1988-89. Eildon and District Community Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Elmore District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Ethnic Affairs Commission-Report for the year 1988-89. Gippsland Base Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Goulburn Valley Base Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Grain Elevators Board-Report for the year ended 30 September 1989. Greyhound Racing Control Board-Report for the year ended 31 July 1989. Hampton Rehabilitation Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Harness Racing Board-Report for the year ended 31 July 1989. Healesville and District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Heathcote District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Heywood and District Memorial Hospital and the Sydney Quayle Hostel for the Aged-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Kerang and District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Kilmore and District Hospital and Kilmore and District Nursing Home Society-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Kingston Centre and Kingston Rehabilitation and Extended Care Centre-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Koroit and District Memorial Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Korumburra District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Kyabram and District Memorial Community Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. La Trobe University Council-Report for the year 1988 and a corrigendum to the report; together with statutes approved by the Governor in Council during the year 1988. Library Council of Victoria-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89 and Council of the State Library of Victoria-Report and Statement of Accounts for the period 24 May to 30 June 1989. Little Company ofMary Hospital Inc.-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Loddon-Campaspe Regional Planning Authority-Report for the year ended 30 September 1989. Lyndoch Home and Hospital for the Aged-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Macarthur and District Memorial Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Manangatang and District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Mansfield District Hospital and Bentley Nursing Home-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Papers 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 65

Maroondah Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Maryborough and District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works Employees' Superannuation Scheme-Report for the year 1988-89. Mildura Base Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Monash Medical Centre-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Mordialloc-Cheltenham Community Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Mortlake District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Mount Eliza Centre for Rehabilitation and Extended Care-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Mount Royal Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Myrtleford District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Nathalia and District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. National Companies and Securities Commission-Report and Financial Statements for the year 1988-89. National Gallery of Victoria-Report for the year 1988-89. Numurkah and District War Memorial Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Omeo District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Orbost and District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Ouyen and District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Ovens and Murray Hospital for the Aged, Beechworth-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Ovens District Hospital, Beechworth-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Penshurst and District Memorial Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Planning and Environment Act 1987-Notices of approval of amendments to the following planning schemes: All Planning Schemes-Nos S4, S6. Alexandra Planning Scheme-No. L9. Altona Planning Scheme-No. L5. Ararat Planning Scheme-Nos Lt, L9. Arapiles Planning Scheme-No. L3 Part 1. A von Planning Scheme-No. L3. Bacchus Marsh Plarming Scheme-No. Ll2 Part lA. Ballan Planning Scheme-No. L4. Ballaarat (City) Planning Scheme-No. L8. Ballarat (Shire) Planning Scheme-No. L3. Bass Planning Scheme-No. L13. Berwick Planning Scheme-Nos L10, L11. Box Hill Planning Scheme-Nos L3 Part 2, RL48 Part 5. Broadmeadows Planning Scheme-Nos L3, L14, RL81 Part 2. Brunswick Planning Scheme-Nos R84, RL100. Bulla Planning Scheme-Nos L4, L6, L7, L8, R85, RL48 Part 6. Buln Buln Planning Scheme-No. Ll. Bungaree Planning Scheme-No. L5. Session 1990-3 66 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Papers

Camberwell Planning Scheme-Nos L6, RS4, RL5S. Castlemaine Planning Scheme-No. L3. Caulfield Planning Scheme-No. RS4. Chelsea Planning Scheme-No. RL3S. Cobram Planning Scheme-Nos L5, L6, L7. Coburg Planning Scheme-No. RLSI Part 2. Collingwood Plann'ing Scheme-No. RS4. Cranbourne Planning Scheme-Nos L14, L21, RL69 Part 2. Dandenong Planning Scheme-Nos L4, RL120. Doncaster and Templestowe Planning Scheme-Nos L6, RS4, RL25. Essendon Planning Scheme-Nos L2, L5, L6, L9, RS4, RLSI Part 2. Fitzroy Planning Scheme-Nos LI, RS4. Flinders Planning Scheme-Nos L9, L19, L20, L22, L29, L31, L32. Footscray Planning Scheme-Nos L7, RS4. Frankston Planning Scheme-Nos L5, L7. Geelong Regional Planning Scheme-Nos RS, R22 Part 2, R26 Part lA, R26 Part 2, R42, R46. Gisborne Planning Scheme-No. L4. Hampden Planning Scheme-No. L2, Part I. Hastings Planning Scheme-Nos L6, L20, L32. Hawthorn Planning Scheme-Nos L2, L4, RS4. Healesville Planning Scheme-Nos L7, L24, L2S. Huntly Planning Scheme-Nos LS, LII, L12. Horsham Planning Scheme-No. Ll3. Keilor Planning Scheme-Nos LII, LIS. Kew Planning Scheme-Nos L4, RS4, RL114. Kilmore Planning Scheme-Nos L20, L21, L27, L2S. Knox Planning Scheme-Nos LS, L14, L16. Korumburra Planning Scheme-Nos LS, L23. Lillydale Planning Scheme-Nos L23, L43, L52. Malvern Planning Scheme-Nos RS4, RL69 Part 3. Marong Planning Scheme-Nos L9, LIt. Maryborough Planning Scheme-No. L6. McIvor Planning Scheme-No. LI Parts I and 2. Melbourne Planning Scheme-Nos L37, L40, L41, L42, RS4, RL27 Part 3. Melton Planning Scheme-Nos L4, L6. Metcalfe Planning Scheme-No. L5. Metropolitan Region Planning Scheme-Nos R73, RS3, RS7, RL27 Part I, RL51 Part 3. Mildura Planning Scheme-Nos L6, LIt. Mildura (City) Planning Scheme-Nos LS, L9, L15. Mildura (Shire) Planning Scheme-Nos L7, L9, L14. Moe Planning Scheme-Nos L9, LII Part A, L12. Mornington Planning Scheme-Nos L20, L22, L23. Morwell Planning Scheme-Nos L2, L9, LIS, L23. Papers 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 67

Myrtleford Planning Scheme-Nos LIl, L12, L13, Ll6. Narracan Planning Scheme-No. LI Part B. Newstead Planning Scheme-No. L3. Newham and Woodend Planning Scheme-Nos L5, LI7 Part 2, L19. Northcote Planning Scheme-Nos L5, R84. Nunawading Planning Scheme-No. R84. Pakenham Planning Scheme-Nos Lll, L14, L20. Phillip Island Planning Scheme-Nos LlO, LIl Part A, L13. Port Melbourne Planning Scheme-No. R84. Port of Melboume Planning Scheme-Nos R84, RL27 Part 4. Prahran Planning Scheme-Nos L9, R84. Preston Planning Scheme-Nos L3, L6, L9, R84. Richmond Planning Scheme-Nos L4, R84. Ringwood Planning Scheme-No. L2. Rodney Planning Scheme-Nos L13, L21, L22. Romsey Planning Scheme-No. LIt. St Kilda Planning Scheme-Nos R84, RL47. Sandringham Planning Scheme-No. R84. Seymour Planning Scheme-Nos L17, L18. Shepparton Planning Scheme-No. L18. Shepparton (City) Planning Scheme-Nos L15, L19. Sherbrooke Planning Scheme-Nos Ll2 Part lA, Ll2 Part 2, L23. South Gippsland Planning Scheme-No. L13. South Melbourne Planning Scheme-Nos L9, Lll, R84, RL27 Part 2. Springvale Planning Scheme-Nos R52, R57, RL38. Stawell (Shire) Planning Scheme-No. L8. Stawell (Town) Planning Scheme-Nos L9, LlO Part 1. Sunshine Planning Scheme-Nos L3, L6 Part I, L12, L14, RLll Part 8. Swan Hill (City) Planning Scheme-No. L4. Tambo Planning Scheme-Nos Ll, L27, L29, L34. Traralgon (City) Planning Scheme-Nos L23, L26, L30. Traralgon (Shire) Plairning Scheme-Nos L23, L29. Upper Yarra Planning Scheme-Nos L4, L12. Wangaratta Planning Scheme-No. Lll. Wangaratta (City) Planning Scheme-No. L12. Warracknabeal Planning Scheme-No. L4. Warrnambool (City) Planning Scheme-Nos LlO, L13, L14. Planning Scheme-Nos L3, L9, L14. Waverley Planning Scheme-Nos L3, RL51 Part 2, RL86. Whittlesea Planning Scheme-Nos L16, L18, R32, RL35 Part 3, RLlO2, RL115. Williamstown Planning Scheme-No. R84. Wodonga Development Areas Planning Scheme-No. L4. Yarrawonga Planning Scheme-No. L4. 68 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Papers

Yea Planning Scheme-No. Ll. Police Regulation Act 1958- Determination Nos 519 to 522 of the Police Service Board. Determination No. 17 of the Police Service Board for Police Recruits. Determination Nos 17 to 19 of the Police Service Board for Protective Services Officers. Determination No. 13 of the Police Service Board for Police Reservists. Port Fairy Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Portland and District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986-Code of Practice for the Housing of Caged Birds. Preston and Northcote Community Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Queen Elizabeth Centre-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Queen Elizabeth Geriatric Centre-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Ripon Peace Memorial Hospital, Beaufort-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Robinvale and District Hospital and Robinvale and District Nursing Home-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Rochester and District War Memorial Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Royal Women's Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Sandringham and District Memorial Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. SEC Superannuation Fund-Financial Statements for the year 1988-89. Seymour District Memorial Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Shelley Memorial Hospital, Bunyip-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Skipton and District Memorial Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Southern Peninsula Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. State Employees Retirement Benefits Board-Report for the year 1988-89. Statutory Rules under the following Acts: Accident Compensation Act 1985-SR No. 407/1989. Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1984-SR No. 263/1989. Alpine Resorts Act 1983-SR No. 385/1989. Architects Act 1958-SR No. 408/1989. Associations Incorporation Act 1981-SR No. 359/1989. Boilers and Pressure Vessels Act 1970-SR Nos 285,286/1989. Building Control Act 1981-SR Nos 278/1989; 27, 28,32/1990. Business Franchise (Tobacco) Act 1974-SR Nos 297/1989; 14/1990. Business Franchise (Petroleum Products) Act 1979-SR Nos 297/1989; 14/1990. Business Names Act 1962-SR No. 360/1989. Chattel Securities Act 1987-SR No. 5/1990. Chiropodists Act 1968-SR No. 345/1989. Chiropractors and Osteopaths Act 1978-SR Nos 332, 341/1989. Construction Industry Long Service Leave Act 1983-SR No. 266/1989. Co-operation Act 1981-SR No. 362/1989. Co-operative Housing Societies Act 1958-SR No. 364/1989. Corrections Act 1986-SR No. 350/1989. Country Fire Authority Act 1958-SR Nos 17, 19/1990. Papers 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 69

County Court Act 1958- SR No. 272/1989 together with a copy of the Public Service Determinations Nos 4.1 to 4.5 and Tables 2 and 5 of Appendix E as required by section 32 of the Interpretation of Legis/ation Act 1984 to accompany the Statutory Rule; SR Nos 354,355/1989; SR No. 380/1989 together with a copy of the Public Service Determinations Nos 4.1 to 4.5 and Tables 2 and 5 of Appendix E as required by section 32 of the Interpretation of Legis/ation Act 1984 to accompany the Statutory Rule. Credit (Administration) Act 1984-SR No. 373/1989. Crimes Act 1958-SR No. 395/1989. Dangerous Goods Act 1985- SR Nos 287,288,289/1989. SR No. 323/1989 together with copies of the following documents as required by section 32 of the Interpretation ofLegis/ation Act 1984 to accompany the Statutory Rule: Australian Standards 1894-1976 Code of Practice for the Safe Handling of Cryogenic Fluids (as amended). 2022-1983 Anhydrous Ammonia-Storage and Handling (as amended). 2927-1987 The Storage and Handling of Liquefied Chlorine Gas. 1940-1988 The Storage and Handling of Flammable and Combustible Liquids (as amended). 2714-1984 The Storage and Handling of Hazardous Chemical Materials-Class 5·2 Substances- Organic Peroxides. National Health and Medical Research Council. Approved Occupational Health Guide­ Threshold Limit Values (1983-84). IP 36/84 Standard Method of Test for Flash and Fire points by Cleveland Open Cup. 1530.4-1985 Methods for Fire Tests on Building Materials, Components and Structures-Part 4-Fire Resistance Tests of Elements of Building Construction. 2106-1980 Methods of Test for the Determination of Flammable Liquids (Closed Cup). 1563-1974 General Purpose Freight Containers (International Sizes). 2430.1-1987 Classification of Hazardous Areas Part I-Explosive Gas Atmospheres. 2430.2-1986 Part 2-Combustible Dusts. 2430.3-1987 Part 3-Specific Occupancies. 1763-1985 Industrial Trucks-Glossary of Terms. 1580-1975 Methods of Test for Paints, Varnishes, Lacquers and Related Materials (Metric Units)-Methods 301.1 Non-Volatile Content. National Health and Medical Research Council-Standard for Uniform Scheduling of Drugs and Poisons-No. 4. 1719-1981 Recommended Common Names for Pesticides. 1319-1983 Safety Signs for the Occupational Environment (as amended). 2118-1982 Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems (as amended). 1851.3-1985 Maintenance of Fire Protection Equipment-Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems. 1221-1989 Fire Hose Reels. 2441-1988 Installation of Fire Hose Reels. 1851.2-1988 Maintenance of Fire Protection Equipment-Fire Hose Reels. 2419.1-1988 Fire Hydrant Installations, System Design, Installation and Commissioning. 1851.4-1988 Maintenance of Fire Protection Equipment-Fire Hydrant Installations. 1851.1-1989 Maintenance of Fire Protection Equipment-Portable Fire Extinguishers. 70 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Papers

1841-1985 Portable Fire Extinguishers-Water (Gas Container) Type. 1842-1985 Portable Fire Extinguishers-Water (Stored Pressure) Type. 1844-1985 Portable Fire Extinguishers-Foam (Gas Container) Type. 1845-1985 Portable Fire Extinguishers-Foam (Stored Pressure) Type. 1846-1985 Portable Fire Extinguishers-Powder Type. 1847-1985 Portable Fire Extinguishers-Carbon Dioxide Type. 1848-1985 Portable Fire Extinguishers-Halon Type (as amended). 1850-1981 Portable Fire Extinguishers-Classification, Rating and Fire Testing (as amended). 2243.1-1982 Safety in Laboratories-Part I-General. 2243.2-1982 Safety in Laboratories-Part 2-Chemical. 2243.6-1980 Safety in Laboratories-Part 6-Mechanical Aspects. 2243.7-1980 Safety in Laboratories-Part 7-Electrical Aspects. 2243.8-1986 Safety in Laboratories-Part 8-Fume Cupboards. 2982-1987 Laboratory Construction. 3000-1986 Wiring Codes Electrical Installations-Buildings, Structures and Premises (as amended). 1020-1984 The Control of Undesirable Static Electricity. 1680-1976 Code of Practice for Interior Lighting and the Visual Environment. 1915-1983 Electrical Equipment for Explosive Gas Atmospheres-Battery Operated Vehicles. 2359.1-1985 Industrial Trucks-Part I-Design and Manufacture. Transport Code-Australian Code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road and Rail (Commonwealth Government Gazette No. P15, 1987). 1210-1989 Unfired Pressure Vessels. API 620-1986 Recommended Rules for Design and Construction of Large, Welded, Low-Pressure Storage Tanks. API 650-1988 Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage. 2030.1-1989 SAA Gas Code-Part I-Cylinders for Compressed Gases other than Acetylene. 2030.2-1985 Part 2-Cylinders for Dissolved Acetylene. 2030.3-1982 Part 3-Non-refillable Cylinders for Compressed Gases. 2030.4-1985 Part 4-Welded Cylinders-Insulated. Supplement No. 1 to AS 2030-Foreign Gas Cylinder Specifications. 1942-1987 Refrigerant Gas Cylinder Identification 1943-1987 Industrial Gas Cylinder Identification. 1944-1987 Medical Gas Cylinder Identification. 1596-1989 LP Gas-Storage and Handling. AG 504-1987 Code of Practice for NGV Refuelling Stations. 2906-1986 Fuel Containers-Portable-Plastics and Metal (as amended). 2236-1985 Electrical Equipment for Explosive Atmospheres-Dust-Excluding Ignition-Proof (DIP) Enclosure. 1692-1983 Tanks for Flammable and Combustible Liquids. 2634-1983 Chemical Plant Equipment made from Glass-Fibre Reinforced Plastics (GRP) based on Thermosetting Resins. CBI8.1-1967 SAA Pressure Piping Code-Part I-Ferrous Piping. Papers 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 71

2117-1983 Hose and Hose Assemblies for Petroleum and Petroleum Products-Suction and Discharge. Institute of Petroleum Standards for Petroleum and its Products-Part I-Methods for Analysis and Testing. AS 2700-1985 Colour Standards for General Purposes. 1530.1-1984 Methods for Fire Tests on Building Materials, Components and Structures Part 1- Combustibility Test for Materials. 1530.2-1973 Part 2-Test for Aammability of Materials. 1530.3-1989 Part 3-Simultaneous determination of ignitability, flame propagation, heat release and smoke release. Dentists Act 1972-SR Nos 307, 337/1989. Dental Technicians Act 1972-SR Nos 308,309,339,344/1989. Dietitians Act 1981-SR No. 329/1989. Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981-SR Nos 275,310,333/1989; 23/1990. Environment Protection Act 1970-SR No. 276/1989. Estate Agents Act 1980-SR Nos 284, 305, 306/1989. Evidence Act 1958-SR Nos 352, 353/1989. Extractive Industries Act 1966-SR No. 318/1989. Financial Institutions Duty Act 1982-SR No. 15/1990 together with copies of the following documents as required by section 32 of the Interpretation ofLegislation Act 1984 to accompany the Statutory Rule: Commonwealth Social Security Act 1947 (as amended). Commonwealth Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (as amended). Fisheries Act 1968-SR Nos 372/1989; 25/1990. Food Act 1984- SR No. 340/1989. SR No. 26/1990 together with copies of the following documents as required by section 32 of the Interpretation ofLegislation Act 1984 to accompany the Statutory Rule: Amendments Nos 3, 4 and 5 to the Food Standards Code published in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette on 11 October, 17 November and 15 December 1989, respectively. Forests Act 1958-SR Nos 270,371/1989. Friendly Societies Act I 986-SR No. 363/1989. Groundwater Act 1969-SR No. 298/1989. Guardianship and Administration Board Act 1986-SR No. 361/1989. Health Act 1958-SR Nos 280,281,312,313,314,315,316,330,336,338/1989. Health Services Act 1988-SR Nos 317, 328,347/1989. Intellectually Disabled Persons' Services Act 1986-SR No. 365/1989; 3/1990. Act 1967-SRNo. 356/1989. Land Act 1958-SR Nos 366, 387/1989. Land Tax Act 1958-SR No. 379/1989. Legal Profession Practice Act 1958-SR No. 410/1989. Lifts and Cranes Act 1967-SR Nos 290,291,292/1989. Liquor Control Act 1987-SR Nos 374, 377/1989. Lotteries Gaming and Betting Act 1966-SR Nos 388, 389, 402/1989. Magistrates' Courts Act 1971-SR Nos 301,351/1989. 72 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Papers

Marine Act 1988-SR No. 283/1989 together with copies of the following documents as required by section 32 of the Interpretation ofLegislation Act 1984 to accompany the Statutory Rule: Notice No. 1 made under section 15 (2) of the Marine Act 1988, Government Gazette No. G49 of 1988, pages 3800 to 3854. Notice No. 2 made under section 15 (2) of the Marine Act 1988, Government Gazette No. G9 of 1989, page 472. Notice No. 3 made under section 15 (2) of the Marine Act 1988, Government Gazette No. G42 of 1989, pages 2777 to 2784. Australian Standards 2260-1984 Buoyancy Garments. Z27 -1966 Life Jackets. 1499-1977 Buoyancy Vests (as amended). 1499-1979 Buoyancy Vests. 1499-1983 Buoyancy Vests. Commonwealth Navigation Act 1912 (as amended). Commonwealth Marine Orders Part 25 (Equipment-Life-Saving) First Issue. Australian Standards 1512-1973 Life Jackets (as amended). 1512-1981 Life Jackets. 1512-1983 Life Jackets. 1512-1988 Personal Hotation Devices-Type 1. 1499-1988 Personal Hotation Devices-Type 2. 2260-1988 Personal Hotation Devices-Type 3. International Code of Signals 1969.-Her Majesty's Office 1975-Extract of Alphabetical Hags and Single Letter Signals. Marine Information Manual-AGPS Canberra 1987-Extract from International Code of Signals. Commonwealth Uniform Shipping Laws Code-Section 16 Collision Regulations. Martial Arts Control Act 1986-SR No. 406/1989. Medical Practitioners Act 1970-SR Nos 342, 346/1989. Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works Act 1958-SR Nos 304/1989; No. 2/1990. Metropolitan Fire Brigades Act 1958-SR No. 18/1990. Metropolitan Fire Brigades Superannuation Act 1976-SR No. 383/1989. Mines Act I 958-SR No. 319/1989. Mining Development Act 1958-SR No. 320/1989. Motor Car Traders Act 1986-SR No. 279/ 1989. National Parks Act 1975-SR Nos 367, 368/1989. Nurses Act 1958-SR Nos 411, 412, 413/1989. Occupational Health and Safety Act 1985-SR No. 349/1989 together with copies of the following documents as required by section 32 of the Interpretation ofLegislation Act 1984 to accompany the Statutory Rule: Australian Standards 1270-1988 Acoustics-Hearing Protectors. 1337-1984 Eye Protectors for Industrial Applications. 1873-1978 Explosive-Powered Hand-Held Fastening Tools, Fasteners and Explosive Charges. Optometrists Registration Act 1958-SR Nos 269,311,343/1989. Papers 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 73

Pathology Services Accreditation Act 1984-SR No. 31/1990. Parliamentary Salaries and Superannuation Act 1968-SR No. 33/1990. Petroleum Act 1958-SR No. 321/1989. Pharmacists Act 1974-SR Nos 331,335/1989. Physiotherapists Act 1978-SR Nos 282,334/1989. Pipelines Act 1967-SR No. 322/1989. Police Regulation Act 1958-SR No. 324/1989; 29/1990. Post-Secondary Education Act 1978-SR Nos 326, 327/1989. Private Agents Act 1966-SR No. 277/1989. Professional Boxing Control Act I 985-SR Nos 403, 405/1989. Public Service Act 1974-SR Nos 265,386/1989; 20,21/1990; PSD Nos 37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44, 45,46,47,48,49,50/1989; 1,2/1990. Racing Act 1958-SR Nos 296,390,391,392,393,394,396,397,398,399,400,401/1989. Reference Areas Act 1978-SR No. 370/1989. Registration of Births Deaths and Marriages Act 1959-SR No. 24/1990. Residential Tenancies Act 1980-SR No. 375/1989. Road Safety Act 1986-SR Nos 267,271,325/1989; 6, 7, 12, 13/1990. Scaffolding Act 1971-SR Nos 293, 294, 295/1989. Small Claims Tribunals Act 1973-SR No. 376/1989. Sport and Recreation Act 1972-SR No. 404/1989. State Casual Employees Superannuation Act 1989-SR No. 382/1989. State Electricity Commission Act 1958- SR No. 274/1989 together with copies of the following documents as required by section 32 of the Interpretation ofLegislation Act 1984 to accompany the Statutory Rule: Australian Standard 3198-1977 Approval and Test Specification for XLPE Insulated Electric Cables. International Standard IEC56-1987 High-Voltage altemating-current circuit breaken. SR No. 414/1989 together with copies of the following documents as required by section 32 of the Interpretation ofLegislation Act 1984 to accompany the Statutory Rule: Australian Standards 1024-1971 Direct Recording Electrical Measuring Instruments and their Accessories. 1042-1973 Direct-Acting Indicating Electrical Measuring Instruments and their Accessories. 2040-1977 Household Electric Clothes Washing Machines. 2442-1981 Performance of Household Electrical Appliances-Rotary Oothes Dryen. 3185-1986 Approval and Test Specification-Electric Rotary Clothes Dryen for Household Use. State Superannuation Act 1988-SR Nos 299,381/1989. Subdivision Act 1988-SR Nos 263, 384/1989. Supreme Court Act 1986- SR Nos 273, 300, 302/1989; SR No. 303/1989 together with a copy of the Commonwealth Admiralty Rules 1988 as required by section 32 of the Interpretation ofLegislation Act 1984 to accompany the Statutory Rules; SR Nos 357,358/1989; 1/1990. 74 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Papers

Teaching Service Act 1981-SR No. 409/ 1989. Tobacco Act 1987-SRNo. 348/1989. Transport Act 1983-SR Nos 8, 9, 10, 11/1990. Transport Accident Act 1986-SR No. 378/1989. Travel Agents Act 1986-SR No. 4/1990. Very Fast Train (Route Investigation) Act 1989-SR No. 22/1990. Water Act-SR No. 34/1990. Wildlife Act 1975-SR Nos 369/1989; 16/1990. Swan Hill District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for year 1988-89. Tawonga District General Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Terang and District Community Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Totalizator Agency Board-Supplementary Statistical and Financial Information for the year ended 31 July 1989. Transport Superannuation Board-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Upper Yarra Valley and Dandenong Ranges Authority-Report for the year ended 30 September 1989. Victorian Arts Centre Trust-Report for the year 1988-89. Victorian Post-Secondary Education Commission-Report for the year 1988-89-Ordered to be printed. Victorian Relief Committee-Report for the year 1988-89. Wangaratta District Base Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Waranga Memorial Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Werribee District Hospital and Wyndham Lodge Nursing Home and Day Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. West Gippsland Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Westemport Memorial Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. William Angliss Knox and Sherbrooke Community Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Williamstown Hospital':""Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Wimmera Base Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Wonthaggi and District Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Woorayl District Memorial Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. Yea and District Memorial Hospital-Report and Statement of Accounts for the year 1988-89. * * * * * The following proclamations fixing operative dates were laid upon the Table by the Qerk, pursuant to an Order of the House dated 25 October 1988. Accident Compensation (General Amendment) Act 1989-Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 10,20,27 (a), 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 and 35; 5 March 1990, Section 36; 1 July 1990 (Gazette No. G8, 21 February 1990). Adoption (Amendment) Act 1989-Whole Act (except section 11 (2»; 5 December 1989 (Gazette No. G48, 6 December 1989). Agriculture Acts (General Amendment) Act 1989-Sections 1-6 inclusive, 8-10 inclusive, 12-16 inclusive, 18-23 inclusive, 25 and 26; 20 December 1989 (Gazette No. G50, 20 December 1989). Crimes (Fingerprinting) Act 1988-Sections 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 7 (except paragraph (b», 8 and 9; 1 January 1990 (Gazette No. G50, 20 December 1989). Crimes Legislation (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 1989-Sections 40,43,44,45,46,47,48 and 54; 20 December 1989, Sections 11, 12 and 13; 1 January 1990 (Gazette No. G50, 20 December 1989). Economic and Budget Review Committee 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 75

Fire Authorities (Contributions) Act 1989-Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 (b), (c), (d), (e), (/), (g), (h) and 8; 12 December 1989 (Gazette No. S72, 12 December 1989). Fire Authorities Act 1989-Section 26 (10); 5 December 1989, Sections 17 (a), 21, 26 (11), (12), (13),32 and 44 (2), (7), and (8); 1 January 1990 (Gazette No. S71, 5 December 1989). Fisheries (Amendment) Act 1989-Whole Act except sections 7 and 9; 20 December 1989 (Gazette No. G50, 20 December 1989). Land (Miscellaneous Matters) Act I 989-Part 7; 24 January 1990 (Gazette No. G4, -24 January 1990). National Parks (Alpine National Park) Act 1989-Whole Act (except section 11 (1) to 11 (5); 2 December 1989 (Gazette No. G47, 29 November 1989). Ombudsman (Amendment) Act 1989-12 December 1989 (Gazette No. S72, 12 December 1989). Pathology Services Accreditation Act 1984-Section 22; 10 December 1989 (Gazette No. G48, 6 December 1989). Prince Henry's Institute of Medical Research Act 1988-1 January 1990 (Gazette No. G48, 6 December 1989). Road Safety (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 1989-Sections 4, 5, 8 (2), 14, 15, 17 and 18; 11 November 1989 (Gazette No. S61, 9 November 1989). Subdivision (Further Amendment) Act 1989-12 December 1989 (Gazette No. G48, 6 December 1989). Very Fast Train (Route Investigation) Act 1989-7 February 1990 (Gazette No. G6, 7 February 1990).

NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE Mr ROPER (Minister for Planning and Environment)-By leave, I move: That Mrs Hill and Mr A. J. Sheehan be discharged from attendance on the Natural Resources and Environment Committee and Mr Hamilton be appointed thereon. The motion was agreed to.

ECONOMIC AND BUDGET REVIEW COMMITTEE Mr ROPER (Minister for Planning and Environment)-By leave, I move: That Mr Batchelor be appointed a member of the Economic and Budget Review Committee. Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! Is leave granted? Mr BROWN (Leader of the Opposition)-Leave is refused. Mr ROPER (Minister for Planning and Environment)-I give notice that tomorrow I will move: That Mr Batchelor be appointed a member of the Economic and Budget Review Committee.

MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITY Mr BROWN (Leader of the Opposition)-By leave, I move: That this House calls on the Premier to dismiss the Treasurer immediately because of the Treasurer's history of gross financial mismanagement and his failure to honour the principles of Ministerial responsibility. The SPEAKER-Order! Is leave granted? Mr ROPER (Minister for Planning and Environment)-Leave is refused. 76 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Yackandandah Land Bill

YACKANDANDAH LAND BILL Mrs SETCHES (Minister for Conservation, Forests and Lands)-I move: That this Bill be now read a second time. The purpose of the Bill is to revoke about 4-5 hectares of the Yackandandah racecourse and recreation reserve. This will allow an exchange of most of that land for some adjoining freehold land and also enable a small area of the reserve to be sold to an owner of other adjoining freehold land. The reserve is an area of 26-21 hectares of Crown land permanently reserved for racecourse and recreation purposes. It is controlled and mana~ed under the Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978 by a committee of management consIsting of nine publicly elected persons. The reserve is primarily used as a golf course. P. R. and N. Holden, the owners of the adjoining freehold of allotment 1G, section N, Parish of Yackandandah, wish to erect a house on that land but the Shire of Yackandandah has refused to issue a permit because of a lack of legal access. The HoIdens desire to obtain legal access to their property. They currently gain access to their land through an area in the eastern section ofthe reserve which abuts a government road and which is fenced in with their land. A large part of that portion of the reserve is unsuitable for development for recreation purposes. The committee of management of the reserve and the HoIdens have agreed to an exchange of an area of 4-279 hectares of the reserve for an area of 1-9 hectares in the western section of the HoIdens' land abutting the reserve. That part of the Hoidens' land is suitable for development for recreation purposes. The exchange benefits both parties. The area of 4-534 hectares proposed to be revoked from the reserve by the proposed legislation will enable the proposed exchange to be effected under sectIon 12A of the Land Act 1958. The Hoidens will pay into the Consolidated Fund an amount equal to the difference in valuations by the Valuer-General of the two areas. The remaining area of2555 square metres of land which is to be revoked from the reservation is fenced in with freehold land owned by G. and R. Brummelen and is to be sold to these owners under section 209 of the Land Act 1958. The Shire of Yackandandah agrees to the proposal. I commend the Bill to the House. Mr COLEMAN (Syndal)-I move: That the debate be now adjourned. In doing so, I wonder whether the House could be given a ruling on whether the Bill should be treated as a private Bill. The SPEAKER-Order! The question is: that the debate be adjourned. The matter raised will be considered in due course. The motion for the adjournment of the debate was agreed to, and it was ordered that the debate be adjourned until Wednesday, March 28.

KEW AND HEIDELBERG LANDS (TRUST) BILL Mrs SETCHES (Minister for Conservation, Forests and Lands)-I move: That this Bill be now read a second time. The purpose of the Bill is to amend the Kew and Heidelberg Lands Act 1933 to give the Yarra Bend Park Trust corporate status, power to borrow money and power to grant leases and licences over Yarra Bend Park. Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 77

Yarra Bend Park is permanently reserved for public park and recreational uses. The freehold of the park is vested in trustees by way ofa Crown grant issued in their names under the Kew and Heidelberg Lands Act 1933. The grant contains a restriction that the land may be used only for the same purposes as the reservation. The Bill does not vary either the restriction on the Crown grant or the purposes of the reservation. Section 14A of the Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978 allows for the incorporation of committees of management. That Act gives incorporated committees power to borrow, subject to the Treasurer's approval, and power to grant leases. As the park is one of Melbourne's major parks, the trustees should be given similar powers to those enjoyed by incorporated committees. The trustees are currently working on a management plan for the park area with the assistance of my department. Once prepared, this plan will be exhibited for public comment prior to its approval and implementation. One of the central features of the park is the Studley Park boathouse, which has operated at Kew since 1865, and will continue to form a key part ofthe overall amenity of the area. The present buildings, which date back to the turn of the century, are in need of substantial renovation and refurbishment. The provisions of the Bill will enable the trust, with the approval of the Treasurer, to borrow the necessary funds to carry out the capital works required for such projects as the boathouse refurbishment. The Bill will also enable the Yarra Bend Park Trust to grant leases of the park or any part of it for up to 21 years and licences for up to three years. The trust will then be able to offer long-term tenure of the boathouse and in doing so ensure recovery of any costs associated with refurbishment and provide a lessee with ample security for his or her investment in the operation of the boathouse. The leasing power is subject to the condition that any lease granted is for purposes consistent with the purposes of the reservation and is subject to the approval of the Governor in Council. It is proposed that any lease be offered by way of public tender. The passage of the Bill will provide a framework for the Yarra Bend Park Trust to plan for the long-term future management of the park. It will enable the trust to provide improved facilities for park users to enjoy the excellent recreational facilities of this most important area of metropolitan parkland. I commend the Bill to the House. On the motion' of Mr COLEMAN (Syndal), the debate was adjourned. It was ordered that the debate be adjourned until Wednesday, March 28.

ROAD SAFETY (AMENDMENT) BILL Mr KENNAN (Minister for Transport)-I move: That this Bill be now read a second time. During the year the government has made a series of announcements about new initiatives to stem the rising toll of death and injury on our roads. In the last sittings legislation was enacted to make the demerit points system much tougher and to enable uncontested drink-driving and excessive speed offences to be dealt with quickly and efficiently. These measures will have a progressive impact on community attitudes and on the road toll, but they form only part of a total package of reforms. The Bill will enable the government to give effect to the following further measures. 78 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill

IMPLEMENTATION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORTS The Bill implements recommendations of the Social Development Committee in its reports on management of drink-drivers apprehended with high blood alcohol levels. The government's response tabled in May foreshadows some departures from the committee's recommendations in the interests of greater road safety. One provision, which affects probationary drivers, is the abolition of the seven-day grace period for production of a probationary drivers licence. In future probationary drivers will be obliged to have their licences with them while driving or in charge of a vehicle and will be penalised for not doing so. In the case of other drivers the present law will continue-that is, they must produce their licences on demand by a police officer or an authorised officer of the Roads Co~oration or a municipality, unless they have a reasonable excuse, in which case the hcences must be produced at a police station within seven days. The change will ensure that probationary drivers are properly identified at the time of interception and are therefore unable to escape the penalties intended by the legislation. A further strengthening of the committee's recommendations is the requirement in the Bill that a person convicted of a drink-driving offence involving a blood alcohol reading of· 1 or above in the case of a first offence or any subsequent drink-driving offence will be relicensed only as a probationary driver. The driver will therefore be subject to probationary licence conditions, including a zero blood alcohol level, for the whole of the period of probation, which is to be extended under the regulations to three years. Normally the driver will revert to a red probationary licence but there will be provision for immediate progression to a gold probationary licence in hardship cases. The new requirement to have possession of the licence while driving will also apply. The other main recommendations of the committee, including those requiring drivers with high blood alcohol readings or second offenders to undergo an assessment, are incorporated in the Bill. Such a driver cannot be relicensed unless an assessment report is obtained from an accredited agency stating that the person is not dependent on alcohol.

PROBATIONARY DRIVER OFFENCES The Act at present requires a court convicting a probationary driver of certain offences specified in the reBUlations to suspend the licence for one month and, as a result, the period of probation is extended for the period of suspension plus a further six months. The offences in question are: failing to stop or give way when required; dangerous overtaking; crossing double lines; careless drivin~; failing to stop after or report an accident; fraudulent use of a driver licence; and failing to display P-plates. The new offence of failing to carry one's licence will also attract these penalties. The Bill will enable these offences in future to be dealt with by infringement notice in accordance with principles develoeed in the autumn le~slatlon for drink-drivin$ and excessive speed infringements. Fadure to object to the Infringement notice withIn 28 days will result in automatic suspension of the licence for one month and seven months extension of the period of probation.

TAILGATING The Bill imposes a mandatory licence suspension period of three months for tailgating offences. At present this offence is in the regulations but it is being transferred into the Act to enable it to be dealt with by infringement notice. Two kinds of offences are covered by this provision: driving a vehicle which is following another vehicle at less than a safe distance; and Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 79

vehicles over 7-5 metres in length failin$ to keep more than 100 metres from any preceding long vehicle in certain areas outsIde built-up areas. In addition to mandatory licence suspension a person committing the offence will be liable to an infringement penalty-currently $85-and four demerit points. GRADUATED LICENSING On 21 September the government announced that a new graduated licensing system would be introduced. The main components are: car learner driver permits at age sixteen instead of seventeen; holding of a learner permit for twelve months instead of three months as a prerequisite to obtaining a car licence; a two-stage probationary licence with the first or red stage being subject to more restrictive conditions than the second or gold stage; extension of the probation period to three years; restriction of a licence to automatic vehicles if the driving test has been taken in an automatic vehicle; and more comprehensive computer-based licence testing. The Bill makes the necessary change to the learner permit section of the Act to deal with the first of these matters. The other components are covered by the regulations which are also being amended. DETECTION DEVICES The provisions ofthe Act relating to speed and red light cameras and the evidentiary value ofrecords produced by those devices are limited to photographs and photographic devices. Other technology is now available which enables images to be recorded, filed, retrieved and transmitted by electronic rather than photographic means, thus improving efficiency. The Bill takes account of these developments by enabling the regulations to prescribe non-photographic devices for these purposes. TAMPERING WITH MONITORING AND SAFETY EQUIPMENT A number of initiatives being taken by the government will require vehicles of various classes and in various circumstances to be equipped with devices to monitor or restrict the operation of the vehicle in the interests of road safety. The recommendation of the Social Development Committee that there be a trial of alcohol ignition interlock devices for drivers convicted of the more serious drink­ driving offences provides one example of a restrictive device. Other examples are speed limiting devices on trucks and monitoring devices such as tachographs. The requirements for these devices, which are being incorporated in the regulations and standards for registration, will not be effective unless the Act provides a substantial deterrent against tampering with the devices to avoid the restrictions that they impose. The Bill therefore amends the existing tampering section of the Act to provide more effective penalties. The maximum court penalty will be a fine of $2500 together with mandatory cancellation of licence for four years. These measures, together with the further measures which have been announced and which do not require amending legislation, are evidence of the government's determination to overcome the disgrace of the present road toll. They deserve the support of all honourable members. 80 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Health (Amendment) Bill

I commend the Bill to the House. On the motion of Mr PESCOTT (Bennettswood), the debate was adjourned. It was ordered that the debate be adjourned until later this day.

HEALTH (AMENDMENT) BILL The debate (adjourned from November 15, 1989) on the motion of Mr Roper (Minister for Planning and Environment) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed. Mr WEIDEMAN (Frankston South)-The Health (Amendment) Bill contains amendments to the immunisation provisions of the Health (General Amendment) Bill that was brought before the House almost two years ago and subsequently taken out of the Bill but implemented in the primary school system last January. There is much objection to the measure because people have found it most difficult to implement. That issue was raised by many teachers and principals throughout Victoria, and there was a need for reconsideration. One could say the consultation, surprisingly, was not a well carried out exercise, and I refer honourable members to points which were raised in the debate in the other place as reported at page 1266 of Hansard of 14 November 1989. Dr Vaughan interjected. The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member should address his remarks to the Chair. Mr WEIDEMAN-I have an expert on the other side of the House. Pilot schemes were carried out; I am not aware whether any were carried out in my electorate, but letters advising of this amending legislation were sent to Catholic schools and to other groups. The recipients did not indicate that they were aware of the pilot schemes being carried out at the commencement of school in January or February 1988, but they expressed concern that most of the pilot studies showed principals and staff did not have the knowledge to weigh up the problems of immunisation with regard to issuing suitable certificates. One would have no doubt that this is a measure dealing with community health and is very desirable. Think of all the immunisations carried out throughout the world! Many millions of dollars are saved by immunisation alone-- Mr Roper interjected. Mr WEIDEMAN-I was about to say that many lives have been saved also, if the Minister will allow me to continue! Immunisation has saved the lives of many new­ born babies, and saved billions of dollars around the world. Honourable members would reco~se the value of the Rotary Club immunisation program which immunised some 45 mtllion babies in 1988 and 1989. That organisation should be complimented on the saving of lives and funds. I note in the amendment that we are giving to local government responsibility that obviously involves some cost, and I understand decisions are being made on joint funding through the Municipal Association of Victoria to see whether costs can be borne by both education and health. If one is going to have a program of this magnitude involving 300 000 or 400 000 schoolchildren who may need immunisation, there will be exceptions in the Act which honourable members should be aware of. There are suitable programs so councils can carry out immunisation and provide information in schools so staff know where they stand. Health (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 81

It seems with the passing of this Bill from the other House that we are still in the pilot stage and not in a full program. That is a shame. It has been two years since the original Bill was introduced, and I raise the issue that has been raised in the press over recent months concerning criticism of the use of immunisation, particularly the triple antigen injection-that is, the Pertussis vaccine for whooping cough. An article appeared in my local newspaper stating that a woman involved in herbal medicines had said that parents should not immunise their children. I found that statement unbelievable, so I went to the trouble of issuing a press release pointing out that her view was not supported by the Opposition or anybody else. I pointed out in that press release that in the 1980s in the United Kingdom the same theories were expressed and there was a serious decline in immunisation. The rates fell well down to 50 or 60 per cent, and whooping cough epidemics were evident. Not only were thousands of people hospitalised during that time, but it resulted in hundreds of deaths. That demonstrates the benefit of giving young children the Pertussis vaccine. People involved in independent studies that have been carried out have discovered that, in England, the maximum risk from immunisation was in the order of one death in 300 000. That seems a minimal risk when, in the case of penicillin, the chance of one death in 10 000 is deemed a suitable risk. Here we have a maximum risk of one death in 300 000, and people are suggesting to young mothers, who are vulnerable to suggestion and want to do the best for their babies, that they should not take advantage of immunisation. The problem arose over the risk of brain damage. The House will be interested to know that the matter was of concern to me and others in the community and to the Victorian Health Promotion Fo~ndation, which funded Dr Graham Oliver to test children aged four to five years for reactions to vaccines to assess the possibility of brain damage. We went to the trouble of researching facts from overseas. It would be a shame to think that the high coverage this matter was given in the press would result in people deeming it not suitable to have their children vaccinated. That is why I feel that, because of what has gone on in the community, maybe this program should have been in place two years ago. Then there would not have been a need for press releases to be issued attacking the procedure in this way, or for doctors to come out in support of vaccination. I suggest that parents go along to their doctors and discuss the problem if they feel there is a risk or they have some concern. There is provision in the Act for exemptions to be granted on religious and other grounds where the child would be deemed not to respond favourably to the vaccine. People have the right, and cannot be denied the right, to education. Let us hope we can get the immunisation rate up to around 90 to 100 per cent, which would be most acceptable. That is the way to save enormous cost increases in hospitalisation rates. Honourable members have not been told the results of the pilot programs and the percentage of people who have had to be followed up. As was said in the second­ reading speech:

(a) local councils, instead of school principals, will be primarily responsible for its administration; and (b) only one certificate, rather than five possible alternative pieces of paper, will need to be given to the principal of the school. One must berate the government for not getting its process in place. I know the amendment was introduced on approximately 15 November; it is now 7 March. I remember when the Labor Party was in opposition and the Hamer government did not call Parliament together for five months. That caused a great debate in the House and the press carried many stories about that. Now we find that we are to adjourn 82 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Health (Amendment) Bill after'two days sitting but there has not been a similar press response. One becomes quite cynical about the press. The Opposition has raised the issue but nobody in the stalls upstairs is interested. Mr Hamilton-The new young Turks. Mr WEIDEMAN-The ambitious group in the Press Gallery. What jobs do they want when the new Ministers take up their roles? Mr Delzoppo-They want jobs in the Government Media Unit. Mr WEIDEMAN-The Government Media Unit must be an exceptional place to work. I have not been invited to look at its offices, but they must be palatial. I shall not take up any more time except to say that the provisions should have been in place two years ago. I do not say that anybody's health has been affected in any major way but the provision should have been in place. I have been advised that it was not possible to do the paper work and the medical knowledge was not in place to carry it through. I hope the government will supply the necessary funds for these duties to be, carried out and that the health of our children will be protected from the serious diseases that are still about. Immunisation has not rid our community of all diseases in the way it has with tuberculosis over a 30-year program. Diseases such as diphtheria and whooping cough still occur in the community. The government has been derelict in its duty to promote the health of the community. The provision should be in place. I do not intend to delay the Bill any further, although it will be impossible for it to be in place for this school year and so immunisation is still on a voluntary basis. Next year schoolchildren will be well protected by the measure. Dr WELLS (Dromana)-I wish to make a few comments about the Health (Amendment) Bill. Part VIII provides for regulations. Proposed new section 146 provides: (1) The Governor in Council may make regulations for or wit!l respect to all or any of the following matters: ... (c) The procedures to be taken to stop, limit or prevent the spread of any infectious disease including- (i) the immunisation of persons; and (ii) the examination, testing and counselling of persons. . The government has got its heart in the right place but it has again failed in its administration. Today's newspapers carry alarming reports about the failure of the government to make vaccine available in our public hospitals for the immunisation of staff exposed to hepatitis B. This will put staff at risk. It is incomprehensible that the government should have its financial affairs in such a state. Despite the statements in the press made by its authorised spokesman, it has failed to keep up adequate vaccine supplies. This is unacceptable when one considers the small amount of money needed and the risks involved. Surely this is something that the government must examine as a matter of urgency because of the risks to those professionally employed and to their patients. Mr ROPER (Minister for Planning and Environment)-On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker, I have allowed the honourable member for Dromana to go on because I assumed he was making only passing reference to this matter. In fact, he is referring to a matter that affects adults and public hospital staff. This Bill provides for the immunisation of schoolchildren and the way that will occur. I ask you, Mr Deputy Speaker, to bring the honourable member back to the Bill. Health (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 83

Dr WELLS (Dromana)-With respect to the Minister, I have not learnt anything about hepatitis B being specific only to adults. I understand there is no age speclficity. The Minister may say that I am drawing a long bow but I have been forced to do so because of the inactivity of the government. The government should face up to the issue and it should provide the minuscule amount of money necessary. The Minister may try to fob off the matter by saying that children will not be affected. Perhaps it is ignorant of the situation. I have been told that Dr Barry Catchlove of the Royal Children's Hospital intends to buy the vaccine for his own hospital and will then bill the government. I refer to proposed new section 146 (1) (c) (v) which deals with infectious diseases of children and adults. It is a disgrace that the government has failed to put regulations in place that adequately safeguard the disposal of infective materials that come from our public hospitals. Mr Roper interjected. Dr WELLS-There is no way that the Minister can sidestep this issue. This is not a question of money; it is a question of the government introducing adequate regulations. Presumably the Bill will provide that scope if it is not provided elsewhere. It is a matter of good administration of the government. Proposed new section 146 (1) (cl) provides power to make regulations with respect to: The tracing of persons having contact with persons infected with infectious diseases. This is a most important matter. I refer to the particular question of HIV infection of human beings-the AIDS issue. In Australia, and in Victoria in particular, emphasis is placed upon the feelings of people infected by this virus. I support that sensitive approach. However, far too little emphasis is being placed on the fact that this is an infectious disease caused by a virus transmitted between different people. Therefore, the essential control for this disease, in the face of having no vaccine and no adequate chemical treatment to stop it, revolves entirely around preventing the spread of the infectious agents. Sooner or later the government must place more emphasis on this fact. There is no adequate system at this time in Victoria for tracing such infected persons or persons who have come into contact with infected persons. It is not a matter of personal sensitivity; it is a matter of public health. Parliament must eventually face up to the need of tracing adults and children, if necessary, who come into contact with HIV-infected persons. Mr ROPER (Minister for Planning and Environment)-Members of the Opposition who have spoken on the Bill have supported it. I am pleased that the Bill is now before Parliament because it was during my term as Minister of Health that the process of moving towards a system where all school children were immunised started; it was in that period that the original recommendations were made. Sometimes these matters take longer than they should. I commend the Bill to the House and look forward to its implementation. The motion was agreed to. The Bill was read a second time and committed. Clause 1 was agreed to. 84 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Land (Further Miscellaneous Matters) Bill Qause2 Mr ROPER (Minister for Planning and Environment)-I move: 1. Clause 2, line 9, omit "I January 1990" and insert "a day to be proclaimed". The date was set when it was hoped the matter would be concluded in the last sessional period. Clearly it now cannot come into effect on that date. The amendment was agreed to, and the clause, as amended, was adopted, as were the remaining clauses. The Bill was reported to the House with an amendment, and passed through its remaining stages. LAND (FURTHER MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS) BILL The Order of the Day for the resumption of the debate on the motion for the second reading of this Bill was read. The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Norris)-Order! I am of the opinion that the second reading of this Bill is required to be passed by an absolute majority. The debate (adjourned from October 26, 1989) on the motion of Mrs Setches (Minister for Conservation, Forests and Lands) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed. Mr COLEMAN (Syndal)-The Land (Further Miscellaneous Matters) Bill was one of the Bills held over from the previous sessional period. It is a Bill of a type that honourable members regularly see, in that it deals with amendments to a range of land matters that have arisen throughout the State involving issues that cannot be resolved by any system other than the Parliamentary process. The Bill has seven Parts, so perhaps if I deal with each Part separately the House will have a better understanding of the amendments and the way the transactions will occur. The first transaction in Part 2 deals with an area of land at Sebastopol near Ballarat. The management committee, which in this case is the local municipality, had some fifteen years ago constructed a bitumen road through what was deemed to be a recreational area. The proposal involves taking the road out of the recreational reservation in which it was placed and then creating a proper road so that the street in question, Vickers Street, will be recognised as a road in its fullest sense by the Borough of Sebastopol. Although it is a minor matter, apparently it has caused some difficulty in the local area. It highlights the range of land matters that must come through the Parliamentary process. The second transaction involves a piece of land in North Bendigo which currently is under lease to an organisation, Pacific Textiles. Like many other organisations around Victoria, Pacific Textiles was established on what was previously a railway reservation. Honourable members have been involved in numerous debates discussing the best way of dealing with commercial enterprises established on railway reservations. In this case proposed legislation has been introduced providing that the current lessee be given first refusal on this piece of land. For a number of years Pacific Textiles has tried to achieve the result being proposed by the Bill. The freehold will be offered to the organisation, and this will give Pacific Textjles the opportunity of increasing its employment capacity in the Bendigo area. The obtaining of a freehold title to the land will allow the organisation to undertake any extension proposals in the future. Part 4 deals with the Albert Park land; I shall return to that in a short while. Land (Further Miscellaneous M alters) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 85

Part 5 deals with an area of land at Lilydale, where a park was developed by the Lions Club in that town. The Bill provides for a swap of land to take place and it will effectively increase the size of the park. It is only a fairly small area but, nevertheless, its addition will enhance the value of the park and assist the shire in providing for some road traffic movement through the town. Part 6 deals with land that is part of what was the Dookie Agricultural College, now the Victorian College of Agriculture and Horticulture. For some time there has been a road problem at a place nearby, called the Nalinga Hills. The problem was addressed originally in 1972, and now some further adjustments must be made. The Bill proposes that a portion of land be excised from the college campus and be devoted to road use. Probably the most important part of the Bill is Part 4, relating to Albert Park. As you will be aware, Mr Deputy Speaker, that area of Melbourne was controlled for many years by a committee of management chaired by the then Senator Keneally. The committee attempted to improve the general surroundings of the area and it provided useful recreational opportunities for the people living in the immediate area, which is fairly densely populated. The Albert Park reservation provided a set of lungs for the area. The Bill proposes that one of the venues for the anticipated 1996 Olympic Games will be located in the area. It is proposed that a sports centre, a large undertaking, be built in the vicinity of what is now known as the South Melbourne Cricket Ground. The proposed centre will cater for basketball, volleyball, badminton, table tennis, water-polo and synchronised swimming, so it will be a major sports centre to replace what is there at the moment. The existing table tennis venue is in desperate need of replacement. With the creation of the new sports centre, the existing enclosed sporting facilities will be demolished and that land will revert to open space, which all honourable members will welcome. It is interesting to observe that Albert Park Lake attracts a large number of rowers and other water sports enthusiasts, including members of yacht clubs. They have experienced a continuing problem with weed growth in the lake. The Opposition hopes, before the sports centre is developed and the lake is used for the sports, contingent on that centre being built, the problem of weed growth in the lake will be addressed in some way different from the way proposed by the committee of management. The herbicide Diuron, which has a potential life of something in the order of six months, was used, and it has proved to be toxic to fish. The Environment Protection Authority has withdrawn that spray from the list of those that may be use in restricted waters such as Albert Park Lake. However, the question of a better way to deal with the problem remains. I understand that at present the water grass is mowed by a floating mower of some kind, just as the weed in the Ballarat Lake is being mowed. As I said, if the sporting clubs are to continue to use the lake, some way must be found of ensuring that the rowing crews or the members of the yacht clubs have an opportunity of using the lake to its fullest extent. I ask the Minister to use her best offices to ensure that the lake is maintained in prime condition so that those wishing to use it for aquatic activities will be able to do so without the impediment of the weed growth. As I indicated, the proposed sports centre is a big undertaking. It has a price tag of $250 million and it is anticipated that work will start on it in March 1992, ifMelboume is successful in its bid to host the 1996 Olympic Games. I hope the government's commitment will go beyond that and it will undertake to build the sports centre whether or not the Olympic bid is successful. 86 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Education (Amendment) Bill

As I said, it is a big venture and will provide a venue for some of the sports clubs that have attempted for some time to find a permanent home in the metropolis. They represent sports that are expanding. For example, I understand that there is a growing following for table tennis, to the extent that a team which has recently returned from Sweden, was particularly successful in competitions there. They are all Olympic sports and, unless we have facilities available for those who want to participate in them, our capacity to compete against countries that provide substantial incentive for participation in the sports will be diminished, and we will not be able to compete on equal terms in those sports that are unique in some way. The Opposition supports the Bill and hopes the sporting centre will be built and will provide a venue in this city for the separate sports to which I have referred. Mr EVANS (Gippsland East)-The Land (Further Miscellaneous Matters) Bill is an annual measure in Parliament. It seeks to vary reservations on Crown lands throughout the State. In most cases the areas referred to in such proposed legislation are relatively small. Nevertheless, it is important that Parliament give due consideration to any change in the reservations on Crown lands. People are more and more conscious of what is happening to Crown lands and it is their wish that every change that is proposed should be given close scrutiny before the purpose of the reservation is changed. The honourable member for Syndal has adequately expressed the purposes of the Bill and its ramifications. I see no point in further delaying the House by being repetitive. I simply indicate that the National Party also supports the proposed legislation. Mrs SETCHES (Minister for Conservation, Forests and Lands)-I thank honourable members from both parties for their support for the Bill and I take on board the comments of the honourable member for Syndal about weed growth in the Albert Park Lake. I shall do what I can to ensure sensible and safe means of controlling that weed. The SPEAKER-Order! I am of the opinion that the second reading of this Bill is required to be passed by an absolute majority. As there is not an absolute majority present in the Chamber, I ask for the bells to be rung. The required number ofmembers having assembled in the Chamber- The motion for the second reading of the Bill was carried by an absolute majority of the whole number of the members of the House. The Bill was read a second time and, by leave, the House proceeded to the third reading. The motion for the third reading of the Bill was carried by an absolute majority of the whole number of the members of the House, and the Bill was read a third time.

EDUCATION (AMENDMENT) BILL The debate (adjourned from November 14, 1989) on the motion of Ms Kirner (Minister for Education) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed. Mr RICHARDSON (Forest Hill)-The Education (Amendment) Bill deals with a variety of matters. It essentially flows on from the multitude of reorganisations that have occurred under a succession of Labor Ministers, none of whom, it seems, were able to work out precisely what they wanted to do. They seemed to be changing the system and then changing the changes. Education (Amendment) Bill 7 ~1arch 1990 ASSE~1BLY 87

The Bill abolishes the three categories of teachers that previously existed; that is, primary, secondary and technical, and has substituted in their place two categories, primary and secondary. That has brought about the effective abolition of technical schools so it is necessary for the registration procedures to accommodate two categories instead of three. Technical alterations are necessary within the appropriate legislation and the regulations. The other matters dealt with in the Bill relate to definitions and their designations of various officers of the department, and I shall come to them in a moment. When the Minister gave her second-reading speech she referred to many of these changes flowing from the establishment of the Victorian certificate of education and the steady move towards the implementation of that new certificate as being contributors to the need for the changes that are taking place. In fact, they are mainly concerned with change for change's sake. The Minister was proud of the fact that high and technical schools have been abolished and that they are now secondary colleges. The old designation of high schools and technical schools no longer exists. As a former technical teacher, I disagree totally with the actions of the Minister. She has said on previous occasions that the motivation for the abolition of technical schools was to do away with a perceived class distinction that existed between high and technical schools. I must say that it is a class distinction that was perceived only by the Minister and by some of the more extreme elements of the left-wing education establishment to which she adheres. There was in fact no element of class distinction existing between high and technical schools. Both types of schools met specific needs. As a former technical college teacher, I know from my many years in the technical service the enormous benefit derived by generations of technical students. Technical and high schools provided different types of education and met different needs but that had nothing to do with class, gender and race, which are the obsessions of the Minister. The Minister referred to the Victorian certificate of education as being the motivation for many of these changes. She really must start looking carefully at the Victorian certificate of education. The criticisms of this new, controversial certificate are mounting. As people examine it and the content of the courses more and more closely, more and more flaws are being found both in the concept and in the actuality of what is being embarked upon. It is not just a particular university vice-chancellor who is objecting. The SPEAKER-Order! I understand the honourable member wishes to demonstrate the relevance of the Victorian certificate of education to the Bill. However, it is not appropriate for the debate on the Bill to be the basis for a full-blown debate on the Victorian certificate of education. The honourable member should relate his remarks to the Bill. Mr RICHARDSON-I understand your concern, Mr Speaker, but I indicate that the Minister for Education, during her second-reading speech, referred to the VCE and said: In accordance with its commitment to providing an education of the highest quality for all young people in government schools, the government has now introduced the new Victorian certificate of education­ VCE-and is replacing high and technical schools with secondary colleges. These changes will ensure that all secondary college students have access to a comprehensive curriculum. The changes have, however, also given rise to the need to amend the Education Act to remove the threefold system of teacher registration. I do not intend to turn this into a debate on the VCE, but you would agree, Mr Speaker, that since the Victorian certificate of education is the basis for the changes that have been found necessary-the Minister made particular rather than passing 88 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Education (Amendment) Bill references to the VCE-it is important that I refer to the VCE and that there be a reference to other matters that are either responsible for or consequent upon the changes in the Education Act which are contained within the Education (Amendment) Bill. For that reason it is important to note that the VCE and the comprehensive curriculum that it provides, to which reference was made by the Minister, are the subji..:ct of considerable controversy within the community. Objections have been raised to many aspects of the VCE. I do not recall hearing anybody condemn the VCE outright, but there has been particular criticism of it and one of those criticisms relates to the way the comprehensive curriculum to which the Minister referred, and which is given as one of the reasons for the introduction of the Bill, is not going to meet the needs of all students, as has been plain, but will institutionalise inequity rather than provide equity for all students. The inequity will come for two reasons: firstly, there are some subject areas where there are grave doubts about the subject content, doubts about the assessment procedures and the way assessment is to be expressed. Doubts have been expressed in many academic quarters, not just by the University of Melbourne, although it is certainly true that Professor Penington has been the most outspoken of the critics of the VCE, but there is criticism of aspects of the VCE from the University of Melbourne, Monash University, certain faculties at La Trobe University and from the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology. They are not critical of everything about it, but certain aspects of it. The other aspect that is relevant to the comprehensive curriculum provision and the amalgamation of technical and high schools into secondary colleges, which will be a cause of gross inequity in the new procedure, is that some students will be greatly advantaged both in academic selection and job selection and others will be grossly disadvantaged in academic selection and job selection because of the way the results are expressed and the need for a student's profile to be provided by the school. I give as an example two former students who have both graduated with the VCE and who received two As and three Bs. One student went to Kerang High School in the Mallee, the other went to Ivanhoe Grammer School in the city. I use those schools as examples because I attended both of them, and they both are good schools. One of those boys will be advantaged immediately. I remind honourable members that each boy received two As and three Bs and there is no way of distinguishing which of the former students has performed better because a mark of A, B, C or D does not give any detail about their performances. Let us assume those two boys are each competing for the one job at a bank and the employment officer has to choose between them. The only mechanism to distinguish between the two former students will be the report from the school, the student profile. I submit to the Minister that the boy from I vanhoe Grammar School, a prominent, well-recognised, highly academic private school, one that is well-known for its academic record, is immediately advantaged over the boy who comes from a small country high school that is not known outside its local area. Ms Kirner interjected. Mr RICHARDSON-The Minister says by interjection that that is not true. I ask the Minister to reflect on the reality of the situation. Myoid school at Kerang would not be known outside its immediate local area. If all the employment officer has to go on is the student profile that is produced by the school I can assure the Minister that the prominent private schools will market their VCE courses and students far better than anything that has occurred before. It will outdo the Minister's $1 million public Education (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 89 relations exercise in marketing the VCE and it will make that exercise look rather amateurish. The fact that the Minister has to contemplate a marketing program costing $1 million to sell the benefits of the VCE shows that there are real flaws in the system. The Minister must fix up the deficiencies that exist in the VCE. She will do part of that as a consequence of the proposed legislation because it will formalise the new arrangements, but she must give some riding instructions to the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Board and instruct it to fix up the deficiencies that exist. There is much that is educationally valid in the VCE as a teaching method, but there are serious flaws in the system and the Minister and the VCAB know about them. Everyone accepts the inevitability of the introduction of the VCE; it is in place and the clock cannot be turned back, but what has to be done for the benefit of the children of Victoria is to fix up the flawed final certificate of education. The changes in the designation of officers is a further example of change for change's sake. The names of the schools have been changed from high and technical schools to secondary colleges for no reason other than that the Minister wants to wipe away any vestige of the past. There is an obsession with getting rid of anything that smacks of the past. The Minister is leading the charge. The deputy director-general and the director-general will become the chief executive and the chief general manager. Regional directors will become regional general managers. The SPEAKER-Order! I have been patient and tolerant with the honourable member in allowing him to stray some distance from the provisions of the Bill. I ask the honourable member to confine his remarks to the provisions in the Bill and to make them relevant to those provisions. Mr RICHARDSON-Mr Speaker, I am referring precisely to the Bill. I refer you to page 3 which deals with "definitions", including the definition "Deputy Director­ General" and "Director-General" being replaced by "Chief Executive" and "Chief General Manager". I further refer you to clause 7 (1) (a) (i), (ii), and (iii). The Bill is a further example of implementing change for the sake of change. It is meeting the ideological obsession of casting away anything that has any vestige of tradition, and imposing the will of a Minister of a particular ideological persuasion on the school system. Ms Kirner interjected. Mr RICHARDSON-None of it really matters; who cares whether one changes "Director-General" to "Chief Executive"? It is a load of nonsense! It is simply a minor part of the Kirner revolution, in sweeping things away! She has swept away regional boards that are part of the structure put in place by the government. She is in charge of an education service that is lurching towards total collapse. No tinkering with Bills of this kind will alter the fact that the education system that she administers is lurching towards a precipice. She has alienated the people on whom she depends-the teachers in the schools. Work bans have been imposed and are now creating increasing disruptions in the schools. The Minister has caused people who have never before gone on strike now to take strike action; and, unless she takes appropriate action, the entire system will grind to a halt. The reason the Minister is not able to meet the needs of teachers in their claim for increased salaries and improved career paths is that the government is broke; there is no money to pay the bills and to meet the salaries and career prospects that everyone agrees teachers are entitled to. 90 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Education (Amendment) Bill

No amount of tinkering and fiddling around with designations of particular officers will alter the reality that the Minister is presiding over a disaster of major proportions. It is not beyond her capacity to retrieve the situation. Ms Kirner interjected. Mr RICHARDSON-I am a generous soul and I thank the Minister for acknowled~ng my generosity, throu~ her interjection. It is not beyond the capacity of the MinIster to retrieve the situatIon. Silly pIeces of proposed legislation like this will go nowhere near that objective. The Bill will not assist the situation by changing names, or by doing away with technical schools because she has a preoccupation with some class distinction which is inherent in technical schools. The Minister must face the reality about the needs of education; she must pause for a moment and put aside her own preoccupation and prejudice with the strange left-wing ideology that she pursues, and which was abandoned by other education Ministers many years ago. The Minister for Education should take notice of what I say from time to time because, frankly, I know more than she does about education. Mr STEGGALL (Swan Hill)-Today is a very disappointing day in many wars. I do not know about other honourable members but I regard today as being one 0 the greatest disappointments I have experienced since I was elected to this place; to see a government treat a Parliament like Parliament has been treated today is something that, quite frankly, has got up my nostrils- I am disappointed! This small Bill will do only certain things. Today Parliament is fulfilling one of its obligations-that is, to pass judgment on changes to the rules or statutes that the government wishes to introduce; to change the way it is running the Ministry of Education. Another function of Parliament is that a government must account for its stewardship, for its management of government and the State. Today Parliament has witnessed the government coming to this place, having a huge loss through State Bank Victoria, and a huge deficit in confidence-- The SPEAKER-Order! Will the honourable member for Swan Hill relate his remarks to the Bill before the House? Mr STEGGALL-Certainly I shall. Today Victorians have an enormous loss of confidence in their democratIc institutions. Parliament is an institution in which Victorians no longer should have any confidence. When one examines the industrial problems in education that the Minister for Education is handling, everyone realises­ except the government-that the only reason she cannot solve the dispute in the education system is that she has no money; she is being squeezed absolutely rotten by the Treasurer's department, which is broke! There is no debate in the House about the state of Victoria's finances-- The SPEAKER-Order! Again I ask the honourable member to relate his remarks to the provisions of the Bill. Mr STEGGALL-The functions, changes and appropriate amendments in the Education (Amendment) Bill concern the functions of Parliament. You, Mr Speaker, and I have been elected members of this place; one of our jobs as members of Parliament is to scrutinise government management and to scrutinise changes to statutes. Today Parliament should have heard that the government is not accounting to Parliament for its stewardship of Victoria. The SPEAKER-Order! The question before the House is that the Bill be read a second time; it is not an opportunity of canvassing other proceedings of the House either of today or that may occur at any other time. The honourable member must Education (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 91 relate his remarks to the Bill before the House, and not to other matters that, even by the longest stretch of the bow, are unrelated to the Bill. Mr STEGGALL-I accept your ruling, Mr Speaker, I do not have much choice; however, Parliament is not functioning as it should and I suggest the Sessional Orders under which this place operates are making a mockery of democracy in Victoria. With those introductory remarks, I must inquire about the relevance of being here; I wonder about the relevance of a Minister actually coming to this place in this day and age, and proposing amendments because they do little about accounting. The government does not hold itself to account, and the government does not account to Parliament. I am a little surprised that the Bill has been introduced. I thought the government may have made changes without introducing the Bill-probably that would have been within the spirit with which the role and function of Parliament is being treated in this day and age! The teacher registration changes have been accepted; it is a commonsense approach that should have been pursued some time ago. The Minister for Education may be able to assist me in my uncertainty. Last year the situation occurred at the same school mentioned by the honourable member for Forest Hill-at Kerang. It should not be called a Mallee school. A problem arose with a teacher of Japanese who had been trained for two years. Under the registration provisions of the Ministry of Education one has to be a four­ year trained teacher to survive. With the changes that took place at the beginning of the year, the teacher of Japanese was cast out of the education system and the pupils who had begun their studies in Japanese were unable to continue. Because of the registration of teachers we have a situation where that teacher has gone to the private sector and she is teaching students at a private school in Gippsland. The Act and the regulations do not provide discretion for the Minister to say that the Japanese teacher in this case is of adequate standard and capability. There should be Ministerial discretion. That teacher of Japanese has been lost to the education system. That might help because money is not being expended in the Ministry of Education. None of us is convinced that the government has any capacity financially to maintain its business. It is obvious from today's actions that the government does not intend to tell us whether it has any financial capacity to carry out the affairs of the State. One cannot speak about those matters when debating an education Bill. The proposed legislation extends the terms of the current members of the Teachers Registration Board and changes certain terminology within the Ministry. It is sad that such a small Bill has been introduced, because it is one that will go down in the annals of disgrace. I should like the Minister and you, Mr Speaker, to allow me to move a little closer to something that happened today. An article that appears in today's Age states: Backbenchers get more say as Cain acts on discontent. Mr SHELL (Geelong)-On a point of order, Mr Speaker, the honourable membt r for Swan Hill is defying your instructions and is again straying from the Bill. The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member for Swan Hill is making remarks that I have yet to relate to the Bill. I suggest that if he wishes to continue referring to the matter he has raised he must relate his remarks to the Bill and make them relevant to the Bill. Mr STEGGALL (Swan Hill)-I am delighted to do that and to receive responses to the issues raised today, if not from the Treasurer or the Premier, then maybe from ------92 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Education (Amendment) Bill the Deputy Premier. What I am alluding to is the discontent of government backbenchers. People must remember that backbenchers of this Parliament are of equal status and that those honourable members who make up the Cabinet do not have any right to discriminate against backbenchers on either side of the Parliament. Will the Minister for Education help me out in the way outlined in the article, which is obviously part of the deal stitched up to quell the discontent of the backbenchers? The article states-- The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member has been invited to relate his remarks to the provisions of the Bill. Standing Orders require that speeches made must be relevant to the Bill. If the honourable member is unable to relate his remarks to the Bill he should turn to another matter that is relevant to the Bill. If not, I will be unable to hear him further. Mr STEGGALL-The article in today's Age that refers to the discontent of Labor Party backbenchers, states: Public servants from each government Ministry will be delegated to act as Parliamentary liaison officers, and backbenchers will be given greater scope to assist Ministers in special projects. Will a Ministry of Education liaison officer be made available to me and my other backbench colleagues to assist with the operation of this Bill, especially with the registration of primary or secondary teachers, which is of great interest and importance in the country as well as in the city? An example of that is the teacher of Japanese. Under the legislation and rules and regulations that teacher has been lost to the service. Victoria does not have a glut of teachers of Japanese. Will Opposition backbenchers be able to share in the liaison officers functions or will it be only for Labor Party members? The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member has made sufficient passing reference to the matter he has raised. I suggest he now return to the provisions of the Bill. Mr STEGGALL-I appreciate your guidance, Mr Speaker, and understand that today has not been easy for any of us. The Education (Amendment) Bill is supported by the National Party. It is one of those small pieces of legislation that are necessary from time to time when Parliament is fulfilling one ofits roles. I have upset the Chair by talking about Parliament fulfilling some of its roles, because we do have other roles to fulfil. Today Parliament has put its stamp on irrelevance; the fears that abound, especially in the education field, have not been helped today. I understand that Parliament is a place where contrary views are allowed to be put and where freedom of speech is still, I think, a cherished part of our democratic system. I hope members of the government do not get too upset if members of the Opposition raise issues that are contrary to their views. I shall be interested in how the government will quell the discontent on its backbench towards education. Mrs HIRSH (Wantirna)-On a point of order, Mr Speaker, the remarks of the honourable member for Swan Hill have no relevance to the Bill. I ask that he be prevented from speaking on issues that are irrelevant. The SPEAKER-Order! It has been impossible to relate the most recent remarks of the honourable member for Swan Hill to the Bill. I uphold the point of order, and I ask the honourable member to return to the provisions of the Bill. If he is unable to relate his remarks to the Bill I shall have to call the next speaker. Education (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 93

Mr STEGGALL (Swan Hill)-I am sorry that the government Whip is of such delicate sensibility. Mrs HIRSH (Wantima)-On a further point of order, Mr Speaker, the remarks of the honourable member for Swan Hill about other members of the House have no relevance to the Bill. Mr STEGGALL (Swan Hill)-On the point of order, Mr Speaker, it appears to me that the oversensitivity of government backbenchers, especially the Whip, proves the point I have been trying to make, and I have been relating it to the education portfolio. The government should consider the role and function of Parliament in this State. Views contrary to those held by the government should be heard in this place. Dr WELLS (Dromana)-On the point of order, Mr Speaker, I consider that the honourable member for Wantirna did not give the honourable member for Swan Hill enough time after her previous point of order to make clear what he was saying. He needs a reasonable amount of time to explain his point. The SPEAKER-Order! I uphold the point of order. I ask the honourable member for Swan Hill to confine himself to remarks relevant to the provisions of the Bill before the House. If he is concerned about other matters being debated in this Chamber, he should take the opportunities that are available to honourable members for raising such matters at the appropriate time. Mr STEGGALL (Swan Hill)-Sessional Orders being what they are, that is hard to do, but I appreciate the point that you make, Mr Speaker. It highlights some of the difficulties that backbench members of Parliament have in speaking about the problems of Victoria. All honourable members are concerned about Victoria, but some tend to forget that. I do not have a great deal more to add to the debate. The narrowness of the debate is disappointing in many ways. The National Party, along with the Opposition, does not oppose the Bill, but I raise the point for the Minister and the government that if they want to resolve the problems of the backbench, obviously, they must-- Mrs HIRSH (Wantirna)-On a point of order, Mr Speaker, I have a long involvement with education and I have been looking forward to listening to the debate on this Bill. However, little has been said about education or the Bill since the honourable member for Swan Hill rose to his feet. It would be good to hear something about the Bill and matters concerning education. The SPEAKER-Order! There is no point of order. Mr STEGGALL (Swan Hill)-Thank you, Mr Speaker. The point I am trying to make-I know the honourable member for Wantirna will not understand, nor will many people on the government backbench-is that there is enormous discontent in Victoria about the way the government functions within Parliament and how Parliament itself operates. That is relevant to the Bill. The government has brou~t forward a small Bill asking for Parliament's approval to change the rules. I agree WIth that process; that is what our democratic system is about. However, I mention the fact that there are a few other responsibilities that governments have to their Parliaments and not simply the backbench of the Labor Party. The point I am trying to make­ which seems to have upset a few people-is that in today's newspaper it is reported that the Premier and the Deputy Premier are trying to solve the problems ofdiscontent within the government party. Mrs HIRSH (Wantirna)-On a point of order, MC" Speaker, obviously the honourable member for Swan Hill has not read the Bill and knows nothing about the matter being debated. I ask you to request him to speak to the Bill. 94 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Education (Amendment) Bill

Mr KENNETT (Burwood)-On the point of order, Mr Speaker, the honourable member for Swan Hill is pointing out that this morning the Premier made a public announcement that bureaucrats within the teaching profession may be allocated to backbench members of the government to assist the government with its internal problems. Obviously that affects the morale of the people involved. It further politicises the Public Service and it goes against the interests of the good standing of teachers. I suggest that it is totally in order for the honourable member for Swan Hill to raise that as a genuine concern because it applies not only to the teaching profession but also to every other department in the State. Individuals will now be allocated to backbench members of the government, and that is politicisation of the Public Service. It will further destroy the morale of those in that profession. Ms KIRNER (Minister for Education)-On the point of order, Mr Speaker, I have tried hard not to intervene in this nonsensical debate about points of order, which has nothing to do with education. Before the honourable member for Burwood came into the Chamber and decided to join the debate for fun, I made the point to the honourable member for Swan Hill that the parliamentary liaison officer will service all backbenchers. A similar position in the transport portfolio is currently held by Mr Bob Wilson, and I am sure many backbenchers have found his assistance helpful. That is the model about which we are talking; therefore, the point made by the honourable member for Burwood in refuting the point of order is wrong. Although the position of parliamentary liaison officer will assist members of the Opposition in their understanding of education-they obviously do not understand it at the moment-it is not part of the Bill. I suggest that honourable members get on with matters included in the Bill. The SPEAKER-Order! I found it somewhat difficult relating to the original point of order some of the latter remarks of both the Deputy Premier and the honourable member for Burwood. At this point I do not uphold the point of order, but I do remind the honourable member for Swan Hill of my earlier rulings: his remarks must be relevant to the Bill. If the honourable member is unable to make his remarks relevant to the Bill, the Chair will have no alternative but to ask him to resume his seat and to call the next speaker. Mr STEGGALL (Swan Hill)-Thank you, Mr Speaker; I appreciate your comments. However, the fact still remains that discontent exists on both sides of the House­ there has always been discontent about it on this side of the House, but I did not realise it was so bad on the government side-about the way the government treats Parliament. The Minister for Education is part of that government. Surely honourable members in this place should occasionally be able to express a contrary view to that which the government may wish to hear. I see nothing wrong with that. I consider Parliament to be the forum where I can represent my constituents in the same way that anyone else in this Parliament can. The point that I made earlier about the government-the Minister and the Ministry of Education are part of that, and this Bill relates to the education portfolio-trying to come to grips with a very irate backbench is that there are other backbenchers in this Parliament who also hav.e a point of view to express and who have a little difficulty in doing so from time to time, as has occurred today. I accept with interest and shall not forget the Minister's comments on the point of order. I look forward to participating, along with other backbenchers, and working with the liaison officers of the Public Service, in assisting the government on special projects. One of the special projects with which I should like to assist the Minister relates to the registration of teachers. Education (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 95

I have given the example of the teacher of Japanese who was lost to the public sector because the relevant legislation does not allow for sufficient discretion. I hope the Minister will be able to inform the House whether the necessary provision to allow wider discretion is contained in this Bill to overcome the rather ridiculous situation that existed at the end of last year. I stand by the comments I have made today. This has been one of the worst days for Parliamentary democracy, and the government ought to be thoroughly ashamed of itself for the way it has accounted for its actions in Victoria over the past few weeks. Dr WELLS (Dromana)-This Education (Amendment) Bill has been said by others to be a relatively small Bill, a machinery measure in some areas, which involves just changing titles. I fully agree with previous speakers that the changing of titles is quite inconsequential. I do not think it matters to anyone on this side of the House what names are used for members of different groups. That is not what the education debate is about; the education debate is about much more important things. The government's move to split registration of teachers into two categories rather than one is probably not-- Ms Kimer interjected. Dr WELLS-If the Minister objects, let me say that the government's wish to formalise the registration of teachers as primary or secondary schoolteachers is perhaps not of such great importance. It may be helpful and, if it is, the Opposition will be pleased about that. However, I take this opportunity of speaking on what is the real malaise in school education in Victoria today, because I can think of no better occasion on which to do so than when we are talking about the registration of members of the teaching system who work at the coalface-not the Minister, not the bureaucrats, not the members of this House, but the teachers who work with our students. That is the real area that matters and that is an area where I think there is abundant evidence to show that it has not been handled efficiently and effectively. I would welcome this proposed Act if indeed it leads to better results and more satisfaction for our teachers, better results for taxpayers' expenditure, and better results for the community, but, above all, better results for each and every one of our students, because that is what really matters. There has been too much debate in the past five years, since I have had the privilege of being in this place, about issues quite peripheral to the central issue of education, which is what we manage to do for and achieve on behalf of each of our children and our students. We badly need better results. I talk not of the government's attention to more university places, nor of the work it has done in increasing the percentage of students staying on to years 11 and 12. I applaud these things. I applaud them for what they have tried to do, but largely failed to achieve, for children who are mentally retarded. In other areas they have tried also to improve things. But the basic fact is that a large part of the problem in society today comes back to the rank-and-file students, the vast bulk of students going through schools in their first years in school. In there, if I had to guess, there might be 10 per cent of our students who are failed abysmally by the education system over which this Parliament presides. I go further and estimate-if you like, as an intelligent guess-that that 10 per cent leads to a great many more, perhaps a majority, of the problems we face later throughout our society. In so many ways we'fail at the only point at which we can succeed, because we cannot do it later. 96 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Education (Amendment) Bill

What I say is absolutely right on the central issue of this Bill. The issue in this Bill is the registration of teachers and that means the training of teachers, the performance of teachers, and the results we get from those teachers. So this is the time to talk about what we want from our teachers and that is what I propose to do. This government has undertaken many initiatives in the years it has been in office. It has held countless inquiries and countless investigations; it has had numberless reports and numberless consultations-everyone is fed up with them-and a rearrangement of the education bureaucracy once, perhaps twice, or even more, depending which part you look at. It has introduced the new VCE or the process for that. It has abolished technical schools in name. It has nominally embraced computer education. It has made attempts to politicise the role offemales in schools and women in society. It has rearranged the year 11 and 12 priorities, culminating in a politicised compulsory subject called Australian studies. There are themes that will not work and are not desirable in the proposed new VCE, and one of them certainly is the weight given to some subjects and the content in some of those subjects, and in that respect I briefly mention that Australian studies subject. It could be a useful subject, but what I have heard so far about it does not suggest that that will be the case in its present format. The government has indulged in ever-increasing expenditure one way or another in education, which I would welcome under normal circumstances. I understand this year the education budget is $3·5 billion to $4 billion of a total Victorian Budget of $14 billion-a huge sum. Even if I am not exactly right on that, the amount is so big as to be central to the point I am making. Enough, money is currently being expended on education to pick up the basic malaise in the system to which I refer. I shall explain that as I proceed. I believe all of these attempts fail to reach significant results, and I do not think it is a question of time; it is not that we are judging too soon. I shall highlight the central problems in education today. The government has claimed there are various reasons for the problems. It has said that the secondary school produces too narrow a range of subjects for students and that is why so many students do not find subjects that interest them in the later years of secondary school. That is a significant nonsense, and I shall indicate why as I proceed. The government has said that a major problem is inappropriate assessment methods in years 11 and 12. Generations of people have been educated in Western knowledge­ for at least five centuries. During that time methods not starkly dissimilar from those operating in Victoria today have been used with success, so it is not that the system is basically at fault. One hears a great deal from the government and those of its political persuasion elsewhere that the cause is unequal distribution of material assets between government and non-government schools. That is absolute nonsense because Roman Catholic schools comprise the bulk of non-government schools and they are not classified as wealthy schools. To blame the system covering two-thirds of those students for the wealth supposedly of a very small number of quite wealthy non-government schools is not an argument that can be rationally defended. It is really just an excuse. The government talks about a shortage of money, general equipment and teachers, and lack of suitable conditions for teachers. However, none of those factors account for the problems faced. It is about time Parliament faced up to the problem and stopped hiding its head in the sand. Education (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 97

The one real problem in education today is the failure to ensure that each child learns the basic essentials in primary school. The ideal of education is to maximise the potential of every human being. None of us would pretend for a moment that we are likely to achieve that in the next five years, or maybe even a generation. It is an exquisitely difficult task to conquer. The much lesser goal is to ensure that each human being acquires the basic educational techniques and, despite any excuses from the government, that goal is achievable and mandatory for any government in a democracy. There is no question: what we need is to see that each child learns the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic; not trigonometry and geometry but arithmetic and speaking-communication in other words-personal pride and personal motivation, the get up and go attitude, and we have to add to that today even for primary school students, some computer literacy. With the exception of the last one, all of the subjects have been clear for generations in our society and every one of them has been achieved by individual families and their children, even at times without a school being involved. They may be in the minority but it is historically factual that human beings have achieved all those basic skills on occasions without even going to a school. It makes this point: the material resources needed for those basic skills are, by and large, fairly unlimited and not exquisitely expensive, with the exception of the computer subject, yet if you look at our schools-- The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Shell)-Order! The honourable member for Dromana has been speaking about education in general and his views on it but it is now 11 minutes into his contribution and I suggest that he addresses the contents of the Bill. Dr WELLS-With great respect, Mr Acting Speaker, I structured my address today in a particular fashion and it will reach the point I am choosing to reach, which is directly on the Bill, as I have said, because there is the central role of teachers in this matter. The ACTING SPEAKER-Order! Will the honourable member for Dromana direct the Chair to the clauses of the Bill he is addressing? Dr WELLS-Yes, I am referring to the clauses that cover the registration of teachers, both those teaching when the Act becomes law and those who will follow thereafter. I propose to demonstrate, I think quite forcefully, that what this Bill says is insufficient. I do not speak in this place today as an academic, not as a university teacher, and not as one who has previously worked with the top 1 per cent of students in our community, but as one who has a love of and lifelong interest in children, including the rearing of four of my own children. I acknowledge that which is well established in our society. All surveys show that the home is the single most important instrument in the education of our children. It is interesting that many successfully educated people have come from homes where learning was greatly encouraged, and I quote one example because I think the whole of Australia would be aware of the home of Robert Gordon Menzies. The Menzies family had four sons and each one of them received prominence from the education process because the home did what no-one else could really do for them. I make those points because I do not believe teachers can substitute for the home adequately. I recognise the stress they are under these days with fractured families and so on, but the fact is that in the end that is the only way we may approach this problem in the short term and our teachers are thus at the coalface working on this problem. It is the sort of teacher we put there at the coalface that will achieve the results; not bureaucrats in the city, not multi-billions of dollars, but the basic ability, commitment Session 1990-4 98 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Education (Amendment) Bill and continuing achievement of teachers at the coalface. That is the point I really am hammering out today. If we look at secondary schools in Victoria, there are real problems in the discipline in some of those schools. Some are like an asphalt jungle. I could name in this place secondary schoolteachers who say they can do no more than attempt to maintain discipline in their classes, and then at great personal cost to themselves. There is no capacity for those students in secondary schools to add to their educational ability. They have reached that point and for various reasons they are no longer interested in, amenable to and susceptible to the education process. The fact of the matter is they cannot get out the gate quickly enough. I referred earlier to a number of essential basic educational prerequisite skills and one of them I referred to is personal pride. If students do not have the basic reading, writing, arithmetic and get up and go skills they use all sorts of devices and subterfuges to try to cover up their deplorable situation, which is not really their doing, and in the process become occasionally rebellious and make further difficulty in the system applying in secondary schools. These students have lost their personal pride and suffer grievously. The problem goes back to primary school, back to teaching the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic. It goes back to students of eight or nine years of age-by ten it is too late. It goes back to a system which, no matter the amount of money invested, no matter how many teachers we have and no matter how committed those teachers are, is failing our children. It has reached the point where someone must take responsibility-and, in the first instance, that responsibility must be taken by our teachers. We must require a better performance at that level, which brings me to the point of the registration of our teachers. I acknowledge the commitment the Minister for Education has to the educational process. Nevertheless, the system over which she presides is not working sufficiently well, despite the fact that the Minister has at her disposal the resources to achieve a better result. The system is not here to serve the bureaucratic unions or the teacher unions; it is here to serve the interests of our children. That is why the Minister must take hold of the system and shake it vigorously to ensure that we achieve a better outcome. The government talks about its interest in social justice and about outcomes more than opportunities. Certainly our students have opportunities because, by law, they are required to attend school-but the standard of outcome is not acceptable. In the end it is the responsibility of the government to ensure that every child receives a basic education because, by law, it has taken unto itself the legally enforceable right to require children to be educated to a certain age. But over and above that legal right, in a democracy a government has a moral responsibility to see that each and every human being receives those basic educational rights. Parliament should hang its head in shame when it contemplates the fact that 10 per cent of our society does not receive a suitable education. The fact that anyone is illiterate is inexcusable-apart from 2 per cent of our population who are incapable of being taught. It is instructive to contrast the situation today with that which existed shortly after the second world war. At that time only 2 per cent of Australians were unemployed, and intellectually unemployable. The other 98 per cent were gainfully employed, to the benefit of themselves, their employers and the nation. That gives some indication that approximately 98 per cent of our population can be taught the basics. On present figures it stands to reason that at least 8 per cent of our people-and that figure may be conservative-are not receiving the basic education they need; and if they suffer, so will the whole of society. Education (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 99

I note that the Minister is grimacing at my assertion. But I could take her to many secondary schools in Victoria where students are not being properly taught and'where they do not have sufficient skills because they were allowed to pass year by year without someone taking responsibility for the hard decisions that had to be made by sayin~, "This child needs special attention; he or she needs to be placed in a special teachIng group". Such pressing matters were fudged over and unskilled children were allowed to continue through the system-and after a while the prospects for such children become hopeless. It is time that the government sought one way or another to ensure that there is adequate discipline in our schools so that teachers may maintain a teaching atmosphere. It is time that a system was established to ensure that families are made responsible for their children-- The SPEAKER-Order! I am having some difficulty relating the honourable member's comments to the Bill. I ask him to return to the Bill and to relate his remarks to its provisions. Dr WELLS-I am talking about the conditions under which teachers work as well as the outcomes they achieve. I am asserting that those outcomes relate to the ability and commitment of teachers, and that the registration of teachers relates particularly to the notion of ability. I do not resile in any way from what may upset some people in our community when I say that, although there are excellent teachers out there-and I say without arrogance that there is no question that the best educational products from Australian schools and universities hold their own anywhere in the world and exceed other countries' standards in many places-it remains incontestable that there are some teachers in our system who are not pulling their weight. If the Minister intends to register teachers she should take advantage of this opportunity to ensure that we achieve better results from all of our teachers and from the taxpar.ers' dollars so that a better job is done for all students. It is the Minister's respons~bllity on behalf of the government to see that we get results better than we are achieving at present. In passing I shall make a brief comment about the computerised teaching of our students. Again, the government claims to be doing a good job in this area, a claim I reject. There is no more powerful a tool for teachers to use than computers. The SPEAKER-Order! I am unable to relate the honourable member's remarks to the Bill. Dr WELLS-I am taking this opportunity to say that, in my view, the government is failing significantly in the way it is using the abilities of its teachers. Althou~ the Bill addresses some matters, I find it to be insufficient in this regard. I ask the MInister to examine the regulations to see what can be done so that, apart from those 1 or 2 per cent of our population who are mentally retarded, the rest of our children receive a proper basic education. That is the biggest single challenge facing teachers today, and it is a matter relevant to the registration of teachers. We cannot afford to go on as we have been going. Mr KENNETT (Burwood)-In speaking on the Bill, which some honourable members have described as small, I point out that for the majority of the debate no government members have been in the House except for the Minister for Education. No educational measure, however small, warrants that 'sort of neglect and abuse. For the government to introduce a Bill that its members do not have the courage to either support or speak on reveals the lack of concern the government really has for education-and teachers and parents of schoolchildren should be appalled by the government's attitude. 100 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Education (Amendment) Bill

It was intended that the Bill would take effect from 1 January of this year. Because Parliament rose early last year this Bill will apply retrospectively: instead of reintroducing the Bill in this sessional period the government should have ensured that the Bill passed through Parliament in the last sessional period so that those who are affected by the rules and regulations of the State can be sure about the timing of procedures by which they are affected. This Bill brings about change simply for change's sake. If anything is upsetting the professionals in a whole range of ~overnment administration, it is the complete succession of change as it affects theIr administration. I do not care whether it is the police or the health system or public transport or, obviously, education. In this case the education providers '.are once again being thrown into turmoil because of change. While the concentration by this government is on change for change's sake involving the bureaucracy and teachers, the quality. of education is being affected. My sympathy clearly goes to teachers, parents and chIldren who are being subjected once again to change for change's sake. I speak a great deal at schools and with teachers and parents. The morale in the teaching profession is, I believe, very low indeed, and it is why so many people have resigned from the profession. According to the information secured by the honourable member for Forest Hill based on freedom of information material that shows that 1112 teachers have left the profession in the three months from November to the end of January. That is greatly in excess of normal retirement-- Ms Kirner-It is 30 less. Mr KENNETI-Are you happy with that? Ms Kirner-No, I am not. The SPEAKER-Order! The Minister should await her opportunity to reply. Mr KENNETI-Isn't that fantastic! Here is the Minister, who used to hold herself up as the voice of education in this State, who achieved her political position today because of her network among the parents associations, who is now reviled by most of those in the teaching profession because of her failure to listen to teachers and parents and her failure to listen to students. She fails to listen to the voices of education. She may argue with figures but, let me tell you, most of those resignations are not attributable to individuals who have left the public teaching system because they have reached retirement age. They are absolutely browned off with the system because of the changes. This legislation is about more change. While for obvious reasons I do not condone strikes by teachers during school terms, however much pain is felt by teachers, I think the interests of the children must come first. I sympathise with the teachers in this State at the moment because of the ongoing changes that are taking place to their profession, of which this legislation is part. For the principals of schools in my area to be threatened with a loss in pay and senior teachers to be pushed into difficulties because of the new arrangements being soupt by the Minister for Education does not do anything for the morale of the teachIng profession. The third point I wish to make about the proposed le~slation, having said, firstly, that it is retrospective, and having argued, secondly, that It is chan$e for change's sake, is that it brings about a further lowering of expectations and stnving for excellence within our communities. I am appalled, and I do not say that lightly, at the Minister's hell-bent drive to equalise the education system. One of the best things this State had was pride in its schools. Not every school was equal in terms of the public system. Others were subjected to more changes in teaching staff and the demographics of the Education (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 101 area concerned, but mostly there was a lot of pride in being associated with a partjcular school. Yet the Minister for Education, through this Bill, in one fell swoop is going to take away the identity of a whole range of schools in the community-schools which have served the community well, and I am talking about technical schools in particular-as she pursues this stupid VCE idea. She is now going to move from three classifications of teachers to two, and we are going to lose the identification in our teaching system of a very important, fundamental part of that system-the technical education component. These are important schools and different from the normal secondary schools; technical schools have built up a very good reputation over many years and teach a range of skills that, in my opinion, are fundamental to the growth of this society. We have been through a period when many students and senior members of society look down on people who use their hands to earn a living and to provide for their families. They believe it is wrong to be a blue-collar worker, a tradesman, a carpenter or a plumber. Yet these occupations offer fantastic opportunities for men and women to establish their own small businesses, to be profitable and to provide security for their families. That is what technical schools were all about. Nevertheless the Minister has used her power and this Bill to bring about change. For what? Is it better? Is it better to have two classifications than three? Is it better to wipe out the separate identity of a whole range of technical schools where those who teach in them are proud and those who attend them are proud? Now every school will lose its own identity and become simply a secondary school. I do not agree with that, and I do not think the Minister does either. The technical schools in this State have been an integral part of the education system. It is no good looking at the Speaker, Madam Minister, for his support. He does not like the abolition of the technical classifications. It will not help anyone. Mrs Hirsh interjected. The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member for Wantirna is out of order and out of her place. Mr KEN NETT-The honourable member for Wantirna is a pain in the butt. The SPEAKER-Order! I suggest the honourable member for Burwood return to the decorous tone he was previously using in his speech, and to the subject matter. Mr KENNETT-I was diverted. What the honourable member's interjection indicates is that the same subjects will be taught in technical schools but will not be recognised as being different and special. That is what I am objecting to. People like to be special. They do not all like to be equal in a society, and they are being driven towards losing their identity. The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member should direct his remarks to the Chair. Mr KENNETT-I am trying to; it is just that the Chair keeps moving. It is fundamentally wrong to keep trying to bring every individual and every institution down to the same common denominator. That is what this Bill does. Gone are the technical education areas in terms of identity. Gone is the history that has been associated with those schools and the special identification that those professionals had. Now they are all going to be thrown into the same 'basket. Through the Chair I ask the Minister: what is the benefit of that change? There is none. The same subjects will be taught. Why bring about change for change's sake? Why waste the money? Why get all the bureaucrats and all the politicians spending all that time about change when there is no benefit, and there is no benefit? 102 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Education (Amendment) Bill

There is a real down side. It is demoralisin$; it is change for change's sake, and it takes away the pursuit of excellence which I thInk is terribly important. The fourth point I wish to make with regard to the Bill concerns the definitions clause. Again, we are moving away from the terms "Deputy Director-General" and "Director-General" to "Chief Executive" and "Chief General Manager". Who wants that? The Minister's new director? The new chief manager? What is the value of that? What is the value in changing definitions? Once the former Education Department in Victoria had a proud record and people were proud to go under a title with such a tradition. If you are going to bring about change there must be some benefit, but change for change's sake is of no benefit at all. That means once again bureaucrats and draftsmen and draftswomen spending hours in Parliament. We will have to print new stationery and everyone is to feel better. But what will be the benefits? There is no benefit at all. Therefore, I say that the proposed le~slation is a fraud and a repetition of what this government has been on about. The Bill explains why morale in the Ministry of Education is so low. The government has lost sight of its primary purpose, and that is the quality of education. What the government is on about now is making as many changes as it can as quickly as possible to divert attention away from its failures. The SPEAKER-Order! To assist the honourable member, may I remind him that it is the tradition throughout the Westminster system that he should address his remarks to the Chair, and if he wishes to refer to another honourable member he should do so in the third person. He does not address the honourable member through the Chair but addresses the Chair and refers to other honourable members in the third person and by their titles. Mr KENNETI-I thank you, Mr Speaker, most sincerely for reminding me of the Westminster tradition that applies to this Parliament. I wish you would remind Ministers of the Westminster tradition from time to time. The proposed legislation is retrospective. It is change for change's sake without benefit for the community. The proposed legislation continues the pursuit by the Minister for Education of normality and the lowering of education standards not only through the organisation of the bureaucracy but also through the organisation of education. If the Minister would spend as much time on ensuring that teachers got what they deserved as she does in introducing Bills such as this, the community would be better off. Part of the change is the change in the designation of schools from disadvantaged to normal. I have written to the Minister about the Alamein Primary School in my electorate. It is located in a disadvantaged area near the Ministry of Housing and Construction accommodation where most parents are single. Again we are seeing change for change's sake. I know the Minister will respond to my correspondence in due course. I accept that some areas must be disadvantaged. It does not take much imagination to understand that those in Ministry accommodation are likely to be disadvantaged. I find it difficult to keep up with the changes that are made in education. My community and I look forward to some stability in education. If mistakes have been made in education let us finetune the system so that the system that is set in place this year will exist for 1991, 1992 to 1995 and even longer. It is demoralising to me as a parent because I do not understand why these changes have to be made. I then find that my children have been sent home from their primary school because the teachers feel so aggrieved that they have gone on strike. I do not support teachers striking during school terms and I am concerned about our children's prospects. Why should they be subject to this? It is a waste of time. Education (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 103

Finally, I refer to the comments made by the Premier this morning when h~ said that public servants from each Ministry will be delegated to act as Parliamentary liaison officers. We have been told by the government that there is a shortage of teachers. Although the Public Service has changed substantially over the past few years it has always been independent. The idea that public servants from each Ministry will be delegated as liaison officers is not acceptable. The SPEAKER-Order! It is difficult to relate the remarks of the honourable member for Burwood to the Bill. Mr KENNETI-Thank you for that, Mr Speaker. The Bill is about change, but the Premier has indicated publicly that there will be other changes without legislation. I suggest it is relevant to refer to this change in the Bill, which the Minister herself said contains a number of minor machinery amendments, but I do so only with reference to the concept of change. It is wrong, depressing and sad. Who will be appointed? Will they be those who have sympathy with the government? The SPEAKER-Order! I have already indicated that the honourable member for Burwood is not relating his remarks to the Bill. As the honourable member is an experienced Parliamentarian, he is well aware that there are other opportunities when he can put his case on this matter. I suggest that the honourable member reserves his comments until that opportunity arises and I ask him to return to the Bill. Mr KENNETI-I understand what you are saying, Mr Speaker, and I shall take it on board. The proposed legislation was a waste of time for those who prepared it and it is a waste of time for the teaching profession. The Minister shakes her head indicating that that is not so, but she should ask the teaching profession what it thinks about the Bill. The Bill is not a No. 1 priority; it is a No. 20 priority. Teachers are more interested in the quality of education, in getting the Victorian certificate of education right and in getting their own employment opportunities right. Unfortunately I consider this is another Bill that is designed to sidetrack the community from the abject failure of the Minister, who came to the portfolio and to this Chamber with so much seeming concern for education. She sought that portfolio, she got it and now she has found a situation that occurs to many who have striven for goals but have been unable to provide answers, solutions or leadership. The Bill represents a continuing erosion of excellence of education and it is another reason why the people of this State, when they next have the opportunity of judging the government's performance-given the way they were cheated at the last election­ will throw the government out. People want security and this proposed legislation does not provide that. Mr ELDER (Ballarat North)-This is a small Bill and I shall speak only briefly in an attempt to offer some constructive criticism of it. It does not matter one iota whether I am called a politician or a public servant. It does not matter whether a deputy director-general is called that or a chief executive. Change for change's sake is a waste of time, as other honourable members have said. That the Country Roads Board was changed to the Road Construction Authority and then to the Roads Corporation does not matter one iota so long as road service is maintained and enhanced. However, there are still holes in the roads. It concerns me that there has been reorganisation and restructuring within the Ministry of Education because I am concerned that it is dollar-led rather than being for the benefit of Victorian students. The staff in the Ministry's regional office in Ballarat has been reduced. The reduction was led from the central bureaucracy at the Rialto building. Some of the major 104 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Education (Amendment) Bill functions of the staff in that office have been done away with. The reduction has not been staff led. The Ministry is about making changes to benefit the organisation and is doing away with certain positions even though those decisions should be staff led because the staff make the day-to-day decisions. They are the people at the coalface and they know best what is the position. For example, the first position that disappeared was that of the manager of operations. No sooner had that staff member been moved out of his position than a new structure was proposed by the regional manager to combine the positions of the school placement officer and the school bussing officer. They are two very important and busy positions in our regional office. Ms Kirner-What close relationship do you have with them? Mr ELDER-I have no close relationship with any of them. I used to harass them daily on behalf of my constituents! In that regional office one position has gone and two very important positions have been combined. If the Minister for Education wants to change the name of the deputy director-general to chief general manager and wants to implement a corporate structure, she must ensure that there is accountability. The government simply cannot have all these flow diagrams designating the positions of officers. Although it looks great on paper, it does not work in reality. It is certainly not working in our regional office. Staff morale is low. A union official who has visited that office told me that staff morale is lower than it has ever been. I raise this with the Minister not as a criticism but in the hope that she will come up with a reasonable solution to the problem. I am concerned about the abolition of regional boards when such reorganisation and restructuring takes place within the Ministry. Something must be put in place so that the community can have consultation and input into the decision-making process. I hope the Minister has something in mind as a result of the abolition of regional boards. I am concerned that a number of positions in our regional offices are being abolished when the Government Gazette continually advertises for new positions at the Ministry's head office at the Rialto building. If the Minister is serious in wishing to provide a sound service to regional Victoria, she must consider decentralisation. Many of the functions now being undertaken at the Melbourne office should be shifted to the bush so that, firstly, we are not forgotten, secondly, our service becomes stronger, and, thirdly, to provide additional jobs in rural Victoria. As honourable members will be aware, Ballarat has an unemployment rate twice that of the State average. I offer these suggest~ons to the Minister in the hope she will consider them. It does not matter one iota to change the names of the positions of officers in the Ministry. What is more important is for there to be accountability and for the service to be enhanced as a result of these changes. Ms KIRNER (Minister for Education)-I thank honourable members for their support of the Bill and for their interesting comments on changes in the education area, although the comments were not necessarily on the Bill. A theme of Opposition contributions was that there is no need for the changes in the Bill-they are simply change for change's sake. It is a pity that that line was taken because it suggests that insufficient preparation of their contributions to the debate was undertaken, especially to the clauses. The change to registration procedures for secondary and primary teachers and the changes in names of positions in the Ministry of Education reflect changes determined some years ago by two former Ministers responsible for education. The change in the Education (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 105 registration procedures for primary and secondary teachers was a request from post­ primary teachers so that they could move between technical and high schools and still have similar conditions of work. It had nothing to do with what occupied much of the contributions from the honourable members for Burwood and Forest Hill, who were concerned with the change in names of schools. However, as that matter has been raised-and it is an important matter-I shall address it. The Victorian community's acceptance of the change of name is based on its understanding of the real reasons for that change. Firstly, in our post-primary schools now there is little difference-and there should not be-in core subjects. Secondly, all students, no matter where they are, should be encouraged to stay on to year 12 and be provided with a breadth of education in all schools. There is a strong need for children in technical schools to study languages. There is just as great a need for children in high schools to undertake technical subjects. I could not help but note the significant contradictions in the speech ofthe honourable member for Dromana who argued for computer literacy but still wanted some difference between technical and high school studies. The whole technology studies area must be made available to all students. The fact that the government wants all post-primary schools to offer the full range of curricula means that children in the smallest post­ primary school in Victoria, through tekpaks and telematics, will be able to take part. It is arrogance to the extreme for Opposition speakers to suggest that some children should have access to some subjects and some to others. They would not wear that for their children, so they should not foist it on other Victorian children. The other issue addressed briefly was the Victorian certificate of education, but, as the Bill does not relate in any detail to the VCE, perhaps I should leave that debate until another time. I was pleased to hear the honourable member for Forest Hill and other speakers offer their commitment to the VCE and their desire to work with the government on some of the issues that must be addressed. The Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Board is well established, with all parties represented, to work through these issues, particularly the issue of finer discrimination in assessments. Teachers need the provisions in the Bill. The honourable member for Burwood suggested the Bill was of no use to teachers, but that is not true. Teachers need these provisions so that they can move between high and technical schools-now post­ primary schools-without discrimination or loss of status. The Bill provides that no change in status will occur, which is an important aspect and relates to the issue raised by the honourable member for Swan Hill. He asked whether the Bill enabled me or the Ministry to allow special category registration for people who did not have full qualifications. It is not a Ministerial discretionary matter; it is a matter that is possible under regulation. It does exist for categories such as instrumental music teachers. Mr Steggall-What about languages? Ms KIRNER-There is no reason why it should not apply to languages. The honourable member is right about the difficulty in getting language teachers, especially in the Asian language area, to the country. There is no reason why teachers, parents, the honourable member for Swan Hill and other interested persons cannot put that issue on the agenda and work it through. The honourable member for Dromana suggested that debate on this Bill should be about outcomes. I suggest the machinery amendments in the Bill are concerned with outcomes for teachers. They will enable them to move between parts of the system without discrimination and loss. The amendments also deal with outcomes for students. They deal with outcomes for the Ministry's budget. Without teachers having 106 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Education (Amendment) Bill

the ability to transfer within the system, which the Bill will provide, the current legislation would apply; so this government, as with previous governments, would have a number of teachers in excess. Whatever people said about technical schools, it was obvious that parents were voting with their feet by transferring their children to high schools. Enrolments in technical schools are dropping considerably, as people want twelve years of education these days. The government was left with some 500 to 600 teachers in excess because they could not be shifted between technical and high schools. If honourable members opposite had done their homework on at least that part of the Bill-as had the honourable member from Swan Hill-they would have said that that revision will have a useful impact. However, I am used to the honourable members for Forest Hill and Burwood not doing their homework but raising issues which come from either a few points they have gained under the Freedom of Information Act or from their own ideological obsessions. The honourable member for Burwood said that one of the problems with staffing at the moment is that there has been a greater percentage of staff resignations over the recent Christmas period than before. I do not want to go over much of what the honourable member for Burwood said because it was not relevant either to the Bill or to education in general. However, ifhe had asked me, I could have told him that there were 30 fewer resignations this year than last year. The cessation rate among teachers is 6 per cent and the resignation rate is 4 per cent. The resignation rate is unacceptably high and is the reason why I have worked so hard over the past twelve months with teachers and parents to develop a new career structure. I am not going to say that it is just a matter of money because it is not; it is a matter of improving education. I could introduce a restructure tomorrow if I offered to just hand over to the teachers all that they want. However, there are matters raised by honourable members opposite that must be worked throu~ in the teacher restructure. It is not just a matter of funding but a matter of education. The honourable member for Dromana made the important point that teacher assessment is in need of a change. The career restructure that we are working through can improve the quality of education by introducing a tougher suitability assessment for teachers in the beginning period and at the other end by providing for fixed term appointments for principals, with the schools fixing the appointment for seven years and then another possible five years. I agree with honourable members opposite that there has been far too much restructure in our education system over the past ten years. It started with the then Minister of Education, Mr Hunt. In many ways, it was an important beginning to reform and I would not want to knock it; we worked together on it. It started then and it has continued over the past ten years. I am determined that there will be a position of stability on structures. The Bill may not contain names with which I necessarily agree but as a previous Minister for Education determined those names two terms ago, I will implement the Bill in its present form and not change it again. I do not think it matters what the names are, frankly, but it matters that the structures are stable and that is what I intend to do. I welcome the comments of the honourable member for Ballarat North. I also think it matters where one puts resources in the education system. I have moved away from regional boards and cut 10 per cent this year from the Public Service in the Ministry of Education because I maintain that the concentration of resources should be in schools. That is where the participation must be right and where the resources must Education (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 107 be put. It has been an important basis for my decisions about education. Indeed, in a tight budgetary climate it is an important priority on which to base our progress. I make one further comment in response to honourable members opposite who raised matters relating to the state of the education budget. The honourable member for Forest Hill suggested that the education system was broke. I hasten to assure him that the budget is on line. However, the most important issue is that the career restructure, which teachers deserve both in increased wages and a better promotion structure for teachers and principals, will be funded by an additional $330 million allocation for teacher restructure over the next three years. That absolutely gives the lie to the suggestion that the difficulties being faced in resolving the career restructure issue are a matter of resources. It is in fact a matter of reaching agreement on what is best for the students in this State, and that is my prime responsibility. Over the past few days, in consultation with teachers, principals, and the Industrial Relations Commission, I hope, too, that the disruption in our schools-which all honourable members regret-will stop. I thank honourable members opposite for their contributions to the debate and their support for the Bill. The motion was agreed to. The Bill was read a second time and committed. Clause 1 was agreed to. Clause 2 Ms KIRNER (Minister for Education)-I move: 1. Clause 2, lines 7 and 8, omit "I January 1990" and insert "a day to be proclaimed", Mr RICHARDSON (Forest Hill)-Honourable members have before them a late amendment from the Minister, who, presumably in a moment of panic, realised that the government had mucked it up yet again. Ms Kirner interjected. Mr RICHARDSON-Ifyou didn't panic, you should have. If you weren't panicking your staff certainly were. Somebody woke up to the fact that you have blown it! The Bill provides that: Sections 4, 5, 6 and 8 of this Act come into operation on 1 January 1990, The problem was that the government was so anxious to get out of this place and remove itself from the possibility of exposure to the scrutiny of the Opposition and the people of Victoria that it jumped ship before it got its legislation through! That is why the Bill is here! The government is absolutely hopeless; it could not run a chook raffle in a country pub! All it had to do was organise its legislative program competently and the Bill would have been passed and could have come into operation on 1 January 1990. The government did not want to do that because that would have meant exposing itself to the scrutiny of its opponents. The Labor Party is so nervous that it cannot get the Treasurer out of this building fast enough! That is why it nicked offand made the House rise and why it made a mess of this! Because it is necessary for this legislation to work to enable the Ministry of Education to operate properly, and despite the stupidity of the government's administration, the Opposition will accede to the request of the Minister. I thank her for her courtesy in writing me a nice letter on 1 March in which she confessed her sins and her incompetence and informed me that indeed it would be necessary for her to propose an amendment so that the provision concerning sections coming into operation on 1 108 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Education (Amendment) Bill

January 1990-which obviously was not possible-should be altered to substitute the words "a day to be proclaimed". The Opposition agrees with that proposition but places on record its continuing contempt for the administrative incompetence of the Labor government. Mr STEGGALL (Swan Hill)-I should like to pose a couple of queries to the Minister. The Bill originally came into the Upper House last year and included the date" 1 January 1990", by which we understood it was the intention of the government that the Bill should come into effect on that date. I now ask the Minister to inform the Chamber when she intends to proclaim the Bill. I ask whether everything is okay and whether the Bill will be proclaimed in the next week or so, or whenever. I also wish to respond to a comment made by the Minister in her response to the second-reading debate. She said the education budget was okay, everything was on line and all the lines were on track. I make a point on behalf of Parliament and on behalf of the people of Victoria who have no confidence in the way the government is managing the financial operation of the State. With the confidence of the people of Victoria being shot to ribbons, I ask why the Treasurer is not in the Chamber to explain-- Ms KIRNER (Minister for Education)-On a point of order, Mr Chairman, I believe the honourable member is not addressing the substance of the Bill. The position of the Treasurer and his availability to this Chamber is irrelevant to this debate. The CHAIRMAN (Mr Norris)-Order! I remind the honourable member for Swan Hill that debate is limited to the amendment. I am sure he will remember that when he continues his remarks. Mr STEGGALL (Swan Hill)-I take umbrage at the Minister saying that the point I raised is irrelevant to this State, this Parliament and this Bill; it is not irrelevant. The government should be condemned for not making the Treasurer available today to explain the finances of the State. The CHAIRMAN-Order! Debate is limited to the amendment. I ask the honourable member for Swan Hill to speak to the amendment, otherwise I shall ask him to resume his seat. Mr STEGGALL-My remarks are made in response to the Minister's comments at the end of the second-reading debate. I believe the government is being silly in not making sure it shows how it is accounting for the finances of this State. The National Party will not oppose the amendment but I ask that the Minister explain when she intends the Bill to be proclaimed. The teaching profession is interested in the Bill and would appreciate knowing when it will be proclaimed. If we can get that information from the Minister today, it might be the only thing of any value we get from her. Ms KIRNER (Minister for Education)-The honourable member for Swan Hill asked me when the Bill was likely to be proclaimed. I intend to proclaim it in May. Mr RICHARDSON (Forest Hill)-We have an extraordinary situation. It is now the beginning of March. The government made a mess of the original drafting of the Bill and has made a mess of its administrative responsibilities. Of course, the Minister was in no small way responsible for that by insisting that she had to deliver a Ministerial statement at about 11 p.m. on the last day of the last sittings. After a series of blunders the Minister, in response to the pertinent question of my colleague, the honourable member for Swan Hill, informs us that she has no precise answer about when the Bill Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 109 will be proclaimed, a Bill which she insisted when she was speaking previously was of such great importance. The Minister has no firm date for its proclamation. She says it will be some time between now and May. Why can the Minister not tell us? Why does she not know? Is this one more thing that she does not know about her own department and the way things should be run? If the Minister knows but does not wish to inform the Chamber, will she tell us why she does not want to inform the Chamber? If she does not know when it is to be proclaimed, will she tell us why she does not know. Will she find out what is the proper procedure and when the job will be properly done? Or will she simply chalk up this Bill as yet another disastrous blunder by an incompetent government? Ms KIRNER (Minister for Education)-In response to the honourable members for Forest Hill and Swan Hill, the point I was making was that the proposed legislation would be in place by May. I have absolutely no objection to its being proclaimed before May, and I should be happy to talk to the honourable members for Forest Hill and Swan Hill and determine the soonest possible date. Mr RICHARDSON (Forest Hill)-On a point of order, Mr Chairman, the Minister is engaging in gross irrelevance and is departing from Standing Orders in doing so. This has nothing to do with the spokesman for the Opposition or the spokesman for the National Party, it is a matter relating to government. For the Minister to wander off on a tangent and make some vague offer that she will consult with the honourable member for Swan Hill and me and arrange a date for the Bill to be proclaimed is humbug and it is an affront. The CHAIRMAN (Mr Norris)-Order! What is the point of order? Mr RICHARDSON-The Minister should be brought to order because her comments are irrelevant and she is incompetent. The CHAIRMAN-Order! There is no point of order. The amendment was agreed to, and the clause, as amended, was adopted, as were the remaining clauses. The Bill was reported to the House with an amendment, and passed through its remaining stages.

ROAD SAFETY (AMENDMENT) BILL The debate (adjourned from earlier this day) on the motion ofMr Kennan (Minister for Transport) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed. Mr PESCOTT (Bennettswood)-I am reminded ofa late night session that occurred a few months a~o at the end of the last sessional period when the Road Safety (Amendment) Bill was introduced in the Legislative Council. The Bill deals with matters that are of great importance to the State, yet it was introduced in another place by the Minister for Housin~ and Construction. The practice of having a Minister other than the Minister responsible for the Bill introduce proposed legislation in another place is absurd. The two Ministers who are responsible for road safety matters in Parliament are the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Minister for Transport. The government has a policy of abolishing the Upper House yet the Minister for Transport, who is responsible for the Bill, asked the Minister for Housing and Construction in another place to introduce the Bill first in that Chamber. It is outrageous 11 0 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill that this Bill was not debated in this Chamber before it was introduced and debated in the other place. Road safety is an issue of great importance in the community. During the past twelve months the number of road deaths and injuries have been horrendous. The Road Safety (Amendment) Bill deals only with the edges of the problem. The provisions in the Bill do not go to the real issues of road safety-that is the main point the Opposition makes this evening. . When the government came to power it abolished the all-party Parliamentary committee on road safety. That committee had an excellent record and made a significant contribution to road safety laws in Victoria. Its recommendations and the adoption of those recommendations by the then government thrust Victoria to the forefront of the world in measures relating to road safety. The then government initiated legislation that required the compulsory wearing of seat belts as well as legislation that prohibited the drivers of vehicles from driving if they exceeded the ·05 blood alcohol content. This government decided to downgrade road safety and it abolished that committee. I understand that an all-party Parliamentary committee will soon submit a recommendation on this very issue and that its recommendation will be that an all-party Parliamentary road safety committee be re-established. The Opposition believes the Bill is a bandaid solution to the problems of road safety. There are several issues with road safety: the condition of Victorian roads which affect the safety of drivers and their passengers; the policing of what happens on Victoria's roads; and better driver education. Some of the clauses in the Bill deal with driver education or the test for obtaining a driver's licence. The Bill will introduce the most complicated system in the world for obtaining a driver's licence. The proposed legislation will introduce different types oflicences and one will almost need a university degree to understand which level one is on. It proposes not just the normal P-plate driver, but a $old and red P-plate driver system and different levels of drivers within those categones. Those provisions miss the point because at the end of the day the issue is whether people can drive safely. It does not matter how many years one has driven if at the end of the day one cannot drive properly. The length of time it takes a person to obtain a full licence is not relevant to that person's expertise as a driver. Some people can pick up the art of driving more quickly than others. The only appropriate system is to introduce tougher measures for licence testing. Other countnes have introduced extremely tough testing procedures. I have been through the licence testing procedures in several countries and I know from first-hand knowledge that those tests are far tougher than in Victoria. The final test is the one that decides the competence of the driver, but that issue is examined in a vague way in the Bill. The Bill does not touch on the major matters to which I referred earlier. Safety on the roads will be improved only if our road system is improved. During the Federal election campaign both parties have stated that road funding must be increased, which demonstrates the significance they attach to improving the road system. The Federal government states that over the term of its period of office road funding has increased significantly, when in fact there has been a decrease in road funding of almost 30 per cent in real terms. Those figures were collated by the Federal Parliamentary Library research service. The same problem exists in Victoria. The Ministry of Transport suffered a decrease in funding in real terms in the last Budget of more than 3 per cent, although the revenue received from road and petrol taxes increased by more than 14 per cent. Rural Victoria has normal local roads that have deteriorated markedly. Recently, the Shire of Ballarat conducted a survey, which it published last month, in which shire Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 111 engineers from 23 local councils examined the age of roads in the region. The survey panel returned with an incredible statistic: in the next five years, if funding remains as at present, 20 per cent of local roads in the Ballarat area will need to be dug up, and turned into gravel. That is a remarkable achievement for any ~overnment to have as part of its record-an actual deterioration in the standard of VIctorian roads. An examination of the statistics on any weekend that produces horrific accidents demonstrates that on a per capita basis the problem mainly exists in rural Victoria. With the Federal election imminent, the Federal government has decided it will do more but it is not doing enough, nor is the Victorian government. Shires throughout Victoria put the road problem as the No. 1 priority on their agendas. A measure to provide more booze buses is included in the Bill but that is a bandaid measure for road safety. Who will man and do the work associated with more booze buses? The police will have to find more personnel to cope with the provisions in the Bill, yet there has been no significant increase in police personnel to account for the extra work. A small amount of funding is provided occasionally for the bandaid solutions, and immediately more pressure is applied to the existing police resources; the police have enough trouble copi~g with the increasing crime rate in the community without having to cope with extra offences on the roads. The Bill provides for Victorians to undergo an accredited agency test, making some reference to the ability of someone who has lost a licence, and his ability to drive after being retested. The licence restoration reports will increase the amount of bureaucracy and red tape applying to the community at large. When that occurs, the poor public again finds that when its members want to drive after losing licences they are faced with more red tape and it is unsure whether they will be better drivers in the long run. The only way one can tell whether a driver is more skilled or at least has reached a certain standard is by having a rigorous test; that would demonstrate whether a person can drive properly on our roads. The implementation of licence restoration reports is a waste of time. The government a~eed in another place to amendments proposed by the Opposition concerning the carryIng of a licence. From discussions with the Minister for Transport and his staff, apparently the reason for everyone being required to carry licences is because many P-plate drivers have been involved in drivin~ offences; they were able to escape because they were not carrying licences. The OpPOsItion suggested a solution: that P-plate drivers should always carry their licences but that the requirement should not apply to the public at large. The government agreed to make that alteration. Another bandaid measure of the government when the Bill was introduced was the introduction of a panel of Parliamentarians to examine the speed limit on Victorian roads. I cannot understand why the government should have gone to such trouble to pretend that the measure would improve road safety; it was only another example of fairy floss, and of pretending that something was being done. The government had appointed a review panel that would not necessarily have the power to do anything useful. Speed limits are important but the Roads Corporation has a body of professionals that knows about speed limits; from experience, the professionals know what speed limits should apply to each stretch of Victorian road. Because of horrific road accidents, the Minister for Transport decided to appoint a panel, thereby indicating to the public at large that the professionals were not good enough. However, those professionals are good enough. By convening that panel the impression given to the community is that the government is doing something about road safety. 112 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill

The Bill introduces measures because there has been a year of horrific road accidents-what more will the government come up with? Will there be more tinkering at the edges of legislation to show that the government is doing something about road safety? Why does the government not become serious? Why are the Victorian roads not improved so that people travelling, particularly on country roads, will not only feel safer but also will be safer because the roads will be capable of carrying traffic? Why are the laws not enforced by means of the government providing more police? Fewer police cars are now seen on Victorian roads than were obvious several years ago. Police should not be on the roads only to book drivers; everyone knows that drivers slow down and drive better in the presence of police cars-thereby, the road laws provided for driver safety will be obeyed. Instead of providing more police on the roads and providing a larger budget so more can be spent on the quality of the roads, and instead of improving the testing of our licences, the government produces bandaid solutions. At the end of the day the regulations will have to be examined; to return to a simple system with one type of licence; one type of P-plate licence; and based on the degree of equality of testing of drivers rather than the complicated course that people have to undergo to obtain licences. The Minister for Transport has missed a fundamental point-there must be better driver education. That should be achieved not by means of different rules, but only if people fail licence tests when they cannot drive properly. Honourable members in this place are rubber-stamping something that has been done in the other place. The Minister for Housing and Construction was in charge of the Bill when it was debated in the other place. The Minister for Transport, who is supposed to know something about the Bill, will get away with it because a proper debate will not take place in this Chamber because we are, in effect, a rubber stamp. We are like the other place as described by some people; we are not supposed to be the House of review. That is not the way things should be in this place. This is the Chamber where the Minister for Transport is situated and this is the Chamber that is examining the road safety legislation and it should be the Chamber where these matters are debated properly. The Bill should not have been introduced by the Minister for Housing and Construction and should not have been debated in the other place. It was debated very late in the day so that it did not receive the scrutiny that we can give it in this place. Mr J. F. McGRATH (Warmambool)-I endorse the comments made by the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party. Had the government been able to get its act together and control the desires of the Minister for Education in the last sessional period we could have debated the proposed legislation in November. The Bill could well have been passed, but it is only now that we are debating road safety problems in Victoria. It is history that the Deputy Premier rode roughshod over Parliament, particularly over her caucus and Cabinet colleagues. She got her own way with the disgraceful VCE Ministerial statement she made on the last night of the last sessional period. The Road Safety (Amendment) Bill has been debated in another place and it is important legislation. The recognition of that is that the Bill will have the support of this House. We all agree that we should examine the real issues of road safety. I share the view of the all-party Parliamentary committee on road safety, which was an effective mechanism within the Victorian Parliamentary system until it was dismantled. It had a good record in dealing with the real issues. It dealt on a tripartite basis with issues that faced the various Ministries and departments. Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 113

The shadow Minister for Transport spoke about driver education, an area about which I have been concerned for some time. Too much emphasis is placed on the ability of a person to learn the rules of the road and respond to answers, and too little emphasis is placed on that person's ability to handle a vehicle. A person's ability to cope with the rigours of driving on the roads today, whether it be a good or bad road surface, is what is important. We should think about what we do with our new drivers because overwhelmingly the majority of them are young. We give them the opportunity of obtaining a learner's permit for a limited period and then place great emphasis on their ability to answer questions. They are never taken out into situations where their abilities are challenged and where they must respond to certain crises. They should have the ability to drive on wet roads and on gravel surfaces. Their reactions should be tested in relation to braking and other areas. They are a small number of the issues for which we, as the Parliamentary body that will pass this and other legislation, are responsible. If we do not take a responsible, caring attitude to driver education in Victoria, we are accountable for the overwhelming number of young people who are being killed and injured on our roads. We are not doing something positive about their education. Seven days ago I was appalled to learn that the Ministry of Education is removing funding for driver education in schools. It is appalling that such funding is being downgraded to a point where a facility at the secondary college in Warmambool is closing down because the Ministry and the government are not prepared to fund the important component of driver education. There is no talk about a replacement facility-it is to be removed. One must consider the tremendous support that has been given to that fadlity by the community. Local car dealers and car manufacturers have made cars available to be used in the program. The expertise that has been drawn on from VIe ROADS and from the police, who have been prepared to go in and talk to the people responsible for the program, has been of benefit. The Ministry of Education has said that the facility has to go. When one examines the economics of the State one can understand, although not accept, that areas of expenditure have to be cut, but we are gettin$. desperate when we start cutting education. We should give our children and our chIldren's children the opportunity of learning about life to their maximum potential. There is no greater area of need today than driver education. The honourable member for Bennettswood referred to roads. It is important to reflect on the current state of roads in Victoria compared with other States. The argument is best analysed in light of the reconstruction cycle of roads, which is set by the Local Government Engineers Assodation of Victoria as being somewhere between 25 and 30 years. Most munidpalities in Victoria range between 50 and 80 years as a reconstruction cycle. I can dte one in my electorate that has a 600-year reconstruction cycle. It is obvious that what the honourable member for Bennettswood said about 20 per cent of roads being returned to gravel could prove to be conservative, and perhaps an underestimate. It is a sad situation because we are into 1990 and heading towards the year 2000 with technology raging throughout the world; yet we are going back to a system that was hardly adequate for horses and drays-a gravel surface. That has happened because governments have not given the priority to roads that they should have. One need only refer to Federal Hansard for March 1988, where Senator Walsh is reported as having said that the government had decreased road funding by $350 114 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill million in four years. That has been admitted by the Federal government. That is why roads are deteriorating before our eyes. The Federal Treasurer is on record as saying that every petrol bowser in the country should be a collection office for the Taxation Office. The Federal government is not prepared to put part of that massive $7 billion or $8 billion back into roads, but like a light from the heavens came the announcement that on 24 March there is to be a Federal election and all of a sudden people want to talk about roads. People want to put their hands in their pockets and say, "Here is an extra half a million dollars". Some few scant weeks before, we were being told that the roads were all right. The sitting was suspended at 6.30 p.m. until 8.3 p.m. Mr J. F. McGRATH---I shall refer to some of the implications of the proposed legislation. Honourable members talk about driver education and the reasoning behind the introduction of the Bill, but we must take into account some of the problems I mentioned earlier regarding the overwhelming number of 18 to 25 year-old people who are involved in road accidents. Many of them incur injuries and some of them, sadly, die. Parliament must join together on road safety measures; it must be a forum that views in an objective way the need for continued review and the speedy introduction of legislative change to ensure that the problems currently being encountered are corrected. The Bill deals with a number of issues, including the drink-driver accreditation program. I shall refer to the report of the Social Development Committee in 1988, which was its second and final report on drink-driver education and treatment. In its report the committee made several recommendations. Almost all of the members of the committee at that time are still members of Parliament, and the report is a credit to them. They obviously did a lot of work and they came up with a number of recommendations, many of which have been accepted by the Minister for Transport. Some of the important recommendations are included in the Bill. The drink-driver accreditation program and the projections for its development are part of the Social Development Committee's report. I commend the Minister for Introducing some of the recommendations contained in the report. Surely it is proven beyond doubt that simply penalising people without giving them the opportunity of mending their ways is no longer satisfactory. An accreditation course is important. I am involved with an accredited agency servicing the Warrnambool electorate. I serve on the committee of management, and the agency has responsibility in the area for carrying out what is simply known as the drink-driver course. That will now become an accredited drink-driver education program and the report of the agency will be evidence required for a person to go before court. The course, which is run by the Warrnambool Regional Association for Alcohol and Drug Dependence-WRAADD-is structured on the model of the course offered by St Vincent's Hospital, which has been involved in such courses for a number of years. The people involved in that course have drawn from initiatives overseas as well as locally and have designed a comprehensive and effective drink-driver course. The WRAADD course comprises two 4-hour sessions, the first of which is taken by the coordinator of the centre. She goes through the introductory segments ofthe course and explains its requirements and responsibilities. She answers many of the questions the participants may have. It is an introductory educational phase lasting 2 hours. The second 2 hours of the course is taken by the drug and alcohol physician, Dr Roger Brough. He speaks about the medical aspects of alcoholism and the implications Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 115 of drink-driving. He takes it a step further by explaining the problems that uncontrolled drinking can have on one's health. The third 2-hour session is conducted by two different leaders. The first hour is conducted by the Victoria Police Force, which participates readily in the program. Representatives talk about the law and the attitudes they expect from drivers. They speak about the things they look for when a driver comes before the court seeking to regain his licence. The police put forward ideas and thoughts and develop a rapport with people who may have a negative view of them after having lost their licences. The second half of the third 2-hour session is handled by the coordinator of the centre who talks about a driver's attitudes to his drink-driving and to the community generally. The problems of drink-driving are discussed, again in a forum-type setting, and they then go further to talk about the importance of separating drinking and driving. They go through very much a learning phase. In the first half of the fourth 2-hour segment of that WRAADD course a member of Alcoholics Anonymous comes in to talk to the group and again they talk about their experiences with drink-driving. That is sometimes an attempt to encourage these drivers to say, "If we do not do something about ourselves today, that will be us somewhere down the track". That program, which is based on the St Vincent's Hospital model, has been found to be very useful. The coordinator then comes back and talks about the evaluation of the course. The participants discuss the course and what each of them has got out of it; hopefully, different things are drawn from different people so that everybody has a better perspective of the course. There is then an individual assessment of members. Instead of giving each participant in the course a long questionnaire, which some people have difficulty in answering, cannot answer, or need assistance in answering, an individual assessment has been introduced. It takes a little extra time, but each participant in the course is given an opportunity of sitting down with the coordinator and going through the Questions individually so that he or she can have a degree of confidentiality when answering the questions. These sorts of reports will be important in the ongoing education of drink-drivers and will assist in addressing the recurrence of drink-driving and the problems and costs to society caused by those people. Therefore, it is important to examine the recommendations on the drink-driver education and treatment report, as presented by the Social Development Committee in August 1988. Under this proposed legislation drink-drivers who exceed the blood alcohol limit of ·1 will be required to undergo one of these courses as part of an analysis of their situation. It will particularly encourage them to question their attitude to drink­ driving. One hopes that that will have a positive effect, and I believe it will have that effect further down the track. I am delighted to support a Bill that goes some of the way towards correcting not so much the errors but the omissions of the past in terms of dealing with the re-education of drink-driving offenders. That is important. That will be used during the licence restoration period and it will be valuable for magistrates and, in particular, for the participants. The Bill is directed specifically at probationary drivers, and it deals with a range of matters. It imposes a zero blood alcohol level and also provides for a graduated licence system. I am interested to see the system being introduced in this measure because, in fact, a constituent of mine from Warmambool who works for what was formerly known as the Road Traffic Authority, Mr Bruce Turner, many months ago showed me a document that he had made available to the Road Traffic Authority detailing the 116 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill concept of a graduated licence system that he had drawn from a whole range of international experiences. It is interesting to reflect that what Mr Turner was talking about is virtually the same as the system being included in this Bill, which proposes a graduated licence procedure for P-plate drivers and red and gold licences. I trust some credit will be given to Mr Bruce Turner, who obviously thinks very much about his responsibility in what is now known as VIe ROADS. Some of the concepts and ideas he put forward have been taken up. Therefore, I trust that VIe ROADS will give Mr Turner recognition in some way, even if it is merely by way of a letter. It is certainly a concept that he presented to me a long time ago, and here it is appearing in proposed legislation. The proposal is significant. Although some people might make the criticism that a graduated licence system categorises drivers-and I believe it does that-it does so in a very positive way. It allows VIe ROADS and the law enforcers of this State the opportunity of saying to P-plate drivers, "We recognise your commitment to good driving attitudes and a good driving record. Here is a gold licence as a reward for that". That is a far better approach than that ofwielding the big stick and hitting people over the head for doing something wrong. Under this proposal an incentive is offered. It would also be an incentive for drivers who changed their attitudes and habits to get off a red licence. Therefore, this is a very positive initiative and I commend the government and those responsible for it because it is a desirable thing to do. There is a need to encourage these people to improve their driving performance. I said before and I shall say again-because facts are facts-that the greatest problem on our roads today is driver attitude. A whole range of other issues such as speed, alcohol and bad roads are also involved, but the whole problem regarding road safety is driver attitude. Something must be done about changing that attitude, and that is why there is always reference to the driver education program and what ought to be contained in a comprehensive driver education program. Until that is done, we will only be reacting with proposed legislation and amendment upon amendment; we will not really be dealing with the issues. Although the Bill goes some way towards addressing the very critical problems of road safety in this State, we still have not grasped the nettle on driver education, and we must do so quickly because, day in and day out, we are allowing hundreds of drivers to be licensed, to go out on our roads and drive vehicles capable of doing high speeds without having the necessary expertise to handle those vehicles under crisis conditions. We need to give them the skills to handle their vehicles under crisis conditions. They have to be able to drive in adverse weather and road conditions and to handle emergency braking. We need to give young people and other drivers every opportunity of enjoying many years of driving rather than allowing them to kill themselves or others. Although the Bill is a positive measure it still has not addressed a driver education program, and there is an urgent need to do so. The former Road Traffic Authority'S own report talks about single vehicle accidents in rural Victoria. The shadow Minister for Transport said that an overwhelming number of accidents occur in rural Victoria. It is interesting to note that the report of the authority said-the honourable member for Springvale, who interjects, might be interested in this-that the most probable and possible cause of single-vehicle accidents on rural roads in Victoria was bad road shoulders rather than a combination of speed and alcohol. Therefore, when one talks about roads not being a part of road safety, one needs to think about that RTA report. That report was not prepared by the Liberal and National parties or some independent Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 117 body; it was a report made by an authority for which the Minister for Transport was responsible. That is what it clearly said, namely, that bad shoulders on roads resulted in a higher percentage of accidents than speed and alcohol combined. Honourable members must think about that, because road safety is important to all Victorians. It is not only country people who drive on country roads. I am still awaiting statistics to tell me where the people who have accidents in country Victoria come from. In other words, I should like to know whether people who have accidents in western Victoria come from northern Victoria or metropolitan Melbourne. Are they driving on strange roads? Are they driving the last few kilometres to get home and dropping off to sleep, as often happens? It is important to have those statistics to understand what is going on. I refer again to the Road Traffic Authority report and its comments on bad roads. The shadow Minister also referred to the compulsory carryin~ of drivers licences and the attempt to remove section 59 from the Act. The proVIsion was obviously introduced without much consideration or knowledge of the implications for the wider community. If established, the provision would create enormous problems, particularly for people in the rural community of Victoria, who may travel from one property to another without needing to carry their wallet or licence carrier with them. The proposed law would place those people at risk. I remind honourable members of the mother who found out that the bus had broken down while it was pouring with rain, so she rushed from her normal duties in the cattle yard to the small rural school without her handbag and faced charges for not carrying a driver's licence. It was only after consultation that the problem was overcome. Mr Reynolds-And pressure! Mr J. F. McGRATH-Yes. The government conceded that, although it was trying to achieve something positive with P-plate drivers, it was throwing out the baby with the bath water. It was an all-embracing piece of proposed legislation that would have disadvantaged responsible drivers and citizens in this State. The change in those aspects of the proposed legislation is welcomed by the National Party. It appreciates the government responding to the pressure that was applied by the opposition parties. Commonsense has finally prevailed, although originally there does not appear to be much commonsense in the Bill. It has been drafted by a bureaucrat sitting in a glass office-a person who has never been out in the real world to understand what happens where the provisions are to apply. The National Party welcomes the change in approach. I ask the House to bear with me for one moment while I talk about something else heavily concerned with road safety. I refer to the current move by VIC ROADS to direct the purchase of bicycle helmets through a central purchasing depot and for the helmets to be dispatched by schools. I issue a word of caution to the Minister and his department. If ,he knows anything about children and bicycle helmets he will understand that there is quite an art to the correct purchase, selection and fitting of bicycle helmets. If the Minister were intending to place further encumbrances on the already overworked principals, teachers or school councils just to make a quick buck I would understand, but the Minister should think again, because two problems will arise. The first problem is the lack of attention to the correct fitting of the helmet which will, to a large degree, reduce the effectiveness of the helmet in an accident. I understand there are many examples of children who have fallen off their bicycles and not been badly injured but ended up with the badly fitting helmets twisted or completely off. I am sure the government is serious about introducin$ the provision requiring the compulsory wearing of helmets by cyclists on 1 July, WhICh I commend and support, 118 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill but I ask it to think about the distribution mode. A whole range of people, such as retailers, are expert in their field and could arrange to meet some sort of price standard to ensure that people are not ripped off. They would be able to ensure that the helmets are fitted correctly. Honourable members must consider the workload the provisions will place on the already overworked principals and teaching establishment. We need to think about the employment of small businesses in Victoria. The provision is placing all the eggs in one basket-allowing one manufacturer to manufacture and sell the goods to the central distribution point. All of the retailers, including bicycle shops in Broadmeadows, Warrnambool and Swan Hill, will be affected. Perhaps bIcycle helmets are not a large part of their business, but I am sure they are an important part. Invariably many bicycles are purchased for little children and the appropriate place to fit a helmet and to ensure it fits correctly is the place where the bicycle is purchased, not the school system. I ask the Minister to reconsider the move. I see the proposal as fraught with danger. I say again for the benefit ofthe honourable member for Springvale, who has not been listenIng, that I have told the Minister that I wholeheartedly support his initiative in making the wearing of safety helmets compulsory for cyclists from 1 July. Ifhelmets are to be fitted correctly they must be fitted by experts to ensure 100 per cent safety. The National Party will not oppose the proposed legislation. Mr Micallef interjected. Honourable members interjecting. Mr J. F. McGRATH-The capitalist from the government backbench is keen on safety, and I am sure all honourable members are keen on safety. Safety is No. 1. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Deizoppo )-Order! I remind honourable members that interjections are disorderly. Mr J. F. McGRATH-The National Party supports the proposed legislation. It provides positive initiatives for a redirection of driver attitudes, particularly drink­ driving behaviour. I hope, in the short term, that the comments I have made this evening about driver education programs and the sorts offacilities and resources that are needed to ensure that these programs are effective are taken up by the government. I hope it will not be lon~ before the Minister announces that he will introduce a comprehensive driver trainIng program dwelling heavily on what the shadow Minister talked about, namely, teaching people to drive vehicles properly and to react in crisis situations. The National Party supports the Bill. Mr PERRIN (Bulleen)-I rise to speak on the Road Safety (Amendment) Bill and remind the House that I have had the pleasure of speaking on every road safety Bill that has come before this House since I was elected, because road safety happens to be a particular interest of mine. I congratulate both the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the honourable member for Warrnambool for their speeches. In particular I commend the honourable member for Warrnambool who again has shown his understanding of the issue. He has debated many similar road safety Bills. The Bill has the following purposes: the age limit for gaining a learner's permit will be lowered from seventeen years to sixteen; the period for the holding of a learner's permit will be increased from three months to twelve months; the probationary licence period will be extended to three years, with two stages, red and gold; P-plate driver suspensions will be increased from one month to a maximum of seven months; licence holders will be restricted to driving automatic vehicles if the driving test was taken in Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 119 an automatic vehicle; the carrying of drivers licences will be made compulsory only for P-plate drivers, thanks to an amendment made in the other place; drivers who lose their licences will be re-licensed only as P-plate licence holders; licence restoration reports for drink-driving offenders will be introduced; tailgating infringements will be introduced; tampering with specified measuring equipment will be prohibited; and evidentiary provisions relating to photographic detection devices will be updated to include electronic devices. All honourable members who have an interest in road safety will agree that the Bill will have little impact on the road toll. Given the tragic increase we experienced in the road toll last year it is a pity to see such a flimsy Bill introduced, especially when the government claims it will have a significant effect on the road toll. Although the Bill was introduced in November 1989 it has taken four months to commence the debate, for which the government should be condemned. This is not the first time that such delays have occurred. The government announced its intention to introduce a previous road safety Bill in March 1988; it was not introduced until November 1988 and was not debated until May 1989, some fourteen months later. The government does not have a proud record in this area; long delays are the order of the day. The government should be condemned for its tardiness. The Bill is a knee-jerk reaction to the media's highlighting of the carnage on our roads last year, and it is tragic that the government has reacted so hastily to public pressure. I shall quote some statistics concerning road fatalities and injuries to bring my point home. In the ten years to 1988 Victoria experienced an annual decrease in the number of road deaths: from 1978 to 1988 there was a 33 per cent drop in the number of people killed on our roads. Last year that trend was markedly reversed. In 1986 the death rate on Victoria's roads was one death per 1·7 million vehicle­ kilometres, compared with the figure for the United States of America for the same year of 1·6 deaths per 100 million vehicle-kilometres. Even though 1986 was one year In a decade of declining road deaths, the figures are not as good as those for America, and we should ask why. Statistics show that 64 per cent of those killed on Victorian roads had a zero blood alcohol content; 6 per cent had a blood alcohol content of between zero and ·05; and some 30 per cent had a blood alcohol content in excess of·05-one-third of the drivers who were killed on our roads. Statistics taken from the 1987-1988 report of the Victoria Police show that in the years to 1974 the annual rate of injuries had been declining; that from 1975 to 1976 they levelled out; and that since then there has been an annual increase. That is a very bad trend that we should all be doing something about. Figures from the Victoria Police Traffic Statistics Department show that, in 1988, 33 885 people were injured in Victoria in 52 398 collisions. Of that number some 31 per cent found themselves in hospital, 47 per cent needed medical treatment, and some 20 per cent needed no medical treatment at all. The trend of injury rates is alarming. Some 140 Victorians are injured on our roads every week. Of those 2 will become quadriplegics and 2 will be brain damaged. Effectively, 4 people every week are ruined for life, losing the opportunity to make a contribution to Victorian society-again, something we should all be trying to do something about. Or Peter Bourke, who contributed to the National Road Trauma Committee Seminar in 1986, said that 6 per cent of all road injuries result in permanent disabilities; 75 per cent of all injuries are multiple injuries; and, in his view, the cost of one injury, in 1985 figures, represents a loss to the community of $52 000. Such statistics show an 120 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill alarming change in the trend concerning collisions on our roads. Figures comparing 1987 with 1988, for example, show an increasing number of collisions occurring in the metropolitan area and a decreasing number in rural areas. We must ask ourselves why, over those two years, collisions in rural areas decreased by 1 per cent and the injuries suffered as a result decreased by 6 per cent. A further comparison of those years shows that the number of metropolitan area collisions increased by 8 per cent and that the number of injuries as a result of road accidents increased by 5 per cent. The Bill will do little to change the trend of those statistics. No-one can be proud of the figures I have quoted; rather, they have had tragic consequences for the people of Victoria. By any objective test the Bill will not reduce the road toll to any extent. I am happy to learn that the Bill will lower the age for the gaining of a learner's permits. One of my teenage children has recently moved from holding a learner's permit to holding a P-plate licence, and another daughter is about to sit for her learner's permit-so the members of my family have an interest in learner's permits! It is interesting to talk to young people about learner's permits. If one thinks lowering the learner's permit age to sixteen years is going to have any marked impact on the road toll, one should think again. The significant thing about it is that the age for the learner's permit might be lowered and the period might be extended from three to six months, but the latest regulation from the Minister's department is that he has just increased all the learner's permit fees. The difference is an extra $12. That is the regulation which came through in the last month or so. Dr Napthine-It comes out of their parents' pockets. Mr PERRIN-Actually, it does not. Most of the young people pay for the permits themselves. They work or it comes out of their pocket money. It is actually taking money out of the pockets of the young people who are going for their learner's permits. Another aspect of the Bill that I wish to comment on is the restrictions on the licences for automatic vehicles. At the time I went for my licence, one went for either the automatic or the manual licence. Now we have a Minister who has cut that out and says, "You do not have to do that". One may drive a manual car even if one learnt in an automatic vehicle. That is absolute nonsense. There is no basis for that; yet time and again the former Road Traffic Authority said that there was no justification for having separate drivers licences for automatic cars compared with manual cars. Now it is in the Bill; we are reverting to the original system. Do we hear an explanation? Was the former Road Traffic Authority misleading the people when it defended moving to the one licence system? I support these changes because they make for commonsense, but the system should never have been changed in the first place. I assure honourable members that my children learnt to drive in manual cars so that if ever they were obliged to drive manual cars they were competent to do so and were not putting their lives at risk. I turn now to the matter of drink-driving offenders who lose their licences. I have no concern for drink-drivers. So far as I am concerned, they should be prepared to lose their licences and if they offend again, they should lose their licences for lon~er periods. However, they come back as P-plate drivers with the restrictions that entaIls, even though they might be experienced drivers, but there is nothing to make them better drivers. What staggers me is that there is no incentive for such drivers to improve. They have to drive with P-plates and must have a zero blood alcohol level, but there is no Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 121 incentive for drink-drivers eventually to become better drivers after their suspension has been concluded. In this State the government has been constantly telling us that imposing higher penalties for all offences is the way to stop people from offending. That is absolute nonsense, as has been proven time and again. The thinking patterns of drivers must be changed before they will change their driving patterns. I have a letter from the Acting Superintendent of the Traffic and Operations Support Department of the Victoria Police, Mr O'Neill, dated 7 December 1989 in which he makes the matter clear to one of my Neighbourhood Watch members. He says: Presently, all revenue from traffic fines is paid directly to the Department of Management and Budget, with the exception ofa number of safety related offences, in which case one-third of the fine is paid to the Transport Accident Commission in order to assist those people injured in traffic accidents. In other words, the only beneficiary from higher fines is the Treasurer, and the government believes it can reduce the road carnage by increasing the fines. The thinking of the drivers must be changed but, more importantly, we need to change the prospect of their being caught, and that is the key to it. I am one of those members of Parliament-I will do it again in this speech-who constantly calls for an all-party Parliamentary committee to look at road safety exclusively. I do not believe a subcommittee of the Social Development Committee can do the job adequately. The carnage on our roads last year should have been the trigger to make the government reconsider its policy of closing that all-party Parliamentary committee. It is my view that all-party Parliamentary committee should be resurrected and become a permanent part of the committee system of this Parliament. When the Labor Party came to government in 1982 it closed that committee down, and now not one committee of this Parliament has the exclusive brief of looking into road trauma. That is a tragedy. I mentioned before that the thinking patterns of motorists must be changed. That has become very obvious to me in driving and I wish to give an example of what happens. If one is driving along the road and sees a policeman in a car or on a motorbike, the automatic reaction is to slow down. It is amazing. Not only that, but motorists coming the other way usually blink their lights to tell other drivers that the police are further down the road. The effect that police presence has is amazing. The traffic, almost as a block, slows down. Police presence is the key to road safety. Getting more police on the road is what will reduce the road toll in Victoria, and It is not a matter of simply putting up the fines. It is a matter of getting more police on the roads to deter those people who want to break the law. When I last spoke I mentioned that there was another statistic that should be considered. In New South Wales police are pulling over in the order of 400 000 to 500 000 cars every year. In Victoria, the police are pulling over approximately 250 000 cars. Clearly the situation is that the police are not apprehending or at least slowing down as many cars as they are in New South Wales. This is a clear indication that more police are needed on the roads and that where there are more police actually pulling over drivers there is more chance of changing the minds of the drivers so that they change their driving habits. That applies not only in relation to speeding or driving through stop signs but also to drink-driving offences. No person walks out of an hotel or drinking establishment to get into his or her car knowing that further down the street he or she will be breath-tested. People just do not do it. We should follow the lead given by New South Wales. We should put more police on the roads so that offending drivers can be sure of the increased prospect of apprehension. 122 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill

The honourable member for Warrnambool correctly pointed out that there was a need for further road funding which would result in reduced accidents. I agree entirely with him. I remember attending Jim Murcott's advanced driving course at Calder raceway. He taught a group of us some safe driving skills. The honourable member for Warrnambool spoke about the shoulders of the roads that cause accidents. Jim Murcott told us that a car did not actually roll over but that it had to be tipped. He said that there must be something wrong with the road for it to turn the car over. If a road has bad shoulders there will be accidents. The important thing is to build safer roads. I am aware of the evidence from the Federal Government's Road Safety Division which has said that freeways without traffic lights are safer than arterial roads. I asked the Royal Automobile Club of Victoria whether it had similar evidence and in a letter to me dated 11 January 1990, Mr D. J. Williams, assistant traffic engineer, stated: I refer to your letter of 9 November 1989 requesting information on how freeways save lives and applicable crash rates on these roads, compared with other two-way roads. VIC ROADS, in an article in the A/bury Border Mail quoted statistics showing the different crash rates between duplicated roads, such as the Hume Freeway and two-lane highways. Statistics have shown that the rate of casualty accidents for every 1 million vehicle-kilometres travelled is 41·9 on the two-way highway sections, compared with 12·5 on the divided sections. This is a 70 per cent reduction in the crash rate between the two road types. Also, we occasionally see quoted figures stating that all duplicated roads save up to 85 per cent of lives compared with a two-way road. The NRMA, NSW may be able to provide more up-to-date information on this figure. The evidence we have received from the Federal Road Safety Division and the RACV suggests that we should be building more freeways and that that would actually reduce the road carnage by 70 per cent, but yet we are not doing this. I wonder why we are allowing our young people to be killed on the roads? There are many persons in the community who have written articles on this matter. Certainly this was the case in January when this issue was running in the newspapers. I also received a letter from Mr David Clarke from Mount Eliza who referred to the Age article on 1 January 1990 and he states: Contrary to the myth which has been promulgated by the police and the Victorian government in little more than a revenue-raising effort of concentration on speed as the cause of accidents, the primary cause of 50 per cent of the road toll is defined by the Police Department's own statistics as "carelessness". That is the real cause of accidents. Yet we have this road safety Bill being delayed when we have been told that it will fix the road toll. We need more police on the roads so that motorists will anticipate being pulled up for their offences. More effort should be put into dealing with the carelessness of motorists and driver education as well as all the other things we know that will reduce road safety. We have been told the Bill will fix the road safety problem, but that is not the case. I shall continue to berate the government for not doing the things that it should be doing to reduce the carnage on the roads. Most of those who are injured or dead are in the younger a$e group. It is tragic that we lose our young people before they can make a contributIon to our society. Because the government has wasted money on the Victorian Economic Development Corporation and has lost money through State Bank Victoria, funding is not available to be directed to these vital areas to reduce the road toll. Each week as a result of road accidents, four people are either rendered quadriplegic or are brain damaged. I am sure that that number can be reduced. The Bill will not do Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 123 it as it only tinkers on the edge of the problem. A proper committee needs to be set up to listen to the facts from the experts and to make recommendations for legislation and programs so that the road toll is reduced below that of the United States of America. We can do it. The Bill is an extremely small step in that direction. It does no more than tinker at the edge of the problem. Dr NAPTHINE (Portland)-It is with pleasure that I join the debate following the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the honourable members for Warrnambool and Bulleen who have made significant contributions. After reading that the government backbenchers have asked for an opportunity of making contributions to debate in the House it is disappointing to find that there has been a dearth of contributions from them. Government backbenchers would be welcomed if they joined the debate and made a positive contribution to road safety. Tonight I shall attempt to put a positive point of view to assist the Minister to reduce the road toll in Victoria. Parliament has a long track record of taking a positive approach in this area. It is unfortunate that the Minister for Transport has failed to take account of some of the valuable suggestions put forward by those on this side of the House. However, the Bill continues the government's ad hoc approach to road safety. During the period I have been in Parliament I have been disappointed by the government's knee-jerk response to this problem. However, I should like to be positive and put forward some useful suggestions. The first suggestion is that a proper analysis of the problem and considered response is necessary. I refer to the House VIC ROADS publication for the summer of 1989-90 and to the first article headed" 1989 ... Victoria's shame!" which states: The road toll last year is Victoria's shame. Especially for a State which has-for decades-been a world leader in road safety initiatives. Elsewhere in Australia, the trend has been for a decline in road accidents. Not so in the Garden State. There is much evidence that Victoria was a world leader in road safety but this government has failed to keep pace. I endorse the comments of the other Opposition speakers in suggesting that Victoria should have an all-party Parliamentary committee on road safety. The Road Safety Committee, which existed prior to the commencement of the Cain government in 1982, had a wonderful track record, involving innovative and forward-thinking ideas such as seat belt legislation, ·05 and myriad measures that made Victoria a leader in road safety. The road safety role has since been given to the Social Development Committee, which is a totally inappropriate committee to deal with such matters. In the short time that I have been a member of that committee it has received two very narrow references on road safety. The first involved vehicle occupant protection, which is the subject of a report to be tabled in Parliament tomorrow. That narrow reference concerned the protection of occupants in vehicles after collisions had occurred. Honourable members will recognise that that is only a minor part of the total road safety problem. The second reference on road safety given to the committee involves an inquiry into the lowering of speed limits in Victoria. That inquiry has not even commenced because of other obli~ations of the Social Development Committee. That is the real problem. The commIttee has a wide range of functions. Victoria needs a specialist committee to examine road safety issues. It has the record on the board with its former successful all-party Parliamentary Road Safety Committee. The Social Development Committee has other tasks to take it away from its references on road safety. There is a definite need for the reintroduction for an all-party Parliamentary committee on road safety. 124 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill

There are many aspects such a committee could examine to reduce the Victorian road toll. Many new technologies are available. Evidence given to the Social Development Committee when inquiring into occupant protection mentioned bar codes on roads and the provision of computers in cars warning drivers of upcoming hazards, and other means of keeping drivers alert. These issues should be fully investigated. Driver education and safer roads are two other important issues. Regular roadworthy checks of vehicles and driver testing are further important considerations. These issues should be analysed by an all-party Parliamentary committee on road safety. Another issue that must be addressed is speed limiters for heavy vehicles. In his second-reading speech the Minister for Transport referred to speed limiters or tachographs for heavy vehicles. New South Wales raised its speed limit from 90 kilometres an hour to 100 kilometres an hour and, following recent incidents, lowered it to 90 kilometres an hour. At the same time Victoria has had a maximum speed of 100 kilometres an hour without apparent problems with road safety. Parliament must ensure that proper investigations are undertaken to ascertain the appropriate speed limit for trucks. The Minister for Transport would be applauded for reintroducing an all-party Parliamentary committee on road safety.

Clause 6 introduces a lower age for persons obtainin~ learner permits; instead of being seventeen years of age, a person of sixteen years Will be able to apply for such a permit. The proposal really begs questions about the urgent need to improve driver education and training. The lowering of the age of learner drivers from seventeen years to sixteen years by itself will not do anything to make people better drivers when they obtain their licences. In his second-reading speech the Minister referred to proposals involving a new graduated licence sy'stem and the use of computer-based licence testing. That is a step forward but it is stll1 inadequate. Victoria's driver testing is not rigorous or adequate enough to ensure that people intending to become licensed drivers can handle the various road situations. I refer to honourable members air pilot training where computer cockpit simulators are part of the pilot training process; yet no pilot takes out a jumbo jet without having adequate training in real flying situatIons. Mr Plowman-Bob Hawke might. Dr NAPfHINE-Perhaps bus drivers would do that! Pilots are trained under real flying conditions and rigorous tests are applied before they obtain their licences. Victoria requires a proper licence testing system. One has only to reflect on one's own licence test. Most people gain their licences by being assessed during daylight hours, driving mainly on good, dry bitumen roads, and in built-up areas where most vehicles travel at fewer than 60 kilometres an hour. After passing such tests, one can drive on gravel roads, at night, and in slippery conditions. No wonder we have problems on our roads. I strongly suggest to the Minister that, prior to undergoing their final licence tests, all learner drivers undergo proper driver training courses at places such as the Shepparton driving centre, which involves a one or two-day course that must be passed satisfactorily. Mr Kennedy-Is this your policy? The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Deizoppo )-Order! Interjections are disorderly. Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 125

Dr NAPTHINE-The point I am making is a valid one and requires serious consideration. I suggest that learner drivers between the ages-- Mr Kennedy interjected. Dr NAPTHINE-I certainly welcome the contribution of the honourable member for Bendigo West. I suggest to him that he makes a better contribution than his Federal colleague for Bendigo, Mr Brumby, who suggested that an additional road tax be applied to pay for our roads. He suggested an additional 1 cent a litre tax. Mr Kennedy-What does Andrew say? The ACTING SPEAKER-Order! If the honourable member for Bendigo West continues to defy the Chair, I will have the Speaker come into the House to deal with him. Mr LEIGH (Malvern)-On a point of order, Mr Acting Speaker, the honourable member for Bendigo West is out of his place. Not only is he making unparliamentary comments, he is also out of his place. The ACTING SPEAKER-Order! There is no point of order. Dr NAPTHINE (Portland)-I challenge the honourable member for Bendigo West to stand up and say whether he endorses the comments of his Federal colleague who has suggested that the government should increase the fuel tax by 1 cent a litre to pay for roads. I challenge the honourable member for Bendigo West to stand up in his place and say that! I am referring to the very important issue of driver testing and education and I am making the positive suggestion that in the period that people have a learner's permit they should be required to undertake a proper training course, pass that course, and produce that certificate before they undergo their final driving test. Such a procedure would ensure that people who have not experienced certain conditions such as wet roads and dirt roads, and handling skids and similar situations, will have that experience. It would provide insights for those people who perhaps have never driven in such high-risk situations and have never had to cope with a blow-out or a skid. Such a procedure would make a positive contribution to reducing the road toll because people would have a proper understanding of how to handle a vehicle. I share the concerns expressed by the honourable member for Warrnambool who referred to the cutbacks in driver education programs provided by the Ministry of Education. It is a disgrace that this sort of thing should happen in this day and age! I direct to the attention of the Ministers for transport and education-if they talk to each other- the document dated 22 February 1990 that all honourable members received from the Victorian Association of Traffic Safety Education Teachers. It contains some positive suggestions on how to improve driver education in our schools. The two Ministers would be well advised to consider seriously the matters raised. The final issue I address is the condition of our roads. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition has highlighted the significant cuts over recent years in road funding by both State and Federal governments. In his contribution, the honourable member for Warrnambool outlined the importance of the quality of our roads to road safety. He quite accurately presented information from the report of the former Road Traffic Authority, which referred to the contribution the condition of our roads makes to road safety. In support of his statements, I quote from an article written by Mr John Sanderson, the RACV Chief Manager of Traffic and Safety, which appeared in the Australian 126 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill

Municipal Journal of November 1989. Mr Sanderson was quoted in the following terms: Increased road funding could result in the development of roads and roadside environments which are more compatible with road safety initiatives. Poor roads and roadside environments are a major contributing factor in about 30 per cent of crashes, and both also contribute to crashes where the primary cause lies elsewhere. This high level often surprises the community. Yet, the significance of roads in contributing to road trauma is a matter of fact, and should be taken into account with all the other factors when solutions are being considered. Similarly, the RACVs well-received pamphlet, "The great Aussie rip-off' contains the following statement: Safe roads save lives When a freeway replaces an outdated section of undivided road, crashes and casualties can fall by up to 90 percent. Conventional highways generally have crash rates up to nine times worse than freeways. When traffic lanes are widened by just one metre, the rate of head-on and run-off-road crashes can fall by 20 per cent. Some interesting examples of such improvements are given in the following terms: Between 1977 and 1983, improvements to the Hume Highway in NSW ... brought about reductions in deaths and injuries of 29 per cent. The Federal government has acknowledged the introduction of passing lanes- not a freeway, but just passing lanes- On the Bruce Highway in resulted in a reduction of 50 per cent in road crashes. Road funding certainly is a very important issue when one talks about road safety. I endorse the excellent campaigns of the RACV and the Municipal Association of Victoria that seek to make road funding an important issue in the forthcoming Federal election. They have made the point that only 20 per cent of taxes, duties and excises charged on petrol are returned to maintain our roads. I refer to an advertisement placed by the Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce in the Sun of 13 February 1990. It shows that taxes, duties and excises on petrol account for 35 cents of the 63·7 cents per litre paid for petrol, that is, well over 50 per cent of the cost. The concern about the lack of funding for roads will be further highlighted tomorrow when several hundred people, perhaps even thousands, will march in Ballarat, demanding that the State and Federal governments increase funding for roads. I am pleased that the Federal coalition parties have responded to that call. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Delzoppo)-Order! Will the honourable member explain what sections of the Bill his speech relates to? Dr NAPTHINE-The Bill is about road safety. It is important in considering the issue of road safety that it not be considered in isolation. In my introductory remarks I pointed out that the government has reacted in an ad hoc and knee-jerk fashion rather than considering the issues as a whole. Therefore, my remarks are relevant to the Bill. As I said, I am pleased that the Federal coalition parties have responded by indicating that there will be an increase of $1 billion for roads. The State Liberal Party has already committed itself to a 15 per cent increase in funding for local roads immediately upon election as the State government of Victoria. Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 127

Mr Micallef-How much is that? Dr NAPTHINE-It is 15 per cent more than the present road funding allocation. I am sure that all the municipal councils in Victoria would greatly welcome that. In conclusion, I refer to what I said at the beginning of my remarks. I have aimed to be positive throughout this presentation, and I have made some positive suggestions. In summary, the most important, firstly, is that the all-party Parliamentary committee on road safety should be re-established. It would make a positive long-term contribution to road safety in Victoria. Secondly, there is an urgent need for improved driver education and testing. Thirdly, I have highlighted the importance of road funding because the condition of roads plays a significant part in road safety. Mr REYNOLDS (Gisborne)-I t gives me great pleasure to contribute to the debate. One of the most important social issues in Victoria at the moment is the road toll. It was never more evident than when the Bill was presented in the Legislative Council in November last. At that time, Victoria's road toll stood at some 70 above the toll for the same time the previous year. It was the flavour of the month, as it were, that Parliament should do something about road safety. The government stands condemned on this Bill because it was passed in the Legislative Council on 16 November. It was introduced in this House on the same day but the second-reading speech was not delivered until today. The government then wished to proceed with the Bill immediately, which is unusual. The Legislative Assembly sat until 5.14 a.m. on Saturday, 17 November. Honourable members will recall that many of us arrived home as the feathered birds were rising. Despite the disastrous road toll, the government was not prepared to proceed with the Bill that is before us tonight because it was not terribly concerned about the matter. I can remember in my first days in this House the then Leader of the Opposition suggested that the government of the day, of which I was a member, could not run a pie stall. The only thing that has changed is that the faces have changed sides. The government of today now could not run a pie stall. The increase in our road toll is the greatest social issue of our time; it is the highest it has been for twelve years, yet the government has been slow to proceed with proposed legislation. I am pleased that the road toll this year has decreased slightly and I am sure all Victorians are grateful that this has happened. When the Bill was before the House during the last sessional period, we were facing the oncoming Christmas period. Honourable members know that that is the most dangerous time on our roads because of Christmas parties and people driving with a higher blood alcohol concentration than they should have, people going on holidays and a whole range of situations that cause our road toll to rise at that time. Despite that, the government sat on the Bill; it would not proceed with it. Why? I believe it was because of a leadership press by the Deputy Premier who wanted her Ministerial statement on the Victorian certificate of education to be debated on the last night of the session. She said in the newspapers at that time that she meant to make her statement earlier in the week but that it had been pushed back to the final day because of legislative pressure. This most important Bill that would save lives on Victorian roads was put off because of legislative pressure at the time. That shows that the government could not run a pie stall. Even the Deputy Premier admits it. An interesting comment was made at the time by Mr Frank Green, the Victoria Police Assistant Commissioner for Traffic and Operations Support, who said: I would have thought that anything to do with road safety and the continuing trauma on the roads was more important than any other thing in Parliament. 128 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill

Obviously Mr Frank Green speaks from the heart, and he is right. We are playing with people's lives. Without doubt we should have had this Bill before Parliament earlier than today. In his second-reading speech, the Minister for Transport should have left out a word. He should not have said, "The amending legislation is evidence of the government's determination to overcome the disgrace of the present road toll", but he should have left out the word "present". In other words the speech was written six months ago and it applied to that time. It is now irrelevant and many of the things being suggested by the government about controlling the road toll are also irrelevant. The Bill before us today does not have an explanatory memorandum or a table of provisions. Given that the government has had four months within which to present the Bill to the House, those adjuncts, which would have made the Bill easier to understand, should have been included. The Bill contains many commendable provisions with which the Opposition agrees. It lowers the age for obtaining a learner permit to the age of sixteen years. That is an excellent move. I endeavoured to teach my two sons to drive. The younger son who drove with me beside him for the twelve months he held a learner permit had already had twelve months driving experience when he turned eighteen years of age. Lowering the learner permit age to sixteen years will mean that young people will have the opportunity of driving in the company of licensed drivers for two years before obtaining their licences. That is a wonderful advantage because experience is one of the best teachers. Many licence holders learn to drive automatic cars at driving schools. The Bill will provide that a person who has learnt to drive an automatic car cannot drive a manual car straight away. Many learner drivers attend driving schools for a few months but some have only a few short lessons and then go onto the roads, after answering the appropriate questions and obtaining their licences, and drive under all conditions. When discussing the road toll it is often said that people must be more thoroughly educated about driving; that is the major factor in combating the road toll. The education of drivers is not mandatory in any facet of the educative process. It is not mandatory in schools; in fact, many schools that used to give road traffic education have stopped that course. Driving is a privilege, not a God-$iven right and it must be earned and cherished by all people. I shall mention this agatn when I speak about the re-establishment of an all-party Parliamentary road safety committee. All people must be educated in road safety. The Bill also requires that probationary drivers must have their licences with them at all times. The Opposition accepts that proposal because it is essential that when probationary drivers are pulled up they have their licences with them to provide proof of age and proof of status as a probationary driver. Another provision of the Bill makes charges for blood alcohol content offences mandatory and the penalties more severe. They are sensible and logical provisions. An incident I heard of recently worries me, and the Minister might consider this point. I have heard of a person who was pulled up for his third or fourth ·05 offence who was able to go to Canberra and obtain a licence and come back to Victoria to drive. When he lost his licence in the courts he lost only his Victorian licence. When that offender is pulled over by a policeman for a possible infringement of the road laws he produces a licence obtained in the Australian Capital Territory and not a Victorian licence and is able to continue driving on Victorian roads. This racket is Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 129 rife among many people convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol. I ask the Minister for Transport to respond to that issue and to tell me in due course whether there is any way the government can overcome the circumstance of people who have lost licences or who may lose licences in the future from obtaining interstate driving licences. There are always "smarties" who use the loopholes in the law for their own benefit and they must be stopped. The provisions relating to the graduation of probationary licence holders from red to gold licence holders is of great merit. I am concerned about the provisions relating to tailgating infringements. Clause 14 refers to a safe distance from the rear of the preceding vehicle. What is a safe distance? The enforcement of the provision rests on the opinion of a police officer or an enforcement officer. The speed of vehicles can be measured accurately, as can the blood alcohol content of drivers of motor vehicles, but it is difficult to measure what is a safe distance from the rear ofa preceding vehicle. The proposed legislation has other provisions that are commendable. The provision relating to the re-licensing of drivers who lose their licences for drink-driving offences is essential. It is important that people who are convicted of drink-driving offences suffer a severe penalty. The provision provides that those drivers will be re-licensed as P-plate drivers. It may also be appropriate for those drivers who offend against the drink-driving laws to have a further penalty attached to the front and rear windows of vehicles they drive-it may be a D-plate or some other sign-which forces them to suffer the ignominy of knowing that the public knows of their conviction for driving under the influence of liquor. After all, the people who drive motor vehicles when they are under the influence of liquor are the cause of the great majority of deaths on our roads. I know that a country magistrate suggested that such a notice be placed on the rear window of the vehicle of a person who had appeared before him charged with a drink­ driving offence. The provision of an education program and licence restoration reports for drink­ driving offenders, as well as the provision preventing people from tamperin~ with equipment fitted to motor vehicles, in particular, tachographs, will help In the prevention of road accidents. I am in favour of any measure that achieves that end. I now refer to the crux of this issue. The all-party Parliamentary Road Safety Committee existed from December 1967 until 1982. That committee was unique throughout the world. It produced recommendations that were of great benefit to Victorian road users. It recommended the initiation of legislation on the ·05 blood alcohol content, random breath-testing and the compulsory wearing of seat belts in motor vehicles. Those legislative measures gained worldwide recognition for Victoria. The Labor government thought that it would be better for that committee to be abolished and the issue' placed under the umbrella of the Social Development Committee. The honourable member for Bellarine and I are the only members still in this House who were members of the committee that was abolished in 1982, and I ask the Minister to discuss this issue with the honourable member for Bellarine; as a former member of the committee, I believe it ought to be reconstituted. The greatest social issue of our time deserves the attention of an all-party Parliamentary committee. Honourable members who are members of today's Parliamentary committee well know that they do not have the chance to devote their full attention to one issue among the numerous issues examined by those committees. The first issue that the reconstituted road safety committee may investigate is the issue of driver education and whether that should be part of our primary, secondary or tertiary education system. As I said earlier, many secondary schools throughout the Session 1990-5 130 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill

State have opted out of driver education programs. Recently I visited driver education complexes at Ballarat and Kilsyth and I know the great servIce those programs provide for the community in preparing young people who are about to obtain driving licences for the rigours of driving on the roads and the dangers that lie ahead of them. A car is a lethal weapon. I am worried that young eighteen-year-olds can obtain their licences and drive vehicles that you, Mr Acting Speaker, or I would not have driven on the roads but would have raced in the Australian Grand Prix because they would have been the fastest things on rubber at that time. Young eighteen-year-olds, after a few months training, can drive motor vehicles such as a high-powered V8 Ford Falcon, which would have been driven only on the speedways when we were younger. The education system should cooperate so that training programs can be instituted even at the kindergarten level right up to tertiary level. Young people could then progress to the defensive driver training course and other similar programs. I know the value of those courses because I undertook a similar course. People like Jim Murcott and Keith George ofMETEC-the Metropolitan Education Traffic Centre­ can demonstrate the value of an advanced driving course. Another aspect often overlooked is the retraining of drivers who have had their licences suspended and the education of driver attitudes. The Minister for Transport, by regulation, recently reduced the speed limit on freeways from 110 kilometres an hour to 100 kilometres an hour. It was a knee-jerk reaction and will not greatly assist in reducing motor accidents. Statistics indicate that not many people are injured when driving on divided highways. In fact, the accident rate on divided highways is one­ thirteenth of accidents that occur on undivided highways. Another issue the government should examine is road funding. Much has been said about this matter by previous speakers. Police visibility on our roads is one method of decreasing the road toll. When a driver passes a police vehicle or sees a police vehicle even going the other way on the road he slows down. It may be an expensive program to increase police visibility, but it is a certain way of making people obey the road laws. Perhaps the government should examine rewarding the responsible driver; for example, by way of a third-party insurance incentive. When talking about the road toll, often it is forgotten that for every person fatally injured on our roads, another twenty are seriously injured-many are permanently scarred by either brain or physical damage, and they cannot fully realise their potential. The most damning statistic is that last year on Australian roads, approximately 3000 people lost their lives. About ten or fifteen years ago, Australia had lar~e demonstrations throughout the country in opposition to Australia's participation In the Vietnam war, including a concern about how many lives would be lost. In one year, 3000 lives were lost on Australian roads, but the Australian participation in the Vietnam war resulted in only 496 enlisted and eight civilian personnel being lost. Mr Micallef interjected. Mr REYNOLDS-I do not decry anyone who opposed Australia's involvement in that war but I wish the community would show the same consideration and the same concern for the number who will be lost on our roads in 1990. Mr W. D. McGRATH (Lowan)-The honourable member for Warrnambool has clearly put the National Party position on the Bill; in most cases, my party has supported the road safety amendments. It is appropriate to examine the road safety measures for traffic throughout Victoria. This debate occurs very shortly after two horrific road crashes in Australia-the Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 131 bus-truck crash and the bus-bus crash in New South Wales, when numerous lives were lost. Also, only two weeks ago, two transports collided on the Western Highway south of Horsham, with the loss of two lives and another person was seriously injured. When a road fatality occurs in one's own electorate and one sees the enormity of such a road crash, it brings home the problems associated with the movement of freight and passengers on our road networks. There is much to be said for the movement of more freight and more passengers by rail because it is far safer. A road accident is always traumatic for the people involved, as well as for the families of those involved. I observed the State Emergency Service and Country Fire Authority personnel who attended the accident at Horsham, and it made me realise the extent of the trauma they must withstand when experiencing such situations; they had to come to terms with the loss of life and the injured, as well as having to battle the large fire that occurred as a result of the accident. The purposes of the Bill refer to the learner permit age. In about 1985 the National Party inserted the need for provisional licences-for the want of a better term-into its policy. My party is strongly committed to the representation of rural youth because of its lack of access to public transport; they have suffered discrimination because they have not been able to travel to school or to work without their parents providing transport or driving them to and from the different locations. At the time of the formulation of my party's policy it was suggested that there should be a restricted licence available to sixteen-year-olds who demonstrated they had the correct driving skills, and who could pass supplementary testing. That licence would have applied from about 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. for the five weekdays, thereby enabling young drivers to drive to their schools or places of employment. It is pleasing that learner permits will be available for younger people. Problems have been experienced when young people turn eighteen years of age because then they have lawful access to driver licences and to licensed premises-and often the two do not mix. If driving skills are acquired at younger ages, perhaps young people may have a greater degree of responsibility and will understand the problems associated with a mixture of driving and the consumption of alcohol. The community often sees the ramifications and destruction that occurs when people try to mix the two-not just with young people but also people of all ages. Another concern of the National Party is the requirement for the production of driver licences or permits upon request. Many of the constituents in rural areas belong to farming communities; for example, I may be working on my farm in working clothes, and may have to drive a truck on the highway from one property to another. In those circumstances I am not likely to be carrying my wallet, which contains my licence. If I were stopped by a traffic officer I may not be able to provide my licence on the spot. Such a provision.would have placed many people in the farming community in difficulty; often they would be caught out because they would not be carrying their licences. Therefore, they would have been in breach of the legislation. I am pleased that the provision has been amended to facilitate that situation. I have received many letters from people who travel on the Western Highway about transport operators tailgating their vehicles. My electorate covers approximately 200 kilometres of the Western Highway, between the South Australian border and Stawell. I have had that experience on the highway. Tailgating is a dangerous practice. I am thankful that not many transport drivers engage in that practice, but those who do show complete discourtesy to other motorists, and create a dangerous driving hazard particularly for overtaking vehicles on the highways. Another provision refers to the government's decision to reduce the speed limits on divided highways from 110 kilometres an hour to 100 kilometres an hour. The National 132 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill

Party considered that to have been a knee-jerk reaction. The statistics demonstrate that there has been a lowering of the number of road deaths, comparing the first few months of this year with the same period last year, but I wonder how many of those deaths actually occurred on divided highways. Divided highways provide a much safer driving environment and I believe they would be suitable for vehicles to travel at speeds of 110 kilometres an hour. When one examines some of the vehicles on our roads, one finds that many are well constructed, heavy sedans, such as the Ford Falcon, Holden Commodore, and so on. Those cars are able to cruise and be handled safely at speeds of 100 or 110 kilometres an hour, yet when one examines the smaller bodied imported Japanese cars that are powered by small horsepower motors one can see immediately that they are very unsafe when they travel on the highways on a windy day at speeds of 100 kilometres an hour as they do not have the same stability as the heavier cars. Indeed, a number of parallels should be considered in the design of motor cars. Although the small cars are very good around the metropolitan area and can move in and out of traffic and park easily, on the open highway at speeds of 100 kilometres an hour it is a different situation when bad conditions apply. One is much safer in a stronger and better built larger vehicle. I turn to police visibility on our roads. An honourable member made the comment that the booze buses can be seen particularly on Friday and Saturday nights and that their visibility brings about a greater degree of responsibility from those who are in charge of motor vehicles; they are more careful with their drinking practices. It is the same when the road traffic police are about and drivers are more aware that they need to comply with the traffic laws. It is a pity we have seen a decline in the number of police officers who are available to patrol our highways, arterial roads and local roads. I turn to driver fatigue and attitude. They are two areas that leaders of our community, our police officers and local government, need to constantly talk about, particularly in our schools. They must stress that driver attitude is an important matter and that everyone must learn that they do not have access to everything once they get behind the wheels of motor vehicles and that they are not able to do what they like. They must have the right attitude not only in their own vehicles, but also towards other road users. If the right attitude is engendered there will be a greater decline in motor accidents in Victoria. Many horrific accidents occur in the early hours of the morning and I believe they are caused, to a degree, by driver fatigue. We must continually advertise that drivers suffer from fatigue. They need to have a degree of responsibility and adopt the attitude that when they are driving they should be fully awake because the machine of which they have control demands their full attention. The honourable member for Warmambool has contributed widely to the debate. The Ministers of transport, both State and Federal, should bring about uniform road laws. The road pavements in Victoria and Australia as a whole are in an unsatisfactory condition. The former Road Traffic Authority report into the number oftraffic accidents and the reasons for those traffic accidents was spelled out very plainly. The report indicated that the most significant contributing factor to road accidents in Victoria had been the bad shoulders on roadways and bad road pavements. The Minister for Transport has a responsibility and must have a commitment to ensure that adequate road funding is provided, not only for the freeways and the roads around the metropolitan area, but also for the State as a whole. We are well aware that produce is transported from the country to the city, and that must be transported economically and safely. The National Party supports the Bill. Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 133

Dr WELLS (Dromana)-The Road Safety (Amendment) Bill tonight has enjoyed a good debate. I am not always of that view on matters in this place, but it does illustrate what I think is a misfortune; that the Bill should have appeared first in the other place. It should have come here first. Many good points have been made tonight and I imagine we could have constructed a better Bill if the other place had not debated it first. It is interesting in a matter as complex as this because we have heard tonight a wide range of suggestions and a number of major themes have emerged. There are goods things in the Bill, such as the learner permit age being lowered to encourage experience before the full licence is obtained. Prohibiting tailgating is obviously a good move to stop such a dangerous procedure. These things and others in the Bill will help. I am not sure the debate about the licence being carried all the time is of such great importance so long as the person can produce the licence in due course; although it does make for more efficiency if it is available on the spot. I should have thought, through the debate I have heard tonight about licences, that it would not be difficult for someone to carry their licence with them. I experienced a measure of frustration in listening to this debate, as I do to other debates in this place, because it seems that so often it is a set piece; the government introduces its Bill, the Opposition speaks and makes suggestions, and rarely does anything happen to bring the two together. For the people of Victoria to benefit from the combined wisdom of the whole Parliament, the Opposition usually must dig its toes in in the other place and demand that something happens. That illustrates the benefit of there being a safety factor in the other place. That, of course, cannot operate on this occasion; the Upper House debate is already finished. We really are dependent, in trying to represent the people of Victoria from the Opposition benches, on the commonsense and intelligence of government members to listen to what we say and to pick up the points that merit support. I hope the Minister for Transport will do precisely that. I do not see that this is a party political matter. I do not see that there are points to be scored when we are talking about something that last year deprived Australia of approximately 3000 people. Among them would be, by the nature of that lethal process, a significantly large percentage of young people who had their lives still ahead of them. Very often, some of those people are our more alert, intelligent people; perhaps they are some of the risk takers. There is no doubt that a large element in the destructive process of road fatalities revolves around unreasonable, indefensible risk­ taking in terms of alcohol, speed or other factors, such as driving cars that are known at the time not to be up to the mark. It is a complex issue and it does require a broad range of policies to be in place to cut the loss from one of the major killers of Australians. In fact, to get the matter in perspective, it is worth looking at the five major causes of death of Australians. The fifth major cause is accidents, and among accidents road accidents probably come first as a single cause and certainly as the major cause of fatalities in young males. Young men are killed in car accidents in this country all too frequently. There are no political points to be scored in this debate; it does require the best that can be given by every legislator in this Parliament to work out what should be done. However, more importantly, when the cards are on the table, it is the government of the day and only the government-certainly so far as this House is concerned-which has the capacity and, therefore, the responsibility of seeing that it goes on to do the things that are necessary. I suggest tonight that it has not shown sufficient capacity; it has not had the stomach for the problem at hand. There certainly would be a measure 134 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill of unpopularity associated with an effective road safety policy, but it would quickly pale in view of the results achieved. Honourable members have heard tonight a number of very good comments based on local experience, but is it not an indictment of this place-a place where reason and intelligence and industry should and must prevail if the job is to be done-that we have heard not one comment from the government about what happens in the other 160 or so countries in the world with regard to road safety? Is that to suggest that other countries are different from Australia? Of course they are not! There is no question that, to its credit, the former Liberal ~overnment-acting through its Road Safety Committee-brought in seat belt legislatIon in Victoria. That led the world and it spread steadily across the world. Are we to seriously believe there is nothing for us to learn from other countries at this time? This country has a high road fatality incidence. Like, I imagine, a good many other honourable members in this place, I have travelled, worked and lived abroad. I learned lessons in those countries which lead me clearly and firmly to believe there are lessons we could learn from looking at them. However, we do not do it. We pass a Bill through here containing some good ideas, perhaps in a semi-cavalier attitude saying that we have done something more. That may salve our consciences for a while, but that is not good enough for people with our responsibilities. We may let the matter go for another year and another 3000 deaths or two years and perhaps another 6000 deaths. The fatality rate is not coming down; last year, as was said by previous speakers, was a particularly bad year. We are salvIng our consciences by tinkering with the problem at the edges and we let it pass on. If there were any subject that I should have thought that the history of Victoria and the history of Parliament and the nature of the problem with which we were confronted with pointed to, it is the establishment of a road safety committee. The evidence suggests that we should smartly institute an all-party road safety committee. I raise this not because the Liberal Party in opposition currently has one-which is a sign of frustration because the government would not get on and do the job-I do not raise it to be repetitious. I raise this matter because we need to find some way from the Opposition benches to impress upon the government that it should listen for a change and should be prepared to do something about the things it has not got right. There is never any undesirable aspect to a government taking on board a good idea from the other side of the House. In the end, it will get the credit for it, so why is it that the government has blinkers on about an all-party road safety committee? I think it is incumbent upon the Minister for Transport when he winds up the debate to say why the government has repeatedly resisted suggestions from this side of the House to reinstitute an all-party road safety committee. Does the government have something to be afraid of? Can it not be bothered making the effort? Can it not afford the minute amount of money involved? Let us have some rational defence by the Minister responsible for the Bill as to why the government refuses to consider thIS previously proven valuable technique. There is no doubt that the question of road safety is continuing all the time and requires continuous attention. It is not something that can be dealt with through another Bill once a year. It is complex; it does involve legislation and it involves the carrot-and­ the-stick policy. It needs to involve penalties, which I shall come to, but it certainly also must involve driver education and, indeed, beyond that, community education. That must surely best come from a committee that is charged with the responsibility of continually looking at this matter and giving sufficient attention to it, particularly on an all-party, Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 135 non-political basis, to bring forward ideas that can be implemented sooner rather than later. It is such a complex issue; it is not one where you can have a little bite of the cherry every so often. Underlined in all this is the proven unfortunate fact that modern cars are highly lethal weapons. There are so many sociological questions that have not been faced by this Parliament in the five years I have been here which revolve around the observation that modern cars are highly lethal weapons. When one is driving a car at speed, ifany one of four or five things go wrong, it is very easy to cause serious damage. Even more tragically, someone not in your car may be killed by your action. That is even more unreasonable and more tragic. Again, a person hit by a car has even less chance of a second opportunity. There are many aspects to this matter for which the government has been found and proven to be sadly wanting. On the one hand I have talked of the need for penalties; I have talked of driver education; I have talked of the efficiency of cars. One can only encourage through this place our law enforcement officers to pull over and to check on any doubtful car as to its efficiency. One car can write off 1 or more, perhaps 3 or 4 lives. As we know, with buses it can be much worse, but cars are usually at fault, and that really needs closer attention. But there is this other more difficult issue from a financial sense and that is the question of road maintenance, and if ever there was a subject other than road safety committees that has been aired through this place-I would have thought, ad nauseam-it is the question of what has happened to our roads under this government because, over the past six or seven years, roads have been one of the best illustrations of the way the physical infrastructure of Victoria has been allowed to deteriorate alarmingly. What an indictment it is of a government to have to acknowledge that over the next five years over 20 per cent of our sealed roads will be ripped up and returned to gravel because there is not enough money to maintain them! There can be no doubt in the mind of the Minister for Transport that the roads and bridges in Victoria are breaking down at an alarming rate. One wonders about the Minister's attitude in this respect because he is not listening to serious debate from this side of the House on what is one of the most important issues at this time in the life of Victoria. Not only is there not money available to do the things at a sociological level that need to be done or to do things in planning for the future that need doing, but we are not even maintaining the infrastructure that we have. The government knows how difficult it is to get money for anything. So how does it raise millions and perhaps even billions of dollars to catch up on maintaining roads that it has let fall far behind? The infrastructure of Victoria is crumbling before our very eyes and that will continue because this government is committed to continuing to waste at least $5 billion each year through firm commitments which cannot be overcome-$5 billion in terms of Victoria's total Budget of$14 billion. It is no wonder that the physical structure of Victoria is falling before our very eyes when the government does not care to do anything about solving those basic problems. Earlier speakers have said that driver attitude is fundamental, and I would have thought there is plenty of evidence to encourage any government of Victoria to get on and use that factor to achieve significant gains. I must admit I was very pleasantly surprised by the rapidity with which the community responded to the campaign on alcohol consumption and drink-driving, which indicates that programs such as that can be very successful. There is no doubt that the attitude in Victoria towards drink-driving has changed dramatically in just a few years. Given that that is the case, it can be done with other 136 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill aspects of road safety, and the government should be getting on and looking at that because that is one of the highest returns we can get for each dollar invested. I am encouraged in that attitude because of the year and a quarter I spent living in Switzerland and what I experienced there. There is no question that attitudes vary from nation to nation on this question of road safety. I found in Switzerland a very different attitude from here. There was not what we mIght call the "cowboy syndrome" attitude there that there is here of "Have car, will drive regardless". Switzerland, I think, is very much more a nation of car drivers who are more cautious and careful about what they do. Indeed I remember-and I suppose this is partly why this is imprinted upon my mind-in the first week, I think, that I was there, in driving a car I moved out from a side road onto a main road a fraction ahead of when a Swiss driver coming along thought I should have. Do you know, he quietly followed me and pulled up at my home, hopped out and said, "Sir, I would like to just explain to you about Swiss driving" and so on. He was so concerned that he was prepared to follow me. We had a full discussion, and I have never forgotten him. The fact is that he was a very conservative driver. In Switzerland two things happen. One is, as in other areas of Swiss life, that the penalties for bad driving are severe. The education of children in driving through the schools is very good and the result is that the attitude of the community leads to much safer driving than we have here. It seems to me, in view of our experience with alcohol here, we have abundant grounds for instituting a program beginning in the schools that will lead to much safer driving right throughout the community. I have no hesitation in saying that if that has to be coupled with severe penalties in a reasonable way, then I would support that sort of policy because I remind you, as a previous speaker said, that we wipe out, through our cowboy attitudes in this country, six times as many people each year, often in the prime of their lives, as we lost in the years of the Vietnam war. It seems to me we do not do enough through our schools. We have had good results there and we should expand our work. Why is it that we would, for example, make a subject like Australian studies compulsory in the new VCE and not make safer car driving and operation compulsory somewhere during the secondary school years? That omission seems to me something that really cannot be defended. I want to mention briefly a word about my own electorate. It illustrates some of the points I have been making. There is no question that the electorate of Dromana has suffered severely in terms of cuts to both Federal and Victorian funding of road construction. My electorate is identified as the major coastal tourist area of the State and, in terms of State economic strategies tourism is identified as its only major industry; so for us roads are vital in terms of commerce and it is vital to prevent people being killed on our roads. We have so many problems down there with road maintenance it is just not funny, and yet the government continues every possible occasion to walk away from doing something about it. At weekends and in summer the Nepean Highway becomes absolutely clogged with people. They spill out throughout our suburbs, and many people suffer in so many ways. The extension of the Southern Freeway down to Portsea has been ruled out by this government simply because, I think, it is an ideologically unacceptable idea that there should be a freeway to Portsea, and yet it does not really benefit the people of Portsea-they are a small number; it will benefit the whole State and my electorate as the major coastal tourist area closest to Melbourne. It is essential that we look further at the question of the better education of our drivers, the introduction of higher penalties where appropriate, of better roads, and of Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 137 better vehicles. If the government continues in a bovine fashion to resist the invitation to re-establish an all-party road safety committee, I think the loss of Victorians in this next year and two or three ahead will be very firmly placed upon its shoulders. I invite the Minister for Transport to offer a satisfactory defence of the government's continued intransigence over this subject. I cannot for a moment imagine why it maintains this attitude. This government has the capacity to shift this debate through legislation. It will not cost much money. The roads are a different issue. There are many other things the government can do. It can shift the debate to legislation very smartly and very significantly, and it is time it followed up this Bill with other matters of substance and got on with the job. Mr DICKINSON (South Barwon)-This important Bill addresses the program of driver education. It is of major concern to the Geelong region, because it does have a road traffic centre, and road safety has been taught by teachers within the career structure of the Ministry of Education. I need hardly say that funding and staffing are inadequate, because the Geelong East Technical Training Centre currently has 100 students, but it has the capacity to look after 1400 students a year. Repeated invitations to the Minister for Education to take an interest in the school have not received the response the community desired, yet on 22, 24 and 28 February, she visited the Ballarat Keith Edmundson Traffic School to inspect its facilities and give it support. I urge the Minister for Transport to encourage the Minister for Education to consider providing extra staff for the Geelong centre because it is viable not only for Geelong but also the whole Warrnambool region. There are 46 excess staff positions at the centre that could provide 31 additional members of staff to teach road safety. I understand the department is sometimes swayed by reports from the United States of America. I believe the Royal Automobile Club of Victoria does not support centres of this kind because it may lose clientele as a result. The Geelong community is conscious of road deaths. If there are 45 in one year that is 45 too many, and if there are five in one year that is five too many. As the Assistant Commissioner for Traffic and Operations Support, Mr Frank Green, says, "Educate the masses before you enforce the law". Tragically, these developments are being funded by money raised from penalties imposed by using speed cameras. One speed camera can raise $100000 a day, and eight speed cameras can raise $1 million a day. I suppose Victorians can take heart from the fact that the losses suffered by the State Bank could be covered in two years in this way. The Premier and the Treasurer were probably overconfident ofbein~ able to find the money. I am concerned that education is not being given the attentIon it deserves, and I implore the government to reinstate the former all-party Road Safety Committee. Before the speed limit on the Geelong Highway was reduced from 110 kilometres an hour to 100 kilometres an hour a car driven by a youth found to be travelling at 120 to 130 kilometres an hour collided with a tree, resulting in the death of four young people. That accident accounted for four of the five people killed on the Geelong Highway in one year. What was wrong with that car? It had a bald tyre and was unroadworthy. Had there been proper road vehicle checks and lower speed limits, four lives could have been saved. I served on the Salinity Committee with Laurie McArthur, MLC, and he told me that four close friends of his family had had teenage children killed on the roads. How may people in the immediate circle of friends of honourable members have lost children or adults through road accidents? The whole area of road safety starts with education, especially in schools. 138 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill

There are other issues of concern such as infringement notices being issued when people damage property. I recall one instance on the Ballarat Highway in which a property owner had his fence smashed sixteen times in a couple of years. People smashed through the fence and walked away. Sheep straying onto the highway can result in further accidents. It is a difficult task to take the owners of the vehicles involved to court to claim damages. The police ought to be able to give infringement notices to the owners of vehicles so that property owners can be recompensed for the damage caused. When people have accidents they often find that the other party is not insured. Third-party insurance should be compulsory, and that law should be enforced. Why should people get away on the cheap? Those who pay their insurance premiums are carrying the load for all. I am conscious also that heavy traffic on the roads is destroying the tarmac. A New South Wales report estimates that one heavy truck does about the same damage as 40 000 cars. The Midlands Highway between Ballarat and Geelong is falling apart because heavily laden trucks bear down the highway, ripping the edges off the road. The road surface on highways in Geelong at the Corio Bay intersections, the coastal road and the Waurn Ponds roundabout at Deakin University is breaking up. The Torquay road needs to be duplicated and improved for heavy traffic during the summer season. People are tailgating down the highway, resulting in further accidents. There is a demand for government funds to be directed to the Geelong and South Barwon police stations, which were given top priority by the former Minister for Police and Emergency Services, Race Mathews, but somewhere along the line were shelved. There are many unanswered questions the Minister for Transport should consider because people are concerned about level crossings and the need for warning lights at crossings along the Warrnambool train line. People want to know when signals and bells will be installed. The statistics up to 1 January 1988 revealed the number of accidents in the electorate and the cost to the community of fatalities and people ending up in hospital as a result of accidents. There is a need for inspections of school buses to ensure they are not overloaded. What action is the Minister for Transport taking to direct to the attention of the Minister for Education the legal limitations on overloading buses? One cannot put families and children at risk. Those buses are often heavily overcrowded. In one incident, a bus stopped suddenly on the Midlands Highway and ran into the back of a tractor. Fortunately the bus had no children in it at the time because if it had been carrying children they would have been injured. The driver of the tractor was killed. Action must be taken to provide warning lights at all rail crossings. If we save one life we will have achieved a great deal. What is the number of road accidents in the entire region? The last figures I have indicate that five people were killed in the Geelong area. Right across the region people are concerned that the roads are not being maintained as they should be. If the correct level of taxes on fuel were directed back into construction of roads in municipalities, there would not be the problems there are today. If the government spent 9 cents a litre of the petrol revenue on roads the works would be carried out. There is a need for a visual police presence. Wherever police cars are visible, responsible drivers take care. The Age newspaper has revealed that the State has the lowest road toll since 1954 at this stage. This can be attributed to the dry spell we have had. Whenever there is a wet weekend more people are killed. Earlier this year ten people were killed during one wet weekend. When the roads are wet and people are driving at excessively high Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 139 speeds, accidents happen easily and chain reactions involving one to five cars may occur. I ask the Minister to take note of questions on notice in the Legislative Assembly because the community wants responses from the government to satisfy itself that the government is taking every step to curb the number of fatalities that are occurring on our roads, not by knee-jerk reactions such as a sudden decreasing of speed limits on major highways, but by considering the whole issue. The re-establishment of the former Parliamentary Road Safety Committee that carried out valuable work under the Hamer government would assist in this regard. The community would be assured that the government and members of Parliament are making a real input into this important issue. Mr LEIGH (Malvern)-Road safety is one of the most important issues to be faced by our community-which is tragically shown by the number of young people who are killed each year on our roads. It staggers me that, although government members profess an interest in promoting debate on road safety and seem to spend a great deal of time in caucus talking about it, they have little to contribute to debates in the House. I remind honourable members of an article that appeared in this morning's Age: The sittings of State Parliament are likely to be extended to allow backbenchers greater Parliamentary participation. It is a move designed to quell backbench discontent in the ALP. One wonders about the reasons for that discontent. I doubt that one of those reasons is road safety because, apart from the Minister for Transport and the honourable member for Frankston North, there is no other government member in the House to listen to the debate. Dr Napthine-There are a lot of future government members! Mr LEIGH-Yes, there are many future government members in the House. The failure of government members to participate in the debate shows that they care little about the number of people who are killed or injured on our roads. Rather than doing something about the matter the Minister for Transport is given to making grandiose statements to look as though he is dealing with this disaster. Mr Maclellan-Soon he'll introduce on-the-spot scratch ticket fines. Mr LEIGH-As the honourable member for Berwick says, no doubt the Minister will introduce scratch ticket fines for road safety infringements, such is his level of interest in the issue. There is only one government member in the House. What a bunch of gutless wimps! I do not believe that is an unparliamentary remark because the government members' response to the debate shows that, apart from the Minister's public relations stunts, they are not interested in road safety. This Minister is so concerned about road safety that he has installed four sets of traffic lights on a section of road linking two freeways-which, as most honourable members should know, is the cause of a great many accidents. The South Eastern Arterial was opened during a State election campaign by a Premier and a Minister for Transport who are interested in nothing other than publicity stunts. Mr Maclellan-They are friends of panel beaters! Mr LEIGH-As the honourable member says, they are the friends of panel beaters. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr F. P. Sbeeban)-Order! The honourable member for Berwick is out of order and out of his place. I remind the honourable member for Malvern that he should be debating the Bill and not the Minister's abilities. 140 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill

Mr LEIGH-The Minister is responsible for road safety. This is his Bill; he introduced it. We know that the Treasurer does not take responsibility for anything; are you saying, Mr Acting Speaker, that neither does the Minister for Transport? Surely not. The government is rudderless in virtually every area of policy. Along with most Victorians I should like to see more police on our roads, because a police presence undoubtedly discourages motorists from speeding. Instead, the government is intent on covering the debts of the State Bank through the use of speed cameras. An article in today's Sun states: In a ID-week period to the end of February, the three existing speed cameras generated $2·1 million in revenue. If motorists speed they should be booked. I am sure there is not one member of the House who, at some stage, has not broken the speed laws while driving in either metropolitan Melbourne or rural Victoria. We have all done it; I am sure every member of the community has broken the speed laws at some stage. Indeed, there are some roads where, if one keeps to the 60 kilometres per hour speed limit, one is in danger of being hit by the cars rushing past! Speed cameras are important in dealing with accident black spots and dangerous intersections. But instead of increasing the police presence on our roads, the government is intent on installing more speed cameras to collect revenue to pay offits debts-in other words, road safety is secondary to revenue raising. The lack of police on our roads is an indictment on the government and shows the emptiness of the government's rhetoric. The government's emphasis on revenue raising is a sign that it is in its last term of office. As more and more people are booked for speeding and other infringements captured by speed cameras, and as their infringement notices arrive in the mail, I can guarantee that nothing will do more to put the government on the nose with electors­ as you would be aware, Mr Acting Speaker. In a sense I am happy to see the government continuing such a strategy, because it will encourage people to vote for the Liberal Party at the next election. It shows that we are living in a State where Big Brother is at work. I should not be surprised if the government went one step further and installed cameras along all of our roadways. I am sure the Minister for Transport is aware that all vehicles travelling on the South Eastern Arterial can be tracked by cameras. This is the government that removed the cameras from the top of Parliament House because it considered they posed a threat to people's civil liberties. What about the civil liberties of motorists? The government is in such a hurry to collect revenue that it has put such principles to one side. It cares less about the security of this building-it has installed the cameras that were once on top of Parliament House on the corner of Brunton Avenue and Punt Road-than about watching the motorists on our roads. It is worried less about infringing civil liberties than about collecting money. Except for some minor amendments the Opposition supports the Bill. Nevertheless some members of the Opposition are concerned about certain provisions in the Bill­ for example, the provision for drink-driver education programs. One of the best ways of increasing road safety is to train young people at an early age in the safe use of motor vehicles. As the honourable member for Gisborne said, these days young people can buy very powerful motor cars for only a couple of thousand dollars. Instead of increasing the training of young people, the government is cutting back available government expenditure. Its priorities are wrong. Driver education programs should Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 141 be established in schools, for example. Once again, the government's failure in this area shows its rhetoric for what it is: its words are not backed up with actions. As to the provision dealing with the failure to produce a licence, today's licences are approximately the size of a credit card and are very easy to misplace. It is not difficult to leave one's licence at home. I suspect the vast majority of individuals in this community have at some time driven to the shop without their wallets; without the licence, in other words. Under this legislation people are being penalised once again. There oUght to be some saving grace in this measure and the Opposition is supporting some slight alteration to it. Perhaps that is a good thing, but, once again, the government is showing it is somewhat wanting in its approach. In relation to owner-onus provisions, one of the problems society appears to be having with modem technology is the concept of being innocent until proven guilty. That is one of the tenets of our government. I understand one of the problems the police have in relation to the speed cameras and the cameras at traffic lights is coping administratively with booking somebody and being told, "I was not driving the vehicle". The police have been made responsible. Our technology has advanced far in excess of our laws. As technology gets better we increasingly impinge upon our traditional laws, if I may put it like that. It started with provisions in relation to parking and now has moved on to provisions on driving motor cars. I accept that driving a motor car is a privilege, not a right, and that ought to be understood. The problem is that this may be extended into other legislation. The difference to this point is the fact that the licence to drive what is potentially a deadly weapon is a privilege and not a right, but some movement is allowed in relation to that philosophy. It would concern me if the government decided to take the easy way out by arranging that one is presumed guilty and must prove one's innocence. All honourable members ought to be very careful about the introduction of "guilty first" provisions in respect of any legislation. It could be of immense detriment to our society. I move to the matter of the tailgating provisions. The Bill provides: The driver of a motor vehicle must keep the motor vehicle at a safe distance from the rear of the preceding motor vehicle or trailer. If one is caught tailgating, one is fined five penalty units. As I understand it, a penalty unit is $100 so one faces a fine of $500 if one is caught within that range of the preceding motor vehicle. In my electorate burglars appearing before the Magistrates Court are bein~ let off with $200 bonds for second or third offences. One has to wonder what the hellls going wrong with our society when somebody who breaks into an individual's house is fined $200 but if one is five millimetres too close to another vehicle, one is fined $500. It seems that the law is becoming a bit bent about all this. One has to decide whether the person who is tailgating or the burglar is the more serious offender. I would suggest that the burglar is the more serious offender. However, under this legislation, it appears that anybody in this Chamber who tailgates is a worse offender than a burglar. I find that particular penalty somewhat interesting. I guess once again it is a form of revenue collecting because we are also going to get the subjective judgment of the individual policeman who sees a person tailgating. Mr Micallef interjected. Mr LEIGH-Ifthe honourable member for Springvale wishes to interject, I invite him to read page 3 of the Age today which said that people like him were going to 142 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill participate and wanted to participate in the debates in this Parliament. Apart from inane interjections from the honourable parrot for Springvale, I have yet to hear him make any major contributions in this Chamber. He sits there makin$ inane interjections to individuals, but let him for once stand up and make a contributIon on behalf of the people he represents. If he has any guts, he will do that. As I understand it, he was on the senior caucus committee which decided that members of Parliament needed more right for the Labor members to participate; yet he participates less than many members on the government side. As I said, I caution the use of the "guilty first" provisions. I think the government has to look at itself in relation to making someone who tailgates in a vehicle a worse offender than a burglar. I think that is wrong. Many people in our society think this and it is one of the reasons why they have less confidence in the governments and Parliaments of today. They are not acting in response to the needs of the community. This is an act designed to raise revenue on behalf of the government; it is not something that is being raised in order to get better road safety legislation. If it were, the Minister would be trying to remove every set of traffic lights at every major intersection and build overpasses and the like. He has not done that. What he has done, as he has done on the South Eastern Arterial, is to connect two major freeways with four sets of traffic lights. His brilliant road, on which traffic travels at four or five kilometres an hour at peak hour, supposedly carries 55 000 vehicles a day. It has 77 000 vehicles a day on it already and one can walk the length of it at peak hour faster than most individuals can drive it. It is all right for the Minister; he sits in the back of his Ministerial car. We know him to be a Minister who never gets on a tram or train and, it seems, never gets on a freeway either. The Minister has to learn some time soon. The Premier was right about this Minister. The Premier decided to make sure the Minister would not succeed him as Premier so he made him the Minister for Transport. Believe you me, with what is happening with road safety and the Met ticket, I can only say that the Opposition would delight in the Labor Party electing the Minister as its Leader because it would not have a safe seat left in this State. Most of the safe seats are in the inner urban area and the people there are all using the Met ticket at the moment. This is the man who turned the safe Labor seat of Broadmeadows into a m~nal seat and on behalf of his constituents I say God help him, and them in partIcular! Mr GUDE (Hawthorn)-I desire to join this debate to acknowledge those features of the legislation that will obviously carry with them benefits to the broader community of Victoria. At the same time I am disappointed about those issues which have been forgotten. In many ways this is a bandaid measure to attract voters' interest rather than being directed to the real needs of the community by providing improved driver education, better roads and a safer environment in which to commute, to transport goods and services and to generally ensure that the roads are safer for all who use them. Clause 6 provides for learner permits, it reduces the age at which a learner permit may be obtained from seventeen years to sixteen years. That provision is to be commended. In my experience young people are better educated than many of the older generation. In a hostile environment, on the whole young people exhibit restraint. I have admiration for young people. To put that in context, my sons are both now adults and they have gone through the P-plate and L-plate driving experiences. They have experienced not being able to drink alcohol while driving. I along with many parents am proud of the fact that young people do not drive their vehicles when they Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 143 have taken alcohol but rather pool together and decide that one of them will not drink when they go out so that that person can drive them all home. In the main, the young are responsible and it is appropriate for the government to recognise that and encourage them to continue to exhibit responsibility. Clause 7 provides for licence restoration reports. The measure is a responsible one because it provides that, at least twelve months before applying for an order for the restoration of his licence, a person must obtain from an accredited agency an assessment report of his use of alcohol. When a person has difficulty in this area, it is responsible to review the problem and to give the individual an opportunity to overcome that difficulty; and that will not only benefit those people who use the roads but also have the side benefit of improving that person's health. So far as the community is concerned most people who drive are in one form or another active in the workplace and to that extent this measure will have the side benefit of improving a person's health in the workplace and perhaps removing the risk of industrial accident. That benefit should be acknowledged and supported. Clause 12 deals with tampering with specified equipment attached to vehicles. Honourable members know of the temptations that many young people have-and not only young people-to replace the tyres on motor vehicles with wider than normal tyres or to lower their vehicles by structural change in a way that will make those vehicles less safe and thereby pose a problem for other drivers in the community. Honourable members know of problems that have been associated with people installing V-8 engines in vehicles that do not have the physical structure to take such dimensions let alone the power associated with such an engine. That measure should be supported. The proposed legislation addresses the problems of excessive speed and tailgating infringements. Many times when one is driving, particularly out of the inner suburban area, one will observe drivers who tailgate. Approximately 3000 people were killed last year on Australia's roads and thousands more were maimed. Many of those victims may have been tailgated. We must rid the community oftailgating practices. I am disappointed that the Minister was left to handle the debate and respond to it without support from the government benches. It is not that I believe the Minister is incapable of responding but rather that government members have not found the issue to be of sufficiently compelling importance to drive them to make a contribution to the debate. Not one single government backbencher has contributed to the debate. I am pleased to acknowledge that at least the honourable member for Springvale, who was on the Social Development Committee that produced the report that resulted in the proposed legislation, has been in the House and listened to the debate, but I should have thought he would be able to make a valuable contribution to the continuum of the debate. I know it may be beyond some people's imagination to believe that that would be the case but I know the honourable member has a commitment to the life and well-being of Victorian citizens because of his involvement in the union movement and in the area of occupational health and safety. However, the honourable member has chosen not to contribute and that is unusual, given the statement of the Premier reported in the media today that more Parliamentary time will be made available for government backbench members to make their contributions to debate. There is one matter that the proposed legislation does not address. I exhort the Minister to do all in his power to deal with the area ofroads and road funding. Because of my duties of office it is necessary for me to travel throughout the length and breadth of Victoria and, as a person who has spent most of his life in the non-metropolitan area, I can say that the standard of roads has deteriorated to a disgraceful extent and 144 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Adjournment has forced councils and shires to the point where they must return roads to gravel because they are not able to maintain them. One of the intents of the Bill is to improve the environment and I believe effort needs to be made in that regard. A tremendous growth of income has been generated from the revenue Jrom fines for traffic offences. In answer to a question on notice asked by the honourable member for Barwon South, I understand that $34 million has been raised in 1985 from on-theoospot fines. The Minister may be able to inform the House of the level of onootheoospot fines presently being generated. A massive amount of money has been obtained which might be more profitably directed towards driver education. On a number of occasions, I have had the opportunity .of recognisin$ young people who have completed driver education courses- at a couple of drivlng schools in Melbourne. I have been impressed with the standard of driving of young people, but that is not enough. We need to go much further and the government has the opportunity of redirecting some of that money generated from onoothe-spot fines to making available broader opportunities for driver education. In accordance with Sessional Orders, the debate was interrupted.

ADJOURNMENT Physiotherapy education-Daylight-saving-Speed warning devices in cars-Home support services for the aged-Ministerial responsibility-Geelong railway station The SPEAKER-Order! The time appointed by Sessional Orders for me to interrupt the business of the House has now arrived. The question is: that the House do now adjourn. Dr WELLS (Dromana)-I raise a matter for the Minister responsible for Post­ Secondary Education in the other place, and ask the Minister for Transport to direct it to his attention: By an Act of this Parliament physiotherapy training in Victoria is conducted at La Trobe University in the School of Health Sciences, yet for the past twelve to eighteen months this whole process of physiotherapy education and research has been held up by industrial action by the Australian Physiotherapy Association (Victorian Branch) and some of its associates who have rejected the academic standards at La Trobe University, have interrupted clinical teaching in the last year and have snubbed the will of Parliament and the University of La Trobe charged by this Parliament to maintain academic standards in physiotherapy training in Victona. It is amazing that a virtual guerrilla campaign run by these people has interrupted the preservation of academic standards in Victoria, has thumbed its nose at the will of Parliament and attacked the properly' authorised institution at La Trobe University appointed to carry out these responsibllities. The matter had been going round in circles but now the situation has changed dramatically. The Minister responsible for Post-Secondary Education recently indicated that he will consider establishing a second school of physiotherapy at the University of Melbourne, the university to which the Australian Physiotherapy Association and its associates have been insisting the single Victorian school should be transferred. This association had been resolutely maintaining that for academic reasons it did not find La Trobe University acceptable in that way, and that the only possible position was for training to be switched to the University of Melbourne. An amazing about-face has come about because now, with the emergence of a possible second school at the University of Melbourne, the association apparently is prepared to Adjournment 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 145 endorse the first school at La Trobe University. A committee was formed to examine the development of the new department. I was surprised to learn that on that committee is a member from La Trobe University. I wondered why that was so. It now becomes clear because I have been advised unofficially that that committee demanded, firstly, that all currrent senior students in physiotherapy at La Trobe University should be moved forthwith to the University of Melbourne; secondly, that half the intake this year of first-year students should go to the University of Melbourne instead of to La Trobe University; and, thirdly, that funds approved originally by the Commonwealth government under Commonwealth and State government planning for the construction of a new School of Health Sciences at La Trobe University should be switched to the University of Melbourne. This is the most amazing development. It is unbelievable that these people should now admit their intellectual dishonesty. They were not interested in academic standards; they were simply interested in shifting from La Trobe University. They are now demanding that major funding be shifted to establish a further student intake at Melbourne. I ask the Minister responsible for Post-Secondary Education to confirm that the government will defend the established legislative rights of La Trobe University to its full student intake, establishment and full financial funding. Secondly, I ask the Minister to make clear to the Australian Physiotherapy Association and its associates that it will not support the intellectually dishonest attitude adopted by the organisation. Mr JASPER (Murray Valley)-I direct to the attention of the Premier a matter creating difficulty for people from north-eastern Victoria and southern New South Wales as a result of the time discrepancy that has occurred as a result of New South Wales reverting to eastern standard time last Sunday. Honourable members will be aware of the controversy that has been raging over the past six months, particularly the pressure that has been brought to bear on the Premiers of New South Wales and Victoria to achieve uniformity in both the commencement and conclusion of daylight-saving. There has been much investigation by and consultation between the two Premiers in seeking to achieve uniformity. The New South Wales government undertook extensive investigations into the commencement and conclusion of daylight-saving. Those investigations, particularly during the 1970s, revealed that it should finish on the first Sunday in March. Legislation was introduced in that State for that to occur. Although the legislation was proclaimed it was not brought into operation in 1989, which meant the New South Wales government fell into line with Victoria, with daylight-saving finishing on the third Sunday in March. Despite the discussions that took place, what I regard as a stand-off situation has occurred: neither the Premier of New South Wales nor the Premier of Victoria were prepared to concede and change the date. We now have the ridiculous sitation where Victoria is continuing with daylight-saving for another two weeks. It is all right for people in Melbourne and those not living along the border between Victoria and New South Wales because they do not understand the seriousness of the problem. I invite members of Parliament who do not live in northern Victoria to visit the area and experience the problems and obstacles posed by the time discrepancy as a result of daylight-saving. I extend an invitation to the Premier and challenge him to visit northern Victoria over the next two weeks to discuss the issue with my constituents and those residing in southern New South Wales. He would then have a true understanding of what is 146 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Adjournment occurring. The Premier is putting his head in the sand. He should be out talking to the people. It is important that the Premier discuss the matter with municipalities, organisations, and individuals, as I have, throughout the Murray Valley electorate. Most people support uniformity, but they also support the conclusion of daylight­ saving on the first Sunday in March. Mr Kennedy interjected. Mr J ASPER-The honourable member for Bendigo West would not understand. He does not understand most things discussed in Parliament. He should go and talk to people living along the border. This evening I spoke to a lady who lives at Barnawartha in north-eastern Victoria. She works in Albury, but her children attend school in Wodonga. She leaves for work to be in Albury at 9.00 a.m. but her children travel one hour earlier because of the time discrepancy. The children finish school at 3.30 p.m. and when she finishes work at 6.00 p.m. in Albury, it is 7.00 p.m. in Victoria. She arrives home between 7.30 p.m. and 8.00 p.m. and the children have been home for a number of hours. This situation is creating tremendous problems for her family. Unfortunately, similar problems are being experienced by all people who travel between Victona and New South Wales. My constituents want the Premiers of the two States to be realistic and to discuss the matter so that uniformity can be achieved. In future years we do not want a situation where the States conclude daylight-saving on different days. Mrs HIRSH (Wantirna)-I ask the Minister for Transport to investigate the feasibility of fitting speed warnin~ devices to cars as a matter of compulsion. In the short term, I hope the Minister mIght be prepared to at least publicise the existence of these devices as an assistance to responsible drivers. The devices are actually called speed control devices but they do not have any effect on the speed of the car. They do not control the speed but are a speed warning device. I am not discussing speed limiters that control the speed ofa car. Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! I suggest the honourable member ignore interjections, and I advise honourable members that interjections are disorderly. Mrs HIRSH-Members of the National Party may think the issue is very funny but inadvertent speeding is becoming quite common in modem, quiet cars and can prove a difficulty for people who are busy watching the road and may not be looking at visual devices. A speed warning device emits a sound-a buzz or a beep-when the speed of the car goes beyond a certain level. I differentiate between speed limiters and speed warning devices. Limiters control the speed of a car so that the driver cannot make it go any faster. Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! I ask the Deputy Leader of the National Party to come to order and I ask the honourable member for Syndal to observe the forms of the House. Mrs HIRSH-I guess the difference between a speed warning device and a speed limiter is something like the difference between the Liberal Party and the National Party-one of them you notice more than the other. One of the problems about fitting speed limiters is that they may be dangerous, whereas speed warning devices-which can be fitted fairly easily at a cost of no more than about $100-can provide a useful safety adjunct to a responsible driver's Adjournment 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 147 behaviour. When a driver may not be aware of a rising speed, the noise alerts the driver so that he or she can slow down. Speeds can be fixed into the devices fairly easily by the driver and they can be altered as the speed limits in the area alter. The most effective use of the device relies on the motorist and it will be a difficult matter to make them compulsory. However, they can be used to assist responsible drivers to maintain a proper speed within the limits set. They have a most useful purpose and provide a timely reminder for motorists driving modern cars. They are already fitted to some cruise controls and are available, as I said, for about $100. I believe the public should know about these devices. I am pleased to be able to let people know about them and I hope the Minister will also make known that information. I intend to get one as soon as possible. The SPEAKER-Order! Before calling on the next honourable member who wishes to raise a matter in the debate on the motion for the adjournment of the sitting, I remind the House of the right of all honourable members to make contributions to this and other debates without interruption, no matter what amusement might be derived from the particular honourable member's circumstances and history in relation to the matters that might be raised. I ask all honourable members to give any honourable member every opportunity of raising a matter without interruption. Mr TANNER (Caulfield)-I direct to the attention of the Minister for Community Services a matter of urgent public importance. The Chief Executive Officer of the City of Caul field, at the direction of the Caul field City Council, has brought to my attention the need for the Commonwealth and State governments to recognise the needs oflocal government to cope with the increasing ageing and frailty of Australia's population and, through the home and community care program, expand home support services. Honourable members will be aware of the pressure being applied to local government through the Commonwealth government's policy of aged care services that requires maintaining the residential aged care bed program at the level of 100 beds to 1000 of the population who are over 70 years of age. Honourable members will also be aware of the change in the balance to 40 nursing home beds and 60 hostel beds. Australia's population comprises an increasing proportion of aged people, and the early discharge from hospitals policy, the policy of deinstitutionalisation of intellectually disabled persons, and the expansion of the HACC program target group to include younger people with disabilities have all put added responsibilities on local government. A particular problem for the City of Caul field is that its population over 70 years represents some 13·6 per cent of Caul field's total population, compared with 7·1 per cent for Victoria. Obviously there is a need not only for State and Federal governments to recognise the requirements of local government in respect of providing care for our frail aged but also for the government in Victoria in particular to recognise the needs of the City of Caul field because of its large elderly population. Such recognition must be accompanied by an ongoing and predictable commitment to funding for local government so that it may plan ahead to provide the services required. In addition, I direct to the Minister's attention the need to establish a home respite service. Representations have been made to me by the Caulfield Domiciliary Workers Group about the need for such a service to be established in Caulfield. The group consists of agencies in the area including Caul field Community Care, the Caul field Council Assessment Team, the Caulfield Regional Geriatric Assessment Team, the Chadstone Community Health Centre, the Jewish Welfare Society, the Royal District Nursing Service and the St Kilda Day Hospital. They are reputable bodies comprised of individuals who are competent to assess the needs of frail aged people in the 148 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Adjournment

Caulfield area. They have directed to my attention the need for the establishment of a home respite service and the particular urgency for such a service in the Caul field area. On behalf of those groups and others who have written to me in respect of this matter-such as the Southern Region Aged Services Network, the Caul field-Royal Southern Memorial Hospital and, as I mentioned earlier, the staff of the St Kilda Day Hospital, the Jewish Welfare Society and the Caulfield Community Care Centre, and other community groups in the Caulfield area-I urge the Minister for Community Services on behalf of the State government to recognise the needs of local government in caring for the frail aged in Victoria. I ask him particularly to recognise the needs of the City of Caulfield that has, as I said, a population over 70 years of age that is nearly double the average for the rest of Victoria. . As the community groups in the area have so clearly pointed out, a home respite service is needed to meet the needs of the people, and a recognition of that and a commitment are needed from both the State and Federal governments. Mr McNAMARA (Leader of the National Party)-The issue I raise with the Premier concerns Ministerial accountability. I believe the Premier is a man with a sense of history. He wants to be seen in his term as Premier of Victoria as a person who has achieved something for the State and I think there have been a number of notable achievements, one of which is the National Tennis Centre, which was constructed with National Party support. If the Premier can, during his term in office, pull off the Olympic Games for Melbourne, that will be a notable achievement. However, unless the Premier takes appropriate action in relation to the Treasurer, or the Treasurer takes appropriate action and tenders his resignation, the achievements of the Premier and the government will be overshadowed by a memory in the public's mind of a Premier who ran for cover when the going got tough and who stonewalled the public and the Parliament. This morning the Treasurer had the opportunity of presenting a Ministerial statement and clearing the deck. So many issues of smaller magnitude have been raised in this Parliament about which Ministerial statements have been introduced. On this occasion the Treasurer saw fit not to introduce a Ministerial statement. It is significant that with the resignation of the former Deputy Premier over the losses of the Victorian Economic Development Corporation, which involved a fraction of the amount of money involved in the State Bank issue, a detailed statement was introduced. The Premier has had a blinkered and bunker-like approach to government in recent months. Comments are coming to this side of the House from government backbenchers who say over a cup of coffee or whatever that they believe the Treasurer should go. Honourable members interjecting. Mr McNAMARA-Editorials bar none are making it clear that the Treasurer should go and the message across the board is that the public lacks confidence in the Treasurer of this State. More than any other politician in Parliament, the Premier knows the political system and the ground rules. He is the son of a former Premier and he was weaned on politics. He knew the principles that his father lived by; he was brought up on those principles. Ifhis father were alive today to see what was happening in the Victorian political scene he would know how a Premier should behave with regard to the Treasurer of this State. When every editorial in the State is calling for the Treasurer's resignation and with the widespread concern in the community about the economic performance of this State, the Premier sits back and says it is not an issue; Adjournment 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 149 it has been dealt with; it is behind us. Unfortunately, it is not an issue that is behind us, it is an issue that must still be tackled. The Treasurer will go. It is only a matter of time. Everyone in Parliament knows that the Treasurer will go. The public of Victoria knows that the Treasurer will go and the editorial writers of the State know that the Treasurer will go. It would have been appropriate if the Treasurer had taken the proper course and tendered his resignation to the Premier. The Premier must now behave like a Leader. At times a Leader must make hard decisions that are unpleasant to his own supporters. The Premier must make a decision that conforms with the standards he set down. I need not remind the Premier of the statements he made in 1978 over a former Housin~ Commission issue. The Premier made the point about how Ministerial responsIbility could be defined: Not only is a Minister responsible for his own lapses but for the serious mistakes and failings of his underlings. He went on to say: if$4·S million is not enough to have a Minister dismissed, what is? Today the State Bank-- The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member's time has expired. Mr SHELL (Geelong)-I raise an issue with the Minister for Transport. The Geelong railwa>:: station comprises platforms Nos 1, 2 and 3. Platforms Nos 2 and 3 are accessIble from a mounted staircase over platform 1 and a descending staircase on the other side. These staircases are difficult for the aged, infirm and disabled. Recently I have received reports of falls on the stairs by elderly and infirm people. The bannisters on the stairs are too large for frail persons to grasp and steady themselves. The station authorities have said that a smaller rail could be attached to the main bannisters. However, I should prefer a wheelchair lift to be installed at either end of the platform to allow easy access for aged and disabled passengers. The Geelong railway station is an historic building which has recently been upgraded and renovated by the government but it does not provide easy access for the aged and disabled. Currently persons in wheelchairs who cannot mount the stairways must seek the assistance of station attendants who take them to a ramp at either end of the platforms and escort them across the train tracks. Trains from Melbourne pull in to platform 2 or 3. A disabled person can press a buzzer to attract the attention of a station attendant to come and take his or her wheelchair across the tracks. This often entails some delay before the station attendant arrives. It also entails some inconvenience to the person who is disabled because the platforms are usually congested by the huge number of passengers who use the Geelong-Melbourne service. I ask that the Minister investigate the possibility of installing wheelchair lifts adjacent to the staircase leading to the upper platforms. Mr CAIN (Premier)-The attitude of the Leader of the National Party is extraordinary. This morning during question time when the honourable member asked me a question about the same matter that he now raises he, with his colleagues, set out deliberately to prevent my answer being heard. That is typical of the kind of frenzied response that the opposition parties have demonstrated during the past few weeks. Mr Pescott inteIjected. Mr CAIN-If you continue interjecting I shall get the Minister for Transport to do you over again. The Minister does you over very well. I shall do you over if you want me to, but the Minister does you over much better. 150 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Adjournment

The SPEAKER-Order! I remind honourable members that interjections are disorderly and I ask the Premier to address the Chair. Mr CAIN-I asked those opposite, in considering the responsibility that rests with Ministers in respect of these matters, to examine the issues dispassionately. Members of the opposition parties choose not to. They run offin a frenzy, having decided what the issue is, and will not look at it dispassionately. If the Leader of the National Party reads what I said this morning he will understand the issue of the Treasurer's responsibility. Mr Coleman interjected. Mr CAIN-I would not expect the honourable member for Syndal to understand anything. He will never be a Minister so the issue of Ministerial responsibility will not concern him. They would not feed him, let alone make him a Minister. I enunciated this morning that I believe the role of the Treasurer in respect of the State Bank is clear. The Treasurer has certain statutory duties to perform regarding the appointment of members of the board, the access of information and matters set out in the Act. The Act also says that the board has an independence that the Treasurer has to protect. Consider for a moment the kind of frenzy that we have seen during the past three weeks where the Treasurer demonstrably and on every account refused to become involved in individual loans. Just imagine the frenzy we would have if there had been a suggestion that he had breached that requirement. I can imagine hearing members of the Opposition shouting from the rooftops. Just imagine if the Treasurer had interfered in the commercial decisions of the State Bank. Mr Pescott interjected. Mr CAIN-The honourable member for Bennettswood will not go very far in this place if that is the best he can do. Mr Kennan-That is the best he can do. Mr CAIN-That is the best he can do; that is his top performance! I have not heard anybody-nor have I read it in editorials of newspapers-demonstrate clearly that the issue the Leader of the National Party enunciates extends to bodies outside government departments. It is demonstrable that there are independent bodies that shall be independent and free of interference and that is exactly what has happened here. Mr Pescott interjected. Mr CAIN-The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party interjects, "Why should taxpayers pay?" I wish he had read the statement of the Treasurer on 23 February. It made abundantly clear the reason the government adopted the course of action that it did. I ask honourable members to examine the position of the State Bank. It is and will continue to be a sound and financial institution. Depositors and customers of the bank need have no concern as to the security of their money. I do not enjoy the fact that a substantial loss was incurred by Tricontinental Corporation Ltd, a subsidiary of the bank, for which the bank had responsibility. The government properly accepted its responsibilities for what occurred. It is true, as we suggested in December last year, that a number of other variations of the arrangements could have been put in place where other public assets could have been transferred to the bank to meet the prudential requirements of the Reserve Bank. The government rejected that notion. That is the kind of thing one would expect from the Opposition, from those bleating about costs. Adjournment 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 151

The government accepted responsibility for the debt to be incurred as and when the provision for bad debts occurred as losses. In doing so it ensured the stability of the bank. If the Opposition asserts that the government should not have done that so that Standards and Poors and other rating companies could give the bank the ratings it has been given in the past few days then it should say that in Parliament. It should not make innuendos about what the government should have done. I indicate unequivocally to the House that it concerned the government greatly that the loss occurred, but the facts are that it did occur and the action taken by the government in ensuring that the bank was sound was the proper course to take-no frills, no exotica, just a determination to accept responsibility to ensure that the bank's integrity was protected. That has been done. Mr McNamara interjected. Mr CAIN-I reject the Leader of the National Party's assertions that the public has lost confidence in the bank. The public, the financial communities and the financial markets are confident of the bank and are confident and supportive of what the government has done. When it comes to dealing with the problems faced by the State Bank of New South Wales, which are of a similar kind to those faced by State Bank Victoria, it will be interesting to see whether the same forthright approach is adopted by that government. I shall not make any predictions about how much anybody will lose, but I do say this: if honourable members opposite choose to make even a cursory examination of what has occurred in the financial markets of this country they will know that approximately $8 billion has been lost by various financial institutions in respect of the high-fliers. Honourable members interjecting. Mr CAIN-The people who have been lauded across the country by the pursuers offree enterprise. The SPEAKER-Order! There are far too many interjections and I ask honourable members on both sides of the House to allow the Premier to complete his response without interruption. Mr CAIN-I am sayin~ that those losses have been incurred and are being shared by a wide range of financIal institutions right across the country. Australians are the losers in the long term. The government has adopted a forthright and robust approach to resolving the problem and it is one that has been applauded by the people of the State and is supported by them. I welcome this opportunity in the debate on the motion for the adjournment of the sitting of the House of making the government's position clear. Mr McNamara interjected. The SPEAKER-Order! The Leader of the National Party has had his opportunity. I do not wish to take action against him at this hour of the night and I ask the honourable gentleman to demonstrate the leadership expected of him in the Chamber. Mr CAIN-I shall conclude by saying that I believe-­ Mr McNamara interjected. The SPEAKER-Order! If the Leader of the National Party is unable to control himselfl suggest he leave the Chamber. The Leader of the National Party is aware of the Standing Orders and the customs and practices of the House. Because he is in a position of leadership in the House I suggest that he respect that position and uphold the Standing Orders. 152 ASSEMBLY 7 March 1990 Adjournment

Mr CAIN-I regret to tell the House that I infer from the interjections of the Leader of the National Party that he believes the government should have walked away from any responsibility for the State Bank. Mr W. D. McGrath interjected. Mr CAIN-If he did not say that, let him get up and say what he means. I took his interjections to mean that the government ought not to have accepted responsibility. That is the kind of irresponsibility that I have come to expect from the Liberal Party but not from the National Party. Now that I have evidence of it, it does not surprise me. The government took the action that it did because it saw it as the responsible course. The government will continue to act to ensure that the integrity of the bank as a financial institution is protected. The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member for Murray Valley also raised a matter for the attention of the Premier. Mr CAIN-If the honourable member for Murray Valley wants to resolve the matter of daylight-saving, he should ring Nick Greiner and ask him to keep to the undertaking that was agreed to by the governments of New South Wales, and Victoria in 1985. I shall say again for the honourable member's benefit that, in 1985, it was agreed that we would commence daylight-saving on the last Sunday in October and conclude it on the third Sunday in March. Apparently Nick Greiner has found himself in some difficulty because of the promise he made to farmers in western New South Wales to end daylight-saving earlier than was agreed. The Premier of New South Wales is responsible for the hiatus that has occurred along the border towns, some of which the honourable member for Murray Valley represents. Nobody else is to blame-and the Premier of New South Wales had to change the Act to do it-so the honourable member should not blame this government; he should talk to Nick Greiner. The matter is clear so far as the other States are concerned. Tasmania will stick with us, as will South Australia-although the Australian Capital Territory falls in with New South Wales. The solution is easy: Nick Greiner can do the right thing if he wishes, or he can continue to cause untold inconvenience to the people of Australia. Ms KIRNER (Minister for Education)-The absence of the honourable member for Dromana from the Chamber shows his interest in the reply to the matter he raised! I shall refer the matter to the Minister responsible for Post-Secondary Education and ask him to reply promptly. Mr SPYKER (Minister for Community Services)-The honourable member for Caulfield raised a matter concerning the needs of aged people in the City of Caul field for increased home and community care services. I am aware of the high percentage of aged people in his electorate. I remind the honourable member that the HACC program is an initiative of the State and Federal Labor governments-it did not exist under Liberal governments. The program's budget has grown from $42 million to $116 million; and the estimated budget for the next financial year is $130 million. Indeed, the budget for HACC programs grew by 12·3 per cent this year. After discussion between the Federal Minister, the Treasurer and me, the government is committed to a minimum growth of 12·3 per cent in the program's budget for the following two years to allow local government and other agencies that provide HACC services to plan properly for the future. The honourable member for Caulfield says the City of Caulfield has a problem meeting the demands of the program. I point out to the honourable member that Adjournment 7 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 153 approximately 50 per cent of local municipalities have some unallocated expenditure­ in other words, money not used up in other programs. If the honourable member provides me with the details I shall be happy, along with officers of my department, to sit down with officers of the City of Caul field to ascertain what unaUocated expenditure may be transferred to ensure that the valuable HACC services that local government and other agencies provide can be continued. Mr KENNAN (Minister for Transport)-The honourable member for Wantirna raised very responsibly a matter concerning the feasibility of fitting speed warning devices to cars-a very helpful suggestion. I am happy to encourage the promotion of the fitting of such devices. The honourable member referred to inadvertent speeding and the way in which, in good conscience, one can exceed the speed limit. The device could be useful to protect both the drivers of cars and other road users. I welcome the assurance of the honourable member that she will investigate the use of such a device in her car, and I look forward to her report on its use. The device could be a very useful road safety device because there are many occasions when drivers inadvertently exceed speed limits, particularly on long trips. The honourable member for Geelong raised a matter concerning the need for a wheelchair lift at the Geelong station. The honourable member has been a strong supporter of the Geelong rail service and of the rebuilding of the station. His request is worthy of investigation, particularly at a time when the patronage of the Geelong line is almost too great. The needs of the disabled must be considered in the renovation of the station, and I shall be happy to investigate the matter. The House adjourned at 11.47 p.m.

Questions without Notice 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 155

Thursday,8 March 1990

The SPEAKER (the Hon. Ken Coghill) took the chair at 10.34 a.m. and read the prayer.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

STA TE BANK VICTORIA Mr BROWN (Leader of the Opposition)-I ask the Treasurer whether the State has made contingency plans in case the $795 million of funding for Tricontinental Corporation Ltd is ruled to fall within the State's global borrowing limit. If so, what are those contingency plans to protect the State's capital works program? Mr JOLLY (Treasurer)-I thought the Leader of the Opposition would have benefited from advice from the missing honourable member for Brighton about the Australian Loan Council details. Obviously the Leader of the Opposition has no understanding of those guidelines. He should understand that, in relation to global limits and the Loan Council, there is a voluntary arrangement between the States and the Federal government. Also, the Leader of the Opposition should appreciate that what the government has said about the situation with State Bank Victoria, Tricontinental and the government is that the government will assume liabilities up to $795 million. The loss that is incurred in relation to bad debts will be passed on to Tricontinental, and not to the government. There is a particular clause in the Loan Council arrangements dealing with the borrowings of financial institutions like the State Bank; that clause makes it clear that it cannot be on-lent to government and, in this case, it is not being on-lent to government. The Leader of the Opposition should also be aware-- Mr Brown interjected. Mr JOLLY-No, he misses the honourable member for Brighton, as does the Opposition generally because it lacks direction on these issues. Obviously he has not been able to obtain the economic advice, unless he has had a telephone call that I am not aware of from London or Paris. I should like the Leader of the Opposition to understand that the clause was drafted by me at the Loan Council, as I am a Loan Council member; it was about avoiding situations where financial institutions would borrow and then on-lend to government for capital works purposes. I repeat: it is clear that there is a voluntary global limit arrangement in any case, and the government has entered into that. I drew up the clause which went to the Loan Council, and which was ultimately endorsed by the Loan Council. Mr McNAMARA (Leader of the National Party)-Given that State Bank Victoria issued a letter of comfort in May 1989 indemnifying Tricontinental Corporation Ltd for its mounting bad debts at that stage, will the Treasurer confirm whether he personally approved that action, or whether the State Bank Victoria board had the Treasurer's open-ended permission to provide State government guarantees without referral back to the Treasurer? 156 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Questions without Notice

Mr JOLLY (Treasurer)-That matter was raised in the other place yesterday. State Bank Victoria entered into arrangements with Tricontinental Corporation Ltd in May 1989, when it was under the impression-on the basis of advice given to me and given to it-that Tricontinental was in a position of either making a profit or reaching a break-even point. That was the advice-and that was confirmed in relation to the position of both the chairman of Tricontinental and the chairman of the State Bank, as well as its chief executive. Honourable members will be aware that the matter about the advice given to me was answered some time ago in Parliament. I asked for a detailed report the moment there was any concern expressed about Tricontinental. As to the particular decision: as the Leader of the National Party would appreciate, it was made by the board of the State Bank, and certainly the board consulted me on the matter. Mr McNamara-Did you agree? Mr JOLLY-I did not oppose that particular course of action.

REGIONAL INDUSTRY AND EMPLOYMENT INITIATIVES Mr KENNEDY (Bendigo West)-Will the Premier advise the House of recent actions resulting from government initiatives to enhance regional industries and regional employment? The SPEAKER-Order! The question is extraordinarily wide and I suggest the honourable member for Bendigo West reframe it to make it more specific. Mr KENNEDY -Can the Premier indicate specific examples in regional Victoria of results that have flowed from government initiatives to enhance regional industries and employment? Mr CAIN (Premier)-I thank the honourable member for his question because it is matter of concern to him and, I believe, most people in rural Victoria that industries are expanding in Melbourne and suburbs at a faster rate than in country areas. The package is designed to address that imbalance, and I am pleased to report to the House that it is already having significant consequences. It is designed to boost economic employment growth in rural Victoria, which is something I believe even the Opposition would support. I know it is preoccupied with jobs for members of Parliament, like the Mildura seat, but everybody else is concerned to see initiatives like the assistance package that has ensured that Packard CT A in Ararat will grow in a way that will increase 145 jobs to over 400 jobs in the next five years. That is what the company currently has. I see the honourable member for Ripon sitting over there. This concerns his area, and I should have though he might ask this question because it is a significant initiative. This is the first company to be funded under that package, and as part of the package provincial centres will be eligible for infrastructure grants. The Shire of Ballarat has received $250 000 for an industrial estate, and three new Victorian business centres will be established. The site of the first of these has been chosen in Traralgon and the Geelong and Wodonga sites will be chosen ,soon. The government's regional industry package recognises the special needs and circumstances of regional areas and sets out to address those. I recognise the kind of preoccupation the Opposition has ·with what it sees as its special needs, and its only concern is dividing the spoils in the bush. The government's package means jobs for country Victoria, and that is the important thing. It rejects the Questions without Notice 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 157 previously haphazard application of assistance in country areas, and more than S15 million in total will be spent in regional and rural Victoria over this current financial year. This is one of a number of programs that will help to set Victoria up to be pre­ eminent in seizing upon and exploiting the economic growth opportunities that will occur in the 1990s right across the State.

STATE BANK VICTORIA Mr BROWN (Leader of the Opposition)-I direct a further question to the Treasurer. I refer to the fact that on 15 August 1989 three officers of the State Bank, Max Carr, Jim McAnany, and John Rawlinson resigned from their positions on the board ofTricontinental Continental Ltd, two of them after only three months service. Did any of these officers express concern about the mismanagement ofTricontinental or about the extent of undisclosed losses while they were on the board or after they resigned? Mr JOLLY (Treasurer)-The Leader of the Opposition is really behaving like a feeble ferret, sniffing down empty burrows. He is trying to undermine the State Bank. Yesterday he made two accusations, both of which were wrong. Mr Brown-Rubbish! Mr JOLLY-It was rubbish. He should know in relation to the position of resignations from the Tricontinental board that the State Bank made sure that Tricontinental came under the full umbrella of the State Bank. That was the reason for the resignations; there was no other reason whatsoever. Nothing implied by the Leader of the Opposition is right. Certainly none of those officers communicated to me anything of the sense that the Leader of the Opposition implied today. The decision by the State Bank to bring the Tricontinental organisation under its umbrella was the most appropriate decision to make in all the circumstances. That decision has been accepted in the marketplace and, I believe, by the community generally. It ensured that the rigorous lending procedures of the State Bank applied to every loan account. There is no criticism of that whatsoever. Honourable members opposite should accept responsibility for indicating to the public the strength of the State Bank rather than smearing it all the time. In the first six months of this financial year, the State Bank-- Mr Brown interjected. Mr JOLLY-The Leader of the Opposition says that it lost $190 million. He fails deliberately to make the distinction between Tricontinental and the State Bank itself; he wants to undermine it. Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! There are too many interjections. In particular, I remind the Leader of the Opposition that he has asked his question, and by continuing to interject and ask supplementary questions by way of interjection he is simply prolonging the answer being given by the Treasurer and is effectively denying other honourable members the opportunity of asking questions. Mr JOLLY-The State Bank itself made $41 million over the past six months of this financial year. The Leader of the Opposition does not understand, or does not want to understand, the distinction. At every attempt he smears the State Bank and 158 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Questions without Notice tries to undermine it when the bank should have the complete support of every honourable member. The State Bank itself is a great institution. What the government has done is cut out the cancer of Tricontinental Corporation Ltd to ensure that the State Bank is fully protected. This action is endorsed by all rating agencies, but it is something that is completely ignored by the Leader of the Opposition. Mr McNAMARA (Leader of the National Party)-Will the Treasurer confirm that, had he not approved the letter of comfort to Tricontinental Corporation Ltd, that merchant bank would have gone into receivership, like Rothwell's in Western Australia, at no further cost to the government or the taxpayers of Victoria? Mr JOLLY (Treasurer)-The Leader of the National Party does not understand financial matters at all. Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! I suggest that if honourable members are concerned about their standing and the standing of Parliament they will enable the Treasurer to reply without interruption. Mr JOLLY-Two fundamental points should be made. Firstly, arrangements entered into were matters for the State Bank board and Tricontinental. Certainly I was informed about that particular action and did not oppose it. My formal approval was not required for that action to take place. Mr McNamara interjected. Mr JOLLY-The coalition between the canaries and the ferrets is not working too well; they have different views on what happened. The only common factor is that they both misunderstand the situation with Tricontinental. Secondly, in my view, the State Bank adopted the only reasonable course that could be adopted with the 100 per cent owned subsidiary, and that was effectively to take over the Tricontinental organisation and bring it within the umbrella of the State Bank. That action was taken with respect to merchant banks owned by the Westpac Banking Corporation and the Commonwealth Bank. The Reserve Bank of Australia has noted that a number of merchant bank organisations have got into much difficulty with bad debts because of the deregulated environment, the increasing economic uncertainty and high interest rates. The only responsible action that could be adopted was for the State Bank to follow the course that it did at that time.

ROAD FUNDING Mr GA VIN (Coburg)-Is the Minister for Transport aware of recent proposals to substantially change arrangements for road funding throughout Australia; if so, will the Minister advise the House of the implications for Victorian car owners? Mr KENNAN (Minister for Transport)-I thank the honourable member for Coburg for his question and for his continuing Interest in transport matters. I am concerned about the proposals for changes in road funding that have recently emerged. The House will be aware that the Federal government has not only committed itself to maintaining road funding for Victoria in real terms over the next few years, but also it has committed an extra $140 million across Australia. It has specifically committed Questions without Notice 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 159 part of that annual amount to Victoria-the National Party would understand the significance of the Federal government's commitment because it has specifically mentioned the Calder and Midlands highways. Unfortunately, the Federal Opposition has made no such commitment in its proposals. Not only is it unable to fund its commitments but also it has talked about cutting general grants to the States by $125 million a year in order to fund the $231 million to be applied across Australia and not one cent of that is promised to Victoria. Under those circumstances Victoria's schools, hospitals and community services will be paying for extra roads in New South Wales. Mr EV ANS (Gippsland East)-On a point of order, I direct your attention, Mr Speaker, to a ruling you have made on a number of occasions: that questions need to be reasonably specific. I point out that the Minister is taking the opportunity of answering the· question to turn it into a general debate on road funding and other matters related to the Commonwealth government's policies. The SPEAKER-Order! I take it from the comments of the honourable member for Gippsland East that he is asking me to rule on the relevance of the Minister's answer. I uphold the point of order to the extent that the Minister's answer must be relevant to the question that was asked. I understand that in the circumstances there would be a temptation for the Minister to broaden his comments somewhat, but he must relate his remarks to the question that was asked. Mr KENNAN (Minister for Transport)-I shall resist the temptation and the terrible provocation from honourable members opposite. I understand why they do not like the answer. It is because of what the Federal government proposal means for road funding in Victoria. Specifically, it will mean real increases for Victoria particularly in provincial areas and specifically in relation to the Calder and Midlands highways. However, the Federal Opposition does not offer one specific cent extra to Victoria. The government will continue to work with the Federal government now and during the next three years to ensure that Victoria, and particularly provincial Victoria, receives its fair share. There will not be a distortion of road funding directed across the border as the Federal Opposition would have it. The all feathers and no meat man is making the Deputy Leader of the Opposition look like a man of substance.

STA TE BANK VICTORIA Mr BROWN (Leader of the Opposition)-I refer to the Treasurer his statement of 23 February regarding State Bank Victoria and Tricontinental Corporation Ltd in which he said that he had issued a policy direction to the State Bank board regarding borrowing and lending activities of the bank, that he had entered into a legally binding agreement with the board undertaking to meet the costs of Tricontinental's bad debts and that he had also entered into an agreement with the State Bank to assume term liabilities of the bank. Is it not a fact that each of those statements is untrue? Mr JOLLY (Treasurer)-The Leader of the Opposition is certainly an amazing man; he is destined to become the most short-term Leader the Liberal Party has had. As to the matters raised by the Leader of the Opposition, I verbally indicated the policy position to the outgoing chairman and the Chief Executive of State Bank Victoria and I also discussed that with the new acting chief executive. It was issued by me verbally. Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! The Leader of the Opposition has asked his question; the Treasurer is giving his reply and he is entitled to complete his reply without interruption 160 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Questions without Notice in the same way as the Leader of the Opposition was given the protection of the Chair in asking his question. Mr JOLLY-The Leader of the Opposition should listen closely to the answer before he interrupts because what he is saying is wrong. The policy direction was given verbally and has subsequently been put In writing. Obviously, it was included in the Treasurer's statement issued on 23 February. The legally binding agreement was signed in accordance with the statement I issued, and I am pleased to learn that the Leader of the Opposition at least appears to have read it, although that may not be the case. The person who wrote his question has certainly read the statement. The legally binding agreement had been entered into when the statement was released.

MOOMBA FIREWORKS DISPLAY Mr MICALLEF (Springvale)-I shall try to ignore the disorganised rabble on the other side of the House. Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member for Springvale is not being assisted by members on his own side of the House or on the other side. In particular, I ask the honourable member for Carrum to resist the temptation to interject and to allow his colleague, the honourable member for Springvale, to ask hIS question without interruption. Mr MICALLEF-I ask the Minister for Labour whether the Department of Labour has completed its investigations into the Moomba fireworks incident; if so, will the Minister advise the House of the results of those thorough investigations? Mr POPE (Minister for Labour)-Most honourable members will be aware of the problems that were encountered last Friday night at the opening of Moomba and the fireworks display. In particular, most honourable members will be aware of the shell that detonated in the National Tennis Centre and blew up 24 seats. One can only imagine the problems that would have arisen if a function had been taking place at the tennis centre at that time. Obviously the government is concerned about the possibility of injury to any spectators at Moomba displays. As there is a further fireworks display at the closing of Moomba on Monday night, dangerous goods inspectors have been working with the manufacturers of the fireworks, Pains-Wessex (Australia) Pty Ltd, to ensure that similar problems are not encountered. It appears that the major problem the Moomba organisers had with the fireworks display last Friday night involved the plastic tape used around the fuse mechanism for the fireworks. The plastic tape would not separate from the fuse mechanism, which resulted in a number of undetonated shells around Melbourne. Yesterday one was discovered on the top of 101 Collins Street. Such a shell could cause harm to a person who encountered it. A shell was also found on the top of the Melbourne Town Hall. As I said, there was also the detonated shell at the National Tennis Centre. Honourable members interjecting. Mr POPE-I find it difficult to understand the mirth on the other side of the House. Grave injuries could have occurred if people had been hit· by one of those shells. Indeed, if anyone later came across one of the undetonated shells some injury or harm could be caused to that person. Questions without Notice 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 161

The Department of Labour has worked with the Pains-Wessex company and believes it has isolated the problem that occurred last Friday night. So long as the Moomba organisers comply with the conditions the department has placed on them for the fireworks display next Monday evening, the government believes it should proceed. However, the department will ensure that the conditions are met because we do not want any spectators being injured as a result of the fireworks.

STATE BANK VICTORIA Mr BROWN (Leader of the Opposition)-The report of the State Bank for the half year to the end of December 1989 refers to a $300 million domestic subordinated debt placement made in December 1989. I ask the Treasurer: was all or any of this amount lent to the State Bank by a Victorian statutory body? Mr JOLLY (Treasurer)-It is amazing that the Leader of the Opposition continues to pursue these matters. The $300 million subordinated debt issue was a normal issue by the State Bank to foster asset growth of the bank. It should be understood by honourable members that the State Bank is in a very good position. Once again the Leader of the Opposition is trying to smear the State Bank. He refuses to distinguish between Tricontinental Corporation Ltd and the State Bank. The bank has an exceptional record. It is currently lending in the order of 30 per cent of housing loans by banks in this State. It has one of the best products for the consumer in the State banking system. I repeat: the $300 million was raised in accordance with the normal program of the State Bank in terms of ensuring that it keeps up its capital ratios, and it was not linked in any way in the manner suggested by the Leader of the Opposition. Mr McNAMARA (Leader of the National Party)-I ask the Treasurer: what incentives did he employ to secure the resignations of the directors of the State Bank board; and were those directors asked to sign secrecy agreements? Mr JOLLY (Treasurer)-Talk about the two Leaders on that side of the House being opposite! The Leader of the National Party is like a reckless Rambo running amuck without any ammunition. That is the way he behaves in this place. He just makes wild accusations. The government believed those who served on the independent commercial decision­ making body should resign. Honourable members should recall that these directors had autonomy in making decisions on all commercial loans and the way in which they put in place arrangements with Tricontinental Corporation Ltd. It was certainly the strong view of the government and me that those responsible for such decisions had to resign. All members of the board who were members as at 30 June last year put in their resignations. I assure the House that there was certainly no secret agreement with anybody. It was a matter of making sure that the members of the board of State Bank Victoria fulfilled their responsibilities because, as independent decision makers, they made the decisions on commercial matters. Session 1990-6 162 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Petitions

PETITIONS The Clerk-I have received the following petitions for presentation to Parliament:

Home and community care program To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of the State of Victoria sheweth that the home and community care-HACC-budget for Victoria in this the financial year 1989-90 is insufficient to meet the objectives of the HACC program. HACC services include home help, delivered meals, home maintenance and renovations and home nursing. These services are provided in the main by local government and district nursing. These objectives are to increase access by people of all disabilities and all ages, including people of Aboriginal descent, of non-English speaking background, from remote and outlying areas and people who are financially disadvantaged, maintain their dignity and independence and to prevent their institutionalisation. Your petitioners therefore pray that the State home and community care budget allocation for this and subsequent years be increased by 20 per cent annually as allowed in the Commonwealth-Victoria HACC agreement. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mrs Barker (86 signatures)

Specialised home care services To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: Receive the humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Victoria which relates to the provision of specialised home care to families with disabled persons. Your petitioners request that the House take action to ensure that the availability of specialised home care services be restored to its former level in the Geelong Region of Victoria so that the quality of life of the consumers returns to the standard previously enjoyed. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Shell (18 signatures) To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: Receive the humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Victoria which relates to the provision of specialised home care to families with disabled persons. Your petitioners request that the House take action to ensure that the availability of specialised home care services be restored to its former level in the Malvern Region of Victoria so that the quality of life of the consumers returns to the standard previously enjoyed. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Leigh (28 signatures)

Gippsland Base Hospital To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of the State of Victoria expresses community outrage at the lack of continued funding for the Gippsland Base Hospital at Sale. This incorrigible decision has resulted in the immediate closure of 30 beds at the hospital, and is unacceptable. Petitions 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 163

Your petitioners therefore pray that the Minister arrange for immediate funding to be granted to enable the effective and efficient operation of the Gippsland Base Hospital at Sale. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Wallace (3629 signatures)

Police services at Neerim South To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE AsSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Neerim District in the State of Victoria sheweth: the government should not close the Neerim South police station for the following reasons: 1. 25 kilometres to next nearest police station in Warragul. 2. Needed to maintain law and order in the North Riding of the Shire ofBuln Buln. 3. Police with local knowledge are invaluable in times of emergency such as bushfires and search and rescue occasions. 4. Supervision of the snow fields of Mount Baw Baw. Your petitioners therefore pray that no attempt will be made to close the essential police service at Neerim South. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Delzoppo (146 signatures)

Support for the arts To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE AssEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of the State of Victoria sheweth that there is widespread community concern at the current loss of Victorian government support for the arts in Victoria. We call on the government to recognise that the arts in all their diversity are both crucial to the quality of life in Victoria and contribute significantly to our economic well-being. Your petitioners therefore pray that the government of Victoria acknowledge the real value of the arts by improving the level of support necessary to maintain Victoria's pre-eminent position as Australia's cultural capital. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Baker (153 signatures)

Safety helmets To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: We, the undersigned, view with concern the government's recently announced intention to require under force oflaw all cyclists to wear safety helmets on roads throughout the State of Victoria. We consider it to be the responsibility of the individual to assess the need for a safety helmet, giving consideration to the circumstances. In the case of young cyclists, we consider it is the parents' responsibility to educate their children in the intelligent use of safety helmets. We hereby request that the government reconsider its plans for compUlsion, and instead engage in positive measures to make this a safe State for cyclists. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Baker (9 signatures) 164 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Release ofCommand Paper

Mental Health Legal Centre To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLiAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of certain citizens of Victoria respectively sheweth: that Victoria is going to lose a valuable community initiative, namely, the Mental Health Legal Centre, through the failure of government departments to provide adequate funding. We consider that the centre fulfils a vital function by providing assistance to mental health consumers in gaining access to the law. And that this is the only community legal centre which: advocates for consumer rights in the mental health area; provides legal advice and representation; provides information and referral services; and provides legal education aimed at enhancing consumers' knowledge of the law, their rights, and how legal and complaint services can be accessed. Your petitioners therefore pray that you demonstrate your commitment to the social justice needs of people with psychiatric disabilities by funding the Mental Health Legal Centre. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Baker (7 signatures)

Administative Appeals Tribunal To THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED: The humble petition of certain citizens of Victoria respectfully sheweth that they wish to protest the Administrative Appeals Tribunal'S flagrant disregard for St Kilda council's efforts to protect St Kilda's architectural heritage through its planning decisions. We have elected a council which now has planning policies which aim at preserving the unique architectural and social character ofSt Kilda. Time and time again the community and its representatives are overridden at the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The community and its representatives must be allowed control over their own environment. Your petitioners humbly pray that you instigate a Parliamentary inquiry into the Planning Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. By Mr Baker (840 signatures) It was ordered that the petitions be laid on the table.

RELEASE OF COMMAND PAPER The SPEAKER-Order! Yesterday the honourable member for Berwick raised with me both in my chambers and later by point of order the report on the ABC television program, 7.30 Report, on Tuesday, 6 March, of excerpts from the report of the board of inquiry into the Office of Corrections and asked that the Chair ascertain from the Attorney-General that there had not been a breach of privilege or a discourtesy to the House. The questions concerned are matters subject to the jurisdiction of the House rather than the Attorney-General. The report in question was presented to the House yesterday by command of His Excellency the Governor. Copies were received at Parliament House on the morning of Tuesday, 6 March. Social Development Committee 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 165

I am satisfied that no part of the report was released from Parliament prior to presentation to the House. I have consulted the Attorney-General who has advised me that he did not release any part of the report and has no knowledge of the manner in which excerpts appear to have been available to the 7.30 Report. A search of the records has not revealed any case in which such a matter has been treated by this House or the United Kingdom House of Commons, at least since 1927, as a breach of privilege. In particular, I refer the House to a ruling by Speaker Christie on 9 March 1971 recorded in H ansard at pages 3925 and 3926. Custom and practice suggest that the act of publication leading to the complaint would not be pursued as a breach of the privileges of the House. The publication of material to be presented to the House prior to its being available to members is a discourtesy and it is suggested that procedures should be adopted to prevent its occurrence.

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Vehicle occupant protection Dr VAUGHAN (Clayton) presented a report from the Social Development Committee on vehicle occupant protection, together with appendices, extracts from the proceedings and a minority report. It was ordered that they be laid on the table and be printed.

COMMAND PAPER Mr McCUTCHEON (Attorney-General) presented, by command of His Excellency the Governor, the report of the Supreme Court judges for the year 1988. It was ordered that the report be laid on the table.

GRIEVANCES The SPEAKER-Order! The question is: That grievances be noted. Mr BROWN (Leader of the Opposition)-Today is effectively the second day that Parliament has sat in three months. The first day, of course, was taken up in full by condolence motions. There was no opportunity for any honourable member to question the Treasurer about his performance and involvement in the scandalous activity that has taken place and has resulted in the losses incurred by State Bank Victoria and Tricontinental Corporation Ltd in recent years. With another early close-down to take place at the end of the day, Parliament will effectively have met for two days in four months! This Parliament has never sat for fewer days in its history and there is no justification for abandoning the scheduled sittings. It is humbug for the Premier to suggest that he will go out and campaign; he is a liability for any Federal government in office because of the scandals that have occurred under his regime in the past seven and a half years. We will monitor the Premier's movements! Yesterday the Opposition sought to debate a motion calling on the Premier: ... to dismiss the Treasurer immediately because of the Treasurer's history of gross financial mismanagement and incompetence and his failure to honour the principles of Ministerial responsibility. 166 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances

The government blocked it. The A¥e of 23 February contains the statement that it is clearly the role of the Treasurer In respect of the State Bank-then, quoting the Treasurer-"to monitor the State Bank's performance". I say: hear, hear! to that. The Treasurer is the man in charge of the State Bank. He introduced a Bill to cover the activities of the bank. I challenge any observer to read the Hansard record or the statements of the Opposition in which a large number of concerns were raised. The Treasurer is the architect of the Act of Parliament that governs the State Bank. It names him, as the Treasurer of the State, the man responsible. Do honourable members think anybody can get him to take responsibility? The answer is: no! He blames everyone else for the biggest corporate loss in this nation's history to date, and the fact that he remains in office is a blight not only on the Premier and the present government but also on the Westminster system itself. This man should not be sitting in his chair as Treasurer, and the entire community knows that. The dogs were barking years ago about Tricontinental. One company, Mitsui, pulled out on the basis of what was known in 1976! People in the market could have told him-and they did, two years ago-that Tricontinental was on the nose! Years ago, George Frew told the Premier in the Premier's office, and there is a statutory declaration to back that up. The Treasurer denies any personal responsibility on the basis that he did not give out the loans personally, that he did not personally meddle or interfere with that process. That is not in disagreement. We would not expect him to know on a day-to­ day basis the details of the loans. The responsibility is his on the basis of his Ministerial responsibility. Prior to Christmas I referred to additional losses of at least $400 million that would be sustained in Tricontinental. The statement was described by the Premier and the Treasurer as untrue. Subsequently I was proved right. Not only that, but at the time this man was denying-I cannot say lying through his teeth because it would be unparliamentary-on the floor of this House what I knew to be true. I had the minutes of the State Bank meetings which indicated the bank was borrowing $300 million behind closed doors with no intention of letting that see the light of day for public knowledge; the board members were keeping it covered up. This man denied there was a problem, but the Opposition knew and the board knew and more will come out about that. The Treasurer claimed in Parliament that he had not been told. Again, he is on the public record as saying that. However, the Treasurer is being sucked down the plughole slowly. He has said he did not know, but the fact is that he did know. It will be proved beyond doubt and, ultimately, he will have no option but to resign. It will all come out in the end. In his statement on 23 February, the Treasurer said that he had: ... issued a policy direction to the State Bank board to ensure that all its borrowing and lending activities, with some minor exceptions ... are subject to the board's credit committee procedures. That was untrue. He had not issued that directive. There were two other blatant untruths. I would like to say "lies", but I know that term is unparliamentary. He knows that even though he said in his statement he had done it, he had not; it was a damned lie! Over the past few weeks Victorians have witnessed appalling scenes of political cowardice, hypocrisy and double-dealing, the worst ever seen in this State. I condemn the Treasurer. I condemn the Premier for not ensuring that his head has rolled as have the heads of Ministers in the past who have resigned for much lesser sins than those brought on this State by the Treasurer. Under the Westminster system, Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 167 the Treasurer of Victoria is responsible for the State Bank-the people's bank-losing $1500 million of the people's money. He should be condemned for other issues and stands condemned in the community for the WorkCare scandal which has accumulated $4·2 billion in unfunded liabilities over four years. He is condemned for the Victorian Economic Development Corporation scandal. It cost the former Deputy Premier his job, and so it should. Yet this man, who was just as involved in the VEDC losing $138 million, still sits there. The Victorian Investment Corporation threw away more than $80 million in high­ risk ventures and it is gone. The Victorian Equity Trust created a financial liability of$7oo million. The Treasurer assured Victorian taxpayers that it was not outside the Loan Council requirements. He was wrong on that and he will be wrong on the State Bank. Without any authority, without having consulted the Loan Council, he has said it is within global borrowing limits; it is not. The next Federal Treasurer, Dr Hewson, has stated his concern. The public needs to know what this fool is going to do. Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! I suggest that the honourable member show the self­ restraint and the type of dignified behaviour that is expected of all honourable members, and especially of a Leader. Mr BROWN-What will this foolish Treasurer do when he finds out-as he will­ that we have $795 million less to spend for hospitals, which have wards closing all over the State? What will he do when he finds out there is almost $800 million less to spend on a public transport system that is in chaos? The former heir apparent to the Premiership has just left the Chamber. The Minister for Transport, who was to replace the present incumbent, certainly before the next State election, has lost all possible chance of that. What will the government do when it finds out there is $800 million less to spend to fix up the transport system and all the other problems-and we have them from one end of the State to the other? In education there is not enough money to give teachers a pay rise or to do some of the essential construction work that is necessary in that portfolio. I turn to the sell-off scheme that was aborted when I made it public. State Bank Victoria probably intended to flog off one-third of its entity and no doubt it would have been the Gas and Fuel Corporation or the Transport Accident Commission that would have taken up the, $300 million equity in that bank to save the hide of the government and the Treasurer. That scheme was aborted after I made it public. The sell-off scheme revelations forced the Treasurer to undertake a half-year audit of the State Bank and to confront the serious consequences of its policies. As a result we have what will possibly turn out to be the biggest scandal of them all, and it is only starting to unfold. I refer to the new one, the bail-out scheme. The more we look at this bail-out scheme, the smellier it becomes. It looks as though we have a culmination of the Victorian Equity Trust, the sell-off scheme and WorkCare all rolled into one appalling new scandal. The announcement of what the Treasurer planned to do gave the impression of an illegal, funny-money scheme designed to cover up for a few more months the depths of this disaster. The only authority the government used to support its case is an opinion from within the totally discredited Department of Management and Budget 168 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances and, in particular, the continuing guru, Dr Peter Sheehan. I call on the Treasurer to release the legal opinions in this debate. There is no justification for the course the government has embarked on; ultimately it will not be authorised by the Australian Loan Council. If the Treasurer rejects my allegation, he must today make available the legal opinions that he suggests back up his scheme. The Opposition says his scheme is illegal. One needs to consider many other issues. The Australian Loan Council was not consulted. We know from briefings we have received from officers of the Department of Management and Budget that the State Bank will be forced to come up with cash from its own resources to cover Tricontinental's losses and, in the process, will find its capacity to provide home loans severely reduced. The bottom line is that at the end of the issue the State Bank will have $800 million less to put into home loans for future borrowers in this State because of the Treasurer's incompetence and gross mismanagement. It is certainly at least $800 million, if not more. What the government intends is that future generations will foot the bill for these losses. It has no proposal to meet the losses other than to meet the interest payable on the current $800 million. There is no proposal to pay back the principal. It is there in perpetuity. That is not merely a funny-money deal; it is a scandalous blight that is part of the sad and pathetic history of the Treasurer of this State over the past seven years. We should consider what the Premier has said on previous occasions. He said that a Minister is accountable not only for his own lapses but also for the serious mistakes of his underlings. There is no more graphic example one can have of this than the failings of his underlings and what the Premier has done. He has sacked everyone else except himself. The Premier said: Ministerial responsibility may be a harsh doctrine, and honourable members may quarrel with it, but it is a doctrine which has prevailed in our system for a long time. I recall a previous case that led to the sacking of the then Deputy Premier-and he knows these issues full well. The independent report carried out by Fergus Ryan led to the former Deputy Premier's sacking. Mr Ryan said that the VEDC was flawed in the following major respects: Insufficient prudential and general financial standards of procedures. Mr Ryan said that was one of the problems with the VEDC; it applies equally to State Bank Victoria and Tricontinental Corporation Ltd. The second point Mr Ryan made in the report that cost the then Deputy Premier his job was: Insufficient concentration of quality by the VEDC's lending processes ... That is what he said about the VEDC and one can substitute "State Bank" in those words. The next point was: Inadequate audit procedures ...

At one stage the Treasurer told t~is House the State Bank losses were at an end, yet it has lost more than another $1000 million since he said that. Again the VEDC issue, which cost the Deputy Premier his job, is identical with this case: Failure of the general manager to ensure proper procedures were put in place ... The Ryan report can certainly apply to the State Bank with a simple change of subject name. . . . a failure of the board to fulfil its role adequately. Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 169

That is identical to this issue. The Deputy Premier lost his job and his political head over that report. Now the Premier steadfastly refuses to have an inquiry into the fact that we have lost $1500 million of the people's money with the people's bank. Mr Cain-Give us the new material. Mr BROWN-The government has lost $1500 million of the people's money but the Premier wants more. The Premier wants more than that as an excuse to put off yet again what is clearly a necessity. There must be a full judicial inquiry; it must come. The State Bank board pursued government policy. It IS garbage to suggest otherwise. It did so at the behest of this government, with the full knowledge of this Treasurer and under his authority. The board could not and would not have implemented it without his full knowledge and agreement. The Treasurer had a representative on the board. That man, Ian Baker, was an extension of himself. Ian Baker was sacked. Did Mr Baker not talk to the Treasurer or did the Treasurer not listen? The Treasurer saw the minutes of board meetings. He was aware of the disaster looming in Tricontinental, yet he did nothing to inform the public or the House. The government appoints the State Bank directors. The government appoints the State Bank's chief general manager. The government changed the Act. The government set the State Bank's policy under a new Act and the government claimed continually to be responsible for the State Bank's successes. The government has no option; it is responsible for the State Bank's losses. Under the Westminster system of Cabinet responsibility, this billion dollar loser should have gone a long time ago. He must~o and he will go. It is a matter of how much electoral damage the Premier is stupId enough to be prepared to sustain. We know the people whose heads have rolled. It has been everybody below the Treasurer. He has blamed them all, but he accepts no responsibility. I saw an interview in which he was asked what was in his sandwich, which was visible. He would not ~ve an answer; he would not honestly say. Eventually he said it was Vegemite when It turned out to be salad. That shows ~aphically the nature of this man. He will not answer questions. That has been said tIme and again. I note that the backbench of the Australian Labor Party is now running the government. It is a welcome sign, because even those backbench members could not be more incompetent than the members of the Cabinet. The "ambition" faction, led by the honourable member for Sunshine, knows full well that the Treasurer is a massive liability to the government. The backbench, the Opposition, the media, and the entire community know that. The Treasurer has to go; the government is wrong if it thinks it can tough it out and that the biggest government scandal this century will disappear. The Treasurer should resign. The Opposition calls on him to resign, or be sacked. The dismissal of the Treasurer must be followed by a full judicial inquiry to bring to the light of day all the issues surrounding the loss of thousands of millions of dollars of the people's money. The Opposition will not let up until both these objectives are achieved. Mr McNAMARA (Leader of the National Party)-It is worth reflecting on the background of the Cain Labor government. One of the strong principles the Premier espoused prior to entering government was open government. One of the first legislative measures introduced into Parliament by the Labor government was the freedom of information legislation. Today the government is running scared. It is not prepared to face the issues. It is skirting around the issues at every opportunity when it should be 170 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances accountable. Yesterday, the government had the opportunity of debating the losses incurred by the State Bank in Parliament, but it refused. The Treasurer should have made a Ministerial statement so that the issue is debated. Issues of far less significance than the State Bank losses have been referred to Parliament in Ministerial statements. On this issue the government has shown a blinkered approach. It has pulled down the shutters. It is pretending that nothing has happened and that the issue will go away. The editorials of every newspaper in the State are saying that action must be taken, that the Treasurer must be removed and that a full judicial inquiry should be instituted. The National Party believes a Royal Commission should be held into this sad and sorry issue. It is worth reflecting also on the performance of the Treasurer as a member of the government during the past eight years and even before when he was an officer of the Australian Council of Trade Unions. The Treasurer has a great record! He was involved in the Bourke's-ACTU store. Mr Heffernan-How did that go? Mr McNAMARA-That went bankrupt. The Treasurer then became involved in ACTU-Solo. Mr Heffernan-How did that go? Mr McNAMARA-That went bankrupt, too. He then got involved in ACfU-Travel. Mr Heffernan-How did that go? Mr McNAMARA-That went bankrupt. However, now he has excelled himself: as Treasurer of the State he has managed to set a record that will not be bettered~ he has managed to record the largest financial loss not only of any Treasurer in the history of the State but also of any Treasurer in the history of government administration in Australia-State or Commonwealth. The Treasurer has also set another record, but this record may be easier to break. He has presided over the largest corporate loss in Australian history. That is the performance and record of the Treasurer. Members of the public are screaming for something to be done. Even the Treasurer's backbench members are screaming for something to be done. The backbench knows he will go. Its future is tied to his. The former Deputy Premier, now the honourable member for Footscray, who is sitting at the table where he was for so many years, was dumped for losing slightly more than $100 million. The Treasurer has presided over the State Bank, which has lost almost fifteen times as much, but he is still here. The backbench knows the Treasurer should be removed from office. It is obviously time to put up the shutters and wait until after 24 March, when the knives will come out. Everyone knows the Treasurer will go. If the Treasurer is not removed from office, members like the honourable member for Ballarat South will lose their seats. The honourable member for Bellarine and other members of the government backbench will be history. I listened with interest to members of the Liberal Party relate this issue to the 1981-82 period of the Liberal government. The Hamer and Thompson governments were under tremendous pressure for losing $4· 5 million. The Premier, when he was the Leader of the Opposition, said that that was sufficient reason for the sacking of a Minister. This Treasurer has lost more than $35 000 million in seven or eight years. Mr Kennedy interjected. Mr McNAMARA-The honourable member for Bendigo West will be one of the first to go. He is finished. Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 171

Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member for Glen Waverley is out of order and out of his place, as is the honourable member for Bendigo West. Both honourable members are being disruptive and are making it difficult for honourable members to concentrate on the contribution of the Leader of the National Party. I ask those honourable members and other honourable members to observe the Standing Orders and the practices of the House. Mr McNAMARA-Honourable members opposite know the future awaiting them if their party does not take the appropriate action. My colleagues on this side of the Chamber have related stories about what occurred prior to 1982. They knew public opinion was turning against them. They were reading the editorials then, just the same as the backbench members of the Labor Party are now reading the editorials; and those backbenchers know their future is limited. Many of them know they will not be back in this Chamber after the next election. What will they do about it? They have sat here like sycophantic mutes saying nothing except "We will support the government". The honourable member for Whittlesea is in a marginal seat and he well knows that if action is not taken he will not be here much longer. Members of the government party say nothing, do nothin~, and make no contribution. However, when they have been kicked out on thelr backsides after the next electon they will say, "I should have done something, I should have spoken to the Premier or raised my voice in caucus and said that we must get the government back on track". The public is screaming for something to be done and something must be done. This issue is not just an issue involving Ministerial responsibility. It goes to the crucial issue of pubhc confidence. The fact is that the public has lost confidence in the Treasurer. If the Treasurer announced a new economic strategy for Victoria for the 1990s the public would laugh and would not take him seriously. Irrespective of the Treasurer's academic qualifications or personal attributes he has lost the confidence of the public. We all know that politics is largely a process of having the confidence of the public, but the public has lost confidence in the Treasurer. It is the Premier's responsibility to take the appropriate action. Time and a~in in this House he has lectured honourable members on the Premier's responsibilitles and Ministerial responsibility is involved. I remind the Premier of a statement he made in this Chamber in 1978 when he said: Secondly, I remind the House that the Premier must be held finally responsible for what is done by members of his government. He holds the commission from the Governor. Mr W. D. McGrath-It was a strong and sensible statement. Mr McNAMARA-Yes, it was a sensible statement. The Premier is a person who had principles. He is a person who was weaned on politics, like no other member of Parliament. His father was a former Premier who instilled in him the appropriate way to behave as a Premier; the principles that apply-Ministerial accountability, performance, public confidence, and so on. It is unfortunate that those principles have been put to one side. The Premier has taken the blinkered and bunkered approach. He has adopted the view that if he turns his back and walks away from the issue and mouths platitudes that will be the end of the affair. He believes if he does not talk about the issue it will go away. The government-and particularly the executive government-has a responsibility under the Parliamentary system to be accountable to Parliament; that is why this forum exists. The government had an opportunity of coming into this place and being accountable, but it shirked the issue. The government should have taken the initiative 172 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances and had the Treasurer deliver a Ministerial statement. The Treasurer knows he should have delivered a Ministerial statement. You know yourself-it is the largest financial disaster in the history of Victoria, and you shirked it! The SPEAKER-Order! The Leader of the National Party must address the Chair. Mr McNAMARA-In his own heart, the Treasurer knows-you cannot deny it, you have seen so many other Ministerial statements-- The SPEAKER-Order! I know it may be a difficult habit of speech to adopt but I remind the Leader of the National Party that it is the tradition in the Westminster system that his remarks must be addressed to the Chair, and not directly to another honourable member. Mr McNAMARA-Certainly in his own heart the Treasurer knows that he should have responded with a Ministerial statement. Parliament received a Ministerial statement following the disaster of the Victorian Economic Development Corporation; subsequently, the Deputy Premier-the second-highest officer in the executive government-was dismissed. At that time the Premier accepted that there was a lack of public confidence; that public confidence had to be restored; and that it could be restored only by the removal of the responsible Minister. The Premier took the appropriate action, and the National Party commends the Premier for his action. However, I cannot understand what has happened in the intervening period; now there seems to be an attitude of, "We will sit back, ignore it, and hope it will go away". Mr Maclellan-The Premier is too closely involved. Mr McNAMARA-I hope the Premier will take a long-term view and observe the principles of this House; also, he should have regard to public confidence in this House. The first step should have been taken on the Treasurer's own initiative; he should have made a statement that could have been debated. Another opportunity for the issue to be debated was afforded by the Leader of the Opposition; again, leave was refused. I believe that action was unprecedented on an issue of such importance. The government says, "We do not want to talk about it, let's forget it". It is a blinkered approach to think that the issue will go away. We must ensure that the government is accountable, and the only way that can happen is for the government to hold an independent inquiry. The National Party believes a Royal Commission must be held so that all issues relating to State Bank Victoria and Tricontinental Corporation Ltd can be brought into the open. It is ridiculous for the Treasurer to suggest that only in the past couple of months have the problems of Tricontinental and the State Bank crept up on him, and that he knew nothing about them. The government knew that there were problems in the entrepreneurial market. The VEDC went to the wall; that should have set alarm bells ringing in the Treasurer's ears; any similar merchant banking operation in the high-risk area was in danger. However, taking that into account and following that disaster, the Treasurer agreed to the State Bank issuing a letter of comfort to Tricontinental which effectively put the taxpayers' funds as a guarantee for the debts of Tricontinental. It was the Treasurer's decision to approve the State Bank letter of comfort. In May 1989 had the Treasurer not agreed to the letter of comfort to Tricontinental, it would have gone into receivership, as happened with Rothwells Ltd in Western Australia; then there would have been no further loss to the government or to the Victorian taxpayers. Time and again the Premier has spoken about the crucial issues, Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 173 and said, "They are at arm's length; they had nothing to do with us, it was an accident of time and circumstance, and we shall carry on with government as before". The government knew that the entrepreneurial market was in danger. With that knowledge, and bearing in mind the particular climate, the Treasurer then extended the guarantee to Tricontinental. It is clear that the direct action of the Treasurer applied that debt to the taxpayers of Victoria. There has been an acceptance by the Premier that people are accountable for their actions; and that principle has been espoused in Ministerial statements on several occasions in Parliament. Firstly, I refer to the sacking of a former Minister, Bill Landeryou, in the other place. At that time, the Premier was most clear about the responsibilities of Ministers. Secondly, the honourable member for F ootscray, the former Deputy Premier, was removed because of his involvement in the VEDC-he was the responsible Minister. Thirdly, a former was dismissed because he accepted a free airline ticket. A comparison of the scales and magnitude involved in those cases with the performance of the Treasurer demonstrates his actions have exceeded any others in the ei~t years of the Cain Labor government. I call on the Premier to show the same propnety, the same acceptance of precedent and the Westminster practice, and the same concern for the public of Victoria. He should take the appropriate action to remove the Treasurer. Everyone knows the Treasurer will go-it is a question of time. Mr MacleUan-Perhaps after the Federal election. Mr McNAMARA-The Premier must do everything possible to regain the confidence of Victorians. Public confidence in the government will continue to be eroded if he does not take the appropriate action. It is obvious that a government directive steered the State Bank into Tricontinental and into the entrepreneurial lending market. Mr JoUy-Rubbish! Mr McNAMARA-Ofcourse it was. I remind the Treasurer of his announced ten­ year strategy delivered in 1984 in the document Victoria The Next Step: · .. to support the State government's economic strategy the State Bank has agreed to ... expand its corporate lending activities. The State Bank did not initiate that action; the State Bank took that policy course following a government paper that wanted it to take that course; that information is contained in the ten-year strategy that commenced in 1984. The Treasurer also acknowledges in that document the bank's purchase of shares: · .. in a large merchant bank (Tricontinental) as part of its expansion of its activities in corporate banking. That was the direction the government wanted the bank to go; to purchase a merchant bank and to get into the easy money market. Everyone else could do it! The Treasurer's statement of November 1985, entitled The Economic Strategy: A Progress Report on Implementation, refers to: · .. the bank's expansion of corporate lending to medium-sized companies. That was praised as a marvellous manoeuvre by the government. To retain public confidence the Treasurer must be removed from his position. Dr Peter Sheehan must be removed as Director-General of the Department of Management and Budget because Dr Sheehan sowed the seeds into the Treasurer's mind. Dr Sheehan moved the Treasurer into the high-risk area, thereby risking many hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayers' money that future Victorian generations 174 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances must redeem for many decades. That very sad legacy will be left by the Treasurer with all Victorians. The Treasurer has accumulated debts and liabilities during his eight years as Treasurer; they now amount to more than $35 000 million. He was the mastermind behind the implementation of WorkCare-another of the sad initiatives introduced by the government. WorkCare has established liabilities of more than $4 billion. The onus is now, I believe, on the Premier to immediately take the appropriate action. If he is not prepared to stand the Treasurer down immediately, he should institute a Royal Commission so that all matters pertaining to the State Bank's involvement with Tricontinental can be aired publicly. Mr JOLLY (Treasurer)-It is interesting that the Leader of the National Party did not use his 20 minutes in this debate. He ran out of material 10 minutes ago so he recycled the arguments that have been heard in this House many times before and whIch have been proven wrong in the past. The Leader of the Opposition introduced only one element of new material, and that is what I eat in my sandwiches. He is a great pretender and has no influence whatsoever over events. I turn to the question of Ministerial responsibility which has been raised consistently by the Liberal Party. Honourable members opposite who have made comments about this issue completely misunderstand or distort the relationship between a Minister and a commercial, independent, decision-making body such ~as the State Bank. In fact, the missing honourable member for Bri~ton has an entirely different view from that of the Leader of the Opposition. That IS probably one of the reasons why the Leader of the Opposition has gone off on a tangent and has not been penetrating in any of his questions. I turn to the relationship between the Treasurer and the State Bank and, in particular, Tricontinental Corporation Ltd. It is about time the Leader of the Opposition attempted to understand the responsibilities that a Treasurer has on these matters. The first one, which is sacrosanct, is the principle that he must take action that enables the independent body to make commercial decisions without interference from the Treasurer. That is the only way such an organisation can operate and the only way political corruption can be avoided. I would not be standing here today if I had been involved in the commercial loan decisions taken by either the State Bank or Tricontinental because I would have breached my responsibility. That responsibility is not to intervene in commercial loan decisions. This view is shared by the Premier and the Treasurer of New South Wales and was stated categorically when the bank Bill in respect to New South Wales was introduced there and when corporatisation took place. Also it is important to recognise that, as the Leader of the Opposition mentioned in the debate, on the State Bank Bill in Victoria back in 1988, the Liberal Party indicated that it had different views on certain issues, but supported the overall thrust of what the government was doing. In fact, the shadow Treasurer, who is somewhere in Europe, I am not sure where-- Mr Cooper-You know where he is. Mr JOLLY-I do not, but I understand he is trying to learn economics. I think the Leader of the Opposition should also take that on board. Let me make two points. Firstly, the shadow Treasurer said that the State Bank had already moved into other areas under the Liberal Party government, and one of those areas was merchant banking, because the link between Tricontinental and the State Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 175

Bank was forged under the Liberal Party government of Victoria. More importantly, on the issue of responsibility and independence of decision making, the shadow Treasurer moved an amendment that would have gone even further than what the government did in relation to the independence issue. As recorded in Hansard of 21 April 1988, the honourable member for Brighton said: I put to the Committee that, particularly in the final analysis, this gives Parliament the opportunity for effective control over undue influence by government over the bank. It is this provision that will secure the independence of the bank board, to allow it to operate on proper commercial principles rather than to be subject to the dictates of the government of the day in its day-to-day operation, as expressed by the Leader ofthe National Party. The former Leader of the National Party has a much more responsible attitude to the State Bank on these issues than the current Leader, who is completely irresponsible in this matter. I also point out that the chairman and the chief executive were at all times vigorous in ensuring that the independence of the State Bank board was protected and that in no way was there political intrusion in their decision-making process or in that of Tricontinental. At page 3 the report issued by the former members of the State Bank board states: It is also mentioned that the Treasurer, to whom the bank reports in relation to the specific matters covered in the State Bank Act, is not required to be and never has been, consulted in relation to commercial decisions on individual corporate loans made by either the bank or Tricontinental. Oearly, any such requirement would be incompatible with the statutory requirement that the bank operate as a competitive commercial organisation under a separately constituted board. Complete independence! It is absolutely imperative that those people have complete independence to make decisions and bear the responsibility of them, and they certainly have. It has been made clear by the Premier of New South Wales in relation to commercial independence; it has been made clear by the former State Bank board itself and it has been made clear by the shadow Treasurer, the honourable member for Brighton, that it is important to ensure complete independence of the State Bank in the way it operates. I should also point out that honourable members would have opposed any attempt by me to interfere in that commercial loan decision-making process; there is no doubt whatsoever. It certainly would have been reprehensible for a Treasurer to do so. I turn to the relationship between Tricontinental, the State Bank and the government-- Mr McNamara interjected. Mr Maclellan interjected. The SPEAKER-Order! The Leader of the National Party has made his contribution and enjoyed the protection of the Chair. The honourable member for Berwick may seek the opportunity to contribute to this debate at a later stage. He will have his opportunity to speak ifhe wishes it. Mr JOLLY-The honourable member for Berwick should listen rather than opening his mouth. He does not like to hear the facts, but the facts are that the Tricontinental board was not-- Mr Maclellan interjected. The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member for Berwick has long experience in Parliament and is well aware of the Standing Orders and customs and practices of 176 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances the House. I again ask him to observe the Standing Orders and to allow the Treasurer to make his remarks in this debate without interruption. Mr JOLLY-The Tricontinental board was appointed by the State Bank board, not by me. It is purely a decision of the State Bank board. The honourable member for Berwick should know that. The Chief Executive of Tricontinental Corporation Ltd was appointed by the Tricontinental board, and it was a responsibility of that board to ensure that its arrangements with Tricontinental were made on sound commercial principles. That is the fundamental position with Tricontinental. I turn to another issue relating to the operation ofTricontinental. I reiterate that the completely independent decision-making body has to' bear responsibility for the decisions that were made. One of the decisions I made about the State Bank board was to appoint people without political bias. Those people had a high degree of respectability and expertise. No-one criticised them until the Tricontinental situation arose. It was agreed that they were appropriate members of the board, but they had to accept responsibility for theIr decisions. During the debate in this place on the State Bank Bill, the former Leader of the National Party, the honourable member for Shepparton, heaped praise on members of the State Bank board. The majority of the members of the board at that time were formerly appointed by the Liberal Party government. There have been accusations today-- Honourable members interjecting. Mr JOLLY-Honourable members opposite do not like the facts. The Opposition argued today, irresponsibly, that I did nothing· when queries were raised about Tricontinental. When the issues first emerged in May last year-and were subject to a great deal of pUblicity-I asked for a detailed report on Tricontinental. The report that was provided to me by the State Bank indicated that the expectation was that Tricontinental would either operate at a small surplus in 1988-89 or would, at worst, break even. Obviously that report was disastrously wrong. The next stage in the development was the presentation to Parliament of the State Bank Victoria annual report. That report was audited and pointed out that, because of the impact ofTricontinental, the State Bank group as a whole would incur a loss of just under $200 million. They are the facts; that was the latest information provided tome. When it came to questions without notice the Leader of the National Party tried to trump up something with no factual basis. Every question I answered in the House about the State Bank was based on the latest information provided to me by the board of the State Bank through either the chief executive officer, the chairman or the Treasurer's representative. The position was understood by them, and it was not until certain questions without notice were asked of me on the State Bank that it was indicated to me that the position could be worse. Anybody who suggests that I misled the House is totally wrong. Mr Brown interjected. The SPEAKER-Order! There have been too many interjections, making it difficult to follow the contribution of the Treasurer. I ask all honourable members to observe the provisions of the Standing Orders and the customs and practices of the House. Mr JOLLY-I turn to the comments made by the Leader of the Opposition about the Loan Council issue that he raised today during questions without notice. The Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 177

Liberal Party is sensitive about this matter because at a Federal level it is intending to enter into a special deal with New South Wales to increase its global limits. That is part of what has been revealed in the election campaign. They tried to say that a special deal had taken place between the Federal Treasurer and me. That is totally incorrect. The only reason the Liberal Party raised this issue is that it wanted to justify its own actions of entering into a special deal with the government of New South Wales-it was to bailout New South Wales. The total package the government has put forward is responsible and supported by the Reserve Bank of Australia. It is also supported by the major international rating agencies. Those agencies have issued statements indicating the maintenance of their credit ratings of the State Bank. The suggestion from the Leader of the National Party that the State Bank, unlike any other bank, should not have stood behind its 100 per cent-owned subsidiary, Tricontinental Corporation Ltd, is ludicrous. If the State Bank had not done so it would have been strongly criticised by the Reserve Bank of Australia because no other major bank would have contemplated such a course of action. It would have had an adverse effect on the rating of the State Bank and that in turn would have increased the interest costs of the bank itself and further reduced its ability to earn a profit. That would have been disastrous. Is the Leader of the Opposition also suggesting that the State Bank, unlike the Commonwealth Banking Corporation and the Westpac Banking Corporation, should not have stood behind Tricontinental? That would be absolutely reprehensible. It could not take such a course of action and expect to maintain its position as a major bank of standing in the international community as well as the local financial community. I turn briefly to more general issues that were raised by the Leader of the Opposition regarding the government's economic performance. There is no question that the government has had an outstanding economic performance. When the government was elected in 1982 not only was unemployment increasing but also employment was falling. Since 1982 the government has transformed the Victorian economy into one with considerable competitive strength and the lowest unemployment rate of any State. The unemployment rate has fallen from more than 9 per cent to about 4·5 per cent. That is not a bad achievement! When one examines the total numper of jobs since the economy was at its lowest, one finds that about 400 000 jobs have been created. I turn to WorkCare. Over the past six months WorkCare has made a $174 million operating surplus. When the actuary's reports are completed, it is expected that the unfunded liabilities will have declined by $1400 million. Further improvements have been made in the financial position of WorkCare in the months of January and February. WorkCare offers the best benefits of any workers compensation system in the land, and it is well on the way to achieving financial viability. It is certainly far better than the old workers compensation system. I could turn to many other areas, but I turn to third-party insurance and the situation that the government inherited from the former Liberal government. Honourable members interjecting. Mr JOLLY-Honourable members opposite do not like it. The third-party insurance system in New South Wales is an absolute mess. New South Wales has a $1·9 billion problem but the Opposition does not like to hear about that. The 178 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances government has been able to reduce Transport Accident Commission charges not only in real terms but also in nominal terms, and the charges are well below those in New South Wales. In New South Wales the total cost of owning a car is approximately $590; in Victoria it is less than $290. In other words, there is approximately $300 difference. The government has reformed third-party insurance to put it on a sound financial position and families have benefited from those policies. Families have also benefited because the increases in taxes and charges in Victoria have been less than in other States. In fact, if we had the same level of taxes and charges as other States we would receive $700 million more in taxes. The SPEAKER-Order! Before calling the next speaker I again remind the House that debate is not meant to be a shouting match or an attempt to shout down the person given the call, but it is to develop orderly decision making, in this case on the question: That grievances be noted. It makes it difficult to maintain the standing of Parliament and that of individual members if they themselves interrupt proceedings in this way. Mr CLARK (Balwyn)-I grieve for State Bank Victoria and particularly the arrangement announced by the Treasurer on 23 February 1990. I shall address my opening remarks to the statement made by the Treasurer to the House and I want to clear up one preliminary point. The Treasurer told the House that when he made statements to the House during the spring sessional period he was not aware of the magnitude of the losses ofTricontinental Corporation Ltd. I am only a new member of Parliament, but I understand that, when a Minister makes a statement offact and then subsequently discovers that he is, albeit innocently, incorrect, it is his duty to return to the House and make a personal explanation on those matters. However, the Treasurer has not done so regarding his statements made during the spring sessional period which have subsequently proven to be incorrect. To return to the Treasurer's defence of his conduct, during his rhetoric he laboured the point that he did not interfere in the decision making on individual loans by State Bank Victoria or Tricontinental. No-one on the Opposition side is suggesting that he did that. Our key point is that it was the government's policy being pushed onto the State Bank and Tricontinental and the constant financial urging from the government to the State Bank board and then to Tricontinental that has been the prime cause of the losses that have been suffered. In particular, I ask the Treasurer to deny that drafts of two key economic policy documents namely, Victoria The Next Step and Victoria The Next Decade, were sent to the State Bank board insofar as the drafts concerned the State Bank and the board was asked to give its assent to those drafts and told to be prepared to act upon and implement what was contained in the published documents. If that is not government interference with the State Bank I do not know what is. Secondly, the Treasurer has admitted that he had regular consultation with the chairman of the board, Mr Hancock. What took place at those consultations? What indications did the Treasurer give the chairman as to what he expected the State Bank to do? The situation is compounded by the arrangements that the Treasurer announced in his statement of 23 February that the bank would not only be engaging in these informal consultations-he referred to the monitoring by the Reserve Bank of what the State Bank does-but he would also require formal reports from the State Bank. In addition he had gone ahead and informally directed the State Bank board­ completely outside the State Bank Act-that it was not to lend to entrepreneurs. If Grtevances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 179 that is not an abuse of the process which the honourable member for Brighton was concerned about when the State Bank Bill was being debated, I do not know what is. The honourable member for Brighton said there was a need for complete separation between the government and the State Bank board with none of this unofficial tinkering or toing and froing. If that had been done, as suggested by the honourable member for Brighton, Victoria might not have been in the difficulties it is in at the moment. It is ironic that one of the things that the Treasurer pointed out in indicating his separation from the board actually strongly links him with the board. He directly referred to a statement made by the board members which specifically exculpated the Treasurer from involvement in individual loans. I ask all honourable members who are familiar with the reality of government procedures: what process or influence led the State Bank to include that statement in its report? In so doing it has undermined the Treasurer's argument about the separation of powers between himself and the board. The Treasurer also asserted that it was under a previous Liberal government that the State Bank became involved with Tricontinental Corporation Ltd. That is true but under that government Tricontinental did not make losses. I also point out that the forerunner of the Victorian Economic Development Corporation was set up under a previous Liberal government. My predecessor, the Honourable Jim Ramsay, was responsible for it but at that time it did not make losses. It was only because of the current government's management and its use of these institutions for its own purposes that losses have occurred. So much for that argument! Finally, the Treasurer said-it is one of the remaining remarks that is worth rebutting-that the various directors of the State Bank had been appointed by the government and that they were eminent and reputable men. Honourable members have not raised any objections to that, but the Treasurer is hoisted on his own double standards when he says that these eminent and capable people appointed to the board ofTricontinental, which made all the losses, and although they did not have personal responsibility for Tricontinental's decisions, they have to bear vicarious responsibility for them. If that argument was good enough for the State Bank board it is good enough to apply to the Treasurer. The Treasurer said he had no reason to believe there was anything wrong with the board, but it supervised the massive losses and he as the person who appointed them must take responsibility. There are other matters relating to the package announced on 23 February that I shall deal with because they will have a significant effect on the future economy of the State. Firstly, the manner of the dismissal of the State Bank board is a matter for concern. It is common knowledge that the management of the State Bank were horrified when they found that all the board members were to be turfed out, because that would leave the State Bank lacking experienced people at that level. Even if the Treasurer believed the whole board should go, he should have left someone to ensure that things would go smoothly. I suggest Mr Renard and Dr Ironmonger would have been suitable persons to remain, but the fact that they were swept off the board shows that the government was concerned to cover up and hide the trail back to them rather than be concerned for the bank. Secondly, the hypocrisy of the Treasurer in the way he disposed of the board undermines the long-term willingness of suitable persons in this State to undertake public office. That is a cost the State will have to bear in the years to come. The Treasurer was quoted in a newspaper as saying that the standard of hindsight is not one on which we operate-it is not the one on which he ought to be judged; but it seems he has judged the State Bank with hindsight because the guilt of board 180 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances members in the Treasurer's eyes lies in the fact that they allowed a separate management structure to be established for Tricontinental. It is all very well for the Treasurer to say that, but I doubt that that was obvious at the time and I doubt whether even reasonably experienced bankers would have been aware of that at that time. The Treasurer also says that he should not take responsibility unless there is personal guilt involved. No honourable member on this side of the House believes there was no personal guilt on the part of the Treasurer. However, that was not the standard observed in relation to the board because the board was dismissed even though its gUilt was purely vicarious. It is the hypocrisy that will be the most galling aspect in the minds of people contemplating public office, and it will do much long-term damage to the government and to incoming governments that wish to restore confidence in those people who might be willing to take public office. I shall now refer to a number of statements made by the Treasurer on 23 February. As late as question time today the Treasurer was given the opportunity of correcting the statements when the Leader of the Opposition put three propositions to him. The first proposition was whether the Treasurer had issued a policy direction to the board of State Bank Victoria regarding borrowing and lending activities of the bank at the time the statement was issued on 23 February. The Treasurer came out with a feeble excuse when the issue was raised previously with the media. He said that it was not his fault that the statement was wrong because it had been approved by the bank's board; so far as I can tell, the outgoing board. That is one of the most pathetic excuses I have ever heard, and the Treasurer came up with a similarly feeble excuse in the House today when he said that it was not a written direction but an oral direction. It appears that it was an oral direction not to the incoming board but to the outgoing board as the Treasurer ushered them out the door. I refer the Treasurer to section 29 (3) of the State Bank Act, which outlines the process by which policy directions are given. Previous subsections refer to a policy of consultation and subsection (3) states: If the Minister and the Board do not reach agreement, the Minister may, in writing, determine the policy or standards to be adopted by the Board and inform the Board that the Government accepts responsibility for the adoption by the Board of that policy or those standards. That is the process, and the words the Treasurer used in his statement of 23 February were calculated and intended to refer to that process. All honourable members on this side of the House took them to refer to that process, and it is now clear that the statement is untrue. Despite that, when the Treasurer was given the opportunity of correctin$ it in the House he did not say that the statement was prepared in a hurry and that It was wrong and apologise for that; he simply trotted out yet another feeble excuse. Two other points were put to the Treasurer by the Leader of the Opposition. The first of those was whether the Treasurer entered into a legally binding agreement with the State Bank board undertaking to meet the costs of the bad debts ofTricontinental Corporation Ltd. In so far as I could understand his answer, the Treasurer said that that was true. If he did say it was true, he is wrong apin because the only legally binding agreement in existence is between the Tncontinental board and the government. Given the great pains to which the Treasurer has gone to distinguish the State Bank board from the Tricontinental board, one would think that the Treasurer would get his facts right on that issue. The third statement made by the Treasurer on 23 February is that he had entered into an agreement with the State Bank to acquire liabilities of the bank. It has now Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 181 become apparent that this agreement does not exist; there is hardly even an agreement to agree with! The Treasurer has put together his rescue package in haste; he had to execute an agreement with Tricontinental to satisfy the auditors, but he has left all the rest to be muddled through as time goes on. He will have great difficulty in putting those arrangements into place because of the Australian Loan Council difficulties referred to by the Leader of the Opposition and to which I shall now refer. The Treasurer proudly informed the House that he was the person responsible for drafting the relevant clause. As most lawyers know, the mere fact that one drafts a document does not mean that it means what one says it means-it means what other people take it to mean based on a reasonable interpretation of the words. I refer to the Treasurer and other honourable members Commonwealth Budget Paper No. 4 at page 51, which describes the relevant portion of the global agreement and it states: Under the global approach, as modified since May 1985, it is agreed that: authorities subject to the limits include semigovernment and local authorities and all companies and trusts which are wholly-owned, majority owned or partly owned and effectively controlled by the relevant governments. Borrowings by government-owned financial institutions (such as State banks and insurance companies) and statutory marketing authorities are excluded from the global limits except when on-lent to, or used for the puposes of, governments or authorities subject to the limits ... The latter phrase is critical, and I emphasise it. The Treasurer is trying to argue that no moneys are being on-lent by the State Bank to the government because it is taking over liabilities and not receiving cash. That may well be so, but the critical point is that the borrowings are being used for the purposes of government because they are being used to pay money to Tricontinental, and that is a purpose of government because the Treasurer, on behalf of the State, has covenented in a deed with Tricontinental that the government would pay money to the corporation in the circumstances specified in that agreement. If that is not a purpose of government, I do not know what is. Regardless of the Treasurer's view, Victoria has a serious Loan Council problem. All honourable members know the Teasurer's views on the Loan Council; we know what he said about the Victorian Equity Trust and the fate that became him with that. I very much fear that we will experience the same fate in the future. The Treasurer has given every indication that he had no consultation with the Commonwealth government about this issue. He has not informed the House what the Solicitor­ General had to say on this point, and he also has not informed honourable members of what qualifications, loopholes or nuances were in the Solicitor-General's opinion to enable us to independently determine whether the Loan Council global limit was infringed. It would be extremely difficult for the Solicitor-General to give a dogmatic opinion on that point because, as honourable members now know, the agreement between the government and the State Bank has not even been finalised let alone released. The Solicitor-General must be advising in a vacuum. Honourable members must contemplate, therefore, the grave risk that this State must treat the $795 million as falling within global limits. What will happen if that occurs? If one looks at the projections made by the Treasurer about the timing of interest payments under his rescue package, one sees that the Treasurer states that $50 million will be paid next financial year and that it will increase to $100 million in following financial years. That is $50 million of interest in the next financial year, and, assuming an interest rate of 17 per cent, that $50 million capitalises to the sum of $294 million as the average amount of debt during the year and that debt must be taken on board by the government. 182 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances

Honourable members must remember that that level of debt is increasing throughout the year. It is reasonable to assume that by the end of the next financial year the total amount of debt taken on board by the government under the agreement with Tricontinental will be in the vicinity of $400 million. That is a massive amount of money; it represents 8 per cent of the tax revenue of the State. If one is to recoup that money through tax, it means an 8 per cent tax increase, or else it means the 8 per cent cut becomes a cut across the board in Budget sector services. If the Treasurer does not bring it on board into the Budget sector but tries to cut back other capital works to make up the shortfall, such things as fire stations, extentions of gas mains and sewerage pipe extensions will go by the board. I refer to pages 54 to 59 of Budget Paper No. 2 issued by the Treasurer. It carries a long list of the capital works projects that have been funded from global borrowings, all of which must be vulnerable if the Treasurer has got it wrong. The State is facing serious financial difficulty if the Treasurer has got it wrong. The final point I wish to briefly address is Commonwealth income tax. Tricontinental pays Commonwealth income tax and always has and will continue to do so as long as it remains a company even though it is owned by the State Bank. Last week I asked whether there were accruing tax benefits that could have been legitimately obtained from the losses incurred by Tricontinental, that is the $795 million. The Treasurer originally said, "No" because they had to be recouped within seven years. That shows that the Treasurer does not know about the changes to the tax laws announced by the Federal Treasurer in the last Budget when he removed the seven-year limit. The Treasurer's spokesman then tried to say that Tricontinental is an inert body. That is a massive chan~e from what was in the State Bank's annual report last year, which was not contradIcted by the Treasurer in his statement of 23 February. The next question was why does not the government sell Tricontinental for a price that reflects some of those tax losses. The Opposition was told that that was not a goer because there were no buyers and that the State Bank's advisers had indicated that. We now find this week that the acting chief executive of the State Bank is talking about a buyer for Tricontinental Corporation Ltd and the Treasurer is saying he will not stand in the way of that. A total of $310 million could be recovered ~n behalf of the Victorian taxpayer if all tax benefits were realised. I do not suggest that the full sum will be attained because a heavy discount will probably be necessary. However, I contrast that amount with the $24 million savings involved in the transport dispute that brought the State tram system to a halt in December and January. In addition the Minister for Health beheves $23 million will bail out our hospital system. Yet in this case the government was prepared to wipe off any chance of recovering $50 million, $100 million or $150 million as a result of preservIng these tax losses. Has the government taken that course to obtain a satisfactory scheme to be put before the Loan Council? No, it has not. The government could have varied the scheme so that the money that was put into Tricontinental would not take up debts but was put in as capital, which would preserve the tax losses. Mr JASPER (Murray Valley)-Although I recognise that the biggest single issue facing Victoria is the massive debt incurred by State Bank Victoria and Tricontinental Corporation Ltd, and that the Treasurer and the government must be held accountable for that significant debt, I refer to another issue of importance to all Victorians: the state of Victoria's road system and, indeed, the road system throughout Australia. The greatest confidence trick that has been perpetrated on Victorians has been the reduction in road funding provided by the Federal, State and local governments. This is not Grievances 8 Man~h 1990 ASSEMBLY 183 only a significant issue for Parliamentarians and Victorians but also a major issue in the forthcoming Federal election. If one analyses the facts and figures presented in various forums, one discovers that Victorians have obvious reasons for concern. Municipalities in the Murray Valley electorate have expressed disappointment about the reduction in the level of road funds. The State government's change in road classifications is a confidence trick that will lead to less funds being provided for roads in metropolitan Melbourne and especially in country Victoria. The new classification system will be introduced on 1 July 1990 and the new level of road funds provided in that financial year to municipalities in country Victoria will be significantly less. The increase in the allocation to main roads will increase funds provided for roads in metropolitan Melbourne but a lesser share for those in country Victoria. Under the old system funds were provided to the States in four categories: main roads; unclassified roads; forest roads; and tourist roads. Under State highways there were five classifications. The new classification system apparently has not been finally determined but it will lead to a significant reduction in funds provided for country roads. I shall quote statistics from the Shire of Benalla, part of which is in the Murray Valley electorate, to indicate the reduction in funding for main roads. Currently 180 kilometres of roads in the shire are classified as main roads. Under the new system, which is to operate from 1 July 1990, main roads in that category will amount to 90 kilometres. It is only logical that a decrease in funding for main roads will occur in 1990-91. In recent years there has been a continuing reduction in road funds provided to municipalities. In 1988-89 the Shire of Benalla received $934 000 for road works. In 1989-90 road funding to the shire amounted to $686 000, a reduction of $248 000, or 27 per cent. Unfortunately, this is not an isolated case. I refer the House to the Shire of Wangaratta, which is also in the Murray Valley electorate and which, in 1988-89, received $638 000; in 1989-90 the amount was reduced to $535000, a reduction of$103 000. The Shire of Yarrawonga has also had its level of road funding reduced from $436 000 to $397 200. The same thing is happening right across Victoria. Federal governments have progressively been providing less money for roads in Victoria and in other States, but the blame does not lie only with them. The State government has received increased funds from fuel taxes imposed on Victorian motorists. Last financial year the State government collected $228 million; this year it is estimated that it will collect $261 million. Honourable members will be aware of the increasing taxes levied by the State and Federal governments. The Federal government receives 32 cents in tax from every litre of fuel. More than 50 per cent of the cost of a litre of fuel goes to the Federal government. Many estimates of the level offunds collected by the Federal government have been made. Some people claim the Federal government collects $6500 million, while others estimate the figure to be $8000 million each year. It is ridiculous that only $1200 million is provided to the States for road funding. It is not good enough. The State government should be pressing the Federal government and the coalition parties to discover what additional road funds will be provided after the Federal election later this month. It appears that a Labor government would provide an additional $300 million over the life of the next Parliament-approximately $100 million a year additional to the $110 million announced earlier this year for the black spot program or for specific roads around Australia. 184 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances

If one examines what the coalition parties are presenting, one discovers an entirely different picture. The coalition parties made a commitment that they will allocate an additional 2 cents a litre of the fuel tax for road funding in Victoria. Recent advertisements in the daily newspapers inserted by the Royal Automobile Club of Victoria and the Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce pressed for such a commitment from the Federal government and the coalition parties. I do not believe that is enough, but it is what is being asked for by those motoring organisations. I have said that the Federal government collects approximately 32 cents for every litre of petrol sold in Victoria and that it allocates back to the States for roadworks less than 5 cents a litre and pockets the rest in consolidated revenue. That is just not good enough. Reduced funds are being provided for roads, particularly in country municipalities. The situation must change. Municipalities are not in a position of being able to maintain their road networks and provide a reasonable system for the ratepayers within those municipalities, particularly in country Victoria. In his answer to a question without notice this morning, the Premier referred particularly to regional Victoria. I applaud the comments he made and the fact that he recognises there is a need for special assistance for country industry. I suggest that the Premier also take note of the need for additional funds for roads in country Victoria. He should recognise that the Federal government is the big collector of petrol and diesel revenue throughout Australia. I suggest he should back the Federal coalition and acknowledge that it is coming up with an allocation that is more realistic and will provide additional funds for roads not only in metropolitan Melbourne-where I believe the government will redirect most of the funds-but also in country Victoria. The Federal government is ripping off Australian motorists and has been doing so for many years. I also direct to the attention of the House the fact that the recent increase in the price of fuel earlier this year included an automatic consumer price index increase, which occurs every six months. That automatic CPI increase is applied by the Federal government to three items: tobacco products, alcohol and petrol. The actual CPI increase earlier this year, on 10 February, was 0·97 cents a litre of petrol-almost 1 cent a litre. The National Party has calculated that it is worth $169 million to the Federal government in a full year. That is a windfall, yet that government is not giving any of that amount back to the States. Why does the Federal government not commit those funds back to the States for roads? The automatic consumer price index rise in the price of diesel fuel for the same period amounts to some $300 million in revenue for the Federal government. I am pleased the Premier is in the Chamber during my contribution to the debate because this is a major issue. Mr Roper interjected. Mr JASPER-I believe it is important because the Premier is really the person who can push this issue and ensure that Victoria receives ajust share of road funding. The Premier knows that I was just as critical, when the coalition was in government in Canberra, of the introduction of the world parity pricing policy, which increased taxes on fuel right across Australia in 1977-78. When it came to power in 1983, the Federal Labor government perpetuated this system. However, it is now in a much better position, where it can consider making additional allocations for roads instead of pocketing the difference in consolidated revenue. I know that the automatic response from the Premier and others will be: where will the additional funds come from; if you take funds from the balance that now goes to Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 185 consolidated revenue, what will you do to make up the shortfall? I suggest the shortfall is automatically made up by the consumer price index increases. The Federal government is sitting back and copping it sweet. It is happy to sit back. The oil companies are really copping the flak for increased fuel prices. They are in the firing line. In fact, I criticise the oil companies as much as anyone else, because when there is discounting, it should occur across Victoria. That would benefit country people who, I remind the House, have an absolute need for fuel compared with those in metropolitan Melbourne who are able to use Met trams-when they are running­ trains and buses to travel to and from the city. There is a need for an extra commitment from the Federal government and the coalition. I suggest there is a commitment from both of them, although there is not a firm enough commitment from the Labor government at present, which talks about $300 million being allocated for roads over the life of the Parliament. The coalition is now suggesting that there will be $1000 million, which I suggest is more realistic and more in keeping with the suggestions made by the Royal Automobile Club of Victoria and the Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce. There is a need for a firm commitment that that money will be provided so that municipalities and the State government are not in the situation of receiving lesser amounts of money with which to develop our roads and ensure that the road system in Victoria does not deteriorate. Country municipalities are in desperate trouble. Many of them will not be able to maintain their roads, which are degenerating and deteriorating to the standard of bush tracks. Unless there is a commitment to a change in the allocations, that will continue to occur. As I said, the funds are being redirected. Metropolitan Melbourne will probably receive a larger share of even the reduced amounts being provided for roads. The previous Liberal government, and then the incoming Labor government, made a commitment to provide for the development of the Hume Freeway between Melbourne and Wodonga. That was to be completed and opened by 1988, the bicentennial year. However, that commitment has not been met and that section of the road is not expected to be completed until 1995 because the level of road funding is being reduced, even though the State and Federal governments are collecting more and more money from motorists. In this financial year it is expected that $35 million will be made available for works on the Hume Freeway in north-eastern Victoria. Last year the allocation was approximately $42 million. Therefore, the completion date for the dual carriageway between Melbourne and W odonga is being pushed further ahead. The suggestion is that it will be completed by 1995, whereas the original commitment was for it to be completed in 1988, when there was an imposition of additional taxes. That has been gobbled up as well. The money is not even earmarked. Therefore, one of the great issues for the people of Victoria is not only this huge debt being built up by State Bank Victoria-which is an absolute disaster, for which the government and the Treasurer must be held accountable-but also the alarming deterioration of Victoria's road network. I want action. Motorists throughout Victoria are angry about paying high prices for fuel, but I am sure they would not be angry if they knew that a large share of the taxes collected by the State and Federal governments was being distributed where it rightfully belonged-to the road network; not to consolidated revenue and all the other airy-fairy programs dreamed up by Labor governments in particular. If those funds are to be collected, they should be placed in their rightful position: let us improve the road network and ensure that it does not deteriorate further and that there is not a reduction of funds for roads throughout Victoria. 186 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances

I challenged the Premier yesterday to visit my electorate and experience at first hand the feelings about the daylight-saving issue. I now challenge the Premier to talk to the municipalities and the people who know what they are doing-the engineers and chief executives-in the Murray Valley electorate. I challenge him to talk to people in the Roads Corporation. They will tell the Premier what is happening-although they will not come out and do so publicly-because they understand the issues involved. The great issue facing country Victoria, Victoria as a whole, and the whole nation is the continuing reduction in funding for roads. It is a big issue and it will continue to be a big issue. The present situation is not good enough; more funds are needed. I want the Premier to say what he believes should be done about Victoria's road network. I believe the State has a commitment, and some funds have been provided by the State government to the road network; the legislative mechanism was put in place by the previous Liberal government to ensure that the fuel taxes collected by the States were distributed for roadworks. I want a firm commitment from this State government that that is what it will do. I hope the Premier will respond briefly to my comments and express his commitment to ensuring that a greater share of funds is allocated to roads so that not only will the deterioration of the roads be arrested but also the road network improved, for the benefit not only of Victorians but also of tourists and others who are interested, as I am, in the complete development of the State. Mr CAIN (Premier)-I suggest that the honourable member for Murray Valley take up the issue with his own Leader because last night his Leader was free in using the word "challenge". He issued a challenge to a debate on the State Bank. Today 4 hours were available for debate on the State Bank. In that 4 hours, members of the Opposition have more time than members on the government side of the House because of the rules of the House. What has happened? The second speaker on the Opposition side did not talk about the State Bank, the issue that is exercising his Leader's mind and is expressed in such a strident manner! So much for their sincerity about the State Bank! Three or four months ago I listened to the celebrated and notorious debate on the motion of want of confidence in the government. Then I likened it to being attacked by a dead sheep. Judging by today's performance, the sheep is well and truly dead. It might have been on steroids but it is well and truly dead! Is the present Leader of the Opposition taking lessons from his former Leader, who could manufacture outrage at the drop of a hat on anything he chose? That is what he has done today. When the present Leader of the Opposition was elected to that position there were those who said that he would sink without a trace. He has not sunk but risen without a trace. Mr Brown interjected. Mr CAIN-He asks: who wrote that? I ask him: who wrote the Thomastown results? The Leader of the Opposition will go down in history-perhaps as a footnote­ as the first Leader of a major political party to lead his party to the third position in an election, behind the Australian Democrats. It has not been done before. Jeffhad a go at least! The Leader of the Opposition left no tracks in Thomastown. He surprised us-he surprised me and his party, I think-because he was not fair dinkum. How desperate does one need to be-and that is what today and the past three months are about-to achieve media profile that one will resort to losing an election to the Australian Democrats? That is what he did. I wonder whether it were not contrived. Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 187

Mr Brown interjected. Mr CAIN-He can rationalise any way he likes by mentioning Kew or anything like that. The facts are that for the first time his party was third in an election, behind the Australian Democrats! Over the past three months the same desperation to obtain a media profile has been evidenced. The Leader of the Opposition seems to have taken some perverse joy or glee in seeing financial institutions in this country-including the State Bank-in financial difficulties. Why else would he have said the things he did; why else would he have gone on with all the puff and wind he could muster to say the things he did about the State Bank and what was going to be revealed on 7 March? Beware the 7th of March! It sounded a bit like beware the ides of March. Some nine or ten questions have been asked by the Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of the National Party. Three speeches have been made: honourable members have heard two today and one last night from the Leader of the National Party. Not one new revelation have we had! Mr Brown interjected. Mr CAIN-The Leader of the Opposition has contrived to con the public about what he had up his sleeve; he has conned the media about what he had up his sleeve; he has not delivered a thing! He has the gall to come in here and talk about Parliament and how much he wants to debate all these matters, all that he has stored up that he was going to bring pressure to bear about and has kept in his hip pocket for three months. Mr Brown interjected. Mr CAIN-He says he will do it. You have had all these speeches! You did not even move the motion or give notice-that is how fair dinkum you are! You were refused leave and you did not give notice! Mr Brown interjected. Mr CAIN-Don't you understand the forms-- The SPEAKER-Order! The Leader of the Opposition has had his opportunity and he enjoyed the protection of the Chair. I suggest he give the Premier the opportunity of making an uninterrupted contribution to the debate. I remind the Premier of the requirement to address his remarks to the Chair. Mr CAIN-During two question times and over two days there has been the opportunity for debate and yet-I repeat-nothing new has been delivered as the Opposition said it would. There has not been a new assertion anywhere-not one. They have just conned the place and have not delivered. They have built up all this hype about the State Bank, throwing mud-- Mr Brown interjected. Mr CAIN-They have built it up and they have not delivered one new fact or made one new assertion. It is the same desperation as was evidenced during the Thomastown by-election. The Leader of the Opposition has the same determination to achieve a media profile. He was even prepared to throw it out. The Leader of the ·Opposition got to the stage of copping a writ for defamation; he is prepared to do and say anything to gain a media profile! 188 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances

It is in marked contrast to what the government has done. The government has behaved responsibly, in a way that is expected by the public and the financial institutions of this State. The Leader of the Opposition is afraid. His greatest fear is that Jeff will mount a challenge and come back. He will say and do anything to try to maintain a profile that might avert that prospect. The Leader of the Opposition is worried also that when the honourable member for Brighton returns-from the summer economics camp, is it­ he might make a challenge. What honourable members see is a Leader of the Opposition-and, to a lesser extent the Leader of the National Party-who will say anything at all, regardless of whether it can be backed up, to try to achieve a media profile. I repeat: the government acted responsibly to ensure the future of the State Bank. We have done that in a climate where there was a clear determination on the part of the opposition parties to try to undermine the State Bank and its integrity. To ensure that the depositors' money was safe, to ensure that home owners' mortgages are safe and secure has been the determination of the government. We have acted in such a way as to ensure that. It has been acknowledged-- Mr Ross-Edwards interjected. The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member for Shepparton knows better. Mr CAIN-It has been acknowledged by-- Mr Ross-Edwards interjected. The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member for Shepparton is an experienced and respected member of this House. I expect that he will honour that respect by remaining silent and enabling the Premier to complete his remarks. Mr CAIN-The government's course was seen as responsible by the Reserve Bank of Australia which has endorsed the government's action. It was clearly acknowledged by those who make an assessment about the viability of banks in determining the State Bank's credit rating. They acknowledged and recognised that the government was standing behind the State Bank. The new board of the State Bank represents a sound and stable basis on which the bank can go forward. The government's responses have been responsible, in sharp contrast with the responses of the Opposition which have been totally irresponsible and compounded by an irresponsibility and a series of assertions that have not been backed up today or at any time by delivery in Parliament. It is an alarming aspect that in desperation the Opposition is prepared to try to keep the assertions about the State Bank afloat and cannot then make them. The sitting was suspended at 1 p.m. until 2.2 p.m. Mr CAIN-I was saying before the suspension of the sitting that I believe it is demonstrable that the government has acted responsibly and the Opposition has acted irresponsibly and sees as its role to undermine public confidence in the State Bank. I believe the Opposition knows-as everybody else does-that the State Bank's future is secure. Yet the Opposition persists in actions that make it harder for the bank to get on with its job. I believe everybody supports the bank, reinforced as I am by the knowledge that all parties supported the State Bank's move into new economic activities in 1986 or thereabouts, which sought to protect its share of the market in traditional business. Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 189

On 12 April 1988 the honourable member for Brighton said in debate on the State Bank Bill: Far from opposing it, the Liberal Party has supported the extension of the bank's charter and its expansion and development as a major financial institution in Victoria and, indeed, on the Australian financial stage. It is disappointing and a matter for regret for all Victorians that when the bank, through the subsidiary that was embraced by Parliament, runs into difficulties it should be left for dead and denigrated by the Opposition. I believe there is malice abroad there. That is reinforced in my estimation by the line that has been taken on the issue of the borrowings and the global limits. Mr MACLELLAN (Berwick)-On a point of order, Mr Speaker, it may have escaped your attention but the Premier said there was malice abroad in regard to the Opposition. Standing Orders do not allow the Premier to suggest that sort of motive and I ask that it be withdrawn. The SPEAKER-Order! Standing Orders provide that a member may not reflect on other members. To that extent I uphold the point of order and ask the Premier to continue in conformity with Standing Orders. Mr CAIN (Premier)-It seems the Opposition is prepared to allow the Loan Council agreement on global borrowings by States to be prostituted in the name of political expediency. That is the conclusion I draw because it is clear on our advice that the government has put in place, to support the State Bank, an arrangement that will not be covered by global limits. These limits were agreed to by the Loan Council at a meeting held in conjunction with the Premiers Conference. Mr Brown interjected. Mr CAIN-The Leader of the Opposition is wrong again. The limit specifically exempts borrowings by government-owned financial institutions and they are exempt unless they are on-lent to governments. Had the Leader of the Opposition chosen to study the statement of the Treasurer on 23 February, he would have seen that no on­ lending is involved. Of course, he does all this in a climate where the Federal Liberals make it clear that they would be willing to prevent the rules of the global limits to catch out the government. At the same time Dr Hewson is willing to blowout the limits of those borrowings to help out his mate, the Premier of New South Wales. He would break the rules to stop Mr Greiner's sewage washing up on the shores of Sydney's beaches. Presumably he would break them again to try to make life difficult for Victoria doing the right thing by the State Bank. If the Opposition in Victoria is supporting that proposition it should say unequivocally whether it is for Victoria or against Victoria. That is the simple question. It seems that the Leader of the Opposition wants a chance to score some more cheap political shots, and he will do anything to do so even if it is at the expense of Victorians. Finally I wish to touch on some comments the Leader of the National Party last night made in debate about what my father might have thought about this issue. He said I was steeped in political tradition and history and I had learnt all about it when I was young. I shall tell the House what I learnt about it. I grew up in the days following the depression, in the late 1930s and the early second world .war years. I believe if my father and those before him were to come back today and see what has occurred in care and concern for the people about whom they were concerned, they would be delighted. The greatest issue in my childhood, when I was steeped in those traditions, 190 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances was the people who came to my home-there were no electorate offices-to see my father about jobs. Unemployment was 30 per cent and the unemployed came to my home seeking assistance when they could not get jobs. They did not have any money~ they did not have any food. I remember sharing my sandwiches with kids at school because their fathers did not have jobs. My father and those before him were the true believers in this country. If they could come back today they would see the situation that the Treasurer has brought about where the people that you and I should be concerned about do have jobs. Victoria has the lowest unemployment of any State and the government regards the dignity of being able to have a job as pretty important. I know the Opposition does not have that view, but that is what the true believers are about. That is what I was brought up to believe, that is what I regard as the most important thing: that people have the dignity of being able to earn a living and look after their families. That is what I learnt, Mr Speaker. That was the traditional way. If those true believers of my father's time could see what this Treasurer and this government have achieved by giving people work, by looking after families by imposing lower taxes, by giving people greater purchasing power and more of the things that matter to the ordinary men and women of this country, they would be delighted, because they were concerned about the ordinary man and woman, not the plastic people that Andrew Peacock tries to suck in in an election campaign. He has been found out; he has no substance. I said six months ago that if Andrew Peacock, the Leader of the Federal Opposition, is put to the test, and is put under public scrutiny, the public will see there is nothing there. It is the same with the Opposition, there is nothing there. The Labor Party and the government have a great tradition of concern about people. The Opposition, that lot over there, con the public, con the media and promise these terrific revelations about what is going to happen, but deliver nothing. The Leader of the National Party had the gall to tell me what my father would have taught me. I shall tell the House what he taught me. He believed the most important thing in this life was the dignity of a job and the Treasurer has given Victorians that opportunity. Far from being concerned about what the government has done, the Treasurer would be revered by those true believers and he is revered and supported by the great mass of people in the State. The Opposition can go on with all the nonsense it likes about the government, but it has enabled the State and Victorians to have a capacity to enjoy life as never before. The government will go on doing that and it will have no regard to the plastic people opposite who try to con the Australian electors with slick commercials on television, but they have been found out because there is no substance in the Federal Opposition up in Canberra, just as there is none in the Opposition here. The Australian Labor Party gives substance to this Parliament and will continue to do so. Mrs WADE (Kew)-Together with other members of the Opposition I believe, despite all the problems confronting the government today, and there are many of them, the most important and top priority should be given to the problems associated with State Bank Victoria and the Treasurer'.s responsibility for the bank. I intend to canvass three areas today. Firstly, in practical terms, neither the government nor the people of Victoria can afford to keep in office the Treasurer, or the Director-General of Management and Budget, Dr Sheehan, for a moment longer. Mr Micallef-Are you going to read the whole speech? Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 191

Mrs W ADE-I am not reading the speech. Secondly, the Treasurer has provided all the evidence that the government needs to get rid of him after the disaster of the State Bank and Tricontinental Corporation Ltd. Thirdly, I want to indicate why the government should establish a judicial inquiry into what has happened with the State Bank and Tricontinental. It is clear that the government knows it cannot afford to keep the Treasurer in office. While the Treasurer was speaking during the debate this morning only the Premier remained in the Chamber for the whole period of the speech. Another Minister was in the Chamber for part of the Treasurer's speech and possibly a third Minister entered the Chamber for a few minutes. Honourable members interjecting. The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member for Kew is just as entitled to be heard as is any other honourable member and I ask honourable members, particularly those on my right, to remain silent while the honourable member is speaking. Mrs W ADE-The Cain Labor government's historic third term has been a disaster. It has been overtaken by one historic disaster after another. This is the term of office when the wheels have fallen off the government. The wheels have fallen off the government not because of decisions it has taken during this term of office, when it is old and tired, but because of the decisions it has taken during its first two terms of office, when it was young and fresh. The current generation of true believers believe in modem financial management. The Sheehan formula for government has produced the Victorian Economic Development Corporation disaster, the Victorian Investment Corporation disaster, the WorkCare disaster and now the State Bank disaster. If the government does not get rid of the Treasurer these disasters will continue to haunt it. Every day decisions are continuing to be made. The State Budget has $130 million earmarked for the government's economic strategy. Dr Sheehan is up to his ears in the multifunction polis and the Olympic Games is still to come! Decisions are now taken week by week. Disasters will return to haunt the government over the next two years. The Treasurer has provided all the evidence that the government needs to show that he is responsible for the disaster of the State Bank. Mr SHELL (Geelong)-On a point of order, Mr Speaker, it appears that the honourable member for Kew is in breach of Standing Orders in that she is reading her speech. The SPEAKER-Order! Will the honourable member advise the Chair whether she is reading her speech? Mrs WADE (Kew)-I am definitely not reading anything. The SPEAKER-Order! There is no point of order. Mrs W ADE-The Treasurer's response to calls for his resignation, not just from the Opposition, but from the media and the ordinary people of Victoria, is to use an Aunt Sally. He says, "I have not been involved in the individual commercial decisions of the State Bank". He gets his friends, Kenneth Davidson and so on, to say the same thing. He even gets the ill-fated former board of the State Bank to support him. No­ one is accusing the Treasurer of being involved in the commercial decisions of the State Bank. The Opposition is accusing him of not carrying out his responsibilities as Treasurer of the State. His admitted failure to involve himself in Tricontinental is also a reason for his resignation or dismissal. 192 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances

If anything else, the Treasurer is responsible to Victorian taxpayers for the way in which their taxes are spent. The taxpayers of Victoria are picking up the bill for the State Bank disaster. They are picking up a tab of $100 million a year for the State Bank and that is interest only and will not repay the $795 million that has been borrowed. The problem started with the government's economic strategy. The honourable member for Balwyn has referred to the House extracts from Victoria The Next Step and Victoria State ofAchievement and I do not intend to go over those documents. The Sheehan blueprint envisaged a brave new future for the State Bank. It included the takeover of Tricontinental as a fully owned subsidiary in 1985. It included a new State Bank Act in 1988. Mr Gavin-You supported it. Mrs W ADE-The Liberal Party supported that legislation in that on its face it gave the Treasurer the power to control the State Bank and Tricontinental. The Act gave the Treasurer the power to protect the customers of the State Bank and the taxpayers of Victoria. The Treasurer needs the support of the taxpayers of Victoria because they are standing behind the State Bank, not the government. They stand behind the guarantee given to customers and in respect of liabilities of the State Bank. The powers given to the Treasurer under the State Bank Act were numerous. The board was directed to send minutes of board meetings to the Treasurer within five days after they were signed. The Treasurer had a representative an the board of the State Bank, and one assumes he would have reported to the Treasurer on a regular basis. Ifhe did not report to the Treasurer, why not? The board of the State Bank was required to keep the Treasurer informed of its prudential standards and policy matters. The Treasurer had the power to make determinations on policy and prudential standards of the bank and those determinations were binding on the bank's board. After listening to the Treasurer, I do not believe any of these safeguards were in place over the past two years. Why does the Treasurer believe he was given these powers if he was not to use them? The annual report of the Department of Management and Budget states that the Finance Division of that department reviews the operation of the State Bank, but the officer in charge of that division tells us that is not so. The Treasurer recently appointed a new board and a new Treasurer's representative and this time he gave him detailed instructions about reporting to the Treasurer. The Treasurer is convicted out of his own mouth. Those requirements for reporting were always necessary. They have not just become necessary now. Together, these deficiencies explain why the Treasurer apparently gave no serious consideration to the takeover of Tricontinental in 1985. Even more damning is the increase in the government guarantee. Under the 1958 Act the government guarantee was limited to depositors of the State Bank and certain other limited borrowings. In 1988 the guarantee was extended to all of the liabilities of the bank. The effect on the guarantee has been dramatic. In his 1986-87 statement the Treasurer said the extent of the guarantee was $9 billion; in 1987-88 the figure was $15 billioB; and at the end of the last financial year the guarantee for the State Bank alone-only one of the guarantees given by the government-was $53 billion. The taxpayers of Victoria are guaranteeing all the liabilities of the State Bank for an amount that is four time's the annual Budget of Victoria. Ifwe had to pay up there would be four years of no schools, no hospitals, no police and not one public servant-in fact, the State would be bankrupt. Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 193

Fortunately Victorians have not been called on to pay the full extent of the guarantee. The Treasurer says he is not responsible for Tricontinental; how can that be when the taxpayers of Victoria are paying for all of its liabilities? Firstly, the Victorian taxpayers are liable because in 1985 State Bank Victoria took over Tricontinental. Before that the State Bank had only a small shareholding in the merchant bank. I understand the Treasurer initiated the takeover. One wonders what independent advice he sought before doing so. Whether he did or did not obtain advice he appears not to have turned his mind to the implications of the takeover for Victorian taxpayers. In May 1989 Tricontinental found itself in trouble. Its lines of credit were drying up, and the State Bank had to decide either to stand behind the merchant bank or let it collapse. IfTricontinental had been allowed to collapse its investors would not have been paid in full, something that happens from time to time to investors in companies and merchant banks. Indeed, six merchant banks have collapsed during the last couple of years. The State Bank decided not to allow Tricontinental to collapse. The decision should have been approved by the Treasurer, because once the State Bank decided to stand behind Tricontinental the taxpayers of Victoria became guarantors of the liabilities of the merchant bank. The Treasurer has said that although he knew of the State Bank's decision he neither approved nor disapproved of it, so he let it go ahead. In permitting the acquisition of Tricontinental, the Treasurer had to choose between investors in the merchant bank and the taxpayers of Victoria, a difficult decision. The investors had voluntarily put their money into Tricontinental, fully aware of its merchant bank operations; Victorian taxpayers had no choice, because their money was put in compulsorily. It was decided that the taxpayers of Victoria would stand behind Tricontinental. The Treasurer decided that the State Bank's reputation was more important than our taxpayers and that it would be they who would bear the loss. The Treasurer gave the investors in Tricontinental the benefit of a government guarantee. Given that the Treasurer considered it absolutely essential for the taxpayers to stand behind Tricontinental, he must explain why he did not take the responsibility of properly monitoring the operations of the merchant bank. The Treasurer had all the powers he needed under the State Bank Act to monitor its operations from the time it was taken over by the State Bank in 1985. The Treasurer did not do so. He has brazenly said that he did not do so-indeed, he has boasted of it-and that is why he must go. The reason the Treasurer of the day is given the powers, under the State Bank Act, to monitor the bank's operations through minutes, reports and so on, is that the State Bank is empowered to incur contingent liabilities on behalf of the people of Victoria­ and it has done so by incurring contingent liabilities of $53 billion! The Treasurer cannot escape the obligation he had to monitor the increase in this appalling liability on a day-to-day basis. Ifhe was not prepared to monitor the merchant bank's operations he should not have allowed the State Bank to take it over in 1985-and in 1985 the Treasurer had every reason to know that there would be problems with merchant banks. In that year the newspapers were full of stories about the difficulties being faced by merchant banks because of the deregulation of the banking system and, in particular, the entry of foreign banks into Australia. An article in of 23 February of this year states: At the time of the takeover, Trico was a small merchant bank with a poor credit rating and a reputation for running a "hot book" on the 11 a.m. money market. That is the sort of bank the Treasurer allowed to be taken over by State Bank Victoria. Session 1990-7 194 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances

I remember 1985 very well because, as the Minister for Transport will remember, at that time I was the Commissioner for Corporate Affairs. I was responsible for the licensing of merchant banks; and at that time I was very concerned about their operations. The newspapers were full of dire predictions about their future. So concerned was I that I wrote to the National Companies and Securities Commission on many occasions saying that we should increase our monitoring of the licences under the Securities Industry Act. I wanted to ensure that we did not have the failures that we now have. It is interesting to think that if I had stayed at the Corporate Affairs Commission the increased monitoring that I was advocating might have stopped these problems occurring. Instead, the Minister for Transport, who was then the Attorney-General, decided that I needed a change of career, and by doing so set me on the fath to this House. So, I was not there to monitor the operations of Tricontinental. I I had been it may have made a difference. I have not said so on the record before, but I take this opportunity of thanking the Minister for Transport for my change in career, which I believe was endorsed by the Premier and the Cabinet! The Treasurer should have been wary of Tricontinental; instead, he took little interest in the matter at all. He has blamed everyone else for the disaster. He has blamed the chief executive of Tricontinental and his deputy, Mr Ziebelle; he has blamed the Tricontinental board, the State Bank board and the bank's auditors. But none of them was responsible to the people of Victoria in the way that the Treasurer is responsible. His duty is to closely oversee any areas in his portfolio that may result in the people of Victoria having to bear massive increases in liabilities. Clearly the Treasurer did not feel he had any such duty in this matter. He has said so himself; he has said that he had no involvement with Tricontinental. The Treasurer stands convicted out of his own mouth, because he admits that he failed to understand and perform the duties of his office. The Treasurer must go. If he does not go by himself, he must be removed! Finally, there is an urgent need to establish a judicial inquiry. Since the last State election we have read disclosure after disclosure of financial mismanagement on a scale never seen in Australia. WA Inc. is not in the same class and, so far as financial mismanagement is concerned, the former National Party government in Queensland is not even in the race! Victoria needs an inquiry similar to the Fitzgerald inquiry in Queensland to examine all of the financial disasters and to discover why the loans were made and how the losses have been incurred. Victoria has paid dearly for what I can only describe as an extravagant party enjoyed by only a privileged few who had the ability to borrow from either Tricontinental, the Victorian Economic Development Corporation or the Victorian Investment Corporation. Those people have been living it up. All honourable members know how easy it was for individuals and companies to borrow from Tricontinental. Indeed, other banks sent customers whom they considered to be unreasonable credit risks to Tricontinental-it was the no-hoper's bank, the bank of the high-fliers. Those who were unable to borrow from Tricontinental went to the VEDC. The Ryan report states that the VEDC lent to anyone who asked for a loan. The report also states that Mr Fergus Ryan did not seek to identify dishonest or fraudulent behaviour. That exercise involving the VEDC, the State Bank group and VIC is yet to be undertaken. Honourable members opposite must realise that Victoria has lost hundreds of thousands of millions of dollars as a result of these financial disasters. That money could have been spent on social justice. Where are the true believers? The money could have been spent on schools, hospitals, the intellectually disabled, and the elderly but it has been thrown away on an extravagant party for a few in the community. Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 195

Honourable members opposite will be condoning that scandal unless they support a judicial inquiry into those financial institutions. The scandal will not disappear. I regret that the Premier is not in the Chamber because I wish to remind him of what he said about the collapse of Trustees Executors and Agency Co. Ltd-TEA­ on 31 May 1983, as reported at page 4708 of Hansard. The collapse involved between $10 million and $20 million, and the Premier, in his Ministerial statement, is reported as having said: The public is entitled to know, as are members of this House, the reasons and circumstances giving rise to the appointment of the provisional liquidators. Although many factors are involved, the key ingredients can be reduced to three: 1. Incompetent management; 2. Wild investment practices; and 3. Outright negligence. He is further reported as having said: These factors combined with poor and incompetent management and, I regret to say, some dealings probably beyond the law, led to disaster. There was no evidence at that stage of any offences by TEA officers or directors­ That disaster was compounded by a policy of concealment. The company was not frank, nor honest with the government. The public deserves an inquiry-- The SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member's time has expired. Mrs GARBUTT (Greensborough)-I wish to grieve about the inadequate State and Federal Liberal and National party policies on the environment and conservation. Their policies regarding the environment and conservation-like their policies on State Bank Victoria and Victoria's economy-are inadequate, not substantial and not credible. Their policies have been rejected by the major environmental groups throughout Australia-the Australian Conservation Foundation and The Wilderness Society; those organisations have decided to support the Australian Labor Party and are urging people in marginal electorates to vote ALP, thereby rejecting the Opposition's policies. Every piece of proposed legislation and every government initiative introduced into this place is opposed by the Opposition. It seeks to amend, to water down, and to weaken all provisions; it is not interested in the future of the environment. By contrast the Victorian government is leading the way in developing environmental policies, as was recognised last weekend at the Australian-New Zealand Environmental Council, which supported many of Victorian government initiatives and urged that the initiatives be adopted at the Federal level. That has been done. A feature of the government's policies is community involvement and support. The community supports the government in developing policies. I shall examine some of the policies proposed by the Opposition parties. Firstly, the policy regarding the greenhouse effect and ozone depletion states: The protection of the Earth's atmosphere and climate on an international level is of unquestioned significance to Australia. 196 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances

No-one can disagree. What policies are to be adopted to protect the environment? Chlorofluorocarbons-CFCs-constitute a significant greenhouse gas. The policy states: ... we commend the positive steps take by industry to move to eliminate the use of CFCs in Australia, and we will act to ensure their complete elimination ... by a target date of 1995. There is no disagreement with that-the government's legislation has assured that. There is nothing new; there is no fresh idea or new direction. It is simply explaining what has been put in place by the government. Mr Evans-Why are you disagreeing with it? Mrs GARBUTT-It is further stated: Particular attention will be paid to the steps which Australia can take to ameliorate the world-wide impact of the "greenhouse effect" ... these include a targeted reduction of 20 per cent in greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2000. That is a sleight of hand; the statement is misleading. The policy refers to a reduction of 20 per cent in greenhouse gases-yet, CFCs are a greenhouse gas. Once they are eliminated by 1995-the Victorian government's target date-- Mr MACLELLAN (Berwick)-On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker, the honourable member appears to be reading from a document that she has not identified. Will she identify the document? The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Norris)-Order! Was the honourable member for Greensborough reading from a document? Mrs GARBUTT-Yes, it is the Liberal and National parties environmental policy. I should have thought the honourable member would be quite familiar with it. The DEPUTY SPEAKER-Order! There is no point of order. Mrs GARBUTT (Greensborough)-The policy does not say how the opposition parties will address carbon dioxide-C02-emissions. They constitute most of the greenhouse gases and are the hardest to reduce. The policy says nothing about reduction of CO2 emissions. The government's policy is to achieve a reduction of 20 per cent in the level of CO 2 by 2005. The Opposition document contains no target-it is a puff of smoke and lacks substance. The next statement in the Opposition policy is quite intriguing: Specific programs will aim at identifying and reducing the sources of acid rain before this becomes a major problem for our region. A study discloses that Australia has only two acid rain problem areas-at Mt lsa and Kalgoorlie; they are small areas around major industrial works. Many environmental problems must be addressed throughout Australia but the one concerning acid rain would be the least important. The policies should address real and substantial issues. I contrast the government's policies on the greenhouse effect and ozone depletion with the policies enunciated in this document. The greenhouse effect is being attacked by the ~overnment in a strategic way. Many months ago the government-as a leading authonty in the world-issued a paper about the greenhouse effect. It has established a greenhouse unit to coordinate its approach; it will employ experts in its field to tackle the problem systematically. That unit will be backed up by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation. The scientific bases and research activities of the Labor government are impeccable. Many of the established programs seek community support. The Australian-New Zealand Environmental Council adopted this government's target for CO2 emissions, Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 197 and asked for a reduction; it requested that a September target be established by the Commonwealth government. Many of the government's projects and programs involve the community, and have received substantial community support; they rely upon community participation through organisations and individuals. The Greenspot program started by producing and distributing 5000 brochures; that program is attempting to inform consumers so that they can make knowledgeable choices about products that affect the environment. Five thousand brochures! One hundred thousand copies of the next brochure will be issued. There is substantial community support for the program, as it allows people to make informed choices as consumers. The second aspect of this program is a labelling system which will entail placing a green spot on environmentally friendly products. This part of the project was endorsed last weekend and it will become a national program by June. Another program which has considerable community support is the "Keep Vic Fit" program. This was publicised in a series of advertisements on television. People are obliged to get up out of their chairs, make a phone call and register themselves on a mailing list in order to obtain the brochure. It was expected to reach 10000 people; at the moment there are 30 000 people on the mailing list. What has the Opposition's response to this been? It has knocked it; the Opposition is not interested. In contrast, the community supports this program. I wish to move on to energy efficiency. The opposition parties policy says there is great scope for saving in energy consumption by more efficient use of energy. That is all well and good, but the Opposition is behind the times. The government has already released a paper on renewable energy and energy conservation. It is the first step towards developing a strategy for renewable energy and alternative energy uses such as solar energy, biomass, landfill gas and wave energy, among others. This paper has already been circulated in the community. The Opposition is not developing any new ideas; it is endorsing our policies. The Opposition's own policies lack substance. The government has long endorsed labelling of domestic appliances to enable consumers to choose very carefully between various items according to their energy rating. This sort of information has been widely accepted by the community, which supports environmentally friendly programs. Land degradation is another vitally important area that must be addressed. The Opposition is talking about the National Soil Conservation Program 1980. It says funding for this program will be at least doubled over the next five-year period and will be funded on a project-by-project basis in accordance with an established series of national priorities. What are the policies? What are the programs'! The Opposition is taking a figure from the Labor government and doubling it, but what is the Opposition going to spend the money on? There is no strategy; there is no well thought out program. The Opposition is simply taking a figure and doubling it. The Opposition's policy states: The Liberal and National parties will continue support for the Decade of Land Care in the 19905 and will ensure that adequate funds are made available both for it and the Murray-Darling Basin Natural Resources Management Strategy. This is a continuation of what has already been done; there are no new thoughts here. 198 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances

Victoria faces substantial problems of land degradation including soil erosion, salinity, tree loss and pest plants and animals. This reduces the productivity capacity and creates unattractive landscapes. The government has developed community based programs to tackle these problems. Land care was developed by the government based on support of community groups which identify their particular problems and are assisted in developing management plans to tackle them. The concept has been embraced enthusiastically by land-holders and there are now 67 land care groups and another 50 projects getting under way. That is a substantial commitment by 2500 land-holders and covers an area of 1·1 million hectares of degraded land. There is a target of more than 100 projects to be put in place by 1992. The national land care program is based on the Victorian program. It is one that has been endorsed and sent across Australia by the Prime Minister with national support. Labor governments and communities are working together and Labor policies are being supported because they are substantial and will have an effect, unlike the Opposition's policies, which lack substance. Another major project designed by the Victorian government to tackle these issues has been the Tree Victoria program. It was supported by $2·2 million of State money in 1989 and has been supported by the community. Many people have knocked programs such as this and the Federal program which promises to plant many more trees, but the community is supportive and is involved. Recently I spoke to a large group of leaders of the Girl Guides Association of Victoria and they were right behind it. They said, "You can do it. We have already planted a million trees through the guiding movement in the last two years". The community sees the value of this pro~am. It is a contribution people can make, and it will have substantial effect. I belIeve the community is right behind what the government is doing, but there is nothing on offer from the opposition parties. I turn now to the subject of national parks. Mr Baker-What does the Opposition say about national parks? Mrs GARBUTT - The Opposition says: We will establish a system of Priority National Parks. In other words, the Opposition will say, "That park is the top priority national park and that one is the lowest priority national park". One wonders what they are going to do in "low priority" national parks. Are they going to open the gates and invite all those who wish to use the land for mining or logging to come in? It is not spelt out in this document, but I do not believe any national parks are low priority. They all deserve complete protection, and that is what they get under this government. I believe this government has a proud record when it comes to national parks. It has established many new parks-including the greatest achievement, the Alpine National Park, the legislation for which was passed by this House in December 1989. This puts into place what has been the dream of many conservationists for 20 to 50 years. Of course, it is not the only one. I should like to mention the Point Nepean National Park, which encompasses the former Cape Schanck Coastal Park, parts of the former Nepean State Park, and the former Commonwealth land at the entrance to Port Phillip Bay. This park offers a different experience from other national parks because of its emphasis on historic and recreational values. Would this be a "low priority" national park to the Liberal Party? One could go through all the national parks in Victoria and it would make one shudder to think which of them would be picked as low priority. Would it be Wilson's Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 199

Promontory? It is impossible to say, and what the opposition parties would do with low priority national parks is of great concern. It is not worth going through any more of the policies because they lack substance. They will be rejected by the people of Australia just as they were rejected by the major environmental groups. Mr MACLELLAN (Berwick)-The honourable member for Greensborough has just addressed the House on conservation and environmental issues. I now realise that she, as an expert, could cause a conundrum with regard to recent events in this State; apparently it is unacceptable for the State government to harvest timber in a few coupes of National Estate forest in East Gippsland. As I understand it, the government, the Liberal Party and the National Party supported legislation for the creation of national parks with once-over logging. I am unsure whether the honourable member for Greensborough can explain why it is that one cannot cut trees in a National Estate area but it is all right to once-over log in a national park. She made it sound as if she would choke rather than give credit to any other party. She is wrong in that approach; her priorities are wrong in view of the fact that the Treasurer has, by a series of deliberate actions, cost the State taxpayers $1300 million or $1500 million. The National parks legislation is in place in the State and the opposition parties are pleased to have supported it and believe the current issues deserve attention. Those current issues include the Premier rising to grieve in the grievance debate in defence of his Treasurer. I can understand how much it must have grieved the Premier to have to support the Treasurer, and how much the Treasurer needed that support. During his remarks the Premier suggested that the Opposition was bent on destroying the State Bank. Mr Speaker, you would know that it is almost impossible for anyone to destroy the State Bank. Half of it has been mortgaged, or is sold off or is disappearing as a result of the Treasurer's actions. In other words, the government has lost half of the State Bank in the Tricontinental fiasco. High principled debates about privatisation have taken place in this House. It was suggested that the Liberals might privatise the State Bank. I can assure you, Mr Speaker, that if the Treasurer remains there will not be anything left of the State Bank to privatise; it will be owned by private enterprise because it will have to be sold to meet obligations arising out of the Tricontinental disaster. During questions without notice the Leader of the National Party asked a question about the critical issue of loans-whether the Treasurer interfered in loan decision A, B or C. The average person in the street must wonder how the directors and the managers ofTricontinental could be so extraordinary that they could not have picked one or two winners. How did they manage to pick so many losers and to have lost all that money? That is another question. It is ominous that the Treasurer was not invited to interfere with the day-to-day loans policy. It was his decision that the State Bank move from a small shareholding in Tricontinental to a full ownership status. It was his decision to give the letter of comfort so that from that moment the people of Victoria-the government of Victoria-were guaranteeing the full outcome of the Tricontinental fiasco. That is the position the opposition parties put to the credit of the Treasurer, and we find him wanting. We find him wanting because he interfered in the loans policy, apparently without inquiry. He said that he was relying on advice, but he will not give the details. I assure you, Mr Speaker, snowballs will develop in hades before he gives a copy of the written opinion, which probably does not even exist. The Treasurer says he is relying on the advice and opinion that Tricontinental 200 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances was all right, or that maybe it would suffer a small loss or break even. That is what he was relying on. People who rely so desperately-and to such disaster for the State-on bad advice must have their own credentials examined carefully. That is what Ministerial responsibility is all about. Nobody is calling the Treasurer to account over the loss of only one loan or another. One could make a good argument along the lines that if one loan had been $1500 million one could question why so much was put into the one loan, but one could not question why he did not interfere in the loan. It is not like that. It was consistent policy, loan after loan, to every shyster, every shabby little job around the State: Tricontinental was the honey pot for every bad account. When prospective borrowers were knocked back from a mainstream bank they were told to go to Tricontinental, "they will lend you the money". They were the high risk lenders, the cowboys, or was it just horses that the cowboys were flogging? Because of the Treasurer's actions, taxpayers funds are required to replace the money that is missing; to pay the interest on the money that is borrowed to keep the State Bank afloat. I say, "to keep the State Bank afloat" because if one examines the State Bank Act one will find that the government managed to wipe out more than the capital and the reserves of the bank. It was only the introduction of fresh borrowed overseas capital that gave the bank any capital at all. One should remember that the Victorian Economic Development Corporation was described as being technically bankrupt or technically insolvent. For a moment the State Bank was technically insolvent because the losses being incurred by an ordinary sensible provision for future disastrous bad debts exceeded its total capital and its total reserves after 147 years in business. In one series of disastrous decisions our clever Treasurer managed to wipe out the total accumulated capital and reserves of the State Bank that were held in 1989. It is only borrowed overseas capital that keeps the bank in any sense afloat and credit worthy, and worthy even of being called a bank. The OpposItion is concerned. The Premier says that the Opposition expects the bank to be left for dead. I expect it to be dead by the time the government acts. The bank willlSe dead the way things are going if the Treasurer is not accountable for $1500 million. One should ask the same question that the Premier asked, "How much does it have to be?" If$1500 million is not enough for the Treasurer, should it be $2000 million; $3000 million; $4000 million or $5000 million? That is the question the Premier asked when the government was in opposition. Mr Brown interjected. Mr MACLELLAN-We know about WorkCare. It will exceed all those figures anyway. I can understand why the Minister for Sport and Recreation is here; he is minding the shop, so to speak. The Premier made a brave effort by saying, "Don't worry. If the Federal Labor Party gets back, the Australian Loan Council will fix it and there won't be any penalties". In other words Victorians will owe another $1000 million; the Labor Party will continue in office; the Treasurer will remain and Dr Sheehan will continue with his modern money management. The Premier sounded almost like a Victorian version of the Prime Minister because he was almost on the verge of tears when he spoke about the true believers. Apparently, a miracle has occurred within the Labor Party. Some may say that a miracle has Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 201 occurred within the factions of the government party because the big spenders have suddenly become true believers. This represents a major miracle that has been observed by the Opposition. Those who were previously interventionists and kick-starters, lending money to goldmines or pharmaceutical companies for psoriasis cures, have changed their views. Previously no businessman could be too sleazy to get a loan from the government; no businessman could be so low that he could not go to Tricontinental Corporation Ltd and get a bankroll that was guaranteed by the government on behalf of the taxpayers. However, these big spenders who previously lashed out with money for every shady deal have now been transformed into true believers. The working-class values are back again. Apparently the poor benighted electors of Thomastown had not understood the situation when they deserted the Labor Party in droves. It was not because the Labor Party had forgotten them; it was just that they had misapprehended things. The Labor Party was not lending money to every sleazy businessman, but it was lending to build kindergartens, to develop more housing, to provide for police or to do all the things that State governments have to do! Mr Baker-Jobs! Mr MACLELLAN-Ofcourse, the Premier mentionedjobs. One of the real growth industries in employment is the accountancy profession because of the bankruptcies and receiverships that have been the result of the VEDC, the VIC and now Tricontinental. They have given the greatest kick-start to the receivership industry. The Treasurer will have boosted the accountancy profession into the 1990s if the government and he continue along the lines they have pursued in the past. Why does this clever Treasurer deserve the censure of any decent person concerned about public accounts? It is because as soon as the truth came out the Treasurer started giving directions about investment policy. He then decided to have the Reserve Bank take up a supervisory role and then decided that he would take firmer control over the bank. Why did he not do that earlier? I shall refer briefly to remarks that were made in this House in 1988 when the State Bank Bill was being debated. I shall illustrate to the House that Liberal Party members did raise issues relating to these matters and also that the National Party raised these issues. Mr Jasper-Absolutely. Mr MACLELLAN-I shall start with the remarks made by the honourable member for Shepparton who said: Statutory provisions provide for the directors of the bank to confer with the Treasurer, but the ultimate power remains with the government of the day, through the Treasurer ... It is hard to quarrel with the argument that the Treasurer, representing the government and the people of Victoria, should have control. The Treasurer now wants to run away saying, "Not me". He wants to wash his hands of the matter. The former honourable member for Doncaster, Mr Williams, said: I might be in favour of the proposed legislation if it were designed to give additional muscle to a true workers' bank, but the more I examine the Bill and read of the activities of the bank, particularly its subsidiary, Tricontinental Corporation Ltd, the more concerned I am ... If there is to be proper deregulation, with which I agree, whereby the foolish who take dangerous risks go broke, the State Bank should be very wary of being involved in this sort of activity. The State Bank would be well advised to forsake the glamorous, high risk, high flying role of merchant banks in favour of supplying cheap money to home owners and small business and looking after its depositors' savings. If only the Premier had the grace to acknowledge those comments. Earlier the Premier said that his party were the true believers and that they were the representatives of 202 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances working-class values. He said that the Labor Party was trying to get the economy going so there would be more employment. What is the difference between that attitude and the attitude in the years before Tricontinental became an issue in this House? All the commercial papers and all the commercial commentators believed Tricontinental to be one of the high risk names on their lists, but the government was determined not to cooperate in allowing the truth to emerge. The government will use every device in an endeavour to stop the truth from emerging, whether it is about the State Bank, bad debts, the VEDC, VIC, loans to Islamic Abattoirs or Fantasy Farms, its report about the prison system or problems and difficulties within any other arm of government. The government runs away from the issue every time, if it can! Yesterday we had yet another illustration of the Minister for Police and Emergency Services acting in thIS manner. Yesterday, the Attorney-General tabled a report of a board of inquiry into the Office of Corrections. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services arranged for the report to be hand delivered to the Parliamentary Press Gallery but there was a further report which was intended never to see the light of day-but we have got it! I wonder whether any government members have read it. They are probably busy reading the other report but I suggest that they stop and put it aside because that report has been carefully vetted for release. This report I hold up is the one that honourable members should read because this is the one that deals with the drug dealing in the prisons and in the Office of Corrections in this State. The author of this report is abroad. He left after he presented thIS to the government. He is out of the jurisdiction. This is the report which will be getting enormous publicity during the next few days and weeks because the government sought to suppress it, as the Treasurer sought to suppress the move to cover up the losses of the State Bank and Tricontinental and as the government has used every device it could involving other instrumentalities in an endeavour to ensure that the accounts did not show the truth. The government is discredited and shown to be untrustworthy. The Treasurer is top of the pops in those descriptions and the sooner he goes the better. It is only a matter of whether he goes before or after the Federal election. To use that classic Labor phrase, it is only a matter of time. It is simply a matter of time as to when the Treasurer gets chopped off for being too clever, too devious and too untrustworthy. Mr EVANS (Gippsland East)-Before the honourable member for Berwick spoke the honourable member for Greensborough put forward an argument that she anticipated would demolish the policies of the conservative parties on the environment. Although she came out fighting, I am afraid her speech was a fizzer. In fact, she had to acknowledge that many of the environment policies of the Opposition are similar to those of the government. I suggest that the major difference is not in the policies but in the ability to put them into effect. Rather than write more reports and publish more pamphlets, the opposition parties will do something practical about the problems of the environment and will get things moving along. The honourable member for Greensborough put forward the proposition that an additional 23 000 pamphlets be produced. She did not explain how that would resolve the problem of the greenhouse effect or cutting down trees. I do not know what the pamphlets will be made of, perhaps recycled paper, but the trees must still be cut down in the first place. The honourable member's proposition is not a solution. The people who seem to be most concerned about the environment choose to live in the part of the country where the environment has changed the most. Those who Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 203 are screaming out the loudest and looking to country areas for solutions to the problems of greenhouse gases and the ozone layer never seem to realise that they are the major contributors to the problem. They always expect someone else to solve the problem; the ball is never in their court. Reluctant though I am to come to the city, unfortunately, it is part of my responsibility to do so. I should be interested to know how the honourable member for Greensborough got to Parliament House to put the case for her constituents. I doubt whether she came by train as I did. It never ceases to amaze me that intelligent people sit in their cars at traffic lights for long periods each day on the way to and from work. Every time one comes to the city on a calm day one can see the smog over the city, yet people pretend they live in a sound, clean, healthy environment. When honourable members talk about conservation we should talk about the elimination of waste. One does not conserve things by letting them die and rot away; one makes use of them while they are valuable. If one cannot use them at that time, they should be put in a form so that they can be kept for future use. They should not be allowed to rot away because that adds to the problem. For many years I have argued about the stupidity of the system in this country that encourages Australians to become the most urbanised people anywhere in the world. This country has wide open spaces. Many people who fly overseas and who are halfway to Singapore cannot get over the fact that they are still flying over Australia. Despite the immense size of the country, Australians want to live on top of each other in large cities rather than take advantage of the other areas in the country that can support additional populations. Most people will agree with what I have said about the city's contribution to the problems of the greenhouse effect through thousands and thousands of car engines idling at traffic lights every morning. Surely that is the greatest environmental problem of all. One cannot open a window in a modern building to get fresh air; the air is pumped around the building through the use of electricity. Such buildings must be cooled in summer and heated in winter, but the people working in those buildings accuse those of us living in the country of damaging the environment! In recent months a lot has been heard about a concept called the multifunction polis. For the past six or eight months that concept has been bandied about East Gippsland for the proposal for a Very Fast Train link between Sydney and Melbourne. The rumours, reports and stories about the multifunction polis have been extraordinary. It appears that many people in Gippsland are convinced that if a Very Fast Train link is built between Melbourne and Sydney through Gippsland, a multifunction polis will be built somewhere in the Gippsland area. It has come as a bit of a shock to find that the proposal for a multifunction polis is well and truly down the track and is almost cut and dried. Over the years the government has claimed that it believes in consultation with the community. How many people have been consulted about the multifunction polis? The first question that should be asked is whether we want it. Do the people of Australia support the concept of a city being developed, financed largely by overseas interests and occupied by people from other parts of the world? As someone who is concerned about the imbalance' that exists in politics between the country and the city, naturally I am concerned about whether people who take up temporary residence in Australia will be allowed to vote. For example, people could be ferried in especially for an election. That possibility is down the track. I shall quote from a document that has come into my possession. It is signed by Dr P. J. Sheehan, the Director-General of the Department of Management and Budget 204 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances and is dated 13 July 1987. It is headed, "Draft Only Strictly Confidential" and contains notes on the concept and feasibility of the multifunction polis proposal. Under the heading "The Concept", the document states: The concept explored here is broadly that outlined by the Japanese Ministry of Trade and Industry­ MITI-in the February 1987 paper, •• A Multifunctionpolis Scheme for the 21 st Century". In essence the proposal is to establish, through joint Japan-Australia cooperation, a new city in an appropriate region of Australia. The new city would have the following key features: it would be based on some core technology research which would involve joint research by individuals and institutions from Japan, Australia and other countries on fundamental technologies for the 21st century; it would also have a broader intellectual, cultural and artistic base drawing on the resources, history and traditions of the peoples represented in the new city; it would provide a strong base for adult education and re-education in both science and technology and cultural, artistic and other broader aspects of human life; it would have extensive facilities for recreation and leisure; it would seek to bring together, in a way which might act as a model for the 21st century, technology, recreation and leisure and re-education; and it would provide a new forum for international exchange and cooperation for Pacific Rim nations and for other countries, but with particular but not exclusive emphasis on exchange and cooperation among young people. The document goes on to state-and this is an interesting comment: Ethnic Diversity and the Role of Japan It will be essential to avoid any suggestion, either in fact or in perception, ofthe new city as a Japanese enclave within Australia or as a form of "cultural imperialism" by Japan. While this is in no way intended by the originators of the scheme, it will be a criticism which will be easily developed unless great care is taken. For this reason, as well as for the proper development of the original concept, it would be necessary to stress ethnic diversity in the new city. It is unfortunate that the Cabinet of the day did not take due heed of Dr Sheehan's advice on that issue. The document is more than two years old, but neither the Cabinet nor any Minister has taken Parliament into its confidence on the multifunction polis proposal. I do not recall any Budget Papers referring to an allocation of funds for the investigation of this proposal, despite it being under consideration for some time. I refer the House to a status summary on the multifunction polis proposal prepared by the Federal Department of Industry, Technology and Commerce in October 1989, to provide further background to the proposal. It states: The multifunction polis-MFP-was first proposed by Mr Tamura, the former Japanese Minister for International Trade and Industry-MITI-at the Australia-Japan Ministerial Committee Meeting in January 1987. Senator Button, the Australian Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce, expressed great interest in advancing the proposal. In a series of subsequent discussions, officers of MITI and Australia'S Department of Industry, Technology and Commerce-DITAC-developed the initial proposal to identify the elements which both countries regarded as essential to their interests. That is further evidence that the Federal government and all State governments have been well aware of this proposal for some time. As was said earlier by the honourable member for Forest Hill, it was generally the belief that the multifunction polis would involve a completely new city on a new site. In the document prepared by Dr Sheehan it was envisaged that it would be on a site some 60 to 80 kilometres north or north­ west of Melbourne. Bearing in mind what I said earlier about the problems the City of Melbourne has with traffic congestion and environmental issues, it comes as a shock to learn that the area favoured by government is the docklands site in the City of Melbourne. Instead of being a brand new city the project will be plonked right in the middle of the City of Melbourne. That will create further traffic congestion, pollution and so on. It will be much more difficult to manage the Melbourne area. Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 205

I wonder why the government has not released the document headed A concept to create a City Of The Future Melbourne. Multi/unction Polis dated January 1990. Perhaps the prospect ofa Federal election at the end of this month is the reason it has not been released. The document is in full colour and outlines the case for the proposal to be established in the City of Melbourne. Perhaps I should refer the House to the second last page of the document so that honourable members will know who is involved in this proposal. Under the heading "Melbourne International Board" it states: The Melbourne International Board, formed in May 1989, is a major joint initiative between the Committee For Melbourne and the government of Victoria. The board provides a forum of consultation and advice direct to the government on projects and programs of international significance to Melbourne and Victoria. The board comprises: Mr Nobby Clark, Chief Executive, National Australia Bank (Chairman); Mr John D. Elliott, Chairman and Chief Executive, Elders IXL; Mr Bill Moyle, Chief Executive, State Bank Victoria-- He may not be involved now: Mr Malcolm Graham, Federal President, Pulp and Paper Workers' Federation of Australia; Hon. , Treasurer of Victoria; Hon. David White, Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources; Hon. Steve Crabb, Minister for Tourism, Police and Emergency Services; Hon. Evan Walker, Minister for Arts and Major Projects; Hon. , Minister for Planning and Environment; Councillor Bill Deveney, Lord Mayor of Melbourne. The Parliamentary Library has an Olympic Games bid package of books that I understand costs $7000 or $8000. They are expensive documents, but no-one seems to be worried about the trees that had to be cut down to produce them. I guarantee that recycled paper has not been used. The Olympic Games bid documents refer to the development of the Olympic Village in the docklands area just beyond the Spencer Street station. It suggests that after the Olympic Games are over, if Melbourne is successful, facilities will revert to private enterprise for housing. But the document I have before me states that the docklands area will be the site of the multifunction polis proposal and it will be the nucleus around which the whole concept will grow and develop. I ask: does the average Australian want a multifunction polis anywhere in Australia? Before one can provide an intelligent answer to that question one needs to know what is involved in the proposal. This document refers to seminars to be held to inform the public of what it is all about. Where are these seminars? Who has been invited? What does the public know about it? I suggest the answer is, "Virtually nothing at all". Come 24 March the decision will probably be taken right out of their hands. I do not wish to condemn the proposal out of hand, but if the government believes this is a good idea it should consult the community to ascertain whether the proposal has community support. If the government were sincere it would do that. Of course, I do not suggest for one moment that the government is sincere. It is certainly not sincere about the concept of open government. If the government were sincere it would tell the people what the proposal is all about. If it is a good proposal, the Victorian and Australian community would endorse it. I suggest the multifunction polis proposal has been conducted in a highly selective way. It is not something that is only now in the process of being developed. The proposal has gone a long way down the track and no-one has heard a thing about it. There are obvious elements ofdeception when a government pretends that the proposed Olympic Village will be available for community housing while it is being proposed at the same time that this multifunction polis project will be developed. 206 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances

I am a great believer in the role of technology to meet the problems of the 21 st century. Honourable members should encourage all possible research to resolve the many difficulties that will be faced by future generations. However, I believe it is time that both the State and Commonwealth governments took the community into their confidence on this all-important issue. Mr THOMSON (Pascoe Vale)-I grieve about the possible impact of the Federal coalition's economic action plan on Victoria in general and on the electorate ofPascoe Vale-which I represent-in particular. The first thing I want to talk about is the Kodak company. In August last year the Eastman Kodak Company announced it was restructuring its operations worldwide in response to poor financial results for the first half year. Those poor results in no way reflect on the performance ofKodak (Australasia) Pty Ltd, which continues to be successful and profitable. Part of the plan was the closure of the manufacturing, research and development, and export operations of Kodak (Australasia) Pty Ltd in Coburg. Fortunately, a quick response by the local subsidiary and the Federal and State governments-and I was involved in lobbying in that regard-resulted in the Eastman Kodak Company postponing its decision, and the situation now exists where the Federal government is providing a bounty on film production for three years, with an annual capital expenditure of $12 million, contingent upon. a range of undertakings by Kodak, the most important of which was the requirement for Kodak to maintain its export commitments for five years or pay back all the bounty. The Federal government has been favourably disposed towards helping Kodak out of its current problems because, simply put, there is no other company in Kodak's position manufacturing in Australia. Kodak (Australasia) Pty Ltd has established itself as an efficient, internationally competitive and export-oriented producer and is our second largest exporter of elaborately transformed manufacturers. Kodak had exports of$167 million in 1988, and it also has the potential to expand exports to the dynamic Asia-Pacific region-a region vital to Australia's economic future. The government has also secured an undertaking from the Eastman Kodak Company that Kodak (Australasia) Pty Ltd will actively seek new markets in the Asia-Pacific area. Against that background, the Federal Liberal Party's proposal to scrap the $12 million-a-year Commonwealth export bounty to Kodak is a slap in the face for the northern suburbs. The whole Kodak plant would close if the Liberals implemented this plan; 500 jobs would disappear immediately, and it is estimated that job losses by 1992 would be 1200. In addition, local suppliers would be devastated, leading to more job losses throughout Melbourne's northern suburbs. The proposal is typical of the Liberal Party's indifference to Melbourne's northern suburbs. On the one hand, it describes the export bounty as a handout and, on the other hand, it will allow the New South Wales Liberal government to have money that exceeds the Australian Loan Council limit to clean up Bondi Beach. Therefore, the Liberal Party has one rule for the New South Wales government and another for Melbourne's northern suburbs. Australia's business reputation will suffer if the legislation providing the export bounty is repealed. Business needs to have a secure climate in which to make investment decisions. If the Liberal Party candidate for the Federal seat of Wills, Mr Delacratez, were fair dinkum about representing the northern suburbs he would repudiate the intended course of the Federal Leader of the Opposition, Mr Peacock, and fight to maintain the export bounty. Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 207

Closure of the Coburg plant would have a net negative impact on the Current Account of approximately $200 million in 1990 and more than $300 million by 1992. It would also have a net impact on government revenue of $25 million a year. It is a dumb decision: members of the Liberal Party are saying that they are the great economic rationalists and that they will save us $12 million a year by doing away with the export bounty. However, in fact, if Kodak closed there would be a loss of $25 million to government revenue. The Liberal Party's economic action plan figures again do not add up. The removal of the bounty would also mean an increase in the price of film in Australia and an additional cost to ordinary photographers. I turn now to the impact of the coalitions's economic action plan on Victoria, aside from its impact on the Kodak company. The coalition proposes a cut of$425 million in grants to the States. Victoria's share of that amounts to $100 million. This would have an adverse impact on Victoria's capacity to provide essential services, such as public transport, schools, hospitals and police. The Victorian Opposition has pretensions to governing this State, and I ask: what does it think about a cut of$100 million in Federal grants to Victoria? The Victorian Opposition ought to dissociate itself from that proposal, which is bad for Victorians. The coalition's economic action plan, which would mean a loss to Victoria of $100 million a year, would cost Victoria more each year and have an even more adverse impact on the State Budget than all the money lost as a result of the Tricontinental Corporation Ltd loans. People are concerned about the situation of State Bank Victoria, and much media attention has been given to it. I, too, am cheesed off about entrepreneurs who have spent money like drunken sailors in the post-deregulation environment. However, equal attention should be given to this Liberal Party proposal of cutting funds by $100 million a year, which would affect the Victorian people more adversely than the State Bank situation. In addition to making direct cuts in grants to the States, the coalition proposes other cuts that would affect Victorians. Last year in the Federal electorate of Wills there was expenditure on labour market programs totalling $4·04 million, which provided assistance to more than 1885 people. The coalition proposes to radically change labour market programs, including the abolition of Job Start, the industry training scheme, the new enterprise training scheme, and Skillshare. The Australian traineeship system subsidy would be reduced by 25 per cent, and fees for service would be introduced for users of the Commonwealth Employment Service. Unemployment benefits would be available for a maximum of only nine months, which would allegedly save $1500 million. The waiting period for unemployment benefits would be increased from one week to two weeks, while school leavers and tertiary leavers aged eighteen years and over would be eligible only for the job search allowance, which would be a lower payment than unemployment benefits. Measures for job training and unemployment benefits are at the core of the Labor Party's attacks on poverty. If the coalition's proposals were seriously implemented, we would have a welfare blanket with gaping holes in it, as in the United States of America. However, it is possible that many unemployed beneficiaries would simply move onto special benefits, in which case the economic action plan would become financial nonsense. The coalition's action plan would deny unemployment and sickness benefits and the invalid pension to new migrants for twelve months after arrival in Australia, except for those from countries with which Australia has reciprocal bilateral 208 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances arrangements, such as the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Italy. This would leave a significant number of people without adequate support. In the area of education, the Coburg campus of the Phillip Institute of Technology last year received from the Commonwealth government a total operating grant of $29· 7 million, and there are currently 6500 students enrolled at the institute. The coalition proposes to reduce funding to higher education institutions by $205 million but to allow them to charge students an up-front fee to recover this amount of money. Students in higher education, including those at the Coburg campus, would clearly suffer from this measure. The economic action plan proposes cuts to a variety of rural-based programs, the abolition ofthe Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission, and a reduction in spending on Aboriginal Affairs by $100 million, including the winding-up of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody. Even after all that had been done we would still face a Budget shortfall. Michelle Grattan wrote in the Age that the Liberal Party undoubtedly has a second hit list which, at this stage, it is unwilling to disclose. Other areas of potential cuts which will disadvantage the electors of Pascoe Vale­ and in the Federal arena the electorate of Wills-include cuts in child care provisions. There has been a dramatic increase in child care places in Wills, with the establishment of the Barry Beckett Child Care Centre and the Derby Street Child Care Centre­ which I had the privilege of opening last year; extensions to the Shirley Robertson Child Care Centre; and many others. Statements by the coalition parties surrounding the economic action plan suggest that eventually there will be a halt to the development of publicly funded day care, a winding down of.access to existing publicly funded centres through reductions in fee relief, and an expansion of commercial-or "for profit"-child care centres. In the area of hospital funding, in 1988-89 the Preston and Northcote Community Hospital received $130 000 under the Commonwealth government's Medicare incentive package to improve geriatric assessment and rehabilitation of long stay patients. Through this the hospital was enabled to treat an additional 250 elective surgery patients. In 1989-89 under the Commonwealth government's hospital enhancement program the hospital received $100 000 to upgrade its computer system. In the area of community services, in 1989-90 the Wills electorate expects to receive $2·16 million in funding for the home and community care program. In 1988-89 under the residential care program recurrent funding totalling $9·1 million was received for 420 nursing home beds in Wills. Further, in 1988-89 recurrent funding for hostel beds totalled $426 000. These projects are all under threat because the coalition parties have offered unfunded promises and the prospect of additional spending cutbacks. The Liberal Party plans to turn back the clock. Mr Ross-Edwards interjected. Mr THOMSON-We ought to be worried about a coalition government or at least have an understanding of what it would mean for the people of Victoria generally and in particular the people in the.suburbs I represent. The Liberal Party plans to turn back the clock. No better demonstration of this can be found than in its contempt for the electors in Wills as displayed through its choice Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 209 of candidate. In the Sunday Herald of25 February, Mr John Delacretaz is reported as having said: In Wills you need a man. The Greeks, the Turks, they don't like politicking from a woman. About Andrew Peacock, he is quoted as having said: He's a man. He's a free man. He's not attached, he doesn't have to ask what to do with his life. We need a mature politician in charge, a man. These comments display an outrageous lack of sensitivity to women and a failure to recognise their potential and achievements. If these attitudes are typical of those held in the Liberal Party, it is little wonder that the Liberal Party still has virtually no women members of Parliament, while the Labor Party has dozens of women members of Parliament, women Cabinet Ministers and, more recently, a woman Premier. The Sunday Herald reported Mr Delacretaz as saying also: We have to put people back to work by saying "no dole". When we cut off the dole and people are destitute they should get it from their local church or club. Anyone who would suggest that local churches and clubs have the capacity to provide social security support to the unemployed must be absolutely out of touch with the Australian community. Churches and clubs were unable to meet this sort of hardship during the depression and they certainly cannot do it now. The question that I invite honourable members to consider is: which party will take us back to the bad old days of industrial conflict and confrontation, environmental vandalism, a failure to recognise the contribution of women, and the days of industrial slumber? The answer to that question is: the Liberal Party. Mr PESCOTT (Bennettswood)-The matter I wish to raise during the grievance debate is of serious concern and relates to the methods of operation of the State and Federal governments. It is a matter that brings grave discredit to them both. I refer to what is known as the Hong Kong light rail project. I begin my contribution by reading an extract from a press release dated 16 July 1985, issued by the Government Media Unit, which contains the following statements: Victoria has won a $200 million contract to construct Hong Kong's new light rail system in the face of stiff competition from four international consortia. The project which will provide more than 250 jobs in the State- was announced by the then Minister for Transport, Mr Roper. I take it this release was an extract from the Minister'S press release. It contains also the following statements: Mr Roper said the Kowloon-Canton Railway Corporation is one of the largest engineering enterprises undertaken by an Australian consortium, with the 70 light rail vehicles being built in Dandenong by Comeng, a division of A~I Corporation Ltd, and at the MTAs Preston workshops. It was won in the face of concerted competition from Japan, Canada, Belgium and the United Kingdom. Mr Roper said the contract involves project management, construction of 70 light rail vehicles similar to those operating in Melbourne, and some 34 kilometres of double rail track. "More than half the contract value will be returned to Victoria in the form of jobs and supply of material." "This is a major step in the Victorian government's economic strategy. The skill and expertise of the Met and Victorian industry was instrumental in winning the contract". As with State Bank Victoria, the Victorian Economic Development Corporation and other pillars of that failed and discredited economic strategy, this press release has a familiar ring to it. Honourable members have heard it before. 21 0 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances

The press release refers to a development which was to provide jobs for Victorians in the future. As the story unfolds, honourable members will hear that actually some 200 jobs were lost because of the project. The plain fact is that the consortium from Victoria, including the Met, did not win the contract at all. The Met ended up with the contract but only because of some shameful dealing by the State and Federal governments in displacin$ the Belgian consortium that actually won the race. During the skulduggery a MInister of the Federal fovernment and the State government threw away money into the pot in a shamefu fashion. They paid off the Belgian consortium and subsidIsed the Australian companies involved in ways and by means that still need to be divulged. If all the commercial dealings in this country had the same involvement of government that this dealing has had, we would never do business properly in this country. The project involves a deal that is on the edge of a system of patronage, something we do not want in this country. The honourable member for Ivanhoe and I have been pursuing this matter under the Freedom of Information Act by seeking copies of the contracts relevant to the project. My colleague, the honourable member for Ivanhoe, first sought access under the freedom of information legislation in July 1988, but do honourable members think he has those documents or is anywhere near getting them? Now it is March 1990-more than ei~teen months later-and in the next fortnight we have a case before the AdministratIve Appeals Tribunal. All that the honourable member for Ivanhoe has had in that time is cover-up and obfuscation-the opposite to any freedom of information. However, honourable members should mark my words: the honourable member for Ivanhoe and I will pursue this matter and get the contracts and see what is behind this shameful story. I begin with the details. The honourable member for Wantirna smiles; she will not be smiling after she has heard the details. It all started in June 1985 when officials of the Kowloon-Canton Railway Corporation visited Melbourne and spoke to the Premier. They went to Canberra and met with Mr Hawke and then they returned home. The Met was one of the hopefuls in gaining the contract for the project which was to be worth some 1·1 billion Hong Kong dollars, which is roughly $220 million in Australian terms. After some discussion and trips to Hong Kong by Met officials and the then Minister, now the Minister for Planning and Environment, a letter was signed in Hong Kong in August with a view to the real contract being signed on 30 November. The idea was that a consortium of Leighton Holdings Ltd, ANI Corporation Limited and the Met would build the system and Comeng, a subsidiary of ANI, would be the subcontractor to build the light rail vehicles. In this mix the Met was to be a consultant to Comeng-- Honourable members interjecting. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Shell)-Order! Up until now the debate has been reasonably free from interjection. It should be kept that way. Mr PESCOTT- The first question that must be asked is why the press release of 16 July announced to the people of Victoria that we had a contract when in fact we did not have a contract. That was only the beginning of the problem for the Minister because he had made certain commitments and later on had to do everything in his power, including things that were shameful, to make sure that the contract that had been lost was won back. Gnevances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 211

In the press release the Minister said that he had visited Hong Kong recently and the Victorian consortium was not even on the short list. He said that a lot of hard work had got us back into the bidding. We shall see in a moment what he meant by hard work. The Minister went to sign the contract again in August. Other things had happened in Hong Kong at that time that will not be the subject of this s~ech; suffice it to say that a single harbour cruise during that trip cost the taxpayers $5254. It was paid through the expense account of one of the employees of the Met-now deceased­ and that would be of interest to the Minister. The story goes on from that August visit to Hong Kong by the Minister to late November and the deadline for the signing of the contract, which was 12 noon on Saturday, 30 November. Comeng, the Australian company chosen to build the light rail vehicles, did not want to go ahead with the contract. It refused to sign. It did not like the deal. The board of ANI Corporation Ltd, Comeng's parent company, wanted out. In the period between August and November the Belgian tenderer had made a legal deal with the Kowloon-Canton Railway Corporation that if the Australian consortium did not sign the contract, the Belgians would get the job. On the one hand the Australian company that was to build these vehicles here in Victoria did not want the job and on the other hand the consortium actually wanted the Belgians because the Belgian deal was financially much better to the consortium. That is not to say that the actual Australian bid was considered ahead on technical terms but we must remember that the Australian manufacturer, Comeng, wanted out. So the Belgians got the contract, not Victoria. That is nothing like the publicity we were hearing in Victoria. We were hearing about this wonderful part of the government's economic strategy but, in simple terms, the Minister's press release, which said we had the contract, was a lie. The so-called skill and expertise of the Met and Victorian industry had not been enough to win the contract because it was that part of Victorian industry that did not want the job. This event put the Minister and the government in a difficult position. What did they do? They bought their way back into the project. They bought off the Belgians and bought off the Australian companies in the deal. They offered inducements to defeat a purely commercial process. We have learnt that when this government talks of its economic strategy and of propriety and doing the right thing, it does not know what that means. The Treasurer is still in office because the Premier has been believing his own rhetoric. He asked what else should the government have done when the State Bank got into difficulty. He said the government intervened when it found out there was a problem. He said the government should not have intervened before but it did so when it found out there was a problem. What the Premier should have done was find the problem a lot earlier. That is why the Treasurer needs to resign. The Treasurer is at fault because he did not know there was a problem. The cover-up in the Hong Kong light rail affair has all the same hallmarks as the other disasters of the Cain government. Up until today people thought that Victoria had won that contract. It did not. However, with the aid of the Hawke government, in matters I shall explain in a moment, Victoria bought it back. The day after 30 November a meeting was hurriedly called in the Sydney office of the Federal Minister responsible for trade, Mr Dawkins. That was a Sunday, an unusual day for all these people to gather in the Sydney office of a Federal Minister. Some flew from Melbourne and some were on a special flight from Canberra. I do not know whether the Minister came all the way from Perth. However, in attendance were 212 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances a representative from the Federal department of trade, the Deputy Managing Director of the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation, a board member from ANI Corporation Ltd, the Managing Director of Leighton Holdings Ltd and two representatives from the Met. The main issue was that Comeng did not want to give an assurance of performance. It could not guarantee it could do the job and it was worried about its capacity to perform. It was worried, of course, because the unions in its factory in Dandenong had made it clear that they would not cooperate. The Electrical Trades Union of Australia, in particular, made this very clear, which is symptomatic of the problems within Australian industry. That is a different story from the one we hear continually from the Prime Minister and others who say how well we are doing in manufacturing industry. The fact is that a leading manufacturer did not want to do the job because of the industrial problems in this State. The industry said no to this contract but the government said yes because it would be an embarrassment to the then Minister for Transport if the contract did not go ahead. To get the contract going again the government pulled out the cheque book and indemnified Comeng against everything. Comeng did not want to be responsible for liquidated damages if the project did not work. It wanted to be covered for compensation, including compensation to the Belgians. Of course, Leighton Holdings Ltd said it wanted the same. They both got it and $3 million was paid to the Belgian consortium because it took legal action once it realised what was afoot. The Belgians were also given some consulting hours at a specified price that would add up to far more than $3 million. Later on Comeng had difficulties with the ETU and other unions at its plant and had to put off200 people because of this project. The Minister had told everyone that the project would create 250 jobs. The Met was liable, because of the deal done with Comeng, for extra costs. We do not know yet how much those costs add up to but we do know a big Met project had to be stopped so that the Hong Kong light rail project could be completed and we know that that cost the Met money. Of course, the end result was that the Met would not make a profit. A project of this size normally has a 3 to 5 per cent profit margin and approximately half of that profit margin would have gone to the Met-$3 million to $5 million. On the one hand there is a 50 per cent partner receiving compensation payments and indemnities over and above the normal profit margin. Leighton Holdings Ltd, and the Met has foregone not only the possible profit in the project, but also has agreed to take on all costs that would accrue, and accrue they did. The full cost of the project is not available, but we know that the Met was involved in a project that could not return any money to the State and was linked to a project that was a sure loss project and would actually cost jobs. In addition the Federal government agreed to give bank guarantees for loans totalling $72 million at low interest to Leighton Holdings Ltd and ANI Corporation Ltd. That was the sweetener that was agreed to at that Sunday meeting in Sydney. That money did not necessarily go into the Hong Kong project. The Minister then responsible for trade, Mr Dawkins, allowed himself to be compromised in this grubby transaction and guaranteed loans for offshore work for Leighton Holdings Ltd when the actual manufacturing was done onshore. Furthermore, the contract stated that Leightons and the Met would receive advance payments from the Hong Kong syndicate, so the project did not need that extra loan. Grievances 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 213

The contract allowed the builders of the light rail project to receive money in advance so that it could go ahead. It also allowed the project partners to receive progress payments. There was no need for the guarantees to be given by the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation. The embarrassed former Minister for Transport needed to get the deal stitched up to save face because he had announced a long time earlier that a contract would be signed. An inducement was given to Australian firms to return to the project-it was forced on them against their will. Of course they came back into the project because they were given an indemnity against any future damages claim. The problem was that the Minister was prepared to pass up possible profits to save his skin. The Met has an appalling record in providing a safe, reliable, efficient transport service, so what was the point of buying back into the contract? Towards the end of the contract period trams being built for the Melbourne system were put on ice so that this project would finish on time, the reason being that the damages claim would be approximately $100 000 a day if the project was not completed on time. Who knows what sort of costs were accrued before the project was finished? This fiasco was not the fault of the companies involved in the project, because they were given red carpet treatment to come back into the project, which was a disgrace. The government entered into a commercial project and gave inducements to companies, an open cheque to companies, so that the Met could be involved in this project. Mr KENNEDY (Bendigo West)-I grieve about the monstrous hoax being perpetuated by the Federal coalition parties on Victorians, particularly country Victorians, with the announcement of their road policy. I refer particularly to the Federal coalition's policy that was released recently by the Leader of the Federal Liberal Party, Mr Peacock. The policy release is an exercise in misleading the public. For many months the Federal Opposition has created expectations in country Victoria about a massive windfall for road funding. The Federal Opposition has not committed itself to a road funding program for three years; it can only fund Australia's roads for one year-the other two years do not get a mention. Mr W. D. McGrath interjected. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Shell)-Order! Is the Deputy Leader of the National Party defying the Chair? The honourable member for Portland is out of his place and is out of order. Honourable members have been responsible during the grievance debate and I ask them to continue to be responsible. Mr KENNEDY -The Federal coalition, in the run-up to the Federal election, has promised increased road funding for one year only if elected to government but has given no indication of how much road funding will be made available for the following two years. The Federal Opposition proposes an increase in funding of $230 million, but it is done at the cost of ripping off $125 million from the Federal government's allocation to State governments. One must add to that the $700 million-- Honourable members interjecting. The ACTING SPEAKER-Order! The constant barrage of interjections coming from the Liberal and National parties is not acceptable and is out of order. A limited time is available for the debate and the honourable member for Bendigo West is entitled to be heard in silence as were honourable members on the other side of the 214 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Grievances

House. I ask members of the Opposition to remain silent while the honourable member for Bendigo West makes his contribution. Mr KENNEDY -States will have to suffer a massive reduction of $425 million in road funding if the coalition is elected to government. That is not the end of it, because Mr Peacock has now indicated that the promises for the remaining two years of his first term in government would mean more cuts for other services; so more reductions in expenditure would be inflicted on this State government. The Federal coalition policy does not commit a single cent to Victoria or to country Victoria. It commits itself to the expenditure of $800 million worth of spending over ten years for the Pacific Highway in New South Wales and Queensland, but do not ask them what they propose for Victoria, especially country Victoria. The National Party has been promising the people of the Bendigo region a huge cash windfall. Honourable members should examine the Federal coalition's policies. What a con! Where is the hidden agenda in all this? Mr J. F. McGrath interjected. The ACTING SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member for Warrnambool is out of his place and out of order. Mr KENNEDY -Country Victorians have been told for months of this cash windfall. They have been told to wait for Mr Peacock's policy speech for the Federal election. Mr J. F. McGrath interjected. The ACTING SPEAKER-Order! Is the honourable member for Warrnambool defying the Chair? The honourable member should remain silent for the remainder of the contribution of the honourable member for Bendigo West. Mr KENNEDY-Members of the National Party would not specify how much money was being made available or from where It was coming and the Federal coalitIon has only presented a program for its first year in office. It cannot promise no increase in Federal taxes. Dunng an interview with Mr John Laws, Mr Peacock was asked: Okay, well, let me rephrase the question. Will you promise that you will not increase the levy on petrol? Honourable members interjecting. Mr COOPER (Mornington)-On a point of order Mr Acting Speaker, I direct to your attention Standing Order No. 108 regarding imputations against members of Parliament. I heard the honourable member for Bendigo West refer to the Leader of the Federal Opposition as a gasbag and I ask him to withdraw that remark. The ACTING SPEAKER-Order! In the context of the debate I do not consider that remark to be offensive. There is no point of order. Mr KENNEDY (Bendigo West)-Mr Laws asked: Will you promise that you will not increase the levy on petrol? All members of the National Party should listen to his reply. Mr Peacock answered: No, I can't give you that promise. Where will the increase in road funding come from? Certainly it will result in a massive reduction in funds available for the States. Not only will the States be deprived of funds for other purposes but also the Liberal Party's policy will open the door to increases in petrol taxes. Supply (1990-91, No. 1) Bill 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 215

The Hawke Labor government has given a firm commitment to increase road funding by $100 million a year for the next three years, almost all of which is earmarked for rural and provincial areas. In the first year of the scheme-next year-the total increase in road funding by the Hawke government will amount to $248 million compared with the $230 million promised by the Federal coalition. The Labor government will fund its outlays from a special tax on luxury cars. The Federal coalition will fund its proposals by imposing a massive burden on the funding capacity of State governments. What a dramatic expose of the conmanship that has been going on for months. It is little wonder that Mr Peacock waited to deliver his policy speech in the third week of the election campaign; it is little wonder that he wanted to say as little as possible about this massive con. The honourable member for Lowan has demanded an inquiry into the setting of petrol prices. Some years ago the honourable member for Murray Valley said that it was time to get tough with the oil companies. On 5 May 1987 he demanded that the government reduce the price of petrol by 5 cents, blaming the oil companies for the price increases. Two days later he issued a pathetic statement abusing the State government and blaming it for rises in the price of petrol. On 2 May 1987 the Honourable K.. I. M. Wright, who represents North Western Province in the other place, called for the setting up of a Royal Commission into Victoria's petrol pricing structure. He raised the matter in the Legislative Council on 18 August 1987, but did not call for a Royal Commission! The SPEAKER-Order! The time allotted under Standing Orders for the grievances debate has expired. The question was agreed to.

SUPPLY (1990-91, No. 1) BILL The SPEAKER announced the presentation of a message from His Excellency the Governor recommending that an appropriation be made from the Consolidated Fund for the purposes of the Supply (1990-91, No. 1) Bill. For Mr JOLLY (Treasurer), Mr Roper (Minister for Planning and Environment), pursuant to Standing Order No. 169 (a), moved for leave to bring in a Bill to make interim provision for the appropriation of moneys out of the Consolidated Fund for recurrent services and for certain works and purposes for the financial year 1990-91. The motion was agreed to. The Bill was brought in and read a first time.

WORKS AND SERVICES (ANCILLARY PROVISIONS, 1990-91, No. 1) BILL For Mr JOLLY (Treasurer), Mr Roper (Minister for Planning and Environment) moved for leave to bring in a Bill to make ancillary provisions for certain works and purposes for the financial year 1990-91. The motion was agreed to. The Bill was brought in and read a first time. 216 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Economic and Budget Review Committee

ECONOMIC AND BUDGET REVIEW COMMITTEE Mr ROPER (Minister for Planning and Environment)-I move: That Mr Batchelor be appointed a member of the Economic and Budget Review Committee. Mr BROWN (Leader of the Opposition)-I make it very clear that the Opposition opposes the appointment of the honourable member for Thomastown to the Economic and Budget Review Committee. Firstly, such an appointment would be without precedent in the history of Parliament. I am unaware of an honourable member being appointed to one of the most important committees of the Parliament immediately after entering Parliament as a result of a by-election. Certainly it has never happened in my time, and I am advised that it has never happened before. The honourable member for Thomastown has not even delivered his maiden speech. So anxious is the government to appoint him to such a senior role that it attempted to make the appointment on the Notice Paper of the first available day of the sessional period. Because of condolences no procedure was available to the government to have the matter dealt with on Tuesday; and yesterday, Wednesday, leave was refused. Surely only suitably qualified persons should be appointed to important all-party Parliamentary committees such as the Economic and Budget Review Committee. Appointees should have suitable backgrounds; preferably they should have some experience of the functions and roles of such committees. For many years there has been a bipartisan approach to appointments to Parliamentary committees. I say with regret that the honourable member for Thomastown does not enjoy the confidence of the Opposition. Many of the reasons why are well known and well documented: they centre on his involvement in the Nunawading Province re-election scandal. His part in that scandal has been the subject of much debate in this Parliament. For that reason in particular the Opposition believes he would be an unsuitable appointment to the committee. However, the Opposition wishes to continue supporting the bipartisan approach to Parliamentary committees, even though having a man such as the honourable member for Thomastown overseeing the well-being of the States's economy leaves a great deal to be desired. A number of honourable members, some of them not from this side of the House, have suggested that, in time, the honourable member may be a suitable appointee to the Printing Committee! Although the Opposition does not consider the honourable member to be a suitable candidate, having regard to all of the issues involved it has decided not to ask for a division on the matter. We will support the continuation of the bipartisan approach to the membership of all-party Parliamentary committees. But the Liberal Party places on record its unhappiness with the choice of the honourable member for Thomastown; he does not enjoy our confidence. The motion was agreed to.

ROAD SAFETY (AMENDMENT) BILL The debate.(interrupted on the previous day) on the motion ofMr Kennan (Minister for Transport) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed. Mr GUDE (Hawthorn)-Last evening, when the House was debating the Bill, I remarked about some of its features that are worthy of support. I made reference to the reduction in age limits on learner permits, the licence restoration reports­ particularly as they relate to drink-driving-and to education programs, as well as to licence losses as a consequence of infringements. I also referred to the changing of Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 217

vehicle structures; for example, the lowering of vehicles and installing oversize engines, and the like. I had commenced to make another point on my concern about matters which are not encompassed in the Bill but which are of significant importance to the community-for example, roads being constructed to a standard, particularly in non­ metropolitan areas where, over the past few years, they have deteriorated considerably; such a measure would ensure appropriate roads to carry increased traffic. Victoria is a small State in area and is dependent upon its capacity to move goods and produce. Victorians prefer to use domestic motor vehicles rather than the public transport system, and one can well understand that, particularly when the government has a MinIster for Transport who cannot even ensure that the trams operate! The community is concerned that there are insufficient police in the community to carry out crime detection and prevention. Driver education is an issue with which I have had some involvement, having placed my sons, at an early age, through the Maroondah Driving School, before they obtained their driving licences. As a parent, I greatly value the sound advice they received. I acknowledge that the Minister for Transport has visited that school-he did not give it enough money but at least he visited the school, and now has some idea of what happens there. I said the school did not receive enough money; that was not meant to be on a jocular note but a serious comment because thousands of young people in particular are learning driving skills for the first time, and many are being deprived of that opportunity. Last night the honourable member for South Barwon made a telling point about his own community when referring to the downturn in teacher time at the East Geelong Technical School. He referred, from personal knowledge, to the availability of people and facilities and to land that has become vacant because of the disused railway hne from Geelong to Queenscliff, which has adjoining facilities near the agricultural society premises at Geelong. That is an outstanding opportunity for the government to resume the land; people are prepared to teach and the area is available. However, no commitment was made in the second-reading speech about available funds. That is most disappointing. Apparently the speed camera installations return revenue of approximately $1 million every day. The Minister for Transport looks very uncommitted, but I am told that is the case. Mr Kennan-Three hundred and sixty-five. Mr GUDE-That is a lot of available income and there are many ways the money could be used in the interests of the community. I share the concerns that have been expressed by honourable members on this side about the failure of the government to form a road safety committee. A former all­ party Road Safety Committee produced much useful material that has resulted in Victoria being the leader in road safety prevention measures. I shall not take up the time of the House by enumerating those measures because they are well known to all honourable members. With some pride I recall the involvement that my predecessor, the former honourable member for Hawthorn, WaIter J ona, had as the second chairman of that committee; it was instrumental in the introduction of the safety belt legislation. Mr Kennan interjected. 218 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill

Mr GUDE-He retains a continuing commitment to road safety and I wish the Minister for Transport-who wishes to passively interject-would show the same level of care and concern as does at least one former Minister and member of this House. Mr Kennan interjected. Mr GUDE-To take up the interjection of the Minister-he is a very nice man. For whatever purpose, the government has chosen to turn its back on that urgent need. It may be argued that the Social Development Committee of this Parliament is an appropriate forum to carry out such investigations as part of its functions-one can only presume that is the reason for the non-establishment of a specialist committee. The government professes a commitment to social justice; however, given the hiding it has received in recent times in by-elections and the like, it should have had a greater understanding of the social need that exists in the community so that there would have been enough briefs to keep any Social Development Committee operating for 24 hours a day, seven days a week for the next ten years, let alone having that committee deal with the important subject of road safety. Honourable members must remember that last year 3000 people were killed on our roads, and untold numbers were maimed, thereby exacting an incredible cost in terms of State, public and private resources-yet, the government turns it back. I encourage the Minister for Transport to give serious consideration to the matters I have raised that are outside the scope of the Bill, in the hope that in the future there may be a more enlightened response from the government. Mr BILDSTIEN (Mildura)-The Bill proposes a range of measures purported to improve road safety in Victoria. It refers to driver education, learner permits, drink­ driving, onus on offenders, probationary licence infringements, tailgating infringements, and the list continues. However, there is no mention of additional road funding. There is no acknowledgment by the Minister for Transport that the deterioration of Victoria's road network is a contributing factor to Victoria's soaring road toll. Is that any wonder when the Minister continues to accept the advice of people like Ian Stoney of the Roads Corporation? Last year I was staggered to learn that the Mildura Shire Council was told by Mr Stoney that he would not entertain the notion that poor roads contributed to the road toll-can honourable members believe that? Victoria's senior roads bureaucrat refuses to accept and admit that the condition of our roads can be blamed for some accidents. In recent years the quality of Victorian roads-especially in rural areas-has deteriorated noticeably; there is no question that there is a direct relationship between the deterioration of Victoria's roads and this State's rising road toll. Bad driving, drink-drivers and inadequate police numbers all contribute to the road toll, but the deterioration of our roads is also quite clearly a major factor. A high percentage of accidents per capita in Victoria occur in rural areas where cutbacks in road funding have been the worst. The Roads Corporation's own figures show that there has been an 18·5 per cent decrease in real terms in State road funds over the past six years. This has meant that local councils have had to try to find an increasing proportion of the money required to maintain their road networks. Understandably, they have been unable to stem the full effects of this government's razor. Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 219

If the Minister does not accept that, he has only to look at action being taken by a host of groups like the Royal Automobile Club of Victoria, the Municipal Association of Victoria, the Victorian Farmers Federation and the Country Women's Association. The list goes on and on and highlights the government's disregard for our road network. It is becoming increasingly obvious that our road system is not good enough to match our needs. The evidence is all around us. It presents itself in deteriorating school bus routes, difficult access to community facilities and, distressingly, the road toll. The crisis facing Victoria because of the deterioration of the roads has to be one of the worst legacies of this government's period in office. Despite constant pressure from the Liberal and National parties, the Minister at the table refuses to acknowledge that there is a problem. The Liberal Party is committed to the establishment of a first­ class network of roads in Victoria, primarily because of its concerns about road safety but also to improve the State's commercial infrastructure. The Opposition's policy was clearly spelt out before the last election and was roundly applauded. When the Liberal Party comes to office it will increase funds for roads by 15 per cent. It is no good the government coming into this Chamber trying to tell us that it is concerned about road safety if it is not prepared to reverse its cuts in road funding. The need for better roads to tackle the road safety problem was one of the major reasons why the RACV launched its highly publicised road campaign. How the Minister can justify his appalling record to himself let alone to the people of Victoria is mystifying to honourable members on this side of the House. In the last State Budget, the amount of money to be spent on roads and road safety this year was 3·6 per cent less than the previous year in real terms. This is in stark contrast to the 14·4 per cent increase in revenue from road and petrol taxes which the government expects to collect over the same period. This trend has been part of a pattern under the Cain government to use motorists as a source of funds to prop up an inefficient and costly public transport system. As I have stated, the quality of our roads, especially in rural Victoria, has deteriorated markedly, and there is no question that this has a direct relationship to the road toll. In and around Mildura the position is just as drastic as elsewhere, despite the strong efforts of the local municipalities to get a fair hearing from the State and Federal governments. As I said, bad driving, drink-drivers and inadequate police numbers contribute to the chronic and unacceptable road toll, but the state of the roads is a major factor. The Minister has a case to answer over his allocation of resources, given that it has been demonstrated in recent months that the lives of Victorian road users are now at very high risk. I ask honourable members to reflect on these words: shocking; appalling; horrendous; ghastly; grim; alarming; horrific! They are accurate and emotive descriptions of the Victorian road toll. As the honourable member for Hawthorn said, the Parliamentary Social Development Committee has a subcommittee dealing with road safety issues, but it has not had a notable public profile; nor has it recommended anything of great note. However, the former Parliamentary Road Safety Committee, which was formed by the Liberal Party, was instrumental in recommending many worthwhile innovations that greatly assisted in lowering the road toll. They included the compulsory wearing of seat belts, the ·05 blood alcohol legislation and random breath testing. The ALP abolished this committee when it came to power in 1982 and since then the major government initiative directed at road safety has been increases in fines and penalties 220 ASSEMBLY 8 March 1990 Road Safety (Amendment) Bill for breaches of the traffic laws. While this might have had some effect, its main aim has been to raise revenue for a bankrupt Labor administration. Clearly, the Minister does not want to re-establish this committee because he does not want to hear that his and the government's policies are wrong. The Liberal Party has decided to tackle this problem head-on by appointing its own road safety committee, which is chaired by the honourable member for Gisborne. Today the road safety agenda is receiving only part-time Parliamentary attention and we are denying ourselves practical ideas and political influence that a full-time committee would achieve. More could be done by governments to reduce the carnage on our roads, and the Liberal Party's committee will certainly be making constructive and feasible suggestions. It will be consulting extensively with groups which share a common interest in preserving road safety, and it will be providing an avenue for the public to submit suggestions to Parliament; it will be promoting the means to achieve greater road safety and a greater public awareness of the disastrous road toll of both death and injury; and it will be pressing the government to take necessary action. The Municipal Association of Victoria, as I mentioned earlier, has recently begun a study to provide economic facts about the value of local roads, and it is examining a number of municipalities. These include Barrabool, Coburg, Dundas, Mildura, Moorabbin, Orbost, Rodney and W oorayl. The purpose of the study is to provide information to show that good local roads are necessary to achieve Federal and State economic objectives, to understand why local roads are deteriorating so quickly and what can be done by councils to establish programs to attract more funds for local roads. Last week I attended the launch of the first phase of that inquiry into roads and road safety in Mildura. Not only is there a cost to the State in terms of deaths on bad roads, but evidence is emerging of significant freight cost increases directly attributable to the poor condition of roads. Road safety is a concern, particularly because of the high number of intersections and increasing traffic volumes, but poor roads, damaged vehicles and increased operating costs, salinity which reduces road pavement life, saturated pavements which cause problems with road conditions, and increased freight volumes are adding to the pressures on road conditions. Dust can reduce the market value of produce and bruising can reduce the value of livestock. There is a whole host of problems resulting from poor roads-not just deaths, tragedy and trauma. The simple fact is that in one municipality like Mildura, it has been estimated that overall the shire needs an increase of $1 million a year to sustain the road system long term. That is without adding anything to the length of the seal. I may have strayed temporarily from the substance of the Bill, but I wanted to highlight the point that roads and road funding are absolutely critical not only to road safety but also to the economic health and well-being of regional areas and the farming community. For the Minister to have made no mention of additional funding for roads in his second-reading speech or in the Bill is a tragedy. If the government were fair dinkum about improving road safety honourabl~ members would not be seeing knee-jerk reactions such as the reduction of the speed limit from 110 to 100 kilometres an hour. We should be looking seriously at re-establishing the all-party Parliamentary committee so that the job can be done properly. I urge the Minister, as have other honourable members who have contributed to the debate, to seriously examine these options. Road Safety (Amendment) Bill 8 March 1990 ASSEMBLY 221

Mr KENNETT (Burwood)-There is no doubt that our roads are perhaps the most important communication network in our society today. The point made by the honourable member for Mildura is correct: although the Bill deals with road safety issues it does so in isolation of the capacity of the roads to maintain the traffic flow let alone the build-up of traffic we now experience and are expecting in the future. I remind the Minister that road safety involves not only the measures that are contained in the proposed legislation, although, as I have said previously and will say again, there are some provisions in the Bill that I obviously support. One cannot look at road safety in isolation. Bad road conditions exist not only in provincial and rural Victoria, but also in the metropolitan area including major thoroughfares like Victoria Parade. Our roads are not only deterioratin~, they also present a serious danger and safety risk to those who use them. That risk IS increased when people travel on them during the evening. Unless honourable members are concerned about road safety in toto and the issues that fall within the general area of road safety, such as the condition of our roads, anything we do is just another bandaid measure to try to prevent not only the deaths on our roads, which are recorded regularly, but also the injuries. For every death on the roads there are literally dozens of injured people, many of them long-term cases, as well as damage to property. My first point in addressing this Bill is that, in part, so far as it goes, it is supportable, but it is only one part of the overall solution to the problems we are currently facin,. It is for that reason that last week the coalition at a Federal level announced that It will pump another billion dollars into the road funding system over the next three years. You, Mr Acting Speaker, as a country member know that although Victoria has some good freeways and highways, even those will be put at risk if they are not maintained. At present the condition of many roads is deteriorating because the infrastructure has not been maintained and improvements have not been made to provide for an increased volume of traffic and safer driving. One must be concerned when one sees how many sealed roads are being ripped up and reverted back to unsealed surfaces simply because municipalities do not have sufficient funds to look after or maintain those roads. The Bill is the result of concern about the carnage on our roads, and the provisions in the Bill represent part of the package that the Minister announced at the time; some obviously not needing legislative approval in this place. I have said before that I support the concept of graduated licences. I support the introduction of a zero blood alcohol limit for P-plate drivers. Blood alcohol content is something that is difficult to police because those who are on certain medications and those who eat certain chocolates can find themselves with a blood alcohol reading that may have been achieved without having had an alcoholic drink. Mr Roper-What about eating chocolates? Mr KENNETT-If the Minister had been listening, he would have heard me indicate that in certain circumstances people who have abided by the intent of the provisions may find themselves at fault. I support strongly the provision for the lowering of the age at which learner permits can be held to sixteen years. I support it because it is a no-cost, preventive and learning experience provision. It offers the opportunity for each of us as parents to accept more responsibility for the driving education of our children.